[192] Ἀπάθειαν γὰρ ποιοῦνται τὸ τέλος· τοῦτο δὲ ἴσον ἐστὶ τῷ θεὸν γενέσθαι. αἰσθανόμενος οὖν ἴσως αὑτοῦ Διογένης ἐν μὲν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασιν ἀπαθοῦς, ὑπὸ δὲ τῆς τοιαύτης ἐδωδῆς μόνον θραττομένου καὶ ναυτιῶντος καὶ δόξῃ κενῇ μᾶλλον(67) ἢ λόγῳ δεδουλωμένου· σάρκες γάρ εἴσιν οὐδὲν ἧττον, κἂν μυριάκις αὐτὰς ἑψήσῃ, κἂν ὑποτρίμμασι μυρίοις τις αὐτὰς καρυκεύσῃ· καὶ ταύτης αὑτὸν ἀφελέσθαι καὶ καταστῆσαι παντάπασιν ἐξάντη τῆς δειλίας ᾠήθη χρῆναι. [B] δειλία γάρ ἐστιν, εὖ ἴσθι, τὸ γοῦν τοιοῦτον. ἐπεὶ πρὸς τῆς Θεσμοφόρου εἰ σαρκῶν ἡψημένων ἁπτόμεθα, τοῦ χάριν οὐχὶ καὶ ἁπλῶς αὐτὰς προσφερόμεθα, φράσον ἡμῖν. οὐ γὰρ ἔχεις ἕτερον εἰπεῖν ἢ ὅτι οὕτω νενόμισται καὶ οὕτω συνειθίσμεθα. οὐ γὰρ δὴ πρὶν μὲν ἑψηθῆναι βδελυρὰ πέφυκεν, ἑψηθέντα δὲ γέγονεν αὑτῶν ἁγνότερα. [C] τί δῆτα ἐχρῆν πράττειν τόν γε παρὰ θεοῦ ταχθέντα καθάπερ στρατηγοῦ πᾶν μὲν ἐξελεῖν τὸ νόμισμα, λόγῳ δὲ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ κρῖναι τὰ πράγματα; περιιδεῖν αὑτὸν ὑπὸ ταύτης τῆς δόξης ἐνοχλούμενον, ὡς νομίζειν ὅτι κρέας μέν ἐστιν ἑψηθὲν ἁγνὸν καὶ ἐδώδιμον, μὴ κατεργασθὲν δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ πυρὸς μυσαρόν πως(68) καὶ βδελυρόν; οὕτως εἶ μνήμων; οὕτως εἶ σπουδαῖος; ὃς τοσοῦτον ὀνειδίζων τῷ κενοδόξῳ, κατὰ σὲ φάναι, [D] Διογένει, κατ᾽ ἐμὲ δὲ τῷ σπουδαιοτάτῳ θεράποντι καὶ ὑπηρέτῃ τοῦ Πυθίου, τὴν τοῦ πολύποδος ἐδωδὴν κατεδήδοκας μυρίους ταρίχους. (Freedom from emotion they regard as the end and aim; and this is equivalent to becoming a god. Now perhaps Diogenes observed that in the case of all other foods he himself had no particular sensations, and that only raw meat gave him indigestion and nausea, and took this for a proof that he was enslaved to vain opinion rather than reason; for flesh is none the less flesh, even though you cook it any number of times or season it with any number of sauces. This, I say, was why he thought he ought to rid and free himself altogether of this cowardice; for you may be sure that this sort of thing is cowardice. And in the name of the Law‐Giving goddess,(69) tell me why if we used cooked meats we do not eat them in their natural state also? You can give me no other answer than that this has become a custom and a habit with us. For surely we cannot say that before meat is cooked it is disgusting and that by being cooked it becomes purer than it was by nature. What then was it right for him to do who had been appointed by God like a general in command to do away with the common currency and to judge all questions by the criterion of reason and truth? Ought he to have shut his eyes and been so far fettered by this general opinion as to believe that flesh by being cooked becomes pure and fit for food, but that when it has not been acted upon by fire it is somehow abominable and loathsome? Is this the sort of memory you have? Is this your zeal for truth? For though you so severely criticised Diogenes the vain‐glorious, as you call him—though I call him the most zealous servant and vassal of the Pythian god—for eating octopus, you yourself have devoured endless pickled food,)