Posts by Don

Well said, Julia.

So, I found the Stobaeus citation:

On Hathi Trust: https://hdl.handle.net/2027/njp.32101…97768772423-302

But κύριος is not in the same spot as the other transcription. Curious. So if it's not in the manuscript, and Usener and Stobaeus (5th c CE) put it in different spots... What is the original source?? It *probably* should be in there, but it then continues to call into question the reliability of the Vatican manuscript itself! Having corroboration from that manuscript and other sources is best... But those instances are few and far between.

It doesn't appear to be a rumor. Unfortunately, it sounds like preservation of the scrolls* would be the least of the worries if the volcano erupted! The last time it happened, it created a new shape to the bay! Yikes.

Naples sits on volcanic monsters - and one of them threatens to consume the city

Beneath one of Italy's most densely populated cities, there is danger brewing.

www.bbc.com

Seismic storm hits Italy’s Campi Flegrei super volcano with strongest earthquake in 40 years

Seismic storm hits Italy’s Campi Flegrei super volcano with strongest earthquake in 40 years | CNN

www.cnn.com

For those who want too much information on the Campi Flegrei caldera...

Potential for rupture before eruption at Campi Flegrei caldera, Southern Italy - Communications Earth & Environment

Unrest at the Campi Flegrei caldera, Italy, is consistent with the start of rupturing below the surface and a possible return to volcanic activity, according…

www.nature.com

*Don't get me wrong. Losing the scrolls, now on the verge of being readable, would be a tragedy!! But the scale of the potential eruption could be devastating for the entire region and possibly the world it sounds like. Yikes!!

Quote from Bryan

"We have been born once – twice it is not possible to be born: it is necessary to no longer exist for eternity. But you, not being master of tomorrow, you delay joy! Life is lost by this delay – and each of us, while occupied, dies."

Γεγόναμεν ἅπαξ – δὶς δὲ οὐκ ἔστι γενέσθαι: δεῖ δὲ τὸν αἰῶνα μηκέτι εἶναι. σὺ δὲ, οὐκ ὢν τῆς αὔριον κύριος, ἀναβάλλῃ τὸ χαῖρον! ὁ δὲ βίος μελλησμῷ παραπόλλυται – καὶ εἷς ἕκαστος ἡμῶν, ἀσχολούμενος, ἀποθνῄσκει.

Hey, Bryan . I was looking over this thread and realized I had previously posted this:

Post

RE: VS14 - Thoughts on VS14 and source in Vatican manuscript

The Vat.gr.1950 manuscript text reads:

epicureanfriends.com/wcf/attachment/3901/

https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr.1950.pt.2/0255

402r

The typical transcription reads:

γεγόναμεν ἅπαξ, δὶς δὲ οὐκ ἔστι γενέσθαι· δεῖ δὲ τὸν αἰῶνα μηκέτι εἶναι· σὺ δὲ οὐκ ὢν τῆς αὔριον κύριος ἀναβάλλῃ τὸ χαῖρον· ὁ δὲ βίος μελλησμῷ παραπόλλυται καὶ εἷς ἕκαστος ἡμῶν ἀσχολούμενος ἀποθνῄσκει.

However, look at the VERY beginning of the saying. There is a large red capital epsilon: Ε' γεγοναμεν αμαξ... that…

Don

July 7, 2023 at 10:46 PM

It appears that Vat.gr1950 actually has the first word in the pluperfect:

'Εγεγοναμεν 'απαξ...

which makes sense, as I understand, since the pluperfect is "more complete" than complete. It seems to me that it also hammers home that unique occurence when we are born. "We had been born once." It's clumsy in English, but I can understand why it might be there.

Also, I'm not seeing any κυριος in "ὢν τῆς αὔριον κύριος". It looks to me like αυριον goes right into αναβαλλη...

So, I'm getting something closer to...

