Marcus Aurelius, Meditations 9.39

Either all things proceed from one Intelligent Source and come together as in one body, and the part ought not to find fault with what is done for the benefit of the whole; or there are only atoms, and nothing else than mixture and dispersion.

Why, then, are you disturbed? Say to the ruling faculty, are you dead, are you corrupted, are you playing the hypocrite, have you become a beast, do you herd and feed with the rest?

—Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 9.39 (tr Long)

Most all of the Classical Stoics, in varying ways and to varying degrees, argued that the Universe was completely One, was ruled by Providence, and had at its heart the design of Perfect Mind.

Call it God, or Zeus, or Logos, or the Highest Pneuma, the Breath and Fire of Life. It is still the absolute force that gives meaning and purpose to all things.

They did not consider God as any distant and impersonal power, or as some bureaucratic administrator. They rather saw all creatures as aspects of the One, expressions of a Divine Awareness that was itself perfect being, as small parts that had no meaning at all outside of that greater whole. Our own minds are nothing but an extension of Mind.

If the Stoics were correct in this view, then there can never be any doubt about our own particular place in this life. Whatever has happened, has happened for a reason, intended by the Divine. It is not God who fails us, as there is no absence in whatever is complete.

No, we are the ones who sadly fail to embrace the freedom of our nature within all of Nature. We fail ourselves through the power that is shared with us.

Even when we abuse our own choices, however, these are already pieces of how all of existence will unfold. Nothing is in vain, and everything is in service, directly or indirectly, to the fullness of all that is. It is about Being, not just about beings.

But let us imagine that there is no God, and no Unity, and there is no greater plan, and it all boils down to the random behavior of matter thrown about this way or that, with no real rhyme or reason behind any of it. Many opponents of the Stoics, especially the Epicureans, argued for precisely that. It is also the philosophical trend of our age to think this way, so we must surely take it into account.

Well, but what of it? We can bracket, for the moment, the source and purpose, the beginning and the end, the alpha and the omega of it all. Assume, for the sake of argument, that there is no higher, greater, or deeper meaning. Does this in any way negate the very identity of what I certainly know that I am, regardless of where I may have come from, and where I might be going?

I am a being endowed with the power of thought, and with a freedom of will. What I do is not merely the result of how I am acted upon, but of how I decide to act. I will even not call myself a creature, if you prefer, because that implies a Creator; let me just be a someone, a something that also has consciousness.

Somehow, perhaps, all the atoms just “happened” to come together to make a living animal, and a rational animal at that. I am still exactly what I was before, as in any other model, and my mission in life should be no different than it was before.

Know what is true. Love what is good. Act with virtue. I should be my own master, subject to only my own rightly informed conscience in how I live. As long as I remain a something, a someone, given reason and choice, I should fear nothing, never be determined by what is beyond my power, or be a slave to any other thing or to any other man.

Imagine, with John Lennon, that there is no God, and even then real moral character would not change one tiny bit. I should not lie, or steal, or seek money and power, or play all the games of pleasure we are so fond of playing. I am not merely an animal, ruled by passions, but a rational animal, ruled by my own judgments.

If you tell me there is no evidence for God, I will politely shrug my shoulders, and I will not bully you about the fact that all existence is itself evidence for God, God in action. Effects are measured by their causes. I have no intention of being offended, or fighting you, or casting you out of my life.

But if you tell me that you are not a being of reason and will, I will hold a mirror to your face.

You give me an argument that you are just an animal? You have just proven you are more than an animal, by appealing to reason.

You insist that you have no choice? I see you making a choice at this very moment, when you know full well you could have chosen differently.

You tell me you are ruled by desire alone? Your very telling itself requires an understanding beyond desire.

I will love and respect you, whoever you are, and whatever you might think. I still believe that none of us were made for nothing. Tell me that there is no God, and I will understand completely, having felt that way many times before; tell me that you are not a being of awareness, and I will question either your sanity or your honesty.

No God? Fine, if you must insist. You say you cannot “see” Him, even as He stares you in the face. No humanity? On that no one can ever insist, already being human to begin with.

Removing God will not changes the calling of our virtue, the expression of everything that is our nature. But how wonderful it would be, if we could choose to understand our nature within all of Nature. God is not something outside; God is.

Written in 12/2008