• We have not inherited the land from our fathers, we have borrowed it from our children.
• We have not inherited the earth from our fathers and are hence entitled to use it according to our wishes. We have rather borrowed it from our children ...
• The world is not given by his fathers but borrowed from his children.
• We don’t inherit the earth from our fathers, we borrow it from our children.
• We have not inherited the earth from our fathers, we are borrowing it from our children.
• We have not inherited the earth from our parents, we have borrowed it from our children.
• We have not inherited the land from our parents, we are borrowing it from our children.
• We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.
• We did not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrowed it from our descendants.
• We did not inherit our future from our ancestors, we have borrowed it from our children..

But there is another form that life can take. We can learn about it from exceptional people of our own culture, and from other cultures less destructive than ours. I am speaking of the lives of people who have undertaken to cherish the world and do it no damage, not because they are duty-bound, but because they love the world and love their children; whose work serves the earth they live on and from and with, and is therefore pleasurable and meaningful and unending; whose rewards are not deferred until “retirement,” but arrive daily and seasonally out of the details of the life of their place; whose goal is the continuance of the life of the world, which for a while animates and contains them, and which they know they can never encompass with their understanding or desire.

There is no certain mark of generous souls:
For in the tempers of mankind prevails
A strange confusion. I have seen the son
Of a great father dwindle into nothing.
And virtuous children spring from wicked Sires;
Among the rich a mean contracted spirit
Have I discover'd, and the poor man's breast
Withi most exalted sentiments inspir'd.
[tr. Wodhull (1809)]

Ah! there is no sure mark to recognize a man's worth; for human nature hath in it an element of confusion. For I have seen ere now the son of a noble sire prove himself a worthless knave, and virtuous children sprung from evil parents; likewise dearth in a rich man's spirit, and in a poor man's frame a mighty soul.
[tr. Coleridge (1891)]

Alas! there is no sure mark of manliness; for the natures of mortals exhibit a confusion. For already have I seen a man who was naught sprung from a noble sire, and good children [sprung] from bad [fathers[,. and hunger in the spirit of a rich man, and a great mind in a poor body.
[tr. Buckley (1892)]

Lo, there is no sure test for manhood’s worth:
For mortal natures are confusion-fraught. --
I have seen ere now a noble father’s son
Proved nothing-worth, seen good sons of ill sires,
Starved leanness in a rich man’s very soul,
And in a poor man’s body a great heart.
[tr. Way (1896)]

How dark lies honour hid! And what turmoil
In all things human: sons of mighty men
Fallen to naught, and from ill seed again
Good fruit: yea, famine in the rich man's scroll
Writ deep, and in poor flesh a lordly soul.
[tr. Murray (1905)]

Ah! There is no exact way to test a man's worth; for human nature has confusion in it. I have seen before now the son of a noble father worth nothing, and good children from evil parents; famine in a rich man's spirit, and a mighty soul in a poor man's body.
[tr. Coleridge (1938 ed.)]

It is impossible to judge a man’s virtue with accuracy. There’s always great confusion in the nature of mortals. I, myself, have seen worthless children born of a virtuous man and from evil parents born brilliant children. I have seen a small, poor mind in a wealthy man and in the soul of a poor man, a great one.
[tr. Theodoridis (2006)]

Well, nothing is precise
when it comes to how a man is valued --
men’s natures are confusing. Before this,
I’ve seen a man worth nothing, yet he had
a noble father; I’ve known evil parents
with outstanding children, seen famine
in a rich man’s mind and a great spirit
in a poor man’s body.
[tr. Johnston (2009)]

I have known a man of a noble father who turns out
To be nothing while powerful men can rise from the low.
I have seen emptiness in a rich man’s thought
And great judgement in a poor person’s frame.
[tr. @sententiq (2020)]

For it is not earthly riches which make us or our sons happy; for they must either be lost by us in our lifetime, or be possessed when we are dead, by whom we know not, or perhaps by whom we would not.
[tr. Dods (1871)]

The riches of this earth can make neither us nor our children happy, if they are to be lost while we are alive or, after we are dead, are to pass to people we do not know or, perhaps, dislike.
[tr. Zema/Walsh (1950)]

For neither we nor our children are made happy by earthly riches, since they are bound either to be lost while we are living or to be acquired after our death by persons unknown and perhaps unwelcome.
[tr. Green (Loeb) (1963)]

Happiness, whether for us or for our children, is not the result of earthly riches, which must either be lost by us in our lifetime or else must pass after our death into the possession of those we do not know or, it may be, of those whom we do not wish to have them.
[tr. Bettenson (1972)]

For neither we nor our sons are made happy by earthly riches. These things must either be lost while we are still alive or, after we are dead, acquired by someone whom we do not know, or perhaps by someone whom we would not wish to have them.
[tr. Dyson (1998)]

For earthly riches do not make either us or our children happy; they will either be lost while we are still alive or will pass, after our death, to someone we do not know or even to someone we do not want.
[tr. Babcock (2012)]

Rarely into the branches of the tree
Doth human worth mount up; and so ordains
He who bestows it, that as his free gift
It may be call’d.
[tr. Cary (1814)]

Rarely shoots merit up into the boughs,
Or human worth; and such the will of Him,
That from the Donor they should seem to come.
[tr. Bannerman (1850)]

Not oftentimes upriseth through the branches
The probity of man; and this He wills
Who gives it, so that we may ask of Him.
[tr. Longfellow (1867)]

