De docta ignorantia

Now concerning what has been said and shown, that the greatest line is the greatest triangle, let us be taught by ignorance. The maximum line has been shown to be a triangle; and since the line is most simple, it will be most simply threefold. Every angle of the triangle will be a line, since the whole triangle is a line. Hence the infinite line is threefold. But it is not possible for there to be several infinites; hence that trinity is unity. Moreover, since the angle opposite the greater side is greater, as shown in geometry, and this is a triangle which has no side but infinite, the angles will be greatest and infinite. Hence one is not smaller than the others, nor two greater than the third, but since outside infinite quantity there cannot be quantity, so outside one infinite angle there cannot be others. Hence one will be in another, and all three one maximum. Furthermore, just as the greatest line is no more line than triangle, circle, or sphere, but in truth is all those without composition, as shown, so likewise the maximum simply is as the maximum of line, which we can call essence; is as triangular, and can be called trinity; is as circular, and can be called unity; is as spherical, and can be called actual existence. The maximum is therefore a threefold essence, one in act; nor is essence other than trinity, nor trinity other than unity, nor actuality other than unity, trinity, or essence, although it is most true that the maximum is these things identically and most simply. Just as, therefore, it is true that the maximum is and is one, so it is true that it is threefold, in the manner in which the truth of trinity does not contradict most simple unity, but is unity itself. But this is possible in no other way than as attainable through the likeness of the greatest triangle. Hence knowing the true triangle itself, and the most simple line, from what precedes, in the manner in which this is possible to man, we shall attain trinity in learned ignorance. For we see that we do not find one angle and then another and thirdly still another, as in finite triangles, since one, and another, and another cannot be in the unity of the triangle without composition. But the one is threefold without numerical multiplication; hence the most learned Augustine rightly says: "When you begin to number the trinity, you depart from the truth."

For in divine things one must embrace contradictories in a simple concept, as far as this is possible, by antecedently anticipating them; for instance, one must not conceive in divine things distinction and indistinction as two contradictories, but conceive them as in their most simple antecedent principle, where distinction and indistinction are not other; and then trinity and unity are more clearly conceived to be the same. For where distinction is indistinction, trinity is unity; and conversely, where indistinction is distinction, unity is trinity. And so of the plurality of persons and the unity of essence: for where plurality is unity, the trinity of persons is the same as the unity of essence; and conversely, where unity is plurality, the unity of essence is trinity in persons. And thus they are clearly seen in our example, where the most simple line is a triangle, and conversely the simple triangle is linear unity. Here too is seen how the angles of the triangle cannot be numbered by one, two, three, since each is in each, as the Son says: I am in the Father, and the Father in me. Yet the truth of the triangle requires three angles. There are therefore here most truly three angles, and each greatest, and all one maximum. The truth of the triangle further requires that one angle not be another; and so the truth of the most simple unity of essence requires that those three angles not be some three distinct things, but one, and this too is true here. Join therefore these things, which seem opposed, antecedently, as I said before, and you will have neither one and three nor conversely, but one-three or three-one, and this is absolute truth.