understanding only in that he can understand as of himself whether a
thing is of reason or not, and so to understand is from the other
faculty, called rationality, steadily imparted to him by the Lord. These
faculties unite in man as will and understanding do, for because a man
can will, he can also understand; willing is impossible without
understanding; understanding is its partner and mate apart from which it
cannot exist. With the faculty called liberty there is therefore given
the faculty called rationality. If, too, you take willing away from
understanding, you understand nothing.

[3] In the measure that you will, you can understand provided the helps,
called knowledges, are present or available, for these are like tools to
a workman. We say, in the measure you will you can understand, meaning,
so far as you love to understand, for will and love act as one. This
seems like a paradox, but it appears so to those who do not love or hence
will to understand. They say they cannot understand, but in the following
section we shall tell who cannot understand, and who can hardly
understand.

[4] It is plain without confirmation that unless man had will from the
faculty called liberty, and understanding from the faculty called
rationality, he would not be human. Beasts do not have these faculties.
Beasts seem to be able to will and to understand, but cannot do so. They
are led and moved to do what they do solely by a natural affection, in
itself desire, which has knowledge for its mate. Something civil and
moral there is in their knowledge, but it does not transcend the
knowledge, for they have nothing spiritual enabling them to perceive or
to think analytically of what is moral. They can indeed be taught to do
something, but this is natural only, is assimilated to their knowledge
and at the same time to their affection, and reproduced through sight or