Henry of Ghent and the Inevitable Failure of Divine Illumination〔１〕 YingyingZHANG (DepartmentofWorldReligions,GraduateSchool,ChineseAcademyofSocialSciences) Author :YingyingZhang,DepartmentofWorldReligions,GraduateSchool,ChineseAcademyofSocialSciencesAddress: No．１１,ChangyuDajie,FangshanDist．,Beijing１０２４８８,P．R．China．Tel:＋８６Ｇ１３７Ｇ６４５２Ｇ１０２８．Email:vinessazy＠１６３．com Abstract :HenryofGhentattemptedtointegrateanAristotelianempiricism,PlatonicexemplarismandanAugustinian doctrineofDivineIllumination,toformafirmphilosophicalbasisforAugustineƳstheoryofknowledge,meanwhiletrying torestoreitstheologicalconnotations．However,hisnewsynthesiswasdoomedtofail,becausethetensionsbetweenthe ChristianmetaphysicalworldviewandtheepistemologicalrequirementsoftheAristoteliansystem wereunsolvable．The th needfordivineilluminationwaswaninginthefaceofencroachingAristotelianismattheendof１３ century． KeyWords :DivineIllumination,Augustine,Platonism,Aristotelianism,exemplar １．IntroductionDivineIlluminationＧAuustinianEistemolo before１３Centur : g p gy y DivineIlluminationisthetheoryofknowledgewhichSt．AugustineappropriatedfromtheNeoＧ PlatonismandcombinedwithChristianfaith,todecipherhumanƳscognitiveactivities．AsTimothy NooneputinTheCambridgeHistoryofMedievalPhilosophy(Vol．I):“(DivineIlluminationis)the theoryofhowGodƳslightisrequiredtoaccountfullyforhowhumansarecapableofattainingthe 〔２〕 truththattheymanagetoattainthroughtheirintellectualactivities．” St．Augustinedevelopedhis viewofDivineIlluminationinhisvariouswritings,butheneversystematicallyillustratedthetheory, whichresultsinmanyconflictinginterpretationsbybothhisfollowersandopponents． TheinfluenceofNeoＧPlatonismisevidentinAugustineƳstheoryofknowledge．JustasPlotinus understandstherealityinordersorlevels,AugustineƳsontologytakesanhierarchicalstructureof 〔３〕 realitywithGoditscreator,attheapexandtheworldofbodiesatthelowestlevel． Incontrastto hisontologyproceeding downward,AugustineƳsepistemology rising upwards,from corporeal (senses),spiritual(imagination),tointellection(reasons)．Heclaimsthatmanbeginswithsensation 〔１〕 Cf．,PanＧchiuLAI,“DivineLoveandHumanLove”,InternationalJournalofSinoＧWesternStudies,vol．１２,１０９Ｇ１１９． (https://www．sinowesternstudies．com/backＧissuses/volＧ１２Ｇ２０１７/) 〔２〕 TimothyNoone,“DivineIllumination,”vol．１ofTheCambridgeHistoryofMedievalPhilosophy,ed．RobertPasnau (New York:CambridgeUniversityPress,２０１０),３６９． 〔３〕 RonaldH．Nash,TheLightoftheMind:St．AugustineƳsTheoryofKnowledge (Lexington:TheUniversityofKentucky, １９６９),５． ９５１ 国学与西学 国际学刊 第 期 年 月 １９ ,２０２０ １２ 〔４〕 butattemptstoclimbbywayofreasontotheeternalideasinthemindofGod． InSoliloquia, Augustineobservesthatasinthesensibleworldallobjectstobeseenmustbeillumined,soalsoin theintelligibleworld．Theanalogyofsunisapplied．“Aboutthiscorporealsunnoticethreethings．It exists．Itshines．Itilluminates．Soinknowingthehidden Godyou mustobservethreethings．He 〔５〕 exists．Heisknown．Hecausesotherthingstobeknown．” Therefore,withoutthelightofthe sun,oureyes,evenifpurified,cannotseeanything．Withoutdivineillumination,thereisnohuman knowledge,eithersenseknowledgeorintellectualone．ItisGodthatmakesknowledgepossiblejust asthelightofthesunmakeitpossibletosee． InAugustineƳsthreeearly works,De magistro,Soliloquia,Dediversisquaestionibusoctoginta tribus４６,hesuggestedthatthefunctionofilluminationwerethreefold．