Preparation for the Gospel 15.7.1–15.14.2
Greek text: Dindorf, Eusebii Opera 1 (Greek text: W. Dindorf, Eusebii Caesariensis Opera 1–2 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1867), digitized by the First Thousand Years of Greek project (Open Greek and Latin), CC BY-SA 4.0).English: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), public domain (CC0). Compare: E. H. Gifford, Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae Praeparationis libri XV (Oxford, 1903), vol. 3 (English).
Preparation 15, chapter 7
15.7.1Dindorf 2:355
“ Περὶ γοῦν τῶν καλουμένων στοιχείων, ἐξ ὧν πρώτων σώματα συνέστηκε, Πλάτων μὲν ἑπόμενος τῇ περὶ αὐτὰ ἐναργείᾳ, καθάπερ καὶ οἱ πρὸ αὐτοῦ, τέσσαρά τε ἔφησεν εἶναι ταῦτα ὁμολογούμενα, πῦρ καὶ γῆν καὶ ἀέρα καὶ ὕδωρ, καὶ ἐκ τούτων συγκρινομένων τὰ λοιπὰ πάντα γεννᾶσθαι· Ἀριστοτέλης δὲ, ὡς ἔοικεν, ἐλπίσας περιττότερος φανεῖσθαι τῷ φρονεῖν εἴ τι σῶμα ἐκ περιττοῦ προσθείη, προσκατηρίθμησε τοῖς φαινομένοις τέτταρσι σώμασι τὴν πέμπτην οὐσίαν, πάνυ μὲν λαμπρῶς καὶ φιλοδώρως τῇ φύσει χρησάμενος, μὴ συνιδὼν δὲ ὅτι οὐ νομοθετεῖν δεῖ φυσιολογοῦντα, τὰ δὲ τῆς φύσεως αὐτῆς ἐξιστορεῖν.
“ Peri goun tōn kaloumenōn stoicheiōn, ex hōn prōtōn sōmata synestēke, Platōn men hepomenos tę̄ peri auta enargeią, kathaper kai hoi pro autou, tessara te ephēsen einai tauta homologoumena, pyr kai gēn kai aera kai hydōr, kai ek toutōn synkrinomenōn ta loipa panta gennasthai; Aristotelēs de, hōs eoiken, elpisas perittoteros phaneisthai tǭ phronein ei ti sōma ek perittou prostheiē, proskatērithmēse tois phainomenois tettarsi sōmasi tēn pemptēn ousian, pany men lamprōs kai philodōrōs tę̄ physei chrēsamenos, mē synidōn de hoti ou nomothetein dei physiologounta, ta de tēs physeōs autēs existorein.
“About the so-called elements, at any rate, from which bodies are first composed, Plato, following the evidence about them, as those before him did, said that they are four, as is agreed, fire and earth and air and water, and that all the rest are generated from these by their combination; but Aristotle, hoping, it seems, to appear more extraordinary in wisdom if he added some body extraordinarily, counted in with the four visible bodies the fifth substance, using nature very splendidly and generously, not seeing that one who studies nature must not legislate but relate what belongs to nature itself.
Notes and citation
Summary: Atticus: Aristotle added a fifth element to make himself appear original.
- Atticus, fragment 5 (des Places).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text; stray mark in the digital text): ἑπόμε- νος → ἑπόμενος; νομοθε- τεῖν → νομοθετεῖν; Πλάτωνʼ → Πλάτων.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.7.1 (Dindorf 2:355; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-7-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-7-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.7.2Dindorf 2:355–356
εἰς τοίνυν τὴν ἀπόδειξιν τοῦ τέτταρας εἶναι τὰς πρώτας τῶν σωμάτων φύσεις, ἧς δὴ χρεία τοῖς Πλατωνικοῖς, οὐ μόνον οὐκ ἂν συντελοῖ τι ὁ Περιπατητικὸς, ἀλλὰ σχεδὸν καὶ μόνος ἐναντιοῖτʼ ἄν. λεγόντων γοῦν ἡμῶν ὅτι πᾶν σῶμα ἢ θερμὸν ἢ ψυχρὸν, ἢ ὑγρὸν ἢ ξηρὸν, ἢ μαλακὸν ἢ σκληρὸν, ἢ κοῦφον ἢ βαρὺ, ἢ ἀραιὸν ἢ πυκνὸν, καὶ εὑρισκόντων ὅτι οὐκ ἂν ἕτερόν τι εἴη τὸ μεθέξον τούτων τινὸς παρὰ τὰ τέτταρα· (εἰ μὲν γὰρ θερμὸν, ἢ πῦρ ἢ ἀήρ· εἰ δὲ ψυχρὸν, ὕδωρ ἢ γῆ· καὶ εἰ μὲν ξηρὸν, πῦρ ἢ γῆ· εἰ δὲ ὑγρὸν, ὕδωρ ἢ ἀήρ· καὶ εἰ μὲν μαλακὸν, ἀὴρ ἢ πῦρ· εἰ δὲ σκληρὸν, ὕδωρ ἢ γῆ· καὶ κοῦφον μὲν καὶ ἀραιὸν, οἶον πῦρ καὶ ἀήρ· βαρὺ δὲ καὶ πυκνὸν, ὕδωρ καὶ γῆ.) καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἄλλων δὲ ἁπασῶν τῶν ἁπλῶν δυνάμεων κατανοούντων ὡς οὐκ ἂν εἴη παρὰ ταῦτά τι σῶμα ἕτερον· οὗτος ἀνθίσταται μόνος, φάσκων δύνασθαι σῶμα εἶναι τούτων ἄμοιρον· σῶμα δὲ μήτε βαρὺ, μήτε κοῦφον, μήτε μαλακὸν, μήτε σκληρὸν, μήτε ὑγρὸν, ἀλλὰ μήτε ξηρὸν, μονονουχὶ λέγων σῶμα οὐ σῶμα. τὸ μὲν γὰρ ὄνομα καταλέλοιπεν αὐτῷ, τὰς δὲ δυνάμεις, διʼ ὧν σῶμα πέφυκε γίνεσθαι, πάσας ἀφῄρηκεν.
eis toinyn tēn apodeixin tou tettaras einai tas prōtas tōn sōmatōn physeis, hēs dē chreia tois Platōnikois, ou monon ouk an synteloi ti ho Peripatētikos, alla schedon kai monos enantioitʼ an. legontōn goun hēmōn hoti pan sōma ē thermon ē psychron, ē hygron ē xēron, ē malakon ē sklēron, ē kouphon ē bary, ē araion ē pyknon, kai heuriskontōn hoti ouk an heteron ti eiē to methexon toutōn tinos para ta tettara; (ei men gar thermon, ē pyr ē aēr; ei de psychron, hydōr ē gē; kai ei men xēron, pyr ē gē; ei de hygron, hydōr ē aēr; kai ei men malakon, aēr ē pyr; ei de sklēron, hydōr ē gē; kai kouphon men kai araion, oion pyr kai aēr; bary de kai pyknon, hydōr kai gē.) kai ek tōn allōn de hapasōn tōn haplōn dynameōn katanoountōn hōs ouk an eiē para tauta ti sōma heteron; houtos anthistatai monos, phaskōn dynasthai sōma einai toutōn amoiron; sōma de mēte bary, mēte kouphon, mēte malakon, mēte sklēron, mēte hygron, alla mēte xēron, mononouchi legōn sōma ou sōma. to men gar onoma kataleloipen autǭ, tas de dynameis, diʼ hōn sōma pephyke ginesthai, pasas aphę̄rēken.
To the proof that the first natures of bodies are four, which the Platonists need, the Peripatetic would not only contribute nothing, but would be almost alone in opposing it. When we say, at any rate, that every body is hot or cold, wet or dry, soft or hard, light or heavy, rare or dense, and find that there could be nothing else sharing in any of these besides the four (for if hot, fire or air; if cold, water or earth; and if dry, fire or earth; if wet, water or air; and if soft, air or fire; if hard, water or earth; and light and rare, such as fire and air; heavy and dense, water and earth); and when from all the other simple powers we perceive that there could be no other body besides these, he alone resists, saying that there can be a body without share in these; a body neither heavy nor light, neither soft nor hard, neither wet nor dry, all but saying a body that is not a body. For he has left it the name, but taken away all the powers by which a body naturally comes to be.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle’s fifth body, lacking all bodily qualities, is a body that is not a body.
- Atticus, fragment 5.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (OCR slip; line-end hyphen left in the digital text): σῶμα ἴτερον → σῶμα ἕτερον; γί- νεσθαι → γίνεσθαι.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.7.2 (Dindorf 2:355–356; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-7-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-7-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.7.3Dindorf 2:356
ἢ τοίνυν ἡμᾶς ἅπερ αὐτὸς λέγει πείθων ἀφαιρήσεται τῆς Πλάτωνος γνώμης, ἢ τὰ Πλάτωνος βεβαιούμενος τῶν αὐτῷ δοκούντων ἀποστήσεται· ὥστε οὐδαμῆ χρήσιμος πρὸς τὰ τοῦ Πλάτωνος.
ē toinyn hēmas haper autos legei peithōn aphairēsetai tēs Platōnos gnōmēs, ē ta Platōnos bebaioumenos tōn autǭ dokountōn apostēsetai; hōste oudamē chrēsimos pros ta tou Platōnos.
Either, then, he will persuade us of what he says and take us away from Plato’s view, or, confirming Plato’s, he will abandon his own; so that he is in no way useful for Plato’s teaching.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle’s fifth element is incompatible with Plato.
- Atticus, fragment 5.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.7.3 (Dindorf 2:356; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-7-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-7-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.7.4Dindorf 2:356
ἔτι ὁ μὲν Πλάτων πάντα τὰ σώματα, ἅτε ἐπὶ μιᾶς ὁμοίας ὕλης θεωρούμενα, βούλεται τρέπεσθαι μεταβάλλειν τʼ εἰς ἄλληλα· ὁ δὲ ἐπὶ μὲν τῶν ἄλλων οὐσίαν ἀπαθῆ τε καὶ ἄφθαρτον καὶ ἄτρεπτον πάντως ἀξιοῖ, ἵνα δὴ μὴ εὐκαταφρονήτου τινὸς πράγματος γεννητὴς εἶναι δοκῇ, περιττὸν μὲν καὶ ἴδιον παντάπασι λέγων οὐδὲν, τὰ δὲ ὑπὸ Πλάτωνος ἐπʼ ἄλλων ἑωραμένα καλῶς μεταφέρων ἐπὶ τὰ μὴ προσήκοντα, καθάπερ τινὲς τῶν ὕστερον γενομένων ἀνδριαντοποιῶν.
eti ho men Platōn panta ta sōmata, hate epi mias homoias hylēs theōroumena, bouletai trepesthai metaballein tʼ eis allēla; ho de epi men tōn allōn ousian apathē te kai aphtharton kai atrepton pantōs axioi, hina dē mē eukataphronētou tinos pragmatos gennētēs einai dokę̄, peritton men kai idion pantapasi legōn ouden, ta de hypo Platōnos epʼ allōn heōramena kalōs metapherōn epi ta mē prosēkonta, kathaper tines tōn hysteron genomenōn andriantopoiōn.
Further, Plato holds that all bodies, being considered as on one like matter, turn and change into one another; but he thinks that the substance of the heavenly bodies, unlike the others, is impassible and imperishable and altogether unchangeable, so that he may not seem to be the begetter of some contemptible thing, saying nothing extraordinary or his own at all, but transferring what Plato saw well in other matters to things where it does not belong, like some sculptors who came later.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle transferred Plato’s ideas to the wrong subject, like a sculptor patching statues.
- Atticus, fragment 5. “Unlike the others” renders the probable sense; the text reads “for the others.”
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text; line-end hyphen left in the digital text): βού- λεται → βούλεται; εἶναι δοκῆ, → εἶναι δοκῇ,.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.7.4 (Dindorf 2:356; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-7-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-7-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.7.5Dindorf 2:356
ἐκεῖνοί τε γὰρ ἀπομιμησάμενοι τοῦδε τοῦ ἀνδρὸς κεφαλὴν, ἄλλου δὲ τὸ στέρνον, ἑτέρου δὲ τὴν ζώνην, εἰς ταυτὸν συνθέντες ἐνίοτε μὴ προσήκοντα πράγματα ἀλλήλοις ἔπεισαν αὐτοὺς ὥς τι πεποιηκότες ἴδιον· καὶ ὄντως τὸ μὲν ὅλον, ὃ δή τις ἂν ἀσυμμέτρως ἔχειν αἰτιάσαιτο, ἐστὶν αὐτῶν, τὰ δʼ ἐν αὐτῷ συνηρανισμένα καί τι καλὸν ἔχοντα οὐκ αὐτῶν.
ekeinoi te gar apomimēsamenoi toude tou andros kephalēn, allou de to sternon, heterou de tēn zōnēn, eis tauton synthentes eniote mē prosēkonta pragmata allēlois epeisan autous hōs ti pepoiēkotes idion; kai ontōs to men holon, ho dē tis an asymmetrōs echein aitiasaito, estin autōn, ta dʼ en autǭ synēranismena kai ti kalon echonta ouk autōn.
For they, copying the head of this man, the chest of another, and the waist of another, and putting together into one things sometimes not fitting one another, persuaded themselves that they had made something of their own; and in fact the whole, which one might blame as disproportioned, is theirs, but the parts collected into it and having some beauty are not theirs.
Notes and citation
Summary: Such sculptors combined borrowed parts into an ill-proportioned whole.
- Atticus, fragment 5.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.7.5 (Dindorf 2:356; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-7-5). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-7-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.7.6Dindorf 2:356–357
ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης ἀκούων Πλάτωνος ὅτι ἐστί τις οὐσία νοητὴ καθʼ αὑτὴν ἀσώματός τε καὶ ἀχρώματος καὶ ἀναφὴς, οὔτε γινομένη οὔτε φθειρομένη οὔτε τρεπομένη οὔτε μεταβαλλομένη, ἀεὶ δὲ κατὰ τὰ αὐτὰ καὶ ὡσαύτως ἔχουσα, πάλιν δʼ αὖ περὶ τῶν κατʼ οὐρανὸν ἀκούων, ὡς ὄντα θεῖα καὶ ἄφθαρτα καὶ ἀπαθῆ ἐστι σώματα, συνέθηκε καὶ συνεκόλλησεν ἐξ ἀμφοῖν πράγματα μὴ συνᾴδοντα· παρʼ ὧν μὲν γὰρ τὸ εἶναι σῶμα, παρʼ ὧν δὲ τὸ ἀπαθὲς εἶναι λαβὼν, σῶμα ἀπαθὲς ἐτεκτήνατο.
hōsautōs de kai Aristotelēs akouōn Platōnos hoti esti tis ousia noētē kathʼ hautēn asōmatos te kai achrōmatos kai anaphēs, oute ginomenē oute phtheiromenē oute trepomenē oute metaballomenē, aei de kata ta auta kai hōsautōs echousa, palin dʼ au peri tōn katʼ ouranon akouōn, hōs onta theia kai aphtharta kai apathē esti sōmata, synethēke kai synekollēsen ex amphoin pragmata mē synądonta; parʼ hōn men gar to einai sōma, parʼ hōn de to apathes einai labōn, sōma apathes etektēnato.
So too Aristotle, hearing Plato say that there is an intelligible substance by itself, incorporeal and colorless and intangible, neither coming to be nor perishing nor turning nor changing, but always the same and in the same state; and again hearing about the heavenly things, that they are divine and imperishable and impassible bodies, put together and glued from both things that do not agree; taking from the one being a body and from the other being impassible, he contrived an impassible body.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle combined Plato’s incorporeal being and divine heavenly bodies into an “impassible body.”
