Against placing blessedness in power, external wisdom, or pleasure alone
The Machiavellians of our time place blessedness in dominion alone. But they err (1) who constitute it in power and dominion alone, or in conservation of oneself by resisting power long in that. For horse and lion are more powerful than man, who yet rules them by wisdom; and a strong man without wisdom is not conserved, and tyrants themselves are of all the most unhappy. Thus a stone would be more blessed than an eagle or a man.
(2) Nor does it consist in wisdom of external things, because that comes about in us not without prior passion; and the wise man, if powerless, is exposed to many miseries, nor is he preserved by his wisdom if he is not good; and though he be best to himself, yet if he considers something better in another, he does not think himself blessed but becomes wretched by envy.
(3) Nor in the sole full enjoyment of pleasures of love. For who enjoys while ignorant and does not taste the enjoyment, nor can conserve himself in it — who will be blessed? Better is he who knows how to abound and to suffer want than he who abounds without sense. (4) Love of self also falls short of blessedness when something better is seen elsewhere, or what is loved cannot be made eternal. Therefore all who think blessedness consists in power alone or wisdom alone or love alone or any other private good err.
Latin
Machiavellistae nostri temporis beatitudinem ponunt in solo dominatu. Sed errant 1. qui eam in sola potentia et dominio constituunt aut in conservatione sui per potentiam resistentem diu in illa. Nam potentior est equus et leo quam homo, qui tamen iis per sapientiam imperat, et vir fortis sine sapientia non conservatur, ipsique tyranni omnium sunt infelicissimi. Sic enim lapis beatior esset quam aquila aut homo. 2. Neque in sapientia rerum externarum consistit, quia illa fit in nobis non sine praevia passione, et sapiens, si sit impotens, multis est obnoxius miseriis, neque servatur sapientia sua, si bonus non sit, et, quamvis sibi ipsi sit optimus, tamen, si aliquid melius in alio considerat, se non beatum putat, sed invidia fit miser. 3. Neque in sola amoris plena fruitione voluptatum. Qui enim fruitur ignorans et fruitionem non sapit, neque in ea se potest conservare, qui erit beatus? Melior enim est qui scit abundare ac penuriam pati, quam qui abundat sine sensu. 4. Sui quoque amor deficit a beatitate, quando aliquid melius alibi videtur, aut quod amatur non potest aeternari. Itaque qui putant beatitudinem consistere in sola potentia aut sola sapientia aut solo amore aut quovis alio bono privo, omnes errant.