📜 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 › 書信與論戰集(CSEL)

書信與論戰集(CSEL) 第 37 章 第 14/28 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 37:514–37:554(全章共 1078 節)

← 第 36 章第 38 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)。
37:514
unde procliuius et ipse crediderim, quod etiam eorum posteri sectatores, illos homines, qui haec primitus in suis libris posuerunt, in hac uita potius intellegi uoluisse quadam peruersitate morum ac turpitudine homines pecorum similes fieri ac sic quodam modo in pecora commutari, ut hoc dedecore obiecto eos a cupiditatum prauitate reuocarent. Nam illa, quae feruntur accidisse, ut quidam quasi recordarentur in quorum animalium corporibus fuerint aut falsa narrantur aut ludificationibus daemonum hoc in eorum animis factum est.
因此我也更願意相信:即使他們後來的追隨者——那些最先把這些說法寫在自己書中的人——其實是要人理解為:在今生,人因某種品性的乖僻與卑污而變得像獸,於是在某種意義上化為獸,好叫他們把這羞恥擺在人面前,將人從貪慾的敗壞中喚回。至於那些據傳發生的事——某些人彷彿記起自己曾在哪些動物的身體裡——那要嘛是虛構的敘述,要嘛是魔鬼的戲弄在他們心裡造成的。
Hence I too would the more readily believe that even their later followers — those men who first set these things down in their books — meant rather that in this present life, by a certain perversity of character and by baseness, men become like beasts and so are in a manner changed into beasts, so that by holding out this disgrace before them they might call them back from the depravity of their desires. For as to those things that are reported to have happened — that certain people, as it were, remembered in the bodies of what animals they had been — either such things are told falsely, or this was wrought in their minds by the mockeries of demons.
37:515
si enim contingit in somnis, ut fallaci memoria quasi recordetur se homo fuisse, quod non fuit, aut egisse, quod non egit, quid mirum, si quodam dei iusto occultoque iudicio sinuntur daemones in cordibus etiam uigilantium tale aliquid posse?
因為若在夢中會發生這樣的事:人憑著虛妄的記憶彷彿記起自己曾是他所未曾是的,或做過他所未曾做的,那麼倘若藉著上帝某種公義而隱密的審判,魔鬼被容許在清醒之人的心中也能行出類似之事,又何足為奇呢?
For if it happens in dreams that by a deceptive memory a man seems to recall that he was something he was not, or did something he did not do, what wonder is it if, by some just and hidden judgment of God, demons are permitted to be capable of something of the sort even in the hearts of the waking?
37:516
Manichaei autem, qui se christianos uel putant uel putari uolunt, in hac opinione translationis uel reuolutionis animarum eo sunt illis gentium philosophis uel si qui alii uani homines hoc putant deteriores et detestabiliores, quod illi animae naturam a dei natura discernunt, isti autem, cum aliud nihil dicant esse animam quam ipsam dei substantiam atque id omnino, quod deus est, non trepidant eam tam turpiter commutabilem dicere, ut nullum sit herbae seu uermiculi genus, ubi eam non esse conmixtam uel quo reuolui non posse mirabili opinentur insania.
但摩尼教徒,那些或自以為是基督徒、或希望被人視為基督徒的人,在這靈魂轉世或輪迴的見解上,比那些外邦哲學家、或任何持此說的其他虛妄之人更為惡劣、更可憎。因為那些哲學家把靈魂的本性與上帝的本性區分開來;而這些人卻說靈魂無非就是上帝的本體,完全就是上帝之所是,於是竟毫不畏縮地宣稱靈魂如此可恥地可變,以致沒有一種草或蟲不被他們認為有靈魂與之混雜其中,或者——以令人驚駭的瘋狂——認為靈魂不能輪迴進入其中。
But the Manichaeans, who either think themselves Christians or wish to be thought so, in this opinion of the transmigration or revolution of souls are worse and more detestable than those pagan philosophers, or than any other vain men who hold this. For those thinkers distinguish the nature of the soul from the nature of God; whereas these men, since they say the soul is nothing else than the very substance of God, and altogether that which God is, do not shrink from calling it so shamefully changeable that there is no kind of herb or worm in which they do not suppose it to be mingled, or into which — with marvellous madness — they think it cannot revolve.
37:517
qui tamen si remotis ab animo suo rerum obscurissimarum quaestionibus, quas carnali corde uersantes necesse est ut in opiniones falsas, noxias monstrosasque labantur et prouoluantur, unum illud firmissime teneant, quod omni animae rationali sine ullius disputationis ambagibus naturaliter et ueraciter insitum est, esse omnino incommutabilem et incorruptibilem deum, tota eorum milleformis fabula repente dilabitur, quam in suis uanis ac sacrilegis mentibus nonnisi de dei turpissima mutabilitate pinxerunt. Non est igitur materies animae humanae nec anima inratiocalis. Quid ergo est, unde anima flatu dei facta est? an corpus aliquod erat terrenum quidem et humidum? nullo modo;
然而,倘若他們願意從心中撇開這些關於最幽晦事物的難題——這些難題,只要他們用屬肉體的心去反覆思索,就必使他們滑落、跌入虛假、有害而怪誕的見解——並且倘若他們願意最堅定地持守那一項真理,就是那不需任何論證的迂迴曲折、自然而真實地栽植於每一個理性靈魂中的真理,即:上帝是完全不可變、不可朽壞的,那麼他們那千形萬狀的寓言便會頓時瓦解——那寓言正是他們在虛妄褻瀆的心中,僅僅憑著上帝那最可恥的可變性所描繪出來的。因此人的靈魂不是物質,靈魂也不是無理性的。那麼,靈魂是由甚麼被上帝的氣息造成的呢?是某種地上而潮濕的物體嗎?絕非如此;
Yet if they would set aside from their minds these questions about the most obscure matters — questions which, so long as they revolve them with a carnal heart, must needs make them slip and tumble into false, harmful, and monstrous opinions — and if they would hold most firmly that one truth which is naturally and truly implanted in every rational soul without any winding turns of argument, namely that God is altogether unchangeable and incorruptible, then their whole thousand-formed fable would suddenly fall to pieces — that fable which in their vain and sacrilegious minds they have painted out of nothing but the most shameful mutability of God. Therefore the human soul is not matter, nor is the soul irrational. What then is it, out of which the soul was made by the breath of God? Was it some body, earthy indeed and moist? By no means;
37:518
hinc enim potius caro facta est. nam quid aliud est limus quam terra humida? nec humore solo anima facta credenda est quasi caro de terra, anima de aqua. nimis enim absurdum est inde factam putare animam hominis, unde facta est caro piscis et uolucris. Ergo fortassis ex aere? huic enim elemento etiam flatus conpetit; sed noster, non dei. unde supra diximus hoc potuisse congruenter putari, si animam mundi tamquam unius maximi animantis deum crederemus, ut ita eam flauerit de aere corporis sui. sicut flat nostra de sui. cum uero deum esse constet supra omne mundi corpus et supra omnem spiritum, quem creauit, inconparabili omnino distantia, quomodo id recte dici potest?
因為肉體毋寧是從那潮濕的泥土所造。因為泥不過是潮濕的地土罷了。也不可相信靈魂僅僅由水氣所造,彷彿肉體出於地、靈魂出於水。因為以為人的靈魂是由那造成魚與飛鳥之肉的東西所造,未免太荒謬了。那麼,或許是出於空氣?因為對這一元素而言,氣息也是相稱的——但那是我們的氣息,不是上帝的。因此我們在上文說過:若我們相信世界之魂彷彿屬於某一最大的活物、即上帝,這說法本可算是相稱的,好使祂從自己身體的空氣呼出那靈魂,正如我們的氣息從我們自己的身體呼出一樣。但既然確定上帝以完全無可比擬的距離超乎世界的一切物體之上、超乎祂所造的一切靈之上,這又怎能被恰當地說出來呢?
for from that, rather, flesh was made. For what else is clay than moist earth? Nor is the soul to be believed made from moisture alone, as though flesh were of earth and the soul of water. For it is too absurd to think that the soul of man was made from that out of which the flesh of a fish and a bird was made. Perhaps, then, from air? For to this element even a breath belongs — but ours, not God's. Hence we said above that this might fittingly be supposed, if we believed the world-soul to be, as it were, of one greatest living being, namely God, so that He breathed the soul from the air of His own body, just as our breath comes from our own. But since it is established that God is above every bodily thing of the world and above every spirit that He created, by a distance altogether beyond comparison, how can this rightly be said?
37:519
an forte quanto magis deus uniuersae creaturae suae praesens est omnipotentia singulari, tanto magis potuit ex aere flatum facere, quae anima hominis esset? sed cum anima non sit corporea. quidquid autem ex mundi corporeis elementis fit, corporeum sit necesse est inque mundi elementis etiam aer iste numeretur, nec si de puri illius caelestisque ignis elemento facta anima diceretur, credi oporteret. omne quippe corpus in omne corpus posse mutari non defuerunt qui adsererent; corpus autem aliquod, siue terrenum siue caeleste, conuerti in animam fierique naturam incorpoream nec quemquam sensisse scio nec fides habet.
