Authors/Thomas Aquinas/metaphysics/liber5/lect20

Lecture 20

Latin	English
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 1 Quia uno modo secundum quod positionem significat, ideo consequenter philosophus prosequitur de nomine dispositionis; et ponit rationem communem huius nominis dispositio, dicens, quod dispositio nihil est aliud quam ordo partium in habente partes. Ponit autem modos quibus dicitur dispositio: qui sunt tres. Quorum primus est secundum ordinem partium in loco. Et sic dispositio sive situs est quoddam praedicamentum.	1058. Because the phrase according to which signifies in one sense position, the Philosopher therefore proceeds to examine next (1058) the term disposition. He gives the common meaning of this term, saying that a disposition is nothing else than the order of parts in a thing which has parts. He also gives the senses in which the term disposition is used; and there are three of these: The first designates the order of parts in place, and in this sense disposition or posture is a special category.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 2 Secundus modus est, prout ordo partium attenditur secundum potentiam sive virtutem; et sic dispositio ponitur in prima specie qualitatis. Dicitur enim aliquid hoc modo esse dispositum, utputa secundum sanitatem vel aegritudinem, ex eo quod partes eius habent ordinem in virtute activa vel passiva.	1059. Disposition is used in a second sense inasmuch as the order of parts is considered in reference to potency or active power, and then disposition is placed in the first species of quality. For a thing is said to be disposed in this sense, for example, according to health or sickness, by reason of the fact that its parts have an order in its active or passive power.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 3 Tertius modus est, prout ordo partium attenditur secundum speciem et figuram totius; et sic dispositio sive situs ponitur differentia in genere quantitatis. Dicitur enim quod quantitas alia est habens positionem, ut linea, superficies, corpus et locus; alia non habens, ut numerus et tempus.	1060. Disposition is used in a third sense according as the order of parts is considered in reference to the form and figure of the whole; and then disposition or position is held to be a difference in the genus of quantity. For it is said that one kind of quantity has position, as line, surface, body and place, but that another has not, as number and time.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 4 Ostendit etiam quod hoc nomen dispositio, ordinem significet. Significat enim positionem, sicut ipsa nominis impositio demonstrat: de ratione autem positionis est ordo.	1061. He also points out that the term disposition signifies order; for it signifies position, as the derivation itself of the term makes clear, and order is involved in the notion of position.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 5 Habitus vero hic prosequitur de nomine habitus; et primo distinguit ipsum nomen habitus. Secundo quaedam nomina quae habent propinquam considerationem ad hoc nomen, ibi, passio dicitur. Ponit ergo primo duos modos, quibus hoc nomen dicitur. Quorum primus est aliquid medium inter habentem et habitum. Habere enim, licet non sit actio, significat tamen per modum actionis. Et ideo inter habentem et habitum intelligitur habitus esse medius, et quasi actio quaedam; sicut calefactio intelligitur esse media inter calefactum et calefaciens; sive illud medium accipiatur ut actus, sicut quando calefactio accipitur active; sive ut motus, sicut quando calefactio accipitur passive. Quando enim hoc facit, et illud fit, est media factio. In Graeco habetur poiesis, quod factionem significat. Et siquidem ulterius procedatur ab agente in patiens, est medium factio activa, quae est actus facientis. Si vero procedatur a facto in facientem, sic est medium factio passiva, quae est motus facti. Ita etiam inter hominem habentem vestem, et vestem habitam, est medius habitus; quia si consideretur procedendo ab homine ad vestem, erit ut actio, prout significatur in hoc quod dicitur habere: si vero e converso, erit ut passio motus, prout significatur in hoc quod dicitur haberi.	1062. “having” means (509). He now proceeds to examine the term having. First, he gives the different senses of the term having. Second (1065), he gives the different senses of certain other terms which are closely connected with this one. He accordingly gives, first, the two senses in which the term having is used: First, it designates something intermediate between the haver and the thing had. Now even though having is not an action, nonetheless it signifies something after the manner of an action. Therefore having is understood to be something intermediate between the haver and the thing had and to be a sort of action; just as heating is understood to be something intermediate between the thing being heated and the heater, whether what is intermediate be taken as an action, as when heating is taken in an active sense, or as a motion, as when heating is taken in a passive sense. For when one thing makes and another is made, the making stands between them. In Greek the term poi,hsij is used, and this signifies making. Moreover, if one goes from the agent to the patient, the intermediate is making in an active sense, and this is the action of the maker. But if one goes from the thing made to the maker, then the intermediate is making in a passive sense, and this is the motion of the thing being made. And between a man having clothing and the clothing had, the having is also an intermediate; because, if we consider it by going from the man to his clothing, it will be like an action, as is expressed under the form “to have.” But if we consider it in the opposite way, it will be like the undergoing of a motion, as is expressed under the form “to be had.”
