Page images
PDF
EPUB

ἀνδρία καὶ αὐτὴ ἡ φρόνησις μὴ καθαρμός τις ᾖ. Καὶ κινδυνεύουσι καὶ οἱ τὰς τελετὰς ἡμῖν οὗτοι καταστήσαντες οὐ φαῦλοί τινες εἶναι, ἀλλὰ τῷ ὄντι πάλαι αἰνίττεσθαι ὅτι ὃς ἂν ἀμύητος καὶ ἀτέλεστος εἰς Αιδου ἀφίκηται, ἐν βορβόρῳ κείσεται, ὁ δὲ κεκαθαρ μένος τε καὶ τετελεσμένος ἐκεῖσε ἀφικόμενος μετὰ θεῶν οἰκήσει. εἰσὶ γὰρ δή, φασὶν οἱ περὶ τὰς τελετάς, ναρθηκοφόροι μὲν πολλοί, βάκχοι δέ τε παῦροι· οὗ

WYTT. Virtue, in truth and reality, consists in the purification of the passions, which is effected by temperance, justice, fortitude, and prudence itself; through the medium of these qualities, and as their origin and source.—Τῶν τοιούτων πάντων, Intell. ἡδονῶν, φόβων, κ. τ. λ. This doctrine of the purifying of the mind by the study of virtue, i. e. by philosophy, was inculcated by many of the ancient philosophical writers, but eminently by Plato, through the whole range of his compositions, whence the frequent mention of the virtues and courses of discipline, entitled καθαρτικαι. V. Aristot. Poet. 16. Politic. viii. 7.

Καθαρμός τις.] This was the first part of the μυήσις, or initiation, which took place by the river Ilissus, where the person to be purified stood, having under his feet the Διὸς κώδιον, or skin of a victim offered to Jove. The second grade of initiation was the τῆς τελετῆς παράδοσις ; the third, ἐποπτεία ; the fourth, ανάδεσις καὶ στεμμάτων ἐπίθεσις, and the fifth, τὸ θεοφιλὲς καὶ θεοῖς συνδίαιτος εὐδαιμονία. See Robinson's Grec. Antiq. iii. c. 19. ΕΛΕΥΣΙΝΙΑ.

Οὗτοι.] Noti illi, celebrati illi; Orpheus, Musæus, &c. STALL. Karaστήσαντες ; Eurip. Bacch. 21. χορεύσας καὶ καταστήσας ἐμὰς Τελε τὰς ἐς τήνδεἦλθον πόλιν.

Κἀκεῖ

Εν βορβόρῳ κείσεται.] This doctrine was taken, according to Olympiodorus, from one of the Orphic hymns. Fragm. Orph. p. 509. Herm. Hymn. in Cerer. 485. Ολβιος, ὃς τάδ' όπωπεν ἐπιχθονίων ἀνθρώπων· Ὃς δ' ἀτελὴς, ἱερῶν ὅς τ ̓ ἄμμορος, οὔποθ' ὁμοίων Αἶσαν ἔχει, φθίμενος περ, ὑπὸ ζόφῳ ευρώεντι. Schol. Olymp.

διόπερ καὶ παρῳδεῖ ἔπος Ορφικὸν τὸ λέγον ὅτι ὅστις δ' ἡμῶν ἀτέλεστος, ὥσπερ ἐν βορβόρῳ κείσεται ἐν ᾅδου. Cf. de Rep. ii. p. 363. D. Μουσαῖος—καὶ ὁ υἱος αὐτοῦ τοὺς ἀνοσίους καὶ ἀδίκους εἰς πηλόν τινα κατορύττουσιν ἐν ᾅδου,—and infr. E. Βίβλων ὅμαδον παρέχονται (οἱ μάντεις) Μουσαίου καὶ Ορφέως—καθ ̓ ἃς θυηπολοῦσι πείθοντες —ὡς ἄρα λύσεις τε καὶ καθαρμοὶ ἀδικημάτων διὰ θυσιῶν καὶ παιδιᾶς ἡδονῶν εἰσὶ μὲν ἔτι ζῶσιν, εἰσὶ δὲ καὶ τελευτήσασιν, ἃς δὴ τελετὰς καλοῦσιν, αἳ τῶν ἐκεῖ κακῶν ἀπολύουσιν ἡμᾶς· μὴ θύσαν. τας δὲ δεινὰ περιμένει. Whence Diog. Cynic. apud Laert. vi. 39. γελοῖον εἰ Αγησίλαος μὲν καὶ Επαμινώνδας ἐν τῷ βορβόρῳ διάξουσιν, εὐτελεῖς δέ τινες μεμυημένοι ἐν ταῖς μακάρων νήσοις ἔσονται.—Βορβόρος, properly ἡ ἐκ τῆς βορᾶς κόπρος. Scap. Lex.

