We are now requiring that new registrants confirm their request for an account by email. Once you complete the "Sign Up" process to set up your user name and password, please send an email to the New Accounts Administator to obtain new account approval.
Here's the book on Internet Archive:
Total absence of speed is death.
I'd suggest "Total absence of *motion* is death."
Plus, those Lucretian citations seem to be discussing the smoothness or roughness of the atoms/seeds/particles themselves. Smooth atoms lead to easier, unimeded motion. Pain seems to be caused, per Lucretius, by jagged, rough atoms tearing and ripping as they move.
Sensation is motion. The cessation of motion is death.
One big problem with *any* Epicurean endeavor in our times is that, in many senses, we're all making it up as we go along. There is no "apostolic succession," no unbroken lineage, no "authority" to say if we're getting it "right"... especially in light of the potential windfall of Epicurean texts now that reading the Herculaneum scrolls is possibly becoming a reality. We're trying to pick our way through an Epicurean labyrinth using a flashlight in the pitch dark. Maybe there's a couple candles lit in a couple locations, but by and large, we don't really have a guide... okay, we have a guide (pleasure) but our instructions on how we should/could/would apply it - in relation to what Epicurus taught - are only in summary with gaps in the paper and pages torn out of the manual.
Here at this forum we have a group of individuals who want to retain their autonomy, independence, individual interpretations (granted, within certain guidelines) with just enough moderation to keep things civil but with no one/way to "interpret" what direction is more "correct" (orthodox?) than another. Note, I don't think there is anyone who can interpret with absolute authority! However, in some ways and at some times, I find the lack of structure, lack of suggested ritual, and lack of a hierarchy frustrating. BUT I realize this is a discussion forum, and it has served - and continues to serve - a vital, unique purpose online. I wouldn't continue to think of myself as "Epicurean" (whatever that means! See below) without it, by Zeus!
The Athenian group seems to be headed in another direction, sponsoring in-person events - to which Cassius has provided content! But they don't have any more claim to "authenticity" than anyone else. The embers of the Epicurean school were kept barely hot enough to give off the faintest glow for centuries. Just because they're in Greece doesn't imbue them with any claim to preserving some lineage. (Fourth leg of the Canon anyone?)
Additionally, it seems (to an outside observer) over at the Society of Friends of Epicurus, they want more structure, more "religiosity," more ritual, more hierarchy. But the insistence of using Latinized Greek words like hegemon, Kyria Doxa, "One way to meleta on..." and using v in Latin like Liber Qvintvs instead of just leader, Principle Doctrine, "One way to meditate on..." and Book Five seems very pretentious and almost cute to me. I freely admit that I like some of the work coming out of SoFE very much, but the insistence to use these unnecessary Hellenisms and idiosyncratic Latin spellings is an impediment to taking it seriously sometimes. There's no need or reason to be exotic, arcane, or mysterious. From all accounts, Epicurus spoke and wrote plainly. Using those exotic-looking Greek and Latin words isn't necessary if you're targeting an English-speaking audience....well, unless you're talking about ataraxia or eudaimonia LOL 
but I digress.
So, what does any of this have to do with the topic of this thread? Maybe this should have been posted over on the "religion" thread. To bring this back to community building, there doesn't seem one way to do this in the modern world. We do not live in the ancient world. To try and reconstruct the structure of Epicurean communities is a failed endeavor. We simply don't know enough on how they were constructed it seems to me. Pacatus has offered a list of suggestions, some I agree with, others less so. I'm also not sure whether he's offering these as guidelines for *this* specific community or if he feels they should apply to any community calling itself "Epicurean." (I sincerely hope he replies to this rambling post.) There's also no "authority" that could make ANY list of guidelines apply to a group that wants to call itself "THE genuine, authentic Epicurean School." And then there's the issue of marketing. If one "Epicurean" group becomes more well known - a la Massimo Pigliucci's "Stoicism" - do they get to dictate "real" Epicureanism?? Will the real Epicureans, please stand up! Who gets to define who is and who isn't an Epicurean? Who should?
