2026 MAY: Meditations by Marcus Aurelius > Likes and Comments
date
newest »
newest »
Started. Right out of the gate it enumerates a bunch of statements of items he says he learned from various people. Could be framed quite a bit better.
I decided I couldn’t listen to any free audiobooks and escape an unwanted bias from the narrator. I don’t often read anymore. I rarely find the time for such an indulgence. I usually listen while walking, commuting, cooking, shopping, doing laundry, etc. But, for this book, I am reading it.This Robin Waterford translation seems best regarded by some. I couldn’t find an audiobook version. This is annotated. The many notes inflate the book but I appreciate all the context.
Meditations is composed of 12 notebooks, which are notes to himself, never meant to be published.Notebook 1 jumps right into an enumerated list. For example:
[3] From my mother: reverence for the gods, generosity, and the ability to abstain not only from wrongdoing but even from contemplating it; also, a frugal lifestyle, far removed from the habits of the rich.
It seems this is a list of things he appreciates that he learned from others. He seems to phrase this as:
From [so and so]: [what I learned].
The implicit missing phrase in between is “I learned the value of” or “I benefited from”.
I don’t like to give authors credit from some conjectured meaning that they didn’t explicitly say. I wish he would have framed this notebook by starting with, “There are people in my life I am indebted to for teaching me the value of certain behaviors.” But, considering it was personal notes, perhaps he kept it terse as possible.
I hate the enumerations … 1, 2, 3, 4, and so on. What is the value of the number? I hate internet content such as 47 ways to [fill in the blank]. I really detest that. So, I try to tune these numbers out and consider it just an indicator that the last bullet is over and the next has begun.
In my most positive construct, I try to consider these almost mantras or affirmations … things he repeats daily to himself so as to remember the ways in which he should strive to be better. My most negative construct is that he is enumerating all the qualities he has that make him better. That … I choose not to think. I detest people thinking they are better than others. That’s the biggest red flag that … they aren’t.
When someone close to me dies, and I find myself crying or in physical pain at the loss, my most effective technique of mourning is trying to divine what was so great about them that I am now in pain being denied exposure to their most favored characteristics.
I had a friend who was kind of big, tough, and scary looking—the way he dressed and carried himself. Tattoos, dark eyeliner, crazy hair, combat boots, a shirt that had some menacing looking figure on it. But whenever I saw him, he would pop out of his tough look and go out of his way to make a happy face and say something silly or funny. Literally, every time I saw him. This made me feel special. He never let you walk by unacknowledged or unnoticed. It made it so uplifting to walk around a corner and run into him, knowing he would always respond to seeing you with a big happy expression. How the hell did he do that? He did it every time? He never let a mood keep him from this. It’s like it was sacred. Why can’t I do that? I loved that. It hurts not to have that any more. No one did it like him. I wish I could honor him by emulating that. Instead, I tend to be so grumpy that often laughing or happy girls behind a cash register will suddenly stop laughing and snap to a serious what can I do for you sir sort of reaction. They will stop smiling and go to a flat mouth, and sometimes even say “I’m sorry”. I must look like I’m about to yell or complain. I really where that grumpy look. A buzz kill effect is the opposite of what I want.
Anyway, I long ago had a list of some of those special things that made me hurt and cry knowing that I wasn’t going to be exposed to them any more since those people died. I like to think Notebook 1 of meditations is like that. But, he isn’t citing people who have died. Still, he is noting the good stuff, and I like to think he is reminding himself to emulate their best qualities … instead of cataloging his own fine qualities which would be narcissistic and odious.
This list is so terse, and if I just read it once and never look back, … no way will I actually learn or benefit from it. I think he must be repeating this to himself periodically, weekly or such. That probably how I need to read it. Will give it a few reps and see if it does have more value. Not all of them strike me as profound. Maybe after a few laps, I’ll think different.
