📜 Verbum · 聖言
原文誦讀聖經與教父文獻
♥ 贊助

← 回書卷目次 · 拉丁教父 › 駁異教徒

駁異教徒 第 2 章 第 2/5 段

拉丁文原文.41 節.部分字詞可點開查義.本章太長已分段,此段為 2:39–2:79(全章共 185 節)

← 第 1 章第 3 章 →
← 上一段下一段 →
ℹ️ 本語料沒有逐節的詞法標註,字義是依字形比對詞典得到的——對上了不代表是同一個字(變化形可能與另一個字的原形同形)。需要精確判斷時請覆核原文與專門詞典。
ℹ️ 中英對照為本站自譯,直接譯自本頁的原文(非和合本/WEB —— 那兩者譯自馬所拉文本,與本頁底本不同)。
2:39
Cura illis est omnibus famem prohibere mortiferam et necessario invigilare pro victu: quid aliud nos tantis agimus in occupationibus vitae, nisi ut ea quaeramus quibus famis periculum devitetur et infelix sollicitudo ponatur? 12. Morbos illa et inedias sentiunt et ad ultimum senectute solvuntur: quid enim? nos immunes malis ab his sumus et non eadem ratione morborum incommoditatibus frangimur et senectutis destruimur tabe? 13. Quod si et illud est verum, quod in mysteriis secretioribus dicitur, in pecudes atque alias beluas ireanimas improborum, postquam sunt humanis corporibus seiunctae, manifestius comprobatur vicinos nos esse neque intervallis longioribus disparatos.
它們一切都以驅避致命的飢餓、並不得不為口糧警醒守候為念;而我們在此生如此繁重的操勞中,所作的又有何別,豈非為要尋求那能躲避飢餓之險、平息不幸憂慮之物麼?它們患病、受飢,最終被衰老所消解;那麼我們又如何呢?我們豈能免於這些禍患,豈不同樣被病痛的不適所折損、被衰老的朽壞所摧毀麼?倘若那在更隱祕的祕儀中所說的也是真的──即惡人的靈魂在與人的身體分離之後,會轉入牲畜與其他野獸之中──那就更明白地證明:我們彼此相近,並未被更遙遠的間隔所分開。
All of them have the care of warding off deadly hunger and of necessity keeping watch for their sustenance; and what else do we do amid such great occupations of life, but seek those things by which the peril of hunger may be avoided and unhappy anxiety laid to rest? They feel diseases and starvation and at the last are dissolved by old age; and what of us? Are we exempt from these evils, and are we not likewise broken by the discomforts of diseases and destroyed by the decay of old age? And if that too is true which is said in the more secret mysteries — that the souls of the wicked pass into cattle and other beasts after they have been separated from human bodies — it is more manifestly proven that we are near of kin and not sundered by any longer intervals.
2:40
Siquidem res eadem nobis et illis est una, per quam esse animantia dicimur et motum agitare vitalem. 17.1. ''Sed rationales nos sumus et intellegentia vincimus genus omne mutorum''. - Crederem istud verissime dici, si cum ratione et consilio cuncti homines viverent, servarent officiorum tenorem, abstinerent ab inlicitis sese, | f. 36 | negotia turpia non adirent, neque quisquam pravitate consilii atque ignorantiae caecitate contraria sibimet atque inimica deposceret. 2. Vellem tamen scire quaenam sit haec ratio, per quam sumus potiores animalium generibus cunctis. 3. Quia nobis domicilia fecimus, quibus possimus hiemalia frigora et aestatis flagrantias evitare? 4.
因為在我們裡面和在它們裡面,有一樣同一的東西,藉此我們被稱為活物,並得以進行生命的活動。「但我們是有理性的,我們在智慧上勝過一切無言之類。」──我本會相信這話說得極為真確,倘若所有的人都憑理性與明智而活,持守本分的常軌,戒絕不法之事,不涉足卑鄙的勾當,也沒有人因謀算的乖僻與無知的盲目而索求那與自身相悖、彼此為敵之物。然而我倒願知道:這使我們勝過一切動物之類的理性究竟是甚麼。是因為我們為自己造了居所,藉以躲避冬日的嚴寒與夏季的酷熱麼?
Since there is one and the same thing in us and in them, by which we are said to be living beings and to carry on vital motion. 'But we are rational, and we surpass the whole race of dumb creatures in intelligence.' — I should believe that this was said most truly, if all men lived with reason and counsel, kept the tenor of their duties, abstained from things unlawful, did not approach base businesses, and if no one, through the depravity of his counsel and the blindness of his ignorance, demanded things contrary and hostile to his very self. Yet I should like to know what this reason is, by which we are superior to all the kinds of animals. Is it because we have made ourselves dwellings, by which we may avoid the winter's cold and the burning heats of summer?
2:41
Quid, animantia cetera huius rei providentiam non habent? Nonne alia cernimus opportunissimis sedibus nidulorum sibi construere mansiones, alia se saxis et rupibus tegere et communire suspensis, excavare alia telluris sola et in fossibilibus foveis tutamina sibimet et cubilia praeparare? 5. Quodsi ministras manus illis etiam donare parens natura voluisset, dubitabile non foret, quin et ipsa construerent moenium alta fastigia et artificiosas excuderent novitates.
那又如何呢?其餘的活物難道沒有這方面的預見麼?我們豈不看見有的為自己在最便利之地築造小巢的居所,有的躲在懸伸的岩石與峭壁之下遮蔽並自衛,有的挖掘大地的地面、在可掘的坑穴中為自己預備防護與棲身之所麼?倘若慈惠的自然也曾願意賜給它們善於操作的雙手,那毫無疑問,它們也必築起城牆的高聳頂端,並錘造出巧妙的新奇之物。
What of it? Do the other living creatures not have foresight for this matter? Do we not behold some building for themselves the dwellings of little nests in the most convenient sites, others covering and fortifying themselves under overhanging rocks and crags, others hollowing out the floors of the earth and preparing for themselves defenses and lairs in diggable pits? And if kindly nature had willed to grant them also serviceable hands, it would be beyond doubt that they too would build the lofty summits of walls and hammer out artful novelties.
2:42
Tamen in his ipsis quae rostris atque unguibus faciunt, multa inesse conspicimus rationis et sapientiae simulacra, quae homines imitari nulla meditatione possimus, quamvis sint nobis opifices manus atque omni genere perfectionis artifices. 18.1. ''Vestem illa non norunt, sellas naves atque aratra conpingere nec denique superlectilem ceteram quam familiaris usus exposcit''. - Non sunt ista scientiae munera sed pauperrimae necessitatis inventa. Neque cum animis artes caeli ex penetralibus ceciderunt, sed exquisitae et natae sunt in terris hic omnes et cum processu | f. 36b | temporum paulatim meditatione conflatae. 2.
然而,就在它們用喙與爪所造之物上,我們看出其中有許多理性與智慧的影像,那是我們人縱有堪為工匠、精於各樣技藝的雙手,也無論如何潛思都無法模仿的。「它們不知怎樣製作衣服、座椅、船隻、犁具,總之也不知製作日常之用所需的其餘家什。」──這些並非知識的恩賜,乃是至為窮乏之必需的發明。技藝也並非隨我們的靈魂從天的深處墜落下來,乃是全都在此地上被尋索、被生出,並隨歲月的推移,藉潛思一點一滴逐漸鍛造而成。
Yet in those very things which they make with their beaks and claws, we behold that there is much semblance of reason and of wisdom, which we men could imitate by no meditation, although we have hands that are craftsmen and are artificers of every kind of perfection. 'They know not how to fashion clothing, chairs, ships, and ploughs, nor, in short, the rest of the household furniture which familiar use demands.' — These are not the gifts of knowledge, but the inventions of most abject necessity. Nor did the arts fall together with our souls from the recesses of heaven, but they were all sought out and born here on earth, and, with the passage of the ages, were gradually forged little by little through meditation.
2:43
Quodsi haberent scientias animae, quas genus et habere divinum atque immortale condignum est, ab initio homines cuncti omnia scirent nec saeculum essct ullum, quod artis esset ignarum alicuius aut rerum experientia non paratum. - Nunc vero inops vita et multarum indigens rerum fortuita conspiciens quaedam commodule provenire, dum imitatur experitur et temptat, dum labitur reformat immutat, ex adsidua reprehensione parvas et concinnavit scientiolas artium et ad unum exitum temporibus plurimis coemendata perduxit.
但倘若靈魂真擁有那配得神聖不朽之類所有的諸般學問,那麼自起初,所有的人便會知曉萬事,也不會有哪個時代對某項技藝一無所知,或未經事物的經驗而毫無預備。然而如今,貧乏而多所匱缺的人生,眼見某些事碰巧順利成就,便在模仿、嘗試、試驗之際,在跌倒、重塑、更改之際,藉不斷的修正,既拼湊出各樣技藝那些微不足道的小學問,又歷經極多時代,將它們修正、帶至單一的成果。
But if souls possessed the sciences — which it is fitting that a divine and immortal kind should possess — from the beginning all men would know all things, nor would there be any age that was ignorant of any art or unprovided by experience of things. But now indeed, life, poor and in need of many things, seeing that certain things turn out conveniently, while it imitates, tries, and tests, while it slips, reshapes, and alters, has out of continual correction both put together the small little sciences of the arts and, over very many periods of time, brought them, corrected, to a single outcome.
