图书图片
PDF
ePub

BOOK III.

66

I. PUBLIUS SCIPIO, my son Marcus, he who first was surnamed Africanus, was accustomed, as Cato, who was nearly of the same age as he, has written, to say that he was never less at leisure than when at leisure, nor less alone than when he was alone." A truly noble saying, and worthy of a great and wise man, which declares that both in his leisure he was accustomed to reflect on business, and in solitude to converse with himself; so that he never was idle, and sometimes was not in need of the conversation of another. Thus, leisure and solitude, two things which cause languor to others, sharpened him. I could wish it were in my power to say the same. But if I can not quite attain to any intimation of so great an excellence of disposition, I come very near it, in will at least. For, being debarred by impious arms and force from public affairs and forensic business, I remain in retirement; and on that account having left the city, wandering about the fields, I am often alone. But neither is this leisure to be compared with the leisure of Africanus, nor this solitude with that. For he, reposing from the most honorable employments of the state, sometimes took leisure to himself, and sometimes betook himself from the concourse and haunts of men into his solitude as into a haven: but my retirement is occasioned by the want of business, not by the desire of repose. For, the senate being extinct, and courts of justice abolished, what is there that I could do worthy of myself, either in the senatehouse or in the forum? Thus, I who formerly lived in the greatest celebrity, and before the eyes of the citizens, now shunning the sight of wicked men, with whom all places abound, conceal myself as far as it is possible, and often am alone. But since we have been taught by learned men, that out of evils it is fit not only to choose the least, but also from those very evils to gather whatever is good in them, I

therefore am both enjoying rest-not such, indeed, as he ought who formerly procured rest for the state, and I am not allowing that solitude which necessity, not inclination, brings me, to be spent in idleness. Although, in my judg ment, Africanus obtained greater praise. For there are extant no monuments of his genius committed to writingno work of his leisure-no employment of his solitude. From which it ought to be understood that he was never either idle or solitary, because of the activity of his mind, and the investigation of those things which he pursued in thought. But I who have not so much strength that I can be drawn away from solitude by silent thought, turn all my study and care to this labor of composition. And thus I have written more in a short time, since the overthrow of the republic, than in the many years while it stood.

II. But as all philosophy, my Cicero, is fruitful and profitable, and no part of it uncultivated and desert-so no part in it is more fruitful and profitable than that about duties, from which the rules of living consistently and virtuously are derived. Wherefore, although I trust you constantly hear and learn these matters from my friend Cratippus, the prince of the philosophers within our memory, yet I think it is beneficial that your ears should ring on all sides with such discourse, and that they, if it were possible, should hear nothing else. Which, as it ought to be done by all who design to enter upon a virtuous life, so I know not but it ought by no one more than you; for you stand under no small expectation of emulating my industry-under a great one of emulating my honors-under no small one, perhaps, of my fame. Besides, you have incurred a heavy responsibility both from Athens and Cratippus; and since you have gone to these as to a mart for good qualities, it would be most scandalous to return empty, disgracing the reputation both of the city and of the master. Wherefore, try and accomplish as much as you can, labor with your mind and with your industry (if it be labor to learn rather than a pleasure), and do not permit that, when all things have been supplied by me, you should seem to have been wanting to yourself. But let this suffice; for we have often written much to you for the purpose of encouraging you. Now let us return to the remaining part of our proposed division.

Panatius, then, who without controversy has discoursed most accurately about duties, and whom I, making some correction, have principally followed, having proposed three heads under which men were accustomed to deliberate and consult about duty-one, when they were in doubt whether that about which they were considering was virtuous or base; another, whether useful or unprofitable; a third, when that which had the appearance of virtue was in opposition to that which seemed useful, how this ought to be determined; he unfolded the two first heads in three books, but on the third head he said that he would afterward write, but did not perform what he had promised. At which I am the more surprised on this account, that it is recorded by his disciple Posidonius, that Panatius lived thirty years after he had published those books. And I am surprised that this matter should be only briefly touched on by Posidonius in some commentaries, especially when he writes that there is no subject in all philosophy so necessary. But by no means do I agree with those who deny that this subject was casually omitted by Panatius, but that it was designedly abandoned, and that it ought not to have been written at all, because utility could never be in opposition to virtue. On which point is one thing that may admit a doubt; whether this head which is third in the division of Panatius, ought to have been taken up, or whether it ought to have been altogether omitted. The other thing can not be doubted, that it was undertaken by Panatius, but left unfinished. For he who has completed two parts out of a three fold division, must have a third remaining. Besides, in the end of the third book he promises that he will afterward write about this third part. To this is also added a sufficient witness, Posidonius, who in a certain letter writes that Publius Rutilius Rufus, who had been a disciple of Panatius, had been accustomed to say, that as no painter could be found who could finish that part of the Coan Venus which Apelles had left unfinished (for the beauty of the countenance left no hope of making the rest of the body correspond), so no one could go through with those things which Panatius had omitted, on account of the excellence of those parts which he had completed.

