Author
Marcus Aurelius
Year Published
c. 161–180 CE
At a Glance
The Meditations of the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (121–180 CE) were a series of discussions begun earlier in life with esteemed philosophers. The reign of Marcus Aurelius (161–180 CE) was fraught with continual conflict, both in Rome and across the outer reaches of the empire. The entries in The Meditations serve as a reminder of the morals of a Stoic, a believer in the ancient Greek philosophy that an individual must practice virtue and ignore such distractions as emotions and pain in order to be happy. They also show how Aurelius uniquely applied his values to the challenges he faced. He struggled as an individual to attain a balanced state between nature and fate, social and personal truth, and reason amid chaos.
About the Title
Meditations originally did not have a title and was not intended for publication. A title was assigned to it in 364 CE as ta eis heauton (Greek for “to himself”) by Roman philosopher Themistius in a manuscript now lost. The title reflects the nature of the text: personal reflections on the author’s life.
Main Ideas
Nature and Universe
The philosophy Aurelius repeatedly reminds himself of throughout Meditations is that nature is at the foundation of all life – human and animal. As such, it is an ongoing manifestation of the universe (Fate, Providence, or God), but in specific instances, it is also transient and temporary. An individual (prince or pauper) lives for a short period, but humanity goes on. The trick is to discern which of these two principles is in action for any given condition. Being able to do this is, for Aurelius, the key to making sure he is acting according to his own nature, leaving others to act according to theirs as allotted to them by the universe.
Transience of Life
Emperor Aurelius spent most of his time and energy on battlefields far from the comforts of his own home and Roman society. He experienced years of watching men fight, suffer mentally and physically, and die. He struggled to put aside his own desires for the sake of duty, as he reminded himself that life is not given to simply be thrown away while seeking gratification.
Aurelius’s experience with facing death informs the Meditations. All 12 books of the text are rich with references to the brief conditions, whether desirable or undesirable, contained in a person’s span of life. He constantly reminds himself of all the people who had been rich, famous, and powerful in their time, but now have succumbed to death.
Parts and Whole
The relationship between the parts and the whole of a system was very much a concern of the Stoics, and the philosophy upon which particularly the Roman Stoics based their ideas. Later considerations of modern philosophy (mainly German) would return to this in a different way, but Aurelius examines this here as a means of determining the truth of nature as directed by a greater power of Providence or the universe. The concert of the individual relative to his society is another view, suggesting a symmetrical unity of reiteration between groupings of units – the idea behind the classical geometry of the Greeks.
Simplicity versus Ostentation
Aurelius evidently struggled with his desire to enjoy the benefits of being emperor of Rome, but he counters this with practical restraint, and reminds himself of previous emperors who overindulged themselves. Even “good” and powerful men like Alexander the Great seem to have everything, but in order to keep it, must spend time and energy slaving away in constant worry. By contrast, those philosophers who have command only of themselves, and who take the time and effort to master their own disciplines of mind, body, and soul, possess the only thing that will last: intelligence. The attainment of such a balance is the only way to counteract the need to avoid pain and suffering, and the need to pursue pleasure and happiness. Book 12 concludes with the phrase, “Depart then satisfied.”
Context
Greco-Roman Culture
Greco-Roman culture was a blend of Greek, Roman, and Hellenistic or “Greek-like” cultural elements that prevailed in Mediterranean regions from about the middle of the 1st century BCE to the early Roman Christian era, 4th century CE. Greco-Roman culture not only enclosed the Mediterranean Sea to include all of North Africa from present-day Morocco to Egypt, but it also extended well into present-day India to the east, creating the first truly international and multicultural trade society the world had known.
A brief summary of Greco-Roman culture supports an understanding of Aurelius’s approach to life as expressed in Meditations. Skilled and unskilled labor was imported wholesale into Rome from Africa, while Far Eastern religious and philosophical influences came in via the trade routes between Rome, India, and China. Professional female poets, philosophers, and physicians were active in the intellectual life in the major cities of Alexandria in Egypt (home to the most comprehensive library in the Western world), Rome, and Carthage in present-day Tunisia. All these influences contributed to a centralized cosmopolitan urban life of the very rich and the very poor, including lavish architecture to glorify kings instead of deities.