Εγεγόναμεν ἅπαξ - δὶς δὲ οὐκ ἔστι γενέσθαι - δεῖ δὲ τὸν αἰῶνα μηκέτι εἶναι - σὺ δὲ οὐκ ὢν - τῆς αὔριον ἀναβάλλῃ τὸ χαῖρον - ὁ δὲ βίος μελλησμῷ παραπόλλυται – καὶ εἷς ἕκαστος ἡμῶν ἀσχολούμενος ἀποθνῄσκει.

The traditional transcription runs (including some different punctuation/breaks in the lines)...

Γεγόναμεν ἅπαξ – δὶς δὲ οὐκ ἔστι γενέσθαι: δεῖ δὲ τὸν αἰῶνα μηκέτι εἶναι. σὺ δὲ, οὐκ ὢν τῆς αὔριον κύριος, ἀναβάλλῃ τὸ χαῖρον! ὁ δὲ βίος μελλησμῷ παραπόλλυται – καὶ εἷς ἕκαστος ἡμῶν, ἀσχολούμενος, ἀποθνῄσκει.

Without kyrios, that middle line seems to me to be something more akin to σὺ δὲ οὐκ ὢν τῆς αὔριον ἀναβάλλῃ τὸ χαῖρον "Therefore, you are not the one who delays joy until tomorrow"???

"Closer to Fine" by the Indigo Girls

Quote from Godfrey

We do have interoception, an awareness of our internal sensations.

Agreed. Good point. Even there, there still has to be a sensation of something.

I should say I didn't want to go down the rabbit hole of some sensor apart from the sensation. The sensation of the stimuli is sensation. No Cartesian duality or anything.

Quote from Cassius

Quote from Don

If there's only one infinite being, by definition there would be nothing exterior to itself with which to interact with it

I agree that sounds reasonable. Does that leave the question of whether it could be aware of itself? Does it leave additional questions anyone can think of about why an infinite being could not be aware of itself. Does "infinity" contradict the idea of being "a being"?

I don't think we can be aware of ourselves without something external to us. There has to be a me and a you, this and that, for there to be awareness. You might counter with dreams or being in a coma. I think the only way awareness is possible in those circumstances is precisely because we've experienced ourselves in relation to an external world previously. We have never ever had the experience of being a completely autonomous being and never can have that experience.*

*PS: Some might bring up sensory deprivation tanks. But people in those experience weird sensations and mental images because they're coming into the tank with those external experiences. Even cut off from sensory stimulation (while still alive!), our minds use prior experience to hallucinate or imagine or visualize.

Here's my take:

An infinite being would have nothing outside of itself *to* sense! If there's only one infinite being, by definition there would be nothing exterior to itself with which to interact with it. Same with motion. If there was only one infinite being encompassing everything, there would be no void into which it could move.

Quote from Little Rocker

Fret not, Don , my sad emoji was in jest. I'm just over here humming my favorite triumph-song, "Eye of the Tiger.'

I need to stop taking things so literally!

And on your choice of "triumph-song"!

Quote from Bryan

ἅπαξ

I like that this is the same word used in the phrase hapax legomenon - a word that only occurs once in an existing corpus of texts. That connotation of a unique and singular existence seems appropriate.

αὔριονκύριος "Master of Tomorrow" is a great word, too!

PS... And ΓΕΓΟΝΑΜΕΝ ΑΠΑΞ is the next Epicurean T-shirt we need

By Zeus, this thread along with the thread on VS47 makes me think a systematic review of Usener's "fragments" would turn up multiple problematic Epicurean attributions. It seems to me he and his colleagues may have been playing fast and loose. I have no doubts about Usener's scholarship and erudition (just as I respect DeWitt's qualities), but it seems to me he may have got a little full of himself that led to some hubris.

(PS: Some may say that I have hubris to even question Usener or Bailey or even DeWitt, and maybe that's true. I would defend myself by saying that I'm not questioning Usener, Bailey, etc al. on a whim. I find a troubling number of their citations lacking in relevance to their assertions. I find their "corrections" and "reconstrctions" to be more flights of fancy in some places than reasoned well-founded scholarship. All this might mean that we have less extant Epicurean texts than we're led to believe, but maybe we need to concentrate on what we clearly have than what we like to have. )

Quote from Josh

One question is there right now. Is “Tending the Epicurean Garden” worth to read? It was written by Hiram Crespo.

