For Nature nere appointed him or me,
Or any else, proprietors to be
Of our own lands, though now the time is his
To turn me out, yet his unthriftiness
Or ignorance of tricks in law, or else
Who e’re survives him, him at last expells,
This Farm which now by Umbrenas name is known
Was mine, but none can say, It is his own;
‘Tis thine, and mine, and his.[Nam propriae telluris erum natura nec illum
nec me nec quemquam statuit: nos expulit ille,
illum aut nequities aut vafri inscitia iuris,
postremum expellet certe vivacior heres.
nunc ager Umbreni sub nomine, nuper Ofelli
dictus, erit nulli proprius, sed cedet in usum
nunc mihi, nunc alii.]Horace (65–8 BC) Roman poet, satirist, soldier, politician [Quintus Horatius Flaccus]
Satires [Saturae, Sermones], Book 2, # 2 “Quae virtus et quanta,” l. 129ff (2.2.129-135) (30 BC) [tr. A. B.; ed. Brome (1666)]
(Source)
On accepting the transitory nature of property and possessions.
(Source (Latin)). Alternate translations:For Nature doth not Me or Him Create,
The proper Lord of such and such Estate:
He forc't us out, and doth possess my Plain;
Another cheat shall force him out again,
Or quircks in Law, or when those fears are past,
His long-liv'd Heir shall force him out at last:
That which was once Ofellus Farm is gone,
Now call'd Umbrena's, but 'tis no Mans own:
None hath the Property, it comes and goes,
As merry Chance, or stubborn Fates dispose,
As God thinks fit, and his firm Nods Decree,
Now to be us'd by Others, now by Me.
[tr. Creech (1684)]Nature will no perpetual heir assign,
Or make the farm his property or mine.
He turn'd us out: but follies all his own,
Or law-suits, and their knaveries unknown,
Or, all his follies and his law-suits past,
Some long-lived heir shall turn him out at last.
The farm, once mine, now bears Umbrenus' name,
The use alone, not property we claim.
[tr. Francis (1747)]For view'd as property, the land, my sons,
Is neither his, nor mine, nor any one's.
He turn'd me out; and him his own excess
Or the law's quirks shall shortly dispossess:
At best, stern Death's ejectment, soon or late,
Shall prove these acres but a life-estate.
Umbrenus' name the farm at present bears;
'Twas lately mine, and shall be soon his heir's:
Now this, now that may sow the ground and till;
But all like are tenants but at will.
[tr. Howes (1845)]For nature has appointed to be lord of this earthly property, neither him, nor me, nor any one. He drove us out: either iniquity or ignorance in the quirks of the law shall [do the same by] him: certainly in the end his long-lived heir shall expel him. Now this field under the denomination of Umbrenus', lately it was Ofellus', the perpetual property of no man; for it turns to my use one while, and by and by to that of another.
[tr. Smart/Buckley (1853)]And I say "resident," because nor him nor me nor any one has nature fixed to be the owner of the land in perpetuity. He turned me out, and him profuse expenditure, or ignorance of legal quirk, or certainly at last, his heir, who's longer lived, will oust. The farm now bears Umbrenus' name, and lately bore Ofella's ; 'twill belong in perpetuity to none, but pass into the tenancy now of myself, now of some other man.
[tr. Millington (1870)]Holder, I say, for tenancy's the most
That he, or I, or any man can boast:
Now he has driven us out: but him no less
His own extravagance may dispossess
Or slippery lawsuit: in the last resort
A livelier heir will cut his tenure short.
Ofellus' name it bore, the field we plough,
A few years back: it bears Umbrenus' now:
None has it as a fixture, fast and firm,
But he or I may hold it for a term.
[tr. Conington (1874)]Nature, in truth, makes neither him nor me nor anyone else lord of the soil as his own. He drove us out, and he will be driven out by villainy, or by ignorance of the quirks of the law, or in the last resort by an heir of longer life. To-day the land bears the name of Umbrenus; of late it had that of Ofellus; to no one will it belong for good, but for use it will pass, now to me and now to another.
[tr. Fairclough (Loeb) (1926)]Nature indeed has appointed not him, not me,
Nor anyone else as lord and master of the earth.
He drove us off; some force will in turn drive him out:
Inefficiency, ignorance of some subtle clause of law,
Or at least and at last, no doubt, an heir that outlives him.
