ℹ️ This corpus has no verse-level morphological tagging. Lemmas come mainly from word-level tagging of other books in the same language (not from this verse), falling back to dictionary form-matching for the rest. Rare homographs can still be misread; verify against the original and a specialist lexicon where precision matters.
ℹ️ The Chinese and English alongside are this site's own translation, made directly from the original text on this page (not the CUV or the WEB, which follow the Masoretic Text and a different textual tradition).
kindred, and whether through their bodies the fire is kindled, or the mixing-bowl is mixed, or the food is prepared? For to think that through each of these the soul of a man becomes a plant or an animal, yet that no marks are imprinted to show which is the plant or animal that came from a human and which is the one that came to be otherwise—he who is taken beforehand by such a supposition will be disposed alike toward all things: so that of necessity either he must behave harshly even toward the very humans living within nature, or, if by nature he inclines toward love of mankind in the case of his own kind, he must be similarly disposed toward every living thing, whether it happen to be among creeping things or among wild beasts;
What sort of life, then, is that of such a man—either cautious toward all things on account of their kinship, or even harsh toward humans on account of his indifference toward the rest? Therefore, from what has been said, such a doctrine would be cast aside, since many other considerations also lead us reasonably away from such a supposition.
For I have heard those who dogmatize such things say that certain nations of souls are set apart, living in a distinctive polity prior to life in a body, revolving along with the rotation of the universe by the subtle and easily-moved character of their nature; but that by a certain inclination toward evil the souls shed their feathers and come to be in a body;
first into human beings, then in this way, through the association of their passions with the irrational creatures, after entering into human life, they are made bestial, and from there they fall down to this natural and insensible life—so that what is by nature subtle and easily-moved, which is the soul, first becomes heavy and downward-tending, being lodged in human bodies through evil;
For if the soul is dragged down from the heavenly life through evil to the woody existence, and from this again runs back up through virtue to the heavenly, their argument is found to be at a loss as to which it considers preferable, whether the woody or the heavenly life.
and from there again runs back up to the incorporeal, nothing other than an undifferentiated confusion of evils and goods is implied by those who dogmatize these things.
nor will the trees be without a share in virtue, if indeed they suppose that from here the soul runs back to the good, but from there begins again upon evil.
For if the soul, revolving in heaven, becomes entangled with evil, and through this is dragged down to the material life, and again from here is pushed back up to the lofty mode of existence;
then the opposite is established by them: namely, that the material life is a purification from evil, while the unerring revolution becomes the originator and cause of evils for the souls—if indeed from here, having grown wings through virtue, they soar aloft, but from there, when their wings fall off through evil, they become earthbound and ground-creeping, being mingled with the grossness of material nature.
For if they say that the heavenly nature is unchangeable, how does passion have a place in the unchangeable? And if the nature below is subject to passion, how is impassibility achieved in what is passible? But they confound things unmixable and unite things that have nothing in common, beholding the unchangeable in passion, and again the impassible in the changeable.
for the soul which through evil they had banished, that very same soul they again resettle there out of the material realm, as into a secure and undefiled life—as though they had forgotten that it was from there that evil, welling up, caused it to be mingled with the nature below.
So then the disparagement of this present life and the praise of heavenly things are confounded with one another and inverted, the disparaged life leading, according to their opinion, to the good;
neither should we follow those who think that souls descend from female bodies to the manly life, and that conversely the souls separated from male bodies come to be in women, or who say that they pass from men to men, and that women come to be from women, as though such persons had aimed at the truth.
For the former argument was rejected not only because it is unstable and deceptive, turning round within itself toward contrary suppositions, but also because it is impious, dogmatizing that none of the things that exist is brought into being, and that evil supplies the beginning to the nature of each.
And somehow it comes about that both happen at the same time—that a human being grows from marriage, and that the soul's downfall coincides with the eager pursuit of marriage.