- Atticus, fragment 5; compare Plato, Phaedrus 247c.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): ἀσώ- ματός → ἀσώματός.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.7.6 (Dindorf 2:356–357; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-7-6). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-7-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.7.7Dindorf 2:357
ἐπὶ μὲν οὖν τῶν ἀνδριάντων, εἰ καὶ μὴ καλὸν τὸ ἐκ τῶν διαφερόντων, οὔτι γε ἀδύνατον γενέσθαι. διδάσκει γοῦν τὰ τοιαῦτα καὶ Ὅμηρος ὄμματα γὰρ, φησὶ, καὶ κεφαλὴν ἴκελος Διὶ τερπικεραύνῳ, Ἄρεϊ δὲ ζώνην, στέρνον δὲ Ποσειδάωνι. τὸ δὲ σῶμα ἀπαθὲς οὐκ ἄν ποτε γένοιτο. παθητῇ γὰρ καὶ τρεπτῇ συνδεδεμένον φύσει ἀνάγκην ἔχει συμπαθεῖν ᾧ συνέζευκται. εἰ δέ τι ἀπαθὲς εἴη, τοῦτο ἀφειμένον καὶ ἐλεύθερον ἀπὸ τοῦ πάσχοντος εἶναι δεῖ· ὥστε χωρὶς ἂν εἴη τῆς ὕλης, ἧς κεχωρισμένον ἀσώματον ἀναγκαίως ὁμολογοῖτʼ ἄν.” Ἔτι καὶ τούτοις πρόσσχωμεν τὸν νοῦν ἐν ὅσοις ἄλλοις διαφέρεσθαι τῷ Πλάτωνι τὸν Ἀριστοτέλην παρίστησιν
epi men oun tōn andriantōn, ei kai mē kalon to ek tōn diapherontōn, outi ge adynaton genesthai. didaskei goun ta toiauta kai Homēros ommata gar, phēsi, kai kephalēn ikelos Dii terpikeraunǭ, Areï de zōnēn, sternon de Poseidaōni. to de sōma apathes ouk an pote genoito. pathētę̄ gar kai treptę̄ syndedemenon physei anankēn echei sympathein hǭ synezeuktai. ei de ti apathes eiē, touto apheimenon kai eleutheron apo tou paschontos einai dei; hōste chōris an eiē tēs hylēs, hēs kechōrismenon asōmaton anankaiōs homologoitʼ an.” Eti kai toutois prosschōmen ton noun en hosois allois diapheresthai tǭ Platōni ton Aristotelēn paristēsin
With statues, even if what is made from different things is not beautiful, it is not impossible to make. Homer teaches such things, at least: “in eyes and head,” he says, “like Zeus who delights in thunder, in waist like Ares, in chest like Poseidon.” But an impassible body could never come into being. For bound to a passible and changeable nature, it must suffer along with that to which it is yoked. And if anything were impassible, it must be released and free from what suffers; so it would be apart from matter, and, being separate from it, would necessarily be admitted to be incorporeal.” Let us attend also to the other matters in which he shows Aristotle to differ from Plato:
Notes and citation
Summary: An impassible body is impossible; what is impassible must be incorporeal.
- Atticus, fragment 5; Homer, Iliad 2.478–479.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): φησὶ καἲ → φησὶ, καὶ.
Extrabiblical texts: Homer, Il. 2.478–479 (Homer, Iliad; quotation); Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.7.7 (Dindorf 2:357; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-7-7). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-7-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
Preparation 15, chapter 8
15.8.1Dindorf 2:357–358
“Ἔπειτα τούτοις ἑπόμενα πολλὰ ἐν οἷς διαφέρονται. ὁ μὲν γάρ φησι τὰ κατʼ οὐρανὸν τὴν πλείστην ἰδέαν ἐκ πυρὸς ἔχειν, ὁ δὲ μηδαμῆ μετεῖναι τοῖς οὐρανίοις πυρός. καὶ ὁ μέν φησιν ἀνάψαι τὸν θεὸν φῶς ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ πρὸς γῆν περιόδῳ, ἵνʼ ὅτι μάλιστα εἰς ἅπαντα φαίνοι τὸν οὐρανὸν, περὶ ἡλίου τὸ τοιοῦτον ἀποφαινόμενος· ὁ δὲ, ἅτε οὐκ ἐθέλων πῦρ εἶναι τὸν ἥλιον, τὸ δὲ φῶς εἰδὼς πῦρ καθαρὸν, ἤ τι πυρὸς ὂν, οὐκ ἐπιτρέπει φῶς περὶ αὐτὸν ἀνῆφθαι.
“Epeita toutois hepomena polla en hois diapherontai. ho men gar phēsi ta katʼ ouranon tēn pleistēn idean ek pyros echein, ho de mēdamē meteinai tois ouraniois pyros. kai ho men phēsin anapsai ton theon phōs en tę̄ deuterą pros gēn periodǭ, hinʼ hoti malista eis hapanta phainoi ton ouranon, peri hēliou to toiouton apophainomenos; ho de, hate ouk ethelōn pyr einai ton hēlion, to de phōs eidōs pyr katharon, ē ti pyros on, ouk epitrepei phōs peri auton anēphthai.
“Then there are many points following these on which they differ. For the one says that the heavenly bodies have their form mostly from fire, the other that the heavenly bodies have no share of fire at all. And the one says that God kindled a light in the second circuit from the earth, so that it might shine as much as possible over the whole heaven, declaring this of the sun; but the other, not wishing the sun to be fire, and knowing that light is pure fire or something of fire, does not allow light to have been kindled around it.
Notes and citation
Summary: Atticus: Plato makes the heavens fiery and the sun a kindled light; Aristotle denies both.
- Atticus, fragment 6 (des Places); Plato, Timaeus 40a, 39b.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (broken word and wrong comma in the digital text): καθα- ρὸν‚ ἤ → καθαρὸν, ἤ.
Extrabiblical texts: Plato, Tim. 39b (Plato (works); quotation); Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.1 (Dindorf 2:357–358; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.2Dindorf 2:358
ἔτι ὁ μὲν, κατʼ εἶδος ἀφθαρσίαν ἀπονέμων τοῖς κατʼ οὐρανὸν ἅπασιν, ἀποχωρήσεις τινὰς αὐτῶν καὶ προσχωρήσεις συμμέτρους φησὶ γίνεσθαι· ἀναγκάζουσι δὲ αὐτὸν λέγειν ταῦτα, τὰς μὲν ἀποκρίσεις, αἵ τε ἀκτῖνες τοῦ ἡλίου καὶ θερμότητες κατὰ ἀπόρρυσιν αὐτοῦ γινόμεναι· τὰς δὲ προσκρίσεις, ἡ ἴση τοῦ μεγέθους αὐτοῦ φάσις· οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἤθελεν ἴσα φαίνεσθαι μηδὲν ἀνθʼ ὧν ἀφίησι λαμβάνοντα·)
eti ho men, katʼ eidos aphtharsian aponemōn tois katʼ ouranon hapasin, apochōrēseis tinas autōn kai proschōrēseis symmetrous phēsi ginesthai; anankazousi de auton legein tauta, tas men apokriseis, hai te aktines tou hēliou kai thermotētes kata aporrysin autou ginomenai; tas de proskriseis, hē isē tou megethous autou phasis; ou gar an ēthelen isa phainesthai mēden anthʼ hōn aphiēsi lambanonta;)
Further, the one, while giving imperishability in form to all the heavenly bodies, says that certain proportionate departures and approaches take place in them; what compels him to say this is, for the separations, the rays and heats of the sun coming about by outflow from it; for the additions, the apparent equality of its size; for it would not appear equal if it received nothing in return for what it gives off.
Notes and citation
Summary: Plato allows exchanges of matter in the heavenly bodies.
- Atticus, fragment 6. The source of this view of Plato is uncertain.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.2 (Dindorf 2:358; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.3Dindorf 2:358
ὁ δὲ Ἀριστοτέλης πάντη μένειν ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς οὐσίας αὐτὰ βούλεται, μήτε τινὸς αὐτοῖς ἀποχωροῦντος μήτε προσιόντος.
ho de Aristotelēs pantē menein epi tēs autēs ousias auta bouletai, mēte tinos autois apochōrountos mēte prosiontos.
But Aristotle wants them to remain entirely in the same substance, nothing departing from them or coming to them.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle makes the heavenly bodies unchanging in substance.
- Atticus, fragment 6.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.3 (Dindorf 2:358; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.4Dindorf 2:358
ἔτι ὁ μὲν πρὸς τῇ κοινῇ κινήσει τῶν ἄστρων, καθʼ ἣν ἐν ταῖς σφαίραις ἐνδεδεμένοι κινοῦνται πάντες οἶ ἀστέρες οἴ τε ἀπλανεῖς καὶ οἶ πλανώμενοι, καὶ ἑτέραν αὐτοῖς κίνησιν ἀποδίδωσιν, ἣν δὴ καὶ ἄλλως καλλίστην εἶναι συμβέβηκε καὶ προσήκουσαν αὐτῶν τῇ φύσει τοῦ σώματος· (σφαιρικοὶ γὰρ ὄντες εἰκότως σφαιρικὴν ἄν τινα κίνησιν ἕκαστος κινοῖτο περιδινούμενος·) ὁ δὲ καὶ ταύτης ἀφαιρεῖται τῆς κινήσεως αὐτοὺς‚ ἣν ὡς ἔμψυχοι κινοῦνται, μόνην δὲ ἀπολείπει τὴν ὑπʼ ἄλλων τῶν περιεχόντων ὥσπερ ἀψύχοις συμβαίνουσαν.
eti ho men pros tę̄ koinę̄ kinēsei tōn astrōn, kathʼ hēn en tais sphairais endedemenoi kinountai pantes oi asteres oi te aplaneis kai oi planōmenoi, kai heteran autois kinēsin apodidōsin, hēn dē kai allōs kallistēn einai symbebēke kai prosēkousan autōn tę̄ physei tou sōmatos; (sphairikoi gar ontes eikotōs sphairikēn an tina kinēsin hekastos kinoito peridinoumenos;) ho de kai tautēs aphaireitai tēs kinēseōs autous‚ hēn hōs empsychoi kinountai, monēn de apoleipei tēn hypʼ allōn tōn periechontōn hōsper apsychois symbainousan.
Further, the one, besides the common motion of the stars, by which all the stars, fixed and wandering, bound in their spheres are moved, gives them another motion too, which happens also to be the finest and proper to the nature of their body (for being spherical, each would reasonably move with a spherical motion, whirling round); but the other takes from them this motion too, by which they move as having souls, and leaves only that which happens to them from the other bodies that contain them, as if they were soulless.
Notes and citation
Summary: Plato gives the stars their own rotation as living beings; Aristotle denies it.
- Atticus, fragment 6; Plato, Timaeus 40a–b.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (repeated syllables in the digital text; stray letters in the digital text): ἀποδίδωσιν, δῶσιν‚ ἣν → ἀποδίδωσιν, ἣν; καὶ ’πʼ προσήκουσαν → καὶ προσήκουσαν.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.4 (Dindorf 2:358; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.5Dindorf 2:358–359
καὶ δὴ καί φησι τὴν γινομένην φαντασίαν ἡμῖν ἀπὸ τῶν ἀστέρων ὡς κινουμένων πάθος εἶναι τῆς ἡμετέρας ὄψεως ἀδυνατούσης καὶ ὡσπερεὶ σειομένης‚ ἀλήθειαν δὲ οὐκ εἶναι· ὥσπερ Πλάτωνος ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς τὴν ὑπὲρ τῆς κινήσεως πίστιν λαμβάνοντος, ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἀπὸ τοῦ λόγου τοῦ διδάσκοντος ὅτι ἀνάγκη τούτων ἕκαστον ζῷον ὄντα καὶ ψυχὴν ἔχοντα καὶ σῶμα κινεῖσθαι τὴν ἰδίαν κίνησιν· (πᾶν γὰρ σῶμα ᾧ μὲν ἔξωθεν τὸ κινεῖσθαι ἄψυχον, ᾧ δὲ ἔνδοθεν καὶ ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ ἔμψυχον·) κινούμενον δὲ, ἅτε θεῖον ὄντα, τὴν καλλίστην κινεῖσθαι κίνησιν· καλλίστης δʼ οὔσης τῆς ἐν κύκλῳ κινήσεως, ταύτῃ αὐτὸν κινεῖσθαι.
kai dē kai phēsi tēn ginomenēn phantasian hēmin apo tōn asterōn hōs kinoumenōn pathos einai tēs hēmeteras opseōs adynatousēs kai hōsperei seiomenēs‚ alētheian de ouk einai; hōsper Platōnos apo tautēs tēs tēn hyper tēs kinēseōs pistin lambanontos, allʼ ouk apo tou logou tou didaskontos hoti anankē toutōn hekaston zǭon onta kai psychēn echonta kai sōma kineisthai tēn idian kinēsin; (pan gar sōma hǭ men exōthen to kineisthai apsychon, hǭ de endothen kai ex heautou empsychon;) kinoumenon de, hate theion onta, tēn kallistēn kineisthai kinēsin; kallistēs dʼ ousēs tēs en kyklǭ kinēseōs, tautę̄ auton kineisthai.
And indeed he says that the appearance we have of the stars as moving is an affection of our sight, which is weak and as it were shaken, but not the truth; as if Plato took his belief about their motion from this, and not from the argument that teaches that each of these, being a living being and having soul and body, must move with its own motion (for every body that is moved from outside is soulless, but that moved from within and from itself is ensouled); and moving, being divine, it moves with the finest motion; and since the finest motion is that in a circle, it moves in this.
Notes and citation
Summary: Plato bases the stars’ motion on reason, not on the eye.
- Atticus, fragment 6; compare Aristotle, On the Heavens 2.8.290a; Plato, Phaedrus 245e.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (word broken in the digital text): κινεῖ σθαι → κινεῖσθαι.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.5 (Dindorf 2:358–359; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-5). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.6Dindorf 2:359
ἡ δὲ αἴσθησις τὰ μὲν ἐκ τοῦ λόγου μαρτυροῖτο ἂν ὡς ἀληθεύουσα, οὐ μὴν αὐτὴ παρέσχε τὴν πίστιν τῆς κινήσεως. περὶ δὲ τῆς τοῦ παντὸς κινήσεως ὡς μὲν οὐκ ἐν κύκλῳ τινὶ γίνεται νικώμενος ὑπὸ τῆς ἐναργείας οὐκ ἔσχεν ἀντειπεῖν Πλάτωνι, παρεῖχε δὲ κἀνταῦθα διαφορὰν αὐτῷ τὸ καλὸν τοῦτο εὕρημα τοῦ σώματος.
hē de aisthēsis ta men ek tou logou martyroito an hōs alētheuousa, ou mēn autē paresche tēn pistin tēs kinēseōs. peri de tēs tou pantos kinēseōs hōs men ouk en kyklǭ tini ginetai nikōmenos hypo tēs enargeias ouk eschen anteipein Platōni, pareiche de kantautha diaphoran autǭ to kalon touto heurēma tou sōmatos.
Perception would bear witness to what comes from reason as truthful, but it did not itself supply the belief in the motion. About the motion of the universe, he could not contradict Plato by saying that it does not take place in a circle, being overcome by the evidence; but here too this fine discovery of the body gave him a difference from him.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle could not deny the circular motion of the universe, but explained it by his fifth body.