The land now known as Umbrenus' was recently called
Ofellus'; it will never belong to anyone, really:
It is loaned to use for our use, now mine, now others'.
[tr. Palmer Bovie (1959)]The land has no owners: nature never granted him a title,
she gave no rights to me or anyone. He pushed us out;
his sloth, or his ignorance of our complicated law,
a surviving heir, if nothing else, will push him out.
Now this field is named after Umbrenus; Ofellus was
the old name. It belongs to no one, but lets itself be used
now by me, now by others.
[tr. Fuchs (1977)]I call him so because nature has not
made him absolute master of
this land; neither he nor I nor anyone else.
He drove us out. His incapacity
or ignorance or quirks of the law will push
him out in turn, or ultimately
without fail, the heir who succeeds him.
Now the farm is under the name of
Umbrenus; once it was owned by
Ofellus. It will never be the absolute
property of anyone but will pass
in use now by me now by another.
[tr. Alexander (1999)]Nobody can own the land.
Nature signs no deeds. He harried us out,
and in his turn, his sloth or ignorance
of legal trickery, or at the last, an heir
will supplant him. Now the land bears the name
of Umbrenus. Once the name was Ofellus.
Still it belongs to none, and uses us
to till it, one by one.
[tr. Matthews (2002)]I say "occupant," for by nature's decree possession of the land
isn't his or mine or anyone else's. He turned us out,
and he'll be turned out by his own improvidence, his inability
to cope with the law's cunning, or at last by the heir who outlives him.
The farm is now in Umbrenus' name; not long ago
it was called Ofellus'; no one will own it, but its use will still
be enjoyed -- now by me, in time by another.
[tr. Rudd (2005 ed.)]Nature makes no-one, not he nor I, the true owner
Of the land: he replaced us, and he’ll be replaced
Through incompetence, not grasping legal subtlety,
Or, failing all that, by the heir that outlives him.
Today it’s Umbrenus’ farm, it was Ofellus’ lately,
No one will truly own it, but it will be worked
Now by me, now another.
[tr. Kline (2015)]
Quotations about:
possession
Note not all quotations have been tagged, so Search may find additional quotes on this topic.
It is not the fact that a man has riches which keeps him from the Kingdom of Heaven, but the fact that riches have him.
John Caird (1820-1898) Scottish theologian, academic, preacher
(Attributed)
I am unable to find the source of this quotation amongst Caird's writings (including of his many sermons). While he preaches in places on money and riches (e.g., "Covetousness a Misdirected Worship"), these phrases or ones like them do not show up in his works that I can find.
Nevertheless, this quotation was popularly requoted in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, beginning during Caird's lifetime. The earliest references I find are from 1878 --
The Pacific, Vol. 27, No. 17/1366 (1878-04-25) and (in quotations marks rather than italics) The Calcutta Indian Mirror (1879-05-18):Dr. Caird says it is not the fact that a man has riches which keeps him from the kingdom of heaven, but the fact that riches have him.
Christian Pioneer Magazine, "Gems," Vol. 23 (1878) and The Raleigh Christian Advocate (1879-02-05):It is not the fact that a man has riches which keeps him from the kingdom of heaven, but the fact that riches have him.
-- Dr. Caird
Even this point, the references are not to a story about Caird preaching or writing it, but column filler, indicating the quote was already in wide circulation. The use of quotes / italics suggests it might also be an excerpt from a more complex formulation.
By the turn of the century, the quote is fixed as above, and gains popularity in various quotation collections, including Hotchkiss, ed., Dictionary of Burning Words of Brilliant Writers (1895).
Citations for this phrase begin with attribution to "John Caird," "J. Caird," and "Dr. Caird," referencing the prominent Scottish theologian and preacher. After a time, only his last name is used. Starting mid-20th century (and as memory of John Caird fades), the attribution is often to David Caird (e.g., 1, 2, 3).
No, what was sad in his case was that he, who didn’t care for carved oak, should have his drawing-room paneled with it, while people who do care for it have to pay enormous prices to get it. It seems to be the rule of this world. Each person has what he doesn’t want, and other people have what he does want.
Jerome K. Jerome (1859-1927) English writer, humorist [Jerome Klapka Jerome]
Three Men in a Boat (To Say Nothing of the Dog), ch. 6 (1889)
(Source)
Gradually we become tired of the old, of what we safely possess, and we stretch out our hands again. Even the most beautiful scenery is no longer assured of our love after we have lived in it for three months, and some more distant coast attracts our avarice: possessions are generally diminished by possession.
