de Vogel, Cornelia Johanna 1966. Pythagoras and Early Pythagoreanism: An Interpretation of Neglected Evidence on the Philosopher Pythagoras. Translated by I. T. de Vries-Jerruish and B. L. Hijmans. Assen: Van Forcum & Comp. [Google Books]
1. Introduction [1-19]
We have all grown up with the idea that very little was to be known about Pythagoras. From contemporary evidence, we saw, he appears as a kind of 'shaman'. And can a shaman be a man of science?
Whatever one might be inclined to say in reply to this question, this much was certain, that the texts in which something like a Pythagorean philosophy of number and numerical proportions appears date from the fourth century B.C., this applying most probably also to the Philolaus texts. Now, whatever may be said, the fourth century is not the sixth. And is not this the limit by which we are strictly bound? (de Vogel 1966: 1)
Üldlevinud ettekujutus, et Pythagorase (filosoofia) kohta on väga vähe, mida saab kindlalt teada, sest meie varajaseimad allikad on pea kaks sajandit hilisemad.
As to the three existing Pythagoras biographies and any later so-called Pythagorean texts, it was obvious that they could not be brought in as 'evidence' at all: they were all under the radical suspicion of being 'Neopythagorean hagiography', or, say, falsification. (de Vogel 1966: 1)
Porphyry, Iamblichus, ja... Kahtlemata de Vogel mõtleb Diogenes Laertiose oma. Esimese asjana hüppas mulle pähe Guthrie kogumikus märgatud "The Anonymous Life of Pythagoras Preserved by Photius" (vt Guthrie 1987[1919]: 137-140).
The Pythagorean Society was of such a character that the tradition was most carefully kept, so that a high degree of continuity may be supposed.
It is possible that earlier, say 4th century B.C., material is preserved in later sources (the Vitae), while the earlier sources may go back to a still earlier tradition. (de Vogel 1966: 2)
See on üks asi, mis näris mind Philipit (1966) lugedes: ta näib eeldavat, et kui meile ei ole kirjalikku allikat, siis järelikult ei ole üldse millestki rääkida. Tal lipsab justkui meelest, et see oli salaühing, mis tegeles müsteeriumitega. Meenub näiteks Platoni vend Charmides, kelle lühike elulugu näitab ajastu vaimu: "his property was confiscated for his role in profaning the Eleusinian Mysteries in 415 BC". Isegi kui see ei vastanud tõele, levis kuuldus Hippasusest, keda jumalad karistasid laevahukuga pütaagorlaste saladuste paljastamise eest.
To put it more concretely, it may happen that one day we will come across some passage in a Hellenistic or Roman writer of history, be it Diodorus or Pompeius Trogus, and find a picture there of Pythagoras' arrival at Croton coinciding with a moral break-down; next, a short account of how Pythagoras by repeatedly speaking to the people, at his request gathered together in four different social groups, brought them back to a strict rule of sober living, the women willingly giving up their precious garments, the men dismissing their concubines. (de Vogel 1966: 2)
It's been a decade since they started x-raying the scrolls of Herculaneum. The Wikipedia entry is lengthy but progress seems to be slow. / Võib-olla kunagi koorub sealt midagi huvitavat välja.
There is, first of all, a fragment by Xenophanes that clearly refers to the doctrine of metempsychosis; next, a few lines by Heraclitus, who is obviously irritated at Pythagoras' 'polymathy'; some lines by Empedocles, who expresses his deep admiration for a man of unusual wisdom. Add to this a few passages in Herodotus, who knows Pythagoras as a great Sage and places him among the so-called Orphics, not to forget Ion of Chios, who says that Pythagoras 'wrote some things in verse' and put these in the name of Orpheus - a way of saying that he was the author of one or more Orphic hymns. (de Vogel 1966: 3)
Ja ongi kogu 5. sajandi moos.
We can then pass on to the 4th century. In Plato we find very important evidence about the way of life by which the Pythagoreans differed from everybody else (βίος Πυθαγορικός); also the curriculum of those mathematical subjects which - as is expressly stated - were studied in the school of Pythagors; finally a praise of 'wise men' - anonymous but clearly referring to the Pythagoreans - who introduced a doctrine of τάξις and κόσμος, an order based on numerical proportions which shoud serve as norms also in human society. (de Vogel 1966: 3)
Jälle kummaline, et Philip arvates justkui mõtles pütaagorliku eluviisi välja Aristoxenus, aga Platoni Politeia-s (600a-b) arutleb Sokrates pütaagorlikku eluviisi. Selle "curriculum" all mõeldakse siin katkendit astronoomiast (529d-530d) ja "a praise of 'wise men'" viitab Gorgias-ele (507d-508a).
In the second half of the fourth century mention is made of Pythagoras in a few fragments by Heraclides Ponticus; about the prohibition of eating meat and beans; about what he calls 'knowledge of the perfection of the numbers of the soul' (according to Pythagoras [|] happiness would have consisted in this); about Pythagoras' various incarnations; and finally about the term philosophia, which he introduced. (de Vogel 1966: 3-4)
Õnnelikkus on teadmine hinge arvude täiuslikkusest.
In the table of opposites, stated in this chapter as being early Pythagorean doctrine, early Pythagoreanism is depicted as a dualistic way of thought. We must undoubtedly look upon this as a reaction to the Milesians and also as the doctrine which, a little later in the sixth century, was strongly opposed to Parmenides. (de Vogel 1966: 4)
Thales of Miletus, Anaximander ja Anaximenes. Dualismi teemal: "Pythagoreanism before the time of Plato was frankly dualistic in its account of ultimate principles, unlike the Milesian systems, which were in intention monistic" (Guthrie 1962: 249) - see peaks de Vageli joonealuse märkuse järgi kinnitama, et varajane pütagorism oli dualistlik; aga jätkub seal samas: "The opposite view was taken by Cornford. He saw the Pythagoreans as believing in an ultimate One behind all else" (ibid, 249).
The historian Polybius reports on the events connected with the setting fire to the Pythagoreans' house in Croton about the middle of the 5th century or a little later. The description clearly shows that a whole popular movement was concerned, not only in Croton but throughout Southern Italy, - a movement which had a political background. Polybius obtained his information from the Sicilian historian Timaeus, who wrote the history of Magna Graecia, in the second half of the 4th century. Timaeus is a very important witness: he must have known about the tradition concerning the part that Pythagoreans played in politics during the 5th century, and here and there even in the 4th century, from local sources. Polybius' testimony, therefore, is based on reliable authority. It shows us a side of Pythagoras' person and work of which we hear nothing in the abovementioned sources. (de Vogel 1966: 5)
Philip ei maini Polybiust, aga tal on Julianuse kokkuvõte relevantsest Timaeus tekstist (vt Philip 1966: 144-145).
We may ask ourselves how this evidence should be interpreted: was it a question of territorial expansion on the part of Croton, of conquest, and do we have to imagine that at that time there was a great Crotonian empire centrally governed by the Pythagorean Society? Or was the hegemony of Croton of a different, more modest character? Does the coin-alliance revealed by archeological discoveries mena that Croton had a wide sphere of influence without there being any question of conquest? Should not we rather suppose that Croton as a commercial and maritime power extracted economic privileges from the places concerned: landing-rights and permission to use the harbours? Again, was it the Pythagorean Society as such that ruled, or was it rather a certain group in the Society which concerned itself with governmental business? (de Vogel 1966: 6)
Esimese võimaluse juures - et Krotoniaani impeeriumi valitses pütaagorlaste koolkond - "This was the opiniono of U. Kahrstedt, who wrote about the so-called alliance-coins" (ibid, 6, fn2). Kahrstedt, Ulrich 1918. Zur Geschichte Grossgriechenlands im 5. Jahrhundert. Hermes 53(2): 180-187. [JSTOR]
The fact that these things are reported by historians from the 1st century B.C. - so before 'the 'hagiography' of Apollonius of Tyana and the later writers who used his work -, historians who took their information directly from Timaeus, Aristoxenus and Dicaearchus, should keep us from doing what so many who have written the history of Greek philosophy have done, that is pass this testimony by. On the contrary, they prompt us to have a closer look at the accounts by the scorned hagiographers, Porphyry and Iamblichus, who have something to say about these things. (de Vogel 1966: 7)
Olen sellest küll juba mitu aastat mõelnud, aga varsti võiks lõpuks käsile võtta. Nüüd avastasin, et see eemaletõukav prolixity on kaks korda hullem kui ma arvasin: seda on tervelt kaks köidet ja mõlemad on 600 lehekülge. Sealjuures esimese saab alla laadida, aga teist tuleb "laenutada".
If we want to understand something about Pythagoras and Pythagoreanism we shall have to 'place' it in its historical context, i.e. we shall have to take it from its isolation and understand it in the light of the spiritual background of Pythagorean thought. It is not only a fact, it is a σημεῖον: it refers back to the thought of the founder of the Pythagorean Society, the philosopher Pythagoras. (de Vogel 1966: 7)
Märgiline.
There were three more important witnesses in the fourth century B.C.: Timaeus, who, just because he was historian of Southern Italy and Sicily, is a very important authority; Aristoxenus of Tarentum, who as a Pythagorean must have been well-informed about the tradition within the School, and Dicaearchus, who as a writer of the cultural history of Greece also took an interest in the Pythagoreans of Magna Graecia. (de Vogel 1966: 8)
See on nii kummaline, et Aristoxenus on korraga peripateetik ja pütaagorlane. Võib-olla just Aristoxenust pidas Aristoteles silmas kui ta rääkis oma kaasaegsetest pütaagorlastest. Igal juhul on ta nüüd nö pütaagorlaste panteonis: Huffmann on ta ära tõlkinud. Erinevalt Philolaose ja Archytase tõlgetest ei ole see (2019) aga veel kergesti kättesaadav.
The foundations of the modern critical interpretation of Greek philosophy were laid in Zeller's detailed work. In the German speaking countries it was followed by the three volumes of Th. Gomperz, dating from the end of the 19th century (fourth edition 1922, English translation 1913-1929) and somewhat later by K. Joël's big volume on the period before Plato (Tübingen 1921). In none of these works has there been a systematic and careful investigation into the source [|] material after Aristotle for the reconstruction and interpretation of early Pythagoreanism, in particular of the figure of its founder. We are assured that he had 'disappeared into the mists of a distant past' before Aristotle's time, for Aristotle nowhere mentions him by name, but always speaks of 'the Pythagoreans'. This view has been a dogma for generations, and it still survives. All the later source material had been labelled Neoplatonic apocrypha by Zeller and was dated as belonging to the first century before and the first century after Christ at the earliest. (de Vogel 1966: 8-9)
Zeller oli tõesti hea, aga ülejäänut tema suurteosest ma niipea ei rutta lugema, sest see oli liiga nõudlik - a la kümneid lehekülgi järjest, millel kehateksti oli üks rida ja ülejäänud lehekülg oli kribukirjas joonealuste märkuste meri. Zellerist saadik on siis ignoreeritud Aristotelese-järgseid allikaid.
Burnet finds examples of primitive taboos in the Vitae of Diogenes Laertius, Porphyry and Iamblichus; the moralizing interpretation is of later date. This may be largely true - later writers did apply themselves to interpreting certain taboo injunctions of the early Pythagoreanism allegorically - it should be pointed out, however, that Burnet had no eye for the ethico-religious character of the βιος founded by Pythagoras and for the essential connection of this aspect with the so-called scientific principles. He was guided by the essentially correct principle that 'what is most primitive is earliest in date'. Conclusion: what is most primitive must have belonged to early Pythagoreanism. Put like this, it is logically correct. If, however, it is concluded that ergo anything that is not primitive cannot be attributed to the founder, one makes a logical mistake. There are no premisses to base this conclusion on. (de Vogel 1966: 11)
Ma ei ole veel Burneti teksti lugenud, sest kohtasin varakult arvamust, et ta on üsna kallutatud. Varsti, tho.
In 1915 A. Delatte published his important study on Pythagorean Literature. It was followed, in 1922, by his Essai sur la politique pythagoricienne, and at the same time by a detailed examination of the sources of the Life of Pythagoras by Diogenes Laertius. Delatte's studies are still of fundamental importance as inquiries into the sources. (de Vogel 1966: 11)
Kahjuks keelebarjääri taga, aga märgin üles sellegipoolest: Etudes sur la Littérature Pythagoricienne (Delatte 1915), Essai sur la politique pythagoricienne (Delatte 1922a) [Internet Archive] ja La vie de Pythagore de Diogène Laerce (Delatte 1922b) [Internet Archive].
Finally Delatte clearly recognized the social-political character of Pythagoras' activity in Croton. He examined the Pythagorean political writings that have come down in the name of Archytas and others, found that the tradition regarding the speeches attributed to Pythagoras by Iamblichus goes back to reliable fourth-century sources, and that their contents have parallels in the earliest-known Pythagorean texts or those that are related to Pythagoreanism (Archytas and Alcmaeon). He assumes that the essence of the contents of these speeches goes back to early Pythagoreanism and argues for the authenticity of the work Περὶ νόμω δικαιοσύνας attributed to Archytas. (de Vogel 1966: 12)
Iamblichus vb ei fantaseeri ja liialda nii palju kui filosoofia-ajaloolased arvavad.
