📜 Verbum · 聖言
原文誦讀聖經與教父文獻

← 回書卷目次 · 拉丁教父 › 文集

特土良

文集 第 27 章

拉丁文原文.26 節.部分字詞可點開查義

← 第 26 章第 28 章 →
27:1
I Magna curiositate et maiore longe memoria opus est ad studendum, si qui velit ex litteris receptissimis quibusque philosophorum vel poetarum vel quorumlibet doctrinae ac sapientiae saecularis magistrorum testimonia excerpere Christianae veritatis, ut aemuli persecutoresque eius de suo proprio instrumento et erroris in se et iniquitatis in nos rei revincantur.
若有人想要從哲學家、詩人,或任何一位世俗學問與智慧之師最廣為接受的著作中,摘錄出對基督真理的見證,好叫它的敵手與逼迫者被他們自己的資材所駁倒——被定為自身有錯謬、對我們有不義之罪,那麼在鑽研的工夫上,就需要極大的勤勉,並需要遠為超群的記憶力。
There is need of great diligence, and of a far greater memory, for the labour of study, if anyone should wish to excerpt from the most widely received writings of the philosophers, or the poets, or any teachers whatsoever of secular learning and wisdom, testimonies to the Christian truth, so that its rivals and persecutors may be refuted out of their own store—found guilty both of error in themselves and of injustice against us.
27:2
Nonnulli quidem, quibus de pristina litteratura et curiositatis labor et memoriae tenor perseveravit, ad eum modum opuscula penes nos condiderunt commemorantes et contestificantes in singula rationem et originem et traditionem et sententiarum argumenta, per quae recognosci possit nihil nos aut novum aut portentosum suscepisse, de quo non etiam communes et publicae litterae ad suffragium nobis patrocinentur, si quid aut erroris eiecimus aut aequitatis admisimus. Sed suis quidem magistris alias probatissimis [atque lectissimis] fidem inclinavit humana de incredulitate duritia, sicubi in argumenta Christianae defensionis impingunt.
確實,有些人——古代文獻的工夫與記憶的持守都在他們身上一直延續著——在我們中間照這方式寫成了一些小著作,逐項地追述並見證各種意見的緣由、起源、傳統與根據,藉此可看出:我們並未接受任何新奇或怪誕之物,凡此連那尋常公認的著作也不為我們作證支持——只要我們是拋棄了錯謬,或是接納了公義。但人的信念,因其不信之剛硬,凡在觸及基督教辯護的論據之處,便撤回了它對那些原本最受推崇、最為精選之師的信從。
Indeed some men, in whom both the labour of ancient literature and the retentiveness of memory have persevered, have composed among us little works after this manner, recalling and attesting in detail the reason and origin and tradition and the grounds of the several opinions, by which it may be recognized that we have taken up nothing either new or monstrous, on behalf of which even the common and public writings do not lend us their patronage as our witnesses—if we have either cast out anything of error or admitted anything of equity. But human credence, through the hardness of its unbelief, has withdrawn its faith from those masters of theirs, otherwise most approved and most choice, wherever they strike upon the arguments of the Christian defence.
27:3
Tunc vani poetae, cum deos humanis passionibus et fabulis designant, tunc philosophi duri, cum veritatis fores pulsant. Hactenus sapiens et prudens habebitur, qui prope Christianum pronuntiaverit, cum, si quid prudentiae aut sapientiae affectaverit seu caerimonias despuens seu saeculum revincens, pro Christiano denotetur. Iam igitur nihil nobis erit cum litteris et doctrina perversae felicitatis, cum in falso eis creditur quam in vero. Viderint si qui de unico et solo deo pronuntiaverunt. Immo nihil omnino relatum sit, quod agnoscat Christianus, ne exprobrare possit. Nam et quod relatum est, neque omnes sciunt neque qui sciunt, constare confidunt.
那時,當詩人以人的情慾與虛構的傳說來描繪諸神,他們便是虛妄的;那時,當哲學家叩擊真理之門,他們便是苛刻的。人被算為智慧明達,也不過以他說出接近基督徒的話為限;然而他若在明達或智慧上有所追求——無論是唾棄他們的禮儀,或是駁倒這世界——便被打上基督徒的烙印。所以如今,我們與那乖謬幸運的著作和教導毫不相干,因為在虛假之事上,人對它們的信從,反倒多過在真實之事上。若有人論及那位獨一無二的神,就由他們去吧。不,寧可完全不引用任何基督徒所能認出的東西,免得他反被責難。因為連已被引用的,也並非人人都知道,就是知道的人,也不敢確信它站得住。
Then the poets are vain, when they portray the gods with human passions and fables; then the philosophers are harsh, when they knock at the gates of truth. So far will a man be accounted wise and prudent, as he has pronounced something near to the Christian; whereas, if he has aimed at anything of prudence or wisdom, whether by spitting upon their ceremonies or refuting the world, he is branded for a Christian. Now therefore we shall have nothing to do with the writings and teaching of a perverse felicity, since more credence is given to them in what is false than in what is true. Let them look to it, if any have pronounced anything concerning the one and only God. Nay, let nothing at all be adduced which a Christian may recognize, lest he be able to be reproached. For even what has been adduced, neither do all know, nor do those who know it feel sure that it holds firm.
27:4
Tanto abest, ut nostris litteris annuant homines, ad quas nemo venit nisi iam Christianus. Novum testimonium advoco immo omni litteratura notius, omni doctrina agitatius, omni editione vulgatius, toto homine maius, id est totum quod est hominis. Consiste in medio, anima, seu divina et aeterna res es secundum plures philosophos, eo magis non mentieris: seu minime divina quoniam quidem mortalis ut Epicuro soli videtur, eo magis mentiri non debebis, seu de coelo exciperis, seu de terra conciperis, seu numeris seu atomis concinnaris, seu cum corpore incipis, seu post corpus induceris, undeunde et quoquo modo hominem facis animal rationale, sensus et scientiae capacissimum.
