|
|
Lull's Book of Propositions
|
|
|
10 - Common Figure
Every universal
reveals all its particulars through its concordance and contrariety with
other universals. To clarify this, propositions were devised for this common
figure which contains all the other figures, and as this figure is the
most general one in this Art, its propositions, in their generality, stand
above all the other propositions.
These
propositions are divided into thirty-six cameras following the combination
of figures to show the concordance or contrariety, closeness or remoteness
of one figure to another so that any particular matter can be judged artificially
in its universality. Thus, each of the thirty-six cameras has three propositions,
for a total of one hundred and eight. Now let us proceed in sequence, beginning
with the propositions of the first camera.
T.A.
1. It
is improper to predicate anything about A. without T.
2. Since
A. can be known and loved, T. signifies A. with goodness, greatness, etc.
3. As
T. and A. are combined through their propositions and questions, A. is
represented in T.
T.S.
1. In
the regular combination of the triangles of S. with the squares of T.,
S. is mirrored in T.
2. S.
uses T. to know itself and others.
3. Accepting
objects without T. darkens the light of C.
T.V.
1. The
species of V. are represented in T.
2. T.
is an instrument for loving blue V. and hating red V.
3. Whoever
neglects T. in V., neglects the virtues.
T.X.
1. By
discoursing with T. in X., X. is made manifest.
2. T.
with its propositions is the recourse in case of doubts about X.
3. When
T. is absent, reasoning about X. is obscured.
T.
Theology
1. Many
very lofty points and principles of Theology can be sought and found with
T.
2. T.
holds an abundance of words and examples for speaking about Theology.
3. When
T. with its statements is combined with Theology and its statements, D.
rejoices, C. delights in A., H. is sorrowful and M. soars aloft.
T.
Philosophy
1. When
the triangles of T. are combined with the cameras of Philosophy, Philosophy
is produced in B.C.D.
2. T.
and Philosophy are two mirrors in which C. finds rest.
3. With
the influence of T., C. produces its likenesses in D.
T.
Law
1. T.
and its terms bear witness to Law.
2. No
judgment can be made without T.
3. With
T., every Law finds its particulars in itself.
T.
Elements
1. The
secrets of the elements are revealed in T.
2. T.
and the elements illuminate S.
3. The
elements in T. represent the disposition of the human body.
A.S.
1. Because
A. is to be understood and not ignored, A. created S. to understand A.
and not to ignore A.
2. A.
influences S. to put S. in D. and not in H.
3. Because
A. loves its own likeness within itself, A. created S. to love its likeness
within itself.
A.V.
1. V.
is a mirror where A. represents its likenesses and unlikenesses.
2. As
blue V. was entirely created by A., red V. opposes it.
3. Blue
V. is a path leading to the presence of A., while red V. is a path leading
to the absence of A.
A.X.
1. Since
X. is a mirror of concordance and contrariety, it signifies concordance
without any contrariety in A.
2. X.
shows how the cameras of A. agree among themselves better than with creatures.
3. Since
all beings do not agree in every way with A., X. in this Art consists of
both concordance and contrariety.
A.
Theology
1. Because
A. can be proclaimed, Theology is meant for proclaiming A.
2. The
operation of A. is in itself nobler than anything that Theology can predicate
about it.
3. Because
A. is everywhere, Theology is to be proclaimed throughout the world.
A.
Philosophy
1. Philosophy
is an effect of A. where created light shows that it is caused by uncreated
light.
2. Philosophy
is lovable because A. is lovable.
3. To
philosophize without A. is to neglect A.
A.
Law
1. A.
and Law both have a likeness in Justice.
2. As
all Laws descend from A., all Laws must be reduced to A.
3. Since
A. and Law both oppose injury, injury is fragile although free will can
empower it.
A.
Elements
1. The
elements are a mirror for viewing the work that proceeds within A. and
the work that proceeds outside of A.
2. The
cameras of A. and the cameras of the elemental figure agree in metaphor.
3. The
elemental figure is entirely obedient to the cameras of A.
S.V.
1. As
D. in blue V. is greater than H. in red V., E. is greater that I.
2. The
substantial virtue of S. produces its likeness in one mode in E.I., in
another mode in blue V. and in yet another mode in red V.
3. The
soul's sanctity is in blue V. and its perdition in red V.
S.X.
1. Because
X. consists of concordant and contrary things, S. seeks out particulars
in X. through consistency and inconsistency.
2. In
the combined propositions of S.X., S. opposes inconsistency.