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 6 Quamvis autem habitus intelligatur esse medius inter hominem et vestem, inquantum habet eam; tamen manifestum est, quod non contingit inter ipsum habitum et habentem esse aliud medium, quasi adhuc sit alius habitus medius inter habentem et ipsum medium habitum. Sic enim procederetur in infinitum, si dicatur quod convenit habere habitum habiti, idest rei habitae. Homo enim habet rem habitam, idest vestem. Sed illum habitum rei habitae non habet homo, alio medio habitu, sicut homo faciens facit factum factione media; sed ipsam mediam factionem non facit aliqua alia factione media. Et propter hoc etiam relationes, quibus subiectum refertur ad aliud, non referuntur ad subiectum aliqua alia relatione media, nec etiam ad oppositum; sicut paternitas neque ad patrem neque ad filium refertur aliqua alia relatione media: et si aliquae relationes mediae dicantur, sunt rationis tantum, et non rei. Habitus autem sic acceptus est unum praedicamentum.	1063. Now although having is understood to be intermediate between a man and his clothing inasmuch as he has it, nonetheless it is evident that there cannot be another intermediate between the having and the thing had, as though there were another having midway between the haver and the intermediate having. For if one were to say that it is possible to have the having “of what is had,” i.e., of the thing had, an infinite regress would then result. For the man has “the thing had,” i.e., his clothing, but he does not have the having of the thing had by way of another intermediate having. It is like the case of a maker, who makes the thing made by an intermediate making, but does not make the intermediate making itself by way of some other intermediate making. It is for this reason too ‘that the relations by which a subject is related to something else are not related to the subject by some other intermediate relation and also not to the opposite term; paternity, for example, is not related to a father or to a son by some other intermediate relation. And if some relations are said to be intermediate, they are merely conceptual relations and not real ones. Having in this sense is taken as one of the categories.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 7 Secundo modo dicitur habitus dispositio, secundum quam aliquid disponitur bene et male; sicut sanitate aliquid disponitur bene, aegritudine male. Utroque autem, scilicet aegritudine et sanitate, aliquid disponitur bene vel male dupliciter; scilicet aut secundum se aut per respectum ad aliquid. Sicut sanum est quod est bene dispositum secundum se; robustum autem quod est bene dispositum ad aliquid agendum. Et ideo sanitas est habitus quidam, quia est talis dispositio qualis dicta est. Et non solum habitus dicitur dispositio totius, sed etiam dispositio partis, quae est pars dispositionis totius; sicuti bonae dispositiones partium animalis, sunt partes bonae habitudinis in toto animali. Et virtutes etiam partium animae, sunt quidam habitus; sicut temperantia concupiscibilis, et fortitudo irascibilis, et prudentia rationalis.	1064. In a second sense the term having means the disposition whereby something is well or badly disposed; for example, a thing is well disposed by health and badly disposed by sickness. Now by each of these, health and sickness, a thing is well or badly disposed in two ways: in itself or in relation to something else. Thus a healthy thing is one that is well disposed in itself, and a robust thing is one that is well disposed for doing something. Health is a kind of having, then, because it is a disposition such as has been described. And having (habit) designates not only the disposition of a whole but also that of a part, which is a part of the disposition of the whole. For example, the good dispositions of an animal’s parts are themselves parts of the good disposition of the whole animal. The virtues pertaining to the parts of the soul are also habits; for example, temperance is a habit of the concupiscible part, fortitude a habit of the irascible part, and prudence a habit of the rational part.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 8 Deinde cum dicit passio dicitur hic prosequitur de illis quae consequuntur ad habitum; et primo de his quae se habent ad ipsum per modum oppositionis. Secundo de eo quod se habet ad ipsum per modum effectus, scilicet de habere, quod ab habitu denominatur, ibi, habere multipliciter dicitur. Habitui autem opponitur aliquid, scilicet passio, sicut imperfectum perfecto. Privatio autem oppositione directa. Unde primo determinat de passione. Secundo de privatione, ibi, privatio dicitur. Ponit ergo primo, quatuor modos, quibus passio dicitur. Uno modo dicitur qualitas, secundum quam fit alteratio, sicut album et nigrum et huiusmodi. Et haec est tertia species qualitatis. Probatum enim est in septimo physicorum, quod in sola tertia specie qualitatis potest esse alteratio.	