57. For if it is requisite not to dissemble any thing through fear, but to speak freely, it is no otherwise possible to obtain the end [of a contemplative life], than by adhering to God, as if fastened by a nail, being divulsed from body, and those pleasures of the soul which subsist through it; since our salvation is effected by deeds, and not by a mere attention to words. But as it is not possible with any kind of diet, and, in short, by feeding on flesh, to become adapted to an union with even some partial deity, much less is this possible with that God who is beyond all things, and is above a nature simply incorporeal; but after all-various purifications, both of soul and body, he who is naturally of an excellent disposition, and lives with piety and purity, will scarcely be thought worthy to perceive him. So that, by how much more the Father of all things excels in simplicity, purity, and sufficiency to himself, as being established far beyond all material representation, by so much the more is it requisite, that he who approaches to him should be in every respect pure and holy, beginning from his body, and ending internally, and distributing to each of the parts, and in short to every thing which is present with him, a purity adapted to the nature of each. Perhaps, however, these things will not be contradicted by any one. But it may be doubted, why we admit abstinence from animal food to pertain to purity, though in sacrifices we slay sheep and oxen, and conceive that these immolations are pure and acceptable to the Gods. Hence, since the solution of this requires a long discussion, the consideration of sacrifices must be assumed from another principle. FOOTNOTES: [13] Porphyry elsewhere calls this Firmus Castricius his friend and fellow disciple. See more concerning him in Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus. [14] παρανομηματα. Porphyry calls the conduct of Firmus _illegitimate_, because the feeding on flesh is for the most part contrary to the laws of genuine philosophy. [15] The original in this place is, ἢ δι’ απατην ουν, ἢ το μηδεν διαφερειν ηγεισθαι προς φρονησιν, κ.τ.λ.; but, for ἢ το μηδεν διαφερειν, I read δια το μηδεν διαφερειν. And this appears to have been the reading which Felicianus found in his MS.; for his version of this passage is, “Vel igitur deceptione inductus, quod sive hoc sive illo modo vescaris, &c.” [16] This philosopher was an auditor of Plato and Speusippus. [17] Hesiod. Op. et Di. lib. I. v. 275, &c. [18] This philosopher was a Mitylenæan, and is said to have been an auditor of, and also the successor of, Epicurus. [19] Iliad, XI. v. 479. [20] Iliad, IV. v. 35. [21] Iliad, XXII. v. 347. [22] _i.e._ Sacrifices from twelve animals. [23] For Cyzicus was situated in an island. [24] In the original εαν μη προση και η κατ’ αυτα φυσιωσις και ζωη; but it is obviously necessary for φυσιωσις to read φυσις.