As individuals, we can call ourselves anything we want...but does that make it so? What constitutes an Epicurean community? What constitutes an Epicurean? Would Epicurus recognize the "brand" of "Epicureanism" being "practiced" on this forum, over at SoFE, over in Greece? Before we start laying out who's in and who's out, I think we have to wrestle with: Are any of us actually "in" in the first place...or are we playing a part of our own composition? Have any of us really "earned" the privilege of calling ourselves members of an "Epicurean" community in the first place? Are we really just "hedonists" seeing pleasure as the guide with a thin veneer of Epicurean terminology and the vaguest understanding of what it really meant to be an Epicurean in the ancient world? Granted, in some ways I'm being consciously provocative to encourage discussion - but only in some ways. I find it both frustrating that there's not more structure to this set of practices/beliefs/life philosophy, but I also find comfort in being able to apply a label to a philosophy I *think* I'm trying to structure my life around...even if that label maybe doesn't fit.
In the words of Epicurus, I've "prattled suffice for the present." I certainly don't know if I've added anything to the discussion, but hopefully I've prattled enough to engender further discussion.
A fascinating TED Talk on the importance of our microbiome in shaping our personalities and behavior. Maybe Epicurus was (by chance) onto something when he said "the rational part resides in the chest"! "Chest" here translates θώραξ (thorax) taken as the part of the body covered by a corselet/body armor: chest, abdominal cavity, trunk, midriff. I still think a rational case can be made for Epicurus's idea that the rational mind resided in the thorax with our own terms like "sick to my stomach" "heart-broken" and "I had butterflies in my stomach".
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, θώραξ
This IS a great find! Thanks, TauPhi !!
FYI: For the "original" https://papyri.info/dclp/62381
PS: That link of mine seems superfluous 
That paper does an amazing job of re-assembling the fragmentary puzzle along with a great transcription and translation. This find gets better and better.
Note: When you see "affections" in the translations, that's πάθη pathe. ... PPS: Hmmm... I'm going to have to take a closer look. The translator might have been playing fast and loose 
I also want to add a caveat that, while this papyrus is of very keen interest to me (and us), we shouldn't "defer" to a treatise from 1st c. BCE over modern scientific neuroscience research when it comes to understanding feelings, perceptions, consciousness, and so on.
I am very much looking to dig into PHerc. 698 with this new find. TauPhi gets a gold star for this discovery!!
Just a quick note on Epicurus' book. The title listed as On Love is Περὶ ἔρωτος (Peri erōtos). Erōtos is from έρως erōs and is where English gets "erotic" so the topic of the book must be "love, mostly of the sexual passion": See LSJ entry for the word.
The word shows up in Laertius in the characteristics of the sage (118): No one was ever the better for sexual indulgence, and it is well if he be not the worse.
And the list of hetairai (7): Also that among other courtesans who consorted with him and Metrodorus were Mammarion and Hedia and Erotion and Nikidion
I'm sure it shows up in Philodemus but that's it for DL.
And I agree with Joshua that Sparta is fascinating, although I would clearly choose Athens if I had to live in the ancient world! 
One thing I remember reading (source amnesia) was that some of Sparta's vaunted military reputation was deliberate spin and PR on THEIR part. They wanted people to fear them ... So they didn't actually HAVE to go into battle! They were constantly showing up late or negotiating out of battle. But their literally laconic one-liners and comebacks make for great reading!!
Speaking of mockery in this episode reminded me that Epicurus was not above that as well, according to Diogenes Laertius:
he himself in his letters says of Nausiphanes : "This so maddened him that he abused me and called me pedagogue." [8] Epicurus used to call this Nausiphanes jelly-fish,13 an illiterate, a fraud, and a trollop ; Plato's school he called "the toadies of Dionysius," their master himself the "golden" Plato,14 and Aristotle a profligate, who after devouring his patrimony took to soldiering and selling drugs ; Protagoras a pack-carrier and the scribe of Democritus and village schoolmaster ; Heraclitus a muddler15 ; Democritus Lerocritus (the nonsense-monger) ; and Antidorus Sannidorus (fawning gift-bearer) ; the Cynics foes of Greece ; the Dialecticians despoilers ; and Pyrrho an ignorant boor.
Epicurus pushed the edges of such circumscription within the Garden (it seems to me)
Fully agree! Letting women and slaves study philosophy??!! Clutch my pearls! 
However, marriages still needed to be sanctioned by the state and the culture to be legal and to allow for inheritance and the other legal and social aspects to be legitimate.
Sexual Relationships
The wise one will not establish a sexual relationship in a way that is against the law or forbidden by custom. Epicureans generally think that the sage will never succumb to lustful desire or be overwhelmed by sexual passions. According to the school, sexual passion is not sent by any supernatural force. They say that having sex like animals never did anyone any good, and people should be content if it does no harm. Epicurus also said that the wise one will not marry nor raise a family (and talked about the pains involved with that life); however, under certain circumstances, the wise one will forsake these rules and decide to marry. (118, 119)
I'll have to look those articles up!! Thanks for the references.
One thing to remember in this discussion was that, Epicurean or not, women's lives were circumscribed within the general Greek culture. Look at his Will and talking about the daughter of Metrodorus:
Let them likewise provide for the maintenance of Metrodorus's daughter,32 so long as she is well-ordered and obedient to Hermarchus; and, when she comes of age, give her in marriage to a husband selected by Hermarchus from among the members of the School ; and out of the revenues accruing to me let Amynomachus and Timocrates in consultation with Hermarchus give to them as much as they think proper for their maintenance year by year.
That said, I don't get the impression that Epicurus was forbidding marriages but I can see men (and women! in the Garden) asking his counsel and advice on who they were thinking of marrying.
Source:
Moral letters to Lucilius/Letter 25 - Wikisource, the free online library
This is also the letter that has SIC FAC OMNIA TAMQUAM SPECTET EPICURUS:
4. But do you yourself, as indeed you are doing, show me that you are stout-hearted; lighten your baggage for the march. None of our possessions is essential. Let us return to the law of nature; for then riches are laid up for us. The things which we actually need are free for all, or else cheap; nature craves only bread and water. No one is poor according to this standard; when a man has limited his desires within these bounds, he can challenge the happiness of Jove himself, as Epicurus says. I must insert in this letter one or two more of his sayings:[2] 5. "Do everything as if Epicurus were watching you." There is no real doubt that it is good for one to have appointed a guardian over oneself, and to have someone whom you may look up to, someone whom you may regard as a witness of your thoughts. It is, indeed, nobler by far to live as you would live under the eyes of some good man, always at your side; but nevertheless I am content if you only act, in whatever you do, as you would act if anyone at all were looking on; because solitude prompts us to all kinds of evil.
The Meaning of Life, according to Monty Python:
"M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations."
Ah!!! Like a Universally-applicable morality. Thanks for the clarification.
I couldn't get Universalism in the Christian theology sense out of my head.
universalism
Mea culpa. I apologize for my ignorance. Could you define "universalism" here?
"value for a person does not depend on sentience or existence" or "facts thus might be good or bad even for those who are dead and no longer exist" I feel these statements are too absurd to need a counterargument..
WTF?! "does not depend on sentience or existence."??? So, by that we can talk about the "value for" fictional, non-existent characters in books or mythology?? Absurd is one word I'd use for that position!
'I know this and want this and think this.'"
'τοῦτ' οιδα καὶ τοῦτο βούλομαι καὶ τοῦτ' οἴDon is that what you are referring to in English and Greek? Agreed that is very interesting.
Yes
This is of great benefit! Thanks for your work! I especially like:
"this is what I believe to be the work of prudence, to dispel the vain turmoil caused by dreams and signs."
"simply to remove those things which disturb without reason, which cannot be done without having examined and known that the things causing the disturbance are false"
"Always, but only to care for health; for if one is healthy, they will not be troubled by any of those things which now cause them distress. 'For indeed,' you will say, 'I know this and want this and think this.'"
'τοῦτ' οιδα καὶ τοῦτο βούλομαι καὶ τοῦτ' οἴ'
(That last line is almost as good a motto or slogan or aphorism as the Tetrapharmakos in my opinion)
"Only through correctly engaging in the study of nature about all these matters is it possible to grasp the truth. "
τὸν ἐλεύθερον βίον "a free life" ton eleutheron bion - I like that description of the Epicurean path!
And I'm only up to page 19! You've given me something to dig into! Thanks for the work and the inspiration!!
To add to DavidN 's post (not that I'm advocating one direction or another, just providing references):
So, 501(c)(3) is the broad category of tax-exempt charitable organizations. And it's relativly easy to start your own tax -exempt "church", as John Oliver demonstrated:
Note: I want to add that I understand that Nate and others (and myself in some ways) are not using "religion" in relation to Epicureanism in a satirical or flippant way like the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or John Oliver's "church." I respect the "taking back the word idea" but these links show how broad and ill -defined the word is from a legal and secular perspective.
