The Court of the Gentiles Part 2, Book 4 · Chapter 5
CHAP. V. Of Epicuriſme.
Epicurus his original, His Inſtitution, Sect, and Character. His Pride, and contention. His temperance according to the Character of his friends. His Industrie, and Diſciples. His Philoſophie. 1. Phyſicks, of Atomes, &c. 2. His contempt of Logick, and Rhetorick. 3. His Ethicks: of Pleaſure, and Paſſion. That Pleaſure is the chiefeſt Good. That this Pleaſure conſiſts in Virtue: Epicurus's Atheistick Conceptions of God's Providence, &c. His denying the Immortalitie of the Soul, what oppoſition Chriſtianitie found from the Epicureans.
§. 1. HAving taken ſome View of all other Sects, Of Epicurus his Original.we ſhall conclude with the Epicurean, which was but a branch of the Eleatick Sect; and received its Inſtitution from Epicurus, who was born in the third year of the 109 Olympiad, ſeven years after Plato's death, and 341 before the birth of Chriſt. He was borne at Gargettus a Town belonging to the Egean Tribe; and was bred up at Samus till the 18 year of his age; at which time he went to Athens, Xenocrates living in the Academie, and Ariſtotle at Chalcis. About the 23 year of his age, he went to Colophon to his Father; and from the 32 year of his age, to the 37 he lived partly at Mitylene, partly at Lampſacum, where he inſtituted a Schole, as Suidas obſerves, and Gaſſendus after him (Chap. 5. of Epicurus) Epicurus returning to Athens about the 37 year of his age, he a while diſcourſed of Philoſophie in publick with others, but after inſtituted a Sect in Private denominated from himſelf Epicureans. At firſt indeed admiring the Doctrine of Democritus he profeſſed himſelf a Democritian, or of the Eleatick Sect, unto which Democritus appertained. So Cicero de Nat. Deorum. Democritus was a very great Perſon, from whoſe fountains Epicurus watered his Garden: meaning his Schole, which was in a Garden. Yet afterwards, out of a ſpirit of Pride, and contention Epicurus rejects Democritus, and changeth many things in his Dogmes; Thence (ſaith Cicero) he was very ungrateful towards Democritus, whom he followed. Clemens Alexandrinus foreign. lib. 1. and others report Nauſiphanes the Pythagorean, Diſciple of Pyrrho, to have been maſter to Epicurus. Laertius affirmes, he was chiefly addicted to Anaxagoras. He alſo admired the Converſation of Pyrrho, as Gaſſendus in his Life cap. 4. By which it appears, that Epicurus firſt embraced Scepticiſme, whence he fell into Atheiſme, and Epicuriſme; and indeed no wonder, for the Sceptick is the fitteſt matter to forme an Atheiſt, and ſenſualiſt out of, as hereafter.
Epicurus's inſtitution of his Sect, and Character.§. 2. Epicurus having imbibed what he thought agreeable to his deſigne, both from the Eleatick and Sceptick Scholes, he formes and ſhapes his own Ideas into a peculiar Sect of his own, called from him Epicureans; and Pleaſure being his main End, he purchaſeth at Athens a very Pleaſant Garden, where he lived with his friends, and diſcourſed of Philoſophie. Apollodorus in Laertius tels us, that this Garden coſt him 80. Pounds. We find this Encomium, of him in Petronius Arbiter, who followed this Epicurean Sect.
Ipſe Pater veri doctis Epicurus in hortis
Juſſit, & hanc vitam dixit habere Deos.
Epicurus the Father of truth dictated in the learned Garden, and he ſaid the Gods led this life. Lucretius the Epicurean l. 3. gives him the like Character.
Tu pater, & rerum inventor, tu patria nobis
Suppeditas praecepta, tuiſque ex, inclyte, Chartis, &c.
Agen ſpeaking of Epicurus.
Qui genus humanum ingenio ſuperavit, & omnes
Restinxit Stellas, Exortus uti aethereus Sol.