1065. “Affection”Here he proceeds to treat the terms which are associated with having. First, he deals with those which are associated as an opposite; and second (1080), he considers something which is related to it as an effect, namely, to have, which derives its name from having. Now there is something which is opposed to having as the imperfect is opposed to the perfect, and this is affection (being affected). And privation is opposed by direct opposition. Hence, first (1065), he deals with affection; and second (1070), with privation (“The term privation”). He accordingly gives, first, four senses of the term affection.: In one sense (modification) it means the quality according to which alteration takes place, such as white and black and the like. And this is the third species of quality; for it has been proved in Book VII of the Physics that there can be alteration only in the third species of quality.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 9 Secundus modus est, secundum quod huiusmodi actiones qualitatis et alterationis, quae fiunt secundum eas, dicuntur passiones; et sic passio est unum praedicamentum, ut calefieri et infrigidari et huiusmodi.	1066. Affection is used in another sense (undergoing) according as the actualizations of this kind of quality and alteration, which comes about through them, are called affections. And in this sense affection is one of the categories, for example, being heated and cooled and other motions of this kind.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 10 Tertio modo dicuntur passiones, non quaelibet alterationes, sed quae sunt nocivae, et ad malum terminatae, et quae sunt lamentabiles, sive tristes: non enim dicitur aliquid pati secundum hunc modum quod sanatur, sed quod infirmatur; vel etiam cuicumque aliquod nocumentum accidit: et hoc rationabiliter. Patiens enim per actionem agentis sibi contrarii, trahitur a sua dispositione naturali in dispositionem similem agenti. Et ideo magis proprie dicitur pati, cum subtrahitur aliquid de eo quod sibi congruebat, et dum agitur in ipso contraria dispositio, quam quando fit e contrario. Tunc enim magis dicitur perfici.	1067. In a third sense (suffering) affection means, not any kind of alteration at all, but those which are harmful and terminate in some evil, and which are lamentable or sorrowful; for a thing is not said to suffer insofar as it is healed but insofar as it is made ill. Or it also designates anything harmful that befalls anything at alland with good reason. For a patient by the action of some agent which is contrary to it is drawn from its own natural disposition to one similar to that of the agent. Hence, a patient is said more properly to suffer when some part of something fitting to it is being removed and so long as its disposition is being changed into a contrary one, than when the reverse occurs. For then it is said rather to be perfected.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 11 Et quia illa, quae sunt modica, quasi nulla reputantur, ideo quarto modo dicuntur passiones, non quaecumque nocivae alterationes, sed quae habent magnitudinem nocumenti, sicut magnae calamitates et magnae tristitiae. Quia etiam excedens laetitia fit nociva, cum quandocumque propter excessum laetitiae aliqui mortui sint et infirmati; et similiter superabundantia prosperitatis in nocumentum vertitur his qui ea bene uti nesciunt: ideo alia litera habet magnitudines lamentationum et exultationum passiones dicuntur. Cui concordat alia litera, quae dicit magnitudines dolorum et prosperorum.	1068. And because things which are not very great are considered as nothing, therefore in a fourth sense (passion) affection means not any kind of harmful alteration whatsoever, but those which are extremely injurious, as great calamities and great sorrows. And because excessive pleasure becomes harmful (for sometimes people have died or become ill as a result of it) and because too great prosperity is turned into something harmful to those who do not know how to make good use of it, therefore another text reads “great rejoicing and grieving are called affections.” And still another text agrees with this, saying, “very great sorrows and prosperities.”