人竟至於不肯認同我們的著作,而人若非已是基督徒,也沒有人來讀它。我要傳召一個新的見證——不,一個比一切文獻更為人所熟知、比一切教義更為通行、比任何版本更廣泛流傳、比整個人更偉大的見證,也就是凡屬人之物的全部。靈魂啊,站出來立在中間吧:無論你按大多數哲學家所說,是神聖而永恆之物——那你就更不會說謊;或者你按唯獨伊壁鳩魯所以為的,既是必死的,就毫不神聖——那你就更不當說謊;無論你是從天上被領受,還是從地上被孕育;無論你是由數目還是由原子拼合而成;無論你是與身體一同開始,還是在身體之後被引入——你無論從何而來、以何方式使人成為有理性的活物,最能領受感覺與知識。
So far is it from being the case that men should assent to our writings, to which no one comes unless already a Christian. I call to witness a new testimony—nay, one better known than all literature, more current than all doctrine, more published abroad than any edition, greater than the whole man, that is, the whole of what belongs to man. Stand forth in the midst, O soul: whether you are a divine and eternal thing, according to most philosophers—so much the more you will not lie; or whether you are by no means divine, since indeed you are mortal, as to Epicurus alone you seem—so much the more you ought not to lie; whether you are received from heaven, or conceived from earth; whether you are fitted together of numbers or of atoms; whether you begin along with the body, or are introduced after the body—from whatever source and in whatever manner you make man a rational animal, most capable of sense and knowledge.
27:5
Sed non eam te advoco, quae scholis formata, bybliothecis exercitata, academiis et porticibus atticis pasta sapientiam ructas. Te simplicem et rudem et impolitam et idioticam compello qualem te habent qui te solam habent, illam ipsam de compito, de trivio, de textrino totam. Imperitia tua mihi opus est, quoniam aliquantulae peritiae tuae nemo credit. Ea expostulo quae tecum homini infers, quae ex temetipsa aut ex quocumque auctore tuo sentire didicisti. Non es, quod sciam, Christiana. Fieri enim, non nasci solet Christiana. Tamen nunc a te testimonium flagitant Christiani, ab extranea adversus tuos, ut vel tibi erubescant, quod nos ob ea oderint et inrideant, quae te nunc consciam detinent.
但我所傳召的並不是你——你這被學堂塑造、在圖書館裏受操練、在雅典的學院與柱廊間受哺育、噴吐智慧的靈魂。我所呼求的乃是你這單純、粗陋、未經雕琢、毫無學識的——就是那些唯獨擁有你的人所擁有的你;就是那整個的靈魂,來自十字路口、來自街角、來自織布房的靈魂。我所需要的正是你的無知,因為對你那一點點的見識,沒有人肯信服。我所索求的,是你隨自身帶進人裏面的那些東西,是你或從你自己、或從你隨便哪位師承所學會去感受的東西。就我所知,你並不是基督徒。因為靈魂通常是「成為」基督徒,而非「生來」就是。然而如今基督徒卻向你索取見證——一個從外人而來、對抗你自己人的見證——好叫他們的仇敵甚至在你面前羞愧,因為他們正是為了那些如今使你心知肚明的事,而恨惡並譏笑我們。
But it is not you that I summon—you who, shaped by the schools, exercised in libraries, fed in the Attic academies and porticoes, belch forth wisdom. It is you, the simple and rude and unpolished and uncultured, that I address—such as they have you who have you alone; that very soul, whole, from the crossroads, from the street-corner, from the weaving-shed. Your inexperience is what I have need of, since to your little bit of experience no one gives credence. I ask for those things which you bring in to man along with yourself, which you have learned to feel either from your own self or from whatever author of yours. You are not, so far as I know, a Christian. For a soul is wont to become Christian, not to be born so. Yet now the Christians demand a testimony of you—from a stranger against your own—that they may blush even before you, for hating and mocking us on account of those very things which now hold you conscious of them.
27:6
II Non placemus deum praedicantes hoc nomine unico unicum, a quo omnia et sub quo universa. Dic testimonium, si ita scis. Nam te quoque palam et tota libertate qua non licet nobis, domi ac foris audimus ita pronuntiare, Quod deus dederit, et, Si deus voluerit. Ea voce et aliquem esse significas et omnem illi confiteris potestatem, ad cuius spectas voluntatem, simul et ceteros negas deos esse, dum suis vocabulis nuncupas, Saturnum, Iovem, Martem, Minervam. Nam solum deum confirmas quem tantum deum nominias, ut, et cum illos interdum deos appellas, de alieno et quasi pro mutuo usa videaris. De natura quoque dei quem praedicamus, nec te latet. Deus bonus, Deus benefacit, tua vox est.
我們傳揚神以這獨一的名為那位獨一無二者、萬物由祂而出、宇宙在祂之下時,並不討人的喜悅。你若果真知道,就作你的見證吧。因為我們也聽見你——公開地、以我們所不被容許的全然自由,在家中在外面——這樣宣告:「神所要賜的」,以及「神若願意」。你藉這話語既表明有一位存在,又向那位你所仰望其意旨的神承認一切權能;同時你稱那些別的為它們自己的名字——撒圖恩、朱庇特、瑪爾斯、彌涅耳瓦——便否認它們是神。因為你唯獨稱那位為神、你唯獨以「神」來稱呼祂,以致你有時縱然稱那些別的為神,看起來也像是借用別人的東西、彷彿是暫借而用。至於我們所傳揚之神的本性,你也並非不知。「神是良善的」、「神施行善事」——這是你的話。
We do not please men when we proclaim God under this one name as the one and only, from whom are all things and under whom is the universe. Give your testimony, if you so know it. For we hear you too, openly and with all the liberty that is not permitted to us, at home and abroad, pronounce thus: 'What God shall grant,' and 'If God will.' By that utterance you signify both that someone exists, and you confess to him all power, upon whose will you look; and at the same time you deny that the rest are gods, while you call them by their own names—Saturn, Jove, Mars, Minerva. For you confirm him alone to be God whom you name only 'God,' so that, even when at times you call those others gods, you seem to be using the word from another's store and as it were on loan. Of the nature too of the God whom we proclaim, you are not ignorant. 'God is good,' 'God does good'—that is your utterance.