抑或,上帝越是以祂那獨一的全能臨在於祂的全部受造物,就越能從空氣造出一口成為人之靈魂的氣息?然而,既然靈魂並非有形之物——而凡由世界的物質元素所造成的,必然是有形的,並且在世界諸元素中連這空氣也被算在內——那麼縱使有人說靈魂是由那純淨屬天之火的元素所造,也不當相信。因為並不乏有人主張:一切物體都能變成一切物體;但要說任何物體、無論屬地或屬天,能轉化為靈魂、成為無形的本性——我知道無人曾如此設想,信德也不容許。
Or perhaps, the more God is present to His whole creation by His singular omnipotence, the more He could make out of air a breath that should be the soul of man? But since the soul is not corporeal — whereas whatever is made from the bodily elements of the world must needs be corporeal, and among the world's elements this air too is reckoned — not even if the soul were said to be made from the element of that pure and heavenly fire ought it to be believed. For there have not been lacking those who asserted that every body can be changed into every body; but that any body, whether earthly or heavenly, is converted into a soul and becomes an incorporeal nature — this I know no one has held, nor does faith admit it.
37:520
Deinde — si non est contemnendum, quod medici non tantum dicunt, uerum etiam probare se adfirmant — quamuis omnis caro terrenam soliditatem in promtu gerat, habet tamen in se et aeris aliquid, quod et pulmonibus continetur et a corde per uenas, quas arterias uocant, diffunditur; et ignis non solum feruidam qualitatem, cuius sedes in iecore est, uerum etiam luculentam, quam uelut eliquari ac subuolare ostendunt in excelsum cerebri locum, tamquam in caelum corporis nostri.
再者——如果我們不該輕忽醫師們不僅所說、甚至自稱能加以證明的事——雖然一切肉體都明顯地帶有地土的堅實性,它裡面卻也具有某種屬空氣之物,這物既包含在肺中,又從心臟經由他們稱為動脈的血管分佈出去;並且具有某種屬火之物,這火不僅有其熾熱的性質——其所在是肝臟——也有一種明亮的性質,他們指出這性質彷彿被蒸餾而向上飛升,升到腦部那崇高之處,如同升入我們身體的天。
Furthermore — if we ought not to despise what physicians not only say but even affirm they can prove — although all flesh openly bears an earthy solidity, it nonetheless has in itself also something of air, which is both contained in the lungs and distributed from the heart through the vessels they call arteries; and something of fire, which possesses not only a fiery quality, whose seat is in the liver, but also a bright and clear one, which they show to be, as it were, distilled and to fly upward into the lofty place of the brain, as into the heaven of our body.
37:521
unde et radii emicant oculorum et de cuius medio uelut centro quodam non solum ad oculos, sed etiam ad sensus ceteros tenues fistulae deducuntur, ad aures uidelicet, ad nares, ad palatum, propter audiendum, olfaciendum atque gustandum; ipsumque tangendi sensum, qui per totum corpus est, ab eodem cerebro dirigi per medullam ceruicis et eam, quae continetur ossibus, quibus dorsi spina conseritur, ut inde se tenuissimi quidam riuuli, qui tangendi sensum faciunt, per cuncta membra diffundant.
眼睛的光芒也是從這處迸射出來的;並且從它的中央、彷彿從某個中心點,有細微的管道被引出,不僅通到眼睛,也通到其餘各感官——即通到耳朵、鼻孔、上顎——為要聽、嗅、嚐;而觸覺本身,這遍佈全身的感覺,也是由這同一個腦,經由頸部的髓、以及那包含在骨中(背脊的脊椎由這些骨連綴而成)的髓所指揮,好使某些極其細微的溪流——即產生觸覺的溪流——從那裡遍佈於全身各肢體。
From this place too the rays of the eyes flash forth; and from its midst, as from a kind of centre, fine channels are led out not only to the eyes but also to the other senses — namely to the ears, to the nostrils, to the palate — for the sake of hearing, smelling, and tasting; and the very sense of touch, which is present throughout the whole body, is directed from the same brain through the marrow of the neck and that which is contained within the bones by which the spine of the back is joined together, so that from there certain very thin streams, which produce the sense of touch, may spread through all the members.
37:522
Cum igitur his quasi nuntiis accipiat anima quidquid eam corporalium non latet, ipsa uero usque adeo aliud quiddam sit, ut, cum uult intellegere uel diuina uel deum uel omnino etiam se ipsam suasque considerare uirtutes, ut aliquid ueri certique conprehendat, ab hac ipsorum quoque oculorum luce se auertat eamque ad hoc negotium non tantum nullo adiumento, uerum etiam nonnullo inpedimento esse sentiens se in obtutum mentis adtollat:
因此,既然靈魂藉著這些器官、如同藉著使者,領受一切不向它隱藏的有形之物,而它本身卻是如此全然不同之物,以致當它想要理解屬神之事、或上帝、或竟至完全省思它自己並自己的能力,好使它把握某種真實而確定之物時,它便從眼睛的這光本身轉離,並且——察覺到這光在此工作上不僅毫無助益、甚至有些妨礙——把自己提升到心智的凝視中:
Since, therefore, the soul receives by these, as by messengers, whatever of bodily things does not lie hidden from it, while it is itself something so wholly other that, when it wishes to understand things divine, or God, or even altogether to consider itself and its own powers, so as to grasp something true and certain, it turns itself away even from this very light of the eyes, and — perceiving that this light is in this task not only no help but even something of a hindrance — raises itself up into the gaze of the mind:
37:523
quomodo ex eo genere aliquid est, cum eiusdem generis summum non sit nisi lumen, quod ex oculis emicat, quo illa non adiuuatur nisi ad corporeas formas coloresque sentiendos habetque ipsa innumerabilia longe dissimilia cuncto generi corporum, quae nonnisi intellectu atque ratione conspiciat, quo nullus carnis sensus aspirat? Quapropter non est quidem humanae animae natura nec de terra nec de aqua nec de aere nec de igne quolibet; sed tamen crassioris corporis sui materiam, hoc est humidam quandam terram, quae in carnis uersa est qualitatem, per subtiliorem naturam corporis administrat, id est per lucem et aerem.
當那類事物的至高者無非就是從眼睛迸射的光——靈魂靠著這光,僅僅在感知有形的形狀與顏色上得著幫助——而靈魂本身卻具有無數與整類物體大為不同之物,這些是它唯獨藉著理智與理性所觀看的,是肉體任何感官都無從企及的:那麼,靈魂怎能是同一類中的某物呢?因此,人的靈魂之本性確實既不屬地、也不屬水、不屬空氣、也不屬任何火;然而它卻藉著一種更精微的物質本性——即藉著光與空氣——來治理它自己那較粗物體的質料,就是那已轉化為肉體性質的某種潮濕地土。
how can it be something of that same kind, when the highest thing of that kind is nothing but the light which flashes from the eyes, by which the soul is aided only for perceiving bodily forms and colours, whereas it has within itself innumerable things far unlike the whole class of bodies, things which it beholds only by understanding and reason, to which no sense of the flesh aspires? Wherefore the nature of the human soul is indeed neither of earth nor of water nor of air nor of any fire whatsoever; and yet through a subtler nature of body — that is, through light and air — it administers the matter of its own grosser body, that is, a certain moist earth which has been turned into the quality of flesh.
37:524
nullus enim sine his duobus uel sensus in corpore est uel ab anima spontaneus corporis motus. sicut autem prius esse debet nosse quam facere, ita sentire prius est quam mouere. anima ergo quoniam res est incorporea corpus, quod incorporeo uicinum est, sicuti est ignis uel potius lux et aer, primitus agit et per haec cetera quae crassiora sunt corporis, sicuti humor et terra — unde carnis corpulentia solidatur — quae magis sunt ad patiendum subdita quam praedita ad faciendum. Non mihi ergo uidetur dictum: factus est homo in animam uiuam, nisi quia sentire coepit in corpore: quod est animatae uiuentisque carnis certissimum indicium.
因為若沒有這兩者,身體裡便既沒有任何感覺,靈魂也沒有對身體的任何自主運動。正如認知理當先於行動,感覺也先於運動。所以靈魂,既是無形之物,便首先作用於那最接近無形之物的身體部分——就是火、或毋寧說是光,以及空氣——再藉著這些作用於身體其餘較粗的部分,如水氣與地土,肉體的厚重就由這些凝結而成,這些部分較是被動受作用的,而非被賦予去行動。因此在我看來,「人成了有生命的活魂」這話之所以被說出,無非是因為他在身體中開始有感覺:這正是有魂、有生命之肉體的最確切標記。
For without these two there is neither any sense in the body nor any voluntary movement of the body by the soul. And just as knowing ought to come before doing, so perceiving comes before moving. The soul, therefore, since it is an incorporeal thing, first acts upon the body that is nearest to the incorporeal — such as is fire, or rather light, and air — and through these upon the other, coarser parts of the body, such as moisture and earth, out of which the bulk of the flesh is made solid, which are more subjected to being acted upon than endowed for acting. It does not, then, seem to me that it was said, 'man was made into a living soul,' except because he began to perceive in the body: which is the surest sign of animate and living flesh.