- Atticus, fragment 6.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): ἐκ τοὐ λόγου → ἐκ τοῦ λόγου.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.6 (Dindorf 2:359; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-6). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.7Dindorf 2:359
ὁ μὲν γὰρ Πλάτων, ὄντων τεττάρων σωμάτων καὶ πάντων φύσει κινουμένων ἁπλῆν καὶ εὐθεῖαν κίνησιν, πυρὸς μὲν ἐπὶ τὸ ἐκτὸς, γῆς δʼ ἐπὶ τὸ μέσον, τῶν δὲ ἄλλων ἐπὶ τὸ μεταξὺ, τὴν ἐν κύκλῳ κίνησιν ἀπέδωκε τῇ ψυχῇ· ὁ δʼ, ᾗπερ ἄλλῳ σώματι ἄλλην, οὕτω δὲ καὶ τὴν ἐν κύκλῳ, καθάπερ σωματικήν τινα, τῷ πέμπτῳ προσένειμε σώματι, πάντʼ εὐκόλως αὑτὸν ἐξαπατήσας.
ho men gar Platōn, ontōn tettarōn sōmatōn kai pantōn physei kinoumenōn haplēn kai eutheian kinēsin, pyros men epi to ektos, gēs dʼ epi to meson, tōn de allōn epi to metaxy, tēn en kyklǭ kinēsin apedōke tę̄ psychę̄; ho dʼ, hę̄per allǭ sōmati allēn, houtō de kai tēn en kyklǭ, kathaper sōmatikēn tina, tǭ pemptǭ proseneime sōmati, pantʼ eukolōs hauton exapatēsas.
For Plato, since there are four bodies and all move by nature in a simple and straight motion, fire outward, earth to the middle, and the others to the space between, assigned circular motion to the soul; but he, as he gave a different motion to a different body, so also gave circular motion, as if some bodily motion, to the fifth body, easily deceiving himself in everything.
Notes and citation
Summary: Plato attributes circular motion to soul; Aristotle to a fifth body.
- Atticus, fragment 6.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): προσ- ένειμε → προσένειμε.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.7 (Dindorf 2:359; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-7). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.8Dindorf 2:359
τοῖς μὲν γὰρ ἐπʼ εὐθείας κινουμένοις αἷ βαρύτητες καὶ κουφότητες τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς κινήσεως παρείχοντο, τὸ δὲ πέμπτον σῶμα, μήτε βάρους μετέχον μήτε κουφότητος, ἀκινησίας μᾶλλον·
tois men gar epʼ eutheias kinoumenois hai barytētes kai kouphotētes tēn archēn tēs kinēseōs pareichonto, to de pempton sōma, mēte barous metechon mēte kouphotētos, akinēsias mallon;
For to those moving in a straight line weights and lightnesses supplied the beginning of motion; but the fifth body, having no share of weight or lightness, would be a cause rather of immobility.
Notes and citation
Summary: A body without weight or lightness would have no reason to move.
- Atticus, fragment 6. “Would be a cause” is supplied by sense.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.8 (Dindorf 2:359; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-8). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.9Dindorf 2:359
οὐ τῆς ἐν κύκλῳ κινήσεως τοῖς ἐπʼ εὐθείας κινουμένοις τὸ σχῆμα τὴν αἰτίαν ἔχει τῆς κινήσεως, ἀλλʼ ἡ ῥοπή· σῶμα οὐ μόνον ἐν μέσῳ τεθὲν ὁμοίου τινὸς οὐχ ἔξει πῆ κλιθῇ, ἀλλʼ ἐν κύκλῳ περιτεθὲν ὁποίῳ τινὶ οὐχ ἕξει τῆς ἐπί τι κλίσεως αἰτίαν, ἴωσι, πρὸς ἠῶ τʼ ἠέλιόν τε, εἴτʼ ἐπʼ ἀριστερά, εἴτε πρόσω εἴτʼ ὀπίσω.
ou tēs en kyklǭ kinēseōs tois epʼ eutheias kinoumenois to schēma tēn aitian echei tēs kinēseōs, allʼ hē rhopē; sōma ou monon en mesǭ tethen homoiou tinos ouch exei pē klithę̄, allʼ en kyklǭ peritethen hopoiǭ tini ouch hexei tēs epi ti kliseōs aitian, iōsi, pros ēō tʼ ēelion te, eitʼ epʼ aristera, eite prosō eitʼ opisō.
and not of motion in a circle. For if for those moving in a straight line it is not their shape that is the cause of their motion, but their inclination, a body not only placed in the middle of something like itself will not have a direction to incline, but placed round in a circle of whatever kind will have no cause of inclining to anything, whether “they go to the right, toward the dawn and the sun, or to the left,” whether forward or backward.
Notes and citation
Summary: Shape cannot cause motion; a body without inclination would not move at all.
- Atticus, fragment 6; Homer, Iliad 12.239–240 (adapted). The sentence is damaged in the text; translated by sense.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (wrong comma in the digital text): αἰτίαν‚ ἴωσι → αἰτίαν, ἴωσι.
Extrabiblical texts: Homer, Il. 12.239–240 (Homer, Iliad; quotation); Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.9 (Dindorf 2:359; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-9). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.10Dindorf 2:359–360
ἔτι τοῖς μὲν ἄλλοις σώμασιν ἐξωσθεῖσι τῶν οἰκείων τόπων παρέχει τὸ κινεῖσθαι πάλιν ἀφʼ αὑτῶν ἡ πρὸς τούτους ἀναφορά· τῷ πέμπτῳ δὲ ἐκείνῳ‚ μηδέποτε ἐκβαίνοντι τῶν αὐτοῦ τόπων, μένειν ἂν προσήκοι.
eti tois men allois sōmasin exōstheisi tōn oikeiōn topōn parechei to kineisthai palin aphʼ hautōn hē pros toutous anaphora; tǭ pemptǭ de ekeinǭ‚ mēdepote ekbainonti tōn autou topōn, menein an prosēkoi.
Further, for the other bodies, when pushed out of their proper places, their relation to these supplies the motion back of themselves; but for that fifth body, which never leaves its own places, it would be fitting to remain still.
Notes and citation
Summary: The fifth body, never displaced, would have no reason to move.
- Atticus, fragment 6.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.10 (Dindorf 2:359–360; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-10). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-10) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.11Dindorf 2:360
καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων σωμάτων‚ ὑπεξαιρουμένου τοῦ πέμπτου, φαίνεται φιλονεικῶν Ἀριστοτέλης μὴ τὰ αὐτὰ λέγειν Πλάτωνι. ζητήσαντος γὰρ τοῦ Πλάτωνος εἰ ἔστι φύσει βαρὺ σῶμα ἢ φύσει κοῦφον, καὶ ἐπειδὴ ταῦτα κατὰ τὴν πρὸς τὸ ἄνω καὶ κάτω σχέσιν ἐφαίνετο λέγεσθαι σκεψαμένου εἴτε ἐστί τι κάτω φύσει καὶ ἄνω‚ εἴτε μὴ‚ καὶ ἀποδείξαντος ἀκριβῶς ὅτι κατὰ μὲν τὰς τῶν σωμάτων πρὸς τοὺς τόπους οἰκειότητας τὸ κάτω λέγοιτο ἑκάστοις ἐφʼ ὃ φέροιντο, ἄνω δὲ ἑκάστοις τὸ ἀλλότριον ἀφʼ οὗ ἀναχωροῖεν‚ καὶ κατὰ τὴν αὐτὴν σχέσιν καὶ τὸ βαρὺ καὶ τὸ κοῦφον διανείμαντος καὶ πρὸς τούτῳ ἀποδείξαντος ὅτι μήτε τὸ μέσον μήτε τὸ πέριξ αὐτῶν εὔλογον ἄνω τι ἢ κάτω λέγεσθαι·
kai peri tōn allōn sōmatōn‚ hypexairoumenou tou pemptou, phainetai philoneikōn Aristotelēs mē ta auta legein Platōni. zētēsantos gar tou Platōnos ei esti physei bary sōma ē physei kouphon, kai epeidē tauta kata tēn pros to anō kai katō schesin ephaineto legesthai skepsamenou eite esti ti katō physei kai anō‚ eite mē‚ kai apodeixantos akribōs hoti kata men tas tōn sōmatōn pros tous topous oikeiotētas to katō legoito hekastois ephʼ ho pherointo, anō de hekastois to allotrion aphʼ hou anachōroien‚ kai kata tēn autēn schesin kai to bary kai to kouphon dianeimantos kai pros toutǭ apodeixantos hoti mēte to meson mēte to perix autōn eulogon anō ti ē katō legesthai;
And about the other bodies too, the fifth being set aside, Aristotle evidently strives not to say the same as Plato. For when Plato inquired whether there is a body heavy by nature or light by nature, and, since these were seen to be spoken of according to relation to up and down, examined whether there is anything up and down by nature or not, and showed precisely that according to the affinities of bodies to places, down for each would be said to be that to which they are carried, and up for each the alien place from which they withdraw, and divided heavy and light according to the same relation, and besides this showed that it is not reasonable to call either the middle or the circumference of them up or down;
Notes and citation
Summary: Plato defined up, down, heavy, and light relative to each body’s proper place.
- Atticus, fragment 6; Plato, Timaeus 62c–63e.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): πρὸς τούτω ἀποδείξαντος → πρὸς τούτῳ ἀποδείξαντος.
Extrabiblical texts: Plato, Tim. 62c–63e (Plato (works); allusion); Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.11 (Dindorf 2:360; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-11). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-11) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.12Dindorf 2:360
ὅδε ἀντιτίθησι, πανταχόθεν καταβάλλειν δεῖν ἡγούμενος τὰ ἐκείνου, καὶ τὸ μὲν ἐπὶ τὸ μέσον φερόμενον βαρὺ λέγειν βιάζεται, τὸ δὲ ἐπὶ τὸ πέριξ κοῦφον· καὶ τὸν μὲν τόπον τὸν ἐν μέσῳ κάτω φησὶ, τὸν δὲ πέριξ ἄνω.”
hode antitithēsi, pantachothen kataballein dein hēgoumenos ta ekeinou, kai to men epi to meson pheromenon bary legein biazetai, to de epi to perix kouphon; kai ton men topon ton en mesǭ katō phēsi, ton de perix anō.”
he opposes this, thinking he must tear down Plato’s views on every side, and forces himself to call what moves to the middle heavy and what moves to the circumference light, and says the place in the middle is down and that at the circumference up.”
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle insisted on absolute up and down, merely to oppose Plato.
- Atticus, fragment 6.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.12 (Dindorf 2:360; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-12). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-12) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.8.13Dindorf 2:360
Ἀλλὰ περὶ μὲν κόσμου, καὶ ἐξ ὧν οὗτος, καὶ τῶν κατʼ οὐρανὸν τοσοῦτον ἀλλήλων ἀφεστήκατον. ταῦτα μὲν οἵδε. Μώσης δὲ καὶ τὰ Ἑβραίων λόγια τούτων οὐδὲν πολυπραγμονεῖ· καὶ εἰκότως‚ ὅτι μηδὲ πρὸς βίου κατόρθωσιν τοῖς περὶ ταῦτα ἀσχολουμένοις λυσιτελεῖν ἐνομίσθη.
Alla peri men kosmou, kai ex hōn houtos, kai tōn katʼ ouranon tosouton allēlōn aphestēkaton. tauta men hoide. Mōsēs de kai ta Hebraiōn logia toutōn ouden polypragmonei; kai eikotōs‚ hoti mēde pros biou katorthōsin tois peri tauta ascholoumenois lysitelein enomisthē.
So far, then, the two stand apart from each other concerning the world, and what it consists of, and the heavenly bodies. So these men. But Moses and the oracles of the Hebrews concern themselves with none of these things; and reasonably, since it was not thought to profit those occupied with them for the right ordering of life.
Notes and citation
Summary: Moses did not concern himself with such cosmological questions, which do not profit life.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (OCR slip): τούτʼ ὢν οὐδὲν → τούτων οὐδὲν.
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.8.13 (Dindorf 2:360; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-8-13). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-8-13) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
Preparation 15, chapter 9
15.9.1Dindorf 2:360
“Ὑπὲρ δὲ τῆς ψυχῆς τί καὶ λέγοιμεν ἄν; δῆλα γὰρ ταῦτα οὐ μόνον τοῖς φιλοσοφοῦσιν‚ ἀλλʼ ἤδη σχεδὸν καὶ τοῖς ἰδιώταις ἅπασιν, ὅτι Πλάτων μὲν ἀθάνατον τὴν ψυχὴν ἀπολείπει, καὶ πολλοὺς ὑπὲρ τούτου λόγους πεποίηται‚ ποικίλως καὶ παντοίως ἀποδεικνὺς ὅτι ἐστὶν ἀθάνατος ἡ ψυχή.
“Hyper de tēs psychēs ti kai legoimen an? dēla gar tauta ou monon tois philosophousin‚ allʼ ēdē schedon kai tois idiōtais hapasin, hoti Platōn men athanaton tēn psychēn apoleipei, kai pollous hyper toutou logous pepoiētai‚ poikilōs kai pantoiōs apodeiknys hoti estin athanatos hē psychē.
“And what could we say about the soul? For this is plain not only to philosophers but now to almost all ordinary people too, that Plato leaves the soul immortal and has made many arguments about this, showing in various and manifold ways that the soul is immortal.
Notes and citation
Summary: Atticus: Plato taught and argued for the soul’s immortality.
- Atticus, fragment 7 (des Places).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text; stray mark in the digital text): παν- τοίως → παντοίως; Πλάτωνʼ → Πλάτων.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.1 (Dindorf 2:360; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.2Dindorf 2:360–361
πολλὴ δὲ καὶ τοῖς ἐσπουδακόσι περὶ τὰ Πλάτωνος ἡ φιλοτιμία γέγονε‚ συναγωνιζομένοις τῷ τε δόγματι καὶ τῷ Πλάτωνι. σχεδὸν γὰρ τὸ συνέχον τὴν πᾶσαν αἵρεσιν τἀνδρὸς τούτʼ ἔστιν.
pollē de kai tois espoudakosi peri ta Platōnos hē philotimia gegone‚ synagōnizomenois tǭ te dogmati kai tǭ Platōni. schedon gar to synechon tēn pasan hairesin tandros toutʼ estin.
And there has been great zeal among those devoted to Plato, contending for both the doctrine and Plato. For this is almost what holds the man’s whole system together.
Notes and citation
Summary: The soul’s immortality holds Plato’s system together.
- Atticus, fragment 7.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): Πλά- τωνος → Πλάτωνος.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.2 (Dindorf 2:360–361; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.3Dindorf 2:361
ἥ τε γὰρ τῶν ἠθικῶν δογμάτων ὑπόθεσις ἐπηκολούθησε τῇ τῆς ψυχῆς ἀθανασίᾳ, τὸ μέγα καὶ λαμπρὸν καὶ νεανικὸν τῆς ἀρετῆς διὰ τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς θεῖον σῶσαι δυνηθείσης‚ τά τε τῆς φύσεως πράγματα πάντα κατὰ τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς διοίκησιν ἔσχε τὸ καλῶς διοικεῖσθαι δύνασθαι.
hē te gar tōn ēthikōn dogmatōn hypothesis epēkolouthēse tę̄ tēs psychēs athanasią, to mega kai lampron kai neanikon tēs aretēs dia to tēs psychēs theion sōsai dynētheisēs‚ ta te tēs physeōs pragmata panta kata tēn tēs psychēs dioikēsin esche to kalōs dioikeisthai dynasthai.
