Plutarch and the E of Delphi (Part 2)

Plutarch and the E of Delphi (Part 2)

I would like to conclude my look at Plutarch’s essay ‘The E of Delphi’ (pronounced EI) by looking at the final pages of the essay which are given over to his teacher AMMONIUS, the Platonist philosopher. (Remember we are referring to ‘Plutarch of Chaeronea’ (circa 46 to 120 CE), a respected philosopher and writer throughout Greece and Rome, who was a high-ranking priest here in Delphi before the destruction of the Temple of Apollo some 300 years after his death. (Surely he is a good place to look to begin to understand what Delphi was really all about…..)

May I remind Greek members of the group that in my previous post there is a link to Plutarch’s essay on this subject in ‘modern Greek’ for people to read easily. In the meantime, here are a few of the things Ammonius says about the E at Delphi, as recorded by Plutarch.

I will be discussing Plutarch’s other 2 essays about Delphi (‘Why Oracles at Delphi Are No Longer Given in Verse’, and  ‘The Obsolescence of Oracles’) in due course…..probably over a coffee with anyone who is interested, since I feel the material is too sacred for discussion via social media…

[James’ selected Quotes – The E at Delphi - Part 2.  Ammonius the teacher of Plutarch concludes the conversation and gives his own deep opinions on the subject…… ]

 The Speakers:

AMMONIUS, the Platonist philosopher, Plutarch’s teacher.

LAMPRIAS, Plutarch’s brother.

PLUTARCH.

THEON, a literary friend.

EUSTROPHUS, an Athenian.

NICANDER, a priest of the temple.

XVII. Ammonius, as one who himself gave Mathematics no mean place in Philosophy, was pleased at the course the conversation was taking, and said: ‘It is not worth our while to answer our young friends with too absolute accuracy on these points; I will only observe that any one of the numbers will provide not a few points for those who choose to sing its praises. Why speak about the others? Apollo’s holy “Seven” will take up all one day before we have exhausted its powers. Are we then to show the Seven Wise Men at odds with common usage, and “the time which runs”, and to suppose that they ousted the “Seven” from its pre-eminence before the God, and consecrated the “Five” as perhaps more appropriate? ‘My own view is that the letter signifies neither number, nor order, nor conjunction, nor any other omitted part of speech; it is a complete and self-operating mode of addressing the God; the word once spoken brings the speaker into apprehension of his power. The God, as it were, addresses each of us, as he enters, with his “KNOW THYSELF”, which is at least as good as “Hail”. We answer the God back with “EI” (Thou Art), rendering to him the designation which is true and has no lie in it, and alone belongs to him, and to no other, that of BEING.

‘For we have, really, no part in real being; all mortal nature is in a middle state between becoming and perishing, and presents but an appearance, a faint unstable image, of itself.

“It is impossible to go into the same river twice”,

said Heraclitus; no more can you grasp mortal being twice, so as to hold it.

Hence becoming never ends in being, for the process never leaves off, or is stayed. From seed it produces, in its constant changes, an embryo, then an infant, then a child; in due order a boy, a young man; then a man, an elderly man, an old man; it undoes the former becomings and the age which has been, to make those which come after. yet we fear (how absurdly!) a single death, we who have died so many deaths, and yet are dying. For it is not only that, as Heraclitus would say, “death of fire is birth of air”, and “death of air is birth of water”; the thing is much clearer in our own selves. The man in his strength is destroyed when the old man comes into being, the young man was destroyed for the man in his strength to be, so the boy for the young man, the babe for the boy. He of yesterday has died unto him of to-day; he of to-day is dying unto him of to-morrow.

No one abides, no one is; we that come into being are many, while matter is driven around, and then glides away, about some one appearance and a common mould. Else how is it, if we remain the same, that the things in which we find pleasure now are different from those of a former time; that we love, hate, admire, and censure different things; that our words are different and our feelings; that our look, our bodily form, our intellect are not the same now as then?

Time is a thing which moves and takes the fashion of moving matter, which ever flows or is a sort of leaky vessel which holds destruction and becoming. Of time we use the words “afterwards”, “before”, “shall be”, and “has been”, each on its face an avowal of not being. For, in this question of being, to say of a thing which has not yet come into being, or which has already ceased from being, that “it is”, is silly and absurd.