Some of my favorites:
“the ability to abstain not only from wrongdoing but even from contemplating it”
“being forgiving and ready to get back on good terms with angry and offensive people as soon as they’re prepared to simmer down”
“the general avoidance, except when absolutely necessary, of telling anyone, to his face or in a letter, “I’m too busy”; and not making this kind of excuse for constantly evading the obligations that arise out of one’s relationships with one’s fellows, by using “the pressure of circumstances” as a pretext”
“genuine love for one’s children”
I take that for granted, so I hope this isn’t something he had to “learn”, those his son was a piece of work
“the general avoidance, except when absolutely necessary, of telling anyone, to his face or in a letter, “I’m too busy”; and not making this kind of excuse for constantly evading the obligations that arise out of one’s relationships with one’s fellows”
Not a fan:
“tolerating plain speaking”
I prefer plain speaking. Must it be “tolerated”.
Contradictory:
“not writing about philosophical theories”
This kinda seems like what he does, no?
“avoiding rhetoric, the composition of poetry, and highfalutin language”
Didn’t he just praise “tolerance of plain language”?
Notebook 2 is along the River Gran among the Quadi. This river is in Slovakia, known as the Hron, a major tributary to the Danube. The Quadi is a Germanic tribe. Marcus is on military campaign at the Roman-German war front. He is focused on war and his life is at risk, and it shows in this notebook.
He begins the notebooks saying he starts his day with what some coin premeditatio malorum (“premeditation of evils). This came from the Cyreneics (a hedonist offshoot), was adopted as a stoic practice, and popularized by Seneca and then Cicero.
His writing are just say a paragraph at a time, all disjoint from each other. There is no story. He just says something from Stoic philosophy. It’s like each paragraph is a different day. He doesn’t explain why. He just say, do X. This is the way.
Notebook 3He notes often that you could die or become senile or infirm or crippled or useless at any time. This comes off more as being anxious than not. The point is perhaps to stifle his anxiety by premeditating bad outcomes, such that if or when they happen it doesn’t overwhelm him. I don’t know. He doesn’t say why.
Arguably it is to keep his focus on the present, not the future.
If that is the case, … great. I don’t want to give him credit for things he isn’t saying.
He does mention taking life in your own hands. Evidently this is a stoic thing to take your own life when you become relatively impotent. I didn’t know. Friend of mine just did that this week, so it is weighing on my mind.
“Don’t waste what remains of your life thinking about other people, unless you do so with reference to the welfare of the state—I mean wondering what so-and-so is doing and why, or what he’s saying, what he’s thinking, what his designs are, and so on, which distracts you from paying attention to your own command center.You have to exclude everything purposeless and random from the sequence of your thoughts, but especially and above all anything prompted by idle curiosity or ill will.“
“His one concern throughout his life is that his mind should never be in a state that is inappropriate to a rational and social being.”
His recipe for the good life:If you carry out every present task by following right reason assiduously, resolutely, and with kindness; if, rather than getting distracted by irrelevancies, you keep your guardian spirit unspoiled and steady, as though you had to surrender it at any moment; if you engage with the task not with expectations or evasions, but satisfied if your current performance is in accord with nature and if what you say and express is spoken with true Roman honesty, you’ll be living the good life. And there’s no one who can stop you doing so!
Notebook 4:Never act without purpose; make sure that all your actions conform to the philosophical principles that constitute the art of living.
I’m thinking “composed” is the word, not “bird”. Stoicism is about staying composed.
Is Marcus Aurelius the fabled philosopher king?The notion of a philosopher king came up in Plato’s Republic, where has has Socrates as his customary mouthpiece discussing the ideal form of government with a group. Socrates says this:
Until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy ... cities will never have rest from their evils,—no, nor the human race, as I believe,—and then only will this our State have a possibility of life and behold the light of day.
Notebook 4: Whatever happens, it’s right that it should happen.
Marcus is a stoic devotee striving for absolute acceptance of everything. This is Katie Byron’s book Loving What Is in a nutshell.
He spews forth a lot of drivel that isn’t constructive. Makes you question his sanity. Is he devoutly dutiful, or OCD, or batshit crazy? Sometimes he sounds like Rain Man. He is absolutely possessed in his writing with not being overly emotional about death. If you don’t panick about it when and if it comes to pass that you got stabbed in a battle, but you are positively obsessed about it for years writing pages and pages about it in your journal, … have you really accomplished something? Are you not just as lacking in composure either way? This is no paragon of composure. Who cares? He’s being asinine.
Sometimes there’s a nugget:
And we shouldn’t act and speak “as though we were asleep” (for even when asleep we do think we’re acting and speaking). Nor should we behave “like children with their parents,” that is, simply accepting things as they’ve been passed down to us.
