OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume III/Anti-Marcion/Against the Valentinians/XV

Chapter XV.—Strange Account of the Origin of Matter, from the Various Affections of Achamoth. The Waters from Her Tears; Light from Her Smile.
Well, now, the Pythagoreans may learn, the Stoics may know, Plato himself (may discover), whence Matter, which they will have to be unborn, derived both its origin and substance for all this pile of the world—(a mystery) which not even the renowned Mercurius Trismegistus, master (as he was) of all physical philosophy, thought out. You have just heard of “Conversion,” one element in the “Passion” (we have so often mentioned). Out of this the whole life of the world, and even that of the Demiurge himself, our God, is said to have had its being. Again, you have heard of “sorrow” and “fear.” From these all other created things took their beginning. For from her tears flowed the entire mass of waters. From this circumstance one may form an idea of the calamity which she encountered, so vast were the kinds of the tears wherewith she overflowed. She had salt tear-drops, she had bitter, and sweet, and warm, and cold, and bituminous, and ferruginous, and sulphurous, and even poisonous, so that the Nonacris exuded therefrom which killed Alexander; and the river of the Lyncestæ flowed from the same source, which produces drunkenness; and the Salmacis was derived from the same source, which renders men effeminate. The rains of heaven Achamoth whimpered forth, and we on our part are anxiously employed in saving up in our cisterns the very wails and tears of another. In like manner, from the “consternation” and “alarm” (of which we have also heard), bodily elements were derived. And yet amidst so many circumstances of solitude, in this vast prospect of destitution, she occasionally smiled at the recollection of the sight of Christ, and from this smile of joy light flashed forth. How great was this beneficence of Providence, which induced her to smile, and all that we might not linger for ever in the dark! Nor need you feel astonished how from her joy so splendid an element could have beamed upon the world, when from her sadness even so necessary a provision flowed forth for man. O illuminating smile! O irrigating tear! And yet it might now have acted as some alleviation amidst the horror of her situation; for she might have shaken off all the obscurity thereof as often as she had a mind to smile, even not to be obliged to turn suppliant to those who had deserted her.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Ille.
* ↑ Recogitavit.
* ↑ “Omnis anima hujus mundi” may, however, mean “every living soul.” So Bp. Kaye, On Tertullian, p. 487.
* ↑ Cetera.
* ↑ Achamoth’s.
* ↑ Exitum.
* ↑ Utique.
* ↑ These two rivers, with their peculiar qualities, are mentioned by Pliny, H. N. ii. 103; [and the latter by Milton against Salmasius.]
* ↑ Ovid. Metam. iv. 286.
* ↑ Pipiavit.
* ↑ Qui.
* ↑ As light.
* ↑ Instrumentum: water is meant.
* ↑ Christ and the Holy Spirit. Oehler.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume III/Anti-Marcion/Against the Valentinians/XVIII

Chapter XVIII.—Blasphemous Opinion Concerning the Origin of the Demiurge, Supposed to Be the Creator of the Universe.
Having become a better proficient in practical conduct by the authority which, we may well suppose, accrued to her from her three children, she determined to impart form to each of the natures. The spiritual one however, she was unable to touch, inasmuch as she was herself spiritual. For a participation in the same nature has, to a very great extent, disqualified like and consubstantial beings from having superior power over one another. Therefore she applies herself solely to the animal nature, adducing the instructions of Soter (for her guidance). And first of all (she does) what cannot be described and read, and heard of, without an intense horror at the blasphemy thereof: she produces this God of ours, the God of all except of the heretics, the Father and Creator and King of all things, which are inferior to him. For from him do they proceed. If, however, they proceed from him, and not rather from Achamoth, or if only secretly from her, without his perceiving her, he was impelled to all that he did, even like a puppet which is moved from the outside. In fact, it was owing to this very ambiguity about the personal agency in the works which were done, that they coined for him the mixed name of (Motherly Father), whilst his other appellations were distinctly assigned according to the conditions and positions of his works: so that they call him Father in relation to the animal substances to which they give the place of honour on his right hand; whereas, in respect of the material substances which they banish to his left hand, they name him Demiurgus; whilst his title King designates his authority over both classes, nay over the universe.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Exercitior.
* ↑ Scilicet.
* ↑ Fere.
* ↑ Eo animo.
* ↑ See above, chap. xvi. p. 512.
* ↑ Demiurgum.
* ↑ Et velut sigillario. “Sigillarium est νευρόσπαστον,” Oehler.
* ↑ The Father acting through and proceeding from his Mother.
* ↑ Commendant.
* ↑ Delegant.
* ↑ Communiter in universitatem.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume III/Anti-Marcion/Against the Valentinians/XVII