[Wir werden des Alten, sicher Besessenen allmählich überdrüssig und strecken die Hände wieder aus; selbst die schönste Landschaft, in der wir drei Monate leben, ist unserer Liebe nicht mehr gewiss, und irgend eine fernere Küste reizt unsere Habsucht an: der Besitz wird durch das Besitzen zumeist geringer.]Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) German philosopher and poet
The Gay Science [Die fröhliche Wissenschaft], Book 1, § 14 (1882) [tr. Kaufmann (1974)]
(Source)
Also known as La Gaya Scienza, The Joyful Wisdom, or The Joyous Science.
(Source (German)). Alternate translations:We gradually become satiated with the old, the securely possessed, and again stretch out our hands; even the finest landscape in which we live for three months is no longer certain of our love, and any kind of more distant coast excites our covetousness: the possession for the most part becomes smaller through possessing.
[tr. Common (1911)]We slowly grow tired of the old, of what we safely possess, and we stretch our our hands again; even the most beautiful landscape is no longer sure of our love after we have lived in it for three months, and some more distant coast excites our greed: possession usually diminishes the possession.
[tr. Nauckhoff (2001)]We gradually grow weary of the old, familiar things we securely hold, and again stretch forth our hands; even the most beautiful landscape lived in for three months is no longer assured of our love, and some more distant shore excites our avarice: what is had loses much in the having.
[tr. Hill (2018)]
Wealth is not his that has it, but his that enjoys it.
Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) American statesman, scientist, philosopher, aphorist
Poor Richard (1736 ed.)
(Source)
FRIAR: For it so falls out
That what we have we prize not to the worth,
Whiles we enjoy it, but being lacked and lost,
Why then we rack the value, then we find
The virtue that possession would not show us
Whiles it was ours.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Much Ado About Nothing, Act 4, sc. 1, l. 228ff (4.1.228-233) (1598)
(Source)
For a possession which is not diminished by being shared with others, if it is possessed and not shared, is not yet possessed as it ought to be possessed.
[Omnis enim res quae dando non deficit, dum habetur et non datur, nondum habetur quomodo habenda est.]
Augustine of Hippo (354-430) Christian church father, philosopher, saint [b. Aurelius Augustinus]
On Christian Doctrine [De Doctrina Christiana], Book 1, ch. 1 / § 1 (1.1.1) (AD 397) [tr. Shaw (1858)]
(Source)
(Source (Latin)). Alternate translations:Everything which does not decrease on being given away is not properly owned when it is owned and not given.
[tr. Robertson (1958)]For everything which does not give out when given away is not yet possessed in the way in which it should be possessed, while it is possessed and not given away.
[tr. Green (1995)]For if a thing is not diminished by being shared with others, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned and not shared.
[Example]
For all you can hold in your cold dead hand
Is what you have given away.Joaquin Miller (1837-1913) American poet [pen name of Cincinnatus Heine (or Hiner) Miller]
“Peter Cooper (Died 1883),” ll. 11-12, In Classic Shades and Other Poems (1890)
(Source)
This phrasing of the sentiment seems to have been made by Miller, but the sentiment itself predates him in various ways. See, for example, Martial, Epigram 5.42 (AD 90): "You keep thus always what you gave."
Edward Gibbon, in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,, ch. 61 (1776), notes the epitaph of 15th Century Earl Edward Courtenay of Devonshire:What we gave, we have;
What we spent, we had;
What we left, we lost.
Miller was himself quoted by Edwin M. Poteat, President of Furman University, in his poem "What You Have Given Away" (1909). Poteat put the phrase in quotation marks, but is sometimes still given full credit.
Elbert Hubbard may have been borrowing from Miller in his Little Journeys to the Homes of the Great, Vol. 12 "Great Scientists," "Haeckel" (collected in 1916, but published earlier), where he writes:We keep things by giving them to others. The dead carry in their clenched hands only that which they have given away; and the living carry only the love in their hearts which they have bestowed on others.
Finally, often in the variant form "All we can hold in our cold dead hands is what we have given away," the phrase is today often identified as a Sanskrit proverb. The universality of thought means it may well have an ancient Indian inspiration, but the language may indicate a tie to Miller's poem, as promulgated. The "Sanscrit proverb" appears as such in Hoyt's New Cyclopedia of Practical Quotations (1922), but not in the 1896 edition. This may be taken from a letter to the editor, New York Times (1908-07-25) by Emily Noble, identifying this as the translation of a Sanskrit proverb.
