Book 5, Chapter 39

113 “Diodotus the Stoic lived in my house for many years while blind. Not only did he devote himself to philosophy even more constantly than before, play a stringed instrument in the Pythagorean manner, and have books read to him night and day—pursuits in which he had no need of eyes—but, scarcely credible as it seems, he also performed the duties of a teacher of geometry, telling his pupils in words where to begin each line and where to draw it. They say that Asclepiades, a philosopher of some standing in the Eretrian school, was asked what blindness had brought him, and replied that it had given him one more boy to accompany him. For just as even the greatest poverty would be bearable if one were allowed to do what certain Greeks do every day, so blindness could easily be borne if the aids to infirmity were available.

114 “After losing his sight, Democritus could not, of course, distinguish white from black; but he could distinguish good from evil, just from unjust, honorable from shameful, useful from useless, great from small. He could live happily without the variety of colors, but not without an understanding of things. Indeed, this man thought that the mind’s vision was actually hindered by the sight of the eyes; and while others often failed to see what lay before their feet, he ranged through all infinity, stopping at no boundary. Homer too is said to have been blind. Yet what we see is his painting, not his poetry: what region, what shore, what place in Greece, what aspect and form of battle, what battle line, what band of rowers, what movement of men or beasts has he not painted so vividly that he makes us see what he himself had not seen? What, then? Do we suppose that delight and pleasure of the mind were ever lacking to Homer, or to any learned man?

115 “If this were not so, would Anaxagoras or this same Democritus have abandoned their fields and inheritances and devoted themselves heart and soul to this divine delight in learning and inquiry? So the poets, who portray the seer Tiresias as wise, never bring him on to bewail his blindness. But Homer, having fashioned Polyphemus as a monstrous savage, even makes him talk with his ram and praise its good fortune in being able to go where it wishes and reach what it wishes. Rightly so: the Cyclops himself was no wiser than that ram.”

113 “The Stoic Diodotus lived in my house for many years after going blind. He devoted himself to philosophy even more constantly than before. He played a stringed instrument in the Pythagorean way, and books were read to him day and night. In those pursuits he didn’t need his eyes. But he also did something scarcely believable, something that seems almost impossible without sight: he kept up his teaching of geometry, telling his students in words where to start and end each line they drew. They say Asclepiades, a well-known philosopher of the Eretrian school, was asked what blindness had brought him. He replied, ‘One more boy to keep me company.’ Even the most extreme poverty would be bearable if you could do what certain Greeks do every day. In the same way, blindness could be borne easily if the aids for such conditions weren’t lacking.

114 “Once blind, Democritus naturally lost the ability to separate black things from white ones. But he still knew the difference between evil and good, unfair and fair, disgraceful and honorable, useless and useful, small and great. Happiness was possible without different colors to look at, but not without a grasp of things. In fact, he believed seeing with the eyes could obstruct mental insight. People often failed to see what lay directly in front of their feet. Meanwhile he ranged across all infinity, with no outer limit to stop him. Homer is also said to have been blind. Yet we look at his work as pictures rather than poems. He gives us Greece’s regions, its coasts, its places; the appearance and shape of battles; the armies in position; the rowing; the movements of human beings and beasts. Is there any of it he hasn’t depicted so vividly that we can see what he himself never saw? Can we really suppose that Homer ever went without delight and pleasure in his mind? Or that any learned person did?

115 “If things weren’t like that, would Anaxagoras or this same Democritus have left their farms and inheritances behind and given themselves wholeheartedly to this divine pleasure of learning and inquiry? And so, when the poets portray the seer Tiresias as wise, they never bring him on complaining about his blindness. But Homer made Polyphemus monstrous and savage. He even has him talk to his ram and praise its good fortune, because it can go where it likes and reach what it likes. Homer was right to do that. The Cyclops himself had no more sense than that ram.”