Letter to Menoikeus translation by Peter Saint-Andre

Important caveat to post 59:

While I am comfortable dogmatically stating that the absence of pain is pleasure, and the total absence of pain is the greatest pleasure, and that there is nothing bad in any pleasure or virtue in itself except the *unlimited* pursuit of that activity, I would never walk up to the man on the street or stand on the street corner and shout that out like a street preacher.

To me it is necessary to always say - except when we are certain to be speaking to people who know what we mean - that "Yes I believe that pleasure is the absence of pain, and yes I believe that no pleasure is a bad thing in itself, but let me explain to you now *why* I believe that.

I think Epicurus gave his explanations in his other writings besides Menoeceus, and I think that Torquatus would have given a much longer explanation if Cicero had allowed him.

Quote from Don

... Yes, but some pleasures are not choiceworthy.

I would say yes, but that is a subsidiary point, and should never be used to dilute the effect of the prior more fundamental statement that "no pleasure is a bad thing in itself." Just as Epicurus did, you start with the basic that no pleasure is bad in itself, and then state that sometimes some pleasures bring more pain than pleasure, and that *for that reason alone* some pleasures are not choiceworthy. You lead with the theorem and then give an application of it, but to me it's essential to hammer home the theorem since that is what everyone wants to fight about, and it chokes in the mouth of the Platonists and Stoics.

Let's make them choke again: "Choiceworthiness" means ONLY that it brings more pain than pleasure.

As usual I think we are in agreement

It is similar as we say:

VS23. All friendship is desirable in itself, though it starts from the common benefit.

All pleasures are desirable in themselves, though they start from the one that does the hedonic calculus.

Quote from Cassius

there is nothing bad in any pleasure or virtue in itself except the *unlimited* pursuit of that activity,

I don't know if I agree with your implying there is only one exception: "the *unlimited* pursuit of that activity"

And I really don't think I agree with with your addition of "or virtue" there. Can't articulate my objection right now, but it's there.

As for pursuit, I go back to the measure of natural justice being "to neither harm nor to be harmed." If something that gives you pleasure that you do harms others, it would be better not to pursue that desire. Your community will sanction you for that.

There's also the continuing push-pull of pleasure vs desire. All pleasure may be good in itself, but that's definitely not true at all for every desire for pleasures. I think we have to be very careful of whether we need to use "pleasure" or "desire" in these kinds of discussions.

I agree that there is a distinction to be made between desire and choice and avoidance and pleasure and it's probably time to go back into that subject, because I am not sure we ever clarified it, and I agree that would help. How does "desire" differ from "choose to pursue" or even just "choose?"

Hi all, it's good to have discovered this discussion forum. And thanks to Don for inviting me!

Upon reflection, I think Little Rocker is onto something with his suggestion that τὰς ἐν ἀπολαύσει κειμένας might mean "lying down in pleasure" - i.e., an oblique reference to the kinetic pleasures of sex. Recall that contemporaries accused the denizens of the Garden of indulging in wild orgies simply because Epicurus allowed women into his philosophical community.

I'll continue to ponder the matter and reply further in this thread once I look more closely at the Greek.

Good to have you Peter! Just to clarify the "edit" in the post, I removed the "color" attribute in the text so that it would be readable on dark themes.

Preliminary and somewhat poetic modification: I think I'll change "the enjoyment of sleep" to "lying in a bed of desire", which echoes the roundabout wording in the original Greek.

Thanks to Kalosyni for raising this issue!

Quote from stpeter

Preliminary and somewhat poetic modification: I think I'll change "the enjoyment of sleep" to "lying in a bed of desire", which echoes the roundabout wording in the original Greek.

In going back - again - to the Greek wording and the text itself, I can see how this is a viable solution.

I find it interesting that the two groups singled out specifically would be the prodigals and those who "lying in a bed" among sensual pleasures. The one of the specific activities is ... (looks at screen... looks back at line 131... looks at line 132....)

I JUST SAW THIS... BY ZEUS!! I've completely overlooked the key!!! Just now, I went back to look at the Greek...

Here's what it says in 131:

οὐ τὰς τῶν ἀσώτων ἡδονὰς καὶ τὰς ἐν ἀπολαύσει κειμένας

"not the pleasures of the prodigals AND (nor) [our *&%#@ mystery phrase here!]

THIS is what it says in 132...