Is it then possible to say that spring, by being implanted into the upper revolution, produces evil, so that it happens at once both that the souls, being filled with evil, fall, and that the wombs of the irrational creatures conceive? And what would one say about the farmer who fixes the cuttings of plants into the earth? How does his hand bury the human soul along with the plant, with a shedding of wings running concurrently with the man's impulse toward planting? The same absurdity, then, applies also to the other of the two arguments—to the supposing that the soul busies itself about the unions of those living in conjugal pairs, or watches over the birth-pangs, in order that it may be smuggled into the bodies that are coming to be.
But if the man should renounce marriage, and the woman should free herself from the necessity of birth-pangs—will evil then not weigh down the soul? Therefore either marriage gives to the evil above the signal to act against the souls, or even apart from this the disposition toward the contrary lays hold of the soul.
Then, moreover, how will they suppose that the Divine presides over existing things through these processes, when they ascribe the beginnings of human life to this random and irrational falling-down of the souls? For it is wholly necessary that the things that come after the beginning be in harmony with the beginning.
And such men make the divine power's relation to existing things to be in vain—those who say that the things in the world come into being not by the divine will, but who trace the first principles of all that comes to be back to some evil concurrence, as though human life could not have been constituted unless evil had supplied life with its starting-impulse.
For all things will in every case lie at the mercy of whatever bears them along, and life will differ in no way from ships without ballast, carried by spontaneous chances—as if by certain waves—now toward one thing,
For how is it possible for a man to be outside that [evil], if he came to be through it? And how could there have arisen in man any deliberate impulse toward the life of virtue, if his nature, as they say, has its beginning from evil? For just as none of the irrational creatures attempts to utter human speech, but uses the voice native to it and according to its nature, and reckons it no loss to have no share in reason;
in the same way, those for whom evil is supposed to be the beginning and cause of life would never come to desire virtue, as being outside their nature.
Therefore by these things it is clearly demonstrated that evil is not older than life, nor did our nature take its first beginnings from there; rather, the wisdom of God, which administers all things, presides over the beginning of our life.
And when the soul has come into being in the manner pleasing to its Creator, then by its own authority it chooses, out of its power of free will, that which accords with its judgment—becoming whatever it wills.
For there might at some time come to be the unnatural in place of the natural—either when one voluntarily shuts his eye, or when he is deprived of sight by some affliction.
So too one may say of the soul, that its constitution is from God; and since no evil is conceived as belonging to the Deity, the soul is outside any necessity toward it;
but having come into being thus, it is led by its own judgment toward what seems good to it—either, by deliberate choice, closing its eye to the good, or, by the plotting of the war that dwells together with us in our life, having its eye harmed and living in the darkness of deception; or, on the contrary, looking purely toward the truth and coming to be far from the dark passions.
When, then, will one say the soul comes into being, and how? But the inquiry into how each thing has come to be must be set wholly outside the discussion.
For not even concerning things readily at hand for our understanding—of which we have apprehension through sense-perception—would it be possible for inquiring reason to comprehend how the visible thing came to subsist, so that even by inspired and holy men such a thing is not deemed comprehensible.
"For by faith," says the Apostle, "we understand that the ages were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were made out of things not visible";
But that by the divine will the age itself was framed, and all that has come to be in it (whatever this age may be, in which is contemplated all creation, visible and invisible)—this the Apostle says he has believed; but the how he left unexamined.
For I think such a thing is not attainable to those who search it out, since the inquiry concerning these matters sets many perplexities before us: how does the moved come from the stationary nature? how does the extended and composite come from the simple and undimensioned? Does it come from the very transcendent Essence itself? But [reason] does not concede that existing things are of a different kind from that [Essence]—rather [they must come] from somewhere else.
For our supposition would be split apart into different first principles, if anything were thought to be outside the creative Cause, from which the artful Wisdom gathers the materials for creation.
and since in either of the things supposed the absurdity is equal—both to suppose that creation comes from the nature of God, and to suppose that it comes from some other
or some material nature outside the divine essence will be set up over against God, made equal to Him in being unbegotten, by reason of the eternity of being.