Ο δὲ κεκαθαρμένος— μετὰ θεῶν οἱκήσει.] The ancient writers have frequently made mention of the future felicity of the initiated. Soph. apud. Plutarch. de Aud. Poet. c. 4. ὡς τρισόλβιοι Κεῖνοι βροτῶν, οἳ ταῦτα δερχο θέντες τέλη Μολῶς εἰς ᾅδου. v. Aristoph. Ran. 346. Æschin. in Axioch. c. 20. Upon this sense of τέλη, Cf. Cic. in Verr. v. 72.-" teque Ceres, et Libera, quarum sacra, sicut opiniones hominum et religiones ferunt, longe maximis atque occultissimis cæremoniis continentur: a quibus initia vitæ, atque victus, legum, morum, mansuetudinis, humanitatis exempla hominibus et civitatibus data ac dispertita esse dicuntur.

Ναρθηκοφόροι μὲν πολλοί βάκχ. δ. τ. π.] Taken also from an Orphic hymn. Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 406. βάκχον οὐ τὸν Διόνυσον ἐκάλουν μό

τοι δ ̓ εἰσὶ κατὰ τὴν ἐμὴν δόξαν οὐκ ἄλλοι ἢ οἱ πες φιλοσοφηκότες ὀρθῶς. ὧν δὴ καὶ ἐγὼ κατά γε τὸ δυ νατὸν οὐδὲν ἀπέλιπον ἐν τῷ βίῳ, ἀλλὰ παντὶ τρόπῳ προὐθυμήθην γενέσθαι. εἰ δὲ ὀρθῶς προθυμήθην καί τι ἠνυσάμην, ἐκεῖσε ἐλθόντες τὸ σαφὲς εἰσόμεθα, ἐὰν θεὸς ἐθέλῃ, ὀλίγον ὕστερον, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ.

Ταῦτ ̓ οὖν ἐγώ, ἔφη, ὦ Σιμμία τε καὶ Κέβης, ἀπολογοῦμαι, ὡς εἰκότως ὑμᾶς τε ἀπολείπων καὶ τοὺς ἐνθάδε δεσπότας οὐ χαλεπῶς φέρω οὐδ ̓ ἀγανακτῶ, ἡγούμενος κἀκεῖ οὐδὲν ἧττον ἢ ἐνθάδε δεσπόταις τε ἀγαθοῖς ἐντεύξεσθαι καὶ ἑταίροις· τοῖς δὲ πολλοῖς ἀπιστίαν παρέχει. εἴ τι οὖν ὑμῖν πιθανώτερός εἰμι ἐν τῇ ἀπολογία ἢ τοῖς ̓Αθηναίων δικασταῖς εὖ ἂν ἔχοι.

§. 14. Εἰπόντος δὴ τοῦ Σωκράτους ταῦτα ὑπολα

νον, ἀλλὰ καὶ πάντας τοὺς τελοῦν.
τας τὰ ὄργια βάκχους ἐκάλουν. Ca-
saub. de Satyr. Poes. i. p. 57. “ Proprie
βάκχοι sunt orgiasta et ministri. Clem.
Alex. Διόνυσον Μαινόλην ὀργιά
ζουσι βάκχοι. Orpheus in hymno
Sileni Ναῖσι καὶ βάκχοις ἡγούμενε
κιττοφόροισι. Sic accipiendum in pro-
verbio, πολλοὶ μὲν ναρθηκοφόροι παϋ-
ροι δέ τε βάκχοι. In Dionysiacis
solennibus, puta in phallagogiis, sa-
cris trietericis, Iacchi exagoge, simi-
libusve pompis multi arrepto thyrso
aut ferula προσκαίρους se præbe-
bant Liberi patris orgiastas: nec so-
lum viri, sed etiam honestæ matronæ ac
virgines. Lege Diodorum Sic. lib. iii.
73. Sed hi θυρσοφόροι aut ναρθηκο-
φοροι solum appellabantur: ut qui or-
gia jugiter et legitime curabant neque a
suscepto ministerio recedebant, hi non
solum narthecophori dicebantur, sed
ναρθηκοφόροι βάκχοι, &c.” Olympiod.
Schol.—τελετὴ γάρ ἐστι ἡ τῶν ἀρες
τῶν βακχεία καὶ φησι [Πλάτων]
“ Πολλοὶ μὲν ναρθηκοφόροι, παῦροι δέ
τε βάκχοι” ναρθηκοφόρους, οὐ μὴν
βάκχους τοὺς πολιτικοὺς καλῶν· ναρ-
θηκοφόρους δέ βάκχους, τοὺς καθαρ-
τικούς. v. Barnes, ad Eurip. Bacch.
145. sqq.
Clem. Alexandr. compares
with the above, Matthew, xx. 16, xxii.

