📜 Verbum
Scripture and the Fathers, read aloud in the original
♥ Support

← All books · Latin Fathers › Against the Pagans

Against the Pagans 2 part 4/5

Latin original · 39 verses · some words can be tapped for a gloss · long chapter, split into parts; this part covers 2:123–2:161 (185 verses in all)

← ch. 1ch. 3 →
← prev partnext part →
ℹ️ This corpus has no morphological tagging. Glosses are matched by word form against a dictionary — a match does not prove it is the same word (an inflected form can coincide with another word’s lemma). 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).
2:123
4. Nonne fieri potis est, ut exorti homines ita sint nec | f. 52b | ad deum primum nativitatis eorum referatur auctoritas? Quid enim putamus habuisse rationis Platonem illum magnum pie sancte que sapientem, cum hominis fictionem deo removit a maximo et ad minores nescio quos transtulit cumque eiusdem noluit sinceritatis esse mixturas humani animas generis, cuius animam fecerat universitatis istius, quam quod hominis fabricam indignam esse rebatur deo nec rei flaccidae fictionem magnitudini eius et eminentiae convenire? [Plat., Tim. 41 b-c] 53.1.
Is it not possible that men have arisen thus, and that the authorship of their birth is not to be referred to the supreme God? For what reason do we suppose that great Plato had, that piously, holily wise man, when he removed the fashioning of man from the supreme God and transferred it to certain lesser beings, and when he was unwilling that the souls of the human race should be of the same pure mixture as that of which he had made the soul of this universe—except that he thought the fabric of man unworthy of God, and that the fashioning of a flaccid thing did not befit his greatness and eminence?
難道人不可能就是這樣產生的,而其出生的來源並不歸於至高的神嗎?我們認為那位偉大的柏拉圖——那位虔敬、聖潔而有智慧的人——究竟出於什麼道理,竟把人的塑造從至高的神那裡挪開、轉交給某些較低微者,並且不願人類的靈魂與他先前用以造成這宇宙之靈的那同一純淨混合物相同——若非因為他認為人的構造不配於神,且認為造一個軟弱之物並不合乎祂的偉大與崇高呢?
2:124
Ergo cum haec ita sint, non absone neque inaniter credimus, mediae qualitatis esse animas hominum utpote ab rebus non principalibus editas, iuri subiectas mortis, parvarum et labilium virium: perpetuitate donari, si spem muneris tanti deum ad principem conferant, cui soli potestas est talia corruptione exclusa largiri. 2. ''Sed stulte istud credimus''. - Quid ad vos, si ineptissime, fatue? Ubi vobis nocemus vel quam vobis facimus aut inrogamus iniuriam, si omnipotentem confidimus deum habiturum esse rationem nostri, cum abire a corporibus coeperimus et ab Orci faucibus quemadmodum dicitur [Liv. IX,6] vindicari? 54.1. ''Ergone, inquiet aliquis, sine dei voluntate quicquam potis est fieri?''.
Therefore, since these things are so, it is not absurdly nor vainly that we believe the souls of men to be of a middle quality, as being brought forth from things not primal, subject to the law of death, of small and unstable powers: but that they are granted perpetuity, if they bring the hope of so great a gift to God the Sovereign, who alone has the power to bestow such things with corruption excluded. 'But we believe this foolishly.' —What is it to you, if most ineptly, foolishly? Where do we harm you, or what injury do we do or inflict upon you, if we trust that almighty God will have regard for us, when we begin to depart from our bodies and, as it is said, to be delivered from the jaws of Orcus? 'Then,' someone will say, 'can anything come to be without God's will?'
所以,既然這些事如此,我們相信人的靈魂是中等品質的,並非謬妄或空洞之見——因為它們是由非本原之物所生,服在死亡之律下,力量微小而易變:但若它們把如此大禮的盼望歸向至高的神——唯有祂有能力賜下這等排除了朽壞的恩賜——它們便得蒙賜予永存。「可是我們如此相信實在愚蠢。」——就算極其笨拙、愚昧,那與你們何干?若我們深信全能的神必顧念我們,好在我們開始離開身體、如俗語所說從冥府之口得蒙救拔之時眷顧我們,我們何處害了你們?又對你們施了、加了什麼冤屈?「那麼,」有人會說,「難道沒有神的旨意,任何事都不能發生嗎?」
2:125
- Considerandum est nobis sollicite et cura inspiciendum non parva, ne dum honorare nos deum tali interrogatione censemus, in contrarium labamur nefas maiestatis eius eminentiam destruentes. 2. ''Qua ratione, qua causa?''. - Quoniam si cuncta eius voluntate confiunt nec citra eius nutum | f. 53 | quicquam potest in rebus vel provenire vel cadere, necessario sequitur, ut mala etiam cuncta voluntate eius intellegantur enasci. 3. Sin autem dicere voluerimus contra, pessimorum ab eo reicientes causas, mali esse conscium generatoremque nullius, incipient evideri aut eo invito res pessimae fieri aut, quod sit immane dixisse, nesciente, ignaro ac nescio.
—We must consider carefully and examine with no little care, lest, while we think to honor God by such a question, we slip into the contrary impiety, destroying the eminence of his majesty. 'By what reasoning, by what cause?' —Because if all things are done by his will, and nothing can either come to pass or fall out in the world apart from his nod, it necessarily follows that all evils too are understood to arise by his will. But if, on the other hand, we should wish to say the contrary, rejecting from him the causes of the worst things, holding that he is conscious of no evil and the begetter of none, it will begin to appear either that the worst things come about against his will, or—which would be monstrous to have said—without his knowledge, in his ignorance and unawareness.
——我們必須謹慎斟酌、以不小的用心省察,免得我們自以為藉這樣的詰問來尊榮神,卻反而滑入相反的褻瀆,摧毀了祂威嚴的崇高。「依何道理、循何緣由?」——因為,若萬事都由祂的旨意成就,且離了祂的意旨,世上便無一事能發生或發落,那就必然隨之而來:連一切惡也都當被理解為由祂的旨意而生。但若我們反過來願意說,把最惡之事的緣由從祂身上除去、說祂不知任何惡、也不生任何惡,那就會開始顯明:最惡之事若非違背祂的意願而成,便是——說出來實在駭人——在祂不知、不曉、無覺之下發生。
2:126
Rursus autem si dicere nulla esse voluerimus mala, sicut esse nonnullis opinatum et placitum repperimus, reclamabunt cunctae gentes universaeque nationes, cruciatus nobis ostentantes suos et discriminum species multiformes, quibus puncta per singula genus uritur et laceratur humanum. 4. Tum deinde a nobis exquirent: ''Cur, mala si nulla sunt, ab operibus vos certis et facinoribus abstinetis? cur non omnia facitis quae inpatiens iusserit atque inperaverit libido? cur in noxios denique terribilibus poenas constituitis legibus? Nam stoliditas inveniri quae inmanior potest, quam mala esse nulla contendere et tamquam malos perdere et condemnare peccantis?''. 55.1.
But again, if we should wish to say that there are no evils—as we find has been opined and approved by some—all peoples and every nation will cry out against us, displaying to us their torments and the manifold kinds of dangers by which the human race is burned and torn at every single point. Then next they will demand of us: 'Why, if there are no evils, do you abstain from certain deeds and crimes? Why do you not do everything that impatient lust may order and command? Why, finally, do you appoint punishments for the guilty by terrible laws? For what greater stupidity can be found than to contend that there are no evils, and yet to destroy and condemn the wicked as wicked, and those who sin?'