Many pleasant things are better when they belong to someone else. You can enjoy them more that way. The first day, pleasure belongs to the owner; after that, to others. When things belong to others, we enjoy them twice as much, without the risk of losing them, and with the pleasure of novelty. Everything tastes better when we are deprived of it.
[Muchas cosas de gusto no se han de poseer en propiedad. Más se goza de ellas ajenas que propias. El primer día es lo bueno para su dueño, los demás para los extraños. Gózanse las cosas ajenas con doblada fruición, esto es, sin el riesgo del daño y con el gusto de la novedad. Sabe todo mejor a privación.]
Baltasar Gracián y Morales (1601-1658) Spanish Jesuit priest, writer, philosopher
The Art of Worldly Wisdom [Oráculo Manual y Arte de Prudencia], § 264 (1647) [tr. Maurer (1992)]
(Source)
(Source (Spanish)). Alternate translations:Many things that serve for pleasure, ought not to be peculiar. One enjoys more of what is another's, than of what belongs to himself. The first day is for the Master, and all the rest for Strangers. One doubly enjoys what belongs to others, that's to say, not only without fear of loss, but also with the pleasure of Novelty. Privation makes every thing better.
[Flesher ed. (1685), §263]Many things of Taste one should not possess oneself. One enjoys them better if another's than if one's own. The owner has the good of them the first day, for all the rest of the time they are for others. You take a double enjoyment in other men's property, being without fear of spoiling it and with the pleasure of novelty. Everything tastes better for having been without it.
[tr. Jacobs (1892)]Many of the things that bring delight should not be owned. They are more enjoyed if another's, than if yours; the first day they give pleasure to the owner, but in all the rest to the others: what belongs to another rejoices doubly, because without the risk of going stale, and with the satisfaction of freshness; everything tastes better after fasting.
[tr. Fischer (1937)]
OLD LADY: Our content
Is our best having.William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet
Henry VIII, Act 2, sc. 3, l. 27ff (2.3.27-28) (1613)
(Source)
To have and not give is in some cases worse than stealing.
[Haben und nichts geben, ist in manchen Fällen schlechter als stehlen.]
Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach (1830-1916) Austrian writer
Aphorisms [Aphorismen], No. 41 (1880-1893) [tr. Wister (1882)]
(Source)
(Source (German)). Alternate translation:To have and not give is in some instances worse than stealing.
[tr. Scrase/Mieder (1994)]
Wise is he who instead of grieving over what he lacks delights in what he has.
[Εὐγνώμων ὁ μὴ λυπεόμενος ἐφ’ οἷσιν οὐκ ἔχει, ἀλλὰ χαίρων ἐφ’ οἷσιν ἔχει.]
Democritus (c. 460 BC - c. 370 BC) Greek philosopher
Frag. 231 (Diels) [tr. @sententiq (2016)]
(Source)
Original Greek. Diels citation "231 (61 N.)"; collected in Joannes Stobaeus (Stobaios) Anthologium III, 17, 25. Bakewell lists this under "The Golden Sayings of Democritus." Freeman notes this as one of the Gnômae, from a collection called "Maxims of Democratês," but because Stobaeus quotes many of these as "Maxims of Democritus," they are generally attributed to the latter. Alternate translations:
- "A sensible man takes pleasure in what he has instead of pining for what he has not." [tr. Bakewell (1907)]
- "The right-minded man is he who is not grieved by what he has not, but enjoys what he has." [tr. Freeman (1948)]
- "A man of sound judgement is not grieved by what he does not possess but rejoices in what he does possess." [tr. Barnes (1987)]
- "A sensible man does not grieve for what he has not, but enjoys what he has." [Source]
We are all more blind to what we have than to what we have not.
Audre Lorde (1934-1992) American writer, feminist, civil rights activist
“Notes from a Trip to Russia,” Sister Outsider (1984)
(Source)
Marrying a woman for her beauty makes no more sense than eating a bird for its singing. But it’s a common mistake nonetheless.
An artist is a creature driven by demons. He doesn’t know why they chose him and he’s usually too busy to wonder why. He is completely amoral in that he will rob, borrow, beg, or steal from anybody and everybody to get the work done.