For the foundation of the ethical doctrines followed on the soul’s immortality, virtue being able to preserve its greatness and splendor and vigor because of the divinity of the soul; and all the things of nature came to be well governed according to the soul’s government.
Notes and citation
Summary: Plato’s ethics and physics depend on the immortal soul.
- Atticus, fragment 7.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.3 (Dindorf 2:361; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.4Dindorf 2:361
ψυχὴ γὰρ πᾶσα, φησὶ, παντὸς ἐπιμελεῖται τοῦ ἀψύχου, πάντα δὲ οὐρανὸν περιπολεῖ ἄλλοτʼ ἐν ἄλλοις εἴδεσι γινομένη. ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ τὰ τῆς ἐπιστήμης καὶ τῆς σοφίας εἰς τὴν ἀθανασίαν τῆς ψυχῆς ἀνῆπται τῷ Πλάτωνι. πᾶσαι γὰρ αἶ μαθήσεις ἀναμνήσεις, καὶ οὐκ ἄλλως οἴεται δύνασθαι σώζεσθαι καὶ ζήτησιν καὶ μάθησιν, ἐξ ὧν ἐπιστήμη γίνεται.
psychē gar pasa, phēsi, pantos epimeleitai tou apsychou, panta de ouranon peripolei allotʼ en allois eidesi ginomenē. alla mēn kai ta tēs epistēmēs kai tēs sophias eis tēn athanasian tēs psychēs anēptai tǭ Platōni. pasai gar ai mathēseis anamnēseis, kai ouk allōs oietai dynasthai sōzesthai kai zētēsin kai mathēsin, ex hōn epistēmē ginetai.
“For all soul,” he says, “cares for all that is soulless, and goes about the whole heaven, coming to be now in one form, now in another.” And indeed for Plato the things of knowledge and wisdom are attached to the soul’s immortality. For all learning is recollection, and he thinks that inquiry and learning, from which knowledge comes, could not otherwise be preserved.
Notes and citation
Summary: For Plato soul governs the world, and learning is recollection.
- Atticus, fragment 7; Plato, Phaedrus 246b; Meno 81c–d; Phaedo 72e.
Extrabiblical texts: Plato, Phaedr. 246b (Plato (works); quotation); Plato, Men. 81c–d (Plato (works); allusion); Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.4 (Dindorf 2:361; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.5Dindorf 2:361
εἰ δὲ μή ἐστιν ἡ ψυχὴ ἀθάνατος‚ οὐδὲ ἀνάμνησις. εἰ δὲ μὴ τοῦτο, οὐδὲ μάθησις. πάντων οὖν τῶν Πλάτωνος δογμάτων ἀτεχνῶς ἐξηρτημένων καὶ ἐκκρεμαμένων τῆς κατὰ τὴν ψυχὴν θειότητός τε καὶ ἀθανασίας, ὁ μὴ συγχωρῶν τοῦτο τὴν πᾶσαν ἀνατρέπει φιλοσοφίαν Πλάτωνος.
ei de mē estin hē psychē athanatos‚ oude anamnēsis. ei de mē touto, oude mathēsis. pantōn oun tōn Platōnos dogmatōn atechnōs exērtēmenōn kai ekkremamenōn tēs kata tēn psychēn theiotētos te kai athanasias, ho mē synchōrōn touto tēn pasan anatrepei philosophian Platōnos.
But if the soul is not immortal, there is no recollection either; and if not this, no learning either. Since all Plato’s doctrines, then, simply hang and depend on the divinity and immortality of the soul, he who does not grant this overturns the whole philosophy of Plato.
Notes and citation
Summary: Denying the soul’s immortality overturns Plato’s entire philosophy.
- Atticus, fragment 7.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.5 (Dindorf 2:361; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-5). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.6Dindorf 2:361
τίς οὖν ἐστιν ὁ πρῶτος ἐγχειρήσας ἀντιτάξασθαι ἀποδείξεσι, καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν ἀφελέσθαι τῆς ἀθανασίας καὶ τῆς ἄλλης πάσης δυνάμεως; τίς δʼ ἕτερος πρὸ Ἀριστοτέλους; τῶν μὲν γὰρ ἄλλων οἷ μὲν ἐπιδιαμένειν συνεχώρησαν, οἱ δʼ‚ εἰ μὴ καὶ τοῦτο‚ δύναμίν γε ἐν τῷ σώματι καὶ κίνησίν τινα καὶ ἔργα καὶ πράξεις ἀπένειμαν τῆς ψυχῆς·
tis oun estin ho prōtos encheirēsas antitaxasthai apodeixesi, kai tēn psychēn aphelesthai tēs athanasias kai tēs allēs pasēs dynameōs? tis dʼ heteros pro Aristotelous? tōn men gar allōn hoi men epidiamenein synechōrēsan, hoi dʼ‚ ei mē kai touto‚ dynamin ge en tǭ sōmati kai kinēsin tina kai erga kai praxeis apeneiman tēs psychēs;
Who, then, was the first who undertook to set himself against the proofs, and to take from the soul its immortality and all its other power? Who other than Aristotle? For of the others, some granted that it survives, others, if not this, at least assigned to the soul power in the body and some motion and works and actions;
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle was the first to deny the soul’s immortality and powers.
- Atticus, fragment 7.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.6 (Dindorf 2:361; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-6). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.7Dindorf 2:361
ὁ δὲ‚ ὅσῳπερ Πλάτων ἀπεσέμνυνε τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς πρᾶγμα, ἀρχὴν γενέσεως καὶ θεοῦ παίδευμα καὶ τῶν ἁπάντων προστάτιν ἀποφηνάμενος‚ τοσῷδε ἐφιλονείκησε καθελεῖν καὶ ἀτιμάσαι καὶ μικροῦ δεῖν μηδὲν ἀποφῆναι τὴν ψυχήν.
ho de‚ hosǭper Platōn apesemnyne to tēs psychēs pragma, archēn geneseōs kai theou paideuma kai tōn hapantōn prostatin apophēnamenos‚ tosǭde ephiloneikēse kathelein kai atimasai kai mikrou dein mēden apophēnai tēn psychēn.
but he, as much as Plato exalted the soul, declaring it the principle of generation and a pupil of God and the ruler of all things, so much he strove to pull it down and dishonor it and make the soul almost nothing.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle belittled the soul as much as Plato exalted it.
- Atticus, fragment 7.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray mark in the digital text): Πλάτωνʼ → Πλάτων.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.7 (Dindorf 2:361; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-7). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.8Dindorf 2:361–362
οὔτε γὰρ πνεῦμα οὔτε πῦρ οὔτε ὅλως σῶμα, ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ ἀσώματον, οἶον εἶναί τε ἐφʼ αὑτοῦ καὶ κινεῖσθαι, ἀλλʼ οὐδʼ ὅσον ἐπὶ τοῦ σώματος ἀκίνητον εἶναι καὶ ὡς εἰπεῖν ἄψυχον. οἶον γὰρ τόδε ἐτόλμησεν, ἢ καὶ ἀπηναγκάσθη, ὡς καὶ τὰς πρωτουργοὺς κινήσεις ἀφελέσθαι τῆς ψυχῆς, τὸ βουλεύσασθαι, τὸ διανοηθῆναι, τὸ προσδοκήσαι, τὸ μνημονεῦσαι, τὸ λογίσασθαι;
oute gar pneuma oute pyr oute holōs sōma, allʼ oude asōmaton, oion einai te ephʼ hautou kai kineisthai, allʼ oudʼ hoson epi tou sōmatos akinēton einai kai hōs eipein apsychon. oion gar tode etolmēsen, ē kai apēnankasthē, hōs kai tas prōtourgous kinēseis aphelesthai tēs psychēs, to bouleusasthai, to dianoēthēnai, to prosdokēsai, to mnēmoneusai, to logisasthai?
For it is neither breath nor fire nor body at all, nor incorporeal such as to exist by itself and move, but not even, as far as concerns the body, unmoved and, so to speak, soulless. What did he dare, or was he compelled to, so as to take from the soul even its primary motions, deliberating, thinking, expecting, remembering, reasoning?
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle denied the soul even its primary motions of thought and memory.
- Atticus, fragment 7.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.8 (Dindorf 2:361–362; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-8). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.9Dindorf 2:362
οὐ γὰρ ψυχῆς ταῦτά φησι τὰ κινήματα ὁ τῆς φύσεως, ὥς φασι, γραμματεύς. πάνυ γοῦν οὗτός ἐστι πιστὸς, ὡς συνεικέναι τι περὶ τῶν ἐκτὸς, ὁ τῆς αὑτοῦ ψυχῆς τοσοῦτον διημαρτηκὼς ὡς μηδʼ ὅτι διανοεῖται παρακολουθεῖν. οὐ γὰρ ἡ ψυχὴ, φησὶν, ἀλλʼ ὁ ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν ὁ τούτων ἕκαστον ἐνεργῶν, ἡ ψυχὴ δὲ ἀκίνητος.
ou gar psychēs tauta phēsi ta kinēmata ho tēs physeōs, hōs phasi, grammateus. pany goun houtos esti pistos, hōs syneikenai ti peri tōn ektos, ho tēs hautou psychēs tosouton diēmartēkōs hōs mēdʼ hoti dianoeitai parakolouthein. ou gar hē psychē, phēsin, allʼ ho anthrōpos estin ho toutōn hekaston energōn, hē psychē de akinētos.
For the secretary of nature, as they call him, says that these are not motions of the soul. Very trustworthy, then, is he to understand anything of external things, who has so far mistaken his own soul as not to follow even that it thinks. For it is not the soul, he says, but the man who performs each of these, and the soul is unmoved.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle says the man, not the soul, thinks, the soul being unmoved.
- Atticus, fragment 7; compare Aristotle, On the Soul 1.4.408b.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.9 (Dindorf 2:362; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-9). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.10Dindorf 2:362
τούτῳ τοιγαροῦν ἑπόμενος Δικαίαρχος, καὶ τἀκόλουθον ἱκανὸς ὢν θεωρεῖν, ἀνῄρηκε τὴν ὅλην ὑπόστασιν τῆς ψυχῆς. ὅτι μὲν γὰρ ἀόρατόν τι καὶ ἀφανές ἐστιν ἡ ψυχὴ δῆλον, ὥστε οὐκ ἂν διά γε τὴν ἀπὸ τῶν αἰσθήσεων ἐνέργειαν δοίημεν εἶναι ψυχήν· αἱ δὲ κινήσεις αὐτῆς ἀφανοῦς οὔσης ἀναγκάζειν ἡμὰς δοκοῦσιν εἶναί τι τὴν ψυχὴν ὁμολογεῖν.
toutǭ toigaroun hepomenos Dikaiarchos, kai takolouthon hikanos ōn theōrein, anę̄rēke tēn holēn hypostasin tēs psychēs. hoti men gar aoraton ti kai aphanes estin hē psychē dēlon, hōste ouk an dia ge tēn apo tōn aisthēseōn energeian doiēmen einai psychēn; hai de kinēseis autēs aphanous ousēs anankazein hēmas dokousin einai ti tēn psychēn homologein.
Following him, then, Dicaearchus, being able to see the consequence, did away with the whole existence of the soul. For that the soul is something invisible and unseen is clear, so that we could not grant that there is a soul because of the activity from the senses; but its motions, though it is unseen, seem to compel us to admit that the soul is something.
Notes and citation
Summary: Dicaearchus, following Aristotle, abolished the soul altogether.
- Atticus, fragment 7.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): Δικᾳίαρχος → Δικαίαρχος.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation); Dicaearchus (Dicaearchus of Messana; echo)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.10 (Dindorf 2:362; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-10). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-10) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.11Dindorf 2:362
ταῦτα γὰρ ἅπας τις συνιέναι δοκεῖ τῆς ψυχῆς ὄντα, τὸ βουλεύεσθαι καὶ σκοπεῖσθαι καὶ καθʼ ὃν δήποτε τρόπον διανοεῖσθαι. ὅταν γὰρ ἴδωμεν τὸ σῶμα καὶ τὰς τούτου δυνάμεις καὶ ἐνθυμηθῶμεν δὲ τὰς τοιαύτας ἐνεργείας, ὡς οὐ σώματος [οὔσας, ] δίδομεν εἶναί τι ἐν ἡμῖν ἕτερον τὸ βουλευόμενον· τοῦτο δὲ εἶναι τὴν ψυχήν. ἐπεὶ πόθεν ἀλλαχόθεν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ὑπὲρ ψυχῆς;
tauta gar hapas tis synienai dokei tēs psychēs onta, to bouleuesthai kai skopeisthai kai kathʼ hon dēpote tropon dianoeisthai. hotan gar idōmen to sōma kai tas toutou dynameis kai enthymēthōmen de tas toiautas energeias, hōs ou sōmatos [ousas, ] didomen einai ti en hēmin heteron to bouleuomenon; touto de einai tēn psychēn. epei pothen allachothen episteusamen hyper psychēs?
For everyone seems to understand that these belong to the soul: deliberating, considering, and thinking in whatever way. For when we see the body and its powers, and consider such activities as not of the body, we grant that there is something else in us that deliberates, and that this is the soul. For from where else did we believe about the soul?
Textual problem in this passage: see the notes.
Notes and citation
Summary: We infer the soul from activities that are not bodily.
- Atticus, fragment 7. The editor deletes “being.”
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray mark in the digital text): τὸ βουλευόμενον ’ τοῦτο → τὸ βουλευόμενον· τοῦτο.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.11 (Dindorf 2:362; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-11). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-11) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.12Dindorf 2:362–363
ἂν οὑν τις ἐξ ὧν μάλιστα ψυχὴ φαίνεται ταῦτα ἀφελόμενος ἑτέρῳ τινὶ προσάψῃ πράγματι, οὔτε ὅθεν οὖσα ἐμφαίνεται καταλέλοιπεν οὔτε ὅ τι χρήσιμος ἂν εἶναι δοκοίη. τίς οὖν ἡ βοήθεια τῷ τὴν ψυχὴν ἀθάνατον εἶναι θέλοντι παρὰ τοῦ τὴν ψυχὴν ἀποκτιννύντος; τίς δὲ ἡ διδασκαλία τοῦ τρόπου τῆς κινήσεως, καθʼ ὃν αὐτοκίνητον αὐτήν φαμεν, παρὰ τῶν μηδὲ τὸ παράπαν αὐτῇ κίνησιν νεμόντων;
an houn tis ex hōn malista psychē phainetai tauta aphelomenos heterǭ tini prosapsę̄ pragmati, oute hothen ousa emphainetai kataleloipen oute ho ti chrēsimos an einai dokoiē. tis oun hē boētheia tǭ tēn psychēn athanaton einai thelonti para tou tēn psychēn apoktinnyntos? tis de hē didaskalia tou tropou tēs kinēseōs, kathʼ hon autokinēton autēn phamen, para tōn mēde to parapan autę̄ kinēsin nemontōn?
If, then, one takes away these things, from which above all the soul appears, and attaches them to something else, he has left neither the ground from which it shows itself to exist, nor in what way it might seem useful. What help, then, has one who wants the soul immortal from him who kills the soul? And what teaching on the manner of motion, by which we say it is self-moved, from those who allow it no motion at all?
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle’s teaching cannot support the soul’s immortality or self-motion.
