Posts by Al-Hakiim von Grof

Welcome, glad to have you involved!

In the spirit of “pamphleteering”, I wanted to put together a brochure that can be easily printed and distributed. It was also an exercise in attempting to digest key concepts of Epicurean Philosophy.

My goal was to briefly introduce Epicurus and Epicureanism in such a way as to stimulate the curiosity of the reader while maintaining the integrity of the doctrines.

Having just finished Dewitt’s “Epicurus and His Philosophy”, the following idea is fresh on my mind:

“Moreover, it was Epicurus who specifically declared that a laborious life was inconsistent with the perfect bliss of the gods…” - dewitt, pg.53

And:

“This notion was so well known as to have been familiar to the dull Horatian commentator Porphyry, who lived early in the third century A.D. Horace had quoted freely from Lucretius: ‘I have learned the lesson that the gods live a life free from concern.’ 60 The comment runs: ‘This derives from the doctrine of the Epicureans, who assert that the gods cannot be immortal unless enjoying leisure and immune from all responsibility.’"

To me, this is the spirit of “the simple life”; avoidance of that which one finds excessively laborious. The simple life is one in which prudent planning ensures your needs are met, your health of mind and body is maintained, and pleasures abound, all with only exactly as much effort as is required and no more.

To me, it’s the opposite of the “rat race” of modern society. The gluttonous levels of consumerism, the social posturing with large houses, exepensive vehicles, and wildly expensive lifestyles that require constant upkeep and 80 hour work weeks.

“Simplicity” is a call to figuring out what truly pleases you, avoiding the all too common “hamster wheel” of life, and realizing that most of the greatest pleasures of being a human on earth don’t require much effort to obtain.

Lots of awesome ideas here!

Given that the New Testament explicitly states Paul interacted with epicureans ( Don , good tie-in reference. I had completely forgotten the interaction of Paul with philosophers in Athens), and the fact that Matthew is reasonably dated to the end of the first century, which is fairly soon after Paul’s execution and at the tail end of him founding churches throughout the empire, I believe it’s a significant possibility that whoever authored the text was using dogs and swine both as an easily recognized (to Jews) example of the “unclean” AND as a reference to certain philosophical schools which stood at odds to Christianity and were thus “unclean” people with “unclean” ideas.

If so, it’s a brilliantly layered passage that conveys the author's meaning in a way that would easily be recognized by both Jew and Gentile converts without changing the words used. Quite clever.

Matthew 7:6 “Do not give dogs what is holy; do not throw your pearls before swine. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.”

The most straightforward meaning of this passage is plain enough.

I just find it interesting that two influential philosophical schools, both of which pre-date Christianity and practitioners of which may have been present in the multicultural cities Jesus spent time in were Cynics (dogs) and Epicureans (pigs).

Perhaps the passage has a double meaning? Maybe a little wordplay by Jesus (or whomever put the words in his mouth)?

Or perhaps it’s not that deep; just a fun thought. Maybe somebody with a better understanding of Greek could take a look at the passage in its original language and weigh in.

Of course. I was looking forward to your presentation since the Livestream announcement was posted with the topics being discussed.

Asceticism, especially in the extremes, is something I’ve always found to be undesirable and confused. Even as a young man growing up in the religious tradition of my family I had an intuitive aversion to it.

Your presentation prompted me to really dig into my intuition and helped me put into words my thoughts regarding asceticism.

I really enjoyed this presentation! Many thanks to Don for putting it together.

I was reminded of my experiences fasting (for general health and specific GI problems I have) and how, upon feeding after multiple days of only consuming water, my hunger was for the simple things. I didn’t desire a fancy meal with complex flavors, I desired “meat and potatoes” kinds of meals; I would frequently break my fasts with steak and eggs, or ground beef and sweet potato, or other such simple yet nourishing foods. And I’ll tell you what, those meals were supremely satisfying - more satisfying than any luxurious meal I’d eaten in the course of a more standard three-meal-per-day feeding schedule. It’s my lived experience of the natural limit of pleasure.