2:44
19 Quodsi homines penitus aut ipsos se nossent aut intellectum dei suspicionis alicuius acciperent aura, numquam sibi adsciscerent divinam immortalemque naturam nec existimarent quiddam magnificum se esse, quia sibi craticulas trulleos creterrasque fecerunt, quia subuculas suppara laenas lacernulas trabeas cultros loricas et gladios, quia rastrs securiculas vomerem. 2. Numquam, inquam, crederent typho et adrogantia sublevati prima esse se numina et aequalia principis summitati, quia grammaticam musicam oratoriam pepererunt et geometricas formulas:
但倘若人或徹底認識自己,或憑任何一絲揣度之氣領受對神的認識,他們就絕不會為自己僭稱神聖不朽的本性,也不會自以為是何等宏偉之物──只因為他們為自己造了烤架、勺子、調酒缽;只因為他們造了汗衫、披巾、斗篷、小外套、朝服、刀、胸甲與劍;只因為他們造了耙、小斧與犁鏵。我說,他們絕不會被自負與傲慢所高舉,就相信自己乃是首要的神明、與元首之至高者同等──只因為他們產生了文法、音樂、演說術與幾何的公式;
But if men either knew themselves thoroughly, or received by any breath of surmise the understanding of God, they would never claim for themselves a divine and immortal nature, nor esteem themselves to be something magnificent, because they have made for themselves gridirons, ladles, and mixing-bowls; because they have made undershirts, wraps, cloaks, little mantles, robes of state, knives, breastplates, and swords; because they have made rakes, little axes, and the ploughshare. Never, I say, would they believe, uplifted by conceit and arrogance, that they are the first divinities and equal to the highest of the Prince, because they have brought forth grammar, music, oratory, and the formulas of geometry;
2:45
in quibus artificiis quidnam insit admirabile non videmus, ut ex eorum inventione credatur esse animas potiores et sole et sideribus cunctis, hunc totum, cuius membra sunt | f. 37 | haec, mundum et dignitate et substantia praeterire. 3. Quid enim aliud se spondent vel insinuare posse vel tradere, quam ut regulas nominum differentiasque noscamus, ut intervalla in vocum sonis, ut loquamur suadenter in litibus, ut terrarum continentias metiamur? 4. Quae si secum animae divinis ex regionibus adtulissent, ea esset necessarium scire omnis, ea iamdudum in omni orbe tractarent neque ullum hominum repperiretur genus, quod non esset his omnibus aequaliter atque uniformiter eruditum. 5.
在這些技藝中,我們看不出有甚麼那樣可讚嘆之處,以致人竟因它們的發明就相信靈魂勝過太陽與一切星辰,並相信這整個世界──而這些技藝不過是它的肢體──在尊嚴與實質上竟被超越。因為它們所應許能傳授、能遞交的,除了使我們知道名詞的規則及其區別、聲音的音程,使我們在訴訟中善於說服地陳詞,使我們丈量土地的面積之外,還能有甚麼呢?倘若靈魂真從神聖之境把這些帶來,那麼眾人都必然知曉,這些早就必在普天下被運用,也絕找不到哪一族人不曾在這一切上受過同等而劃一的教導。
in which crafts we see nothing so admirable that, from their invention, souls should be believed to be superior both to the sun and to all the stars, and that this whole world, whose members these things are, should be surpassed in dignity and substance. For what else do they promise that they can either impart or hand down, than that we should know the rules of nouns and their differences, the intervals in the sounds of voices, that we should speak persuasively in lawsuits, that we should measure the surfaces of lands? And if souls had brought these things with them from the divine regions, it would be necessary that all should know them, that they should have long since been handled in all the world, nor would any race of men be found that was not equally and uniformly instructed in all these things.
2:46
Nunc vero in mundo quotusquisque est musicus dialecticus et geometres, quotus orator poeta grammaticus? Ex quo apparet, ut saepius dictum est, inventa haec esse locorum necessitate ac temporum neque divinas eruditas advolavisse huc animas, quod neque omnes doctae sint neque discere omnes possint, at sint in his plurimae acuminis obtunsioris et bardi et ad discendi studium plagarum coercitione cogantur. 6. Quodsi ea quae discimus reminiscentias esse constaret, ut antiquis opinionibus scitum est, conveniebat nos omnes ab una veritate venientes unum nosse unumque reminisci, non habere diversas, non plurimas dissidentisque sententias;
然而如今,在世上有多少人是音樂家、辯證家、幾何家;有多少人是演說家、詩人、文法家呢?由此看來,正如屢次所說的,這些乃是因地方與時代的需要而被發明的,有學問而神聖的靈魂並未飛到這裡來;因為並非人人都有學問,也並非人人都能學習,反而在他們中間有極多資質較鈍、遲緩之人,須靠鞭撻的強制才被逼去用功學習。但倘若確立我們所學的乃是回憶,如古老的意見所主張的,那就理當是:我們眾人既都出於同一真理,便該知曉同一之事、回憶同一之事,而非持有紛歧、眾多而彼此不合的見解;
But now indeed, in the world, how few there are who are musicians, dialecticians, and geometers; how few who are orators, poets, and grammarians! From which it appears, as has often been said, that these things were invented by the necessity of places and times, and that learned and divine souls did not fly hither; for neither are all learned, nor can all learn, but among them there are very many of duller and slower keenness, and are compelled to the pursuit of learning by the coercion of blows. But if it were established that the things we learn are recollections, as was held in the ancient opinions, it would be fitting that we all, coming from one truth, should know one thing and recollect one thing, and not have diverse, not many and dissenting opinions;
2:47
nunc vero cum singuli aliud atque aliud adseramus, manifestum et promptum est nihil nos adtulisse de caelo, sed hic nata addiscere o et suspicionibus coalita vindicare. 20.1. Et ut vobis clarius manifestiusque monstremus, cuius sit / f. 37b | pretii homo, quem simillimum creditis potentiae superioris existere, concipite animis hanc imaginem vestris et, quod fieri si adgrediamur potest, tamquam si simus adgressi, similitudinis adsumptione teneamus. 2.
然而如今,既然我們各人所主張的彼此不同,那就明明白白:我們並未從天上帶來甚麼,反而是學習那在此地所生之物,並把那從揣度中湊集起來之物冒認為己有。為要更清楚、更明白地向你們顯示,你們所相信與那更高權能最為相似而存在的人,究竟值多少身價,請你們在心中構想這個影像,並且──既然只要我們著手去作便能作成──就讓我們藉著假設一個比擬,彷彿我們已然著手,來持守此想。
but now indeed, since each of us asserts one thing and another, it is manifest and plain that we have brought nothing from heaven, but that we learn things born here and claim as our own things gathered together out of surmises. And that we may show you more clearly and more manifestly of what price is that man whom you believe to exist most like to the higher power, conceive in your minds this image, and — since it can be done if we set about it — let us hold to it, by the assumption of a likeness, as though we had set about it.
2:48
Sit igitur nobis tellure in effossa locus habitabilis formam cubilis efficiens, tecto et parietibus clausus, non algidus in frigore, non fervoris nimii in calore, sed ita temperatus et medius ut nec frigoris sensum nec ardorem validum perpetiamur aestatis. 3. In hunc sonus omnino nullius incidat vocis, non avis, non bestiae, non tempestatis, non hominis, non denique fragoris alicuius aut concrepantis terribiliter caeli. Excogitemus deinde quemadmodum lumen accipiat: non ex inlato igni neque ex sole conspecto sed nothum aliquid fiat, quod imaginem luminis caligine interposita mentiatur;
那麼,就讓我們在挖空的地下有一處可居之所,作成寢室的形狀,用屋頂與牆壁封閉,在寒冷中不覺冰冷,在暑熱中不覺過熱,乃是這樣調和適中,以致我們既不受寒冷之感,也不受夏日炎熱的強烈灼燒。讓全然沒有任何聲音落入其中──沒有鳥聲,沒有獸聲,沒有風暴聲,沒有人聲,總之也沒有任何轟響聲或那可怕作響的天空之聲。然後讓我們設法使它得著光:不是靠引入的火,也不是靠所見的太陽,乃是造出某種假冒之物,藉著居間插入的幽暗,來仿冒光的影像;
Let there be for us, then, in the dug-out earth, a habitable place forming the shape of a chamber, closed by roof and walls, neither chilly in the cold nor too fervent in the heat, but so tempered and middling that we suffer neither the sensation of cold nor the strong ardor of summer's burning. Into it let the sound of no voice at all fall — not of a bird, not of a beast, not of a storm, not of a man, nor, in short, of any crash or of the terribly resounding sky. Let us then contrive how it may receive light: not from fire brought in, nor from the sun beheld, but let some spurious thing be made which, with darkness interposed, may counterfeit the image of light;
2:49
ianua non una sit nec sit introitus rectus, adeatur inflexibus flexuosis nec recludatur aliquando, nisi cum necessaria ratio postularit. 21.1. Nunc quoniam imagini praeparavimus sedem, accipiamus deinceps mox aliquem natum et in loci illius hospitium, quod habeat rem nullam et sit inane ac vacuum, Platonica licet aut Pythagorea progenie aut horum alicuius, qui acuminis perhibentur fuisse diuini aut ex deum responsis sapientissimi nuncupati. 2. Quod cum actum fuerit, | f. 38 | nutriri ut debeat sequitur et alimoniis convenientibus educari.