Almost twenty years were to pass before, in another part of the world, attention began to be devoted to this aspect of early Pythagoreanism, in the studies by K. von Fritz (New York 1940) and E. L. minar (Baltimore 1942), which both were concerned with early Pythagorean politics. These scholars clearly recognized that our knowledge of the social-political aspect of early Pythagoreanism is based on a solid foundation. Von Fritz included the archaeological material of the coins in his investigation of the literary sources and he subjected Kahrstedt's results to a critical examination. But for him, too, 'Pythagorean politics' is a separate chapter, obviously [|] standing apart from philosophy. Minar concludes from the same material that Pythagoras was 'rather a shrewd politician', an aristocratic reactionary at a time of rising democracy - and that all this had nothing to do with philosophy. (de Vogel 1966: 12-13)
Von Fritz on juba lugemisjärjekorda lisatud. Minariga on see paha lugu, et teda ei saa kuidagi kätte. Tuleb raamatukogudevahelise laenutuse kaudu tellida, aga nii vanade raamatutega on seda paha teha - vb laguneb kätte võttes koost (ühe 1951. aasta raamatuga mul juhtus nii ja see oli päris traumeeriv).
In a later study, published in 1922, Rostagni dealt with the four speeches attributed to Pythagoras in Iamblichus V.P. Struck by a certain similarity of ideas between the Pythagoras speeches and Gorgias, he found that the notion of καιρός, which had such an important place in the thought of the rhetor of Leontini, was of Pythagorean origin and apparently goes back to Pythagoras himself. Moreover, Rostagni defends the theory that Pythagoras actually was the founder of the art of rhetoric, as stated by Iamblichus, an assertion which till now has hardly been taken seriously. This study of Rostagni deserves careful attention, especially as it seems to have been little read. (de Vogel 1966: 13)
Vau. Tõepoolest huvitav värk. Philip näiteks on 180°ree; vastupidisel arvamusel: "The whole Pythagorean tradition is non-rhetorical until we come down to Apollonius of Tyana" (Philip 1966: 142). Itaalia keelt on iseenesest kerge (lihtsam kui prantsuse keelt) ümber trükeldada ja tõlkemootorist läbi lasta, aga kahjuks pole allalaetav: Rostagni, Augusto 1922. Un nuovo capitolo nella storia della retorica e della sofistica. Studi italiani di filolofia classica 2(1-2): 148-201 [Dialnet]
Lenormant's work is written in a different style: it is not written as a 'technical' treatise, with precise references to sources, but as a literary work. Nevertheless the whole picture of Pythagoras and his school drawn in those pages is based on a careful and thoroughly critical study of the literary, archaeological as well as topographical evidence. Moreover, Lenormant's results are on no account so different from Rostagni's as the latter's rather fierce rejection of his French predecessor's work would suggest. (de Vogel 1966: 13, fn2)
Viidet ei anta, pidin minema ise otsima: Lenormant, François 1881. La Grande-Grèce: paysages et histoire. Paris: A. Lévy.. [Google Books] - Huvitav tegelane, kelle teoseid on ka inglise keeles, a la Chaldean Magic: Its Origin and Development (1877), Medes and Persians, Phoenicians, and Arabians (1871), The Serpent Myths of Ancient Egypt (1873), jne.
There was a clear reaction against the one-sided philosophical treatment of Pythagoras and early Pythagoreanism immediately after the second world war. It came from two sides: (1) in O. Gigon's work, Der Ursprung der griechischen Philosophie (1945); (2) in Werner Jaeger's Theology of the early Greek philosophers (1947). These two authors have rightly pointed out that the pre-Socratic philosophers were by no means so exclusively natural philosophers as Aristotle's name οι φυσικοί seems to suggest; more particularly in Pythagoras the ethical-religious element must have been considerable. Gigon regards the transmigration of souls as central in Pythagoras' doctrine. He also recognizes its ethical implications and the development of 'cathartics', both in medical and in musical science. (de Vogel 1966: 14)
Jaegeri loengud on juba nimekirjas. Gigon [lg] on toore skännina, millele peab ise OCR-i tegema, saadaval.
Robert Joly, who belongs to the school of Delatte, goes a step further: the speeches date from the fifth century and were written by Gorgias - which in itself is not such a bad idea, for it was indeed typical of Gorgias to write 'speeches by Pythagoras'. However, it might well be asked whether, if he had done this, the speeches would not have come down to us in his name, as is the case with his Helena, Palamedes and Epitaphios. Only a thorough stylistic analysis will enable us to answer the question either in the affirmative or in the negative. (de Vogel 1966: 15)
Misasja? Vana-Kreeklased on mõnikord kentsakad.
Has Guthrie recognized and understood the unity of Pythagorean thought - or, as we may safely put it, of Pythagoras' thought and teaching? One might have expected this. He has clearly seen that for the philosopher of Croton the 'purification' of the soul, a term also used by the Orphics, is attained by study and rational insight, i.e. by understanding the numerical proportions in the universe. Since the cosmic order is a divine order, man has to imitate it in his own life. Guthrie has also clearly recognized that these principles are to be found in Plato: in Gorgias 507 e, in The Republic (e.g. 550 c, 525 b, 527 b, 529 d), and in the Timaeus (47 b-c). He probably would not dissociate the social-political aspect of Plato's philosophy from the core of Plato's philosophical thought. (de Vogel 1966: 16)
Kui see on muidu üleüldine antus, et ettekujutusi Pythagorasest on sama palju kui tema uurijaid ("there are as many answers as there are historians of philosophy" - Philip 1966: 24), aga siin tuleb välja, et põhiline probleem on selles, et enamik keskendub ühele või teisele aspektile Pythagorase-loos (filosoofiale, religioonile, teadusele, poliitikale) ja lahutab osa tervikust viisil, mis nt Platoni käsitluste puhul oleks ettekujuteldamatu.
The first to explore Magna Graecia from an archaeological point of view was François Lenormant. In the second volume of his great work La Grande-Grèce, published in 1881, we find an important and surprising chapter: Crotone et la Pythagorisme. Lenormant is fully conversant with the source material and makes a sensible and sober use both of the archaeological evidence (the coins) and of the historians who go back to the fourth century. The picture he gives of the philosopher Pythagoras and of his cativities in Croton shows precisely that integration of the historical data into the philosophical personality of the thinker which is usually lacking in the accounts given by the historians of Greek philosophy. I do not hesitate to say that in this case the archaeologist has shown a deeper understanding.
I quote the following passage to show how François Lenormant understood the real meaning of Pythagoras' thought."L'originalité de Pythagore, la nouveauté de l'œuvre qu'il osa entreprendre consista en ce qu'il tenta le premier d'embrasser dans un même système tout ce que l'on avait jusqu'alors essayé séparément, de coordonner en une vaste conception encyclopédique puissament enchaînée dans toutes ses parties et déduite de quelques principe fondamentaux, l'ensemble des choses matérielles et morales. Métaphysique, physique, science, religion, liturgie, morale, législation, et politique, la doctrine pythagoricienne englobait tout, ramenait tout à ses principes établissant entre ces choses diverses un lien étroit, les faisant découler les unes des autres, de manière à les concilier, en une sorte d'harmonieuse symphonie à la fois théorique et pratique. Et afin d'assurer le succès de son œuvre, de donner à sa doctrine plus 'defficacité pour rendre les hommes meilleurs, ce qui était son but principal, il eut l'idée véritablement de génie d'emprunter à l'Orient le principe de l'ascétisme, que les Grecs avaient jusqu'alors ignoré, dont ils n'avaient pas compris la force".Quite rightly Lenormant describes Pythagoras' activity not as having been confined to the foundation of a kind of monastic order but as a popular mission: a preaching which was addressed to the population of Croton as a whole and which met with a tremendous response. Thus Pythagoreanism was a real spiritual réveil. It is against this background that Pythagoras' political influence must be seen and understood. Lenormant interprets the historical data better than Kahrstedt and Minar did after him, even better than Von Fritz. (de Vogel 1966: 18-19)
Pmst Pythagoras tõi kõik need erinevad asjad ühte süsteemi ja ühendas teoreetilist ja praktilist harmooniliseks sümfooniaks, mille eesmärk oli inimest parendada. Või, nagu Herakleitos selle kokku võttis: polümaatia.
2. Some dates concerning Pythagoras and the Pythagorean Society [20-27]
Indeed, there is another good reason for doing this: it is improbable that Pythagoras should have undertaken a completely new task in another part of the then civilized world when he stood 'on the threshold of old age'. It is much more likely that he was some twenty years younger when he came to Croton. This entails the correction that he must have been born c. 570 and lived till c. 470 at the latest. This was in fact assumed by Delatte. (de Vogel 1966: 21)
Mis häda on minna 56-aastaselt maailma teise otsa uut elu alustama?
Until the final attack came: the setting fire to the synedrion in Croton. (de Vogel 1966: 22)
Synedrion - "sitting together" - koosistumine.
This account tells us about the division of the land of captured Sybaris: in the absence of Pythagoras the party in power allotted this land only to the propertied class, which caused a violent democratic reaction. This reaction turned, naturally enough, against Pythagoras. "On doit, du reste, dégager la mémoire du philosophe de toute responsabilité personnelle dans cette décision (sc. du Sénat de Croton) aussi blamable qu'insensée. S'il avait été présent, dirigeant lui-même son parti, il est probable qu'il l'en aurait détourné, car elle devait blesser son sentiment profond d'équité, son ferme bon sens et son mépris pour les appétits matériels". Thus François Lenormant in 1881 in 1881 [p. 88]. There are good grounds for his opinion in the texts. It is an interesting counterpart to Minar who regards Pythagoras as a reactionary politician, by no means disinterested in material gain for his own class. (de Vogel 1966: 23)
Njaa, hästi ei kujuta ette, et Pythagoras oleks niivõrd "kasuahne", et neile, kellel juba on, anda juurde.
However this may be, it is a fact that the Pythagorean Society, and consequently the dominant influence of the Pythagoreans on political life in Southern Italy, survived till the middle of the fifth century. The catastrophe mentioned in Polybius II 39, the destruction by fire of the synedrion and the political disturbances throughout Southern Italy can be assigned with certainty to that period. Lysis, who is named as one of the two survivors, lived at this time; the alliance coins, proof of the hegemony of Croton, at this time give way to coins belonging to the various cities themselves. (de Vogel 1966: 24)
Pütaagorlased kestsid umbes pool sajandit pärast Pythagorase arvatavat surma. Teine tuleroast pääsenud pütaagorlane oli Archippus (Iamblichus V.P. 249-250; Porphyry V.P. 58).
Are we to suppose that a group did escape after all, and that they fled to Sicily and settled in Rhegium later on? Archytas, however, who in 362 was head of thegovernment in Tarentum, can hardly have been born by 450. It is not improbable that this is another instance of chronological confusion, and that the departure of the Pythagoreans from Southern Italy mentioned by Iamblichus in this context, did not take place until towards the end of the fifth century or the beginning of the fourth century. (de Vogel 1966: 26)
Kandsin nüüd Archytase ka ajajoonele (see äpp raudselt mõne aasta pärast juba täielikult tasuline või juba uksed sulgenud).
In any case a group of Pythagoreans seems to have survived the catastrophe in Croton, for our text continues: "And assembled at Rhegium they stayed there together". Then follows an unfinished [|] sentence: "In the course of time, however, and when the political situation deteriorated" ... This is immediately followed by the list of prominent Pythagoreans whom Aristoxenus knew. Among them there is at least one well-known to us: Echecrates, the companion of Phaedo, who was present at Socrates' death as a young man of perhaps 18. (de Vogel 1966: 26-27)
"We recall that in Plato's Phaedo the other person of the dialogue is Echecrates, a Pythagorean of Phlius, where the dialogue is set; and that most of "the last Pythagoreans" whom Aristoxenus claims to have known (D.L. 8.46) are from Phlius." (Philip 1966: 186)
Von Fritz adduced as a decisive argument in favour of the later date that in the years immediately preceding the conquest of Southern Italy by Dionysius I (388) there must have been an atmosphere of political threat in these regions, which will have forced the Pythagoreans to a large-scale exodus. This event would then have to be dated about 390. He finds a confirmation of this dating in the fact that it is precisely in these years (shortly after 390) that the Πυθαγορισταί make their appearance in Attic literature, which points to an invasion of Pythagoreans "of a somewhat less aristocratic type, who live in extreme poverty". These arguments seem convincing. If things did happen in this way we must suppose that Philolaus left earlier. (de Vogel 1966: 27)
Ilmuvad välja meie vaesed, räpased, paljasjalgsed taimetoitlased pütaagorlased.
3. The survival of Pythagoreanism after the fourth century B.C. [28-51]
In any case these texts give no support to the otherwise attractive hypothesis of Holger Thesleff, that Pythagorean schools continued to live on in Southern Italy, that they flourished there in a cultural isolation, and produced a whole literature of school texts, written in the Doric of Archytas, in the course of the third and second century. (de Vogel 1966: 28)
See on ahvatlev hüpotees tõepoolest, aga kirjanduse põhjal ei tundu väga tõenäoline. Neljanda ja teise sajandi pütaagorlaste - ehk varajaste pütaagorlaste ja neopütaagorlaste - vahel justkui haigutab kuristik.