Stoicism
Stoicism comes from the word porch, or stoa poikilĕ, after the area where Stoics gathered at the Agora in Athens. Founded by the philosopher Zeno (c. 333–262 BCE), it provides much of the background for Aurelius’s thoughts, and he credits both Greek and Roman Stoics throughout his Meditations. Important features of Stoicism are the ideas that everything will recur and change is constant. Therefore, the stoic individual seeks to live according to the reasoned laws of nature with direct simplicity and attention. This discipline allows the philosopher to acknowledge the presence of – but not be controlled by – the passing forces of emotion. Virtue and dedication to the duty of one’s allotted condition in life is sufficient for true happiness across periods of confusion, chaos, and adversity. Despite transient appearances, the order of the universe unfolds through time.
Much of Meditations displays the influence of two Stoics: Epictetus and Rusticus. Epictetus had been born an illiterate slave, but dictated his philosophy to one of his pupils, who wrote his master’s Discourses. Epictetus was an unorthodox Stoic, who believed in greater individual freedom of will rather than the role of Fate. Aurelius’s mentor, Rusticus, may have studied with Epictetus and passed on his perspectives to the future emperor.
Empire and Character
The Romans Aurelius presents in his Meditations (notably Book 1) as admirable people adhere to three important characteristics; pater familias, gravitas, and pietas.
The patrician, or aristocratic, Roman citizen established his standing through his ancestry. Thus, pater familias, or familial rule by the eldest living male, was an important Roman trait. Romans placed marble busts of their forefathers together in a household shrine to honor them. The fact that Aurelius even credits his mother in Book 1 is something of a departure from this tradition, for only male ancestors were revered.
It was not unusual for a powerful elder Roman to formally “adopt” a younger man (who may or may not be a blood relation) with great promise and potential as his “son.” The route to becoming emperor of Rome for Aurelius demonstrates the importance of this practice of adoption. Emperor Hadrian first chose Lucius Ceionius Commodus as his successor by publicly declaring his adoption, but this failed when Commodus died in 138 CE. Hadrian then chose Aurelius’s uncle, who consequently became Emperor Titus Antoninus Pius when Hadrian died. Titus then adopted his nephew Aurelius at age 17, along with the son of Commodus (following Hadrian’s wish), which placed Aurelius in a position to succeed his uncle as the next emperor. In like manner, Aurelius paralleled the practice by pulling his adoptive brother in as co-emperor to honor Hadrian’s wishes, even though his brother exhibited little political or military ability.
The virtue of gravitas represented a deep-rooted seriousness and adherence to self-discipline and duty. The downfall of Rome in the latter years of the empire was in part due to an abandonment of this strict sense of self-discipline, along with increased slave labor and a foreign army base. Aurelius hints at this himself throughout Meditations. By contrast, Romans attributed to any non-Roman (i.e., women, slaves, barbarians) the opposite attribute of furor (emotion, or strong, overruling passion).
The Roman trait of pietas represents respect for both forefathers and the Olympian gods. Respect for religion was more or less public. Many upper-class and well-educated Romans either didn’t believe in the gods in private, or left the matter open to question. However, to cater to those who were religious, or who needed religion as a moral and ethical base, the ideal Roman citizen acknowledged the official Roman pantheon along with the gods of others.
A Unique Work of Literature
Aurelius never intended for Meditations to be made public. The 12 books that make up these personal, written notes are arbitrarily drawn from recurring thoughts, memories, allusions, and philosophical concepts. The author’s goal was to juxtapose these meditations in various combinations by replicating philosophical discussions between two people. In these discussions, the implication is often that one speaker is the teacher and the other is the student. Aurelius was middle-aged when he wrote his Meditations and presented the student/teacher exchange as a dialogue in which he took both roles.
His responsibilities in directing the vast Roman empire gave Aurelius little time to continue the philosophical discussions he enjoyed. Meditations was the means by which Aurelius could continue the discussion within himself – a kind of chart along which he could examine his life and perceptions. Regardless of what adverse events he faced, he would be able to keep a balanced state of mind and make reasoned, sensible decisions. What this means is that the 12 books revolve around the same issues from different perspectives in a recurring fashion, with no clear organization by which one book can be distinguished from another. Even so, each book opens with a specific statement. Recurring reminders of the ubiquitous presence of death are found throughout Meditations. Ultimately, it is important to remember that Meditations was written for the personal and private use of the warrior/emperor and was not meant to be made public.