What fasting also taught me was true hunger. I firmly believe that most people in the developed world don’t actually know what hunger feels like. They confuse cravings with hunger due to the unnatural abundance of hyper-stimulating food in our modern environment. I believe these cravings are what is referenced when people claim “there is no limit to pleasure”. But they miss that unhealthy and disproportionate cravings come from an unhealthy mind; with a proper perspective on food, its purpose, and an experience of what hunger really is one comes to realize how the pleasure of satisfying true hunger to its extreme requires only simple and easily obtainable foods.

Now, given that we’re Epicureans, it’s obvious that we’d accept and even promote the prudent consumption of delicious meals. The point is to recognize the ease and simplicity with which hunger, as opposed to craving, is satisfied. I believe this perspective shift allows the luxurious meals to be consumed with even more appreciation, but it also allows for one to walk away from the banquet table content, and helps one avoid consuming with gluttonous abandon. In short, it fosters prudent choices regarding food and satiety, which in turn fosters health of mind and body.

In contrast, the ascetic approach - which fetishizes self-denial and makes a virtue of suffering - fosters a sort of disproportionate estimation of the impact and value of consuming luxurious meals - or partaking in any other sensuous experience for that matter.

The root of such a confused perspective is the false duality of mind/soul and body as antagonists to one another. Such thinking can be dismissed as a load of bull. One need only refer to their lived experience to prove otherwise. We’ve all experienced the mind altering and personality shifting effects of a neglected body; with poor sleep, a garbage diet, and a lack of adequate physical exertion, the mind suffers significantly. So too does the body suffer (as modern science shows) when the mind suffers through chronic stress, isolation, and mental abuse.

The two components form one holistic, interdependent unit. The ascetic attempt to pit one against the other under false pretenses, especially those of supernatural gain (the most common reason most practice some form of asceticism), only serves to undermine the function of the unit and needlessly increases the suffering of the human organism. At best, asceticism leads to a life under-lived. At worst, it all but kills you. In either case, it’s a practice all should avoid if you wish to live your most pleasing life.

Welcome! The Jefferson connection is also very fascinating to me. I’m looking forward to any findings and ideas you decide to post here.

Huzzah! Happy Birthday!

Thanks for all the reading suggestions. I’ve begun DeWitt’s book and I’ll refer to this thread for my next read.

The Jefferson topic is one I’m eager to dive into, especially once I understand the philosophy more and truly appreciate the connection.

For no reason at all, throughout my entire journey of religious conversion, deconstruction, and philosophical inquiry, I had never given Epicureanism any thought or investigation until just a couple days ago. A combination of happenstance and sudden curiosity (the source of which I can’t recall) led me to this website, and what a boon it’s been. This weekend has been spent with every spare second consuming the treasure trove of posts, articles, conversations, and texts housed and linked here. It’s as if the authors of the Epicurean works reached through time and accessed my inner-self to put into words - more succinctly and comprehensively than I ever could have - the views and ideas I’ve taken such a long and circuitous journey to formulate for myself.

I’d like to thank everyone who’s contributed to this website, and acknowledge all the work that has gone into compiling and synthesizing what seems to be the whole of Classical Epicureanism. Such work is priceless.

A recent discovery (stumbled upon on this website, of course) that I’ve found quite intriguing is that Thomas Jefferson proclaimed himself an Epicurean. This led me down a brief rabbit hole where evidence of this was presented through a number of his personal writings. Given this knowledge, one can’t help but notice the not-insignificant influence Epicurean philosophy has had on the formation of The United States, or at the very least some of its founding documents, like the Declaration:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

The emphasized portions seem to me most obviously influenced by Jefferson’s Epicurean worldview:

- Equality among men (we’re all made from the same stuff, trying to live a life of pleasure, making friends or at least not making enemies)

- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness/pleasure (obvious principles of Epicurean philosophy from my very limited understanding. Life is good, we seek freedom from the violence and oppression of evil men as it’s deeply unpleasant, pursuing pleasure is self explanatory as its kind of the whole point)

- the purpose of government, at its core, being the promotion of mutual peace between men to allow the freedom to pursue a life of pleasure. Perhaps even an extension or a development off of PD6?

While parts of the Declaration are not Epicurean, and other parts may even be contradictory depending on one’s reading of the text, the influence of Epicureanism is evident.

Let me know what you think.