Are there any archeological data which contradicts this tradition? Of importance in this connexion is C. Láscaris Comneno and A. Manuel de Guadan's study entitled Contribucion a la historia de la diffusion del Pitagorismo, which appeared in the Revista de Filosofia del Institutio Luis Vives 15 (1956). H. Thesleff is of the opinion that this study proves the continuation of Pythagoreanism. (de Vogel 1966: 28)
Hispaaniakeelne ja ei leia üles. Samadelt autoritelt ilmus samal aastal Intento de reconstrucción de una escuela pitagórica: a propósito de una estátera de Melos [SIIDCA]
If the occurrence of coins with pentagram in certain places in Southern Italy, Samnium and Etruria can be considered as evidence for [|] the existence of Pythagorean centres in such places, then it would seem that the necessary proof has been found. The question which must be asked, however, is whether these pentagrams - which occur from time to time, as well as many other decorative motifs, on the coins of the above-mentioned places - can indeed be ascribed to Pythagoreans. (de Vogel 1966: 28-29)
Njaa. Mingi nurga alt vaadates näib pentagrammi (mis oli väidetavalt pütaagorlaste salasümbol ning tähistas tervist ja abielu) muutumine "satanistlikuks" sümboliks nagu kristliku kultuuri ürgmälu lahvatus. Umbes, et paganatest, kelle maailmapilt ja ideoloogia võistles varakristlusega, konstrueeritakse hiliskristluses iseenda antitees või mingi tehislik vaenlane. Võiks olla huvitav lugemine - Jan Schouteni The Pentagram as a Medical Symbol (1968).
In this view Pythagoreanism, after Archytas, would have lived on in Tarentum and surroundings. What precisely are 'the cities of Southern Italy', where around the middle of the 3rd century most writings of group II were composed? - Apparently the places known of old around the Ionic Sea: Metapontum, Croton, Caulonia, perhaps also Rhegium. Which others? We could not say. (de Vogel 1966: 30)
Naiss, just täna lugesin Encyclopædia Britannica 4. köitest Caulonia kohta. Ühtlasi ainus siinnimetatutest, millest ma varem ei ole mainimisi märganud. Seal vermiti münte, millele oli kirjutatud ΚΑΥΛ.
Cicero [Cato Maior 39-41] has Cato tell that as an adolescent in Tarentum, where he was the guest of the loyal pro-Roman Nearchus, he heard a speech by Archytas cited about voluptas corporis being the most pernicious human passion. Nearchus heard these words of Archytas from older people. In the Laelius, another speech of Archytas is cited about man's need to have someone to share his joy with. These passages do suggest that Archytas gave 'addresses' to a wider circle, comparable with the speeches attributed to Pythagoras in Croton, and show that the memory of these lived on in the local tradition. That is certainly interesting, but it does not prove the existence of a Pythagorean school at Tarentum, either in Archytas' days or a century later as a continuation of this. (de Vogel 1966: 30)
Kehalised naudingud on taunitavad. Seda, et Archytas samuti pidas avalikke kõnesid, pole ma varem kohanud (samas ei ole tema kohta üldse midagi väga konkreetset veel lugenud). De Vogel keskendub tugevalt retoorikale.
This latter possibility is improbable, because among the Pythagoreans the pentagram and other geometrical figures were a strictly esoteric character. It should be noted that Croton itself in the time of the Pythagoreans never had coins with a pentagram or a geometrical figure like the square divided into triangles. (de Vogel 1966: 33)
Postitustele raamatutest ja peatükkidest mille pealkirjad on stiilis "Pythagoras ja pütaagorlased" annan ma pealkirjaks "Autori Πυθ." (e kellegi käsitlus pütagorismist), et neid oleks kergem tuvastada. Kui ma annaksin käesolevale postitusele A Title'i, siis see siin oleks võitja.
Also in Diogenes Laertius 'Zalmoxis' appears as Pythagoras' slave. Further details are not given. He knows nothing of a connection with the Druids. However, we know the Thracian Salmoxis from Herodotus: here, too, the tradition is reported that he served Pythagoras on Samos and later as a free man returned to Thrace, where he preached and later as a free man returned to Thrace, where he preached the doctrine of immortality. Herodotus, however, rejects this story on chronological grounds: he is of the opinion that Salmoxis lived long before Pythagoras. Porphyry neither mentions Zalmoxis nor the Druids. (de Vogel 1966: 35)
Zalmoxise lugu on tõepoolest kahtlane.
There is perhaps also in all this some lingering notion of the association of the German word Drudenfuss with 'Druid'. Unjustly so. The word has nothing to do with Druids, but with Drude: in Southern German and Austrian popular belief in a Drude is a female ghost who causes nightmares. That an apotropeic power is ascribed to the pentagram against these and other evil spirits, as is also found in Goethe's Faust, might be a distant echo of the meaning that this gometrical figure had for the early Pythagoreans: the early Pythagorean [|] symbol would have found its way as an apotropeic sign from late Antiquity through the Middle Ages and the Renaissance to the so enlightened eighteenth century. (de Vogel 1966: 35-36)
Täpselt sama mõte, mida arutlesin ülal.
It is true that in the middle of the first century B.C. Pythagoreanism was coming into vogue in Rome, but, as appears from Cicero and from an unambiguous passage in Gellius, more in the cultured upper class than as a popular belief. The so-called Basilica at the Porta Maggiore - supposed that it was a Pythagorean place of worship - is definitely not older than the first century A.D., and it must be assumed that in the generations between (there were at least two) a rapid development took place. In the middle of the first century B.C., however, Pythagoreanism was as yet not a popular religion the symbols of which could have been imported by soldiers. (de Vogel 1966: 36)
Tean neopütaagorlastest veel nii vähe, et see on minu jaoks uus informatsioon.
As for Moderatus, he lived in the second part of the first century A.D., under Nero or the Flavii. It is true that in accordance with ancient usage we call him Moderatus of Gades, but this does not in the lesat mean to say that he always lived there. Rome was then the centre of culture and it is not improbable that it was here that Moderatus received his intellectual training, just as he apparently also trained pupils there. (de Vogel 1966: 39)
Kandsin ta eluaja oma ajajoonele. Viimastest sündmustest 400 aastat lahutatud.
When compared with the Roman denarii of L. Papius where the pentagram appears as a symbol of the builders, the emblem of the Gouda surgeons reveals to us the difference between the Roman coins of the first century B.C. and the 17th century symbolism in Holland: in Rome the pentagram appears as a geometrical figure, serving as such to symbolizing the builders; at Gouda it proves to be the symbol of health. In the first case the use of the pentagram has nothing to do with Pythagoreanism at all, in the latter case it has - and even more directly than the pentagram as an apotropeic sign or talisman. We must remember that in the 16th century Greek texts such as Lucian's were read and printed, and the symbolism of classical forms was cultivated by the humanists. No doubt the pentagram as a symbol of health is a 16th century renewal of the Pythagorean identification mentioned by Lucian in his treatise In defense of a slip of the tongue in greeting. (de Vogel 1966: 46)
Veel üks väike ajaline hüpe.
The passage is interesting enough to be cited. The disciples of Pythagoras, the author says, never began their letters with the usual greeting formula χαίίρειν or with the less usual one of εὖ πράττειν (which was preferred by Plato in his Third Letter); they always began with the formula ύγιαίνειν. For this was in their opinion the most suitable thing you could wish a person, both for the well-being of the soul and of the body. "Indeed the pentagram, the triple intersecting triangle, [|] which they used as a token serving to recognize the members of their sect, they called Health". (de Vogel 1966: 46-47)
Öelda "tervitus" või "tee head" (do well) asemel "tervist!" on pütaagorlik.
4. The testimony of coins with regard to early Pythagoreanism [52-57]
The appearance of the oldest coins in S. Italy has been connected with the arrival of Pythagoras. The argument for this ran as follows. The introduction of coins in a country marks a very important step in its economic and, taken in a wide sense, its cultural development. Now we see that this highly important event in S. italy took place exactly at the time when Pythagoras must have settled there. He came there from a country which was culturally and economically far in advance of Italy, and in Croton he soon acquired a position of great authority. Is it not then an obvious inference to assume that it was he who induced the inhabitants of Croton and later on those of the surrounding places to introduce coinage? (de Vogel 1966: 52)
Võib olla kokkusattumus.
Trogus (Justin XX 2) says with a certain emphasis that the Metapontines were the oldest: we are informed that the Trojan horse was constructed at Metapontum. As a proof of this the iron tools with which the work was accomplished, were shown at the temple of Athena. The power and wealth of Sybaris were famous everywhere in Antiquity and left their trace in ancient literature. According to Diod. X 23, Sybaris had overwhelming power when it came into conflict with Croton. Cf. Diod. XII 9. Also T. J. Dunbabin, The Western Greeks, Oxford 1948, p. 356 f. (de Vogel 1966: 54, fn6)
Sellest johtub siis ka omadussõna, "sübariitiline" (~hedonistlik).
5. The testimony of historians and biographers about Pythagoras and early Pythagoreanism (1) [58-59]
According to Justinus' account the there Achaean colonies - Metapontum, Sybaris and Croton - attacked the Ionic colony of Siris, at that time a rival of Sybaris. Locri chose the side of Siris. This support resulted in an attack by Croton on Locri. The Crotonians marched with enormously superior forces against the much smaller Locri - according to Justinus more than 120.000 on the side of Croton against 15.000 Locrians -, but contrary to all expectations they suffered a crushing defeat at the river Sagra at the hands of the Locrians who fought with the courage wrought out of despair.
The ancient sources only relate the story that the Locrians, fearfull of the superior power of Croton, asked Sparta for help and that the Spartans, who quite understandably were unwilling and not in a position to go on an overseas expedition, sent the Dioscuri to their rescue. It is related to how they travelled with great ceremony on the ambassadors' ship to Locri and how they were seen up to the end of the battle dressed in scarlet and on white horses. (de Vogel 1966: 58)
"Before that battle, the Locrians sent to Sparta for help. The Spartans' hands were full, but they solemnly sent the Dioscuri, in a ship, with envoys and crew. The Dioscuri disembarked at Locri, fought on the side of the Locrians - on white horses, in scarlet cloaks - and were instrumental in defeating the greatly superior forces of Croton." (Philip 1966: 161)
The fact that Pythagoras settled in Croton was no doubt not due to chance, but it was a deliberate choice. We may assume that Pythagoras, who was then in the prime of life and who had already for many years taught in his native city, came to Southern Italy with definite views: views on the structure of the universe, which he recognized as a divine order, views also on the nature of man and his place in the universe, and finally views on his own task and calling. What these views were is made clear to us in broad outline by the ancient sources. They are unanimous. All show us Pythagoras as a man who, because of his views on the cosmic order, felt called to form and lead a human community in order to teach people to take their appropriate place in the cosmos. With this purpose in mind Pythagoras will have wanted to settle in a large population centre of such political structure that it was not a priori cut off from new ideas, and of such a spirit that it was not too tied by material interests. At that time Sybaris was the largest and most powerful city in Southern Italy. It is clear why Pythagoras did not make his way there. Immediately after Sybaris in importance came Croton - Croton that was shaken and humiliated by the heavy defeat in the battle of the Sagra, and by these very circumstances was perhaps more open to a strong spiritual leadership than at a time of unbroken prosperity. Other places were much less important: Locri was much smaller and moreover a Doric, highly self-contained city; Tarentum, later an important place, was in the background at that time. Hence it is easy to understand in every respect why Pythagoras went to Croton. (de Vogel 1966: 60)
Tõepoolest veenvad asjaolud.
He brought the people of Croton back from luxury to sobriety. And this is what the ancient historian considers was Pythagoras' real and great achievement: not the formation of a circle of students of mathematical science, like a modern scholar with radically new insights and inner strength for winning over young people to a certain field of investigation succeeds in gathering around him first an audience and later fellow workers; nor the formation of an idealistic religio-ethical brotherhood, a kind of 'congregation' living according to a rule. [|] Pythagoras did do all that. He undoubtedly inspired young people to work on mathematical, musicological and astronomic problems; he founded his 'Brotherhood' let us say the Societas Pythagorica (S.P.) - an organisation which does indeed, at least in Iamblichus' description, impress us as being of a highly monastic character. And this is what distant posterity, to which we ourselves belong, is still being told about Pythagoras in more or less detail, more or less documented, more or less illustrated by handbooks and monographs. But for the ancient historian the real achievement of the philosopher Pythagoras was something else: it was precisely that about which our historians of ancient philosophy are silent: the education of the people of Croton as a whole. (de Vogel 1966: 61-62)
Sellest siis rõhk tema avalikel kõnedel Krootonisse saabudes: ta sai asutada oma "vennaskonna", sest ta oli oma õpetusega veennud kogu linna.