All things are coming into being, or being destroyed, even while we measure them by time. Hence it is not permissible, even in speaking of that which is, to say that “it was”, or “it shall be”; these all are inclinations, transitions, passages, for of permanent being there is none in Nature. XX. ‘But the God IS, we are bound to assert, he is, with reference to no time but to that age wherein is no movement, or time, or duration; to which nothing is prior or subsequent; no future, no past, no elder, no younger, which by one long “now” has made the “always” perfect. Only with reference tot his that which really is, is; it has not come into being, it is not yet to be, it did not begin, it will not cease. Thus then we ought to hail him in worship, and thus to address him as “Thou Art”, aye, or in the very words of some of the old people, “Ei Hen”, “Thou art one thing”. For the Divine is not many things,…..

Therefore the first of the names of the God, and the second, and the third. “Apollo” (Not-many) denies plurality and excludes multitude. Ἴητος means one and one only; Phoebus, we know, is a word by which the ancients expressed that which is clean and pure,…..

Now The One is transparent and pure, pollution comes by commixture of this with that, just as Homer, you remember, says of ivory dyed red that it is stained, and dyers say of mingled pigments that they are destroyed, and call the process “destruction”.

But now that we see them dreaming of the God in the fairest of nightly visions, let us rise and encourage them to mount yet higher, to contemplate him in a dream of the day, and to see his own being. Let them pay honour also to the image of him and worship the principle of increase which is about it; so far as what is of sense can lead to what is of mind, a moving body to that which abides, it allows presentments and appearances of his kind and blessed self to shine through after a fashion.

To my thinking the word “EI” is confronted with this false view, and testifies to the God that THOU ART, meaning that no shift or change has place in him, but that such things belong to some other God, or rather to some Spirit set over Nature in its perishing and becoming,…..

Anyhow, the phrase “KNOW THYSELF” seems to stand in a sort of antithesis to the letter “E”, and yet, again, to accord with it. The letter is an appeal, a cry raised in awe and worship to the God, as being throughout all eternity; the phrase is a reminder to mortal man of his own nature and of his weakness.’

Source: Plutarch. Delphi Complete Works of Plutarch. (Delphi Ancient Classics Book 13) .

Plutarch and the E of Delphi (Part 1)

 

I would like to continue my comments on Plutarch - ‘Plutarch of Chaeronea’ (circa 46 to 120 CE), who was a respected philosopher and writer throughout Greece and Rome, and was also a high-ranking priest here in Delphi before the destruction of the Temple of Apollo some 300 years after his death.

I remind Greek members of the group that in my previous post there is a link to Plutarch’s essay on this subject in ‘modern Greek’ for people to read easily. In the meantime, here are a few of the things Plutarch writes about the E at Delphi - pronounced EI.

The Speakers:

AMMONIUS, the Platonist philosopher, Plutarch’s teacher.

LAMPRIAS, Plutarch’s brother.

PLUTARCH.

THEON, a literary friend.

EUSTROPHUS, an Athenian.

NICANDER, a priest of the temple.

 

[James’ selected Quotes - Part 1]

‘Well, then, our kind Apollo, in the oracles which he gives his consultants, seems to solve the problems of life and to find a remedy, while problems of the intellect he actually suggests and propounds to the born love of wisdom in the soul, thus implanting an appetite which leads to truth….

….. We may well guess that it was not by chance, or by lot, that, along among the letters, it received pre-eminence in the God’s house, and took rank as a sacred offering and a show object. No, the officials of the God in early times, when they came to speculate, either saw in it a special and extraordinary virtue, or found it a symbol for something else of serious importance, and so adopted it……

…… That the God is no less philosopher than he is prophet appeared to all to come out directly from the exposition which Ammonius gives us of each of his names. He is ‘Pythian’ (The Inquirer) to those who are beginning to learn and to inquire; ‘Delian’ (The Clear One) and ‘Phanaean’ to those who are already getting something clear and a glimmering of the truth; ‘Ismenian’ (The Knowing) to those who possess the knowledge; ‘Leschenorian’ (God of Discourse) when they are in active enjoyment of dialectical and philosophic intercourse. ‘Now since,’ he continued, ‘Philosophy embraces inquiry, wonder, and doubt, it seems natural that most of the things relating to the God should have been hidden away in riddles, and should require some account of their purpose, and an explanation of the cause. For instance, in the case of the undying fire, why the only woods used here are pine for burning and laurel for fumigation; again, why two Fates are here installed, whereas their number is everywhere else taken as three;…..

