Home About Network of subjects Linked subjects heatmap Book indices included Search by subject Search by reference Browse subjects Browse texts

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database

validated results only / all results

and or

Filtering options: (leave empty for all results)
By author:     
By work:        
By subject:
By additional keyword:       

Results for
Please note: the results are produced through a computerized process which may frequently lead to errors, both in incorrect tagging and in other issues. Please use with caution.
Due to load times, full text fetching is currently attempted for validated results only.
Full texts for Hebrew Bible and rabbinic texts is kindly supplied by Sefaria; for Greek and Latin texts, by Perseus Scaife, for the Quran, by Tanzil.net

For a list of book indices included, see here.

8 results for "action"
1. Varro, Antiquitates Rerum Divinarum, None (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Mackey (2022) 129
2. Cicero, On The Haruspices, 23 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •action, deontic Found in books: Mackey (2022) 129
3. Cicero, On Invention, 2.65-2.66, 2.160-2.161 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •action, deontic Found in books: Mackey (2022) 129
2.65. Nunc huius generis praecepta videamus. utrisque aut etiam omnibus, si plures ambigent, ius ex quibus rebus constet, considerandum est. initium ergo eius ab natura ductum videtur; quaedam autem ex utili- tatis ratione aut perspicua nobis aut obscura in con- suetudinem venisse; post autem adprobata quaedam a consuetudine aut vero utilia visa legibus esse fir- mata; ac naturae quidem ius esse, quod nobis non opinio, sed quaedam innata vis adferat, ut religionem, pietatem, gratiam, vindicationem, observantiam, veri- 2.66. tatem. religionem eam, quae in metu et caerimonia deorum sit, appellant; pietatem, quae erga patriam aut parentes aut alios sanguine coniunctos officium conservare moneat; gratiam, quae in memoria et re- muneratione officiorum et honoris et amicitiarum ob- servantiam teneat; vindicationem, per quam vim et contumeliam defendendo aut ulciscendo propulsamus a nobis et nostris, qui nobis cari esse debent, et per quam peccata punimur; observantiam, per quam aetate aut sapientia aut honore aut aliqua dignitate antecedentes veremur et colimus; veritatem, per quam damus operam, ne quid aliter, quam confirmaverimus, fiat aut factum aut futurum sit. 2.160. Prudentia est rerum bonarum et malarum neutra- rumque scientia. partes eius: memoria, intellegentia, providentia. memoria est, per quam animus repetit illa, quae fuerunt; intellegentia, per quam ea perspicit, quae sunt; providentia, per quam futurum aliquid videtur ante quam factum est. Iustitia est habitus animi communi utilitate con- servata suam cuique tribuens dignitatem. eius initium est ab natura profectum; deinde quaedam in con- suetudinem ex utilitatis ratione venerunt; postea res et ab natura profectas et ab consuetudine probatas legum metus et religio sanxit. 2.161. naturae ius est, quod non opinio genuit, sed quaedam in natura vis insevit, ut religionem, pietatem, gratiam, vindicationem, ob- servantiam, veritatem. religio est, quae superioris cuiusdam naturae, quam divinam vocant, curam caeri- moniamque affert; pietas, per quam sanguine con- iunctis patriaeque benivolum officium et diligens tri- buitur cultus; gratia, in qua amicitiarum et officiorum alterius memoria et remunerandi voluntas continetur; vindicatio, per quam vis aut iniuria et omnino omne, quod obfuturum est, defendendo aut ulciscendo pro- pulsatur; observantia, per quam homines aliqua digni- tate antecedentes cultu quodam et honore digtur;
4. Cicero, On Laws, 1.24, 2.27 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •action, deontic Found in books: Mackey (2022) 129
5. Cicero, On The Nature of The Gods, 1.2 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •action, deontic Found in books: Mackey (2022) 129
1.2. As regards the present subject, for example, most thinkers have affirmed that the gods exist, and this is the most probable view and the one to which we are all led by nature's guidance; but Protagoras declared himself uncertain, and Diagoras of Melos and Theodorus of Cyrene held that there are no gods at all. Moreover, the upholders of the divine existence differ and disagree so widely, that it would be a troublesome task to recount their opinions. Many views are put forward about the outward form of the gods, their dwelling-places and abodes, and mode of life, and these topics are debated with the widest variety of opinion among philosophers; but as to the question upon which the whole issue of the dispute principally turns, whether the gods are entirely idle and inactive, taking no part at all in the direction and government of the world, or whether on the contrary all things both were created and ordered by them in the beginning and are controlled and kept in motion by them throughout eternity, here there is the greatest disagreement of all. And until this issue is decided, mankind must continue to labour under the profoundest uncertainty, and to be in ignorance about matters of the highest moment.
6. Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, 1.30 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)  Tagged with subjects: •action, deontic Found in books: Mackey (2022) 129
1.30. Ut porro firmissimum hoc adferri videtur videretur V c cur deos esse credamus, quod quod quia K 2 nulla gens tam fera, nemo omnium hominum K tam sit sit K 2 V 2 s inmanis, fit X inmani s R imm. KH cuius mentem non imbuerit deorum deorum K div in r. V 1 opinio (multi de diis prava sentiunt—id enim idem K 1 (id enim 2 ) RH vitioso more effici solet—, omnes tamen esse vim et naturam divinam arbitrantur, nec vero id conlocutio hominum aut consessus consessus Bouhier (cf. Legg. II, 13) consensus efficit, effecit Bouhier non institutis opinio est nec... opinio est in r. K 1 confirmata, non legibus; omni omnia R omni V autem in re consensio omnium omnium hominum R 1 gentium lex naturae putanda est Porro infirmissimum ... 20 putanda est H )—quis est igitur, qui suorum mortem primum non eo lugeat, quod eos orbatos vitae commodis arbitretur? tolle hanc opinionem, luctum sustuleris. nemo enim maeret suo suo K incommodo: dolent fortasse et anguntur, sed illa lugubris lamentatio fletusque maerens ex eo est, quod eum, quem dileximus, vitae commodis privatum arbitramur idque sentire. idque sentire eras. in V atque haec ita sentimus natura duce, nulla ratione nullaque doctrina. Maxumum vero argumentum maximum KR 1 (u ss. 1 ) maxu mu m vero argumentum V ( ss. 2 ) est naturam ipsam de inmortalitate animorum tacitam iudicare, quod omnibus curae sunt, et maxumae maxume X (-ime K) quidem, quae post mortem futura sint. sunt K 2 Caecil. com. 210 serit arbores, quae alteri altero K 1 saeclo saeculo K 1 V 2 suppl. s (cf. Cato m. 24) ille ' cod. Aug. ' prosint, ut ait Statius in Synephebis, sinephebis KV sine phebis GR (coni. 1 ) quid spectans expectans V nisi etiam postera saecula ad se pertinere? ergo arbores seret diligens agricola, quarum aspiciet bacam ipse numquam; vir magnus leges instituta rem publicam non seret? non seret V c (1. n in r.) s conseret GKR quid procreatio liberorum, quid propagatio propagatio progatio R prorogatio V 1 nominis, quid adoptationes filiorum, quid testamentorum diligentia, quid ipsa sepulcrorum monumenta elogia significant nisi nos futura etiam cogitare? Quid?
7. Lactantius, Divine Institutes, 5.52.9 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •action, deontic Found in books: Mackey (2022) 129
8. Augustine, The City of God, 4.23, 6.2 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)  Tagged with subjects: •action, deontic Found in books: Mackey (2022) 129
4.23. But how does it happen, if their books and rituals are true, and Felicity is a goddess, that she herself is not appointed as the only one to be worshipped, since she could confer all things, and all at once make men happy? For who wishes anything for any other reason than that he may become happy? Why was it left to Lucullus to dedicate a temple to so great a goddess at so late a date, and after so many Roman rulers? Why did Romulus himself, ambitious as he was of founding a fortunate city, not erect a temple to this goddess before all others? Why did he supplicate the other gods for anything, since he would have lacked nothing had she been with him? For even he himself would neither have been first a king, then afterwards, as they think, a god, if this goddess had not been propitious to him. Why, therefore, did he appoint as gods for the Romans, Janus, Jove, Mars, Picus, Faunus, Tibernus, Hercules, and others, if there were more of them? Why did Titus Tatius add Saturn, Ops, Sun, Moon, Vulcan, Light, and whatever others he added, among whom was even the goddess Cloacina, while Felicity was neglected? Why did Numa appoint so many gods and so many goddesses without this one? Was it perhaps because he could not see her among so great a crowd? Certainly king Hostilius would not have introduced the new gods Fear and Dread to be propitiated, if he could have known or might have worshipped this goddess. For, in presence of Felicity, Fear and Dread would have disappeared - I do not say propitiated, but put to flight. Next, I