Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I am not very smart. I need to actually understand how things work. So let's start from the last line of the letter and try to figure out how this work.

Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἀληθὴς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀληθῆ φιλοσοφίαν ἐξήγησις.

Morton Smith thought that this was the last surviving line of a much longer letter. So since Morton Smith fabricated the letter it must be the true explanation. Yet I could see how this might have been the end of an actual letter of Clement to someone. Clement has just cited material from the Secret Gospel of Alexandria. He doesn't provide any exegesis because it's related to the mysteries of the community. So Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἀληθὴς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀληθῆ φιλοσοφίαν ἐξήγησις with its reference to the "true philosophy" (which Clement elsewhere says is a "secret word") tells Theodore basically, that's as much as I can say about the Secret Gospel i.e. I can't provide any exegesis.

But again, we know Morton Smith forged the letter. So he must be right. But just for laughs let's see how Ἡ μὲν οὖν is used throughout Clement's writings, whether it is used to transition to a new topic or to sum up what was said before it. Interestingly Ἡ μὲν οὖν is a feature of Clement's writing style. Origen never uses the phrase. Most Church Fathers also do not employ it. It is a Clementism. To analyze the structure and style of the provided sentences from Clement of Alexandria's Stromata, let's break down each sentence and compare them to the initial sentence:

1. Letter to Theodore.

Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἀληθὴς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀληθῆ φιλοσοφίαν ἐξήγησις

"The true and according to true philosophy interpretation."

This sentence features a nominative subject (ἡ ἐξήγησις), with the phrase "μὲν οὖν" indicating a contrast or continuation. It also includes adjectives (ἀληθὴς) and a prepositional phrase (κατὰ τὴν ἀληθῆ φιλοσοφίαν) describing the subject.

"ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to sum up what was said before it. Let's break down the passage to see how this transition works:

"Τούτοις οὖν, καθὼς καὶ προείρηκα, οὐδέποτε εἰκτέον, οὐδέ προτείνουσιν αὐτοῖς τὰ κατεψευσμένα συγχωρητέον τοῦ Μάρκου εἶναι τὸ μυστικὸν εὐαγγέλιον, ἀλλὰ καὶ μεθ᾽ ὅρκου ἀρνητέον. Οὐ γὰρ ἅπασι πάντα ἀληθῆ λεκτέον. Διὰ τοῦτο ἡ σοφία τοῦ Θεοῦ διὰ Σολομῶντος παραγγέλλει, ἀποκρίνου τῷ μωρῷ ἐκ τῆς μωρίας αὐτοῦ, πρὸς τοὺς τυφλοὺς τὸν νοῦν τὸ φῶς τῆς ἀληθείας δεῖν ἐπικρύπτεσθαι διδάσκουσα. Αὐτίκα φησὶ, τοῦ δὲ μὴ ἔχοντος ἀρθήσεται, καὶ ὁ μωρὸς ἐν σκότει πορευέσθω. Ἡμεῖς δὲ υἱοὶ φωτός ἐσμεν, πεφωτισμένοι τῇ ἐξ ὕψους ἀνατολῇ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ Κυρίου. Οὗ δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ Κυρίου, φησίν, ἐκεῖ ἐλευθερία. Πάντα γὰρ καθαρὰ τοῖς καθαροῖς. Σοὶ τοίνυν οὐκ ὀκνήσω τὰ ἠρωτημένα ἀποκρίνασθαι δι᾽ αὐτῶν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου λέξεων τὰ κατεψευσμένα ἐλέγχων."

This section advises not to concede to false claims about the Secret Gospel of Mark, emphasizing the importance of rejecting falsehoods and selectively revealing the truth to the wise while hiding it from the foolish. It also reassures the addressee of the willingness to respond to inquiries using the words of the Gospel to expose falsehoods.
Summative Transition:

"Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἀληθὴς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀληθῆ φιλοσοφίαν ἐξήγησις"

This phrase ("ἡ μὲν οὖν") introduces a summary of the preceding advice, emphasizing the correct and truthful interpretation in accordance with true philosophy.

The phrase "ἡ μὲν οὖν" in this context serves to summarize and encapsulate the previous detailed discussion about how to handle the false claims about the Secret Gospel of Mark.

In this passage, "ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to sum up the preceding discussion and transition to a related point about the true and philosophical interpretation. This usage aligns with the style of summarizing detailed arguments and reaffirming broader principles, providing continuity and coherence in the argument.

2. Comparison Sentences from Stromata:

a) 1.1.14.1 Ἡ μὲν οὖν τῶνδέ μοι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων γραφὴ ἀσθενὴς μὲν εὖ οἶδ' ὅτι παραβαλλομένη πρὸς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκεῖνο τὸ κεχαριτωμένον, οὗ κατηξιώθημεν ὑπακοῦσαι, εἰκὼν δ' ἂν εἴη ἀναμιμνῄσκουσα τοῦ ἀρχετύπου τὸν θύρσῳ πεπληγότα.

"The writing of these memoranda of mine is weak, I know well, when compared to that graceful spirit which we were deemed worthy to hear, but it would be an image reminding us of the archetype."

Starts with "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" followed by a complex subject phrase (τῶνδέ μοι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων γραφὴ). It includes multiple clauses describing the subject's qualities and comparisons.

b) 1.16.80.5 Ἡ μὲν οὖν Ἑλληνικὴ φιλοσοφία, ὡς μέν τινες, κατὰ περίπτωσιν ἐπήβολος τῆς ἀληθείας ἁμῇ γέ πῃ, ἀμυδρῶς δὲ καὶ οὐ πάσης, γίνεται.

"The Greek philosophy, as some say, by chance attains the truth in some way, but dimly and not completely."

Uses "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" followed by the subject (Ἑλληνικὴ φιλοσοφία) and various descriptive clauses with comparisons.

c) 1.28.176.1 Ἡ μὲν οὖν κατὰ Μωυσέα φιλοσοφία τετραχῇ τέμνεται, εἴς τε τὸ ἱστορικὸν καὶ τὸ κυρίως λεγόμενον νομοθετικόν, ἅπερ ἂν εἴη τῆς ἠθικῆς πραγματείας ἴδια, τὸ τρίτον δὲ εἰς τὸ ἱερουργικόν.

"The philosophy according to Moses is divided into four parts: the historical, the legislative, which belongs to ethical discussions, and the third into the liturgical."

Begins with "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" and the subject (κατὰ Μωυσέα φιλοσοφία) followed by detailed divisions and descriptions of the philosophy's parts.

d) 1.28.176.2 ἐστιν ἤδη τῆς φυσικῆς θεωρίας.

"This is part of natural contemplation."

A continuation of the previous sentence, specifying another aspect of the philosophy.

e) 2.2.5.1 ἡ μὲν οὖν βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία, ἣν μεθέπομεν ἡμεῖς, τελεία τῷ ὄντι καὶ ἀληθής.

"The barbarian philosophy that we follow is truly perfect and true."

"ἡ μὲν οὖν" with the subject (βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία) followed by descriptive phrases highlighting its qualities.

f) 3.7.57.1 Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἀνθρωπίνη ἐγκράτεια, ἡ κατὰ τοὺς φιλοσόφους λέγω τοὺς Ἑλλήνων, τὸ διαμάχεσθαι τῇ ἐπιθυμίᾳ καὶ μὴ ἐξυπηρετεῖν αὐτῇ εἰς τὰ ἔργα ἐπαγγέλλεται, ἡ καθ' ἡμᾶς δὲ τὸ μὴ ἐπιθυμεῖν, οὐχ ἵνα τις ἐπιθυμῶν καρτερῇ, ἀλλ' ὅπως καὶ τοῦ ἐπιθυμεῖν ἐγκρατεύηται.

"Human self-control, according to the philosophers I mean the Greeks, promises to struggle against desire and not to serve it in actions, while our self-control aims not to desire at all, not to endure desire, but to control it."

"Ἡ μὲν οὖν" with a subject (ἀνθρωπίνη ἐγκράτεια) and a complex comparison between Greek and Christian concepts of self-control.

g) 4.9.71.2 ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐν φωνῇ ὁμολογία καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐξουσιῶν γίνεται, ἣν μόνην, φησίν, ὁμολογίαν ἡγοῦνται εἶναι οἱ πολλοὶ οὐχ ὑγιῶς, δύνανται δὲ ταύτην τὴν ὁμολογίαν καὶ οἱ ὑποκριταὶ ὁμολογεῖν.

"Confession with the voice also happens before authorities, which alone, he says, many consider to be true confession, but this confession can also be made by hypocrites."

Begins with "ἡ μὲν οὖν" followed by the subject (ὁμολογία) and descriptive clauses.

h) 4.25.162.5 ᾗ μὲν οὖν ἐστιν οὐσία, ἀρχὴ τοῦ φυσικοῦ τόπου· καθ' ὅσον ἐστὶν τἀγαθόν, τοῦ ἠθικοῦ.

"As it is essence, it is the beginning of the physical realm; as it is good, it is the beginning of the ethical realm."

Starts with "ᾗ μὲν οὖν" followed by a comparison of different aspects (οὐσία and τἀγαθόν) and their corresponding domains.

i) 6.12.102.5 ᾗ μὲν οὖν τίς ἐστι δίκαιος, πάντως οὗτος καὶ πιστός, ᾗ δὲ πιστός, οὐδέπω καὶ δίκαιος, τὴν κατὰ προκοπὴν καὶ τελείωσιν δικαιοσύνην λέγω, καθ' ἣν ὁ γνωστικὸς δίκαιος λέγεται.

"As someone is just, he is also faithful; but as someone is faithful, he is not yet just in the sense of progressive and complete righteousness, which the gnostic is called just."

Starts with "ᾗ μὲν οὖν" followed by a comparison of justice and faithfulness and their interrelation.

j) 7.10.57.3 ἡ μὲν οὖν πίστις σύντομός ἐστιν, ὡς εἰπεῖν, τῶν κατεπειγόντων γνῶσις, ἡ γνῶσις δὲ ἀπόδειξις τῶν διὰ πίστεως παρειλημμένων ἰσχυρὰ καὶ βέβαιος, διὰ τῆς κυριακῆς διδασκαλίας ἐποικοδομουμένη τῇ πίστει εἰς τὸ ἀμετάπτωτον καὶ μετ' ἐπιστήμης καὶ καταληπτὸν παραπέμπουσα.

"Faith is brief, so to speak, the knowledge of urgent matters, while knowledge is the strong and firm demonstration of what has been received through faith, being built up by the Lord’s teaching into immutability and understanding."

"ἡ μὲν οὖν" with the subject (πίστις) and a comparison between faith and knowledge, including detailed descriptive clauses.

Structural and Stylistic Similarities:

Use of "ἡ μὲν οὖν": Each sentence begins with "ἡ μὲν οὖν," a common phrase in Clement's writing indicating a contrast or continuation. All sentences feature a nominative subject (e.g., ἀληθὴς ἐξήγησις, ἀνθρωπίνη ἐγκράτεια, βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία) often followed by multiple descriptive clauses. The sentences contain detailed descriptions, comparisons, and qualifications of the subjects, often including prepositional phrases and relative clauses. Many sentences set up contrasts or comparisons, either within the same sentence or against a previous idea. Overall, Clement’s structural and stylistic choices involve starting with "ἡ μὲν οὖν," presenting a complex subject, and elaborating with detailed, often contrasting or comparative, descriptions.

Among the provided sentences, some do use "ἡ μὲν οὖν" to summarize previous content, while others introduce new points or contrasts. Specifically, sentences like 4.25.162.5 and 6.12.102.5 seem to summarize or clarify earlier discussions. Most sentences, however, use "ἡ μὲν οὖν" as a transitional element to introduce complex subjects with detailed descriptions and comparisons, rather than purely summarizing previous content.

Detailed Analysis of Each Citation with the Question: Is Ἡ μὲν οὖν used to sum up what was said before it?

a) ἐπεὶ διὰ τί μὴ πάντες ἴσασι τὴν ἀλήθειαν; διὰ τί δὲ μὴ ἠγαπήθη ἡ δικαιοσύνη, εἰ πάντων ἡ δικαιοσύνη; ἀλλὰ γὰρ τὰ μυστήρια μυστικῶς παραδίδοται, ἵνα ᾖ ἐν στόματι λαλοῦντος καὶ ᾧ λαλεῖται, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐκ ἐν φωνῇ, ἀλλ' ἐν τῷ νοεῖσθαι. δέδωκεν δὲ ὁ θεὸς τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοὺς μὲν ἀποστόλους, τοὺς δὲ προφήτας, τοὺς δὲ εὐαγγελιστάς, τοὺς δὲ ποιμένας καὶ διδασκάλους, πρὸς τὸν καταρτισμὸν τῶν ἁγίων, εἰς ἔργον διακονίας, εἰς οἰκοδομὴν τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Ἡ μὲν οὖν τῶνδέ μοι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων γραφὴ ἀσθενὴς μὲν εὖ οἶδ' ὅτι παραβαλλομένη πρὸς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκεῖνο τὸ κεχαριτωμένον, οὗ κατηξιώθημεν ὑπακοῦσαι, εἰκὼν δ' ἂν εἴη ἀναμιμνῄσκουσα τοῦ ἀρχετύπου τὸν θύρσῳ πεπληγότα

Yes, in the passage "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to sum up what was said before it. This passage discusses why not everyone knows the truth and why justice isn't loved by all, even if justice is for everyone. It mentions that mysteries are handed down mystically and emphasizes the roles given by God to the church: apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds, and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for ministry and building up the body of Christ. The summative transition:

"Ἡ μὲν οὖν τῶνδέ μοι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων γραφὴ ἀσθενὴς μὲν εὖ οἶδ' ὅτι παραβαλλομένη πρὸς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκεῖνο τὸ κεχαριτωμένον, οὗ κατηξιώθημεν ὑπακοῦσαι, εἰκὼν δ' ἂν εἴη ἀναμιμνῄσκουσα τοῦ ἀρχετύπου τὸν θύρσῳ πεπληγότα."