In other words: whereas elsewhere the teaching of Pythagoras is clearly and repeatedly described as being esoteric, the historian tells us that esoteric teaching in the S.P. was by no means the be-all and end-all of Pythagoras' activities. Pythagoras also addressed the wider circle, and not just once in a kind of propaganda-speech, to acquire followers, but in a systematic education of the people. That he devoted himself personally to this, is for the ancient historian the most impressive aspect of his activities. (de Vogel 1966: 63)
Seepärast vb üllatas informatsioon, ülal, et ka Archytas võib-olla pidas avalikke kõnesid kogu linnale. See vist ei olnud Kreeka linnades tüüpiline?
Diodorus expresses himself in rather vague, rhetorical terms, when he says (X 3):"His speech was so convincing and so elegant that almost the whole city turned to him daily: the whole population flocked together to hear him, as if it was for the appearance of a god. And not only did he show himself as a great man as to the power of speaking, but he also showed a moral character of great firmness and stability and for young people a wonderful example of a life of self-discipline, and he would keep those with whom he came in contact from extravagance and from luxury."Despite from their rhetorical form these few lines make it sufficiently clear that Diodorus goes back to the same tradition as Trogus: he, too, regards Pythagoras not in the first place as the founder of the S.P. and the leader of a closed circle. It is his activities before the people of Croton as a whole that are mentioned in the first place. (de Vogel 1966: 63)
"They spread the story, and told everyone his name, which they learnt from the servants. Those who heard wanted to see the stranger, and that was easy, for his appearance was such as to strike awe into those who saw him, and made them aware of his true nature." (Iamblichus 1989: 15) - Tagantjärgi tunduvad üha tähenduslikumad pütaagorlikud ütlemised, mis puudutavad kogu linna. A la "For harmony indeed is the virtue of the world; equitable legislation is the virtue of a city; and health and strength are the virtue of the body. Each of the parts likewise in these things is co-arranged on account of the whole and the universe." (Hippodamus 1818: 147)
As for Porphyry in V.P. 18, he talks about Pythagoras' activities in Croton, for which he refers to Dicaearchus: he reports in the first place about his impressive physical appearance; then also his extremely pleasant voice, and furthermore his charming and good character. (de Vogel 1966: 64)
Kõik kiidavad, et Pythagoras olevat olnud ilus mees.
The theory, which forms the background of this view, originated in 19th century Germany, and hence spread all over Europe: it supposes that Dicaearchus who, in reaction to Aristotle's exclusive ideal of the βιος θεωρητικός, claimed the supremacy of the βιος πρακτικός, created the figure of the socio-political Pythagoras as a projection of his own ideal of life. (de Vogel 1966: 65)
Tuttav muusika. "Both E. Rohde and Zeller held this theory. They were followed more recently by Werner Jaeger and many others." (ibid, 65, fn2) - nagu nt Philip (1966: 140-141).
We may be short on this theory: it is refused by the fact that, two generations before Dicaearchus, the four speeches of Pythagoras were [|] cited by Antisthenes, when he commented on the first line of the Odyssea, as an example of πολυτροπία. Therefore, let us go on taking the historical evidence as it lies before us. (de Vogel 1966: 65-66)
Boom.
The ancient historian shows us a Pythagoras different from the one we used to imagine. From the dimness behind the σινδών which hid him from the uninitiated he now appears in the open. This presents him to us as a completely different person; we see him as a pastoral preacher, as a man who was aware that he had something to say to everyone, young and old, men and women, great and small; not just to an intellectual élite, but to everyone without exception. (de Vogel 1966: 66)
Loor.
As against this we must point out that according to the ancient sources there was indeed a direct education of the people by Pythagoras, and secondly, this education was not so much concerned with political influence, but with character training in a social context, with 'Sozialpaedagogik', as it was called by the Marburg philosopher Natorp; or if one wishes to express it in other terms: it was a kind of mission. (de Vogel 1966: 68)
Eelnev rõhutas, et Platon oma Akadeemiaga mõjutas avalikku haridust kaudselt, just nagu Pütaagorlaste koolkond, aga erinevalt Platonist ja Aristotelesest tegi Pythagoras seda ka otseselt, Krootonlasi alatasa vooruslikkusele hurjutades.
6. The testimony of historians and biographers (2). The speeches in Iamblichus [70-147]
The regulations for honouring gods and parents, as a primary human duty stated with the greatest emphasis, are well known to the readers of Plato's Laws and the Memorabilia of Xenophon. It is worth while reading and comparing the passages concerned. These are Plato, Nom. IV, 715 e 7 - 718 a 6, and Xen., Mem. II 2.
Plato begins with the gods. "God has the beginning, the end and the middle of everything that is in his hands", thus begins the Athenian in his speech to the supposed citizens of the city about to be founded, and he added that the Divinity "according to Nature completes his circular course going straight on". (de Vogel 1966: 71)
Jumala käes on algus, kestus ja lõpp.
Instructions follow which are in their formulation purely Pythagorean:"If one honours the chthonic gods after the gods of Olympus and the gods of the city, he will perfectly fulfil the requirements of piety when offering to these gods the even, the less good and the left part of the sacrifice, but to the gods of Olympus and of the city the uneven, the best and right hand part of the sacrificial animal. And after having made sacrifices to [|] these gods the sensible man will make sacrifices to the demons and after these to the heroes" (717a 6 - b 4).(de Vogel 1966: 72-73)
Tõepoolest nagu otse Kuldvärsside algusest. "About even - uneven, left - right, see the συστοιχία in Aristotle, Met. A 5, 986a 15ff." (ibid, 72, fn3)
"For it is only right that we should pay our first and greatest obligations, the oldest of our debts, and that we should believe that all we possess and have belongs to our parents, who have brought us up, to place it at their disposal for their support to the best of our abilities, first of all our material possessions, then our physical strength, and thirdly our spiritual wealth, repaying them for the care and trouble they devoted to us when we were young, repaying them when they are old and in their old age are in great need of support." (717 b 6 - d 6).So much for Plato in the Nomoi. (de Vogel 1966: 73)
Justkui triaad mu lemmikanekdoodist: (1) maine vara, (2) kehaline tugevus, ja (3) vaimsed rikkused. Inimesed lähevad Olümpiamängudele (1) oma asju müütama ja rikastuma, (2) võistlustel osalema, et teenida au ja kuulsust, või (3) filosofid lähevad sinna vaatama, mis kirjandust sissepääsu juures müüakse.
There is just one text which might seem to support the thesis that he must have criticized the poets rather severely, namely, the passage of Hieronymus of Rhodes, cited in Diogenes Laertios VIII 21, where it is said that, "when he had descended into Hades, Pythagoras saw the soul of Hesiod bound fast to a brazen pillar and squeaking, and that the soul of Homer hung on a tree with serpents writhing about it, this being their punishment for what they had said about the gods". No doubt this much is true, that Pythagoras did select certain passages from Hesiod and Homer as particularly fitting for education, while probably he dropped certain other passages as not suitable to that purpose. But that he condemned Homer and Hesiod as greatly guilty, does not square so well with what we know for certain about the important place of these poets in early Pythagorean education. For the rest there is no indication that Pythagoras ever criticized the poets in an aggressive way, or even that his allegory took a clearly apologetic form. (de Vogel 1966: 80)
"There is mention even of a descent into Hades." (Zeller 1881: 340) - Lugu on tuttav, aga ma ei ole varasematest lugemistest talletanud muud arutelu ega alternatiivset tõlget.
Now there is certainly a profound affinity between Platonic and Pythagorean thought, not least in the practical field. Yet Plato formed his ethics in a different way; his doctrine of virtue(s) has a different appearance, and even where he speaks of divine sanctions - which is not at all exceptional with him: it is done, for instance, in quite an improssive form in the Gorgias myth and in the myth of Er - the setting is rather different and the emphasis is on the life hereafter. (de Vogel 1966: 84)
Ma ikka veel ei väsi kogumast selliseid üldisi väiteid platonismi ja pütagorismi sarnasusest.
And education is by its nature so important that, whereas of the other things that are usually praised some are not transferable from one person to another - such as physical strength, beauty, health, courage - and others when given away are lost to the former owner - such as wealth, position and many other things that we pass over here -, education can be passed on without being lost to the giver himself. (Iamblichus c. 43)(de Vogel 1966: 89)
Alles nüüd kolmandal (!) lugemisel märkan triaadi. Clarke'i tõlke lugemisel isegi talletasin selle kirjakoha (vt Iamblichus 1989: 17), aga ei märganud seda enam-vähem ainsat asja, mida ma justkui alati märkan: (1) rikkust ja ametikohta saab ära anda ja kaotada, teisele inimesele üle anda, (2) füüsilist jõudu, ilu, tervist ja julgust ei saa teisele inimesele üle kanda, aga (3) haridust [tarkust, teadmisi, filosoofiat, jne] saab teistele inimestele edasi anda ilma ise seda kaotamata!
First let us take Plato. It is obvious that no similar recommendation of παιδεία is found anywhere in his works. Nonetheless, since it will be useful to have in mind how he used to speak about παιδεία, I will cite a few passages.
(1) Phaedo 107 d. The soul goes to Hades possessing nothing but its παιδεία καὶὶ τροφή, and this is esteemed either to be of the gretaest help to it or of the greatest harm at the very beginning of that journey: (108 a 6) for the soul which is κοσμία τε καὶ φρόνιμος follows its attendant genius quietly and without resistance; the soul that is full of bodily desires, howveer, is παιδεία by its new surroundings and resists violently.
This passage clearly brings out that for Plato παιδεία, just as φιλοσοφία, implies a moral κάθαρσις, and a detachment from the body and [|] its desires, and this as the result of an intense intellectual life, directed towards what is called in the PhaedoRep 509 d-511) νοητά (de Vogel 1966: 90-91)
Ma ei leia nüüd kirjakohta üles (tekst, mida loen, pole otsitav), aga toon välja, et se "quietly and without resistance" kõlab väga sarnaselt ühele siin esitatud katkenditest, kus esines tervelt kaks korda mõistepaar humility ja self-discipline.
Here, as in the Phaedo passage, παιδεία denotes the result of παιδευθῆναι, which, if practised in the right way, leads to a state of inner purity and detachment from the body and earthly things, a state on which eudaemonia evidently depends. For Plato the way in which to attain such a state was both by training the body and the intellect; the latter by means of mathematical thinking as a preparation was directed towards the contemplation of pure νοητά. (de Vogel 1966: 91)
Kõlab õige natuke nagu budism. Sisemise puhtuse kohta ei oska veel midagi arvata, aga lahtiütlemine (1) maistest asjadest ja (2) kehast vastavad anekdoodi-triaadile.
When we compare this with our psasage in Iamblichus, the remarkable difference is, in the first place, that in Iamblichus παιδεία is introduced only after social conduct, including regard for older persons, and the inner harmony of the soul (φιλία and σωφροσύνη) have been dealt with. Separated from those virtues παιδεία appears to be used here particularly of the training of the intellect: it is defined as an ἄσκησις τῆς διανοίας, διάνοια being 'the faculty by which we deliberate about the other things'. (de Vogel 1966: 91)
Siin avaneb võimalus, et ka need vastavad eelnevale mustrile: (1) vanemate inimeste austamine on seotud maise varaga - rikkust päritakse, (2) hinge sisemine harmoonia on samuti asi, mida ei saa ära anda või üle kanda, (3) vaimu treenimine - haridus.
(Ad 2). Isocrates' summons to the trining of the intellect (διάνοια) found in AD Demonicum 19 is followed by elaborate advice about how to behave in social life in order to be successful. What we find there are things like this: (1) Be friendly in your dealings with people you meet, easy in your manner of addressing them, and affable in your replies; (2) Be pleasant to all, but intimate only with the best; (3) [|] Avoid frequent intercourse with the same persons, and long talks about the same subjects; (4) Train yourself to endure hard work; (5) Be sober in all those things whose sway over the soul is felt to be a shame; (6) Be silent about secrets, and trust only the good ones; (7) Do not swear an oath, except to save either your own honour or the life of your friends; etc. etc. (de Vogel 1966: 94-95)
Väga äge. #2 on isegi faatiline. Selle kohta tahaks lähemalt lugeda. "To Demonicus" on George Norlini tõlke 1. köites. (Kahjuks ainult 2. ja 3. köite ilusad värvilised skännid on internetiarhiivis üleval; lg-s on mustvalge.)
Here it is not rhetorical training that is referred to, but theoretical-scientific culture. This is Pythagoras: he taught his pupils τὰ μὲν ἐἐξ ἱστοριῶν - things which he himself had heard from others (in Babylon!), τὰ δὲ καὶ ἀπὸ δογμάτων - and also things he had worked out for himself. For that which was discovered by those in former times who excelled in a certain branch of science, has become παιδεία for others. We are the heirs of a spiritual heritage: the acquisitions of others are for us a κοινὴ εὐφυΐα: a kind of natural wealth which is shared by all of us. (de Vogel 1966: 96)
Kultuuriline kapital.
