the six enneads-第53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！


l；　a　perdurable　Existent…　one　which　never　turns　to　any　Kind　outside　itself；　that　possesses　life　complete　once　for　all；　that　has　never　received　any　accession；　that　is　now　receiving　none　and　will　never　receive　any…　we　have；　with　the　statement　of　a　perduring　Being；　the　statement　also　of　perdurance　and　of　Eternity：　perdurance　is　the　corresponding　state　arising　from　the　＇divine＇　substratum　and　inherent　in　it；　Eternity　＇the　Principle　as　distinguished　from　the　property　of　everlastingness＇　is　that　substratum　carrying　that　state　in　manifestation。　　　　　Eternity；　thus；　is　of　the　order　of　the　supremely　great；　it　proves　on　investigation　to　be　identical　with　God：　it　may　fitly　be　described　as　God　made　manifest；　as　God　declaring　what　He　is；　as　existence　without　jolt　or　change；　and　therefore　as　also　the　firmly　living。　　　　　And　it　should　be　no　shock　that　we　find　plurality　in　it；　each　of　the　Beings　of　the　Supreme　is　multiple　by　virtue　of　unlimited　force；　for　to　be　limitless　implies　failing　at　no　point；　and　Eternity　is　pre…eminently　the　limitless　since　（having　no　past　or　future）　it　spends　nothing　of　its　own　substance。　　　　　Thus　a　close　enough　definition　of　Eternity　would　be　that　it　is　a　life　limitless　in　the　full　sense　of　being　all　the　life　there　is　and　a　life　which；　knowing　nothing　of　past　or　future　to　shatter　its　completeness；　possesses　itself　intact　for　ever。　To　the　notion　of　a　Life　（a　Living…Principle）　all…comprehensive　add　that　it　never　spends　itself；　and　we　have　the　statement　of　a　Life　instantaneously　infinite。　　　　　6。　Now　the　Principle　this　stated；　all　good　and　beauty；　and　everlasting；　is　centred　in　The　One；　sprung　from　It；　and　pointed　towards　It；　never　straying　from　It；　but　ever　holding　about　It　and　in　It　and　living　by　Its　law；　and　it　is　in　this　reference；　as　I　judge；　that　Plato…　finely；　and　by　no　means　inadvertently　but　with　profound　intention…　wrote　those　words　of　his；　〃Eternity　stable　in　Unity〃；　he　wishes　to　convey　that　Eternity　is　not　merely　something　circling　on　its　traces　into　a　final　unity　but　has　＇instantaneous＇　Being　about　The　One　as　the　unchanging　Life　of　the　Authentic　Existent。　This　is　certainly　what　we　have　been　seeking：　this　Principle；　at　rest　within　rest　with　the　One；　is　Eternity；　possessing　this　stable　quality；　being　itself　at　once　the　absolute　self…identical　and　none　the　less　the　active　manifestation　of　an　unchanging　Life　set　towards　the　Divine　and　dwelling　within　It；　untrue；　therefore；　neither　on　the　side　of　Being　nor　on　the　side　of　Life…　this　will　be　Eternity　＇the　Real…Being　we　have　sought＇。　　　　　Truly　to　be　comports　never　lacking　existence　and　never　knowing　variety　in　the　mode　of　existence：　Being　is；　therefore；　self…identical　throughout；　and；　therefore；　again　is　one　undistinguishable　thing。　Being　can　have　no　this　and　that；　it　cannot　be　treated　in　terms　of　intervals；　unfoldings；　progression；　extension；　there　is　no　grasping　any　first　or　last　in　it。　　　　　If；　then；　there　is　no　first　or　last　in　this　Principle；　if　existence　is　its　most　authentic　possession　and　its　very　self；　and　this　in　the　sense　that　its　existence　is　Essence　or　Life…　then；　once　again；　we　meet　here　what　we　have　been　discussing；　Eternity。　　　　　Observe　that　such　words　as　〃always；〃　〃never；〃　〃sometimes〃　must　be　taken　as　mere　conveniences　of　exposition：　thus　〃always…　used　in　the　sense　not　of　time　but　of　incorruptibility　and　endlessly　complete　scope…　might　set　up　the　false　notion　of　stage　and　interval。　We　might　perhaps　prefer　to　speak　of　〃Being；〃　without　any　attribute；　but　since　this　term　is　applicable　to　Essence　and　some　writers　have　used　the　word　〃Essence〃　for　things　of　process；　we　cannot　convey　our　meaning　to　them　without　introducing　some　word　carrying　the　notion　of　perdurance。　　　　　