This sentence begins with "Ἡ μὲν οὖν," indicating that it is drawing a conclusion or summarizing the preceding discussion. The subject of this summation is the "writing of these memoranda," which the author admits is weak compared to the graceful spirit they were fortunate to hear but serves as an image reminding them of the archetype.

The phrase "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" in this context acts as a summative transition, pulling together the previous discussion about divine roles and mystical knowledge to introduce a reflection on the current writing's limitations and purpose. The use of "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" helps connect the discussion about the divinely appointed roles and the mystical transmission of knowledge to the author's humble acknowledgment of their work's imperfections. This transition ties the larger theological context to the author's personal contribution.

From the previously analyzed sentences, here are a few that also appear to use "ἡ μὲν οὖν" in a summative or connective manner:

4.25.162.5: ᾗ μὲν οὖν ἐστιν οὐσία, ἀρχὴ τοῦ φυσικοῦ τόπου· καθ' ὅσον ἐστὶν τἀγαθόν, τοῦ ἠθικοῦ.

This sentence sums up different aspects of a concept as both essence and good, providing a conclusion to the previous discussion.

6.12.102.5: ᾗ μὲν οὖν τίς ἐστι δίκαιος, πάντως οὗτος καὶ πιστός, ᾗ δὲ πιστός, οὐδέπω καὶ δίκαιος, τὴν κατὰ προκοπὴν καὶ τελείωσιν δικαιοσύνην λέγω, καθ' ἣν ὁ γνωστικὸς δίκαιος λέγεται.

This sentence draws a conclusion about the relationship between being just and faithful, likely summarizing earlier points about these concepts. As such, in the provided passage and several other examples from Stromata, "ἡ μὲν οὖν" functions as a summative phrase, encapsulating previous discussions or arguments and transitioning to a concluding or reflective statement. This usage is a characteristic feature of Clement's writing.

b) Λυκοῦργος δὲ μετὰ πολλὰ τῆς Ἰλίου ἁλώσεως γεγονὼς ἔτη πρὸ τῶν ὀλυμπιάδων ἔτεσιν ἑκατὸν πεντήκοντα νομοθετεῖ Λακεδαιμονίοις· Σόλωνος γὰρ τοὺς χρόνους προ1.16.80.1 ειρήκαμεν. ∆ράκων δὲ ὁ καὶ αὐτὸς νομοθέτης περὶ τὴν τριακοστὴν 1.16.80.2 καὶ ἐνάτην ὀλυμπιάδα γεγονὼς εὑρίσκεται. Ἀντίλοχος δὲ αὖ ὁ τοὺς ἵστορας πραγματευσάμενος ἀπὸ τῆς Πυθαγόρου ἡλικίας ἐπὶ τὴν Ἐπικούρου τελευτήν, ** γαμηλιῶνος δὲ δεκάτῃ ἱσταμένου γενομένην, ἔτη 1.16.80.3 φέρει τὰ πάντα τριακόσια δώδεκα. ἔτι φασὶ τὸ ἡρῷον τὸ ἑξάμετρον Φανοθέαν τὴν γυναῖκα Ἰκαρίου, οἳ δὲ Θέμιν μίαν τῶν Τιτανίδων 1.16.80.4 εὑρεῖν. ∆ίδυμος δ' ἐν τῷ περὶ Πυθαγορικῆς φιλοσοφίας Θεανὼ τὴν Κροτωνιᾶτιν πρώτην γυναικῶν φιλοσοφῆσαι καὶ ποιήματα γράψαι ἱστορεῖ. 1.16.80.5 Ἡ μὲν οὖν Ἑλληνικὴ φιλοσοφία, ὡς μέν τινες, κατὰ περίπτωσιν ἐπήβολος τῆς ἀληθείας ἁμῇ γέ πῃ, ἀμυδρῶς δὲ καὶ οὐ πάσης, γίνεται·

In this passage "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to sum up and transition from the preceding content. This section discusses various figures in Greek history and philosophy, including Lycurgus, Draco, Antilochus, and others, along with their contributions and timelines. The summative transition is:

"Ἡ μὲν οὖν Ἑλληνικὴ φιλοσοφία, ὡς μέν τινες, κατὰ περίπτωσιν ἐπήβολος τῆς ἀληθείας ἁμῇ γέ πῃ, ἀμυδρῶς δὲ καὶ οὐ πάσης, γίνεται."

This sentence begins with "Ἡ μὲν οὖν," indicating a summation or transition. It generalizes the nature of Greek philosophy, suggesting that it sometimes attains truth by chance, but only dimly and not entirely. The phrase "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" here serves to sum up the previous discussion about notable historical and philosophical figures, transitioning to a broader statement about Greek philosophy. The use of "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" connects the detailed historical recounting to a general observation about the nature of Greek philosophy, effectively summarizing and transitioning from the specifics to a general conclusion. In this passage, "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to summarize what was said before it, drawing together the previous content and transitioning to a concluding or reflective statement about Greek philosophy. This usage is consistent with how Clement of Alexandria often employs the phrase to provide coherence and continuity in his writing.

c) ταῦτα γὰρ δύνασθαι τὸν νόμον ὁμολογεῖται, κἂν οἱ κατὰ νόμον μὴ πολιτευόμενοι ὡς ἐν νόμῳ ἀλαζονεύωνται βιοῦντες· μακάριος δὲ ἀνὴρ ὃς εὗρεν σοφίαν, καὶ θνητὸς ὃς εἶδεν φρόνησιν, ἐκ δὲ τοῦ στόματος αὐτῆς, τῆς σοφίας δηλονότι, δικαιοσύνη ἐκπορεύεται, νόμον δὲ καὶ 1.27.174.3 ἔλεον ἐπὶ γλώσσης φορεῖ. ἑνὸς γὰρ κυρίου ἐνέργεια, ὅς ἐστι δύναμις καὶ σοφία τοῦ θεοῦ, ὅ τε νόμος τό τε εὐαγγέλιον, καὶ ὃν ἐγέννησε φόβον ὁ νόμος, ἐλεήμων οὗτος εἰς σωτηρίαν. ἐλεημοσύναι δὲ καὶ πίστεις καὶ ἀλήθεια μὴ ἐκλιπέτωσάν σε, ἄφαψαι δὲ αὐτὰς 1.27.175.1 περὶ σῷ τραχήλῳ. ὁμοίως δὲ τῷ Παύλῳ ἡ προφητεία ὀνειδίζει τὸν λαὸν ὡς μὴ συνιέντα τὸν νόμον. σύντριμμα καὶ ταλαιπωρία ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁδὸν εἰρήνης οὐκ ἔγνωσαν, οὐκ ἔστι φόβος 1.27.175.2 θεοῦ ἀπέναντι τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν. φάσκοντες εἶναι σοφοὶ ἐμωράνθησαν. οἴδαμεν δὲ ὅτι καλὸς ὁ νόμος, ἐάν τις αὐτῷ νομίμως χρήσηται· οἳ δὲ θέλοντες εἶναι νομοδιδάσκαλοι οὐ νοοῦσι, φησὶν ὁ ἀπόστολος, οὔτε ἃ λέγουσιν οὔτε περὶ τίνων διαβεβαιοῦνται, τὸ δὲ τέλος τῆς παραγγελίας ἀγάπη ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας καὶ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς καὶ πίστεως ἀνυποκρίτου. 1.28.176.1 Ἡ μὲν οὖν κατὰ Μωυσέα φιλοσοφία τετραχῇ τέμνεται, εἴς τε τὸ ἱστορικὸν καὶ τὸ κυρίως λεγόμενον νομοθετικόν, ἅπερ ἂν εἴη τῆς ἠθικῆς πραγματείας ἴδια, τὸ τρίτον δὲ εἰς τὸ ἱερουργικόν, ὅ 1.28.176.2 ἐστιν ἤδη τῆς φυσικῆς θεωρίας

"Ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to transition to a new topic rather than strictly summing up the previous content. It introduces a new point about Mosaic philosophy and its divisions. This section discusses the nature of the law and wisdom, the blessedness of finding wisdom, and the importance of charity, faith, and truth. It also mentions the rebuke of people by prophecy for not understanding the law and the role of the law when used properly. The transition to a new topic is:

"Ἡ μὲν οὖν κατὰ Μωυσέα φιλοσοφία τετραχῇ τέμνεται, εἴς τε τὸ ἱστορικὸν καὶ τὸ κυρίως λεγόμενον νομοθετικόν, ἅπερ ἂν εἴη τῆς ἠθικῆς πραγματείας ἴδια, τὸ τρίτον δὲ εἰς τὸ ἱερουργικόν, ὅ ἐστιν ἤδη τῆς φυσικῆς θεωρίας."

This sentence begins with "Ἡ μὲν οὖν," indicating a shift in focus to Mosaic philosophy and its four divisions: historical, legislative, ethical, and liturgical. In this context, "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" functions as a transition rather than strictly summing up the previous content. It introduces a detailed discussion about the divisions of Mosaic philosophy. While it does connect to the prior content by continuing the broader theme of law and wisdom, it does not explicitly summarize what was said before. Instead, it moves the discussion to a specific aspect of Mosaic philosophy. In this passage, "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to transition to a new topic related to Mosaic philosophy and its divisions. It does not strictly sum up the previous content but serves as a connective phrase to shift the discussion to a new, detailed examination of Mosaic philosophy. This usage is consistent with how Clement of Alexandria often employs "ἡ μὲν οὖν" to provide coherence and continuity in his writing, linking related but distinct topics.

d) Ἐπὶ δὲ σῇ σοφίᾳ μὴ ἐπαίρου, αἱ Παροιμίαι λέγουσιν, ἐν πάσαις δὲ ὁδοῖς γνώριζε αὐτήν, ἵνα ὀρθοτομῇ τὰς ὁδούς σου· ὁ δὲ πούς σου οὐ μὴ προσκόπτῃ. βούλεται μὲν γὰρ διὰ τούτων δεῖξαι ἀκόλουθα δεῖν γενέσθαι τῷ λόγῳ τὰ ἔργα, ἤδη δὲ ἐμφαίνειν χρῆναι 2.2.4.2 τὸ ἐξ ἁπάσης παιδείας χρήσιμον ἐκλεγομένους ἡμᾶς ἔχειν. αἱ δὴ ὁδοὶ σοφίας ποικίλαι ὀρθοτομεῖν ἐπὶ τὴν ὁδὸν τῆς ἀληθείας, ὁδὸς δὲ ἡ πίστις· ὁ δὲ πούς σου μὴ προσκοπτέτω, λέγει περί τινων ἐναντιοῦσθαι δοκούντων τῇ μιᾷ καὶ θείᾳ τῇ προνοητικῇ διοικήσει. 2.2.4.3 ὅθεν ἐπάγει· μὴ ἴσθι φρόνιμος παρὰ σεαυτῷ, κατὰ τοὺς ἀθέους λογισμοὺς τοὺς ἀντιστασιώδεις τῇ οἰκονομίᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ, φοβοῦ δὲ τὸν μόνον δυνατὸν θεόν, ᾧ ἕπεται μηδὲν ἀντικεῖσθαι τῷ θεῷ 2.2.4.4 ἄλλως τε καὶ ἡ ἐπαγωγὴ διδάσκει σαφῶς, ὅτι ὁ θεῖος φόβος ἔκκλισίς ἐστι κακοῦ. φησὶ γάρ· καὶ ἔκκλινον ἀπὸ παντὸς κακοῦ. αὕτη παιδεία σοφίας· ὃν γὰρ ἀγαπᾷ κύριος παιδεύει, ἀλγεῖν μὲν ποιῶν εἰς 2.2.5.1 σύνεσιν, ἀποκαθιστὰς δὲ εἰς εἰρήνην καὶ ἀφθαρσίαν. ἡ μὲν οὖν βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία, ἣν μεθέπομεν ἡμεῖς, τελεία τῷ ὄντι καὶ ἀληθής. φησὶ γοῦν ἐν τῇ Σοφίᾳ·

"ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to sum up what was said before it. This passage discusses not being proud of one's wisdom, recognizing it in all paths to straighten them, and ensuring that one's foot does not stumble. It elaborates on the importance of aligning actions with words, selecting what is useful from all education, and the various paths of wisdom leading to truth. It emphasizes faith, divine guidance, and the fear of God as essential to avoid evil. It concludes by discussing divine education and correction as acts of love leading to understanding, peace, and incorruption. The summative transition is:

"ἡ μὲν οὖν βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία, ἣν μεθέπομεν ἡμεῖς, τελεία τῷ ὄντι καὶ ἀληθής. φησὶ γοῦν ἐν τῇ Σοφίᾳ·"

This sentence begins with "ἡ μὲν οὖν," indicating a summation. It asserts that the "barbarian philosophy" (which likely refers to the wisdom of non-Greek traditions, possibly Christian wisdom) that they follow is truly perfect and true. The phrase "ἡ μὲν οὖν" in this context serves to sum up the preceding discussion about wisdom, the fear of God, and the proper conduct aligned with divine guidance. It introduces a broader statement about the perfection and truth of the philosophy they follow, which is implied to be superior to merely human wisdom. The use of "ἡ μὲν οὖν" connects the detailed discussion on the virtues of divine wisdom and fear of God to a concluding affirmation of the completeness and truth of their philosophy. In this passage, "ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to sum up the preceding discussion and transition to a broader statement about the nature of their philosophy.

