§85.19Illud autem absurdum est, quod dicitur beatum quidem futurum vel sola virtute, non futurum autem perfecte beatum.
But that is absurd, which is said, that one will indeed be happy even by virtue alone, but will not be perfectly happy.
Quod quemadmodum fieri possit, non reperio.
How this can happen, I do not find.
Beata enim vita bonum in se perfectum habet, inexsuperabile.
For a happy life has in itself a perfect good, which cannot be surpassed.
Quod si est, perfecte beata est.
If this is so, it is perfectly happy.
Si deorum vita nihil habet maius aut melius, beata autem vita divina est; nihil habet, in quod amplius possit attolli.
If the life of the gods has nothing greater or better, and a happy life is divine; it has nothing to which it can be raised further.
§85.20Praeterea si beata vita nullius est indigens, omnis beata vita perfecta est eademque est et beata et beatissima.
Moreover, if a happy life is in need of nothing, every happy life is perfect, and the same is both happy and most happy.
Numquid dubitas, quin beata vita summum bonum sit? Ergo si summum bonum habet, summe beata est.
Do you doubt that a happy life is the highest good? Therefore, if it possesses the highest good, it is supremely happy.
Quemadmodum summum bonum adiectionem non recipit (quid enim supra summum erit?), ita ne beata quidem vita, quae sine summo bono non est.
Just as the highest good does not admit addition (for what will be above the highest?), so neither does a happy life, which is not without the highest good.
Quod si aliquem magis beatum induxeris, induces et multo magis; innumerabilia discrimina summi boni facies, cum summum bonum intellegam, quod supra se gradum non habet.
But if you introduce someone who is more happy, you will also introduce someone who is much more happy; you will make innumerable degrees of the highest good, whereas I understand the highest good to be that which has no step above itself.
§85.21Si est aliquis minus beatus quam alius, sequitur, ut hic alterius vitam beatioris magis concupiscet quam suam.
If someone is less happy than another, it follows that this man will desire the life of the happier person more than his own.
Beatus autem nihil suae praefert.
But a happy man prefers nothing to his own.
Utrumlibet ex his incredibile est: aut aliquid beato restare, quod esse quam quod est malit, aut id illum non malle, quod illo melius est.
Whichever of these you choose is incredible: either that something remains for the happy man which he would prefer to be rather than what he is, or that he does not prefer that which is better than what he has.
Utique enim quo prudentior est, hoc magis se ad id, quod est optimum, extendet et id omni modo consequi cupiet.
For surely, the wiser he is, the more he will stretch himself toward that which is best, and will desire to attain it by all means.
Quomodo autem beatus est, qui cupere etiamnunc potest, immo qui debet?
But how is he happy, who can still desire, or rather, who ought to?
§85.22Dicam, quid sit, ex quo veniat hic error: nesciunt beatam vitam unam esse.
I will say what it is, from which this error comes: they do not know that a happy life is one.
In optimo illam statu ponit qualitas sua, non magnitudo.
Its own quality, not its magnitude, places it in the best state.
Itaque in aequo est longa et brevis, diffusa et angustior, in multa loca multasque partes distributa et in unum coacta.
Therefore, long and short, widespread and narrower, distributed into many places and many parts, and gathered into one, are on an equal footing.
Qui illam numero aestimat et mensura et partibus, id illi, quod habet eximium, eripit.
He who estimates it by number and measure and parts, takes away from it that which it has as exceptional.
Quid autem est in beata vita eximium? Quod plena est.
But what is exceptional in a happy life? That it is full.
§85.23Finis, ut puto, edendi bibendique satietas est.
The limit, as I think, of eating and drinking is satiety.
Hic plus edit, ille minus;
This man eats more, that man less; what does it matter?
quid refert? Uterque iam satur est.
Both are already sated.
Hic plus bibit, ille minus;
This man drinks more, that man less; what does it matter?
quid refert? Uterque non sitit.
Neither is thirsty.
Hic pluribus annis vixit, hic paucioribus; nihil interest, si tam illum multi anni beatum fecerunt quam hunc pauci.
This man lived for more years, this one for fewer; there is no difference, if many years made that one as happy as few years made this one.
Ille, quem tu minus beatum vocas, non est beatus; non potest nomen inminui.
He whom you call less happy is not happy; the name cannot be diminished.
§85.24"Qui fortis est, sine timore est.
"He who is brave, is without fear.
Qui sine timore est, sine tristitia est.
He who is without fear, is without sadness.
Qui sine tristitia est, beatus est. "Nostrorum haec interrogatio est.
He who is without sadness, is happy." This is the syllogism of our school.
Adversus hanc sic respondere conantur: falsam nos rem et controversiosam pro confessa vindicare, eum, qui fortis est, sine timore esse.
Against this they try to respond in this way: that we claim a false and controversial thing as admitted, namely, that he who is brave is without fear.
"Quid ergo?" inquit, "fortis inminentia mala non timebit? Istuc dementis alienatique, non fortis est.
"What then?" he says, "will the brave man not fear imminent evils? That belongs to a madman and an insane person, not to a brave man.
Ille vero," inquit, "moderatissime timet, sed in totum extra metum non est. "
But he indeed," he says, "fears most moderately, but he is not entirely outside of fear."