27:7
Plane, adicis, Sed homo malus, scilicet contraria propositione oblique et figuraliter exprobrans ideo malum hominem, quia a deo bono abscesserit. Etiam quod penes deum bonitatis et benignitatis omnis benedictio inter nos summum sit disciplinae et conversationis sacramentum, Benedicat te deus tam facile pronuntias quam Christiano necesse est, at cum in maledictum convertis dictionem dei, perinde dicto omnem super nos potestatem eius consistere secundum nos confiteris.
「顯然如此,」你又補上一句,「但人是邪惡的」——你藉一個相反的命題,含蓄而比喻地責備人為惡,其緣故就在於他離棄了良善的神。照樣,既然一切良善與仁慈的祝福都在乎神——這在我們中間乃是訓誨與品行的最高聖禮——你便毫不遲疑地說出「願神賜福與你」,正如基督徒所必需的一樣;但當你把神的言語轉為咒詛,你同樣藉著你這話語,按我們的看法,承認祂的一切權能都臨在我們之上。
'Plainly,' you add, 'but man is evil'—reproaching man, by a contrary proposition, obliquely and figuratively, as evil for this reason, that he has departed from the good God. So too, seeing that with God there is all blessing of goodness and kindness, which among us is the highest sacrament of discipline and conduct, 'May God bless you' you pronounce as readily as is necessary for a Christian; but when you turn the saying of God into a curse, in like manner by your very word you confess, according to us, that all his power stands over us.
27:8
Sunt qui etsi deum non negent, dispectorem plane et arbitrum et iudicem non putent -- in quo utique nos maxime reiciunt, qui ad istam disciplinam metu praedicati iudicii transvolamus -- sic deum honorantes, dum curis observationis et molestiis animadversionis absolvunt, cui ne iram quidem adscribunt. Nam si deus, inquiunt, irascitur, corruptibilis et passionalis est: porro quod patitur quodque corrumpitur, etiam interitum potest capere, quem deus non capit. At idem alibi animam divinam et a deo conlatam confitentes cadunt in testimonium ipsius animae retorquendum adversus opinionem superiorem.
有些人縱然不否認神,卻不認為祂是察看者、裁斷者與審判者——正是在這一點上,他們尤其棄絕我們,因為我們是出於對那所宣告之審判的懼怕,才投奔到這一訓誨的;他們如此「尊崇」神,同時卻免除祂察看之操勞與察究之煩擾,甚至不把憤怒歸於祂。因為他們說:神若動怒,就是可朽壞、有情感的了;再者,凡受苦、凡被朽壞的,也能遭遇毀滅,而神並不遭遇毀滅。然而這同一批人在別處,卻承認靈魂是神聖的、是神所賜的,便從靈魂本身跌入一個可反過來駁倒他們先前意見的見證。
There are those who, even though they do not deny God, yet do not think him an observer and arbiter and judge—in which point above all they reject us, who fly over to this discipline through fear of the judgement that is proclaimed—thus honouring God, while they absolve him of the cares of watching and the troubles of taking note, to whom they do not even ascribe anger. For if God, they say, grows angry, he is corruptible and subject to passion; and further, what suffers and what is corrupted is able also to meet destruction, which God does not meet. Yet these same men elsewhere, confessing that the soul is divine and bestowed by God, fall into a testimony to be turned back against their former opinion, from the soul itself.
27:9
Si enim anima aut divina aut a deo data est, sine dubio datorem suum novit, et si novit, utique et timet et tantum postremo adauctorem. An non timet quem magis propitium velit quam iratum? Unde igitur naturalis timor animae in deum, si deus non novit irasci? Quomodo timebitur, qui nescit offendi? Quid timetur nisi ira? Unde ira nisi ex animadversione? Unde animadversio nisi de iudicio? Unde iudicium nisi de potestate? Cuius potestas summa, nisi dei solius? Hinc ergo tibi, anima, de conscientia suppetit domi ac foris nullo irridente vel prohibente praedicare, Deus videt omnia, et Deo commendo, et Deus reddet, et Deus inter nos iudicabit. Unde tibi hoc non Christianae?
因為靈魂若是神聖的、或是神所賜的,就無疑認得它的賜予者;它既認得祂,就必也敬畏祂,簡言之,敬畏祂為它的至大增益者。或者,它豈不敬畏那位它寧願其施恩、不願其發怒的神嗎?那麼,靈魂對神天然的敬畏又是從何而來,倘若神不曉得動怒呢?那不能被冒犯的,怎能被敬畏呢?所懼怕的,豈不就是憤怒嗎?憤怒從何而來,豈不是從察究嗎?察究從何而來,豈不是從審判嗎?審判從何而來,豈不是從權能嗎?至高的權能屬於誰,豈不唯獨屬於神嗎?所以,靈魂啊,正是出於你的良知,你才得以在家中在外面宣告,無人譏笑、無人攔阻:「神看見萬事」、「我交託給神」、「神必報應」、「神必在我們中間審判」。你這並非基督徒的,這見證是從何而來的呢?
For if the soul is either divine or given by God, without doubt it knows its giver; and if it knows him, assuredly it also fears him, and fears him, in short, as its great enhancer. Or does it not fear him whom it would rather have propitious than angry? Whence then the soul's natural fear toward God, if God knows not how to be angry? How shall he be feared who cannot be offended? What is feared but anger? Whence anger but from taking note? Whence taking note but from judgement? Whence judgement but from power? Whose is the supreme power, but God's alone? Hence therefore, O soul, out of your consciousness it is granted you to proclaim, at home and abroad, with none deriding or forbidding: 'God sees all things,' and 'I commend it to God,' and 'God will requite,' and 'God will judge between us.' Whence have you this, you who are not a Christian?
27:10
Atque adeo et plerumque et vitta Cereris redimita, et pallio Saturni coccinata, et deae Isidis linteata, in ipsis denique templis deum iudicem imploras. Sub Aesculapio stas, Iunonem in aere exornas, [Minervam calcias furvis galeam formis], et neminem de praesentibus deis contestaris. In tuo foro aliunde iudicem appellas, in tuis templis alium deum pateris. O testimonium veritatis, quae apud ipsa daemonia testem efficit Christianorum! III Enimvero cum daemonia affirmamus esse, sane quasi non et probemus qui ea soli de corporibus exigimus, aliqui Chrysippi adsentator inludit. Et esse et abominationem sustinere execrationes tuae respondent.