Chapter XVII.—Achamoth in Love with the Angels. A Protest Against the Lascivious Features of Valentinianism. Achamoth Becomes the Mother of Three Natures.
Then Achamoth, delivered at length from all her evils, wonderful to tell goes on and bears fruit with greater results. For warmed with the joy of so great an escape from her unhappy condition, and at the same time heated with the actual contemplation of the angelic luminaries (one is ashamed) to use such language, (but there is no other way of expressing one’s meaning), she during the emotion somehow became personally inflamed with desire towards them, and at once grew pregnant with a spiritual conception, at the very image of which the violence of her joyous transport, and the delight of her prurient excitement had imbibed and impressed upon her. She at length gave birth to an offspring, and then there arose a leash of natures, from a triad of causes,—one material, arising from her passion; another animal, arising from her conversion; the third spiritual, which had its origin in her imagination.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Ecce.
* ↑ Subavit et ipsa.
* ↑ Trinitas generum.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume III/Anti-Marcion/Against the Valentinians/XXIX

Chapter XXIX.—The Three Natures Again Adverted to. They are All Exemplified Amongst Men. For Instance, by Cain, and Abel, and Seth.
I will now collect from different sources, by way of conclusion, what they affirm concerning the dispensation of the whole human race. Having at first stated their views as to man’s threefold nature—which was, however, united in one in the case of Adam—they then proceed after him to divide it (into three) with their especial characteristics, finding opportunity for such distinction in the posterity of Adam himself, in which occurs a threefold division as to moral differences. Cain and Abel, and Seth, who were in a certain sense the sources of the human race, become the fountain-heads of just as many qualities of nature and essential character. The material nature, which had become reprobate for salvation, they assign to Cain; the animal nature, which was poised between divergent hopes, they find in Abel; the spiritual, preordained for certain salvation, they store up in Seth. In this way also they make a twofold distinction among souls, as to their property of good and evil—according to the material condition derived from Cain, or the animal from Abel. Men’s spiritual state they derive over and above the other conditions, from Seth adventitiously, not in the way of nature, but of grace, in such wise that Achamoth infuses it among superior beings like rain into good souls, that is, those who are enrolled in the animal class. Whereas the material class—in other words, those which are bad souls—they say, never receive the blessings of salvation; for that nature they have pronounced to be incapable of any change or reform in its natural condition. This grain, then, of spiritual seed is modest and very small when cast from her hand, but under her instruction increases and advances into full conviction, as we have already said; and the souls, on this very account, so much excelled all others, that the Demiurge, even then in his ignorance, held them in great esteem. For it was from their list that he had been accustomed to select men for kings and for priests; and these even now, if they have once attained to a full and complete knowledge of these foolish conceits of theirs, since they are already naturalized in the fraternal bond of the spiritual state, will obtain a sure salvation, nay, one which is on all accounts their due.

## Footnotes

* ↑ De dispositione.
* ↑ Inunitam.
* ↑ Argumenta.
* ↑ Essentiæ.
* ↑ Choicum: “the clayey.” Having the doubtful issues, which arise from freedom of the will (Oehler).
* ↑ Recondunt: or, “discover.”
* ↑ Recondunt: or, “discover.”
* ↑ Superducunt.
* ↑ De obvenientia.
* ↑ Indulgentiam.
* ↑ The “quos” here relates to “spiritalem statum,” but expressing the sense rather than the grammatical propriety, refers to the plural idea of “good souls” (Oehler).
* ↑ Depluat.
* ↑ Salutaria.
* ↑ We have tried to retain the emphatic repetition, “inreformabilem naturæ naturam.”
* ↑ Eruditu hujus.
* ↑ Above, in ch. xxv. p. 515.
* ↑ Istarum næniarum.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume III/Anti-Marcion/Against the Valentinians/XVI