William Faulkner (1897-1962) American novelist
“The Art of Fiction,” Interview by Jean Stein, Paris Review #12 (Spring 1956)
(Source)
When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues. We shall be able to afford to dare to assess the money-motive at its true value. The love of money as a possession — as distinguished from the love of money as a means to the enjoyment and realities of life — will be recognized for what it is, a somewhat disgusting morbidity, one of those semi-criminal, semi-pathological propensities which one hands over with a shudder to the specialists in mental disease.
John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946) English economist
“Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren,” Nation and Athenaeum (1930-10-11)
(Source)
Originally a society talk in 1920, expanded to a lecture given in Madrid (1930-06). Reprinted in Essays in Persuasion, Part 5, ch. 2 (1931).
What do you suppose makes all men look back to the time of childhood with so much regret (if their childhood has been, in any moderate degree, healthy or peaceful)? That rich charm, which the least possession had for us, was in consequence of the poorness of our treasures. That miraculous aspect of the nature around us, was because we had seen little, and knew less. Each increased possession loads us with a new weariness; every piece of new knowledge diminishes the faculty of admiration; and Death is at last appointed to take us from a scene in which, if we were to stay longer, no gift could satisfy us, and no miracle surprise.
John Ruskin (1819-1900) English art critic, painter, writer, social thinker
The Eagle’s Nest, Lecture 5 “The Power of Contentment in Science and Art,” Sec. 82 (22 Feb 1872)
(Source)
The way to love anything is to realize that it might be lost.
Gilbert Keith Chesterton (1874-1936) English journalist and writer
Tremendous Trifles, “The Advantages of Having One Leg” (1909)
(Source)
It is not merely that the ownership of any substantial share in the national wealth is concentrated to-day in the hands of a few hundred thousand families, and that at the end of an age which began with an affirmation of the rights of property, proprietary rights are, in fact, far from being widely distributed. Nor is it merely that what makes property insecure to-day is not the arbitrary taxation of unconstitutional monarchies or the privileges of an idle noblesse, but the insatiable expansion and aggregation of property itself, which menaces with absorption all property less than the greatest, the small master, the little shopkeeper, the country bank, and has turned the mass of mankind into a proletariat working under the agents and for the profit of those who own.
R. H. Tawney (1880-1962) English writer, economist, historian, social critic [Richard Henry Tawney]
The Acquisitive Century, ch. 5 “Property and Creative Work” (1920)
In the end, a life of prayer is a life with open hands where we are not ashamed of our weakness but realize that it is more perfect for us to be led by the Other than to try to hold everything in our own hands.
Henri Nouwen (1932-1996) Dutch Catholic priest and writer
With Open Hands (1972)
In private life, no motive of action is at present so powerful and so persistent as acquisitiveness, which, unlike most other desires, knows no satiety.
William Ralph Inge (1860-1954) English prelate [Dean Inge]
“Patriotism,” Outspoken Essays: First Series (1915)
Songwriting is about getting the demon out of me. It’s like being possessed. You try to go to sleep, but the song won’t let you. So you have to get up and make it into something, and then you’re allowed to sleep. It’s always in the middle of the bloody night, or when you’re half-awake or tired, when your critical faculties are switched off. So letting go is what the whole game is.
John Lennon (1940-1980) English rock musician, singer, songwriter
Interview, Playboy (Sep 1980)
The worth of a man does not consist in the truth he possesses, or thinks he possesses, but in the pains he has taken to attain that truth. For his powers are extended not through possession but through the search for truth. In this alone his ever-growing perfection consists.
[Nicht die Wahrheit, in deren Besitz irgend ein Mensch ist, oder zu sein vermeint, sondern die aufrichtige Mühe, die er angewandt hat, hinter die Wahrheit zu kommen, macht den Wert des Menschen. Denn nicht den Besitz, sondern durch die Nachforschung der Wahrheit erweitern sich seine Kräfte, worin allein seine immer wachsende Vollkommenheit bestehet.]
Gotthold Lessing (1729-1781) German playwright, philosopher, dramaturg, writer
Eine Duplik, Part 1 (1778) [tr. Chadwick (1957)]
(Source)
This passage (in the Scott Horton translation below) is given as the epigraph to chapter 19 of Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great (2007); this prominence gave it a fair amount of fame. It is identified in Hitchens as being from Lessing's Anti-Goeze tracts (1778), though strictly speaking the passage is actually from Eine Duplik (1778), a different writing by Lessing over the same Fragment Dispute of 1777-1778.