而且,你還往往——頭戴刻瑞斯的祭帶、身披撒圖恩的緋紅斗篷、穿著女神伊西斯的麻衣——竟就在那些神廟裏,向作審判者的神呼求。你站在埃斯庫拉庇烏斯之下,你用青銅裝點朱諾,你為彌涅耳瓦戴上暗色盔飾,卻不召在場的諸神中任何一位作證。在你自己的公堂上,你向別處的審判者上訴;在你自己的神廟裏,你容忍另一位神。啊,這真理的見證,竟連在鬼魔中間也為基督徒立起見證!因為當我們斷言有鬼魔存在時——彷彿我們這些唯獨能把它們從身體中趕出的人還不算證明了似的——就有某個克律西波斯的諂媚者加以嘲弄。而它們既存在、又忍受被憎惡,你自己的咒詛便作了回答。
And so, moreover, very often—crowned with the fillet of Ceres, clad in the scarlet cloak of Saturn, robed in the linen of the goddess Isis—in the very temples, indeed, you implore God as judge. You stand beneath Aesculapius, you deck out Juno in bronze, you fit dark-crested helmet-shapes upon Minerva, and yet you call none of the gods present to witness. In your own forum you appeal to a judge from elsewhere; in your own temples you suffer another God. O testimony of the truth, which even among the very demons produces a witness for Christians! For indeed, when we affirm that demons exist—as if we did not also prove it, we who alone drive them out of bodies—some flatterer of Chrysippus mocks. And that they both exist and endure abomination, your own curses answer.
27:11
Daemonium vocas hominem aut immunditia aut malitia aut insolentia aut quacumque macula quam nos daemoniis deputamus ad necessitatem odii inportunum. Satanan denique in omni vexatione et aspernatione et detestatione pronuntias, quem nos dicimus malitiae angelum, totius erroris artificem, totius saeculi interpolatorem, per quem homo a primordio circumventus, ut praeceptum dei excederet, et propterea in mortem datus exinde totum genus de suo semine infectum suae etiam damnationis traducem fecit. Sentis igitur perditorem tuum, et licet soli illum noverint Christiani vel quaecumque apud dominum secta, et tu tamen eum nosti, dum odisti.
你稱一個人為「魔鬼」,是因他以汙穢、惡意、傲慢,或我們歸於鬼魔的任何汙點,使人厭煩到不得不恨的地步。總之,你在一切煩擾、輕蔑與憎惡中所宣稱的「撒但」——正是我們所稱的惡意之天使、一切錯謬的巧匠、整個世界的敗壞者;藉著他,人從起初就被誘騙,以致越過神的誡命,因而被交付於死,此後便使整個從他的種子受了感染的人類,也成了他自己定罪的承受者。那麼,你認出了你的毀滅者;縱然唯獨基督徒認識他,或凡有在主那裏的宗派認識他,然而你既恨他,你也就認識他了。
You call a man a 'demon' who is troublesome by reason of uncleanness or malice or insolence or whatever blemish we impute to demons—troublesome to the point of hatred's necessity. Satan, in short, you pronounce in every vexation and scorn and detestation—him whom we call the angel of malice, the artificer of all error, the corrupter of the whole world, through whom man, circumvented from the beginning so as to transgress God's precept, and therefore given over to death, thereafter made the whole race, infected from his own seed, an heir also of his own condemnation. You perceive, then, your destroyer; and though only Christians know him, or whatever sect there is with the Lord, yet you too know him, in that you hate him.
27:12
IV Iam nunc quod ad necessariorem sententiam tuam spectet, quantum et ad ipsum statum tuum tendit, adfirmamus te manere post vitae dispunctionem et expectare diem iudicii proque meritis aut cruciatui destinari aut refrigerio, utroque sempiterno; quibus sustinendis necessario tibi substantiam pristinam eiusdemque hominis materiam et memoriam reversuram, quod et nihil mali ac boni sentire possis sine carnis passionalis facultate et nulla ratio sit iudicii sine ipsius exhibitione qui meruit iudicii passionem.
如今,至於你那更為要緊的意見——因它關乎你自身的狀態——我們斷言:你在生命的結算之後仍要存留,並等候審判之日,按你的功過被分派給刑罰或安舒,兩者都是永遠的;為了忍受這些,你先前的實體、以及那同一個人的質料與記憶,都必要歸回於你——因為你若無那能受苦之肉體的官能,便不能感覺任何禍與福,而審判也毫無根據,除非那配受審判之苦的本人親自被呈現出來。
Now then, as to that opinion of yours which is more necessary, inasmuch as it bears upon your very state, we affirm that you continue after the reckoning-up of life and await the day of judgement, and are assigned according to your deserts either to torment or to refreshment, both everlasting; for the enduring of which your former substance, and the matter and memory of the same man, must necessarily return to you—because you can perceive nothing of evil nor of good without the faculty of passible flesh, and there is no ground for judgement without the very presentation of him who has earned the endurance of judgement.
27:13
Ea opinio Christiana etsi honestior multo Pythagorica, quae te non in bestias transfert, etsi plenior Platonica, quae tibi etiam dotem corporis reddit, etsi Epicurea gravior, quae te ab interitu defendit, tamen propter suum nomen soli vanitati et stupori et, ut dicitur, praesumptioni deputatur. Sed non erubescimus, si tecum erit nostra praesumptio. Primo enim, cum alicuius defuncti recordaris, misellum vocas eum, non utique quod de bono vitae ereptum sed ut poenae et iudicio iam adscriptum. Ceterum alias securos vocas defunctos. Profiteris et vitae incommodum et mortis beneficium.
