In the last episode of Stoicism On Fire, I focused on the Stoic doctrine of an excellent human life and the fact that such a life requires agreement with both human nature and cosmic Nature. The corollary of that doctrine is that human reason alone is not enough to lead us toward an excellent moral character; we must bring our human reason (logos) into agreement with universal Reason (Logos). As I pointed out, the concept of human reason as a fragment of the Logos permeating the cosmos relates to the inner guardian the Stoics referred to as a daimon. With those concepts in mind, we are ready to continue with Marcus’ list of characteristics of a good person. When Marcus reminds himself not to defile his daimon, he notes the good person will exhibit the characteristic of:
following God in an orderly fashion, never uttering a word that is contrary to the truth nor performing an action that is contrary to justice.
We see three related characteristics here; they are: following god, speaking truth, and acting justly.
Following God in an Orderly Fashion
First, what does it mean to follow God in Stoic practice? The instruction to “Follow God” may inspire curiosity or provoke resistance among secular moderns. This is not equivalent to following the commands of a sacred text; the Stoics had no such texts. Recall that God is equivalent to Nature in Stoicism. Therefore, to follow God is to follow Nature. However, we misrepresent this aspect of Stoic practice if we remove the divine and providential characteristics of Nature the Stoics attributed to her. Nature devoid of providence is not the cosmic Nature with which the ancient Stoics tried to live in agreement. Absent providence, some version of a chance universe like that of the Epicureans remains. The Stoics opposed this model and found it inadequate as a guide for ethical human life. That is the reason they emphasized the relationship between us and a purposeful (providential) cosmos. Throughout the Meditations, we see Marcus seeking a relationship with cosmic Nature and attempting to align his life with its universal Law. In several passages, Marcus expresses this as following God:
Hearten yourself with simplicity and self-respect and indifference towards all that lies between virtue and vice. Love the human race. Follow God. (Meditations 7.31)
And he has put aside every distraction and care, and has no other desire than to hold to the straight path according to the law, and by holding to it, to follow God. (Meditations 10.11)
In the final passages of his Meditations, Marcus instructs himself to constantly consider,
those who have been greatly aggrieved at something that came to pass, and those who have achieved the heights of fame, or affliction, or enmity, or any other kind of fortune; and then ask yourself, ‘What has become of all that?’ Smoke and ashes and merely a tale, or not even so much as a tale. (Meditations 12.27)
Then, he reminds himself how “cheap” those things are we strive for and reminds himself of those things that are worthy of our pursuit such as wisdom, justice, temperance, and obedience to the gods. Marcus then imagines a dialog with those who doubt or deny the existence of the gods. He writes:
To those who ask, ‘Where have you seen the gods, or what evidence do you have of their existence, that you worship them so devoutly?’, I reply first of all that they are in fact visible to our eyes, and secondly, that I have not seen my own soul, and yet I pay it due honour. So likewise with the gods; from what I experience of their power at every moment of my life, I ascertain that they exist and I pay them due reverence. (Meditations 12.28)
Finally, he asks himself a deeply probing question and provides himself with an answer.
