But not only is the question not solved by all these considerations, but, on the contrary, it is even more difficult to solve when it is asserted, on the basis of the authority of Dionysius, not only that everything is eternal in God, but also that God Himself is manifested in everything, a proposition "unheard of and unknown to many and almost everyone," which will seem strange even to those who are considered wise. In order to explain and prove the possibility of such a conception, Erigena goes on to refer to an example borrowed from arithmetic as the science of numbers, but "not those which we count, but by which we count," and which are not found in any subject, "having themselves as their substance," i.e., as the science of objective laws which underlie the function of counting, and which have meaning independently of any substratum. on which they are carried out[759].

Unity, or the idea of unity, according to Erigene, as an objective "monad", presupposes and in itself includes multiplicity. Just as multiplicity is inconceivable without unity, so unity is always the unity of something many united. In the monad, therefore, all numbers exist from eternity. The eternal existence of numbers and their objective significance is proved by the fact that "in the number 6 the Creator did all His works" and distributed everything that exists in time, and times themselves, and that which is above time, and that God created everything by measure, number, and weight. Existing eternally in their essence in the monad and possessing the potential to reveal themselves, the laws of number are manifested in the function of numbering inherent in the human spirit and in the multiplicity of material objects to be numbered, which is revealed to the external sense of man. In so far as numbers, having themselves an eternal objective meaning, i.e., existing in the divine mind, reveal themselves at the same time, in one way or another, to the human spirit, they can be called both eternal and created. Thus, they are recognized as created, since they manifest themselves for human consciousness.

For Erigena, this is actually more than a simple example. In discussing numbers, he solves the question of the relation of the many in general to the One, and of the origin of the former from the latter, in the sense that the many have always existed in the One as eternal, and in the conditions of temporal existence it is revealed only to the consciousness of finite beings. Remarking that by "monad" he does not mean the Absolute itself, but the "created monad," i.e., the idea of unity existing in the Absolute, he goes on to say that the numbers which have been in it since eternity, when they are manifested even in sensible objects, do not borrow matter for their manifestation from without, but from themselves, and discusses in general the possibility of a purely spiritual being assuming sensible forms when they are discovered. and the question of this does not bother the philosopher, since he resolves all material existence into spiritual elements, as will be said later.

In spite of all these explanations, however, in spite of the student's amazement at the discourse on the Logos, and especially on the teacher's mathematical contemplations, the main question still remains unclear. It is not clear how one and the same thing can be both eternal in the divine Word, and created, manifested in time; for that which existed in the Word as eternal does not cease to be in Him even when it is manifested in time, as Ev. John: All things were there, and without Him nothing was (John 1:3), i.e. everything came through the Word, and at the same time nothing exists outside the Word (χωρίς)[764]. It remains to admit that all reason is powerless to solve it, and that it is above all intellect, even that of the angels, and only to believe that everything that exists in time and from eternity exists in Him who creates time itself, and at the same time is created.

"It surprises me and even makes me agitated," the teacher finally replies to the constantly repeated question, "how can you reconcile with reason the proposition of the eternity and creation of everything, why do you seek a rational foundation for that in relation to which all reason is powerless, or a clear understanding of that which is above all reason? Do you think that the intent of divine wisdom can be clear to human or angelic minds when you read that the mysterious animals (seen by the prophet and signifying seraphim, Isaiah 6:2)

f. From the firstfruits of spiritual creation to the last worm, knowing that the faculties of their nature are not sufficient to comprehend it, why do we, who are still under the burden of the flesh, try to point out a rational basis for divine providence and action? Here we must think only of the divine will, which acts in everything as it wills, because it is omnipotent, and puts into nature hidden and unsearchable foundations, since it is itself the foundation of everything; Nothing is more hidden than it, nothing is so manifest as it is, it is difficult [to understand it] where it is, it is difficult where it is not, the ineffable light that is always present with the mental eyes of all beings, although in itself it is not known by any mind, is spread to infinity in everything, and is all in all, and nothing in nothing." "Let us believe," it is further said, "contemplating and with the eye of the mind, as far as it is granted, that all things visible and invisible, eternal and temporal, and eternity itself, and time, and places, and spaces, and everything that is called as substance or accident, generally speaking, everything that only contains the totality of all nature, — in the only-begotten Word of God, both eternal and created, and neither eternity here precedes creation, nor the creation of eternity, since the eternity of all things named is created, and the creation is eternal in the foundation of the Word; for all that seems to come into being through birth in the order of ages in times and places, from eternity was created together and once in the Word of the Lord." And with regard to phenomena occurring in time, it is impossible to give an account of why they occur in this way and not in another, in this order and not in another. Who, then, can comprehend the eternal creation of all things in the Word? One can only point out the reasons why everything must be recognized as both eternal and created, but this antinomy cannot be resolved.