這意見是基督徒的意見,儘管它遠比畢達哥拉斯派的更為尊貴——後者不把你變成走獸;儘管它比柏拉圖派的更為完滿——後者甚至還你身體的嫁妝;儘管它比伊壁鳩魯派的更為厚重——後者護你免於毀滅——然而單單因它的名,它便被算作純然的虛妄、愚蠢,並如人所說的僭妄。但我們並不臉紅,倘若我們的「僭妄」竟與你一致。因為首先,當你想起某個亡者,你稱他為「可憐的小苦人」——並非因他被從生命的美好中奪走,而是因他已被登記入刑罰與審判。然而在別處,你又稱死者為「安穩的」。你既承認生命的不利,也承認死亡的益處。
This opinion is a Christian one, though far more honourable than the Pythagorean, which does not transfer you into beasts; though fuller than the Platonic, which gives you back even the dowry of a body; though weightier than the Epicurean, which defends you from destruction—yet on account of its name alone it is reckoned mere vanity and stupidity, and, as it is said, presumption. But we do not blush, if our presumption shall be with you. For first, when you call to mind someone deceased, you call him 'poor little wretch'—not indeed as one snatched from the good of life, but as one already enrolled unto punishment and judgement. Yet elsewhere you call the departed 'secure.' You profess both the disadvantage of life and the benefit of death.
27:14
Vocas porro securos, si quando extra portam cum obsoniis et matteis tibi potius parentans ad busta recedis aut a bustis dilutior redis. At ego sobriam tuam sententiam exigo. Misellos vocas mortuos, cum de tuo loqueris, cum ab eis longe es. Nam in convivio eorum quasi praesentibus et conrecumbentibus sortem suam exprobrare non possis. Debes adulari propter quos lautius vivis. Misellum ergo vocas qui nihil sentit? Quid, quod ut sentienti maledicis? Cuius memoriam cum alicuius offensae morsu facis, terram gravem inprecaris et cineri penes inferos tormentum. Aeque ex bona parte cui gratiam debes, ossibus et cineribus eius refrigerium comprecaris et ut bene requiescat apud inferos cupis.
此外,每逢你帶著酒食佳餚走出城門,與其說是為亡者、不如說是為自己在墳前設祭,或從墳前微醺而歸之時,你就稱他們為「安穩的」。但我索求你清醒時的意見。當你憑自己的感受、當你遠離他們之時,你稱死者為「可憐的小苦人」。因為在他們的筵席上,彷彿他們在場、與你同席斜臥之時,你就不能拿他們的境遇來責備他們了。你必須奉承那些你賴以生活得更奢華之人。那麼,你竟稱一個毫無知覺的人為「可憐的小苦人」嗎?可你又怎能像對有知覺者一樣咒他呢?當你帶著某種冒犯的刺痛想起他,你就咒願塵土重壓在他身上,並在陰間對他的骨灰施以折磨。同樣,在良善的一面,對一個你所虧欠恩情的人,你就為他的骸骨與骨灰祈求安舒,並願他在陰間安然歇息。
You call them 'secure,' moreover, whenever you withdraw outside the gate with viands and dainties, to make an offering rather to yourself at the tombs, or return from the tombs somewhat mellowed. But I demand your sober opinion. You call the dead 'poor little wretches' when you speak from your own feeling, when you are far from them. For at their banquet, as though they were present and reclining together with you, you could not reproach them with their lot. You must flatter those on whose account you live more sumptuously. Do you then call 'poor little wretch' one who feels nothing? What of it, that you curse him as if he felt? When you make his memory with the sting of some offence, you imprecate the earth to lie heavy on him, and torment upon his ashes down among the shades. Equally, on the good side, to one to whom you owe gratitude, you invoke refreshment upon his bones and ashes, and desire that he may rest well down among the shades.
27:15
Si nihil passionis est tibi post mortem, si nulla sensus perseverantia, si denique nihil est tui, cum istud corpus reliquisti, cur mentiris in te, quasi aliquid ultra pati possis? Immo cur in totum times mortem? Nihil est tibi timendum post mortem, qua nec experiundum post mortem. Nam et si dici potest ideo mortem timeri non ultra quid minantem, sed ut commodum vitae amputantem, atquin cum et incommoda longe plura vitae pariter excedant, lucratione gravioris partis metum diluit, ne iam timenda est amissio bonorum quae altero bono, id est incommodorum pace, pensatur. Non est timendum quod nos liberat ab omni timendo.
你死後若毫無苦楚,若感覺毫不存續,若你既離了這身體便一無所餘,那你為何要違背自己而說謊,彷彿你之後還能受什麼苦呢?不,你究竟為何要懼怕死亡呢?死後沒有什麼是你該懼怕的,因為死後沒有什麼可經歷的。因為即便有人說:死之所以可懼,並非因它威脅什麼死後之事,而是因它割斷了生命的好處——然而,既然生命那遠為眾多的不利也一同消逝,那麼得著較重的那一分便消解了懼怕:喪失諸般好處已不再可怕,因為它被另一種好處,即擺脫諸般不利的平安,所抵償了。那使我們脫離一切可懼之事的,正是不當懼怕的。
If there is for you no suffering after death, if no persistence of sense, if in short there is nothing of you when you have left this body, why do you lie against yourself, as though you could suffer anything beyond? Nay, why do you fear death at all? There is nothing you need fear after death, since there is nothing to be experienced after death. For even if it can be said that death is feared for this reason—not as threatening anything beyond, but as cutting off the advantage of life—yet since the disadvantages of life, far more numerous, likewise pass away together, the gaining of the weightier part dissolves the fear: the loss of goods is no longer to be dreaded, since it is offset by another good, that is, by peace from disadvantages. That is not to be feared which frees us from all that is to be feared.
27:16
Si times vita decedere quia optimam nosti, certe mortem timere non debes quam malam nescis. At cum times, scis malam. Non scires autem malam, quia nec timeres, si non scires aliquid esse post mortem quod eam malam faciat, ut timeas. Omittamus nunc naturalem formam timendi mortem. Nemo timeat quod evadere non potest. Ex altera parte congredior laetioris spei post mortem. Nam omnibus fere ingenita est famae post mortem cupido. Longum est retexere Curtios et Regulos et Graecos viros quorum innumerabilia elogia sunt contemptae mortis propter postumam famam.
