Aristotle: On Coming-to-Be and Passing-Away

95 Pages·1946·1.481 MB·English

by  W. J. Verdenius, J. H. Waszink

ARISTOTLE
ON COMING-TO-BEA ND PASSING AWAY
ANTIQUA
PHILOSOPHIA
A SERIES OF MONOGRAPHS ON ANCIENT
PHILOSOPHY
EDITED BY
W. j. VERDENIUS
AND
J.
H. W ASZINK
VOLUME I
ARISTOTLE
ON COMING-TO-BE AND PASSINO-AWAY
LEIDEN
E. J. BRILL
1946
ARISTOTLE
ON COMING-TO-BE AND PASSING-AWAY
SOME COMMENTS
BY
W. J. VERDENIUS,D . LITT.
AND
J. H. WASZINK,D . LITT.
LEIDEN
E. J. BRILL
1946

PREFACE
The following dissertation asks for a short preliminary
explanation. It will b.e observed that most of our remarks
contain a criticism of the commentary by Professor H. H.
Joachim (Oxford, 1922). This fact might cause some mis-
understanding, which we should like to clear up before-
hand. Firstly, if only incidentally we mention other works,
( e.g. the French translation by Mr. /. Tricot, Paris,
1934), it is not because we have not consulted them, but
because their interpretations are either overridden by
Joachim's .explanations or correspond to them. This does
not hold good for Pacius' and Zabarella' s editions, which
were not accessible to us. Secondly, when passing Jo~
chim' s interpretations and corrections in silence, we do
not always agree with them; we have confined ourselves
to such points as appeared to us most in ne.ed of elucid-
ation. Finally, it has never been our intention to belittle
the merits of Joachim' s commentary by our criticism. On
the contrary, irt the course of our studies we have got the
highest respect for his work and we should consider it an
honour, if our comments were looked upon as a supple- .
ment to his commentary.
We wish to thank Professor C. W. Vollg raft for some
valuable suggestions and Dr L. /. Guittart for cor-
recting the wording of our dissertation.
W. /. V.
/. H. W.

