There's also the section on death in the Letter to Menoikeus (emphasis added):

Quote from Epicurus's Letter to Menoikeus

Furthermore, accustom yourself in believing that, for us, death is nothing since all pleasure and pain are in perception of the senses and the mind, and death is the absolute negation of perception. So, correct understanding is that death is nothing for us, and this is what makes the mortality of life enjoyable: not gaining an endless lifetime for oneself but taking away the yearning for not dying or immortality. [125] For there is nothing terrible in living for the one who truly comprehends that there is nothing terrible in not living. So, the one who says death is to be feared is foolish, not that there will be pain and distress when it is present but that there is pain in anticipation; because that which is present does not trouble, disquiet, or annoy, and anticipation itself pains and distresses one fruitlessly. Death, that which causes utter horror, which causes one to shudder, that "most utterly horrifying of pains" as it is understood by the hoi polloi, then is nothing to us. On the one hand, at the time when we are (that is while we are living), death is not present; on the other hand, whenever death is present, then we are not (i.e., we don't exist). Death is neither a concern for those who are living nor for those whose lives are ended.

But the hoi polloi, on the one hand, flee from death as if it is the greatest evil, then, on the other hand, on the other hand, they desire for themselves an ending of the evil (pain) in living. [126] So then, the wise one neither begs nor craves for living nor fears not living: Neither to set oneself against living, nor to imagine that it is evil to not live. Just as the most food is not chosen but that which brings the greatest pleasure; choose as well not the longest time but that in which one enjoys the fruits of that which bring the greatest pleasure.

So, the one who exhorts, on the one hand, for the one who is young to live nobly; and, on the other hand, the one who is old to come to an end nobly is a good-hearted simpleton not only because life is to be welcomed but also because the practice of living well, nobly, and beautifully and the practice of dying well, nobly, and beautifully are the same. But far worse is the one who says, on the one hand, it is well not to be born; or, on the other hand,

"failing this, to pass through the gates of Hades as soon as possible."

[127] On the one hand, if what they say is persuasive, how does one not depart from life? For this is readily at hand, if indeed one was to resolve oneself steadfastly to this. If, on the other hand, this is in jest, one is foolish for making fun of things which do not admit of this.

To me, all those underlined parts are saying the same this as leaving life "animo aequo."

Quote from Cassius

you are taking the position that suicide is never warranted for an Epicurean?

I'm not sure I'm saying that, especially in light of modern medical intervention that can continue physical existence but not provide quality of life. Right now, I'm neither saying nor not saying suicide is never an option for an Epicurean. I (think) I am saying I'm not seeing any advocacy for suicide as a viable option in any of the texts.

Quote from Cassius

So that while you might choose to die 'for a friend" you would never choose to die "for yourself"?

I think that's an apple and orange argument. To me, the reason you would "die for a friend" is that if the friend dies and you *could* have saved them, you have to live with that pain for the remainder of your life. I don't think that's applicable to the discussion of whether suicide is an option as an end of life decision.

I want to state here that this discussion of suicide is not meant to be casual or flippant. It is an exploration of the ancient texts.

I am sure all of us would encourage anyone dealing with thoughts of suicide to reach out for help to a friend or to a medical professional or to the national 988 number.

Today in the US, “988” is the three-digit, nationwide phone number to connect directly to the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline as established by the FCC.

Here is a paper that cites the one you referenced (that one behind the paywall)

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f6a6/8bb87913d6481817873845afa32fd0385936.pdf

Quote from Cassius

I would see "exiting the play when it has ceased to please us" as a viable option.

As I mentioned, I don't see that line as saying what you're interpreting it as. I see it as having no more concern for the approach of imminent death as one would in "exiting the play when it has ceased to please us." The emphasis is not on an active walking out or actively killing oneself that's the metaphor. It's accepting one's imminent death "animo aequo" with no more concern than walking out of a play that has no pleasure anymore. "Torquatus" acknowledges that there is no pleasure in the pain, but death is imminent so it's time to not regret or complain to the gods and so on. It's time to hold on to the only thing you have left in your final moments,

"animo aequo".

Quote from Cassius

And in support of that spirit I would enlist "spitting contempt on life and on those who cling to it" as the same spirit of taking charge of your death just as you take charge of your life:

VS47. I have anticipated thee, Fortune, and I have closed off every one of your devious entrances. And we will not give ourselves up as captives, to thee or to any other circumstance; but when it is time for us to go, spitting contempt on life and on those who cling to it maundering, we will leave from life singing aloud a glorious triumph-song on how nicely we lived.