e) ὁ μὲν γὰρ σπείρων καὶ πλείονα συνάγων οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ διὰ τῆς ἐπιγείου καὶ προσκαίρου μεταδόσεως τὰ οὐράνια κτώμενος καὶ τὰ αἰώνια, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ μηδενὶ μεταδιδούς, κενῶς δὲ θησαυρίζων ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ὅπου σὴς καὶ βρῶσις ἀφανίζει (περὶ οὗ γέγραπται· συνάγων τοὺς μισθοὺς συνήγαγεν εἰς δεσμὸν τετρυπη3.6.56.3 μένον), τούτου τὴν χώραν εὐφορῆσαι λέγει ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ ὁ κύριος, ἔπειτα τοὺς καρποὺς ἀποθέσθαι βουληθέντα, οἰκοδομησόμενον ἀποθήκας μείζονας κατὰ τὴν προσωποποιίαν εἰπεῖν πρὸς ἑαυτόν· ἔχεις ἀγαθὰ πολλὰ ἀποκείμενά σοι εἰς ἔτη πολλά, φάγε, πίε, εὐφραίνου· ἄφρον οὖν, ἔφη, ταύτῃ γὰρ τῇ νυκτὶ τὴν ψυχήν σου ἀπαιτοῦσιν ἀπὸ σοῦ. ἃ οὖν ἡτοίμασας, τίνι γένηται; 3.7.57.1 Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἀνθρωπίνη ἐγκράτεια, ἡ κατὰ τοὺς φιλοσόφους λέγω τοὺς Ἑλλήνων, τὸ διαμάχεσθαι τῇ ἐπιθυμίᾳ καὶ μὴ ἐξυπηρετεῖν αὐτῇ εἰς τὰ ἔργα ἐπαγγέλλεται, ἡ καθ' ἡμᾶς δὲ τὸ μὴ ἐπιθυμεῖν, οὐχ ἵνα τις ἐπιθυμῶν
καρτερῇ, ἀλλ' ὅπως καὶ τοῦ ἐπιθυμεῖν ἐγκρατεύηται

"Ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to introduce a comparison rather than strictly summing up the previous content. This section discusses the parable of the rich fool from the Gospel, emphasizing the folly of storing earthly treasures without being rich toward God. It contrasts those who sow and gather more (representing spiritual accumulation) with those who hoard wealth on earth. The transition to a new topic is:

"Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἀνθρωπίνη ἐγκράτεια, ἡ κατὰ τοὺς φιλοσόφους λέγω τοὺς Ἑλλήνων, τὸ διαμάχεσθαι τῇ ἐπιθυμίᾳ καὶ μὴ ἐξυπηρετεῖν αὐτῇ εἰς τὰ ἔργα ἐπαγγέλλεται, ἡ καθ' ἡμᾶς δὲ τὸ μὴ ἐπιθυμεῖν, οὐχ ἵνα τις ἐπιθυμῶν καρτερῇ, ἀλλ' ὅπως καὶ τοῦ ἐπιθυμεῖν ἐγκρατεύηται."

This sentence begins with "Ἡ μὲν οὖν," indicating a shift to a comparison between Greek and Christian concepts of self-control. It contrasts the Greek philosophical approach to self-control (fighting desires) with the Christian approach (not desiring at all). In this context, "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" introduces a new point of comparison, moving from a discussion about wealth and spiritual priorities to a philosophical comparison about self-control. It does not directly summarize the previous content but transitions to a related but distinct topic. While the phrase does not summarize the previous content, it maintains the broader thematic connection of ethical and spiritual teachings by moving from the topic of material wealth and spiritual readiness to the topic of self-control. In this passage, "Ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to transition to a new point of comparison rather than summing up the preceding discussion. It shifts the focus from the parable of the rich fool and the folly of storing earthly treasures to a philosophical comparison between Greek and Christian notions of self-control.

f) ὃς γὰρ ἂν ἐπαισχυνθῇ με ἢ τοὺς ἐμοὺς λόγους ἐν τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ τῇ μοιχαλίδι καὶ ἁμαρτωλῷ, καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐπαισχυνθήσεται αὐτόν, ὅταν ἔλθῃ ἐν τῇ δόξῃ τοῦ πατρὸς 4.9.70.3 αὐτοῦ μετὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων αὐτοῦ. πᾶς οὖν ὅστις ἐὰν ὁμολογήσῃ ἐν ἐμοὶ ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὁμολογήσω κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ ἔμ4.9.70.4 προσθεν τοῦ πατρός μου τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς. ὅταν δὲ φέρωσιν ὑμᾶς εἰς τὰς συναγωγὰς καὶ τὰς ἀρχὰς καὶ τὰς ἐξουσίας, μὴ προμεριμνᾶτε πῶς ἀπολογηθῆτε ἢ τί εἴπητε· τὸ γὰρ ἅγιον οἱ ὑποκριταὶ ὁμολογεῖν. ἀλλ' οὐδ' εὑρεθήσεται οὗτος ὁ λόγος καθολικῶς εἰρημένος· πνεῦμα διδάξει ὑμᾶς ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ τί δεῖ εἰπεῖν. 4.9.71.1 Τοῦτον ἐξηγούμενος τὸν τόπον Ἡρακλέων ὁ τῆς Οὐαλεντίνου σχολῆς δοκιμώτατος κατὰ λέξιν φησὶν ὁμολογίαν εἶναι τὴν μὲν ἐν 4.9.71.2 πίστει καὶ πολιτείᾳ, τὴν δὲ ἐν φωνῇ. ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐν φωνῇ ὁμολογία καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐξουσιῶν γίνεται, ἣν μόνην, φησίν, ὁμολογίαν ἡγοῦνται εἶναι οἱ πολλοὶ οὐχ ὑγιῶς, δύνανται δὲ ταύτην τὴν ὁμολογίαν καὶ οἱ ὑποκριταὶ ὁμολογεῖν

"ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to clarify and expand upon the previous content rather than strictly summing it up. This section includes teachings about the importance of not being ashamed of Jesus and His words, the assurance that those who confess Him before others will be confessed by Him before the Father, and the instruction not to worry about what to say when brought before authorities because the Holy Spirit will teach them what to say.

Commentary by Heracleon:

"Τοῦτον ἐξηγούμενος τὸν τόπον Ἡρακλέων ὁ τῆς Οὐαλεντίνου σχολῆς δοκιμώτατος κατὰ λέξιν φησὶν ὁμολογίαν εἶναι τὴν μὲν ἐν πίστει καὶ πολιτείᾳ, τὴν δὲ ἐν φωνῇ."

This section introduces Heracleon, a respected member of the Valentinian school, interpreting the preceding passage to distinguish between two types of confession: one in faith and conduct, and the other in voice. ἡ μὲν οὖν is used for further clarification:

"ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐν φωνῇ ὁμολογία καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐξουσιῶν γίνεται, ἣν μόνην, φησίν, ὁμολογίαν ἡγοῦνται εἶναι οἱ πολλοὶ οὐχ ὑγιῶς, δύνανται δὲ ταύτην τὴν ὁμολογίαν καὶ οἱ ὑποκριταὶ ὁμολογεῖν."

This section clarifies Heracleon's interpretation further, explaining that the confession by voice happens before authorities and is considered by many to be the only true confession, although hypocrites can also make this type of confession. In this context, "ἡ μὲν οὖν" serves to clarify and elaborate on the previous commentary provided by Heracleon. It does not merely summarize but adds depth to the distinction between types of confession. The phrase connects the detailed commentary to a broader explanation, enhancing the reader's understanding of the two types of confession and their implications. In this passage, "ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to provide further clarification and expansion on the previous commentary, not simply to sum up what was said before. It builds on Heracleon's distinction between confessions in faith and conduct versus confessions by voice, adding nuance to the interpretation. This usage aligns with Clement's style of deepening the discussion by connecting and expanding on previous points.

g) Σαλὴμ γὰρ ἑρμηνεύεται εἰρήνη, ἧς ὁ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν ἀναγράφεται βασιλεύς, ὅν φησι Μωυσῆς, Μελχισεδὲκ βασιλεὺς Σαλὴμ ὁ ἱερεὺς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ὑψίστου, ὁ τὸν οἶνον καὶ τὸν ἄρτον τὴν ἡγιασμένην διδοὺς τροφὴν εἰς τύπον εὐχαριστίας. καὶ δὴ ἑρμηνεύεται ὁ Μελχισεδὲκ βασιλεὺς δί4.25.162.1 καιος, συνωνυμία δέ ἐστι δικαιοσύνης καὶ εἰρήνης. Βασιλείδης δὲ ὑποστατὰς ∆ικαιοσύνην τε καὶ τὴν θυγατέρα αὐτῆς τὴν Εἰρήνην ὑπολαμβάνει ἐν ὀγδοάδι μένειν ἐνδιατεταγμένας. 4.25.162.2 Μετιτέον δὴ ἀπὸ τῶν φυσικωτέρων ἐπὶ τὰ προφανέστερα <τὰ> ἠθικά· ὁ γὰρ περὶ ἐκείνων λόγος μετὰ τὴν ἐν χερσὶ πραγματείαν ἕψεται. 4.25.162.3 αὐτὸς οὖν ἡμᾶς ὁ σωτὴρ ἀτεχνῶς κατὰ τὴν τραγῳδίαν μυσταγωγεῖ, ὁρῶν ὁρῶντας καὶ δίδωσιν ὄργια. κἂν πύθῃ· τὰ δὲ ὄργια ἐστὶ τίν' ἰδέαν ἔχοντά σοι; ἀκούσῃ πάλιν· ἄρρητ' ἀβακχεύτοισιν εἰδέναι βροτῶν, 4.25.162.4 κἂν πολυπραγμονῇ τις ὁποῖα εἴη, αὖθις ἀκουσάτω· οὐ θέμις ἀκοῦσαί σε, ἔστιν δ' ἄξι' εἰδέναι· ἀσέβειαν ἀσκοῦντα ὄργι' ἐχθαίρει θεοῦ· 4.25.162.5 ὁ θεὸς δὲ ἄναρχος, ἀρχὴ τῶν ὅλων παντελής, ἀρχῆς ποιητικός. ᾗ μὲν οὖν ἐστιν οὐσία, ἀρχὴ τοῦ φυσικοῦ τόπου· καθ' ὅσον ἐστὶν τἀγαθόν, τοῦ ἠθικοῦ·

"ᾗ μὲν οὖν" is used to transition to a new topic by summarizing and shifting the focus from the previous discussion to a related concept. This section discusses the interpretation of Salem as peace, identifying Melchizedek as the king of peace and righteousness. It mentions Basilides' view of Justice and her daughter Peace being in the Ogdoad. It then suggests moving from natural to more evident ethical topics, indicating a transition in the discourse. Let's see how the transition works:

"αὐτὸς οὖν ἡμᾶς ὁ σωτὴρ ἀτεχνῶς κατὰ τὴν τραγῳδίαν μυσταγωγεῖ, ὁρῶν ὁρῶντας καὶ δίδωσιν ὄργια. κἂν πύθῃ· τὰ δὲ ὄργια ἐστὶ τίν' ἰδέαν ἔχοντά σοι; ἀκούσῃ πάλιν· ἄρρητ' ἀβακχεύτοισιν εἰδέναι βροτῶν, κἂν πολυπραγμονῇ τις ὁποῖα εἴη, αὖθις ἀκουσάτω· οὐ θέμις ἀκοῦσαί σε, ἔστιν δ' ἄξι' εἰδέναι· ἀσέβειαν ἀσκοῦντα ὄργι' ἐχθαίρει θεοῦ. ὁ θεὸς δὲ ἄναρχος, ἀρχὴ τῶν ὅλων παντελής, ἀρχῆς ποιητικός."

This section appears to delve into a more mystical and philosophical discussion about the role of the Savior in guiding and initiating people, possibly referencing secret teachings or rituals. The summative transition:

"ᾗ μὲν οὖν ἐστιν οὐσία, ἀρχὴ τοῦ φυσικοῦ τόπου· καθ' ὅσον ἐστὶν τἀγαθόν, τοῦ ἠθικοῦ."