3. X.
is either the rise or the fall of S.
S.
Theology
1. Theology
is spiritual food for S. living in A.
2. Theology
is the water of sacred sermons cleansing S. of sin.
3. Theology
is a light for S. to direct unbelievers to the path of truth.
S.
Philosophy
1. Because
S. contains an unlikeness of A., S. begins to philosophize outside of itself
before philosophizing within itself.
2. Philosophy
is a mirror where S. can produce its likenesses.
3. Philosophy
gives S. the example for producing E.I.N.R.
S.
Law
1. Because
A. rules, Law comes from A. and is assimilated by S.
2. Laws
were constituted so that S. can produce E.I.N.R. in a regulated way.
3. S.
can be inadequate to Law, but Law cannot be inadequate to S.
S.
Elements
1. The
justice in elemental acts shows how objects are to be assumed by S.
2. The
Book of S. relates to the elemental figure, to show how S. can investigate
and judge particular issues.
3. The
elemental figure clarifies the senses so that S. can see with spiritual
sight.
V.X.
1. X.
is an experiment in separating red V. from blue V.
2. Inasmuch
as V.X. consist of concordant and contrary things, they are fit for dealing
with concordant or contrary things.
3. In
combining V.X., blue V. is enlivened and red V. is mortified.
V.
Theology
1. Theology
is a light that clarifies blue V.
2. Theology
and red V. are connected only through the camera of punishment and aevum.
3. V.
and Theology cannot be combined without some intermediary.
V.
Philosophy
1. Philosophy
is a ladder where V. can ascend and descend.
2. According
to Philosophy, blue V. is the legitimate child of S.
3. Philosophy
totally contradicts red V.
V.
Law
1. Law
is meant for separating red V. from blue V.
2. There
is no likeness of Law in red V.
3. Blue
V. is regulated and conditioned by the rule of Law.
V.
Elements
1. With
the elements, blue V. regulates its likenesses to oppose red V.
2. The
elemental figure is the justice of blue V., and not of red V.
3. The
elemental degrees show the way to gradually oppose blue V. to red V.
X.
Theology
1. X.
raises E. up to Theology.
2. X.
is specified through theological interpretation.
3. The
secrets of Theology are revealed in X.
X.
Philosophy
1. Philosophy
is acquired through X.
2. Philosophy
in X. is greater in reality than in the rational mind.
3. Philosophy
would be useless if free will only existed as a concept of the rational
mind.
X.
Law
1. X.
is an exemplar for investigating Law in accordance with the disposition
of X.
2. X.
contradicts Law with privation, guilt and punishment.
3. The
concordance between predestination and free will is revealed in Law.
X.
Elements
1. X.
and the elements are similar in terms of guilt and corruption.
2. Predestination
and free will are signified in the free appetite of the elements.
3. Just
as the elements really produce a secondary act through their concordance
and contrariety, so does the rational mind use X. to produce a secondary
act composed of concordant and contrary things.
Theology,
Philosophy
1. Theology
and Philosophy agree in the Law of scripture and in natural Law.
2. As
C. and Philosophy agree in the light of understanding, D. has an appetite
for speaking of Theology in terms of Philosophy.
3. Philosophy
shows the way to preach Theology.
Theology,
Law
1. Law
is an instrument for making Theology an object of E., and injury an object
of I.
2. The
science of Theology is the prime intention and the science of Law is a
secondary intention.
3. Every
Law is subservient to Theology.
Theology,
Elements
1. Metaphorically
speaking, the elements are an exemplar showing the way to preach Theology.
2. The
intellect draws more intimate likenesses from the figure of Theology than
from the elemental figure.
3. Elemental
reality shows how Theology must be conceived by reason.
Philosophy,
Law
1. Philosophy
provides the doctrine and rule for investigating Law.
2. Law
must be conceived by reason in the same way that Philosophy deals with
reality.
3. Through
the habit of Philosophy, the intellect is raised to the habit of Law.
Philosophy,
Elements
1. Philosophy
rises higher in the intellect than in the senses, and higher in the senses
than in the imagination.
2. The
elements figuratively show the way to philosophize.
3. Philosophy
takes on greater magnitude in the interiority of the elements than in their
exteriority.
Law,
Elements
1. The
natural Justice that exists in the elements signifies the science of Law.
2. As
every element seeks its likeness and flees its unlikeness, so does every
Law.
3. The
specification of legal science is shown in the specification of the elements.

|