Marcus Aurelius:

Stoicism in Practice

Ryan Johnson

Dr. Kenneth Dorter

PHIL*4710

April 11, 2014

Johnson 2

Introduction

In much the same way as Epictetus Discourses are philosophically instructive as

well as ethically practical, Marcus Aurelius Meditations are likewise saturated with

themes pertaining to the living of a moral life.1 They differ in that the words of Epictetus

were recorded by his student Arrian, while those of Marcus Aurelius were written on the

page directly from his mind and with his own hand. Furthermore, the Discourses seem to

be a record of Epictetus conversations both with his students and passers-by, which has

the benefit of being instructive insofar as what we read in the Discourses is that which

was presented to those wishing to learn about Stoicism. On the other hand, the

Meditations, being Marcus own record of his thoughts, are no less instructive but are

indeed presented to us in a manner not totally polar to that of Epictetus, but dissimilar to

some extent.2 For the reader, this is, I would argue, equally beneficial since it gives us an

insight into Stoicism in practice, rather than Stoicism in the classroom. Marcus Aurelius

Meditations, then, present us with the thoughts of a man who was trying to live in

accordance with, and practise the principles of Stoicism, rather than the words of a man

who was trying to teach them.3

For this reason, I shall examine the Meditations with a view to shedding some

light on both the philosophical ideas present in the work, as well as on the writer himself,

as this is just as integral to an understanding of those ideas. To do this, I will look first at

the style in which Marcus recorded his thoughts, examining the style in general as well as

his use of metaphor and simile, and dogmata. I will then look at Marcus own 1 Where I have not provided an abbreviation, I am referring to the Meditations; otherwise Disc. shall refer to the Discourses of Epictetus. 2 I am not asserting that the Meditations are a sort of diary, as will be discussed below. 3 That is not to say, of course, that Epictetus was not also practicing Stoicism, in addition to his teaching of it.

Johnson 3

philosophy, which I will examine by identifying the connection between two important

themes found in the Meditations: the Universe and the Self. Wherever there is call to do

so, I will indicate where Marcus has borrowed from or was influenced by Epictetus, but I

will not commit a section to this discussion, for surely much of the Meditations was

composed with Epictetus lessons in mind, a topic which would make for an extensive

treatise unto itself.

Style

The writings of Marcus Aurelius have come to be referred to as the Meditations.

He, however, did not call them this, nor indeed did he give them a title at all, but simply

addressed them to himself,

, which translates, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus the Emperor to himself.

The Meditations is, nevertheless, an appropriate title for these writings, since when one

meditates, he might loosely be said to be focusing his mind, releasing himself from

physicality, and/or pondering sincerely over a certain idea, notion, or feeling. Indeed,

this is the nature of the writings of Marcus Aurelius, insofar as they are not a formal

treatise or essay, but a record of a mans thoughts, organized in such a way that they

provided, both for him as well as us, a reminder of Stoic principles. In comparison with

this, we ought to look at what has come to be called the Discourses of Epictetus, for the

titles themselves suggest much about the theme and style of each work, wherein the

Discourses are a record of the , which were recorded by

Arrian, Epictetus student (Discourses 1.1), while the Meditations are a record of Marcus

Aurelius own thoughts, recorded by himself.

Johnson 4

There are several points that must be addressed in apposition with the above

notion in mind. First, because each work is a record of the thoughts of each man, we

should expect these thoughts to have been influenced by the circumstance of each, insofar

as his experiences would have contributed to the contents of his mind. For example, the

diatribes of Epictetus make constant reference to notions of slavery, freedom, pain, and

exile. Why might this be? Well we know Epictetus was a former slave of the freedman

Epaphroditus, was beaten regularly, and was exiled by Domitian, so it is not a stretch to

place the content of his thought within these circumstances. On the other hand, Marcus

writings seem to focus more on notions of death, society and the Universal. The focus on

death, I suggest, is a result of the fact of his being both sickly and an emperor, and

therefore having always to be conscious of his mortality whether it be due to his various

illnesses (1.17.8), war abroad, or conspiracy at Rome.

