A study of Epicurus' fragments and doxographies on his philosophy

伊壁鸠鲁是否主张两种神？首先，笔者利用伊壁鸠鲁本人、他的弟子和多神教的著作，特别是西塞罗的《自然神论》一书，考察了学者们关于《第一大教义》的论述与西塞罗的《自然神论》一书之间的关系。然后，笔者猜测西塞罗对伊壁鸠鲁的神论的意图有轻微的歪曲，因为伊壁鸠鲁重视神的结构的柔软性，在《新民主主义》的一段话中强调了神的幻象。因此，我确定伊壁鸠鲁承认两种神，即居住在“intermundia”中的不朽神是幻象的起源，而幻象神则是它们的衍生物，本研究的另一个目的，是检视伊壁鸠鲁的哲学片段与教义，并将其翻译成日文，并附上注解。在这份报告中，Fr.7-25（Arrighetti）的翻译和在Usener，Epicurea和Arrighetti，Epicuro Opere的片段之间的对比列表进行了描述。

An aim of this study is to make clear whether or not Epicurus maintained two kinds of the gods.At first I examine a relationship between the statement of the scholiast on the first of Principal Doctrines and the description of Cicero' De natura deorum I especially, by utilizing the writings of Epicurus himself, his disciples and the doxoraphers.Then I guess that Cicero distorted slightly the intention of Epicurus' doctrine of the gods, because he weighted the softness of structure of gods and emphasized the eidola-gods in a passage of N.D.Consequently I determine that Epicurus admitted two kinds of the gods, that is, the incorruptible gods dwelling in 'intermundia' as the origin of eidola and the eidola-gods as the derivative from them, although their substance consists of fine atoms.Another aim of this study is to examine Epicurus' fragments and doxographies on his philosophy and to translate them into Japanese with commentaries. In this report the translations of Fr.7-25 (Arrighetti) and the list contrasting between the fragments in Usener, Epicurea and the fragments in Arrighetti, Epicuro Opere are described.