(Source (German)). Alternate translations:It is not the truth that a man possesses, or believes he possesses, but the honest pains he has taken to get at truth, which makes a man's worth; for it is not by the possession of truth, but by the march after it, that his powers are extended, in which alone his perfection consists.
[Source (1884)]The true value of a man is not determined by his possession, supposed or real, of Truth, but rather by his sincere exertion to get to the Truth. It is not possession of the Truth, but rather the pursuit of Truth by which he extends his powers and in which his ever-growing perfectibility is to be found.
[tr. Horton (2007)]
Better one byrde in hand than ten in the wood.
John Heywood (1497?-1580?) English playwright and epigrammist
Proverbes, Part 1, ch. 2 (1546)
It is preoccupation with possession, more than anything else, that prevents men from living freely and nobly.
Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) English mathematician and philosopher
Principles of Social Reconstruction [Why Men Fight], ch. 8 (1916)
Prospect is often better than possession.
Thomas Fuller (1654-1734) English physician, preacher, aphorist, writer
Gnomologia: Adages and Proverbs (compiler), # 3958 (1732)
(Source)
Whatever you can lose, reckon of no account.
Publilius Syrus (d. 42 BC) Assyrian slave, writer, philosopher [less correctly Publius Syrus]
Sententiae [Moral Sayings], # 191 [tr. Lyman (1862)]
Human happiness konsists in having what yu want, and wanting what yu hav.
[Human happiness consists in having what you want, and wanting what you have.]
Josh Billings (1818-1885) American humorist, aphorist [pseud. of Henry Wheeler Shaw]
Everybody’s Friend, Or; Josh Billing’s Encyclopedia and Proverbial Philosophy of Wit and Humor, ch. 131 “Affurisms: Plum Pits (1)” (1874)
(Source)
Never a possession, always the possessor, with skin as pale as smoke, and eyes tawny and sharp as yellow wine: Desire is everything you have ever wanted. Whoever you are. Whatever you are.
Everything.
Neil Gaiman (b. 1960) British author, screenwriter, fabulist
Sandman, Book 4. Season of Mists, # 21 “A Prologue” (1990-11)
(Source)
The three most important things a man has are, briefly, his private parts, his money, and his religious opinions.
Samuel Butler (1835-1902) English novelist, satirist, scholar
Further Extracts from Note-books of Samuel Butler (1934)
What difference does it make how much you have? What you do not have amounts to much more.
Seneca the Younger (c. 4 BC-AD 65) Roman statesman, philosopher, playwright [Lucius Annaeus Seneca]
(Attributed)
Attr. by Aulus Gellius in Noctes Atticae, bk. 12, ch. 2, sct. 13 (2nd cent. A.D.).
TECMESSA: Ignorant men
Don’t know what good they hold in their hands until
They’ve flung it away.Sophocles (496-406 BC) Greek tragic playwright
Ajax, l. 964 [tr. Moore (1959)]
Alt trans.:
- “Men of perverse opinion do not know / The excellence of what is in their hands, / Till some one dash it from them.” [George Young (1888)]
- "Men of ill judgement oft ignore the good / That lies within their hands, till they have lost it."
- "For those who are base in judgement do not know the good they hold in their hands until they cast it off."
Those two fatal words, Mine and Thine.
Miguel de Cervantes (1547-1616) Spanish novelist
Don Quixote, Part 1, Book 2, ch. 11 (1605) [tr. Motteux & Ozell (1743)]
(Source)
Alt trans.:
- "Oh happy age, which our first parents called the age of gold! not because gold, so much adored in this iron-age, was then easily purchased, but because those two fatal words, mine and thine, were distinctions unknown to the people of those fortunate times." [Full version of the above]
- "Happy the age, happy the time, to which the ancients gave the name of golden, not because in that fortunate age the gold so coveted in this our iron one was gained without toil, but because they that lived in it knew not the two words 'mine' and 'thine'!" [tr. Ormsby (1885)]
- "Happy age, and happy days were those, to which the ancients gave the name of golden; not, that gold, which in these our iron-times, is so much esteemed, was to be acquired without trouble, in that fortunate period; but, because people then, were ignorant of those two words MINE and THINE." [tr. Smollett (1976), as Part 1, Book 1, ch. 3]
Most people seek after what they do not possess and thus are enslaved by the very things they want to acquire. They become prisoners of their desires even though they appear to be free.
