Epicurus and the Gods: A Philosophy of Tranquilit by Adel Elsherif. 
Epicurus
Epicurus realized that fear of the gods disturbed peace of mind and hindered true happiness.
He rebelled against the traditional, human-like deities—those imagined in the likeness of flawed mortals and instead embraced a conception of the gods that reflected his own aspiration for tranquility.
For Epicurus, the ultimate goal was to live like the gods: serene, undisturbed, and free from pain or anxiety.
Their role, he believed, was symbolic not authoritative. Much like the Queen of the United Kingdom, they were revered and respected, yet held no real power over human affairs.
Epicurus held distinct and often counter-intuitive views on the gods, which formed a cornerstone of his philosophy aimed at achieving human tranquility.
He firmly believed in the existence of gods, but his conception of them differed significantly from popular religious beliefs—particularly in his emphasis that fear of the gods is not justified.
Epicurus on the
Nature of the Gods: A Non-Traditional View Rooted in Natural Philosophy
Epicurus held a radically different view of the divine compared to the popular beliefs of his time.
His conception of the gods emphasized their blessedness, tranquility, and detachment from human affairs, aligning them more with natural harmony than with supernatural authority.
1. Immortality and Blessedness
“First of all believe that god is a being immortal and blessed, even as the common idea of a god is engraved on men’s minds, and do not assign to him anything alien to his immortality or ill-suited to his blessedness: but believe about him everything that can uphold his blessedness and immortality.
For gods there are, since the knowledge of them is by clear vision.”
—Epicurus, Letter to Menoeceus
This quote establishes the Epicurean view that gods are immortal and blessed, and that any belief about them must be consistent with these attributes. Epicurus rejects portrayals of gods as angry, vengeful, or interfering—such traits are incompatible with divine tranquility.
The phrase “clear vision” refers to mental perceptions or simulacra images of the gods that arise in the mind, not through sensory experience or religious dogma.
2. Redefining Impiety
“And the impious man is not he who denies the gods of the many, but he who attaches to the gods the beliefs of the many.”
-Epicurus, Letter to Menoeceus
Epicurus redefines impiety.
True irreverence, he argues, is not disbelief in popular gods, but the misattribution of flawed human traits—like wrath or favoritism—to the divine.
He distinguishes between the gods of philosophy and the gods of the masses, challenging traditional theology.
3. Divine Tranquility
“The blessed and immortal nature knows no trouble itself nor causes trouble to any other, so that it is never constrained by anger or favour. For all such things exist only in the weak.”
—Epicurus, Principal Doctrines
This core doctrine asserts that the divine nature is free from emotional disturbance.
Anger and favor are signs of weakness, and therefore incompatible with the serene, incorruptible nature of the gods.
This directly contradicts traditional portrayals of gods who punish or reward.
4. Celestial Bodies Are Not Divine
“Nor again must we believe that they, which are but fire agglomerated in a Mass, possess blessedness, and voluntarily take upon themselves these movements.”
But we must preserve their full majestic significance in all expressions which we apply to such conceptions, in order that there may not arise out of them opinions contrary to this notion of majesty.”
Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus
Epicurus rejects the idea that celestial bodies—stars, planets, comets—are divine beings.
He describes them as material conglomerations, governed by natural laws.
Their movements are not voluntary or divine, but mechanical.
True majesty lies in understanding their nature, not worshipping them.
Epicurus’s Memoirs fiction by me.
While walking along the hill at sunset, I watched the sun disappear behind the horizon, painting the sky with a charm that filled me with quiet happiness. I often close my eyes and imagine atoms dancing in the air—images more beautiful than the sunset itself. Beauty is everywhere. But when I walk through my garden and see nature’s grace, I feel undisturbed, at peace.
From the hilltop, I gaze down at the temple and the people gathered below. Their rituals stir a chain of thoughts that never ceases. When I think deeply, I feel the same pleasure as when I sit among friends sharing simple food, or when I run my fingers through the hair of a beautiful woman. Thought itself is a pleasure.
I’ve always wondered why people waste their lives worshipping gods who never intervene—not even to offer a cup of water to the thirsty.
These Athenians inherited their beliefs like they inherited their language, their customs, their appearance.
They never stop to question, never apply reason or critical thought to test whether these gods truly care.
Where are the gods when earthquakes destroy cities without mercy?
Where are they when villages burn and the skies remain dry?
Where are they when criminals and tyrants slaughter the innocent?
These are not gods as people imagine them. The gods I know are made of atoms.
They are serene, blessed, untouched by mortal suffering. They did not create us.
They did not move the universe.
They are not the unmoved movers of Aristotle, nor the ghostly abstractions of Plato and his deluded followers. They are not the moral overseers of Socrates.
And so I ask myself again: if gods exist but remain indifferent, why must we believe in them?
Ah, but if I deny them, I will be attacked. I will lose friends. I will be called an atheist—a word soaked in stigma, the same accusation that led to Socrates’ death. I will lose my peace of mind. And for what?
Suddenly, I noticed a man whose face seemed familiar. He wore clean white garments and carried offerings in his arms—fruits, incense, and a small jug of oil.