Lactantius lib. 3. Inſtit. producing the…e verſes, ſubjoyns; Truely I can never read theſe verſes without ſmiling: for he ſpake not this of Socrates, and Plato, who were as Princes among the Philoſophers: but of a man, than whom no ſick man ever dreamed, or talked more fooliſhly. Indeed the Diſciples of Epicurus extolled him (as ſome now adaies) to the Skies, as if he only of all the Philoſophers had found out the Truth, and all others had embraced Shadows: Yea his adherents were ſo raviſht with the admiration of him, as that every monethmonth they Sacrificed to his birth day, and that on the 20. day; whence they called thoſe holie daies foreign. And they burned with ſo great love to their Maſter, as that they carryed his Picture engraven on a Ring as a luckie fortune wherever they went.
Epicurus's Pride, and Contention.§. 3. But notwithſtanding the great eſteem Epicurus's Diſciples had concerning him; others were not a little offended at him; eſpecially for his Pride, Vanitie, and Contentious ſpirit. As for Epicurus's Pride, and Vanitie, Plutarch in his book againſt Epicurus acquaints us, that he had ſo proud, and ſwelling an opinion of himſelf, as that he would call no one learned, but himſelf, and thoſe, who proceeded from his Schole. And touching his contention, Cicero. 1. De Nat. Deor. relates, that Epicurus did moſt contumeliouſly vexe Ariſtotle: he did moſt ſhamefully rail againſt Phaedo the Socratick: he did by ſeveral volumnes oppoſe Timocrates the brother of Metrodorus, his companion; becauſe he in ſome ſmall matters differed from him in Philoſophie: he was very ungrateful even to Democritus himſelf, whom yet he followed: he never ſtiled Chryſippus by any other name than Cheſippus, &c. As for Epicurus's Converſation; thoſe, who differed from him ſuppoſe him to have been immerſed in all manner of ſenſual, and brutiſh pleaſures.Epicurus's temperance according to the relation of his friends. But thoſe, that converſed with him, and adhered to his Sect, make him to be very pious towards the Gods, his Parents, and Countrie: alſo very bountiful towards his Brethren, friends, and ſervants: grave, and temperate, contenting himſelf with moſt ſimple, and mean diet; likewiſe ſparing in Wine, yea living on bread and water only; So that he accounted it a great feaſt, if he had a little cheeſe. His induſtrie, and Works.They make him alſo to be very ſtudious, and induſtrious; which they argue from the multitude of volumnes he writ, beyond any other of the Philoſophers, to the number of 300. All which books are periſht, excepting three Epiſtles given us by Laertius in his 10. book, who has alſo given us a compende of his Philoſophie. Epicurus lived 72. years; and died (as Laertius) of the ſtone ſtopping his urine, in the ſecond year of the 127. Olympiad.
§. 4. Among the Diſciples of Epicurus, The Diſciples of Epicurus.the firſt rank is given to Mus his ſervant, who Philoſophized together with his maſter, and after him became the head of the Epicurean Sect, as Diogen. Laertius lib. 10. Alſo among the Sectators of Epicurus is reckoned Hermannus mention'd by Porphyrie lib. 1. de Abſtinentia. Alſo Lucian was an Epicurean, and friend of Celſus the Epicurean, who writ againſt the Chriſtians, and is anſwered by Origen. This Lucian is by ſome ſtiled the Atheiſt, becauſe of his blaſphemie againſt Chriſt, ſo Suidas: but herein he is vindicated by Voſſius) de Philoſ. Sect. cap. 8. §. 24.) who ſhews, that Lucian no where ſpeaks Evil of Christ, ſave in the perſon of a ſtranger, where he cals Chriſt a Sophist, a title of no ill import amongſt the Philoſophers, only he ſpeaks unworthily of God, on which account I ſuppoſe he was termed foreign the Atheiſt. There were alſo many of the Romans, who adhered to this Epicurean Sect, as Lucretius, Caſſius: alſo Maro, who dedicated the latter part of his life to the Epicurean Philoſophie; as in like manner, Petronius Arbiter; with others. And indeed there was no Sect continued ſo long, as the Schole of Epicurus, which when all other Sects failed, perſiſted in continual ſucceſſion, as Laertius boaſts of it; and Lactantius lib. 3. Institut. eaſilie grants; giving this reaſon thereof. The Diſcipline of Epicurus was alwaies more famous than that of other Philoſophers; not that it brought any thing of reaſon with it, but becauſe the popular name of Pleaſure invites many: for all are prone to V…ce. Nazianzen Orat. 23. on the praiſe of Hero Alexandrinus joyns theſe 3. in Epicurus as containing the chief of his Philoſophie foreign Epicurus's Automatum together with his Atomes, & Pleaſure.
