Chap. XVIII.—The Pythagoreans and Stoics, While They Hold the Immortality of the Soul, Foolishly Persuade a Voluntary Death.

Others, again, discuss things contrary to these, namely, that the soul survives after death; and these are chiefly the Pythagoreans and Stoics. And although they are to be treated with indulgence because they perceive the truth, yet I cannot but blame them, because they fell upon the truth not by their opinion, but by accident. And thus they erred in some degree even in that very matter which they rightly perceived. For, since they feared the argument by which it is inferred that the soul must necessarily die with the body, because it is born with the body, they asserted that the soul is not born with the body, but rather introduced into it, and that it migrates from one body to another. They did not consider that it was possible for the soul to survive the body, unless it should appear to have existed previously to the body. There is therefore an equal and almost similar error on each side. But the one side are deceived with respect to the past, the other with respect to the future. For no one saw that which is most true, that the soul is both created and does not die, because they were ignorant why that came to pass, or what was the nature of man. Many therefore of them, because they suspected that the soul is immortal, laid violent hands upon themselves, as though they were about to depart to heaven. Thus it was with Cleanthes421    Cleanthes was a Stoic philosopher, who used to draw water by night for his support, that he might devote himself to the study of philosophy by day. He ended his life by refusing to take food.   and Chrysippus,422    Chrysippus was a disciple of Zeno, and, after Cleanthes, the chief of the Stoic sect. According to some accounts, he died front an excessive draught of wine; according to others, from excessive laughter.   with Zeno,423    Zeno, the chief of the Stoic sect. He is said to have died from suffocation.   and Empedocles,424    Empedocles was a philosopher and poet. There are various accounts of his death; that mentioned in the text is usually received.   who in the dead of night cast himself into a cavity of the burning Ætna, that when he had suddenly disappeared it might be believed that he had departed to the gods; and thus also of the Romans Cato died, who through the whole of his life was an imitator of Socratic ostentation. For Democritus425    There are various accounts respecting the death of Democritus.   was of another persuasion. But, however,  

and nothing can be more wicked than this. For if a homicide is guilty because he is a destroyer of man, he who puts himself to death is under the same guilt, because he puts to death a man. Yea, that crime may be considered to be greater, the punishment of which belongs to God alone. For as we did not come into this life of our own accord; so, on the other hand, we can only withdraw from this habitation of the body which has been appointed for us to keep, by the command of Him who placed us in this body that we may inhabit it, until He orders us to depart from it; and if any violence is offered to us, we must endure it with equanimity, since the death of an innocent person cannot be unavenged, and since we have a great Judge who alone always has the power of taking vengeance in His hands.  

All these philosophers, therefore, were homicides; and Cato himself, the chief of Roman wisdom, who, before he put himself to death, is said to have read through the treatise of Plato which he wrote on the immortality of the soul, and was led by the authority of the philosopher to the commission of this great crime; yet he, however, appears to have had some cause for death in his hatred of slavery. Why should I speak of the Ambraciot,427    Cleombrotus of Ambracia.   who, having read the same treatise, threw himself into the sea, for no other cause than that he believed Plato?—a doctrine altogether detestable and to be avoided, if it drives men from life. But if Plato had known and taught by whom, and how, and to whom, and on account of what actions, and at what time, immortality is given, he would neither have driven Cleombrotus nor Cato to a voluntary death, but he would have trained them to live with justice. For it appears to me that Cato sought a cause for death, not so much that he might escape from Cæsar, as that he might obey the decrees of the Stoics, whom he followed, and might make his name distinguished by some great action; and I do not see what evil could have happened to him if he had lived. For Caius Cæsar, such was his clemency, had no other object, even in the very heat of civil war, than to appear to deserve well of the state, by preserving two excellent citizens, Cicero and Cato. But let us return to those who praise death as a benefit. You complain of life as though you had lived, or had ever settled with yourself why you were born at all. May not therefore the true and common Father of all justly find fault with that saying of Terence:428    Heautontim., v. 2, 18. This advice is given to a young man, who, not knowing the value of life, is prepared rashly to throw it away in consequence of some check to his plans.  —  