This phrase ("ᾗ μὲν οὖν") serves to summarize the multifaceted nature of God as both the principle of all creation (natural) and the ultimate good (ethical), thereby connecting the previous mystical discussion to a broader philosophical context. In this context, "ᾗ μὲν οὖν" functions to summarize and clarify the dual aspects of God, encapsulating the prior discussion about divine attributes and transitioning to the implications of these attributes. The phrase connects the mystical and philosophical reflections on God and Melchizedek to a more general statement about God's nature as both the origin of all things and the embodiment of goodness. In this passage, "ᾗ μὲν οὖν" is used to summarize the preceding discussion and to transition to a related but broader philosophical assertion about God's nature. This usage aligns with the style of providing coherence and continuity, linking specific mystical and theological insights to overarching philosophical principles.

h) Εὔχεται τοίνυν ὁ γνωστικὸς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἔννοιαν πᾶσαν τὴν ὥραν, δι' ἀγάπης οἰκειούμενος τῷ θεῷ. καὶ τὰ μὲν πρῶτα ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν αἰτήσεται, μετὰ δὲ τὸ μηκέτι ἁμαρτάνειν ἔτι τὸ εὖ ποιεῖν δύνασθαι καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν κατὰ τὸν κύριον δημιουργίαν τε καὶ οἰκονο6.12.102.2 μίαν συνιέναι, ἵνα δή, καθαρὸς τὴν καρδίαν γενόμενος, δι' ἐπιγνώσεως τῆς διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον τὴν μακαρίαν θέαν μυηθῇ, ἐπακούσας τῆς λεγούσης γραφῆς ἀγαθὸν 6.12.102.3 νηστεία μετὰ προσευχῆς· νηστεῖαι δὲ ἀποχὰς κακῶν μηνύουσιν πάντων ἁπαξαπλῶς, τῶν τε κατ' ἐνέργειαν καὶ κατὰ λόγον καὶ κατὰ 6.12.102.4 τὴν διάνοιαν αὐτήν. ὡς ἔοικεν οὖν ἡ δικαιοσύνη τετράγωνός ἐστι, πάντοθεν ἴση καὶ ὁμοία ἐν λόγῳ, ἐν ἔργῳ, ἐν ἀποχῇ κακῶν, ἐν εὐποιίᾳ, ἐν τελειότητι γνωστικῇ, οὐδαμῇ οὐδαμῶς χωλεύουσα, ἵνα 6.12.102.5 μὴ ἄδικός τε καὶ ἄνισος φανῇ. ᾗ μὲν οὖν τίς ἐστι δίκαιος, πάντως οὗτος καὶ πιστός, ᾗ δὲ πιστός, οὐδέπω καὶ δίκαιος, τὴν κατὰ προκοπὴν καὶ τελείωσιν δικαιοσύνην λέγω, καθ' ἣν ὁ γνωστικὸς δίκαιος 6.12.103.1
λέγεται.

"ᾗ μὲν οὖν" is used to summarize and transition from the previous discussion to a related but distinct point. This section discusses the prayers and aspirations of the gnostic, emphasizing the desire for forgiveness of sins, the ability to do good, and understanding divine creation and providence. It also mentions the importance of purity of heart, fasting, and abstaining from evil in all forms, leading to a state of justice that is consistent and complete. The summative transition:

"ᾗ μὲν οὖν τίς ἐστι δίκαιος, πάντως οὗτος καὶ πιστός, ᾗ δὲ πιστός, οὐδέπω καὶ δίκαιος, τὴν κατὰ προκοπὴν καὶ τελείωσιν δικαιοσύνην λέγω, καθ' ἣν ὁ γνωστικὸς δίκαιος λέγεται."

This sentence uses "ᾗ μὲν οὖν" to summarize the characteristics of being just and faithful. It explains that someone who is just is certainly faithful, but someone who is faithful is not necessarily just, referring to the progression and perfection of justice by which the gnostic is called just. The phrase "ᾗ μὲν οὖν" in this context serves to summarize and encapsulate the prior discussion about the characteristics and aspirations of the gnostic, particularly focusing on the concepts of justice and faith. The phrase connects the detailed discussion on the spiritual practices and virtues of the gnostic to a broader philosophical assertion about the relationship between justice and faith, indicating a progression towards perfection. In this passage, "ᾗ μὲν οὖν" is used to summarize and transition from the preceding discussion about the gnostic's spiritual practices and virtues to a related philosophical point about justice and faith. This usage aligns with Clement's style, providing coherence and continuity in his writing by linking specific spiritual teachings to broader philosophical principles.

i) μεθ' ἣν ἀπολύτρωσιν τὸ γέρας καὶ αἱ τιμαὶ τελειωθεῖσιν ἀποδίδονται, πεπαυμένοις μὲν τῆς καθάρσεως, πεπαυμένοις δὲ καὶ 7.10.56.5 λειτουργίας τῆς ἄλλης, κἂν ἁγία ᾖ καὶ ἐν ἁγίοις· ἔπειτα καθαροὺς τῇ καρδίᾳ γενομένους κατὰ τὸ προσεχὲς τοῦ κυρίου προσμένει τῇ 7.10.56.6 θεωρίᾳ τῇ ἀιδίῳ ἀποκατάστασις. καὶ θεοὶ τὴν προσηγορίαν κέκληνται, οἱ σύνθρονοι τῶν ἄλλων θεῶν, τῶν ὑπὸ τῷ σωτῆρι πρώτων 7.10.56.7 τεταγμένων, γενησόμενοι. ταχεῖα τοίνυν εἰς κάθαρσιν ἡ γνῶσις καὶ 7.10.57.1 ἐπιτήδειος εἰς τὴν ἐπὶ τὸ κρεῖττον εὐπρόσδεκτον μεταβολήν. ὅθεν καὶ ῥᾳδίως εἰς τὸ συγγενὲς τῆς ψυχῆς θεῖόν τε καὶ ἅγιον μετοικίζει καὶ διά τινος οἰκείου φωτὸς διαβιβάζει τὰς προκοπὰς τὰς μυστικὰς τὸν ἄνθρωπον, ἄχρις ἂν εἰς τὸν κορυφαῖον ἀποκαταστήσῃ τῆς ἀναπαύσεως τόπον,
τὸν καθαρὸν τῇ καρδίᾳ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον ἐπιστημονικῶς καὶ καταληπτικῶς τὸν θεὸν ἐποπτεύειν διδάξασα. 7.10.57.2 ἐνταῦθα γάρ που τῆς γνωστικῆς ψυχῆς ἡ τελείωσις, πάσης καθάρσεώς τε καὶ λειτουργίας ὑπεκβᾶσαν σὺν τῷ κυρίῳ γίγνεσθαι, ὅπου 7.10.57.3 ἐστὶν προσεχῶς ὑποτεταγμένη. ἡ μὲν οὖν πίστις σύντομός ἐστιν, ὡς εἰπεῖν, τῶν κατεπειγόντων γνῶσις, ἡ γνῶσις δὲ ἀπόδειξις τῶν διὰ πίστεως παρειλημμένων ἰσχυρὰ καὶ βέβαιος, διὰ τῆς κυριακῆς διδασκαλίας ἐποικοδομουμένη τῇ πίστει εἰς τὸ ἀμετάπτωτον καὶ μετ' ἐπιστήμης 7.10.57.4 καὶ καταληπτὸν παραπέμπουσα

"ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to sum up and transition from the previous discussion. Let's analyze the passage to see how this transition functions: This section discusses the rewards and honors given after redemption, describing the cessation of purification and other services, and the ultimate restoration to eternal contemplation. It talks about becoming divine and attaining knowledge through mystical progress until reaching the peak of rest, seeing God face to face with a pure heart.

"ἐνταῦθα γάρ που τῆς γνωστικῆς ψυχῆς ἡ τελείωσις, πάσης καθάρσεώς τε καὶ λειτουργίας ὑπεκβᾶσαν σὺν τῷ κυρίῳ γίγνεσθαι, ὅπου ἐστὶν προσεχῶς ὑποτεταγμένη. ἡ μὲν οὖν πίστις σύντομός ἐστιν, ὡς εἰπεῖν, τῶν κατεπειγόντων γνῶσις, ἡ γνῶσις δὲ ἀπόδειξις τῶν διὰ πίστεως παρειλημμένων ἰσχυρὰ καὶ βέβαιος, διὰ τῆς κυριακῆς διδασκαλίας ἐποικοδομουμένη τῇ πίστει εἰς τὸ ἀμετάπτωτον καὶ μετ' ἐπιστήμης καὶ καταληπτὸν παραπέμπουσα."

This sentence begins with "ἡ μὲν οὖν," indicating a summation. It summarizes and transitions to discussing the relationship between faith and knowledge, stating that faith is brief and concerns urgent matters, while knowledge is a strong and firm demonstration of what is received through faith, built upon the Lord's teachings. The phrase "ἡ μὲν οὖν" in this context serves to summarize the previous detailed discussion about the gnostic soul's progress and ultimate goal, transitioning to a broader statement about the roles of faith and knowledge. The phrase connects the detailed mystical and spiritual progressions to a broader philosophical assertion about the nature and function of faith and knowledge. In this passage, "ἡ μὲν οὖν" is used to summarize the preceding discussion and to transition to a related but broader point about faith and knowledge.

Josephus frequently ends sections with this phrase.


III
(1)[98] Λωφήσαντος δὲ πρὸς βραχὺ τοῦ θύραζε πολέμου πάλιν τὸν ἔνδον ἡ στάσις ἐπήγειρεν. [99] Καὶ τῆς τῶν ἀζύμων ἐνστάσης ἡμέρας τεσσαρεσκαιδεκάτῃ Ξανθικοῦ μηνός, ἐν ᾗ δοκοῦσιν Ἰουδαῖοι τὸν πρῶτον ἀπαλλαγῆναι καιρὸν Αἰγυπτίων, οἱ μὲν περὶ τὸν Ἐλεάζαρον παρανοίγοντες τὰς πύλας ἐδέχοντο ἐκ τοῦ δήμου τοὺς προσκυνεῖν ἐθέλοντας εἴσω, [100] Ἰωάννης δὲ προκάλυμμα τῆς ἐπιβουλῆς ποιησάμενος τὴν ἑορτὴν τῶν σὺν αὐτῷ κρυπτοῖς ὅπλοις ἐνσκευάσας τοὺς ἀσημοτέρους, ὧν οἱ πλείους ἦσαν ἄναγνοι, διὰ σπουδῆς παρεισπέμπει προκαταληψομένους τὸ ἱερόν. Οἱ δ' ὡς ἔνδον ἐγένοντο, τὰς ἐσθῆτας ἀπορρίψαντες ἐφάνησαν ἐξαπίνης ὁπλῖται. [101] Ταραχὴ δὲ μεγίστη περὶ τὸν ναὸν αὐτίκα καὶ θόρυβος ἦν, τοῦ μὲν ἔξω τῆς στάσεως λαοῦ κατὰ πάντων ἄκριτον οἰομένων εἶναι τὴν ἐπίθεσιν, τῶν δὲ ζηλωτῶν ἐπὶ σφίσι μόνοις. [102] Ἀλλ' οἱ μὲν ἀφέμενοι τὸ φρουρεῖν ἔτι τὰς πύλας καὶ τῶν ἐπάλξεων καταπηδήσαντες πρὶν εἰς χεῖρας ἐλθεῖν εἰς τοὺς ὑπονόμους τοῦ ἱεροῦ κατέφυγον· οἱ δ' ἀπὸ τοῦ δήμου πρὸς τῷ βωμῷ καταπτήσσοντες καὶ περὶ τὸν ναὸν συνειλούμενοι κατεπατοῦντο ξύλοις τε ἀνέδην παιόμενοι καὶ σιδήρῳ. [103] Πολλοὺς δὲ τῶν ἡσυχίων κατ' ἔχθραν καὶ μῖσος ἴδιον ὡς ἀντιστασιαστὰς ἀνῄρουν οἱ διάφοροι, καὶ πᾶς ὁ προσκρούσας τῳ τῶν ἐπιβούλων πάλαι τηνικαῦτα ἐπιγνωσθεὶς ὡς ζηλωτὴς πρὸς αἰκίαν ἀνήγετο. [104] Πολλὰ δὲ δεινὰ τοὺς ἀναιτίους διαθέντες ἐκεχειρίαν τοῖς αἰτίοις ἔδοσαν, καὶ προελθόντας ἐκ τῶν ὑπονόμων διίεσαν. Αὐτοὶ δὲ καὶ τὸ ἐνδότερον ἱερὸν κατασχόντες καὶ τὰς ἐν αὐτῷ παρασκευὰς πάσας κατεθάρρουν ἤδη τοῦ Σίμωνος. [105] Ἡ μὲν οὖν στάσις οὕτω τριμερὴς οὖσα πρότερον εἰς δύο μοίρας περιίσταται

