A few notes about the Cynics (and Christianity).
A few notes about the Cynics (and Christianity).
The idea behind this post began with a desire to find out a bit more about the Cynics that are mentioned in the book by Burton L. Mack:
The Book of Q and Christian Origins
Laura http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=1082.msg5035#msg5035 Lost Gospel Revealed; Says Jesus Asked Judas to Betray Him said:
When fully analyzed and compared with other norms of
the time, Jesus emerges as a man living the life of the popular philosophy of the Cynic. This is striking because the Cynics are remembered as distinctly unlovable because they promoted biting sarcasm and
public behavior that was designed to call attention to the absurdity of standard conventions. Cynics were:
The Lost Gospel by Burton L. Mack said:
"critics of conventional values and oppressive forms of government. [...] Their gifts and graces ranged from the endurance of a life of renunciation in full public view, through the courage to offer social
critique in high places, to the learning and sophistication required for the espousal of Cynic views at the highest level of literary composition. Justly famous as irritants to those who lived by the system
and enjoyed the blessings of privilege, prosperity, and power, the Cynics were rightly regarded for their achievement in honing the virtue of self-sufficiency in the midst of uncertain times.
The crisp sayings of Jesus in Q show that his followers thought of him as a Cynic-like sage. [...]
These popular philosophers of a natural way of life did not wander off to suffer in silence. Their props were a setup for a little game of gotcha with the citizens of the town. [...] The Cynic's purpose was
to point out the disparities sustained by the social system and refuse to let the system put him in his place. [...] The marketplace was the Cynic's platform, the place to display a living example of freedom
from social and cultural constraints, and a place from which to address townspeople about the current state of affairs. [...]
The challenge for a Cynic was to see the humor in a situation and quickly turn it to advantage. [...]
In our time there is no single social role with which to compare the ancient Cynics. But we do recognize the social critic and take for granted a number of ways in which social and cultural critique are
expressed. These compare nicely with various aspects of the Cynic's profession. For example, we are accustomed to the social critique of political cartoonists, standup comedians, and especially of satire in
the genre of the cabaret. All of these use humor to make their point. We are also accustomed to social critique in a more serious and philosophical vein, such as that represented by political commentary. And
there is precedent for taking up an alternative lifestyle as social protest, from the utopian movement of the nineteenth century, to the counterculture movement of the 1960s, to the environmentalist protest
of the 1980s and 1990s. The list could be greatly expanded, for much modern entertainment also sets its scenes against the backdrop of the unexamined taboos and prejudices prevailing in our time. Each of
these approaches to critical assessment of our society (satire, commentary, and alternative lifestyle), bears some resemblance to the profession of the Cynic sage in late antiquity. [...]
Noting the Cynic's wit should not divert our attention from their sense of vocation and purpose. Epictetus wrote that the Cynic could be likened to a spy or scout from another world or kingdom, whose
assignment was to observe human behavior and render a judgment upon it. The Cynic could also be likened to a physician sent to diagnose and heal a society's ills. [...] The Stoics sometimes claimed the
Cynics as their precursors. [...]
[The Cynics] were much more interested in the question of virtue, or how an individual should live given the failure of social and political systems to support what they called a natural way of life. They
borrowed freely from any and every popular ethical philosophy, such as that of the Stoics, to get a certain point across. That point was the cost to one's intelligence and integrity if one blindly followed
social convention and accepted its customary rationalizations. [...]
What counted most, they said, was a sense of personal worth and integrity. One should not allow others to determine one's worth on the scale of social position. One already possessed all the resources one
needed to live sanely and well by virtue of being a human being. Why not be true to the way in which the world actually impinges upon you [objectively]? Say what you want and what you mean. Respond to a
situation as you see it in truth, not as the usual proprieties dictate. Do not let the world squeeze you into its mold. Speak up and act out. The invitation was to take courage and swim against the social
currents that threatened to overwhelm and silence a person's sense of verve. [...]
The Jesus people are best understood as those who noticed the challenge of the times in Galilee. They took advantage of the mix of peoples to tweak the authorities of any cultural tradition that presumed to
set the standard for others. They found a way to encourage one another in the pursuit of sane and simple living. And they developed a discourse that exuded the Cynic spirit. [...]
