XLIX.When someone exalts himself on account of his powers of understanding and expounding the writings of Chrysippus,[1] then say to yourself, If Chrysippus had not written obscurely, this man would have had nothing whereon to exalt himself. But I, what do I desire? Is it not to learn to understand Nature and to follow her? I inquire, then, who can expound Nature to me, and hearing that Chrysippus can, I betake myself to him. But I do not understand his writings, therefore I seek an expounder for them. And so far there is nothing exalted. But when I have found the expounder, it remains for me to put into practice what declares to me, and in this alone is there anything exalted. But if I look on the exposition as a thing to be admired in itself, what else am I become than a grammarian instead of a sage? except that the exposition is not of Homer but of Chrysippus. Therefore when one may ask me to lecture on the philosophy
- ↑ Chrysippus (3rd century b.c.) united brilliant talents with the true Stoic independence of character, and was very famous in his own day and for long afterwards. He philosophized with a fearless idealism, resolved to follow logic wherever it should lead him. In consequence, perhaps, of hypotheses put forward in this spirit, he was accused by some (εἰσἰν οἱ) of having advocated cannibalism and incest. None of his many writings are now extant, but Diogenes Laertius gives some traits of him.
