πρὸς τὸ παρ' ὀφθαλμοῖς ζωῆς αἰωνίου σύμβολα etc.

[Pacifica]

I can't figure out the part πρὸς τὸ παρ' ὀφθαλμοῖς ζωῆς αἰωνίου σύμβολα . . . τῇ ζωοποιῷ πίστει. In any case, the Latin doesn't seem to correspond.

I suspect με is a mistake for μεν. But even so I still can't really make sense of the passage.

 

[Notascooby]

What is προσοιχειωσαι? I can't find this word.

 

[Pacifica]

The closest I could find is this. There may be a typo.

 

[Iáson]

suspicor ita intellēxisse interpretātōrem:

νεκρὰ γὰρ ἡ πλάνη, καὶ νεκροῦσα τὸν κεκτημένον αὐτὴν, καὶ ῥυθμίζουσα τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ συνοδοιποροῦντος αὐτῇ ἐν ἀσελγείαις φύρεσθαι, πρὸς τὸ [[παρ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖς] ζωῆς αἰωνίου σύμβολα] μὴ γνωρισθέντα πρὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, καταλεῖψαί με τὸν θάνατον, καὶ τὴν αὐτοῦ θυγατέρα πλάνην, προσοικειῶσαι δὲ ἑαυτὸν τῇ ζωοποιῷ πίστει.

nam error (=error in theologiā?) est (similis) mortī, et eum cadāuer facit quī errat,[1] et docet animam eiius quī errat[2] ut impiīs inquinētur, ut nōn (ēvēnit ut) cognoscerem signa uītae aeternae ante oculōs meōs et reliquerem mortem et errōrem fīlium eiius et familiārem mē redderem fideī uīuificae.

[1]ad uerbum 'quī obtinet (errōrem)'.
[2]ad uerbum 'quī cum (errōre) iter facit'.

tamen utrum haec rē uērā sit sententia scrīptōris graecī nōnnihil dubitō.

 

[Iáson]

The closest I could find is this. There may be a typo.

potius προσοικειῶ.

 

[Pacifica]

tamen utrum haec rē uērā sit sententia scrīptōris graecī nōnnihil dubitō.

Equidem non satis intellego quomodo ille sensus e Graeco possit extrahi.

Putasne hoc ἐμαυτόν pro illo ἑαυτόν legendum?

Et num quid de sensu horum πρὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου conicere potes?

potius προσοικειῶ.

Videtur aditus mihi negari.

 

[Iáson]

meliusne hoc? https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=prosoikeiow&la=greek#lexicon

 

[Pacifica]

Etiam.

 

[Iáson]

Putasne hoc ἐμαυτόν pro illo ἑαυτόν legendum?

Et num quid de sensu horum πρὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου conicere potes?

mihi quoque haec difficilia uidentur, nōn clārum uidētur utrum Arius hīc loquātur dē sē ipsō an dē persōnā ūniuersālī, uel quandō loquātur.

praeteritā in sententiā incipit cum ἐγώ. sed hīc inuenimus τὸν κεκτημένον, τοῦ συνοδοιποροῦντος, πρὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου(?), με, ἑαυτόν, ἐρρύσατό με. ut dīxistī, fortasse dēbēmus ēmendāre aut με -> μέν aut ἑαυτόν -> ἐμαυτόν.

dē γνωρισθέντα πρὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου fortasse interpretātor intellexit = γνωρισθέντα ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, et melius scrīpsissem 'ut nōn (ēvēnit ut) cognosceret quis signa uītae aeternae ante oculōs suōs, et ipse reliquerem mortem...'

fortasse intellegī potest, γνωρισθέντα πρὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ~ cognoscitur ex (comparātiōne) hominis. nam ut homo ūnus est, ita fides (in proximā sententiā).

 

[Iáson]

aliquandō ἐαυτόν prō ἐμαυτόν inuenītur (LSJ sv. ἑαυτοῦ II).

