ONE FOREVER AT REST

Going through the list of Xenophanes’ extant fragments, arranged numerically, according to their official commonly accepted classification, I shall start with the very first one, which illustrates one of Nietzsche’s points regarding Xenophanes, namely that he was a great rhapsodist and poet, but also a moralizer and an astute teacher of propriety.

(1) Now is the floor clean, and the hands and cups of all; one sets twisted garlands on our heads, another hands us fragrant ointment on a salver. The mixing bowl stands ready, full of gladness, and there is more wine at hand which promises never to leave us in the lurch, soft and smelling of flowers in the jars. In the midst the frankincense sends up its holy scent, and there is cold water, sweet and clean. Brown loaves are set before us and a lordly table laden with cheese and rich honey. The altar in the midst is clustered round with flowers; song and festivity fill the halls.

But first it is proper that people should sing to the god with joy, with holy tales and pure words; then after offerings and prayer made that we may have strength to do right, for that is in truth the first thing to do.

The next sequence of fragments has been quoted by historians of philosophy most frequently as it contains Xenophanes’ criticism of amoral polytheism and anthropomorphism, and lays down his monotheistic idea of One God, neither in form nor in thought bearing any resemblance to mortals. Observe, however, his use of the masculine He in reference to God. We may find it normal in man-controlled society but having said that God is totally unlike the mortals in every respect, his use of He in talking about God is at least worthy of being noticed.

(11) Homer and Hesiod have ascribed to the gods all things which are shame and disgrace among mortals, stealings, and adulteries, and deceivings of one another. (12) Since they have uttered many lawless deeds of the gods, stealings, and adulteries, and deceivings of one another. (14) But mortals deem that the gods are begotten as they are, and have clothes like theirs, and voice and form. (15) Yes, and if oxen and horses or lions had hands, and could paint with their hands, and produce works of art as people do, horses would paint the forms of the gods like horses, and oxen like oxen, and they would make their bodies in the image of their several kinds. (16) The Ethiopians make their gods black and snub-nosed; the Thracians say theirs have blue eyes and red hair. (18) The gods have not revealed all things to people from the beginning, but by seeking, they find in time what is better.

(23) One god, the greatest among gods and humans-- neither in form like unto mortals, nor in his thought. (24) He sees all over, thinks all over, and hears all over. (25) But-- without toil-- he sways all things by the thought of his mind. (26) And he abides always in the selfsame place, one forever at rest; nor does it befit him to go about now here, now there.

The next series of fragments talks about the origin of all things and about their ultimate destination. (27) All things come from the earth, and in earth all things end. (29) All things are earth and water that come into being and grow. (33) For we all are born of earth and water. Compare the last fragment to this passage in the Bible: For dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return (Genesis 3:19). It goes without saying that we are dealing not exactly with the familiar pre-Socratic cosmological statement about the particular origin of all things, but rather with a profound contemplation of the character of life and death, akin to the Biblical statement also quoted here.

And finally, Fragment 34 is concerned with the epistemological certainty of God and complete (absolute) truth. The fact that such certain knowledge cannot be available without destroying the essence of faith has been discussed by me in several places, and what remains for me here is only to express my admiration for Xenophanes’ profundity, from which, regrettably, the fathers of Christian theology did not choose to profit and instead, spent lifetimes of inspiration and thorough scholarship, trying to prove what was never meant to be subjected to a rational scientific probe.

(34) There never has been, nor will ever be, a person who has certain knowledge about the gods and about all the things I speak of. Even if he should chance to say the complete truth (by sheer accident, but not as a result of the specific intent), yet he himself knows not that it is so. But all may have their fancy.

As I said before, and as the historiography of philosophy never fails to mention in its own right, only very few fragments of Xenophanes’ works have reached us over the ages, and there are fewer still which I have chosen to discuss in this entry. But they alone are sufficient to establish Xenophanes as a philosopher who can stand his ground among the bigger, more established names. For, as Nietzsche writes in his Preface to Philosophy During the Tragic Age of the Greeks:

This attempt to relate the history of the earlier Greek philosophers is distinguished from similar attempts by its brevity. This has been accomplished by mentioning only a small number of the doctrines of every philosopher, i.e., by incompleteness. Those doctrines, however, have been selected, in which the personal element of the philosopher re-echoes most strongly; whereas a complete enumeration of all the possible propositions handed down to us, as is the custom in textbooks, merely brings about one thing, the absolute silencing of the personal element. It is through this that those records become so tedious, for in the systems which have been refuted it is only this personal element that can still interest us, for this alone is eternally irrefutable. (And now comes the big punch line!) It is possible to shape the picture of a person out of three anecdotes. I endeavor to bring into relief three anecdotes out of every system and abandon the remainder.

And of course the reader may have noted that for the purposes of this entry I myself “endeavored to bring into relief three anecdotes” out of Xenophanes’ small, but important legacy, and I do agree with Nietzsche that it is possible, on such a limited basis, to shape the picture of a genius, to which Xenophanes certainly measures up.