Ἀλλ᾽ ἴσως ὁ μὲν λόγος οὔ φησι δεῖν ἀντὶ τῶν ἀληθῶν [D] καὶ μὴ πεπλασμένων τὰ ψευδῆ καὶ πεπλασμένα παρὰ τοῦ κυνός, ᾧ μόνῳ τῆς ἐλευθερίας μέτεστιν, ἐν τοῖς κοινοῖς ᾄδεσθαι συλλόγοις, ἡ συνήθεια δὲ οὕτω[142] γέγονεν ἀπὸ Διογένους ἀρξαμένη καὶ Κράτητος ἄχρι τῶν ἐφεξῆς. οὐδὲν οὐδαμοῦ παράδειγμα τοιοῦτον εὑρήσεις· ἐκεῖνο γὰρ ἀφίημι τέως, ὅτι τῷ Κυνικῷ τὸ νόμισμα παραχαράττοντι [pg 084] τῇ συνηθείᾳ προσέχειν οὐδαμῶς προσήκει, τῷ λόγῳ δὲ αὐτῷ μόνῳ, [209] καὶ τὸ ποιητέον εὑρίσκειν οἴκοθεν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ μανθάνειν ἔξωθεν. εἰ δ᾽ Ἀντισθένης ὁ Σωκρατικὸς ὥσπερ ὁ Ξενοφῶν ἔνια διὰ τῶν μύθων ἀπήγελλε, μήτι[143] τοῦτό σε ἐξαπατάτω· καὶ γὰρ μικρὸν ὕστερον ὑπὲρ τούτου σοι διαλέξομαι·[144] νῦν δὲ ἐκεῖνό μοι πρὸς τῶν Μουσῶν φράσον ὑπὲρ τοῦ Κυνισμοῦ, πότερον ἀπόνοια τίς ἐστι καὶ βίος οὐκ ἀνθρώπινος, ἀλλὰ θηριώδης ψυχῆς διάθεσις οὐδὲν καλόν, οὐδὲν σπουδαῖον οὐδὲ ἀγαθὸν νομιζούσης; [B] δοίη γὰρ ἂν ὑπολαβεῖν πολλοῖς περὶ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα Οἰνόμαος. εἴ τί σοι τοῦ ταῦτα γοῦν ἐπελθεῖν ἐμέλησεν, ἐπέγνως ἂν σαφῶς ἐν τῇ τοῦ κυνὸς αὐτοφωνίᾳ καὶ τῷ κατὰ τῶν χρηστηρίων καὶ πᾶσιν ἁπλῶς οἷς ἔγραψεν ὁ ἀνήρ. τοιούτου δὲ ὄντος τοῦ πράγματος, ὥστε ἐνῃρῆσθαι μὲν ἅπασαν τὴν πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς εὐλάβειαν, ἠτιμάσθαι δὲ πᾶσαν ἀνθρωπίνην φρόνησιν, νόμον δὲ μὴ τὸν ὁμώνυμον τῷ καλῷ καὶ δικαίῳ πεπατῆσθαι μόνον, [C] ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἐκ τῶν θεῶν ἡμῖν ὥσπερ ἐγγραφέντας ταῖς ψυχαῖς, ὑφ᾽ ὧν πάντες ἀδιδάκτως εἶναι θεῖόν τι πεπείσμεθα καὶ πρὸς τοῦτο ἀφορᾶν ἐπ᾽ αὐτό τε οἶμαι σπεύδειν οὕτω διατιθέμενοι τὰς ψυχὰς πρὸς αὐτὸ ὥσπερ, οἶμαι πρὸς τὸ φῶς τὰ βλέποντα, πρὸς τούτῳ δὲ εἰ καὶ ὁ δεύτερος ἐξελαύνοιτο νόμος ἱερὸς ὢν φύσει καὶ θεῖος, ὁ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων πάντη καὶ πάντως [pg 086] ἀπέχεσθαι κελεύων καὶ μήτε ἐν λόγῳ μήτε ἐν ἔργῳ μήτε [D] ἐν αὐταῖς ταῖς λανθανούσαις τῆς ψυχῆς ἐνεργείαις ταῦτα ἐπιτρέπων συγχεῖν, ὅσπερ ἡμῖν καὶ τῆς τελειοτάτης ἐστὶν ἡγεμὼν δικαιοσύνης· ἆρ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι βαράθρου τὸ πρᾶγμα ἄξιον; ἆρ᾽ οὐ τοὺς ταῦτα ἐπαινοῦντας ὥσπερ τοὺς φαρμακοὺς ἐχρῆν οὐ θύσθλοις παιομένους[145] ἐλαύνεσθαι· κουφοτέρα γάρ ἐστι τῶν ἀδικημάτων ἡ ζημία· λίθοις δὲ βαλλομένους ἀπολωλέναι; διαφέρουσι γὰρ οὗτοι τί, [210] πρὸς τῶν θεῶν εἰπέ μοι, τῶν ἐπ᾽ ἐρημίας λῃστευόντων καὶ κατειληφότων τὰς ἀκτὰς ἐπὶ τῷ λυμαίνεσθαι τοῖς καταπλέουσι; καταφρονοῦντες θανάτου, φασίν· ὥσπερ οὐ κἀκείνοις συνομαρτούσης ταυτησὶ τῆς ἀπονοίας. φησὶ γοῦν ὁ καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς μὲν ποιητὴς καὶ μυθολόγος, ὡς δὲ ὁ Πύθιος λῃσταῖς χρωμένοις ἀνεῖλεν, ἥρως καὶ δαίμων, ὑπὲρ τῶν λῃζομένων τὴν θάλατταν