“Illuminationisthesourceof thecognitivecapacity;itsustainstheongoingprocessofcognition;anditsuppliestheverycontentof 〔６〕 thought．” However,itseemsthatSt．Augustineneverintendstodevelopasystematicsystem．Noone claimsthatbeforethethirteencentury,onemightonlyspeakofthethemeofDivineIllumination,not 〔７〕 thetheoryofDivineIllumination． Despitebeingunsystematicandambiguous,AugustineƳsviewof DivineIlluminationisrich andappealing,especiallytothethirteenth century philosophersand theologians．Undoubtedly,itpermeatesthemedievalChristiantradition．UntilThomasAquinas,the theoryofDivineIlluminationhadplayedaprominentroleinallthemostinfluentialmedievaltheories of knowledge,including those of Anselm,Albert the Great,Roger Bacon,and especially 〔８〕 Bonaventure． St．BonaventurebelievedthatthedivinelightactuallyguidedhumanƳsintellectualcognitionas regulatingandmovingcause,presentinallouractsofintellectualknowledge．HedidnƳtdenytherole ofsenseknowledgeandabstraction,whicharepartialcauses,cooperatingwiththedivinelight．This isthe standard Franciscan interpretation．Simply put,a prioriconcepts coming from Divine Illuminationdonotaffordtheactualknowledge,butregulatetheprocessofcognitiontoensurethe conceptsgeneratedbymindcorrespondtothedivineideasaboutrealityandarethereforeabsolute certain． TheintroductionofAristotleƳsmostimportantworkstothemedievalwestEuropebroughton revolutionarychangesinthethirteenthＧcenturythought,butattheexpenseofdeclinesofsome doctrines．ThegrowingdominanceoftheAristoteliantheoryofcognitionquicklymadeAugustinian 〔９〕 theoryofDivineIlluminationseemsuperfluous． However,thecondemnationof２１９propositions byEtienneTempier,theyearof１２７７witnessedarevivalofAugustinianthoughtandamoveaway fromtheincreasinglypopularAristotelianism．HenryofGhentwasthemostrepresentativeofsuch 〔４〕 Ibid．,５． 〔５〕 J．H．S．Burleigh,ed．,Augustine:Early Writings(London:SCM,１９５３ ),３２． 〔６〕 LydiaSchumacher,“Illumination,Divine．”In The Oxford Guidetothe Historical Reception of Augustine．:Oxford UniversityPress,２０１３．Accessedon Nov．５,２０１８．http://www．oxfordreference．com．ezproxy．library．ubc．ca/view/１０．１０９３/acref/ ９７８０１９９２９９１６４．００１．０００１/acrefＧ９７８０１９９２９９１６４ＧeＧ３９０． 〔７〕 TimothyNoone,“DivineIllumination”,３６９． 〔８〕 RobertPasnau,“HenryofGhentandtheTwilightofDivineIllumination”,TheReviewofMetaphysics,Vol．４９,１ (１９９５): ５０． 〔９〕 Ibid．,４９． １６０ YingyingZHANG:HenryofGhentandtheInevitableFailureofDivineIllumination NeoＧAugustinianthoughtinthelatethirteenthcentury． ２．HenryofGhentƳsNewSynthesis HenryofGhent(? Ｇ１２９３),alsoknownasDoctorSolemnis,wassecularmasterintheFacultyof TheologyattheUniversityofParisfrom１２７６to１２９２．Asapanelmemberofthepapacommission underEtienneTempier,BishopofParis,in１２７７,hehaslongbeenviewedastheleadingconservative th 〔１０〕 philosophicalforce at the University of Parisin last quarter of the １３ century． Inhis epistemology,heattemptedtointegratean Aristotelianempiricism,Platonicexemplarism andan AugustiniandoctrineofDivineIllumination．Healsotriedtorestorethetheologicalconnotationto DivineIllumination．IntheyearsbetweenThomasAquinasandJohnDunsScotus,HenryofGhentis certainlymostinfluentialphilosopher．Hisworkbecamethestartingpointandthetargetofcriticism forDunsScotus．