37:525
nam mouentur et arbusta non tantum ui extrinsecus inpellente, uelut cum uentis agitantur, sed illo motu, quo intrinsecus agitur quidquid ad incrementum speciemque arboris pertinet, quo ducitur sucus in radicem uertiturque in ea, quibus constat herbae natura uel ligni; nihil enim horum sine interno motu. sed iste motus non est spontaneus, qualis ille, qui sensui copulatur ad corporis administrationem, sicut in omni animalium genere, quam uocat scriptura animam uiuam. nam et nobis nisi inesset etiam ille motus, nec crescerent nostra corpora nec ungues capillosque producerent. sed si hoc solum esset in nobis sine sensu motuque illo spontaneo, non diceretur homo factus in animam uiuam.
因為灌木也會運動,不僅是由外面推動的力量所致,如被風吹動之時,也是由那從內部推動之運動所致——凡屬於樹木的生長與形態的一切,都由這運動從內驅動,藉此汁液被吸入根中,並轉化為草或木之本性所賴以構成之物;因為這一切沒有內在運動便不會發生。但這運動並非自主的,不像那與感覺相連、為治理身體之用的運動,如在各類動物中所見——聖經稱之為活的魂。因為在我們裡面,若也沒有那內在運動,我們的身體便既不生長,也不長出指甲與毛髮。但假使我們裡面僅有這運動,而沒有感覺與那自主運動,人就不會被稱為成了有生命的活魂。
For shrubs also are moved, not only by a force impelling from without, as when they are stirred by the winds, but by that movement whereby whatever pertains to the growth and form of the tree is stirred from within, by which the sap is drawn into the root and turned into those things of which the nature of grass or wood consists; for none of these happens without an internal movement. But this movement is not voluntary, such as that which is joined to sense for the administration of the body, as in every kind of animals — which Scripture calls a living soul. For in us too, unless that movement were also present, our bodies would neither grow nor put forth nails and hair. But if this alone were in us, without sense and that voluntary movement, man would not be said to have been made into a living soul.
37:526
Proinde, quoniam pars cerebri anterior, unde sensus omnes distribuuntur, ad frontem conlocata est atque in facie sunt ipsa uelut organa sentiendi — excepto tangendi sensu, qui per totum corpus diffunditur; qui tamen etiam ipse ab eadem anteriore parte cerebri ostenditur habere uiam suam, quae retrorsus per uerticem atque ceruicem ad medullam spinae, de qua loquebamur paulo ante, deducitur, unde habet utique sensum in tangendo et facies, sicut totum corpus, exceptis sensibus uidendi, audiendi, olfaciendi, gustandi, qui in sola facie praelocati sunt — ideo scriptum arbitror, quod in faciem deus sufflauerit homini flatum uitae, cum factus est in animam uiuam.
因此,既然腦的前部——一切感官都由此分佈——安置在額頭一帶,並且在臉上安置著感知的諸器官——除了觸覺,觸覺遍佈全身;然而連觸覺也被顯明有它自己的通路,從腦的這同一前部發出,這通路向後經由頭頂與頸項,被引至脊髓(就是我們稍早所說的),臉正是由此、如同全身一樣、擁有觸覺,唯獨視、聽、嗅、嚐這幾種感覺是單獨安置在臉上——因這緣故,我認為經上記著說:上帝將生命的氣息吹進人的臉,那時人就成了有生命的活魂。
Accordingly, since the front part of the brain, from which all the senses are distributed, is placed toward the forehead, and in the face are, as it were, the very organs of perceiving — except the sense of touch, which is diffused throughout the whole body; yet even this is shown to have its own path from that same front part of the brain, a path which is led backward through the crown and the neck to the marrow of the spine, of which we spoke a little before, whence indeed the face too, like the whole body, has the sense of touch, apart from the senses of seeing, hearing, smelling, and tasting, which are placed in the face alone — for this reason I judge it was written that God breathed into the face of man the breath of life, when he was made into a living soul.
37:527
anterior quippe pars posteriori merito praeponitur, quia et ista ducit, illa sequitur et ab ista sensus, ab illa motus est, sicut consilium praecedit actionem. Et quoniam corporalis motus, qui sensum sequitur, sine interuallis temporum nullus est, agere autem interualla temporum spontaneo motu nisi per adiutorium memoriae non ualemus, ideo tres tamquam uentriculi cerebri demonstrantur: unus anterior ad faciem, a quo sensus omnis; alter posterior ad ceruicem, a quo motus omnis; alter posterior ad ceruicem, a quo motus omnis; tertius inter utrumque, in quo memoriam uigere demonstrant, ne, cum sensum sequitur motus, non conectat homo quod faciendum est, si fuerit quod fecit oblitus.
因為前部理當置於後部之先,因為前者領導、後者跟隨,感覺出於前者、運動出於後者,正如謀慮先於行動。並且,既然跟隨感覺而來的身體運動,無不帶有時間間隔,而我們除非藉著記憶的幫助,便無法以自主運動貫穿時間間隔而行動,因此就有腦的三個所謂腦室被指出來:一個在前、朝向臉,一切感覺由此而出;另一個在後、朝向頸,一切運動由此而出;還有第三個在兩者之間,他們指明記憶在其中運作,免得當運動跟隨感覺之時,人若忘了自己所做的,便無法把當做的事連貫起來。
For the front part is deservedly set before the hinder part, because the former leads and the latter follows, and from the former comes sense, from the latter movement, just as counsel precedes action. And since there is no bodily movement following upon sense without intervals of time, and we cannot act through intervals of time by voluntary movement except by the help of memory, therefore three, as it were, ventricles of the brain are pointed out: one in front toward the face, from which comes all sense; another behind toward the neck, from which comes all movement; and a third between the two, in which they show that memory is vigorous, lest, when movement follows sense, a man should fail to connect what is to be done, if he has forgotten what he has done.
37:528
haec illi certis indiciis probata esse dicunt, quando et ipsae partes aliquo adfectae morbo uel uitio, cum defecissent officia uel sentiendi uel mouendi membra uel motus corporis reminiscendi, satis quid ualerent singulae declararunt eisque adhibita curatio cui rei reparandae profecerit exploratum est. sed anima in istis tamquam in organis agit, nihil horum est ipsa; sed uiuificat et regit omnia et per haec corpori consulit et huic uitae, in qua factus est homo in animam uiuam. Unde ergo sit ipsa, id est de qua uelut materie deus hunc flatum fecerit, quae anima dicitur, dum quaeritur, nihil corporeum debet occurrere.
這些事他們說已由確鑿的徵兆證明了,因為連這些部位本身,一旦受某種疾病或缺損所影響,當感知、或使肢體運動、或記憶身體運動的功能失效時,便充分顯明了各部位各能做甚麼;並且藉著施用於這些部位的治療,就查明了各部位有助於恢復甚麼。但靈魂在這些部位中運作,如同在器官中運作;它本身並非其中任何一者;毋寧說,它賦予這一切生命、治理這一切,並藉著這些照顧身體與這生命——人正是在這生命中成了有生命的活魂。因此,當有人追問靈魂本身出於何處——即上帝是由甚麼、彷彿由甚麼質料,造成這稱為靈魂的氣息——時,不當有任何有形之物浮現出來。
These things they say have been proved by sure signs, since even these very parts, when affected by some disease or defect, once the functions either of perceiving, or of moving the members, or of remembering the body's movement had failed, sufficiently declared what each was capable of; and by the treatment applied to them it was ascertained for the restoration of what thing each availed. But the soul acts in these parts as in instruments; it is itself none of them; rather it gives them life and governs all, and through them looks after the body and this life, in which man was made into a living soul. Therefore, when it is asked whence the soul itself is — that is, out of what, as it were, matter God made this breath which is called the soul — nothing corporeal ought to present itself.
37:529
sicut enim deus omnem creaturam, sic anima omnem corpoream creaturam naturae dignitate praecellit. per lucem tamen et aerem, quae in ipso quoque mundo praecellentia sunt corpora magisque habent faciendi praestantiam quam patiendi corpulentiam, sicut humor et terra, tamquam per ea quae spiritui similiora sunt corpus administrat. nuntiat enim aliquid lux corporea; cui autem nuntiat, non hoc est, quod illa; et haec est anima, cui nuntiat, non illa, quae nuntiat. et cum adflictiones corporis moleste sentit, actionem suam, qua illi regendo adest, turbato eius temperamento inpediri offenditur, et haec offensio dolor uocatur.
