Discourses by Epictetus (good books to read for beginners txt) 📕

ἀπόλυτοι. Compare Marcus Aurelius, Meditations x 24, viii 34. ↩

He tells some imaginary person, who hears him, that since he is come into the world, he must do his duty in it. ↩

This discussion is with a young philosopher who, intending to return from Nicopolis to Rome, feared the tyranny of Domitian, who was particularly severe towards philosophers. See also note 152. (Johann Schweighäuser.) Compare Pliny, Epistles i 12, and the expression of Corellius Rufus about the detestable villain, the emperor Domitian.

The title “of Indifference” means “of the indifference of things;” of the things which are neither good nor bad. ↩

On τὸ συνημμένον, see book I chapter XXIX. ↩

Book II chapter V at 24. ↩

Epictetus alludes to the verses from the Hypsipyle of Euripides. Compare Marcus Aurelius (Meditations vii 40): “Life must be reaped like the ripe ears of corn: one man is born; another dies.” Cicero (Tusculan Disputations iii 25) has translated six verses from Euripides, and among them are these two:

tum vita omnibus
Metenda ut fruges; sic jubet necessitas.

↩

The story is in Xenophon’s Cyropaedia (IV near the beginning) where Cyrus says that he called Chrysantas by name. Epictetus, as John Upton remarks, quotes from memory. ↩

So Anaxagoras said that the road to the other world (ad inferos) is the same from all places (Cicero, Tusculan Disputations i 43). What follows is one of the examples of extravagant assertion in Epictetus. A tyrant may kill by a slow death as a fever does. I suppose that Epictetus would have some answer to that. Except to a Stoic the ways to death are not indifferent: some ways of dying are painful, and even he who can endure with fortitude would prefer an easy death. ↩

The text has ἐπὶ Καίσαρος; but ἐπὶ perhaps ought to be ὑπό or ἀπό. ↩

See note 160. ↩

Diogenes Laërtius reports in his life of Socrates that he wrote in prison a Paean, and he gives the first line which contains an address to Apollo and Artemis. ↩

Divination was a great part of ancient religion, and, as Epictetus says, it led men “to omit many duties.” In a certain sense there was some meaning in it. If it is true that those who believe in God can see certain signs in the administration of the world by which they can judge what their behavior ought to be, they can learn what their duties are. If these signs are misunderstood, or if they are not seen right, men may be governed by an abject superstition. So the external forms of any religion may become the means of corruption and of human debasement, and the true indications of God’s will may be neglected. John Upton compares Lucan (Pharsalia ix 572), who sometimes said a few good things. ↩

A man who gives his opinion on grammar gives an opinion on a thing of which many know something. A man who gives his opinion on divination or on future events, gives an opinion on things of which we all know nothing. When then a man affects to instruct on things unknown, we may ask him to give his opinion on things which are known, and so we may learn what kind of man he is. ↩

Gratilla was a lady of rank, who was banished from Rome and Italy by Domitian. Pliny, Epistles iii 11. See the note in Johann Schweighäuser’s edition on ἐπιμήνια. ↩

As knavish priests have often played on the fears and hopes of the superstitious. ↩

Johann Schweighäuser reads τὸν ὀρνιθάριον. See his note. ↩

“Κύριε ἐλέησον, Domine miserere. Notissima formula in Christiana ecclesia jam usque a primis temporibus usurpata”⁠—John Upton. ↩

Johann Schweighäuser observes that the title of this chapter would more correctly be ὁ Τεὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, God in man. There is no better chapter in the book. ↩

Socrates (Xenophon, Memorabilia iv 6, 8) concludes “that the useful is good to him to whom it is useful.” ↩

I do not remember that Epictetus has attempted any other description of the nature of God. He has done more wisely than some who have attempted to answer a question which cannot be answered. But see book II chapter XIV at 11⁠–⁠13. ↩

Compare Cicero, De Officiis i 27. ↩

Noble descent. See book I chapter IX.

The doctrine that God is in man is an old doctrine. Euripides said (Aphthonius, Sophistae Progymnasmata):

Ὁ νοῦς γὰρ ἡμῖν ἐστιν ἐν ἑκάστῳ Τεός.

The doctrine became a common place of the poets (Ovid, Fasti vi),“Est deus in nobis, agitante calescimus illo;” and Horace, Satires ii 6, 79, “Atque affigit humo divinae particulam aurae.” See note 97. ↩

Elizabeth Carter has a note here. “See 1 Corinthians 6:19, 2 Corinthians 6:16, 2 Timothy 1:14, 1 John 3:24, 4:12⁠–⁠13. But though the simple expression of carrying God about with us may seem to have some nearly parallel to it in the New Testament, yet those represent the Almighty in a more venerable manner, as taking the hearts of good men for a temple to dwell in.