What must be found is a method with regard to assent [to sugkatatit/1es-1hai ]. In the area [topos] of the inclinations [honnai ], we must keep vigilant our attentive faculty, so that these inclinations may operate with reserve:, in l hc 11crvicc of the community, and in a way corresponding to t he v11lur uf lhl'ir ohjcclN. Finally, when it comes to things that do not
1 96
Figures
depend on us, we must abstain totally from desire [orekseos apekhesthai ]
and feel no aversion towards any of them.92
Additionally, Marcus repeatedly formulates the triple rule of life himself. We can easily recognize it in the following passages: What is enough for you?
- Your present value-judgement, so long as it is objective;
- The action you are accomplishing at the present moment, so long as it is done for the benefit of the human community;
- Your present inner disposition, as long as it rejoices in every event brought about by causes outside yoursclf.93
A rational nature is proceeding as it should if it fulfills the following conditions:
- If, in its representations [ phantasiai ], it does not give its assent
[sugkatatithemene] either to what is false, or to what is unclear;
- If it guides its inclinations [honnas] only towards those actions which serve the human community;
- If it has desire [orekseis] or aversion only for things that depend on us, while joyfully greeting everything allotted to it by universal nature.94
Wipe out your representations [ phantasian].
Check your inclinations [honnaij.
Extinguish your desire [oreksin].
Keep your directing principle [hegemonikon] under your control.95
On what, then, should we exert our efforts? Only this:
- correct intentions;
- actions [prakseis] carried out in the service of the community;
- speech [logos] which could never be used to deceive;
- an inner disposition [diathesis] which joyfully greets each event like something necessary and familiar, since it flows from so grand a principle, and so great a source.'16
The reader will perhaps have noticed that, although it is quite obvious that Marcus Aurelius took over his tripartite structure from Epictetus, there is nevertheless a difference in tone and emphasis in Marcus' presentation of it.
When, for instance, Marcus speaks of the discipline of desire, he does not, as Epictetus had done, insist on the necessity of desiring only those things which depend on us - that is, moral good so that our desires may not be frustrated.
-
Rather, Marcus, in n much more explicit way thlln EpictctuK, conceives of this exercise as putting our desires in harmony with the will of fate 1111d of
Marcus Aurelius
1 97
universal reason. Its goal is to bring about within us an attitude of indifference to indifferent things; that is, whatever does not depend on us. For Marcus, much more than for Epictetus, the discipline of desire takes on the form of applied "physics," or physics transformed into a spiritual exercise.
The discipline of desire culminates in a joyful, loving satisfaction97 in the events willed by nature. But in order to achieve this state, we must totally change our way of looking at things. We must consider them from the point of view of universal nature, and this implies learning to recognize the chain of causes which produce each event. We are to consider each event as woven by destiny, and as flowing forth by natural necessity from the first causes. The discipline of desire thus obliges us to relocate the totality of human life within a coi.mic perspective, and become aware of the fact that we are a part of the world: "He who doesn't know what the world is doesn't know where he himself is, either. He who doesn't know for what purpose the world exists, doesn't know who he is himself. Whoever doesn't know the answer to one of these questions is unable to say for what purpose he himself exists." 98
In order to practice this kind of "physics," Marcus, as we have seen, tries to follow a rigorous method of definition,99 which consists in relocating all objects within the totality of the universe, and all events within the nexus of causes and effects. They are to be defined in and for themselves, and separated from the conventional, anthropomorphic representations mankind habitually makes of them.
Here we can perhaps glimpse in what way the three disciplines, like the three parts of philosophy, imply one another within the single act of philosophizing. The method of "physical" definition discussed by Marcus corresponds to the discipline of assent, which prescribes that we must give our assent only to those representations which are objective and freed from all subjective value-judgments.
Once prolonged experience has allowed us to come to know nature's ways and laws, "physics," when practiced as a spiritual exercise, leads us to
"familiarity" with nature.11lD Thanks to this familiarity, we can perceive the links between all phenomena which seem strange or repugnant to us, and between these phenomena and universal reason, the source from which they flow. From such a perspective, every event will seem to us beautiful and worthy of our affectionate assent. To be indifferent to indifferent things means to make no difference between them; in other words, to love them equally, just as nature does: " 'The earth loves the rain; she also loves the venerable Ether.'101 And the Universe, too, loves to produce all that must be produced.
Thus, I say to the Universe: 'I love along with you!' Isn't this, after all, the meaning of of the phrase, 'Such-and-such an event "loves" to happen?' " 102
When, in ancient Greek, one wished to say that something "usually occurs,"
m "iN lll'CUNtomcd to occur," n common idiom made it pm;siblc to sny the
198
Figures
event "loves" to occur ( philei ginesthai). Here, Marcus gives us to understand that events literally "love" to happen. We are to "love" to see them happen, because universal nature "loves" to produce them.
In the last analysis, such an attitude of joyful consent to the world corresponds to an attitude of obedience to the divine will. This is why Marcus sometimes describes the discipline of desire as an invitation to "follow the gods" or "God," as in the following presentation of the three disciplines:
"Keep the daimon within you in a state of serenity; so that it may follow God in an appropriate way, neither saying anything contrary to the truth, nor doing anything contrary to justice." 103 In the formulation of the second theme, Epictetus placed more emphasis on the fact that our inclinations and actions must be related to our duties (kathekonta) toward our fellow-men. Marcus, by contrast, speaks more often about just actions, done in the service of the human community. As was the case with the first theme, the second theme takes on a strongly emotional tonality for Marcus: we must love other people with all our hearts, he writes,1°" for rational beings are not only parts of the same whole, but the limbs of the same body. Moreover, we arc to extend our love even toward those who commit injustices against us, bearing in mind that they belong to the same human race as we do, and that, if they sin, they do so involuntarily, and out of ignorance.105
Marcus differs the least from Epictetus in his presentation of the third theme, the discipline of assent. The discipline Marcus imposes on himself relates, however, not only to the inner logos - that is, to the assent we give to our representations (phantasia1) - but also to the outer logos; that is, our manner of expressing ourselves.1111• Herc, the fundamental virtue is that of truth, understood as rectitude of thought and speech. Lies, even when involuntary, arc the result of the deformation of our faculty of judgment.107