14. Πολλοί εἰσι κλητοὶ, ὀλίγοι δὲ ἐκλεκτοί: and Fischer correctly explains the adage: multi præ se ferunt amorem et studium philosophia, sed pauci sunt veri philosophi.

'Ων δὴ καὶ ἐγώ.] i. e. Quorum unus ut fierem, nihil, quantum in me fuit intentatum reliqui, sed omnibus modis studui. HEIND.-οὐδὲν ἀπολείπειν, nihil reliqui facere, omnia experiri. ID.

̓Απολείπων — οὐ χαλεπῶς φέρω.] For this construction see Matthiae Gr. s. 555. i.

Απιστίαν παρέχει.] Quod tamen vulgo incredibile est. HEIND., who understands αὐτὸ, sc. τὸ πρᾶγμα, as the subject of παρέχει.

Εἴ τι-πιθαν. εἰμι εὖ ἂν ἔχοι.] See Apol. Socr. c. 12. sub. fin. εἰ εἷς-διαφθείρει. η.

§. 14. Εἰπόντος δὴ, κ. τ. λ.] Το obviate the objection that the soul cannot exist independently of the body, Socrates proceeds to argue that it existed before its union with the body. The prevailing law of nature, according to the philosopher, is, that all things are produced from their contraries; the greater from the less, swift from slow, strong from weak, heat from cold, and vice versa. Life and death are subject to the same necessity, and reproduce each

βὼν ὁ Κέβης ἔφη Ω Σώκρατες, τα μὲν ἄλλα δο κεῖ ἔμοιγε καλῶς λέγεσθαι, τὰ δὲ περὶ τῆς ψυ χῆς πολλὴν ἀπιστίαν παρέχει τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, μὴ ἐπειδὰν ἀπαλλαγῇ τοῦ σώματος οὐδαμοῦ ἔτι ᾖ, ἀλλ ̓ ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ διαφθείρηταί τε καὶ ἀπολλύηται ᾗ ἂν ἄνθρωπος ἀποθάνῃ, εὐθὺς ἀπαλλαττομένη τοῦ σώματος, καὶ ἐκβαίνουσα, ὡς περ πνεῦμα ή καπνὸς διασκεδασθεῖσα, οἴχηται διαπτομένη καὶ οὐ δὲν ἔτι οὐδαμοῦ ᾖ, ἐπεὶ εἴ περ εἴη που αὐτὴ καθ' ἑαυ τὴν ξυνηθροισμένη καὶ ἀπηλλαγμένη τούτων τῶν κατ κῶν ὧν σὺ νῦν δὴ διῆλθες, πολλὴ ἂν ἐλπὶς εἴη καὶ καλή, ὦ Σώκρατες, ὡς ἀληθῆ ἐστὶν ἃ σὺ λέγεις. Αλλὰ τοῦτο δὴ ἴσως οὐκ ὀλίγης παραμυθίας δεῖται καὶ

other; unless it is to be supposed that here the law of nature is infringed, and these two principles exempted from its sway. But this is not so, and to understand the former position more clearly it is to be observed, that of every change there are three stages: the first, when the change begins; the second, while it is in progress; and the third, when it is complete. For instance, waking and sleeping are the two extremes, the intermediate state, or progress from one to the other, is that of falling asleep. So between sleeping and waking there is the middle stage, becoming awake. In like manner, that one should be alive or dead, it is necessary to have passed through the intermediate states of coming to life and dying, which states, as in the case above, must be alternated again, for if sleeping were not reciprocated by waking, all things should at last be buried in unbroken slumber, and equally if dying and death were not reciprocated by becoming alive and life, all nature should eventually sink and be destroyed. Wherefore the soul does not perish by death, but passes to another state, a future life, embittered to the evil, and enjoyed by the good. This argument is founded upon a certainty and an uncertainty. It is certain that in nature nothing new is produced, nor is what does exist destroyed. The production or destruction of anything does

