OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/Origen Against Celsus/Book VI/Chapter XXVI

Chapter XXVI.
It is in the precincts of Jerusalem, then, that punishments will be inflicted upon those who undergo the process of purification, who have received into the substance of their soul the elements of wickedness, which in a certain place is figuratively termed “lead,” and on that account iniquity is represented in Zechariah as sitting upon a “talent of lead.” But the remarks which might be made on this topic are neither to be made to all, nor to be uttered on the present occasion; for it is not unattended with danger to commit to writing the explanation of such subjects, seeing the multitude need no further instruction than that which relates to the punishment of sinners; while to ascend beyond this is not expedient, for the sake of those who are with difficulty restrained, even by fear of eternal punishment, from plunging into any degree of wickedness, and into the flood of evils which result from sin. The doctrine of Geenna, then, is unknown both to the diagram and to Celsus: for had it been otherwise, the framers of the former would not have boasted of their pictures of animals and diagrams, as if the truth were represented by these; nor would Celsus, in his treatise against the Christians, have introduced among the charges directed against them statements which they never uttered instead of what was spoken by some who perhaps are no longer in existence, but have altogether disappeared, or been reduced to a very few individuals, and these easily counted. And as it does not beseem those who profess the doctrines of Plato to offer a defence of Epicurus and his impious opinions, so neither is it for us to defend the diagram, or to refute the accusations brought against it by Celsus. We may therefore allow his charges on these points to pass as superfluous and useless, for we would censure more severely than Celsus any who should be carried away by such opinions.
* ↑ χωνευομένων.
* ↑ ποῦ.
* ↑ Cf. Zech. v. 7.
* ↑ [See Dean Plumptre’s The Spirits in Prison, on “The Universalism of Origen,” p. 137, et seqq. S.]
* ↑ μάτην ἐκκείμενα.
# Archaeological Journal/Volume 9/Notice of an Example of Decorative Coloured Brickwork in the Neighbourhood of Rouen

Portion of Bay, Pigeon-house, at Boos, near Rouen.
NOTICE OF AN EXAMPLE OF DECORATIVE COLOURED BRICKWORK IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF ROUEN.
Pigeon-house, at Boos, near Rouen.
During a recent visit to the city of Rouen, and a fresh examination of the varied architectural remains existing in ​that part of Normandy, my attention was attracted to a little building of unusual character. It appeared to present a subject which might prove acceptable to those readers of the Archaeological Journal who take an interest in the adaptation of fictile work, as a means of producing architectural decorations; and, as a very pleasing and uncommon specimen of its kind, I hope that the accompanying representations may be viewed with interest.
It is a pigeon-house of an octagonal form, with a round cornice; this, and the angles of the building, the base- moulding, and the string-course between the upper and lower stage, is of stone; the other parts of the building- are of brick. Each face is divided into two stages, the upper is panelled in brickwork; the lower has a plain surface. Both exhibit much variety in the colours of the bricks, and the patterns in which they are disposed; the colours employed are red, of two different tints,—purple, green, and yellow: the three latter are glazed.
But the chief peculiarity is a row of glazed tiles, each having, on a white ground, a head in profile, in a round medallion, coloured; or else an ornamental pattern, as is shown in the accompanying coloured illustration.
The tiles themselves are of square form. I should incline to think that the date of this work cannot be far from the beginning of the sixteenth century, as, at an earlier period, we should hardly find the adaptation of a round cornice to an octagonal building, the lower mouldings cropping out of the plane surfaces; and at a later period we should find marks of the revived Italian st3de.
The house to which this building belongs is of considerable antiquity, and retains, amongst later works, some windows apparently of the fourteenth century. It is situated near the church, in the village of Boos, about five or six miles from Rouen, on the upper road to Paris.
PIGEON-HOUSE AT BOOS, NEAR ROUEN
# Archawski v. Hanioti

