‘Contrary to human nature? What human nature? A man is a human being besides being an animal, and while it is true that such a relation to a woman is not consonant with man’s animal nature, it is consonant with his rational nature. When man uses his reason to serve his animal nature he becomes worse than an animal, and descends to violence and incest and to things no animal would do. But when he uses his reason to restrain his animal nature, then that animal nature serves his reason, and only then does he attain a happiness that satisfies him.’
V
‘BUT tell me about yourself,’ said Julius. ‘I see you with that lovely girl, it seems that you live near her and help her. Is it possible that you do not wish to become her husband?’
‘I do not think about it,’ said Pamphilius. ‘She is the daughter of a Christian widow. I serve them as others do. You ask whether I love her so that I wish to unite my life with hers? That question is hard for me to answer, but I will do so frankly. That thought has occurred to me but I dare not as yet entertain it, for there is another young man who loves her. That young man is a Christian and loves us both, and so I cannot do anything that would cause him pain. I live without thinking of it. I seek only one thing: to fulfil the law of love of man. That is the one thing needful. I shall marry when I see that it is necessary.’
‘But it cannot be a matter of indifference to her mother to get a good industrious son-in-law. She will want you and not someone else.’
‘No, it is a matter of indifference to her, because she knows that we are all ready to serve her, as we would anyone else, and that I should serve her neither more nor less whether I became her son-in-law or not. If it comes about that I marry her daughter, I shall accept it gladly, as I should do her marriage with someone else.’
‘That is impossible!’ exclaimed Julius. ‘What is so terrible about you is that you deceive yourselves and so deceive others. What that stranger told me about you was correct. When I listen to you I involuntarily yield to the beauty of the life you describe, but when I reflect I see that it is all a deception leading to savagery, to a coarseness of life resembling that of the animals.’
‘In what do you see this savagery?’
‘In this, that supporting yourselves by labour, you can have neither leisure nor opportunity to occupy yourselves with the sciences and arts. Here you are in ragged garments, with coarsened hands and feet; and your companion, who could be a goddess of beauty, resembles a slave. You have neither songs to Apollo, nor temples, nor poetry, nor games – none of the things the gods have given for the adornment of man’s life. To work, to work like slaves or like oxen, merely to feed coarsely – is not this a voluntary and impious renunciation of man’s will and of human nature?’
‘Again “human nature”!’ said Pamphilius. ‘But in what does this nature consist? In tormenting slaves to work beyond their strength, in killing one’s brother-men and enslaving them, and making women into instruments of pleasure? All this is needed for that beauty of life which you consider natural for human beings. Is that man’s nature? Or is it to live in love and concord with all men, feeling oneself a member of one universal brotherhood?