not arise from creation or annihilation, but from the union or disunion of its parts. It is uncertain whether all souls existed before their junction with the body, whether they were created in the first instance by the Deity himself, or consisted of material particles. But that the soul, if created by the Deity, does not perish with the body, follows, as well from the rest of the Platonic doctrine, as from what has preceded upon the subject of a divine Providence.→→ To remove this uncertainty, then, it is to be proved that the thinking faculty of the mind does not arise from a combination of the parts of matter, which will be made appear in the course of the dialogue.

Εὐθὺς ἀπαλλαττομένη.] Statim ut discedit a corpore. HEIND.

Ὥσπερ πνεῦμα ἢ καπνός.] Cf. Lucret. iii. 456. “ Ergo dissolvi quoque convenit omnem animai Naturam, ceu fumus in altas aëris auras." Hom. Iliad. ψ'. 100. ψυχὴ δὲ κατὰ χθονὸς ἠΰτε καπνός Οίκετο τετριγυῖα.

Οὐδὲν ἔτι οὐδαμοῦ γ.] Nil amplius usquam sit, omnino nihil sit, funditus perierit. WYTT. Cf. Cic. de Senec. 22. “ Nolite arbitrari, rarissimi filii, me, cum a vobis discessero, nusquam aut nullum fore." Plaut. Cistell. iv. 2. 18. "Nulla est, neque ego sum usquam; perdita perdidit me."

Παραμυθίας.] Persausion : παρα

πίστεως, ὡς ἔστι τε ἡ ψυχὴ ἀποθανόντος τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καί τινα δύναμιν ἔχει καὶ φρόνησιν. Αληθῆ, ἔφη, λέγεις, ὁ Σωκράτης, ὦ Κέβης. ἀλλὰ τί δὴ ποιῶμεν ; ἢ περὶ αὐτῶν τούτων βούλει διαμυθολογῶμεν, εἴτε εἰκὸς οὕτως ἔχειν εἴτε μή; Εγωγ ̓ οὖν, ἔφη ὁ Κέβης, ἡδέως ἂν ἀκούσαιμι ἦν τινα δόξαν ἔχεις περὶ αὐτῶν. Οὔκουν γ ̓ ἂν οἶμαι, ἦ δ' ὃς ὁ Σωκράτης, εἰπεῖν τινὰ νῦν ἀκούσαντα, οὐδ ̓ εἰ κωμῳδοποιὸς εἴη, ὡς ἀδολεσχῶ καὶ οὐ περὶ προσηκόντων τοὺς λόγους ποι οῦμαι. εἰ οὖν δοκεῖ, χρὴ διασκοπεῖσθαι.

μυθία signifying, not merely consolation, but, as Wyttenbach justly observes, an assurance of the judgment, when it hesitates to admit an apparently improbable position.

This

ὡς ἔστι τε ἡ ψυχὴ, κ. τ. λ.] sentence contains the Platonic doctrine of the immortality of the soul. - Tivà δύναμιν ἔχει καὶ φρόνησιν ; Olympiod. Τινὰ ζωὴν ἔχει καὶ γνωστικὴν ἐπιστήμην. ἡ μὲν γὰρ δύναμις τὴν ζωτικὴν ἐνέργειαν δηλοῖ, ἡ δὲ φρόνησις τὴν ἐπιστημονικήν. STALL.

Διαμυθολογῶμεν.] Olympiod. Τί οὖν μῦθος τὰ λεγόμενα ὑπὸ Σωκράτους; ἢ τὴν ἐξ ἑπόμενου πίστιν μυθολογίαν ἐκάλεσεν ὁ Σωκράτης, οἷός ἔστιν ὁ προκείμενος λόγος ; κατα σκευάζει γὰρ τὴν μὲν ἀθανασίαν τῆς ψυχῆς, οὐκ ἐκ τὴς οὐσίας ὁρμώμενος, ἀλλ ̓ ἔκ τινος ἐπομένου τοῦ μεταβάλλειν τὸν θάνατον καὶ τὴν ζωὴν εἰς ἄλληλα. ταύτην οὖν μυθολογίαν εἶ

πεν.