Chapter XVI.—Achamoth Purified from All Impurities of Her Passion by the Paraclete, Acting Through Soter, Who Out of the Above-Mentioned Impurities Arranges Matter, Separating Its Evil from the Better Qualities.
She, too, resorts to prayers, after the manner of her mother. But Christ, Who now felt a dislike to quit the Pleroma, appoints the Paraclete as his deputy. To her, therefore, he despatches Soter, (who must be the same as Jesus, to whom the Father imparted the supreme power over the whole body of the Æons, by subjecting them all to him, so that “by him,” as the apostle says, “all things were created”), with a retinue and cortege of contemporary angels, and (as one may suppose) with the dozen fasces. Hereupon Achamoth, being quite struck with the pomp of his approach, immediately covered herself with a veil, moved at first with a dutiful feeling of veneration and modesty; but afterwards she surveys him calmly, and his prolific equipage. With such energies as she had derived from the contemplation, she meets him with the salutation, Κύριε, χαῖρε (“Hail, Lord”)! Upon this, I suppose, he receives her, confirms and conforms her in knowledge, as well as cleanses her from all the outrages of Passion, without, however, utterly severing them, with an indiscriminateness like that which had happened in the casualties which befell her mother. For such vices as had become inveterate and confirmed by practice he throws together; and when he had consolidated them in one mass, he fixes them in a separate body, so as to compose the corporeal condition of Matter, extracting out of her inherent, incorporeal passion such an aptitude of nature as might qualify it to attain to a reciprocity of bodily substances, which should emulate one another, so that a twofold condition of the substances might be arranged; one full of evil through its faults, the other susceptible of passion from conversion. This will prove to be Matter, which has set us in battle array against Hermogenes, and all others who presume to teach that God made all things out of Matter, not out of nothing.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Saviour: another title of their Paraclete.
* ↑ Col. i. 16.
* ↑ Fructiferumque suggestum.
* ↑ Expumicat.
* ↑ Habilitatem atque naturam. We have treated this as a “hendiadys.”
* ↑ Æquiparantias corpulentiarum.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume III/Anti-Marcion/Against the Valentinians/XXII

Chapter XXII.—Origin of the Devil, in the Criminal Excess of the Sorrow of Achamoth. The Devil, Called Also Munditenens, Actually Wiser Than the Demiurge, Although His Work.
The odium felt amongst them against the devil is the more excusable, even because the peculiarly sordid character of his origin justifies it. For he is supposed by them to have had his origin in that criminal excess of her sorrow, from which they also derive the birth of the angels, and demons, and all the wicked spirits. Yet they affirm that the devil is the work of the Demiurge, and they call him Munditenens (Ruler of the World), and maintain that, as he is of a spiritual nature, he has a better knowledge of the things above than the Demiurge, an animal being. He deserves from them the pre-eminence which all heresies provide him with.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Infamia apud illos.
* ↑ Tolerabilior.
* ↑ Capit: “capax est,” nimirum “infamiæ” (Fr. Junius).
* ↑ Ex nequitia.
* ↑ Achamoth’s.
* ↑ Irenæus’ word is Κοσμοκράτωρ; see also Eph. vi. 12.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume III/Anti-Marcion/Against the Valentinians/XXIV

