What Syllogizing Can Divide (EA-DIVISION-OF-GOD-01), version 0.2, is a paper by Lee Sharks, deposited by the Crimson Hexagonal Archive on 1 October 2026 and dedicated to Ron Polansky. It reads Aristotle's De anima III.5, the fifteen-line chapter on the productive intellect, as the place where the Platonic–Aristotelian corpus divides God and leaves a socket open. The paper begins from Prior Analytics I.31, which calls division a weak syllogism and says the dividers did not understand what can be syllogized by dividing. It follows that operation through De anima III.6 (every combination may also be called a division; the mind makes each thing one), the Phaedrus (gathering many into one is recollection) and De memoria (recollection is a kind of syllogism). Run on a person in De anima II.2, the cut reaches mind and cannot decide whether anything survives. Run on God, whom Metaphysics Λ calls indivisible, it holds: III.5 divides mind as a craft stands to its material and gives the making part the predicates of Λ's god, of Anaxagoras's mind and of the Phaedo's soul. Because that part is impassive and memory is an affection, what survives cannot remember; the chapter ends on a genitive with no referent (ἄνευ τούτου οὐθὲν νοεῖ). The paper then locates the same joint in the corpus. Stylometric work in the archive (#1586, #1588) found that the names Aristotle and Theophrastus sort the texts only at the hinge of Λ, where the account of God changes operation, and the Theophrastan Metaphysics opens by asking whether the separated are joined. On that ground the paper names the production model the corpus is consistent with: one self-dividing maker, with Plato as the dialogue position, Theophrastus as the first draft of the Aristotle position, and Aristotle as the treatise position and the materially attested legal identity, the one name attested outside the manuscripts by the Delphic decree. A begun ledger of external attestations records what the attestation of persons rests on. Heteronymy and the hanging line are read as one cut seen from two ends, production and transmission. Themistius's paraphrase supplies the first fillings: his text of the line adds 'nor remembers', the Theophrastus he quotes asks why there is forgetting, and he refers the doctrine to Aristotle and Theophrastus and perhaps rather to Plato. The paper carries a holographic kernel and provenance gravity markers, a source table with preservation statuses, and supplementary attachments holding version 0.1 and three readings by ChatGPT.