In order, then, that we may best escape the absurdity on either side in our inquiry into existing things, following the Apostle's example, we shall leave uninvestigated the discussion of how each thing is, noting only this much in passing: that the impulse of the divine will, whenever it wills, becomes a deed, and the design is at once given substance, becoming nature; for the all-powerful authority does not leave its will without substance—whatever it wills wisely and skillfully.
the creation of intelligible things does not seem in any way to be out of tune with the nature of the incorporeal, but rather, by being near akin to it, shows itself to be formless, intangible, and undimensioned.
and this especially produces much perplexity for reason, which is unable to discern how the visible comes from the invisible, the solid and resistant from the intangible, the bounded from the unbounded, the thing in every way confined by measures contemplated in quantity from that which is without quantity and magnitude. And as to each of the things that are apprehended concerning bodily nature, of these we say only this much: that nothing of the things contemplated concerning body is in itself body—not shape, not color, not weight, not extension, not size, nor any other of the things contemplated as quality, but each of these is a concept;
Since, then, the qualities that complete the body are apprehended by mind and not by sense, and the Deity is intelligible, what difficulty is there in the intelligible One bringing the intelligible concepts into effect—those whose concurrence with one another has generated for us the nature of body?
But that souls come into being later, and are younger than the molding of bodies, no one of those who think soundly would suppose, since it is plain to all that nothing of the inanimate things has within itself a power of motion and growth.
And just as the earth, receiving from the husbandmen the slip taken from the root, made it a tree—not herself implanting the growth-power in the thing nourished, but only supplying to that which was set there the starting-points for growth;
so we say that the thing torn away from man for the planting of man is itself in a certain way a living being—animate from the animate, nourished from the nourished.
For neither is the grain in the seed at once, in visible appearance, an ear of corn (for how could so much be contained in so little?); but as the earth nurses it with suitable nourishment, the grain becomes an ear, not changing its nature in the casting, but manifesting itself and being perfected by the
after these things, bringing the gift of perception upon those who have come forth into the light; then so, like a kind of fruit, when the plant has now grown, moderately manifesting the rational power—not all at once and in a mass, but increasing together with the upward growth of the plant by a consequent advance.
Since, then, that which is torn from animate beings for the starting-point of the constitution of an animate being cannot be dead (for deadness comes about by privation of soul;
from these things we apprehend that the coming-into-being of the compound formed from both [soul and body] is common to it, neither this one taking precedence nor that one coming after;
And the cause why our nature too must at some point become stationary, we think to be this: that since all the intelligible nature stands fast in its own fullness, it is likely that the human race too should at some time come to its limit—for neither is this [race] alienated from the intelligible nature;
When, then, the human race attains to its proper fullness, this flowing motion of the nature will altogether come to a stand, having arrived at its necessary limit, and some other state succeeds the life that is now carried on in generation and corruption, a state separated from it.
Therefore the life after these things is shown by consequence to be a certain stable and indissoluble one, altered neither by generation nor by corruption.
{Gregory:} And when the Teacher had gone through these things—since to the many who sat by it seemed that the discourse had reached a fitting end—I, fearing that there would no longer be one to resolve for us the objections brought from outside concerning the resurrection, if the Teacher should suffer anything from her illness (which indeed also came to pass), said:
For the God-inspired Scripture says, according to both the new and the ancient teaching, that surely at some time, when our nature has run through its passing course by the motion of time in a certain order and sequence, this flowing onrush, advancing through the succession of those who are added on, will come to a stand; and, the completion of the whole no longer admitting of further increase, the entire fullness of souls will return again from the formless and scattered state to the compacted and visible state, the same elements running together again to one another according to the same sequence.
And such a state of life is, in the Scriptures of divine teaching, called resurrection—the whole motion of the elements being denoted together by [the term for] the raising up of that which is of earth.
{Macrina:} "What then," she says, "of these things has been left unmentioned in what has been said?" {Gregory:} "The very doctrine," I say, "of the resurrection."
{Gregory:} "For you do not know," I said, "how great a swarm of contradictions is brought against us by our opponents on account of this hope." And at the same time I attempted to set forth all that is devised by the contentious for the overthrow of the resurrection.