- Atticus, fragment 7.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (broken word and accent slip in the digital text): αὐτο- κίνητὸν → αὐτοκίνητον.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.12 (Dindorf 2:362–363; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-12). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-12) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.13Dindorf 2:363
ναί· ἀλλὰ κατά γε τὴν ἀθανασίαν τοῦ νοῦ φήσαι τις ἂν αὐτὸν κοινωνεῖν Πλάτωνι. καὶ γὰρ εἰ μὴ πᾶσαν βούλεται τὴν ψυχὴν ἀθάνατον εἶναι, τόν γε νοῦν ὁμολογεῖ θεῖόν τε καὶ ἄφθαρτον εἶναι. τίς μὲν οὖν τὴν οὐσίαν καὶ τὴν φύσιν ὁ νοῦς, ὅθεν ὢν, καὶ πόθεν ἐπεισκρινόμενος τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, καὶ ποῦ πάλιν ἀπαλλαττόμενος, αὐτὸς ἂν εἰδείη· εἰ γέ τι συνίησιν ὧν λέγει περὶ τοῦ νοῦ, καὶ μὴ τὸ ἄπορον τοῦ πράγματος τῷ ἀσαφεῖ τοῦ λόγου περιστέλλων ἐξίσταται τὸν ἔλεγχον, ὥσπερ αἱ σηπίαι τὸ δυσθήρευτον ἐκ τοῦ σκοτεινοῦ ποριζόμενος.
nai; alla kata ge tēn athanasian tou nou phēsai tis an auton koinōnein Platōni. kai gar ei mē pasan bouletai tēn psychēn athanaton einai, ton ge noun homologei theion te kai aphtharton einai. tis men oun tēn ousian kai tēn physin ho nous, hothen ōn, kai pothen epeiskrinomenos tois anthrōpois, kai pou palin apallattomenos, autos an eideiē; ei ge ti syniēsin hōn legei peri tou nou, kai mē to aporon tou pragmatos tǭ asaphei tou logou peristellōn existatai ton elenchon, hōsper hai sēpiai to dysthēreuton ek tou skoteinou porizomenos.
Yes, one might say, but in the immortality of the mind he shares with Plato. For even if he does not want the whole soul to be immortal, he admits that the mind is divine and imperishable. What the mind is in substance and nature, from where it comes, and from where it enters men, and where it departs again, he himself would know; if indeed he understands anything of what he says about the mind, and does not wrap the difficulty of the matter in the obscurity of his speech and so escape refutation, procuring, like the cuttlefish, the difficulty of being caught from the darkness.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle’s immortal mind is obscure, and he hides behind his obscurity.
- Atticus, fragment 7; compare Aristotle, On the Soul 3.5.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.13 (Dindorf 2:363; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-13). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-13) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.9.14Dindorf 2:363
πάντως δὲ καὶ ἐν τούτοις διαφέρεται Πλάτωνι. ὁ μὲν γάρ φησι νοῦν ἄνευ ψυχῆς ἀδύνατον εἶναι συνίστασθαι, ὁ δὲ χωρίζει τῆς ψυχῆς τὸν νοῦν. καὶ τὸ τῆς ἀθανασίας ὁ μὲν μετὰ τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτῷ δίδωσιν, ὡς ἄλλως οὐκ ἐνδεχόμενον, ὁ δέ φησιν αὐτῷ μόνῳ χωριζομένῳ τῆς ψυχῆς τοῦτο περιγίνεσθαι. καὶ τὴν μὲν ψυχὴν τοῦ σώματος οὐκ ἠξίωσεν ἐκβαίνειν, ὅτι Πλάτωνι τοῦτο ἤρεσε, τὸν δὲ νοῦν ἀπορρήγνυσθαι τῆς ψυχῆς ἠνάγκασεν, ὅτι ἀδύνατον ἔγνω Πλάτων τὸ τοιοῦτο.” Ταῦτα μὲν ὁ Ἀττικός. συνάψω δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ τὰ Πλωτίνου τόνδʼ ἔχοντα τὸν τρόπον
pantōs de kai en toutois diapheretai Platōni. ho men gar phēsi noun aneu psychēs adynaton einai synistasthai, ho de chōrizei tēs psychēs ton noun. kai to tēs athanasias ho men meta tēs psychēs autǭ didōsin, hōs allōs ouk endechomenon, ho de phēsin autǭ monǭ chōrizomenǭ tēs psychēs touto periginesthai. kai tēn men psychēn tou sōmatos ouk ēxiōsen ekbainein, hoti Platōni touto ērese, ton de noun aporrēgnysthai tēs psychēs ēnankasen, hoti adynaton egnō Platōn to toiouto.” Tauta men ho Attikos. synapsō de autois kai ta Plōtinou tondʼ echonta ton tropon
In any case he differs from Plato in this too. For the one says that mind cannot subsist without soul, the other separates mind from soul. And immortality the one gives it with the soul, since it is not otherwise possible; the other says it belongs to it only when separated from the soul. And he did not see fit that the soul should leave the body, because Plato held this, but forced mind to be torn from the soul, because Plato knew such a thing to be impossible.” So much from Atticus. I shall join to them also the words of Plotinus, which run thus:
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle separates mind from soul in deliberate opposition to Plato; Eusebius introduces Plotinus.
- Atticus, fragment 7; Plato, Timaeus 30b.
Extrabiblical texts: Plato, Tim. 30b (Plato (works); allusion); Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.9.14 (Dindorf 2:363; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-9-14). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-9-14) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
Preparation 15, chapter 10
15.10.1Dindorf 2:363
“ Τὸ δὲ τῆς ἐντελεχείας ὧδʼ ἄν τις ἐπισκέψαιτο πῶς περὶ ψυχῆς λέγεται. τὴν ψυχήν ἐν τῷ συνθέτῳ εἴδους τάξιν ὡς πρὸς ὕλην τὸ σῶμα ἔμψυχον ἔχειν, σώματος δὲ οὐ παντὸς εἶδος, οὐδὲ ᾗ σῶμα, ἀλλὰ φυσικοῦ, ὀργανικοῦ, δυνάμει ζωὴν ἔχοντος.
“ To de tēs entelecheias hōdʼ an tis episkepsaito pōs peri psychēs legetai. tēn psychēn en tǭ synthetǭ eidous taxin hōs pros hylēn to sōma empsychon echein, sōmatos de ou pantos eidos, oude hę̄ sōma, alla physikou, organikou, dynamei zōēn echontos.
“How ‘entelechy’ is said of the soul one might examine thus. They say that the soul holds the rank of form in the compound, in relation to the ensouled body as matter; and that it is the form not of every body, nor of body as body, but of a natural body, furnished with organs, having life potentially.
Notes and citation
Summary: Plotinus examines Aristotle’s definition of the soul as entelechy of an organic body.
- Plotinus, Enneads 4.7.8⁵ (On the Immortality of the Soul).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): ἐπισκέ- ψαιτο → ἐπισκέψαιτο.
Extrabiblical texts: Plotinus, Enn. 4.7.8⁵ (Plotinus, Enneads; quotation); Aristotle (Aristotle (works); allusion)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.10.1 (Dindorf 2:363; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-10-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-10-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.10.2Dindorf 2:363–364
εἰ μὲν οὖν ᾗ παραβέβληται ὡμοίωται, ὡς μορφὴ ἀνδριάντος πρὸς χαλκόν· καὶ διαιρουμένου τοῦ σώματος συμμερίζεσθαι τὴν ψυχὴν, καὶ ἀποκοπτομένου τινὸς μέρους μετὰ τοῦ ἀποκοπέντος ψυχῆς μόριον εἶναι, τήν τε ἐν τοῖς ὕπνοις ἀναχώρησιν μὴ γίνεσθαι, εἴπερ δεῖ προσφυᾶ τὴν ἐντελέχειαν οὗ ἐστιν εἶναι· τὸ δʼ ἀληθὲς μηδὲ ὕπνον γίνεσθαι.
ei men oun hę̄ parabeblētai hōmoiōtai, hōs morphē andriantos pros chalkon; kai diairoumenou tou sōmatos symmerizesthai tēn psychēn, kai apokoptomenou tinos merous meta tou apokopentos psychēs morion einai, tēn te en tois hypnois anachōrēsin mē ginesthai, eiper dei prosphya tēn entelecheian hou estin einai; to dʼ alēthes mēde hypnon ginesthai.
If, then, it is like that with which it is compared, as the shape of a statue to the bronze, then when the body is divided the soul would be divided with it, and when any part is cut off there would be a portion of soul with the part cut off; and the soul’s withdrawal in sleep would not happen, if the entelechy must be grown into that of which it is the entelechy; though in truth sleep would not even happen.
Notes and citation
Summary: If the soul were like a statue’s shape, it would be divided with the body.
- Plotinus, Enneads 4.7.8⁵.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen and accent slip in the digital text): ἀποκο- πτομἐνου → ἀποκοπτομένου.
Extrabiblical texts: Plotinus, Enn. 4.7.8⁵ (Plotinus, Enneads; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.10.2 (Dindorf 2:363–364; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-10-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-10-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.10.3Dindorf 2:364
καὶ μὴν ἐντελεχείας οὔσης, οὐδὲ ἐναντίωσιν λόγου πρὸς ἐπιθυμίας· ἓν δὲ καὶ ταὐτὸν διʼ ὅλου πεπονθέναι τὸ πᾶν οὐ διαφωνοῦν ἑαυτῷ. αἰσθήσεις δὲ μόνον δυνατὸν ἴσως γίνεσθαι, τὰς δὲ νοήσεις ἀδύνατον. διὸ καὶ αὐτοὶ ἄλλην ψυχὴν τὸν νοῦν εἰσάγουσιν, ὃν ἀθάνατον τίθενται.
kai mēn entelecheias ousēs, oude enantiōsin logou pros epithymias; hen de kai tauton diʼ holou peponthenai to pan ou diaphōnoun heautǭ. aisthēseis de monon dynaton isōs ginesthai, tas de noēseis adynaton. dio kai autoi allēn psychēn ton noun eisagousin, hon athanaton tithentai.
And indeed, if it were an entelechy, there would be no opposition of reason to desires, but the whole would be affected in one and the same way throughout, not disagreeing with itself. Perceptions alone might perhaps come about, but thoughts could not. That is why they themselves bring in mind as another soul, which they make immortal.
Notes and citation
Summary: The entelechy theory cannot explain inner conflict or thought.
- Plotinus, Enneads 4.7.8⁵.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text; breathing slip in the digital text): ἕν δὲ καὶ ταὐτὸν → ἓν δὲ καὶ ταὐτὸν; τἀς δὲ νοήσεις → τὰς δὲ νοήσεις.
Extrabiblical texts: Plotinus, Enn. 4.7.8⁵ (Plotinus, Enneads; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.10.3 (Dindorf 2:364; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-10-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-10-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.10.4Dindorf 2:364
τὴν οὖν λογιζομένην ψυχὴν ἄλλως ἐντελέχειαν ἢ τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον, ἀνάγκη εἶναι, εἰ δεῖ τῷ ὀνόματι τούτῳ χρῆσθαι. οὐδʼ ἡ αἰσθητικὴ‚ εἴπερ καὶ αὕτη τῶν αἰσθητῶν ἀπόντων τοὺς τύπους ἔχει‚ αὐτοὺς οὐ μετὰ τοῦ σώματος ἄρα ἕξει· εἰ δὲ μὴ‚ οὕτως ἐνέσονται ὡς μορφαὶ καὶ εἰκόνες· ἀλλʼ ἀδύνατον ἄλλως δέχεσθαι, εἰ οὕτως ἐνεῖεν. οὐκ ἄρα οὖσʼ ἀχώριστος ἐντελέχεια.
tēn oun logizomenēn psychēn allōs entelecheian ē touton ton tropon, anankē einai, ei dei tǭ onomati toutǭ chrēsthai. oudʼ hē aisthētikē‚ eiper kai hautē tōn aisthētōn apontōn tous typous echei‚ autous ou meta tou sōmatos ara hexei; ei de mē‚ houtōs enesontai hōs morphai kai eikones; allʼ adynaton allōs dechesthai, ei houtōs eneien. ouk ara ousʼ achōristos entelecheia.
The reasoning soul, then, must be an entelechy in some other way than this, if one must use this name. Nor will the perceiving soul, since it too holds the impressions of perceived things when they are absent, hold them with the body; otherwise they will be in it as shapes and images; but it would be impossible to receive them otherwise, if they were in it so. So it is not an inseparable entelechy.
Notes and citation
Summary: Neither reasoning nor perceiving soul is an inseparable entelechy.
- Plotinus, Enneads 4.7.8⁵.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray letters in the digital text): λογιζομένην νῆν ψυχὴν → λογιζομένην ψυχὴν.
Extrabiblical texts: Plotinus, Enn. 4.7.8⁵ (Plotinus, Enneads; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.10.4 (Dindorf 2:364; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-10-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-10-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.10.5Dindorf 2:364
καὶ μὴν οὐδὲ τὸ ἐπιθυμοῦν μὴ σιτίων, μηδὲ ποτῶν, ἀλλʼ ἄλλων παρὰ τὰ τοῦ σώματος‚ οὐδὲ αὐτὸ ἀχώριστος ἐντελέχεια. λοιπὸν δὲ τὸ φυτικὸν ἂν εἴη‚ ὁ ἀμφισβήτησιν ἂν δόξειεν ἔχειν, μήποτε τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον ἐντελέχεια ἀχώριστος ᾖ.
kai mēn oude to epithymoun mē sitiōn, mēde potōn, allʼ allōn para ta tou sōmatos‚ oude auto achōristos entelecheia. loipon de to phytikon an eiē‚ ho amphisbētēsin an doxeien echein, mēpote touton ton tropon entelecheia achōristos ę̄.
Nor indeed is the desiring part, which desires not food or drink but other things beyond those of the body, itself an inseparable entelechy. What remains would be the vegetative part, which might seem to admit of dispute, whether it is not an inseparable entelechy in this way.
Notes and citation
Summary: The desiring soul too is separable; only the vegetative soul is in doubt.
- Plotinus, Enneads 4.7.8⁵.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text; line-end hyphen left in the digital text): ἐντελέ- χεια → ἐντελέχεια; ἀχώριστος ῇ. → ἀχώριστος ᾖ..
Extrabiblical texts: Plotinus, Enn. 4.7.8⁵ (Plotinus, Enneads; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.10.5 (Dindorf 2:364; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-10-5). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-10-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.10.6Dindorf 2:364
ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ τοῦτο φαίνεται οὕτως ἔχον. εἰ γὰρ ἡ ἀρχὴ παντὸς φυτοῦ περὶ τὴν ῥίζαν, καὶ αὐξανομένου τοῦ ἄλλου σώματος περὶ τὴν ῥίζαν, καὶ τὰ κάτω ἐν πολλοῖς τῶν φυτῶν‚ ἡ ψυχὴ δηλονότι ἀπολιποῦσα τὰ ἄλλα μέρη εἰς ἕν τι συνεστάλη· οὐκ ἄρα ἦν ἐν τῷ ὅλῳ ὡς ἀχώριστος ἐντελέχεια. καὶ γὰρ αὖ ἐστὶ πρὶν αὐξηθῆναι τὸ φυτὸν ἐν τῷ ὀλίγῳ ὄγκῳ.
allʼ oude touto phainetai houtōs echon. ei gar hē archē pantos phytou peri tēn rhizan, kai auxanomenou tou allou sōmatos peri tēn rhizan, kai ta katō en pollois tōn phytōn‚ hē psychē dēlonoti apolipousa ta alla merē eis hen ti synestalē; ouk ara ēn en tǭ holǭ hōs achōristos entelecheia. kai gar au esti prin auxēthēnai to phyton en tǭ oligǭ onkǭ.
