Posts by Bryan

Quote from Don

Oh, this looks promising?

http://www.epicuros.gr/pages/en/Tempe…us_Porphyry.pdf

This was written by Elias Tempelis (Professor of Philosophy at the Hellenic Naval Academy) to accompany his presentation for the 9th Panhellenic Symposium of Epicurean Philosophy.

His interpretation also excludes the quote Elli rejects, but he argues that most of the letter contains quotes from our school (with Porphyry only parenthetically adding his objectionable content). So Tempelis represents the most "optimistic" interpretation. I am inclined to agree.

Thank you for sharing this, Don. I do not think we discussed it.

Great episode! Accepting the belief that evil exists as a disembodied force leaves one under the control of those who decide how to wield it.

Exploring alternate paths in Roman history -- and how they would have redefined who the “bad guys” were -- is a good way to illustrate the point. Thank you!

Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, 9.41:

Epíkouros says that "in my illness, my conversations were not about the feelings of my little body, nor was I chatting about such things to those who visited, but, while studying nature, I continued with the prior topics, even while in that very state, studying how the mind (although participating in such movements occurring within my little bit of flesh) remains untroubled, while preserving its own good. Nor did I surrender power to the doctors to act important as if they were accomplishing something – instead, my lifestyle was being led well and correctly."

Quote from Rolf

When I'm in a "neutral state" - not sick, injured, etc. - and I focus on my body's senses, I pretty much always notice some kind of ache, tenseness, stomach pain, itchiness, or some other uncomfortable feeling that I'm generally able to ignore when I'm not not fixating on it.

I think this is typically the case for most people. For me, "clearing the mind" is pleasant before sleep, but when I am awake and ready, then "mind-clearing meditation" feels like intellectual asceticism and it is at this point I will notice the extra sensations you mention.

Happily, Epikouros recommends an active and applied mind, he says:

"I recommend continuous activity in physics and pacify myself particularly with such a life."
(D.L. 10.37a)

----------

Epikouros fully acknowledged that all pleasures are based in active pleasures, but he identified the pleasure of being satisfied (i.e., "established pleasures") as the natural goal of living things.

Unlike ascetics, we do not deny the body -- and unlike the average man, we do not deny having reached full pleasure when we are satisfied.

"Eating" is pleasurable, but a life dedicated to "eating" is sad and unhealthy -- and so for the rest of the active pleasures. If we reach the point of satisfaction and wonder what else our body needs, we are missing the point. If we form a lifestyle focused on satisfying our physical pleasures, our intellectual abilities will suffer.

But bodily satisfaction is the beginning of the intellectual life -- and once this is achieved, then here it is healthy to settle in, and consume and consume (philosophy and science) as a lifestyle.

THANK YOU!

I have been reading through your letter to Herodotus a little every day. "Shining a new light" may seem trite, but it applies to your brilliant and beautiful work (I looked at that letter very closely last year, but you brought out many different and new ways of looking at it).

Just as a point of discussion: I was initially a bit surprised by your preservation of cases in the transliterations used in your translation -- certainly not something I have ever seen before -- but now I think it serves as a linguistic bridge to draw a potential student closer to the original!

Posting an update to coins and rings I have been making, They are still a bit rough, but if anybody wants any, let me know. The necklaces and the coins are the easiest to make, and the Lucretius Trio ring is "on hold" at the moment (but I should be able to make more, somewhat better versions, soon).

Quote from Don

Glossarium

Yes on page 677, Usener says "τρικαλίνδητος, τρικυλίνδητος. ac similiter τρικυμία dicta. Epicurus dicit 'paratus sum ad vos quocumque iubebitis me ut trochum praecipiti cursu volventem agere (trudere)'"

So he takes it as as a colloquialism, but based on the wheel imagery.

Quote from Joshua

'thrice-garlanded'

I fully agree with your line of thinking, Joshua.

The sentence ending with "ὠθεῖσθαι / to be pushed" has led most translators toward the "wheel" interpretation -- but it can just as easily mean "compelled."