(But perhaps you will say that though reason asserts that the Cynic, who alone of men can claim to be free, ought not to invent and compose lying fictions instead of the unvarnished truth and then recite these in public assemblies, nevertheless the custom began with Diogenes and Crates, and has been maintained from that time by all Cynics. My answer is that nowhere will you find a single example of such a custom. For the moment I do not insist on the fact that it in no wise becomes a Cynic who must “give a new stamp to the common currency”[146] to pay any attention to custom, but only to pure reason, and he ought to discover within himself what is right for him to do and not learn it from without. And do not be misled by the fact that Antisthenes the disciple of Socrates, and Xenophon too, sometimes expressed themselves by means of myths; for I shall have something to say to you on this point in a moment. But now in the Muses' name answer me this question about the Cynic philosophy. Are we to think it a sort of madness, a method of life not suitable for a human being, but rather a brutal attitude of mind which recks naught of the beautiful, the honourable, or the good? For Oenomaus[147] would make many people hold this view of it. If you had taken any trouble to study the subject, you would have learned this from that Cynic's “Direct Inspiration of Oracles” and his work “Against the Oracles,” in short from everything that he wrote. This then is his aim, to do away with all reverence for the gods, to bring dishonour on all human wisdom, to trample on all law that can be identified with honour and justice, and more than this, to trample on those laws which have been as it were engraved on our souls by the gods, and have impelled us all to believe without teaching that the divine exists, and to direct our eyes to it and to yearn towards it: for our souls are disposed towards it as eyes towards the light. Furthermore, suppose that one should discard also that second law which is sanctified both by nature and by God, I mean the law that bids us keep our hands altogether and utterly from the property of others and permits us neither by word or deed or in the inmost and secret activities of our souls to confound such distinctions, since the law is our guide to the most perfect justice—is not this conduct worthy of pit?[148] And ought not those who applauded such views to have been driven forth, not by blows with wands, like scapegoats,[149] for that penalty is too light for such crimes, but put to death by stoning? For tell me, in Heaven's name, how are such men less criminal than bandits who infest lonely places and haunt the coasts in order to despoil navigators? Because, as people say, they despise death; as though bandits were not inspired by the same frenzied courage! So says at any rate he[150] who with you counts as a poet and mythologist, though, as a Pythian god proclaimed to certain bandits who sought his oracle, he was a hero and divinity—I mean where, speaking of pirates of the sea, he says:)
Οἷά τε ληιστῆρες, ὑπεὶρ ἅλα τοί τ᾽ ἀλόωνται
[B] Ψυχὰς παρθέμενοι.