Η δ ̓ ὅς ὁ Σωκράτης.] Infr. c. 18. a med. ή δ' ὃς ὁ Σιμμίας. Cf. Æschyl. S. C. Th. 555. ἔστιν δὲ καὶ τῷδ' ὃν λέγεις τὸν ̓Αρκάδα, ἀνὴρ ἀκομπος.

Οὐδ' εἰ κωμῳδοποιός εἴη.] In allusion to Aristophanes, Amipsias; Diog. Laert. ii. 28; and Eupolis. Olympiod. τί βούλεται ἐνταῦθα τῷ Πλάτωνι ἡ μνήμη τῶν κωμῳδοποιῶν; ἢ τὸ λεγόμενον τοῦτό ἐστιν, ὅτι οὐ δώσω χώραν τοῖς κωμῳδοποιοῖς διαλοιδορεῖσθαι μοι· ὁ γὰο Εύπολις φησι περὶ Σωκράτους, Τί δῆτ ̓ ἐκεῖνον τὸν ἀδολέσχην καὶ πτωχὸν, Ὃς τ' ἄλλα μὲν πεφρόντικεν, Πόθεν δὲ καταφαγεῖν ἔχοι, Τούτου κατημέληκεν. The com

mon taunt, τῆς ἀδολεσχίας περὶ τῶν μετεώρων, which the vulgar threw out against Socrates and the philosophers in general, was taken up by the comic poets, and occurs in several instances throughout the writings of Plato, in many of which the expression is evidently repeated in sarcastic ridicule of the ignorance and fully by which its proper meaning was abused. Cratyl. c. 39. κινδυνεύουσι γοῦν—οἱ πρῶτοι τὰ ὀνόματα τιθέμενοι οὐ φαῦλοι εἶναι, ἀλλὰ μετεωρολόγοι τινὲς καὶ ἀδολέσ χαι. Parmenid. c. 19. καλὴ μὲν οὖν καὶ θεία, εὖ ἴσθι, ἡ ὁρμὴ, ἣν ὁρμᾷς ἐπὶ τοὺς λόγους· ἕλκυσον δὲ σαυτὸν καὶ γύμνασον μᾶλλον διὰ τῆς δοκούσης ἀχρήστου εἶναι καὶ καλουμένης ὑπὸ τῶν πολλῶν ἀδολεσχίας, ἕως νέος εἶ· εἰ δὲ μὴ, σὲ διαφεύξεται ἀλήθεια. So in that celebrated passage, de Repub. xi. p. 488, where the true philosopher is compared to the pilot of a vessel, and the ignorant mob in a state, to its mutinous crew, Socrates says: τοιούτων δὴ [i. e. the mutiny on board,] περὶ τὰς ναῦς γιγνομένων, τὸν ὡς ἀληθῶς κυβερνητικὸν οὐκ ἡγῇ ἂν τῷ ὄντι μετεωροσκόπον τε καὶ ἀδολέσχην καὶ ἄχρηστόν σφισι και λεῖσθαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν ταῖς οὕτω κατε σκευασμέναις ναυσὶ πλωτήρων;-Ού δὴ οἶμαι δεῖσθαί σε ἐξέταζομένην τὴν εἰκόνα ἰδεῖν, ὅτι ταῖς πόλεσι πρὸς τοὺς ἀληθινούς φιλοσόφους τὴν διάν θεσιν ἔοικεν. Cf. Aristoph. Νub. 1482. ἀλλ ̓, ὦ φίλ' ̔Ερμῆ, μηδαμῶς θύμαινε μοι, μηδέ μ' ἐπιτρέψης ἀλλὰ συγγνώμην ἔχε, ἐμοῦ παρανοήσαντος ἀν δολεσχία, &c. The term αδολεσχης,

§. 15. Σκεψώμεθα δ ̓ αὐτὸ τῇδέ πῃ, εἴτε ἄρα ἐν "Αιδον εἰσιν αἱ ψυχαὶ τελευτησάντων τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἴτε καὶ οὔ. παλαιὸς μὲν οὖν ἔστι τις λόγος, οὗτος

whence ἀδολεσχῶ supr., had been originally applied to those who undertook to explain the difficulties and obscurities of natural phenomena, without an adequate knowledge of the subject of which they professed themselves competent to treat; it was subsequently used in a commendatory sense, but continued to be employed in the former by those who could only vituperate the virtues they did not care to possess.