With that problem out of the way, τρικύλιστος certainly has a basic meaning of "rolled three times" -- but with κυλιστός meaning "twined in a circle, an epithet of a kind of garland" (as LSJ states, and as you and Athenaîos have shown) -- "rolled" can certainly refer to a garland. (It seems most of the "garlands" Athenaîos is discussing are worn on the head, so I think we are talking about wreaths.)

So the only remaining mystery is the prefix "three" -- which could easily be a colloquialism for either entwining three different plants to make one wreath, or just placing one upon the other -- the effect would be similar.

*******

Regarding "Three," we do see our Philōnídēs of Laodíkeia honored with three distinct wreaths (στέφανοι) in the inscription Attica, IG II2 1236:

"...the people honored him: both [the elder] Philōnídēs himself and his sons Philōnídēs and Dicaearchus – with citizenship, and crowned them with (1) a wreath of laurel and again with (2) a golden wreath... ...to praise [the elder] Philōnídēs of Laodicea and his sons Philōnídēs and Dicaearchus, and to crown each of them with (3) a wreath of myrtle, which it is customary to use when crowning their own benefactors."

Significantly, these are specifically honors given to Philōnídēs by the Athenians.

*****

So it could mean, in the context of Epikouros' letter to Themísta, "with all the honors you have given me in your letter" (i.e., crowned with multiple compliments)"

It is not much of a connection, but Lucius Lucretius Trio was an older contemporary (and presumably relative) of our Lucretius, and the crescent moon shows up on some of his coins.

Oh, I was just pointing to the (1) specific meaning "hooked" vs. (2) merely meaning "bulk." I know he usually uses "bulk," but I am not sure if he uses "hooked."

Quote from Eikadistes

ὄγκοι (ónkoi, “hooks”),

Although that exists, Epíkouros mostly uses:

 "ὄγκος (B), ὁ, bulk, size, mass of a body"

ὁ ὄγκος is really his main word for "particle."

I fully agree with your point, even using this example I could see us being "oncologists" instead of "atomists" (but that word was taken for other uses).

For the threefold division, it seems that "empty" has a negative connotation in Epistemology and Ethics, but is neutral in Physics.

Quote from Don

VS423.

I think you want U423, and so for the rest.

Is that from a version that has the Greek and English already paired?

I read that part of 62 as "The addition of judgment concerning the unseen... ...is not true in such cases: since everything envisioned or comprehended through our attention to [mental] perception is true."

The addition of judgment, then, is the source of the error, not "attention to mental perception."

In the sentence we are looking at aliquam is an adjective, from aliquis and usually means "some."

Less common is the adverbial use of aliquam, and only there does it mean "somewhat, to some degree" which comes close to "largely."

https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=aliquis&la=la#lexicon

"aliquis, indef. adj., some, any"

Plutarch, in his Reply (at 1116c) says this -- and then ends with a helpful quote from Colotes:

But I should like to ask the very man (Epicurus), who brings this indictment, if his school does not see this distinction in their own system, whereby some objects are enduring and unchanging in their being, just as atoms too in their doctrine are forever the same because they are too hard to be affected, while all aggregates of atoms are subject to flux and change and come into being and pass out of it, as innumerable films leave them in a constant stream, and innumerable good others, it is inferred, flow in from the surroundings and replenish the mass -- which is varied by this interchange and altered in its composition, since in fact even the atoms in the interior of the aggregate can never cease moving or vibrating against one another, as the Epicureans say themselves.

"It is true" you (Colotes) say "that this sort of difference in ways of being is found in the actual world. But Epicurus shows himself a better philosopher than Plato in applying 'being' to all alike -- to the intangible void and resistant body and to the elements and their aggregates, holding that a common and single way of being is found in both the eternal and the generated, both the indestructible and the destructible, both the unaffected and enduring and changeless realities that can never be expelled from their being and those whose being lies in the fact that they are acted upon and changed and which never for an instant remain as they were."

The "aliquam" from your list is the adverb "largely," --- which is not that common -- but in this sentence it is a version of aliquis and means "some."