讓那裡不只有一道門,入口也不是直的,而要經由曲折的迂迴才可進入,並且除非必要之理有所要求,永不開啟。如今,既然我們已為這影像預備了居所,就讓我們接著隨即取來某個新生之人,把他安置在那處所的寓居中──那裡要空無一物,是空的、虛的;隨你們的意,讓他出於柏拉圖或畢達哥拉斯的血統,或出於那些據稱具有神聖敏銳、或因眾神的諭示而被稱為至智之人的後裔。這事既作成,接下來他就必須用合宜的養料得著哺養、撫育。
let there be not one door, nor let the entrance be straight, but let it be approached by winding turns, nor let it ever be opened, except when necessary reason shall demand it. Now, since we have prepared a seat for the image, let us next presently take up someone newly born and place him in the lodging of that place, which is to have no thing in it and to be empty and void — let him be, if you will, of Platonic or Pythagorean stock, or of one of those who are reported to have been of divine keenness or were named most wise from the responses of the gods. And when this has been done, it follows that he must be nourished and reared with suitable nourishments.
2:50
Adhibeamus igitur et nutricem, quae semper ad eum nuda, semper silens accedat, verbum nullum faciens nec in sermonis alicuius usus ora et labra diducat, sed cum mammas dederit et consequentia supplerit officia, datum quieti linquat et ante fores clausas dies noctesque continuet: poscit enim plerumque res, nutricias adesse curas et observari temporarios motus. 3. At vero cum coeperit solidioribus cibis infans debere fulciri, nutrice inferantur ab eadem, veste ut diximus posita et tenore reticentiae servato.
因此,讓我們也預備一名乳母,她總是赤身無語地走近他,不出一言,也不張開口唇去用任何言語;但當她餵過乳、盡了隨後的職分後,就讓她把餵飽的孩子留下安歇,並晝夜不斷地把門關閉──因為此事多半需要乳母的照料在旁,並需按時觀察其需求的動靜。但當嬰孩開始需要靠更堅實的食物來扶持時,就讓同一名乳母把食物送入,如我們所說,把她的衣裳除下,並持守緘默的常態。
Let us therefore also provide a nurse who always approaches him naked, always silent, making no word, nor parting her mouth and lips into the use of any speech; but when she has given the breasts and supplied the consequent offices, let her leave him, once fed, to rest, and let her keep the doors shut day and night without interruption — for the matter for the most part demands that nurse's cares be at hand and that timely motions be observed. But when the infant begins to need to be supported by more solid foods, let them be brought in by the same nurse, with her garment, as we have said, laid aside, and the tenor of silence preserved.
2:51
Ipse autem qui infertur cibus sit unus atque idem semper, nihil materia differens nec per varios redintegratus sapores, sed aut fitilla de milio aut sit panisex farre aut, ut saecula imitemur antiqua, ex cinere caldo glandes aut ex ramis agrestibus baculae. 4. Potio autem vini sit prorsus incognita nec sedandae aliud admoveatur siti quam liquor purus e fontibus caldore ignis intactus et, si fieri potis est, manibus subministratus cavis. Fiet enim familiaris e more consuetudo in naturam versa nec adpetitio porrigetur ulterius, esse amplius nesciens quod petatur. 22.1. Quorsum igitur haec spectant?
但讓所送入的食物始終是同一而不變的,在質料上毫無差別,也不以各樣滋味翻新,乃是或用小米的稀粥,或用斯佩耳特麥的餅,或──為要仿效古代──用熱灰中的橡子,或用野樹枝上的漿果。至於葡萄酒的飲用,讓它全然無人知曉,也不用別的來解渴,只用泉中純淨、未經火熱沾染的水;若可能,就盛在手掌的窪中奉上。因為由習慣所成的熟悉之性,必轉化為本性,他的胃口也不會再伸展得更遠,因他毫不知道還有別的可以求索。那麼,這一切究竟指向何處呢?
But let the food itself which is brought in be one and the same always, differing in no material nor renewed by various flavors, but let it be either a gruel of millet, or bread of spelt, or — that we may imitate the ancient ages — acorns from hot ashes or berries from the branches of the wild. But let the drinking of wine be utterly unknown, nor let anything else be applied to quench thirst than pure liquor from springs, untouched by the heat of fire and, if it can be done, served up in the hollows of the hands. For a familiar habit will arise from custom, turned into nature, nor will his appetite be stretched further, knowing nothing more that might be sought. To what, then, do these things look?
2:52
Ut, quoniam creditum est animas divinas a deo immortales esse et ad hominum corpora disciplinis cum omnibus advolare, experiamur ex isto quem hoc genere voluimus educari, capiatne res fidem an sit leviter credita et frustrabili | f. 38b | expectatione praesumpta. 2.
乃是這樣:既然有人相信靈魂是神聖的、由神而來不朽的,並且與其一切學問一同飛入人的身體,就讓我們藉這個我們有意如此撫養的人來試驗:這事究竟能否取信,抑或不過是輕率所信、憑一種必將落空的期待所擅自臆斷的。
It is this: since it has been believed that souls are divine, immortal from God, and fly to the bodies of men together with all their disciplines, let us test from this one, whom we have willed to be reared in this fashion, whether the matter accepts belief, or whether it has been lightly believed and presumed with a frustrable expectation.
2:53
Procedat igitur nobis solitudine in operta nutritus quot vultis annos agens, vultis vicenarius, vultis tricenarius, immo cum annos fuerit quadraginta permensus, mortalium conciliis inferatur, et si verum est illum principalis esse substantiae portionem, iam laetae ex fontibus vitae derivatum hic agere, antequam notitiam rei sumat alicuius aut sermone imbuatur humano, det responsum rogatus, quisnam sit ipse aut quo patre, quibus sit in regionibus editus, quo pacto aut quanam ratione nutritus, quid operis aut negotii celebrans ante acti temporis decurrerit aevitatem: 3.
那麼,就讓他──在那隱蔽的孤寂中被撫養、按你們所願度過了那麼多年的人──前來到我們這裡:你們願他二十歲,願他三十歲,甚至當他滿了四十歲時;讓他被帶入眾人的聚會中。倘若真如所說,他乃是那本源實質的一分,是已從生命歡樂的泉源被引到此地度日的,那麼,在他還未認識任何事物、還未沾染人的言語之先,就讓他被問及時作答:他自己是誰,出於哪位父,在何地被生出,以何方式或何緣由被撫養,在既往流逝的年歲中他從事過何等工作或事務。
Let him then come forth to us, reared in that hidden solitude, having spent as many years as you please — you wish him twenty, you wish him thirty, nay, when he shall have measured out forty years — and let him be brought into the assemblies of mortals; and if it is true that he is a portion of the principal substance, already derived here from the glad fountains of life to spend his time, before he takes cognizance of any thing or is imbued with human speech, let him give answer when asked who he himself is, or of what father, in what regions he was brought forth, in what way or by what means he was reared, celebrating what work or business he has run through the course of time already past.
2:54
ita ille non omni pecore ligno saxo obtunsior atque hebetior stabit, non missus in res novas et numquam sibi ante eognitas ipsum sese est ante omnia nesciturus? Poteritne, si quaeras, sol quid sit ostendere, terra maria sidera nubes nebula pluviae tonitrua nix grando? poterit arbores scire quid sint, herbae aut gramina, taurus equus aut aries, eamellus elephantus aut milvus? 23.1. Esurienti si dederis uvam mustaceum caepe carduum cucumerem ficum, sciet posse sedari omnibus ex his famem aut quo genere singula esse debeant esui?
他豈不因此比任何野獸、木頭或石頭都更愚鈍、更遲緩地站在那裡麼;他被送入新奇、從未曾識的事物之中,豈不首要之處連自己是誰也茫然無知麼?你若問他,他能指明太陽是甚麼,地是甚麼,海、星辰、雲、霧、雨、雷、雪、雹是甚麼麼?他能知道樹是甚麼,草或菜蔬是甚麼,公牛、馬或公羊,駱駝、象或鳶是甚麼麼?你若給一個飢餓的人一顆葡萄、一塊葡萄漿餅、一個蔥、一株薊、一根黃瓜、一顆無花果,他能知道飢餓可藉這一切平息,或知道這各樣該以何法食用麼?