Beliefs were not a major concern. Behavior was what mattered and the arena for the action was in public. The public sphere was not subjected to a systematic analysis, however, as if society's ills had been
traced to this or that particular cause. The social world was under review, to be sure, for the behavior recommended was intentionally non-conventional, mildly disruptive, and implicitly countercultural. But
there is no indication that the purpose of this behavior was to change society at large. The way society worked in general was taken for granted, in the sense of "What more can one expect?" Instead, the
imperatives were addressed to individuals as if they could live by other rules if they chose to do so. [...] It is important to see that the purpose of the change was not a social reform. The Jesus people
were not organizing to fight Roman power or to reform Jewish religion.
The term Cynic
Looking up Cynics at _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynic one finds:
The name Cynic derives from the Greek word κυνικός, kunikos, "dog-like" and that from κύων, kuôn, "dog" (genitive: kunos). One explanation offered in ancient times for why the Cynics were called dogs
was because the first Cynic, Antisthenes, taught in the Cynosarges gymnasium at Athens. The word Cynosarges means the place of the white dog. It seems certain, however, that the word dog was also thrown at
the first Cynics as an insult for their shameless rejection of conventional manners, and their decision to live on the streets. Diogenes, in particular, was referred to as the Dog, a distinction he seems to have revelled in, stating that "other dogs bite their enemies, I bite my friends to save them."
__http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/c/cynics.htm has more discussion about the origens of the name.
The term cynic is used in common language.
_http://dictionary.reference.com/cite.html?qh=cynic&ia=luna said:
1. a person who believes that only selfishness motivates human actions and who disbelieves in or minimizes selfless acts or disinterested points of view.
2. (initial capital letter) one of a sect of Greek philosophers, 4th century b.c., who advocated the doctrines that virtue is the only good, that the essence of virtue is self-control, and that surrender to any external influence is beneath human dignity.
3. a person who shows or expresses a bitterly or sneeringly cynical attitude.
The Oxford Advanced Dictionary of Current English (1974!)has:
a person who sees little or no good in anything and who has not belief in human progress.
The above present day understandings of the word "Cynic" do not match that well with the main point of the Cynic philosophy:
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynic said:
Although there was never an official Cynic doctrine, the fundamental principles of Cynicism can be summarised as follows:
1. The goal of life is happiness which is to live in agreement with Nature.
2. Happiness depends on being self-sufficient, and a master of mental attitude.
3. Self-sufficiency is achieved by living a life of Virtue.
4. The road to virtue is to free oneself from any influence such as wealth, fame, or power, which have no value in Nature.
5. Suffering is caused by false judgments of value, which cause negative emotions and a vicious character.
A Cynic, then, has no property and rejects all conventional values of money, fame, power or reputation. A life lived according to nature requires only the bare necessities required for existence, and one can
become free by unshackling oneself from any needs which are the result of convention. The Cynics adopted Hercules as their hero, as epitomizing the ideal Cynic.
The Cynic way of life required continuous training, not just in exercising one's judgments and mental impressions, but a physical training as well: [Diogenes] used to say, that there were two kinds of exercise: that, namely, of the mind and that of the body; and that the latter of these created in the mind such quick and agile impressions at the time of its performance, as very much facilitated the practice of virtue; but that one was imperfect without the other, since the health and vigour necessary for the practice of what is good, depend equally on both mind and body.
None of this meant that the Cynic would retreat from society, far from it, Cynics would live in the full glare of the public's gaze and would be quite indifferent in the face of any insults which might result from their unconventional behaviour. The Cynics are said to have invented the idea of cosmopolitanism: when he was asked where he came from, Diogenes replied that he was "a citizen of the world, (kosmopolitês)."
The ideal Cynic would evangelise; as the watchdog of humanity, it was their job to hound people about the error of their ways. The example of the Cynic's life (and the use of the Cynic's biting satire) would
dig-up and expose the pretensions which lay at the root of everyday conventions.