You are indignant that you are exposed to evils; as though you deserved anything good, who are ignorant of your Father, Lord, and King; who, although you behold with your eyes the bright light, are nevertheless blind in mind, and lie in the depths of the darkness of ignorance. And this ignorance has caused that some have not been ashamed to say, that we are born for this cause, that we may suffer the punishment of our crimes; but I do not see what can be more senseless than this. For where or what crimes could we have committed when we did not even exist? Unless we shall happen to believe that foolish old man,429    Pythagoras taught the doctrine of the transmigration of souls, and affirmed that he had lived already as Euphorbus, one of the heroes of Troy, who was slain by Menelaus in the Trojan war. Lactantius again refers to this subject, book vii. ch. 23, infra.   who falsely said that he had lived before, and that in his former life he had been Euphorbus. He, I believe, because he was born of an ignoble race, chose for himself a family from the poems of Homer. O wonderful and remarkable memory of Pythagoras! O miserable forgetfulness on the part of us all, since we know not who we were in our former life! But perhaps it was caused by some error, or favour, that he alone did not touch the abyss of Lethe, or taste the water of oblivion; doubtless the trifling old man (as is wont to be the case with old women who are free from occupation) invented fables as it were for credulous infants. But if he had thought well of those to whom he spoke these things; if he had considered them to be men, he would never have claimed to himself the liberty of uttering such perverse falsehoods. But the folly of this most trifling man is deserving of ridicule. What shall we do in the case of Cicero, who, having said in the beginning of his Consolation that men were born for the sake of atoning for their crimes, afterwards repeated the assertion, as though rebuking him who does not imagine that life is a punishment? He was right, therefore, in saying beforehand that he was held by error and wretched ignorance of the truth.  

CAPUT XVIII. Pythagorici et Stoici, animarum immortalitatem statuentes, voluntariam mortem inaniter persuadent.

Alii autem contraria his disserunt, superesse animas post mortem; et hi sunt maxime Pythagorici ac Stoici: quibus etsi ignoscendum est, quia verum sentiunt, 0405B non possum tamen non reprehendere eos, quia non sententia, sed casu inciderunt in veritatem. Itaque in eo ipso quod recte sentiebant aliquid errarunt. 0406A Nam cum timerent argumentum illud, quo colligitur necesse esse, ut occidant animae cum corporibus, quia cum corporibus nascuntur, dixerunt non nasci animas, sed insinuari potius in corpora, et de aliis in alia migrare. Non putaverunt aliter fieri posse, ut supersint animae post corpora, nisi videantur fuisse ante corpora. Par igitur, ac prope similis error est partis utriusque. Sed haec in praeterito falsa est, illa in futuro. Nemo enim vidit, quod est verissimum, et nasci animas, et non occidere; quia, cur id fieret, aut quae ratio esset hominis, nescierunt. Multi ergo ex iis, quia aeternas esse animas suspicabantur, tamquam in coelum migraturi essent, sibi ipsis manus intulerunt: ut Cleanthes, ut Chrysippus; ut Zeno, ut Empedocles, qui se in ardentis Aetnae specum intempesta 0406B nocte dejecit, ut, cum repente non apparuisset, abiisse ad deos crederetur; et ex Romanis Cato, qui fuit in omni sua vita Socraticae vanitatis imitator. 0407A Nam Democritus 0407A in alia fuit persuasione. Sed tamen Sponte sua letho caput obvius obtulit ipse,quo nihil sceleratius fieri potest. Nam si homicida nefarius est, quia hominis extinctor est, eidem sceleri obstrictus est, qui se necat, quia hominem necat. Imo vero majus esse id facinus existimandum est, cujus ultio Deo soli subjacet. Nam sicut in hanc vitam non nostra sponte venimus, ita rursus ex hoc domicilio corporis, quod tuendum nobis assignatum est, ejusdem jussu recedendum est, qui nos in hoc corpus induxit, tamdiu habituros, donec jubeat emitti; et si vis aliqua inferatur, aequa mente id patiendum est, cum extincta innocentis anima inulta esse non possit, habeamusque judicem magnum, cui soli vindicta in integro semper est.

