The Theology of Heraclitus: a Presocratic Pantheism

and elser"rhere.l3 H.o..".desc end ect of the originalProP er resPect foi another.andt4t94can see that aidola 1s a directpositive neaning of aidS's, aAidoia, llke its chlasnic partnerDlonysus, is therefore only neant as a healthy anal vigorousobject, sonething to be reveled not embarrassed by. Therord does Eot carry two eanlngs, as some have clalned. Thejljllgjll are completely good because they 6re !he source of llfe.rrAtfirst glance, 0d.6,I29 looks as lf lt is an exception to thlscandidness about oners sex orgals, odysseus, havtng been lEshed aghore onthe lsland of the ?halakians, carefully appxoaches Nauslkaa and he! frlendswtth a le-afy branch held around htn so as to hlde his nanly parts (Ur6oe).Moreover, a few flnes later he declines the offer of betng washed by the$onen, saylng o.i6dq-c.L ydp/ 'vL4rvcrioooL xcbnolv dftloroiroloL r€Te),],i, (6,221-2). lJas odysseus enbarlassed to stand naked before them? I do notthtnk thts ls the whole slory, Men are unsbashedly bEihed by wotlen all thetiDe In Honer (e,g,g!.3,464; 7,296; 8,4501 10,361; 17,87-9). Lthat nakesodysseus cover hhself , the poet lmplles, ls hl6 extrene ugliness broughtabout by the sea brlne e[crustlng h1s hairy body. When he flrst apploacheslhen he is no! denure or erbartassed, bur ltke a hungry and terrifyinglion (130 ff.). The girls scalter not because lhe Dan ls laked but becausehe ls frlghlening (138) and presumed to be an attacker (200). His extr€ore-Iy fllthy condlrion ls stressed (137, 224-6) a$d l'el1 expla{ns \,hy heshould no! wan! to stend naked before thsn. Flrst, 1t would be degradlngfor odysseus to have hls body vlered so ug1y, and second, lt ttould be unpleasantfor lhe wolxen to have to look at lt. llence he says he has g:!!39for them and so wlll nol be naked before them. 4!1@ agaln ls seen as arespec! fo! others, not inner shame. (A sLntlar argunent explains theaidSs odysseus feels vhe[ he crles a! 0d,8,85-6; cf, Verdenlus, ]lnen, 12[1944], 48 n.l. )l4lnthis case, the "another" nay actually have been thought to bethe penls/sex organ ltself. There ls sone evidence that lhe Greeks couldview their sex organs as creatures separate from thensefves, and lheleforedeselving respect 1n thenselves. As the glvers of llfe they nlght havebeen held to possess sonre posrer that we do not have. Fot clear reasons, thenale genitals could be conslclered an ;Tlen eeo nore readily than the fenale.cf. Devereux, st'nbolae osloers ls ,42(19 67 ) ,7 3-4i Augustlne, c.D.14'17. Yetboth sexes' organs seeD !o be thoughE of as separate'persons'itr the irather odd passage fron Plators IiIgglE(9lb) shere the nale aldoia 16calted a self-rrilled creature and the fenale ltorob a z_oon that noves lhroughouthe! body. The personificatlon of one's sex orgalls ls not just aqualntly priroitive conception. The Phetronenon conlinues ln ollr day, noticeablyin the Eale predilectlon for giving nanes to their Penlses.