The basic point of view, however, is fully maintained, and only the position is more firmly established: not only does everything exist in God, but there is even God Himself. To the above references to Dionysius are added new references partly to him,[767] partly to Maximus and Basil the Great, also to St. Scripture, and then especially the arguments of reason.

Not only Dionysius, but also Maximus calls God the essence of the existing[768]. According to Basil, the divine Word, or creative command, is the very nature of that which is created by this Word[769]. Who has examined the wisdom of God, which precedes all things? First of all, wisdom was created (Sir. 1:3-4), says the Most Wise, expressing with these words both the eternity of Wisdom and Its creation[770].

God knows, or contemplates, that which He has created as the will of His own will, as Maximus says, and what He has created is not really anything different from His will, for otherwise it would be so for divine knowledge, and the latter would then be a complex act, which is incompatible with the simplicity of the divine being. The will of the Godhead is inseparable from the nature of the Godhead. Consequently, by manifesting His will in creation, God manifests and, as it were, creates Himself[771]. In other words, from eternity God has will and knowledge, which are identical with each other and with the very existence of the Godhead. But even that which exists in the divine will and divine knowledge, their object, does not differ in the simple Being from His very nature. From this it follows that the one God is all in all[772]. But if anyone thinks that a creature can be contained in God without being a manifestation of Himself, since it seems incredible that God created, so to speak, Himself, one may ask: What did God see in Himself when He saw the creature before it was created? Obviously, seeing the creature, He saw Himself then, for then there was only He Himself. Yet the creature that appeared in time is the same that He has seen from eternity, and thus the conclusion is drawn that God is all things, the Creator and the created, the Seeing and the visible. The Absolute Spirit does not need any matter outside of Himself for the manifestation of His wills or ideas, and the matter of which the world is created received its origin from Him and exists in Him, just as He exists in it.

Thus there is no room for that "nothing" than the negation of all being, or of all positive state or existence, out of which everything is supposed to be created, in the opinion of people who have a low degree of understanding. By "nothing" we must understand, as stated above, only the unapproachable brightness of divine goodness, manifested in everything[775].

Having in mind, in all likelihood, some definite opponents of his doctrine among the scholars of the time, Erigena concludes by expounding in the form of syllogisms a refutation of the doctrine of "nothing" as absolute non-being, from which the world was created. Very few, however, according to the philosopher, can rise to such a height of contemplation that they can now see that God is all in all, as the angels see it. God will be all in all (1 Cor. 15:28), according to the Apostle, for the consciousness of all without exception only after the return of human nature to its former state, equal to that of the angels. At present, for those who have a carnal way of thinking, this seems very inconvenient, and they are ready to accuse those who express such a position of folly[777].

Thus, Erigena combines the concept of the Absolute as a self-conscious spirit with the proposition: everything is a manifestation of the Deity Himself and God is everything. And although it is incomprehensible how the form of the temporal existence of the finite world can be compatible with the eternity of everything in God, or in other words, the eternal existence of God Himself, the philosopher is firmly convinced of the truth of this proposition and decisively expresses it in other works as well. [778]

The very creation of the world, its appearance as temporary or together with time, was an instantaneous and one-time act, as Bl. Augustine, although Basil the Great, applying himself to the simple sense of believers, interpreted the days of creation in the literal sense. Moses' account of the six-day creation is in fact a depiction of the metaphysical constitution of the world. The days of creation are separate moments of the contemplation by the writer of Genesis of various aspects of this constitution. It is to consider it in relation to the story of the Bible that the philosopher turns further. But the question of the constitution of the world Erigene had already been touched upon earlier, in the first book, when it was a question of categories. He assumes the doctrine set forth there to be known to the reader in this case.

Categories are actually the most particular subdivisions of the third form in the general system of division of nature. By them are meant the highest generic concepts found by Aristotle, by which everything in the created world is determined. Taking Aristotle's table of categories (essence, quantity, quality, relation, position, state, place, time, action, suffering) and dividing them into motionless and moving, Erigena gives them the meaning, as it were, of metaphysical elements of which the universe is composed.