Notebook 5:How easy it is to banish and erase every upsetting or unwelcome thought and gain immediate and complete tranquility!
This sounds like an exasperated wish. He is clearly constantly striving for it.
He seems devoid of purpose. Preaches accepting your lot in life. I suppose if you are the Emporer, that acceptance might be a tad easier to come by.You should welcome every experience even when it seems rather harsh, because it contributes to the health of the universe and to the advancement and success of Zeus’s activity.
Acceptance is often the thing that if we could get there quicker, we might “stop suffering” quicker. But, his rationale/motivation is rather underwhelming.
These are the 4 stoic virtues: wisdom, moderation, justice, and courage.I find myself juxtaposing of Marcus Aurelius to the current “leader of the free world” and wondering if he has any of these virtues.
Still chipping away. This is not a stellar book. It strikes more as OCD ramblings and short assertions. I’d say he echoes or regurgitates philosophy … but isn’t doing it. He isn’t a philosopher so much as a fan of a stoic philosophy. There isn’t a deep rationale for what he asserts—so much as recurring emphasis to the point of admonishing himself repeatedly to do what he presumes to be the right thing. Hey … do the right thing. That’s great. But just saying “do the right thing” is not profound and not a rationale in itself.To hear Ryan Holiday describe it—or any book he likes—you get this absolutely cock sure sound bite length review that basically translates to “this is the best … because I said so … with conviction”.
I have not listened to his podcast on stoic things. Maybe he is deeper than that. Low odds I will bother to find out.
Meditations has me intrigued me about stoicism. I would like to know more than I do. Marcus is repeatedly putting forth random things I didn’t know were stoicism. I’m not saying I like it. I’m pretty damn sure and this adds to the feeling that it is not aligned with my thinking. But, I am interested in what it’s about, primarily because he gives such a scatterbrained view of it that now I have more questions than answers.
Let’s … give an example. Don’t worry my self looking far. I just started Notebook 6. Here’s the first “verse”.The physical substance of the universe is compliant and plastic, but there’s nothing inherent in the reason that directs the universe that could cause it to do wrong. Badness isn’t one of its qualities, nor does it do things badly, nor is anything made worse by it. Everything comes into existence and runs its course in accordance with its will.
WTF? What is this gobbledygook? Is there a point? Or is this just stark raving blather?
Yes, but we’ll give it a college try at … unpacking the nonsense. Rationalizing the irrational is a fool’s errand, and yet I proceed.
Any rational and sane person will readily concede that the laws of nature … which we might otherwise term physics … have no inherent “evil” or “bad” aspect. Sure, a black hole or a star going supernova are things that exist … and are quite a force. A star going supernova … spontaneously exploding … is predicted by physics in certain situations that seem to happen regularly enough that scientists agree on it. When that happens, multitudes of solar systems in the vicinity will be summarily obliterated including all life, … and from the perspective of whatever is living in that neighborhood … that’s a bad thing. But, physics is not a malevolent force.
I think he’s trying to saying nothing is bad. Just accepting it. Acceptance is fine. But … the holocaust was legit bad. Something’s we should not take sitting down. Sometimes we oppose. Sometimes we just voice or influence and sometimes we fight.
What a hypocrite? This guys is out there fighting the Germans and all of humanity to expand his empire. He’s just saying accept things. Shouldn’t you just live and let live Mr. Acceptance? You don’t accept the Germans. You fight them. You kill people. You don’t accept them. You have no nuance. There is zero discussion of when to accept and when not to. You do whatever the hell you want to Mr. Emperor. You kill Germans and take their lands. You make them slaves. Yet you preach acceptance and not telling a man unpleasant things? You’re full of it … a walking contradiction. Put down your sword Mr. take it however it comes? You never did. Living in “virtue” sir is living in accord with your professed deepest values. You do not. You are not virtuous. Deal with it. A virtue is not just a said to be good thing. It is something you do that you indeed thing is damn sacred. Acceptance? You don’t accept whole cultures being in your vicinity without conquering them.