About Cynicism in general
_http://www.iep.utm.edu/c/cynics.htm said:
Cynicism originates in the philosophical schools of ancient Greece that claim a Socratic lineage. To call the Cynics a “school” though, immediately raises a difficulty for so unconventional and anti-theoretical a group. Their primary interests are ethical, but they conceive of ethics more as a way of living than as a doctrine in need of explication. As such askesis—a Greek word meaning a kind of training of the self or practice—is fundamental. The Cynics, as well as the Stoics who followed them, characterize the Cynic way of life as a “shortcut to virtue” (see Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent
Philosophers, Book 6, Chapter 104 and Book 7, Chapter 122). Though they often suggest that they have discovered the quickest, and perhaps surest, path to the virtuous life, they recognize the difficulty of this route.
The colorfulness of the Cynic way of life presents certain problems. The triumph of the Cynic as a philosophical and literary character complicates discussions of the historical individuals, a complication further troubled by a lack of sources. The evidence regarding the Cynics is limited to apothegms, aphorisms, and ancient hearsay; none of the many Cynic texts have survived. The tradition records the tenets of Cynicism via their lives. It is through their practices, the selves and lives that they cultivated, that we come to know the particular Cynic ethos.
In this summary there appear to be a conflict between 'anti-theoretical' and 'many Cynic texts', since if they were anti-theoretical, why should some of them have concerned themselves with writing anything? Or is the label anti-theoretical justified, because their many alleged writings did not survive? Or because a majority of them in fact were anti theoretical and in spite of writing did not give importance to theories but were more concerned with practice?
A Socratic lineage means that the first historically recognized cynic was a student of Socrates. His name was Antisthenes (445 B.C -365 B.C.), whose most famous student was the socalled archetypal cynic; Diogenes of Sinope, whose best known students were Onesicritus (c. 360-c. 290 BCE), who became Historian of Alexander the Great and Crates of Thebes (c. 365-c. 285 BCE), who became a Cynic teacher himself.
Crates had several students including one, who became his wife, Hipparchia (c. 325 BCE) and her brother Metrocles (c. 325 BCE), but the most famous is Zeno of Citium (334 BC - 262 BC) the founder of the Stoic
philosophy _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_of_Citium
The Cynics and the Stoics are not mentioned in the Cassiopaean transcripts, but Socrates happen to be:
941005 said:
Q: (L) Are there any other incarnations of Jesus with which we would be familiar if you
were to name them?
A: Yes. Socrates.
A small detour around the Orthodox Church
It was mentioned previously that the Cynics were into asceticism. About askesis in general one finds more on _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism With regard to the Cynics _http://www.iep.utm.edu/c/cynics.htm gives examples:
In order to live the Cynic life, one had to be inured to the various physical hardships entailed by such freedom. This required, then, a life of constant training, or askesis. The term askesis, defined above as a kind of training of the self but which also means “exercise” or “practice,” is appropriated from athletic training. Instead of training the body for the sake of victory in the Olympic Games, on the battlefield, or for general good health, the Cynic trains the body for the sake of the soul.
The examples of Cynic training are multiple: Antisthenes praised toil and hardship as goods; Diogenes of Sinope walked barefoot in the snow, hugged cold statues, and rolled about in the scalding summer sand
in his pithos; Crates rid himself of his considerable wealth in order to become a Cynic. The ability to live without any of the commodities usually mistaken for necessities is liberating and beneficial. It is also, however, a difficult lesson: “[Diogenes of Sinope] used to say that he followed the example of the trainers of choruses; for they too set the note a little high, to ensure that the rest should hit the right note” (Diogenes Laertius, Book 6, Chapter 35).
The relationship between the functioning of the body and mind that was described in the Wikipedia quote above does not seem too opposite to the view of the Orthodox Church:
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasting said:
For Eastern Orthodox and Greek-Catholic Christians, fasting is an important spiritual discipline, found in both the Old Testament and the New, and is tied to the principle in Orthodox theology of the synergy between the body (Greek: soma) and the soul (pnevma). That is to say, Orthodox Christians do not see a dichotomy between the body and the soul, but rather consider them as a united whole, and believe that what happens to one affects the other (this is known as the psychosomatic union between the body and the soul).[3][4] Saint Gregory Palamas argued that man's body is not an enemy, but a partner and collaborator with the soul. Christ, by taking a human body at the Incarnation, has made the flesh an inexhaustible source of sanctification.[5] This same concept is also found in the much earlier homilies of Saint Macarius the Great.
