Chapter 9.—The Manichæan Fictions About Things Good and Evil are Not Consistent
with Themselves.
14. I have said these things to make you cease, if that is possible, giving the name of
evil to a region boundless in depth and length; to a mind wandering through the region; to
the five caverns of the elements,—one full of darkness, another of waters, another of winds,
another of fire, another of smoke; to the animals born in each of these elements,—serpents
in the darkness, swimming creatures in the waters, flying creatures in the winds, quadrupeds
in the fire, bipeds in the smoke. For these things, as you describe them, cannot be called
evil; for all such things, as far as they exist, must have their existence from the most high
God, for as far as they exist they are good. If pain and weakness is an evil, the animals you
speak of were of such physical strength that their abortive offspring, after, as your sect be-
lieves, the world was formed of them, fell from heaven to earth, according to you, and could
not die. If blindness is an evil, they could see; if deafness, they could hear. If to be nearly
or altogether dumb is an evil, their speech was so clear and intelligible, that, as you assert,
they decided to make war against God in compliance with an address delivered in their as-
sembly. If sterility is an evil, they were prolific in children. If exile is an evil, they were in
their own country, and occupied their own territories. If servitude is an evil, some of them
were rulers. If death is an evil, they were alive, and the life was such that, by your statement,
even after God was victorious, it was impossible for the mind ever to die.
15. Can you tell me how it is that in the chief evil so many good things are to be found,
the opposites of the evils above mentioned? and if these are not evils, can any substance be
an evil, as far as it is a substance? If weakness is not an evil, can a weak body be an evil? If
blindness is not an evil, can darkness be an evil? If deafness is not an evil, can a deaf man
be an evil? If dumbness is not an evil, can a fish be an evil? If sterility is not an evil, how
can we call a barren animal an evil? If exile is not an evil, how can we give that name to an
animal in exile, or to an animal sending some one into exile? If servitude is not an evil, in
what sense is a subject animal an evil, or one enforcing subjection? If death is not an evil,
in what sense is a mortal animal an evil, or one causing death? Or if these are evils, must
we not give the name of good things to bodily strength, sight, hearing, persuasive speech,
fertility, native land, liberty, life, all which you hold to exist in that kingdom of evil, and yet
venture to call it the perfection of evil?
74
16. Once more, if, as has never been denied, unsuitableness is an evil, what can be more
suitable than those elements to their respective animals,—the darkness to serpents, the waters
to swimming creatures, the winds to flying creatures, the fire to voracious animals, the
smoke to soaring animals? Such is the harmony which you describe as existing in the race
of strife; such the order in the seat of confusion. If what is hurtful is an evil, I do not repeat
the strong objection already stated, that no hurt can be suffered where no good exists; but
if that is not so clear, one thing at least is easily seen and understood as following from the
The Manichæan Fictions About Things Good and Evil are Not Consistent with Themselves.
124
The Manichæan Fictions About Things Good and Evil are Not Consistent with…