to fire; of earth, to earth; of air (spirit), to air; of water to water: no Hades, nor Acheron, nor Cocytus, nor Pyriphlegethon, but all is full of Gods and Daemons. When a man has such things to think on, and sees the sun, the moon and stars, and enjoys earth and sea, he is not solitary nor even helpless. Well then, if some man should the spirit shall return to God who gave it," Ecoles. xii. 7.' Mrs. Carter; who also refers to 1 Thess. iv. 14; John vi. 59, 40; xi. 25, 26; 1 Cor. vi. 14; xv. 53; 2 Cor. v. 14 etc. Mrs. Carter quotes Ecclesiastes, but the author says nearly what Epicharmus said, quoted by Plutarch, παραμυθ, πρὸς ̓Απολλώνιον, vol. i. p. 435 ed. Wytt. συνεκρίθη καὶ διεκρίθη καὶ ἀπῆλθεν ὅθεν ἦλθε πάλιν, γὰ μὲν ἐς γᾶν, πνεῦμα δ ̓ ἄνω· τί τῶνδε χαλεπόν ; οὐδὲ ἕν. Euripides in a fragment of the Chrysippus, fr. 836, ed. Nauck, says τὰ μὲν ἐκ γαίας φύντ ̓ εἰς γαῖαν, τὰ δ ̓ ἀπ' αἰθερίου βλαστόντα γονῆς εἰς οὐράνιον πάλιν ἦλθε πόλον. I have translated the words of Epictetus ὅσον πνευματίου, εἰς TVEVμάTION by 'of air (spirit), to nir': but the veνμáтiov of Epictetus may mean the same as the veuμa of Epicharmus, and the same us the 'spirit' of Ecclesiastes. An English commentator says that "the doctrine of a future retribution forms the great basis and the leading truth of this book (Ecclesiastes)," and that "the royal Preacher (Ecclesiastes) brings forward the prospect of a future life and retribution." I cannot discover any evidence of this assertion in the book. The conclusion is the best part of this ill-connected, obscure and confused book, as it appears in our translation. The conclusion is (xii. 13, 14): Fear God aud keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man, for God shall bring every work into judgment with every accret thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil. This is all that I can discover in the book which can support the commentator's statement; and even this may not mean what he affirms. Schweighaeuser observes that here was the opportunity for Epictetus to say something of the immortality of the soul, if he had any thing to say. But he says nothing unless he means to say that the soul, the spirit, "returns to God who gave it" as the Preacher says. There is a passage (iii. 24, 94) which appears to mean that the soul of wan after death will be changed into something else, which the universe will require for some use or purpose. It is strange, observes Schweig., that Epictetus, who studied the philosophy of Socrates, and speaks so eloquently of man's capacity and his duty to God, should say no more: but the explanation inay be that he had no doctriue of man's immortality, in the sense in which that word is now used. come upon me when I am alone and murder me? Fool, not murder You, but your poor body. What kind of solitude then remains? what want? why do we make ourselves worse than children? and what do children do when they are left alone? They take up shells and ashes, and they build something, then pull it down, and build something else, and so they never want the means of passing the time. Shall I then, if you sail away, sit down and weep, because I have been left alone and solitary? Shall I then have no shells, no ashes? But children do what they do through want of thought (or deficiency in knowledge), and we through knowledge are unhappy. Every great power (faculty) is dangerous to beginners." You must then bear such things as you are able, but conformably to nature: but not.... Practise sometimes a way of living like a person out of health that you may at some time live like a man in health. Abstain from food, drink water, abstain sometimes altogether from desire, in order that you may some time desire consistently with reason; and if consistently with reason, when you have anything good in you, you will desire well.-Not so; but we wish to live like wise men immediately and to be useful to men-Useful how? what are you doing? have you been useful to yourself? But, I suppose, you wish to exhort them? You exhort them! You wish to be useful to them. Show to them in your own example what kind of men philosophy makes, and don't trifle. When you are eating, do good to those who eat with you; when you are drinking, to those who are drinking with you; by yielding to all, giving way, bearing with them, thus do them good, and do not spit on them your phlegm (bad humours). s The text has ἀρχομένων, but it probably ought to be ἀρχομένῳ. Compare i. 1, 8, πᾶσα δύναμις ἐπισφαλής. The text from φέρειν οὖν δεῖ τo τῷ φθισικῷ is unintelligible. Lord Shaftesbury says that the passage is not corrupt, and he gives an explanation; but Schweig. says that the learned Englishman's exposition does not make the text plainer to him; nor does it to me. Schweig. observes that the passage which begins wâra peydλn aud what follows seem to belong to the next chapter xiv. • See Schweig.'s note, and the Latin version CHAPTER XIV. CERTAIN MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS. As bad1 tragic actors cannot sing alone, but in company with many so some persons cannot walk about alone. Man, if you are anything, both walk alone and talk to yourself, and do not hide yourself in the chorus. Examine a little at last, look around, stir yourself up, that you may know who you are. When a man drinks water, or does anything for the sake of practice (discipline), whenever there is an opportunity he tells it to all: I drink water.' Is it for this that you drink water, for