Posts by Elli

Quote from Kalosyni

So when we say that pleasure is the goal, we do not mean over-indulgence or indolence, as is believed by those who are ignorant, who don't understand correctly, or who oppose our school.

Dear Kalosyni Ηello and Joy !

IMO that "OR" between over-indulgence /indolence leads to aristotles' logic with the excluded middle and dilemmas of "either this or that". In this paragraph Epicurus puts the word "KAI" ["AND"] that means he speaks for one and the same issue.

Translation by Bailey : When, therefore, we maintain that pleasure is the end, we do not mean the pleasures of profligates AND those that consist in sensuality, as is supposed by some who are either ignorant or disagree with us or do not understand, but freedom from pain in the body and from trouble in the mind.

Translation by Norman DeWitt : When therefore we say that pleasure is the end we do not mean the pleasures of profligates AND those that consist in high living, as certain people think, either not understanding us and holding to different views or willfully misrepresenting us; but we mean freedom from pain in the body and turmoil in the soul.

Well, we forgot the translation by the great Norman DeWitt that I find it more accurate and clear!

"high living" means: a luxurious lifestyle involving lots of fine eating, drinking, parties, etc

Just putting one proper word i.e. "high living" and now see HOW DeWitt connects these two paragraphs by Epicurus as he explains what means "οι ηδονές των ασώτων ΚΑΙ τας εν κειμένας απολαύσεις" : "For it is not protracted drinking bouts and revels nor yet sexual pleasures with boys and women nor rare dishes of fish and the rest – all the delicacies that the luxurious table bears – that beget the happy life but rather sober calculation, which searches out the reasons for every choice and avoidance and expels the false opinions, the source of most of the turmoil that seizes upon the souls of men".

And yet, finally, the translation by Bailey is right "τας εν απολαύσει κειμένας" Epicurus means "sensual pleasures" because he has to clarify: " when we are speaking for pleasures we do not mean the "sensual pleasures" as the slanderers accuse us e.g. like Timocrates, the brother of Metrodorus that accused Epicurus that "he used to vomit twice a day in consequence of his self-indulgent";

Moreover, when we say pleasures we do not mean the Cyrenaic pleasures, those pleasures in motion and as they are the same that do not have empathy (i.e. the narcissistic pleasures); and as today there is a new greek idiom: "whatever we eat and drink today, and we do not give a damn for tomorrow, and for the feelings of others" or as the english say with an idiom: "eat, drink, and by merry".

So, Epicurus clarifies: When we are speaking about pleasures we do not mean that we suffer of ............. [chose the right english word as prurience or salacity or carnality or lubricity].

Epicurus clarifies finally: that epicureans, based on their philosophy, they have acquire such prudence that is able to measure the LIMITS of ALL pleasures for reaching the qualified pleasures with the highest psycho-spiritual state: the joy, the bliss and calmness of the body and soul that Epicurus tells us about, ending his letter to Herodotus. In Lucretius also the word "voluptas" has a range of semantics: from physical pleasure to the most ecstatic divine pleasure.

Doctrine 3. The limits of quantity in pleasures is the removal of all that is painful. Wherever pleasure is present, as long as it is there, there is neither pain of body nor of mind, nor of both at once.

Doctrine 20. The flesh perceives the limits of pleasure as unlimited, and unlimited time is required to supply it. But the mind, having attained a reasoned understanding of the ultimate good of the flesh and its limits and having dissipated the fears concerning the time to come, supplies us with the complete life, and we have no further need of infinite time: but neither does the mind shun pleasure, nor, when circumstances begin to bring about the departure from life, does it approach its end as though it fell short in any way of the best life.

κειμένων απολαύσεις = naughty enjoyments or lethargy enjoyments or (I found you a new greek word for "sleepy" "ενύπνιες" [enypnies] enjoyments.

No, dear friends the enjoyments are enjoyments, and the only they have are LIMITS.

A profligate would lough with this conversation, since his enjoyments are not sleepy, they are the awaken, and are those that are costantly in motion i.e. in a few words, a profligate is taking all the pleasures for himself, he is going to bed with many women or boys, he has the luxurious tables with luxurious foods, and he left for us, the suckers, a piece of bread and cheese and some figs for living in a cave.

And this fragment 207 ? Wow I'm astonished !

"to be better to lie serene upon a bed of straw than to be full of troubles on a golden chair at an overflowing table".

See the cunning: if you have a desire to buy a golden chair i.e to have a little luxury in your life... Alas, you will have troubles. So, you have to chose the bed of straw getting there and your enjoyments and feeling good. No, this gnomicon, alone, smells of stoicism.

