Doubts on Zuntz's Lesson 7

Χαίρετε, ῶ φίλοι!

This time I have only two doubts:

B2. Απ’εχθρῶν πολλὰ μανθάνουσιν οὶ σοφοί

I’ve understood the syntax of this sentence: οὶ σοφοί is the subject, πολλά is an accusative governed by μανθάνουσιν, etc. I just want to know whether I lost some subtlety in the meaning of this verb, because “The wise learn much away from their enemies” doesn’t seem to make much sense.

H2. Οἱ Πυθαγόρειοι έλεγον ὡς τοῦ λογικοῦ ζῴου τὸ μὲν εστι θεός, τὸ δ’άνθρωπος, τὸ δὲ οῖον Πυθαγόρας.

Of this I’ve got nothing but the beginning: The Pythagoreans said that… I truly cannot understand the rest (what is that genitive doing there? If it were τὸ λογικὸν ζῷον, it seems to me that the meaning would be “The Pythagoreans said that the rational animal is either a god, or a man, or like Pythagoras”).

Ἔρρωσθε!
Ἰωάννης Στέφανος

Wassup Ἰωάννης, I think I’ve got some insights. Regarding the first one, I’d say the preposition ἀπό has a causal sense: “The wise learn much from their enemies”.

In the second one, I believe the structure to be as follows: “The pythagorics said that (έλεγον ὡς), regarding the rational animal, there is (τὸ μὲν εστι) the god, there is (τὸ δ’) the men, and there is (τὸ δὲ) the one like Pythagoras”. The τὸ μὲν… τὸ δὲ… work as nouns, making a differentiation between two groups. Check the famous fragment of Heraclitus: Πόλεμος πάντων μὲν πατήρ ἐστι, πάντων δὲ βασιλεύς, καὶ τοὺς μὲν θεοὺς ἔδειξε τοὺς δὲ ἀνθρώπους, τοὺς μὲν δούλους ἐποίησε τοὺς δὲ ἐλευθέρους. “τοὺς μὲν θεοὺς” is not jointly the object of the action, but rather “τοὺς μὲν”, and the same with the “τοὺς δὲ”.

Hope it helps.

Χαῖρε, Αλέξανδρε!

It makes sense for από to mean from; if I’m not mistaken, the Latin preposition ab (a cognate of the Greek one) can also be used thus: Sapitentes multa discunt ab inimicis.

On the second point: can the genitive alone, therefore, be used as the Latin de (as in De Imitatione Christi and De Natura Deorum)? I know that περί is thus used with that case (as in the phrase Zuntz himself put in another chapter: Περὶ θεῶν λέγε ὡς εισίν.), but I don’t remember he saying that the very genitive also has that function.

Ἔρρωσο.
Ἰωάννης Στέφανος.

I think that the genitive is partitive: of the rational animal, one is a god etc.

Hey! Actually, it is not in the sense of περί that it is used here, it’s not “about”, but rather “among”, “of”, as Bedwere notes. My use of “regarding” may have been misleading, I used it because in English this use of “of” sounds a bit rare to me; in Spanish, we would say “del animal racional, uno es dios…”, such as Bedwere did it in English. Let me make this example: τοῦ άνθρώπου, τὸ μὲν εστι σοφός, τὸ δ’ἀμαθής.

Makes sense. “Among the rational animals, there is the god, the man, and those like Pythagoras” would be the right understanding, then?

It’s first framed as bipartite (τὸ μὲν … τὸ δέ, god/human) but then a third part is added. A possible translation would be “the one part of the rational animal is a god and the other is a human being—and the other is like Pythagoras.” For Pythagoras’ followers Pythagoras was rather more than human: Superman.

Iamblichus, De Vita Pythagorica
περὶ τοῦ Πυθαγορικοῦ βίου λόγος
Chapter 6 Section 31 (6.31)

ἱστορεῖ δὲ καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης ἐν τοῖς περὶ τῆς Πυθαγορικῆς φιλοσοφίας, διαίρεσίν τινα τοιάνδε ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐν τοῖς πάνυ ἀπορρήτοις διαφυλάττεσθαι· τοῦ λογικοῦ ζῴου τὸ μέν ἐστι θεός, τὸ δὲ ἄνθρωπος, τὸ δὲ οἷον Πυθαγόρας. καὶ πάνυ εὐλόγως τοιοῦτον αὐτὸν ὑπελάμβανον, δι’ ὃν περὶ θεῶν μὲν καὶ δαιμόνων καὶ ἡρώων καὶ

κόσμου, σφαιρῶν τε καὶ ἀστέρων κινήσεως παντοίας, ἐπιπροσθήσεών τε καὶ ὑπολείψεων καὶ ἀνωμαλιῶν, ἐκκεντροτήτων τε καὶ ἐπικύκλων, καὶ τῶν ἐν κόσμῳ πάντων, οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς καὶ τῶν μεταξὺ φύσεων ἐκδήλων τε καὶ ἀποκρύφων, ὀρθή τις καὶ ἐοικυῖα τοῖς οὖσι παρεισῆλθεν ἔννοια, μηδενὶ τῶν φαινομένων ἢ δι’ ἐπινοίας λαμβανσμένων μηδαμῶς ἀντιπαίουσα, μαθήματα δὲ καὶ θεωρία καὶ τὰ ἐπιστημονικὰ πάντα, ὅσα περ ὀμματοποιὰ τῆς ψυχῆς ὡς ἀληθῶς καὶ καθαρτικὰ τῆς ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων ἐπιτηδευμάτων τοῦ νοῦ τυφλώσεως, πρὸς τὸ κατιδεῖν δυνηθῆναι τὰς ὄντως τῶν ὅλων ἀρχὰς καὶ αἰτίας ἐνῳκίσθη τοῖς Ἕλλησιν.

Yes, Iamblichus unsurprisingly attributes the partitioning (διαίρεσις) to Aristotle.

Also, that οἷον would be a conjunction, like Latin ut, right? It seems οἷος is an adjective, but here it doesn’t seem to concord with anything neuter to be one…

Yes, it’s neuter, and used much like Latin ut: “like P.” LSJ οἷος V 2.

Thanks Michael, Bedwere and Alejandro for the help!

1 Like