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 12 Sciendum est autem, quod quia haec tria, scilicet dispositio, habitus, et passio, non significant genus praedicamenti, nisi secundum unum modum significationis, ut ex praehabitis patet, ideo non posuit ea cum aliis partibus entis, scilicet quantitate, qualitate et ad aliquid. In illis enim vel omnes vel plures modi ad genera praedicamenti, significata per illa nomina, pertinebant.	1069. Now it should be noted that because these three—disposition, habit or having, and affection— signify one of the categories only in one of the senses in which they are used, as is evident from what was said above, he therefore did not place them with the other parts of being, i.e., with quantity, quality and relation. For either all or most of the senses in which they were used pertained to the category signified by these terms.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 13 Privatio dicitur hic distinguit modos, quibus dicitur privatio; et quia privatio includit in sua ratione negationem et aptitudinem subiecti, ideo primo distinguit modos privationis ex parte aptitudinis. Secundo ex parte negationis, ibi, et quoties. Et circa primum ponit quatuor modos. Primus modus est, secundum quod aptitudo consideratur ex parte rei privatae, non ex parte subiecti. Dicitur enim hoc modo privatio, quando ab aliquo non habetur id quod natum est haberi, licet hoc quod ipso caret non sit natum habere; sicut planta dicitur privari oculis, quia oculi nati sunt haberi, licet non a planta. In his vero, quae a nullo nata sunt haberi, non potest dici aliquid privari, sicut oculus visu penetrante per corpora opaca.	1070. The term “privation” (511). Here he gives the different senses in which the term privation is used. And since privation includes in its intelligible structure both negation and the fitness of some subject to possess some attribute, he therefore gives, first, the different senses of privation which refer to this fitness or aptitude for some attribute. Second (1074), he treats the various senses of negation (“And in all instances”). In regard to the first he gives four senses of privation: The first has to do with this natural fitness taken in reference to the attribute of which the subject is deprived and not in reference to the subject itself. For we speak of a privation in this sense when some attribute which is naturally fitted to be had is not had, even though the subject which lacks it is not designed by nature to have it. For example, a plant is said to be deprived of eyes because eyes are naturally designed to be had by something, although not by a plant. But in the case of those attributes which a subject is not naturally fitted to have, the subject cannot be said to be deprived of them, for example, that the eye by its power of vision should penetrate an opaque body.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 14 Secundus modus attenditur secundum aptitudinem subiecti. Hoc enim modo dicitur privari hoc solum quod natum est illud habere, aut secundum se, aut secundum genus suum: secundum se, sicut homo caecus dicitur privari visu, quem natus est habere secundum se. Talpa autem dicitur privari visu, non quia ipsa secundum se sit nata habere visum; sed quia genus eius, scilicet animal, natum est habere visum. Multa enim sunt a quibus aliquid non impeditur ratione generis, sed ratione differentiae; sicut homo non impeditur quin habeat alas ratione generis, sed ratione differentiae.	1071. A second sense of the term privation is noted in reference to a subject’s fitness to have some attribute. For in this sense privation refers only to some attribute which a thing is naturally fitted to have either in itself or according to its class; in itself, for example, as when a blind person is said to be deprived of sight, which he is naturally fitted to have in himself. And a mole is said to be deprived of sight, not because it is naturally fitted to have it, but because the class, animal, to which the mole belongs, is so fitted. For there are many attributes which a thing is not prevented from having by reason of its genus but by reason of its differences; for example, a man is not prevented from having wings by reason of his genus but by reason of his difference.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 15 Tertius modus attenditur ex parte circumstantiarum. Unde hoc modo dicitur aliquid privari aliquo, si non habet ipsum habitum cum natum sit habere. Sicut caecitas, quae est quaedam privatio, et tamen animal non dicitur caecum secundum omnem aetatem, sed solum si non habeat visum in illa aetate in qua natum est habere; unde canis non dicitur caecus ante nonum diem. Et sicut est de hac circumstantia quando, ita est et de aliis circumstantiis, scilicet in quo, ut in loco; sicut nox dicitur privatio lucis in loco ubi nata est esse lux, non in cavernis, ad quas lumen solis pervenire non potest; et secundum quid, sicut homo non dicitur edentulus, si non habet dentes in manu; sed si non habet secundum illam partem, secundum quam natus est habere; et ad quod, sicut homo non dicitur parvus, vel