Posts by Don

Quote from Sam_Qwerty

Sometimes there is guilt at feeling pleasure or happiness after a loved one passed away. I told myself, "how can I feel happy after losing my father?" But he wouldn't have wanted me to stop living just because he is no longer alive.

Agreed. I've actually found over the last few funerals I've been to, that sharing stories about the one who died, especially when coupled with photos or a slide show of photos, is helpful and bittersweet, and pleasurable. Giving people a conversation starter with the photos is good. The first time I remember this is putting together the photos for my grandmother's funeral. Family joined in. But after the funeral, it can be hard. Epicurus' philosophy drives home though the preciousness of life, both remembering the life of the one who died and the life we go on living. We should not feel guilty for going on living. The dead live through our memories of them. That's the only afterlife we get. Famous people may leave books and writing and now video and audio, but they're still only memories.

... And, lo, the thread strayed far from the purpose that Cassius had set for it; for those who did post did take tangents and walk down many fascinating paths, whilst leaving Metrodorus stranded far behind, beseeching them to return.

Epicuriens | Search Results | Society of Friends of Epicurus

Mention of Les Epicuriens in an article at the site usually means it's either part of a fragment or a harder to find work (eg, volumes of On Nature). There are valuable resources here.

Quote from Cassius

And in the end, something similar for Hermarchus, though I gather there's a much smaller universe of surviving fragments.

It's important to remember that some of the Vatican Sayings are attributed to Metrodorus, too.

Metrodori Epicurei Fragmenta collegit scriptoris incerti Epicurei Commentarium moralem, subiecit Alfredus Koerte : Metrodorus, of Lampsacus, d. 277 B.C : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

26

archive.org

It is in Latin and Greek, but it's also a source for citations to look up. It's come in handy in the past for me.

Quote from Sam_Qwerty

I have found that you have to allow yourself to feel the grief before you can release it. Sometimes in our culture, expressing emotions is not considered macho. You don't have to cry in front of other men. You can wait until you are in private. But if you don't allow yourself to ever cry, you will be carrying your grief around with you.

I'll agree that you don't have to cry in front of other men, but I reject wholeheartedly the stoic character that men are too often expected to maintain in our culture. I was at an extended-family event recently, and a young boy (4-6 years old?) hit his head under a table under which he was crawling around under. He was stoic, holding the top of his head, walked over to his grandmother and buried his head under her arm and cried. She said, "he doesn't like people to see him cry." My heart ached. I wanted to say "hey, it's okay to cry" but I didn't. Extended family and all. The son of the daughter of a cousin. That attitude instilled in this young boy, understandable from a societal perspective, does damage. Feeling feelings is human, it's a natural part of living. To say "it's not manly.. not macho... To cry" or even most times to show affection even, that does no one any good. Express the feelings you feel honestly.

Grief is a natural, human reaction to loss, and Epicurean philosophy accepts everyone will feel the sting of grief at the loss of a loved one.

The thing is not to be overwhelmed by the grief. The person who died can no longer feel anything. If they were in pain, they no longer feel pain.

The memory of the one who died is precious, and should be cherished, should bring pleasure.

Fragment 213. Sweet is the memory of a dead friend. ἡδὺ ἡ φίλου μνήμη τεθνηκότος

"Death is nothing" is to be taken literally. Death is not a thing. Nothing and no one can BE dead. Death is not a state of being. Beings can either exist or not exist. The memories of my father bring me pleasure, but he no longer exists. He "lives" in my memory and that of my mother and family and friends. But he is NOT Dead nor is he alive. He simply, as a being, no longer exists.

From my work on the letter to Menoikeus:

124e. Συνέθιζε δὲ ἐν τῷ νομίζειν μηδὲν πρὸς ἡμᾶς εἶναι τὸν θάνατον·

δε "and" just serves as "furthermore, to continue, etc."

Συνέθιζε "Accustom (yourself)! Become habituated to!"

ἐν τῷ νομίζειν literally, "in the believing" and along with συνέθιζε means "Accustom yourself in the believing…" We would say "Become accustomed to believing…"

μηδὲν "nothing"

πρὸς ἡμᾶς "for us" "with regards to us"

θάνατον (thanaton) "death" (accusative)

Συνέθιζε δὲ ἐν τῷ νομίζειν μηδὲν πρὸς ἡμᾶς εἶναι τὸν θάνατον: "Furthermore, accustom yourself in believing that, for us, death is nothing."