And then there is that comparison between other bona - bodily strength, beauty, health, courage, which one cannot give to others, or wealth and position, which can be given to others but not without losing them oneself - and the gifts of science which can be imparted to others without losing them. One might almost expect: which can be given away, but not without enriching oneself. The idea has an Eastern ring. Might Pythagoras have heard such a saying in Babylon? I consider it very well possible. (de Vogel 1966: 96)
Või siis: (1) "With respect to externals however, wealth, glory, and nobility, are naturally adapted to be attendant on man, and to follow precedaneous goods", (2) "And the good of the body is beauty, health, a good corporeal habit, and excellence of sensation.", (3) "the good of the soul is prudence, fortitude, justice, and temperance." (Archytas 1818: 156-157) - Samamoodi võib kõrvutada Archytase hüvedega (samas, 155), mis on (1) "eligible for the sake of something else, and not on their own account", (2) "eligible for their own sakes, and not for the sake of another thing" ja (3) "eligible both on its own account, and for the sake of another thing". A la (1) raha ei ole iseenesest hea, vaid hea millekski muuks - teda saab ära anda millegi vastu, (2) kehaline tervis, tugevus, ilu ja julgus on head iseenesest, aga neid ei saa üle kanda või ära anda, (3) teadmised, tarkused, aga ka meelekindlus, õiglustunne, mõõdukus jne on head iseenesest ja neid saab teistele edasi õpetada ilma neist ise ilma jäämata.
Festugière, who in 1954 spoke at the First Congress of classical philologists at Copenhagen about the theme of the three βίοι basically shares Jaeger's view. It is true that in an earlier work he pointed to the remarkable fr. 910 of Euripides in which that man is praised as being 'blessed' who dedicates his life to the contemplation of the 'ever young order of immortal Nature'. As others did before him, Festugière sees in these verses a reference to Anaxagoras who in those years lived in Athens and who apparently to his own contemporaries incorporated the ideal of the βίος θεωρητικός in the same way as he did to a later generation. Nonetheless Festugière thinks that it was Plato who gave its peculiar meaning to the term philosophy, since it was Socrates and Plato who first opposed the soul as a superior being to the body and matter. Festugière's contribution to the Copenhagen congress shows that in this he did not differ essentially from Jaeger. In the expositions of both scholars Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans are equally lacking. (de Vogel 1966: 97)
Kahju. Esmapilgul tundus huvitav - just see, mida jälitan (oma lemmikanekdoodi mõju). Euripidese fragmendi tõlget saab kaeda siin. Festugière, André-Jean 1958. Les trois vies. In: Festugière, André-Jean (ed.), Acta Congressus Madvigiani, Vol. II: The Classical Pattern of Modern Western Civilization: Formation of the Mind, Forms of Thought, Moral Ideas. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 131-174.
The second argument: Zeno of Elea wrote a book entitled Against the philosophers. This must have been directed against the Pythagoreans, for these were from the beginning the opponents of the Eleatics. - This argument is also interesting. It does corroborate the first argument. (de Vogel 1966: 98)
Lahe.
For the present it may be noted [|] that the recent study by W. Burkert, Platon oder Pythagoras, on the origin of the word 'philosophy' does not seem convincing to me. Burkert discusses the question as to whether the anecdote about Pythagoras which Cicero, according to Tusc. V 8, found in Heraclides Ponticus is ancient or not. He thinks that Heraclides has here put ideas of Plato's into the mouth of the old Pythagoreans, and contends that fifth-century word usage argues against the word φιλόσοφος already being used by Pythagoras or his followers. (de Vogel 1966: 99-100)
Philip (1966: 186) jättis mainimata, et Cicero käsi oli ka siin mängus.
(c. 47) It was not seemly for the councillors, (he said), to use the name of any of the gods in vain, for swearing an oath: they should use such words that also without swearing an oath they would be trustworthy; and they should rule in their own homes in such a way that their political dicisions could bear comparison with their private lives.We have here in the first place the theme of simplicity and consistency, concord and harmony in personal life: your words should be simple and trustworth. In politics the same principles must be applied as in family life. (de Vogel 1966: 110)
Linna ja majapidamise analoogia, mis tuleb esile ka Thomas Taylori kommentaaris: "The seventh tetractys is of communities; of which the principle indeed, and as it were monad, is man; the duad is a house; the triad a street; and the tetrad a city. For a nation consists of these." (Taylor 1818: 238)
Those who wish to achieve honour, he said, will not fail to attain their goal if they do as the victors in races: for they, too, do not do their opponents any harm, but they do wish to be victorious themselves. Likewise it is also fitting for political leaders not to be resentful towards those who contradict them, but to help those who listen to them.[.|.] The passage about the striving for honour centains the following ideas.(de Vogel 1966: 118, 120)
- φιλοτιμεῖσθαι as such si not condemned, but certain conditions are imposed, buth as far as its method and as far as its object are concerned.
- The method: in striving for honour one must not harm one's opponent. The fairness in sports competitions may serve as an example.
- The same applies to political life.
Kahtlaselt sarnane sellega, kuidas Sokrates vaidleb õigluse kohta Politeia 1. raamatus: õiglus ei saa olla see, et sa teed sõpradele head ja vaenlastele halba, sest vaenlastele halba tegemine teeks neid halvemateks ja ebaõiglasemateks inimesteks; see, kes teeb vaenlasele halba, ei saa olla õiglane inimene, sest see tähendaks, et õiglus sünnitab ebaõiglust; järelikult see ei ole õige õiglus. Konkreetne sarnasus on analoogiates: see, kes soovib saada au sisse, peaks toimima nagu võidujooksu võitjad: mitte tegema oma vastastele halba (nt mitte panema kaasjooksjale jalga ette või teda müksama või lükkama), aga tahtma olla ise võitja, st pingutada rohkem kui teised (kaasvõitlejatele jala ette panemine jne ei ole auväärsed tegevused, neist ausalt kiiremini jooksmine on). Näen siin sarnasust sellega kuidas Sokrates argumenteerid Politeia 1. raamatus, et nt arstid sihivad selle poole, et patsienti võimalikult hästi ravida, aga mitte nt teiste arstidega võistelda, kes ravitseb paremini.
Giving good advice was according to traditional popular wisdom a religious duty. This is why Hesiod wrote the verses:"Whosoever digs a pit for another falls into it himself;Iamblichus mentions it among the Pythagorean ἀἀκούσματα, in the category of the τί πρακτέον: "And to him who asks your advice you must only give the best; for advice is holy". This can be found as a proverbial expression throughout Antiquity. Pythagoras emends this old precept with a 'But I tell you: Advice is holy, but prais is holier - for the first is only applicable to humans, while the latter much more has its function with regard to the gods.' (de Vogel 1966: 114)
bad advice is worst for him who has given it".
Vanasõna "Kes teisele auku kaevab, see ise sisse kukub" on tõepoolest väga vana (Hesiodose tegutsemisaeg oli 750-650 eKr). Nähtavasti läheb see edasi: "halb nõu on halvim sellele, kes seda annab". St halva nõuande andmine maksab iseendale kätte. Pythagoras parandab ütlust: Nõu andmine on püha, aga kiitus on püham veel - nõu antakse ainult inimestele, aga kiitus toimib rohkem jumalate suunas. Siin on implikatsioon, et jumalad ei vaja inimeste nõu; küll aga võivad inimesed jumalaid takka kiita kõige eest, mida nad niigi juba teavad ja oskavad - näen teatud ähmast sarnasust selle seletusega, mida Platon nii sageli andis filosoofia mõiste määratlemisel: inimene võib olla vaid tarkuse-armastaja, sest ainult jumalatel on täielik tarkus.
In the wisdom of the seven Sages καιρός is found repeatedly. Solon says: "Seal your words with silence, and your silence with καιρός". And Bias: "By καιρός you will have εὐλάβειαν": a good hold of things. Pittacus admonishes laconically: "Know your time" (καιρός), and Chilon declares: "All good things belong to καιρός".
With respect to this folk wisdom, Pythagoras did the same as he did with the religious tradition - he adopted it, but not without putting his stamp on it. He rationalized it by giving it a place in his mathematically ordered cosmic system: hence the definition καιρός = seven, a number which for Pythagoras - and for many after him - denoted a period of maturity in human life as well as in the cosmos as a whole. (de Vogel 1966: 115)
Pütaagorlikus astronoomias peaks päike olema nr. 7 (kuu nr. 8, Maa nr. 9) (vt Philip 1966: 113). Ritter annab nr. 7 sümboolseks tähenduseks "opportunity" e võimalus; samuti Burkert, kes lisab, et see on sümboliseerib ka Ateenat kui "neitsilik" primaararv (?) (vt 1972: 467-468) . Siin jääb mulje, et καιρός on "õige hetk" või "sobiv hetk" või "kriitiline hetk" vms mille suhtes tuleb olla valvas: Iamblichus c. 49 algab "And he urged them to banish idleness from their actions" (samas, 112), st tuleb kogu aeg tegutseda ja olla tähelepanelik, et tabada õiget hetke. De Vogeli joonealune märkus seostab seda ka eluaja seitsmeaastasteks osadeks jaotamisega ("birth at seven months, cutting of teeth at seven months after birth, puberty at 14, maturity at 21", samas, 115, fn 6).
What should in particular be emphasized is: that for Pythagoras καιρός is rooted in a cosmic-ontological order, whereas for Gorgias this background is completely absent. This makes for a radical difference; for it implies that for Pythagoras καιρός had its place within a τάξις and as such is of a rational-ethical character, whereas for Gorgias, where there is no such foundation, a complete irrationality remains. (de Vogel 1966: 118-119)
Kosmilis-ontoloogiline korrastus.
Τάξις is such a specifically Pythagorean concept, that the similarity of background should be obvious. Can it be proved that there is continuity here? I would say that, even if we cannot prove it, it is not improbable that there was some connection. Early Pythagorean ideas could for example have found their way into the Old Stoa by way of the Early Academy. (de Vogel 1966: 119)
Korrastus on väga pütaagorlik.
This aspect of early Pythagoreanism can be denoted by the modern term situationism, however with this restriction that for Pythagoras the 'situation' was morally and rationally determined, as appears from Iamblichus, V.P. 180 f. By this situationism of Iamblichus' Pythagoras, Rostagni was reminded of the Dissoi Logoi. Here we do indeed find ourselves knee deep in situationism: the same thing is for some a good, for others an evil, and for the same person sometimes a good and at other times an evil. The writer agrees with this standpoint and illustrates it with numerous instances. When speaking about justice and injustice he argues that lying and deceiving under certain circumstances are justifiable,; so are stealing the possessions of friends and inflicting violence on them, making slaves of people, house-breaking and perjury. Even robbing temples and murdering one's next-of-kin is under certain circumstances δίκαιον. This work which, in view of an allusion to recent events, can be dated shortly after the Peloponnesian war, was first edited by Henricus Stephanus as a Pythagorean text, no doubt chiefly because it is written in the same Doric as a number of Pythagorean texts. Up to the nineteenth century it was considered as such. It was especially Berkg who pointed out the sophistic contents of the work, which according to him was alien to early Pythagoreanism. And this view has up to the present been generally accepted. Rostagni expressed his disagreement with this: sophistic ideas were, he considered, not alien to early Pythagoreanism; on the contrary, it was here that they had originated. There is a straight line running from Pythagoras to Gorgias, and the Dissoi Logoi, too, can be conceived as an extension of early Pythagorean thought. (de Vogel 1966: 120)
Väga huvitav värk. Just mõnikümmend minutit tagasi sj sain teada, et Platoni töid nummerdatakse Henricus Stephanuse 1578 väljaande järgi (Wikipedia). See Dissoi logoi on tundmatu autoriga. Argument meenutab jällegi Platoni Politeia 1. raamatu arutelu, kus Sokrates lükkab ümber Cephaluse õigluse-määratluse, mille järgi õiglus seisneb tõe rääkimises ja võlgade tagasimaksmises, kuna see ei oleks õiglus kui sa laenad oma tervemõistuslikult sõbralt mõõga, aga siis ta läheb hulluks ja nõuab seda tagasi ning sa annadki; ja kui sa annad oma hullunud sõbrale mõõga tagasi, siis see ei oleks õiglus rääkida talle kogu tõde, kus tema naised ja lapsed tema eest ennast peidavad.
It is not the sophists, but Socrates and Plato who judged and guided human action in this spirit: when they teach that the just man shall never act unjustly in any situation, not even by way of retribution, they speak in the spirit of Pythagoras. (de Vogel 1966: 121)
Täpselt seda pidasingi ülal silmas.
Returning to Iamblichus V.P. 49, we find that the statement that the greatest crime is to separate children from their parents, follows organically on to what precedes. As to the principle itself, that it was well-known in Southern Italy in those days as being a basic Pythagorean rule of life, appears from Iamblichus, V.P. 262 where, after the catastrophe of 450, the principle is said to have been used ironically against the Pythagoreans themselves. Moreover, it should be observed that this is another topic on which Plato's educational views differed greatly from Iamblichus' Pythagoras: for Plato considered it to be the right thing that among the rulers and the guardians of his ideal state nobody should know his own children. (de Vogel 1966: 122)
Tõepoolest diameetriliselt vastanduvad mõtteviisid. De Vogel üritab järjepidevalt osutada välja kohti, mis võiksid tõestada, et Iamblichuse tekst sisaldab autentseid eelsokraatilisi taakasid ja ei ole neopütaagorlikud-neoplatonistlikud väljamõeldised. Ma saan sellest aru, aga see siin ei ole küll väga veenev, sest Iamblichus võis täiesti vabalt nt mitte hoolida väga Platoni Politeia-nägemusest vms.