因為正如上帝超越一切受造之物,靈魂也在本性的尊貴上超越一切有形的受造之物。然而它藉著光與空氣——這兩者在世界本身裡是較卓越的物體,較具行動的優越,而非如水氣與地土般具有受動的厚重——來治理身體,彷彿藉著那些較像靈之物。因為有形的光傳報某事;但它所傳報的對象,並不等同於那光;靈魂就是這受報者,不是那傳報者。並且當靈魂痛苦地感受身體的種種苦楚時,它就被冒犯了——因為它那使它臨在以治理身體的作為,被身體協調的紊亂所阻礙,而這被冒犯之感就稱為疼痛。
For as God excels every creature, so the soul excels every corporeal creature in dignity of nature. Yet through light and air — which in the world itself are the more excellent bodies and have more of the excellence of acting than the corpulence of being acted upon, as moisture and earth have — it administers the body, as through those things which are more like spirit. For bodily light announces something; but that to which it announces is not the same as the light; and the soul is this — that to which it announces — not that which announces. And when it feels the afflictions of the body with distress, it is offended that its own action, by which it is present to govern the body, is hindered by the disturbance of the body's temperament, and this offence is called pain.
37:530
et aer, qui neruis infusus est, paret uoluntati, ut membra moueat, non autem ipse uoluntas est. et illa pars media motum membrorum nuntiat, ut memoria teneatur, non ipsa memoria est. denique, dum haec eius tamquam ministeria uitio quolibet seu perturbatione omni modo deficiunt desistentibus nuntiis sentiendi et ministris mouendi, tamquam non habens cur adsit abscedit. si autem non ita deficiunt, ut in morte adsolet, turbatur eius intentio, tamquam conantis redintegrare labentia nec ualentis. et in quibus rebus turbatur, inde cognoscitur quae pars ministeriorum in causa sit, ut, si potuerit, medicina succurrat.
並且那注入神經的空氣順服意志,好使肢體運動,但它本身並不是意志。而那中間的部位傳報肢體的運動,好叫記憶把它保存,但它本身並不是記憶。總之,只要靈魂的這些所謂職務因某種缺損或紊亂而以任何方式失效,感知的使者與運動的僕役停止工作,靈魂便彷彿沒有理由再臨在而離去。但若這些職務並非像在死亡時慣常那樣完全失效,靈魂的用心便會被攪擾,如同有人竭力想使正在滑落之物復原、卻無能為力。並且從它在哪些事上被攪擾,就得知是哪一部分職務出了問題,好使醫術若能夠,便來救治。
And the air which is infused into the nerves obeys the will, so as to move the members, but is not itself the will. And that middle part announces the movement of the members, that it may be retained by memory, but is not itself the memory. In short, so long as these, as it were, ministries of the soul fail in any way through some defect or disturbance, the messengers of perceiving and the servants of moving ceasing, the soul, as having no reason to be present, departs. But if they do not fail as they are wont to do in death, its intention is disturbed, like that of one striving to make whole again the things that are slipping and yet not availing. And in what matters it is disturbed, thence it is known which part of the ministries is at fault, so that, if it can, medicine may come to the rescue.
37:531
Namque aliud esse ipsam, aliud haec eius corporalia ministeria, uel uasa uel organa uel si quid aptius dici possunt, hinc euidenter elucet, quod plerumque se uehementi cogitationis intentione auertit ah omnibus, ut prae oculis patentibus recteque ualentibus multa posita nesciat et, si maior intentio est, dum ambulabat, repente subsistat, auertens utique imperandi nutum a ministerio motionis, qua pedes agebantur; si autem non tanta est cogitationis intentio, ut figat ambulantem loco, sed tamen tanta est, ut partem illam cerebri mediam nuntiantem corporis motus non uacet.
因為靈魂是一回事、而這些屬它的身體職務——無論稱之為器皿、器官,或凡能更貼切稱呼之物——是另一回事,這從以下事實中明顯可見:靈魂常常因思想的強烈專注而從一切事物轉離,以致對擺在它張開、功能正常的眼前的許多事物竟不察覺;並且,若專注更強,靈魂在行走之際會突然停下,完全把發令的示意從那推動雙腳運動的職務上撤回;但若思想的專注沒有強到把行走者釘在原地,卻仍強到不容那傳報身體運動的腦中間部位得空:
For that the soul is one thing, and these its bodily ministries — whether vessels, or organs, or whatever they can more fitly be called — another, is plainly evident from this: that very often, by a vehement intensity of thought, it turns itself away from all things, so that it does not notice many things set before its open and rightly functioning eyes; and, if the intensity is greater, while it was walking it suddenly stops, turning away entirely the nod of command from the ministry of the motion by which the feet were being moved; but if the intensity of thought is not so great as to fix the walker in his place, yet is nonetheless so great that it does not leave free that middle part of the brain which announces the body's movements.
37:532
aduertere, obliuiscitur aliquando et unde ueniat et quo eat, et transit inprudens uillam, quo tendebat, natura sui corporis sana, sed sua in aliud auocata. quapropter istas corporei caeli corporeas quasdam particulas, id est lucis et aeris, quae primae excipiunt nutus animae uiuificantis, eo quod incorporeae naturae propinquiores sunt quam humor et terra, ut ad earum proximum ministerium tota moles administretur, utrum deus de hoc circumfuso et superfuso caelo corpori uiuentis miscuerit aut adiunxerit, an et ipsas de limo sicut carnem fecerit, non est ad rem pertinens quaestio. omne quippe corpus in omne corpus mutari posse credibile est;
——去專注於此,那麼人有時就會忘記自己從何處來、往何處去,並不知不覺地走過他原本要去的農莊,他身體的本性雖然無恙,他自己的心思卻被喚往別處。因此,關於那有形之天(即光與空氣)的某些有形微粒——這些微粒最先領受那賦予生命之靈魂的示意,因為它們比水氣與地土更接近無形的本性,好使整個軀體因它們就近的職務而受治理——究竟是上帝從這環繞並覆蓋於上的天,把它們混合或連接到活物的身體上,抑或是連這些微粒祂也如同造肉體一樣由泥所造,這問題與本題無關。因為凡物體都能變成凡物體,這是可信的;
— to attend to it, then a man sometimes forgets both whence he comes and whither he goes, and passes unawares the farmhouse to which he was heading, his body's nature being sound but his own attention called away to something else. Wherefore, as to those certain bodily particles of the bodily heaven — that is, of light and air — which first receive the nods of the life-giving soul, because they are nearer to incorporeal nature than moisture and earth, so that at their proximate ministry the whole mass is administered: whether God mingled or joined them to the body of the living being from this surrounding and superimposed heaven, or whether He made these too from clay, as He made the flesh — this is a question not pertinent to the matter. For it is credible that every body can be changed into every body;
37:533
quodlibet autem corpus mutari posse in animam credere absurdum est. Quamobrem nec illud audiendum est, quod quidam putauerunt, quintum quoddam esse corpus unde sint animae, quod nec terra nec aqua sit nec aer nec ignis, siue iste turbulentior atque terrenus, siue ille caelestis purus et lucidus, sed nescio quid aliud, quod careat usitato nomine, sed tamen corpus sit. si enim qui hoc sentiunt hoc dicunt corpus, quod et nos, id est naturam quamlibet longitudine, latitudine, altitudine spatium loci occupantem, neque hoc est anima neque inde facta credenda est. quidquid enim tale est, ut multa non dicam, in quacumque sui parte lineis diuidi uel circumscribi potest:
但要相信任何物體能變成靈魂,乃是荒謬的。因此,也不當聽從某些人所設想的:說有某種第五類的物體,靈魂就從那裡而來,這物體既不是地、也不是水、不是空氣、也不是火——無論是那較混濁而屬地之火,或那屬天、純淨光亮之火——而是某種別的、我不知是甚麼的東西,缺乏通用的名稱,卻仍是物體。因為若持此見解的人所說的「物體」與我們所說的相同——即凡以長、寬、高佔據空間位置的本性——那麼靈魂既不是這個,也不當被相信是由此所造。因為凡屬這一類之物——姑且少說些——都能在它自身的任何部分被線條分割或界定:
but to believe that any body whatever can be changed into a soul is absurd. Wherefore neither is that to be listened to which certain people have supposed: that there is a certain fifth kind of body out of which souls come, which is neither earth nor water nor air nor fire — whether the more turbulent and earthy fire or that heavenly, pure and shining fire — but some other thing, I know not what, which lacks a common name, yet is nevertheless a body. For if those who hold this opinion mean by 'body' what we too mean — that is, any nature whatever that occupies a space of place by length, breadth, and height — then neither is the soul this, nor is it to be believed made from it. For whatever is of such a kind — to say no more — can in any part of itself be divided or circumscribed by lines:
37:534
quod anima si pateretur, nullo modo nosse posset tales lineas, quae per longum secari non queunt, quales in corpore non posse inueniri nihilominus nouit. Nec ipsa sibi aliquid tale occurrit, cum se nescire non possit, etiam quando, se ut cognoscat, inquirit. cum enim se quaerit, nouit, quod se quaerat; quod nosse non posset, si se non nosset. neque enim aliunde se quaerit quam a se ipsa. cum ergo quaerentem se nouit, se utique nouit et omne, quod nouit, tota nouit. cum itaque se quaerentem nouit, tota se nouit, ergo et totam se nouit; neque enim aliquid aliud, sed se ipsam tota nouit. quid ergo adhuc se quaerit, si quaerentem se nouit?