Fasting can take up a significant portion of the calendar year. The purpose of fasting is not to suffer, but according to Sacred Tradition to guard against gluttony and impure thoughts, deeds and words.[6]
Fasting must always be accompanied by increased prayer and almsgiving (donating to a local charity, or directly to the poor, depending on circumstances). To engage in fasting without them is considered useless or even spiritually harmful.[3] To repent of one's sins and to reach out in love to others is part and parcel of true fasting.
Note: The [numbers] are references one will find on the Wiki page.
Interestingly Orthodox Christianity is mentioned in the Cassiopaean transcripts:
980606 said:
Q: [...] Okay, now, I was reviewing our Jesus pages for the net, and on the subject of this life of Jesus that you gave, the few details, you mentioned that the biological father of Jesus was an individual named Tonatha. Then, you said that this individual was a member of what you called the 'White Sect' also known as Aryans. Aryans are not precisely known as a sect, but what sect is there among Aryans that you were referring to; what is it called?
A: White sect.
Q: So, they call it the White Sect. Is it like the White Brotherhood?
A: Those of fair complexion who wear white robes.
Q: (T) We call them KKK here! (L) Similar to the Templars? Is there, for example, a name that they call themselves?
A: White Sect.
Q: And when they call themselves this, in what language did they create this moniker?
A: Aramaic.
Q: So, we need to know what it is in Aramaic. What kind of teachings did they follow?
A: Similar to the monks of orthodox Christianity.
Q: If they were similar to the monks of orthodox Christianity, then the activities of this individual in being the biological father of Jesus, would that not be considered to be breaking one's monkly vows?
A: All can be forgiven a singular indiscretion.
Q: So, this Mary knew this individual who was, for all intents and purposes, a monk in this sect and the hypnosis was activated and possibly in him also... was he also hypnotized level 1 as you said about her?
A: Close enough.
Q: He was a monk and he had taken vows, this event occurred and this child was conceived, is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: Was she also a member of some sort of order?
A: No.
Q: Was she in any way a sort of Temple virgin or did she had spent her whole life preparing to be the vessel for this child?
A: No.
Q: Is it true that the Essene community that was attempting to prepare a vessel for the coming of the messiah, that this was their whole plan, their work?
A: No.
Q: This sect existed... where was this monastery or group located?
A: Near today's Haifa.
__http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/c/cynics.htm has
The impact of Cynicism is also felt in Christian, Medieval, and Renaissance thought, though not without a good deal of ambivalence. Christian authors, for example, praise the Cynics for their self-discipline, independence, and mendicant lifestyle, but rebuke the bawdy aspects of Cynic shamelessness.
Web links to Eastern and Western Christianity
Not knowing too much about Eastern Christianity I tried to find out: For a comparison between the Roman Catholic interpretation of faith and the Orthodox Church (seen from a Roman Catholic point of view) _http://www.scripturecatholic.com/orthodoxy.html It begins with:
John Salza said:
Orthodox Christianity possesses the seven sacraments; valid ordination, the Real Presence, a reverential understanding of Sacred Tradition, apostolic succession, a profound piety, a great history of contemplative monastic spirituality, a robust veneration of Mary and the saints, and many other truly Christian attributes. Catholics (including myself) widely admire, in particular, the sense of the sacred and the beauty and grandeur of the Orthodox Divine Liturgy (which - it should be noted - is also present in the many Byzantine or Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church), as Thomas Howard eloquently illustrates:
When I walk into an Orthodox Church ... one is immediately aware that one has stepped into the presence of what St. Paul would call the whole family in heaven and earth. You have stepped into the precincts of heaven! ... I love the Orthodox Church's spirit. I think the Orthodox Church many, many centuries ago, discovered a mode of music and worship which is timeless, which is quite apart from fashion, and which somehow answers to the mystery and the solemnity and the sacramental reality of the liturgy.
("A Conversation With Thomas Howard and Frank Schaeffer," The Christian Activist, Vol. 9, Fall/Winter 1996, p. 43)
After this kind introduction he enters into the fallacies which he thinks the
Orthodox Church is subject to. Now if one wishes to read about Western Christianity seen from the perspective of Eastern Christianity try _http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/prot_rc_heresy.aspx
For more information about Christian Churches, Orthodox and Western.
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Christian_group_structuring
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrament
_http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church
Via _http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/about.aspx one can get to _http://ishmaelite.blogspot.com/ which has many links to sites about Orthodox Christianity.