Chapter XXIV.—The Formation of Man by the Demiurge. Human Flesh Not Made of the Ground, But of a Nondescript Philosophic Substance.
Such being their conceits respecting God, or, if you like, the gods, of what sort are their figments concerning man? For, after he had made the world, the Demiurge turns his hands to man, and chooses for him as his substance not any portion of “the dry land,” as they say, of which alone we have any knowledge (although it was, at that time, not yet dried by the waters becoming separated from the earthy residuum, and only afterwards became dry), but of the invisible substance of that matter, which philosophy indeed dreams of, from its fluid and fusible composition, the origin of which I am unable to imagine, because it exists nowhere. Now, since fluidity and fusibility are qualities of liquid matter, and since everything liquid flowed from Sophia’s tears, we must, as a necessary conclusion, believe that muddy earth is constituted of Sophia’s eye-rheums and viscid discharges, which are just as much the dregs of tears as mud is the sediment of waters. Thus does the Demiurge mould man as a potter does his clay, and animates him with his own breath. Made after his image and likeness, he will therefore be both material and animal. A fourfold being! For in respect of his “image,” he must be deemed clayey, that is to say, material, although the Demiurge is not composed of matter; but as to his “likeness,” he is animal, for such, too, is the Demiurge. You have two (of his constituent elements). Moreover, a coating of flesh was, as they allege, afterwards placed over the clayey substratum, and it is this tunic of skin which is susceptible of sensation.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Vel.
* ↑ Ex pituitis et gramis.
* ↑ Choicus.
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 29 (30)

29 (30). To Agni and Vishṇu.
[Medhātithi (?).—dvyṛcam. mantroktadāivatam. trāiṣṭubham.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx. (in inverse order of verses); and, as connected passage, further in TS. (i. 8. 22$^1$) and ÇÇS. (ii. 4. 3). Used by Kāuç. (32. 3), with hymns 42, 46, 78, 112, in a remedial rite for various diseases, with binding of grass on the joints; and also (59. 19) with 17 etc.: see 17. In Vāit. (8. 1), it accompanies an offering to Agni and Vishnu at the beginning of the parvan ceremony. ⌊Whitney seems to doubt whether the Anukr. does not mean to ascribe this hymn (and 27, 28) to Bhṛgvan̄giras.⌋
Translated: Ludwig, p. 374; Henry, 12, 65; Griffith, i. 341.
1. O Agni-and-Vishnu, great [is] that greatness of yours; ye drink of the ghee that is called secret, assuming seven treasures in each house; may your tongue move on to meet the ghee.
TS. has, in b, the imperative vītám, and ÇÇS. pātam, and both gúhyāni, which makes of nā́ma an accus. pl.; at the end, TS. has caraṇyet, and ÇÇS. -ṇyat; and both dádhānā at end of c: ÇÇS. further exchanges 1 c and 2 c, and has upa for prati at beginning of d. MS. mixes up the material of the two verses still more, putting our 1 b, c after our 2 a in iv. 10. 1, and our 2 b, c after our 1 a in iv. 11. 2 (in iv. 10. 1 it reads gúhyāni and dádhānā, like the other two texts, the pāthás, like ours); in d (iv. 11. 2), it has ánu (the text wrongly nú) instead of práti, and at the end -ṇyat. KB. (vii. 2) has two pādas resembling d (one with upa and one with prati at the beginning, and both ending with caraṇyat). With b compare further RV. iv. 58. 1 c, and with c RV. v. 1. 5 ⌊c and vi. 74. 1 c⌋. Ppp. exchanges the place of 1 b and 2 b, and reads in the former (like ÇÇS.) pātam and guhyāni see my addition to note to vs. 2⌋.
2. O Agni-and-Vishṇu, great [is] your dear domain (dhā́man); ye partake of (vī) the ghee, enjoying secret things, increasing by good praise in each house; may your tongue move up to meet the ghee.
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 24 (25)

24 (25). To various gods.
[Brahman.—sāvitram: trāiṣṭubham.]
Not found in Pāipp. Used by Kāuç. (59. 19) only with 17 etc.: see under hymn 17.
Translated: Henry, 10, 62; Griffith, i. 339.
1. What Indra dug for us, what Agni, all the gods, what the well-singing Maruts—that may Savitar of true ordinances, may Prajāpati, may Anumati confirm to us.
The comm. reads asanat (= adadāt) in a, and so do our Bp.I. (E. aṣanat p.m.), although SPP. reports no such variant among his authorities.
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 28 (29)

