Fascinating discussion, many thanks to everyone. 
The progression of Sufism through the ages and 
its penetration into so many traditions along 
with what people of those traditions see in it 
and take out of it, is always worth looking at 
always provides significant food for thought.

Tierno Bokar Salif Tal wasn't on my radar -- I've 
generally been looking at stuff a lot further 
back. I'll follow up on him.

Cheers, geoff

At 12:55 PM +0200 8/10/11, Farid Benfeghoul wrote:
>Hi ,
>
>My contribution was purposely limited to the 
>philological controversy. But Manfred is 
>perfectly right : this is not just a matter of 
>quotation tradition, it affects the way  we 
>behave, when we want to follow the respective 
>«prescriptions»: «bene» prescribes «fairness», 
>«bonum» «panegyric».
>But here again I prefer a harmonizing solution, 
>which leads us even farther away from the main 
>objective of the Nisus Forum. If we remember the 
>parabole of the "black birds and the white 
>birds" ingeniously devised by Tierno Bokar Salif 
>Tal, the African Sufi sage of Bandiagara (Mali, 
>1875-1939), a well of Love and Charity -- 
>therefore called by many the «African Franz of 
>Assisi", and put on stage by Peter Brook in 2004 
>as an hommage to him -- both readings, «bene» 
>and «bonum»,  are white birds.  Both are 
>spiritually beneficient for the sender (e.g. the 
>Mac community) and the adressee (Steve Jobs, a 
>fellow creature who  lived and died, and -- 
>among many other things - did much for this 
>community) . The cynic may stick to his 
>cynicism, but the good news is: there is no way 
>for him or her to escape the unfathomable law of 
>Love.
>
>This said, I apologize to all those who might be 
>irritated by the admonishing tone of this 
>intervention. Many points of view have been 
>expressed on this issue. This one is just one of 
>them.
>
>Farid.
>
>
>
>Zitat von Manfred Kropp <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>>Thanks Farid! The two different traditions have 
>>become clear; a further discussion of the Greek 
>>should be left to another moment.
>>On the other hand: the practical question is: 
>>what does one accept as a general rule for 
>>behaviour and acting; because it is not only a 
>>question of two different traditions. If one 
>>keeps to one of the respective rules practical 
>>consequences can be very different. If that has 
>>become clear, the learned discussion - and my 
>>thanks to all who took their time to contribute 
>>- has got a good result.
>>msk
>>
>>>What we have here might just be two different 
>>>quoting traditions: one Anglo-Saxon or 
>>>Anglo-American (see the Dictionary of foreign 
>>>Terms by O. Sylvester Mawson (ed. of Roget's 
>>>International Thesaurus,Pocket Edition, 
>>>Bantam, 1961, p. 94) favorising «bonum» (see 
>>>also the English Wikipedia); the other, German 
>>>(see. Büchmann's famous "Gefügelte Worte", 
>>>34th ed., Frankfurt... 1981, 249b), favorising 
>>>«bene» (see also the German Wikipedia). This 
>>>divergence is perhaps due to two different 
>>>translations, because the Latin is NOT the 
>>>semantically faithful translation of the 
>>>Greek, but rather a modulation of it. 
>>>According to Büchmann's "Gefügelte Worte", the 
>>>Greek original is «Tòn tethnekóta mè 
>>>kakologein» «Man soll von einem Toten nichts 
>>>Schlechtes reden» [one should say nothing bad 
>>>of a dead]; the Latin translation turned 
>>>«nothing bad» into «only good». But there are 
>>>still other more divergent variants of this 
>>>sentence quoted by Buechmann.
>>>
>>>So it seems that everybody may be happy with 
>>>his version, for everybody is right within his 
>>>own tradition.
>>>
>>>German-speaking may be interested in the following article:
>>>http://www.onlinezeitung24.de/article/3545
>>>
>>>Farid.
>>>
>>>
>>>Zitat von Rich Hansen <[log in to unmask]>:
>>>
>>>>On Oct 7, 2011, at 12:27 AM, Manfred Kropp wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>The "bonum" is a miscitation (cf. the not 
>>>>>trustworthy 
>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_mortuis_nil_nisi_bonum)
>>>>>or deliberate alteration of
>>>>>"de mortuis nil nisi bene".
>>>>>Deliberate?: yes, because it changes the 
>>>>>imperative from "being just and fair" in "to 
>>>>>be a panegyric" (perhaps more fashionable 
>>>>>and accepted in our times).
>>>>>msk
>>>>
>>>>Well as the translation is from the 
>>>>Renaissance, at least according to Wikipedia 
>>>>and not from Classical times almost anything 
>>>>is possible. Also, although this certainly 
>>>>doesn't prove much one way or the other, a 
>>>>Google search on both phrases has bonum 
>>>>outnumbering bene by a good margin.
>>>>
>>>>While there is nothing written (and may never 
>>>>have been) from Chiron himself we DO have the 
>>>>source in a way in "Lives of the Emminent 
>>>>Philosophers" by Diogenes and I guess someone 
>>>>more mobile than I could hie themselves to 
>>>>the Library and look in the Loeb Library 
>>>>translation because what passes (after some 
>>>>2500 years who knows for sure) for the 
>>>>original Greek is there in his discussion of 
>>>>Chiron. Not to mention searching Google 
>>>>books. I leave this to someone whose Greek is 
>>>>bound to be better than mine.
>>>>
>>>>rich
>>>>--
>>>>Rich Hansen
>>>>[log in to unmask] // [log in to unmask]