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 532
Archawski v. Hanioti
Argued: March 5, 1956. --- Decided: April 9, 1956
Mr. Harry D. Graham, New York City, for petitioners.
Mr. Israel Convisser, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# An Introduction to Yoga/Foreword

These lectures are intended to give an outline of Yoga, in order to prepare the student to take up, for practical purposes, the Yoga sutras of Patanjali, the chief treatise on Yoga. I have on hand, with my friend Bhagavan Das as collaborateur, a translation of these Sutras, with Vyasa's commentary, and a further commentary and elucidation written in the light of Theosophy. To prepare the student for the mastering of that more difficult task, these lectures were designed; hence the many references to Patanjali. They may, however, also serve to give to the ordinary lay reader some idea of the Science of sciences, and perhaps to allure a few towards its study.
Annie Besant

## Footnotes

* ↑ Delivered at the 32nd Anniversary of the Theosophical Society held at Benares, on Dec. 27th, 28th, 29th, and 30th, 1907.
* ↑ These have never been finished or printed.
# An Introduction to Yoga/Lecture I/Chapter 1

The Meaning of the Universe
Let us, first of all, ask ourselves, looking at the world around us, what it is that the history of the world signifies. When we read history, what does the history tell us? It seems to be a moving panorama of people and events, but it is really only a dance of shadows; the people are shadows, not realities, the kings and statesmen, the ministers and armies; and the eventsÄ the battles and revolutions, the rises and falls of states Äare the most shadowlike dance of all. Even if the historian tries to go deeper, if he deals with economic conditions, with social organisations, with the study of the tendencies of the currents of thought, even then he is in the midst of shadows, the illusory shadows cast by unseen realities. This world is full of forms that are illusory, and the values are all wrong, the proportions are out of focus. The things which a man of the world thinks valuable, a spiritual man must cast aside as worthless. The diamonds of the world, with their glare and glitter in the rays of the outside sun, are mere fragments of broken glass to the man of knowledge. The crown of the king, the sceptre of the emperor, the triumph of earthly power, are less than nothing to the man who has had one glimpse of the majesty of the Self. What is, then, real? What is truly valuable? Our answer will be very different from the answer given by the man of the world.
"The universe exists for the sake of the Self." Not for what the outer world can give, not for control over the objects of desire, not for the sake even of beauty or pleasure, does the Great Architect plan and build His worlds. He has filled them with objects, beautiful and pleasure-giving. The great arch of the sky above, the mountains with snow-clad peaks, the valleys soft with verdure and fragrant with blossoms, the oceans with their vast depths, their surface now calm as a lake, now tossing in furyÄthey all exist, not for the objects themselves, but for their value to the Self. Not for themselves because they are anything in themselves but that the purpose of the Self may be served, and His manifestations made possible.
The world, with all its beauty, its happiness and suffering, its joys and pains" is planned with the utmost ingenuity, in order that the powers of the Self may be shown forth in manifestation. From the fire-mist to the LOGOS, all exist for the sake of the Self. The lowest grain of dust, the mightiest deva in his heavenly regions, the plant that grows out of sight in the nook of a mountain, the star that shines aloft over us-all these exist in order that the fragments of the one Self, embodied in countless forms, may realize their own identity, and manifest the powers of the Self through the matter that envelops them.
There is but one Self in the lowliest dust and the loftiest deva. "Mamamsaha"ÄMy portion,Ä" a portion of My Self," says Sri Krishna, are all these Jivatmas, all these living spirits. For them the universe exists; for them the sun shines, and the waves roll, and the winds blow, and the rain falls, that the Self may know Himself as manifested in matter, as embodied in the universe.
# An Introduction to Yoga

* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, quotes, textbook, course, Wikidata item.
These lectures were given in 1907, and published in 1908.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1933, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 90 years or less. This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# An Introduction to Yoga/Lecture I