The focus on society and the Universal is, in my opinion, due also to his being an

emperor, though not merely this, but the Emperor of Rome to boot, whose charge was to

manage the affairs of a vast empire, which incorporated many and various cultures and

customs. As a result of this, thoughts of general social principles in conjunction with

thoughts of the Universe would likely have been in his mind since the Universe might be

said to be a macrocosmic example of the Roman Empire.

This, I am aware, is rather a strong exaggeration, but if I should be allowed to

explain myself, I would do so by referring to the thoughts of Marcus himself who says,

Now the end for rational beings is to submit themselves to the reason and law of that

archetypal city and polity the Universe (2.16). Marcus debates with himself as to the

nature of that which governs the Universe, There must be either a predestined Necessity

Johnson 5

and inviolable plan, or a gracious Providence, or a chaos without design or director

(12.14). Certainly I am not here suggesting that he was an agnostic,4 but as these are his

own personal reflections it is not unquestionable for him to ponder about the nature of

that which governs. Nonetheless, with his view of the Universe as an archetypal polity,

he therefore accepts that there must needs be something presiding over it, which is

expressed when he writes, Even that which knoweth beginning and end, and the reason

that informs all Substance, and governs the Whole from ordered cycle to cycle through

all eternity (5.32), and further, All things come from that one source, from that ruling

Reason of the Universe (6.36). So, in this context, it is no longer unreasonable to say

that perhaps Marcus viewed the Universe as a macrocosmic example of the Roman

Empire, which was, at least for a blink in Eternity, his to govern.

Recognizing his post, he described himself as having come into the world to be

set over men, as a ram over a flock or a bull over a herd (11.18). From all of this, then, I

assert that he is trying to govern his small corner5 in a manner that accords with the

governance of that larger whole, the Universe, which governs, by its own nature, in

accordance with Nature. Given the above, it seems reasonable to assert that such

thoughts were on Marcus mind, who, in fact, confirms this himself. He reflects:

This must always be borne in mind, what is the Nature of the whole Universe, and what mine, and how this stands in relation to that, being too what sort of a part of what sort of a whole; and that no one can prevent thee from doing and saying always what is in keeping with the Nature of which thou art a part. (2.9).

Bearing this context in mind, we may continue our examination of the Meditations with

the view that Marcus was striving to achieve that state which accords with Nature. 4 Since he gives thanks to the gods in his introduction (1.17). 5 Asia, Europe, corners of the Universe: the whole Ocean a drop in the Universe: Athos but a little clod therein: all the present a point in Eternity: - everything on a tiny scale, so easily changed, so quickly vanished (6.36).

Johnson 6

As has been stated already, the Discourses of Epictetus and the Meditations of

Marcus Aurelius would surely not be said to be polar opposites. In fact, they seem to

differ only inasmuch as Epictetus was rather more frank in his speech than was Marcus.

The core of each text, however, remains essentially parallel, but there is still room for

examination. R. B. Rutherford identifies the style of the Meditations as being that of a

diatribe, a style, which he explains concerns itself with central moral questions, but with

a strong practical slant how to conduct ones personal relationships, how best to

achieve peace of mind, how to face up to exile, enslavement, hardship, illness, and

death.6 The word diatribe comes from the Greek to rub hard, give a

thorough rub down, employ oneself on a thing. Rutherford emphasizes that this style is

sometimes coarse and colloquial, often full of striking and yet usually simple or homely

images, drawn from nature and the animal world.7 The coarse, colloquial aspect of

diatribe was certainly more prominent in Epictetus Discourses,8 but seems to have been

smoothed out by the time of Marcus Meditations, which I feel emphasizes the points

made above concerning the background of each man, where Epictetus was, although later

educated and freed, born a slave, whereas Marcus was born into nobility. Certainly these

circumstances would have influenced their manner of speech, insofar as Epictetus was

frank and harsh, and Marcus made more use of simple, homely images. That is not to

say, however, that he was not equally strict. The aspect of self-discipline in the

Meditations is actually one that marks it out, as Marcus was indeed very hard on himself.