Same here for Metrodorus's Vatican Saying. You seem to imply that he encourages us to kill ourselves while "singing aloud a glorious triumph-song on how nicely we lived." I don't get that at all. He's a little hyperbolic but he's encouraging the same things as I've mentioned above. When the end comes and you know what's coming, sing "a glorious triumph-song on how nicely we lived." Don't cling needlessly to life if you're dying. Don't try to bargain with the gods. If you've lived well, be happy for that! Life is done. Take the example of Epicurus's death and look back on a life well-lived with pleasant memories as death is imminent.

Quote from Cassius via Epicurus Wiki

The fourth tenet of the Four-Part Cure alludes precisely to this: what is painful, is easy to endure. In illness, we hope to regain our health; even when the illness is chronic and painful, the pain grows dull with habituation, and we learn to cherish the pleasures left us, despite the pain; finally, when pain reaches an unbearable maximum, death cannot be far behind it -- and death means the cessation of the senses, and thus of both pleasure and pain.

Epicurus' view on suicide is both humane and practical: it does not entirely disallow suicide (as does Christianity, and other religious faiths), nor does it offer it too readily, either as escapism or as an article in some code of honor (as have done several militarist cultures).

In principle, I think I agree with that last paragraph, but, for me, it would be an extrapolation from the existing texts and not based on any I've read (in this thread or outside of it). Especially in the letter to Menoikeus, Epicurus seems to come down hard on those who talk about exiting life as quickly as possible. He doesn't appear to add any qualifiers. The end of life situations I read are about living life in a manner that will allow you to accept imminent death at the end, even if accompanied by "pains that cannot be augmented," with no regrets, no cursing the gods, no fear of an afterlife, etc.

Quote from Cassius

It is easy for me to imagine hypothetical circumstances in which continuing to live would result in overwhelming pain with virtually no offsetting pleasure whatsoever.

Oh, it's easy for me, too. If I ever encounter that situation in my life, what will I do? I don't know, but I'm not discounting the option out of hand. Consider a diagnosis of Alzheimer's or a degenerative physical disease where everything, one's mind and one's control over one's body are slowly, inexorably taken from you accompanied by constant pain. Would you - would I - choose to end our suffering? This also brings up the difference between "suffering" and "pain." They're not the same. Is suicide - or physician-assisted suicide - an option?

I have no problem coming up with hypothetical situations around this topic.

But you also say "virtually no offsetting pleasure whatsoever," which implies that there's *some* "offsetting pleasure" which almost looks to me like a description of Epicurus's end of life.

Like I said above, I might agree with in principle that suicide - or physician-assisted suicide - is a viable end of life option in extremis, but I'm wrestling with whether or not that's necessarily an Epicurean response to that situation. I'm just not seeing justification for that in the extant texts. I *fully* agree with you as you've said elsewhere about Epicurus insisting that we take charge for our lives and choices. But, as far as I can see in the texts, Epicurus and Metrodorus and "Torquatus" never advocated for suicide in response to "intolerable" pain. You've mentioned that Epicurus was able to tolerate his pain and so he wasn't experiencing "intolerable" pain, but to my mind that's splitting hairs. If someone tells me that can't image any greater pain than they were already experiencing and that they feel they're dying within the day, that sounds pretty "intolerable" to me. (Now, whether Epicurus's letter has been embellished over the centuries? Maybe, but we have the text that we have.)

Quote from Cassius

"Do you think Epicurus would say that Cassius made a poor decision in committing suicide rather than handing himself over to Antony's men?"

I hesitant to put words in dead people's mouth, so I won't speak for Epicurus. I will say that it seems to be that G. Cassius Longinus committed suicide because he was a Roman, first and foremost, not because he was an Epicurean. His Roman culture and upbringing and conditioning led him to that - probably to him - inescapable decision to take his life.

Quote from Cassius

The main issue is that I don't see a bright line saying "hang in there to the very last moment" that would apply to everyone in all situations.

It's not a "hang in there until the last moment." That kind of "grit your teeth and bear it" is a Stoic response. That's not what I'm saying the texts say. If you're in pain, you can scream, yell, bite down on a wooden stick, writhe. An Epicurean is not going to "grin and bear it."

BUT, I'm seeing the texts within the time period they were written, which is why it's so hard translating specific ancient situations into modern "hypothetical" scenarios. The intolerable pain, the pain with no pleasure left, the mind-numbing all-encompassing pain - when those texts were written - is going to lead to death imminently. You have wounds or a disease like that, it's going to kill you - most likely in short order. And, even if you are in pain, try to remember to face it "animo aequo" - no regrets, no fear, no superstition.

On the other hand, modern science can work medical miracles in situations that would have been lethal in ancient times! That's where the difficulty comes in. Is it better to allow someone to die rather than provide "life-saving" (usually "life-prolonging-at-what-expense") treatment? That's where the modern "death positive" community is so intriguing and important in providing information on palliative care, hospice care, etc. If pain can be managed and suffering relieved, death can be faced "animo aequo".