(c. 51, 2) They must not start to insult others, and (if others abused them) they must not defend themselves against the offenders. [...]The first point in 'boys' virtue' appears for [Pythagoras] to be πρᾳότης: the boys are in the first place exhorted not to be aggressive in their speech, and not even to give up their gentle bearing when abused by others. This is nothing other than an application of φιλία, ὁμόνοια and σωφροσύνη to the age and character difficulties of boys. (de Vogel 1966: 125)
Turn the other cheek. Allpool kokkuvõte sellest punktist: "Never to be abusive, not even to defend oneself against abuse." (ibid, 138)
The formulation τοὺς ἄλλους ὁπόσα ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εὐφημήσουσι for "being careful that others speak little of them and in so far as they say anything about them, nothing ill" is brachylogic, but clear enough and correct. The strangeness of the expression probably does not point to a late hand, but rather to a certain archaism. (de Vogel 1966: 133)
Define:brachyologic - "1. Brevity of speech; conciseness. 2. A shortened or condensed phrase or expression." - Ei saa aru, mis mõttes; kas see soovitus ise on brahhüoloogiline või see ütlus soovitab naistel olla brahhüoloogilised. Objekti- või metatasand? Konstruktsiooni kummalisuse kommentaar viitaks metatasandile, aga samas on kõnede kokkuvõttes see punkt antud kui "Speak little and well" (ibid, 139).
But there is more. The Ecclesiazousae were performed in Athens in 392. Now this was exactly the same time as a stream of Pythagoreans leaving Southern Utaly under the threat of Dionysius' aggression came into, or had just arrived in, central Greece. In the light of these events the text of Aristophanes spoken on the Athenian stage in 392 appears aparticularly meaningful: it refers to the text of one of Pythagoras' speeches, and apparently this text was read and discussed by the people of Athens at that very moment, having been newly introduced by the Pythagoreans coming from the West. (de Vogel 1966: 135)
Jälle otsisin kõik oma postitused läbi, aga ei leidnud, kus ma olen varem näinud arutlust Aristophanese Assemblywomen'ist ja pütagorismist.
Pythagoras having 'ordered' the speech of man and invented 'names', credits him with more than we can verify: surely, we can hardly call him the inventor of language. What is meant by this praise? Apparently Pythagoras is credited with a decisive importance for the knowledge of language and the use of words. This tradition has probably some basis. What it will mean is that Pythagoras was the first in his school who thought about language philosophically. The acousma reported in Iamblichus V.P. 82 points in this direction. τί τὸ σοφώατον; - ἀριθμός δεύτερον δὲ τὸ τοῖς πράγμασι τὰ ὀνόματα τιθέμενον. How should we interpret the neuter here? Probably as referring to human reason. Reflection on language and 'names' was apparently a feature of early Pythagoreanism from the beginning. In this sense we can agree with Rostagni, who found the beginnings of rhetoric in the school of Pythagoras. (de Vogel 1966: 136)
"Pythagoras korrastas inimkeele ja leiutas nimed" ei ole tõesti väga veenev, aga pütaagorlased asuvad - nii palju kui ma olen sekundaarkirjandust sirvinud - Cratylus-e küsimuses sellel poolel, et sõnade tähendused on motiveeritud.
We may start from the fact that Pythagoras spoke to the wider circle of the population of Croton, and that he spoke to four categories. This fact has a solid historical foundation, just as solid as anything else that is assumed to be known about Pythagoras and early Pythagoreanism on the basis of Aristotle's account, or even it is perhaps better founded; for mention of the four speeches was made half a century earlier, viz. by Antisthenes. This can be proved. According to the Scholia on Odyssey 1, vs. 1, Antisthenes explained the term πολύτροπος as: able to speak to people in different ways. He illustrates this with the example of Pythagoras: "for it is said that, when invited [|] to speak to the children, he composed speeches in a child-like style for them (λόγους παιδικούς), for the women speeches adapted to women, for the archons a speech in archontic style (λόγους ἀρχοντικούς), and for the young men speeches in a style suited to young men" (ἐφηβικούς). It is characteristic of wisdom, Antisthenes declared, to be able thus to adapt one's words to everyone. This is πολυτροπία λόγου, a varied use of the words. On the other hand, it is a sign of ignorance to be able to express oneself in one way only. (de Vogel 1966: 140-141)
Keeleline mitmekesisus (heterogeensed kõnestiilid) kui intelligentsuse märk. Antisthenes (445-365 eKr) oli Gorgiase ja seejärel Sokratese õpilane ja vb küünikute koolkonna rajaja.
7. The testimony of historians and biographers (3): Further data [148-191]
Porphyry tells the story of Simichus, the tyrant of Centuripae, a small town not far from Catania. Pythagoras' tecahing made such an impression on him that he gave up his rule and divided his possessions between his sister and his fellow-citizens. This story is only found in Porphyry. However, he is not in the habit of adding gifments of his own imagination to the existing tradition. In any case the story is characteristic of the spirit of early Pythagoreanism and of the way in which, according to the tradition which existed in these regions in the fourth century B.C., the influence of Pythagoras extended over Southern Italy and Sicily. (de Vogel 1966: 149)
Veel üks lugu, mille kohta mul ei ole seni kogunenud mitte mingit materjali.
It will be useful to consider for a moment where exactly we get if we strictly follow the above line of thought. As a starting point we may put forward this thesis: "we only know fourth-century Pythagoreanism". Conclusion: ergo we know nothing about Pythagoreanism in the sixth or even fifth-century. We may then say: all we know about Pythagoras is that he believed in the transmigration of the soul and that at an early date a legend of miracles grew up round him. Not any scientific doctrine, mathematical or astronomical, can be attributed to him on any solid basis of fact, nor can any system of philosophical thought legitimately be called his. (de Vogel 1966: 153)
Kui me ei usalda neljanda sajandi allikaid Pythagorase kohta, siis me ei teagi tema kohta midagi rohkem kui nood 5 tüüpi 5. sajandist ütlevad oma vähestes fragmentides.
Erwin Rohde considered it 'eine alberne Geschichte' and because of the silliness of the story he readily ascribed it to Apollonius. Yet, is it not a story which is characteristic of the mentality of these people? Time was of no account to them; when they had given their word, to be faithful to it went without saying and was absolute; these sober Greeks had very few material needs. True, one can hardly imagine any modern Western European who would sit patiently waiting on a seat for almost twenty-four hours on end. But an early Pythagorean could do this as if it were the most ordinary thing in the world, - and on top of it not become angry when the next day the [|] other said to him: "One of the gods must have inspired me with this forfgetfulness as a touchstone for your faithfulness in keeping appointments"... (de Vogel 1966: 157-158)
Lysis istus terve öö templi kõrval kivi peal ja meenutas, mida ta eile ja üleeile tegi. Võib-olla isegi mida ta mõned päevad varem tegi. Või palju nädalaid tagasi. Jne.
Also the term ὡρισμένον (in 8) is reminiscent of the fourth century: it is one of Plato's terms from a late phase of his thought. But, again, one must not forget that this late-Platonic thought presupposes early Pythagorean philosophy, where πέρας and ἄπειρον took the first place in the συστοιχία. (de Vogel 1966: 158)
Ma ikka veel ei väsi kogumast selliseid üldisi väiteid varajase pütagorismi ja hilise platonismi sarnasusest.
Of the other side of the Pythagorean φιλία we hear in Iamblichus V.P. 259, where it is said that the Pythagoreans revered their friends as if they were gods, but tretaed 'the others' like beasts, and 'had no esteem whatsoever for others'. It is obviously an enemy who is speaking here: it is the annoyed tone of the outsider who does not [|] recognize that to a Pythagorean animals are not at all an object of contempt. What is in fact at the bottom of this annoyed reaction we can learn from the injunction reported sub (9), which also occurs word for word in Porphyry: the Pythagoreans were taught to be very reserved with respect to people with other principles and not too rashly strike up a friendship with persons who would turn out to be unworthy of it. This does not exclude the principle that their benevolence (φιλία in the wider sense) extended to everybody and that they were expressly taught never to take up an aggressive attitude. They must have been gentle and humane people towards everyone. (de Vogel 1966: 158-159)
Meenutab kangesti Kuldvärsside algust, "Ülejäänud inimkonna hulgast vali parimaks sõbraks keegi, kes paistab vooruslikuna silma ja kuula tema hüva nõu ning järgi tema eeskuju" (6-7). Võib eeldada, et "vooruslik" on siin samaväärne pütaagorlike põhimõtete järgi elamisega.
It should not be objected - as Guthrie rightly remarks - that Plato very rarely mentions Pythagoras by name and that Aristotle always speaks of the Pythagoreans'; no one doubts that Plato knew Pythagorean philosophy as an old and, to him, venerable school-tradition. The ancient philosophers think in 'schools' more than we do and only rarely quote by name. Once again, Aristotle in particular often speaks of 'the Platonists' without further specification if he means a particular man, even Plato himself. (de Vogel 1966: 164)
Aristoteles viitas koolkondadele rohkem kui üksikutele mõtlejatele. Ühel ilusal päeval imestavad teadurid, kuidas me praegusel pimedal ajal, mil enamus maailma teadmistest on ikka veel tõlkimata ja kättesaamatu, oma autorinimede, avaldamisaastate ja leheküljenumbritega hakkama saime - mismõttes ainult tervel dokumendil on DOI kood? Iga grafeem ei olegi ära indekseeritud?
The notion that the soul in its essence is related to the heavenly bodies which are divine beings is found in Pythagoras' circle, with Alcmaeon of Croton. With some variations the thought returns in numerous later authors. First of all we have Plato, who teaches in the Timaeus that man's higher soul is made of the same substance as the star-souls, and that each individual soul comes from a particular star to which it will return. Aristotle apparently still shared this doctrine in the comparatively early Περὶ φιλοσοφίας. In Heraclides of Pontus we find the doctrine that the souls before incarnation stay on the Milky Way. (de Vogel 1966: 166)
Kiviaja-inimene Briti komöödiasaates Ghosts mõtleb samamoodi. Võib-olla selle vahega, et tema valib ise tähe välja, et lahkunut mälestada.
Aristoxenus ap. Stob., Ecl. IV, 1,49 says: "It was their opinion that one ought to look after each period of life; that schildren ought to exercise reading and writing and other subjects, that young men should train in the customs and laws of the state, that men should be busy with activities and service for the public good, and old men with purely mental work, with the law, with advice and with all sciences, so that the children may not be dumb, the young men not like children, that the men may not behave like youths and the old men may not be lacking in wisdom." (de Vogel 1966: 168)
Pole üldse paha see neljaosaline eluaja-jaotus. Igaüks neist on 20 aastat. Seepärast oli Pythoni võitnud ~16-aastane Apollon enne Pythagorase kõnes veel "laps". 33-aastane on veel "nooruk". Alles 40-aastane on juba täismees ja 60-aastane saab vanameheks.
Censorinus, De die natali 7,2, has a passage showing that Hippo of Metapontum, who lived in Athens around 425, adhered to the doctrine of the special force of the number seven. He was known as a Pythagorean. With him however, the number ten also has acquired a special meaning. (de Vogel 1966: 159)
Ja ongi kõik. Rohkem ma tasuta asju ajajoonele ei saa lisada. Pean mingi vabavaralise ajajoone-tarkvara välja otsima.
The doctrine of hebdomads in Diocles of Carystus, also adopted by the Peripatetic philosopher Strato, is more old-fashioned. This doctrine is mentioned by Nicomachus of Gerasa, Theol. arithm. p. 46 f. Ast, and by Macrobius in Somn. Scip. I 6, 65 ff. Roscher thinks that they have used Posidonius' commentary on the Timaeus. Here we find the following. [.|.] After 7 years the child gets teeth and speaks correctly. Puberty starts after 2 × 7 years, growth of the beard after 3 × 7 years; after 4 × 7 years the body's growth is complete, also in width. The apex of physical strength is reached at 5 × 7 years of age. This lasts until the age of 6 × 7 years, after which follows a decline, though not immediately observable. For that reason most states do not call up men for campaigns after 42 years of age, never after 49. Finally, 70 years is the end term of life. Thereafter one ought to be free of all (physical) labours and devote oneself entirely to the enjoyment of what (by Aristotle) is called εὐδαιμονία. Macrobius expresses this in the words: ab omni officio vacuus soli exercitio sapientiae vacat. (de Vogel 1966: 169-170)
35-42 on parim iga. Kummalisel kombel sobitub informatsiooniga, et kui enne 35-aastaseks saamist suitsetamine maha jätta, siis pole vahet kui kaua sa tubaka orjuses olid, ei pruugi kopsuvähki tekkida. Pärast 35. eluaastat suitsetades on aga suurem tõenäosus ja nukram lugu.