6 R. B. Rutherford, The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1989), 21-22. 7 Rutherford, The Meditations of Marcus, 22. 8 Arrian records Epictetus referring to his listeners as fools, wicked ones, and slaves.

Johnson 7

He chastises himself frequently, for example, Wrong thyself, wrong thyself, O

my Soul! But the time for honouring thyself will have gone by for a man has but one life,

and this for thee is well-nigh closed (2.6),9 and again:

But thou canst refrain from insolence; but thou canst rise superior to pleasures and pains; but thou canst tread under thy feet the love of glory; but thou canst forbear to be angry with the unfeeling and the thankless, aye and even care for them Let no one hear thee anymore grumbling at life in a court, nay let not thine own ears hear thee (8.8, 9).

These excerpts are typical of passages in the Meditations wherein Marcus is constantly

reminding himself to be vigilant, and to adhere to Stoic principles. Furthermore, this sort

of self-discipline is typical of a diatribe, insofar as he is morally strict with himself in

similar fashion to Epictetus moral strictness in his lessons. This notion supports the

argument put forth by Rutherford that the Meditations are no mere diary or personal

journal, but a philosophic treatise meant to sharpen the philosophers moral system,

insofar as This self-scrutiny is an important part of a whole series of self-disciplinary

methods which philosophers of the Graeco-Roman period had prescribed as principles of

moral health.10 Rutherford explains that this tradition goes back to Heraclitus and can

be found in Plato, Cicero, and Seneca as well.11 I will not discuss this here, but this type

of self-discipline in literature is said to have contributed to the basis of modern

psychotherapy.12 To conclude this discussion, then, as to whether the Meditations were a

personal journal, a formal treatise, or a combination of the two, I refer to the words of

9 As an informal aside, these words were put into the mouth of Russell Crowes character, Maximus, in the 2000 film entitled Gladiator. Marcus Aurelius, in his Meditations, gives thanks to a man by the name of Maximus for teaching him self-mastery and stability of purpose (1.15). Russell Crowes character exercises these very traits in this scene of the movie: http://youtu.be/jEMPyjATNC0?t=1m16s. 10 Rutherford, The Meditations of Marcus, 18. 11 Rutherford, The Meditations of Marcus, 15, 19. 12 Rutherford, The Meditations of Marcus, 19; Pierre Hadot, The Inner Citadel: The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, trans. Michael Chase (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 244ff.

Johnson 8

Epictetus who was recorded to have said, Have thoughts like these ready at hand by

night and by day; write them, read them, make your conversation about them,

communicating with yourself, or saying to another, Can you give me some help in this

matter? (Disc. 3.24.103). Perhaps, then, Marcus was simply following, to the best of

his ability, the instruction of Epictetus.

As stated above, one aspect of a diatribe is its use of simple and homely images,

so it is to the use of metaphor and simile in the Meditations that I now turn. There are

numerous examples present in the text that might be inspected, but I have selected only a

few, which will contribute to a discussion both on Marcus style and his philosophy.13

To begin then, there are several important similes to be found in book four. He writes,

As a river consisting of all things that come into being, aye, a rushing torrent, is Time.

No sooner is a thing sighted than it is carried past, and lo, another is passing, and it too

will be carried away (4.43).14 This notion of time is found in Epictetus as well as here,

Why then live? Is it to involve yourself in one grief after another that makes you

miserable?... Whenever you grow attached to something, do not act as though it were one

of those things that cannot be taken away (Disc. 3.24.82-84). Later, Marcus then

writes, Be like a headland of rock on which the waves break incessantly; but it stands

fast and around it the seething of the waters sinks to rest (4.49). Here we are given an

insight into how Marcus may have wished to be perceived as an emperor, and into the

sort of steady mindset he believed was appropriate for a man, which he strived to

achieve. Furthermore, it seems that this was his philosophy concerning the constancy of

13 Of course each metaphor and simile that might be found in the text would contribute to such a discussion, but for the purposes of this paper I have chosen to be selective. 14 Cf. Heraclitus.

