The Ethics of Diet: A Catena of Authorities Deprecatory of the Practice of Flesh EatingWilliams, Howard
Philosophy
The Ethics of Diet: A Catena of Authorities Deprecatory of the Practice of Flesh Eating
Williams, Howard
Diet; Vegetarianism
“So that, altogether, but a few [animals] were left proper for
their food. And of those which he permitted them to touch, he
prohibited such as had died, or were offered to idols, or had been
strangled: inasmuch as to touch these was unlawful.... Pleasure
has often produced in men harm and pain, and full feeding begets
in the soul uneasiness, and forgetfulness, and foolishness. It is
said, moreover, that the bodies of children, when shooting up to
their height, are made to grow right by abstinence in diet; for
then the spirit which pervades the body, in order to its growth,
is not checked by abundance of food obstructing the freedom of
its course. Whence that truth-seeking philosopher, Plato, fanning
the spark of the Hebrew philosophy, when condemning a life of
luxury, says: ‘On my coming hither [to Syracuse] the life which
is here called happy pleased me not by any means. For not one man
under heaven, if brought up from his youth in such practices, will
ever turn out a _wise_ man, with however admirable genius he may
be endowed.’ For Plato was not unacquainted with David,[69] who
placed the sacred ark in his city in the midst of the tabernacle,
and bidding all his subjects rejoice ‘before the Lord, divided to
the whole host of Israel, men and women, to each a loaf of bread,
and baked bread, and a cake from the frying-pan.’[70] This was the
_sufficient_ sustenance of the Israelites. But that of the Gentiles
was over-abundant, and no one who uses it will ever study to
become temperate, burying, as he does, his mind in his belly, very
like the fish called _onos_ which, Aristotle says, alone of all
creatures has its heart in its stomach. This fish Epicharmus, the
comic poet, calls ‘monster-paunch.’ Such are the men who believe in
their stomach, ‘whose God is their belly, whose glory is in their
shame, who mind earthly things.’ To them the apostle predicted no
good when he said ‘whose end is destruction.’”[71]
In treating of the subject of sacrifices, upon which he uses a good
deal of sarcasm (in regard to the _pagan_ sacrifices at least), Clement
incidentally allows us to see, still further, his opinion respecting
gross feeding. He quotes several of the Greek poets who ridicule the
practice and pretence of sacrificial propitiation, _e.g._, Menander:--
“the end of the loin,
The gall, the bones uneatable, they give
Alone to Heaven: the rest _themselves_ consume.”
“If, in fact,” remarks Clement, “the savour is the special desire of
the Gods of the Greeks, should they not first deify the _cooks_, and
worship the Chimney itself which is still closer to the much-prized
savour?”
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