Will he not thus stand duller and blunter than any beast, log, or stone; will he not, sent forth into new things and never before known to him, be ignorant of his very self above all else? Will he be able, if you ask, to show what the sun is, the earth, the seas, the stars, the clouds, the mist, the rains, the thunders, the snow, the hail? Will he be able to know what trees are, or plants, or grasses, or the bull, the horse, or the ram, the camel, the elephant, or the kite? If you give to one who is hungry a grape, a must-cake, an onion, a thistle, a cucumber, a fig, will he know that hunger can be stilled by all of these, or in what manner each of them ought to be for eating?
2:55
Ignem si plurimum feceris aut venenatas circumposueris bestias, nonne ibit per medias flammas viperas solifugas, esse noxias nesciens et timere ipsum quid sit ignorans? iam vero si vestem, si superlectilem ponas in medio tam urbanam | f. 39 | quam rusticam, eritne, idem ut possit diseriminare, discernere, cui negotio res quaeque conveniat, cuius muneris adcommodata sint usui? 2. Indicet in quos habitus vestis stragula facta sit, mitra strophium fascia pulvinus mucinnium laena calautica mantele mastruca soccos solea calceos? Quid si adicias quaerere rota quid sit aut tribula, vannus dolium cupa, trapetum vomis aut cribrum, mola buris aut sarculum?
你若生起大火,或在他四圍擺設毒獸,他豈不會逕直走過火焰、毒蛇、毒蜘蛛之中,既不知它們有害,也不曉得懼怕本身是甚麼麼?如今,你若在他面前擺上城裡與鄉間的衣物與家什,他豈能分辨、辨識它們,知道各樣適合何種用途、配作何等職分之用麼?他能指明鋪蓋之布是為穿戴甚麼而造,或說出頭巾、束胸帶、繃帶、靠墊、手帕、斗篷、婦人的頭飾、擦手巾、羊皮衣、矮鞋、涼鞋、長靴各是甚麼麼?你若再進而問他:輪子是甚麼,或打穀橇、簸箕、大甕、木桶、榨油機、犁鏵或篩子、磨、犁柄或鋤頭又是甚麼呢?
If you make a great fire or set poisonous beasts around him, will he not go through the midst of the flames, the vipers, the poisonous spiders, not knowing that they are harmful and being ignorant of what fear itself is? Now indeed, if you place in his midst clothing and furniture, both urban and rustic, will he be able to distinguish and discern the same, for what business each thing is suited, to the use of what office they are fitted? Will he indicate for what wearing a coverlet-cloth has been made, or a turban, a breast-band, a bandage, a cushion, a napkin, a cloak, a woman's head-dress, a hand-towel, a sheepskin garment, low shoes, a sandal, boots? What if you should add to ask what a wheel is, or a threshing-sledge, a winnowing-fan, a large jar, a cask, an oil-press, a ploughshare or a sieve, a mill, a plough-tail or a hoe?
2:56
quid arquata si sellula, acus strigilis polubrum siliquastrum trulla lancicula candelabrum batioca scopae scyphus saccus? quid si cithara tibia argentum aes aurum code? radius liber? quid instrumenta si cetera quibus vita succingitur et continetur humana? 3. Ita ut diximus ille non bovis ritu aut asini, porci aut si ullum est animal tardius, conspiciet haec quidem formaturas varias respectans set quae sint singula nesciens et quam in causam possideantur ignorans? Nonne vocem si fuerit necessitate aliqua coactus emittere, ut solemne est mutis, inarticulatum nescio quid ore hiante clamabit? 24.1. Quid in Menone, o Plato [Plato, Men.
你若問他弧形座椅是甚麼,或針、刮身器、洗盆、凳子、勺子、小碟、燭臺、酒杯、掃帚、大杯、口袋是甚麼?琴、笛、銀、銅、金、磨石、織梭、書卷又是甚麼?此外那用來裝束、維繫人生的其餘器具又是甚麼呢?如此,正如我們所說,他豈不像牛或驢、豬、或若有更遲鈍的動物一般,固然望著這些、端詳其各樣形狀,卻不知那各件是甚麼、也不曉得它們是為何用途而被擁有麼?他若被某種必需所迫,非發聲不可──如同啞者的慣常──豈不會張著口,喊出某種含糊不清之聲麼?
What if you ask what an arched seat is, a needle, a scraper, a wash-basin, a stool, a ladle, a small dish, a candlestick, a drinking-cup, a besom, a goblet, a sack? What of a lyre, a flute, silver, bronze, gold, a whetstone, a weaver's shuttle, a book? What of the other instruments with which human life is girded and held together? Thus, as we have said, will he not, after the manner of an ox or an ass, a pig, or if there is any slower animal, gaze at these things indeed, regarding their various shapes, but not knowing what the several things are and ignorant for what purpose they are possessed? If, forced by some necessity, he must utter a voice — as is customary with the dumb — will he not, with gaping mouth, cry out some inarticulate thing?
2:57
82], quaedam rationibus numeri admota ex puerculo sciscitaris et ex eius niteris responsionibus comprobare, quae discamus non discere sed in eorum memoriam quae antiquitus noveramus redire? Qui si tibi vere respondet - non enim nos convenit fidem rebus abiudicare quas dicis - non rerum scientia sed intellegentia ducitur, et ex eo quod aliquos numeros cottidianis habet ex usibus notos fit ut sequatur rogatus et ipsa illum semper | f. 39b | multipilicationis adducat accessio. 2. Quodsi vere confidis immortales huc animas et plenas scientiae pervolare, adulescentulum istum rogare desinito, quem esse conspicis gnarum rerum et humanitatis esse in finibus constitutum:
柏拉圖啊,你在《美諾篇》中作了甚麼──你向一個小男孩詢問某些藉數的推理所引出之事,並竭力從他的回答來證明:我們所學的並非在學,乃是回到我們古來所知之事的記憶麼?他若真確地回答你──因為對你所述之事拒不採信,於我們並不合宜──他所憑的並非事物的知識,乃是悟性;並且因為他有某些從日常之用得知的數目,才使他被問時能跟得上,而乘法本身不斷的遞增總在牽引他前進。但你若真確信靈魂是不朽而滿有知識地飛到這裡來,就別再問那少年了,因你看他是通曉事物、並被立於人性界限之內的;
What in the Meno, O Plato — do you inquire of a little boy certain things brought to bear by the reasonings of number, and strive from his answers to prove that the things we learn we do not learn, but return to the memory of things which we had known of old? If he truly answers you — for it does not befit us to deny credit to the matters you tell of — he is led not by knowledge of things but by intelligence; and from the fact that he has certain numbers known from his daily uses, it comes about that he follows when questioned, and the very increase of multiplication always leads him on. But if you truly are confident that souls fly hither immortal and full of knowledge, cease to question that stripling, whom you see to be knowing of things and to be established within the bounds of humanity;
2:58
quadragenarium istum ad te voca et ex eo percontare non abstrusum aliquid, non involutum, non de triangulis, non de quadratis, quid sit cubus aut dynamis, sesqueoctavus aut sesquetertius ultimus , sed quod in medio situm est, bis bina, bis terna quam efficiant summulam quaerito. 3. Volumus videre, volumus scire, quid rogatus respondeat, an inquisitam expediat quaestionem. Ita ille sensurus est, quamvis ei pateant aures, an aliquid dicas, an aliquid quaeras, an tibi ab sese responderi aliquid postules? Et non stipes ut aliquis aut Marpesia ut dictum est [Verg. Aen.