"It is thought better to obtain some part rather than none [at all]."

Lists of the books from these two paragraphs:

Quote from Don

The idea that Zeno questioned the authorship of the letter to Pythocles is speculative at best

Yes I fully agree. Although Usener puts this in the "Spurious Letters" section, ὑποψία only means there was some uncertainty regarding them.

The Greek, indeed, is broken, but it could go something like:

"[Zeno, because he was] approaching the [writings] of the men [i.e., the founders of the school] with precision, regarded those [precise points] that were accepted by them from the foundation [of the school] as very important – therefore he acquired some uncertainty regarding..."

Which makes sense -- and happens to us all the time!

Also, he would have been very aware that the idea of "separating" is at the center of the word he uses for "compound."

Great question. I cannot find a good quote for this.

(We do have the scholion 10.73c "it is clear [Epicurus] states that the cosmoi are also perishable because their parts are transforming")

Impermanence is certainly part of the discussion of whole natures vs. qualities -- with only the necessary qualities of whole natures existing as permanent (starting at 39c).

[Don, I accidently posted just after you, but I see we jumped on the same section!]

Quote from Don

Zeno’s name doesn’t appear in the manuscript, so I'd suggest looking at Epicurus's titles, too.

I agree.

Zeno’s name is not preserved in that column of P.Herc. 1005. (7/10), so while many scholars infer Zeno of Sidon as the author of these books, I am unsure.

1. Περὶ τῆς τῶν Ἀτόμων Ἀνομοιότητος (On the Dissimilarity of Atoms)
2. Περὶ Παρεγκλίσεως καὶ τῆς τοῦ Ἀθρόου Προκαταρχῆς (On the Swerve and the Initial Beginning of the Aggregate)
3.0 Περὶ Τελῶν (On Fulfillments, "On Ends"), which contains
3.1 Περὶ Τελειώσεως Ἄκρας καὶ τῆς Εὐδαιμονίας (On the Highest Perfection and Wellbeing)
4. Περὶ Γραμματικῆς (On Grammar)
5. Περὶ Ἱστορίας (On History)
6. Περὶ Παροιμιῶν καὶ τῶν Ὁμοίων (On Proverbs and Similar Things)
7. Περὶ Λέξεως (On Terminology)
8. Περὶ Ποιημάτων Χρήσεως (On the Usage of Poems)
9. Περὶ Εὐσεβείας (On Piety)

Zeno is mentioned once in the succeeding surviving columns, where Philódēmos is talking about his time with Zeno, and their frustration that "most of the Epicureans" have "inaction in the books."

We know Epikouros wrote an "On Piety" (as Cicero and Philodemus say) but for the rest of these, I think this is the only source (these are not in D.L.'s list).

A translation of the second half of the column, with speculative insertions is:

"...but also, in response to the accusations against the reasoning and the way of life of those around Epíkouros – through these writings, he [i.e., Zeno of Sidon]^? made his defense – supplying incredible [amounts of material] of the things in [Epíkouros']^? books concerning each: such as On Grammar, On History, On Proverbs and Similar Things, and On Terminology, and On the Usage of Poems, and On Piety…"

Another possibility is that both are true. Just as there was "On Piety by Epikouros" and also an "On Piety by Philodemus" -- these titles could be shared by Zeno and Epikouros.

Less important, but just for fun:

Quote from Don

black, short and deformed. (πάντας ἀνθρώπους μέλανα[ς] εἶναι καὶ μικροὺς καὶ δι̣[εσ]τραμμένους) [Book footnote suggests a reference to "Pygmies"]

Although he does talk about Anthony having Pygmies in another work, here I do not think Pygmies are in-mind:

"..but it will be possible if someone were to present this in a similar way and also those things that all the [Epicureans] accomplished who entered into our school along with Hérmarchos: [presenting them] as those who had intended [to do something] and also as those who had accomplished [that thing], which I do not think [was the case] in times before [them] – with all humanity [before then] being obscure [in their expressions], small [minded], and corrupted [in their actions]..."