Truly this is not the only place where saws and thoughts attributed to Pythagoras remind us of Socrates in Plato's dialogues. As an instance may be cited the Socrates of the Crito who mentions among the precept that he has given others throughout his life and that still hold true for him the one "not to heed the judgment of the masses, but only the judgment of the expert." And again, we may take Socrates in the Protagoras and in the Gorgias trusting only the expert, while vigorously opposing the sophists who pretend to be able to speak 'well' about any subject. This similarity should not induce us to invert the sequence and to suppose that 'apparently' Socrates (or Plato) was the earlier and that what we read in Iamblichus is nothing but the 'projection' of a later period. We should learn in more than one respect that expressions and notions which we first encounter in Plato are in fact of early Pythagorean origin. (de Vogel 1966: 175)
Ei väsi, ei väsi. Jutuks on sümbol "Not to walk on highways" (ibid, 160, fn 2), mida tõlgendatakse kui ära usalda rahvamasside arvamust, vaid usalda ainult asjatundjaid. Aga saab ka otsesemalt tõlgendada:
Porphyry who says he is following Diogenes here (in this case probably Antonius Diogenes) adds to the first warning: 'and to avoid intercourse with the masses'. This piece of advice - later found e.g. in Seneca's Letters to Lucilius - fits in well with the Pythagoreans' withdrawn style of life. They practised a kind of 'apartness' with respect to the majority of the citizens in whose midst they lived. Compare the description of the Pythagorean day in Iambl. V.P. 96-100, and the 'apartness' with which the political club of Three Hundred is reproached in Iambl. 254, the end. (de Vogel 1966: 175)
St pütaagorlased hoidsid sõna otseses mõttes "rahvamassidest" (crowds) eemale. Porphyry V.P. 32 räägib sellest, kuidas Pythagoras eelistas maksimaalselt 1-2 kaaslasega jalutada templis või pühas metsasalus, igal juhul kõige vaiksemates ja meeldivamates kohtades.
The negative attitude of Diels-Kranz with respect to the Archytas-tradition probably still derives from the deep-rooted German school dogma which denies any social-political activity on the part of Pythagoras. Their inability to explain someone like Archytas is quite consistent with this premiss. (de Vogel 1966: 177, fn 1)
See on täitsa võimalik. Hoian edaspidi silmad lahti selle eelarvamuse suhtes kui jälle mõnda sakslast loen.
Thymaridas of Tarentum, a Pythagorean, once set out upon a journey. He was seen off by his friends. When he had boarded the ship they gave him their best wishes, one of them in this form: "May the gods grant you every desire, Thymaridas!". But Thymaridas rejected this with an indignant εὐφήμει and emended it to: "May I desire everything the gods grant". (de Vogel 1966: 183)
Mitte, et su soovid läheksid täide, vaid, et see, mis läheb täide, oleks see, mida sa soovid.
8. Pythagoras and Plato [192-217]
The close relationship between Plato and the Pythagoreans has - entirely apart from the enquiry in the previous pages - long been clear. The following points of contact might be mentioned.(de Vogel 1966: 192)
- The doctrine of thes oul and the hereafter (Apology, Crito and Phaedo; eschatological myths of the Gorgias and Republic X).
- The arrangement of soul and cosmos in the Timaeus.
- The microcosm-macrocosm idea in Phaedrus 270c.
- The τάξις principle in Gorgias 506 d, the principle of geometrical identity (in Gorgias 508 a and in the Republic); the double μετρητική in the Politicus (284e-285c). Cf., too, the definition of health in Gorg. 504b.
- Number, the beginning of all philosophy, can be known through contemplation of the hevaens (Timaeus 47a-c).
- Πέρας and ἄπειρον as first principles in the Philebus (24a-25b).
- The identification of Ἕν and Ἀγαθόν in the ἄγραφα (Aristoxenus, Harm. II, p. 30 Meib.).
Rõhutasin neid, mis on mulle praegu vahetult ligemad (millega tegelen lähiajal).
It is no longer necessary to show that the eschatological myths in the Phaedo, the Gorgias and Republic X have an Orphic-Pythagorean background. The doctrines of the immortality of the soul, of the rewards and punishments after death, and of a periodic reincarnation originate there. Certain details, such as the description of the spindle of Ananke in the myth of Er, show distinct Pythagorean traits. But [|] these images are not onl ypresent in the myths. They form now and again a visible background in the Apology and in the Crito; the Phaedo is full of them. (de Vogel 1966: 192-193)
Väga huvitav. See Paratamatuse Vurr tundub esmapilgus üsna kõle värk.
The second point likewise needs little argumentation after the work of Taylor, Cornford and Guthrie. That the World-Soul is divided according to harmonic intervals brings us back to Pythagorean theory. That the circles of the planets are fitted into the framework of the circles of the Same and the Different, which are the World-Soul's elements, is doubtless Plato's adaptation. But again, sthat the planets are the heavenly clock, the movements of which are the measure of time, was a Pythagorean theory. (de Vogel 1966: 193)
Päikesesüsteem on üks üüratu kellavärk.
In the Gorgias (506d) virtue is derived from τάξις or κόσμος. An 'orderly life' is given the epithet σώφρων; 'the desires must not be without curb'. For a man who tries to satisfy his desires without restraint cannot be loved either by man or by the Divine: he is asocial, and where κοινωνία is lacking, φιλία cannot exist. "And the wise men say, Callicles, that heaven and earth, and gods and men are kept together by κοινωνία and φιλία, by orderliness, self-restraint nad justice; and, my friend, this is why they call the Universe cosmos, not lack of order and restraint. But it seems to me that you don't pay any heed to these things though you are a clever man, and that it has escaped your notice that geometrical equality has great power both with the Gods and with men. Yet you are of the opinion that onee ought systematically to try and gain more than the other. The reason is that you don't pay attention to geometry".
It is clear that the Wise men referred to are the Pythagoreans. Their cosmic and universal thought is used by Socrates-Plato as the very basis of the doctrine of man's social existence just as they had always done themselves. Human virtue must be an imitation of cosmic harmony; the principle of order implies restraint of desires and therefore unity, justice, inward peace and happiness. Thus the Pythagorean ethic inspires Plato's social ethic; we find its elaboration in the Republic finally confirmed in the Laws. (de Vogel 1966: 194)
Platoni sotsiopoliitiline teooria ehitub pütaagorlikule eetikale, mille keskmes on korrapära, enesevalitsemine ja õiglus - geomeetriline võrdsus. Kõige ilmsem on siin teistest rohkema omandamine, omakasu püüdlemine.
The principle of geometric equality, which not only occurs in this place in the Gorgias but is a leading principle in the Republic where democracy is branded as the greatest injustice since it wishes to apply an arithmetic equality, may be found in Archytas, fr. 2. (de Vogel 1966: 194)
Väga huvitav. Archytase tõlge tuleb lugemisjärjekorras ülespoole bump-ida.
From a few passages in Aristotle and a very clear passage in Aristoxenus we also know that in his late years Plato identified the determining principle, that he called The One, with The Good, the ultimate principle of the Republic.
One might perhaps be inclined to add the entire program of mathematical studies for philosophers-to-be in the Republic. For were not these four mathematical disciplines - arithmetic, geometry, musicology and astronomy - of Pythagorean origin? No doubt they were studied in Pythagoras' school and, what is more, had they not been introduced by him, as they were by Plato, for a 'cathartic' effect? Were not mathematics studied in the school of Pythagoras as a kind of cleansing of the soul and a contact with the higher, a divine reality? (de Vogel 1966: 196)
Platoni suhtumine matemaatilistesse valdkondadesse on sarnane. Mitte sama, aga sarnane.
So much for the well known points of agreement and more or less clear influence on Plato. As a result of the preceding discussion we have to add something that has not so far been noticed. It is no less than the fact that Pythagoras appeared to be Plato's example in an essential and classical element of his philosophy, viz. the basic thought [|] that the divine order manifesting itself in the cosmos likewise establishes the standard for Man and the social order; from which he concludes that the philosopher who has an insight into this order has been called to lead human society. In Plato's view a school of philosophers fulfilling its natural function would educate politicians. This is what he wished to realize in his Republic and later in his Laws. His Academy was in fact a place where lawgivers were schooled. But this was not a new concept: something which has seemed for a long time to be Plato's proprium was in fact long before him the proprium of Pythagoras. (de Vogel 1966: 197-198)
Väga hästi öeldud. Ühtlasi üks põhjustest, miks Politeia on just see Platoni dialoog, millest ma alustan oma tutvust tema töödega - see näib minu jaoks, kes ma ei kuulu Saksa traditsiooni ja ei eita pütaagorlaste seltsi poliitilisust, kõige loogilisem samm.
Nor should one be misled by the fact that Plato in the Laws gives as proofs of the existence of the Divine (1) the fact that the soul is superior to all bodily objects and as cause of motion is cause of the process of coming-into-being, and (2) the fact that the orderly element in the courses of the heavenly bodies presupposes a Noûs. (de Vogel 1966: 198)
Siin on huvitav joonealune märkus viimasele väitele: "Thus first Lutoslawski in 1897. He has found several followers in recent years." (ibid, 198, fn 2) - Wincenty Lutosławski-l on respektaabel eestikeelne Vikipeedia-artikkel, sest "Ta sai mõjutusi Gustav Teichmüllerilt" ja "Tema esimene töö Platonist valmis Tartus magistriväitekirjana"! See teos, millele de Vogel siin tõenäoliselt viitab, on tema inglisekeelne The origin and growth of Plato's logic; with an account of Plato's style and of the chronology of his writings (1905[1897]) [Internet Archive]
But in Laws XII 965 bc it appears that those who have supervision in the state as depicted in The Laws must be able "to look away from the many and unequal to the one Idea". Is this passage in the late works of Plato to that extent isolated? Passing over the Timaeus, what are wo to think of the passage such as Philebus 59 a-c, where the opposition of 'eternal Being' and the world of constant change and coming -to-be is again present, as much as e.g. in Republic V 479a-480, and Timaeus 27 d 5-28a? (de Vogel 1966: 199)
Jäädvustan need kirjakohad, millele mul tuleb millalgi erilist tähelepanu pöörata. Ka väga huvitav joonealune märkus: "The author [H. Görgemanns] takes the view that the Laws were a more or less popular work written for a wider circle." (ibid 199, fn 2) - See kõlab natuke justkui Politeia oleks Platoni Puhta mõistuse kriitika ja Seadused tema Prolegomena igale tulevasele metafüüsikale.
But all this is more or less a parenthesis aiming at a clear stand over and against an incorrect modern interpretation which seems to lose sight of the fact that Plato's philosophy was, and remained to the end, a metaphysic of the transcendent. In Pythagoras himself one might say that the problem of transcendence versus immanence was hardly raised, if at all. Up to a point this is so, but only up to a point. It must be said that in his search for the final ground of being he has stopped too soon. The mathematical number as such already has the θεῖον. And even after many centuries one finds this inclination towards an immanent metaphysic in 'Neo'-pythagorean texts. We are then in a period when the ultima principia of the older Plato have long been fused with the ancient Pythagorean πέρας and ἄπειρον. (de Vogel 1966: 200)
Hakkab juba üle minu pea minema. Vaidlused selle üle kas pütaagorlased olid idealistid või materialistid või midagi hoopis kolmandat, neile eelnevat, ei ole väga tulemuslikud andmete puudumise tõttu.
There is a passage in Stobaeus, Ecl. I, p. 21 (Wachsmuth), which says that Pythagoras when comparing the numbers with the Gods called the One Apollo, the Two Artemis, the Six Gamos and Aphrodite, the Seven Kairos and Athena, Eight Poseidon and Ten Panteleia. Delatte, Litt. pyth. p. 196, has ascribed this passage to Moderatus, the two preceding passages being fragments of Moderatus as well (fr. 1 and 2 in Mullach II p. 48). (de Vogel 1966: 200, fn 1)
Kuhu jäid 3, 4, 5 ja 9?
But Justinus, De monarchia 2, quotes the following passage of 'Pythagoras':εἴ τις ἐρεῖ. "θεός εἰμι", παρὲξ, οὗτος ὀφείλει"If someone, apart from one (who really is), says 'I am God', he ought to put before us a world equal to this one and say 'This is mine'. Nor ought he merely to put it before us saying 'This is mine', but he should himself inhabit the world he has made. For this world (the one existing now) has been made by Him (who is God)". (de Vogel 1966: 201)
κόσμον ἴσον τούτῳ στήσας εἰπεῖν "ἐμὸς οὗτος".
Kui sa oled jumal siis loo üks maailm, siin ja praegu, ja astu sinna sisse. - Midagi, mida Rick Sanchez, kes ütleb, et jumalaid ei ole olemas, saab teha; aga mida Kanye West, kes ütleb, et tema on jumal, ei saa.
Plato had, in his later years, identified the Ideas with numbers, as Aristotle repeatedly says or indicates. Elsewhere I have discussed at some length what exactly was the meaning of this identification. Two points must be kept in mind:The Ideal numbers were not the ultimate principles in Plato's thought of the later years: they presupposed, as was very well seen by Ross, a final determining and a final undetermined principle. Plato called the former Ἕν and the latter ἄπειρον or the 'undetermined dyad' (ἀόριστος δυάς). He also used for the undetermined principle the term 'the Great-and-Small'. What precisely was meant by this curious term becomes clear from the passage of Hermodorus in Simplicius cited above. Plato thinks of the ἄπειρον in which there is no determining factor as continually oscillating between two extremes, great and small, long and short, narrow and wide, etc. It never stops (it is ἄστατον), but moves eternally without determination (ἐν ἀκρισίᾳ τινι φέρεσθαι).
