God as mirror

Use in the book

The passage occupies 133c8–17 in Burnet's text and is printed in angle brackets. Its comparison begins with the superiority of ordinary mirrors to the reflecting surface in the eye. They are clearer, purer, and brighter. God is then said to stand in the same relation to the best in our soul. By looking into god, the speakers would use him as the finest mirror, and among human objects they would look into soul's virtue. The result would be the fullest seeing and knowing of themselves.

The supplement matters philosophically because it distinguishes the divine object from even the best human reflection and assigns it superiority. The preceding text at 133c1–6 says that the knowing region of soul resembles the god and that attention to the divine leads to self-knowledge. The supplied sentences are a further comparative step, not merely a repetition in other words.

Its textual status must remain explicit. According to Burnet's apparatus as supplied here, the four speeches are absent from B and T and supplied from Eusebius. The apparatus also says that Julian and Stobaeus read something of the kind. That notice is weaker than a verified verbatim quotation from all three witnesses. The edition's own concluding record says it has not located Julian's passage. The authenticity of the supplement is disputed, so the lexicon cannot present it as undisputed manuscript wording.

The correct response is neither to suppress it nor to build the whole dialogue's theology upon it unconditionally. This edition translates it as part of its reading text, and readers need to know what argument it contributes. They also need to see what remains without it: the eye-to-eye analogy, soul's wisdom, and divine likeness. The subsequent question identifying self-knowledge with temperance begins after the closing bracket and can follow the preceding transmitted material.

The language is also more careful than a bare equation “God is a mirror.” The speakers would use god as the finest mirror in their act of looking. The instrumental construction and potential mood describe a proposed cognitive orientation. They do not specify which deity is meant through a new mythological identification or explain a concrete visual experience of seeing god.

Places to read

1. 133c1–6The preceding divine-likeness argument provides the comparison’s background
2. 133c8–17The supplied four speeches make god the superior mirror
3. 133c8–17 (apparatus)Burnet supplies the passage from Eusebius and notes approximate parallels
4. 133c18–20After the supplement the discussion returns to self-knowledge as temperance

Translation in this edition

The English translates the angle-bracketed supplement, following Burnet. The source notes locate Eusebius at Preparation for the Gospel 11.27.5 but acknowledge an unverified Julian reference. “Using him as the finest mirror” retains the construction better than “using that finest mirror.”

καθαρός

Attested: καθαρώτερόν (katharōteron; 133c); καθαρὸν (katharon; 113e). At 133c: Purer than the best region of human soul, an attribute of god in the supplied comparison with clearer mirrors. Clean, required by the fastidious recipient for a supposedly new proof. Lexical identification: lemma: καθαρός. This attestation at 133c belongs to the Eusebius passage supplied by Burnet in angle brackets, not to the text preserved in B and T. See God as mirror; Clothes and repeated arguments.

λαμπρός

Attested: λαμπρότερον (lamproteron; 133c); λαμπρὸν (lampron; 134d). At 133c: Brighter than the best in our soul, the second comparative quality in the supplied divine-mirror argument. At 134d: The bright object toward which just and temperate action looks, continuing the cognitive imagery in ethics. Lexical identification: lemma: λαμπρός. This attestation at 133c belongs to the Eusebius passage supplied by Burnet in angle brackets, not to the text preserved in B and T. See God as mirror.