De Ebrietate

What has been said by other philosophers about drunkenness we have to the best of our ability recorded in the treatise before this present one. But now let us consider what is the opinion of the lawgiver, who was in all respects great and wise, on this subject;

for in many places of his history of the giving of the law he mentions wine, and the plant which produces wine, namely the vine; and he commands some persons drink it, but some he does not permit to do so; and at times he gives contrary directions to the same people, ordering them sometimes to drink and some times to abstain. These therefore are the persons who have taken the great vow, to whom it is expressly forbidden to drink unmixed wine, being the priests who are engaged in offering sacrifices. But those who drink wine are numerous beyond all calculation, and among them are all those who are especially praised by the lawgiver for their virtue.

But before we begin to talk of these subjects we will examine with accuracy some points that concern this argument, and, as I at least imagine they are these.

Moses looks upon an unmixed wine as a symbol not of one thing only but of many, namely of trifling, and playing the fool, and of all kinds of insensibility and of insatiable greediness, and of a covetousness which is hard to be pleased, and of a cheerfulness which comprehends many other objects, and of a nakedness which is apparent in all the things now mentioned, such as that which he says Noah, when drunk, displayed himself in. Wine, then, is said to produce all these effects.

But great numbers of persons who, because they never touch unmixed wine, look upon themselves as sober, are them involved in the same accusation. And one may see some of acting in a foolish and senseless manner, and others possessed by complete insensibility; and others again who are never satisfied, but are always thirsting for what cannot be obtained, because of their want of knowledge; others, on the other hand rejoicing and exulting; and others in good truth naked.

The cause now of behaving foolishly is a mischievous ignorance; I mean by this expression, not an ignorance of such things

for no one can possibly put off both these things at one time, nor can he either strip them both off together. But when any one discards the one, he must of necessity take up and clothe himself with the other.

For as the old story tells us, God, when he had combined pleasure and pain, two things naturally at variance, under one head, gave to us an outward sense capable of appreciating them both, not at the same moment, but at different times, fixing the period of the return of one to be simultaneous with the moment of the flight of the other. Thus from one root of the dominant principle, the two shoots of virtue and vice sprang up, neither blossoming nor bearing fruit at the same time;

for when the one loses its leaves and fades away, then the other begins to shoot, and blossom, and look green, so that one might fancy that the one withered through dissatisfaction at the blooming appearance of the other. It is with reference to this that Moses represents in a most natural manner the departure of Jacob to be contemporaneous with the arrival of Esau; "For it came to pass," says he, "that as Jacob went out his brother Esau came in." [*](Genesis xxvii. 30. )

As long, indeed, as prudence dwells in and makes his abode in the soul, so long every companion of folly is discarded and banished to a distance; but when prudence departs then folly rejoices and enters, since its enemy and adversary, for whose sake it was driven away and banished, is no longer inhabiting the same place as before.

We have now then said enough by way of preface to this treatise. We will proceed to adduce the proofs of [*](Genesis xxvii. 30. )

for ignorance is the primary evil of all the errors of the soul, if we must tell the truth, from which, as from a spring, all the actions of life do flow, never producing to any one, one single stream of wholesome or drinkable water, but only brackish water, the cause of disease and destruction to all who use it.

Thus, at all events, the lawgiver is very indignant with all uninstructed and unmanageable persons, more than he is with any other description of people whatever. And a proof of this is this: who are they who are united in alliance not so much by study as by nature, whether among men or among the other kinds of animals? No one; not even a madman would say that any beings were so closely united as parents and children; for even by the mere untaught instinct of nature the parent always cares for his offspring, and in every case endeavours to provide for its safety and durability.

Those, then, who are the natural protectors of others, Moses represents as having crossed over to the ranks of enemies, making those accusers who would naturally have been advocates, I mean the father and mother, in order that the children may be destroyed by those by whom above all others it was natural they should be saved; "For if," says he, "any man’s son be disobedient, or contentious, not obeying the voice of his father and of his mother, and if they reprove him and he does not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take him, and shall bring him before the elders of the city, and shall bring him to the gate of that place, and shall say to the men of their city, This our son is disobedient and contentious, and does not obey our voice, but spends his time in revelling and drunkenness. And the men of that city shall stone him, and you shall destroy that wicked one from among you." [*](Deuteronomy xxi. 18. )

Therefore, here the accusations are four in number—disobedience, and contentiousness, and love of revelling, and drunkenness; and the last of these is the greatest, deriving its growth from [*](Deuteronomy xxi. 18. )

It is then confessed by all most undeniably, that it is both honourable and advantageous to yield and to become obedient to virtue, so that on the other hand to be disobedient to it must be disgraceful and in no moderate degree disadvantageous. And to be contentious and obstinate is a quality which comprehends every extravagance of evil; for the man who is disobedient is less wicked than he who is contentious, since the one only disregards what he is commanded to do, but the other also exerts himself to do the contrary.

Come, now, let us investigate the true nature of these things. Since the law commands, for instance, that men should honour their parents, he who does not honour them is disobedient; but he who dishonours them is contentious. And again, since it is a righteous action to preserve one’s country, we must call the man who admits of hesitation in the pursuit of the object disobedient, but the man who is prepared moreover to betray it we must pronounce perverse and contentious.

Again, he who, when requested to requite a favour, contradicts the man who says that he ought to consider himself a debtor, is disobedient; but he who, in addition to making no return, is so carried away by contentiousness that he endeavours to do the person what harm he can, commits unredeemable wickedness. And further, he who never approaches, nor practises sacrifices, or any of the other observances required by piety, disobeys the commandments which the law usually ordains in such matters; but he who resists and turns aside to the opposite disposition, impiety, is a wicked man and a minister of impiety.

Such a man as this was he who said, "Who is there whom I am to obey?" and again, "I do not know the Lord." [*](Exodus v. 2. ) For by his first expression he states that there is no such thing as a Deity; and by the second question he means, that even if there is such a being, still he will not [*](Exodus v. 2. )

Now to bring contributions and supplies in aid of an entertainment with a view to a participation in that best of all possessions, prudence, is praiseworthy and advantageous. But to do so with a view to the worst of all objects, folly, is disadvantageous and blameable;