- The 'numbers' with which the Ideas are identified were no mathematical numbers, but rather their archetypes which were thought to exist in the realm of transcendence. Their distinction from mathematical numbers was made clear: the latter was, as appears from the 'division of the line' in Republic VI [509d-511e] a semi- νοητόν, the Ideal number, on the contrary, was pure νοητόν.
- The identification is probably to be interpreted in this sense that the Ideas, which were infinite in number, were 'reduced to' or subsumed under the ten ideal numbers.
It is clear that Plato with this doctrine of ultimate principles approximated very closely to the Ancient Pythagorean doctrine of [|] πέρας and ἄπειρον. One could even say that they were the same: only the terminology was different - or at least the way in which the Undetermined Principle was indicated differed. (de Vogel 1966: 202-203)
Vau. Platoni arvuteooria on seega lihtsalt edasiarenenud pütagorism.
For Epicharmus whose birth is dated in 530 by L. Beck was of student age when Pythagoras had reached the pinnacle of his fame, and nothing is more probable than that he - East-Sicilian as he was - should go and audit the famous philosopher in Croton. (de Vogel 1966: 213)
"The comic poet Epicharmus, who occasionally alludes to disputed questions in philosophy, appears to have come under the influence of various philosophies, and among them, in particular, of Pythagoreanism. (Ueberweg 1889: 43)
Damascius, a late Neoplatonist of the 6th century, quotes a treatise of Aristotle on Archytas. We do not know this treatise. It is never quoted, which arouses our suspicion. It may be spurious. (de Vogel 1966: 215)
Nimekiri teostest, mida ajamasinaga minna Pergamoni raamatukokku sisse pildistama, muudkui kasvab.
9. Pythagoras and rhetoric [218-231]
But there were several other instances in which the introduction of a term by Pythagoras is specifically mentioned or in which a terminology especially used by the Pythagoreans is in question. I made a note of the following cases.(de Vogel 1966: 218)
- Pythagoras is said to have been the first to use the term κόσμος: Aetius II, 1 (Doxogr. 327,8). Cf. Plato, Gorgias 508 a 3.
- It is said repeatedly that Pythagoras was the first to call his wisdom φιλοσοφία or that he eferred to himself as a φιλοσοφος.
- Iamblichus, V.P. 162 says the term ἐστώ was also introduced by Pythagoras. Compare Philolaus fr. 6: ἁ ἐστὼ τῶν πραγμάτων.
- The word τετρακτύς is mentioned in Iamblichus (ibid.) among Pythagoras' neologisms. We know it as a Pythagorean term from other texts as well.
Nimekiri läheb edasi 17-ni, aga need on vast kõige olusisemad. Mulle on siit valikust uudiseks ἐστώ (éstō), mis on kääne tegusõnast εἰμῐ́ ('to be', 'exist', 'live', 'it is possible'). Ma oletan, et see võib seega olla "saamine".
The term φυσιογνωμονῆσαι for studying a man's face and outward appearance as a σημεῖον of his character is probably Pythagoras' as well. It is mentioned both by Porphyry and by Iamblichus; moreover, it is cited by Gellius as a proprium of Pythagoras. (de Vogel 1966: 220)
"Teaduste nimekirja võttis füsiognoomika Aristoteles oma sellesisulise traktaadiga. [...] Praktikas oli selliseid seisukohti rakendatud juba varem - Pythagoras ei lubanud enda juurde matemaatikat õppima kedagi, kelle näost ei paistnud matemaatilist andekust" (Leinbock 1990: 1481).
It is not our only indication of such an interest. We find repeated mention of the fact that Pythagoras consciously meditated on language as a means of communication: he consciously chose the form of catechistic questions (acousmata) and symbolic indication. Iamblichus discusses Pythagoras' symbolic manner of expression several times and praises its profundity. Porphyry likewise, as we have seen, mentions the symbola as a special category of acousmata. Apparently this manner of expressing oneself was very striking to contemporaries and one may ask whether Pythagoras was inspired to adopt it by his stay in Babylon. I regard that as not improbable. (de Vogel 1966: 220)
Huvitav, aga kahjuks niivõrd üldine, et sellega ei ole eriti midagi pihta hakata.
Because of these studies it happened that the whole of S. Italy was filled with philosophers and that, though previously unknown, i tcame to be called Greater Greece because of Pythagoras. And very many philosophers, poets and legislators were with them. For rhetorical technique and set orations as well as written laws were brought to Greece from them. (Iamblichus c. 166; in de Vogel 1966: 221)
De Vogelil on oluliselt arusaadavam sõnastus kui isegi Clarke'il: "These practices caused all Italy to be filled with philosophers, and to be called Great Greece (though formerly unknown) on account of Pythagoras. Many philosophers, poets and legislators arose there. Rhetorical skills, set-piece speeches, and written laws were taken from these men to Greece." (Iamblichus 1989: 74)
Let us read Iamblichus' explanation in V.P. 130-131.On the basis of this hypothesis (sc. of the mingling of opposite elements and opposite ethical notions) reason obtains its point of departure in either of two directions; there are two motions both of the body and of the soul: the one irrational, the other based on choice.(de Vogel 1966: 228-229)
He symbolized the constitutions in a figure of 3 lines, the ends of which touched. They formed one rectangle; one line contained the proportion 4 : 3, the second 5, and the third in between. When we calculate the proportion of these lines and their squares we obtain the best picture of a constitution. Plato usurped the fame of this discovery since he clearly speaks in the Republic of the base line in the proportion 4 : 3 which is connected with the 5 and which provides two harmonies.
They say that he strove for moderation of the emotions and [|] for the right mean and also that each one personally should make his own life happy with the good he prefers. In short he discovered the choice of what is good for each of us personally and of the tasks that fit us.
See on see katkend (vt Iamblichus 1989: 57-58), mille kohta Clarke ütles "A confusing passage". Praegu loen siit välja, et mõistus võtab oma alguspunktiks (?) neli (4) võimalikku nähtust: (1) tahtlik ja (2) tahtmatu kehaliigutus ja (3) tahtlik ja (4) tahtmatu hingeliigutus. See meenutab väga E. R. Clay The Alternative'i, kust muu hulgas tärkas esmakordselt minu huvi Pythagorase vastu, sest ta eristab alatasa tahtlikku (teadlikku) tahtmatust (alateadlikust) ja nimetab viimast nö ase-nähtuseks; näiteks tähelepanu, mida inimene juhib ja pöörab ise, ja ase-tähelepanu (vice-attention), mida püüavad näiteks värvilised-vilkuvad reklaamid vms linnakeskkonnas; sa ei taha neile tähelepanu osutada, aga nad võtavad su tähelepanu. Küll aga ei näe ma siin keha ja hinge topeldamise mõtet kui neid jooni ja valitsusvorme on 3. Tõenäoliselt on mõeldud ikka nii, et keskelt läheb kuldne kesktee ja ühele poole jääb tahtlik ja teisele poole tahtmatu? On see kesktee siis segu tahtlikust ja tahtmatust? Endiselt confusing.
The doctrine of a rational and an irrational element in the soul is probably old-Pythagorean: that is what the emphasis on internal φιλία, ὁμόνοια and ἀρμονί referred to. There is every reason to accept that this was the original doctrine of Pythagoras which is here translated into a more modern terminology, as appears from the words προαιρετικὴ κίνησις. (de Vogel 1966: 223)
Vähemalt nii paljugi siis.
The term μετριοπάθεια is reasonably young; it is found neither in Plato nor in Aristotle, but is found in authors of the 1st and 2nd [|] centuries and later (Philo, Plutarch, Alexander of Aphrodisias and Porphyry). Μεσότης and its plural is an old-Pythagorean mathematical term: according to Nicomachus, Hippasus knew of three types of μεσότης, arithmetical, geometrical and harmonic. We also hear of it in Philolaus and in Archytas' circle. But in ethics it is an Aristotelian term. Pythagoras used different metaphors in this field, as we have seen. (de Vogel 1966: 223-224)
Kas sel võib olla midagi pistmist aritmeetilise ja geomeetrilise võrdsusega (vt ülal)?
They are the very points that are shared (as Rostagni saw) by Gorgias and Pythagoras' λόγοι: the καιρός-principle, the doctrine that the virtues are many, and everything that pedagogically speaking is connected with these. Rostagni did not see that Gorgias' notion of virtue appears in full in Aristotle, Politica I 5. Nor did he notice that the notion of ἐπιείκεια which, in the shape of aequitas, found its way through Aristotle into present day law, derives from Gorgias. (de Vogel 1966: 226)
Nii palju siis sellest, et Pythagorase voorused on ühtsed - "I owe the suggestion on the unity of the virtues to Anne Shephard" (Clarke 1989: xx, fn 13).
10. Pythagoras and medicine [232-244]
Diodorus [X 7. T 29a] says:His advice was to strive for simplicity, for excess destroys people's possessions as much as their bodies. Most diseases originate from indigestion which in its turn originates from excess. And he persuaded many to live on raw food and to drink water all their lives in order to strive for the truly good.(de Vogel 1966: 232)
(1) possessions [wealth], (2) bodies [strength].
Boyancé (Revue des Études Anciennes 36 (1934)) defended the thesis that this entire passage in [|] Iamblichus (215-219) was borrowed directly from Heraclides Ponticus' dialogue Abaris, but he was not able to argue these later categories and terms away. That is why his otherwise attractive theory - which gives an elegant and convincing explanation of the unhistorical stage-setting of the conversation between Phalaris, the tyrant, Pythagoras and the Thracian Abaris - cannot be accepted without some reservations. (de Vogel 1966: 232-233)
Veel üks huvitav teos mida tuleb minna ajamasinaga otsima.
Edelstein thinks that the Oath dates from the 4th century, no earlier - for we cannot know anything about the Pythagoreanism of the 5th or 6th centuries - no later, for after the 4th century Pythagoreanism fades away, at least as a movement of scholarly importance.
These arguments of Edelstein are unacceptable. It is incorrect to depict Pythagoreanism as flourishing during the 4th century while its pre-history is clothed in impenetrable darkness. The School flourished during the 6th and the first half of the 5th centuries, and if there is still a tradition of Pythagorean forms of behaviour during the 4th century, this is due to the things that were handed down by previous generations. (de Vogel 1966: 241)
See on justkui põhiline tüliküsimus: kas 4. sajandi pütaagorlased olid aktiivsed teadlased ja filosoofid, kes omistasid kõike "talle endale" või oli pütaagorlaste koolkonna kõrgaeg 5. sajandi esimesel poolel ja 4. sajandil nad jooksid Dionysus I eest ära Kreeka maismaale ning said sel ajal laiemalt tuntuks.
Appendix A. On the Babylonian origin of the pentagram [292-297]
In cuneiform texts this sign is usually rendered by 'regions', heavenly 'quarters' or 'directions'. It is often found with the number four. There are four cosmic regions, four quarters of the heavens, and there are four directions: forward, backward, left and right. A Jeremias, Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur, 1929, p. 189f., suggests, since the early Babylonians imagined the universe as being ruled from above by a divine Power, that from four divisions they arrived at five. Thus, to the four directions mentioned above the upward direction could be added. This is illustrated by the Jewish Prayer of the Night: here four of the five directions are connected with the four archangels (Michael, Gabriel, Uriel and Raphael), while the fifth is connected with the Schekina, the emanation of the supreme Divinity. In Babylon the four directions were connected with the planets Jupiter, Mercury, Mars and Saturn. To these four Venus as the 'queen of the heavens' representing the upper world could be added as a fifth. (de Vogel 1966: 293)
Äärmuselt huvitav tõlgendus. Pentagramm tähistab nelja suunda ja viies on jumalate pealtvaate-suund.
Appendix C. On the problem of the sources of Iamblichus, V.P. [299-303]
Undoubtably Neoplatonic are: the ch. 59, 157-160, and 240. (de Vogel 1966: 300)
Jätan meelde järgmiseks lugemiseks (vb John Dilloni oma).
Here the author passes on to the qcqcqc, both in a waking state and sleeping: he says that more than anybody else Pythagoras knew how to lead people to this communion, viz. by healing them from all kind of perturbations of the soul and from ignorance. He healed and purified their soul like a superhuman being and kindled the divine in it, saved it and led 'the divine eye' on to the vision of the intelligible World. For only by this eye the Truth about all things is seen. Raising the intellect towards this level he was always at work on purifying it. (de Vogel 1966: 300)
Võib ehk ühendada ettekujutusega, et Pythagoras võib anda inimesele võime meelde tuletada kõiki oma eelnevaid elusid.
Iamblichus mentions a few other names: Aristotle's work On Pythagorean philosophy (31), Androcydes Π. Πυθαγορικῶν συμβόλων (145), Hippobotus and Neanthes (189), Spintharus (197). He neither mentions Timaeus nor Heraclides Ponticus. (de Vogel 1966: 302)
Veel tellimusi ajarändurile.
0 comments:
Post a Comment