把那四十歲的人叫到你面前,向他發問──不是問甚麼深奧之事,不是問甚麼糾纏之事,不是問三角形,不是問正方形,不是問立方是甚麼或乘方,也不是問九比八或最末的四比三──乃是問那擺在中間的:問二乘二、二乘三得多少的小小總和。我們願看看、願知道,他被問時如何作答,他能否解開向他所提的問題。他豈能感覺出──縱使他的雙耳向他敞開──你是否在說甚麼、是否在問甚麼、是否要求他親自回答你甚麼麼?他豈不會像某截樹樁,或如所說的一塊瑪耳珀薩的
call that forty-year-old to you, and question him — not about something abstruse, not something involved, not about triangles, not about squares, not what a cube is or a power, a sesquioctave or an ultimate sesquitertian — but about what lies in the midst: ask how great a little sum twice two, twice three make. We wish to see, we wish to know, what he answers when asked, whether he unfolds the question put to him. Will he thus feel, though his ears lie open to him, whether you say anything, whether you ask anything, whether you require anything to be answered to you by himself? And will he not, like some stump or, as it has been said, a Marpesian
2:59
6, 471] rupes stabit elinguis et mutus, hoc ipsum ignorans et nesciens, secum potius an cum altero conloquaris, cum altero sermocineris an secum, oratio sit ista quam promis an sonitus vocis nihil rerum significans sed inani continuatione pertractus? 25.1. Quid dicitis, o viri plus quam satis est vobis ex aliena generositate tribuentes? Haecine est anima docta illa quam dicitis, immortalis perfecta divina, post deum principem rerum et post mentes geminas locum optinens quartum et afluens ex crateribus vivis? 2. Hic est ille pretiosus et rationibus homo augustissimis praeditus, mundus minor qui dicitur et totius in speciem similitudinis fabricatus | f. 40 | atque formatus:
岩石一般,無舌無言地站著,對這事本身茫然不覺──即你究竟是在自言自語還是與他人交談,你是在與他人交談還是在自語,你所發的那言語究竟是一篇論述,還是一種不指涉任何事物、只在空洞的延續中被拖長的聲音麼?你們這些憑他人的慷慨而過度抬舉人的人哪,你們說甚麼呢?這就是你們所說的那有學問的靈魂麼──不朽的、完全的、神聖的,在萬有之元首神之後、在雙重心智之後居第四位,並從活的調酒缽中流出?這就是那寶貴的人麼──賦有至尊之推理才能、被稱為小世界、按著那全然相似的樣式被構造、被塑成的:
rock, stand tongueless and dumb, ignorant and unaware of this very thing — whether you are conversing rather with yourself or with another, whether you are talking with another or with yourself, whether that speech which you utter is a discourse or the sound of a voice signifying no things but drawn out in an empty continuation? What do you say, O men who bestow upon man more than enough from another's generosity? Is this that learned soul which you speak of — immortal, perfect, divine, holding the fourth place after God the Prince of things and after the twin minds, and flowing forth from the living mixing-bowls? Is this that precious man, endowed with the most august faculties of reasoning, who is called the lesser world and was framed and formed in the semblance of the total likeness:
2:60
nullo melior ut apparuit pecore, obtunsior ligno, saxo, qui nesciat homines et in mutis semper solitudinibus degat, demoretur iners, valeat inaniter , quamvis annis vivat innumeris et numquam nodis corporeis eximatur. Sed cum scholas attigerit et magistrorum fuerit institutionibus eruditus, efficitur prudens, doctus et quam nuper habuerat imperitiam ponit. 3.
他,如已顯明的,不比任何野獸更好,比木頭、比石頭更遲鈍;他不認識人,總在無言的孤寂中度日,遲鈍地滯留,徒然地強壯,縱使活過無數的年歲,也永不從身體的束縛中得釋。然而,當他進了學堂、受了師傅的教導,他就成了明智、有學識的人,並把他方才所有的無知放下了。然而──我已說過──這才是人真正的身價。
who, as has appeared, is better than no beast, blunter than a log, than a stone; who knows not men and ever spends his life in dumb solitudes, lingers sluggish, is strong to no purpose, though he live for countless years and is never released from the bodily bonds? But when he has attained the schools and been instructed by the teachings of masters, he is made prudent and learned, and lays aside the inexperience which he had but lately. Yet — I have said it — such an one is the true price of man.
2:61
Et asellus et bos aeque usu atque adsiduitate cogendi discit arare ac molere, equus iugum subire et agnoscere in curriculo flexiones, camellus sese summittere sive cum sumit onera sive cum ponit, columba manumissa revolare ad dominicas sedes, canis cum invenerit praedam cohibere et continere latratum, verba psittacus et integrare et nomina corvus expromere. 26.1. Sed ego cum audio nescio quid praestans animam dici, deo vicinum et proximum, scientem huc omnia superioribus adventare de saeculis, nolo illam discere set docere nec ex docta ut dicitur elementariam fieri sed retinentem res suas corporibus semet circumligare terrenis.
驢和牛同樣藉著練習與不斷被驅使的操練,學會耕田與磨麥;馬學會負軛,並辨認在賽道上的轉彎;駱駝學會俯身,無論是承受重擔或卸下重擔之時;鴿子一旦被釋放,便飛回主人的居所;狗尋得獵物時,便克制自己、抑住吠聲;鸚鵡學會重複話語,烏鴉學會說出名字。然而,當我聽人說靈魂是某種卓越之物,與神相親相近,知曉此處的一切皆是從更高的世代而來,我卻不願它去學習,而願它去教導;不願它如人所言從有學識淪為初學者,而願它保存自己所有的,將自己束縛於屬地的身軀之中。
Both the ass and the ox learn, equally by practice and by constant exertion of being driven, to plough and to grind; the horse learns to bear the yoke and to recognize the turnings on the racecourse; the camel to lower itself, whether when it takes up its burdens or when it lays them down; the dove, once set free, to fly back to its master's dwellings; the dog, when it has found its prey, to check itself and restrain its barking; the parrot to repeat words, and the raven to bring out names. But when I hear it said that the soul is something surpassing, akin and near to God, knowing that all things here come to it from higher ages, I do not wish it to learn but to teach, nor from being learned, as they say, to become a beginner, but rather, retaining its own possessions, to bind itself about with earthly bodies.
2:62
Nisi enim sese habuerit res ita, discerni qui poterit, utrumne illud quod audit reminiscatur an discat, cum multo facilius sit credere, discere illam quod nesciat quam oblitam quod paulo ante sciebat. 2. ''Ex oppositu corporis amittit repetentiam priorum'' [Plat., Phaedr. 248 a-c]. - Et ubi est illud quod dicitur, incorporalis animas substantiam non habere? Quod enim nullius est corporis, oppositione alterius non inpeditur nec potest aliquid sua de re perdere | f. 40 b | id quod non potest tactum rei oppositae sustinere.
因為若事情不是如此,又怎能分辨靈魂究竟是回憶它所聽見的,還是學習它?既然相信它學習它所不知道的,遠比相信它遺忘了不久前所知道的要容易得多。「由於身體的阻擋,它喪失了對從前之事的記憶」(如柏拉圖所言)。可是,那句「非物質的靈魂沒有實體」的話又在何處呢?因為凡不屬於任何身體的,就不被另一物的阻擋所妨礙,也不能喪失屬於自身存在的任何東西,既然它根本無法承受相對之物的觸碰。
For unless the matter were so, how could it be distinguished whether the soul recollects what it hears or learns it? Since it is far easier to believe that it learns what it did not know than that it has forgotten what a little before it knew. 'Because of the opposition of the body it loses the recollection of former things,' as Plato says. But then, where is that saying, that incorporeal souls have no substance? For what belongs to no body is not impeded by the opposition of another, nor can it lose anything of its own being, seeing that it cannot sustain the touch of an opposed thing.
2:63
Ut enim numerus sine corporibus constitutus, quamvis mille corporibus obruatur, intactus et inviolabilis constat, ita necesse est animas, si sunt ut perhibetur incorporeae, oblivionem priorum nullam pati, quamvis eas solidissimae corporum circumligaverint vinctiones. 3. Quid quod eadem ratio non tantum incorporeas indicat eas non esse, verum etiam privat immortalitate has omnis et ad fines adplicat quibus vita consueta est terminari? Quicquid enim causa ingruente nonnulla ita mutatur et vertitur ut integritatem suam retinere non possit, id necesse est iudicari natura esse passivum. Quod autem est promptum atque expositum passioni, corruptibile esse ipsa passibilitate interveniente denuntiat.
因為正如數目,既無需身體便可成立,即使被千萬個身體所淹沒,仍保持不受觸動、不可侵犯;同樣,靈魂若如人所主張是非物質的,則必然不會遭受任何對從前之事的遺忘,無論多麼堅固的身體束縛捆住它們。再者,同樣的推理不僅顯明它們並非非物質的,甚至剝奪它們一切的不朽,將它們歸入生命慣常受限的界限之內。因為凡當某原因逼迫時便如此改變變化、以致無法保持自身完整的,必然要被判定為本性上是被動的。而凡預備好且暴露於受苦的,正是這受苦性的介入,便宣告它是可朽壞的。
For just as number, being constituted without bodies, remains untouched and inviolable, though it be overwhelmed by a thousand bodies, so it is necessary that souls, if they are incorporeal as is asserted, suffer no forgetfulness of former things, however much the most solid bonds of bodies may bind them about. Moreover, the same reasoning not only shows that they are not incorporeal, but even deprives them all of immortality and applies them to those limits by which life is wont to be bounded. For whatever, when some cause presses upon it, is so altered and changed that it cannot retain its own integrity, must of necessity be judged to be by nature passive. And whatever is ready and exposed to suffering, by that very passibility intervening, proclaims itself to be corruptible.
