VS63 - "Frugality Too Has A Limit..."

    I think there's a subtle, nautical metaphor Epíkouros encrypted here.

    I'm looking at the active particle (in the dative singular) τῷ ἐκπίπτοντι (tõi ekpíptonti), which Bailey translates as "him who errs". The phrase is referring to "the one doing the ekpíptō-ing", or "the one falling out of...", as in "...out of a boat", for example, "being cast ashore".

    With this in mind, consider the second part of the prepositional phrase διʼ ἀοριστίαν (di' aoristían) that Bailey translates as "through excess". The word ἀοριστίαν (aoristían) comes from ἀ- ("not") and οριστικός ("definite"), which is the root word from which we receive "horizon" and "horizontal".

    So, "the one doing the ekpíptō-ing" is doing so διά (diá) "by way of", "on account of", or "due to" something being "indefinite" (for example, a boundary, limit, or horizon). If there aren't any lighthouses, and the captain views an indefinite horizon, the boat is likely to crash.

    I think he's calling someone who can't "live simply" a trainwreck, or in this case, a "ship-wreck".

    Quote from Eikadistes

    is doing so διά (diá) "by way of", "on account of", or "due to" something being "indefinite"

    Here I think we have the feminine abstract noun "ἡ ἀοριστία, indefiniteness" itself -- but it is an odd one, and I only have examples of the adjective being used elsewhere.

    For example (of the adjective):

    Porphyry of Tyre (fl. 275 CE), Letter to Marcella, 29.459-461

    "ἐφʼ ὅσον δ’ ἂν Ἀμηχανῇς: Λήθῃ τῆς φύσεως Ἀμηχανεῖς· σαυτῷ γὰρ ἀορίστους φόβους καὶ ἐπιθυμίας Προσβάλλεις"

    "to the extent that you have no means: you have no means because you fail to notice nature – for you apply undefined fears and desires upon yourself"

    ----------------

    Epicurus, On Nature, Book 25, P.Herc. 1056 col. 15 (fr. B 37) et alia

    …{[μ]νήμ̣η̣ ἢ τὸ τε̣͂ι [μνή]μηι πά}θος ἀνάλογον ὧν ἔδει μ̣ᾶλλον ἐνεγείνετο πρὸς τὸ ὡρισμ̣ένον καὶ τὰ πάντα {ἐξελέγχον τῆς ἀναφορᾶς γινομένης κα̣ὶ οὐ πρὸς ἀόριστα καὶ κρίσεως προσδεόμενα –– αὕτη δ' αὖ πάλιν ἡ {τούτου μνήμ̣η̣ ἢ ἀνάλογος μνήμηι κίνησις τὰ μὲν συνεγε}γέν[νη]το εὐθὺς, τὰ δ' ηὔξητο τὴν [ἀρχὴ]ν ἔχουσα καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν.

    …Memory, or the Experience of those [movements] analogous to memory. It would have been more necessary that [the memory] was implanted in relation to what [experience] was being defined – even with Everything refuting out the reference [to the definition] as it was being produced ¬ and not in relation to the undefined things, that are also in need of distinction. but again, this Memory of [an experience] or a Movement analogous to memory: with Some [aspect of memory] having been generated together directly [from experiences] – while Other [aspects of memory] had increased, although they have a foundation and a cause [from former experiences].

    --------------------------------

    For ἐκπίπτειν of course we also have:

    ΚΔ 15. ὁ τῆς φύσεως Πλοῦτος καὶ ὥρισται καὶ εὐπόριστός ἐστιν – ὁ δὲ τῶν κενῶν δοξῶν εἰς ἄπειρον ἐκπίπτει.

    The wealth of nature is limited and well acquirable – but the [wealth] of empty judgments falls out into infinity.

    As my post above on ἡ λεπτότης shows, "subtlety" is a word used by Epicurus in discussing physics -- but not (except for this example of the manuscript's version of VS 63) when discussing morals.


    Among the examples, this quote below must be the best, because Epicurus stacks near synonyms, and in doing better shows us what he thought of the word:

    "...It has the force to eject air, [while] carrying [the air] over – and It is evident that this same Force also exists even in the films: for if only a hard Object had the force to produce ejections ¬ but a Film did not [have the force to produce ejections] – then only hard Objects would have the force to be quickly carried in the ejecting way ¬ but the films would not [have the force to be quickly carried], at least [not] in the ejecting [way]: however, in what is completely encompassed around immediately from the ready void, through the settlements into narrowness, subtlety, and minuteness……"

    [Epicurus, On Nature, Book 2, P.Herc. 993 col. 10 (column 111inf) | P.Herc. 1149 col. 5 (column 112sup)] "…[ἀέ]ρα ἐξ̣ω̣[θεῖ]ν [δυνα]τὸν περαιοῖ, φα̣[ν]ερὸν ὡς καὶ τοῖς εἰδώλοις ὑπάρχει καὶ [α]ὕτη ἡ δύναμις· εἰ μὲν γὰρ τὸ στ̣ερέμνιον μόνον ἠδύνατο τὰς | ἐξ̣ώσεις π[οιεῖσ]θαι, τὸ δ̣' εἴδωλο[ν μή], ἦν ἂν κατὰ τὸν ἐ̣[ξ]ω̣στικὸν τρ̣όπον τὰ στερέμνια μόνον ταχέ̣ως δύνασθαι φέρεσ[θ]αι, [τ]ὰ̣ δὲ εἴδωλα μή, κατ̣ά γε τὸν ἐξωστ[ι]κό[ν], κα[τ]ὰ μέντοι τὸ περ̣ι̣λαμβανόμενον εὐθὺ[ς ἐξ] ἑτ[ο]ίμου κε̣νοῦ διὰ τ[ὰς] συνιζήσεις τὰς ε[ἰς στ]ενότητα καὶ λεπτ̣[ό]τ̣ητα καὶ μι[κρ]ότη[τ]α…"


    We could draw a line from "subtlety" to "simple living" if it was otherwise established, but I do not see that it is.

    The closest I have is in The Double Indictment (section 2) Lucian has Zeus complain "I myself have to do any number of tasks that are almost impossible to carry out on account of their subtlety (ὑπὸ λεπτότητος)" -- which may be enough to draw it all together and preserve the manuscripts reading.

    This is great work, Bryan .

    Quote from Bryan

    We could draw a line from "subtlety" to "simple living" if it was otherwise established, but I do not see that it is.

    The closest I have is in The Double Indictment (section 2) Lucian has Zeus complain "I myself have to do any number of tasks that are almost impossible to carry out on account of their subtlety (ὑπὸ λεπτότητος)" -- which may be enough to draw it all together and preserve the manuscripts reading.

    I see LSJ cites Plato, Laws, in their definition, so maybe applicable:

    Plato, Laws, section 646b

    Ἀθηναῖος: τί δέ; σώματος, ὦ ἑταῖρε, εἰς πονηρίαν, λεπτότητά τε καὶ αἶσχος καὶ ἀδυναμίαν, θαυμάζοιμεν ἂν εἴ ποτέ τις

    Athenian: And how about plunging into a bad state of body, such as leanness or ugliness or impotence? Should we be surprised if a man of his own free will ever

    LSJ defines that use as "thinness, meagreness, of body"