36. On the other hand, it would be wrong to suppose that Orphicism or
the Mysteries suggested any definite doctrines to philosophers, at least
during the period which we are about to consider. We have admitted that
they really implied a new view of the soul, and we might therefore have
expected to find that they profoundly modified men’s theory of the world
and their relation to it. The striking thing is that this did not
happen. Even those philosophers who were most closely in touch with the
religious movement, like Empedokles and the Pythagoreans, held views
about the soul which really contradicted the theory implied by their
religious practices.[182] There is no room for an immortal soul in any
philosophy of this period. Up to Plato’s time immortality was never
treated in a scientific way, but merely assumed in the Orphic rites, to
which Plato half seriously turns for confirmation of his own
teaching.[183]
Footnote 182:
For Empedokles, see § 119; for the Pythagoreans, see § 149.
Footnote 183:
Cf. _Phd._ 69 c 2, καὶ κινδυνεύουσι καὶ οἱ τὰς τελετὰς ἡμῖν οὗτοι
καταστήσαντες οὐ φαῦλοί τινες εἶναι, ἀλλὰ τῷ ὄντι πάλαι αἰνίττεσθαι
κ.τ.λ. The gentle irony of this and similar passages ought to be
unmistakable.
All this is easily accounted for. With us a religious revival generally
means the vivid realisation of a new or forgotten doctrine, while
ancient religion has properly no doctrine at all. “The initiated,”
Aristotle said, “were not expected to learn anything, but merely to be
affected in a certain way and put into a certain frame of mind.”[184]
Nothing was required but that the ritual should be correctly performed,
and the worshipper was free to give any explanation of it he pleased. It
might be as exalted as that of Pindar and Sophokles, or as material as
that of the itinerant mystery-mongers described by Plato in the
_Republic_. The essential thing was that he should duly sacrifice his
pig.
Footnote 184:
Arist. fr. 45, 1483 a 19, τοὺς τελουμένους οὐ μαθεῖν τι δεῖν, ἀλλὰ
παθεῖν καὶ διατεθῆναι.
I. PYTHAGORAS OF SAMOS
[Sidenote: Character of the tradition.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account