Lecture I
THE NATURE OF YOGA
In this first discourse we shall concern ourselves with the gaining of a general idea of the subject of Yoga, seeking its place in nature, its own character, its object in human evolution.
* Chapter 1: The Meaning of the Universe
* Chapter 2: The Unfolding of Consciousness
* Chapter 3: The Oneness of the Self
* Chapter 4: The Quickening of the Process of Self-Unfoldment
* Chapter 5: Yoga is a Science
* Chapter 6: Man a Duality
* Chapter 7: States of Mind
* Chapter 8: Samadhi
* Chapter 9: The Literature of Yoga
* Chapter 10: Some Definitions
* Chapter 11: God Without and God Within
* Chapter 12: Changes of Consciousness and Vibrations of Matter
* Chapter 13: Mind
* Chapter 14: Stages of Mind
* Chapter 15: Inward and Outward-turned Consciousness
* Chapter 16: The Cloud
# At Arlington

* "At Arlington" in Maryland, my Maryland, and other poems (1908)
* "At Arlington" in Pieces People Ask For, edited by George Melville Baker (1909)
# At Christmas Time

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "At Christmas Time."
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* At Christmas Time, a short story by Anton Chekhov.
* At Christmas Time, a poem by Dora Sigerson Shorter.
# At Break of Day

"I thought that past the gates of doom"
* Coates, Florence Earle (1892), "At Break of Day" in The Century Magazine (April 1892).
* Coates, Florence Earle (1898), "At Break of Day" in Poems.
* Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "At Break of Day" in Poems I.

## References

* ↑ View this version at Google Books.
# At Christmas Time (Chekhov)

English-language translations of На святках include:
* At Christmas Time (Chekhov/Garnett)
* At Christmas Time (Chekhov/Fell)
# At Dawning

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "At Dawning."
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* "At Dawning" (1906), a song written by Charles Wakefield Cadman
* "At Dawnin'" (1928), a song written for the film Lights of New York, performed by Harry Downing

## See also

* Dawn
# At Castle Boterel

As I drive to the junction of lane and highway,  And the drizzle bedrenches the waggonette, I look behind at the fading byway,  And see on its slope, now glistening wet,  Distinctly yet   Myself and a girlish form benighted  In dry March weather. We climb the road Beside a chaise. We had just alighted  To ease the sturdy pony’s load  When he sighed and slowed.   What we did as we climbed, and what we talked of  Matters not much, nor to what it led, ― Something that life will not be balked of  Without rude reason till hope is dead,  And feeling fled.   It filled but a minute. But was there ever  A time of such quality, since or before, In that hill’s story ? To one mind never,  Though it has been climbed, foot-swift, foot-sore,  By thousands more.   Primaeval rocks form the road’s steep border,  And much have they faced there, first and last, Of the transitory in Earth’s long order ;  But what they record in colour and cast  Is—that we two passed.   And to me, though Time’s unflinching rigour,  In mindless rote, has ruled from sight The substance now, one phantom figure  Remains on the slope, as when that night  Saw us alight.   I look and see it there, shrinking, shrinking,  I look back at it amid the rain For the very last time; for my sand is sinking,  And I shall traverse old love’s domain  Never again.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# At Christmas Time (Shorter)