你若因知道生命美好而懼怕離世,那你當然不該懼怕死亡,因為你並不知道它是禍。但你既確實懼怕它,你就知道它是禍。然而,你之所以知道它是禍——因為若不知道,你也就不會懼怕——正是因你知道死後有某種使它成為禍的東西存在,才叫你懼怕。如今讓我們把懼怕死亡的那種天然方式撇在一旁。沒有人該懼怕那無法逃脫之事。從另一面,我要迎上那死後更為歡欣的盼望。因為對死後的名聲的渴慕,幾乎是人人與生俱來的。要一一鋪陳庫爾提烏斯、雷古路斯,以及那些希臘英雄,那將是冗長的了——關於他們為了身後之名而藐視死亡,有數不盡的頌辭。
If you fear to depart from life because you know it to be excellent, surely you ought not to fear death, which you do not know to be evil. But since you do fear it, you know it to be evil. You would not know it to be evil, however—for neither would you fear it—if you did not know that there is something after death which makes it evil, so that you fear. Let us now leave aside the natural manner of fearing death. Let no one fear what he cannot escape. From the other side I engage the more cheerful hope after death. For it is inborn in almost all men to crave fame after death. It would be long to unfold the Curtii and the Reguli and those Greek heroes, of whom there are innumerable eulogies of death despised for the sake of posthumous fame.
27:17
Quis non hodie memoriae post mortem frequentandae ita studet, ut vel litteraturae operibus vel simplici laude morum vel ipsorum sepulcrorum ambitione nomen suum servet? Unde animae [hodie] affectare aliquid quod velit post portem et tantopere praeparare quae sit usura post obitum? Nihil utique de postero curaret, si nihil de postero sciret. Sed forsitan de sensu post excessum tui certior sis quam de resurrectione quandoque cuius nos praesumptores denotamur. Atquin hoc quoque ab anima praedicatur. Nam si de aliquo iam pridem defuncto tanquam de vivo quis requirat, prae manu occurrit dicere, Abiit iam et reverti debet.
今日有誰不這樣力求:叫他死後的記念絡繹不絕,好使他或藉文獻的著作,或藉對其品格單純的稱讚,或藉墳墓本身的宏偉,來保存自己的名字呢?靈魂今日之所以渴望某種它願意在死後得著之物,並如此辛勞地預備那將在身後有用之事,這是從何而來的呢?它若對將來一無所知,就必定不會為將來操心。但你或許對自己離世之後的知覺,比對那有朝一日的復活更為確信——我們正是為那復活而被打上僭妄的烙印的。然而連這復活也是靈魂所宣告的。因為若有人問起一個久已亡故之人,彷彿在問一個活人,就會脫口而出地說:「他如今去了,還必回來。」
Who today does not so strive that his memory may be thronged after death, that he may preserve his name either by works of literature, or by the simple praise of his character, or by the very ambition of his sepulchre? Whence comes it that the soul today aspires to something that it wills after death, and prepares so laboriously what shall be of use after decease? Assuredly it would take no care of the future, if it knew nothing of the future. But perhaps you are more certain of consciousness after your departure than of the resurrection at some time, on account of which we are branded as presumptuous. Yet this too is proclaimed by the soul. For if anyone should inquire about someone long since deceased, as though about one alive, it comes readily to hand to say: 'He is gone now, and must return.'
27:18
V Haec testimonia animae quanto vera tanto simplicia, quanto simplicia tanto vulgaria, quanto vulgaria tanto communia, quanto communia tanto naturalia, quanto naturalia tanto divina. Non puto cuiquam frivola et ridicula videri posse, si recogitet naturae maiestatem, ex qua censetur auctoritas animae. Quantum dederis magistrae, tantum adiudicabis discipulae. Magistra natura, anima discipula est. Quicquid aut illa edocuit aut ista perdidicit, a deo traditum est, magistro scilicet ipsius magistrae. Quid anima possit de principali institutore praesumere, in te est aestimare de ea quae in te est. Senti illam quae ut sentias efficit.
靈魂的這些見證,愈是真實就愈是質樸,愈是質樸就愈是通俗,愈是通俗就愈是普遍,愈是普遍就愈是自然,愈是自然就愈是屬神的。我不認為,凡思想自然之尊威者,會覺得這些見證是輕浮可笑的,因為靈魂的權威正是從自然而受評定。你賦予師傅多少,就必判給門徒多少。自然是師傅,靈魂是門徒。無論這一位所教導的,或那一位所學得的,皆是由神所傳授的,因祂正是師傅本身的師傅。靈魂能對那位首要的教導者有何預感,你可從你裡面的那靈魂來估量。當感知那使你能感知的一位。
These testimonies of the soul are as true as they are simple, as simple as they are common, as common as they are universal, as universal as they are natural, as natural as they are divine. I do not think they can seem frivolous or ridiculous to anyone who reflects upon the majesty of Nature, from which the soul derives its authority. As much as you grant to the mistress, so much will you adjudge to the pupil. Nature is the mistress, the soul her pupil. Whatever the one has taught or the other has learned has been handed down by God, who is of course the Master of the mistress herself. What the soul may be able to presage concerning its principal Instructor, it lies within you to estimate from that soul which is within you. Perceive her who brings it about that you perceive.
27:19
Recogita in praesagiis vatem, in ominibus augurem, in eventibus prospicem. Mirum, si a deo data novit homini divinare? Tam mirum, si eum, a quo data est, novit? Etiam circumventa ab adversario meminit sui auctoris et bonitatis et decreti eius et exitus sui et adversarii ipsius. Sic mirum, si a deo data eadem canit quae deus suis dedit nosse? Sed qui eiusmodi eruptiones animae non putavit doctrinam esse naturae et congenitae et ingenitae conscientiae tacita commissa, dicet potius diventilatis in vulgus opinionibus publicatarum litterarum usum iam et quasi vitium corroboratum taliter sermocinandi.