Key Figures
| Key Figure | Description |
|---|---|
| Marcus Aurelius | Marcus Aurelius was emperor of Rome at the time he wrote his Meditations, c. 161–180 CE. He refers to himself in both the first and second person as he presents his philosophical discussions as dialogues. |
| Quintus Junius Rusticus | Rusticus was influential in mid- 160s CE Rome as two-time consul and city prefect. He is considered Aurelius’s philosophical father. |
| Epictetus | Epictetus is the Roman Stoic philosopher who dictated his philosophy to one of his students, who wrote down Discourses. |
| Hadrian | Roman Emperor Hadrian evidently took a shine to the very young Aurelius and wanted him as his successor. |
| Epicurus | Epicurus was the Greek founder of one of two major philosophical schools in the Greco-Roman empire. |
| Heraclitus | Heraclitus was a Greek Stoic who hailed from the city of Ephesus. |
| Socrates | Socrates was the Greek founder of philosophy. He believed in the free exchange of ideas based upon the principles of reason. |
Symbols
Bee and Fig
Recurring images of bees and fig trees are found throughout Meditations, and serve the purpose of reminding the author of his own resolve to remain steadfast in the action of the duty that his lot in life has assigned to him. Just as a bee benefits from, and acts as beneficiary to, the colony to which it belongs, so too is man inextricably connected to his society.
The fig tree has no other option than to bear fruit, a condition mandated to it by Providence. By extension, then, the words and actions of other men are not subject to any expression of anger or judgement by Aurelius. No matter how obnoxious these people might be, they are acting as nature has directed them.
Branch and Tree
Horticulture as practiced by the Greeks and Romans included grafting branches of one variety of grape onto a “parent,” or host plant. With care, the branch would successfully bond and grow to bear its own characteristic fruit supported by a sturdy host. Aurelius uses the practice of grafting as a way to explain that corrupt men placed in positions of power may believe in moral principles of community service, but in truth serve only their own fundamental purposes. They can be “grafted” onto a position of trust, but like any grafted branch, can bear fruit only according to their true nature, and not that of the host plant.
The Great Books 
Book 1:
The opening section of Meditations serves as both an introduction to the philosophical and ethical orientations of the author and a dedication/acknowledgments passage. The first sentence reads, “From my grandfather Verus I learned good morals and the government of my temper.” Subsequent paragraphs continue in kind, naming his influences and then stating what he learned from each one. This book provides a kind of symbolic “shrine” through which Aurelius pays homage to his forefathers and mother, peers, mentors, teachers, and those philosophers who contributed to the foundation of his personal sense of moral, ethical, and reverential honor.
The last paragraph thanks the gods, the givers of all these good people in his life. By mentioning his sources of inspiration, Aurelius reminds himself of his intent to maintain a simple, humble, and respectful attitude over the course of his life.
It is remarkable that, unlike the usual acknowledgements of Roman pater familias, Aurelius here also credits his mother, as well as his paternal forefathers, and mentions his relationship with household servants and slaves. Greeks as well as Romans are included, regardless of social status in a manner appropriate to Aurelius’s philosophical orientations.
Aurelius closes this book with the sentence “Among the Quadi at the Granua,” which suggests a date for the recording of this book. The Quadi were a small, fiercely combative Germanic tribe encountered by the Romans in the early centuries CE. Their defeat is represented on the commemorative column of Marcus Aurelius in Rome, which occurred when the Roman legions were much refreshed by rainwater, while the Quadi forces against them were struck by lightning. The event is recorded as having taken place on June 11, 172 CE, in modern-day Slovakia, as the river Granula refers to a tributary of the Danube in that area.
LikeLike
Book 2:
Aurelius starts off with a fairly pessimistic statement that likely reflects the bulk of his interactions with military personnel in the field. The author presents the important principles by which he can guide himself through these kinds of frustrations. As he will remind himself throughout Meditations in different ways, his life is brief and made up of “a little flesh and breath and the ruling part [intelligence].” Instead of worrying about what other people think or do, it is up to him to see to his own duty and to discipline his thoughts accordingly.
