the six enneads-第44章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


auty；　it　is　the　expression　of　a　lack；　the　subject　is　conscious　of　insufficiency　and；　wishing　to　produce　beauty；　feels　that　the　way　is　to　beget　in　a　beautiful　form。　Where　the　procreative　desire　is　lawless　or　against　the　purposes　of　nature；　the　first　inspiration　has　been　natural；　but　they　have　diverged　from　the　way；　they　have　slipped　and　fallen；　and　they　grovel；　they　neither　understand　whither　Love　sought　to　lead　them　nor　have　they　any　instinct　to　production；　they　have　not　mastered　the　right　use　of　the　images　of　beauty；　they　do　not　know　what　the　Authentic　Beauty　is。　　　　　Those　that　love　beauty　of　person　without　carnal　desire　love　for　beauty's　sake；　those　that　have…　for　women；　of　course…　the　copulative　love；　have　the　further　purpose　of　self…perpetuation：　as　long　as　they　are　led　by　these　motives；　both　are　on　the　right　path；　though　the　first　have　taken　the　nobler　way。　But；　even　in　the　right；　there　is　the　difference　that　the　one　set；　worshipping　the　beauty　of　earth；　look　no　further；　while　the　others；　those　of　recollection；　venerate　also　the　beauty　of　the　other　world　while　they；　still；　have　no　contempt　for　this　in　which　they　recognize；　as　it　were；　a　last　outgrowth；　an　attenuation　of　the　higher。　These；　in　sum；　are　innocent　frequenters　of　beauty；　not　to　be　confused　with　the　class　to　whom　it　becomes　an　occasion　of　fall　into　the　ugly…　for　the　aspiration　towards　a　good　degenerates　into　an　evil　often。　　　　　So　much　for　love；　the　state。　　　　　Now　we　have　to　consider　Love；　the　God。　　　　　2。　The　existence　of　such　a　being　is　no　demand　of　the　ordinary　man；　merely；　it　is　supported　by　Theologians　and；　over　and　over　again；　by　Plato　to　whom　Eros　is　child　of　Aphrodite；　minister　of　beautiful　children；　inciter　of　human　souls　towards　the　supernal　beauty　or　quickener　of　an　already　existing　impulse　thither。　All　this　requires　philosophical　examination。　A　cardinal　passage　is　that　in　the　Symposium　where　we　are　told　Eros　was　not　a　child　of　Aphrodite　but　born　on　the　day　of　Aphrodite's　birth；　Penia；　Poverty；　being　the　mother；　and　Poros；　Possession；　the　father。　　　　　The　matter　seems　to　demand　some　discussion　of　Aphrodite；　since　in　any　case　Eros　is　described　as　being　either　her　son　or　in　some　association　with　her。　Who　then　is　Aphrodite；　and　in　what　sense　is　Love　either　her　child　or　born　with　her　or　in　some　way　both　her　child　and　her　birth…fellow？　　　　　To　us　Aphrodite　is　twofold；　there　is　the　heavenly　Aphrodite；　daughter　of　Ouranos　or　Heaven：　and　there　is　the　other　the　daughter　of　Zeus　and　Dione；　this　is　the　Aphrodite　who　presides　over　earthly　unions；　the　higher　was　not　born　of　a　mother　and　has　no　part　in　marriages　for　in　Heaven　there　is　no　marrying。　　　　　The　Heavenly　Aphrodite；　daughter　of　Kronos　who　is　no　other　than　the　Intellectual　Principle…　must　be　the　Soul　at　its　divinest：　unmingled　as　the　immediate　emanation　of　the　unmingled；　remaining　ever　Above；　as　neither　desirous　nor　capable　of　descending　to　this　sphere；　never　having　developed　the　downward　tendency；　a　divine　Hypostasis　essentially　aloof；　so　unreservedly　an　Authentic　Being　as　to　have　no　part　with　Matter…　and　therefore　mythically　〃the　unmothered〃　justly　called　not　Celestial　Spirit　but　God；　as　knowing　no　admixture；　gathered　cleanly　within　itself。　　　　　Any　Nature　springing　directly　from　the　Intellectual　Principle　must　be　itself　also　a　clean　thing：　it　will　derive　a　resistance　of　its　own　from　its　nearness　to　the　Highest；　for　all　its　tendency；　no　less　than　its　fixity；　centres　upon　its　author　whose　power　is　certainly　sufficient　to　maintain　it　Above。　　　　　Soul　then　could　never　fall　from　its　sphere；　it　is　closer　held　to　the　divine　Mind　than　the　very　sun　could　hold　the　light　it　gives　forth　to　radiate　about　it；　an　outpouring　from　itself　held　firmly　to　it；　still。　　　　　