Johnson 9

change, and change in general is a particularly important theme of the Meditations, but

this will be discussed later in relation to the Universe and the Self.

In a later book, Marcus says, That which is not in the interests of the hive cannot

be in the interests of the bee If the sailors spoke ill of a steersman or the sick of a

physician, what else would they have in mind but how the man should best effect the

safety of the crew or the health of his patients? (6.55, 56). Here we find one allusion to

nature, and one to a man-made environment, but both appeal to similar notions regarding

the interests of the Whole. These literary devices have the effect of humbling the author,

but also of conveying what might outwardly appear to be a very complex philosophy in a

very simple way. Marcus, then, appears to employ such metaphors and similes

throughout the Meditations as a way of relating his personal philosophies, indeed to

himself, but perhaps also in practice for when he might have occasion to do so publicly.

To rephrase, then, it might therefore be said that his frequent use of these devices had the

purpose of expressing complex notions in simple and relatable ways, so that he might

instruct others efficiently and without excessive and confusing discourse.15

To similar effect as that of metaphor and simile, the use of dogmata is very

characteristic of the Stoic style, and Marcus was no exception to this. First, we must look

at what the notion of dogma entails. If taken literally, , being the nominal form of

the verb , to seem to one, to seem good to one, to think, suppose, opine, means

that which seems to one, an opinion. Marcus employs the term throughout the

Meditations, and some translators have opted simply to translate it as dogma, while

others have chosen axiom. 15 As you eat, help those who are eating with you, as you drink, those who are drinking with you; by yielding to everybody, giving place, submitting help men in this way, and dont bespatter them with your own sputum (Disc. 3.13.23).

Johnson 10

Taken in whatever manner, if we look at the context in which the term occurs in

the text itself, it seems to denote a particular notion or principle one should adhere to or

recall in particular circumstances, such as when Marcus writes, Just as physicians

always keep their lancets and instruments ready to their hands for emergency operations,

so also do thou keep thine axioms ready for the diagnosis of things human and divine,

and for the performing of every act, even the pettiest (3.13). Pierre Hadot gives

special attention to dogma in the Meditations. He notes, A dogma is a universal

principle which founds and justifies a specific practical conduct, and which can be

formulated in one or in several propositions.16 With this concept of dogmata in mind,

we should be able to accept the above argument that the Meditations is more than a diary

or personal reflection, but that it is indeed a work of philosophy, which Hadot has

deduced based on Marcus notes that philosophy is the one thing that can protect us in

life (2.17) and that we ought to fight to remain as philosophy wished us to be (6.30).

The purpose of these dogmata, then, I will discuss only in relation to the

Meditations, and Marcus Aurelius the man, who himself writes, How else can axioms be

made dead than by the extinction of the ideas that answer to them? And these it lies with

thee ever to kindle anew into flame (7.2). Since he is addressing himself, we might

posit from this that Marcus saw it as his duty to preserve these principles of Stoicism,

both by constantly reminding himself of them in order that he might put them into

practice, and also by writing them down, that he might ever remember the initial ideas.

In a manner that I sincerely hope is not speculative, I would also posit that, based on his

full awareness of the responsibilities attached to his position, as well as the fact of his

status on its own, he felt he might be better able to preserve the Stoic mindset by setting 16 Hadot, The Inner Citadel: The Meditations, 36.

Johnson 11

an example worthy to be followed. There is a potential weakness in this assertion,

however, as it is a part of Stoic doctrine not to behave in a certain way merely to be

noticed (Disc. 3.23.23-28), but surely this was not Marcus aim. Instead I am calling to

mind the Stoic doctrine of living by example, Do you wish to help them? Then show

them, by your own example, the kind of men philosophy produces, and stop talking

nonsense (Disc. 3.13.22-23).