IV
(1)[63] Τίτος δὲ Καῖσαρ τῆς περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀγγελίας αὐτῷ κομισθείσης, ὅτι πάσαις μὲν ποθεινὸς ταῖς κατὰ τὴν Ἰταλίαν πόλεσιν ἐπῆλθεν, μάλιστα δ' ἡ Ῥώμη μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτὸν ἐδέξατο προθυμίας καὶ λαμπρότητος, εἰς πολλὴν χαρὰν καὶ θυμηδίαν ἐτράπετο, τῶν περὶ αὐτοῦ φροντίδων ὡς ἥδιστον ἦν ἀπηλλαγμένος. [64] Οὐεσπασιανὸν γὰρ ἔτι μὲν καὶ μακρὰν ἀπόντα πάντες οἱ κατὰ τὴν Ἰταλίαν ἄνθρωποι ταῖς γνώμαις περιεῖπον ὡς ἥκοντα, τὴν προσδοκίαν ἐκ τοῦ πάνυ θέλειν ἄφιξιν αὐτοῦ νομίζοντες καὶ πάσης ἀνάγκης ἐλευθέραν τὴν πρὸς αὐτὸν ἔχοντες εὔνοιαν. [65] Τῇ τε γὰρ βουλῇ κατὰ μνήμην τῶν γεγενημένων ἐν ταῖς τῶν ἡγεμόνων μεταβολαῖς συμφορῶν εὐκταῖον ἦν ἀπολαβεῖν ἡγεμόνα γήρως σεμνότητι καὶ πράξεων ἀκμῇ πολεμικῶν κεκοσμημένον, ᾧ τὴν ὑπεροχὴν πρὸς μόνην ἠπίσταντο τὴν τῶν ἀρχομένων σωτηρίαν ἐσομένην. [66] Καὶ μὴν ὁ δῆμος ὑπὸ τῶν ἐμφυλίων κακῶν τετρυχωμένος ἔτι μᾶλλον ἐλθεῖν αὐτὸν ἔσπευδε, τότε δὴ βεβαίως μὲν ἀπαλλαγήσεσθαι τῶν συμφορῶν ὑπολαμβάνων, ἀπολήψεσθαι δὲ τὴν ἄδειαν μετὰ τῆς εὐετηρίας πεπιστευκώς. [67] Ἐξαιρέτως δὲ τὸ στρατιωτικὸν εἰς αὐτὸν ἀφεώρα· μάλιστα γὰρ οὗτοι τῶν κατωρθωμένων αὐτῷ πολέμων ἐγίνωσκον τὸ μέγεθος, τῆς ἀπειρίας δὲ τῶν ἄλλων ἡγεμόνων καὶ τῆς ἀνανδρίας πεπειραμένοι πολλῆς μὲν αἰσχύνης αὐτοὺς ἐπεθύμουν ἀπηλλάχθαι, τὸν μόνον δὲ καὶ σώζειν αὐτοὺς καὶ κοσμεῖν δυνάμενον ἀπολαβεῖν ηὔχοντο. [68] Τοιαύτης δὲ εὐνοίας ἐξ ἁπάντων ὑπαρχούσης τοῖς μὲν κατὰ τὰς ἀξιώσεις προύχουσι τῶν ἀνδρῶν οὐκέτ' ἀνεκτὸν ἦν ἀναμένειν, ἀλλὰ πορρωτάτω τῆς Ῥώμης αὐτῷ προεντυχεῖν ἔσπευδον. [69] Οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ τῶν ἄλλων τις ἠνείχετο τῆς ἐντεύξεως τὴν ἀναβολήν, ἀλλ' οὕτως ἐξεχέοντο πάντες ἀθρόοι καὶ πᾶσιν εὐπορώτερον καὶ ῥᾷον ἐδόκει τοῦ μένειν τὸ ἀπιέναι, ὡς καὶ τὴν πόλιν αὐτὴν τότε πρῶτον ἐν ἑαυτῇ λαβεῖν ὀλιγανθρωπίας αἴσθησιν ἰδίαν· ἦσαν γὰρ ἐλάττους τῶν ἀπιόντων οἱ μένοντες. [70] Ἐπεὶ δὲ προσιὼν ἠγγέλλετο, καὶ τὴν ἡμερότητα τῆς ἐντεύξεως αὐτοῦ τὴν πρὸς ἑκάστους ἐδήλουν οἱ προσελθόντες, ἅπαν ἤδη τὸ λοιπὸν πλῆθος ἅμα γυναιξὶ καὶ παισὶν ἐπὶ ταῖς παρόδοις ἐξεδέχετο, [71] καὶ καθ' οὓς γένοιτο παριὼν οὗτοι πρὸς τὴν ἡδονὴν τῆς θέας καὶ τὸ μειλίχιον αὐτοῦ τῆς ὄψεως παντοίας ἠφίεσαν φωνάς, τὸν εὐεργέτην καὶ σωτῆρα καὶ μόνον ἄξιον ἡγεμόνα τῆς Ῥώμης ἀνακαλοῦντες· ἅπασα δ' ἡ πόλις ὡς νεὼς ἦν στεφανωμάτων καὶ θυμιαμάτων ἀνάπλεως. [72] Μόλις δ' ὑπὸ πλήθους τῶν περὶ αὐτὸν ἱσταμένων δυνηθεὶς εἰς τὸ βασίλειον ἐλθεῖν αὐτὸς μὲν τοῖς ἔνδον θεοῖς θυσίας τῆς ἀφίξεως χαριστηρίους ἐπετέλει, [73] προτρέπεται δὲ τὰ πλήθη πρὸς εὐωχίαν καὶ κατὰ φυλὰς καὶ γένη καὶ γειτονίας ποιούμενοι τὰς ἑστιάσεις ηὔχοντο τῷ θεῷ σπένδοντες αὐτόν τ' ἐπὶ πλεῖστον χρόνον Οὐεσπασιανὸν ἐπιμεῖναι τῇ Ῥωμαίων ἡγεμονίᾳ, καὶ παισὶν αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῖς ἐξ ἐκείνων ἀεὶ γινομένοις φυλαχθῆναι τὸ κράτος ἀνανταγώνιστον. [74] Ἡ μὲν οὖν Ῥωμαίων πόλις οὕτως Οὐεσπασιανὸν ἐκδεξαμένη προθύμως εὐθὺς εἰς πολλὴν εὐδαιμονίαν ἐπεδίδου.

Does the letter still lack a closing?
Best wishes,
Stephen

Not sure. Either way seems possible. It's fun analyzing things. In Josephus it is definitely used to end a section. Here is what I came up with in terms of sections concluded by the phrase in Josephus:

Flavius Josephus, De bello Judaico, 5.105 Ἡ μὲν οὖν στάσις οὕτω τριμερὴς οὖσα πρότερον εἰς δύο μοίρας περιίσταται “So the revolt which had been split into three factions was now down to two,”

7.74, Ἡ μὲν οὖν Ῥωμαίων πόλις οὕτως Οὐεσπασιανὸν ἐκδεξαμένη προθύμως εὐθὺς εἰς πολλὴν εὐδαιμονίαν ἐπεδίδου. “This was how the city of Rome joyfully welcomed Vespasian and soon reached great prosperity,”

Antiquities 5.9.1 ἡ μὲν οὖν Ὀρφᾶ μένει, τὴν δὲ Ῥούθην μὴ πεισθεῖσαν ἀπήγαγε κοινωνὸν παντὸς τοῦ προστυχόντος γενησομένην. “So Orpah stayed, but unable to persuade Ruth to stay she took her along, for she wished to share her fate, whatever it be.”

8.9.58 ἡ μὲν οὖν Εἱρώμου φιλία καὶ Σολόμωνος ἀπὸ τούτων ἔτι μᾶλλον ηὔξησε καὶ διαμένειν ὤμοσαν εἰς ἅπαν. “So the friendship between Hiram and Solomon grew stronger and they swore to continue it for ever.”

12.145 Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐπιστολὴ ταῦτα περιεῖχεν. σεμνύνων δὲ καὶ τὸ ἱερὸν πρόγραμμα κατὰ πᾶσαν τὴν βασιλείαν ἐξέθηκεν περιέχον τάδε: "These were the contents of this letter." (immediately after the citation of a letter referenced in the narrative)

12.228 Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐπιστολὴ ἡ πεμφθεῖσα ὑπὸ τοῦ Λακεδαιμονίων βασιλέως τοῦτον περιεῖχε τὸν τρόπον. "These were the contents of the letter sent by the king of the Spartans." (Again at the end of the citation of a letter as its conclusion).

16.220 ἐκείνη μὲν οὖν ἀντιμετατεθείσης τῆς ἐγγύης ἐγαμεῖτο τῷ Φερώρα μειρακίῳ φερνὴν ἐπιδόντος ἑκατὸν τάλαντα τοῦ βασιλέως. "Therefore, after the pledge had been exchanged, she was married to the young Pheroras, the king providing a dowry of one hundred talents."

So with Michael of Ephesus.

Michael of Ephesus, Commentary on Aristotle’s On Dreams
“And so this is the general idea [of what Aristotle wrote], but in the passage, “for sight, too, is a bright object and one that has colour”, ‘sight’ means the whole eye. Also, he says that “it is reasonable” that the eyes change during the period of menstruation. For since the whole body changes at that time, necessarily the eyes also change. After talking about ‘the eyes’ in the neuter, he shifts and talks about them in the masculine, saying ‘for they [masculine] are naturally veiny’. For the eyes [masculine] are veiny. He also says that, as among menstruating women, a certain bloody affection is produced around the eyes, so too it happens to us during the emission of semen. This is not obvious when we look into a mirror because of the fact that semen is naturally white.

‘The bronze mirror, because of how smooth it is, is especially sensitive to any touch.’

“The phrase ‘is especially sensitive’ can be paraphrased as, ‘it makes stains on it that are especially sensible and obvious to us.’ For just as noises are produced especially on smooth bodies because of the fact that the air on them is not broken up or in general divided up into very fine parts, so too on smooth mirrors the blemish becomes obvious because of the fact that they are continuous and unitary, so to speak, because of the extreme smoothness of the mirror. But on those that are not smooth they are not observed, since they are divided up into very fine parts because of the unevenness of the reflecting surface, and what is very fine is not easily sensed. Therefore, the smoothness is the cause of continuity, while the cleanliness is productive of the clarity. For if it were clean but not smooth, then it will not produce sensation since it is broken up into small parts due to the unevenness. It is clear that, in the case of clean mirrors, stains become visible deep down. But that sensation that is quick also apprehends the images from the sensible object quickly, this is not clear.

‘Evidence for what we’ve described are facts about wines and perfumery.’

“Having said ‘that change is caused even by small differences,’ as proof of it he adds what happens in the case of perfumery: ‘For oil, when it has been prepared, quickly takes on the scents of things close by.’ For the scent of something close by, when it changes the oil, gives it a share of its own scent.”

Ἡ μὲν οὖν διάνοια αὕτη, ἐν δὲ τῇ λέξει τῇ «καὶ γὰρ ἡ ὄψις τῶν λαμπρῶν καὶ ἐχόντων χρῶμα» ὄψιν τὸν ὅλον ὀφθαλμὸν εἴρηκε. λέγει δὲ καὶ ὅτι εὐλόγως ἐν τῷ τῶν καταμηνίων καιρῷ τὰ ὄμματα μεταβάλλει· τοῦ γὰρ σώματος ὅλου τότε μεταβάλλοντος ἀνάγκη συμμεταβάλλειν καὶ τὰ ὄμματα. εἰπὼν δὲ τὰ «ὄμματα,» τρέψας εἶπε τὴν λέξιν ἀρρενικῶς εἰπών· «καὶ γὰρ φύσει τυγχάνουσι φλεβώδεις ὄντες·» οἱ γὰρ ὀφθαλμοὶ φλεβώδεις. λέγει δὲ καὶ ὅτι, ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τῶν γυναικῶν γινομένων τῶν καταμηνίων γίνεταί τι πάθος περὶ τὰ ὄμματα αἱματικόν, οὕτω γίνεται καὶ ἡμῖν ἐν τῇ τοῦ σπέρματος προέσει. οὐ φαίνεται δὲ ἐνορῶσιν εἰς τὸ κάτοπτρον διὰ τὸ τὸ σπέρμα φύσει λευκὸν εἶναι.

ὥσπερ δὲ τῶν ἱματίων, τὰ μάλιστα καθαρὰ τάχιστα κηλιδοῦται· τὸ γὰρ καθαρὸν ἀκριβῶς δηλοῖ ὅ τι ἂν δέξηται, καὶ τὸ μάλιστα τὰς ἐλαχίστας κινήσεις. ὁ δὲ χαλκὸς διὰ μὲν τὸ λεῖος εἶναι ὁποιασοῦν ἁφῆς αἰσθάνεται μάλιστα (δεῖ δὲ νοῆσαι οἷον τρίψιν οὖσαν τὴν τοῦ ἀέρος ἁφὴν καὶ ὥσπερ ἔκμαξιν καὶ ἀνάπλυσιν), διὰ δὲ τὸ καθαρὸν ἔνδηλος γίνεται ὁπηλικηοῦν οὖσα. τοῦ δὲ μὴ ἀπιέναι ταχέως ἐκ τῶν καινῶν κατόπτρων αἴτιον τὸ καθαρὸν εἶναι καὶ λεῖον· διαδύεται γὰρ διὰ τῶν τοιούτων καὶ εἰς βάθος καὶ πάντῃ, διὰ μὲν τὸ καθαρὸν εἰς βάθος, διὰ δὲ τὸ λεῖον πάντῃ. ἐν δὲ τοῖς παλαιοῖς οὐκ ἐμμένει, ὅτι οὐχ ὁμοίως εἰσδύεται ἡ κηλὶς ἀλλ' ἐπιπολαιότερον.

«Ὁ δὲ χαλκὸς διὰ τὸ λεῖος εἶναι ὁποιασοῦν ἁφῆς αἰσθάνεται μάλιστα.»

Τὸ «αἰσθάνεται μάλιστα» ἴσον ἐστὶ τῷ ‘αἰσθητὰς μάλιστα καὶ διαδήλους ἡμῖν ποιεῖ τὰς ἐν αὐτῷ κηλῖδας’. ὥσπερ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς λείοις σώμασι μάλιστα γίνεται ὁ ψόφος διὰ τὸ μὴ θραύεσθαι ἐν αὐτοῖς τὸν ἀέρα μηδ' ὅλως εἰς λεπτότατα κατακερματίζεσθαι, οὕτω καὶ ἐν τοῖς λείοις κατόπτροις αἱ κηλῖδες διάδηλοι γίνονται διὰ τὸ μένειν συνεχεῖς καὶ ὡς εἰπεῖν μία διὰ τὴν τοῦ κατόπτρου λειότητα. ἐν δὲ τοῖς μὴ λείοις οὐχ ὁρῶνται, ὅτι κατακερματίζονται εἰς λεπτότατα διὰ τὴν τοῦ ἐνόπτρου ἀνωμαλίαν· τὸ δὲ λεπτότατον οὐκ εὐαίσθητον. τὸ μὲν οὖν λεῖόν ἐστιν αἴτιον τῆς συνεχείας, τὸ δὲ καθαρὸν τοῦ διαδήλους γίνεσθαι. κἂν γὰρ ᾖ καθαρὸν μὴ λεῖον δέ, εἰς μικρὰ κατακερματισθὲν διὰ τὴν ἀνωμαλίαν οὐ ποιήσει αἴσθησιν. ὅτι δὲ ἐν τοῖς καθαροῖς ἐνόπτροις εἰς βάθος ἐμφαίνονται αἱ ἐν αὐτοῖς κηλῖδες, δῆλον. ὅτι δὲ καὶ ἡ αἴσθησις ταχεῖα καὶ ταχέως ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῶν ἀπὸ τῶν αἰσθητῶν εἰδώλων, οὐδὲ τοῦτο ἄδηλον.