{Macrina:} And she said, "It seems to me that we ought first to run briefly over the things scattered through the divine Scripture concerning this doctrine, so that from there the finishing flourish may be set upon our discourse."
"I have heard, then, David hymning in his divine songs, when he had made the ordering of the universe the theme of his hymn, saying this at the end of the hymnody in the hundred and third psalm: 'You will take away their spirit, and they will fail, and to their dust they will return.
You will send forth Your Spirit, and they will be created, and You will renew the face of the earth.' He calls the power of the Spirit, which works all things in all, life-giving to those in whom it comes to be, and again withdrawing life from those from whom it departs.
Since, then, he says that by the withdrawal of the spirit comes the failing of the living, and by its presence comes the renewal of those who have failed, and in the order of the discourse the failing precedes the renewing;
But also from another place this same prophet says that the God of the universe, the Lord of all that is, has appeared to us for the establishing of the feast among those who keep the Feast of Tabernacles densely [adorned]—interpreting the Feast of Tabernacles by the word 'dense-covering,' which of old had been ordained by the tradition of Moses, the lawgiver, I think, prophetically foretelling the things to come;
but this true Feast of Tabernacles was not yet, but on this account, according to the prophetic word, the God and Lord of all manifested Himself to us, in order that the building-up [Tabernacle-pitching] of our dissolved dwelling might be constituted for human nature, being again densely covered bodily through the reuniting of the elements.
Which seems to me to proclaim beforehand by a riddle this: that one feast is constituted for the whole rational creation, the lesser dancing together with the higher in the assembly of good things.
For since in the figurative construction of the temple it was not permitted to all to come within the outer enclosure, but everything Gentile and foreign was excluded from the entrance, and again, of those who came inside, not all had equal access to the more inward passage, unless they had been purified by some cleaner manner of life and by certain sprinklings;
and again, even among these very ones, the inner temple was not accessible to all, but it was lawful only for the priests, according to the need of priestly service, to come within the veil; while the hidden and innermost sanctuary of the temple, in which the altar was set, adorned with certain projecting horns, was untrodden even by the priests themselves, except for the one set over the priesthood, who alone, once in the year on a certain appointed day, entered within, bringing a more secret and more mystical service;
since, then, there was so great a distinction concerning this temple—that it was a certain image and imitation of the intelligible order, bodily observance teaching this: that not all rational nature draws near to the temple of God, that is, to the confession of the great God;
And of those who have come within through confession, who are more honored than the rest, those who are first cleansed by sprinklings and purifications, and of these the ones already consecrated, have the greater part, so as to be deemed worthy of the inner initiation; and so one might bring the sense of the riddle to greater clarity.
and certain others, again, are contemplated even among these in a position of eminence, projecting in the likeness of horns; and others, around those, take precedence and follow in a certain order of sequence.
But since the after-partitions are destined at some time to be dissolved—those by which evil walled us off from the things within the veil—when our nature is once more pitched as a tabernacle through our resurrection, and all the corruption that has come to be through evil is made to vanish from among existing things, then the common feast around God will be constituted for those who through the resurrection have been densely covered [reclothed in body], so that one and the same gladness lies before all;
no longer any difference of equal participation cutting the rational nature in two, but those who are now outside on account of evil coming at some time to be within the sanctuary of the divine blessedness, and joining themselves to the horns of the altar—that is, to the eminent powers above the world.
Which indeed the Apostle says more nakedly, interpreting the harmony of the whole toward the good, that 'to Him every knee shall bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father';
by 'the horns' meaning the angelic and heavenly order, and by 'the rest' signifying the creation conceived as after those—namely, us—all of whom one harmonious feast shall hold fast.
"There are also," she says, "many other things of the holy Scripture that may be gathered for the establishing of the doctrine concerning the resurrection."
For Ezekiel too, by the prophetic Spirit, overleaping all the time in between and the interval contained in it, stands at the very moment of the resurrection, and by his foreknowing power brings before the eyes in narrative that which is to be, as though already beheld.