而靈魂若承受這種分割,它便絕無法認識這樣的線——那不能沿其長度被切割的線——然而靈魂卻認識到這樣的線在物體中無法尋見。並且靈魂也不會在自身裡遇到任何這類東西,既然它不可能不認識自己,甚至當它為要認識自己而探尋之時亦然。因為當它尋求自己時,它知道自己在尋求自己——這是它若不認識自己便無法知道的。它也無非從自己那裡尋求自己。因此,當它認識到自己在尋求時,它必然認識自己,並且凡它所認識的,它都全然認識。所以,既然它認識到自己在尋求,它便全然認識自己;因此它認識整個的自己;因為它所認識的並非別的,乃是它自身,且是全然地。那麼,它既已認識到自己在尋求,為何還尋求自己呢?
and if the soul underwent this, it could in no way know such lines as cannot be cut along their length — which it nonetheless knows cannot be found in body. Nor does anything of the sort occur to it about itself, since it cannot not know itself, even when, in order that it may know itself, it inquires. For when it seeks itself, it knows that it seeks itself — which it could not know if it did not know itself. Nor does it seek itself from anywhere but from itself. When, therefore, it knows itself as seeking, it certainly knows itself, and all that it knows, it knows wholly. Since therefore it knows itself as seeking, it knows itself wholly; therefore it knows the whole of itself; for it knows not something else, but its very self wholly. Why then does it still seek itself, if it knows itself as seeking?
37:535
neque enim si nesciret se, posset quaerentem se scire se; sed hoc in praesenti; quod autem de se quaerit, quid antea fuerit uel quid futura sit quaerit. desinat ergo nunc interim suspicari se esse corpus, quia, si aliquid tale esset, talem se nosset, quae magis se nouit quam caelum et terram, quae per sui corporis oculos nouit. Omitto dicere, quia illud eius, quod etiam pecora habere intelleguntur uel caeli uolatilia, cum habitacula sua seu nidos repetunt, quo capiuntur imagines omnium rerum corporalium, nullo modo cuiquam corpori simile est; et utique hoc potius corpori esse simile deberet, ubi corporearum rerum similitudines continentur.
因為若它不認識自己,它便無法認識到自己在尋求自己;但這是就當下而言。它關於自己所尋求的,乃是它先前曾是甚麼、或將要成為甚麼。因此,至少暫且讓它不再懷疑自己是物體,因為它若是任何這類之物,它便會如此認識自己——它認識自己,比認識它藉自己身體的眼睛所認識的天與地更真切。我且不說:靈魂的那項官能——連獸類、或空中的飛鳥都被認為具有它,牠們返回自己的住處或巢時所憑藉的、藉以領受一切有形事物影像的官能——絕不像任何物體;而這官能,既然一切有形事物的相似影像都容納在其中,本來理當更像物體才是。
For unless it knew itself, it could not know itself as seeking itself; but this is in the present. What it seeks about itself is what it was before, or what it will be. Let it therefore cease, at least for now, to suspect that it is a body, because, if it were anything of the sort, it would know itself as such — it that knows itself better than the heaven and the earth, which it knows through the eyes of its own body. I forbear to say that that faculty of its own — which even beasts, or the birds of the air, are understood to have, when they return to their dwellings or nests, whereby the images of all bodily things are received — is in no way like any body; and surely this ought rather to be like a body, wherein the likenesses of bodily things are contained.
37:536
at si hoc corpus non est, quia certum est eas simulitudines corporum illic non solum memoriter detineri, uerum etiam innumerabiles pro arbitrio figurari, quanto minus alia qualibet ui sua corpori esse anima similis potest! Si autem corpus esse dicunt alia qualibet notione omne quod est, id est omnem naturam atque substantiam, non quidem admittenda est ista locutio, ne non inueniamus, quomodo loquentes ea, quae corpora non sunt, a corporibus distinguamus; non tamen nimis est de nomine laborandum. nam et nos dicimus, quidquid anima est, non esse horum quattuor notissimorum elementorum, quae manifesta sunt corpora, sed neque hoc esse, quod deus est.
但若這官能不是物體——既然確定那些物體的相似影像在其中不僅被記憶保存,甚至能隨意被無數地構圖——那麼靈魂憑它自己任何別的能力,就更不能像物體了!但若他們以某種別的概念,把凡存在之物——即凡本性與本體——都稱為「物體」,那麼這種說法確實不可採納,免得我們在說話時找不到辦法,把那些並非物體之物與物體區分開來;然而我們也不必為一個詞過分費力。因為我們也說:凡靈魂之所是,都不是這四種最為人熟知、顯然是物體的元素之一,但也不是上帝之所是。
But if this is not a body — since it is certain that those likenesses of bodies are there not only retained by memory but even figured innumerably at will — how much less can the soul by any other power of its own be like a body! But if by some other notion they call 'body' everything that exists — that is, every nature and substance — this manner of speaking is not indeed to be admitted, lest we find no way, when speaking, to distinguish from bodies those things that are not bodies; yet we need not labour overmuch about the word. For we too say that whatever the soul is, it is not one of these four most familiar elements, which are manifest bodies, but neither is it that which God is.
37:537
quid sit autem, non dicitur melius quam anima uel spiritus uitae. ideo enim additur" uitae", quia et iste aer plerumque dicitur spiritus. quamquam et animam eundem aerem appellauerunt, ut iam non possit inueniri nomen, quo proprie distinguatur ista natura, quae nec corpus nec deus est nec uita sine sensu, qualis potest credi in arboribus, nec uita sine rationali mente, qualis est in pecoribus, sed uita nunc minor quam angelorum, et futura, quod angelorum, si ex praecepto sui creatoris hic uixerit.
但它是甚麼,除了稱為靈魂、或生命之靈之外,再無更好的說法。之所以加上「生命的」,是因為這空氣也常被稱為靈(氣息)。然而他們竟也用這空氣的同一名稱來稱呼靈魂,以致如今再找不到一個名稱,可用來恰當地區分這種本性——它既不是物體、也不是上帝,不是那沒有感覺的生命(如可信存在於樹木中者),也不是那沒有理性心智的生命(如存在於獸類中者),而是一種如今低於天使的生命,並且若它在此按著造物主的訓誡而活,就要成為與天使一樣的生命。
But what it is cannot be better told than as soul, or spirit of life. For 'of life' is added because this air too is often called spirit. Yet they have also called the soul by the same name as this air, so that no name can now be found by which to distinguish properly this nature, which is neither body nor God, nor life without sense, such as can be believed to be in trees, nor life without a rational mind, such as is in beasts, but a life now lower than that of angels, and destined to be what the angels' is, if it shall have lived here according to the precept of its Creator.
37:538
Unde sit autem, id est de qua uelut materie facta sit uel de qua perfecta beataque natura defluxerit uel utrum omnino ex nihilo facta sit, etiamsi dubitatur et quaeritur, illud tamen minime dubitandum est et, si aliquid antea fuit, a deo factum esse, quod fuit, et eam nunc a deo factam, ut anima uiua sit; aut enim nihil fuit aut hoc, quod est, non fuit. sed illam partem, qua quaerebamus quasi eius materiem unde facta sit, iam satis tractauimus. Nunc, si omnino non fuit, quaerendum est, quomodo possit intellegi, quod causalis eius ratio fuisse dicebatur in primis sex dierum operibus dei, quando fecit deus hominem ad maginem suam, quod nisi secundum animam non recte intellegitur.
但它出於何處——即它是由甚麼、彷彿由甚麼質料所造,或它是從何等完美有福的本性流溢而出,抑或它竟是完全從無中被造——縱使這被懷疑、被探究,至少有一點絕不可懷疑:即若先前有甚麼存在,那存在之物是被上帝所造,並且它如今是被上帝所造,好使它成為活的魂;因為要嘛先前一無所有,要嘛那如今存在之物先前並不存在。至於我們曾追問、彷彿探究其質料、它由甚麼所造的那部分,我們如今已充分討論過了。現在,若它先前完全不存在,就當追問:如何能理解「它的因果之理曾存在於上帝六日的頭幾日的工作中」這話——那時上帝按自己的形像造人,這句話除非按靈魂來理解,便無法正確理解。
But whence it is — that is, out of what, as it were, matter it was made, or from what perfect and blessed nature it flowed down, or whether it was made altogether out of nothing — even if this is doubted and inquired into, this at least is by no means to be doubted: that, if there was anything before, that which was, was made by God, and that it was now made by God, so that it should be a living soul; for either there was nothing, or that which now is, was not. But as for that part in which we were inquiring, as it were, into its matter, out of what it was made, we have now treated it sufficiently. Now, if it in no way existed before, it must be asked how it can be understood that its causal ratio was said to have existed in the first six days of God's works, when God made man to His own image — which is not rightly understood except according to the soul.
