Chapter LX.

In the next place, as if this were possible, viz., that the image of a man who was dead could appear to another as if he were still living, he adopts this opinion as an Epicurean, and says, “That some one having so dreamed owing to a peculiar state of mind, or having, under the influence of a perverted imagination, formed such an appearance as he himself desired, reported that such had been seen; and this,” he continues, “has been the case with numberless individuals.”  But even if this statement of his seems to have a considerable degree of force, it is nevertheless only fitted to confirm a necessary doctrine, that the soul of the dead exists in a separate state (from the body); and he who adopts such an opinion does not believe without good reason in the immortality, or at least continued existence, of the soul, as even Plato says in his treatise on the Soul that shadowy phantoms of persons already dead have appeared to some around their sepulchres.  Now the phantoms which exist about the soul of the dead are produced by some substance, and this substance is in the soul, which exists apart in a body said to be of splendid appearance.286    τὰ μὲν οὖν γινόμενα περὶ ψυχῆς τεθνηκότων φαντάσματα ἀπό τινος ὑποκειμένου γίνεται, τοῦ κατὰ τὴν ὑφεστηκυῖαν ἐν τῷ καλουμένῳ αὐγοειδεῖ σώματι ψυχήν.  Cf. note in Benedictine ed.  But Celsus, unwilling to admit any such view, will have it that some dreamed a waking dream,287    ὕπαρ. and, under the influence of a perverted imagination, formed to themselves such an image as they desired.  Now it is not irrational to believe that a dream may take place while one is asleep; but to suppose a waking vision in the case of those who are not altogether out of their senses, and under the influence of delirium or hypochondria, is incredible.  And Celsus, seeing this, called the woman “half-mad,”—a statement which is not made by the history recording the fact, but from which he took occasion to charge the occurrences with being untrue.

Εἶτα ὡς δυναμένου τούτου συμβῆναι, λέγω δὴ τοῦ φαντασίαν τινὶ γίνεσθαι περὶ τοῦ τεθνηκότος ὡς ζῶντος, ἐπιφέρει ὡς Ἐπικούρειος καὶ λέγει κατά τινα διάθεσιν ὀνειρώξαντά τινα ἢ κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ βούλησιν δόξῃ πεπλανη μένῃ φαντασιωθέντα τὸ τοιοῦτον ἀπηγγελκέναι, ὅπερ, φησί, μυρίοις ἤδη συμβέβηκε. Τοῦτο δὲ εἰ καὶ δεινότατα ἔδοξεν εἰρῆσθαι, οὐδὲν ἧττον κατασκευαστικόν ἐστιν ἀναγκαίου δόγματος, ὡς ἄρα ἡ ψυχὴ ὑφέστηκε τῶν ἀποθανόντων· καὶ οὐ μάτην πεπίστευκε περὶ τῆς ἀθανασίας αὐτῆς ἢ κἂν τῆς διαμονῆς ὁ τοῦτο τὸ δόγμα ἀνειληφώς· ὡς καὶ Πλάτων ἐν τῷ περὶ τῆς ψυχῆς λέγει "σκιοειδῆ φαντάσματα" περὶ μνημεῖά τισι γεγονέναι τῶν ἤδη τεθνηκότων. Τὰ μὲν οὖν γινόμενα περὶ μνημεῖα τεθνηκότων "φαντάσματα" ἀπό τινος ὑποκειμένου γίνεται, τοῦ κατὰ τὴν ὑφεστηκυῖαν ἐν τῷ καλουμένῳ αὐγοειδεῖ σώματι ψυχήν. Ὁ δὲ Κέλσος οὐ βουλόμενος τὸ τοιοῦτον θέλει καὶ ὕπαρ ὀνειρώττειν τινὰς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἑαυτῶν βούλησιν δόξῃ πεπλανημένῃ φαντα σιοῦσθαι· ὅπερ ὄναρ μὲν πιστεύειν γίνεσθαι οὐκ ἄλογον, ὕπαρ δὲ ἐπὶ τῶν μὴ πάντῃ ἐκφρόνων καὶ φρενιτιζόντων ἢ μελαγχολώντων οὐ πιθανόν. Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προειδόμενος ὁ Κέλσος παροιστρῶσαν εἶπε τὴν γυναῖκα· ὅπερ οὐκ ἐμφαίνει ἡ ἀναγραφεῖσα ἱστορία, ὅθεν λαβὼν κατηγορεῖ τῶν πραγ μάτων.