«Μαρτυρεῖ δὲ τοῖς εἰρημένοις καὶ τὰ περὶ τοὺς οἴνους καὶ τὴν μυρεψίαν συμβαίνοντα.»

Εἰπὼν «ὅτι μὲν οὖν καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν μικρῶν διαφορῶν γίνεται κίνησις,» πίστιν τούτου παράγει τὰ περὶ τὴν μυρεψίαν γινόμενα. «τὸ γὰρ παρασκευασθὲν ἔλαιον ταχέως λαμβάνει τὰς τῶν πλησίον ὀσμάς·» ἡ γὰρ ὀσμὴ τοῦ πλησίον κινήσασα τὸ ἔλαιον μετέδωκεν αὐτῷ τῆς οἰκείας ὀσμῆς.

So with Theophilus.

Dionysus and Althaea, daughter of Thestius, begot Deianeira, who with Heracles, son of Zeus, begot Hyllus, who begot Cleodaeus, who begot Aristomachus, who begot Temenus, who begot Cisseus, who begot Maron, who begot Thestius, who begot Achaeon, who begot Aristodamis, who begot Caranus, who begot Coenus, who begot Tyrimmas, who begot Perdiccas, who begot Philip, who begot Aeropus, who begot Alcetas, who begot Amyntas, who begot Bocchus, who begot Meleager, who begot Arsinoe, who with Lagus begot Ptolemy, called Soter, who with Berenice begot Ptolemy Philadelphus, who with Arsinoe begot Ptolemy Euergetes, who with Berenice, daughter of Magas, the king of Cyrene, begot Ptolemy Philopator. Thus, the kinship with Dionysus is contained for those who ruled in Alexandria. (ἡ μὲν οὖν πρὸς Διόνυσον τοῖς ἐν Ἀλεξανδρείᾳ βασιλεύσασιν συγγένεια οὕτως περιέχει.)

While it is not a conclusion per se, the phrase has a recapitulation function in Eusebius:
,

"Who will give from Zion the salvation of Israel?" The title, then, which requires much understanding, was spoken concerning the choral group that was about to be constituted among men through the salvation. (Ἡ μὲν οὖν προγραφὴ πολλῆς συνέσεως δεομένη ὑπὲρ τῆς χορείας ἐλέγετο τῆς μελλούσης διὰ τοῦ σωτηρίου συνίστασθαι ἐν ἀνθρώποις).

In Philo also it has a concluding function at the end of sections:

"But neither is the mind able to work, that is to activate, according to perception, unless God rains and showers upon the perceptible; nor is there benefit when the perceptible is wetted, unless the mind, like a spring, stretches itself up to the perception, moves it when it is still, and brings it to the apprehension of the subject. Thus, the mind and the perceptible always cooperate: the former, as the one moving perception towards the external like an artisan, and the latter, as the pre-existing material for perception, so that impulse may arise. For the living being surpasses the non-living in two ways: imagination and impulse. Imagination consists in the approach of the external, impressing the mind through perception, and impulse, the sibling of imagination, consists in the mind’s vigorous power, which, stretching through perception, grasps the subject and moves towards it, striving to reach and apprehend it. (ἡ μὲν οὖν φαντασία συνίσταται κατὰ τὴν τοῦ ἐκτὸς πρόσοδον τυποῦντος νοῦν δι' αἰσθήσεως, ἡ δὲ ὁρμή, τὸ ἀδελφὸν τῆς φαντασίας, κατὰ τὴν τοῦ νοῦ τονικὴν δύναμιν, ἣν τείνας δι' αἰσθήσεως ἅπτεται τοῦ ὑποκειμένου καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸ χωρεῖ γλιχόμενος ἐφικέσθαι καὶ συλλαβεῖν αὐτό)."

"The one who is according to the ideal is examined not only in the cultivation of virtues but is also a worker and guardian of them. This means he remembers what he has heard and practiced, while the artificial one neither works on the virtues nor guards them but only introduces himself into the teachings abundantly by God, intending immediately to flee from virtue. Therefore, the one whom He places alone in paradise, He calls artificial, but the one whom He appoints as both worker and guardian, He does not call artificial, but the one He has made; and this one He accepts, while the other He casts out. The one He accepts is worthy of three things, from which good nature is constituted: readiness, persistence, and memory. Thus, readiness is placement in paradise, persistence is the practice of good deeds [working on good deeds], and memory is the guarding and keeping of holy teachings. The artificial mind neither remembers the good nor works on it; it is only readily placed. Therefore, even though placed in paradise, it shortly flees and is cast out."

"Therefore, there he says is the gold (Gen. 2:11). He does not say that the gold is only there, but there where it is. For prudence, which he likened to gold, by its nature is guileless, pure, refined, tested, and valuable, and it is there in the wisdom of God. But being there, it is not a possession of wisdom, but it is where wisdom itself is, of the creator and possessor God. And the gold of that land is good (Gen. 2:12). Therefore, is there another gold that is not good? Very much so; for there are two kinds of prudence, one general and the other particular. The prudence in me, being particular, is not good; for when I am corrupted, it is also corrupted. But the general prudence, which resides in the wisdom of God and His house, is good; for it remains incorruptible in an incorruptible house."

"The mind, moreover, moves even concerning that which is not present, in the case of what is past through memory, and in the case of what is future through hope and expectation. For this reason, she shall be called woman (Gen. 2:23), meaning, therefore, that perception shall be called woman, because she is taken from man, who moves her, he says. Why then is this 'she' added? Because there is another perception, not taken from the mind, but created together with it. For there are, as I have already said, two perceptions: one by habit and one by activity. The one by habit is not taken from man, that is, from the mind, but is born together with it."

"Therefore, Joseph, the man of self-control, when the so-called pleasure said to him, 'Lie with me' (Gen. 39:7), and 'Being a man, suffer as a man and enjoy the pleasures of life,' he opposed, saying: 'I would sin against God, the lover of virtue, if I became a lover of pleasure; for this is a wicked deed.' And now he defends himself from afar, and soon he will resist vigorously, whenever the soul enters into its own house and, returning to its own principles, renounces bodily things and works as its own works those that are of the soul. Neither in the house of Joseph nor in that of Potiphar, but in its own house—and he does not add whose house, so that you may allegorize thoughtfully—does he perform his works (Gen. 39:11). Therefore, the house is the soul, into which he retreats, leaving external things, so that what is said may become inward within himself."

"What then is signified by the Cherubim and the flaming sword that turns every way must now be examined. Perhaps he implies the motion of the entire heaven through suppositions; for the spheres in the heavens have received a movement opposite to each other, the one that is fixed to the right, and the wandering one to the left. The outermost of the so-called fixed spheres is one, which also follows the same circuit from east to west, while the seven within, of the wandering ones, have both a voluntary and a compelled motion, holding contrary and double movements at the same time."

"Recognize, O soul, and understand who is the one who is hated and who is the son of the hated one, and immediately you will perceive that no one else but this one alone is worthy of honor. For each of us has two women living with us who are hostile and unfriendly to each other, striving to fill the house of the soul with jealousy and contention. One of these we love, considering her gentle, tame, most beloved, and most familiar to ourselves; she is called pleasure. The other we hate, considering her untamed, savage, extremely hostile; her name is virtue. She approaches in the manner of a harlot and a lowly woman, her walk broken by excessive luxury and extravagance, shaking her eyes with which she ensnares the souls of the young, gazing boldly with shamelessness, raising her neck, standing taller than her nature, her hair arranged and adorned, her face painted, her eyebrows dyed, using frequent hot baths, made ruddy, clothed in expensive and elaborately adorned garments, adorned with bracelets and necklaces and all other ornaments of gold and precious stones that constitute women's adornment, exuding the fragrance of the finest perfumes, considering the marketplace her home, a prowler at the crossroads, pursuing the counterfeit in place of genuine beauty."

"For Abraham, with zeal, speed, and all eagerness, went and urged virtue Sarah to hasten and knead three measures of fine flour and make cakes (Gen. 18:6), when God, attended by two of the highest powers, both Authority and Goodness, He being the middle one, produced threefold visions for the perceptive soul, each of which is immeasurable—for God is immeasurable, and so are His powers—but has measured all things. His goodness is the measure of good things, His authority is the measure of those who obey, and He Himself is the ruler of all, both bodies and incorporeal beings, through whom the powers, having taken the rule and the principles, have established the order for those beneath them."

"But he shall guard the watches, but he shall not perform works (Num. 8:24-26). Therefore, to one half he grants perfection—for the fiftieth number is perfect, but the half part of twenty-five—and allows to work and to perform the holy tasks, showing the approval through works—since, as someone of old said, the beginning is half of the whole—and to the perfect one, he no longer labors, but guards all the things he acquired through practice and toil. For may I never be an ascetic without also being a guardian of those things. Therefore, asceticism is in the middle, not perfect, for it exists in souls that are not perfect but striving for excellence."

"And God said, 'What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground' (Gen. 4:10). The phrase 'What have you done?' indicates both indignation at the impious deed and mockery of the one who thought he could commit murder. Therefore, the indignation arises from the intention of the perpetrator, because he planned to destroy what is good."

"What have you done, O wretched one? Do you not see that the godly reputation you thought you had destroyed lives on with God? But you have become the murderer of yourself, the only one with whom you could live blamelessly, having killed him from ambush. It is indeed eloquently stated, both in terms of the beauty of the expression and the discovery of the thoughts, the following: 'The voice of your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground' (Gen. 4:10). Therefore, the loftiness of the phrase is recognizable to all who are not uninitiated in words."

"What then should we say? Each of us, according to the immediate divisions, happens to be two things by number: a living being and a human. Each of these has a corresponding power related to the soul: the vital power, according to which we live, and the rational power, according to which we become rational. The vital power is shared also by irrational beings, but the rational power is not shared, for God rules it, being the source of the highest reason. The common power shared with the irrational beings has its essence as blood, while the one flowing from the rational source is the spirit, not moving air, but a type and character of divine power, which Moses calls by its proper name 'image,' indicating that God is the archetype of the rational nature, and man is the imitation and image, not the dual-natured being, but the highest form of the soul, which is called mind and reason."

"But the one pursuing virtue is examined in corresponding joys; for he has either acquired the good or will acquire it. Possessing it indeed constitutes joy, the most beautiful of possessions, while expecting to have it provides the nourishment of hopeful souls who love virtue. Through this hope, letting go of hesitation, with self-motivated readiness, we meet the good works. Therefore, wherever righteousness has given birth to a male offspring in the soul, the just reasoning, all distressing things are banished from it."

And indeed Lamech, being humility, is ambiguous; either we are humbled by the lowering of the soul's efforts due to the diseases and weaknesses arising from irrational passions, or we humble ourselves through the zeal for virtue, departing from swelling pride. The former occurs due to weakness, being a type of the multifaceted and varied leprosy."

"For it is said that the spies came to Hebron, and there were Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai, the descendants of Anak; and then it adds: 'And Hebron was built seven years before Zoan in Egypt' (Num. 13:23). It is very natural to distinguish homonyms by their forms. For Hebron is interpreted as 'union'; and this is twofold, [61] either of the soul joined with the body or of one harmonized with virtue. Therefore, the one submitting itself to physical unions has as inhabitants those mentioned."

"For these parents, there are four classes of children: one obedient to both, one attentive to neither and opposed to the former, and the other two each partially obedient. One of the latter is strongly devoted to the father, attending to him but disregarding the mother and her injunctions, while the other, seemingly devoted to the mother, serves her in all things but cares least for the father. The first, therefore, will bear the victorious prizes for all, while the opponent will receive defeat and destruction. Of the other two, each will claim second or third prizes, the one obeying the father the second prizes, and the one obeying the mother the third."

"But it is not permissible for such a one to even behold the sacred flame from afar. However, if one were to understand that neither the tabernacle nor the altar is to be called the visible things made from lifeless and perishable matter, but rather the invisible and intelligible contemplations, of which these are sensible images, he would be more astonished at the explanation. For, indeed, in everything the maker created both the model and the imitation, and he fashioned the archetypal seal of virtue, and from this marked out the most similar character. Therefore, the archetypal seal is an incorporeal idea, while the engraved image is now a body, by nature perceptible, though not necessarily perceivable."

"And she teaches that the uneven and rough path is impassable for souls that love virtue, but that they should walk smoothly along the highway without stumbling or slipping. Therefore, the interpretive power through the vocal organs and the logical discovery of sophisms, captivating with accurate persuasiveness, will necessarily be servants of the former, while food and drink will be necessary sustenance for the latter. The names of the two maidservants are written for us: Zilpah and Bilhah (Gen. 30:3, 9). Zilpah, when taken as a companion, is called the mouth, a symbol of interpretive and descriptive power, while Bilhah means swallowing, the first and most necessary support of mortal beings."