III. Wherefore, there can not be a doubt about the opinion

of Panatius; but whether it was right in him, or otherwise, to join this third part to the investigation of duty, about this, perhaps, there may be a question. For whether virtue be the only good, as is the opinion of the Stoics, or whether that which is virtuous be, as it appears to your Peripatetics, so much the greatest good, that all things placed on the other side have scarcely the smallest weight; it is not to be doubted but that utility never can compare with virtue. Therefore we have learned that Socrates used to execrate those who had first separated in theory those things cohering in nature. To whom, indeed, the Stoics have so far assented, that they considered that whatever is virtuous is useful, and that nothing can be useful which is not virtuous. But if Panætius was one who would say that virtue was to be cultivated only on this account, because it was a means of procuring profit, as they do who measure the desirableness of objects either by pleasure or by the absence of pain, it would be allowable for him to say that our interest sometimes is opposed to virtue. But as he was one who judged that alone to be good which is virtuous, but that of such things as oppose this with some appearance of utility, neither the accession can make life better, nor the loss make it worse, it appears that he ought not to have introduced a deliberation of this kind, in which what seems profitable could be compared with that which is virtuous. For what is called the summum bonum by the Stoics, to live agreeably to nature, has, I conceive, this meaning-always to conform to virtue; and as to all other things which may be according to nature, to take them if they should not be repugnant to virtue. And since this is so, some think that this comparison is improperly introduced, and that no principle should be laid down upon this head. And, indeed, that perfection of conduct which is properly and truly called so, exists in the wise alone, and can never be separated from virtue. But in those persons in whom there is not perfect wisdom, that perfection can indeed by no means exist; but the likeness of it can. For the Stoics call all those duties about which we are discoursing in these books, mean duties (media officia). These are common, and extend widely, which many attain by the goodness of natural disposition, and by progressive improvement. But that duty which the same philosophers call right (rec

tum), is perfect and absolute, and, as the same philosophers say, has all the parts perfect, and can not fall to the lot of any but the wise man. But when any thing is performed in which mean duties appear, it seems to be abundantly perfect, because the vulgar do not at all understand how far it falls short of the perfect; but as far as they understand, they think there is nothing wanting. Which same thing comes to pass in poems, in pictures, and in many other matters, that those things which should not be commended, the unskillful are delighted with and commend; on this account, I that there is in these things some merit which catches the unskillful, who indeed are unable to judge what deficiency there may be in each. Therefore, when they are apprised of it by the initiated, they readily abandon their opinion.

suppose,

[ocr errors]

IV. These duties, then, of which we are discoursing in these books, they say are virtuous in some secondary degree -not peculiar to the wise alone, but common to every description of men. By these, therefore, all are moved in whom there is a natural disposition toward virtue. Nor, indeed, when the two Decii or the two Scipios are commemorated as brave men, or when Fabricius and Aristides are called just, is either an example of fortitude looked for from the former, or of justice from the latter, as from wise men. For neither of these was wise in such a sense as we wish the term wise man to be understood. Nor were these who were esteemed and named wise, Marcus Cato and Caius Lælius, wise men; nor were even those famous seven,' but from the frequent performance of mean duties they bore some similitude and appearance of wise men. Wherefore, it is neither right to compare that which is truly virtuous with what is repugnant to utility, nor should that which we commonly call virtuous, which is cultivated by those who wish to be esteemed good men, ever be compared with profits. And that virtue which falls within our comprehension is as much to be maintained and preserved by us, as that which is properly called, and which truly is virtue, is by the wise. For otherwise, whatever advancement is made toward virtue, it can not be maintained. But these remarks are made

1 The Stoics.

2 The seven wise men of Greece.

« 上一页继续 »