Chap. XIII.—Of the Immortality of the Soul, and of Wisdom, Philosophy, and Eloquence.

The subject seems to require in this place, that since we have taught that immortality is the chief good, we should prove this also, that the soul is immortal. On which subject there is great disputation among philosophers; nor have they who held true opinions respecting the soul been able to explain or prove anything: for, being destitute of divine knowledge, they neither brought forward true arguments by which they might overcome, nor evidence by which they might convince. But we shall treat of this question more conveniently in the last book, when we shall have to discuss the subject of a happy life. There remains that third part of philosophy, which they call Logic, in which the whole subject of dialectics and the whole method of speaking are contained. Divine learning does not stand in need of this, because the seat of wisdom is not the tongue, but the heart; and it makes no difference what kind of language you employ, for the question is not about words,388    There is a memorable story related by ecclesiastical historians, about a very clever disputant, whose sophistries could not be answered by his fellow-disputants, but who was completely silenced by the simple answers of a Christian otherwise unknown. When questioned about his sudden silence, the sophist replied that others exchanged words for words, but that this simple Christian fought with virtue.   but facts. And we are not disputing about the grammarian or the orator, whose knowledge is concerned with the proper manner of speaking, but about the wise man, whose learning is concerned with the right manner of living. But if that system of natural philosophy before mentioned is not necessary, nor this of logic, because they are not able to render a man happy, it remains that the whole force of philosophy is contained in the ethical part alone, to which Socrates is said to have applied himself, laying aside the others. And since I have shown that philosophers erred in this part also, who did not grasp the chief good, for the sake of gaining which we are born; it appears that philosophy is altogether false and empty, since it does not prepare us for the duties of justice, nor strengthen the obligations and settled course of man’s life. Let them know, therefore, that they are in error who imagine that philosophy is wisdom; let them not be drawn away by the authority of any one; but rather let them incline to the truth, and approach it. There is no room for rashness here; we must endure the punishment of our folly to all eternity, if we shall be deceived either by an empty character or a false opinion. But man,389    There seems to be a reference to a passage of Terence, in which the poet represents it as the property of man to err. [Or to Cicero, rather: Cujusvis hominis est errare, etc. Philipp. xii. 2.]   such as he is, if he trusts in himself, that is, if he trusts in man, is (not to say foolish, in that he does not see his own error) undoubtedly arrogant, in venturing to claim for himself that which the condition of man does not admit of.  

And how much that greatest author of the Roman language is deceived, we may see from that sentiment of his; for when, in his “Books on Offices,”390    Cicero, De Officiis, ii. 2.   he had said that philosophy is nothing else than the desire of wisdom, and that wisdom itself is the knowledge of things divine and human, added: “And if any one censures the desire of this, I do not indeed understand what there is which he imagines praiseworthy. For if enjoyment of the mind and rest from cares is sought, what enjoyment can be compared with the pursuits of those who are always inquiring into something which has reference to and tends to promote a good and happy life? Or if any account is taken of consistency and virtue, either this is the study391    Ars denotes study, method, or system. The word is applied both to theoretical knowledge and practical skill.   by which we may attain them, or there is none at all. To say that there is no system in connection with the greatest subjects, when none of the least is without a system, is the part of men speaking inconsiderately, and erring in the greatest subjects. But if there is any discipline of virtue, where shall it be sought when you have departed from that kind of learning?” For my own part, although I endeavoured to attain in some degree to the means of acquiring learning, on account of my desire to teach others, yet I have never been eloquent, inasmuch as I never even engaged in public speaking; but the goodness of the cause cannot fail of itself to make me eloquent, and for its clear and copious defence the knowledge of divinity and the truth itself are sufficient. I could wish, therefore, that Cicero might for a short time rise from the dead, that a man of such consummate eloquence might be taught by an insignificant person who is devoid of eloquence, first, what that is which is deemed worthy of praise by him who blames that study which is called philosophy; and in the next place, that it is not that study by which virtue and justice are learned, nor any other, as he thought; and lastly, that since there is a discipline of virtue, he might be taught where it is to be sought, when you have laid aside that kind of learning, which he did not seek for the sake of hearing and learning. For from whom could he hear when no one knew it? But, as his usual practice was in pleading causes, he wished to press his opponent by questioning, and thus to lead him to confession, as though he were confident that no answer could be given to show that philosophy was not the instructress of virtue. And in the Tusculan disputations he openly professed this, turning his speech to philosophy, as though he was showing himself off by a declamatory style of speaking. “O philosophy, thou guide of life,” he says; “O thou investigator of virtue, and expeller of vices; what could not only we, but the life of men, have effected at all without thee? Thou hast been the inventor of laws, thou the teacher of morals and discipline;”—as though, indeed, she could perceive anything by herself, and he were not rather to be praised who gave her. In the same manner he might have given thanks to food and drink, because without these life could not exist; yet these, while they minister to sense, confer no benefit. But as these things are the nourishment of the body, so wisdom is of the soul.  

