Plato: The Complete Works (31 Books). Plato

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ will be sure to do so, Socrates; but go on telling him something new, and let me hear, as long as I am allowed to stay.

      I certainly cannot refuse, I said, since you ask me; but then, as you know, Menexenus is very pugnacious, and therefore you must come to the rescue if he attempts to upset me.

      Yes, indeed, he said; he is very pugnacious, and that is the reason why I want you to argue with him.

      That I may make a fool of myself?

      No, indeed, he said; but I want you to put him down.

      That is no easy matter, I replied; for he is a terrible fellow—a pupil of Ctesippus. And there is Ctesippus himself: do you see him?

      Never mind, Socrates, you shall argue with him.

      Well, I suppose that I must, I replied.

      Hereupon Ctesippus complained that we were talking in secret, and keeping the feast to ourselves.

      I shall be happy, I said, to let you have a share. Here is Lysis, who does not understand something that I was saying, and wants me to ask Menexenus, who, as he thinks, is likely to know.

      And why do you not ask him? he said.

      Very well, I said, I will; and do you, Menexenus, answer. But first I must tell you that I am one who from my childhood upward have set my heart upon a certain thing. All people have their fancies; some desire horses, and others dogs; and some are fond of gold, and others of honour. Now, I have no violent desire of any of these things; but I have a passion for friends; and I would rather have a good friend than the best cock or quail in the world: I would even go further, and say the best horse or dog. Yea, by the dog of Egypt, I should greatly prefer a real friend to all the gold of Darius, or even to Darius himself: I am such a lover of friends as that. And when I see you and Lysis, at your early age, so easily possessed of this treasure, and so soon, he of you, and you of him, I am amazed and delighted, seeing that I myself, although I am now advanced in years, am so far from having made a similar acquisition, that I do not even know in what way a friend is acquired. But I want to ask you a question about this, for you have experience: tell me then, when one loves another, is the lover or the beloved the friend; or may either be the friend?

      Either may, I should think, be the friend of either.

      Do you mean, I said, that if only one of them loves the other, they are mutual friends?

      Yes, he said; that is my meaning.

      But what if the lover is not loved in return? which is a very possible case.

      Yes.

      Or is, perhaps, even hated? which is a fancy which sometimes is entertained by lovers respecting their beloved. Nothing can exceed their love; and yet they imagine either that they are not loved in return, or that they are hated. Is not that true?

      Yes, he said, quite true.

      In that case, the one loves, and the other is loved?

      Yes.

      Then which is the friend of which? Is the lover the friend of the beloved, whether he be loved in return, or hated; or is the beloved the friend; or is there no friendship at all on either side, unless they both love one another?

      There would seem to be none at all.

      Then this notion is not in accordance with our previous one. We were saying that both were friends, if one only loved; but now, unless they both love, neither is a friend.

      That appears to be true.

      Then nothing which does not love in return is beloved by a lover?

      I think not.

      Then they are not lovers of horses, whom the horses do not love in return; nor lovers of quails, nor of dogs, nor of wine, nor of gymnastic exercises, who have no return of love; no, nor of wisdom, unless wisdom loves them in return. Or shall we say that they do love them, although they are not beloved by them; and that the poet was wrong who sings—

      ‘Happy the man to whom his children are dear, and steeds having single hoofs, and dogs of chase, and the stranger of another land’?

      I do not think that he was wrong.

      You think that he is right?

      Yes.

      Then, Menexenus, the conclusion is, that what is beloved, whether loving or hating, may be dear to the lover of it: for example, very young children, too young to love, or even hating their father or mother when they are punished by them, are never dearer to them than at the time when they are being hated by them.

      I think that what you say is true.

      And, if so, not the lover, but the beloved, is the friend or dear one?

      Yes.

      And the hated one, and not the hater, is the enemy?

      Clearly.

      Then many men are loved by their enemies, and hated by their friends, and are the friends of their enemies, and the enemies of their friends. Yet how absurd, my dear friend, or indeed impossible is this paradox of a man being an enemy to his friend or a friend to his enemy.

      I quite agree, Socrates, in what you say.

      But if this cannot be, the lover will be the friend of that which is loved?

      True.

      And the hater will be the enemy of that which is hated?

      Certainly.

      Yet we must acknowledge in this, as in the preceding instance, that a man may be the friend of one who is not his friend, or who may be his enemy, when he loves that which does not love him or which even hates him. And he may be the enemy of one who is not his enemy, and is even his friend: for example, when he hates that which does not hate him, or which even loves him.

      That appears to be true.

      But if the lover is not a friend, nor the beloved a friend, nor both together, what are we to say? Whom are we to call friends to one another? Do any remain?

      Indeed, Socrates, I cannot find any.

      But, O Menexenus! I said, may we not have been altogether wrong in our conclusions?

      I am sure that we have been wrong, Socrates, said Lysis. And he blushed as he spoke, the words seeming to come from his lips involuntarily, because his whole mind was taken up with the argument; there was no mistaking his attentive look while he was listening.

      I was pleased at the interest which was shown by Lysis, and I wanted to give Menexenus a rest, so I turned to him and said, I think, Lysis, that what you say is true, and that, if we had been right, we should never have gone so far wrong; let us proceed no further in this direction (for the road seems to be getting troublesome), but take the other path into which we turned, and see what the poets have to say; for they are to us in a manner the fathers and authors of wisdom, and they speak of friends in no light or trivial manner, but God himself, as they say, makes them and draws them to one another; and this they СКАЧАТЬ