再者,若我們願意說根本沒有惡——正如我們發現有些人如此主張並認可的——那麼萬民與各邦國都要向我們高聲抗議,向我們展示他們的苦楚與各樣多變的危難,人類無時無刻不因這些而被灼燒、被撕裂。接著他們便會詰問我們:「若沒有惡,你們為何戒絕某些行為與惡行?為何不去做那放縱之慾所吩咐、所命令的一切?又為何以可畏的法律為罪人定下刑罰?因為,還能找到比這更兇的愚蠢嗎——一面力辯根本沒有惡,一面卻把作惡者當作惡人來毀滅、定罪?」
2:127
Quae cum esse consenserimus victi et universa his scatere non inaniter adnuerimus humana, consequetur ut rogitent: ''Cur ergo haec mala deus omnipotens non aufert sed esse perpetitur et cum omnibus saeculis pertinaci continuatione procedere?''. 2. - Si intellectus nobis adfuerit dei regis ac principis nec per impias vagari suspicionum voluerimus insanias, respondeamus necesse est, nescire nos ista nec quae nullis possent | f. 53b | facultatibus comprehendi expetisse aliquando aut studuisse cognoscere:
And when, overcome, we shall have agreed that these evils exist, and shall have admitted not vainly that all human affairs teem with them, it will follow that they keep asking: 'Why then does almighty God not take away these evils, but suffers them to exist and to advance through all the ages in stubborn continuance?' —If the understanding of God the King and Sovereign is present with us, and we are unwilling to wander through the impious madnesses of suspicions, we must needs answer that we do not know these things, nor have we ever at any time sought or striven to know things which could be comprehended by no faculties:
當我們被駁倒、承認這些惡確實存在,並不空泛地認可人間萬事都充斥著它們時,隨之他們便會追問:「那麼全能的神為何不除去這些惡,反倒容它們存在、並頑固相續地歷經萬世而前行?」——若我們心中存有那作君王與至高者之神的悟性,且不願藉不敬的猜疑之狂亂而遊蕩,我們就必須回答:我們不知這些事,也從未追求或竭力去認識那些憑任何能力都無法測透之事:
2:128
meliusque ducetis, quinimmo potius magis in inscientiae finibus atque ignorantiae permanere quam nisi dei dicere nihil fieri per voluntatem, ut simul intellegatur et malis eum causas dare et miseriarum esse innumerabilium conditorem. 3. ''Mala ergo, dicetis, unde sunt haec omnia?''. ''Ex elementis'' inquiunt, ''et ex eorum inaequabilitate,'' sapientes: quod fieri qui possit ut quae sensum et iudicium non habent malitiosa esse perhibeantur et noxia aut non ille sit potius malitiosus et noxius, qui res pessimas et nocentissimas futuras in alicuius operis adsumpsit effectum, eorum est qui adserunt pervidere. 4. ''Quid ergo nos? unde?''. - Responsionis necessitas nulla est.
and you will hold it better—nay rather, better to remain within the bounds of unknowing and ignorance—than to say that nothing comes about except by God's will, so that it be understood at once both that he gives causes to evils and is the founder of innumerable miseries. 'Whence then,' you will say, 'come all these evils?' 'From the elements,' say the wise, 'and from their inequality': but how it can be that things which have neither sense nor judgment are declared to be malicious and harmful, or whether rather he is not malicious and harmful who took up into the effecting of some work the worst and most injurious things that were to be—that is for those to discern who make the assertion. 'What then of us? whence are we?' —There is no necessity of an answer.
你們反倒會認為更好——寧可存留在無知與蒙昧的界限之內,也勝過說「除了神的旨意什麼都不發生」,以致同時被理解為:祂既給惡以緣由,又是無數苦難的締造者。「那麼,」你們會說,「這一切惡從何而來?」智者們說:「從元素、並從元素的不均而來」:但那些沒有感知與判斷之物怎能被指為惡毒有害?抑或那把註定極惡、極其有害之物取來、用以成就某工者,豈不更是惡毒有害?——這要由那作此主張的人自去洞察。「那麼我們呢?我們從何而來?」——這並無回答的必要。
2:129
Sive enim possumus dicere, sive minus valemus nec possumus, utrumque apud nos parvum est; nec in magnis ponderibus ducimus vel ignorare istud vel scire, unum solum posuisse contenti, nihil a deo principe quod sit nocens atque exitiabile proficisci. Hoc tenemus, hoc novimus, in hac una consistimus cognitionis et scientiae veritate, nihil ab eo fieri nisi quod sit omnibus salutare, quod dulce, quod amoris et gaudii laetitiaeque plenissimum, quod infinitas habeat atque incorruptibiles voluptates, quod sibi quisque contingere votis omnibus expetat, forisque ab his esse exitiabile ac mortiferum ducat. 56.1.
For whether we can say it, or are less able and cannot, both are small matters to us; nor do we count it of great weight either to be ignorant of this or to know it, content to have laid down this one thing alone: that nothing which is harmful and destructive proceeds from God the Sovereign. This we hold, this we know, in this one truth of knowledge and science we take our stand: that nothing is done by him except what is salutary to all, what is sweet, what is most full of love and joy and gladness, what has infinite and incorruptible delights, what each one seeks to attain for himself with all his prayers, and reckons that outside of these lies what is destructive and death-bringing.
因為,無論我們能說、或無力而不能說,這兩者於我們都是小事;我們也不把「不知或知道此事」看得舉足輕重,只滿足於確立這唯一一點:凡有害且致命之物,斷不從至高的神而出。這是我們所持守、所認識的,我們就立足於這唯一的知識與真理之上:除了對眾人有益、甘甜、充滿愛與喜樂歡欣、含有無限而不朽之樂、人人以一切禱願所渴求得著、並認定在其之外便是致命與死亡之物者外,祂什麼都不作。
2:130
Caetera quaecumque sunt alia, quae in quaestionibus adsolent controversiisque versari, quibus genitoribus | f. 54 | orta sint vel quibus auctoribus fiant, neque nosse contendimus neque inquirere aut vestigare curamus: suis omnia relinquimus causis nec ad id quod expetimus esse nobis adiuncta atque adplicata iudicamus. 2. Quid est enim, quod humana ingenia labefactare, dissolvere studio contradictionis non audeant, quamvis illud quod infirmare moliuntur sit purum et liquidum et veritatis obsignatione munitum? Aut quid rursus adserere verisimilibus argumentis non queunt, quamvis sit apertissime falsum, quamvis evidens manifestumque mendacium?
As for all the other things which are wont to be dealt with in questions and controversies—from what begetters they arose or by what authors they come to be—we neither contend to know nor care to inquire or trace out: we leave all things to their own causes, and do not judge them to be joined and applied to that which we seek. For what is there that human wits do not dare to undermine and dissolve out of a zeal for contradiction, however pure and clear and fortified with the seal of truth may be that which they strive to weaken? Or what, again, can they not assert with plausible arguments, however plainly false it be, however evident and manifest a lie?
至於其餘一切通常在辯論與爭議中被討論之事——它們是由哪些生育者而起、或由哪些作者而成——我們既不力求知道,也不費心去探究或追蹤:我們把一切都留給它們各自的緣由,並不認為它們與我們所追求的有所關聯或相干。因為,出於好辯之熱衷,人的心智有什麼是不敢去動搖、瓦解的呢?縱使他們所竭力削弱的,是純淨、清澈、且以真理之印所護衛的?或者,他們又有什麼不能以貌似有理的論證來斷言呢?縱使那明明是虛假、是顯而易見、昭然若揭的謊言?
2:131
Cum enim sibi persuaserit quis, esse aliquid aut non esse, amat quod opinatur adserere et acumine alios anteire, maxime si agatur res submota et abdita et caligine involuta naturae. 3. Mundum quidam ex sapientibus aestimant neque esse natum neque ullo esse in tempore periturum; immortalem nonnulli, quamvis eum conscribant esse gnatum et genitum; tertiis vero conlibitum dicere est, et esse natum et genitum et ordinaria necessitate periturum. Et cum ex istis opinionibus trinis unam esse necesse sit veram, cunctis tamen argumenta non desunt quibus et sua decreta confirment et aliorum subripiant et labefaciant scita. 4.
For when someone has persuaded himself that something exists or does not exist, he loves to assert what he opines and to outstrip others in acumen, especially if the matter dealt with is remote and hidden and wrapped in the darkness of nature. Some of the wise reckon the world to be neither born nor destined to perish at any time; some call it immortal, although they write that it was born and begotten; to a third group it has pleased to say that it is both born and begotten and destined to perish by an ordinary necessity. And though of these three opinions one must necessarily be true, yet to all of them there is no lack of arguments by which they may both confirm their own tenets and undermine and shake the doctrines of others.
因為當一個人說服了自己:某物存在或不存在,他便愛去斷言自己所臆想的、並在敏銳上勝過他人,尤其當所論之事是隱僻、深藏、包裹在本性之幽暗中的。有些智者認為世界既非受生、也不會在任何時候毀滅;另有一些稱它不朽,雖然他們寫道它是受生、被造的;至於第三派,則喜歡說它既是受生、被造的,又會依尋常的必然而毀滅。這三種意見中必有一為真,然而每一派都不乏論證,可用以既確立自己的主張,又暗中削弱、動搖他人的定論。
2:132
Eundem hunc alii elementis ex quatuor tradunt et pronuntiant stare, ex geminis alii, ex singulis tertii, sunt qui ex his nullo set individua corpora eius esse materiem et primam originem dicant. Cumque ex his vera sit una sententia, at nulla ex his certa, similiter hic quoque argumenta omnibus praesto sunt, quibus | f. 54b | et ea quaedicunt vera esse constituant et redarguant positas in aliorum sententiis falsitates. 5. Sic et deos nonnulli esse abnegant prorsus dubitare se alii an sint uspiam dicunt; alii vero existere neque humana curare: immo alii perhibent et rebus interesse mortalium et terrenas administrare rationes. 57.1.
