Apophthegmata Patrum 18. Aesop-ish?

Are you learning Koine Greek, the Greek of the New Testament and most other post-classical Greek texts? Whatever your level, use this forum to discuss all things Koine, Biblical or otherwise, including grammar, textbook talk, difficult passages, and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Apophthegmata Patrum 18. Aesop-ish?

Post by jeidsath »

ιη΄. Ἀδελφοὶ παρέβαλον τῷ ἀββᾷ Ἀντωνίῳ ἀπὸ Σκήτεως, καὶ ἐμβάντες εἰς πλοῖον ἀπελθεῖν πρὸς αὐτὸν, εὗρον γέροντα θέλοντα καὶ αὐτὸν ἀπελθεῖν ἐκεῖ. Ἠγνόουν δὲ αὐτὸν οἱ ἀδελφοί. Καὶ καθήμενοι ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ ἐλάλουν λόγους Πατέρων, καὶ ἐκ τῆς Γραφῆς, καὶ πάλιν περὶ ἐργοχείρων ἑαυτῶν. Ὁ δὲ γέρων ἐσιώπα. Ἐλθόντων δὲ αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τοῦ ὅρμου, εὑρέθη καὶ ὁ γέρων ὑπάγων πρὸς τὸν ἀββᾶν Ἀντώνιον. Ὡς δὲ ἦλθον πρὸς αὐτὸν, λέγει αὐτοῖς· Καλὴν συνοδίαν εὕρετε, τὸν γέροντα τοῦτον. Εἶπε δὲ καὶ τῷ γέροντι· Καλοὺς ἀδελφοὺς εὗρες μετὰ σοῦ, ἀββᾶ. Λέγει ὁ γέρων· Καλοὶ μέν εἰσιν, ἀλλ’ ἡ αὐλὴ αὐτῶν οὐκ ἔχει θύραν, καὶ ὁ θέλων εἰσέρχεται εἰς τὸν σταῦλον, καὶ λύει τὸν ὄνον. Τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγεν, ὅτι τὰ ἐρχόμενα εἰς τὸ στόμα αὐτῶν λαλοῦσιν.

18. Fratres abbatem Antonium inviserunt de Sceti, et ingressi navem ut irent ad eum, invenerunt senem qui ipse etiam illuc proficisci volebat. Fratribus autem non erat notus. Sedentes porro in navi, loquebantur sermones Patrum, necnon ex Scripturis, postea de laboribus manuum suarum. At senex tacebat. Cum autem venissent ad portum, deprehensus est etiam senex ad abbatem Antonium proficisci. Utque ad eum venerunt, ait illis : Bonum comitatum nacti estis, hunc senem. Dixit quoque seni : Probos fratres tecum reperisti, abba. Tum senex: Praeclari quidem sunt; verum aula eorum non habet januam, et quicunque vult intrat in stabulum, ac solvit asinum. Id vero dicebat, quia quidquid illis in buccam veniebat, loquebantur.
Is there an (Aesop's?) fable background to Apophthegmata Patrum 18? This story feels to me as if it's being retold from another context. The moral, "καὶ ὁ θέλων εἰσέρχεται εἰς τὸν σταῦλον, καὶ λύει τὸν ὄνον", works, but seems not quite sufficiently motivated, and one could easily imagine a story that makes the point more sharply. The sense of "ὅτι τὰ ἐρχόμενα εἰς τὸ στόμα αὐτῶν λαλοῦσιν" would be stronger with a verb like ἰέναι (that is, they *vomit* out whatever comes up to their mouth). Matthew 15:11 has "τὸ ἐκπορευόμενον ἐκ τοῦ στόματος τοῦτο κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον". There is another version of 18., apparently trying to explain the text, that reads "εἰσερχόμενα εἰς αὐτοὺς ἐλάλουν," but this removes that mental image entirely.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Apophthegmata Patrum 18. Aesop-ish?

Post by mwh »

Oddly enough, the culminating λύει τὸν ὄνον in the old man’s comment has an echo in a quotation of a retort by Jesus to accusations of sabbath-breaking (cf. Lk.6): “ὑποκριταί, ἕκαστος ὑμῶν οὐ λύει τὸν ὄνον αὐτοῦ ἐν σαββάτῳ ἀπὸ τῆς φάτνης;”—this in a letter of Leo of Ohrid (extrapolated from Luke?, Marcion?) initiating the theological clash which directly resulted in the Great Schism.

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Apophthegmata Patrum 18. Aesop-ish?

Post by jeidsath »

Well, there is a certain story in the Gospels that may be rather closer. There some people are made to λῦσαι an ὄνος that has been left tied up outside, and to lie about what they are doing. Enough to drive you crazy if you've ever commuted by bicycle in the city. It's in my mind because I happened to double-book translate Mark's version on Wednesday evening:

Καὶ ὅτε ἐγγίζουσιν εἰς Ἰεροσόλυμα εἰς Βηθφαγὴ καὶ Βηθανίαν πρὸς τὸ Ὄρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν, ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς Ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν κώμην τὴν κατέναντι ὑμῶν, καὶ εὐθὺς εἰσπορευόμενοι εἰς αὐτὴν εὑρήσετε πῶλον δεδεμένον ἐφ' ὃν οὐδεὶς οὔπω ἀνθρώπων ἐκάθισεν· λύσατε αὐτὸν καὶ φέρετε. καὶ ἐάν τις ὑμῖν εἴπῃ Τί ποιεῖτε τοῦτο; εἴπατε Ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ χρείαν ἔχει· καὶ εὐθὺς αὐτὸν ἀποστέλλει πάλιν ὧδε. καὶ ἀπῆλθον καὶ εὗρον πῶλον δεδεμένον πρὸς θύραν ἔξω ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀμφόδου, καὶ λύουσιν αὐτόν. καί τινες τῶν ἐκεῖ ἑστηκότων ἔλεγον αὐτοῖς Τί ποιεῖτε λύοντες τὸν πῶλον; οἱ δὲ εἶπαν αὐτοῖς καθὼς εἶπεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς· καὶ ἀφῆκαν αὐτούς. καὶ φέρουσιν τὸν πῶλον πρὸς τὸν Ἰησοῦν, καὶ ἐπιβάλλουσιν αὐτῷ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτῶν, καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐπ' αὐτόν. (Mark 11)

Now in Mark it is just a πῶλος. But Matthew famously turns this into an ὄνος and a πῶλος (mis-)reading Zechariah 9:9 as two beasts, which Matthew has Jesus ride in tandem.

Matthew and Luke both fix the Mark account in various other ways. Of course, as you should expect without even looking up the alternate accounts, φέρετε becomes ἀγάγετε. And, as you should expect, Matthew fixes, and Luke drops, the very dark καὶ εὐθὺς αὐτὸν ἀποστέλλει πάλιν ὧδε. The KJV-tradition translations fix this phrase as if Mark's Greek isn't even there, ie. NIV: "The Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly."

What Mark has Jesus say though is the seemingly bizarre (and Matthew and Luke agree that it can't go into their Gospels): "Tell them that its master has a need. And he immediately sends it off again in this wise."

Is Jesus telling them to...lie?

"He will send it back shortly" would be what Matthew (so prosaically) writes: εὐθὺς δὲ ἀποστελεῖ αὐτούς [two beasts in Matthew, of course]. "The Lord" of KJV/NIV/RSV/etc. would be just ὁ Κύριος.

The actual solution to the riddle, which Matthew, Luke, and all of the 16th century translators who locked us into the rut of English Bible translation that we're now in, didn't get, is something like the following: ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ in reference to an animal is "his master", of somewhat different significance than a simple property owner. If you've trained a horse, good, but more likely you have a dog and can think of Chrysostomus: καθάπερ κύων λείχων τοὺς πόδας τοῦ κυρίου αὐτοῦ.

A colt that his not been ridden has no master of this sort...yet Jesus calls himself so. Nor has a beast that has never been ridden ever been dispatched anywhere, yet Jesus says that he has dispatched it before. Jesus is the master of every man and beast, and has dispatched this one into the world and again has a duty for it. This is a semi-mystical "hidden Christ" story of the sort that Mark loves.

So what we have here is an entirely characteristic, beautiful jewel of a story about Jesus, misunderstood and ignored, though obvious once you see, because people think that the Gospels have been plumbed dry and they don't need to bother reading them carefully.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Apophthegmata Patrum 18. Aesop-ish?

Post by mwh »

That’s a hell of a lot to hang from the position of αυτου. So you take the Matthew as saying “Their master has need”?

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Apophthegmata Patrum 18. Aesop-ish?

Post by jeidsath »

We have an example in this very passage of Matthew taking someone else's words to mean something that that author did not intend (Zech 9:9). It's only a certain brand of Christian interpretation that creates a forced and unnatural syncretism between the holy writers.

But, for anyone merely skimming the above, I would suggest that mwh's summation not be relied upon: there is the word order, the present tense of the next phrase, the fact that ἀποστέλλειν is "send off/dispatch" not "send back", and Matthew's and Luke's decisions to suppress/change a difficult bit in Mark, as they are known to do.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Apophthegmata Patrum 18. Aesop-ish?

Post by mwh »

So according to Joel the account in Mark is an entirely characteristic, beautiful jewel of a story that no-one has ever properly understood—no-one until Joel, that is.

His argument is tendentious in the extreme, and I find it hard to believe that he expects to be taken seriously.

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Apophthegmata Patrum 18. Aesop-ish?

Post by jeidsath »

"ὁ κύριος" should give us pause though. It occurs in Mark 5:19, referring to God, following LXX usage. It would be weird and anachronistic to see The Lord as a simple title for Jesus in Mark (or in Matthew, now that I look). A Luke/John thing.

Michael, I get upset too often at the sort of pugilism going on here. But I have lately begun to notice that this rhetoric has sharpened me over the years, and that I actually owe much thanks to you for it. Despite what you say, I don't pretend to be at a very high level with my Greek, but it's higher than it would otherwise have been.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Apophthegmata Patrum 18. Aesop-ish?

Post by mwh »

Joel, It’s your incorrigible chutzpah that gets my goat. Usually I just let it go, as with that nonsense over a purported accusative absolute in Thucydides (and now again in Xenophon), but sometimes I feel bound to protest.
And if you owe me any thanks it would not be for my rhetoric but for my patient efforts to help you with your Greek earlier on. Of course your Greek is much stronger now, while mine, as you have insinuated, is probably going downhill.

In this Mark passage most of your points (made so very tendentiously, as I say) seemed to me weak to say the least. αποστελλει is αποστελλει παλιν ωδε, and the switch from aorist to present (and back again) occurs again in this very passage. But it must be a wonderful thing to have your self-assurance.

Post Reply