28 (29). Of the instruments of offering.
[Medhātithi (?).—vedadevatākam. trāiṣṭubham.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx. To this hymn, as to the preceding, Kāuç. pays no attention; but it is used twice by Vāit.: once in the parvan ceremony (4. 12), as the hotar unties the veda-bunch; and once in the agniṣṭoma (13. 2), in connection with the prayaṇīya iṣṭi.
Translated: Ludwig, p. 19; Henry, 11, 65; Griffith, i. 341.
1. The vedá [is] well-being, the tree-smiter well-being; the rib [is] sacrificial hearth (védi), the ax our well-being; oblation-making, worshipful, lovers of the offering, let those gods enjoy this offering.
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 25 (26)

25 (26). Praise to Vishṇu and Varuṇa.
[Medhātithi.—dvyṛcam. vāiṣṇavam. trāiṣṭubham.]
The hymn is found also in Pāipp. xx. Used by Kāug. (59. 19) only with hymn 17 etc. (which see).
Translated: Ludwig, p. 429; Henry, 10, 63; Griffith, i. 339.
​1. By whose ⌊du.⌋ force were established the spaces (rájas), who by heroisms are most heroic, most mighty, who by their powers lord it unopposed—to Vishṇu, to Varuṇa hath gone the first invocation.
The verse is found also in a number of other texts: VS. (viii. 59), TB. (ii. 8. 4$^5$), MS. (iv. 14. 6), SB. (i. 5), AÇS. (v. 20. 6), ÇÇS. (iii. 20. 4); all of them agree nearly in their variations from our text: thus, vīryèbhir (but MS. vīrébhir) for yāú vīryāìr in b; yā́ and ápratītā (but TB. -tīttā) in c; and víṣṇū, váruṇā, and pūrváhūtāu (but MS. -tim) in d; TB. further çáciṣṭhā in b. Ppp. has stabhitā in a, and çacībhiḥ (for çaviṣṭhā) in b.
2. In whose (sing.) direction is whatever shines out here, [whatever] both breathes forth and looks abroad mightily (çácībhis), of old, by the god's ordinance, with powers (sáhas)—to Vishṇu, to Varuṇa hath gone the first invocation.
The first pāda is found above as iv. 23. 7 a, and nearly as iv. 28. 1 b; also in TS. iii. 3. 11$^4$. Ppp. reads, for c, maho* ṛtasya dharmaṇā yuvānā, and begins with yayos. The comm., in b, seems to give prā ’niti ca. The first pāda is rather jagatī. *⌊So Roth's collation: his notes give mahā.⌋
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 3

3. Mystic.
[Atharvan (as above).—ātmadevatyam. trāiṣṭubham.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx., and in a whole series of other texts: TS. (i. 7. 12$^2$), MS. (i. 10. 3), ACS. (ii. 19. 32), KÇS. (xxv. 6. 10), ÇÇS. (iii. 17. 1). Kāuç. (15. 11) prescribes the use, with vi. 125 and vii. 110 and a couple of single verses from elsewhere (the comm. includes also vii. 4), in the battle incantations, while the king and his charioteer mount a new chariot; as to its medical employment with vii. 2, see under the latter. Vāit. (9. 15) uses the verse in the sākamedha ceremony, on leaving the sacrificial hut.
Translated: Henry, 2, 48; Griffith, i. 328.
1. By this shape (viṣṭhá) generating exploits (kárvara), he verily, fiery, a wide way for space (? vára); he went up to meet the sustaining top (ágra) of the sweet; with his own self (tanū́) he sent forth (īraya-) a self.
The translation given is purely mechanical. With c compare iv. 32. 7 c. The comm., after a mystic explanation, gives as alternative another, accordant with the use in Kāuç., making the verse relate to a king who desires victory and mounts a new chariot. He understands viṣṭhā as -ās; our pada-text reads vi॰sthā́ ⌊as does SPP's⌋. The other texts all agree with ours in a, b (but TS. understands viṣṭhā́s, MS. viṣṭhā́); in c (cf. iv. 32. 7 c), all* have dharúṇas, TS. accents práti, and MS. reads pratyán̄ (!) āit; for d, TS.KÇS. have svā́yāṁ yát tanúvāṁ tanū́m āírayata, and MS.AÇS.ÇÇS. svā́ṁ yát tanū́ṁ tanvā̀m āírayata. Doubtless āirayata is the reading to be given at the end of the verse in our text; it is accepted by SPP., being favored by the considerable majority of his authorities, as it is of ours (Bp.W.T.R.p.m. -at; K. has -yanta). Ppp. has dharuṇe in c. *⌊AÇS.ÇÇS. in fact have -am.⌋ ⌊KÇS. has tanvām.⌋
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 21 (22)