But this does not appear to be so either. For if the principle of every plant is about the root, and while the rest of the body is growing the soul is about the root and the lower parts in many plants, the soul has clearly left the other parts and been drawn together into one place; so it was not in the whole as an inseparable entelechy. And again, before the plant grows, it is in the small mass.
Notes and citation
Summary: In plants the soul withdraws to the root, so it is separable.
- Plotinus, Enneads 4.7.8⁵. Plotinus’ text has “withering” (αὐαινομένου) where the text here reads “growing.”
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (OCR slip): εἰς ἴν τι → εἰς ἕν τι.
Extrabiblical texts: Plotinus, Enn. 4.7.8⁵ (Plotinus, Enneads; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.10.6 (Dindorf 2:364; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-10-6). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-10-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.10.7Dindorf 2:364–365
εἰ οὖν καὶ εἰς ὀλίγον ἔρχεται ἐκ μείζονος φυτοῦ καὶ ἐξ ὀλίγου ἐπὶ πᾶν‚ τί κωλύει καὶ ὅλως χωρίζεσθαι; πῶς δʼ ἂν καὶ ἀμερὴς οὖσα μεριστοῦ τοῦ σώματος ἐντελέχεια γένοιτο μεριστή; ἥ τε αὐτὴ ψυχὴ ἐξ ἄλλου ζῴου ἄλλο γίνεται· πῶς οὖν ἡ τοῦ προτέρου τοῦ ἐφεξῆς ἂν γένοιτο, εἰ ἦν ἐντελέχεια ἑνός;
ei oun kai eis oligon erchetai ek meizonos phytou kai ex oligou epi pan‚ ti kōlyei kai holōs chōrizesthai? pōs dʼ an kai amerēs ousa meristou tou sōmatos entelecheia genoito meristē? hē te autē psychē ex allou zǭou allo ginetai; pōs oun hē tou proterou tou ephexēs an genoito, ei ēn entelecheia henos?
If, then, it both comes into a little from a larger plant and from a little to the whole, what prevents it from being wholly separated? And how could it, being partless, become a divided entelechy of a divided body? And the same soul passes from one animal into another; how then would the soul of the former become that of the next, if it were the entelechy of one?
Notes and citation
Summary: Transmigration and growth show the soul is not the entelechy of one body.
- Plotinus, Enneads 4.7.8⁵.
Extrabiblical texts: Plotinus, Enn. 4.7.8⁵ (Plotinus, Enneads; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.10.7 (Dindorf 2:364–365; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-10-7). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-10-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.10.8Dindorf 2:365
φαίνεται δὲ τοῦτο ἐκ τῶν μεταβαλλόντων ζῴων εἰς ἄλλα ζῷα. οὐκ ἄρα τῷ εἶδος εἶναί τινος τὸ εἶναι ἔχει, ἀλλʼ ἔστιν οὐσία, οὐ παρὰ τὸ ἐν σώματι ἱδρῦσθαι τὸ εἶναι λαμβάνουσα, ἀλλʼ οὖσα πρὶν καὶ τοῦδε γενέσθαι, οἷον ζῴου, οὐ τὸ σῶμα τὴν ψυχὴν γεννήσει.
phainetai de touto ek tōn metaballontōn zǭōn eis alla zǭa. ouk ara tǭ eidos einai tinos to einai echei, allʼ estin ousia, ou para to en sōmati hidrysthai to einai lambanousa, allʼ ousa prin kai toude genesthai, hoion zǭou, ou to sōma tēn psychēn gennēsei.
This is evident from the animals that change into other animals. So it does not have its being by being the form of something, but is a substance, not receiving its being from being seated in a body, but existing before it came to belong to this, for example, to a living being; the body will not generate the soul.
Notes and citation
Summary: The soul is a substance prior to the body, not its form.
- Plotinus, Enneads 4.7.8⁵.
Extrabiblical texts: Plotinus, Enn. 4.7.8⁵ (Plotinus, Enneads; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.10.8 (Dindorf 2:365; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-10-8). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-10-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.10.9Dindorf 2:365
τίς οὖν οὐσία αὐτῆς; εἰ δὲ μήτε σῶμα μήτε πάθος σώματος, πρᾶξις δὲ καὶ ποίησις, καὶ πολλὰ καὶ ἐν αὐτῇ καὶ ἐξ αὐτῆς, οὐσία παρὰ τὰ σώματα οὖσα, ποία τίς ἐστιν; ἢ δῆλον ὅτι ἥν φαμεν ὄντως οὐσίαν εἶναι; τὸ μὲν γὰρ γένεσις‚ ἀλλʼ οὐκ οὐσία, πᾶν τὸ σωματικὸν εἶναι λέγοιτʼ ἂν, γινόμενον καὶ ἀπολλύμενον‚ ὄντως δὲ οὐδέποτε ὂν, μεταλήψει δὲ τοῦ ὄντος σωζόμενον, καθʼ ὅσον ἂν αὐτοῦ μεταλαμβάνον.” Ἐπειδὴ δὲ καὶ τὰ Πλωτίνου διήλθομεν, συνιδεῖν οὐκ ἄτοπον καὶ τὰ Πορφυρίῳ ἐν τοῖς πρὸς Βόηθον περὶ ψυχῆς εἰρημένα
tis oun ousia autēs? ei de mēte sōma mēte pathos sōmatos, praxis de kai poiēsis, kai polla kai en autę̄ kai ex autēs, ousia para ta sōmata ousa, poia tis estin? ē dēlon hoti hēn phamen ontōs ousian einai? to men gar genesis‚ allʼ ouk ousia, pan to sōmatikon einai legoitʼ an, ginomenon kai apollymenon‚ ontōs de oudepote on, metalēpsei de tou ontos sōzomenon, kathʼ hoson an autou metalambanon.” Epeidē de kai ta Plōtinou diēlthomen, synidein ouk atopon kai ta Porphyriǭ en tois pros Boēthon peri psychēs eirēmena
What, then, is its substance? If it is neither body nor an affection of body, but action and making, and many things are both in it and from it, being a substance besides bodies, what kind is it? Is it not clear that it is what we say is truly substance? For all that is bodily might be said to be becoming, but not substance, coming to be and perishing, but never truly being, preserved by participation in being, so far as it participates in it.” And since we have gone through the words of Plotinus too, it is not out of place to look also at what was said by Porphyry in his books against Boethus On the Soul:
Notes and citation
Summary: Plotinus: the soul is true being, unlike bodies, which only become; Eusebius introduces Porphyry.
- Plotinus, Enneads 4.7.8⁵.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (OCR slip; line-end hyphen and breathing lost in the digital text): τὰ σ΄σματα → τὰ σώματα; μετα- λαμβάνον.” Επειδὴ → μεταλαμβάνον.” Ἐπειδὴ.
Extrabiblical texts: Plotinus, Enn. 4.7.8⁵ (Plotinus, Enneads; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.10.9 (Dindorf 2:365; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-10-9). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-10-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
Preparation 15, chapter 11
15.11.1Dindorf 2:365
“Πρὸς δὲ τὸν ἐντελέχειαν τὴν ψυχὴν εἰπόντα καὶ ἀκίνητον παντελῶς οὖσαν κινεῖν ὑπειληφότα ῥητέον πόθεν οἱ ἐνθουσιασμοὶ τοῦ ζῴου μηδὲν μὲν ξυνιέντος ὧν ὁρᾷ τε καὶ λέγει, τῆς δὲ ψυχῆς καὶ τὸ μέλλον καὶ μὴ ἐνεστὸς βλεπούσης καὶ κατὰ ταὐτὸ κινουμένης‚ πόθεν δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς τοῦ ζῴου συστάσεως αἶ τῆς ὡς ζῴου ψυχῆς βουλαί τε καὶ σκέψεις καὶ θελήσεις, ῥοπαὶ οὖσαι τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ οὐ τοῦ σώματος.”
“Pros de ton entelecheian tēn psychēn eiponta kai akinēton pantelōs ousan kinein hypeilēphota rhēteon pothen hoi enthousiasmoi tou zǭou mēden men xynientos hōn horą te kai legei, tēs de psychēs kai to mellon kai mē enestos blepousēs kai kata tauto kinoumenēs‚ pothen de kai epi tēs tou zǭou systaseōs ai tēs hōs zǭou psychēs boulai te kai skepseis kai thelēseis, rhopai ousai tēs psychēs kai ou tou sōmatos.”
“To him who called the soul an entelechy and supposed that, being wholly unmoved, it moves, we must say: from where come the inspirations of the living being, when it understands nothing of what it sees and says, while the soul sees what is to come and is not present and is moved accordingly; and from where, in the constitution of the living being, come the counsels and considerations and wishes of the soul as of a living being, which are inclinations of the soul and not of the body?”
Notes and citation
Summary: Porphyry: inspiration and deliberation show the soul is moved, against Aristotle.
- Porphyry, Against Boethus, On the Soul (fragment).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (OCR slip; repeated syllables in the digital text): ῥητέον τέον πόθεν → ῥητέον πόθεν; μηδὲν μὶν ξυνιέντος → μηδὲν μὲν ξυνιέντος.
Extrabiblical texts: Porphyry, Boeth. (Porphyry, Against Boethus, On the Soul; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.11.1 (Dindorf 2:365; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-11-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-11-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.11.2Dindorf 2:365–366
Εἶθʼ ἑξῆς ἐπιλέγει “Τὸ δὲ βαρύτητι ἀπεικάζειν τὴν ψυχὴν ἢ ποιότησι μονοειδέσι καὶ ἀκινήτοις σωματικαῖς‚ καθʼ ἃς ἢ κινεῖται ἢ ποιόν ἐστι τὸ ὑποκείμενον, ἐκπεπτωκότος ἦν τέλεον ἢ ἑκόντος ἢ ἄκοντος τῆς ψυχικῆς ἀξίας, καὶ οὐδαμῶς καθεωρακότος ὡς παρουσίᾳ μὲν τῆς ψυχῆς ζωτικὸν γέγονε τὸ τοῦ ζῴου σῶμα, ὡς πυρὸς παρουσίᾳ θερμὸν τὸ παρακείμενον ὕδωρ, ψυχρὸν ὂν καθʼ ἑαυτό· καὶ ἡλίου ἀνατολῇ πεφώτισταί γε ὁ ἀὴρ‚ σκοτεινὸς ὢν ἄνευ τῆς τούτου ἐκλάμψεως.
Eithʼ hexēs epilegei “To de barytēti apeikazein tēn psychēn ē poiotēsi monoeidesi kai akinētois sōmatikais‚ kathʼ has ē kineitai ē poion esti to hypokeimenon, ekpeptōkotos ēn teleon ē hekontos ē akontos tēs psychikēs axias, kai oudamōs katheōrakotos hōs parousią men tēs psychēs zōtikon gegone to tou zǭou sōma, hōs pyros parousią thermon to parakeimenon hydōr, psychron on kathʼ heauto; kai hēliou anatolę̄ pephōtistai ge ho aēr‚ skoteinos ōn aneu tēs toutou eklampseōs.
Then next he adds: “To compare the soul to weight, or to uniform and unmoved bodily qualities, by which the subject is either moved or qualified, belongs to one who has utterly fallen away, willingly or unwillingly, from the dignity of the soul, and has in no way seen that by the presence of the soul the body of the living being has become living, as by the presence of fire the water placed beside it becomes hot, being cold in itself, and by the sun’s rising the air is lit, being dark without its shining.
Notes and citation
Summary: The soul gives life as fire gives heat and the sun light.
- Porphyry, Against Boethus, On the Soul.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text; quotation mark lost in the digital text): ἐπιλέγει Τὸ δὲ → ἐπιλέγει “Τὸ δὲ; ποιό- τησι → ποιότησι.
Extrabiblical texts: Porphyry, Boeth. (Porphyry, Against Boethus, On the Soul; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.11.2 (Dindorf 2:365–366; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-11-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-11-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.11.3Dindorf 2:366
ἀλλʼ οὔτε ἡ θέρμη τοῦ ὕδατος ἡ θερμότης ἦν τοῦ πυρὸς οὔτε τὸ πῦρ, οὔτε τὸ ἐναέριον φῶς τὸ σύμφυτον τῷ ἡλίῳ φῶς· ὡσαύτως δὲ οὐδὲ ἡ τοῦ σώματος ἐμψυχία, ἥτις ἔοικε τῇ βαρύτητι καὶ τῇ περὶ σῶμα ποιότητι, ἡ ψυχὴ ἡ ἐν τῷ σώματι κατατακθεῖσα, διʼ ἣν καὶ πνοῆς τινος ζωτικῆς μετέσχε τὸ σῶμα.”
allʼ oute hē thermē tou hydatos hē thermotēs ēn tou pyros oute to pyr, oute to enaerion phōs to symphyton tǭ hēliǭ phōs; hōsautōs de oude hē tou sōmatos empsychia, hētis eoike tę̄ barytēti kai tę̄ peri sōma poiotēti, hē psychē hē en tǭ sōmati katataktheisa, diʼ hēn kai pnoēs tinos zōtikēs metesche to sōma.”
But neither was the heat of the water the heat of the fire, nor the fire itself, nor the light in the air the light innate in the sun; and likewise neither is the animation of the body, which is like weight and the quality of a body, the soul that is set down in the body, through which the body has shared in a certain breath of life.”
Textual problem in this passage: see the notes.
Notes and citation
Summary: The body’s life is distinct from the soul that gives it.
- Porphyry, Against Boethus, On the Soul.
- “Set down” renders the corrupt κατατακθεῖσα by sense.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): τὸ σύμφυτον τό ἡλίῳ → τὸ σύμφυτον τῷ ἡλίῳ.
Extrabiblical texts: Porphyry, Boeth. (Porphyry, Against Boethus, On the Soul; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.11.3 (Dindorf 2:366; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-11-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-11-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.11.4Dindorf 2:366
Εἶθʼ ἑξῆς μεθʼ ἕτερα ἐπιλέγει “Τὰ μὲν οὖν ἄλλα ὅσα περὶ αὐτῆς εἰρήκασιν ἄλλοι αἰσχύνην ἡμῖν φέρει. πῶς γὰρ οὐκ αἰσχρὸς ὁ ἐντελέχειαν τιθεὶς τὴν ψυχὴν λόγος σώματος φυσικοῦ ὀργανικοῦ; πῶς δὲ οὐκ αἰσχύνης γέμων ὁ πνεῦμά πως ἔχειν αὐτὴν ἀποδιδοὺς‚ ἢ πῦρ νοερὸν‚ τῇ περιψύξει καὶ οἶον βαφῇ τοῦ ἀέρος ἀναφθὲν ἢ στομωθὲν, ὅ τε ἀτόμων ἄθροισμα θεὶς ἢ ὅλως ἀπὸ σώματος αὐτὴν τὴν γεννᾶσθαι ἀποφαινόμενος;" Ὁν δὴ λόγον ἐν Νόμοις ἀσεβῶν ἀσεβῆ εἶναι ἀπεφήνατο. αἰσχύνης οὖν πάντες οὗτοι πλήρεις λόγοι. ἐπὶ δὲ τῷ λέγοντι αὐτοκίνητον οὐσίαν οὐκ ἄν τις, φησὶν, αἰσχυνθείη.
Eithʼ hexēs methʼ hetera epilegei “Ta men oun alla hosa peri autēs eirēkasin alloi aischynēn hēmin pherei. pōs gar ouk aischros ho entelecheian titheis tēn psychēn logos sōmatos physikou organikou? pōs de ouk aischynēs gemōn ho pneuma pōs echein autēn apodidous‚ ē pyr noeron‚ tę̄ peripsyxei kai oion baphę̄ tou aeros anaphthen ē stomōthen, ho te atomōn athroisma theis ē holōs apo sōmatos autēn tēn gennasthai apophainomenos?" Hon dē logon en Nomois asebōn asebē einai apephēnato. aischynēs oun pantes houtoi plēreis logoi. epi de tǭ legonti autokinēton ousian ouk an tis, phēsin, aischyntheiē.