(“Like pirates who wander over the sea, staking their lives.”[151])
τί οὖν ἔτι ἕτερον ζητεῖς ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀπονοίας τῶν λῃστῶν μάρτυρα; πλὴν εἰ μὴ καὶ ἀνδρειοτέρους ἂν εἴποι τις τῶν τοιούτων κυνῶν ἐκείνους τοὺς λῃστάς, ἰταμωτέρους δὲ τῶν λῃστῶν ἐκείνων τοὺς κύνας τουτουσί. οἱ μὲν γὰρ συνειδότες αὑτοῖς οὕτω μοχθηρὸν τὸν βίον οὐ μᾶλλον διὰ τὸ τοῦ θανάτου δέος ἢ τὴν αἰσχύνην τὰς ἐρημίας προβάλλονται, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα περιπατοῦσιν[152] [C] ἐν τῷ μέσῳ τὰ κοινὰ νόμιμα συγχέοντες, οὐχὶ τῷ κρείττονα [pg 088] καὶ καθαρωτέραν, ἀλλὰ τῷ χείρονα καὶ βδελυρωτέραν ἐπεισάγειν πολιτείαν.
(What better witness can you require for the desperate courage of bandits? Except indeed that one might say that bandits are more courageous than Cynics of this sort, while the Cynics are more reckless than they. For pirates, well aware as they are how worthless is the life they lead, take cover in desert places as much from shame as from the fear of death: whereas the Cynics go up and down in our midst subverting the institutions of society, and that not by introducing a better and purer state of things but a worse and more corrupt state.)
Τὰς ἀνανφερομένας δὲ εἰς τὸν Διογένη τραγῳδίας, οὔσας μὲν καὶ ὁμολογουμένως[153] Κυνικοῦ τινος συγγράμματα, ἀμφισβητουμένας δὲ κατὰ τοῦτο μόνον, [D] εἴτε τοῦ διδασκάλου, τοῦ Διογένους, εἰσίν, εἴτε τοῦ μαθητοῦ Φιλίσκου, τίς οὐκ ἂν ἐπελθὼν βδελύξαιτο καὶ νομίσειεν ὑπερβολὴν ἀρρητουργίας οὐδὲ ταῖς ἑταίραις ἀπολελεῖφθαι; ταῖς Οἰνομάου δὲ ἐντυχών· ἔγραψε γὰρ καὶ τραγῳδίας τοῖς λόγοις τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ παραπλησίας, ἀρρήτων ἀρρητότερα καὶ κακῶν πέρα, καὶ οὐκέθ᾽ ὅ,τι φῶ περὶ αὐτῶν ἀξίως ἔχω, κἂν τὰ Μαγνήτων κακὰ, κἂν τὸ Τερμέριον, κἂν πᾶσαν ἁπλῶς αὐτοῖς ἐπιφθέγξωμαι [211] τὴν τραγῳδίαν μετὰ τοῦ σατύρου καὶ τῆς κωμῳδίας καὶ τοῦ μίμου, οὕτω πᾶσα μὲν αἰσχρότης, πᾶσα δὲ ἀπόνοια πρὸς ὑπερβολὴν