This same world others hand down and declare to stand composed of four elements, others of two, a third group of single ones; there are those who say that of these it consists of none, but that indivisible bodies are its material and first origin. And though of these one view is true, yet none of them is certain; similarly here too arguments are at hand for all, by which they may both establish that what they say is true and refute the falsehoods set down in the views of others. So too some deny outright that gods exist; others say that they doubt whether they are anywhere; others say that they exist but do not care for human things; nay, others declare that they both take part in the affairs of mortals and administer earthly matters.
這同一個世界,另有人傳講、斷言它是由四元素構成而立,另一些說由二元素,第三派說由單一元素;還有些人說它並非由這些構成,而是以不可分割之微體為其材質與最初起源。這些之中雖有一說為真,卻無一是確定的;同樣在此,論證也為眾人所現成,藉以既確立他們所說為真,又駁斥立於他人之見中的謬誤。如此,也有些人斷然否認有神;另一些說他們懷疑神是否存在於何處;又有一些說神雖存在卻不顧人間之事;甚而還有一些主張,神既參與凡人之事,又治理地上的事務。
2:133
Cum ergo haec ita sint neque aliter fiat, quin sit unum ex omnibus verum, pugnant tamen argumentis omnes, neque singulis deest id quod probabiliter dicant, sive cum suas res adserunt sive cum alienis opinionibus contradicunt. 2. Non alia neque absimili ratione de animarum ab his condicione disseritur. Hic enim eas retur et esse perpetuas et superesse mortalium functioni, superesse ille non credit, sed cum ipsis corporibus interire: alterius vero sententia est nihil eas continuo perpeti, sed post hominem positum aliquid eis ad vitam dari, mortalitatis deinde in iura succedere.
Since therefore these things are so, and it cannot be otherwise but that one out of them all is true, yet they all fight with arguments, nor does any of them lack what he may plausibly say, whether when they assert their own positions or when they contradict the opinions of others. In no other nor unlike manner is the condition of souls discussed by them. For this one thinks that they are both perpetual and survive the discharge of mortals; that one does not believe they survive, but that they perish together with the bodies themselves: while another's view is that they suffer nothing immediately, but that after the man is laid in death something is given to them for life, and that they then pass into the law of mortality.
既然這些事如此,且斷不能不是眾說之中必有一為真,然而他們卻都以論證相爭,每一派都不乏可貌似有理地陳說之辭,無論是在維護自己的立場、還是在反駁他人的意見時。關於靈魂之境況,這些人的討論方式也並無不同、並非兩樣。因為這一位認為靈魂既是永存的、又在凡人的死亡之後續存;那一位卻不信它們續存,反倒認為它們隨身體一同滅亡:又另一位的看法是,靈魂並非立即遭受任何事,而是在人被安葬之後,有某種東西賜給它們以維生,隨後它們便進入必死之律〔終將死亡〕。
2:134
Et cum omnia nequeant veri esse consortia, ita tamen fortibus et validissimis probationibus omnes agunt, ut repperire non possis quidnam tibi videatur falsum, quamvis ex omni parte diversa dici aspicias et rerum contrarietatibus dissonare. Quod utique non fieret, si certum aliquid tenere curiositas posset humana, vel quod videretur inventum, aliorum omnium comprobaretur adsensu. 3. Inanissima igitur res est et supervacui operis, tamquam scias aliquid promere, aut velle scire contendere quod, etsi sit verum, posse videas destrui, aut acceptare pro vero id quod forsitan non sit et ex more halucinantium | f. 55 | proferatur. Et merito res ita est.
And though all cannot be partakers of the truth, yet they all argue with such strong and most valid proofs that you cannot find out what would seem false to you, although you observe that things quite diverse are said on every side and are dissonant with the contrarieties of the matters. Which surely would not happen, if human curiosity could hold anything certain, or if what seemed discovered were approved by the assent of all others. It is therefore a most empty thing and of superfluous labor, to bring forth something as though you knew it, or to wish to contend that you know what—even if it be true—you can see may be demolished, or to accept as true that which perhaps is not so and is put forth after the manner of those who hallucinate. And rightly is it so.
雖然這一切不能都分有真理,然而他們都以如此有力而極其確鑿的論證來申辯,以致你無法找出在你看來哪一個是虛假的,儘管你看見各方所言彼此迥異、並因事理的相互矛盾而不諧。這斷不會發生,倘若人的求知能夠持守什麼確定之事,或倘若那看似被發現的能得到其餘所有人一致的認可。所以,這是最空洞、最徒勞之事:彷彿你知道某事似地把它端出,或執意想要知道那即使為真、你卻看得出可被推翻之事,或把那或許不真、且照那些幻覺者之慣例所提出之事當作真理來接受。而事情本當如此。
2:135
Non enim divina divinis sed rationibus pendimus et coniectamus humanis atque ut fieri meruisse quid remur, ita esse oportere contendimus. 58.1. Quid ergo? nos soli ignoramus, nescimus, quisnam sit animarum conditor, quisnam constitutor, quae causa hominem finxerit, mala unde proruperint, vel cur ea rex summus et esse patiatur et confici neque ab rebus propellat humanis? Vos enim horum quicquam exploratum habetis et cognitum? 2. Si suspicionum exponere volueritis audaciam, potestis explicare ac promere, mundus iste qui nos habet utrumne sit (in>genitus an tempore in aliquo constitutus? Si constitutus et factus est, quonam operis genere aut rei cuius ob causam? 3.
For we weigh and conjecture divine things not by divine but by human reasonings, and as we suppose a thing to have deserved to be done, so we contend it ought to be. What then? Are we alone ignorant, do we alone not know, who is the founder of souls, who their establisher, what cause fashioned man, whence evils burst forth, or why the supreme King both suffers them to be and to be wrought, and does not drive them from human affairs? Do you then have any of these things ascertained and known? If you are willing to display the boldness of your suspicions, can you explain and set forth whether this world which holds us is unborn or established at some time? If it was established and made, by what kind of work, or for the sake of what thing?
因為我們衡量、推測神聖之事,並非憑神聖的、而是憑人的理性;我們認為一事理當如何成就,就力主它理當如此。那又怎樣呢?難道唯獨我們不知、不曉:誰是眾靈魂的締造者、誰是它們的立定者,是什麼緣由塑造了人,惡從何處迸發,或至高的王為何既容它們存在、又容它們被行出,卻不把它們從人間驅逐?難道你們對這些事有任何已查明、已知曉的嗎?若你們願展示你們猜疑的膽量,你們能否解釋、道出:這容納我們的世界究竟是未受生的、還是在某個時候被造立的?若它是被造立、被造成的,那是以何種工藝、又是為了什麼緣故?
2:136
Potestis inducere atque expedire rationem, cur non fixus atque immobilis maneat sed orbito semper circumferatur in motus sua ipse se sponte et voluntate circumagat an virtutis alicuius inpulsionibus torqueatur? locus ipse ac spatium, in quo situs est ac volutatur, quid sit? infinitus, finitus, inanis an solidus? quis eum sustineat extremis cardinibus nitens an ipse se potius vi propria sufferat et spiritu interiore suspendat? 4.
Can you adduce and unfold the reason why it does not remain fixed and immovable, but is always carried round in orbit into motions—whether it turns itself round of its own accord and will, or is spun by the impulses of some power? What is the very place and space in which it is set and rolls—infinite, finite, empty, or solid? Who sustains it, resting on its outermost hinges, or does it rather uphold itself by its own force and suspend itself by an inner spirit?
你們能否引出並闡明其緣由:它為何不保持固定不動,反倒總在軌道上被旋轉而運行——它是憑自己的意願自行旋轉,還是被某種力量的推動所轉?它所處、所滾動於其中的那地方與空間本身,究竟是什麼?是無限、是有限、是虛空、還是實體?是誰支撐著它、憑其最外的樞軸〔兩極〕頂托著它,抑或它反倒憑自身之力自我承載、以內在之氣自我懸持?
2:137
Potestis interrogati planum facere scientissimeque monstrare, quid nivem in plumeas subaperiat crustulass quidnam fuerit rationis et causae, ut non ab occiduis partibus dies primus exsurgeret et lucem in oriente finiret quemadmodum sol ipse uno eodemque contactu tam varias res efficiat, quinimmo contrariass quid sit luna? | f. 55b | quid stellae? cur una specie aut illa non maneat, aut per somne mundi corpus frustilla haec ignea convenerit atque oportuerit figi? cur alia ex his parva, ampliora et maiora sint alia, obtunsi haec luminis, acutioris illa et fulgidae claritatis? 59.1.
Can you, when questioned, make plain and show most learnedly what opens snow into feathery flakes; what reason and cause there was that the day did not rise first from the western parts and end its light in the east; how the sun itself by one and the same contact produces things so various—nay, contrary; what the moon is; what the stars are; why the moon does not remain in one appearance, or why these fiery bits have come together throughout the whole body of the world and had to be fixed there; why some of them are small, others fuller and greater, these of dull light, those of sharper and gleaming brightness?