請思想那在預兆中的先知,在徵候中的占卜者,在事件中的預言者。人既從神領受了占卜的恩賜,這豈是奇事?他認識那賜恩者,這豈更是奇事?靈魂即使被那仇敵所包圍,仍記得它的創造者、祂的良善與祂的定旨,記得自己的結局,也記得那仇敵本身。那麼,由神所賜的靈魂,唱出神所賜給屬祂之人所當知的事,這豈是奇事?然而,凡不肯承認靈魂這類迸發乃是自然之教導、乃是與生俱來且非受生的良心之默然見證的人,反倒會說:這只是因著已公開流傳、其見解散播於眾人之間的著作,如今養成了、幾乎成了積習的如此言說之慣例罷了。
Consider the seer in his presages, the augur in his omens, the diviner in his forecasts of events. Is it a marvel that man, having received the gift from God, knows how to divine? Is it as great a marvel that he knows Him from whom the gift was given? Even when beset by the adversary, the soul remembers its Author, His goodness and His decree, its own end, and the adversary himself. Is it then a marvel that, given by God, it sings the very things which God has granted His own to know? But whoever has refused to regard such outbursts of the soul as the teaching of nature and the silent depositions of an inborn and unbegotten conscience, will rather say that it is the established habit—now grown almost into a vice—of speaking in this manner, arising from the use of published writings whose opinions have been scattered abroad among the common people.
27:20
Certe prior animas quam littera, et prior sermo quam liber, et prior sensu quam stilus et prior homo ipse quam philosophus et poeta. Numquid ergo credendum est ante litteraturam et divulgationem eius mutos ab huiusmodi pronuntiationibus homines vixisse? Nemo deum et bonitatem eius, nemo mortem, nemo inferos loquebatur? Mendicabat sermo, opinor, immo nec ullus esse poterat, cessantibus etiam tunc, sine quibus etiam hodie beatior et locupletior et prudentior non potest, si ea, quae tam facilia, tam assidua, tam proxima hodie sunt, in ipsis quodammodo labiis parta, retro non fuerunt, antequam litterae in saeculo germinassent, antequam Mercurius, opinor, natus fuisset.
靈魂必定先於文字,言語先於書卷,意念先於筆,人本身也先於哲學家與詩人。那麼,難道我們該相信,在文字及其傳播之前,人是啞的,說不出這類話語嗎?難道無人談論神與祂的良善,無人談論死亡,無人談論陰間?我想,言語必是行乞了,甚至根本不能存在,倘若連當時也缺了那些東西——就是那些即使今日缺了,人也不能更蒙福、更富足、更智慧的東西;倘若那些今日如此容易、如此不斷、如此近便、彷彿就生在唇邊的事物,在往昔並不存在,在文字尚未於世上萌芽之前,我想,在墨丘利尚未出生之前,都不存在的話。
Surely the soul is prior to the written word, and speech is prior to the book, and sense is prior to the pen, and man himself is prior to the philosopher and the poet. Must we then believe that before literature and its diffusion men lived mute, incapable of such utterances? Did no one speak of God and His goodness, no one of death, no one of the underworld? Speech, I suppose, went begging—nay, it could not even have existed—if, even then, those things were wanting without which even today one cannot be more blessed or richer or wiser; if those things which are today so easy, so constant, so ready at hand, born as it were upon the very lips, did not exist in former times, before letters had sprung up in the world, before Mercury, I suppose, had been born.
27:21
Et unde, oro, ipsis litteris contigit nosse et in usum loquelae disseminare quae nulla umquam mens conceperat aut lingua protulerat aut auris exceperat?
我且問,文字本身又是從何處得以認識,並在言語中傳播供眾人使用的呢——這些事物是任何心思從未構想過、任何舌頭從未說出過、任何耳朵從未聽聞過的呀?
And whence, I ask, did it fall to letters themselves to know, and to disseminate for common use in speech, those things which no mind had ever conceived, nor tongue uttered, nor ear received?
27:22
At enim cum divinae scripturae quae penes nos vel Iudaeos sunt, in quorum oleastro insiti sumus, multo saecularibus litteris vel modica tantum aetate aliqua antecedant, ut loco suo edocuimus ad fidem earum demonstrandam, et si haec eloquia de litteris usurpavit anima, utique de nostris credendum erit, non de vestris, quia potiora sunt ad instruendam animam priora quam posteriora, quae et ipsa a prioribus instrui sustinebant, cum, etsi de vestris instructam concedamus, ad originem tamen principalem traditio pertineat, nostrumque omnino sit quodcumque de nostris sumsisse et tradidisse contigit vobis. Quod cum ita sit, non multum refert, a deo formata sit animae conscientia an a litteris dei.
然而事實上,我們手中所存的、或猶太人手中所存的神聖經典(我們正是被接枝於他們的橄欖樹上),遠早於世俗的著作,或至少只以一小段年歲居先(正如我們已在適當之處,為證明其可信而說明過的);即或靈魂是從文字中借用了這些話語,我們也必當相信它是從我們的經典借來,而非從你們的著作,因為在教導靈魂上,較早的比較晚的更有力,而後者本身還須受前者教導。縱使我們承認它是受你們的著作所教,這傳統仍要追溯到那最初的本源;凡從我們這裡取來、又碰巧傳給你們的,皆全然屬於我們。既是如此,靈魂的良心是由神所塑造,抑或由神的文字所塑造,其間並無多大分別。
But in fact, since the divine Scriptures which are in our keeping—or in that of the Jews, upon whose olive tree we have been grafted—far antedate secular writings, or at least precede them by some little span of time (as we have shown in its own place in demonstrating their claim to belief), even if the soul has borrowed these utterances from written sources, we must certainly believe it borrowed them from ours, not from yours; for the earlier are more powerful to instruct the soul than the later, which themselves had to be instructed by the earlier. And even if we should grant that it was instructed from yours, still the tradition traces back to the original source, and whatever it has chanced to take from ours and hand on to you is altogether ours. Since this is so, it makes little difference whether the soul's conscience was formed by God or by the letters of God.
27:23
Quid igitur vis, homo, de humanis sententiis litterarum tuarum exisse haec in usus communis callositatem? VI Crede itaque tuis et de commentariis nostris tanto magis crede divinis, sed de animae ipsius arbitrio perinde crede naturae. Elige quam ex his fidem sororem observes veritatis. Si de tuis litteris dubitas, neque deus neque natura mentitur. Ut et naturae et deo credas, crede animae, ita fiet ut et tibi credis. Illa certe est quam tanti facis, quantum illa te facit, cuius es totus, quae tibi omnia est, sine qua nec vivere potes nec mori, propter quam deos neglegis. Cum enim times fieri Christianus, eam conveni. Cur cum alium colat, deum nominat?