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Christianity
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant
For monasticism Eastern and Western:
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monasticism
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Benedict the founder of Western monasticism
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_monasticism
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Christian_monasticism
_http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10467a.htm About Eastern Monasticism.
_http://www.stanthonysmonastery.org/monasticism.php is about Orthodox monasticism.
_http://www.stanthonysmonastery.org/links.php from here one can get to pages with links to other Orthodox monastaries.
On a different "note" Russian/Ukrainian orthodox church music is available at _http://www.origenmusic.com/
The Case Against Q?
As I was looking for sources about the Cynics on _http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/asbook.html I found _http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/asbook11.html which contains many texts and links to
sources about ancient history including Christianity. One entry is The Case Against Q _http://www.ntgateway.com/Q/ (That is against the theory of Q that has been presented by Burton L. Mack and others) A book is available: The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and Synoptic Problem (Paperback) by Mark Goodacre, but if one clicks around on his website one may be able to read before leaping onto purchasing his 39 $ book. The hypothesis is found also on _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markan_priority There also is a Two Source Hypothesis for the origin of the synoptic Gospels at _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis and several sides of the argument is available on _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_Document which has a very illustrative graph, that shows the textual relationship between the three synoptic gospels. I did not analyse the case against Q in detail, so I have no comment,
What it takes to be a good Cynic
Two translations are available of a discourse about cynicism attributed to Epictetus, a Stoic who lived (55 CA - 135 CA) that is about 450 years after the main Cynic philosophers: _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epictetus and _http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/e/epictetu.htm It is book 3 chapter 22: _http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0237;layout=;query=toc;loc=disc%203.22 which has: Epictetus, Works (ed. Thomas Wentworth Higginson) "Of the Cynic philosophy" _http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0237:text=disc:book=3:chapter=22 and
Epictetus, Works (ed. George Long) Arrian's Discourses of Epictetus "About Cynism." _http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0236:text=disc:book=3:chapter=22
Long's translation said:
WHEN one of his pupils inquired of Epictetus, and he was a person who appeared to be inclined to Cynism, what kind of person a Cynic ought to be and what was the notion (prolêpsis) of the thing, we will inquire, said Epictetus, at leisure: but I have so much to say to you that he who without God attempts so great a matter, is hateful to God, and has no other purpose than to act indecently in public.
Higginson's translation said:
Do you, too, carefully deliberate upon this undertaking; it is not what you think it. "I wear an old cloak now, and I shall have one then. I sleep upon the hard ground now, and I shall sleep so then. I will moreover take a wallet and a staff, and go about, and beg of those I meet, and begin by rebuking them; and if I see any one using effeminate practices, or arranging his curls, or walking in purple, I will rebuke him." If you imagine this to be the whole thing, avaunt; come not near it; it belongs not to you. But if you imagine it to be what it really is, and do not think yourself unworthy of it, consider how great a thing you undertake.
First, with regard to yourself; you must no longer, in any instance, appear as now. You must accuse neither God nor man. You must altogether control desire, and must transfer aversion to such things only as are controllable by Will. You must have neither anger, nor resentment, nor envy, nor pity. Neither boy, nor girl, nor fame, nor dainties must have charms for you.
[...]
In the first place, then, you must purify your own ruling faculty, to match this method of life. Now, the material for me to work upon is my own mind, as wood is for a carpenter, or leather for a shoemaker; and my business is a right use of things as they appear. But body is nothing to me; its parts nothing to me. Let death come when it will, either of the whole body or of part. "Go into exile." And whither? Can any one turn me out of the universe? He cannot. But wherever I go there is the sun, the moon, the stars, dreams, auguries, communication with God. And even this preparation is by no means sufficient for a true Cynic. But it must further be known that he is a messenger sent from Zeus to men, concerning good and evil; to show them that they are mistaken, and seek the essence of good and evil where it is not, but do not observe it where it is; that he is a spy, like Diogenes, when he was brought to Philip after the battle of Chaeronea. For, in effect, a Cynic is a spy to discover what things are friendly, what hostile, to man; and he must, after making an accurate observation, come and tell them the truth; not be struck with terror, so as to point out to them enemies where there are none; nor, in any other instance, be disconcerted or confounded by appearances.