deficientis staturae si non est magnus respectu montis, vel respectu cuiuscumque alterius rei, ad cuius comparationem non est natus habere magnitudinem: et sic homo non dicitur tardus esse motu, si non currat ita velociter sicut lepus vel ventus; vel ignorans, si non intelligit sicut Deus.	1072. A third sense of the term privation is noted in reference to circumstances. And in this sense a thing is said to be deprived of something if it does not have it when it is naturally fitted to have it. This is the case, for example, with the privation blindness; for an animal is not said to be blind at every age but only if it does not have sight at an age when it is naturally fitted to have it. Hence a dog is not said to be blind before the ninth day. And what is true of the circumstance when also applies to other circumstances, as “to where,” or place. Thus night means the privation of light in a place where light may naturally exist, but not in caverns, which the sun’s rays cannot penetrate. And it applies “to what part,” as a man is not said to be toothless if he does not have teeth in his hand but only if he does not have them in that part in which they are naturally disposed to exist; and “to the object in relation to which,” as a man is not said to be small or imperfect in stature if he is not large in comparison with a mountain or with any other thing with which he is not naturally comparable in size. Hence a man is not said to be slow in moving if he does not run as fast as a hare or move as fast as the wind; nor is he said to be ignorant if he does not understand as God does.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 16 Quartus modus est secundum quod ablatio cuiuslibet rei per violentiam, dicitur privatio. Violentum enim est contra impetum naturalem, ut habitum est supra. Et ita ablatio per violentiam est respectu eius quod quis natus est habere.	1073. Privation is used in a fourth sense inasmuch as the removal of anything by violence or force is called a privation. For what is forced is contrary to natural impulse, as has been said above (829); and thus the removal of anything by force has reference to something that a person is naturally fitted to have.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 17 Deinde cum dicit et quoties distinguit modos privationis ex parte negationis. Graeci enim utuntur hac praepositione a in compositionibus ad designandas negationes et privationes, sicut nos utimur hac praepositione in. Dicit ergo quod quoties dicuntur negationes designatae ab hac praepositione a posita in principio dictionis per compositionem, toties dicuntur etiam privationes. Dicitur enim inaequale uno modo, quod non habet aequalitatem, si aptum natum est habere; et invisibile, quod non habet colorem; et sine pede, quod non habet pedes.	1074. And in all (512). Then he gives the different senses of privation which involve negation: For the Greeks use the prefix av-, when compounding words, to designate negations and privations, just as we use the prefix in- or un-; and therefore he says that in every case in which one expresses negations designated by the prefix av-, used in composition at the beginning of a word, privations are designated. For unequal means in one sense what lacks equality, provided that it is naturally such as to have it; and invisible means what lacks color; and footless, what lacks feet.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 18 Secundo modo dicuntur huiusmodi negationes non per hoc quod est omnino non habere; sed per hoc quod est prave vel turpiter habere; sicut dicitur non habere colorem, quia habet malum colorem vel turpem; et non habere pedes, quia habet parvos vel turpes.	1075. Negations of this kind are used in a second sense to indicate not what is not had at all but what is had badly or in an ugly way; for example, a thing is said to be colorless because it has a bad or unfitting color; and a thing is said to be footless because it has defective or deformed feet.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 19 Tertio modo significatur aliquid privative vel negative ex hoc, quod est parum habere; sicut dicitur in Graeco apirenon, idest non ignitum, ubi est modicum de igne: et hic modus quodammodo continetur sub secundo, quia parum habere est quodammodo prave et turpiter habere.	1076. In a third sense an attribute is signified privatively or negatively because it is had to a small degree; for example, the term avpu,rhnon i.e., unignited, is used in the Greek text, and it signifies a situation where the smallest amount of fire exists. And in a way this sense is contained under the second, because to have something to a small degree is in a way to have it defectively or unfittingly.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 20 Quarto modo dicitur aliquid privative vel negative, ex eo quod non est facile, vel non bene; sicut aliquid dicitur insecabile, non solum quia non secatur, sed quia non facile, aut non bene.	1077. Something is designated as a privation or negation in a fourth sense because it is not done easily or well; for example, something is said to be uncuttable not only because it is not cut but because it is not cut easily or well.