Epicurus's Philoſophie. 1. Phyſicks of Atoms.§. 5. As for Epicurus's Philoſophie, the beſt thereof conſiſted in Phyſicks, wherein he chiefly embraced the Dogmes of Anaxagoras, yet he differed from him in many things. Touching the Origine of the Ʋniverſe. Epicurus held, that all things were compoſed of Atomes. Thence that of Au…tin de Civit. Dei. lib. 11. cap. 9. Epicurus held, that there were innumerable worlds produced by the fortuitous confluxe of Atomes. See Lud. Vives on the text. Epicurus's Hypotheſis is ſuppoſed to have been this: viz. that before the world was brought into that forme, and order it is now in,Stillingf. Orig. Sacr. l. 3. c. 2. there was an infinite emptie ſpace, in which were an innumerable companie of ſolid particles, or Atomes of different ſizes, and ſhapes, which by their weight were in continual motion, and that by the various occurſions of theſe, all the bodies of the Univerſe were framed in that order, they now are in. Theſe his ſentiments of Atomes Epicurus is ſaid to have traduced from Leucippus, and Democritus; eſpecially from the latter, as before; though indeed the firſt great aſſertor of Atomes was Mochus, that famous Phenician Phyſiologist, who traduced them from the Jews, as has been proved in the Phenician Philoſophie. The whole of the Epicurean Phyſicks is comprehended by Lucretius the Epicurean in 6. books.
Epicurus his contempt of Logick.§. 6. Epicurus contemned Logick, Rhetorick, and the Mathematicks. His contempt of Logick is mention'd by Laertius in Epicurus, foreign. They rejected Logick, as that, which perverts mens minds: for they ſay, that ſimple words ſuffice for Phyſicks. Yea Cicero lib. 1. de Nat. Deorum, brings in Epicurus denying, that either part of Contradictorie Propoſitions were true. In the room of Logick Epicurus introduced his Canonick Ratiocination:His Canon. whence he compoſed a book ſtyled foreign, which was (as Laertius tels us) foreign, concerning the Rule of judgement, and Principle; alſo a Work, that delivered the firſt Elements. This Canon, or Criterion of judgement Epicurus made to be not Reaſon, but ſenſe. So Cicero de Nat. Deor. lib. 1. Epicurus ſaid, that the ſenſes were the meſſengers, His contempt of Rhetorick, and Mathematicks.or judges of truth. As for Epicurus's contempt of Rhetorick Laertius gives this account thereof foreign he uſed a proper kind of ſpeech, ſuch as was accommodated to things, which becauſe it was ſimple or plain, Aristophanes the Grammarian reprehended. So Cicero de Finibus lib. 1. acquaints us, that Epicurus neglected letters, and ornaments of Speech. Epicurus's contempt of the Mathematicks is mentioned by Plutarch in his book againſt Epicurus.