ἐν ἐκείναις τῷ ἀνδρὶ πεφιλοτέχνηται· καὶ εἰ μὲν ἐκ τούτων τις ἀξιοῖ τὸν Κυνισμὸν ὁποῖός τις ἐστιν ἡμῖν ἐπιδεῖξαι, βλασφημῶν τοὺς θεούς, ὑλακτῶν πρὸς ἅπαντας, ὅπερ ἔφην ἀρχόμενος, ἴτω, χωρείτω,[154] γῆν πρὸ γῆς, ὅποι βούλοιτο· εἰ δ᾽, ὅπερ ὁ θεὸς ἔφη Διογένει, τὸ νόμισμα παραχαράξας ἐπὶ τὴν πρὸ ταύτης εἰρημένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ συμβουλὴν τρέποιτο, τὸ Γνῶθι σαυτόν, ὅπερ ζηλώσαντες ἐπὶ τῶν ἔργων Διογένης καὶ Κράτης φαίνονται, τοῦτο ἤδη τοῦ παντὸς ἄξιον ἔγωγε φαίην ἂν ἀνδρὶ καιὶ [pg 090] στρατηγεῖν καὶ φιλοσοφεῖν ἐθέλοντι. τί δὲ εἶπεν ὁ θεός, ἆρ᾽ ἴσμεν; ὅτι τῆς τῶν πολλῶν αὐτῷ δόξης ἐπέταξεν [C] ὑπερορᾶν καὶ παραχαράττειν οὐ τὴν ἀλήθειαν, ἀλλὰ τὸ νόμισμα. τὸ δὲ Γνῶθι σαυτὸν ἐν ποτέρᾳ θησόμεθα μοίρᾳ; πότερον ἐν τῇ τοῦ νομίσματος; ἢ τοῦτό γε αὐτὸ τῆς ἀληθείας εἶναι κεφάλαιον θήσομεν καὶ τρόπον εἰρῆσθαι τοῦ Παραχάραξον τὸ νόμισμα διὰ τῆς[155] Γνῶθι σαυτὸν ἀποφάσεως; ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ τὰ νομιζόμενα παντάπασιν ἀτιμάσας, ἐπ᾽ αὐτὴν δὲ ἥκων τὴν ἀλήθειαν οὐδ᾽ ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ τοῖς νομιζομένοις, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ὄντως οὖσι θήσεται, [D] οὕτως οἶμαι καὶ ὁ γνοὺς ἑαυτὸν ὅπερ ἔστιν ἀκριβῶς εἴσεται καὶ οὐχ ὅπερ νομίζεται. πότερον οὖν οὐχ ὁ Πύθιος ἀληθής τέ ἐστι θεός, καὶ Διογένης τοῦτο ἐπέπειστο σαφῶς, ὅς γε αὐτῷ πεισθεὶς ἀντὶ φυγάδος ἀπεδείχθη οὐ τοῦ Περσῶν βασιλέως μείζων, ἀλλ᾽, ὡς ἡ φήμη παρέδωκεν, αὐτῷ τῷ καταλύσαντι τὸ Περσῶν κράτος καὶ ταῖς Ἡρακλέους ἁμιλλωμένῳ πράξεσιν, ὑπερβάλλεσθαι δὲ τὸν Ἀχιλλέα φιλοτιμουμένῳ ζηλωτός; οὗτος οὖν ὁ Διογένης ὁποῖός τις ἦν τά τε πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς [212] καὶ τὰ πρὸς ἀνθρώπους μὴ διὰ τῶν Οἰνομάου λόγων μηδὲ τῶν Φιλίσκου τραγῳδιῶν, αἷς ἐπιγράψας τὸ Διογένους ὄνομα τῆς θείας πολλά ποτε κατεψεύσατο κεφαλῆς, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ὧν ἔδρασεν ἔργων ὁποῖός τις ἦν γνωριζέσθω.