There　is；　of　course；　no　difference　between　Being　and　Everlasting　Being；　just　as　there　is　none　between　a　philosopher　and　a　true　philosopher：　the　attribute　〃true〃　came　into　use　because　there　arose　what　masqueraded　as　philosophy；　and　for　similar　reasons　〃everlasting〃　was　adjoined　to　〃Being；〃　and　〃Being〃　to　〃everlasting；〃　and　we　have　＇the　tautology　of＇　〃Everlasting　Being。〃　We　must　take　this　〃Everlasting〃　as　expressing　no　more　than　Authentic　Being：　it　is　merely　a　partial　expression　of　a　potency　which　ignores　all　interval　or　term　and　can　look　forward　to　nothing　by　way　of　addition　to　the　All　which　it　possesses。　The　Principle　of　which　this　is　the　statement　will　be　the　All…Existent；　and；　as　being　all；　can　have　no　failing　or　deficiency；　cannot　be　at　some　one　point　complete　and　at　some　other　lacking。　　　　　Things　and　Beings　in　the　Time　order…　even　when　to　all　appearance　complete；　as　a　body　is　when　fit　to　harbour　a　soul…　are　still　bound　to　sequence；　they　are　deficient　to　the　extent　of　that　thing；　Time；　which　they　need：　let　them　have　it；　present　to　them　and　running　side　by　side　with　them；　and　they　are　by　that　very　fact　incomplete；　completeness　is　attributed　to　them　only　by　an　accident　of　language。　　　　　But　the　conception　of　Eternity　demands　something　which　is　in　its　nature　complete　without　sequence；　it　is　not　satisfied　by　something　measured　out　to　any　remoter　time　or　even　by　something　limitless；　but；　in　its　limitless　reach；　still　having　the　progression　of　futurity：　it　requires　something　immediately　possessed　of　the　due　fullness　of　Being；　something　whose　Being　does　not　depend　upon　any　quantity　＇such　as　instalments　of　time＇　but　subsists　before　all　quantity。　　　　　Itself　having　no　quantity；　it　can　have　no　contact　with　anything　quantitative　since　its　Life　cannot　be　made　a　thing　of　fragments；　in　contradiction　to　the　partlessness　which　is　its　character；　it　must　be　without　parts　in　the　Life　as　in　the　essence。　　　　　The　phrase　〃He　was　good〃　＇used　by　Plato　of　the　Demiurge＇　refers　to　the　Idea　of　the　All；　and　its　very　indefiniteness　signifies　the　utter　absense　of　relation　to　Time：　so　that　even　this　Universe　has　had　no　temporal　beginning；　and　if　we　speak　of　something　〃before〃　it；　that　is　only　in　the　sense　of　the　Cause　from　which　it　takes　its　Eternal　Existence。　Plato　used　the　word　merely　for　the　convenience　of　exposition；　and　immediately　corrects　it　as　inappropriate　to　the　order　vested　with　the　Eternity　he　conceives　and　affirms。　　　　　7。　Now　comes　the　question　whether；　in　all　this　discussion；　we　are　not　merely　helping　to　make　out　a　case　for　some　other　order　of　Beings　and　talking　of　matters　alien　to　ourselves。　　　　　But　how　could　that　be？　What　understanding　can　there　be　failing　some　point　of　contact？　And　what　contact　could　there　be　with　the　utterly　alien？　　　　　We　must　then　have；　ourselves；　some　part　or　share　in　Eternity。　　　　　Still；　how　is　this　possible　to　us　who　exist　in　Time？　　　　　The　whole　question　turns　on　the　distinction　between　being　in　Time　and　being　in　Eternity；　and　this　will　be　best　realized　by　probing　to　the　Nature　of　Time。　We　must；　therefore；　descend　from　Eternity　to　the　investigation　of　Time；　to　the　realm　of　Time：　till　now　we　have　been　taking　the　upward　way；　we　must　now　take　the　downward…　not　to　the　lowest　levels　but　within　the　degree　in　which　Time　itself　is　a　descent　from　Eternity。　　　　　If　the　venerable　sages　of　former　days　had　not　treated　of　Time；　our　method　would　be　to　begin　by　linking　to　＇the　idea　of＇　Eternity　＇the　idea　of＇　its　Next　＇its　inevitable　downward　or　outgoing　subsequent　in　the　same　order＇；　then　setting　forth　the　probable　nature　of　such　a　Next　and　proceeding　to　show　how　the　conception　thus　formed　tallies　with　our　own　doctrine。　　　　　But；　as　things　are；　our　best　beginning　is　to　range　over　the　most　noteworthy　of　the　ancient　opinions　and　see　whether　any　of　them　accord　with　ours。　　　　　