你們被詰問時,能否講明並極其博學地指出:是什麼把雪展開成羽狀的薄片;有什麼道理與緣由,使得白晝不從西方升起、不在東方結束其光;太陽本身為何以同一次接觸就產生如此紛雜、甚而相反之事;月亮是什麼?眾星是什麼?為何月亮不保持同一形貌,或為何這些火屑〔眾星〕聚合於整個世界之體、且必須被固定於其上?為何其中有些小、有些較大而更巨,這些光暗鈍、那些光更銳利而燦爛明亮?
2:138
Si praesto est quod libuerit scire et in aperto rerum est scientia constituta, edissertate nobis et dicite, quibus modis fiant et rationibus pluviae, ut in superis partibus atque in aeris hoc medio suspensa aqua teneatur, natura res labilis et ad fluorem semper decursionemque tam prona? 2. Edissertate, inquam, et dicite, quid sit quod grandinem torqueat, quod guttatim faciat pluviam labi, quod imbres ruat, nivis plumas et foliola dilatarit, ventus unde oriatur et quid sit, cur temporum vicissitudines institutae, cum statui unum posset et una esse species caeli, nihil ut rerum desideraret integritas? 3.
If what you please to know is at hand and the knowledge of things is set in the open, expound to us and tell by what modes and reasons rains come to be, so that in the upper parts and in this middle region of the air water is held suspended—a thing by nature slippery and always so prone to flowing and running down? Expound, I say, and tell what it is that whirls the hail, that makes the rain fall drop by drop, that pours down the showers, that spreads out the feathers and little leaves of snow; whence the wind arises and what it is; why the changes of the seasons were instituted, when one could have been established and there could be one appearance of the sky, so that the integrity of things would lack nothing?
若你們所樂於知道之事就在手邊、且對萬物的知識已擺在明處,那就請向我們詳述並道出:雨是以何種方式、循何緣由而生成,使得在上層、在空氣的這中段,水能被懸持——水本是易滑之物、且總是如此傾向流淌與奔落?我說,請詳述並道出:是什麼旋動冰雹,是什麼使雨一滴一滴地落下,是什麼傾瀉驟雨,是什麼把雪的羽片與小葉展開;風從何而起、又是什麼;為何要設立四季的更替,既然本可以只立定一種、天空只有一種形貌,而萬物的純全卻毫無欠缺?
2:139
quae est causa, quae ratio, ut maria salsa sint aut terrae aquarum hae dulces vel calidae , aliae sint amarae vel frigidae? quo ex materiae genere humanorum corporum concreta, et stabilita sunt viscera, unde ossa solidata, quid intestina, quid venas fistulatas et conmeabiles fecerit? cur cum esset utilius oculis nos inluminare conpluribus ad periculum caecitatis, duorum sumus angustiis adplicati? 4. beluarum et anguium tam infinita atque innumerabilia genera cuius rei sunt causa vel informata vel prodita? quid in mundo faciunt bubones inmussili buteones? quid alites et volucres ceterae? quid formicarum | f. 56 | et vermium genera in varias labes perniciesque nascentia?
What is the cause, what the reason, that the seas are salt, or that of the earth's waters these are sweet or warm, others bitter or cold? From what kind of matter were the inward parts of human bodies compacted and stabilized, whence were the bones solidified; what made the intestines, what the veins pipe-like and passable for passage? Why, when it would have been more useful to illuminate us with several eyes against the peril of blindness, are we confined to the narrowness of two? For the sake of what thing are the so infinite and innumerable kinds of beasts and serpents formed or brought forth? What do owls, screech-owls, and buzzards do in the world? What the other birds and fowls? What the kinds of ants and worms, born to various decays and destructions?
是什麼緣由、什麼道理,使海洋是鹹的,或使地上的水這些是甘甜或溫熱、另一些是苦澀或冰冷?人的身體之內臟是由哪一種材質凝結、堅立而成,骨頭從何堅固;是什麼造了腸子、造了那管狀而可通行的血管?既然多給我們幾隻眼睛、以防失明之險本更為有益,我們為何卻被侷限於僅兩隻之窄?野獸與蛇類如此無盡、無數的種類,是為了什麼緣故而被塑造或產出?貓頭鷹、鵂鶹、鵟鷹在世上有何用處?其餘的飛禽與鳥類呢?那些為著種種腐敗與禍害而生的螞蟻與蟲類,又有何用?
2:140
quid pulices, quid inpudentes muscae, araneae sorices mures scunguisugae tippulae? quid spinae, quid sentes, quid avenae, quid lolium, quid herbarum aut fruticum aut adolentia naribus aut tristia in odoribus semina? 5. Immo si aliquid sciri, comprehendi aut aliquid si posse censetis, quid sit triticum dicite, far hordeum milium cicer faba lenticula melo cuminum porrina ulpicum caepe. Non enim, si fructui vobis sunt et ciborum mediis in generibus constituta, expeditum aut promptum est quid sint singula scire, cur talibus figurata sint formis, fuerit necessitas aliqua, ut non alios sapores alios odores alios colores quam quos habent singulae res habere debuerint, an et alios potuerint sumere.
What of fleas, what of shameless flies, spiders, shrews, mice, leeches, water-spiders? What of thorns, what of brambles, what of wild oats, what of darnel, what of the seeds of herbs or shrubs, whether fragrant to the nostrils or foul in their odors? Nay, if you judge that something can be known, comprehended, or that anything is possible, say what wheat is, and spelt, barley, millet, chickpea, bean, lentil, melon, cumin, leek, garlic, onion. For if they are for your food and are set among the middling kinds of foods, it is not easy or ready to know what each of them is, why they were shaped in such forms, whether there was some necessity that individual things should have no other flavors, other odors, other colors than those they have, or whether they could also have taken others.
跳蚤呢?無恥的蒼蠅、蜘蛛、鼩鼱、老鼠、水蛭、水黽呢?荊棘呢?蒺藜、野燕麥、稗子呢?各樣草木的種子——無論是鼻中芬芳的、還是氣味難聞的——又如何?不僅如此,若你們認為有什麼可以被知道、被理解,或有什麼是可能的,那就請說出小麥是什麼,還有斯佩爾特小麥、大麥、粟、鷹嘴豆、蠶豆、扁豆、甜瓜、孜然、韭蔥、大蒜、洋蔥。因為,縱然它們作為你們的食物、被列於各樣中等的食品之中,要知道每一樣究竟是什麼、為何被塑成這樣的形態,卻並不容易或現成:是否曾有某種必然,使各物只能具有它們所有的、而非別的滋味、別的氣味、別的顏色,抑或它們本也能具有別樣?
2:141
6. Ipsa deinde haec quid sint, sapor dico [id est sapor] et cetera, qualitatum distantias quibus ex rationibus ducunt. ''Ex elementis, inquitis, et ex principalibus originibus rerum''. - Amara sunt enim elementa vel dulcia, odoris sunt alicuius, alicuius coloris, ut ex eorum concretione credamus partitas esse in nascentibus qualitates quibus aut suavitas nascitur aut sensibus offensio comparatur. 60.1.
Then again, what these very things are — taste, I mean, and the rest — the differences of qualities: from what causes do they derive them? 'From the elements,' you say, 'and from the primary origins of things.' For the elements are bitter or sweet, they have some odor, some color, so that from their combining we may believe that in things being born the qualities are apportioned by which either sweetness arises or offense is produced for the senses.
其次,這些東西本身究竟是什麼——我是說味道以及其餘一切——各種性質的差異,你們是根據什麼道理推導出來的?你們說:「出於元素,出於萬物的原初本源。」因為元素或苦或甜,帶有某種氣味、某種顏色,於是我們便相信:由於它們的結合,在生成之物中分配了各種性質,由此或生出甘美,或給感官帶來不快。
2:142
Cum igitur et vos ipsos tantarum ac tot rerum fugiant origines, fugiant causae, fugiant rationes, neque dicere neque explanare possitis, quid sit factum aut quare, aut cur oportuerit non esse, verecundiam convellitis et dilaceratis nostram, qui quae nequeunt sciri nescire nos confitemur neque ea conquirere | f. 56b | aut investigare curamus quae comprehendi liquidissimum est non posse, quamvis mille per corda suspicio se porrigat atque intendat humana. 2.
Since, then, the origins of so many and so great things escape even you yourselves, the causes escape you, the reasons escape you, and you can neither state nor explain what was done, or why, or why it ought not to be — you tear apart and rend our modesty, we who confess that we do not know the things which cannot be known, nor do we care to seek out or investigate those matters which it is most plain cannot be comprehended, however much human conjecture may reach out and strain through a thousand hearts.