§. 7.Epicurus's Ethicks. 1. That Pleaſure is the chiefeſt Good. Of Pleaſure, and Paſſion. In Epicurus's Philoſophie nothing was more pleaſing to corrupt nature, than his Ethicks eſpecially touching the chiefeſt good, which he placed in Pleaſure: ſo that he made the firſt, and laſt cauſe of all human actions to be Pleaſure, or Delight ariſing from that good, which the minde enjoys. His Canons of Pleaſure, and Paſſion (according to Gaſſendus de Epicuri Philoſ. Morali, cap. 3.) are theſe: 1. All Pleaſure, which hath no pain joyned with it, is to be embraced. 2. All pain, which hath no Pleaſure joyned with it, is to be ſhunned. 3. All Pleaſure, which either hindereth a greater Pleaſure, or procureth a greater pain, is to be ſhunned. 4. All pain, which putteth away a greater pain, or procureth a greater Pleaſure, is to be imbraced, &c. Epicurus's Canons touching Pleaſure, as the first and laſt good, were (according to Gaſſendus cap. 3.4.5.) theſe. 1. That pleaſure, without which,That Pleaſure is the chiefeſt good. there is no notion of Felicitie, is in its own nature good. 2. That Felicitie conſiſts in Pleaſure, becauſe it is the firſt Connatural Good, or the firſt thing agreeable to nature, as alſo the laſt of expetibles, or End of good things. 3. That Pleaſure, wherein conſiſts Felicitie, is Indolence of bodie, & Tranquillitie of mind: for herein the abſolute good of man is contained. The Indolence of the bodie is preſerved by the uſe of temperance. The health of the mind is preſerved by Virtues provided, and applied by Philoſophie. That this Pleaſure is in Virtue, and Mental.Diogenes Laertius gives the like favorable interpretation of Epicurus's Pleaſures, in his Vindication of him againſt the imputations of Diotymus the Stoick. Epicurus (ſaith Laertius) held foreign. That the chiefeſt happineſſe was in God. 2. Hence he placed happineſſe in the Pleaſures of the mind, and reflexion on former enjoyments. 3. Laertius alſo tels us, that he held there was an unſeparable connexion 'twixt Virtue, and true Pleaſure: whence he ſaid, that Virtues were naturally conjoyned with a pleaſant life: agen, live thou as God in immortal Virtues, and thou ſhalt have nothing common with mortal. Ammonius in Ariſtot. Categ. pag. 9. gives the like account of the Epicurean Pleaſure foreign. The Epicureans are called Hedonici, becauſe they make Pleaſure the laſt End; Pleaſure; not that of the bodie, but the tranquille, and indiſturbed conſtitution of the Soul, following a Virtuous life, but they miſtake ſaying 'tis the Carkaſſe of Virtue, or the ſhadow, ſeeing they make it the laſt End. Seneca affirmes, that Epicurus complained, men were very ungrateful towards paſt enjoyments, becauſe what ever good they enjoy, they reflect not again upon it, neither do they reckon it among pleaſures: where as there is no pleaſure ſo certain as that which is paſt, becauſe it cannot be taken from us. Preſent goods have not yet a compleat ſolid being: and what is future yet hangs in ſuſpence, and is uncertain, but what is paſt is moſt ſ…t…. Yea Epicurus himſelf in his Epiſtle to Idomeneus, ſpeaking of the torments, he was then under, being ready to dye, ſaies, that the joy, which he had in his mind upon the remembrance of the reaſonings, which he had in his life time, ſtood in battail of array againſt all thoſe torments (as great as could be imagined) of the ſtrangurie he laboured under. According to theſe accounts, Epicurus's Pleaſures were not ſo groſſe, as is generally conceived, yet ſufficiently blame-worthy; in that he placeth mans objective, and formal happineſſe in Pleaſure, which is but a conſequent thereof.