……Look again at those inscriptions, KNOW THYSELF and NOTHING TOO MUCH; how many philosophic inquiries have they provoked! What a multitude of arguments has sprung up out of each, as from a seed! Not one of them I think is more fruitful in this way than the subject of our present inquiry.’….

….. IV. Ammonius gave a quiet smile; he had a suspicion that Lamprias had been giving us a view of his own, making up history and legend at discretion…… [James Note: A good general warning when we listen to some people or read their books….]

V. ‘No, the Delphic Officials’, said Nicander the priest, speaking for them, ‘believe that it is a vehicle, a form assumed by the petition addressed to the God; it has a leading place in the questions of those who consult him, and inquire, If they shall conquer; If they shall marry; If it is advisable to sail; If to farm; If to travel. The God in his wisdom would bow out the dialecticians when they think that nothing practical comes of the “If” part with its clause attached; he admits as practical, in his sense of the word, all questions so attached…..’

…… Just so, when the God puts out ambiguous oracles, he is exalting and establishing Dialectic, as essential to the right understanding of himself. You will grant again, that in Dialectic this conjunctive particle has great force, because it formulates the most logical of all sentences. This is certainly the “conjunctive”, seeing that the other animals know the existence of things, but man alone has been gifted by nature with the power of observing and discerning their sequence. That “it is day” and “it is light” we may take it that wolves and dogs and birds perceive. But “if it is day it is light”, is intelligible only to man; he alone can apprehend antecedent and consequent, the enunciation of each and their connexion, their mutual relation and difference, and it is in these that all demonstration has its first and governing principle. Since then Philosophy is concerned with truth, and the light of truth is demonstration, and the principle of demonstration is the conjunctive proposition, the faculty which includes and produces this was rightly consecrated by the wise men to that God who is above all things a lover of truth……

Also, the God is a prophet, and prophetic art deals with that future which is to come out of things present or things past. Nothing comes into being without a cause, nothing is known beforehand without a reason.

Hence, though it may perhaps seem a petty thing to say, I will not shrink from it; the real tripod of truth is the logical process which assumes the relation of consequent to antecedent, then introduces the fact, and so establishes the conclusion. If the Pythian God really finds pleasure in music, and in the voices of swans, and the tones of the lyre, what wonder is it that as a friend to Dialectic, he should welcome and love that part of speech which he sees philosophers use more, and more often, than any other.

For Aeschylus says: ‘In mingled cries the dithyramb should ring,……. With Dionysus revelling, its King. ‘But Apollo has the Pæan, a set and sober music. Apollo is ever ageless and young; Dionysus has many forms and many shapes as represented in paintings and sculpture, which attribute to Apollo smoothness and order and a gravity with no admixture, to Dionysus a blend of sport and sauciness with seriousness and frenzy:…..’

XVII. Ammonius, as one who himself gave Mathematics no mean place in Philosophy, was pleased at the course the conversation was taking, and said: ‘It is not worth our while to answer our young friends with too absolute accuracy on these points; I will only observe that any one of the numbers will provide not a few points for those who choose to sing its praises. Why speak about the others? Apollo’s holy “Seven” will take up all one day before we have exhausted its powers. Are we then to show the Seven Wise Men at odds with common usage, and “the time which runs”, and to suppose that they ousted the “Seven” from its pre-eminence before the God, and consecrated the “Five” as perhaps more appropriate? ‘My own view is that the letter signifies neither number, nor order, nor conjunction, nor any other omitted part of speech;

----------

I will conclude my comments on this text ‘The E at Delphi’ next time by giving an outline of what Ammonius (the teacher of Plutarchos) thinks is the reason for the E. We should note that Plutarch significantly leaves his teacher’s views and comments to last to conclude his piece.

James.

Plutarch's 'Isis and Osiris' and some deeper philosophical wisdom.....

 A few words about why I like Plutarch (Πλούταρχος) – and some clues to the richness and wisdom one can find in his writings.