既然如此眾多、如此宏大之事的起源連你們自己也不得而知,其緣由不得而知,其道理不得而知,你們既說不出也解釋不了何事發生、為何發生、又為何本不當存在——你們卻來撕扯、詆毀我們的謙遜。我們坦承:凡不可知之事,我們便承認自己無知,也不去探求或考究那些顯然無法被領會之事,儘管人的臆測會透過千萬人的心靈伸展並竭力揣度。
2:143
Et ideo Christus licet [in] vobis invitis deus, deus, inquam, Christus - hoc enim saepe dicendum est, ut infidelium dissiliat et dirumpatur auditus - dei principis iussione loquens sub hominis forma, cum mortalium sciret caecam esse naturam neque ullam posse comprehendere veritatem positarum nec ante oculos rerum, pro comperto habere et cognito quidquid sibi esse suasisset nec pro suis suspicionibus haesitare litigiosas serere atque intendere quaestiones, 3.
And therefore Christ — though you are unwilling, a god; a god, I say, is Christ (for this must often be said, that the hearing of the unbelievers may burst and be shattered) — speaking under the form of a man at the command of God the sovereign, since he knew the nature of mortals to be blind and unable to grasp any truth even of things set before their eyes, [taught us] not to hold as ascertained and known whatever one has persuaded oneself to be so, nor to hesitate over one's own conjectures by sowing and pressing contentious inquiries,
因此,基督——縱使你們不願,祂仍是神;我說,基督是神(這話必須常說,好叫不信者的耳朵爆裂崩解)——祂奉至高之神的命令,以人的形象說話。祂既知世人的本性盲昧,連擺在眼前之物的真相也無法領會,便教導我們:不要把自己所說服自己相信的一切當作已然確知;也不要執著於自己的臆測,去播弄並強逼那些爭辯不休的問題,
2:144
omnia ista nos linquere et posthabere praecepit neque in res eas quae sint a nostra procul cognitione dimotae infructuosas inmittere cogitationes, sed, quantum fieri potis est, ad dominum rerum tota mente atque animo proficisci, sustolli ab his locis atque in eum traducere suspensas pectoris conversiones, memoriam eius habere perpetuam et licet nulla possit imaginatione formari, auras tamen nescio quas eius sibi contemplationis adfingere: 4.
He commanded us to leave all these things aside and set them behind us, and not to cast fruitless thoughts into matters removed far from our knowledge, but, as far as is possible, to set out with our whole mind and soul toward the Lord of all things, to be lifted up from these places, and to carry over to him the yearning stirrings of the heart, to hold perpetual memory of him, and — though he can be shaped by no imagining — yet to fashion for ourselves some faint breaths, as it were, of his contemplation:
祂吩咐我們撇下這一切、將之置於次要,不要把徒勞的思慮投入那些遠離我們認知的事物,而是要盡其所能,以全部的心思與靈魂朝向萬物之主前進;要從這塵世之地被提升,把心中懸切的嚮往轉向祂,永遠銘記祂;縱然祂無法被任何想像所描摹,我們仍要為自己揣摩出對祂默觀的、彷彿某種難以名狀的氣息:
2:145
rebus enim ex omnibus, quas augustae continet divinitatis obscuritas, solum esse indubitabilem, solum verum et de quo nullus ambigere nisi amens possit et desperationis insanae, quem satis sit scire ut nihil aliud noveris, sisque veram et maximam scientiam consecutus in dei rerum capitis et cognitione defixus. 61.1. '' Quid est , inquit, vobis investigare, conquirere, quisnam hominem fecerit, animarum origo quae sit, quis malorum | f. 57 | excogitaverit causas, orbe sit sol amplior an pedis unius latitudine metiatur, alieno ex lumine an propriis luceat fulgoribus luna? Quae neque scire compendium neque ignorare detrimentum est ullum. 2.
For of all the things which the obscurity of august divinity contains, he alone is beyond doubt, he alone is true, and one about whom none but a madman lost in insane despair could waver; whom it is enough to know so that you may know nothing else, and you will have attained true and supreme knowledge, fixed in the knowledge of God the head of all things. 'What good is it to you,' he says, 'to investigate and search out who made man, what is the origin of souls, who devised the causes of evils, whether the sun is larger than the earth or measures but a single foot in breadth, whether the moon shines by another's light or by her own radiance? To know these things is no gain, and to be ignorant of them no loss.'
因為在莊嚴神性的幽晦所含的一切之中,唯有祂是無可置疑的,唯有祂是真實的,除了瘋狂絕望的癲者,無人能對祂有所疑惑;只要認識祂便已足夠,縱使你別無所知,也已獲得真實而至高的知識,牢牢立足於對萬物之首、神的認識。他說:「你們去探究、去追問是誰造了人、靈魂的起源為何、是誰設計了諸惡的緣由、太陽是比大地更大還是只有一尺之寬、月亮是藉他物之光還是憑自身的光輝發亮——這對你們有什麼好處?知道這些既無益處,不知道也毫無損失。」
2:146
Remittite haec deo atque ipsum scire concedite, quid quare aut unde sit, debuerit esse aut non esse, supernatum sit aliquid an ortus primigenios habeat, aboleri conveniat an reservari, exuri, dissolvi an repetita integritate renovari. Vestris non est rationibus liberum inplicare vos talibus et tam remota in utilitate curare? 3. Res vestra in ancipiti sita est, salus dico animarum vestrarum, et nisi vos adplicatis dei principis notioni, a corporalibus vinculis exsolutos expectat mors saeva, non repentinam adferens extinctionem sed per tractum temporis cruciabilis poenae acerbitate consumens''. 62.1.
Leave these matters to God, and grant that he himself knows what a thing is, why and whence, whether it ought to be or not to be, whether something was born from on high or has original beginnings, whether it is fitting to be abolished or preserved, to be burned up, dissolved, or renewed with recovered wholeness. Is it not open to your reason to entangle yourselves in such things and to trouble yourselves over so remote a benefit? Your case stands in the balance — I mean the salvation of your souls; and unless you apply yourselves to the knowledge of God the sovereign, once loosed from bodily chains a savage death awaits you, bringing not sudden extinction but consuming you through a stretch of time by the bitterness of tormenting punishment.
把這些事交給神,容許祂自己去知道:某物是什麼、為何如此、從何而來,本當存在還是不當存在,是從上而生還是有其原初的開端,是宜於消滅還是宜於保存,是被焚燒、被消解,還是恢復完整而得更新。難道你們的理性可以隨意糾纏於這類事、去操心如此遙不可及的益處嗎?你們的處境正懸於危殆之中——我是指你們靈魂的救恩;除非你們專注於對至高之神的認識,否則一旦脫離肉體的枷鎖,就有兇殘的死亡在等著你們,它帶來的不是瞬間的消滅,而是經年累月、以折磨之刑的苦楚將你們慢慢吞噬。
2:147
Neque illud obrepat aut spe vobis aeria blandiatur, quod ab sciolis nonnullis et plurimum sibi adrogantibus dicitur, deo esse se gnatos nec fati obnoxios legibus, si vitam restrictius egerint, aulam sibi eius patere, ac post hominis functionem prohibente se nullo tamquam in sedem referri patritam; neque quod magi spondent, commendaticias habere se preces quibus emollitae nescio quae potestates vias faciles praebeant ad caelum contendentibus subvolare, neque quod Etruria libris in Acheronticis pollicentur, certorum animalium sanguine numinibus certis dato divinas animas fieri et ab legibus mortalitatis educi. 2. Blandimenta haec cassa sunt et inanium fomenta votorum. Servare | f.