124f. ἐπεὶ πᾶν ἀγαθὸν καὶ κακὸν ἐν αἰσθήσει·

ἐπεὶ "since" (the cause of something)

πᾶν ἀγαθὸν καὶ κακὸν "all good things and evil things" (i.e., all pleasure and pain). Remember the ἀγαθὸν "good things" from the Tetrapharmakos and lines 122e and 124b. There is no doubt in my mind that "the good" in these passages is referring to pleasure. If this is the case then, the fact that Epicurus is specifically stating in the next phrase...

έν αἰσθήσει "in perception from the senses, feeling, hearing, seeing, etc., and by the intellect"

έν αἰσθήσει is important since this seems to imply that all pleasure and pain is experienced through the senses (including the intellect),

124g. στέρησις δέ ἐστιν αἰσθήσεως ὁ θάνατος.

Our old friend δε is used again as the conjunction, and this sentence is constructed "backwards" in relation to English. So, let's start at the end:

ὁ θάνατος (thanatos) "death" ὁ is the definite article, often used in Greek in places we wouldn't normally use it in English. We would not translate this as “the death” for example, just “death” in general.

αἰσθήσεως This is the genitive singular of the word above meaning "perception from the senses, feeling, hearing, seeing, etc., and by the intellect" so…

στέρησις αἰσθήσεως "deprivation/negation of perception from the senses, feeling, hearing, seeing, etc., and by the intellect"

So, 124e-g:

"So, accustom yourself in believing that, for us, death is nothing; since all good and bad things (pleasure and pain) are in perception of the senses and the mind; and death is the absolute negation of perception."

Lo and behold, this is the second Principal Doctrine as well as the second Vatican Saying: Death is nothing to us; for what has been dissolved into its elements lacks sensation, and what lacks sensation is nothing to us. ὁ θάνατος οὐδὲν πρὸς ἡμᾶς· τὸ γὰρ διαλυθὲν ἀναισθητεῖ, τὸ δʼἀναισθητοῦν οὐδὲν πρὸς ἡμᾶς.

Just like mention of those beings who are blessed and imperishable is Principal Doctrine 1 and foremost here in the Letter, the idea of "death is nothing to us" is placed next in the Doctrines and here. Epicurus is consistent in what he sees as important.

Welcome aboard!!

To get a fictional look at how the Catholic Church may react to beings on another planet, I highly recommend The Sparrow by Mary Doria Russell. It doesn't go well, let's say. There's also a sequel: Children of God.

(Side note: Russell also wrote two great novels featuring Doc Holliday and Wyatt Earp)

Quote from Kalosyni

Quote from Don

αὔριον εἰς λιτήν σε καλιάδα, φίλτατε Πείσων,
ἐξ ἐνάτης ἕλκει μουσοφιλὴς ἕταρος,
εἰκάδα δειπνίζων ἐνιαύσιον: εἰ δ᾽ ἀπολείψεις
οὔθατα καὶ Βρομίου χιογενῆ πρόποσιν,
ἀλλ᾽ ἑτάρους ὄψει παναληθέας, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπακούσῃ
Φαιήκων γαίης πουλὺ μελιχρότερα:
ἢν δέ ποτε στρέψῃς καὶ ἐς ἡμέας ὄμματα, Πείσων,
ἄξομεν ἐκ λιτῆς εἰκάδα πιοτέρην.

Display More

Translation?

Hope to see you next time!

Display More

It's just Philodemus' poem/invitation to Piso for the Twentieth.

Philodemus: Epigrams - translation

(11.44)

A joyous Twentieth to all!

(I was out doing yard work this morning and time got away from me. I came in all sweaty and unpresenable at precisely 12:30!!)

αὔριον εἰς λιτήν σε καλιάδα, φίλτατε Πείσων,
ἐξ ἐνάτης ἕλκει μουσοφιλὴς ἕταρος,
εἰκάδα δειπνίζων ἐνιαύσιον: εἰ δ᾽ ἀπολείψεις
οὔθατα καὶ Βρομίου χιογενῆ πρόποσιν,
ἀλλ᾽ ἑτάρους ὄψει παναληθέας, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπακούσῃ
Φαιήκων γαίης πουλὺ μελιχρότερα:
ἢν δέ ποτε στρέψῃς καὶ ἐς ἡμέας ὄμματα, Πείσων,
ἄξομεν ἐκ λιτῆς εἰκάδα πιοτέρην.