And what a stoic/platonean idea is this really to use metaphors for the feelings? Cassius what do you say for the issue on the enjoyments are they OUT or IN of LIMITS? How we measure according to hedonic calculus ? Are there limits or not which are PERSONAL of course, and why is needed to use metaphorical terms for speaking and describing the FEELINGS? Feelings are our faculty, from the day we were born, we feel them immediately and without mistake in accordance with the circumstances (place and time) and are unique for everyone!

Don You wrote: "I still don't see how you're going from <those that lie in enjoyments> to getting [ those enjoyments that are out of limits]".

And I do not see how you're going from the feelings (enjoyments) and intepret them - metaphorically - to getting them onto the bed because they are sleepy!

We can connect the whole issue on "the enjoyments of the profligates" with the VS 11 (see photo) the word "ναρκά" that used by Epicurus means "lethargy". However, a profligate is not in a situation that he is not doing anything, he is just prone to the pleasures with motion (like the Cyreanics) the second word that is used by Epicurus that is "λύττα" [mania] is a proper one to describe the enjoyments of the profligates.

<τας εν κειμένας απολαύσεις> = <those that lie in enjoyments> [ those enjoyments that are out of limits] and this is what Epicurus means.

1) "Κείμαι" is one greek word and means "I am, be located, I find myself, I lie around".

2 ) "Kοιμάμαι" is another greek word that means "I'm sleeping".

Please, observe that there is a difference between them of one letter the first has an "ε" and in the second has an "o".

both have the same root describing a situation in which I am, I find myself, I be located somewhere, but the second word means clearly and literally that "I'm sleeping".

Sorry, but I do not agree that Epicurus means the pleasures of the profligates are the enjoyment of one who sleeps or is dead. He means the enjoyments (of the profligates) that lie out of limits.

A profligate fears and is FEELING pain, he is not dead and he does not sleep. He has no prudence to make the hedonic calculus, but this does not mean that he does not FEEL.

CANON is the methodology that we measure with the senses and feelings.

Sorry guys, but it is not needed to be so scholastic with the meaning of the words. We grasp the meaning immediately and without mistake since we use our faculties and as we have studied properly the whole of our philosophy.

Thanks

In the basis of feelings what is the situation that a profligate is? Is he dead, is he sleepy? No he is in fears and he feels pains, and pains provokes to himself and others next to him. Since a profligate is in a situation of oblivion [λήθη], because he does not know the truth [α+λήθεια] about the phenomena in the sky, the Universe, and the death and the god etc etc. In the basis of empathy who is a profligate, usually? He is a kind of a narcissist, he feels enjoyment in the sake of himself, he does not provoke pleasure, enjoyment and benefit to others. Since the profligate has no prudence and without prudence we are not able to put the proper LIMITS in pleasure and pain and with this behavior we are not friendly with others in our society and the worse is that we are not such kind of citizens to be free, self sufficient and autonomous to judge the laws and the powers. Usually in the powers (political and religious) there are such kind of persons: narcissistic-profligates who are holding each other by "the balls" i.e. there is a silent blackmailing if they are not obedient in their "silent agreements" then, their "dirty laundy" will be revealed in public.

BUT : VS81. The disturbance of the soul cannot be ended nor true joy created either by the possession of the greatest wealth or by honor and respect in the eyes of the mob or by anything else that is associated with or caused by unlimited desires. (again here Epicurus speaks about the limits).

Don first of all : hello and joy!

With franknenss of speech and sorry, but you give me the impression that you use the platonean methodology of " dialectic" searching out in the greek words endless definitions using the lexicons in which there are the greek words according to the texts by Homer, Aristotle, Plato, Sophocles, Thucydides et.al. And one word used by them in a text has another meaning for someone else in another text. That is the greek language that is rich, but the danger is hidden, as said by Epicurus, to not use empty words without meaning. In the opposite I use the methodology of epicurean Canon for the translating and renditions in the phrases by Epicurus i.e. I grab the meaning of the words immediately, since I use my ability that the greek language is my native language and at the same time, I know (since I have studied properly) and seeing clearly the whole picture of epicurean philosophy.

Behind a phrase by Epicurus there is always a structure that is based on the whole of his philosophy and his thoughts. When he uses the phrase with the words "τας εν απολαύσεις κειμένας" he does not mean something (i.e. the enjoyment) that lies in sleep or dead or the sensual enjoyments, this meaning does not make any sense according to the whole of Epicurean philosophy.

