R. G. Bury, The Symposium of Plato

εἴπερ τοῦ ἀγαθὸν κτλ. Against Bekker, Dindorf, Ast, Stallb.^{1} who adopted τοῦ τἀγαθὸν Rückert wrote: “etiam vulg. proba est. Construe: εἴπερ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἔρως ἐστὶν, quibus ἐξηγητικῶς addita sunt verba ἑαυτῷ εἶναι ἀεί. In quibus supplendum est subj. ὁ ἔρως.” To this Stallb.^{2} and Rettig assent, comparing Pind. Ol. III. 33 τῶν νιν γλυκὺς ἵμερος ἔσχεν...φυτεῦσαι: Thuc. V. 15. 1 ἐπιθυμίᾳ τῶν ἀνδρῶν τῶν ἐκ τῆς νήσου κομίσασθαι (where Poppo cites for the epexegetic infin. Crito 52 C, Xen. Cyr. V. 231). None the less, the MSS.' text seems—if not “sine ullo sensu” as Wolf put it—at least very awkward Greek. The obvious allusion to the former definition, ὁ ἔρως ἐστὶ τοῦ τὸ ἀγαθὸν αὑτῷ εἶναι ἀεί (206 A ad fin.), supports Bekker's reading here as the right one: but if we read τοῦ τἀγαθόν here consistency requires that we also read μετὰ τἀγαθοῦ in the preceding line, an easy change but supported by no authority. Hence I content myself with the minimum of alteration, viz. ἀγαθὸν for ἀγαθοῦ.

ὡς δεινῶς διατίθεται. “In welchem gewaltsamen Zustande sich die Thiere befinden” (Schlei.). The phrase is echoed by Alcibiades in 215 E, cp. 207 B, 208 C. For διάθεσις see Phileb. 11 D, with my note.