"And the oracle guarantees my promise, in which it is said: 'The Lord himself is his inheritance' (Deut. 10:9). Thus, souls are more inclined to give birth when they are conceiving rather than possessing. Just as the eyes of the body often see dimly and often clearly, in the same way, the eye of the soul sometimes receives the properties of things in a confused and indistinct manner, and sometimes in a clear and distinct manner. The unclear and indistinct reception resembles the embryo not yet fully formed in the womb, while the vivid and distinct reception is most like the fully formed one, crafted in every part both inside and out, and having received its proper shape."

"It is said, therefore, that the moon is not purely composed of ether like each of the other stars, but is a mixture of etheric and aerial substance. And the dark spot visible on it, which some call a face, is nothing other than the mixed air, which, being naturally dark, extends up to the heavens. Thus, the ladder in the cosmos, spoken of symbolically, is of this nature, but if we examine it in humans, we will find it to be the soul, whose base is the earth-like element, perception, and its head is the heavenly, the purest mind."

"[241] Therefore, he himself says: 'I am the God, whose image you first saw as me and upon which you inscribed a most sacred epitaph on the pillar and dedicated it' (Gen. 31:13). The epitaph declared that 'I alone stand' (Exod. 17:6) and that I established the nature of all things, bringing disorder and chaos into order and arrangement and supporting everything so that it may be firmly established by my mighty and pre-existing word. For the pillar is a symbol of three things: standing, dedication, and inscription. The standing and the inscription have been declared, but the dedication must necessarily be made known."

"For it is said: 'And your sheaves turned and bowed down to my sheaf' (Gen. 37:7). For the lover of modesty is amazed at the stiff-necked, the pious at the stubborn, and the one who values equality at the one who is unequal to himself and others. Perhaps not without reason, for being an observer not only of human life but of all things in the world, the wise man knows how much necessity, fortune, opportunity, violence, and power usually exert influence, and how many suppositions and great successes running swiftly up to heaven they have overturned and dashed to pieces. So he will necessarily take up piety as a shield, a kindred guardian to prevent suffering anything terrible from an attack. For, I think, just as a wall is to a city, so is piety to each individual. Are not those who strive to display untimely frankness erring and mad, daring at times to speak and act contrary to kings and tyrants, not realizing that they have yoked not only their necks like cattle, but have surrendered their entire bodies and souls, wives and children, parents and the large family connection of friends and kin, to be driven and directed at will by the driver and overseer, with complete ease? Therefore, being branded, whipped, mutilated, and suffering all other harsh things before death brutally and mercilessly, they are led away and die. These are the wages of untimely frankness, not frankness judged by the wise, but foolishness and insanity full of incurable melancholy. What do you say? Seeing a raging storm, heavy adverse wind, a tempest roaring, and a tumultuous sea, should one who ought to anchor, set sail and venture out? What captain or shipowner was ever so drunk and deranged that when those conditions descended, he wished to sail, so that the ship, overwhelmed by the sea, becomes a floating wreck for them? For one wishing to sail safely, it was possible to wait for a fair wind, both favorable and calm. What then? Seeing a bear or wild boar or lion charging, should one who ought to tame and pacify it, enrage and provoke it to make himself a feast for the most cruel flesh-eaters? If even for the Egyptians’ snakes and asps and others that carry deadly poison, it is not advantageous to resist, bringing certain death to those once bitten; it is preferable to charm and make them gentle to avoid suffering anything terrible from them. Are there not people more savage and treacherous than pigs, snakes, and asps? Whose treachery and hostility can only be escaped by using taming and soothing methods. Therefore, the wise Abraham bowed to the sons of Heth—who are interpreted as outcasts—persuaded by the times to act so. Not out of respect for those who by nature, lineage, and customs are enemies of reason, who pitifully destroy the coinage of the soul, education, wasting it and shattering it, did he come to bow, but fearing their present power and impregnable strength, avoiding provocation, a great and secure possession and exercise of virtue, the best dwelling of wise souls, the double cave, which is taken not by fighting and warring but by surpassing and serving with reason. What then? Do we not also, when lingering in the marketplace, bow to rulers and also to burdens? But with opposite opinions and not the same; to rulers in honor, but to burdens out of fear of being harmed by them. And when times permit, attacking the enemy's force is good to overthrow it, but when not allowed, it is safe to rest quietly, wishing to find some benefit from them by appropriate taming. Therefore, it is now worthy to praise those who do not yield to the commander of empty glory, but resist and say: 'Will you indeed reign over us?' (Gen. 37:8). For they do not yet see him as strong, not like a flame burning and shining in abundant fuel, but still like a spark being kindled, dreaming of glory, not yet pursuing it clearly. They entertain good hopes for themselves, as if they could even avoid capture. Hence they say: 'Will you indeed reign over us?' meaning, 'Do you think you will rule over us while we are alive, existing, strong, and breathing? Perhaps you will prevail if we become weak, but while we are strong, you will be subjected to obedience.' And so it naturally is: whenever the right reason is strong in the mind, empty glory is dissolved and is strengthened when it weakens. So as long as the soul still retains its own power and no part of it is amputated, let it have the courage to strike and shoot at the opposing pride and speak freely, saying: 'You will neither reign nor lord over us' (ibid.), neither over us nor over others. But we will overcome your uprisings and threats with one attack, along with your armed followers and bodyguards, descendants of prudence. It is said of them that they added to their hatred for him because of his dreams and words (ibid.). But all the words and dreams that pride idolizes are lies, while deeds and clear realities belong to the right life and reason. The false ones are hateful, while the true ones, full of lovable truth, are worthy of friendship. Therefore, let no one dare to accuse the virtues of such men as exhibiting misanthropy and fraternal hatred. Instead, learn that it is not a person now being judged but the boastful and pride-loving traits in each soul. Accept those who lift up implacable enmity and irreconcilable hatred against it and never love the one despised by them, knowing precisely that such judges of opinion would never err if they are healthy in mind. Learning and being educated from the beginning to worship and honor the true king, the Lord, they are indignant if anyone usurps the honor of God and calls his supplicants to his own service. Therefore, they will boldly say: 'Will you indeed reign over us?' Or do you not know that we are not autonomous, but ruled by the immortal king, the only God? And what? Will you indeed rule over us (Gen. 37:8)? Do we not have and will always have the same Lord? Serving him, we have become more free than anyone else in freedom. For serving God is the best of all honors in existence. I would therefore wish to be able to remain steadfast in what these have known; for they are exact judges, overseers, and supervisors of matters, not bodies, always vigilant, so as not to be deceived by any of the usual temptations. But I, intoxicated until now and using great obscurity, need supports and guides like the blind need them; for perhaps by leaning on them, I might neither stumble nor slip. If some, knowing themselves to be unexamined and thoughtless, do not strive to follow exactly and carefully what the examined ones require, unaware of the way known to those who know, let them know that they will not be able to proceed if they step into impassable ravines. As for me, whenever I release a little of my intoxication, I am so reconciled to them that I consider the same person to be both enemy and friend. And now, no less than then, I will hate and detest the dreamer because even they will. And no one who thinks rightly would blame me for always prevailing over the opinions and votes of the many. But when he changes to a better life and no longer dreams, nor suffers from the vain imaginations of the vainglorious, and does not dream of night, darkness, and uncertain and unprovable events, but rising from the deep sleep remains vigilant, accepting clarity over obscurity, truth over falsehood, day over night, and light over darkness, and turns away from the Egyptian woman, the pleasure of the body, who invites him to enter her and enjoy her company (Gen. 39:7) due to his desire for self-control and unspeakable zeal for piety, then he will claim again the part of virtue that he had seemed to lose, justifying himself in reclaiming it, and with gradual improvements, being established at the peak and end of his life, he will declare what he has precisely learned through experience: that it is of God (Gen. 50:19) and no longer at all of any of the perceptible things that have come into existence. His brothers will make reconciling agreements, turning hatred into friendship and malice into goodwill. And I, his follower—for I learned to obey them as masters like a servant—will not cease praising him for his repentance. For even Moses, the hierophant, preserves his repentance, worthy of desire and remembrance, from corruption through the symbol of the bones, which he did not think it necessary to allow to remain buried in Egypt until the end (Exod. 13:19), considering it utterly dreadful to let any goodness that has blossomed in the soul wither away and be obliterated by floods, which the Egyptian river of passions, the body, constantly pours out through all the senses. Therefore, the appearance that appeared in the bundles has been called separation from the earth."

Ἡ μὲν οὖν προτέρα τριὰς τῶν ἀρετὴν ἐπιποθησάντων δεδήλωται. [Thus, the first triad of those who desired virtue has been declared."]

"But since of the two powers, one is beneficent and the other punitive, each naturally appeared in the land of the Sodomites because out of the five best cities in it, four were destined to be burned, while one was to remain safe and free from all evil. For destruction was to occur through the punitive power, but salvation through the beneficent one. But since even the part that was to be saved did not possess complete and perfect virtues, it was indeed benefitted by the power of the being, but primarily due to its lack of worthiness to receive that vision. Therefore, this is the evident and public retribution for the many."

"Of the forty cubits, which are counted from the width of the ten curtains, thirty belong to the length—for such is also the length of the tent—while nine belong to the rear chamber, and the remaining portion to the vestibule, so that it forms the entire covering; and on the vestibule is the veil. And almost the curtains are like veils, not only in covering the roof and the walls but also in being woven from the same materials, hyacinth and purple and scarlet and fine linen. From these same materials were made both the veil and the so-called covering, the one inside on the four pillars, to conceal the sanctuary, and the one outside on the five, so that no one not consecrated might be able to see the holy things from afar. He chose the materials of the fabrics with the utmost care, selecting from countless options those corresponding in number to the elements from which the world was created, and which were related to them: earth, water, air, and fire. For fine linen comes from the earth, purple from water, hyacinth resembles air (for it is naturally dark), and scarlet from fire, since both are crimson. It was necessary for those constructing the sacred handmade tent for the father and ruler of all to use substances similar to those from which He created the universe. So the tent, like a holy temple, was constructed in the manner described.

"Now, the decad encompasses the distinctive properties of triangles, squares, and other polygons, as well as those of musical harmonies. These include the harmony through the fourth, in a ratio of 4:3; the harmony through the fifth, in a ratio of 3:2; the harmony through the octave, in a ratio of 2:1; and the harmony through the double octave, in a ratio of 8:2. Hence, it seems to me that the ancients, who were wise, appropriately named it 'decad,' as it receives and contains all kinds of numbers and numerical proportions, as well as harmonies and consonances. Moreover, in addition to the aforementioned reasons, one might justifiably marvel at the decad for containing both the continuous and the discrete nature. The continuous is arranged according to the point alone, while the discrete is arranged according to three forms: line, surface, and solid."

"Thus, these are the things that needed to be declared in advance. Now, we must turn to the sayings themselves and investigate all the different aspects within them. Being ten in number, he divided them into two sets of five, inscribing them on two tablets. The first set of five took precedence, while the second was considered secondary. Yet both are good and beneficial for life, paving wide and public roads that end in a single goal, leading the aspiring soul to an unfaltering journey toward the best. The better set of five was as follows:"

"But the special privilege that the number seven is considered to possess among existing things is demonstrated by those who have devoted themselves to learning, having diligently and carefully investigated it. For this is the virgin in numbers, the nature without a mother, most akin to the monad and the beginning, the ideal of the planets, as it is also the monad of the fixed sphere. For the incorporeal heaven is made from the monad and the heptad, the paradigm of the visible. The heaven consists of both the indivisible nature and the divisible. The indivisible nature has received the first, highest, and unchanging revolution, which the monad oversees, while the divisible nature has received the second in both power and order, which is governed by the heptad, which, distributed into six parts, formed the seven planets."

On the holy month, two kinds of sacrifices are appropriately offered, as there are two aspects concerning it: one as a new moon, and the other as a holy month. As a new moon, it is prescribed to perform the same rituals as for the other sacrifices, but as a holy month, the offerings are doubled, except for the calves

"The stomach, receiving food, performs its secondary function, for which it is naturally assigned, processing the food into chyme. Two tubular ducts extend from the stomach into the liver, pumping into its interconnected reservoirs. The liver has a dual function: one for separation and the other for blood formation. The separating function diverts all the indigestible and coarse material into the adjacent gall bladder, while the other function turns the pure and filtered part into highly vital blood through the surrounding heat, which is then pressed into the heart. From there, as mentioned, it is conveyed through the veins throughout the entire body, becoming nourishment for it."

"First, there is the remembrance of God, which is the highest good that can be found. Then, there is the most righteous reward to the cause of the abundance: the truth. For the things that come from agricultural skill are few or nothing, such as raising furrows, digging around and circling a plant, deepening a ditch, pruning excessive growths, or performing some similar tasks. But the things from nature are all necessary and useful: highly fertile soil, well-watered areas with springs, rivers, natural streams, torrents, and annual rains, with air blowing life-giving breezes. The forms of sown crops and plants are countless. For which of these did man either find or create? Nature, which produces them, did not begrudge man its own goods, considering him the most dominant of mortal creatures because he shares in reason and wisdom. It chose him in the best way and called him to participate in its own blessings."

Concerning Contests, Punishments, and Blessings

[1] There are three types of the sayings delivered through the prophet Moses: those concerning the creation of the world, those historical, and those legislative. The account of the creation of the world is entirely noble and divinely fitting, beginning with the creation of the heavens and ending with the formation of man.