Firstly, let me say that I am talking about the ‘real’ or ‘famous’ ’ Plutarch, well to my mind at least. He is usually known as ‘Plutarch of Chaeronea’ (a city in central Greece) and lived around  46 CE and died around 120.    (In other words, this is not the latter Plutarch of Athens who lived around 350 – 430 CE and was one of the latter Neo Platonist group of that time – a group that I personally have mixed feelings about…… but that is something for another day.)

Plutarch was born into a wealthy and well connected family and received the best possible education.  He travelled to Asia minor and Egypt – and later made a series of visits to Rome where he was given official recognition by the emperors Trajan and Hadrian, which added to his fame.  

He writes in a popular / accessible and practical way…. You will know what Plutarch was getting at after you read the one of his essays – even if you do not agree with him about everything.   If you prefer reading this with specialist vocabulary, supposed esoteric hidden meanings, and the discussion of very vague abstract ideas opened to interpretation or esoteric deliberations - then I think this Plutarch will not be to your taste.

However, if like me - you are not put off by down to earth and straightforward philosophical writing, I think it is fair to say Plutarch’s essays contain a rich source of spiritual and philosophical guidance and nourishment; along with several suggested pitfalls to avoid in a quest to lead a more philosophical life. Keep in mind, he also held responsible positions here in Delphi in the priesthoods there…and was very well respected here. When he speaks about ‘certain’ spiritual things – albeit in a simple and straightforward way - we should consider at least that he not only knows what he is talking about – but has an understanding of these deeper things as well.

Personally, I try to read some Plutarch every year or two at least…… to remind myself of the wisdom within his writings about how to live, and what kinds of attitudes we should have towards other people……

When I hear some modern commentators relegate Plutarch to the side lines simply - because he uses down to earth and very understandable language - I am not that impressed. After all, Socrates himself (who lived some 400 years before Plutarch ) warns us about just accepting ‘clever or stylish  arguments’ over ideas that are presented simply and in a straightforward manner. Socrates is very critical of rhetoric (basically the art of persuasion and clever speech making) - if it is in the wrong hands. By this Socrates means, if the speaker however elegant and polished, does not really what they are talking about and just pretends they do, or is deliberately trying to mislead is audience.…… as is often the case with our political leaders, or people who perhaps are trying to persuade us to buy things we don’t want, or do things that are not good for us.

Plutarch wrote two main works which have come down to us today:

..... One was the more well know Parallel Lives of outstanding Greek and Roman leaders – which deliberately and cleverly compares two leaders at a time who may have different characters or outlooks on certain matters; so the descriptions are very ‘philosophical’ as well, and not just historical.

The second lesser well know work (book) is conventionally known as The Moralia which is a Latin translation of a Greek term for ‘Moral Pieces’ (ēthika), – which comprised of some 26 essays on various subjects – not just moral subjects as we might suppose. (Incidentally, Plutarch’s son, Lamprias, is attributed with compiling and editing his father’s essays and papers into books after Plutarch’s death.)

Within The Moralia Plutarch writes an essay explaining The E at Delphi, and I will make a few comments about this over the next week or two.  Greek members of this group can read Plutarch’s Isis and Osiris, and about the E in Delphi from:

https://www.kaktos.gr/el/authors/archaioi-suggrafeis/ploutarchos/ploutarhos-ithika-10-978-960-352-354-3.html

However, let me finish this post by telling you some of the more unusual things (but very straightforward and important things) Plutarch says within his essay on the Gods Isis and Osiris.  I feel these are importance quotes to share with people who are on the philosophical path….

Some Quotes from Plutarch’s essay on Isis and Osiris

(Plutarch is talking to a friend, Clea, in Delphi)

🔑All good things, my dear Clea, sensible men must ask from the gods; and especially do we pray that from those mighty gods we may, in our quest, gain a knowledge of themselves, so far as such a thing is attainable by men. For we believe that there is nothing more important for man to receive, or more ennobling for God of His grace to grant, than the truth.

🔑For the Deity is not blessed by reason of his possession of gold and silver, nor strong because of thunder and lightning, but through knowledge and intelligence.