I would enthusiastically endorse Emily Austin's "Living for Pleasure." It is, in my opinion, the best, most approachable, and conversational introduction to Epicurean philosophy and putting it into practice.

That's great, Bryan ! You da man!!

I just found that quote in that saying is from the Iliad, I.70:

Homer, Iliad, Book 1, line 68

Quote from Iliad, I.69/70

When he had thus spoken he sat down, and among them arose Calchas son of Thestor, far the best of bird-diviners, who knew the things that were, and that were to be, and that had been before,

Quote from Cassius

even if the line *didn't* end that way, it *could* have ended that way

And I'm more than fine with that! It's a nice use of classical themes and allusions. Coming up with new metaphors and sayings would be a fine exercise!

I just think it's disingenuous to pass off one's "brilliant emendation" as the actual ancient text.

Usener's "correction" appears to have really stuck in my craw.

Quote from Don

Always the killjoy here at the forum ... I just made a post on the VS47 thread that the word "triumph-song" is not in the original manuscript... that's a "correction" by Usener. Feel free to continue the conversation over there:

Thread

VS47 - Source in Vat.gr.1950 and elsewhere

This saying is attributed to Metrodorus.

Here is the manuscript of VS47

epicureanfriends.com/wcf/attachment/4774/

(Source: Vat.gr.1950, part 2, 403verso)

And here is the text in Metrodori Epicurei Fragmenta collegit scriptoris incerti Epicurei Commentarium moralem, subiecit Alfredus Koerte (p.561)

epicureanfriends.com/wcf/attachment/4775/

That famous word "triumph-song" does not appear in the manuscript! It is a "correction" by Usener, clearly shown in the manuscript itself and in Note (5) in…

Don

May 23, 2024 at 6:46 AM

I'll admit I feel bad I made Little Rocker sad (see emoticons). In the end, I agree with Cassius about the need for accuracy. When we have access to the manuscripts themselves - the same ones examined by scholars of the past and present - we don't have to just accept the "brilliant emendations" they give. Trying to get to an accurate transcription and reconstruction of texts is one thing. Being clever and trying to outsmart or "correct" an ancient scribe is another, in my opinion.

Quote from Cassius

If so, then that helps further to understand Usener's point.

I think Usener was being clever and trying to show off. Occam's Razor tells me that if πλειονος is viable and that's what the manuscript shows with no other conflicting manuscript evidence to the contrary, I'm not impressed by Usener's "brilliant emendation."

Yeah, Aristophanes ended his plays like that a lot.

Quote from Bryan

.ἄπιμεν ἐκ τοῦ ζῆν μετὰ καλοῦ πλείονος ἐπιφωνοῦντες ὡς εὖ ἡμῖν βεβίωται.

...we shall depart from life with more [of] good, proclaiming that we have lived well.

Yes. With the "more nobly" going with the departing?

Quote from Cassius

Anyone familiar with the reference to Aristophanes?

Assuming it's referring to the cast of the play singing and dancing their way off the stage at the end of his plays.

But επιφωνουντες doesn't imply singing or dancing, just "call out, proclaim, exclaim"

I did a Google search for "μετά πλειονος" alone and came up with numerous examples from numerous texts. For example, "μετὰ πλείονος ἡδονῆς, μετὰ πλείονος εὐφροσύνης" "More happily and comfortably" just with the other genitive after and not before, but Greek word order was flexible to a degree.

πλειονος is a neuter singular genitive of πλειον (Attic form of πλειων). As such, it looks like it usually means something like "more"

καλού is neuter singular of καλος with all its various connotations: beauty, nobility, good, etc.

So, I guess I'm leaning toward something like "more nobly; more beautifully; more honorably, etc" with the "more than those who don't follow pleasure as their guide" implied.