2:64
27.1. Ergo si et animae perdunt omne quod noverant, corporalibus vinculis occupatae, patiantur necesse est aliquid quod eas efficiat oblivionis induere caecitatem. Neque enim nihil omnino perpessae aut integritatem conservantes suam possunt rerum scientiam ponere aut in alios habitus sine sui mutabilitate transire. 2. Atquin nos arbitramur, quod est unum, quod immortale, quod simplex, quacumque in re fuerit, necessario semper suam retinere naturam nec debere aut posse aliquid perpeti, si modo e sse perpetuum cogitat et in finibus propriae immortalitatis haerere. Omnis enim passio leti atque interitus ianua est, ad mortem ducens via et inevitabilem rebus adferens functionem:
所以,靈魂若也喪失了它們所知的一切,被身體的束縛所擄,它們必然遭受某種使它們披上遺忘之盲的東西。因為它們若全然無所遭受、或保持自身完整,便既不能放下對事物的知識,也不能在自身不變的情況下轉入別的狀態。然而我們認為,凡是唯一的、不朽的、單純的,無論它在何物之中,都必然要永遠保持自身的本性,若它意欲永存並安住於自身不朽的界限之內,便不應、也不能遭受任何事。因為一切受苦都是死亡與毀滅之門,是通往死亡之路,為萬物帶來無可避免的消亡:
Therefore, if souls too lose all that they knew, being seized by the bonds of the body, they must of necessity suffer something which causes them to put on the blindness of forgetfulness. For neither, having suffered nothing at all or preserving their integrity, can they lay aside the knowledge of things or pass into other states without change in themselves. And yet we hold that what is one, what is immortal, what is simple, in whatever thing it be, must of necessity always retain its own nature, and ought not, nor is able, to suffer anything, if only it means to be perpetual and to abide within the limits of its own immortality. For every suffering is the door of death and destruction, a way leading to death, and bringing upon things an inevitable dissolution:
2:65
quam si sentiunt animae | f. 41 | et tactui eius atque incursionibus cedunt, usu et illis est vita, non mancipio tradita, quamvis aliter quidam inferant et rei tantae fidem suis in argumentationibus ponant. 28.1. Ac ne tamen instructi non plenius abeamus [ne videamus] a vobis, quemadmodum dicitis animas, cum terrenis fuerint corporibus involutae, priorum reminiscentiam non habere, cum in ipsis corporibus positae et prope insensibiles eorum commixtione perfectae pertinaciter et fideli ter teneant ea quae ante annos plures, si velis dicere vel octoginta vel hoc amplius, vel fecerunt vel passae sunt vel locutae sunt vel audierunt. 2.
靈魂若感受到這死亡、並對它的觸碰與攻擊讓步,那麼生命對它們而言乃是憑使用而有的,並非以完全的所有權交付;儘管有些人論證不同,把如此重大之事的確據建立在他們自己的推論之上。然而,為使我們離開你們時不至於未能更充分地受教:你們怎能說靈魂一旦被裹入屬地的身軀,便不再記得從前之事,而它們置於這些身軀之中、幾乎因與身軀混合而變得無感,卻仍頑強而忠實地緊握著它們在許多年前——比方說八十年前、甚或更久,隨你怎麼說——所做、所受、所說、或所聽見的事物呢?
and if souls feel this and yield to its touch and its assaults, then life is theirs by use, not handed over in full ownership, however differently some may argue and place the assurance of so great a matter upon their own reasonings. Yet lest we depart not more fully instructed from you: how is it that you say souls, when they have been wrapped in earthly bodies, do not have recollection of former things, when, placed in these very bodies and made almost insensible by their commingling, they yet stubbornly and faithfully hold fast those things which, many years before—say eighty or even more, if you will—they either did or suffered or spoke or heard?
2:66
Si enim obstaculo perficitur corporis, ne meminerint eorum quae iamdudum et ante hominem sciebant, magis est ut ea debeant oblivisci quae conclusae in corporibus factitarunt quam quae foris positae, nondum hominibus coniugatae. Quod enim rebus ingressis priorum repetentiam detrahit, et intra se gesta inrecordabili debet obliteratione deperdere. 3. Una enim causa res duas efficere ac sibi contrarias non potest, ut aliorum memorias sopiat, alia patiatur actoris in recordationem venire.
因為,若身體的阻礙使它們不記得那些久遠以前、成為人以先所知曉之事,那麼更當預期的是:它們會遺忘被封閉於身軀中所做之事,而非遺忘在外面、尚未與人結合時所做之事。因為那使已入身之物喪失對從前之事記憶的東西,也應當以不可記憶的抹除喪失它自身內部所做之事。因為一個原因不能產生兩個彼此相反的效果,以致既使某些事物的記憶沉睡,又容許行為者自身作為的回憶重現。
For if it is brought about by the obstacle of the body that they do not remember those things which long ago and before becoming man they knew, it is rather to be expected that they should forget the things they did while shut up in bodies than the things done outside, while not yet joined to men. For that which takes away from things that have entered in the recollection of former things ought also to lose by unremembering obliteration the things done within itself. For one cause cannot produce two effects contrary to each other, so as to lull to sleep the memories of some things while allowing the recollection of the doer's own deeds to come back.
2:67
Quod si animae quas vocatis membrorum impediuntur obstaculo, quominus artes suas atque antiquas reminiscantur, in corporibus ipsis quemadmodum constitutae meminerunt et sciunt animas se esse et corporalem substantiam non habere, inmortalitatis condicione mactatas, quem tenent in rebus gradum, quo sint | f. 41b | ordine a deo patre discretae, ad infima haec mundi quanam ratione pervenerint, quas ex quibus circulis qualitates, dum in haec loca labuntur, adtraxerint? 4. Quemadmodum, inquam, sciunt doctissimas se fuisse et obstructione corporum amisisse quae noverant? Et hoc ipsum enim nescire debuerant, si aliquid eis labis corporalis invexi sset adiunctio:
但你們說靈魂受肢體的阻礙而無法回憶其技藝與古老的知識,這些靈魂卻在這些身軀之中、在它們所處的狀態下,記得並知道自己是靈魂、不具物質的實體、且被賦予不朽的境況——那麼,它們在萬物之中居於何等地位?由父神以何等次序加以分別?憑何緣故來到世界這些最低的區域?當它們滑落到這些地方時,從哪些天界圈層汲取了哪些性質?我問,它們怎麼知道自己曾是最有學問的、而因身體的阻擋喪失了所知之事?因為若身體的結合為它們帶來任何污損,這一點它們本也應當一無所知:
But if the souls, which you say are hindered by the obstacle of the limbs from recollecting their arts and their ancient knowledge, yet in these very bodies, in the state in which they are placed, remember and know that they are souls and do not possess corporeal substance, that they have been endowed with the condition of immortality—then what rank do they hold among things, in what order they have been distinguished by God the Father, by what reason they came to these lowest regions of the world, what qualities and from which circles they drew as they glided down into these places? How, I say, do they know that they were most learned and lost through the obstruction of the body the things they knew? For this very thing too they ought to have been ignorant of, if the conjunction of the body had brought upon them any taint:
2:68
Nam scire quid fueris et quid hodie non sis, non est signum memoriae perditae sed comprobatio indiciumque servatae. 29.1. Quae cum ita se habeant, desinite, quaeso, desinite res parvas atque exigui nominis immanibus pretiis aestimare, desinite hominem proletari us cum sit classicis et capite cum censeatur adscribere ordinibus primis, cum sit inops, pauper lare et tugurii pauperis nec patriciae claritatis unquam meritus nuncupari.
因為知道自己曾是什麼、如今不是什麼,並非記憶已滅的標記,反倒是記憶得以保存的證據與憑記。既然事情如此,我懇求你們,不要再以驚人的價碼估量那渺小而微不足道之名的事物;不要再把人——他不過是最低階的無產者、只按人頭計數——列入首等的階級之中;他既貧乏、家道寒微、居於破陋的茅舍,從不配被列名於貴族之列。
For to know what you have been and what today you are not is no sign of a memory that has perished, but rather a proof and token of a memory preserved. Since these things are so, cease, I beseech you, cease to value at monstrous prices things small and of trifling name; cease to enroll man—when he is but a proletarian and reckoned by his head—among the first ranks, the classes; when he is destitute, poor in his household and in a poor hovel, and never deserving to be named among the patrician nobility.
2:69
Cum enim vos oporteret veros recti atque integritatis auctores typhum et adrogantiam frangere, quorum alis cuncti extollimur et inanium distendimur vanitate, non tantum ** accidere mala ista censetis, verum, quod gravius multo est, addidistis causas quibus et vitia crescerent et inemendabilis nequitia permaneret. 2. Quis est enim hominum, quamvis ille sit indolis infamia semper atque ignominiosa fugientis, qui cum dici exaudiat viris ab sapientibus maxime, immortalis animas esse nec fatorum esse obnoxias legibus, non in omnia flagitia praeceps se ruat, non securus, intrepidus res obeat atque | f.