“For that old love I once adored…”
* Shorter, Dora Sigerson (1893), "At Christmas Time" in Verses
* Shorter, Dora Sigerson (1907), "At Christmas-Time" in The Collected Poems of Dora Sigerson Shorter
# Arizona v. California (347 U.S. 986)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
347 U.S. 986
Arizona v. California (347 U.S. 986)
It is order that George I. Haight, Esquire, of Chicago, Illinois, be, and he is hereby, appointed special master in this cause, with authority to summon witnesses, issue subpoenas, and take such evidence as may be introduced and such as he may deem it necessary to call for. The master is directed to find the facts specially and state separately his conclusions of law thereon, and to submit the same to this Court with all convenient speed, together with a draft of the decree recommended by him. The findings, conclusions, and recommended decree of the master shall be subject to consideration, revision, or approval by the Court. The master shall be allowed his actual expenses and a reasonable compensation for his services to be fixed hereafter by the Court. The allowances to him, the compensation paid to his stenographic and clerical assistants, and the cost of printing his report shall be charged against and be borne by the parties in such proportion as the Court hereafter may direct. If the appointment herein made of a master is not accepted, or if the place becomes vacant during the recess of the Court, the Senior Associate Justice shall have authority to make a new designation which shall have the same effect as if originally made by the Court herein.
The CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in the consideration or decision of this order.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Arizona v. California (348 U.S. 947)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
348 U.S. 947
Arizona v. California (348 U.S. 947)