 

[Pacifica]

Alia difficultas est quod hoc membrum, παρ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖς ζωῆς αἰωνίου σύμβολα μὴ γνωρισθέντα πρὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, videtur ab nullo verbo pendere. Non enim video cuius verbi subiectum aut obiectum esse possit. Nisi forte est accusativus qui dicitur absolutus (qualis et in mala Latinitate invenitur).

 

[Iáson]

ad hanc rem, cum praeteritīs participiīs necesse erat ἐστίν subaudīre; fortasse dēbēmus igitur ita intelligere (in mente interpretātōris):

νεκρὰ γὰρ ἡ πλάνη, καὶ νεκροῦσα τὸν κεκτημένον αὐτὴν, καὶ ῥυθμίζουσα τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ συνοδοιποροῦντος αὐτῇ ἐν ἀσελγείαις φύρεσθαι, πρὸς τὸ <μὴ> [[παρ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖς ζωῆς αἰωνίου σύμβολα] μὴ γνωρισθέντα <εἶναι> πρὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου], <οὐδὲ> καταλεῖψαί με τὸν θάνατον, καὶ τὴν αὐτοῦ θυγατέρα πλάνην, <οὐδὲ> προσοικειῶσαι δὲ ἑ<μ>αυτὸν τῇ ζωοποιῷ πίστει.

 

[Iáson]

est noua ēditiō, cuiius exemplar inuenītur in bibliothēcā theologiae huiius urbis. quaeram hodiē, sī fortasse melior ibi sit textus uel commentārium dē hīs difficultātibus.

 

[Iáson]

inuēnī, sed nōn erat ēditiō, potius symbola, in quā dē hōc locō nūlla mentiō fit.

sunt quoque nōnnūllae ueteres ēditiōnēs, quae paene eadem habent:

 

[Iáson]

et imāginem pessimam cuiiusdam mānūscrīptae (https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr.402 pāgina 36):

 

[Iáson]

scrībitur, nisi fallor, τὸ τὰ παρ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖς... μὴ γνωρισθέντα πρὸς... sed post -λεῖψαι nōn certus sum quid sit, fortasse autem nōn 'με' ... τὴν τούτου θυγατέρα... ἑαυτὸν...

 

[Pacifica]

Audebo aliquid ultra rogare. Dubito enim num haec recte intellegam (quae interpres Latinus nequaquam transtulit):

Estne sensus hic fere "si non statim sive cunctanter (tyrannidem illam ex anima mea eiecero)"?

An fortasse:

"si non statim sive specie (tantum)"?

 

[Pacifica]

Dubito etiam de verbo συνεπιδιωσι. Rectene id interpres verbo "acquiescet" transtulit?

 

[Pacifica]

(quae interpres Latinus nequaquam transtulit)

Falso dixi; videtur enim in hoc "diligenter" transtulisse.

 

[Dantius]

scrībitur, nisi fallor, τὸ τὰ παρ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖς... μὴ γνωρισθέντα πρὸς... sed post -λεῖψαι nōn certus sum quid sit, fortasse autem nōn 'με' ... τὴν τούτου θυγατέρα... ἑαυτὸν...

After καταλεῖψαι the manuscript has μὲν; it appears to be μ followed by some sort of ligature, but with a grave accent, which wouldn't apply to με. We also don't see an acute accent on the αι of καταλεῖψαί, which would be required if the next word were the enclitic με. The ligature closely resembles the ones I've attached below for εν, especially the 5th one.

Vat.gr. 400, which has the same text, agrees:

This doesn't really clarify most of the weird things about the passage, though; my guess is that the σύμβολα μὴ γνωρισθέντα has to be an accusative absolute (especially if the succeeding phrases are balanced out by a μέν...δέ..., which would indicate that those are the main parts of the clause and the σύμβολα part is subordinate. But I'm not comfortable with the μή somehow applying to everything, so I'm really not sure what to do with it all.