οὐδ’ ἀπολαύσεις παίδων καὶ γυναικῶν

nor ἀπολαύσεις of boys/children/slaves and women (I prefer to use the "slaves" connotation)

Anything look similar in those two phrases!!!????

οὐδ᾽ἀπολαύσεις is usually translated as "nor the act of enjoying, nor the taking pleasure in…"

THE SAME WORD is used in both places in the Greek! They have to be connected!

I have to process this. I can't believe I overlooked this until right now!! For now, here is the section in my translation/commentary on the mention in 132:

ἀπολαύσεις

In translations of the Letter I have seen, οὐδ᾽ἀπολαύσεις is always given a straightforward sexual meaning:

"not sexual love" (Hicks)

"sexual enjoyment" (Epicurus Wiki)

"enjoying [boys and women]" (Saint-Andre)

"enjoyment (of female society)" (Yonge)

"sexual pleasures (with boys and women)" (DeWitt)

"satisfaction of lusts" (Bailey)

ἀπολαύσεις, according to LSJ, doesn't have this sexual connotation by itself. I'll admit that it could be here within the context of this passage. My contention is that Epicurus is getting at a deeper, more nuanced point. ἀπολαύω does have to do with enjoying something (or someone, in this case), but it seems to also include a sense of taking advantage or taking benefit from something (or someone). I can't necessarily vouch for the authority of a website by Georgios Babiniotis, but the etymology he gives of the word implies something taken as booty. Translated into English, Babiniotis states "it is a delight that comes from an acquisition that has been preceded by conflict, an exercise of violence that offers the joy of fruition and power." So that idea of taking enjoyment in something you feel entitled to or that you can take advantage of with impunity underlies the word Epicurus decided to use. It's not just a sexual meaning. So, in light of all that, I would advocate translating that phrase as "not taking advantage of slaves (or boys) and women," Admittedly, it's most often likely advantage for sex, but the translation for which I'm advocating expands that sense. For me, this fits into the egalitarian ethos of the Garden in which slaves and women took active roles in the life of the school. People who took advantage of these members of society - who were most often seen by ancient Greek society as the lowest, least important members - would be going against the equality of opportunity that the Garden professed. From my perspective, this also seems to fit with the characteristic of the sage shared by Diogenes Laertius: γυναικί τ᾽ οὐ μιγήσεσθαι τὸν σοφὸν ᾗ οἱ νόμοι ἀπαγορεύουσιν "The wise one will not establish a sexual relationship in a way that is against the law or forbidden by custom." Now, I know ancient "law or custom" is a wide spectrum, but I'm using that as the translation for νόμοι. In the end, my perspective is that ἀπολαύσεις - yet again - demonstrates the inadequacy of relying on a single translator or translation and not digging into the original Greek.

Kalosyni Thanks for the kind words. I had no idea this forum existed, so I'll definitely tarry awhile.

Quote from Don

the inadequacy of relying on a single translator or translation

Oh yes indeed! Translators can never be completely trusted, and I say that as a translator myself.

Don You are spot on about the recurrence of ἀπολαύσει[s] in sections 131 and 132. This leads me to change one other word in my translation: from "enjoying boys and women" to "bedding boys and women". This picks up on my "lying in a bed of desire" and has a tinge of your "taking advantage" without committing wholeheartedly to that etymology of ἀπολαύσει, which it feels somewhat far-fetched at first glance.

Hello and Joy to all epicurean friends!

For intepreting the greek word "απολαύω" that means: "I enjoy", and giving meanings as "I took advantage" or "I fight for" or "taking benefit" from someone (women, and boys) or something (fish and luxurious food), it is not proper to go straight to paragraph LTM. 131-132 without seeing first the paragraph 130 in which the same word "απολαύω" is used by Epicurus. For this, I repeat again that that great Norman DeWitt gave the right translation and meaning in the phrase "τας εν απολαύσει κειμένας" is the high living/luxurious living and nothing more. Since DeWitt understood deeply all the structure that exists in the LTM.