0407B Homicidae igitur illi omnes philosophi, et ipse romanae 0408A sapientiae princeps Cato, qui antequam se occideret, perlegisse Platonis librum dicitur, qui est scriptus de aeternitate animarum, et ad summum nefas philosophi auctoritate compulsus est; et hic tamen aliquam moriendi causam videtur habuisse, odium servitutis. Quid Ambraciotes ille, qui, cum eumdum librum perlegisset praecipitem se dedit, nullam aliam ob causam, nisi quod Platoni credidit? Execrabilis prorsus ac fugienda doctrina, si abigit homines a vita. Quod si scisset Plato, atque docuisset, a quo, et quomodo, et quibus, et quae ob facta, et quo tempore immortalitas tribuatur, nec Cleombrotum impegisset in mortem voluntariam, nec Catonem, sed eos ad vitam et justitiam potius erudisset. Nam Cato videtur mihi causam quaesisse moriendi, non tam ut Caesarem 0408B fugeret, quam ut Stoicorum decretis obtemperaret, quos sectabatur, nomenque suum grandi aliquo facinore 0409A clarificaret: 0409A cui quid mali accidere potuerit, si viveret, non invenio. Caius enim Caesar, ut clemens erat, nihil aliud efficere volebat, etiam in ipso belli civilis ardore, quam ut bene mereri de Republica videretur, duobus optimis civibus Cicerone et Catone servatis. Sed redeamus ad eos qui mortem pro bono laudant. De vita quereris, quasi vixeris, aut umquam tibi ratio constiterit, cur omnino sis natus. Nonne igitur tibi verus ille et communis omnium pater Terentianum illud (Vid. Ter. Heautontimor., act. V, sc. 2) jure increpaverit: Prius disce, quid sit vivere; Si displicebit vita, tum isthoc utitor.Indigaris te malis esse subjectum: quasi quidquam merearis boni, qui patrem, qui dominum, qui regem tuum nescis; qui quamvis clarissimam lucem 0409B intuearis oculis, mente tamen caecus es, et in profundis ignorantiae tenebris jaces. Quae ignorantia effecit, ut quosdam dicere non puderet, idcirco nos esse natos, ut scelerum poenas lueremus: quo quid delirius dici possit, non video. Ubi enim, vel quae scelera potuimus admittere, qui omnino non fuimus? Nisi forte credemus inepto illi seni, qui se in priori vita Euphorbum fuisse mentitus est. Hic, credo, quod erat ignobili genere natus, familiam sibi ex Homeri carminibus adoptavit. O miram et singularem Pythagorae memoriam! O miseram oblivionem nostrum omnium, qui nesciamus, qui ante fuerimus! Sed fortasse, vel errore aliquo, vel gratia sit effectum, ut ille solus lethaeum gurgitem non attigerit, nec oblivionis aquam gustaverit: videlicet senex 0409C vanus (sicut otiosae aniculae solent) fabulas tamquam 0410A infantibus credulis finxit. Quod si bene sensisset de iis, quibus haec locutus est, si homines eos existimasset, nunquam sibi tam petulanter mentiendi licentiam vindicasset. Sed deridenda est hominis levissimi vanitas. Quid Ciceroni faciemus? qui cum in principio Consolationis suae dixisset, luendorum scelerum causa nasci homines, iteravit id ipsum postea, quasi objurgans eum, qui vitam non esse poenam putet. Recte ergo praefatus est, errore, ac miserabili veritatis ignorantia se teneri.