Against the Physicists, Books IX-X of Against the Learned Section 296

ἀλλὰ σῶμα μὲν ἀπὸ ἀσωμάτου ἀφαιρεῖσθαι αὐτόθεν ἐστὶν ἀδιανόητον, ἀσώματον δὲ ἀπὸ σώματος χωρίζεσθαι τῶν ἀδυνάτων· θιγεῖν γὰρ δεῖ τοῦ ἀφαιρουμένου τὸ ἀφαιροῦν, ἀθιγὲς δέ ἐστι τὸ ἀσώματον καὶ ἀδύνατος δέδεικται ἡ θίξις· ὥστε οὐδὲ ἀσώματον σώματος χωρισθείη ποτ’ ἄν. καὶ ἄλλως· τὸ χωριζόμενόν τινος οἱονεὶ μέρος ἐστὶ τοῦ ἀφ’ οὗ χωρίζεται, τὸ δὲ ἀσώματον τοῦ σώματος οὐκ ἂν εἴη μέρος.

But for a body to be subtracted from an incorporeal is immediately inconceivable, while for an incorporeal to be separated from a body is impossible. For that which subtracts must touch what is subtracted, but the incorporeal is intangible and contact has been shown to be impossible. Therefore an incorporeal could never be separated from a body. And otherwise: what is separated from something is, as it were, a part of that from which it is separated, but an incorporeal could not be a part of a body.

Mais qu’un corps soit retranché d’un incorporel est d’emblée inconcevable, et qu’un incorporel soit séparé d’un corps est impossible. Car ce qui retranche doit toucher ce qui est retranché ; or l’incorporel est intangible, et le contact a été montré impossible. Ainsi, un incorporel ne saurait jamais être séparé d’un corps. Autre argument : ce qui est séparé d’une chose est en quelque sorte une partie de ce dont il est séparé, mais l’incorporel ne saurait être une partie du corps.