In this book Aurelius includes a debate about which is worse: desire or anger. He cites the philosopher Theophrastus’s beliefs that offenses committed through desire “are more blameable” than those committed through anger. While anger colors one’s reason, desire overpowers it. Regulation of “every act and thought” helps a man avoid falling under the influence of either emotion.
Aurelius’s struggle with having to deal with difficult people is evident. He works on it by reminding himself of two points that will underpin his Meditations. First, having observed both “the good that is beautiful” and the “bad that is ugly,” Aurelius finds himself neither benefitted nor injured by these opposites. They are but expressions of the divine, and it isn’t up to him to judge one better, or more desirable, than the other. Second, by focusing on the tasks at hand, and by dealing only with that specific portion of the task and duty given to him by Providence, Aurelius is ruled by neither pleasure nor pain, but only by himself. Finally, he reminds himself of the temporary nature of his condition as a living human being. This would certainly be obvious to him on a daily basis on the battlefield.
Aurelius interchangeably cites Providence, the universe, Fate, and the gods as that inscrutable agency to which human beings are subject, and over which they have no control. Determining whether or not the “universe” is ordered and systematic (as would be consistent with the Stoic point of view), or random and chaotic (Epicurean world view), it is more important to Aurelius’s philosophy that he not complain about the nature of his own lot in life, nor blame others who have very different allotments and duties.
LikeLike
Book 3:
Aurelius advises making the most of what is to be had in physical health and strength of mind in the present moment, for time eventually corrodes these elements either by death or old age. Such change is inevitable, and Aurelius mentions the physical degradation and death of several esteemed philosophers and emperors, including Alexander the Great. At the same time, he says, things derived from nature hold at least a temporary beauty and essence of their own. He gives the example of a loaf of bread which, when baked, has a split in the top of it. While this “disfigurement” is not “ideal” in beauty, it carries the implication of something good and wholesome to eat.
It is useless to look after what other people are doing or saying. Instead, Aurelius advises to stick to good principles that mutually and interchangeably serve the individual man, society as a whole, and the divine. The concept of the divine includes the “deity which is in thee,” which is detached from the senses and answerable to the gods. Take the lessons of history to heart, and then discard the history books, he says, because it does no good to brood on the accomplishments of others. As for the self, all accomplishments are their own reward, and the praises or condemnations of others are irrelevant.
Book 3 is one of the darker segments of Meditations, and the transience of life in the face of the inevitability of death seems uppermost in the author’s mind. His discussion of ordinary things like olives and bread resonates with the practical observation that perfection of beauty is on par with perfection of happiness. In other words, it is unattainable. Nevertheless, it is entirely possible to achieve contentment and take pleasure in the simple things, knowing that they are transient.
The “deity within” likely refers to a person’s “daimon.” Socrates referred to this concept as his “little voice inside,” or a conscience, which may (or may not) be directly connected to the conscience of everyone. If a man will follow his own daimon, it won’t matter how short or long his life is – he is always ready to die without anticipating or fearing it.
Aurelius reminds himself several times throughout Meditations, it doesn’t matter how rich and powerful these men were, because nothing is now left of them. Being a “slave to the vessel” means being a slave to the body, which is only a temporary container for the superior “contents” of intelligence and deity.
LikeLike
Book 4:
Aurelius speculates on the type of sanctuary that best supports the individual self. He advocates against vainly amassing an outward show of material wealth. Instead, he suggests practicing self-discipline by creating personal order and tranquility from within. The practice provides insulation from jealousy and discontent on the part of others, and reminds the individual to curb appetites for fame, fortune, and praise.
Aurelius also brings up the topic of political community as supported and sustained by the same rational principles as those sustaining a good man. What is good for the whole in the ordering of the universe is good for society and is also good for the individual. One cannot be a stranger to the universe and what is going on there; to act this way is to be like a philosopher without clothes.
Not only is life brief for both “beggar and king,” Aurelius says, but its events and activities (birth, sickness, heath, marriage, warring, feasting, etc.) are repeating and cyclical. The same things happen to all people in their lives. The difference is in how the continual changes from one state to the other (exemplified by the exchanges of transformation between the elements of earth, air, fire, and water) are perceived. One person buries another, just as whole cities, such as Pompeii and Herculaneum, were once buried. It therefore makes no sense to let a fear of death guide one’s life.