21 (22). In praise of the sun.
[Brahman.—mantroktātmadevatyam. çakvarīvirāḍgarbhā jagatī.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx., and in SV. (i. 372). According to Kāuç. (86. 16), the verse is used in the pitṛnidhāna division of the funeral ceremony accompanying the application of the dhruvanas {sic); ⌊see xviii. 3. 10, 17.⌋
Translated: Henry, 9, 61; Griffith, i. 338.
1. Come ye together all with address (vácas) to the lord of the sky; [he is] the one mighty (vibhū́) guest of people; may he, ancient, conciliate the present one; him, being one, the track hath much turned after.
The verse is here literally rendered according to the AV. version, but comparison with SV. and Ppp. shows plainly that its readings are very corrupt. SV. reads, in a, s. víçvā ójasā; it has at beginning of b yá éka íd bhū́r; in c, ājígīṣam; in d, vartanī́r, and éka it at the end (omitting purú). Ppp's version is this: a, b, sam āitu viçvā oham ā pati divo eṣa ita bhūr aditir janānām; in d, vivṛte ’kam it paruḥ. ⌊Henry suggests some emendations.⌋ The meter (12 + 10: 11 + 14 = 47) is not accurately defined by the Anukr.
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 22 (23)

22 (23). To the sun (?).
[Brahman.—dvyṛcam. lin̄goktadevatyam. 1. 2-p. l-av. virāḍgāyatrī; 2. 3-p. anuṣṭubh.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx. Both verses form a single long verse in SV. (i. 458). Appears in Kāuç. (66. 14), in the savayajñas, with vi. 31, on giving a spotted cow. In Vāit. (13. 8) it follows, in the agniṣṭoma, next after hymn 14.
Translated: Henry, 9, 61; Griffith, i. 338.
​1. This one [is] a thousand for our seeing, thought of the poets, light in extent.
The translation is only mechanical, the real sense being wholly obscure. SV. reads ā́navo dṛçáḥ (for ā́ no dṛçé); Ppp., ā na ṛṣiṣ; and aditir for matir. SV. ends with vídharma. The comm. divides the verses differently, ending the first with sam āirayan, against the mss., the Anukr., the SV., and the evident connection ⌊but apparently with Ppp.⌋. The metrical definitions of the Anukr. are bad; each verse is 12 + 8, the second having an added pāda of 11 syllables.
2. The ruddy one sent together the collected dawns, faultless, like-minded, most-furious, in the gathered stall of the cow.
Even to make a mechanical version it has been necessary to read āirayat, with SV., which has further, at the end, manyumántaç citā́ góḥ; Ppp. gives īraya, and citayo goḥ.
The second anuvāka, ending here, has 9 hymns and 22 verses; the Anukr. quotation says dve dvitīye tu vidyāt.
⌊In the head-line of p. 150 of the Berlin edition, correct the misprinted kāṇḍa-number 6 to 7.⌋
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 23 (24)

23 (24). Against ill conditions and beings.
[Yama.—mantroktaduṣvpnanāçanadtvatyam: ānuṣtubham.]
The hymn is merely a repetition of iv. 17. 5 above, and is not found in Pāipp. otherwise than as part of the latter hymn. It is used neither by Kāuç. nor by Vāit. ⌊As to its insertion in the second anuvāka, see p. 389, near top.⌋
Translated: Henry, 9, 62; Griffith, i. 338.
1. Evil-dreaming, evil-living, demon, monster, hags, all the ill-named (f.), ill-voiced—them we make disappear from us.