Then after other things he adds: “The other things that others have said about it bring us shame. For how is the account not shameful that makes the soul the entelechy of a natural body furnished with organs? And how is that not full of shame which makes it breath in a certain state, or intelligent fire, kindled or tempered by the chilling and, as it were, dipping in the air, or which makes it a gathering of atoms, or declares that it is generated from body at all? This account he declared in the Laws to be the impious account of the impious. All these accounts, then, are full of shame. But at the one who calls it a self-moved substance, he says, no one would be ashamed.”
Notes and citation
Summary: Porphyry: Aristotle’s, the Stoics’, and the Epicureans’ accounts of the soul are shameful; Plato’s self-moved soul is not.
- Porphyry, Against Boethus, On the Soul; Plato, Laws 10.891c–892a; Phaedrus 245c–e.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text; page subdivision letter leaked into the digital text): ἄλ- λοι αἰσχύνην → ἄλλοι αἰσχύνην; περι- ψύξει → περιψύξει; αὐτὴν d τὴν γεννᾶσθαι → αὐτὴν τὴν γεννᾶσθαι; ἀπε- φήνατο → ἀπεφήνατο.
Extrabiblical texts: Plato, Leg. 891c–892a (Plato (works); allusion); Porphyry, Boeth. (Porphyry, Against Boethus, On the Soul; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.11.4 (Dindorf 2:366; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-11-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-11-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
Preparation 15, chapter 12
15.12.1Dindorf 2:366–367
“Ἔτι τοῦ Πλάτωνος λέγοντος τὴν ψυχὴν διακοσμεῖν τὰ πάντα διήκουσαν διὰ πάντων‚ καὶ ταύτην ὑφʼ ἧς καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ διοικεῖσθαι συγχωροῖεν ἂν ἕκαστα, καὶ μηδὲν ἄλλο εἶναι τὴν φύσιν ἢ ψυχὴν, καὶ δηλονότι ψυχὴν οὐκ ἄλογον‚ καὶ ἐκ τούτων συνάγοντος ὅτι πάντα κατὰ πρόνοιαν γίνεται, εἴ γε καὶ κατὰ φύσιν· πρὸς οὐδὲν τούτων ἡμῖν Ἀριστοτέλης ὁμολογεῖ.
“Eti tou Platōnos legontos tēn psychēn diakosmein ta panta diēkousan dia pantōn‚ kai tautēn hyphʼ hēs kai hoi loipoi dioikeisthai synchōroien an hekasta, kai mēden allo einai tēn physin ē psychēn, kai dēlonoti psychēn ouk alogon‚ kai ek toutōn synagontos hoti panta kata pronoian ginetai, ei ge kai kata physin; pros ouden toutōn hēmin Aristotelēs homologei.
“Further, when Plato says that soul orders all things, pervading all things, and that this is the one by which the others too would admit each thing is governed, and that nature is nothing else than soul, and clearly a soul not irrational, and concludes from this that all things come about by providence, if indeed by nature; Aristotle agrees with us on none of these.
Notes and citation
Summary: Atticus: Plato makes soul govern all things by providence; Aristotle denies it.
- Atticus, fragment 8 (des Places).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (breathing slip in the digital text): “Ἕτι τοῦ → “Ἔτι τοῦ.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.12.1 (Dindorf 2:366–367; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-12-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-12-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.12.2Dindorf 2:367
οὐ γὰρ εἶναι τὴν φύσιν ψυχὴν, καὶ τὰ περὶ γῆν ὑπὸ μὲν φύσεως διοικεῖσθαι. εἶναι γὰρ ἐφʼ ἑκάστῳ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄλλας καὶ τὰς αἰτίας. τῶν ἐχόντων αἰτίαν τὴν εἱμαρμένην ὑποτίθησι, τῶν δὲ ὑπὸ σελήνην τὴν φύσιν, τῶν δὲ ἀνθρωπίνων φρόνησιν καὶ πρόνοιαν καὶ ψυχήν· τὸ μὲν γλαφυρὸν ἐν ταῖς τοιαύταις διαιρέσεσι παρεχόμενος, τὸ δὲ ἀναγκαῖον οὐ συνορῶν.
ou gar einai tēn physin psychēn, kai ta peri gēn hypo men physeōs dioikeisthai. einai gar ephʼ hekastǭ tōn pragmatōn allas kai tas aitias. tōn echontōn aitian tēn heimarmenēn hypotithēsi, tōn de hypo selēnēn tēn physin, tōn de anthrōpinōn phronēsin kai pronoian kai psychēn; to men glaphyron en tais toiautais diairesesi parechomenos, to de anankaion ou synorōn.
For he says nature is not soul, and that the things about the earth are governed by nature. For there are different causes for each kind of thing: he supposes fate as cause of the heavenly things, nature of those below the moon, and wisdom and providence and soul of human things; offering elegance in such divisions, but not seeing what is necessary.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle divides causes among fate, nature, and providence.
- Atticus, fragment 8. “Of the heavenly things” supplies a word lost from the text.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.12.2 (Dindorf 2:367; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-12-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-12-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.12.3Dindorf 2:367
εἰ γὰρ μὴ μία τις εἴη δύναμις ἔμψυχος διήκουσα διὰ τοῦ παντὸς καὶ πάντα συνδοῦσα καὶ συνέχουσα, οὔτʼ ἂν εὐλόγως τὸ πᾶν οὔτε καλῶς διοικούμενον εἶναι δύναιτο. τῆς δʼ αὐτῆς ἦν ἄρʼ ἀβλεψίας καὶ πόλιν ἐλπίσαι ποτὲ καλῶς χωρὶς ἑνώσεως διαγενέσθαι, καὶ τὸ πᾶν τόδε ἡγήσασθαι πάγκαλον τῷ λόγῳ διαφυλάξειν, οἷόν περ φαίνεται, μὴ συνδήσαντα καὶ συναρμόσαντα ἑνός τινος ὁμοίου κοινωνίᾳ.
ei gar mē mia tis eiē dynamis empsychos diēkousa dia tou pantos kai panta syndousa kai synechousa, outʼ an eulogōs to pan oute kalōs dioikoumenon einai dynaito. tēs dʼ autēs ēn arʼ ablepsias kai polin elpisai pote kalōs chōris henōseōs diagenesthai, kai to pan tode hēgēsasthai pankalon tǭ logǭ diaphylaxein, hoion per phainetai, mē syndēsanta kai synarmosanta henos tinos homoiou koinōnią.
For if there were not one ensouled power pervading the universe and binding and holding all things together, the universe could not be governed reasonably or well. It would be of the same blindness to hope that a city could ever be well conducted without unity, and to think that this all-beautiful universe would preserve its order as it appears, without binding and fitting it together by fellowship in some one like thing.
Notes and citation
Summary: Without one soul pervading the whole, the universe could not be well governed.
- Atticus, fragment 8.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.12.3 (Dindorf 2:367; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-12-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-12-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.12.4Dindorf 2:367
καὶ τοιοῦτον μέν τι πρᾶγμα τὸ διοικοῦν ἕκαστα εἶναί φησιν, οἶον ἀρχὴν εἶναι κινήσεως, τοῦτο δὲ εἶναι ψυχὴν οὐ βούλεται· καίτοι καὶ τοῦ Πλάτωνος αὐτοῦ δεικνύντος ὅτι τοῖς κινουμένοις ἅπασιν ἀρχὴ καὶ πηγὴ τῆς κινήσεως ἡ ψυχή. καὶ ὃ μὲν ἂν ἔργον εἴη ψυχῆς λογικῆς καὶ φρονίμου τὸ μηδὲν μάτην ποιεῖν, τοῦτο ἀνατίθησι τῇ φύσει, τοῦ δὲ ὀνόματος αὐτῇ τῆς ψυχῆς οὐ μεταδίδωσιν, ὥσπερ ἐκ τῶν ὀνομάτων, ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἐκ τῶν δυνάμεων, τῶν πραγμάτων λαμβανομένων.”
kai toiouton men ti pragma to dioikoun hekasta einai phēsin, oion archēn einai kinēseōs, touto de einai psychēn ou bouletai; kaitoi kai tou Platōnos autou deiknyntos hoti tois kinoumenois hapasin archē kai pēgē tēs kinēseōs hē psychē. kai ho men an ergon eiē psychēs logikēs kai phronimou to mēden matēn poiein, touto anatithēsi tę̄ physei, tou de onomatos autę̄ tēs psychēs ou metadidōsin, hōsper ek tōn onomatōn, allʼ ouk ek tōn dynameōn, tōn pragmatōn lambanomenōn.”
And he says that the thing that governs each is such as to be a principle of motion, but he will not have this be soul; though Plato himself shows that soul is the principle and source of motion for all things that move. And what would be the work of a rational and wise soul, to make nothing in vain, this he assigns to nature, but does not give it the name of soul, as though things were understood from names and not from powers.”
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristotle gives nature the work of soul but denies it the name.
- Atticus, fragment 8; Plato, Phaedrus 245c; Laws 10.896a–b.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text; repeated syllables in the digital text): μηδὲν μά- μάτην → μηδὲν μάτην; ὀνό- ματος → ὀνόματος.
Extrabiblical texts: Plato, Phaedr. 245c (Plato (works); allusion); Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.12.4 (Dindorf 2:367; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-12-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-12-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
Preparation 15, chapter 13
15.13.1Dindorf 2:367–368
“Τὸ δὲ κεφάλαιον καὶ τὸ κῦρος τῆς Πλάτωνος αἱρέσεως, ἡ περὶ τῶν νοητῶν διάταξις, ἠτίμασται καὶ προπεπηλάκισται καὶ παντοίως, τό γε ἐξὸν ἐπʼ Ἀριστοτέλει, περιύβρισται. οὐ γὰρ δυνάμενος ἐννοῆσαι διότι τὰ μεγάλα καὶ θεῖα καὶ περιττὰ τῶν πραγμάτων παραπλησίου τινὸς δυνάμεως εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν δεῖται‚ τῇ δʼ αὑτοῦ λεπτῇ καὶ ταπεινῇ δριμύτητι πιστεύων‚ ἥτις διαδῦναι μὲν τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς πραγμάτων καὶ τὴν ἐν τούτοις ἀλήθειαν ἰδεῖν ἐδύνατο, τῆς δʼ ὄντως ἀληθείας ἐποπτεῦσαι τὸ πεδίον οὐχ οἵα τε ἦν, αὑτῷ κανόνι καὶ κριτῇ τῶν ὑπὲρ αὐτὸν χρησάμενος, ἀπέγνω τινὰς εἶναι ἰδίας φύσεις, οἵας Πλάτων ἔγνω, λήρους δὲ καὶ τερετίσματα καὶ φλυαρίας ἐτόλμησεν εἰπεῖν τὰ τῶν ὄντων ἀνώτατα.
“To de kephalaion kai to kyros tēs Platōnos haireseōs, hē peri tōn noētōn diataxis, ētimastai kai propepēlakistai kai pantoiōs, to ge exon epʼ Aristotelei, periybristai. ou gar dynamenos ennoēsai dioti ta megala kai theia kai peritta tōn pragmatōn paraplēsiou tinos dynameōs eis epignōsin deitai‚ tę̄ dʼ hautou leptę̄ kai tapeinę̄ drimytēti pisteuōn‚ hētis diadynai men tōn epi gēs pragmatōn kai tēn en toutois alētheian idein edynato, tēs dʼ ontōs alētheias epopteusai to pedion ouch hoia te ēn, hautǭ kanoni kai kritę̄ tōn hyper auton chrēsamenos, apegnō tinas einai idias physeis, hoias Platōn egnō, lērous de kai teretismata kai phlyarias etolmēsen eipein ta tōn ontōn anōtata.
“The head and authority of Plato’s school, the ordering of the intelligible things, has been dishonored and trampled in the mud and insulted in every way, as far as lay in Aristotle. For not being able to conceive that the great and divine and extraordinary things need some similar power for their knowledge, but trusting his own fine and lowly sharpness, which could penetrate the things on earth and see the truth in them, but could not survey the plain of true truth, using himself as rule and judge of things above him, he denied that there are any such natures as Plato knew, and dared to call the highest of beings nonsense and twitterings and babble.
Notes and citation
Summary: Atticus: Aristotle mocked Plato’s Ideas, the summit of his philosophy.
- Atticus, fragment 9 (des Places); compare Aristotle, Posterior Analytics 1.22.83a33 (“twitterings”).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text; stray mark in the digital text; wrong mark and Latin letter in the digital text): "Tὸ δὲ κεφάλαιον → “Τὸ δὲ κεφάλαιον; Πλά- τωνος αἱρέσεως → Πλάτωνος αἱρέσεως; ἐπίγνω- σιν → ἐπίγνωσιν; Πλάτωνʼ → Πλάτων.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.13.1 (Dindorf 2:367–368; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-13-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-13-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.13.2Dindorf 2:368
τὸ μὲν οὖν ἄκρον τε καὶ ἔσχατον τῶν Πλάτωνος φιλοσοφημάτων ἐστὶ τὸ περὶ τὴν νοητὴν ταύτην καὶ ἀίδιον οὐσίαν τὴν τῶν ἰδεῶν, ἔνθα δὴ πόνος τε καὶ ἀγὼν ἔσχατος τῇ ψυχῇ πρόκειται. ὁ μὲν γὰρ μετασχὼν καὶ ἐφικόμενος αὐτῆς πάντως εὐδαίμων, ὁ δὲ ἀπολειφθεὶς καὶ ἀδυνατήσας θεωρὸς γενέσθαι πάντως ἄμοιρος εὐδαιμονίας καταλείπεται.
to men oun akron te kai eschaton tōn Platōnos philosophēmatōn esti to peri tēn noētēn tautēn kai aidion ousian tēn tōn ideōn, entha dē ponos te kai agōn eschatos tę̄ psychę̄ prokeitai. ho men gar metaschōn kai ephikomenos autēs pantōs eudaimōn, ho de apoleiphtheis kai adynatēsas theōros genesthai pantōs amoiros eudaimonias kataleipetai.
The summit and last of Plato’s philosophical teachings concerns this intelligible and eternal substance of the Ideas, where the last toil and contest is set before the soul. For he who shares in it and reaches it is wholly happy, while he who is left behind and unable to become its beholder is left wholly without share in happiness.
Notes and citation
Summary: The vision of the Ideas is the goal of Plato’s philosophy and the condition of happiness.
- Atticus, fragment 9; compare Plato, Phaedrus 247e–248b.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.13.2 (Dindorf 2:368; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-13-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-13-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.13.3Dindorf 2:368
καὶ διὰ τοῦτο Πλάτων τε πανταχῆ διαγωνίζεται, δεικνὺς τὴν ἰσχὺν τούτων τῶν φύσεων· οὔτε γὰρ ὡντινωνοῦν ἀποδοῦναί φησιν οἶόν τε εἶναι καλῶς, ἂν μὴ τούτων μεθέξει, οὔτε γνῶσίν τινος ἀληθοῦς, ἂν μὴ τῇ πρὸς ταῦτα ἀναφορᾷ, ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ λόγου μετέσεσθαί τισιν, εἰ μὴ τὴν τούτων οὐσίαν ὁμολογήσειαν·
kai dia touto Platōn te pantachē diagōnizetai, deiknys tēn ischyn toutōn tōn physeōn; oute gar hōntinōnoun apodounai phēsin oion te einai kalōs, an mē toutōn methexei, oute gnōsin tinos alēthous, an mē tę̄ pros tauta anaphorą, allʼ oude logou metesesthai tisin, ei mē tēn toutōn ousian homologēseian;
And for this reason Plato contends everywhere, showing the strength of these natures; for he says that it is not possible to give a good account of anything at all unless it partakes of these, nor any knowledge of anything true except by reference to them, nor will any share in reason unless they admit their being.