Quote from Cassius

"never consider suicide lightly and always consider it to be a last resort but know that death is available to you as a relief from pain if in fact you judge the situation makes it the best choice."

Fully agree with that first statement! And that's where the "death positive" movement says that there are ways to mitigate suffering as death approaches. If it is "the best choice," it has to be after every other option has been weighed because of its finality. Too many people see it as just another choice. Here are some statistics about suicide in the US:

Suicide Data and Statistics | Suicide | CDC

This is why the letter to Menoikeus section is so important in my view. Epicurus is specifically addressing people who talk flippantly about suicide and "leaving life as quickly as possible." It couldn't have been the Stoics either, because they were not the powerhouse they would become at the time Epicurus was writing. This seems to be a general cultural attitude in ancient Greece.

And I know you're not talking flippantly. I know that and want to acknowledge that. But when we talk about suicide being a "choice" or even the "best choice" it seems the old slippery slope argument to making it just another choice if there's pain in one's life. And Epicurus and the Epicurean school did not endorse that in any way.

Quote from Cassius

death is unconsciousness for eternity

I know you didn't mean it this way, but I'll note it anyway. I would caution against using a word like "unconsciousness for eternity" in that context. Unconsciousness is still a state of being and implies a being that is unconscious. Death is the complete absence of sensation and feeling because there's no thing to sense or feel. There is no being - no person, no thing - after one dies. It is the complete cessation of life. Nada. Zilch. No thing. Like I said, I know you didn't mean anything like that by using that word, but it stuck out to me when I read it like "Oops! Better nip this one in the bud before someone else latches onto it!"

Quote from ccarruth42

Don, are you pointing to an experience similar to what's reported when someone is on their deathbed and a loved one tells them that it's ok to go if they need to. Basically, the loved one tells the sick person they have permission to let go when they're ready. So instead of clinging to life, they now have permission to "exit the play"?

To me, this scenario seems to match the sentiment behind your quote

Quote from Don

It's accepting one's imminent death "animo aequo" with no more concern than walking out of a play that has no pleasure anymore. "Torquatus" acknowledges that there is no pleasure in the pain, but death is imminent so it's time to not regret or complain to the gods and so on. It's time to hold on to the only thing you have left in your final moments,

Exactly! Well put. That's one of the exact scenarios I was thinking of!

Quote from Cassius

I never thought we were far apart on this and after further discussion I feel sure of it

On the actual topic of suicide, I would agree. I think we both understand someone's (maybe even my own) decision to take that step in the extreme of pain and suffering. I think that's a humane and humble position to have.

That said, I don't necessarily think that's a position that Epicurus or the Epicurean school would take. I don't see textual evidence of that position. We can rationalize that they might have taken it, but I'm not seeing textual evidence of it.

Quote from Cassius

There are not really any Ideal forms or essences of "Epicureans," only individual people who claim to more or less apply Epicurean views in their lives - and no matter how many doctrines we add or subtract from a person there is no essence or ideal form of an Epicurean for us to justify our labelling, or any moment when an Epicurean ceases to be an Epicurean due to a loss of sufficient Epicurean elements.

Hmmm... Well, under that definition of "Epicurean," it seems to me that I could call myself a "Christian" if I want to. There have to be some Epicurean criteria or some "essential" (I don't like the word but I'll use it) doctrines by which one lives their life to be considered an Epicurean. Otherwise the word has no meaning.

I wasn't saying that Cassius Longinus wasn't an Epicurean. In fact, I said he was an Epicurean. I'm saying his decision to kill himself was in keeping with his heritage and upbringing as to what it meant to be a Roman citizen in a military setting. He could be both things. I would even go so far as to posit that him laying down his life in a manner befitting a Roman may even have given him pleasure in the end. He determined he would die *as a Roman* and not as some kind of captured criminal or slave.

Quote from Pacatus

we try to apply Epicurean teachings to better our lives

And...Right there. I'd ask what "Epicurean teachings" are you trying to apply to better your life. If you're trying to apply Epicurus's teachings to better your life, that makes you an Epicurean as opposed to a Christian or Stoic or something else.

I'll be the first to say unequivocally that there is no "apostolic" Epicurean lineage, there is no Epicurean scholarch determining Orthodox practices. But, if someone wants to think of themselves as an Epicurean and part of a larger Garden community, there has to be some shared principles and practices. I also grant it's a wide net but the net cannot be so huge that it means nothing to say "I'm an Epicurean." Otherwise, it means nothing and Epicurus at least taught that words have to have a commonly understood meaning otherwise communication is impossible.

There is also a difference between implementing a smorgasbord or cafeteria of practices into one's life and picking a single path. Both can need done. There are Jewish Buddhists out there. But, from my perspective, if someone wants to think of themselves as an Epicurean, they have to share some principles and practices with other "Epicureans" for that word to have meaning.