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Arizona v. California (350 U.S. 114)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 114
Arizona v. California (350 U.S. 114)
Argued: Dec. 8, 1955. ---
See 350 U.S. 955, 76 S.Ct. 340. See also 350 U.S. 880, 76 S.Ct. 133.
Mr. Northcutt Ely, Washington, D.C., for State of California.
Messrs. John P. Frank, Phoenix, Ariz., Ernest W. McFarland, Florence, Ariz., for State of Arizona.
Mr. W. T. Mathews, Reno, Nev., for State of Nevada.
Mr. Hatfield Chilson, Loveland, Colo., for State of Colorado et al.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Arizona v. California (292 U.S. 341)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
292 U.S. 341
Arizona v. California (292 U.S. 341)
Argued: May 21, 1934. ---
[Syllabus from pages 341-343 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Arthur T. LaPrade, Attorney General of the State of Arizona (Messrs. Charles A. Carson, Jr., of Phoenix Ariz., and A. M. Crawford, of Prescott, Ariz., of counsel), for complainant.Messrs. I. W. Stewart and Arvin B. Shaw, Jr., both of Los Angeles, Cal., for Palo Verde Irrigation District.
Mr. Chas. L. Childers, of El Center, Cal., for Imperial Irrigation District.
Messrs. I. W. Stewart and Arvin B. Shaw, Jr., both of Los Angeles, Cal., and E. C. Finney, of Washington, D.C., for Coachella Valley County Water District.
Mr. U.S. Webb, Atty. Gen., for State of California.
Messrs. James H. Howard, General Counsel, of Los Angeles, Cal., Northcutt Ely, of Washington, D.C., and Ray W. Bruce, of Los Angeles, Cal., for Metropolitan Water Dist. of Southern California.
Messrs. Ray L. Chesebro, City Attorney, and James M. Stevens and Fred M. Bottorf, Asst. City Attorneys, all of Los Angeles, Cal., for the City of Los Angeles.
Messrs. C. L. Byers, City Atty., and Phil D. Swing, both of San Diego, Cal., for the City of San Diego.
Messrs. Thomas Whelan and Phil D. Swing, both of San Diego, Cal., for the County of San Diego.
Mr. Paul P. Prosser, Atty. Gen., for State of Colorado.
Mr. Gray Mashburn, Atty. Gen., for State of Nevada.
Mr. E. K. Neumann, Atty. Gen., for State of New Mexico.
Mr. Joseph Chez, Atty. Gen., for State of Utah.
Mr. Ray E. Lee, Atty. Gen., for State of Wyoming.
Messrs. James D. Parriott, City and County Atty., and R. C. Hecox, Jr., and Malcolm Lindsey, all of Denver, Colo., Asst. City and County Attys., and Stanley P. Smith, of Washington, D.C., for the City and County of Denver.Messrs. J. Crawford Biggs, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D.C., Harry W. Blair, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charles Bunn and Aubrey Lawrence, Sp. Assts. to the Atty. Gen. and Nathan R. Margold, of Washington, D.C., for the Department of the Interior.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Arizona v. California (347 U.S. 986)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
347 U.S. 986
Arizona v. California (347 U.S. 986)
Messrs. Edmund G. Brown, Atty.Gen., Northcutt Ely, Robert L. McCarty and Prentiss Moore, Asst. Attys. Gen., and Gilbert F. Nelson, George M. Treister, Irving Jaffe and Robert Sterling Wolf, Deputy Attys. Gen., for defendant State of California.
Francis E. Jenney, for defendant Palo Verde Irrigation District.
Messrs. Harry W. Horton and R. L. Knox, Jr., for defendant Imperial Irrigation District.
Mr. Earl Redwine, for defendant Coachella Valley County Water District.
Messrs. James H. Howard, Charles C. Cooper, Jr., Donald M. Keith, Alan Patten and Frank P. Doherty, for defendant Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.
Mr. Roger Arnebergh, for defendant City of Los Angeles.
Mr. T. B. Cosgrove, for defendant City of San Diego.
Attorney General Brownell, for intervener United States.
Messrs. W. T. Mathews, Atty. Gen., Alan Bible and William J. Kane, Special Asst. Attys. Gen., and Geo. P. Annand, William N. Dunseath and John W. Barrett, Deputy Attys. Gen., for intervener State of Nevada.
Messrs. Ross F. Jones, Atty. Gen. of Arizona, Howard F. Thompson, Special Asst. to Atty. Gen., John H. Moeur, Burr Sutter and Perry M. Ling, for complainant.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Arizona v. California (348 U.S. 947)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
348 U.S. 947
Arizona v. California (348 U.S. 947)
Messrs. Ross F. Jones, Atty. Gen., Howard F. Thompson, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., John H. Moeur, Burr Sutter, Theodore Kiendl and Perry M. Ling, for complainant State of Arizona.
Messrs. Edmund G. Brown, Atty. Gen., Northcutt Ely, Robert L. McCarty, Prentiss Moore and Gilbert F. Nelson, Asst. Attys. Gen., and Charles E. Corker and Burton J. Gindler, Deputy Attys. Gen., for defendant State of California.
Mr. Francis E. Jenney, for defendant Palo Verde Irrigation District.
Messrs. Harry W. Horton and R. L. Knox, Jr., for defendant Imperial Irrigation District.
Mr. Earl Redwin, for defendant Coachella Valley County Water District.
Messrs. James H. Howard, Charles C. Cooper, Jr., Donald M. Keith, Alan Patten and Frank P. Doherty, for defendant Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.
Mr. Roger Arnebergh, for defendant City of Los Angeles.
Mr. T. B. Cosgrove, for defendant City of San Diego.
Messrs. Harvey Dickerson, Atty. Gen., William N. Dunseath and John W. Barrett, Deputy Attys. Gen., W. T. Mathews, and William J. Kane, Special Asst. Attys. Gen., and H. W. Edwards, for intervener State of Nevada.
Messrs. Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., and Hatfield Chilson, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State of Colorado.
Mr. Howard B. Black, Atty. Gen., for the State of Wyoming.
Messrs. Richard Robinson, Atty. Gen., and Fred E. Wilson, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State of New Mexico.
Messrs. E. R. Callister, Atty. Gen., and Ken Chamberlain, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State of Utah.
The motion of California defendants for leave to file an amended answer is granted. The motion to join as parties, the States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming is hereby referred to George I. Haight, Special Master, to hear the parties and report with all convenient speed his opinion and recommendation as to whether the motion should be granted.
The CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Arizona v. California (298 U.S. 558)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
298 U.S. 558
State of Arizona v. State of California
Argued: April 28, 1936. --- Decided: May 25, 1936.
Mr. James R. Moore, of Phoenix, Ariz., for the State of arizona.
Mr. William W. Ray, of Salt Lake City, Utah, for defendants State of Colorado et al.
Mr. Phil D. Swing, of San Diego, Cal., for defendants State of California et al.
Mr. Justice STONE delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse