You Gotta Spit Upon Luxurious Pleasures

This meme might not be everyone's cup of tea, but it's certainly a well known allusion at the moment, and the point of memes is to get people thinking.

I do think the title is worth comment, however, in that I think the best Epicurean takeaway would be to "autocomplete" it mentally with the full text of the saying (..not for their own sake, but for the inconveniences that follow them"). To my ear, the truncated version "You gotta spit upon luxurious pleasures...." as it currently reads would be misleading it if were taken to imply that Epicurus held that all luxurious pleasures should be spit upon all the time.

The source of this version is not Diogenes Laertius or other primary source, but Strobeus as recorded at Usener 181:

(U181 Johannes Stobaeus, Anthology, XVII.24: From Epicurus: “I revel in the pleasure of my humble body, employing water and bread, and I spit upon the pleasures of extravagance, not for their own sake, but because of the difficulties which follow from them.”)

(I would question: 1 - "humble body?"... and 2 - even if we take Don's useful assertion that "bread" doesn't refer to a prison diet, no credible person seriously maintains that all Epicurus ate was bread and water, or that any reputable later Epicurean took "living on bread and water" as a model for their own conduct). That whole passage as written by Strobeus (or as translated by Usener, whichever the case may be) has an ascetic feel that I do not think is supported by Epicurus' own letters or the rest of the authoritative material.

I would see the more authoritative text as being to Menoeceus, and I do not read that letter as condemning "luxury" per se, but "luxury" which leads to more pain than pleasure. I don't see "luxury" as having an absolute definition - what is luxury at one time and place can be a necessity at another, and I so i do not think Epicurus would ever endorse a blanket condemnation of a 'pleasure' of any kind, the overriding principle being that some pleasures bring more trouble than they are worth, but knowing ahead of time which ones are certain to do so is not possible given that there is no fate and what actually happens will be controlled by circumstances which are not inherent in the pleasure itself.

[130] Yet by a scale of comparison and by the consideration of advantages and disadvantages we must form our judgment on all these matters. For the good on certain occasions we treat as bad, and conversely the bad as good. And again independence of desire we think a great good — not that we may at all times enjoy but a few things, but that, if we do not possess many, we may enjoy the few in the genuine persuasion that those have the sweetest pleasure in luxury who least need it, and that all that is natural is easy to be obtained, but that which is superfluous is hard. And so plain savours bring us a pleasure equal to a luxurious diet, when all the pain due to want is removed; and bread and water produce the highest pleasure, when one who needs them puts them to his lips.

[131] To grow accustomed therefore to simple and not luxurious diet gives us health to the full, and makes a man alert for the needful employments of life, and when after long intervals we approach luxuries disposes us better towards them, and fits us to be fearless of fortune. 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.

And of course as well:

PD08. No pleasure is a bad thing in itself; but the means which produce some pleasures bring with them disturbances many times greater than the pleasures.

and at 129 of the ltter to Menoeceus:

While therefore all pleasure because it is naturally akin to us is good, not all pleasure is choiceworthy, just as all pain is an evil and yet not all pain is to be shunned.