What is it in itself? What is its nature?

I came across a reference to movie dialogue from a movie I saw many years ago but which I recall.  The movie was Silence of the Lambs and the dialogue is between Hannibal Lector, the cannibal, and Clarice Starling, an FBI agent.  Hannibal Lector:

First principles, Clarice: simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius, “Of each particular thing, ask: What is it in itself? What is its nature?” What does he do, this man you seek?

This is a reference to the Greek idea of Telos, what is the reason and nature of the thing?

Telos (/ˈtɛ.lɒs/; Greek: τέλος, translit. télos, lit. "end, 'purpose', or 'goal'") is a term used by philosopher Aristotle to refer to the full potential or inherent purpose or objective of a person or thing, similar to the notion of an 'end goal' or 'raison d'être'. Moreover, it can be understood as the "supreme end of man's endeavour".

Telos is the root of the modern term teleology, the study of purposiveness or of objects with a view to their aims, purposes, or intentions. Teleology is central in Aristotle's work on plant and animal biology, and human ethics, through his theory of the four causes. Aristotle's notion that everything has a telos also gave rise to epistemology. It is also central to some philosophical theories of history, such as those involving messianic redemption, such as Christian salvation history those of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and Karl Marx.

The dialogue between Lector and Starling:

Hannibal Lecter: I’ve read the case files. Have you? Everything you need to find him is right there in those pages.

Clarice Starling: Then tell me how.

Hannibal Lecter: First principles, Clarice: simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius, “Of each particular thing, ask: What is it in itself? What is its nature?” What does he do, this man you seek?

Clarice Starling: He kills women.

Hannibal Lecter: No, that is incidental. What is the first and principal thing he does, what needs does he serve by killing?

Clarice Starling: Anger, social acceptance, and, uh, sexual frustration …

Hannibal Lecter: No, he covets. That’s his nature. And how do we begin to covet, Clarice? Do we seek out things to covet? Make an effort to answer, now.

Clarice Starling: No. We just …

Hannibal Lecter: No. We begin by coveting what we see every day.

I love that "Make an effort to answer, now."  Starling is feeling like Socrates' many interlocutors.  Every answer they provide is insufficient.  

The dialogue highlights one of the challenges thinking about Telos.  How do we get to the root Telos?  What are the guidelines which help us sort the frivolous and second-order definitions from the true Telos?

But Lector is referencing Aurelius, not Aristotle.  Marcus Aurelius was both a Roman Emperor (161-180AD) and also a Stoic philosopher.  His Meditations is among the best explications of the Stoic ideas extant.  Whenever the issue is raised of the relevance of philosophy, Aurelius is always a handy counter-point.  

Specifically, Lector is paraphrasing Book II, Verse 9 of the Meditations.  Here are a handful of translations:

Remember always what the nature of the Universe is, what your own nature is, and how these are related—the one to the other. Remember what part your qualities are of the qualities of the whole, and that no man can prevent you from speaking and acting always in accordance with that nature of which you are a part.

Translated by George Chrystal

Always remember these things: what the nature of the Whole is, what my own nature is, the relation of this nature to that, what kind of part it is of what kind of Whole; and that there is no one who can prevent you keeping all that you say and do in accordance with that nature, of which you are a part.

Translated by Martin Hammond

Remembering always what the World-Nature is, and what my own nature is, and how the one stands in respect to the other – so small a fraction of so vast a Whole – bear in mind that no man can hinder you from conforming each word and deed to that Nature of which you are a part.

Translated by Maxwell Staniforth

Don’t ever forget these things:

The nature of the world.

My nature.

How I relate to the world.

What proportion of it I make up.

That you are part of nature, and no one can prevent you from speaking and acting in harmony with it, always.

Translated by Gregory Hays

Be mindful at all times of the following: the nature of the whole universe, the nature of the part that is me, the relation of the one to the other, the one so vast, the other so small.  No one can ever prevent me from saying and doing what is in complete conformity with the whole of which I am so small yet integral a part.

Translated by C. Scott Hicks and David V. Hicks

This thou must always bear in mind, what is the nature of the whole, and what is my nature, and how this is related to that, and what kind of a part it is of what kind of a whole; and that there is no one who hinders thee from always doing and saying the things which are according to the nature of which thou art a part.

Translated by George Long

Always keep the following points in mind: what the nature of the whole is, and what my own nature is; and how my nature is related to that of the whole, and what kind of a part it is of what kind of a whole; and that no one can prevent you, in all that you do and say, from always being in accord with that nature of which you are a part.

Translated by Robin Hard

Always remember the following: what the nature of the Whole is; what my own nature; the relation of this nature to that; what kind of part it is of what kind of Whole; and that no man can hinder your saying and doing at all times what is in accordance with that Nature whereof you are a part.

Translated by A.S.L. Farquharson

Consider how quickly all things are dissolved and resolved: the bodies and substances themselves, into the matter and substance of the world: and their memories into the general age and time of the world. Consider the nature of all worldly sensible things; of those especially, which either ensnare by pleasure, or for their irksomeness are dreadful, or for their outward lustre and show are in great esteem and request, how vile and contemptible, how base and corruptible, how destitute of all true life and being they are.

Translated by Meric Casaubon

"What is it in itself? What is its nature?" is more summarized but captures the essence.