CAPUT. XIII. De animae immortalitate, deque sapientia, philosophia et eloquentia.

0383C Res exigere videtur hoc loco, ut quoniam docuimus 0384A immortalitatem esse summum bonum, id ipsum immortalem esse animam comprobemus. Qua de re ingens inter philosophos disceptatio est, nec quidquam tamen explicare, aut probare potuerunt ii, qui verum de anima sentiebant; expertes enim hujus divinae eruditionis, nec argumenta vera, quibus vincerent, attulerunt, nec testimonia, quibus probarent. Sed oportunius hanc quaestionem tractabimus in ultimo libro, cum de vita beata nobis erit disserendum. Superest pars illa philosophiae tertia, quam vocant λογικὴν, in qua tota dialectica, et omnis loquendi ratio continetur. Hanc divina eruditio non desiderat: quia non in lingua, sed in corde sapientia est; nec interest, quali utare sermone: res enim, non verba quaeruntur. Et nos non de grammatico, aut oratore, 0384B quorum scientia est, quomodo loqui deceat, sed de sapiente disserimus, cujus doctrina est, quomodo vivere oporteat. Quod si neque physica illa ratio necessaria est, neque haec logica, quia beatum facere non possunt: restat ut in sola ethica totius philosophiae vis contineatur, ad quam se, abjectis omnibus, Socrates contulisse dicitur. In qua etiam parte quoniam philosophos errasse docui, qui summum bonum, cujus capiendi gratia generati sumus, non comprehenderunt; apparet falsam et inanem esse omnem philosophiam, quia nec instruit ad justitiae munera, nec officium hominis rationemque confirmat. Sciant igitur errare se, qui philosophiam putant esse sapientiam: non trahantur auctoritate cujusquam; sed veritati 0384C potius faveant, et accedant. Nullus hic temeritati 0385A locus est: in aeternum stultitiae poena subeunda est, si aut persona inanis, aut opinio falsa deceperit. Homo autem, 0385A qualiscumque est, si sibi credit, hoc est si homini credit (ut non dicam stultus, qui suum non videat errorem) certe arrogans est, qui sibi audeat vendicare, quod humana conditio non recipit.

Ille ipse romanae linguae summus auctor quantum fallatur, licet ex illa sententia pervidere: qui cum in libris officiorum philosophiam nihil aliud esse dixisset, quam studium sapientiae, ipsam autem sapientiam, rerum divinarum et humanarum scientiam, tum adjecit: «Cujus studium qui vituperat, haud sane intelligo quidnam sit, quod laudandum putet. Nam si oblectatio quaeritur animi, requiesque curarum, quae conferri cum eorum studiis potest, qui 0385B semper aliquid inquirunt, quod spectet, et valeat ad bene beateque vivendum? Sive ratio constantiae virtutisque ducitur, aut haec ars est, aut nulla omnino, per quam eas assequamur. Nullam dicere maximarum rerum artem esse, cum minimarum sine arte nulla sit, hominum est parum considerate loquentium, atque in maximis rebus errantium. Si autem est aliqua disciplina virtutis, ubi ea quaeretur, cum ab isto genere discendi discesseris.» Equidem tametsi operam dederim, ut quantulamcumque discendi assequerer facultatem propter studium docendi, tamen eloquens nunquam fui; quippe qui forum ne attigerim quidem: sed necesse est, ipsa me faciat causae bonitas eloquentem; ad quam diserte copioseque defendendam scientia divinitatis, et ipsa veritas sufficit. Vellem igitur Ciceronem paulisper ab inferis surgere, ut vir 0385C eloquentissimus ab homunculo non diserto doceretur, primum, quidnam sit, quod laudandum putet, qui 0386A vituperat id studium, quod vocatur philosophia; deinde, neque illam esse artem, qua virtus et justitia discatur, nec aliam ullam, sicut putavit; postremo, quoniam est virtutis disciplina, ubi quaerenda sit, cum ab illo discendi genere discesseris: quod ille non audiendi discendique gratia quaerebat. A quo enim posset audire, cum sciret id nemo? Sed ut in causis facere solebat, interrogatione voluit urgere, ad confessionemque perducere; tanquam confideret responderi prorsus nihil posse, quominus philosophia esset magistra virtutis. Quod quidem in Tusculanis disputationibus aperte professus est, ad eam ipsam conversa oratione, tamquam se declamatorio dicendi genere jactaret. «O vitae philosophia dux, inquit, o virtutis indagatrix expultrixque vitiorum: quid 0386B non modo nos, sed omnino vita hominum sine te esse potuisset? Tu inventrix legum, tu magistra morum ac disciplinae fuisti.» Quasi vero aliquid per se ipsa sentiret, ac non potius ille laudandus esset, qui eam tribuit. Potuit eodem modo gratias agere cibo et potui, quia sine his rebus vita constare non possit; in quibus ut sensus, ita beneficii nihil est. Atqui ut illa corporis alimenta sunt, sic animae, sapientia.