Nor let this creep upon you or flatter you with airy hope — what is said by certain smatterers who arrogate very much to themselves: that they are born of God and not subject to the laws of fate, that if they have lived a more restrained life his court lies open to them, and that after the man's discharge, with none forbidding, they are brought back as it were to their ancestral seat; nor what the Magi promise, that they possess commendatory prayers by which certain powers, once softened, offer easy roads to those striving to fly up to heaven; nor what Etruria promises in the books of Acheron, that by the blood of certain animals given to certain deities souls are made divine and led out from the laws of mortality. These are empty allurements and fomentations of vain wishes. To save
也不要讓這種說法悄悄潛入、以虛幻的希望諂媚你們——那是某些自命不凡、極度自負的一知半解者所言:他們是神所生的,不受命運律法的約束,倘若他們生活得較為節制,神的宮廷便向他們敞開;人一旦卸下肉身,無人攔阻,他們便彷彿被領回祖先的居所;也不要相信術士所許諾的,說他們握有薦引的禱詞,藉此使某些權能得以軟化,為奮力向天飛升者提供坦途;更不要相信伊特魯里亞人在《阿刻戎之書》中所應許的,說把某些動物的血獻給某些神明,靈魂便可成神,脫離必死的律法。這些不過是空洞的誘惑、虛妄願望的溫床。要拯救
2:148
57b | animas alius nisi deus omnipotens non potest, nec praeterea quisquam est qui longaevas facere, perpetuitatis possit et spiritum subrogare, nisi qui immortalis et perpetuus solus est et nullius temporis circumscriptione finitus. 3. Cum enim dii omnes, vel quicumque sunt veri vel qui esse rumore atque opinione dicuntur, immortales et perpetui voluntate eius sint et beneficii munere, qui fieri potis est, ut alii praestare id quod ipsi sunt valeant, cum alienum id habeant et maioris potentia commodatum? 4. Caedant licet hostias quantaslibet Etruria, humana sibi omnia sapientes negent, magi cunctas emolliant et commulceant potestates:
souls, none can save them save God almighty, nor is there besides anyone who could make them long-lived and confer a spirit of perpetuity, except him who alone is immortal and everlasting and bounded by no limitation of time. For since all the gods — whether those that are truly such, or those said to exist by rumor and opinion — are immortal and everlasting by his will and by the gift of his beneficence, how is it possible that others should be able to bestow what they themselves are, when they hold it as another's and lent by the power of a greater? Though Etruria may slay ever so many victims, though the wise may deny themselves all that is human, though the Magi may soften and soothe all the powers:
靈魂,除了全能的神,無人能拯救;此外也沒有任何一位能使靈魂長存、能賜予永恆之靈——除非是那位唯獨不朽、永存、不受任何時間界限所束縛者。因為既然一切神明——無論是真正存在的,還是憑傳聞與臆想被說成存在的——都是憑祂的意志、憑祂恩惠的賞賜才得以不朽永存,那麼別的神又怎可能有力量賜予他們自己本身所是之物呢?既然那對他們而言乃是外來之物,是憑更大者的權能借予的。縱使伊特魯里亞人宰殺再多的祭牲,縱使智者摒絕一切屬人之物,縱使術士軟化並撫慰一切權能:
2:149
nisi ab domino rerum datum fuerit animis id quod ratio postulat idque per mandatum, multum postea paenitebit fuisse inrisui, cum ad sensum coeperit interitionis accedi. 63.1. ''Sed si, inquiunt, Christus in hoc missus a Deo est, ut infelices animas ab interitionis exitio liberaret, quid saecula commeruerunt priora, quae ante ipsius adventum mortalitatis condicione consumpta sunt?''. - Potestis enim scire, quid sit cum eis animis actum priscorum veterrimorum que mortalium, subventum et his an sit ratione aliqua, consultum atque provisum? 2.
unless there be granted to souls by the Lord of all things that which reason requires, and that by his command, one will afterward greatly regret having been a mocker, when one begins to draw near to the perception of destruction. 'But if,' they say, 'Christ was sent by God for this, to free unhappy souls from the ruin of destruction, what did the earlier ages deserve, which before his coming were consumed under the condition of mortality?' — For can you know what was done with those souls of the ancient and most ancient mortals, whether they too were succored by some means, provided for and foreseen?
除非萬物之主、藉祂的命令,把理性所要求的賜給靈魂,否則日後當人開始逼近對毀滅的感知時,必會為自己曾是譏誚者而深深懊悔。他們說:「可是,如果基督受神差遣正是為了把不幸的靈魂從毀滅的沉淪中釋放出來,那麼在祂降臨之前、在必死之境中消逝的先前世代,究竟犯了什麼過而該當如此呢?」——你們豈能知道那些古代乃至極古的世人,他們的靈魂遭遇了什麼?他們是否也藉某種方式得了拯救、蒙了照顧與預備呢?
2:150
Potestis, inquam, scire id quod Christo potuit docente cognosci, infinita an finita sint saecula ex quo in terris esse genus hominum coepit, quando primum animae corporibus inligatae, quis auctor vinctionis istius, quinimmo ipsius quisnam hominis fabricator, quo priorum abscesserint animae, quibus in mundi partibus | f. 58 | aut regionibus fuerint, corruptibiles an contra, potuerintne accedere ad periculum moriendi , nisi tempore necessario conservator occurrisset Christus? 3. Exponite has curas et incognitas vobis relinquite quaestiones: miseratio et illis impertita est regia et aequaliter per omnes divina beneficia cucurrerunt:
Can you, I say, know that which could be learned only by Christ's teaching — whether the ages are infinite or finite since the human race began to be on earth, when souls were first bound to bodies, who was the author of that binding, nay rather who was the fashioner of man himself, whither the souls of those earlier ones departed, in what parts or regions of the world they were, whether corruptible or the contrary, whether they could have come to the peril of dying, had not Christ the preserver come at the necessary time? Set aside these cares and leave these questions unknown to you: the royal compassion was imparted to them also, and the divine benefits ran equally through all:
我說,你們豈能知道那唯有藉基督教導才能得知之事——自人類在地上開始存在以來,這些世代是無限的還是有限的;靈魂最初何時被繫於肉體;那繫縛的作者是誰,甚而人本身的造作者又是誰;先前那些人的靈魂去了何處,曾在世界的哪些部分或區域,是可朽壞的還是相反的;倘若保存者基督未在必要之時來到,它們是否本會陷入死亡的危險?把這些憂慮擱下,讓這些問題留作你們的未知:君王般的憐憫也施予了他們,神聖的恩惠平等地流遍眾人:
2:151
conservatae sunt, liberatae sunt et mortalitatis sortem condicionem que posuerunt. ''Quo genere, quae, quando?''. - Si adrogantia, si typhus, si elatio abesset a vobis, iamdudum haeG scire Christo potuistis auctore. 64.1. ''Sed si generis Christus humani, ut inquitis, conservator advenit, quor omnino non omnes aequali munificentia liberat?''. - Non aequaliter liberat qui aequaliter omnes vocat? aut ab indulgentia principali quemquam repellit aut despuit, qui sublimibus infimis servis feminis pueris uniformiter potestatem veniendi ad se facit? ''Patet, inquit, omnibus fons vitae neque ab iure potandi quisquam prohibetur aut pellitur''. 2.
they were preserved, they were freed, and they laid aside the lot and condition of mortality. 'By what means, which souls, and when?' — If arrogance, if pride, if haughtiness were absent from you, you could long ago have learned these things with Christ as your teacher. 'But if Christ, as you say, came as the preserver of the human race, why does he not free all with equal munificence?' — Does he not free all equally who calls all equally? Or does he repel or spurn anyone from his sovereign indulgence, who grants uniformly to the high and the low, to slaves, women, and children, the power of coming to him? 'The fountain of life,' he says, 'lies open to all, and no one is forbidden or driven from the right of drinking.'
他們被保存了,被釋放了,卸下了必死的命運與處境。「藉何方式?哪些靈魂?何時?」——倘若傲慢、自負、自高遠離你們,你們早就能以基督為師學得這些了。「可是,如你們所說,基督既是為拯救人類而來,為何不以同等的慷慨釋放所有人呢?」——那以同等呼召萬人的,豈不是同等地釋放萬人嗎?那對尊貴者與卑微者、對奴僕、婦女、孩童都一律賜予到祂面前來之權能的,豈會把任何人從祂君王般的恩寵中推開或唾棄嗎?他說:「生命的泉源向所有人敞開,無人被禁止或被逐出暢飲的權利。」
2:152
- Si tibi fastidium tantum est, ut oblati respuas beneficium muneris, quinimmo si tantum sapientia praevales, ut ea quae offeruntur a Christo ludum atque ineptias nomines, quid invitans expectat, cuius solae sunt hae partes, ut sub tui iuris arbitrio fructum suae benignitatis exponat? ''Sortem vitae eligendi nulli est, inquit Plato [Plato, rep. 617 e], deus causa, neque alterius voluntas adscribi potest cuiquam recte, cum voluntatis libertas in ipsius sit posita potestate qui voluit''. 3. An numquid orandus es, ut beneficium salutis ab deo digneris accipere, | f. 58b | et tibi aspernanti fugientique longissime infundenda in gremium est divinae benivolentiae gratia?
— If you have such disdain that you spurn the benefit of the gift offered, nay rather if you so prevail in wisdom that you call the things offered by Christ a game and follies, why does he who invites you wait — he whose sole part is this, that he sets forth the fruit of his kindness under the judgment of your own free choice? 'For of the choosing of one's lot of life,' says Plato, 'God is not the cause, nor can another's will rightly be ascribed to anyone, since freedom of will lies placed in the power of the one who has willed.' Must you then be entreated to deign to receive the benefit of salvation from God, and, while you scorn and flee far away, must the grace of divine benevolence be poured into your bosom?
——倘若你如此嫌棄,竟拒斥所賜恩惠的好處;甚或你自以為智慧超群,竟把基督所賜之物稱作兒戲與愚妄,那麼那位發出邀請者又何必等待呢?祂唯一的本分不過是:把祂良善的果實置於你自己自由抉擇的判斷之下。柏拉圖說:「人選擇何種人生際遇,神並非緣由,別人的意志也不能被正當地歸諸任何人,因為意志的自由乃在於那立意者自身的權柄之中。」難道還要人懇求你,你才肯屈尊從神領受救恩的恩惠?難道當你輕蔑地逃遁得遠遠時,神慈愛的恩典還要被傾注進你的懷中?