(Now as for the tragedies ascribed to Diogenes, which are and are admitted to be, the composition of some Cynic—the only point in dispute being whether they are by the master himself, Diogenes, or by his disciple Philiscus,—what reader of these would not abhor them, and find in them an excess of infamy not to be surpassed even by courtesans? However, let him go on to read the tragedies of Oenomaus—for he too wrote tragedies to match his discourses—and he will find that they are more inconceivably infamous, that they transgress the very limits of evil; in fact I have no words to describe them adequately, and in vain should I cite in comparison the horrors of Magnesia,[156] the wickedness of Termerus[157] or the whole of tragedy put together, along with satiric drama, comedy and the mime: with such art has their author displayed in those works every conceivable vileness and folly in their most extreme form. Now if from such works any man chooses to demonstrate to us the character of the Cynic philosophy, and to blaspheme the gods and bark at all men, as I said when I began, let him go, let him depart to the uttermost parts of the earth whithersoever he pleases. But if he do as the god enjoined on Diogenes, and first “give a new stamp to the common currency,” then devote himself to the advice uttered earlier by the god, the precept “Know Thyself,” which Diogenes and Crates evidently followed in their actual practice, then I say that this is wholly worthy of one who desires to be a leader and a philosopher. For surely we know what the god meant? He enjoined on Diogenes to despise the opinion of the crowd and to give a new stamp, not to truth, but to the common currency. Now to which of these categories shall we assign self-knowledge? Can we call it common currency? Shall we not rather say that it is the very summary of truth, and by the injunction “Know Thyself” we are told the way in which we must “give a new stamp to the common currency”? For just as one who pays no regard whatever to conventional opinions but goes straight for the truth will not decide his own conduct by those opinions but by actual facts, so I think he who knows himself will know accurately, not the opinion of others about him, but what he is in reality. It follows then, does it not? that the Pythian god speaks the truth, and moreover that Diogenes was clearly convinced of this since he obeyed the god and so became, instead of an exile, I will not say greater than the King of Persia, but according to the tradition handed down actually an object of envy to the man[158] who had broken the power of Persia and was rivalling the exploits of Heracles and ambitious to surpass Achilles. Then let us judge of the attitude of Diogenes towards gods and men, not from the discourses of Oenomaus or the tragedies of Philiscus—who by ascribing their authorship to Diogenes grossly slandered that sacred personage—but let us, I say, judge him by his deeds.)
Ἦλθεν εἰς Ὀλυμπίαν ἐπὶ τί πρὸς Διός; ἵνα τοὺς ἀγωνιστὰς θεάσηται; τί δέ; οὐχὶ καὶ Ἰσθμίοις [pg 092] τοὺς αὐτοὺς καὶ Παναθηναίοις θεάσασθαι δίχα πραγμάτων οἷόν τε ἦν; ἀλλὰ ἐθέλων ἐκεῖ τοῖς κρατίστοις συγγενέσθαι τῶν Ἑλλήνων; [B] οὐ γὰρ Ἰσθμόνδε ἐφοίτων; οὐκ ἂν οὖν εὕροις ἄλλην αἰτίαν ἢ τὴν εἰς τὸν θεὸν θεραπείαν. εἰ δ᾽ οὐκ ἐξεπλάγη τὸν κεραυνὸν· οὐδὲ ἐγὼ μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς πολλῶν πολλάκις πειραθεὶς διοσημιῶν ἐξεπλάγην. ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως οὕτω δή τι τοὺς θεοὺς πέφρικα καὶ φιλῶ καὶ σέβω καὶ ἅζομαι καὶ πάνθ᾽ ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα πρὸς αὐτοὺς πάσχω, ὅσαπερ ἄν τις καὶ οἷα πρὸς ἀγαθοὺς δεσπότας, πρὸς διδασκάλους, πρὸς πατέρας, πρὸς κηδεμόνας, πρὸς πάντα ἁπλῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα, [C] ὥστε ὀλίγου δεῖν ὑπὸ τῶν σῶν ῥημάτων πρῴην ἐξανέστην. τοῦτο μὲν οὖν οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅντινα τρόπον ἐπελθὸν ἴσως σιωπᾶσθαι δέον ἐρρέθη.