🔑Therefore, the effort to arrive at the Truth, and especially the truth about the gods, is a longing for the divine. For the search for truth requires for its study and investigation the consideration of sacred subjects, and it is a work more hallowed than any form of holy living or temple service; and, not least of all, it is well-pleasing to that goddess whom you worship, a goddess exceptionally wise and a lover of wisdom, to whom, as her name at least seems to indicate, knowledge and understanding are in the highest degree appropriate. For Isis is a Greek word,…..

🔑.....for she is wise, and discloses the divine mysteries to those who truly and justly have the name of “bearers of the sacred vessels” and “wearers of the sacred robes.” These are they who within their own soul, as though within a casket, bear the sacred writings about the gods clear of all superstition and pedantry; and they cloak them with secrecy, thus giving intimation, some dark and shadowy, some clear and bright, of their concepts about the gods, intimations of the same sort as are clearly evidenced in the wearing of the sacred garb. ……

🔑 It is a fact, Clea, that having a beard and wearing a coarse cloak does not make philosophers, nor does dressing in linen and shaving the hair make votaries of Isis; but the true votary of Isis is he/she who has legitimately received what is set forth in the ceremonies connected with these gods, and uses reason in investigating and in studying the truth contained therein…

🔑 But for all this there is only one true reason, which is to be found in the words of Plato: “for the Impure to touch the Pure is contrary to divine ordinance.”  [Note: This is particularly important for readers searching for the truth, the beautiful, the good or the divine….]

🔑 In Saïs the statue of Athena, whom they believe to be Isis, bore the inscription: “I am all that has been, and is, and shall be, and my robe no mortal has yet uncovered.” Moreover, most people believe that Amoun is the name given to Zeus in the land of the Egyptians, a name which we, with a slight alteration, pronounce Ammon. But Manetho of Sebennytus dthinks that the meaning “concealed” or “concealment” lies in this word.

🔑 When they, therefore, address the supreme god, whom they believe to be the same as the Universe, as if he were invisible and concealed, and implore him to make himself visible and manifest to them, they use the word “Amoun”; so great, then, was the circumspection of the Egyptians in their wisdom touching all that had to do with the gods. 10 1 Witness to this also are the wisest of the Greeks: Solon, Thales, Plato, Eudoxus, Pythagoras, who came to Egypt and consorted with the priests; and in this number some would include Lycurgus also.

🔑 ……and you must not think that any of these tales actually happened in the manner in which they are related. The facts are that they do not call the dog by the name Hermes as his proper name, but they bring into association with the most astute of their gods that animal’s watchfulness and wakefulness and wisdom,b since he distinguishes between what is friendly and what is hostile by his knowledge of the one and his ignorance of the other, as Plato remarks. Nor, again, do they believe that the sun rises as a new-born babe from the lotus, but they portray the rising of the sun in this manner to indicate allegorically the enkindling of the sun from the waters.

🔑 If, then, you listen to the stories about the gods in this way, accepting them from those who interpret the story reverently and philosophically, and if you always perform and observe the established rites of worship, and believe that no sacrifice that you can offer, no deed that you may do will be more likely to find favour with the gods than your belief in their true nature, you may avoid superstition which is no less an evil than atheism.

🔑 Moreover, Lysippus the sculptor was quite right in his disapproval of the painter Apelles, because Apelles in his portrait of Alexander had represented him with a thunderbolt in his hand, whereas he himself had represented Alexander holding a spear, the glory of which no length of years could ever dim, since it was truthful and was his by right. 25 1 Better, therefore, is the judgment of those who hold that the stories about Typhon, Osiris, and Isis, are records of experiences of neither gods nor men, but of demigods, ewhom Plato and Pythagoras and Xenocrates and Chrysippus, following the lead of early writers on sacred subjects, allege to have been stronger than men and, in their might, greatly surpassing our nature, yet not possessing the divine quality unmixed and uncontaminated, but with a share also in the nature of the soul and in the perceptive faculties of the body, and with a susceptibility to pleasure and pain and to whatsoever other experience is incident to these mutations, and is the source of much disquiet in some and of less in others. For in demigods, as in men, there are divers degrees of virtue and vice.