I approached him and asked, “Where are you going with those offerings?”
The man looked up, recognized me, and smiled. “Epicurus,” he said warmly, “I’m on my way to the temple to give my sacrifices to the gods.”
I nodded, then asked gently, “Do you have children, my friend?”
“Yes,” he replied. “Four sons.”
I paused, then said, “Do you think the gods need these things—or is it the priests who do? Leave these gifts for your children. Worship the gods with reverence, not with bribes. The gods are rich—they want nothing material from us.”
The man scratched his balding head, looked down at the offerings, and quietly turned back toward his home.
As he walked away, I called out, “Respect the gods, my friend—but don’t try to buy their favor.”
Epicurus held distinct and often counter-intuitive views on the gods, which formed a cornerstone of his philosophy aimed at achieving human tranquility.
He firmly believed in the existence of gods, but his conception of them differed significantly from popular religious beliefs, particularly in his emphasis that fear of the gods is not justified.
Epicurus’s Conception of the Gods
Existence and Knowledge
Epicurus maintained that the existence of gods is certain because the knowledge of them is a “universal idea” or “pre-notion” (prolepsis) common to all humanity, implanted by Nature itself.
This knowledge is not derived from physical senses, but directly by the mind through “mental images” or “apprehensions” (epinoiai / epibolē tēs dianoias), often experienced in dreams.
Nature and Attributes
The gods, according to Epicurus, are “blessed and incorruptible.”
He specifically used the term “incorruptible” rather than “immortal,” implying that while they are theoretically subject to dissolution, they avoid it in practice. These divine beings possess perfect happiness and are free from all trouble, care, and anxiety.
Form and Abode
Epicurus described the gods as corporeal beings with human (anthropomorphic) form—though larger, more beautiful, and ethereal in nature. Their dwelling place is in the intermundia—the spaces between worlds—where they remain untouched by the dangers and concerns of any single world.
Inaction and Non-Interference
Crucially, Epicurus taught that the gods do not interfere in human affairs or govern the world. They neither cause trouble nor offer favor, feeling neither anger nor affection. Such emotions, he argued, imply weakness and are inconsistent with their serene blessedness.
Piety and Worship
Epicurus allowed and even practiced public worship and religious ceremonies—not out of fear or hope for divine intervention, but as a form of reverence for their excellence and as a means of achieving ataraxia (tranquility). He emphasized that the proper attitude toward the gods is eusebeia (reverence), not fear.
Why the Fear of Gods Is Not Justified
Epicurus argued against the fear of gods for several fundamental reasons:
1. Inconsistency with Divine Nature
He asserted that “fear, anger, and favor are incompatible with the perfect blessedness and incorruptibility of the gods.”
To attribute such emotions or worldly control to them would imply toil and weakness—alien to their serene existence.
2. Origin of Fear in Ignorance
Fear of the gods arises primarily from human ignorance of natural causes. Celestial events like thunder, lightning, comets, and eclipses—or terrestrial disasters like floods and failed harvests—were mistakenly attributed to divine wrath. Epicurus believed that scientific understanding of these phenomena dispels this superstitious dread.
3. Detrimental to Human Happiness
Fear of the gods is one of the chief causes of mental disturbance (tarachē), preventing individuals from achieving ataraxia (peace of mind) and aponia (freedom from pain)—the ultimate goals of Epicurean philosophy. Such fear leads to anxiety, superstition, and a life of constant appeasement that obstructs true happiness.
4. Emphasis on Human Agency and Free Will
Epicurus stressed that human actions are largely within our control and subject to praise or blame—not predetermined by divine will or fate. Belief in divine interference undermines free will and leads to a “slavery to necessity.”
In this fictional story, Epicurus wanted the man to understand that the gods require no material offerings—only respect. Perhaps the man realized his sons needed those gifts more than the temple did.
In reality, Epicurus did participate in religious offerings, even though it contradicted his views on divine indifference. He did so for pragmatic reasons.
Epicurus held a nuanced stance on religious practices:
1. Public Participation: Despite his beliefs, Epicurus advised his followers to take part in public rituals “reverently and properly.” This was a strategic move to avoid accusations of impiety, especially in a society where philosophers like Socrates had been persecuted.
2. Reinterpreting Rituals: Epicurus didn’t see rituals as divine transactions. Instead, he believed they could help the mind receive “simulacra” of the gods—mental images that inspired tranquility. Prayer, for Epicureans, was a form of communion, not a request for intervention. He revered the gods for their excellence, not their power.
3. Community Offerings: Within his school, Epicurus organized voluntary contributions to sustain the Garden. His will included provisions for offerings in honor of deceased loved ones. Monthly gatherings and birthday celebrations featured symbolic “offerings” and philosophical banquets, fostering fellowship and reflection.
4. Limits of Prayer:
Epicurus taught that it was “idle to seek from the gods what a man is capable of providing for himself.” While one might reflect on life’s duration, true peace of mind must be earned through reason and self-awareness.
Summary
Epicurus’s theology sought to rationalize the existence of gods in a way that freed humanity from religious terror, allowing individuals to pursue a tranquil and happy life based on understanding nature and mastering their desires and fears.