ΠΕΡΙ ΑΘΛΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΕΠΙΤΙΜΙΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΑΡΩΝ   Τῶν μὲν οὖν διὰ τοῦ προφήτου Μωυσέως λογίων τρεῖς ἰδέας εἶναι συμβέβηκε, τὴν μὲν περὶ κοσμοποιίας, τὴν δὲ ἱστορικήν, τὴν δὲ τρίτην νομοθετικήν. ἡ μὲν οὖν κοσμοποιία παγκάλως πᾶσα καὶ θεοπρεπῶς μεμήνυται, λαβοῦσα τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀπὸ γενέσεως οὐρανοῦ καὶ λήξασα εἰς ἀνθρώπου κατασκευήν·

The living being excels over the non-living in two ways: imagination and impulse. Imagination arises from the mind's reception of the external form through sensation, while impulse, the companion of imagination, stems from the mind's dynamic power. The mind, through sensation, grasps the subject and proceeds toward it, desiring to reach and capture it.

In Clement of Alexandria.

Since why does not everyone know the truth? And why is righteousness not loved, if righteousness belongs to everyone? But the mysteries are handed down mystically so that it may be in the mouth of the speaker and the one to whom it is spoken, rather than in voice but in understanding. God gave to the church the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, for the equipping of the saints, for the work of ministry, for the building up of the body of Christ. Therefore, the writing of these reminders, I know well, is weak compared to that graceful spirit, which we have been deemed worthy to hear, yet it might be an image recalling the archetype to the one struck by the thyrsus.

[at the end of 1.16] Thus, Greek philosophy, according to some, incidentally reaches the truth in certain respects, though faintly and not entirely. Others claim its movement comes from the devil. Some assert that certain underlying powers inspired the entire philosophical pursuit. But even if Greek philosophy does not grasp the greatness of truth and fails to practice the Lord's commands, it nonetheless prepares the way for the most royal teaching, instructing prudently and exemplifying morals, and bringing those who glorify providence to accept the truth.

[at the beginning of 1.28 but the second last chapter of Book 1] Moses' philosophy is divided into four parts: the historical, which is directly related to ethical discourse; the legislative, properly called so, which belongs to moral treatment; the third part is the sacerdotal, which pertains to natural theory; and the fourth, above all, is the theological aspect, the vision that Plato refers to as truly belonging to the great mysteries, and Aristotle calls this type of study "metaphysics."

"He has not forbidden wealth gained rightly, but rather wealth gained unjustly and greedily. For acquisition pursued with lawlessness becomes less. For there are those who sow more and produce more, and those who gather less. Concerning whom it is written: He has dispersed, he has given to the poor; his righteousness endures forever. For the one who sows and gathers more is the one who acquires heavenly and eternal things through earthly and temporary distribution. Another who gives nothing to anyone, but vainly treasures up on earth where moth and rust destroy (concerning whom it is written: gathering wages into a bag with holes), the Lord says in the gospel that his land was fertile, and when he wished to store up the fruits, planning to build larger barns, he said to himself in the parable: You have many goods laid up for many years; eat, drink, be merry. Fool, he said, this very night your soul is required of you. Now, the things you have prepared, whose will they be? Therefore, human self-control, according to the philosophers of the Greeks, promises to fight against desire and not serve it in deeds but our self-control means not to desire at all, so that one not only endures desire but also controls the act of desiring."

"Regarding martyrdom, the Lord has spoken explicitly, and let us compile the differently written passages: 'I tell you, everyone who confesses me before men, the Son of Man will also confess him before the angels of God; but whoever denies me before men, I will also deny him before the angels. For whoever is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. Therefore, everyone who confesses me before men, I will also confess him before my Father in heaven. When they bring you before synagogues and rulers and authorities, do not worry about how you should defend yourself or what you should say; for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.' Interpreting this passage, Heracleon, the most esteemed of the Valentinian school, says that confession is both in faith and in conduct, and in voice. The confession in voice happens even before authorities, which many, he says, wrongly consider to be the only confession. Even hypocrites can make this confession."

It is Heracleon who uses Ἡ μὲν οὖν so it is hard to determine how he originally used it because it is now only preserved in this sentence.

This is the most like the Letter to Theodore in structure:

"Do not be proud of your wisdom," say the Proverbs, "but acknowledge her in all your ways so that she may make your paths straight, and your foot will not stumble." For it means to show through these things that works must follow reason and that we must make use of all education for our benefit. The ways of wisdom are various, but they lead straight to the path of truth, and this path is faith. "Do not let your foot stumble," it says, referring to those who seem to oppose the one divine and providential governance. Hence, it continues, "Do not be wise in your own eyes," which pertains to the atheistic thoughts that resist the economy of God. Instead, fear the only powerful God, against whom nothing stands. Furthermore, the inducement clearly teaches that divine fear is a departure from evil. It says, "Turn away from every evil." This is the instruction of wisdom; for the Lord disciplines the one he loves, making him experience pain for understanding, but restoring him to peace and incorruption. Thus, the barbarian philosophy that we follow is truly perfect and true.

Ἡ μὲν οὖν βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία, ἣν μεθέπομεν ἡμεῖς, τελεία τῷ ὄντι καὶ ἀληθής.

"The barbarian philosophy, which we follow, is truly complete and true."

Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἀληθὴς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀληθῆ φιλοσοφίαν ἐξήγησις

"The true and according to the true philosophy explanation."

Both sentences, "ἡ μὲν οὖν βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία, ἣν μεθέπομεν ἡμεῖς, τελεία τῷ ὄντι καὶ ἀληθής." and "Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἀληθὴς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀληθῆ φιλοσοφίαν ἐξήγησις," exhibit a striking similarity in their structure and thematic focus, suggesting they were likely penned by the same author. Both sentences commence with "ἡ μὲν οὖν," establishing a comparative or explanatory tone that is characteristic of a nuanced philosophical argumentation. The repeated emphasis on "ἀληθής" (true) and "φιλοσοφία" (philosophy) in both phrases underscores a preoccupation with the authenticity and correctness of philosophical thought, reflecting a consistent intellectual concern. Additionally, the meticulous construction of these sentences, wherein each element is carefully juxtaposed to convey a sense of completeness and coherence, points to a sophisticated and deliberate writing style. The author’s balanced and harmonious use of language further supports the notion of a singular, coherent authorship, one that is adept at expressing complex ideas with clarity and precision.

It is entirely possible that "The true and according to the true philosophy explanation" is the original conclusion to the Letter to Theodore (i.e. there is no missing fragment).

Here is the situation:

1. Morton Smith might be imagined to have "built" the conclusion of his letter after this passage in the Stromata:

"Do not be proud of your wisdom," say the Proverbs, "but acknowledge her in all your ways so that she may make your paths straight, and your foot will not stumble." For it means to show through these things that works must follow reason and that we must make use of all education for our benefit. The ways of wisdom are various, but they lead straight to the path of truth, and this path is faith. "Do not let your foot stumble," it says, referring to those who seem to oppose the one divine and providential governance. Hence, it continues, "Do not be wise in your own eyes," which pertains to the atheistic thoughts that resist the economy of God. Instead, fear the only powerful God, against whom nothing stands. Furthermore, the inducement clearly teaches that divine fear is a departure from evil. It says, "Turn away from every evil." This is the instruction of wisdom; for the Lord disciplines the one he loves, making him experience pain for understanding, but restoring him to peace and incorruption. Thus, the barbarian philosophy that we follow is truly perfect and true.

2. The problem is that the section ends with ἡ μὲν οὖν βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία, ἣν μεθέπομεν ἡμεῖς, τελεία τῷ ὄντι καὶ ἀληθής. It's not a fragment. ἡ μὲν οὖν βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία, ἣν μεθέπομεν ἡμεῖς, τελεία τῷ ὄντι καὶ ἀληθής ends the exegesis of Proverbs and then another exegetical discussion starts. So according to the forgery hypothesis Morton Smith "cobbled together" random words and passages from the Stromateis to make a fake letter of Clement. Ok but I've just demonstrated that there are like 15 sentences which begin with ἡ μὲν οὖν. Are you trying to tell me he took one of those 14 other sentences and took out his hammer and nails and "built" a sentence that looks like ἡ μὲν οὖν βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία, ἣν μεθέπομεν ἡμεῖς, τελεία τῷ ὄντι καὶ ἀληθής from the other 14? No that would seem unlikely. So he must have used THIS sentence. But why would he use THIS sentence which doesn't go on to further exegesis to pretend that the letter originally went on to discuss more exegesis? Makes no sense. ἡ μὲν οὖν βάρβαρος φιλοσοφία, ἣν μεθέπομεν ἡμεῖς, τελεία τῷ ὄντι καὶ ἀληθής is a dead end in Strom. 2.2.5.1. Clement doesn't have anything more to say and then goes straight on to another scripture:

"He says in Wisdom: 'For He Himself has granted me knowledge of what exists, to know the structure of the world and the operations of the elements, to understand the forces of roots.' In all these things, He has comprehended the natural contemplation according to the visible world of all things that have come into being. Next, He hints about the intelligible things by what follows: 'I have known both what is hidden and what is manifest; for Wisdom, the fashioner of all things, has taught me.' Here, you have in brief the aim of our philosophy. The learning of these things, practiced with right conduct, leads through the wisdom that is the fashioner of all things to the ruler of all, a difficult thing to capture and even more difficult to hunt, always retreating and moving further away from the pursuer."

So Strom 2.2.5.1 uses a sentence that starts with ἡ μὲν οὖν to end a section. The Letter to Theodore ends the letter with ἡ μὲν οὖν too. Why does Morton Smith think there was more to the letter and it got destroyed in a fire at the Mar Saba monastery and blah blah blah. Because he doesn't know what he is talking about.

I was reading in Smith's 1973 book that he says somewhere that after 1961 he stopped looking at the Letter as a letter of Clement and devoted himself only to the Secret Gospel of Mark.[1] That's very telling. Had he studied the Stromata he would realize that the last line of the letter is probably the end of the exegesis of Secret Mark. Nothing originally followed. It's a letter after all. He didn't have pages to examine the gospel and says in Book 5 that a letter isn't the proper place to explain the divine mysteries.

But here's the standard translation of the section from Book 2. I will just go over it one more time so you can see what I mean. He starts out with a passage from Proverbs:

Be not elated on account of your wisdom, say the Proverbs. In all your ways acknowledge her, that she may direct your ways, and that your foot may not stumble. By these remarks he means to show that our deeds ought to be conformable to reason, and to manifest further that we ought to select and possess what is useful out of all culture. Now the ways of wisdom are various that lead right to the way of truth. Faith is the way. Your foot shall not stumble is said with reference to some who seem to oppose the one divine administration of Providence. Whence it is added, Be not wise in your own eyes, according to the impious ideas which revolt against the administration of God. But fear God, who alone is powerful. Whence it follows as a consequence that we are not to oppose God. The sequel especially teaches clearly, that the fear of God is departure from evil; for it is said, and depart from all evil. Such is the discipline of wisdom (for whom the Lord loves He chastens ), [Prov. iii. 5, 6, 7, 12, 23] causing pain in order to produce understanding, and restoring to peace and immortality. Accordingly, the Barbarian philosophy, which we follow, is in reality perfect and true.

And that's the end of the exegesis of Proverbs. Immediately he brings up another scripture:

And so it is said in the book of Wisdom: For He has given me the unerring knowledge of things that exist, to know the constitution of the word, and so forth, down to and the virtues of roots. Among all these he comprehends natural science, which treats of all the phenomena in the world of sense. And in continuation, he alludes also to intellectual objects in what he subjoins: And what is hidden or manifest I know; for Wisdom, the artificer of all things, taught me. [Wisd. 7. 17, 20, 21, 22] You have, in brief, the professed aim of our philosophy. [ἔχεις ἐν βραχεῖ τὸ ἐπάγγελμα τῆς καθ' ἡμᾶς φιλοσοφίας]

That's the end of the next scriptural exegesis. So it's back to back scriptural exegeses and then immediately afterward there is yet another discussion. [/quote]

There are two closed discussions of scripture only to be followed by a completely new discussion:

And the learning of these branches, when pursued with right course of conduct, leads through Wisdom, the artificer of all things, to the Ruler of all — a Being difficult to grasp and apprehend, ever receding and withdrawing from him who pursues. But He who is far off has — oh ineffable marvel!— come very near. I am a God that draws near, says the Lord. He is in essence remote; for how is it that what is begotten can have approached the Unbegotten? But He is very near in virtue of that power which holds all things in its embrace. Shall one do anything in secret, and I see him not? Jeremiah 23:23-24 For the power of God is always present, in contact with us, in the exercise of inspection, of beneficence, of instruction.

The idea that Morton Smith took this passage which ends a discussion of one scripture and used it to argue that ἡ μὲν οὖν was the beginning of a lost "fragment" discussing the Secret Gospel in more detail is fucking eisegesis on Smith's part. Smith wanted more. He wanted there to be more in the letter. There wasn't. He didn't forge the letter.

[1] At the beginning of the section which dealt with the Clementine portion of the Letter on p. 6.

T h e w ork for this chapter was com pleted in 1961, a t w hich tim e I turned from C lem en t to study the Gospel fragm ent. Since that tim e I have m ade on ly m inor changes in the text and have not attem pted to take accoun t o f recent publications on C lem ent, o f w hich I should m ention as particularly valu able A . M e h a t’s Etude. I have not been persuaded b y P. N au tin ’s attem pt to redate the events o f C lem en t’s later life (Lettres, i3 g f) though the traditional dates are certain ly dubious (Barnes, Origen, 314 f.)

Apart from the purely grammatical issues, there is the problem that if the letter was intended to conclude there, then it is hard to see how it could possibly have been expected to reassure Theodore. As the letter stands, behind the bluster, it basically tells Theodore that the Carpocratians are mostly right.

Andrew Criddle