🔑 The assumption, then, is that the demigods (or daemons) have a complex and inconsistent nature and purpose; wherefore

🔑 …..That Osiris is identical with Dionysus who could more fittingly know than yourself, Clea? For you are at the head of the inspired maidens of Delphi, and have been consecrated by your father and mother in the holy rites of Osiris. If, however, for the benefit of others it is needful to adduce proofs of this identity, let us leave undisturbed what may not be told, but the public ceremonies which the priests perform in the burial of the Apis, when they convey his body on an improvised bier, do not in any way come short of a Bacchic procession; for they fasten skins of fawns about themselves, and carry Bacchic wands and indulge in shoutings and movements exactly as do those who are under the spell of the Dionysiac ecstasies.

🔑 The Egyptians, as has already been stated, point out tombs of Osiris in many places, and the people of Delphi believe that the remains of Dionysus rest with them close beside the oracle; and the Holy Ones offer a secret sacrifice in the shrine of Apollo whenever the devotees of Dionysus wake the God of the Mystic Basket.

🔑 We must not treat legend as it were history at all, but we should adopt that which is appropriate in each legend in accordance with its verisimilitude.

Talks in Delphi - Program for June 2021

Every Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday Evening during JUNE 2021

@ Apollon Café – High Street, Delphi. (On the lovely terrace watching the sun go down.) Meet new people and learn something new.

Meet 7.00pm for a prompt 7.15 start

3 Introductory Philosophy Talks With Time for Questions and Discussion Afterward.

(by James, throughout June 2021)

3 Introductory Talks by James:

Monday Nights: 'Know Yourself’ - Socrates tells young Alcibiades; and we will look at Plato’s book ‘First Alcibiades' to help explain this ‘apparently’ easy idea. (Will include a general introduction to Plato and Socrates if you wish…..)

Tuesday Nights: ‘The Nuts and Bolts of Plato’ - Helping us to understand and enjoy Plato’s books more by looking at 3 regular themes frequent throughout his writings – Metaphysics, Psyche (the soul) and Ethics

Wednesday Nights: Plato’s Book ‘The Phaedrus' - suggesting that LOVE is an important driving force for our journey to the stars…..  

Note: No previous study of philosophy is needed to come along and enjoy the talks, while more experienced philosophers are also welcome. Talks are in English and last about 45 minutes with time for questions afterwards.

How to find us: The Apollon Cafe is in the little High Street in Greece - and we are meeting on the outside terrace at the rear of the cafe. When you arrive - please make your way through the cafe and out on to the terrace. Please find James and let him know you are there for the talk.

Cost: Places at the Delphi/June talks are limited, and need to be reserved. Tickets are offered on a ‘pay-what-you-can’ basis. (Suggested amount for those who can is 5 to 10 euros). The subject of the talk varies on different nights of the week - so please reserve your place for the correct evening at EVENTBITE.COM at:

….. or go to ‘Greek Philosophy Talks from Delphi on Eventbrite.com

To Contact James: to arrange another time for a private talk (subject to availability) for individuals and groups email:

jamestalksgreece@hotmail.com

Extracts of Text for ONLINE Meetup Talk on Plutarch - Weds 3rd March - 8 pm Greek Time

 Time will be limited to read text together at the talk, and so we will use only use points v, viii, and ix of the extracts below at our meetup talk on March 3rd 2021.

How Can We Measure Our Progress In Virtue (Morals) & Philosophy?’

From Plutarch’s book of essays: Moralia.

(Extracts Translated to English by Arthur Richard Shilleto, M.A.)

EXTRACTS 

§ v. …………………… …….. ‘Similarly they relate of Diogenes of Sinope, when he began to be a philosopher, that the Athenians were celebrating a festival, and there were public banquets and shows and mutual festivities, and drinking and revelling all night, and he, coiled up in a corner of the market-place intending to sleep, fell into a train of thought likely seriously to turn him from his purpose and shake his resolution, for he reflected that he had adopted without any necessity a toilsome and unusual kind of life, and by his own fault sat there debarred of all the good things. At that moment, however, they say a mouse stole up and began to munch some of the crumbs of his barley-cake, and he plucked up his courage and said to himself, in a railing and chiding fashion, "What say you, Diogenes? Do your leavings give this mouse a sumptuous meal, while you, the gentleman, wail and lament because you are not getting drunk yonder and reclining on soft and luxurious couches?" Whenever such depressions of mind are not frequent, and the mind when they take place quickly recovers from them, after having put them to flight as it were, and when such annoyance and distraction is easily got rid of, then one may consider one's progress in virtue as a certainty.