This, I feel, summarizes why Marcus practised these dogmata in his reflections,

that is, to refine his own sense of the philosophy in order that he may better represent it,

with a view to helping those around him and those under his influence, i.e., the populace

of the Empire. Some dogmata found in the Meditations have already been referenced

above, but most notable is this list of kephalaia, which expresses these and certain other

integral points:

In taking umbrage at anything, thou forgettest this, that everything happens in accordance with the Universal Nature; and this that the wrong-doing is anothers; and this furthermore, that all that happens, always did happen, and will happen so, and is at this moment happening everywhere. And thou forgettest how strong is the kinship between man and mankind, for it is a community not of corpuscles, of seed or blood, but of intelligence. And thou forgettest this too, that each mans intelligence is God and has emanated from Him; and this, that nothing is a mans very own, but that his babe, his body, his very soul came forth from Him; and this, that everything is but opinion; and this, that it is only the present moment that a man lives and the present moment only that he loses (12.26).

This listing of eight principles a man ought to remember is, I believe, Marcus

categorizing of some of the fundamental principles of Stoic philosophy, in order that he

might better access them in his mind. We find this sort of listing throughout the

Meditations, and is an essential component in the texts interpretation, insofar is it gives

us an insight into the thought process of the author. Hadot supports this view, noting, If

we assemble these kephalaia we can thus discover almost all the themes announced or

developed in the Meditations. By connecting them to the most fundamental dogmas of

Johnson 12

Stoicism, we can present, in a structured form, the whole ensemble of doctrines which

constitute the essential core of the Meditations.17

To conclude this section on the style of and devices used in the Meditations, I

would assert that the text is unique unto itself insofar as it is as personal as it is

instructive, both for us and for the author. The style it was written in was indeed unique,

but was not atypical for a Stoic, inasmuch it was situated within a tradition,18 which we

can trace through the many references to Epictetus, who likewise made reference to his

own predecessors, Chrysippus and Zeno especially.

The Universe and the Self

The theme of the Universe and the Self bears heavily on a discussion of Marcus

Aurelius philosophy. First, Stoic philosophy in general orbits the belief in living in

accordance with that Universal Nature of which thou art a part (2.9). Marcus

emphasizes throughout the Meditations that we must at all times do only that which is in

keeping with Nature,19 and not only this, but what is in keeping with our own nature

(7.53), which is composed of:

the Causal and the Material, and neither of these disappears into nothing, just as neither did it come into existence out of nothing. So shall my every part by change be told off to form some part of the Universe, and that again be changed into another part of it, and so on to infinity. It was such a process of change that I too came into being and my parents, and so backwards into a second infinity. And the statement is quite legitimate, even if the Universe be arranged according to completed cycles (5.13).

This connection between the Self and the Universe is what I would here like to

emphasize, as I feel it forms the core of Marcus belief system. The belief in a cycle of

change and movement is strong in this excerpt, and throughout the text, and forms the

principle by which we should understand things as being impermanent, including our 17 Hadot, The Inner Citadel: The Meditations, 38-39. 18 Hadot, The Inner Citadel: The Meditations, 71. 19 1.9; 3.11, 12; 4.39, 48, 51; 5.3, 4; 7.56, 74; 8.5, 26; 10.15; 11.16; 12.1.

Johnson 13

own lives. He explains further, it is the changes not only of the elements but of the

things compounded of them that preserve the Universe and a limit has been set to thy

time, which if thou use not to let daylight into thy soul, it will be gone and thou! and

never again shall the chance be thine (2.3, 4). So, as was discussed above in regards to

the state as being a microcosm of the Universe, we might then also say that we should

govern ourselves with the same principles by which we would govern others, and by

which the Universe is governed, i.e., that we should accept change, and that we are part

of a predetermined, unchangeable cycle (4.3).

Moreover, the Self for Marcus is composed of three things: body, soul, and

intelligence. He writes:

for the body sensations, for the soul desires, for the intelligence axioms. To receive impressions by way of the senses is not denied even to cattle; to be as puppets pulled by the strings of desire is common to wild beasts there is left as the characteristic of the good man not to sully the divine genius that is enthroned in his bosom (3.16).