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 21 Quinto modo dicitur aliquid negative vel privative, ex eo quod est omnino non habere. Unde monoculus non dicitur caecus, sed ille qui in ambobus oculis caret visu.	1078. And something is designated as a privation or negation in a fifth sense because it is not had in any way at all. Hence it is not a one-eyed person who is said to be blind but one who lacks sight in both eyes.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 22 Ex hoc inducit quoddam corollarium; scilicet quod inter bonum et malum, iustum et iniustum, est aliquid medium. Non enim ex quocumque defectu bonitatis efficitur aliquis malus, sicut Stoici dicebant ponentes omnia peccata esse paria; sed quando multum a virtute recedit, et in contrarium habitum inducitur. Unde in secundo Ethicorum dicitur: ex eo quod homo recedit parum a medio virtutis, non vituperatur.	1079. From this he draws a corollary, namely, that there is some intermediate between good and evil, just and unjust. For a person does not become evil when he lacks goodness to any degree at all, as the Stoics said (for they held all sins to be equal), but when he deviates widely from virtue and is brought to a contrary habit. Hence it is said in Book II of the Ethics that a man is not to be blamed for deviating a little from virtue.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 23 Deinde cum dicit habere multipliciter hic ponit quatuor modos eius, quod est habere: quorum primus est, secundum quod habere aliquid est ducere illud secundum suam naturam in rebus naturalibus, aut secundum suum impetum in rebus voluntariis. Et hoc modo febris dicitur habere hominem, quia homo traducitur a naturali dispositione in dispositionem febrilem. Et hoc modo habent tyranni civitates, quia secundum voluntatem et impetum tyrannorum res civitatum aguntur. Et hoc etiam modo induti dicuntur habere vestimentum, quia vestimentum coaptatur induto ut accipiat figuram eius. Et ad hunc modum reducitur etiam habere possessionem, quia homo re possessa utitur secundum suam voluntatem.	1080. “To have” (513). Then he gives four ways in which the term to have (to possess or hold) is used: First, to have a thing is to treat it according to one’s own nature in the case of natural things, or according to one’s own impulse in the case of voluntary matters. Thus a fever is said to possess a man because he is brought from a normal state to one of fever. And in the same sense tyrants are said to possess cities, because civic business is carried out according to the will and impulse of tyrants. And in this sense too those who are clothed are said to possess or have clothing, because clothing is fitted to the one who wears it so that it takes on his figure. And to have possession of a thing is also reduced to this sense of to have, because anything that a man possesses he uses as he wills.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 24 Secundus modus est, prout illud, in quo existit aliquid ut in proprio susceptibili, dicitur habere illud; sicut aes habet speciem statuae, et corpus habet infirmitatem. Et sub hoc modo comprehenditur habere scientiam, quantitatem, et quodcumque accidens, vel quamcumque formam.	1081. To have is used in a second way inasmuch as that in which some attribute exists as its proper subject is said to have it. It is in this sense that bronze has the form of a statue, and a body has disease. And to have a science or quantity or any accident or form is included under this sense.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 25 Tertius modus est, secundum quod continens dicitur habere contentum, et contentum haberi a continente; sicut dicimus quod lagena habet humidum, idest humorem aliquem, ut aquam vel vinum; et quod civitas habet homines, et navis nautas. Et secundum hunc modum etiam dicitur quod totum habet partes. Totum enim continet partem, sicut et locus locatum. In hoc enim differt locus a toto, quia locus est divisus a locato, non autem totum a partibus. Unde locatum est sicut pars divisa, ut habetur in quarto physicorum.	1082. To have is used in a third way (to hold) when a container is said to have or to hold the thing contained, and the thing contained is said to be held by the container. For example, we say that a bottle has or “holds a liquid,” i.e., some fluid, such as water or wine; and a city, men; and a ship, sailors. It is in this sense too that a whole is said to have parts; for a whole contains a part just as a place contains the thing in place. But a place differs from a whole in this respect that a place may be separated from the thing which occupies it, whereas a whole may not be separated from its parts. Hence, anything that occupies a place is like a separate part, as is said in Book IV of the Physics.