우리가 악이나 죄로 이끌리는 까닭은 무엇인가? 도대체 우리 안에 있는 어떤 요소가 악의 성향을 가지는가? 이런 물음에 대해 오리게네스는 세 가지 가설을 제시한다. ① 우리 안에 두 영혼(신적이고 천상의 영혼과 비천한 영혼)이 있다. 그리고 모든 악의 원인은 바로 비천한 영혼(육적 영혼)이다. ② 영혼은 본래 이성적 능력만을 지니는 단일체이지만, 육체(본성상 생명이 없으며 영혼으로부터 생명을 얻는)를 기쁘게 하는 악들로 이끌어지고 자극된다. ③ 영혼은 이성적 부분과 비이성적 부분으로 나뉘는데, 비이성적이라고 일컬어지는 부분은 또다시 두 개의 감성적 요소(욕망과 기개)로 나뉜다. 오리게네스는 세 번째 가설(영혼삼분설)을 비성경적이라고 간주한 반면, 나머지 두 가설은 성경적 근거를 가진다고 보았다. 그렇다면 과연 오리게네스 자신은 영혼을 구성하는 요소와 심신관계에 관해 어떤 입장에 동의했으며, 악의 기원을 어떻게 설명하고 있는가? 이 물음에 답하기 위해서 우리는 두 가설(두 영혼 가설과 한 영혼 가설)을 면밀히 검토하고자 한다. 이를 통해 우리는 다음과 같은 결론에 도달하게 된다. 첫째, 오리게네스는 창조주의 선함과 공의로움을 변증하기 위해 두 번의 창조설을 주장했다. 즉 태초에 신은 비물질적 지성만을 창조했으나, 지성은 자유의지를 악용해서 타락함으로써 온기를 잃고 영혼으로 강등되었다. 이러한 타락에 대한 벌로 영혼은 육체의 구속을 받게 되었다. 둘째, 타락한 영혼을 구속하는 교도소인 육체는 죄악을 더욱 융성하게 하기도 하지만, 죄는 일차적으로 자유의지의 잘못된 사용으로 인해 생겨났다. 이 때문에 오리게네스는 두 번째 가설(한 영혼 가설)에서 육체적 욕망에 대해 경고하면서 인간의 정체성을 영혼의 이성적 기능에 정초하고 있는 한편, 첫 번째 가설(두 영혼 가설)을 통해서는 영혼 속에도 천하고 지상적인 부분이 있음을 지적하고 있다. 셋째, 영혼의 기능과 육체와의 관계를 설명함에 있어서 오리게네스는 스토아철학의 용어(hegemonikon)와 논증(“정념을 포함해서 영혼의 모든 기능은 이성적이다”)을 차용하고 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 인간의 정체성을 영적 세계에 두고 있다는 점에서 오리게네스의 인간론은 플라톤의 영혼론과 크게 다르지 않다. 넷째, 오리게네스는 최초의 피조세계가 비물질적이었음을 당연히 여기고 있지만 이를 증명하지 않고 있다. 결국 성경의 의미를 온전히 설명하고 신을 변증하려는 오리게네스의 시도가 성공적인지는 불분명하다.

Why are we drawn and incited into evils? What in us possesses this inclination and movement in the direction of evil? To these questions Origen enumerates three hypotheses. 1) We have within us two souls(the one divine and heavenly, and the other of a lower sort). The cause of all evils is nothing else but the lower soul(bodily soul). 2) There is in us a single movement of one and same soul. But if two images occur to a man in turn and suggest contrary modes of action, they should drag the mind in conflicting directions. This conflict is due to the nature of the body. 3) Our soul is composed of several parts, namely, one part that is called rational and another irrational, while that part which is called irrational is again divided into the two emotional elements of appetite and passion. Origen contends that of these theories the third is not confirmed by the authority of divine scriptures, while in regard to the remaining two a certain number of passages of scripture are found. Then what is the position of Origen as regards the part of soul and the origin of evil? Analyzing the two hypotheses(the "one-soul" hypothesis and the "two-souls" hypothesis), we arrive at the following conclusions: 1) In order to defend the goodness and the righteousness of God, Origen maintained two stages of creation. In the beginning God created rational beings only. But this rational beings sinned misusing the freedom of the will. The creation of the material world is due to the fall of rational beings which have grown cold by the loss of their first natural and divine warmth. And as a result of sins each soul receives a recompense in proportion to its deserts. That is why the soul is enclosed within the body. 2) Because of the body which is the prison of the soul, the sin increases. But the first sin was originated by rational being's misuse of the freedom of the will. That is why Origen regards human nature as the soul bound to the body warning against the bodily vices(the "one-soul" hypothesis), while he shows that the soul can admit different energies, that is, controlling influences or spirits either good or bad(the "two-souls" hypothesis). 3) Explaining functions of the soul and its relation to the body, Origen uses a number of terms of the Stoic philosophy(for example "hegemonikon") and some Stoic arguments("Every function of the soul including the passion is rational."). Nevertheless Origen's anthropology is not much different from Platonic trichotomy in that it characterizes the real human identity as a immaterial rational being. 4) Although Origen takes for granted that in the beginning God created rational beings only, he does not prove it. Then it is not sure whether Origen's attempt to explain the meaning of the Bible and to defend the goodness and the righteousness of God is successful.

Why are we drawn and incited into evils? What in us possesses this inclination and movement in the direction of evil? To these questions Origen enumerates three hypotheses. 1) We have within us two souls(the one divine and heavenly, and the other of a lower sort). The cause of all evils is nothing else but the lower soul(bodily soul). 2) There is in us a single movement of one and same soul. But if two images occur to a man in turn and suggest contrary modes of action, they should drag the mind in conflicting directions. This conflict is due to the nature of the body. 3) Our soul is composed of several parts, namely, one part that is called rational and another irrational, while that part which is called irrational is again divided into the two emotional elements of appetite and passion. Origen contends that of these theories the third is not confirmed by the authority of divine scriptures, while in regard to the remaining two a certain number of passages of scripture are found. Then what is the position of Origen as regards the part of soul and the origin of evil? Analyzing the two hypotheses(the "one-soul" hypothesis and the "two-souls" hypothesis), we arrive at the following conclusions: 1) In order to defend the goodness and the righteousness of God, Origen maintained two stages of creation. In the beginning God created rational beings only. But this rational beings sinned misusing the freedom of the will. The creation of the material world is due to the fall of rational beings which have grown cold by the loss of their first natural and divine warmth. And as a result of sins each soul receives a recompense in proportion to its deserts. That is why the soul is enclosed within the body. 2) Because of the body which is the prison of the soul, the sin increases. But the first sin was originated by rational being's misuse of the freedom of the will. That is why Origen regards human nature as the soul bound to the body warning against the bodily vices(the "one-soul" hypothesis), while he shows that the soul can admit different energies, that is, controlling influences or spirits either good or bad(the "two-souls" hypothesis). 3) Explaining functions of the soul and its relation to the body, Origen uses a number of terms of the Stoic philosophy(for example "hegemonikon") and some Stoic arguments("Every function of the soul including the passion is rational."). Nevertheless Origen's anthropology is not much different from Platonic trichotomy in that it characterizes the real human identity as a immaterial rational being. 4) Although Origen takes for granted that in the beginning God created rational beings only, he does not prove it. Then it is not sure whether Origen's attempt to explain the meaning of the Bible and to defend the goodness and the righteousness of God is successful.

, , , , , , ,

soul, pneuma, body, hegemonikon, passion, God, Origen, evil