ItshouldalsobenotedthatitisJohnDunScotuswhovirtuallybroughtthetheory totheend．ItƳsreasonabletoproclaim HenryofGhentasthelastforcefuldefenderofthetheoryof DivineIlluminationinthe Medieval Ages．However,HenryƳsadaption of DivineIlluminationis doomedpartlyinhisowntheoreticalsynthesis． Theyearsaround and afterthecondemnations,the defenders of Augustiniantradition,in particularthetheoryofDivineIllumination,werefaceduptheincreasinglycriticalandcontroversial climate．Variousattemptsweremadetoexplainhowthedivinelightinteractedwithordinarypowers ofhumanunderstanding．HenryofGhent,asTempierƳspanelmemberin１２７７andaleadinginfluence atParisbetween１２７７to１２９３,wasfullyawareofthedifficultiesofthetraditionalphilosophy．Itis interestingtonotethat HenrybeganhisSumma withaquestion whetheritispossibletoknow anythingatall．Itsignalsadeparturefromhispredecessors,sincetheyhadbeguntheirworkswith questionson GodƳsnature．After Henry,itbecamecommonforFranciscanstofollow,askingthe 〔１１〕 questionaboutthepossibilityofknowledgeattheoutsetofmajortheologicalworks． Logically, thequestion “can manknowtruth?”ispriortoinvestigationsintothesubjectofhow manknow truth． ２．１ TheKnowledgeoftheTrueandtheKnowledgeofTruth HenrythinksthatapparentsuperfluityofDivineIlluminationismerelyapparentandtriesto buildasolidepistemologicalbasisformaintainingthetheory．Differentfrom Augustine,however, HenryclaimsthatDivineIlluminationisnotrequiredforallknowledge．Hisdefenseofthetheoryof DivineIlluminationrestsonadistinctionbetweentheknowledgeofthetrueandtheknowledgeofthe truth (veritassyncera)． Tothefirstargumentontheotherside,thathumanbeingscanthroughtheir 〔１０〕 John Marenbon,ed．MedievalPhilosophy．Routledge HistoryofPhilosophy,v．３．London;New York:Routledge,１９９８,P． ４８３．CF:Pasquale Porro,“An HistoriographicalImage of Henry of Ghent”,Henry of Ghent:Proceedings oftheInternational th ColloquiumontheOccasionofthe７００ AnniversaryofHisDeath(１２９３),ed．W．Vanhamel(Leuven:LeuvenUniversityPress,１９９６), P．３９３． 〔１１〕 LydiaSchumacher,DivineIllumination:TheHistoryandFutureofAugustineƳsTheoryofKnowledge (WestSussex,UK; Malden,MA:WileyＧBlackwell,２０１１),１８７． １６１ 国学与西学 国际学刊 第 期 年 月 １９ ,２０２０ １２ ownactivityacquireknowledge,itshould besaidthatthisistrue [asregards knowledge]ofnaturalthingsinknowingwhatistrueasregardsthething．ButGod teachesthis,bygivinganaturalcapacityforjudgmentthroughwhichonediscerns thethingstobeknown．Puretruth,however,oranytruththatmustbecognized supernaturally,orperhapsanytruthatall,cannotbeknown withoutGodhimself 〔１２〕 doingtheteaching． Henrythinkshumanbeingiscapableofacquiringknowledgeofthetrue,thatis,whatistrueas regardsnaturalthings．ItislikelythatHenryhashadAquinasinmindinhisoriginaleffortstoface upwiththechallenges．Explicitly,Henryopposed AquinasƳpositionthatordinary (ornatural ) 〔１３〕 DivineIllumination amounts merelyto a naturallyinnatecapacityto know thetruth． For Aquinas,thefirstprinciplescomefromthedivinelightbytheimpressingitslightonhumanagent intellect．Thishappensatthecreationofthehumansoulanditisthenaturalendowmentoftheagent intellect．Aquinasdeniesanyfurtherneedforthedivinelighttoconcurwiththehumanintellect beyondthecreation．For Henry,Aquinasoverestimatesthepowerofhumanintellectandfailsto