Seldom rises human goodness through the branches; and this wills He who gives it in order that from Him it may be claimed.
[tr. Butler (1885)]

But rarely in the branch again is grown
Our human excellence, so willeth He
Who gives it, that the boon be called His own.
[tr. Minchin (1885)]

Rarely doth human goodness rise through the branches, and this He wills who gives it, in order that it may be asked from Him.
[tr. Norton (1892)]

Rarely doth human probity rise through the sons branches:
and this he wills who giveth it,
so that it may be prayed for from him.
[tr. Okey (1901)]

Rarely does human worth rise through the branches, and this He wills who gives it, that it may be sought from Him.
[tr. Sinclair (1939)]

Full seldom human virtue rises through
The branches; and the Giver wills it so,
That they to him for such a gift may sue.
[tr. Binyon (1943)]

Rare is the tree that lifts to every limb
the sap of merit -- He who gives, so wills
that men may learn to beg their best from Him.
[tr. Ciardi (1961)]

Rarely does human worth rise through the branches, and this He wills who gives it, in order that it may be asked from Him.
[tr. Singleton (1973)]

Not often does the sap of virtue rise
to all the branches. This is His own gift,
and we can only beg that He bestow it.
[tr. Musa (1981)]

Rarely does human worth rise through the branches;
That is the will of him whose gift it is,
So that it should be matter for petition.
[tr. Sisson (1981)]

How seldom human worth ascends from branch to branch,
and this is willed by Him who grants that gift,
that one may pray to Him for it!
[tr. Mandelbaum (1982)]

Seldom does human probity rise up through the branches, and this is willed by him who gives it, that it may be attributed to him.
[tr. Durling (2003)]

Human worth rarely increases through its branches: and this He wills who creates it, so that it may be asked for of him.
[tr. Kline (2002)]

It seldom happens that man’s probity
will rise through every branch. He wills it thus,
so, given from beyond, it’s known as His.
[tr. Kirkpatrick (2007)]

Rarely does human worth rise through the branches.
And this He wills who gives it,
so that it shall be sought from Him.
[tr. Hollander/Hollander (2007)]

Goodness rarely flows to the spreading branches
Of a family tree, for God who gives it decrees
That since the gift is His, humans must ask it.
[tr. Raffel (2010)]

Now the noblest inheritance that can ever be left by a father to his son, and far exceeding that of houses and lands, is the fame of his virtues and glorious actions; and for a son to live so, as is unworthy of the name and reputation of his ancestors, is the basest and most abominable thing in the world.
[tr. Cockman (1699)]

The best inheritance left by a father to his children, superior to every other patrimony, is the honor of a virtuous conduct, and the glory of his public transactions. And it is base and criminal by an unworthy conduct, to bring disgrace upon a father's reputation.
[tr. McCartney (1798)]

Now, the best inheritance a parent can leave a child -- more excellent than any patrimony -- is the glory of his virtue and his deeds; to bring disgrace on which ought to be regarded as wicked and monstrous.
[tr. Edmonds (1865)]

The noblest heritage, the richest patrimony a father can bequeath to his children is a reputation for virtue and noble deeds. To tarnish his good name is a sin and a crime.
[tr. Gardiner (1899)]

The best legacy a father can leave to his children, a legacy worth far more than the largest patrimony, is the fame of a virtuous and well-spent life. He who disgraces such a bequest is deserving of infamy.
[ed. Harbottle (1906)]

The noblest heritage, however, that is handed down from fathers to children, and one more precious than any inherited wealth, is a reputation for virtue and worthy deeds; and to dishonour this must be branded as a sin and a shame.
[tr. Miller (1913)]

The best heritage that descends from fathers to sons is the fame for honesty and great deeds. Such fame surpasses any legacy. We must judge it a crime and a shame to disgrace it.
[tr. Edinger (1974)]

And so it is best to unite women of about eighteen years of age and men of thirty-seven or less; for by such an arrangement the union will be during their greatest physical perfection, and will, as the years pass reach the limit of child-begetting at the right time. Again, the succession of children will be secured, as the younger generation will be having children at the beginning of their prime, supposing some to be born at once, as we may expect, and as the right age has passed away from the older generation as they approach the limit of seventy years.
[tr. Bolland (1877)]

Women should marry when they are about eighteen years of age, and men at seven and thirty; then they are in the prime of life, and the decline in the powers of both will coincide. Further, the children, if their birth takes place soon, as may reasonably be expected, will succeed in the beginning of their prime, when the fathers are already in the decline of life, and have nearly reached their term of three-score years and ten.
[tr. Jowett (1885)]

For which reason the proper time for a woman to marry is eighteen, for a man thirty-seven, a little more or less; for when they marry at that time their bodies are in perfection, and they will also cease to have children at a proper time; and moreover with respect to the succession of the children, if they have them at the time which may reasonably be expected, they will be just arriving into perfection when their parents are sinking down under the load of seventy years.
[tr. Ellis (1912)]

Hence it is fitting for women to unite in marriage around the age of eighteen, and for men at thirty-seven or a little before. At such an age, union will occur when their bodies are in their prime, and will arrive at its conclusion conveniently for both of them with respect to the cessation of procreation. Further, the succession of the offspring -- if birth occurs shortly after marriage, as can reasonably be expected -- will be for them at the beginning of their prime, while for the fathers it will be when their age has already run its course toward the seventieth year.
[tr. Lord (1984)]