37:539
uerendum est autem, ne, cum dicimus non ipsas tunc naturas atque substantias, quae futurae fuerant, deum creauisse, dum crearet omnia simul, sed earum futurarum causales quasdam rationes, putemur inania quaedam dicere. quae sunt enim istae causales rationes, secundum quas posset iam dici deus fecisse hominem ad imaginem suam, cuius corpus nondum de limo finxerat, cui nondum animam flando fecerat? et corporis quidem humani etiamsi fuit aliqua occulta ratio, qua futurum erat, ut formaretur, erat et materies, de qua formaretur, id est terra, in qua uideri potest illa ratio uelut in semine latuisse;
然而必須有所顧慮,免得當我們說「上帝在同時創造萬物時,並非那時就創造了那些將要存在的本性與本體,而是創造了那些將來之物的某些因果之理」時,被人認為我們在說某種空洞之言。因為這些因果之理是甚麼——照著這些理,上帝竟能已被說成造了按自己形像的人,而人的身體祂尚未由泥塑成,人的靈魂祂尚未藉吹氣而造?至於人的身體,縱使有某種隱藏之理、照此理它將要被形塑,也有那將要供形塑的質料——即地土,那理彷彿如同在種子中一般,可被視為潛藏於其中;
But it is to be feared lest, when we say that God did not then create the very natures and substances that were to be, while He created all things together, but rather certain causal ratios of those future things, we be thought to say something empty. For what are these causal ratios, according to which God could already be said to have made man to His own image, whose body He had not yet fashioned from clay, into whom He had not yet made a soul by breathing? And of the human body indeed, even if there was some hidden ratio by which it was to be formed, there was also the matter out of which it was to be formed — that is, earth, in which that ratio can be seen to have lain hidden, as it were, in a seed;
37:540
animae autem faciendae, id est flatum faciendi, qui esset anima hominis, quae ibi ratio causalis primitus condita est, cum diceret deus: faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram — quod nisi secundum animam recte intellegi non potest —, si nulla erat natura, ubi conderetur? Si enim haec ratio in deo erat, non in creatura, nondum ergo erat condita. quomodo ergo dictum est: fecit deus hominem ad imaginem dei? si autem iam in creatura erat, hoc est in his, quae simul omnia creauerat deus, in qua creatura erat? utrum spiritali, an corporali? si spiritali, agebatne aliquid in corporibus mundi, seu caelestibus seu terrestribus?
但為了造靈魂——即為了造那將要成為人之靈魂的氣息——這因果之理最初被建立在甚麼本性之中呢?當上帝說「我們要照我們的形像、按我們的樣式造人」時——這話除非按靈魂便無法正確理解——若沒有一種本性可供它被建立於其中?因為若這理是在上帝裡面、而不在受造物裡,那麼它便尚未被建立。那麼「上帝照上帝的形像造人」這話又是怎麼說的呢?但若它已經在受造物裡——即在那些上帝同時一併創造之物裡——它是在哪一受造物裡呢?是在屬靈的、還是屬形體的受造物裡?若在屬靈的受造物裡,它在世界的物體中、無論屬天或屬地的物體中,可有做甚麼事?
but for the making of the soul — that is, for the making of the breath which was to be the soul of man — in what nature was that causal ratio first established, when God said, 'Let us make man to our image and likeness' — which cannot rightly be understood except according to the soul — if there was no nature in which it might be established? For if this ratio was in God, not in the creature, then it was not yet established. How then was it said, 'God made man to the image of God'? But if it was already in the creature — that is, in those things which God created all together at once — in what creature was it? Whether in a spiritual or in a corporeal one? If in a spiritual one, was it doing anything in the bodies of the world, whether heavenly or earthly?
37:541
et in ea erat hoc uacans antequam homo in sua natura propria conderetur, sicut. in ipso homine iam propriam ducente uitam latenter otioseque inest ratio generandi, quae non operatur nisi per concubitum atque conceptum. an et illa creatura spiritalis, in qua latenter erat haec ratio, nihil agebat sui operis? et ut quid creata erat? an ut contineret rationem futurae animae humanae uel futurarum animarum, tamquam in se ipsis esse non possent, sed in aliqua creatura uita propria iam uiuente, sicut generandi ratio non potest esse nisi in aliquibus iam existentibus perfectisque naturis?
並且在人於他自己本有的本性中被建立之前,這理在那受造物裡是閒置不動的嗎?正如在人自己裡面——那已經過著自己本有生命的人——生殖之理潛藏而不活動地存在著,這理除非藉著交合與受孕便不運作。抑或那潛藏著此理的屬靈受造物,也全然不做自己的工作嗎?那麼它被造是為了甚麼呢?是為了讓它容納那將來的人之靈魂、或將來眾靈魂之理嗎?彷彿這些靈魂不能在它們自己裡面存在,而只能在某個已過著自己生命的受造物裡存在——正如生殖之理除非在某些已存在且已完備的本性裡便不能存在?
And was this idle within it before man was established in his own proper nature, just as in man himself, already leading his own proper life, there is present latently and inactively the ratio of generating, which does not operate except through intercourse and conception? Or did that spiritual creature also, in which this ratio was latently present, do nothing of its own work? And to what end was it created? Was it that it might contain the ratio of the future human soul, or of future souls, as though they could not exist in themselves, but only in some creature already living its own life — just as the ratio of generating cannot exist except in some natures already existing and perfected?
37:542
parens ergo animae instituta est aliqua creatura spiritalis, in qua sit ratio futurae animae, quae non inde existat, nisi cum eam deus homini inspirandam facit. neque enim et ex homine fetum uel seminis uel ipsius iam prolis creat et format nisi deus per sapientiam adtingentem ubique propter suam munditiam, ita ut nihil inquinatum in eam incurrat, dum pertendit a fine usque ad finem fortiter et disponit omnia suauiter.
那麼,是否有某個屬靈的受造物被設立為靈魂之親,將來靈魂之理就在其中,這理除非上帝使靈魂被吹入人裡面,便不從它而出?因為上帝也不從人造出並形塑其後裔——無論是種子的、或已生出之子嗣本身的——除非藉著智慧;智慧因其純潔而遍及各處,以致沒有污穢之物竄入她裡面,同時她大有能力地從這端伸展到那端,並溫柔地安排萬事。
Was there, then, established as the parent of the soul some spiritual creature, in which lies the ratio of the future soul, which does not come forth from it except when God makes it to be breathed into man? For neither does God create and form the offspring — whether of the seed or of the already-existing progeny itself — out of man, except through Wisdom that reaches everywhere by reason of her purity, so that nothing defiled runs into her, while she stretches mightily from end to end and disposes all things sweetly.
37:543
sed nescio, quemadmodum possit intellegi ad hoc tantum creatam nescio quam creaturam spiritalem, quae in dei conditionibus per illos sex dies factis non commemoraretur, cum deus hominem sexto die fecisse dictus est, quem nondum in propria natura fecerat, sed adhuc ratione causali in illa creatura, quae commemorata non est. magis enim debuit ipsa commemorari, quae sic consummata erat, ut non adhuc esset secundum suae praecedentem rationem facienda.
但我不知道如何能理解:竟有某個我不知是甚麼的屬靈受造物,單為此目的而被造,卻沒有在上帝那六日所成的奠基之工中被提及——當上帝被說成在第六日造人時,這人祂尚未在其本有的本性中造成,而只是在那沒有被提及的受造物裡以因果之理的方式存在。因為那受造物理當更被提及才是,既然它是如此完成,以致無需再照著先於它的某個理而被造。
But I do not know how it can be understood that some spiritual creature, I know not which, was created for this purpose alone, which was not mentioned among God's foundations made through those six days, when God was said to have made man on the sixth day — man whom He had not yet made in his proper nature, but as yet only in causal ratio in that creature which was not mentioned. For that creature ought rather to have been mentioned, which was so consummated that it was not still to be made according to a ratio preceding it.
37:544
An forte in illius diei natura, quem primitus condidit, si spiritus intellectualis dies ille recte accipitur, hanc faciendae animae causalem rationem deus inseruit, cum sexto die fecit hominem ad imaginem suam, causam scilicet rationemque praefigens, secundum quam eum post illos septem dies faceret, ut uidelicet corporis eius causalem rationem in natura terrae, animae autem in natura illius diei creasse credatur?
抑或,也許在祂最初所建立的那日的本性中——若那日恰當地被理解為理智之靈——上帝插入了這造靈魂的因果之理,就在祂第六日照自己的形像造人之時,也就是預先設定了那因與理,好照此在那七日之後造人:即,人身體的因果之理可被相信是造在地土的本性中,而人靈魂的因果之理則造在那日的本性中?