In the LTM from the paragraph 130 we read : Kαὶ τὴν αὐτάρκειαν δὲ ἀγαθὸν μέγα νομίζομεν, οὐχ ἵνα πάντως τοῖς ὀλίγοις χρώμεθα, ἀλλ' ὅπως ἐὰν μὴ ἔχωμεν τὰ πολλά, τοῖς ὀλίγοις χρώμεθα, πεπεισμένοι γνησίως ὅτι ἥδιστα πολυτελείας ἀπολαύουσιν οἱ ἥκιστα ταύτης δεόμενοι,

Translation by DeWitt: And self-sufficiency we believe to be a great good, not that we may live on little under all circumstances but that we may be content with little when we do not have plenty, being genuinely convinced that they enjoy luxury most who feel the least need of it;

That is imo: I am self-sufficient, I practice to be self-sufficient when I have not plenty. I do not go after as a maniac for the luxurious living if I have not the money to have luxury in my life; and that is because this will bring me PAIN. But when it happens I do not deny it, I ENJOY luxury to the fullest! And it happens: long live the father in law of Ceasar, that was named Peison, who offered a luxurious living to Philodemus in the villa of Papyri. And long live Diogenis of Oinoanda who gave such a huge amount for the construction of the huge (100 m2) inscription in Oinoanda. And long live Epicurus and his last Will in which we read that had plenty of money for the marriages, the pensions of the old friends etc etc. So, that famous phrase that was by Epicurus/Metrodorus "τον σοφόν πλούτου μελητέον" [ton sofon plouton meliteon] means the wise man has to care/interest to asquire and maintaining estate and wealth, as long as it does not bring to him pain, since this is a harmonious strategy, as Metrodorus said, i.e. the wise man has not to be obliged for being hired as a servant for working under someone else in the future.

PS1. The word "απολαύω" [apolávo] "Ι enjoy" has AND this meaning, as we use this word in greek vocabulary in nowdays:

e.g. I enjoy special privileges. ~ I enjoy of great esteem / I enjoy trust - I am well esteemed, I am highly respected.

Thus, there is no need "to fight" to enjoy of being trusted and well esteemed!

The fact is that : Epicurus enjoyed trust, respect and was well esteemed among his friends.

Moreover, we have the VS 27 that Epicurus uses the same word "απολαύω" for philosophy !!

XXVII.(27) Ἐπὶ μὲν τῶν ἄλλων ἐπιτηδευμάτων μόλις τελειωθεῖσιν ὁ καρπὸς ἔρχεται, ἐπὶ δὲ φιλοσοφίας συντρέχει τῇ γνώσει τὸ τερπνὸν οὐ γὰρ μετὰ μάθησιν ἀπόλαυσις, ἀλλὰ ἅμα μάθησις καὶ ἀπόλαυσις.

Translation : In the case of other occupations the fruit (of one's labors) comes upon completion of a task while (in the case) of philosophy pleasure is concurrent with knowledge because enjoyment does not come after learning but at the same time with learning.

P.S.2 When Epicurus speaks about "boys" does not mean "slaves" actually. He means literally "to have company and sleeping with boys". Sleeping with boys was the Socratic/Platonean tactic as well as the tactic of the powers, and the wealthy elite with which, both Socrates and Plato had company with them! So Epicurus with this "sleeping with boys" is attacking Plato et.al.

Moreover, on the issue with boys and women, Epicurus saw how the choice of luxurious living and IF this was reaching the extravagance, it was something that brought PAIN. From historical facts: "Demetrius I of Macedon or the "Poliorcetes" - the Besieger, among his outrages was his courtship of a young boy named Democles the Handsome. The youth kept on refusing his attention but one day found himself cornered at the baths. Having no way out and being unable to physically resist his suitor, he took the lid off the hot water cauldron and jumped in. His death was seen as a mark of honor for himself and his country. In another instance, Demetrius waived a fine of 50 talents imposed on a citizen in exchange for the favors of Cleaenetus, that man's son. He also sought the attention of Lamia, a Greek courtesan. He demanded 250 talents from the Athenians, which he then gave to Lamia and other courtesans to buy soap and cosmetics".

I just realized Epicurus also uses ἀπολαυστὸν in the letter in line 124:

ὅθεν γνῶσις ὀρθὴ τοῦ μηθὲν εἶναι πρὸς ἡμᾶς τὸν θάνατον ἀπολαυστὸν ποιεῖ τὸ τῆς ζωῆς θνητόν,

I've translated that was simply:

"So, correct understanding is that death is nothing for us, and this is what makes the mortality of life enjoyable:"

But it's not just "enjoyable", it's fully taking advantage of the time that is available between birth and death.

So, 124, 130, 131, and 132 all need to be read in relation to each other to get at the meaning in 131. Which both complicates the process and makes it more interesting.