ask, how is it that the Roman empire had already immensely increased before any one worshipped Felicity? Was the empire, therefore, more great than happy? For how could true felicity be there, where there was not true piety? For piety is the genuine worship of the true God, and not the worship of as many demons as there are false gods. Yet even afterwards, when Felicity had already been taken into the number of the gods, the great infelicity of the civil wars ensued. Was Felicity perhaps justly indigt, both because she was invited so late, and was invited not to honor, but rather to reproach, because along with her were worshipped Priapus, and Cloacina, and Fear and Dread, and Ague, and others which were not gods to be worshipped, but the crimes of the worshippers? Last of all, if it seemed good to worship so great a goddess along with a most unworthy crowd, why at least was she not worshipped in a more honorable way than the rest? For is it not intolerable that Felicity is placed neither among the gods Consentes, whom they allege to be admitted into the council of Jupiter, nor among the gods whom they term Select? Some temple might be made for her which might be pre-eminent, both in loftiness of site and dignity of style. Why, indeed, not something better than is made for Jupiter himself? For who gave the kingdom even to Jupiter but Felicity? I am supposing that when he reigned he was happy. Felicity, however, is certainly more valuable than a kingdom. For no one doubts that a man might easily be found who may fear to be made a king; but no one is found who is unwilling to be happy. Therefore, if it is thought they can be consulted by augury, or in any other way, the gods themselves should be consulted about this thing, whether they may wish to give place to Felicity. If, perchance, the place should already be occupied by the temples and altars of others, where a greater and more lofty temple might be built to Felicity, even Jupiter himself might give way, so that Felicity might rather obtain the very pinnacle of the Capitoline hill. For there is not any one who would resist Felicity, except, which is impossible, one who might wish to be unhappy. Certainly, if he should be consulted, Jupiter would in no case do what those three gods, Mars, Terminus, and Juventas, did, who positively refused to give place to their superior and king. For, as their books record, when king Tarquin wished to construct the Capitol, and perceived that the place which seemed to him to be the most worthy and suitable was preoccupied by other gods, not daring to do anything contrary to their pleasure, and believing that they would willingly give place to a god who was so great, and was their own master, because there were many of them there when the Capitol was founded, he inquired by augury whether they chose to give place to Jupiter, and they were all willing to remove thence except those whom I have named, Mars, Terminus, and Juventas; and therefore the Capitol was built in such a way that these three also might be within it, yet with such obscure signs that even the most learned men could scarcely know this. Surely, then, Jupiter himself would by no means despise Felicity, as he was himself despised by Terminus, Mars, and Juventas. But even they themselves who had not given place to Jupiter, would certainly give place to Felicity, who had made Jupiter king over them. Or if they should not give place, they would act thus not out of contempt of her, but because they chose rather to be obscure in the house of Felicity, than to be eminent without her in their own places. Thus the goddess Felicity being established in the largest and loftiest place, the citizens should learn whence the furtherance of every good desire should be sought. And so, by the persuasion of nature herself, the superfluous multitude of other gods being abandoned, Felicity alone would be worshipped, prayer would be made to her alone, her temple alone would be frequented by the citizens who wished to be happy, which no one of them would not wish; and thus felicity, who was sought for from all the gods, would be sought for only from her own self. For who wishes to receive from any god anything else than felicity, or what he supposes to tend to felicity? Wherefore, if Felicity has it in her power to be with what man she pleases (and she has it if she is a goddess), what folly is it, after all, to seek from any other god her whom you can obtain by request from her own self! Therefore they ought to honor this goddess above other gods, even by dignity of place. For, as we read in their own authors, the ancient Romans paid greater honors to I know not what