Full Idea
Accidental qualities are not non-existent, nor are they distinct corporeal entities inhering in the body, nor parts of it. We should think that the whole body throughout derives its permanent nature from these properties, though not as a compound of them.
Gist of Idea
Accidental properties give a body its nature, but are not themselves bodies or parts of bodies
Source
Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 69)
Book Reference
Epicurus: 'The Epicurus Reader', ed/tr. Inwood,B. /Gerson,L. [Hackett 1994], p.14
A Reaction
'Permanent' nature sounds more like essential than accidental properties. This is uncomfortably negative in its attempt to pin down what accidental properties are. The last bit seems to deny the bundle view of objects. Would he like tropes?
Related Ideas
Idea 14044 The perceived accidental properties of bodies cannot be conceived of as independent natures [Epicurus]
Idea 14046 A 'body' is a conception of an aggregate, with properties defined by application conditions [Epicurus]
Idea 14047 Bodies have impermanent properties, and permanent ones which define its conceived nature [Epicurus]