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 26 Quartus modus est secundum quod aliquid dicitur habere alterum, ex eo, quod prohibet ipsum operari vel moveri secundum suum impetum; sicut columnae dicuntur habere corpora ponderosa imposita super eas, quia prohibent ea descendere deorsum secundum inclinationem. Et hoc etiam modo poetae dixerunt quod Atlas habet caelum. Fingunt enim poetae quod Atlas est quidam gigas qui sustinet caelum ne cadat super terram. Quod etiam quidam naturales dicunt, qui ponebant quod caelum quandoque corrumpetur et resolutum cadet super terram. Quod patet praecipue ex opinione Empedoclis, qui posuit mundum infinities corrumpi et infinities generari. Habuit autem poetica fictio ex veritate originem. Atlas quidem magnus astrologus, subtiliter motus caelestium corporum perscrutatus est, ex quo fictio processit quod ipse caelum sustineret. Differt autem hic modus a primo. Nam in primo habens, habitum cogebat sequi secundum suum impetum, et sic erat causa motus violenti. Hic autem habens, prohibet habitum moveri motu naturali, unde est causa quietis violentae. Ad hunc autem modum reducitur tertius modus quo continens dicitur habere contenta; ea ratione quia aliter contenta suo proprio impetu singula separarentur abinvicem, nisi continens prohiberet; sicut patet in lagena continente aquam, quae prohibet partes abinvicem separari.	1083. To have is used in a fourth way (to hold up) inasmuch as one thing is said to hold another because it prevents it from operating or being moved according to its own impulse. It is in this sense that pillars are said to hold up the heavy bodies placed upon them, because they prevent these bodies from falling down in accordance with their own inclination. And in this sense too the poets said that Atlas holds up the heavens; for the poets supposed Atlas to be a giant who prevents the heavens from falling on the earth. And certain natural philosophers also say this, holding that the heavens will at some time be corrupted and fall in dissolution upon the earth. This is most evident in the opinions expressed by Empedocles, for he held that the world is destroyed an infinite number of times and comes into being an infinite number of times. And the fables of the poets have some basis in reality; for Atlas, who was a great astronomer, made an accurate study of the motion of the celestial bodies, and from this arose the story that he holds up the heavens. But this sense of the term to have differs from the first. For according to the first, as was seen, the thing having compels the thing had to follow by reason of its own impulse, and thus is the cause of forced motion. But here the thing having prevents the thing had from being moved by its own natural motion, and thus is the cause of forced rest. The third sense of having, according to which a container is said to have or hold the thing contained, is reduced to this sense, because the individual parts of the thing contained would be separated from each other by their own peculiar impulse if the container did not prevent this. This is clear, for example, in the case of a bottle containing water, inasmuch as the bottle prevents the parts of the water from being separated.
lib. 5 l. 20 n. 27 Dicit autem in fine, quod esse in aliquo similiter dicitur sicut et habere; et modi essendi in aliquo consequuntur ad modos habendi. Octo autem modi essendi in aliquo in quarto physicorum positi sunt: quorum duo, scilicet secundum quod totum integrale est in partibus et e converso: duo etiam, scilicet secundum quod totum universale est in partibus, et e converso, et alius modus secundum quod locatum est in loco, consequuntur ad tertium modum habendi, secundum quod totum habet partes, et locus locatum. Modus autem secundum quod aliquid dicitur esse in aliquo, ut in efficiente vel movente, sicut quae sunt regni in rege, consequitur primum modum habendi hic positum. Modus autem essendi in, secundum quod forma est in materia, reducitur ad secundum modum habendi hic positum. Modus autem quo aliquid est in fine, reducitur ad modum habendi quartum hic positum; vel etiam ad primum, quia secundum finem moventur et quiescunt ea quae sunt ad finem.	1084. In closing he says that the phrase to be in a thing is used in the same way as to have, and the ways of being in a thing correspond to those of having a thing. Now the eight ways of being in a thing have been treated in Book IV of the Physics. Two of these are as follows: (1&2) that in which an integral whole is in its parts, and the reverse of this. Two others are: (3&4) the way in which a universal whole is in its parts, and vice versa. (8) And another is that in which a thing in place is in a place, and this corresponds to the third sense of having, according to which a whole has parts, and a place thas the thing which occupies it. (6) But he way in which a thing is said to be in something as in an efficient cause or mover (as the things belonging to a kingdom are in the king) corresponds to the first sense of having given here (1080). (7) And the way in which a thing is in an end or goal is reduced to the fourth sense of having given here (1083), or also to the first, because those things which are related to an end are moved or at rest because of it. [(5) The way health is in a balance of temperature, and any form is in matter or a subject, whether the form be accidental or substantial.]