LikeLike
Book 5:
This section begins with outlining the relationship between labor and rest. Just as it is necessary to allocate sufficient time in the day for eating and drinking, so is it necessary to set aside appropriate periods for work and leisure in such a way that these daily routines follow the principles of a person’s individual nature. Aurelius explains that attachment to one part of it over another is on par with doing service to another person and then expecting to be thanked for it.
The problem with being disappointed or setting up an expectation of reward is parallel to the problem of being attached to rest more than to work, or vice versa, or to being overly concerned with eating and drinking to the exclusion of other activities. In a similar fashion, placing either body or soul as more important than the other makes it difficult to recognize the dichotomy of body and soul without undue attachment to either. To that end, Aurelius suggests that if prayers are offered to a divinity, such prayers should be simple, straightforward, and with an acknowledgement that nature dictates both.
The leading principle of a person’s own nature is brought forward in this book as a means to explore the interconnection between a man’s own interests that serve, and are served by, the common good. To this end, Aurelius presents animals and plants that are the perfection of nature simply because they follow the nature of their own being. He advises himself to continually observe the behavior of other people in the same light, that is, without judgment. Aurelius reminds himself that no one can compel another to forget the nature of the universe, or to act against “my god and daimon.” In this way he is reassured that all is to the ultimate good, and he need not be distressed by any adverse condition.
In this argument, Aurelius seems to be arguing more prominently on the side of the Stoics, who generally affirmed an orderly and systematic cosmos. The idea of order tended to support the notion of a god (Zeus) in command of the universe. By allowing right thought to guide rightness of action, a man naturally performs the duty for which he has been designed to carry out.
LikeLike
Book 6:
The opening statement in Book 6 suggests that the perfection of the universe unfolds over time and holds no evil or malice whatsoever. Aurelius augments this perspective by giving a number of examples that explore the passing nature of sensation. He draws these examples from nature, occupations from emperors to laborers, and daily activities, such as eating. Ordinary people are distracted by the appearances of things, and allow themselves to be influenced by superficial attributes that cause them to either praise or condemn others.
Aurelius finds it curious that these people spend so much time and energy trying to figure out what others think of them, when it is insignificant. All that matters is what the individual thinks of himself. This perspective touches on skepticism, since the ultimate nature of the universe cannot be determined. Ultimately Aurelius returns to the idea that even the greatest of men die; what is important is to live in truth and justice and to consider the virtues of the living.
The Stoics’ attitude toward fate versus free will is that certain conditions are irrevocably placed upon all human beings by their fate. The only choice of the will is either to accept those conditions and make the best of them, or to reject them, resulting in damage to both the individual and society as a whole. The principle guiding this choice is logic and reason. Aurelius’s goal is to remember that distractions keep one from fulfilling one’s role as dictated by fate.
Aurelius specifies that even “Philistion, Phoebus and Origanion” are dead. It isn’t known exactly who or what these people were. The point Aurelius wishes to remind himself of is that despite all their earthly might, all their accomplishments and fame have vanished. It is the present that matters: living a virtuous life himself while considering the good qualities in those around him.
LikeLike
Book 7:
Aurelius gets down to the “brass tacks” of philosophical discussion and its application to the struggles of daily life. He outlines three critical disciplines: that of the will, action, and perception. He proposes a series of questions with statements of insight from pertinent philosophers specific to his understanding. Beneath the discussion, however, is another reminder that regardless of esteem, wealth, or accomplishments of any kind, everyone dies and is forgotten. It is immaterial whether “the nature of All” moves in continuity or whether there is no ultimate rationality of action. A person must attend to duty with an attitude of love and forgiveness for its own sake, and not because a reward of praise or gratitude is expected.
Aurelius presents here three disciplines he finds essential to maintaining peace of mind; discipline of the will, discipline of action, and discipline of perception. These are emphasized in this book and are drawn forward to play out under most of the other ideas and concepts in Meditations.
Discipline of the will makes it possible to maintain a steady and consistent focus on what is, and what is not, important in the moment. For example, while the opinions of others are unimportant, what one thinks of the self from within is the only important perspective to keep in mind. Then, guided by discipline of the will, the person with discipline of action can go forward in the moment of each day with focused attention. While duty is served to the best of one’s ability, there is no need to worry about situations over which one has no control.