Notes and citation
Summary: For Plato all knowledge depends on the Ideas.
- Atticus, fragment 9.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray mark in the digital text): Πλάτωνʼ → Πλάτων.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.13.3 (Dindorf 2:368; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-13-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-13-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.13.4Dindorf 2:368
οἵ τʼ αὖ τὰ τοῦ Πλάτωνος συνιστάναι ἐγνωκότες τὸν πλεῖστον ἀγῶνα τῶν λόγων ἐν τούτῳ τίθενται πάνυ ἀναγκαίως. οὐδὲν γὰρ ἔτι τὸ Πλατωνικὸν ἀπολείπεται, εἰ μὴ τὰς πρώτας καὶ ἀρχικωτάτας φύσεις ταύτας συγχωρήσεταί τις αὐτοῖς ὑπὲρ Πλάτωνος. ταῦτα γάρ ἐστιν οἶς μάλιστα τῶν ἄλλων ὑπερέχει.
hoi tʼ au ta tou Platōnos synistanai egnōkotes ton pleiston agōna tōn logōn en toutǭ tithentai pany anankaiōs. ouden gar eti to Platōnikon apoleipetai, ei mē tas prōtas kai archikōtatas physeis tautas synchōrēsetai tis autois hyper Platōnos. tauta gar estin ois malista tōn allōn hyperechei.
And those who have resolved to establish Plato’s teachings place the greatest contest of their arguments in this, quite necessarily. For nothing Platonic remains if one does not grant them, on Plato’s behalf, these first and most principal natures. For it is by these above all that he excels the others.
Notes and citation
Summary: Without the Ideas nothing Platonic remains.
- Atticus, fragment 9.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): τἀς πρώτας → τὰς πρώτας.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.13.4 (Dindorf 2:368; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-13-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-13-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.13.5Dindorf 2:368–369
νοήσας γὰρ θεὸν πρὸς αὐτὰ τῶν ἀπάντων πατέρα καὶ δημιουργὸν καὶ δεσπότην καὶ κηδεμόνα, καὶ γνωρίζων ἐκ τῶν ἔργων τὸν τεχνίτην πρότερον νοῆσαι τοῦτο ὃ μέλλει δημιουργήσειν, εἶθʼ οὕτω τῷ νοηθέντι κατόπιν ἐπὶ τῶν πραγμάτων προσάγειν τὴν ὁμοιότητα· ταὐτὸν δὴ, τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ νοήματα πρεσβύτερα τῶν πραγμάτων‚ τὰ τῶν γενομένων παραδείγματα, ἀσώματα καὶ νοητὰ, κατὰ τὰ αὐτὰ καὶ ὡσαύτως ἔχοντα ἀεὶ, μάλιστα μὲν καὶ πρώτως αὐτὰ ὄντα, παραίτια δὲ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις τοῦ εἶναι τοιαῦτα ἕκαστα οἷά περ ἐστὶ, κατὰ τὴν πρὸς αὐτὰ ὁμοιότητα, συνιδὼν ὁ Πλάτων ὄντα οὐ ῥᾷστα ὀφθῆναι, οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ λόγῳ σαφῶς δηλωθῆναι δυνάμενα, αὐτὸς ὡς οἶόν τε ἦν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εἰπεῖν καὶ φρονῆσαι καὶ παρασκευάσαι τοὺς μέλλοντας ἐπακολουθήσειν πραγματευσάμενος ταῦτα, καὶ τὴν σύμπασαν αὑτοῦ φιλοσοφίαν εἰς τοῦτο συνταξάμενος, περὶ ταῦτά φησι καὶ τὴν τούτων νόησιν καὶ τὴν σοφίαν εἶναι καὶ τὴν ἐπιστήμην, διʼ ἧς τὸ ἀνθρώπινον τέλος καὶ ἡ μακαριστὴ βιοτὴ παραγίνεται.”
noēsas gar theon pros auta tōn apantōn patera kai dēmiourgon kai despotēn kai kēdemona, kai gnōrizōn ek tōn ergōn ton technitēn proteron noēsai touto ho mellei dēmiourgēsein, eithʼ houtō tǭ noēthenti katopin epi tōn pragmatōn prosagein tēn homoiotēta; tauton dē, ta tou theou noēmata presbytera tōn pragmatōn‚ ta tōn genomenōn paradeigmata, asōmata kai noēta, kata ta auta kai hōsautōs echonta aei, malista men kai prōtōs auta onta, paraitia de kai tois allois tou einai toiauta hekasta hoia per esti, kata tēn pros auta homoiotēta, synidōn ho Platōn onta ou rhąsta ophthēnai, ou mēn oude logǭ saphōs dēlōthēnai dynamena, autos hōs oion te ēn hyper autōn eipein kai phronēsai kai paraskeuasai tous mellontas epakolouthēsein pragmateusamenos tauta, kai tēn sympasan hautou philosophian eis touto syntaxamenos, peri tauta phēsi kai tēn toutōn noēsin kai tēn sophian einai kai tēn epistēmēn, diʼ hēs to anthrōpinon telos kai hē makaristē biotē paraginetai.”
For having conceived God in relation to them as the Father and Maker and Master and Guardian of all things, and knowing from works that the craftsman first conceives what he is going to make, and then afterward brings the likeness of what he has conceived to the things; so in the same way, the thoughts of God are older than the things, the patterns of what has come to be, incorporeal and intelligible, always the same and in the same state, being above all and first themselves, and joint causes for the others of each being such as it is, by likeness to them. Plato, seeing that they are not very easily seen nor able to be shown clearly by speech, worked himself to speak and think about them as far as possible and to prepare those who would follow, and ordering his whole philosophy to this end, says that wisdom and knowledge concern these and the understanding of them, through which man’s end and the blessed life come about.”
Notes and citation
Summary: Atticus: the Ideas are God’s thoughts, the patterns of creation, and knowing them is man’s end.
- Atticus, fragment 9.
Extrabiblical texts: Atticus (Atticus, Against Those Who Interpret Plato through Aristotle; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.13.5 (Dindorf 2:368–369; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-13-5). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-13-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.13.6Dindorf 2:369
Τοσαῦτα ὁ Ἀττικός. παρῆν δὲ καὶ τούτων ἔτι πλείω ἐκ τῆς δηλωθείσης παραθέσθαι τοῦ ἀνδρὸς γραφῆς· πλὴν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἐκτεθεῖσιν ἀρκεσθέντες μεταβησόμεθα καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν τῶν Στωϊκῶν αἵρεσιν.
Tosauta ho Attikos. parēn de kai toutōn eti pleiō ek tēs dēlōtheisēs parathesthai tou andros graphēs; plēn alla tois ektetheisin arkesthentes metabēsometha kai epi tēn tōn Stōïkōn hairesin.
So much Atticus. One could set out still more than these from the man’s work mentioned; but contenting ourselves with what has been set out, we shall pass on to the school of the Stoics.
Notes and citation
Summary: Eusebius ends Atticus and turns to the Stoics.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): μετα- βησόμεθα → μεταβησόμεθα.
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.13.6 (Dindorf 2:369; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-13-6). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-13-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.13.7Dindorf 2:369
Σωκράτους τοίνυν ἀκουστὴς ἐγένετο Ἀντισθένης. Ἡρακλεωτικός τις ἀνὴρ τὸ φρόνημα, ὃς ἔφη τοῦ ἥδεσθαι τὸ μαίνεσθαι κρεῖττον εἶναι· διὸ καὶ παρῄνει τοῖς γνωρίμοις μηδέποτε χάριν ἡδονῆς δάκτυλον ἐκτείνειν.
Sōkratous toinyn akoustēs egeneto Antisthenēs. Hērakleōtikos tis anēr to phronēma, hos ephē tou hēdesthai to mainesthai kreitton einai; dio kai parę̄nei tois gnōrimois mēdepote charin hēdonēs daktylon ekteinein.
Antisthenes, then, became a hearer of Socrates, a man of Heraclean spirit, who said that it is better to be mad than to feel pleasure; that is why he advised his pupils never to stretch out a finger for the sake of pleasure.
Notes and citation
Summary: Antisthenes, Socrates’ pupil, scorned pleasure.
- Compare Diogenes Laertius 6.3.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (OCR slip): Ἡρακλεωτκός → Ἡρακλεωτικός.
Extrabiblical texts: Antisthenes (Antisthenes (fragments); allusion)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.13.7 (Dindorf 2:369; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-13-7). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-13-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.13.8Dindorf 2:369
τούτου δὲ ἀκουστὴς γέγονε Διογένης ὁ κύων, ὃς καὶ αὐτὸς θηριωδέστατα φρονεῖν δόξας πολλοὺς ἐπηγάγετο. τοῦτον Κράτης διεδέξατο· Κράτητος δὲ ἐγένετο Ζήνων ὁ Κιτιεὺς, ὁ τῆς τῶν Στωϊκῶν φιλοσόφων αἱρέσεως καταστὰς ἀρχηγός
toutou de akoustēs gegone Diogenēs ho kyōn, hos kai autos thēriōdestata phronein doxas pollous epēgageto. touton Kratēs diedexato; Kratētos de egeneto Zēnōn ho Kitieus, ho tēs tōn Stōïkōn philosophōn haireseōs katastas archēgos
Diogenes the Dog was his hearer, who, seeming himself to think most like a beast, drew many after him. Crates succeeded him; and Zeno of Citium was Crates’ pupil, who became the founder of the school of the Stoic philosophers.
Notes and citation
Summary: The succession from Antisthenes through Diogenes and Crates to Zeno.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): Διογενὴς ὁ κύων → Διογένης ὁ κύων.
Extrabiblical texts: Zeno of Citium, Zeno (Zeno of Citium; allusion)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.13.8 (Dindorf 2:369; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-13-8). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-13-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.13.9Dindorf 2:369–370
Ζήνωνα δὲ Κλεάνθης διεδέξατο, Κλεάνθην δὲ Χρύσιππος, τοῦτον δὲ Ζήνων ὁ ἕτερος καὶ οἶ καθεξῆς. λέγονται δʼ οὗτοι πάντες διαφερόντως καὶ βίου στερροῦ καὶ διαλεκτικῆς ἐπιμεληθῆναι. τά γέ τοι τῆς κατʼ αὐτοὺς φιλοσοφίας δόγματα ὧδέ πως ἔχει
Zēnōna de Kleanthēs diedexato, Kleanthēn de Chrysippos, touton de Zēnōn ho heteros kai oi kathexēs. legontai dʼ houtoi pantes diapherontōs kai biou sterrou kai dialektikēs epimelēthēnai. ta ge toi tēs katʼ autous philosophias dogmata hōde pōs echei
Cleanthes succeeded Zeno, Chrysippus Cleanthes, and the other Zeno him, and the others in turn. All of these are said to have cared especially for a hard life and for dialectic. The doctrines of their philosophy run somewhat thus:
Notes and citation
Summary: The Stoic succession after Zeno; Eusebius introduces their doctrines.
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.13.9 (Dindorf 2:369–370; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-13-9). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-13-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
Preparation 15, chapter 14
15.14.1Dindorf 2:370
“ Στοιχεῖον εἶναί φασι τῶν ὄντων τὸ πῦρ, καθάπερ Ἡράκλειτος, τούτου δʼ ἀρχὰς ὕλην καὶ θεὸν, ὡς Πλάτων. ἀλλʼ οὗτος ἄμφω σώματά φησιν εἶναι, καὶ τὸ ποιοῦν καὶ τὸ πάσχον, ἐκείνου τὸ πρῶτον ποιοῦν αἴτιον ἀσώματον εἷναι λέγοντος.
“ Stoicheion einai phasi tōn ontōn to pyr, kathaper Hērakleitos, toutou dʼ archas hylēn kai theon, hōs Platōn. allʼ houtos amphō sōmata phēsin einai, kai to poioun kai to paschon, ekeinou to prōton poioun aition asōmaton heinai legontos.
“They say that the element of existing things is fire, as Heraclitus did, and its principles matter and God, as Plato did. But he says both are bodies, both the active and the passive, while Plato says that the first active cause is incorporeal.
Notes and citation
Summary: Aristocles: for the Stoics, fire is the element, and God and matter, both bodies, are principles.
- Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy, book 7 (fragment; the book’s table of contents assigns this chapter to Aristocles); compare Zeno, fragment 98 (von Arnim).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (wrong comma in the digital text): τὸ πάσχον ‚ ἐκείνου → τὸ πάσχον, ἐκείνου.
Extrabiblical texts: Zeno of Citium, Zeno fr. 98 (Zeno of Citium; quotation); Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.14.1 (Dindorf 2:370; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-14-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-14-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.
15.14.2Dindorf 2:370
ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ κατά τινας εἱμαρμένους χρόνους ἐκπυροῦσθαι τὸν σύμπαντα κόσμον, εἶτʼ αὖθις πάλιν διακοσμεῖσθαι. τὸ μέντοι πρῶτον πῦρ εἶναι καθαπερεί τι σπέρμα, τῶν ἀπάντων ἔχον τοὺς λόγους καὶ τὰς αἰτίας τῶν γεγονότων καὶ τῶν γιγνομένων καὶ τῶν ἐσομένων· τὴν δὲ τούτων ἐπιπλοκὴν καὶ ἀκολουθίαν εἱμαρμένην καὶ ἐπιστήμην καὶ ἀλήθειαν καὶ νόμον εἶναι τῶν ὄντων ἀδιάδραστόν τινα καὶ ἄφυκτον. ταύτῃ δὲ πάντα διοικεῖσθαι τὰ κατὰ τὸν κόσμον ὑπέρευ, καθάπερ ἐν εὐνομωτάτῃ τινὶ πολιτείᾳ.”
epeita de kai kata tinas heimarmenous chronous ekpyrousthai ton sympanta kosmon, eitʼ authis palin diakosmeisthai. to mentoi prōton pyr einai kathaperei ti sperma, tōn apantōn echon tous logous kai tas aitias tōn gegonotōn kai tōn gignomenōn kai tōn esomenōn; tēn de toutōn epiplokēn kai akolouthian heimarmenēn kai epistēmēn kai alētheian kai nomon einai tōn ontōn adiadraston tina kai aphykton. tautę̄ de panta dioikeisthai ta kata ton kosmon hypereu, kathaper en eunomōtatę̄ tini politeią.”
Then also that at certain fated times the whole world is set on fire, and then ordered again. The first fire is like a seed, holding the principles of all things and the causes of what has been and is and will be; and their interweaving and sequence is fate and knowledge and truth and a law of existing things, inescapable and unavoidable. By this all things in the world are governed exceedingly well, as in a most well-ordered city.”
Notes and citation
Summary: The Stoics: periodic conflagration, the seminal fire, and fate as the law of all.
- Aristocles, On Philosophy, book 7 (fragment).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (wrong comma in the digital text): τὸν σύμπαντα κόσμον ‚ εἶτʼ → τὸν σύμπαντα κόσμον, εἶτʼ.
Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.14.2 (Dindorf 2:370; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/15-7-1/#p-15-14-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-15-14-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.