§ vi. And since not only the things that in themselves shake and turn them in the opposite direction are more powerful in the case of weak philosophers, but also the serious advice of friends, and the playful and jeering objections of adversaries bend and soften people, and have ere now shaken some out of philosophy altogether, it will be no slight indication of one's progress in virtue if one takes all this very calmly, and is neither disturbed nor aggravated by people who tell us and mention to us that some of our former comrades are flourishing in kings' courts, or have married wives with dowries, or are attended by a crowd of friends when they come down to the forum to solicit some office or advocateship. He that is not moved or affected by all this is already plainly one upon whom philosophy has got a right hold; for it is impossible that we should cease to be envious of what most people admire, unless the admiration of virtue was strongly implanted in us. For over-confidence may be generated in some by anger and folly, but to despise what men admire is not possible without a true and steady elevation of mind. And so people in such a condition of mind, comparing it with that of others, pride themselves on it, and say with Solon, "We would not change virtue for wealth, for while virtue abides, wealth changes hands, and now one man, now another, has it."

 

And Diogenes compared his shifting about from Corinth to Athens, and again from Thebes to Corinth, to the different residences of the King of Persia, as his spring residence at Susa, his winter residence at Babylon, and his summer residence in Media. And Agesilaus said of the great king, "How is he better than me, if he is not more upright?" And Aristotle, writing to Antipater about Alexander, said, "that he ought not to think highly of himself because he had many subjects, for anyone who had right notions about the gods was entitled to think quite as highly of himself." And Zeno, observing that Theophrastus was admired for the number of his pupils,  said, "His choir is, I admit, larger than mine, but mine is more harmonious."

§ vii. Whenever then, by thus comparing the advantages of virtue with external things, you get rid of envies and jealousies and those things which fret and depress the minds of many who are novices in philosophy, this also is a great indication of your progress in virtue. Another and no slight indication is a change in the style of your discourses. For generally speaking all novices in philosophy adopt most such as tend to their own glorification; some, like birds, in their levity and ambition soaring to the height and brightness of physical things; others like young puppies, as Plato says, rejoicing in tearing and biting, betake themselves to strifes and questions and sophisms; but most plunging themselves into dialectics immediately store themselves for sophistry; and some collect sentences and histories and go about (as Anacharsis said he saw the Greeks used money for no other purpose but to count it up), merely piling up and comparing them, but making no practical use of them.

 

Applicable here is that saying of Antiphanes, which someone applied to Plato's pupils. Antiphanes said playfully that in a certain city words were frozen directly they were spoken, owing to the great cold, and were thawed again in the summer, so that one could then hear what had been said in the winter. So he said of the words which were spoken by Plato to young men, that most of them only understood them late in life when they were become old men. And this is the condition people are in in respect to all philosophy, until the judgement gets into a sound and healthy state, and begins to adapt itself to those things which can produce character and greatness of mind, and to seek discourses whose footsteps turn inwards rather than outwards, to borrow the language of Æsop.  For as Sophocles said he had first toned down the pompous style of Æschylus, then his harsh and over-artificial method, and had in the third place changed his manner of diction, a most important point and one that is most intimately connected with the character, so those who go in for philosophy, when they have passed from flattering and artificial discourses to such as deal with character and emotion, are beginning to make genuine and modest progress in virtue.

§ viii. Furthermore, take care, in reading the writings of philosophers or hearing their speeches, that you do not attend to words more than things, nor get attracted more by what is difficult and curious than by what is serviceable and solid and useful. And also, in studying poems or history, let nothing escape you of what is said to the point, which is likely either to correct the character or to calm the passions. For as Simonides says the bee hovers among the flowers "making the yellow honey," while others value and pluck flowers only for their beauty and fragrance, so of all that read poems for pleasure and amusement he alone that finds and gathers what is valuable seems capable of knowledge from his acquaintance with and friendship for what is noble and good.  For those who study Plato and Xenophon only for their style, and cull out only what is pure and Attic, and as it were the dew and the bloom, do they not resemble people who love drugs for their smell and colour, but care not for them as anodynes or purges, and are not aware of those properties? Whereas those who have more proficiency can derive benefit not from discourses only, but from sights and actions, and cull what is good and useful, as is recorded of Æschylus and other similar kind of men. As to Æschylus, when he was watching a contest in boxing at the Isthmus, and the whole theatre cried out upon one of the boxers being beaten, he nudged with his elbow Ion of Chios, and said, "Do you observe the power of training? The beaten man holds his peace, while the spectators cry out." And Brasidas having caught hold of a mouse among some figs, being bitten by it let it go, and said to himself, "Hercules, there is no creature so small or weak that it will not fight for its life!"