What is it that you seek? The mere continuation of your life? To experience sensation, then, and impulse? To grow, and cease from growing? To make use of your tongue, and your mind? And what is there in that which strikes you as worth desiring? But if all these things are worthy of contempt, take the final step, and follow reason, follow God. (Meditations 12.31)
The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius are the best expression of Stoicism we have before the Stoa ceases to exist a short time after his death. Within this text we see a deeply held reverence for the divinity of Nature along with a desire and commitment to follow God. This attitude of reverence is not unique to Marcus. As Pierre Hadot emphasizes while writing about the Discipline of Desire,
All this corresponds, then, to a religious need: the need to personalize that power, to the will of which the discipline of desire instructs us complacently to consent. This is why Marcus Aurelius, like Epictetus, often employs the expressions "follow the gods" or "obey the gods" to describe this attitude of consent.[1]However, this concept of following God does not begin with Epictetus or Marcus. It can be traced to the founding of the Stoa. In the Discourses of Epictetus we see the “follow God” theme more frequently and, as Hadot points out, to follow the gods “means to accept their will, which is identical with the will of universal Nature.”[2] Likewise, A.A. Long points out, “Hence for Epictetus, the goal of `following God' is equivalent to `living in accordance with nature' (1.26.1), which was the standard Stoic definition of the good life.”[3] Let us look at what Epictetus had to say about this topic in several passages:
And one who is still being educated should approach his education with this aim in view: ‘How may I follow the gods in everything, and how can I act in a way that is acceptable to the divine administration, and how may I become free?’ (Discourses 1.12.8)
For does it in fact take long to say that ‘our end lies in following the gods, and the essence of the good in the correct use of impressions’? (Discourses 1.20.15)
‘Tell me further, what were the things that you regarded as being “goods”?’—‘The right exercise of choice and right use of impressions.’—‘And what is the end?’—‘To follow God.’ (Discourses 1.30.4)
Again, "following the gods" was the language used throughout the history of the Stoa as equivalent to living in agreement with nature. This is clear from the writings of Chrysippus, the second founder and third Scholarch of the Stoa. In Diogenes Laertius’ ancient book Lives of Eminent Philosophers, we read:
Chrysippus says in the first book of his De finibus; for our individual natures are parts of the nature of the whole universe. And this is why the end may be defined as life in accordance with nature, or, in other words, in accordance with our own human nature as well as that of the universe, a life in which we refrain from every action forbidden by the law common to all things, that is to say, the right reason which pervades all things, and is identical with this Zeus, lord and ruler of all that is. (DL 7.87-8)
If that is not clear enough, Chrysippus followed up with this unambiguous statement:
And this very thing constitutes the virtue of the happy man and the smooth current of life, when all actions promote the harmony of the spirit dwelling in the individual man with the will of him who orders the universe. (DL 7.88)
Virtue and happiness, according to Chrysippus, result from the harmony between “the spirit dwelling in the individual” (daimon) and “the will of him who orders the universe” (Zeus, God). Considering that Chrysippus was the third Scholarch of the Stoa, these quotes get us close to the founding. However, we can get closer. On four occasions in the Discourses of Epictetus, he repeats a prayer he attributes to Cleanthes, whom Zeno selected to succeed him as the second Scholarch of the ancient Stoa. The most famous version of Cleanthes prayer is found in Enchiridion 53:
Guide me, O Zeus, and thou, O Destiny,
To wheresoever you have assigned me;
I’ll follow unwaveringly, or if my will fails,
Base though I be, I’ll follow nonetheless.[4]For those who are unfamiliar with Stoic theology, it is important to note that the name Zeus does not refer to the anthropomorphic figure of Greek mythology or a transcendent deity. Instead, it refers to the God of many names that is the immanent and active force within all of Nature. As professor Keimpe Algra of Utrecht University writes:
we know that the Stoics were willing to link their philosophical monotheism or pantheism with at least parts of traditional polytheism. They were prepared to call their one cosmic god by many traditional names—Zeus, Hera, etc.[5]The Stoic God is a philosophical God—one arrived at by observation and reason. Nevertheless, as the surviving texts make clear, the Stoics were not playing mere word games by declaring the cosmos divine as some modern scientific pantheists do. The reverence to Nature and individual piety is clearly present from Cleanthes’ Hymn to Zeus at the founding all the way to Marcus’ Meditations as the flame of the Stoa grows dim. As A.A. Long argues,
Epictetus' theological language betokens a personal belief and experience as deep and wholehearted as that of any Jew or Christian or Muslim.[6]This evidence makes it abundantly clear that the idea of following God was there from the founding of the Stoa. The instruction to “follow the gods” cannot be dismissed as Epictetus’ “own version” of the Stoic edict to follow nature.[7] It is also important to remember a fragment of that logos resides in each of us. Therefore, as A.A. Long points out:
We don’t need God, as distinct from ourselves, to tell us what to do; but we are able to tell ourselves what to do only because of the way our nature has been constructed. And the author of our nature's construction is God. Hence for Epictetus, the goal of `following God' is equivalent to `living in accordance with nature' (1.26.1), which was the standard Stoic definition of the good life.[8]Just in Word and Deed
