When the description of this regime provokes Adeimantus to remark
that “you are not making the men of this class particularly happy,”
Socrates is made to reply that while it is not his object to make any
class particularly happy, yet it would not surprise him if in the given
circumstances even this class were very happy. When we look further
for his meaning, we find it to be that the guardians are trained by
their ascetic discipline to abandon all private aims and to find their
happiness in an appreciation of a perfectly ordered commonwealth. If
we understand this we shall, I believe, understand what civilized
asceticism means. We shall have come back to the original meaning of
the word itself, which is derived from the Greek ἀσκέω, “I practice,”
and “embodies a metaphor taken from the ancient wrestling place or
palæstra, where victory rewarded those who had best trained their
bodies.” An ascetic in the original meaning of the term is an athlete;
and it was in this spirit that the early Christians trained themselves
deliberately as “athletes of Christ” to bear without flinching the
tortures of their martyrdom.
When asceticism is irrational, it is a form of totemism or fetich
worship and derives from a belief that certain things are tabu or
that evil spirits can be placated by human suffering. Or without any
coherent belief whatsoever asceticism may be merely a perversion
arising out of that ambivalence of the human passions which often makes
pain, inflicted on others or self-inflicted, an exquisite [p161]
pleasure. But when asceticism is rational, it is a discipline of the
mind and body to fit men for the service of an ideal. Its purpose
is to harden and to purify, to suppress contrary passions, and thus
to intensify the passion for the ideal. “I chastise my body,” said
St. Paul, “and bring it into subjection.” The Church, especially in
the earlier centuries, was compelled to fight continually against
irrational asceticism, and as late as the Middle Ages, the Inquisition
pursued sects which regarded marriage as the “greater adultery” and
practiced self-emasculation. The rational view was the view of St.
Jerome: “Be on your guard when you begin to mortify your body by
abstinence and fasting, lest you imagine yourself to be perfect and a
saint; for perfection does not consist in this virtue. It is only a
help; a disposition; a means, though a fitting one, for the attainment
of true perfection.”
Now when St. Paul said that he had to bring his body into subjection,
when Aristotle defined the barbarians’ ideal as “the living as one
likes,” when Plato made Socrates say that the soul is infected by
the body, when Buddha preached the extinction of all craving, when
Spinoza wrote that because we rejoice in virtue we are able to
control our lusts, they accepted a view of human nature which is
quite diametrically opposed to one which has had wide currency in our
civilization since the Renaissance.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account