2:153
Vis sumere quod offertur atque in tuos usus convertere? consulueris tu tibi. 4. Aspernaris, contemnis et despicis? tu te muneris commoditate privaveris. Nulli deus infert necessitatem, imperiosa formidine nullum terret. Neque enim necessaria nostra illi salus est, ut conpendii aliquid dispendiive patiatur, si aut deos nos fecerit aut ad nihilum redigi corruptionis dissolutione permiserit. 65.1. ''Immo, inquit, si deus est potens misericors conservator, convertat nobis mentes et invitos faciat suis pollicitationibus credere''. - Vis ergo est ista, non gratia nec dei liberalitas principis, sed ad vincendi studium puerilis atque vani animi contentio. 2.
Do you wish to take what is offered and turn it to your own uses? You will have consulted your own good. Do you scorn, despise, and look down on it? You will have deprived yourself of the advantage of the gift. God imposes necessity on none, terrifies none with imperious dread. For our salvation is not a necessity to him, that he should suffer any gain or loss whether he make us gods or permit us to be reduced to nothing by the dissolution of corruption. 'Nay,' he says, 'if God is a powerful and merciful preserver, let him convert our minds and make us believe his promises even against our will.' — That is force, then, not grace, nor the liberality of God the sovereign, but the wrangling of a childish and empty spirit bent on winning.
你願意領受所賜之物、轉為己用嗎?那你便是為自己謀了益處。你輕蔑、鄙視、藐視它嗎?那你便是剝奪了自己享用此恩的好處。神不強加任何人以必然,不以威嚇的恐懼恫嚇任何人。因為我們的救恩對祂並非必需之事,無論祂使我們成神,還是任憑我們因朽壞的消解而歸於烏有,祂都無所謂得失。他說:「不然,若神是有能且仁慈的保存者,就讓祂轉變我們的心思,違背我們的意願也要使我們相信祂的應許。」——那便是強迫了,不是恩典,也不是至高之神的慷慨,而是一個幼稚而空虛、一心求勝之靈的爭辯。
2:154
Quid est enim tam iniustum, quam repugnantibus, quam invitis extorquere in contrarium voluntates, inculcare quod nolint et quo refugiant animis, prius nocere quam prosis et priore detracto in alienum habitum sententiamque traducere? 3. Tu qui te verti et vim desideras perpeti, ut id quod nolis efficias atque arripias coactus, cur respuis adsumere voluntate id quod versus desideras atque immutatus efficere? ''Nolo, inquit, et voluntatem non habeo''. - Quid ergo criminaris deum tamquam tibi desit opem desideranti ferre? cuius dona et munera non tantum asperneris et fugias, verum inania verba cognomines et iocularibus facetiis prosequaris. 4.
For what is so unjust as to wrench the wills of the resisting, of the unwilling, into their contrary — to force upon them what they do not want and from which their minds shrink, to harm before you help, and, the former will being taken away, to carry them over into an alien disposition and opinion? You who desire to be turned and to undergo force, so that you may accomplish and seize by compulsion what you do not want — why do you refuse to take up willingly that which, once turned, you desire, and once changed, to accomplish? 'I do not want to,' he says, 'and I have no will for it.' — Why, then, do you accuse God, as though he failed to bring aid to you desiring it — you whose gifts and bounties you not only scorn and flee, but even call empty words and pursue with mocking jests?
還有什麼比這更不公義的呢:把抗拒者、不情願者的意志扭轉到相反的方向,強塞給他們所不願、其心所躲避之物,在幫助之前先造成傷害,並且奪去原先的意志,把他們帶入一種陌生的心境與見解?你既渴望被扭轉、渴望承受強力,好讓自己被迫去完成、去攫取你所不願之事,那你為何拒絕甘心領受那——一旦被轉變便會渴望、一旦被改變便會去完成之事?他說:「我不願,我沒有這意願。」——那你又為何控告神,彷彿祂沒有向渴求援助的你施予幫助?何況祂的恩賜與賞賜,你非但輕蔑逃避,甚至還稱之為空話,以嘲弄的戲謔相待。
2:155
''Christianus ergo ni fuero, spem salutis habere | f. 59 | non potero?''. - Ita est, ut ipse proponis. Partes enim salutis dandae conferendi que animis quod tribui convenit necessariumque est adplicari, solus ab deo patre iniunctum habet et traditum, ita se habentibus semotis atque interioribus causis. Ut enim dii certi certas apud vos habent tutelas licentias potestates neque eorum ab aliquo id quod eius non sit potestatis ac licentiae postulatis, ita unius pontificium Christi est dare animis salutem et spiritum perpetuitatis adponere. 5.
'If, then, I shall not be a Christian, shall I not be able to have hope of salvation?' — It is so, as you yourself propose. For the office of giving salvation and of bestowing upon souls what is fitting and necessary to be applied to them, he alone has received, enjoined and handed down from God the Father, the hidden and inner causes being so disposed. For just as certain gods among you have certain guardianships, licenses, and powers, and you do not ask from any of them what is not within his power and license, so it belongs to the sole priesthood of Christ to give salvation to souls and to add to them a spirit of perpetuity.
「那麼,我若不作基督徒,就不能有救恩的盼望嗎?」——正如你自己所提的那樣,確是如此。因為賜予救恩、以及把宜於且必須施予靈魂之物授予靈魂的職分,唯獨祂領受了,是由父神所託付、所傳下的,那隱秘而內在的緣由既已如此安排。正如你們當中某些神各有其固定的守護、職權與權能,你們也不會向其中任何一位求取不在其權能與職權之內之物;照樣,唯獨基督的祭司之職才在於賜靈魂以救恩、並為之添上永恆之靈。
2:156
Si enim patrem creditis Liberum dare posse vindemiam, medicinam non posse, si Cererem fruges, si Aesculapium sanitatem, si Neptunum aliud, aliud posse Iunonem, Fortunam Mercurium Vulcanum rerum esse singulos certarum ac singularum datores: et hoc necesse a nobis est ut debeatis accipere, ab nullo animas posse vim vitae atque incolumitatis accipere nisi ab eo quem rex summus huic muneri officioque praefecit. 6. Hanc omnipotens imperator esse voluit salutis viam, hanc vitae ut ita dixerim ianuam, per hanc solum est ingressus ad lucem neque alias datum est vel inrepere vel invadere ceteris omnibus clausis atque inexpugnabili arce munitis. 66.1.
For if you believe that father Liber can give the vintage but not medicine, that Ceres can give crops, Aesculapius health, Neptune one thing and Juno another, that Fortune, Mercury, and Vulcan are each the givers of certain particular things — then this too you must needs receive from us: that souls can receive the power of life and safety from none save from him whom the supreme King has set over this office and duty. This the almighty Emperor willed to be the way of salvation, this, so to speak, the door of life; through this alone is there entrance to the light, nor is it granted otherwise either to creep in or to break in, all other ways being closed and fortified by an impregnable citadel.
因為你們若相信:利柏爾父神能賜葡萄收成卻不能賜醫治,刻瑞斯能賜五穀,阿斯克勒庇俄斯能賜健康,尼普頓能賜此、尤諾能賜彼,命運女神、墨丘利與伏爾坎各是某些特定事物的賜予者——那麼你們也必須從我們這裡接受這一點:靈魂除了從那位至高君王委派掌管此職此責者之外,不能從任何別的來源領受生命與平安的力量。全能的君王立意要這成為救恩之道,這,可以說,是生命之門;唯有經此才得進入光明,也不容以別的方式潛入或闖入,因為其餘一切通路都已封閉,並由攻不破的堡壘所鞏固。
2:157
Licet ergo tu purus et ab omni fueris vitiorum contaminatione purgatus, conciliaveris illas atque inflexeris potestates, ad caelum ne redeunti vias cludant atque obsaepiant transitum, ad immortalitatis accedere nullis poteris contentionibus praemium, nisi quod ipsam immortalitatem facit Christo adtribuente | f. 59b | perceperis et veram fueris admissus ad vitam. 2. Nam quod nobis obiectare consuestis, novellam esse religionem nostram et ante dies natam propemodum paucos neque nos oportuisse antiquam et patriam linquere et in barbaros ritus peregrinosque traduci, ratione istud intenditur nulla. 3.
Though therefore you be pure and cleansed from all contamination of vices, though you win over and bend those powers so that they do not close the ways against you as you return to heaven and block your passage, you will by no strivings be able to reach the reward of immortality, unless by Christ's bestowal you receive that which makes immortality itself and are admitted to true life. Now as for what you are wont to cast at us — that our religion is new and born but a few days ago, and that we ought not to have forsaken the ancient, ancestral faith and been carried over into barbarous and foreign rites — this is urged with no reason.