I don’t want to be a stupid stoic. I don’t want to be composed at all costs. It isn’t a sin to show emotion. When my team scores a goal in the World Cup, I prefer to jump up and down and scream and give high fives or chest bumps with friends. You go ahead Mr. Golf Clap with your composure at all costs world view. That’s f@%&ing silly.
I’ll take Tiger Woods, hitting a massive slice on #18 of Pebble Beach because there’s that tree is in his way. He can’t just hits straight through the tree. So, he hits it out over the ocean and slices it back and his fairway wood outdistances most people’s teed up driver and curves back by his design for this particular shot and lands on the green and he has an eagle putt. It was ferociously athletic and strong and yet incredibly dexterous and skilled. He hammered it … “nuked” it in Johnny Miller’s words and grunted like a heavy squat, and ran out from behind the tree to see it curve with the spin he put on it, and he yells at it “COME ON!” … willing it to turn as it flies out over the ocean. No composure. Whatever Spock. It did curve back from its path out over the ocean and landed on the green and he pumped a fist and yelled and gave a high five to Bones. Yeah. I’ll take that Mr. Composed emperor killing off the Germans like a hypocrite with a gold clap when you win. You’re just … confused. Not a philosopher.
I’ll take this one. Maybe a broken clock is right twice a day. I don’t want to sing praise as if he walks on water if 2 in 50 sayings are actually useful. But, I’ll try to take what’s useful and leave the rest.6:20: If, while taking exercise, someone scratches us with his nails or butts us with his head as he breaks out of a hold, we don’t blame him or take offense or suspect him subsequently of wishing us ill. True, we exercise caution and try to avoid being hurt again, but in a kindly fashion, not because we regard him as malicious or suspect him of anything. That’s how we should behave in the rest of our lives as well. We should overlook much of what those whom we could call our wrestling partners do. After all, as I said, one may avoid trouble without being suspicious or hostile.
I hold grudges to excess. Need to hear this one.
Re: messages 19–20I don’t think the contradictions disappear if we call these passages exercises rather than arguments, but the private-notebook form explains why Marcus leaves them unresolved. He was not building a system for strangers. He was writing injunctions to a repeat offender: himself.
That makes the repetition more interesting to me, not automatically wiser. A maxim can be sincere while the conduct around it remains indefensible. The imperial record is not a footnote to the philosophy; it is one of the tests of it. If “acceptance” becomes an instruction for everyone beneath the ruler while the ruler keeps commanding armies, the asymmetry is impossible to ignore.
I would also separate composure from passivity. The useful part of Stoicism is not “nothing is bad.” It is the attempt to stop anger, fear, or vanity from deciding what one does next. That still leaves the hard moral question: what should be opposed, and at whose cost? Meditations rarely answers it. Your irritation points to the gap rather than to a failure to understand the book.
Pages: 254 | Hours: 5 | Rated: 4.28 | Ratings: 353k
Why? The sage advice of the stoic philosopher king.
The leftmost cover is a recent translation by Hays, said to be the easiest reading, and I’m thinking I’ll try that. Waterford has a more precise translation but it’s evidently a bit more cumbersome.
Publisher’s Summary
Nearly two thousand years after it was written, Meditations remains profoundly relevant for anyone seeking to lead a meaningful life.
Few ancient works have been as influential as the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, philosopher and emperor of Rome (A.D. 161–180). A series of spiritual exercises filled with wisdom, practical guidance, and profound understanding of human behavior, it remains one of the greatest works of spiritual and ethical reflection ever written. Marcus’s insights and advice—on everything from living in the world to coping with adversity and interacting with others—have made the Meditations required reading for statesmen and philosophers alike, while generations of ordinary readers have responded to the straightforward intimacy of his style. For anyone who struggles to reconcile the demands of leadership with a concern for personal integrity and spiritual well-being, the Meditations remains as relevant now as it was two thousand years ago.
In Gregory Hays’s new translation—the first in thirty-five years—Marcus’s thoughts speak with a new immediacy. In fresh and unencumbered English, Hays vividly conveys the spareness and compression of the original Greek text. Never before have Marcus’s insights been so directly and powerfully presented.
With an Introduction that outlines Marcus’s life and career, the essentials of Stoic doctrine, the style and construction of the Meditations, and the work’s ongoing influence, this edition makes it possible to fully rediscover the thoughts of one of the most enlightened and intelligent leaders of any era.