To discuss discipline of perception – which can also be thought of as a discipline of the senses – Aurelius mentions qualities such as sweetness and bitterness. It is easily observable, he says, that the sense of taste by which what is sweet is distinguished from what is bitter differs from one person to another, so there is no “absolute” state of sweet or bitter taste. Furthermore, for anyone, something tastes more sweet if it follows something bitter than if it follows something that is also sweet. These observations lead Aurelius to conclude that there is no absolute reality of the senses, and therefore, there is no absolute reality to the will or actions a person may take. So, instead of adhering to a rule to be followed in any and all situations, Aurelius describes these as “disciplines” that guide him toward his own relative reality. Reality is thus generated by the individual person, instead of handed from a superior authority. The idea is taken from one of Democritus’s discussions about how the senses present relative instead of absolute conditions of reality.
LikeLike
Book 8:
Aurelius attempts to identify his reasons for feeling disturbed by external impressions, and finding a degree of resolution by discovering “what is fit and useful.” The idea is that this exercise helps put aside the desire for fame and wealth that is impressive to the masses for only a brief period of time. While only a few men have the destiny to become a Caesar or an Alexander and rule the world, all men, regardless of their station in life, have access to the disciplines of philosophical perspective of the most noted philosophers. Aurelius speculates on the control power and influence have over those who appear to wield it. In contrast, a simplicity of life and contentment with what is needed to sustain life while it lasts places a person in perfect control of himself. Within its own domain, he says, nobody can frustrate the mind.
The interconnected concerns of individual and social life are one and the same. Be willing to show others the error of their ways with humility, Aurelius says; and at the same time, take what is valuable from the advice of others. Do not blame others.
An attachment to all that is temporary and subject to change means there is no way to avoid what is not wanted, just as there is no way to keep what is wanted. Knowing one’s own nature and how to act on it is crucial to maintaining an even balance. Since everything exists for a reason, reason sustains the oppositions of certainty and uncertainty by establishing a middle ground.
Underlying Aurelius’s Meditations is his main theme of the transience of life. He writes that by turning away from wondering over the “why” of things and their conditions, people should simply adhere to what is, because there is no answer available. In this kind of thinking Aurelius appears to be taking more the side of a random universe than the side of the Stoics and a systematic one.
LikeLike
Book 9:
Aurelius says the wise adopt a policy of neutrality that can exist only between the opposites of pain and pleasure. The discipline is one of perception. To exercise it conscientiously requires neither desiring nor avoiding these opposites. The same relationship exists between other kinds of opposites, and an understanding of how this works leads to a sustainable state of tranquility based on reason. Failing to exercise this discernment is a sin. Continuing his discussion of sin, he states that the sinner sins against himself through the things he does and those he fails to do.
In this book Aurelius also touches on the cyclical nature of the universe; the idea that all that has happened will happen again, or that all living beings experience a kind of constant flow of change which, is ultimately unchangeable.
Of all the books in Meditations, it is in this one that Aurelius most clearly presents his understanding of Epicurus. The philosopher’s mind was not on his own suffering or pain, but rather on those reasoned actions that can be taken to endure and survive. The attitude is an admirable one for a warrior/emperor to embrace during long campaigns. The exercise of this approach is designed to hone an understanding of what is transient (subject to change and decay) and what is eternal (the soul).
Aurelius suggests it is only by looking inward that a person can make this distinction. The sentiment is less connected to Stoicism than it is to an Epicurean attitude toward an unfathomable and random lack of patterns in the world. The discipline of enduring pain without complaint may refer to an account Epicurus made of his illness, which he struggled to endure with patience.
LikeLike
Book 10:
Aurelius first reminds himself to be attentively aware of the distinctions between the needs of his soul, which are simple, direct, and good, and the wants of an ever-restless and discontented body. He appeals to a sense of his own nature in a “whatever doesn’t kill you only makes you stronger” approach. He expands on the issue of nature and its inevitable unfolding through his life. Nature affects him as an individual, and also acts upon the “community with gods and men.” This line of discussion provides him with a neutrality that does not waste energy in finding fault and condemnation on a personal or social level.