But　following　upon　Kronos…　or；　if　you　will；　upon　Heaven；　the　father　of　Kronos…　the　Soul　directs　its　Act　towards　him　and　holds　closely　to　him　and　in　that　love　brings　forth　the　Eros　through　whom　it　continues　to　look　towards　him。　This　Act　of　the　Soul　has　produced　an　Hypostasis；　a　Real…Being；　and　the　mother　and　this　Hypostasis…　her　offspring；　noble　Love　gaze　together　upon　Divine　Mind。　Love；　thus；　is　ever　intent　upon　that　other　loveliness；　and　exists　to　be　the　medium　between　desire　and　that　object　of　desire。　It　is　the　eye　of　the　desirer；　by　its　power　what　loves　is　enabled　to　see　the　loved　thing。　But　it　is　first；　before　it　becomes　the　vehicle　of　vision；　it　is　itself　filled　with　the　sight；　it　is　first；　therefore；　and　not　even　in　the　same　order…　for　desire　attains　to　vision　only　through　the　efficacy　of　Love；　while　Love；　in　its　own　Act；　harvests　the　spectacle　of　beauty　playing　immediately　above　it。　　　　　3。　That　Love　is　a　Hypostasis　＇a　〃Person〃＇　a　Real…Being　sprung　from　a　Real…Being…　lower　than　the　parent　but　authentically　existent…　is　beyond　doubt。　　　　　For　the　parent…Soul　was　a　Real…Being　sprung　directly　from　the　Act　of　the　Hypostasis　that　ranks　before　it：　it　had　life；　it　was　a　constituent　in　the　Real…Being　of　all　that　authentically　is…　in　the　Real…Being　which　looks；　rapt；　towards　the　very　Highest。　That　was　the　first　object　of　its　vision；　it　looked　towards　it　as　towards　its　good；　and　it　rejoiced　in　the　looking；　and　the　quality　of　what　it　saw　was　such　that　the　contemplation　could　not　be　void　of　effect；　in　virtue　of　that　rapture；　of　its　position　in　regard　to　its　object；　of　the　intensity　of　its　gaze；　the　Soul　conceived　and　brought　forth　an　offspring　worthy　of　itself　and　of　the　vision。　Thus；　there　is　a　strenuous　activity　of　contemplation　in　the　Soul；　there　is　an　emanation　towards　it　from　the　object　contemplated；　and　Eros　is　born；　the　Love　which　is　an　eye　filled　with　its　vision；　a　seeing　that　bears　its　image　with　it；　Eros　taking　its　name；　probably；　from　the　fact　that　its　essential　being　is　due　to　this　horasis；　this　seeing。　Of　course　Love；　as　an　emotion；　will　take　its　name　from　Love；　the　Person；　since　a　Real…Being　cannot　but　be　prior　to　what　lacks　this　reality。　The　mental　state　will　be　designated　as　Love；　like　the　Hypostasis；　though　it　is　no　more　than　a　particular　act　directed　towards　a　particular　object；　but　it　must　not　be　confused　with　the　Absolute　Love；　the　Divine　Being。　The　Eros　that　belongs　to　the　supernal　Soul　must　be　of　one　temper　with　it；　it　must　itself　look　aloft　as　being　of　the　household　of　that　Soul；　dependent　upon　that　Soul；　its　very　offspring；　and　therefore　caring　for　nothing　but　the　contemplation　of　the　Gods。　　　　　Once　that　Soul　which　is　the　primal　source　of　light　to　the　heavens　is　recognized　as　an　Hypostasis　standing　distinct　and　aloof　it　must　be　admitted　that　Love　too　is　distinct　and　aloof　though　not；　perhaps；　so　loftily　celestial　a　being　as　the　Soul。　Our　own　best　we　conceive　as　inside　ourselves　and　yet　something　apart；　so；　we　must　think　of　this　Love…　as　essentially　resident　where　the　unmingling　Soul　inhabits。　　　　　But　besides　this　purest　Soul；　there　must　be　also　a　Soul　of　the　All：　at　once　there　is　another　Love…　the　eye　with　which　this　second　Soul　looks　upwards…　like　the　supernal　Eros　engendered　by　force　of　desire。　This　Aphrodite；　the　secondary　Soul；　is　of　this　Universe…　not　Soul　unmingled　alone；　not　Soul；　the　Absolute；　giving　birth；　therefore；　to　the　Love　concerned　with　the　universal　life；　no；　this　is　the　Love　presiding　over　marriages；　but　it；　also；　has　its　touch　of　the　upward　desire；　and；　in　the　degree　of　that　striving；　it　stirs　and　leads　upwards　the　Souls　of　the　young　and　every　Soul　with　which　it　is　incorporated　in　so　far　as　there　is　a　natural　tendency　to　remembrance　of　the　divine。　