In this excerpt in LTM, Epicurus has to make clear to others (i.e. the slanders) and describe to them that when we epicureans mean pleasures we are not speaking of the enjoyments of the profligates, i.e. the enjoyments that lie out of limits. Epicurus in the most of his PDS concerning the feelings of pleasure and pain puts the limits in the basis of prudence that is higher than philosophy. Do you think that a profligate is prudent enough to set limits in the enjoyment and teaching us the LIMITS in the desires that produce pure pleasures? The answer is NO, since Doctrine 10 says also this: << If the things that produce the pleasures of profligates could dispel the fears of the mind about the phenomena of the sky and death and its pains, and also teach the LIMITS of desires (and of pains), we should never have cause to blame them: for they would be filling themselves full with pleasures from every source and never have pain of body or mind, which is the evil of life.>>

Yes, I do not agree with those translations and meanings in this text of LTM. Both do not judge according to the whole of our philosophy.

Hello to all the epicurean friends.

"Ὅταν οὖν λέγωμεν ἡδονὴν τέλος ὑπάρχει, οὐ τὰς τῶν ἀσώτων ἡδονὰς καὶ τὰς ἐν ἀπολαύσει κειμένας λέγομεν"

<τὰς ἐν ἀπολαύσει κειμένας>.

Υes, indeed, in this phrase there no the greek word "αίσθησις" or "αισθησιακός" in english as "sensual".

If we translate "τας εν απολαύσει κειμένας" as "sensual enjoyments" or "sensual pleasures", it seems to be that the philosopher who glorified the senses, he rejects the senses.

Note: the verb "κείμαι" has a similar meaning with another greek word as "τίθημι" that means: "I put /find myself/be located".

From my understanding of the text <τὰς ἐν ἀπολαύσει κειμένας> Epicurus means "those enjoyments that lie out of limits".

My translation in the above phrase is:

"So when we say that pleasure is the end of life, we are not speaking of the pleasures of the profligates and those in the enjoyment (that lie out of limits). i.e. he means if we will pass the limits in the enjoyment we get sick or miserable.

And then Epicurus continues to describe what makes a pleasurable life for someone with prudence and sober reasoning for putting the proper LIMITS in : "drinkings and feasts, and enjoyments with boys and women, and luxuries dinners with fish etc".

Οk my friend Cassius. I've point out to him the website with this forum and this link.

Goodnight!

Hello to all epicurean friends,

I was late to answer at this thread and on the issue, as has been studied and written by our friend Don , and discussed with the rest of us, because I had a private communication with a greek person named Orestis Pylarinos who keeps everyday and with responsibility the ancient Athenian Calendar with the customs and celebrations of ancient greeks.

Orestis Pylarinos is a mathematician, he speaks both the greek and english language, as he has studied in the US at UCLA Mathematics. In our communication, Orestis Pylarinos said to me, that he would have no problem joining this discussion as it evolves, concerning which is the right date to celebrate the birthday of Epicurus.

Cassius , my friend, please inform me if it would be ok with you to announce him this website forum and his participation to it. And IF yes, please give me some instructions and info.

Thanks.

P.S. 1. Orestis Pylarinos profile at FB in which he announces in public, the ancient Athenian Calendar is at this link. We read at this link that he refers to Epicurus birthday.

(https://www.facebook.com/SacredAthenian…aK7BFZV1gj8Zt2l)

2. And the website with the ancient Athenian Calendar is at this link:

athenianyear.wordpress.com

Τhank you my friend, I wish you the best too.

"τῇ προτέρᾳ δεκάτῃ τοῦ Γαμηλιῶνος" as it is mentioned by Epicurus in his Will, maybe it does not mean in the 20th day of Gamelion.

Moreover, I read in a book that there are some academic scholars that do not take Meritts' speculations to be entirely correct concerning the ancient Greek chronology/calendar.

The book is here: https://books.google.gr/books?id=pmxPEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA55&lpg=PA55&dq=δεκάτη+προτέρα&source=bl&ots=um1N9lGmQ1&sig=ACfU3U2KAlKuUifHl0d3p5rtAj6DZLlxVQ&hl=el&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwik4N3lw_P7AhUn_7sIHVYjDaQQ6AF6BAgdEAM#v=onepage&q=δεκάτη προτέρα&f=false

But anyway I think that in Epicurus phrase "τῇ προτέρᾳ δεκάτῃ τοῦ Γαμηλιῶνος" in greek adjective "τῇ προτέρᾳ" the subjective noun that is meant is the word (day/ημέρα) and if we want to be precise in the translation from ancient to new greek we place always the subjective noun in parentheses. So, this phrase by Epicurus goes like this "τῇ προτέρᾳ (ἡμέρᾳ) δεκάτῃ τοῦ Γαμηλιῶνος" and in english is: [The (day) before of 10th of Gamelion].

E.g. from the historian Thucydides we read [ τῇ δὲ προτέρᾳ ἡμέρᾳ ξυνέβη τῆς μάχης ταύτης...]

in english: [The day before this battle it happened...]

Thucydides mentions the word [day/ἡμέρᾳ ] next to the word [before/προτέρᾳ].