Epicurus's Atheiſtical conceptions of God, his Providence, &c.§. 8. But whatever Epicurus's opinion was about Pleaſure; certain it is, he was fouly miſtaken in his Metaphyſical Philoſophizings about God, his Providence, &c. Its true; Epicurus (according to Laert…us) denyed not the Being, and ſpiritual nature, of God: for he held foreign, that God was incorruptible, and moſt bleſſed, &c. Yet he denyed the Providence of God wherein he diſcovered the abſurdneſſe of his reaſon: for take away the belief of Divine Providence, and the notions of a Deitie, though never ſo excellent, will have no awe upon the ſpirits, and lives of men; and therefore ſoon be rooted out of men's minds. Wherefore ſome Ancient Philoſophers ſuppoſed, that Epicurus's deſigne in acknowledging a Dei…ie which he really believed not) was only to avoid the cenſure of downright Atheiſme: aſſuring himſelf, that albeit he aſſerted one moſt excellent Being, which he called God, yet ſo long as he denyed his Providence, he ſufficiently ſerved his own Interest; which was to root out all common foundations of Religion, and ſo to eſtabliſh a practical Atheiſme. Thence Tullie de Nat. Deor. 1o. tels us, that Epicurus extracted Religion by the roots out of mens minds, ſeeing he took from the immortal Gods both aſſistance, and Grace. For albeit he affirmed the Nature of God to be moſt excellent, and beſt, yet he denyed Grace in God; and ſo took away that, which is moſt proper to the beſt, and moſt excellent Nature. For what is better, or more excellent, than bonity and beneficence? which if you take from God, you make no one dear to God,How Epicurus undermined the Providence of God. and no one beloved of him, &c. Epicurus's great Canon, whereby he deſtroyed the Providence of God, was (according to Laertius lib. 10.) this, foreign. The bleſſed, and immortal being neither hath any affairs of his own, neither doth he h…ed other mens. His great argument to defend this his Hypotheſis was, that it was beneath the Majeſtie of the Divine Being, to condeſcend ſo far, as to regard and mingle with the affairs of this lower world. Whence he placed all Religion in the adoration of the Divine Being, abſtractly for its own excellence, without any regard to his Providence; which is indeed to deſtroy all Religion. This Atheiſtical perſwaſion makes Tullie, Plutarch, and the other Great Moralists degrade him from the title of a Philoſopher.
§. 9. Epicurus alſo denyed the Immortalitie of the Soul, He denyed the immortalitie of the Soul.which indeed was but the conſequent of his foregoing Atheistical perſuaſion; and both, as I preſume, imbibed together with his Sceptick Infuſions from the Sceptick Schole: for Scepticiſme naturally degenerates into Atheiſme, and this into Senſualitie. Likewiſe Epicurus's Dogmes touching Atomes gave a great foundation to his Atheiſme: For his Hypotheſis being granted, that the firſt production of the Ʋniverſe, and all ſucceſſive generations proceed from a Caſual combination of Atoms, it is eaſie to ſalve all the Phaenomenas of Nature without a Providence.
§. 10. What oppoſition the Christian Religion found from this Epicurean Sect is evident from Act. 17.18. foreign] He mentions (ſaith Grotius) two Sects of Philoſophers moſt oppoſite to the Christian Religion. For the Epicureans believed that the world was not created by God; and that God regarded not human affairs; that there were no Rewards or puniſhments after death; that there was no Good, but what was ſenſible:
§. 11. Campanella in his Politicks ſeems to make the Scepticiſme, Atheiſme, and ſenſualitie of the Epicureans the occaſion of their Ruine. The Philoſophers (ſaies he) paſſed not from opinion to opinion, beyond Epicurus; under whom denying God, and Providence, their Sects were deſtroyed. He makes this the curſe of all that kind of Philoſophie, which degenerating firſt into Scepticiſme, and from thence into Atheiſme, was then rooted out of the World. And no wonder, God blaſted Philoſophie, when Philoſophie dar'd ſo highly to blaſpheme God: No wonder God ſhould root that Philoſophie out of the World, which in Epicurus, and his Sectators (the Swine of that Stie) became ſo debaucht, and vain, as to attempt the eradicating of the Notion of a God, or at leaſt his due Fear, and Reverence out of the World. But the Miſchief of all ſuch Vain Philoſophie, to, and the Ʋſefulnes of ſincere ſound Philoſophie in the Christian Religion, may be the matter of an other Undertakement; if this Historical Account now finiſht (and mainly deſign'd in Order thereunto) find any ſuch Reception, and Entertainment, as may give Encouragement to ſuch a Worke.
FINIS.