ARISTOTLE
ON COMING-TO-BE AND PASSING-AWAY
The Atomists hold that all things are composed of
ae
indivisible bodies: Q'l)'t(l neoi; Q'U'ta6 tacpEQ£L't'OV' U'tOl;
i~ oov dai xat 02021.x at 'ta;eL 'tomoov {314a, 23-24).
ae
Joachim writes ail'ta neo; ail'ta with EJL and remarks:
'The compounds differ 'one as compared with another',
not 'as compared with themselves'.' However, it will
be difficult to quote parallels for ail'ta neoi; all'ta in
the sense of 'one as compared with another'. On the
other hand, the traditional reading can certainly have
this meaning. The present treatise contains two more
examples of ai>'ta = ciU.11ia, viz. 323b, 28-29: oi,x i;Ca-
fl)ai yae EaV'ta 'tij; qruaeoo;o aa JL1l0 'tE'V«'V't£JaL 1l0 "Ci;
ivav't£CJ>i'Vcn :£v( where Joachim rightly has not accepted
the reading of EL, aii11ia), and 327a, 2: JLT0JL yycivov"Ca
JL1J'tea i>'t<i>vJL 'll't'a A.ACJ>C'Vf.. De incessu anim. 707a, 7,
Pol. 1305b, 13, and Liddell-Scott, s.v. iavTov, Ill.
'Those who make the ultimate kinds of things more
than one' cannot identify 'alteration' (dll.0Cooa1.i;w} ith
coming-to-be, because they conceive of coming-to-be
as a mechanical combination of elements. ~1.0 ).eyeL
'toih:ov "CO''Vt'Q onov xat 'Eµ.:nel>ox).'ijiO;,' t1... q ruai; oi,3ev6;
icn:1.v•. • aAA.a J1.0'VOµ'£V;1 .; 't£ 6uilla;C; "CEJ .I.LYE'V'tCl>'V"
{314b,6 -8). Joachim translates: 'That is why Empedo-
kles too uses language to this effect', and he explains
Philosophia Antiqua I
2 ARISTOTLE
the word 'too' by 'as well as Anaxagoras', referring
to 314a, 13-15. But the mere word Ka£ can hardly refer
to. what has been stated so long before, and besides
the reference is not to the point. In 314a, 13-15 Aris-
totle points out an inconsistency in the system of Anaxa-
goras, who, though being a pluralist, declared coming-
to-be and passing-away to be identical with 'alteration'.
On the other hand, the statement of Empedocles is in
harmony with the logical foundation of his system, and
it is quoted by Aristotle as a historical proof of his
systematic interpretation. Hence we should translate:
'That is why Empedocles in fact expresses himself in
these terms' {thus rightly Sylvester Maurus: 'ideoque
Empedocles cecinit').
Aristotle has more examples of Ka£ introducing a
quotation, cf. 314b, 17-21: -rci ycie nci&q• •• 61.acpoeaL
-r<i>va i:01.xe£coevt a£v ••• ci>anee 'H.ULcp 11<1"LEvp .:i:e:60,u,.fi,
..- flD..1.oµv. iv 1£11Kovo eav"', K-r1., Rhet. 1367a, 7-9: -re\
yc\e ataxeci alaxwo'U'Y'fatK aLU yovr2' KaLn o1.o'Dv-rKe,O L
µDJ.one,, ci>aneoK OL :Eancpcin>e noC1JKEsVtn cSv-ro,- rov
'A1Ka£ou "0D..m 'fL elnijv", K-r1., Poet. 1453b, 27-29:
lai:1. µAvy cie o-u-rmy £vea0a1f.l l'V nea;1.v, ci>anseo l naM1.ot
ino£0'U'V el66-ra, KOLy 1.yvco<1'H.O'VK'afa0"c in£Q' H.UEL' 6et·
n£611,E ffOLT)<dJEno'VK 'f£l'VO'U<-JrCaul',V n ai6a, fll'VM t\6£1.av,
Pol. 1328a, 1-5: neo; ycie -rau; auvt\0e" Kot cpD..ou,6
&up.o;U LQE'fUp.Lc iUovf l ffQO'' fO'Ud' yvci>-ra;6, 1.tyCl>Q£i<J00L
voµ.£aa,. 61.0 'H.UL'A ex£1oxo; :CQOO'l)'H.6'V-'rfo(Ii;) ; cp£10t;
EyKa1ci>6v1 .a)..eye-rafLfQ O' 'fO'V9 ufJ,6v•" 'O'U'V CIQ6 11 ffCIQCJ
cp£1.Cld>n'Vci yxeo··, De caelo 268a, 10-11 : 'H.a0cin£Qyc iQ
cpaa1.' H.at ot Il-u0ay6oe1.01-.,r o nav Kot -re\ ncina -rot;
-rea.atv me1.ai:a1.I.t is important to realize the special
ON COMING-TO-BE AND PASSING-AWAY 3
force of Ka£ in such cases. In the passage quoted from
the Poetics, for example, it has led editors astray, in
so far as it is commonly held that Aristotle did not