Or perhaps, in the nature of that day which He first established — if that day is rightly taken to be the intellectual spirit — God inserted this causal ratio of making the soul, when on the sixth day He made man to His own image, foreordaining, that is, the cause and ratio according to which He would make him after those seven days: so that, namely, the causal ratio of his body may be believed to have been created in the nature of earth, but that of his soul in the nature of that day?
37:545
sed quid aliud dicitur, cum hoc dicitur, nisi angelicum spiritum quasi parentem esse animae humanae, si sic in illo inest animae humanae creandae praecondita ratio, sicut in homine futurae prolis suae, ut corporum quidem humanorum parentes homines sint, animarum autem angeli, creator uero et corporum et animarum deus, sed corporum ex hominibus, animarum ex angelis, aut prioris corporis ex terra et prioris animae ex angelica natura, ubi rationes eorum causales praefixerat, quando primitus fecit hominem in his. quae simul omnia creauit, deinceps uero iam homines ex hominibus, corpus ex corpore, animam ex anima!
但當人這樣說時,除了說天使之靈彷彿是人之靈魂的親之外,還說了甚麼呢?——若那將被造的人之靈魂之理,就這樣預先建立在天使之靈裡面,正如在人裡面有他將來後裔之理一般,以致人身體的親固然是人,靈魂的親卻是天使,而身體與靈魂的造物主都是上帝,只是身體出於人、靈魂出於天使;或者說最初的身體出於地、最初的靈魂出於天使的本性——祂就在那裡預先設定了它們的因果之理,即當祂在那些同時一併創造之物中最初造人之時,但此後便是人從人而出、身體從身體而出、靈魂從靈魂而出!
But what else is said, when this is said, than that the angelic spirit is, as it were, the parent of the human soul, if in it there is thus pre-established the ratio of the human soul to be created, just as in a man there is that of his future offspring — so that the parents of human bodies indeed are men, but of souls are angels, while the Creator both of bodies and of souls is God, yet of bodies from men, of souls from angels; or of the first body from earth and of the first soul from the angelic nature, where He had pre-established their causal ratios, when He first made man in those things which He created all together, but thereafter now men from men, body from body, soul from soul!
37:546
durum est hoc angeli aut angelorum filiam dicere esse animam, sed multo durius caeli corporei; quanto magis ergo maris et terrae! multo minus igitur in aliqua corporali creatura causalis animae ratio praecondita est, cum faceret deus hominem ad imaginem suam, antequam eum suo tempore de limo formatum flatu animaret. si absurde creditur animam causaliter in natura angelica condidisse. Illud ergo uideamus, utrum forsitan uerum esse possit, quod certe humanae opinioni tolerabilius mihi uidetur, deum in illis primis operibus, quae simul omnia creauit, animam etiam humanam creasse, quam suo tempore membris ex limo formati corporis inspiraret:
要說靈魂是某天使、或眾天使的女兒,這是艱難的;但要說它是有形之天的女兒,就更加艱難得多——那麼要說它是海與地的女兒,又是何等更甚呢!因此,當上帝照自己的形像造人、在祂尚未於適當時候以氣息使那由泥塑成的人得生命之前,靈魂的因果之理更不是預先建立在任何有形的受造物中——如果把靈魂以因果方式奠基於天使本性之中被認為荒謬的話。因此讓我們來看,或許那在我看來對人的見解確實較可容忍之說可為真:即上帝在那些同時一併創造萬物的最初工作中,也創造了人的靈魂,並要在適當時候把它吹入那由泥塑成之身體的肢體中:
It is hard to say that the soul is the daughter of an angel or of angels; but much harder still, of the corporeal heaven — how much more, then, of the sea and the earth! Far less, therefore, was the causal ratio of the soul pre-established in any corporeal creature, when God made man to His own image, before He animated with breath the man formed from clay in his own time — if it is absurd to believe that He founded the soul causally in the angelic nature. Let us therefore see whether perhaps that can be true which certainly seems to me more tolerable to human opinion: that God, in those first works in which He created all things together, also created the human soul, which He would in its own time breathe into the members of the body formed from clay:
37:547
cuius corporis in illis simul conditis rebus rationem creasse causaliter, secundum quam fieret, cum faciendum esset, corpus humanum. nam neque illud, quod dictum est" ad imaginem suam", nisi in anima neque illud, quod dictum est "masculum et feminam", nisi in corpore recte intellegimus. credatur ergo, si nulla scripturarum auctoritas seu ueritatis ratio contradicit, hominem ita factum sexto die, ut corporis quidem humani ratio causalis in elementis mundi, anima uero iam ipsa crearetur, sicut primitus conditus est dies, et creata lateret in operibus dei, donec eam suo tempore sufflando, hoc est inspirando, formato ex limo corpori insereret. Sed hic rursus non spernenda oritur quaestio.
並且那身體之理,祂以因果方式造在那些同時奠立之物中,好使那身體——人的身體——照此理在當被造之時得以成形。因為「照自己的形像」這話,我們除非按靈魂便無法正確理解,「男與女」這話,我們除非按身體也無法正確理解。因此,若無任何聖經的權威或真理之理與之相矛盾,就讓我們如此相信:人在第六日被造成這樣,即人身體的因果之理固然造在世界的諸元素中,而靈魂本身則已被造——正如頭一日被建立一般——並且一經受造便潛藏在上帝的工作中,直到適當時候祂藉吹氣、即藉吹注,把它安置入那由泥塑成的身體裡。但在此又生出一個不可輕忽的問題。
and that the ratio of that body He created causally in those things founded all together, according to which it should come to be, when it was to be made — the human body. For neither do we rightly understand that which was said, 'to His own image,' except in the soul, nor that which was said, 'male and female,' except in the body. Let it therefore be believed — if no authority of the Scriptures or ratio of truth contradicts — that man was so made on the sixth day, that the causal ratio of the human body indeed was created in the elements of the world, but the soul itself was already created, just as the first day was established, and, once created, lay hidden in the works of God, until in its own time He should, by breathing — that is, by inspiring — insert it into the body formed from clay. But here again there arises a question not to be scorned.
37:548
si enim iam facta erat anima et latebat, ubi ei posset esse melius quam ibi? quid ergo fuit causae, ut anima innocenter uiuens insereretur uitae huius carnis, in qua peccando ipsum, qui eam creauit, offenderet, unde eam merito sequeretur laboris aerumna damnationisque cruciatus? an illud dicendum est, quod ad corpus administrandum uoluntate propria fuerit inclinata, in qua uita corporis, quoniam et iuste et inique uiui potest, quod eligeret hoc haberet, uel praemium de iustitia uel de iniquitate subplicium, ut nec illi apostolicae sententiae sit contrarium, qua dicit nondum natos nihil egisse boni seu mali?
因為若靈魂已被造成並潛藏著,它還能在哪裡比在那裡更好呢?那麼是甚麼緣故,使那無辜而活的靈魂被安置入這肉體的生命裡——在這生命中,它藉犯罪而冒犯那造它者,以致勞苦的艱辛與定罪的酷刑理當隨之而來?抑或當這樣說:是它憑自己的意志傾向去治理身體,在這身體的生命裡——既然人既能公義地、也能不義地生活——它便照它所揀選的而擁有其結果,或因公義得賞、或因不義受罰,好使這不至於與使徒那句話相矛盾,就是他所說:尚未出生的人未曾行過善或惡?
For if the soul had already been made and lay hidden, where could it be better than there? What then was the cause that the soul, living innocently, was inserted into the life of this flesh, in which, by sinning, it should offend Him who created it, whence there should deservedly follow it the toil of hardship and the torment of damnation? Or is this to be said: that by its own will it was inclined to administering the body, in which life of the body — since one can live both justly and unjustly — it should have that which it chose, either a reward for justice or a punishment for iniquity, so that this may not be contrary to that apostolic sentence, in which he says that those not yet born had done nothing good or evil?
37:549
illa quippe inclinatio uoluntatis ad corpus nondum est actio uel iustitiae uel iniquitatis, de qua ratio reddenda est in iudicio dei recepturo unoquoque secundum ea, quae per corpus gessit, siue bonum siue malum. cur ergo non iam et illud credatur, quod dei nutu ad corpus uenerit, ubi, si uellet secundum eius praeceptum agere, mercedem acciperet uitae aeternae atque angelorum societatis; si autem contemneret, poenas iustissimas lueret siue laboris diuturni siue ignis aeterni? an, quia hoc ipsum, deo uolenti obtemperasse, iam utique actio bona est, et erit contrarium nondum natos nihil egisse uel boni uel mali?
因為意志向著身體的那傾向,尚不是公義或不義的行為——關於行為,將在上帝的審判中交帳,那時各人要照他藉身體所行的、無論善惡而受報。那麼為何不也如今相信這事:靈魂是憑上帝的示意而來到身體,在那裡,它若願意照祂的訓誡而行,就要領受永生的賞賜與天使的團契;但它若輕視祂,就要付出最公義的刑罰,或是長久的勞苦、或是永火?抑或,既然這件事本身——順服了那意欲的上帝——就已確實是善的行為,這豈不就與「尚未出生的人未曾行過善或惡」這話相矛盾了嗎?