Existing　explanations　of　Time　seem　to　fall　into　three　classes：　　　　　Time　is　variously　identified　with　what　we　know　as　Movement；　with　a　moved　object；　and　with　some　phenomenon　of　Movement：　obviously　it　cannot　be　Rest　or　a　resting　object　or　any　phenomenon　of　rest；　since；　in　its　characteristic　idea；　it　is　concerned　with　change。　　　　　Of　those　that　explain　it　as　Movement；　some　identify　it　with　Absolute　Movement　＇or　with　the　total　of　Movement＇；　others　with　that　of　the　All。　Those　that　make　it　a　moved　object　would　identify　it　with　the　orb　of　the　All。　Those　that　conceive　it　as　some　phenomenon；　or　some　period；　of　Movement　treat　it；　severally；　either　as　a　standard　of　measure　or　as　something　inevitably　accompanying　Movement；　abstract　or　definite。　　　　　8。　Movement　Time　cannot　be…　whether　a　definite　act　of　moving　is　meant　or　a　united　total　made　up　of　all　such　acts…　since　movement；　in　either　sense；　takes　place　in　Time。　And；　of　course；　if　there　is　any　movement　not　in　Time；　the　identification　with　Time　becomes　all　the　less　tenable。　　　　　In　a　word；　Movement　must　be　distinct　from　the　medium　in　which　it　takes　place。　　　　　And；　with　all　that　has　been　said　or　is　still　said；　one　consideration　is　decisive：　Movement　can　come　to　rest；　can　be　intermittent；　Time　is　continuous。　　　　　We　will　be　told　that　the　Movement　of　the　All　is　continuous　＇and　so　may　be　identical　with　Time＇。　　　　　But；　if　the　reference　is　to　the　Circuit　of　the　heavenly　system　＇it　is　not　strictly　continuous；　or　equable；　since＇　the　time　taken　in　the　return　path　is　not　that　of　the　outgoing　movement；　the　one　is　twice　as　long　as　the　other：　this　Movement　of　the　All　proceeds；　therefore；　by　two　different　degrees；　the　rate　of　the　entire　journey　is　not　that　of　the　first　half。　　　　　Further；　the　fact　that　we　hear　of　the　Movement　of　the　outermost　sphere　being　the　swiftest　confirms　our　theory。　Obviously；　it　is　the　swiftest　of　movements　by　taking　the　lesser　time　to　traverse　the　greater　space　the　very　greatest…　all　other　moving　things　are　slower　by　taking　a　longer　time　to　traverse　a　mere　segment　of　the　same　extension：　in　other　words；　Time　is　not　this　movement。　　　　　And；　if　Time　is　not　even　the　movement　of　the　Kosmic　Sphere　much　less　is　it　the　sphere　itself　though　that　has　been　identified　with　Time　on　the　ground　of　its　being　in　motion。　　　　　Is　it；　then；　some　phenomenon　or　connection　of　Movement？　　　　　Let　us；　tentatively；　suppose　it　to　be　extent；　or　duration；　of　Movement。　　　　　Now；　to　begin　with；　Movement；　even　continuous；　has　no　unchanging　extent　＇as　Time　the　equable　has＇；　since；　even　in　space；　it　may　be　faster　or　slower；　there　must；　therefore；　be　some　unit　of　standard　outside　it；　by　which　these　differences　are　measurable；　and　this　outside　standard　would　more　properly　be　called　Time。　And　failing　such　a　measure；　which　extent　would　be　Time；　that　of　the　fast　or　of　the　slow…　or　rather　which　of　them　all；　since　these　speed…differences　are　limitless？　　　　　Is　it　the　extent　of　the　subordinate　Movement　＇=　movement　of　things　of　earth＇？　　　　　Again；　this　gives　us　no　unit　since　the　movement　is　infinitely　variable；　we　would　have；　thus；　not　Time　but　Times。　　　　　The　extent　of　the　Movement　of　the　All；　then？　　　　　The　Celestial　Circuit　may；　no　doubt；　be　thought　of　in　terms　of　quantity。　It　answers　to　measure…　in　two　ways。　First　there　is　space；　the　movement　is　commensurate　with　the　area　it　passes　through；　and　this　area　is　its　extent。　But　this　gives　us；　still；　space　only；　not　Time。　Secondly；　the　circuit；　considered　apart　from　distance　traversed；　has　the　extent　of　its　continuity；　of　its　tendency　not　to　stop　but　to　proceed　indefinitely：　but　this　is　merely　amplitude　of　Movement；　search　it；　tell　its　vastness；　and；　still；　Time　has　no　more　appeared；　no　more　enters　into　the　matter；　than　when　one　certifies　a　high　pitch　of　heat；　all　we　have　discovered　is　Motion　in　ceaseless　succes