the purpose of drinking water? Man, if it is good for you to drink, drink; but if not, you are acting ridiculously. But if it is good for you and you do drink, say nothing about it to those who are displeased with water-drinkers. What then, do you wish to please these very men? Of things that are done some are done with a final purpose (ponyovμévws), some according to occasion, others with a certain reference to circumstances, others for the purpose of complying with others, and some according to a fixed scheme of life.2 You must root out of men these two things, arrogance (pride) and distrust. Arrogance then is the opinion that you want nothing (are deficient in nothing): but distrust is the opinion that you cannot be happy when so many circumstances surround you. Arrogance is removed by confutation; and Socrates was the first who practised this. And (to know) that the thing is not impossible inquire and seek. This search will do you no harm; and in a manner this is philosophizing, to seek how it is possible to employ desire and aversion (ikkλioa) without impediment. I am superior to yon, for my father is a man of consular rank. Another says, I have been a tribune, but you have All the MSS. have 'good' (kaλo), which the critics have properly corrected. As to akówe see Schweig.'s note. This section is not easy to translate. not. If we were horses, would you say, My father was swifter? I have much barley and fodder, or elegant neck ornaments. If then while you were saying this, I said, Be it so let us run then. Well, is there nothing in a man such as running in a horse, by which it will be known which is superior and inferior? Is there not modesty (aidos), fidelity, justice? Show yourself superior in these, that you may be superior as a man. If you tell me that you can kick violently, I also will say to you, that you are proud of that which is the act of an ass. CHAPTER XV. THAT WE OUGHT TO PROCEED WITH CIRCUMSPECTION TO Ix every act consider what precedes and what follows, and then proceed to the act. If you do not consider, you will at first begin with spirit, since you have not thought at all of the things which follow; but afterwards when some consequences have shown themselves, you will basely desist (from that which you have begun).-I wish to conquer at the Olympic games.-[And I too, by the gods: for it is a fine thing]. But consider here what precedes and what follows; and then, if it is for your good, undertake the thing. You must act according to rules, follow strict diet, abstain from delicacies, exercise yourself by compulsion at fixed times, in heat, in cold; drink no cold 1 Compare Encheiridion 29. "This chapter has a great conformity to Luko xiv. 28 etc. But it is to be observed that Epictetus, both here and elsewhere, supposes some persons incapable of being philosophers; that is, virtuous and pious men but Christianity requires and enables all to be such." Mrs. Carter. The passage in Luke contains a practical lesson, and so far is the same as the teaching of Epictetus: but the conclusion in v. 33 does not appear to be helped by what immediately precedes v. 28-32. The remark that Christianity enables all to be such' is not true, unless Mrs. Carter gives to the word 'enables 'a meauing which I do not see. water, nor wine, when there is opportunity of drinking it." In a word you must surrender yourself to the trainer, as you do to a physician. Next in the contest, you must be covered with sand, sometimes dislocate a hand, sprain an ankle, swallow a quantity of dust, be scourged with the whip; and after undergoing all this, you must sometimes be conquered. After reckoning all these things, if you have still an inclination, go to the athletic practice. If you do not reckon them, observe you will behave like children who at one time play as wrestlers, then as gladiators, then blow a trumpet, then act a tragedy, when they have seen and admired such things. So you also do: you are at one time a wrestler (athlete), then a gladiator, then a philosopher, then a rhetorician; but with your whole soul you are nothing: like the ape you imitate all that you see; and always one thing after another pleascs you, but that which becomes familiar displeases you. For you have never undertaken any thing after consideration, nor after having explored the whole matter and put it to a strict examination; but you have undertaken it at hazard and with a cold desire. Thus some persons having seen a philosopher and having heard one speak like Euphrates — and yet who can speak like him?—wish to be philosophers themselves. Man, consider first what the matter is (which you propose to do), then your own nature also, what it is able to bear. If you are a wrestler, look at your shoulders, your thighs, your loins: for different men are naturally formed for different things. Do you think that, if you do (what The commentators refer us to Paul, 1 Cor. c. 9, 25. Compare Horace, Ars Poetica, 39: Versate diu quid ferre recusent, Wolf thought that the word wapopúσσeσba, might mean the loss of an eye but other commentators give the word a different meaning. See Schweigh.'s note. In place of Euphrates the Encheiridion 29 had in the text 'Socrates,' which name the recent editors of the Encheiridion altered to'Euphrates,' and correctly. The younger Pliny (i. Ep. 10) speaks in high terms of the merits and attractive cloquence of this Syrian philosopher Euphrates, who is mentioned by M. Antoninus (x. 31) and by others. |