因為你們既是正直與純全的真正倡導者,本應打破那使我們眾人被高舉、被空虛之物的虛榮所膨脹的驕傲與傲慢,你們卻不僅斷定這些惡事臨到我們,而且更嚴重的是,還加上了使罪惡滋長、使無可挽救的邪惡長存的緣由。因為,即使有人天性一向逃避可恥與蒙羞之事,可是當他聽見——尤其是聽智者說——靈魂是不朽的、不受命運律法所轄,有誰不會一頭栽進一切卑劣之中,不會漫不經心、無所畏懼地著手行不法之事,
For whereas you, being true authors of rectitude and integrity, ought to have broken down pride and arrogance—by whose wings we are all lifted up and puffed out with the vanity of empty things—not only do you judge that these evils fall upon us, but, what is much graver, you have added the causes by which vices grow and incorrigible wickedness endures. For what man is there—even though he be always of a disposition that flees the shameful and disgraceful—who, when he hears it said, chiefly by wise men, that souls are immortal and not subject to the laws of the fates, would not rush headlong into every vileness, would not, careless and undaunted, undertake and set his hand to unlawful deeds,
2:70
42 | adgrediatur inlicitas, non denique omnia suis cupiditatibus largiatur quae libido inpotens iusserit, inpunitatis praeterea etiam libertate munita? 3. Quid enim prohibebit quominus haec faciat? metus supernae potestatis iudiciumque divinum? et qui poterit territari formidinis alicuius horrore, cui fuerit persuasum tam se esse immortalem quam ipsum deum primum nec ab eo iudicari quicquam de se posse, cum sit una immortalitas in utroque nec in alterius altera condicionis possit aequalitate vexari? 30.1. ''Sed memoratae apud inferos poenae et suppliciorum generibus multiformes?''.
他豈不終究會把放縱的私慾所命令的一切都賜予自己的慾念,何況他還受到不受懲罰之自由的加固?因為有什麼能攔阻他行這些事呢?是對上天權能與神聖審判的懼怕嗎?而一個已被說服自己與那第一位神同樣不朽、且祂不能對自己作任何審判的人——既然兩者同有一個不朽,而這一個不朽不能因與另一者境況的平等而受擾亂——他又怎能被任何懼怕的驚駭所震懾呢?「可是陰間記載著刑罰,並有各樣的酷刑嗎?」
would not, in fine, grant to his own desires all things that ungoverned lust commands, being moreover fortified by the freedom of impunity? For what will hinder him from doing these things? The fear of a supernal power and divine judgment? And how can he be terrified by the dread of any fear, who has been persuaded that he is as immortal as the first God himself, and that nothing can be judged concerning him by Him, since immortality is one in both, and the one immortality cannot be troubled by any equality with the condition of the other? 'But punishments among the dead are recorded, and manifold with kinds of torments?'
2:71
- Et quis erit tam brutus et rerum consequentias nesciens, qui animis incorruptibilibus credat aut tenebras Tartareas posse aliquid nocere aut igneos fluvios aut caenosis gurgitibus paludes aut rotarum volubilium circumactus? 2. Quod enim contiguum non est et ab legibus dissolutionis amotum est, licet omnibus ambiatur flammis torrentium fluminum, volvatur in caeno [non], saxorum imminentinm casibus et immanium montium operiatur ruinis, inlibatum necesse est permaneat et intactum neque ullum sensum mortiferae passionis adsumere. 3.
又有誰會如此愚昧、對事物的後果如此無知,竟相信有什麼能傷害不可朽壞的靈魂——無論是塔耳塔洛斯的黑暗、火河、泥漿漩渦的沼澤、或旋轉之輪的翻轉?因為凡不與任何物接觸、且脫離了消解律法的東西,即使被烈焰奔騰之河的一切火焰所環繞、在泥濘中翻滾、被懸崖巨石的墜落與龐大山嶽的崩塌所掩埋,也必然保持不受損傷、不被觸動,全然不承受任何致命受苦的感覺。
And who will be so stupid and ignorant of the consequences of things as to believe that anything can harm incorruptible souls—whether the darkness of Tartarus, or fiery rivers, or marshes with muddy whirlpools, or the whirling of revolving wheels? For that which is not in contact with anything, and is removed from the laws of dissolution, though it be surrounded by all the flames of burning rivers, though it be rolled in mire, though it be buried by the falling of overhanging rocks and the ruins of enormous mountains, must needs remain unimpaired and untouched, and take on no sense of deadly suffering.
2:72
Quid quod ista persuasio non tantum est incitatrix ad vitia libertate ex ipsa peccandi, verum etiam philosophiae ipsius causam tollit et inaniter eam suscipi supervacanei | f. 42 b | operis difficultate declarat. Nam si verum est, animas nullius esse participes finis et cum omnibus saeculis aevorum perpetuitate procedere, quid periculi res habet contemptis praetermissisque virtutibus, quibus est contractior atque horridior vita, voluptatibus se dare ac per omnia libidinum genera eflrenatum spargere inmensae cupiditatis ardorem? 4. Ne deliciis marceat et corrumpatur mollitudine vitiorum? - Et qua poterit ratione corrumpi id quod immortale, quod semper est et nulli obnoxium passioni?
再者,這種信念不僅藉犯罪的那份自由煽動人趨向惡行,甚至取消了哲學本身存在的理由,並以一項多餘勞作的艱難宣告哲學是徒然被承擔的。因為,若靈魂不參與任何終結、而與萬代同以世代的永恆前行是真的,那麼一個人若輕視並越過那使生命更受約束、更艱苦的諸德,把自己交付於逸樂,並無所節制地藉各樣情慾散發無邊慾望的熱火,事情中還有什麼危險呢?難道怕他因逸樂而軟弱、被惡行的柔靡所敗壞嗎?可是那不朽的、永遠存在、不受任何受苦的東西,又能憑什麼道理被敗壞呢?
Moreover, this persuasion is not only an incitement to vices by the very freedom of sinning, but it even takes away the reason for philosophy itself, and declares that it is vainly undertaken, by the difficulty of a superfluous labor. For if it is true that souls partake of no end and proceed with all the ages in the perpetuity of the ages, what danger is there in the matter, if, despising and passing over the virtues by which life is made more restricted and rougher, one gives oneself to pleasures and, unbridled, scatters through every kind of lust the ardor of immense desire? Lest one grow flabby with delights and be corrupted by the softness of vices? And by what reasoning can that be corrupted which is immortal, which always is and subject to no suffering?
2:73
Ne sordescat et polluatur actionum turpium foeditate? - Et qui poterit pollui corporalem quod substantiam non habet, aut ubi sedem contaminatio ponere, ubi spatium nullum est in quo nota se possit ipsius contaminationis adfigere? Rursus vero si animae leti adeunt ianuas, Epicuri ut sententia definitur, nec sic causa est conpetens, cur expeti philosophia debeat, etiamsi verum est purgari hac animas atque ab omni puras vitiositate praestari. 5.
難道怕它因卑劣行為的污穢而變得骯髒、受玷污嗎?可是那不具物質實體的東西,又怎能受玷污呢?或者,玷污能在哪裡安置其座位,既然沒有任何空間可讓那玷污本身的痕跡附著其上?但反過來說,若如伊壁鳩魯的主張所界定的,靈魂趨近死亡之門,那麼即使哲學能潔淨靈魂、使之脫離一切邪惡而變得純潔是真的,也仍沒有充分的理由要追求哲學。
Lest it grow foul and be polluted by the filthiness of base deeds? And how can that be polluted which does not possess corporeal substance? Or where can the contamination place its seat, where there is no space in which the mark of that very contamination can fix itself? But again, if souls approach the doors of death, as the opinion of Epicurus is defined, not even so is there a sufficient cause why philosophy should be sought, even if it is true that by it souls are purged and rendered pure from all viciousness.
2:74
Nam si communiter obeunt et in ipsis corporibus sensus eis deperit extinguiturque vitalis, non lantum est erroris maximi verum stolidae caecitatis, frenare ingenitos adpetitus, cohibere in angustiis vitam, nihil indulgere naturae, non quod cupidines iusserint atque instigaverint facere, cum nulla te praemia tanti laboris expectent cum dies mortis advenerit et corporalibus fueris vinculis exsolutus. 31.1. Medietas | f. 43 | ergo quaedam et animarum anceps ambigua que natura locum philosophiae peperit et causam cur appeteretur invenit, dum periculum scilicet ex malis iste formidat admissis, alter concipit spes bonas, si nihil sceleris faciat et cum officio vitam iustitiaque traducat. 2.
因為,若靈魂共同滅亡、且它們生命的感覺在身軀之中衰退熄滅,那麼勒住天生的慾念、把生命侷限於狹隘之內、對本性毫不放縱、凡慾望所命所催逼的一概不行,這不僅是最大錯誤的標記,更是愚頑之盲的標記——既然當死亡之日來臨、你從身體的束縛中被鬆開時,如此巨大勞苦的報償都無一等候著你。所以,靈魂那某種中間的、模稜兩可、含糊不定的本性,才為哲學生出了立足之地,並找到了應當追求它的理由——因為一者顯然懼怕所犯之惡帶來的危險,而另一者則懷抱美好的盼望,只要他不犯罪、以本分與公義度過一生。
For if souls perish in common and in the very bodies their vital sense fails and is extinguished, it is a mark not only of the greatest error but of stolid blindness to bridle inborn appetites, to confine life within narrow limits, to indulge nothing to nature, to do nothing which desires have bidden and urged, when no rewards of so great a labor await you, once the day of death has come and you have been loosed from the bonds of the body. Therefore a certain middle and doubtful, ambiguous nature of souls has given birth to a place for philosophy and found a reason why it should be sought, since the one, forsooth, dreads danger from evils committed, while the other conceives good hopes, if he does no crime and passes his life with duty and justice.