He must, then, if it should so happen, be able to lift up his voice, to come upon the stage, and say, like Socrates: O mortals, whither are you hurrying? What are you about? Why do you tumble up and down, O miserable wretches! like blind men? You are going the wrong way, and have forsaken the right. You seek prosperity and happiness in a wrong place, where they are not; nor do you give credit to another, who shows you where they are.
[...]
" But how is it possible that a man destitute, naked, without house or home, squalid, unattended, an outcast, can lead a prosperous life?" See; God hath sent us one, to show in practice that it is possible. "Take notice of me, that I am without a country, without a house, without an estate, without a servant; I lie on the ground; have no wife, no children, no coat; but have only earth and heaven and one poor cloak. And what need I? Am not I without sorrow, without fear? Am not I free? Did any of you ever see me disappointed of my desire, or incurring my aversion? Did I ever blame God or man? Did I ever accuse any one? Have any of you seen me look discontented? How do I treat those whom you fear and of whom you are struck with awe? Is it not like poor slaves? Who that sees me does not think that he sees his own king and master? " This is the language, this the character, this the undertaking, of a Cynic. No, [but you think only of] the wallet and the staff and a large capacity of swallowing and appropriating whatever is given you; abusing unseasonably those you meet, or showing your bare arm. Do you consider how you shall attempt so important an undertaking? First take a mirror. View your shoulders, examine your back, your loins. It is the Olympic Games, man, for which you are to be entered; not a poor slight contest. In the Olympic Games a champion is not allowed merely to be conquered and depart; but must first be disgraced in the view of the whole world, -not of the Athenians alone, or Spartans, or Nicopolitans; and then he who has prematurely departed must be whipped too, and, before that, must have suffered thirst and heat, and have swallowed an abundance of dust.
Consider carefully, know yourself; consult the Divinity; attempt nothing without God; for if he counsels you, be assured that it is his will, whether that you should become eminent, or that you should suffer
many a blow. For there is this fine circumstance connected with the character of a Cynic, that he must be beaten like an ass, and yet, when beaten, must love those who beat him as the father, as the brother
of all.
[...]
" But," said the young man, " will marriage and parentage be recognized as important duties by a Cynic? "
Grant me a community of sages, and no one there, perhaps, will readily apply himself to the Cynic philosophy. For on whose account should he there embrace that method of life? However, supposing he does, there will be nothing to restrain him from marrying and having children. For his wife will be such another as himself, his father-in-law such another as himself, and his children will be brought up in the same manner. But as the state of things now is, like that of an army prepared for battle, is it not necessary that a Cynic should be without distraction;2 entirely attentive to the service of God; at liberty to walk among mankind; not tied down to common duties, nor entangled in relations, which if he transgresses, he will no longer keep the character of a wise and good man; and which if he observes, there is an end of him, as the messenger and spy and herald of the gods? For consider, there are some offices due to his father-in-law, some to the other relations of his wife, some to his wife herself. Besides, after this, he is confined to the care of his family when sick, and to providing for their support. At the very least, he must have a vessel to warm water in, to bathe his child; there must be wool, oil, a bed, a cup for his wife after her delivery; and thus the furniture increases; more business, more distraction. Where, for the future, is this king whose time is devoted to the public good?- To whom the people is trusted, and many a care? (Homer, Iliad, ii. 25. H. ) who ought to superintend others, married men, fathers of children, - whether one treats his wife well or ill; who quarrels; which family is well regulated; which not, - like a physician who goes about and feels the pulse of his patients: "You have a fever; you the headache; you the gout. Do you abstain from food; do you eat; do you omit bathing; you must have an incision made; you be cauterized." Where shall he have leisure for this who is tied down to common duties? Must he not provide clothes for his children, and send them, with pens and ink and paper, to a schoolmaster? Must he not provide a bed for them, - for they cannot be Cynics from their very birth? Otherwise, it would have been better to expose them as soon as they were born than to kill them thus. Do you see to what we bring down our Cynic; how we deprive him of his kingdom? "Well, but Crates3 was married." The case of which you speak was a particular one, arising from love; and the woman was another Crates. But we are inquiring about ordinary and common marriages; and in this inquiry we do not find the affair much suited to the condition of a Cynic.
[...]