Quote

Slaves were often called pais (‘boy’/‘girl’) and its diminutives paidion, paidarion and paidiskē. These words express paternalistic views of slaves and their equivalence to minors in the family, but the slaves thus described are not necessarily children (e.g. Lysias 1.12). Therefore, these words too must be studied in context. The pais-words, especially the vocative form, ‘pai’, often have a demeaning shade. As words referring to the domestic scene they are most frequently used in comedy (Mactoux 1980: 156–157). In Graeco-Roman Egypt these words were used mainly in private documents, whose addressees knew the legal status of the persons so called; in official documents other terms are generally found.

11 12

Greek and Roman Terminologies of Slavery

The Greeks had no single generic term for ‘slave’, but a variety of terms for diverse relations of dependence and unfree people, many of which were also used…

www.academia.edu

Still VERY much a work in progress but...

I'm seeing απολαυσις and its derivatives as:

- Taking pleasure or enjoyment in something to which you feel entitled to do so since you have "worked for it," in the broadest sense.

Or something like that.

This, to me, dovetails with what Elli is saying the modern sense of the word is:

Quote from Elli

e.g. I enjoy special privileges. ~ I enjoy of great esteem / I enjoy trust - I am well esteemed, I am highly respected.

Thus, there is no need "to fight" to enjoy of being trusted and well esteemed!

Quote from Don

"So, correct understanding is that death is nothing for us, and this is what makes the mortality of life enjoyable:"

But it's not just "enjoyable", it's fully taking advantage of the time that is available between birth and death.

In this paragraph, there is also continuity : not because it adds to it an infinite span of time, but because it takes away the (πόθος) i.e. craving or lust for immortality.

The correct understanding (that death is nothing to us) makes the mortality of life enjoyable ...and that is BECAUSE this enjoyment does not lead to the consequence which is the desire (a desire which is out of limits) the desire "pothos"- lust - craving, for immortality (immortality is somehting out of limits). And this another attacking to Socrates & Plato!

And then, Don , you continue: But it's not just "enjoyable", it's fully taking advantage of the time that is available between birth and death.

Sorry, I do not agree putting to the word, enjoyable, quotation marks and then connecting the word, enjoyable, with "fully taking advantage of the time". Since the life is enjoyable as itself! Because as it concerns "on the issue of time", we have concluded finally and for this issue: "And just as with food he (the wise man) does not seek simply the larger share and nothing else, but rather the most pleasant, so he seeks to enjoy not the longest period of time, but the most pleasant"!!

The process for understanding the LTM is a complicated process? I do not think so. We have the great Norman DeWitt who uncomplicated the whole issue in LTM making it clear and simple for all the english speaking friends!

Quote from Cassius

I agree that there is a distinction to be made between desire and choice and avoidance and pleasure and it's probably time to go back into that subject, because I am not sure we ever clarified it, and I agree that would help. How does "desire" differ from "choose to pursue" or even just "choose?"

We can choose to pursue or reject a desire.

We cannot choose whether or not something feels good, ie, evokes pleasure.

VS 71. Every desire must be confronted by this question: what will happen to me if the object of my desire is accomplished and what if it is not?

imo the desire is connecting with a vision or as an imagination to the future on how we could be/exist and whatever we have along with our existence for the future, are something (vision/imagination) that only humans are able to have (*).

Pleasure and pain are instinctive feelings/emotions that both humans and animals have.

A humans' desire as a vision to the future has to be connected harmonically with the instinct of pleasure, since pleasure is something good (and as any good has value) and pain is an evil, but sometimes we choose the pain (evil) because we want to return back again to the good (that has value) and that is a greater pleasure.

(*) vision and imagination to our future: and here lies that interference and the obstacle that is the fear of death (since we have consciousness and subconsciousness about death) and it is the same fear of death that creates another obstacle that is the image of gods. Both are the obstacles that interfere to our fullest enjoyment of life. Both obstacles are what Epicurus starts speaking in his LTM. This is the structure in his letter: first we say what is the ultimate good that is eudaemonia/ bliss, then we point out what are the obstacles to our pleasurable living, then we make the algorithm on the desires (natural, necessary and not necessary), and then we conclude with the epilogue, as we have started in the prologue which is the same thing: eudaemonia or living like god among men or the divine pleasure as Lucretius said.