人哪,你到底想要甚麼呢?想說這些事乃是從你們著作中的人為見解,進入了眾人言語那積成頑習的慣用嗎?那麼就信你自己的著作吧;但你更要信我們的記載,要信那屬神的記載;然而關乎靈魂本身的判斷,你也照樣要信自然。從這幾者中,揀選你所要持守的、真理之姊妹作你的信仰。你若疑惑自己的著作,神與自然都不說謊。為叫你既信自然又信神,你當信靈魂;如此你也就信了你自己。她確是你所看重的,正如她看重你;你全然屬乎她,她於你就是一切,沒有她你既不能活也不能死,你也為了她的緣故而輕忽眾神。因為當你懼怕作基督徒時,你且問問她。她既敬拜別的,為何卻稱那名為神呢?
What then do you want, O man? To have it that these things have passed into the hardened usage of common speech from the human opinions of your own writings? Believe your own writings then; but believe our records so much the more, believe the divine records; yet concerning the judgment of the soul itself, believe likewise Nature. Choose which of these you will keep as the sister of faith, the guardian of truth. If you doubt your own writings, neither God nor Nature lies. That you may believe both Nature and God, believe the soul; so it will come to pass that you also believe yourself. It is indeed she whom you value as much as she values you, whose you are wholly, who is everything to you, without whom you can neither live nor die, and for whose sake you neglect the gods. For when you fear to become a Christian, question her. Why, when she worships another, does she name God?
27:24
Cur cum maledicendo spiritus denotat, daemonia pronuntiat? Cur ad caelum contestatur et ad terram detestatur? Cur alibi servit, alibi vindicem convenit? Quid de mortuis iudicat? Quae verba habet Christianorum quos nec auditos visosque vult? Cur aut nobis dedit ea verba aut accepit a nobis? Cur aut docuit aut didicit? Suspectam habe convenientiam praedicationis in tanta disconvenientia conversationis. Vanus es, si huic linguae soli aut Graecae quae propinquae inter se habentur, reputabis eiusmodi, ut neges naturae universitatem. Non Latinis nec Argivis solis anima de caelo cadit.
她既以咒罵給諸靈打上烙印,為何又宣稱它們是鬼魔?她為何指天為證,又以詛咒把事付與地?她為何在此處事奉,卻在彼處召求伸冤者?她對死人作何判斷?她既不願聽見也不願看見基督徒,卻有甚麼基督徒的言語?她為何要麼把這些言語給了我們,要麼從我們領受?她為何要麼施教,要麼受學?在行為如此大相逕庭之際,這言語上的一致當被存疑。你若把這類話語僅算作屬於拉丁語,或屬於彼此被視為相近的希臘語,以致否認自然的普世性,你就是虛妄的。靈魂並非單為拉丁人或阿爾戈斯人才從天而降。
Why, when she brands the spirits by cursing, does she pronounce them demons? Why does she call heaven to witness and consign to earth by execration? Why does she serve in one place, yet in another summon an avenger? Why does she pass judgment upon the dead? What words of Christians has she, whom she wishes neither to have heard nor seen? Why has she either given us those words or received them from us? Why has she either taught or learned? Hold suspect this agreement of language amid so great a disagreement of conduct. You are vain if you would reckon such things peculiar to this tongue alone, or to Greek, which are held to be closely akin, so as to deny the universality of nature. It is not for Latins or Argives alone that the soul falls from heaven.
27:25
Omnium gentium unus homo, varium nomen est, una anima, varia vox, unus spiritus, varius sonus, propria cuique genti loquela, sed loquelae materia communis. Deus ubique et bonitas dei ubique, daemonium ubique et maledictio daemonii ubique, iudicii divini invocatio ubique et conscientia mortis ubique et testimonium ubique. Omnis anima suo iure proclamat quae nobis nec mutire conceditur. Merito igitur omnis anima et rea et testis est, in tantum et rea erroris in quantum et testis veritatis, et stabit ante aulas dei die iudicii nihil habens dicere.
就萬民而論,人本是一,其名卻各異;靈魂是一,其聲卻各異;心靈是一,其音卻各異。各民各有其言語,但言語的內容卻是共通的。神無處不在,神的良善也無處不在;鬼魔無處不在,鬼魔的咒詛也無處不在;對神之審判的呼求無處不在,對死亡的意識也無處不在,這見證更無處不在。凡靈魂憑其自有之權,都宣揚那些連我們也不被許可低聲說出的事。所以每一靈魂理當既是被告又是見證——它作真理見證有多深,作謬誤被告就有多深;到審判之日,它必無言可辯地站在神的殿庭之前。
Of all nations man is one, though his name is various; the soul is one, though its voice is various; the spirit is one, though its sound is various. Each nation has its own speech, but the matter of speech is common. God is everywhere, and the goodness of God everywhere; the demon everywhere, and the demon's curse everywhere; the invocation of divine judgment everywhere, and the consciousness of death everywhere, and the testimony everywhere. Every soul by its own right proclaims those things which we are not permitted so much as to mutter. Rightly therefore is every soul both defendant and witness—defendant of error in as far as it is witness of truth—and it shall stand before the courts of God on the day of judgment with nothing to say.
27:26
Deum praedicabas et non requirebas, daemonia abominabaris et illa adorabas, iudicium dei appellabas nec esse credebas, inferna supplicia praesumebas et non praecavebas, Christianum nomen sapiebas et persequebaris.
你曾宣揚神,卻不尋求祂;你曾憎惡鬼魔,卻又敬拜它們;你曾訴諸神的審判,卻不信有此審判;你曾料想陰間的刑罰,卻不加提防;你曾嘗到基督徒之名的滋味,卻又逼迫這名。
You proclaimed God and did not seek Him; you abhorred demons and yet adored them; you appealed to the judgment of God and did not believe it to be; you presumed the punishments of hell and did not guard against them; you had a savour of the Christian name and yet persecuted it.
← 第 26 章第 28 章 →
1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435