2:75
Inde est quod inter doctos viros et ingeniorum excellentia praeditos de animarum qualitate certamen est et eas alii dicunt mortali esse natura nec divinam posse substantiam sustinere, alii vero perpetuas nec in naturam posse degenerare mortalem, quod istud ut fiat, medietatis efficitur lege: quod et illis argumenta sunt praesto, quibus eas passivas atque interibiles invenitur, et his contra non desunt quibus esse divinas immortalesque monstratur. 32.1.
由此之故,在博學而稟賦卓越才智的人們當中,就靈魂的性質起了爭論:有些人說靈魂本性是可朽的、不能承載神聖的實體,另有些人則說靈魂是永存的、不能墮落為可朽的本性——而這之所以如此,乃是由那中間狀態的律法所造成的:因為主張靈魂被動而可朽的人有其論據,而反之,主張靈魂神聖不朽的人也不乏其論據。
Hence it is that among learned men, endowed with excellence of talents, there is a contest concerning the quality of souls: and some say they are of a mortal nature and cannot sustain a divine substance, while others say they are everlasting and cannot degenerate into a mortal nature—for the fact that this is so is brought about by the law of the middle state: since arguments are at hand for those who find them passive and perishable, and to these, on the contrary, arguments are not lacking by which they are shown to be divine and immortal.
2:76
Haec cum ita se habeant et cum ab summo traditum teneamus auctore, non esse animas longe ab hiatibus mortis et faucibus constitutas, posse tamen longaevas summi principis munere ac beneficio fieri, si modo illum temptent ac meditentur adgnoscere - eius enim cognitio fermentum quoddam est vitae ac rei dissociabilis glutinum - tum deinde feritate atque inhumanitate depositis resumant ingenia mitiora, ut ad illud quod dabitur esse possint paratae. 2. Quid est quod a vobis tamquam bruti et stolidi iudicemur, si propter hos metus liberatori dedidimus et mancipavimus nos deo? Adversus ictus noxios | f.
既然事情如此,又既然我們持守由至高創始者所傳授的教訓:靈魂並非遠離死亡張開的咽喉,卻仍能藉至高君王的恩賜與慈惠得以長存——只要它們嘗試並致力於認識祂,因為認識祂乃是生命的某種酵、是本會分崩之物的黏合劑——然後放下其兇殘與野蠻,取得較溫和的性情,好使它們得以為那將賜下的預備妥當:那麼,若我們因這些懼怕而降服、把自己交託給那位拯救者神,你們憑什麼理由把我們判為愚頑之輩呢?為抵禦有害的擊打
Since these things are so, and since we hold it handed down by the highest Author that souls are not far removed from the gaping jaws of death, yet can nevertheless be made long-lived by the gift and beneficence of the highest Sovereign, if only they attempt and study to acknowledge Him—for the knowledge of Him is a kind of leaven of life and the glue of a thing that would fall apart—and then, laying aside their ferocity and inhumanity, take up gentler dispositions, that they may be prepared for that which shall be given: what reason is there that we should be judged by you as brute and stolid, if because of these fears we have surrendered and given ourselves over to God the Deliverer? Against noxious blows
2:77
43b | et venenatos colubrarum morsus remedia saepe conquirimus et protegimus nos lamminis, Psyllis Marsis vendentibus aliisque institoribus atque planis, ac ne nobis frigora solesque incommodent rapidi, munimenta domorum ac vestium sollicitae praeparamus diligentia cautionis. 33.1. Mortis nobis cum proponatur metus id est animarum interitus, quid? non ex commodi facimus sensu quo amamus nos omnes, quod eum qui nobis spondet tali a periculo liberaturum retinemus amplectimur animisque ipsis nostris, si modo iusta extat vicissitudo, praeponimus? Vos vestrarum animarum salutem in ipsis vobis reponitis fierique vos deos vestro fiditis intestinoque conatu;
以及毒蛇的毒咬,我們常尋求解藥,用護身符保護自己——這些是普敘利人、馬爾西人及其他小販與江湖術士所販賣的;而為免嚴寒與灼熱的烈日侵擾我們,我們以謹慎防範的殷勤預備房屋與衣物的防護。那麼,當死亡的懼怕——即靈魂的毀滅——擺在我們面前時,我們憑著那使我們眾人愛惜自己的利益感,為何不緊握並擁抱那應許要救我們脫離如此危險的祂,甚至將祂置於我們自己的靈魂之上,只要有公義的報償存在?你們把自己靈魂的拯救寄託於自身,並相信憑自己內在的努力便能成為神明;
and the venomous bites of serpents we often seek out remedies and protect ourselves with amulets, which the Psylli, the Marsi, and other peddlers and quacks sell; and lest the cold and the scorching suns should trouble us, with anxious diligence of caution we prepare the defenses of houses and clothing. When, then, the fear of death—that is, the destruction of souls—is set before us, why should we not, out of that sense of advantage by which we all love ourselves, hold fast and embrace Him who promises to deliver us from such a peril, and prefer Him even to our very souls, if only a just requital exists? You place the salvation of your souls in yourselves, and trust that you become gods by your own inward effort;
2:78
at vero nos nobis nihil de nostra infirmitate promittimus naturam intuentes nostram virium esse nullarum et ab suis adfectibus in omni rerum contentione superari. 2. Vos cum primum soluti membrorum abieritis e nodis, alas vobis adfuturas putatis quibus ad caelum pergere atque ad sidera volare possitis; nos tantam reformidamus audaciam nec in nostra ducimus esse positum potestate res superas petere, cum et hoc ipsum habeamus incertum, an vitam accipere mereamur et ab lege mortalitatis abduci. Vos in aulam dominicam tamquam in propriam sedem remeaturos vos sponte nullo prohibente praesumitis; at vero nos istud rerum sine domino fieri neque speramus posse neque ulli | f.
但我們反而不從自身的軟弱向自己許諾什麼,因為我們看見我們的本性毫無力量,並在萬事的一切爭戰中被自身的情感所勝。你們一旦從肢體的結扣中被鬆開離去,便以為將有翅膀為你們所用,可藉之上升至天、飛向星辰;我們卻對如此巨大的膽量退縮,也不認為尋求上界之事是在我們的能力之內,因為我們連這一點都視為不確定——我們是否配得領受生命、脫離必死的律法。你們臆想自己會自願、無人攔阻地返回主的宮廷,如同回到自己的居所;但我們不指望這事能離了主而成就,也不判定人中有誰被賜予如此大的權能與許可。
but we, on the contrary, promise ourselves nothing from our own weakness, seeing that our nature is of no strength and is overcome by its own affections in every contest of things. You, as soon as you have departed loosed from the knots of the limbs, think that wings will be at hand for you, by which you can proceed to heaven and fly to the stars; we shrink from such great boldness, and do not count it to be placed within our power to seek the things above, since we hold even this very thing uncertain—whether we deserve to receive life and to be led away from the law of mortality. You presume that you will of your own accord, with none forbidding, return to the Lord's court as to your own dwelling; but we do not hope that this can be done without the Lord, nor do we judge that so much power and license is granted to any of men.
2:79
44 | hominum tantum potestatis attribui licentiaeque censemus. 34.1. Cum igitur haec ita sint, quaenam iniustitia tanta est, ut fatui vobis credulitate in ista videamur, cum vos et similia credere et in eadem videamus expectatione versari? Si inrisione existimamur digni, quod spem nobis huiusmodi pollicemur, et vos eadem exspectat inrisio, qui spem vobis immortalitatis adsciscitis. Si tenetis alioqui sequiminique rationem, et nobis aliquam portionem ex ista ratione concedite. 2.
既然事情如此,那麼有何等大的不公,竟使我們在這些事上的輕信在你們看來顯得愚蠢,而我們卻見你們既相信類似之事、又處於同樣的期待之中?我們若因向自己許諾這樣的盼望而被視為配受譏笑,那麼同樣的譏笑也在等候你們,就是你們這些為自己主張不朽盼望的人。然而,你們若持守並遵循理性,也請將那理性中的一份分給我們。
Since, then, these things are so, what injustice is so great, that we should seem to you fools in our credulity in these matters, when we see you both believing similar things and being engaged in the same expectation? If we are deemed worthy of derision because we promise ourselves a hope of this kind, the same derision awaits you also, who claim for yourselves a hope of immortality. If, however, you hold and follow reason, grant us also some portion out of that reason.
← 上一段下一段 →
← 第 1 章第 3 章 →
1234567

新的原文誦讀上線時通知我

每次有新章節誦讀影片就寄一封信。採雙重確認,隨時可一鍵取消。