Summanus, to whom they attributed nocturnal thunderbolts, than to Jupiter, to whom diurnal thunderbolts were held to pertain. But, after a famous and conspicuous temple had been built to Jupiter, owing to the dignity of the building, the multitude resorted to him in so great numbers, that scarce one can be found who remembers even to have read the name of Summanus, which now he cannot once hear named. But if Felicity is not a goddess, because, as is true, it is a gift of God, that god must be sought who has power to give it, and that hurtful multitude of false gods must be abandoned which the vain multitude of foolish men follows after, making gods to itself of the gifts of God, and offending Himself whose gifts they are by the stubbornness of a proud will. For he cannot be free from infelicity who worships Felicity as a goddess, and forsakes God, the giver of felicity; just as he cannot be free from hunger who licks a painted loaf of bread, and does not buy it of the man who has a real one. 6.2. Who has investigated those things more carefully than Marcus Varro? Who has discovered them more learnedly? Who has considered them more attentively? Who has distinguished them more acutely? Who has written about them more diligently and more fully?- who, though he is less pleasing in his eloquence, is nevertheless so full of instruction and wisdom, that in all the erudition which we call secular, but they liberal, he will teach the student of things as much as Cicero delights the student of words. And even Tully himself renders him such testimony, as to say in his Academic books that he had held that disputation which is there carried on with Marcus Varro, a man, he adds, unquestionably the acutest of all men, and, without any doubt, the most learned. He does not say the most eloquent or the most fluent, for in reality he was very deficient in this faculty, but he says, of all men the most acute. And in those books - that is, the Academic - where he contends that all things are to be doubted, he adds of him, without any doubt the most learned. In truth, he was so certain concerning this thing, that he laid aside that doubt which he is wont to have recourse to in all things, as if, when about to dispute in favor of the doubt of the Academics, he had, with respect to this one thing, forgotten that he was an Academic. But in the first book, when he extols the literary works of the same Varro, he says, Us straying and wandering in our own city like strangers, your books, as it were, brought home, that at length we might come to know of who we were and where we were. You have opened up to us the age of the country, the distribution of seasons, the laws of sacred things, and of the priests; you have opened up to us domestic and public discipline; you have pointed out to us the proper places for religious ceremonies, and has informed us concerning sacred places. You have shown us the names, kinds, offices, causes of all divine and human things. This man, then, of so distinguished and excellent acquirements, and, as Terentian briefly says of him in a most elegant verse, Varro, a man universally informed, who read so much that we wonder when he had time to write, wrote so much that we can scarcely believe any one could have read it all - this man, I say, so great in talent, so great in learning, had he had been an opposer and destroyer of the so-called divine things of which he wrote, and had he said that they pertained to superstition rather than to religion, might perhaps, even in that case, not have written so many things which are ridiculous, contemptible, detestable. But when he so worshipped these same gods, and so vindicated their worship, as to say, in that same literary work of his, that he was afraid lest they should perish, not by an assault by enemies, but by the negligence of the citizens, and that from this ignominy they are being delivered by him, and are being laid up and preserved in the memory of the good by means of such books, with a zeal far more beneficial than that through which Metellus is declared to have rescued the sacred things of Vesta from the flames, and Æneas to have rescued the Penates from the burning of Troy; and when he nevertheless, gives forth such things to be read by succeeding ages as are deservedly judged by wise and unwise to be unfit to be read, and to be most hostile to the truth of religion; what ought we to think but that a most acute and learned man - not, however made free by the Holy Spirit - was overpowered by the custom and laws of his state, and, not being able to be silent about those things by which he was influenced, spoke of them under pretence of commending religion?