因此,縱使你潔淨無瑕、洗淨了一切惡習的沾染,縱使你收攏並使那些權能屈服,好叫它們在你返回天上時不封閉道路、不阻塞你的通行,你仍無法憑任何努力抵達不朽的獎賞——除非藉基督的賞賜,你領受了那造就不朽本身之物,並被接納進入真正的生命。至於你們慣常拋向我們的指責——說我們的宗教是新的、不過數日之前才誕生,說我們不該撇棄古老的、祖傳的信仰而被帶入蠻夷與異邦的儀式——這種指控毫無道理可言。
2:158
Quid enim, si hoc modo culpam velimus infligere prioribus illis atque antiquissimis saeculis, quod inventis frugibus glandes spreverint et repudiaverint arbuta, quod corticibus contegi et amiciri desierint pellibus, postquam vestis excogitata est textilis usu et commoditate succinctior, aut quod structis domibus et lautioribus successibus institutis non antiquas adamaverint casulas nec sub rupibus et cavernis praeoptaverint ut beluae permanere? 4. Commune est omnibus et ab ipsis paene incunabulis traditum, bona malis anteferre, inutilibus utilia praeponere, et quod esse constiterit pretiosius, laetius, id consectari et petere in eoque defigere spem salutis et salutarium commodorum. 67.1.
For what if we should wish in this way to lay blame on those earlier and most ancient ages, because, when crops were discovered, they scorned acorns and rejected arbute-berries; because they ceased to be covered with bark and clothed in skins after woven clothing was devised, more convenient in use and comfort; or because, when houses were built and more elegant modes of living established, they did not love the old huts nor prefer to remain under rocks and in caves like wild beasts? It is common to all, and handed down almost from the very cradle, to prefer good to bad, to set the useful before the useless, and to pursue and seek that which has proved more precious and more pleasant, and in it to fix the hope of well-being and of wholesome advantages.
因為,我們若想以這種方式歸罪於那些更早、極古的世代,說他們在發現了五穀之後便鄙棄橡實、拋卻野果;說他們在織成的衣物——更便於穿用、更為舒適——被發明之後,便不再以樹皮蔽體、以獸皮裹身;又或說他們在房屋建成、更雅致的生活方式確立之後,便不再眷戀古老的茅舍,也不再願像野獸般棲居於岩下洞穴——那又如何呢?這對眾人乃是共通的,幾乎自搖籃時代便已傳承下來:以善勝惡、以有用者先於無用者、追求並尋取那已證明更為珍貴、更為愉悅之物,並把福祉與有益之利的盼望繫於其上。
2:159
Itaque cum nobis intenditis aversionem a religione priorum, causam convenit ut inspiciatis, non factum, nec quid reliquerimus opponere, sed secuti quid simus potissimum contueri. Nam si mutare sententiam culpa est ulla vel crimen et a veteribus institutis in alias res novas voluntatesque migrare, criminatio ista et vos spectat, qui totiens vitam consuetudinemque mutastis, qui in mores alios atque alios ritus priorum condemnatione transistis. 2. Numquid | f. 60 | enim quinque in classes habetis populum distributum, vestri olim ut habuere maiores? numquid magistratus per populum creatis? militaria urbana communia quae sint comitia scitis?
Therefore, when you charge us with turning away from the religion of our forebears, it is fitting that you examine the cause, not the deed; not to object what we have left behind, but rather to consider what we have followed. For if to change one's opinion is any fault or crime, and to migrate from old institutions into other new things and preferences, that accusation regards you also, who have so often changed your life and custom, who have passed into other manners and rites with condemnation of your predecessors. For do you have the people distributed into five classes, as your ancestors of old had them? Do you create magistrates through the people? Do you know what the military, urban, and common assemblies are?
因此,當你們指責我們背離了先人的宗教時,理應審察其緣由,而非其行為;不是拿我們所撇棄之物來責難,而是要留意我們所追隨的是什麼。因為若改變見解算是什麼過錯或罪行,若從舊制度遷入其他新事物與新意向算是罪過,那麼這指控也牽連到你們,因為你們如此頻繁地改變了生活與習俗,帶著對前人的定罪而轉入了別樣的風俗與儀式。難道你們仍把人民劃分為五個階級,如你們古時的先祖所行嗎?難道你們仍由人民選立官員嗎?你們可還知道軍團大會、部族大會、百人團大會是什麼嗎?
2:160
servatis de caelo aut otiosas facitis obnuntiationibus actiones? si paratis bella, signum monstratis ex arce? aut fetialia iura tractatis? per clarigationem repetitis res raptas? aut Martium discrimen obeuntes spem proelii sumitis et ex acuminibus auspicatis ? 3. in potestatibus obeundis leges conservatis annarias? in donis, in muneribus Cincias? in cohibendis censorias sumptibus? in penetralibus et caeligenis perpetuos fovetis focos? sacras facitis mensas salinorum adpositu et simulacris deorum? cum in matrimonia convenitis, toga sternitis lectulos et maritorum genios advocatis? nubentium crinem caelibari hasta mulcetis? puellarum togulas Fortunam defertis ad Virginalem?
Do you watch the heavens, or by ill-omened announcements render proceedings idle? If you prepare wars, do you display the signal from the citadel? Or do you handle the fetial laws? Do you demand back plundered goods by the formal declaration of war? Or, entering upon the crisis of Mars, do you take your hope of battle and augur from the spear-points? In entering upon offices do you observe the age-laws, in gifts and presents the Cincian laws, in restraining expenses the censorian laws? In your inner shrines and to the heaven-born gods do you keep perpetual hearth-fires burning? Do you make the tables sacred by setting on the salt-cellars and the images of the gods? When you come together in marriage, do you spread the couches with a toga and call upon the guardian spirits of the husbands? Do you stroke the bride's hair with a bachelor's spear? Do you carry the little togas of maidens to Fortuna Virginalis?
你們可還觀測天象,或憑凶兆的宣告使議程停擺?你們若備戰,可還從城堡舉起信號?或處置那祭司團的宣戰之法?可還藉正式的討還宣告索回被劫之物?或在踏入戰神的險境時,從矛尖的預兆汲取戰鬥的指望?你們在就任官職時可還遵守年齡法,在饋贈禮品時遵守欽奇烏斯法,在節制開支時遵守監察官法?在你們的內室聖壇、向那天生的諸神,可還常燃著爐火?可還藉擺上鹽罐與眾神的像使餐桌成聖?當你們締結婚姻時,可還以托加袍鋪設臥榻、召喚丈夫們的守護神靈?可還以單身漢的長矛梳理新娘的頭髮?可還把少女的小托加袍獻給童貞的命運女神?
2:161
matres familias vestrae in atriis operantur domorum industrias testificantes suas? potionibus abstinent vini? adfinibus et propinquis osculari eas ius est, ut sobrias comprobent atque abstemias se esse? 68.1. In Albano antiquitus monte nullos alios licebat quam nivei tauros immolare candoris: nonne istum morem religionemque mutastis atque, ut rufulos liceret dari, senatus constitutum sanctione? Cum Romulo Pompilioque regnantibus percocta plane ac madida concremarentur diis exta, nonne rege sub Tullo semicruda coepistis et leviter animata porrigere prisca observatione contempta? 2. Ante adventum in Italiam | f.
Do your matrons work in the halls of their homes, attesting their industry? Do they abstain from draughts of wine? Is it the right of their kinsmen and near relations to kiss them, that they may prove themselves sober and abstemious? On the Alban Mount of old it was permitted to sacrifice no bulls but of snowy whiteness: have you not changed that custom and religion, and by a decree of the Senate sanctioned that reddish ones might be offered? When, in the reigns of Romulus and Pompilius, the entrails were burned to the gods thoroughly cooked and moist, did you not, under king Tullus, begin to offer them half-raw and but lightly warmed, the ancient observance being scorned? Before the coming into Italy
你們的主婦可還在自家廳堂中勞作,以見證她們的勤勉?她們可還戒絕飲酒?她們的親屬與近親可還有權親吻她們,好讓她們證明自己清醒有節、滴酒不沾?昔日在阿爾巴山上,只准獻上雪白無瑕的公牛為祭:你們豈不是改變了那習俗與宗教,並藉元老院的法令批准了可獻赤褐色的公牛?當羅慕路斯與龐皮利烏斯在位時,臟腑是煮得熟透而濕潤地焚獻給眾神的,你們豈不是在圖盧斯王治下開始獻上半生、僅略經加熱的臟腑,把古老的儀規棄之不顧?在赫丘利進入義大利
← prev partnext part →
← ch. 1ch. 3 →
1234567

Tell me when new readings are published

One email per new chapter reading. Double opt-in; one-click unsubscribe.