Much of Aurelius’s thought is centered on the intertwined relationships between the part and the whole. He refers to the incorporation of body and soul as similar to the relationship between the individual and the community to which he belongs, and of which he is an indelible part. He also draws upon concrete examples of people, places, and things to illustrate the principles of sensations. The emphasis here is on a duality of condition resolved by the conclusion of life. The final paragraph reflects on his opening statements about body and soul, observing that although the body contains the soul, it is the hidden soul within that “pulls the strings,” using the tool of the body to express itself. The implication is that it is more important to understand the soul than to be concerned with the functions of the body.
Aurelius seems to be asking if the needs of his own soul will ever surpass the wants of the body. However, this tension reflects specifically upon the nature of soul and body. That is, while the body is material and temporary, the soul is eternal and imperishable, and the only possession a man is able to keep. It is not that one is “better” or more important than the other. Rather, it is a matter of natural order to look to the source instead of looking to the manifestation of what the source produces. In other words, Aurelius reminds himself not to be fooled by appearances the way children might be fooled into believing that the characters of a puppet show are acting of their own volition.
LikeLike
Book 11:
Aurelius continues his discussion on the relativity of body and soul, but shifts his perspective toward reality and illusion to make his point. He proceeds to examine the properties of “the rational soul,” by which it recognizes, understands, and thereby “owns” itself as its only true and enduring property. This ownership makes it possible to perceive the universe as not only orderly and systematic but also cyclic. The idea brings forward an understanding that nothing new ever happens in the universe, and that, although one’s own experiences are new to oneself, they are not unique.
Having opened the discussion in this way, Aurelius continues to examine the art of the self. He discusses why one man may have a false sense of separation from the community of which he is an integral part. Just as art mimics life, so too does the artifice of appearances mimic the true nature of a person. Words are one thing, but the genuine scale of a person’s worth is balanced in actions.
Aurelius also outlines the nine considerations to bring into play when someone offends another person. They are:
1. to remember the common bond among all people
2. to consider reputation, the kind of person the offender is
3. to remember that wrong-doing is often a matter of ignorance
4. to remember that one’s own self also offends
5. to be aware that all the circumstances leading to the offence may not be known
6. to remember how brief life is
7. to know that a discipline of perception makes one realize that it is not the person who has offended one, but only one’s perception of the offence
8. to remember that being angry does harm to a person
9. to rest assured that a genuinely good disposition is an invincible shield from any harm
The implication is that no one can harm a person’s soul unless the person allows it to happen, even though harm to the body may occur.
Underlying the insights is the reminder that if the soul is understood as distinct from the body, then all things that render the body temporary and perishable cannot affect the soul. Although Aurelius never specifically names Aristotle directly here, he expresses a thorough understanding of the nature of art/artifice as detailed by the philosopher. Playing roles, however, does not mean that a person should attach himself to any one of them to the exclusion of others. It is the balance between them that sustains society and thereby also sustains the individual.
LikeLike
Book 12:
Aurelius returns to the idea that the best course of action in time and space is to remember death can come at any time. He urges himself to shake free of both past regrets or nostalgia and the fearful anticipation of an uncertain future. He seems hopeful that the universe is ordered and reasoned according to a divine plan, and whether or not that plan is in part or whole understood is beside the point – the perspective of humans is necessarily limited. The left hand is practiced in holding the bridle of a horse, even though it does not do well in other tasks.
Whether ordered or disordered, Providence can take away only the poor flesh and the poor breath – never a person’s intelligence. If he practices using his intelligence every day of his life, it will strengthen beyond life itself. The conclusion of this last book presents the idea that death comes at the right time regardless of the length of one’s life, and when it does come, a satisfied God releases a person’s very essence from those appearances.
It is unclear whether Aurelius meant this book as a summary of the previous 11 books. However, he does return to specific ideas regarding the brevity of life and the responsibility of a person to depend confidently on his own ideas.
While it is the duty of a person to take reasonable care of the body and breath, it is intelligence that must be carefully guarded. The advice here is to protect it well and hold it above all various opinions, praise, or condemnation that others would apply. If a person adheres to confidence in his own opinion instead of seeking outside himself for evaluation, then there is nothing to fear from any condition of life and death.
LikeLike