Consider, sir, that he is the father of mankind; that all men are his sons, and all women his daughters. Thus he attends to all; thus takes care of all. What! do you think it is from impertinence that he rebukes those he meets? He does it as a father, as a brother, as a minister of the common parent, Zeus.
[...]
But he has need of a constitution duly qualified; for if he should appear consumptive, thin, and pale, his testimony has no longer the same authority. For he must not only give a proof to the vulgar, by the constancy of his mind, that it is possible to be a man of weight and merit without those things that strike them with admiration; but he must show, too, by his body, that a simple and frugal diet, under the open air, does no injury to the constitution. "See, I and my body bear witness to this." As Diogenes did; for he went about in hale condition, and gained the attention of the many by his mere physical aspect. But a Cynic in poor condition seems a mere beggar; all avoid him, all are offended at him; for he ought not to appear slovenly, so as to drive people from him; but even his indigence should be clean and attractive.
Much natural tact and acuteness are likewise necessary in a Cynic (otherwise he is almost worthless), that he may be able to give an answer, readily and pertinently, upon every occasion. So Diogenes, to one who asked him, " Are you that Diogenes who does not believe there are any gods?" How so, replied he, when I think you odious to them? Again, when Alexander surprised him sleeping, and repeated,--
To sleep all the night becomes not a man who gives counsel; (Homer, Iliad, ii. 24, 25.- H.)
before he was quite awake, he responded,-
"To whom the people is trusted, and many a care."
But, above all, the reason of the man must be clearer than the sun; otherwise he must necessarily be a common cheat and a rascal if, while himself guilty of some vice, he reproves others. For consider how the case stands. Arms and guards give a power to common kings and tyrants of reproving and of punishing delinquents, though they be wicked themselves; but to a Cynic, instead of arms and guards, conscience gives this power. When he knows that he has watched and labored for mankind; that he has slept pure, and waked still purer; and that he hath regulated all his thoughts as the friend, as the minister of the gods, as a partner of the empire of Zeus; that he is ready to say, upon all occasions, -
Conduct me, Zeus, and thou, O Destiny, (Cleanthes, in Diogenes Laertius.- H.)
and, " If it thus pleases the gods, thus let it be,"
why should he not dare to speak boldly to his own brethren, to his children; in a word, to his kindred? Hence he who is thus qualified is neither impertinent nor a busybody; for he is not busied about the affairs of others, but his own, when he oversees the transactions of men. Otherwise call a general a busybody, when he oversees, inspects, and watches his soldiers and punishes the disorderly. But if you reprove others at the very time that you have booty under your own arm, I will ask you if you had not better go into a corner, and eat up what you have stolen. But what have you to do with the concerns of others? For what are you? Are you the bull in the herd, or the queen of the bees? Show me such ensigns of empire as she has from nature. But if you are a drone, and arrogate to yourself the kingdom of the bees, do you not think that your fellow-citizens will drive you out, just as the bees do the drones?
Long said:
The Cynic also ought to have such power of endurance as to seem insensible to the common sort and a stone: no man reviles him, no man strikes him, no man insults him, but he gives his body that any man who chooses may do with it what he likes. For he bears in mind that the inferior must be overpowered by the superior in that in which it is inferior; and the body is inferior to the many, the weaker to the stronger. He never then descends into such a contest in which he can be overpowered; but he immediately withdraws from things which belong to others, he claims not the things which are servile. But where there is will and the use of appearances, there you will see how many eyes he has so that you may say, Argus was blind compared with him. Is his assent ever hasty, his movement (towards an object) rash, does his desire ever fail in its object, does that which he would avoid befal him, is his purpose unaccomplished, does he ever find fault, is he ever humiliated, is he ever envious? To these he directs all his attention and energy; but as to every thing else he snores supine. All is peace; there is no robber who takes away his will,26 no tyrant. But what say you as to his body? I say there is. And his possessions? I say there is. And as to magistracies and honours?-- What does he care for them?--When then any person would [p. 264] frighten him through them, he says to him, Begone, look for children: masks are formidable to them; but I know that they are made of shell, and they have nothing inside.
About such a matter as this you are deliberating. Therefore, if you please, I urge you in God's name, defer the matter, and first consider your preparation for it. For see what Hector says to Andromache,
Retire rather, he says, into the house and weave:
War is the work of men
Of all indeed, but specially 'tis mine. (II. vi. 490.)
