οὐδὲν χαλεπόν, ἦ δ᾽ ὅς, ἐννοῆσαι ὃ λέγω·
ἀλλ᾽ οἷον εἰ τὸ καταδαρθάνειν μὲν εἴη,
τὸ δ᾽ ἀνεγείρεσθαι μὴ ἀνταποδιδοίη γιγνόμενον ἐκ τοῦ καθεύδοντος, οἶσθ᾽ ὅτι τελευτῶντα πάντ᾽ (72c) <ἂν> λῆρον τὸν Ἐνδυμίωνα ἀποδείξειεν καὶ οὐδαμοῦ ἂν φαίνοιτο διὰ τὸ καὶ τἆλλα πάντα ταὐτὸν ἐκείνῳ πεπονθέναι, καθεύδειν.
κἂν εἰ συγκρίνοιτο μὲν πάντα, διακρίνοιτο δὲ μή, ταχὺ ἂν τὸ τοῦ Ἀναξαγόρου γεγονὸς εἴη, “ὁμοῦ πάντα χρήματα”.
ὡσαύτως δέ, ὦ φίλε Κέβης, καὶ εἰ ἀποθνῄσκοι μὲν πάντα ὅσα τοῦ ζῆν μεταλάβοι, ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἀποθάνοι, μένοι ἐν τούτῳ τῷ σχήματι τὰ τεθνεῶτα καὶ μὴ πάλιν ἀναβιώσκοιτο, ἆρ᾽ οὐ πολλὴ ἀνάγκη τελευτῶντα πάντα (72d) τεθνάναι καὶ μηδὲν ζῆν;
εἰ γὰρ ἐκ μὲν τῶν ἄλλων τὰ ζῶντα γίγνοιτο, τὰ δὲ ζῶντα θνῄσκοι, τίς μηχανὴ μὴ οὐχὶ πάντα καταναλωθῆναι εἰς τὸ τεθνάναι;
“Non difficile” inquit ille “intelligere quod aio;
verum possibile, si dormire quoque fiat,
expergisci vero non reddatur factum ex dormiente nosti quoniam finem capiencia cunda delirum Endimionem ostendent, et nusquam utiquam comparebunt eo quod cetera cuncta idem illi paciantur, dormire.
Et si coartentur universa, divellantur autem minime, forsan id quod est Anaxagore factum erit ‘simul universas res.’
Similiter, O amice Cebes, et si moriantur omnia quecumque vita participant, ex quo defunda erunt, manebunt in hac figura que mortua sunt et non iterato reviviscent, itaque nonne plurima necessitas finem habencia cunda mori et nichil vivere?
Si enim ex aliis vivencia gignantur, vivenciaque moriuntur, que possibilitas haut omnia consumi in moriendo?”
"Haudquaquam intellectu difficile est", inquit, "quod loquor.
Perinde e(42)nim ac si in somnum caderetur quidem,
ab eo vere in vigiliam nunquam resurgeretur, mi(43)nime te latet omnia tandem eo deventura, ut Endymion ridicula quaedam fabula videa(44)tur, neque appareat usquam, cum caetera quoque universa somno similiter opprimantur.
Pro(45)inde si confunderentur quidem omnia, nunquam vero discernerentur, Anaxagoras illud (46) repente contingeret, universa videlicet esse simul.
Eadem ratione, o amice Cebes, si quae(47)cunque vitam acceperint moriantur, mortua vero cum fuerint, mortua relinquantur ne(48)que iterum reviviscant, an non necessarium est omnino cuncta demum interijsse nihilque (49) vivere?
Nam si ex alijs quidem viventia fierent, postea vero perirent, quid obstaret quo(50)minus in interitum cuncta consumerentur?"
A simple thing enough,
which I will illustrate by the case of sleep, he replied.
You know that if there were no alternation of sleeping and waking, the tale of the sleeping Endymion would in the end have no meaning, because all other things would be asleep, too, and he would not be distinguishable from the rest.
Or if there were composition only, and no division of substances, then the chaos of Anaxagoras would come again.
And in like manner, my dear Cebes, if all things which partook of life were to die, and after they were dead remained in the form of death, and did not come to life again, all would at last die, and nothing would be alive--what other result could there be?
For if the living spring from any other things, and they too die, must not all things at last be swallowed up in death? (But compare Republic.)