For that inclination of the will toward the body is not yet an act either of justice or of iniquity, of which an account is to be rendered in the judgment of God, when each shall receive according to the things he has done through the body, whether good or evil. Why then should not this also now be believed: that it came to the body by the nod of God, where, if it should be willing to act according to His precept, it would receive the reward of eternal life and of the fellowship of the angels; but if it should despise Him, it would pay the most just penalties, whether of long-lasting toil or of eternal fire? Or, since this very thing — to have obeyed the willing God — is already surely a good act, will it be contrary to the saying that those not yet born had done nothing either good or evil?
37:550
Quae si ita sunt, fatebimur etiam non in eo rerum genere animam primitus creatam, ut esset praescia futuri operis sui uel iusti uel iniqui. nimis quippe incredibile est eam potuisse propria uoluntate inclinari ad corporis uitam, si se ita in quibusdam peccaturam esse praesciret, ut iuste subplicio perpetuo puniretur. iuste sane creator laudatur in omnibus, qui fecit omnia bona ualde. neque enim ex his tantum laudandus est, quibus praescientiam dedit, cum recte laudetur etiam, quia pecora creauit, quibus est natura humana praestantior etiam in ipsis peccantibus. natura quippe hominis ex deo est, non iniquitas, qua se ipse inuoluit male utendo libero arbitrio:
若這些事如此,我們便要承認:靈魂並非被造在那能預知自己將來之工(無論公義或不義)的那類事物中。因為要說靈魂能憑自己的意志傾向於身體的生命,倘若它預知自己會在某些方面如此犯罪、以致公義地受永刑,這實在太難以置信了。造物主在萬事上確實理當受讚美,祂造的一切甚好。因為祂不僅該為那些祂賜以預知之能者受讚美,既然祂也理當因祂造了獸類而受讚美,而人的本性——縱然在那些犯罪的人身上——仍比獸類更為卓越。因為人的本性出於上帝,而非那不義;那不義是人自己藉著誤用自由意志而使自己陷於其中的:
If these things are so, we shall confess that the soul was not created in that class of things which was foreknowing of its own future work, whether just or unjust. For it is too incredible that it could have been inclined by its own will to the life of the body, if it foreknew that it would so sin in certain respects as to be justly punished with perpetual torment. The Creator is indeed justly praised in all things, who made all things very good. For He is to be praised not only for those to whom He gave foreknowledge, since He is rightly praised also because He created the beasts, than which human nature is more excellent even in those men who sin. For the nature of man is from God, not the iniquity in which he himself has become entangled by the ill use of free will:
37:551
quod tamen si non haberet, in natura rerum minus excelleret. cogitandus est quippe homo iuste uiuens etiam non praescius futurorum et ibi uidendum est, excellentia uoluntatis bonae quam non inpediatur ad recte uiuendum et deo placendum, quod ignarus futuri uiuit ex fide. huiusmodi ergo creaturam quisquis esse nollet in rebus, contradicit dei bonitati; quisquis autem poenas eam non uult luere pro peccatis, inimicus est aequitati. Sed si ad hoc fit anima, ut mittatur in corpus, quaeri potest, utrum, si noluerit, conpellatur. sed melius creditur hoc naturaliter uelle, id est in ea natura creari, ut uelit, sicut naturale nobis est uelle uiuere;
然而人若沒有自由意志,他在萬物的本性中就會較不卓越。因為人公義地生活,即使被設想為不預知未來,也應如此設想,並且要看見:善良意志的卓越,並不因人不知未來、憑信心而活這事實,而在正直生活、討上帝喜悅上有絲毫受阻。因此,凡不願世上有這樣一種受造物的人,就與上帝的美善相矛盾;但凡不願它為自己的罪付出刑罰的人,就是公平的仇敵。但若靈魂是為此而被造,即為要被差入身體,那麼可以問:它若不願意,是否會被強迫。然而更好的看法是相信它自然地願意這事——即它被造在這樣一種本性中,使它願意,正如願意活著對我們是自然的一樣;
yet if he did not have it (free will), he would excel less in the nature of things. For a man living justly is to be conceived of even as not foreknowing the future, and there is to be seen how the excellence of a good will is in no way hindered from living rightly and pleasing God by the fact that, ignorant of the future, he lives by faith. Whoever, therefore, would not have a creature of this kind to be among things, contradicts the goodness of God; but whoever would not have it pay penalties for its sins, is an enemy of equity. But if the soul is made for this, that it should be sent into a body, it may be asked whether, if it should be unwilling, it is compelled. But it is better to believe that it wills this naturally — that is, that it is created in such a nature that it wills, just as it is natural to us to will to live;
37:552
male autem uiuere iam non est naturae, sed peruersae uoluntatis, quam iuste poena consequitur. Frustra ergo iam quaeritur, ei qua ueluti materie facta sit anima, si recte intellegi potest in primis illis operibus facta, cum factus est dies; sicut enim illa, quae non erant, facta sunt, sic et haec inter illa. quodsi et materies aliqua formabilis fuit, et corporalis et spiritalis — non tamen et ipsa instituta nisi a deo, ex quo sunt omnia — quae quidem formationem suam non tempore, sed origine praecederet, sicut uox cantum, quid nisi de materia spiritali facta anima congruentius creditur?
然而,敗壞地生活已不再屬於本性,而是屬於悖逆的意志,公義的刑罰必隨之而來。因此,如今若問靈魂是彷彿由何種質料所造,乃是徒然,倘若可以正確地理解為,它是在那最初的諸工中、在日子被造成之時被造的;因為正如那些原本不存在的事物被造成,靈魂也照樣在那些事物之中被造成。而假使也曾有某種可被賦形的質料,既有形體的也有屬靈的——然而這質料本身也非由別的,唯獨由萬有所出的神所設立——這質料在本源上(而非在時間上)先於它自身的賦形,正如聲音先於歌唱:那麼,還有什麼比相信靈魂是由屬靈的質料所造更為恰當呢?
But to live wickedly belongs no longer to nature, but to a perverse will, which punishment justly follows. In vain, then, is it now asked out of what material, as it were, the soul was made, if it can rightly be understood to have been made among those first works, when the day was made. For just as those things which were not came to be, so this too came to be among them. And if there was also some material capable of being formed, both corporeal and spiritual — yet this too not established except by God, from whom are all things — a material which would indeed precede its own formation not in time but in origin, as the voice precedes song, then what more fittingly is believed than that the soul was made of spiritual material?
37:553
Si autem aliquis non uult eam existimare factam, nisi cum formato corpori est inspirata, uideat, quid respondeat, cum quaeritur, unde facta sit.
但若有人不願承認靈魂是被造的,除非是在它被吹入那已成形的身體之時,那麼當人問它是由何而造時,讓他思量該如何回答。
But if anyone is unwilling to reckon it as made except when it was breathed into the already-formed body, let him consider what he will answer when it is asked out of what it was made.
37:554
aut enim ex nihilo dicturus est deum aliquid fecisse uel facere post illam consummationem operum suorum et debet intueri, quomodo explicet sexto die factum hominem ad imaginem dei — quod nisi secundum animam recte intellegi non postet —, id est in qua natura causalis ratio facta fuerit eius rei, quae nondum fuit, aut non de nihilo, sed de aliquo iam existente factam dicet animam et laborabit inquirendo, quaenam illa natura sit, utrum corporalis an spiritalis, secundum eas quaestiones, quas superius uersauimus, manente illa quoque molestia, ut adhuc quaeratur, in qua substantia creaturarum in sex diebus primitus conditarum causalem illam rationem fecerit animae, quam nondum uel de nihilo uel de aliquo fecerat.
因為他要麼說神在完成祂的諸工之後,從無中造了或正在造某物——那麼他就必須留意,如何解釋第六日人被造成是照著神的形像,這句話唯獨就靈魂而言才能被正確地理解;也就是說,那尚未存在之物的因果之理是在何種本性中被造的——要麼他會說靈魂並非從無中,而是從某個已然存在之物所造,於是他將勞苦地探究:那本性究竟是什麼,是有形體的還是屬靈的,正如我們上文所探討的那些問題一樣;而那同一個難處依然存在,以致人還要進一步追問:在六日之內最先受造的諸受造物中,神是在何種本體之內造了靈魂的那因果之理,而那靈魂祂尚未從無中、也尚未從某物中造出。
For either he will say that God made or makes something out of nothing after that completion of His works — and then he must look to how he explains that on the sixth day man was made in the image of God, which cannot rightly be understood except in respect of the soul; that is, in what nature the causal reason of that thing which did not yet exist had been made — or he will say that the soul was made not out of nothing but out of something already existing, and he will labour in inquiring what that nature is, whether corporeal or spiritual, according to those questions which we have handled above; while that same difficulty still remains, so that it is further asked in what substance among the creatures first established in the six days God made that causal reason of the soul which He had not yet made either out of nothing or out of something.
← 上一段下一段 →
← 第 36 章第 38 章 →
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061626364

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。