class Euripides among the 'ancient' poets. The im-
probability of this view has been pointed out by Mr.
J.
D. Denniston in Class. Rev. 43 (1929), 60. Instead
of 'Euripides as well as the ancients' he proposes the
translation 'Euripides as well as other ancients' and,
accordingly, in his Greek Particles (Oxford, 1934), 296,
he declares: 'Ka£ sometimes refers, not to the content
of the main clause, but to other, unspecified, examples'.
Yet we cannot accept this view either. It is highly
improbable that Aristotle, in using the word Ka£, should
have other instances in mind. We should rather refer
to the use of Ka£ in the following examples (partly
borrowed from Uenniston, The Greek Particles): Iliad
12, 8-9: 0eoov 6" aEK1J't''tI'.E 't"UK't'cOi0 ava't'OO• V't 'O Kai. O'U't l.
:n:oA.iwx e6vov iµ.:n:e6ov; jev. Od. 20, 156: dlla ,uiA0. tiei.
vsov't'at, bcei. Kai. :n:ciai.vi oQ't'1J.A ristoph. Thesm. 580:
't'1JQ'fi'tµ'ei J Kai. :n:eoa:n:s<i>,µ1t1v . Nub. 611-12: :n:eoo't'aµ ev
't'O'U µ11vo; el; 6116' oiJK u.a't''t'OVi i 6Qaxµ11v/, ooa't'eK ai.
Uyei.v ci:n:ana;, K't'A,.P lato Lach. 194a: KaQ-ree11aooµev,
iva Kai µiJ 11µ.ooavi i't'1)1 1c iv6ee£aK a't'ayeA.a<>P1h1d. r. 258e:
6 611 oA.Cyou:n :ciaai.a l :n:eei'.t 'o aooµa 116ovai.e xo1.1a16.u· \
Kai. 61.xa£00c; iv6ea:n:06006e1K.E; XA.1JV't'Path. d. 73d : 't'O'U't'O
6s SO't'LVc ivaµv11a1.,·o oa:n:eey e Kal l':1.µµ.£av' t'l£ l6Cl>'Y
:n:oUaKL£K s(i1)'t'O£d veµV11a81J1.0 8d: ciµa µev eyoo taooc;
oi,6" liv otcS; 't'e et11v, aµa 6s, et Kai T1:n:1.0't'aµ161 v(3, £oc;
o co
JI.OL6 oxet iµcS,, l':1.µµ£a,' t'ci} JJ.'l)KE'It.' O'UA .O"fO'lO! '\JK
oe11
i;aexetv. 11O d: Kai. a-u 't'a ci>aav't'ooK; ai 't'O'U£U 001.1c;
exe1.v dva 't'OV a-u't'ov Aoyov 't''tl'V 't'E MLO't'1J't'aK ai. 't'TJV
4 ARISTOTLE
oov
6uxcpcive1.axva i 'ta xewµa"ta xaU.£ro· xai "ta ev9ci6e
11.8£61.eat vai. "tav"ta 'ta ciyanwµeva µ6e1.a. In all these
cases Ka£ seems to emphasize the connection between
the contents of a subordinate clause with those of
the main sentence. So it conveys the idea of some-
thing natural or factual, which may be translated by
'indeed', 'really', 'in fact', 'actually'. Accordingly, the
terms 61.0 Ka£ and ci>anee xa£ introducing the above
quotations from Aristotle do not serve to give one
example taken from many others, but to stress the
factual accordance of an example with a general truth.
Hence, in 314b, 20, for example, we should translate:
'as indeed Empedocles says'.
We must treat this point at some length, because
it has often been an obstacle to the right understanding
of the text. For instance, in Plato Crat. 436e: 8auµcit0tµ·
av et xai 'ta ov6µa"ta auµcprovet ai>'ta av"tot;, the term
et xa£ means 'if really', and Denniston (op. cit., 327)
is wrong in taking this passage as one of the instances
of irregular order, for xa£ does not go closely with
auµcp6>Ve(tD enniston, 323), but it serves to bring out
the conditional purport of the sentence. In Soph. Phil.
191-2: oi>6ev 'tO'U't6>9Va "UµaO"toivµ o£·I 9eta ycie, etnee
xdyw 'tt cpeovoo,t he last words are usually explained
as 'I as well as others', but the meaning is obviously
'if actually', 'if at least'. The same interpretation holds
good for Ant. 719 and 0. R. 1110. In the laws 792d
Plato says: "to µiaov, 6 vw6ia neoaetnov ci>; LM6>V
O'VOf.1.CJ'Oijva" 6 116 ta9eal.'VX at 0e0'0 Xa'ta 'tt'VUµ aV't££a;
cpftµ11ve i>O"t6xro;n civ1:e; neoaayoerioµev. <tav't1)v fflV
~lV 6tWX£l'V< pT)JI6Le tv ,;µooxva i 'tO'Vµ iU .o. v1:a eaea9m.