To preserve this divine genius within us, we ought therefore to remember that the

intellectual capacity is common to us all, which gives rise to our rationality, and therefore

also, our laws; that we are part of a common community which is like to the Universe

(4.4). But not only this, we ought also to remember how this fact bears on our essential

nature as human beings, i.e., that because we are a part of a common State, the Universe,

we ought to:

Look not about thee at the ruling Reason of others, but look with straight eyes at this, To what is Nature guiding thee? both the Nature of the Universe, by means of what befalls thee and thy nature by means of the acts thou hast to do all things have been constituted for the sake of rational beings Social obligation then is the leading feature in the constitution of man (7.55).

What this means, then, is that to be selfish is to reject both our essential nature as human

beings, but also the purpose, which Nature itself has set for us. This concept of the

Universal State is old Stoic doctrine, and gave rise to what Cicero promoted as a ius

Johnson 14

gentium, or universal law.20 Therefore, Marcus writes, those who do not attend closely

to the motions of their own souls must inevitably be unhappy (2.8). He builds on this

same notion by employing another list of five pertinent kephalaia:

The soul of man does wrong to itself then most of all, when it makes itself, as far as it can do so, an imposthume and as it were a malignant growth in the Universe And the soul wrongs itself then again, when it turns away from any man or even opposes him with intent to do him harm, as is the case with those who are angry. It does wrong to itself, thirdly, when it is overcome by pleasure or pain. Fourthly, when it assumes a mask, and in act or word is insincere or untruthful. Fifthly, when it directs some act or desire of its own towards no mark, and expends its energy on any thing whatever aimlessly and unadvisedly, whereas even the most trifling things should be done with reference to the end in view.

That he perceived a connection between man and the Universe, then, there can be no

doubt, insofar as he believed the governance of our very souls must accord with it, for

the intelligence of the Universe is social (5.30). Furthermore, we should neither reject

change, nor each other, for our nature is subject to change as much as it has developed so

that rational being might do right by other rational beings. Change, then, alongside our

social nature, is what might be said to denote one of the essential principles of Marcus

philosophy.

Conclusion

The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius are typical of Stoic doctrine, insofar as they

bear that characteristic of moral treatises which is repetitive, strict, practical, and

timeless. The Meditations, though, however similar to the Discourses of Epictetus, is

unique unto itself, in that its repetitiveness is not the same didactic diatribe we find

elsewhere, but is the vigilance of a man trying to remind himself of the principles he is

trying to follow in his day-to-day life. Furthermore, Marcus appears to have been strict

with himself in this pursuit, so that we might interpret his self-strictness as being

representative of both the man, and the philosophy. In this way, the style of the 20 Cicero De Officiis 3.69.

Johnson 15

Meditations gives us as much an insight into Marcus Aurelius personal philosophy, as it

does into Stoicism in general. This combined with the connection between the major

themes of the Universe and the Self, i.e., that we are part of a cycle of unending change,

and we are part of it together as rational beings, indicates certain essential principles of

Stoic philosophy.

As to the argument about the true nature of the treatise, I have nothing more to

say. I would, however, like to affectionately assert that Marcus recording of his

reflections, or meditations, about philosophy, the nature of man and the Universe, and

what it is to live a good life in accordance with Nature, represents his retreat into his soul;

that one safe place for all of us, wherein we might be free from care (4.3). So we too

ought to remember that the Mind, unmastered by passions, is a very citadel, for a man

has no fortress more impregnable wherein to find refuge and be untaken for ever (8.48).

Johnson 16

Bibliography

Arnold, Matthew. Essays in Criticism: First Series. New York, NY: Macmillan and Company, 1902.

Aurelius, Marcus. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus the Emperor to Himself. Translated by C. R.

Haines. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1930. Brunt, P. A. Studies in Stoicism. Edited by Miriam Griffin, Alison Samuels, and Michael

Crawford. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2013. Hadot, Pierre. The Inner Citadel: The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. Translated by Michael

Chase. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998. Rutherford, R. B. The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. New York, NY: Oxford

University Press, 1989.