In looking closer, that phrase can't be (in the manuscript) μετά καλού...(bottom line above). What we (writ large) have been using as μετά has no ε in it but looks like a η. Also, that letter above the line doesn't appear to be a τ. The same shape, down to the line to the right is also in VS2, which is PD1, where the word below is ουδεν .

So, on a cursory glance that word looks less like μετά and something like μηνα? μήνα being maybe genitive/accusative singular of μήνας "month"?? Then maybe καλη?? The feminine nominative singular of καλος?

Admittedly, I'm looking at words in isolation out of context. That said, I personally like to try to stick to the manuscript text if at all possible, especially when it's as well preserved like the Vatican Sayings are and not filled with lacunae like the P.Herc's.

This is all blue-skying it right now. Doing my usual muddying the waters.

And if you go back to our discussion at the start of this thread: remember that παιωνος "triumph song" doesn't appear in the manuscript. It's πλειονος.

Quote from DaveT

Comments please.

I've come across the following post questioning the attribution of VS 47 to Epicurus himself: VS 47" I have anticipated thee, Fortune, and entrenched myself against all thy secret attacks. 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 here vainly cling to it, we will leave life crying aloud in a glorious triumph-song that we have lived well."

SOURCE: https://www.epicurism.info/etexts/VS.html#**

Right. It's attributed to Metrodorus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrodoru…%29?wprov=sfla1

Quote from Kalosyni

I am wondering if it literally says "spitting contempt on life" or what exactly it said?

Yes. I believe προσπτυσαντες conveys literally spitting upon.

Another curiosity of this VS is that it's Metrodorus writing and not Epicurus.

Fwiw...

136] [Epicurus] differs from the Cyrenaics with regard to pleasure. They do not include under the term the pleasure which is a state of rest (καταστηματικὴν katastematiken), but only that which consists in motion (ἐν κινήσει en kinesei). Epicurus admits both ; also pleasure of mind as well as of body (ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος), as [Epicurus] states:

• in [Epicurus'] work On Choice and Avoidance
• and in [Epicurus'] On the Ethical End,
• and in [Epicurus'] first book of his work On Human Life
• and in [Epicurus'] epistle to his philosopher friends in Mytilene.
• So also Diogenes in the seventeenth book of his Epilecta,
• and Metrodorus in his Timocrates, whose actual words are : "Thus pleasure being conceived both as that species which consists in motion and that which is a state of rest."
• The words of Epicurus in his work On Choice [and Avoidance] are : "Peace of mind and freedom from pain are pleasures which imply a state of rest ; joy and delight are seen to consist in motion and activity."

Quote from Cassius

why a basic formulation such as "...we call pleasure the beginning and end of the happy life) might occur in the letter to Menoeceus

From my Menoikeus paper:

A short digression is now in order to examine that phrase ἀρχὴν καὶ τέλος "the foundation and fulfillment, the beginning and end." Often, this is simply translated as "the beginning and the end" as if there's a starting line and a finish line. This is much deeper than that, although the running of a race could be one metaphor that could used. Let's first look at the word ἀρχὴν (accusative of ἀρχή).

ἀρχή (arkhē)

English archeology "study of beginnings/origins" but also the -archy in monarchy, patriarchy, etc.

ᾰ̓ρχή carries the meaning of beginning, origin, foundation, the farthest point. It even took on the meaning of "the corners of a sheet" by the time the New Testament was being written (Acts 10:11). It also had the connotation of the "beginning of power" residing in a ruler, the "most important person" in a kingdom. It carries the idea of a foundational element or first principle. The alpha (first letter of the Greek alphabet) to τέλος's omega (the last letter of the Greek alphabet) which is how Hicks translated them.

τέλος (telos) carries the meaning of endings, the goal, completion, maturity, result, fulfillment, consummation. Where αρχή is the foundation, τέλος is the highest point. The definition of τέλος in LSJ is extensive!

Αρχή is not quite as long but gives the nuance we're working with.

Therefore, to translate ἀρχὴν καὶ τέλος as "beginning and end" (every other translation I've seen except Hicks) misses a lot of deeper meaning. This phrase is one that I highly recommend giving more attention to in one's personal translation or at least being aware of when reading. We miss so much by not examining Epicurus's words. Always go back to the texts!