Αnd "προτέρᾳ" means "The day before" of 10th of Gamelion" so, IMO Epicurus points out one day before of 10th of Gamelion which is the seventh month as it is said correctly OR Epicurus points out that "προτέρᾳ" maybe means "early in this day".

Since it would be wrong - when Epicurus used with so much clarity the greek words and the experiences/facts - to use two different dates with the same meaning.

"ταῖς εἰκάσι" that means the 20th of every month.

Conclusion: IMO Epicurus in his Will uses two different dates and not one and the same as the 20th. Another day (another fact of experience) was the celebration of his birthday; and another day (another fact of experience) was the celebration of memory (that usually is connected with a death, i.e here of Metrodorus) and that was of every 20th "eikas".

So, IMO in his Will Epicurus points out clearly that when I will die too, you will have the same comemmorate date of remembrance that we were celebrating the death of Metrodorus and this is the 20th of every month.

Concerning "eikas" this also means and something else that is very important, and as Epicurus points out too: So true/real friends we were me (Epicurus) and Mitrodorus to each other and you epicureans will celebrate our commemorate date/remembrance the same date.

IMO for the word "σύνοδος" the appropriate word in english is "session" i.e. a period devoted to a particular activity.

Also, "σύνοδος" in new greek means: a period devoted to a collective institution. For the english word "institution" in greek is "θεσμός" that means: "a habit with great importance for an individual or small or large group".

So, IMO the appropriate translation in english could be: For the session of all my School held every month on the twentieth day to commemorate Metrodorus and myself according to the rules now in force.

I take as correct, the last desire of the Last Will of Epicurus in which he says that his birthday was on the 10th Gamelion. Why the 10th of Gamelion? Maybe, in Epicurus era, there was a big celebration to honor all hellenic gods. And 10th of Gamelion was a favourable date of the year for a boy to be born.

In the profile below, there is a post from the last year, in this post we read:

"Today (12 January), Hemera Hermou [Day of Hermes - Wednesday], beginning at sundown, will be the tenth day of the lunar month of Gamelion.

“The tenth is favourable for a male to be born; but, for a girl, the four of the mid-month.” – excerpt from Hesiod, Works and Days

The number ten is associated by the Pythagoreans to the Kosmos, as such today is a good day to honour All the Gods, especially the Gods of the celestial beings and Zeus, King of All".

Below is the profile at FB as they're counting the days of the months according to Ancient Hellenic Counting.

μένος (menos) and μήνις (mēnis)

Yes, Don both words had to do with "anger" and both have a duration in time. The first word "menos" had to do with the anger of humans that remains for searching a revenge, and the latter word "mēnis" had to do with the anger of gods. For the word "mēnis", we use this word, in newgreek until now, when we want to describe catastrophic natural phenomena as we say, the word "theomenia". (theos=god) + mēnis.

In greek texts the word "μένος" [menos] usually means rage, fury, anger.

μένος - Ελληνοαγγλικό Λεξικό WordReference.com

"μένος" [menos] as "strength" its meaning has to do with things. If we accept that “menos” means “strength” then we could say that the name Menoikeus means "the strength of the house". But this meaning is so vague, since Menoikeus is a person who has passions/emotions. Usually when the ancient greeks gave a name to a person, this name was based on feelings and whatever the parents wished for their children to have as characteristics and to become/behave as a person in general.

The name Mενοικεύς (Menoikeus) consists of two words, the verb “μένω”+ “οίκος” (meno+oikos) and I have the impression that this name means: "the one who stays at his home permanently".

Τhe antonym is "the one who is wandering around" i.e. the wanderer or in slang "the vagrant", and the antonym is "the settled", or "the resident".

In new Greek, if we want to know by someone where is his/her home, we use the same verb "μένω" [meno], as we ask : "πού μένεις;" (pron. pou meneis?) means literally "where do you stay?" (where do you live?), where is your home/residence, where is your city and your address?

I think for teaching the epicurean ethics to someone with the name “Menoikeus” it’s an appropriate name for him to accept more easily ethical exhortations, such as :

«For it is not continuous drinkings and revelings, nor the satisfaction of lusts, nor the enjoyment of fish and other luxuries of the wealthy table, which produce a pleasant life, but sober reasoning, searching out the motives for all choice and avoidance, and banishing mere opinions, to which are due the greatest disturbance of the spirit».

Cassius, it depends on what kind of philosophy prevails in a society! If the epicurean would prevail is inclined to the constitution of direct democracy, since on the wise man we read also: "The wise will not become a tyrant". Monarchy and Kingship are despotic regimes and usually lead to tyrany. I have the impression that Epicurus did not like Macedonians at all. Macedonians had Kings e.g. Alexander the great who had Aristotle for his teacher. Epicurus was not a teacher of kings, as we know already, but he was a teacher of common people like us.