XVI. Wealth Is a Servant, Not a Master

The practical position. Seneca is not arguing for poverty; he is arguing for the right relationship with wealth.

Here is the real difference between the wise man and the fool when it comes to wealth: riches are servants in the house of the wise man and masters in the house of the fool.

The wise man possesses wealth but does not depend on it. He owns property, but property does not own him. He can be placed in a rich man's house surrounded by gold plate and silver and feel not the slightest pride in it, because he knows that those things are in his house but not part of him. He can be put on a bridge among beggars and feel no shame, because his real possessions have not been touched.

Consider what Socrates would say if you handed him everything. Make me conqueror of all nations. Let the great king of Persia receive laws from me. Let them carry me in triumph across the known world and call me a god. At that moment, he says, I would still know I was a man.

Now reverse it entirely. Strip the triumph away. Put me in chains. Make me follow behind a conqueror's chariot as a captive, displayed to the crowd as proof of someone else's victory. I will follow that chariot with no more humility than I showed when I stood in my own. The circumstance has changed completely. I have not changed at all.

The position changes. The man does not. That is the whole argument.

The wise man thinks more about poverty when surrounded by riches than the fool does when actually poor. He can see the siege machines being assembled at a distance while the fool sits idly inside the walls, unaware. The fool stares at his wealth and sees only safety. The wise man stares at his wealth and sees something temporary that is already in the process of leaving.

This is not gloomy. It is liberating. The man who has already made peace with the loss of a thing enjoys it more freely while he has it, because he is not spending his energy defending it.