Opening the library…

Search the Bible

A Treatise on the Soul

Tertullian

Chapter 31

About this work

Author: Tertullian

Chapter XXXI.—Further Exposure of Transmigration, Its Inextricable Embarrassment.

Again, if this recovery of life from the dead take

‹ Chapter 30 Chapter 32 ›

place

at

all

,

individuals

must

of

course

resume

their

own

individuality

.

Therefore

the

souls

which

animated

each

several

body

must

needs

have

returned

separately

to

their

several

bodies

.

Now

,

whenever

two

,

or

three

,

or

five

souls

are

re

-

enclosed

(

as

they

constantly

are

)

in

one

womb

,

it

will

not

amount

in

such

cases

to

life

from

the

dead

,

because

there

is

not

the

separate

restitution

which

individuals

ought

to

have

;

although

at

this

rate

,

(

no

doubt

,

)

the

law

of

the

primeval

creation

is

signally

kept

,

by

the

production

still

of

several

souls

out

of

only

one

!

Then

,

again

,

if

souls

depart

at

different

ages

of

human

life

,

how

is

it

that

they

come

back

again

at

one

uniform

age

?

For

all

men

are

imbued

with

an

infant

soul

at

their

birth

.

But

how

happens

it

that

a

man

who

dies

in

old

age

returns

to

life

as

an

infant

?

If

the

soul

,

whilst

disembodied

,

decreases

thus

by

retrogression

of

its

age

,

how

much

more

reasonable

would

it

be

,

that

it

should

resume

its

life

with

a

richer

progress

in

all

attainments

of

life

after

the

lapse

of

a

thousand

years

!

At

all

events

,

it

should

return

with

the

age

it

had

attained

at

its

death

,

that

it

might

resume

the

precise

life

which

it

had

relinquished

.

But

even

if

,

at

this

rate

,

they

should

reappear

the

same

evermore

in

their

revolving

cycles

,

it

would

be

proper

for

them

to

bring

back

with

them

,

if

not

the

selfsame

forms

of

body

,

at

least

their

original

peculiarities

of

character

,

taste

,

and

disposition

,

because

it

would

be

hardly

possible

for

them

to

be

regarded

as

the

same

,

if

they

were

deficient

in

those

characteristics

by

means

of

which

their

identity

should

be

proved

.

(

You

,

however

,

meet

me

with

this

question

)

:

How

can

you

possibly

know

,

you

ask

,

whether

all

is

not

a

secret

process

?

may

not

the

work

of

a

thousand

years

take

from

you

the

power

of

recognition

,

since

they

return

unknown

to

you

?

But

I

am

quite

certain

that

such

is

not

the

case

,

for

you

yourself

present

Pythagoras

to

me

as

(

the

restored

)

Euphorbus

.

Now

look

at

Euphorbus

:

he

was

evidently

possessed

of

a

military

and

warlike

soul

,

as

is

proved

by

the

very

renown

of

the

sacred

shields

.

As

for

Pythagoras

,

however

,

he

was

such

a

recluse

,

and

so

unwarlike

,

that

he

shrank

from

the

military

exploits

of

which

Greece

was

then

so

full

,

and

preferred

to

devote

himself

,

in

the

quiet

retreat

of

Italy

,

to

the

study

of

geometry

,

and

astrology

,

and

music

—

the

very

opposite

to

Euphorbus

in

taste

and

disposition

.

Then

,

again

,

the

Pyrrhus

(

whom

he

represented

)

spent

his

time

in

catching

fish

;

but

Pythagoras

,

on

the

contrary

,

would

never

touch

fish

,

abstaining

from

even

the

taste

of

them

as

from

animal

food

.

Moreover

,

Æthalides

and

Hermotimus

had

included

the

bean

amongst

the

common

esculents

at

meals

,

while

Pythagoras

taught

his

disciples

not

even

to

pass

through

a

plot

which

was

cultivated

with

beans

.

I

ask

,

then

,

how

the

same

souls

are

resumed

,

which

can

offer

no

proof

of

their

identity

,

either

by

their

disposition

,

or

habits

,

or

living

?

And

now

,

after

all

,

(

we

find

that

)

only

four

souls

are

mentioned

as

recovering

life

out

of

all

the

multitudes

of

Greece

.

But

limiting

ourselves

merely

to

Greece

,

as

if

no

transmigrations

of

souls

and

resumptions

of

bodies

occurred

,

and

that

every

day

,

in

every

nation

,

and

amongst

all

ages

,

ranks

,

and

sexes

,

how

is

it

that

Pythagoras

alone

experiences

these

changes

into

one

personality

and

another

?

Why

should

not

I

too

undergo

them

?

Or

if

it

be

a

privilege

monopolized

by

philosophers

—

and

Greek

philosophers

only

,

as

if

Scythians

and

Indians

had

no

philosophers

—

how

is

it

that

Epicurus

had

no

recollection

that

he

had

been

once

another

man

,

nor

Chrysippus

,

nor

Zeno

,

nor

indeed

Plato

himself

,

whom

we

might

perhaps

have

supposed

to

have

been

Nestor

,

from

his

honeyed

eloquence

?

Notes

1
Signatur. Rigaltius reads “singulatur,” after the Codex Agobard., as meaning, “The single origin of the human race is in principle maintained,” etc.
2
Temere.
3
Recensentur.