So he was conscious of his own qualification, and knew her weakness.
For the complete text see the above given links. For other discourses, in various translation, attributed to Epitetus: _http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/10661 and _http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/871 _http://www.sacred-texts.com/phi/epi/disc.txt _http://www.sacred-texts.com/phi/epi/enchir.txt Reading him is quite inspiring.
Another who wrote about the cynic way of life in several chapters, was Dio Chrysostom (ca. 40–ca. 120) he was a Greek orator, writer, philosopher and historian of the Roman Empire, see _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dio_Chrysostom
_http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Dio_Chrysostom/Discourses/6*.html said:
Diogenes, however, always waited until he was hungry or thirsty before he partook of nourishment, and he thought that hunger was the most satisfactory and pungent of appetizers. And so he used to p259partake of a barley cake with greater pleasure than others did of the costliest of foods, and enjoyed a drink from a stream of running water more than others did their Thasian wine. 13 He scorned those who would pass by a spring when thirsty and move heaven and earth to find where they could buy Chian or Lesbian wine; and he used to say that such persons were far sillier than cattle, since these creatures never pass by a spring or a clear brook when thirsty or, when hungry, disdain the tenderest leaves or grass enough to nourish them. 14 He also said that the most beautiful and healthful houses were open to him in every city: to wit, the temples and the gymnasia. And one garment was all he needed for both summer and winter, for he endured the cold weather easily because he had become used to it. 15 He never protected his feet, either, because they were no more sensitive, he claimed, than his eyes and face. For these parts, though by nature most delicate, endured the cold very well on account of their constant exposure; for men could not possibly walk after binding their eyes as they did their feet. He used to say, too, that rich men were like new-born babes; both were in constant need of swaddling-clothes. 16 That for which men gave themselves the most trouble and spent the most money, which caused the razing of many cities and the pitiful destruction of many nations — this he found the least laborious and most inexpensive of all things to procure.
More sources about the Cynics
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Cynic_philosophers Apparently Cynicism is listed as a subcategory of Skepticism _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Skepticism (I looked up Skepticism, but there is no mention of the Cynics so what the argument is I could not find out.)
_Cynicism was a school of Hellenistic Philosophy _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenistic_philosophy
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenistic_period describes the time in which the Cynic philosophers came to be.
_http://plato.stanford.edu/search/searcher.py?query=Cynics
_http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/inourtime_20051020.shtml is radion programme.
Diogenes Laertius, who lived somewhere between 200 and 500 C.A., but more likely in the first half of the third centtury, see _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes_Laërtius collected and wrote "The Lives
and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers." The following link gives a translation of the the book relating to the Cynics: _http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/diogeneslaertius-book6-cynics.html
For Book VI. 96-98 of the above relating to 'The Life of Hipparchia' there is a another translation and better at _http://www.stoa.org/diotima/anthology/hipparchia.shtml see also _http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/h/hipparch.htm (Hipparchia was the student who became the wife of Crates of Thebes)
_Via Wikipedia page on Cynicism one can find links for downloading "A History Of Cynicism" by Dudley, Donald R. (1937),
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisthenes _http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/a/antisthe.htm
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes_of_Sinope _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes Laertius
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crates_of_Thebes the husband of Hipparchia (When I read the story about their marriage in Diogenes Laertius I wondered if this might be an example of a polar couple somewhere on the staircase of Mouravieff?)
_http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/luc/wl4/wl431.htm Contains a chapter titled "The Cynic" from volume four of The Works of Lucian of Samosata tr. by H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler
Oxford: The Clarendon Press [1905] _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian
_http://www-oxford.op.org/allen/html/acts.htm has an essay "WAS JESUS A PHILOSOPHICAL CYNIC?" by Bruce Griffin
When one reads the qualities Epictetus lists and matches them with what is said about Jesus from the Gospels and other sources, then it seems that he could have passed the test had he applied. In practical terms he lived a life very similar to the best cynics, although philosophically, there may have been some differences. A question is, if those, who count themselves Christians, had been Cynics in the best sense of the word, would they have been closer to achieving the ideal they claim to follow? In any case the Cynics examplify the lack of concern for the small worries of life, which Jesus is said to have spoken of.
), The Gospel of Judas.