For　every　Soul　is　striving　towards　The　Good；　even　the　mingling　Soul　and　that　of　particular　beings；　for　each　holds　directly　from　the　divine　Soul；　and　is　its　offspring。　　　　　4。　Does　each　individual　Soul；　then；　contain　within　itself　such　a　Love　in　essence　and　substantial　reality？　　　　　Since　not　only　the　pure　All…Soul　but　also　that　of　the　Universe　contain　such　a　Love；　it　would　be　difficult　to　explain　why　our　personal　Soul　should　not。　It　must　be　so；　even；　with　all　that　has　life。　　　　　This　indwelling　love　is　no　other　than　the　Spirit　which；　as　we　are　told；　walks　with　every　being；　the　affection　dominant　in　each　several　nature。　It　implants　the　characteristic　desire；　the　particular　Soul；　strained　towards　its　own　natural　objects；　brings　forth　its　own　Eros；　the　guiding　spirit　realizing　its　worth　and　the　quality　of　its　Being。　　　　　As　the　All…Soul　contains　the　Universal　Love；　so　must　the　single　Soul　be　allowed　its　own　single　Love：　and　as　closely　as　the　single　Soul　holds　to　the　All…Soul；　never　cut　off　but　embraced　within　it；　the　two　together　constituting　one　principle　of　life；　so　the　single　separate　Love　holds　to　the　All…Love。　Similarly；　the　individual　love　keeps　with　the　individual　Soul　as　that　other；　the　great　Love；　goes　with　the　All…Soul；　and　the　Love　within　the　All　permeates　it　throughout　so　that　the　one　Love　becomes　many；　showing　itself　where　it　chooses　at　any　moment　of　the　Universe；　taking　definite　shape　in　these　its　partial　phases　and　revealing　itself　at　its　will。　　　　　In　the　same　way　we　must　conceive　many　Aphrodites　in　the　All；　Spirits　entering　it　together　with　Love；　all　emanating　from　an　Aphrodite　of　the　All；　a　train　of　particular　Aphrodites　dependent　upon　the　first；　and　each　with　the　particular　Love　in　attendance：　this　multiplicity　cannot　be　denied；　if　Soul　be　the　mother　of　Love；　and　Aphrodite　mean　Soul；　and　Love　be　an　act　of　a　Soul　seeking　good。　　　　　This　Love；　then；　leader　of　particular　Souls　to　The　Good；　is　twofold：　the　Love　in　the　loftier　Soul　would　be　a　god　ever　linking　the　Soul　to　the　divine；　the　Love　in　the　mingling　Soul　will　be　a　celestial　spirit。　　　　　5。　But　what　is　the　Nature　of　this　Spirit…　of　the　Supernals　in　general？　　　　　The　Spirit…Kind　is　treated　in　the　Symposium　where；　with　much　about　the　others；　we　learn　of　Eros…　Love…　born　to　Penia…　Poverty…　and　Poros…　Possession…　who　is　son　of　Metis…　Resource…　at　Aphrodite's　birth　feast。　　　　　But　to　take　Plato　as　meaning；　by　Eros；　this　Universe…　and　not　simply　the　Love　native　within　it…　involves　much　that　is　self…contradictory。　　　　　For　one　thing；　the　universe　is　described　as　a　blissful　god　and　as　self…sufficing；　while　this　〃Love〃　is　confessedly　neither　divine　nor　self…sufficing　but　in　ceaseless　need。　　　　　Again；　this　Kosmos　is　a　compound　of　body　and　soul；　but　Aphrodite　to　Plato　is　the　Soul　itself；　therefore　Aphrodite　would　necessarily…　he　a　constituent　part　of　Eros；　dominant　member！　A　man　is　the　man's　Soul；　if　the　world　is；　similarly；　the　world's　Soul；　then　Aphrodite；　the　Soul；　is　identical　with　Love；　the　Kosmos！　And　why　should　this　one　spirit；　Love；　be　the　Universe　to　the　exclusion　of　all　the　others；　which　certainly　are　sprung　from　the　same　Essential…Being？　Our　only　escape　would　be　to　make　the　Kosmos　a　complex　of　Supernals。　　　　　Love；　again；　is　called　the　Dispenser　of　beautiful　children：　does　this　apply　to　the　Universe？　Love　is　represented　as　homeless；　bedless　and　barefooted：　would　not　that　be　a　shabby　description　of　the　Kosmos　and　quite　out　of　the　truth？　　　　　6。　What　then；　in　sum；　is　to　be　thought　of　Love　and　of　his　〃birth〃　as　we　are　told　of　it？　　　　　Clearly　we　have　to　establish　the　significance；　here；　of　Poverty　and　Possession；　and　show　in　what　way　the　parentage　is　appropriate：　we　have　also　to　bring　these　two　into　line　with　the　other　Supernals　since　one　spirit　nature；　one　spirit　essence；　must　characterize　all　unless　they　are　to　have　merely　a　name　in　common。　　　　　We　mus