Humanitext Reader

Seneca the Younger · On Leisure §8.1-8.4

The Flaws of Existing States and the Necessity of Leisure

Passage 8 of 8 · Latin

Summary

Seneca argues, drawing on Chrysippus, that because all existing commonwealths have severe flaws and no state is fit for a wise man, choosing a life of leisure becomes an absolute necessity for him.

§8.1Adice nunc, quod e lege Chrysippi vivere otioso licet; non dico, ut otium patiatur, sed ut eligat.
Add now to this, that according to the rule of Chrysippus, it is permitted to live in leisure; I do not say that he should endure leisure, but that he should choose it.
Negant nostri sapientem ad quamlibet rem publicam accessurum; quid autem interest, quomodo sapiens ad otium veniat, utrum quia res publica illi deest, an quia ipse rei publicae, si non ubivis futura res publica est? Semper autem deerit fastidiose quaerentibus.
Our school denies that the wise man will enter any commonwealth; but what difference does it make how the wise man comes to leisure—whether because the commonwealth is lacking to him, or he to the commonwealth, if a commonwealth is not to exist everywhere? But it will always be lacking to those who seek it fastidiously.
Interrogo, ad quam rem publicam sapiens sit accessurus.
I ask, which commonwealth is the wise man going to enter?
Ad Atheniensium, in qua Socrates damnatur, Aristoteles, ne damnetur, fugit? in qua opprimit invidia virtutes? Negabis mihi accessurum ad hanc rem publicam sapientem.
That of the Athenians, in which Socrates is condemned, and from which Aristotle fled lest he should be condemned? In which envy oppresses virtues? You will deny to me that the wise man will enter this commonwealth.
§8.2Ad Carthaginiensium ergo rem publicam sapiens accedet, in qua adsidua seditio et optimo cuique infesta libertas est, summa aequi ac boni vilitas, adversus hostes inhumana crudelitas, etiam adversus suos hostilis? Et hanc fugiet.
Will the wise man then enter the commonwealth of the Carthaginians, in which there is constant sedition, and liberty is hostile to all the best men, where there is the lowest valuation of justice and goodness, inhuman cruelty towards enemies, and hostility even towards their own? This one also he will flee.
§8.3Si percensere singulas voluero, nullam inveniam, quae sapientem aut quam sapiens pati possit.
If I should wish to run through them one by one, I shall find none which can either endure the wise man, or which the wise man can endure.
Quodsi non invenitur illa res publica, quam nobis fingimus, incipit omnibus esse otium necessarium, quia quod unum praeferri poterat otio, nusquam est.
But if that commonwealth which we picture to ourselves is not found, leisure begins to be necessary for all, because the one thing which could be preferred to leisure is nowhere to be found.
§8.4Si quis dicit optimum esse navigare, deinde negat navigandum in eo mari, in quo naufragia fieri soleant et frequenter subitae tempestates sint, quae rectorem in contrarium rapiant, puto hic me vetat navem solvere, quamquam laudet navigationem.
If someone says that it is best to sail, and then says that one must not sail on that sea in which shipwreck is accustomed to happen and there are frequent sudden storms which sweep the pilot in the opposite direction, I think this man is forbidding me to loose the ship, although he praises navigation.

Notes

  1. §8.1vivere otioso licet — The impersonal verb `licet` (it is permitted) takes the dative `otioso`, which functions as the logical subject of the infinitive `vivere`. The dative case is used instead of the accusative `otiosum` due to the attraction of `licet`.
  2. §8.1utrum quia res publica illi deest, an quia ipse rei publicae — An elliptical structure. In the second clause `an quia ipse rei publicae`, the verb `deest` from the first clause is understood: 'or because he himself is lacking to the commonwealth' (meaning he is unsuitable for it).
  3. §8.3quae sapientem aut quam sapiens pati possit — A parallel construction where the nominative and accusative relative pronouns are symmetrically inverted. In `quae sapientem...`, `quae` is nominative (subject: 'which [commonwealth]') and `sapientem` is accusative (object of `pati`). In `quam sapiens...`, `quam` is accusative (object of `pati`: 'which [commonwealth]') and `sapiens` is nominative (subject).
  4. §8.4puto hic me vetat — The verb `puto` (I think) is used parenthetically or as a leading verb, followed by the main clause `hic me vetat...`. Here, `hic` is a demonstrative pronoun acting as the subject of `vetat`, referring to the speaker hypothesized in the conditional clause.

Cite this passage

Seneca the Younger, On Leisure §8.1-8.4. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:stoa0255.stoa011.humanitext-lat2:8.1-8.4

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.