§. 15. Σκεψώμεθα.] Olympiod. Ὁ σκοπὸς τῷ προκειμένῳ λόγῳ δεῖξαι, οὐκ ἀθάνατον τὴν ψυχὴν, ἀλλ' ἐπιδιαμένουσαν χρόνον τινὰ μετὰ τὸν χωρισμὸν τοῦ σώματος, καὶ οὐ καθάπερ Ιαμβλιχος οἴεται ἕκαστον λόγον δεικνῦναι τὴν ἀθανασίαν τῆς ψυχῆς οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ ἐρωτῶν τοῦτο ἠρώτησε τὸ πρόβλημα, οὔτε ὁ ἀποκρινόμενος ἔδειξε τὴν ψυχὴν ἀθάνατον. ὁ μὲν γὰρ Κέβης ἠρώτησεν, εἰ δυνατὸν τὴν ψυχὴν χωρισθεῖσαν ἀπὸ τοῦ σώματος ἐπιδιαμένειν, καὶ μὴ δίκην πνεύματος διασκορπίζεσθαι. καὶ ὁ Σωκράτης δείκνυσιν ὅτι ἐπιδιαμένει χρόνον τινὰ μετὰ τὸν χωρισμὸν τοῦ σώματος, οὐ μὴν ὅτι καὶ ἀεὶ, ἔδειξε. FORST.

Αὐτὸ τῇδέ πρ.] Αὐτὸ is explained by εἴτε ἄρα ἐν ᾅδ. and τῇδή πη refers to seqq. παλαιὸς μὲν οὖν, &c. HEIND.

Παλαιὸς μὲν τις λόγος.] See Herodot. ii. c. 123. where the historian evidently refers to the doctrines of the Pythagoreans. How closely the preexistence of the soul was united with the idea of its immortality amongst the ancient philosophers, appears from the following passage in Cudworth. Intell. Syst. B. i. c. 1. s. 31. "It is also further evident, that this same principle which thus led the ancients to hold the soul's immortality, or its future permanence after death, must needs determine them likewise to maintain its προΰπαρξις, or preexistence, and consequently its με ενσωμάτωσις, or transmigration. For that which did preexist before the generation of any animal, and was then somewhere else,

must needs transmigrate into the body of that animal where now it is. But, as for that other transmigration of human souls into the bodies of brutes, though it cannot be denied but that many of the ancients admitted it also, yet, Timæus Locrus, and divers others of the Pythagoreans, rejected it, any otherwise than as it might be taken for an allegorical description of that beastly transformation that is made of men's souls by vice.Aristotle tells us again, agreeably to what was declared before, ὅτι μάλιστα φοβούμενοι διετέλησαν οἱ παλαιὸι τὸ ἐκ μηδενὸς γίνεσθαι τι προϋπάρχοντος. That the ancient philosophers were afraid of nothing more than this one "thing, that anything should be made out of nothing preexistent. And, therefore, they must needs conclude, that the souls of all animals preexisted before their generations. And indeed it is a thing very well known, that, according to the sense of philosophers, these two things were always included together in that one opinion of the soul's immortality, namely, its pre-existence as well as its post-existence. Neither was there any of the ancients, before Christianity, that held the soul's future permanency after death, who did not likewise assert its preexistence; they clearly perceiving, that if it were once granted that the soul was generated, it could never be proved but that it might also be corrupted. And, therefore, the assertors of the soul's immortality commonly began here; first to prove its pre-existence, proceeding thence, afterwards, to establish its permanency after death." Cf. Tertullian de Anima. xxiii. p. 275. “ Illius (Platonis) est enim in Phædone, quod animæ hinc euntes sunt illuc, et inde huc." Olympiod in Fragm. Orph. p. 510. ed Herm. Ορφικός τε γὰρ καὶ Πυθαγόρειος ὁ πάλιν ἄγων τὰς ψυ χὰς εἰς τὸ σῶμα καὶ πάλιν ἀπὸ τοῦ σώματος ἀνάγων, καὶ τοῦτο κύκλῳ πολλάκις. in Menon. p. 81. Β. καὶ Πίνδαρος καὶ ἄλλοι πολλοὶ τῶν ποιητῶν, ὅσοι θεῖοί εἰσιν—φασὶ τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου εἶναι ἀθάνα

M

« PreviousContinue »