And Diogenes, seeing a lad drinking water out of the palm of his hand, threw away the cup which he kept in his wallet. So much does attention and assiduous practice make people perceptive and receptive of what contributes to virtue from any source. And this is the case still more with those who mix discourses with actions, who not only, to use the language of Thucydides, "exercise themselves in the presence of danger," but also in regard to pleasures and strifes, and judgements, and advocateships, and magistrateships make a display of their opinions, or rather form their opinions by their practice. For we can no more think those philosophers who are ever learning and busy and investigating what they have got from philosophy, and then straightway publish it in the market-place or in the haunt of young men, or at a royal supper-party, any more than we give the name of physicians to those who sell drugs and mixtures. Nay rather such a sophist differs very little at all from the bird described in Homer,  offering his scholars like it whatever he has got, and as it feeds its callow young from its own mouth, "though it goes ill with itself," so he gets no advantage or food from what he has got for himself.

§ ix. We must therefore see to it that our discourse be serviceable to ourselves, and that it may not appear to others to be vain-glorious or ambitious, and we must show that we are as willing to listen as to teach, and especially must we lay aside all disputatiousness and love of strife in controversy, and cease bandying fierce words with one another as if we were contending with one another at boxing, and leave off rejoicing more in smiting and knocking down one another than in learning and teaching. For in such cases moderation and mildness, and to commence arguing without quarrelsomeness and to finish without getting into a rage, and neither to be insolent if you come off best in the argument, nor dejected if you come off worst, is a sufficient sign of progress in virtue. Aristippus was an excellent example of this, when overcome in argument by the sophistry of a man, who had plenty of assurance, but was generally speaking mad or half-witted. Observing that he was in great joy and very puffed up at his victory, he said, "I who have been vanquished in the argument shall have a better night's rest than my victor."

 

We can also test ourselves in regard to public speaking, if we are not timid and do not shrink from speaking when a large audience has unexpectedly been got together, nor dejected when we have only a small one to harangue to, and if we do not, when we have to speak to the people or before some magistrate, miss the opportunity through want of proper preparation; for these things are recorded both of Demosthenes and Alcibiades. As for Alcibiades, though he possessed a most excellent understanding, yet from want of confidence in speaking he often broke down, and in trying to recall a word or thought that slipped his memory had to stop short. And Homer did not deny that his first line was unmetrical,  though he had sufficient confidence to follow it up by so many other lines, so great was his genius. Much more then ought those who aim at virtue and what is noble to lose no opportunity of public speaking, paying very little attention to either uproar or applause at their speeches.

§ x. And not,,,,,,,,,,,,

                                                                                 x x x x x x x x x x

The full text of Plutarch's essay and others in his Moralia is available as follows:

Available free in English on Amazon (Kindle):

 https://www.amazon.com/Plutarchs-Morals-Plutarch-ebook/dp/B0082W83DO

(Full Plutarch essay available for free and easily printable from:

https://jameslongerstuff.blogspot.com/2016/06/this-down-to-earth-essay-by-plutarch.html

Also, there is a more contemporary translation by Robin Waterfield at:

https://www.amazon.com/Essays-Penguin-Classics-Plutarch/dp/0140445641

 

For Greek readers - This essay is available in ancient+modern Greek from the delightful Kaktos bookshop – (temporarily selling online rather than in Panepistimeo) – see Book 2 of Plutarch’s Ethics at:

https://www.kaktos.gr/el/authors/archaioi-suggrafeis/ploutarchos/ploutarhos-ithika-2-978-960-352-346-8.html

(Pages 171 to 221 …. odd pages only - is the essay I will be talking about in ‘modern’ Greek. The ‘even’ pages are Ancient Greek.)