the six enneads-第97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！


wards　the　unmanifold　and　says；　〃I　am　that　being；〃　it　misses　both　itself　and　the　being　＇since　the　simplex　cannot　be　thus　divided　into　knower　and　known＇：　if　it　is　＇to　utter＇　truth　it　cannot　indicate　by　〃being〃　something　like　a　stone；　in　the　one　phrase　multiplicity　is　asserted；　for　the　being　thus　affirmed…　＇even＇　the　veritable；　as　distinguished　from　such　a　mere　container　of　some　trace　of　being　as　ought　not　to　be　called　a　being　since　it　stands　merely　as　image　to　archetype…　even　this　must　possess　multiplicity。　　　　　But　will　not　each　item　in　that　multiplicity　be　an　object　of　intellection　to　us？　　　　　Taken　bare　and　single；　no：　but　Being　itself　is　manifold　within　itself；　and　whatever　else　you　may　name　has　Being。　　　　　This　accepted；　it　follows　that　anything　that　is　to　be　thought　of　as　the　most　utterly　simplex　of　all　cannot　have　self…intellection；　to　have　that　would　mean　being　multiple。　The　Transcendent；　thus；　neither　knows　itself　nor　is　known　in　itself。　　　　　14。　How；　then；　do　we　ourselves　come　to　be　speaking　of　it？　　　　　No　doubt　we　deal　with　it；　but　we　do　not　state　it；　we　have　neither　knowledge　nor　intellection　of　it。　　　　　But　in　what　sense　do　we　even　deal　with　it　when　we　have　no　hold　upon　it？　　　　　We　do　not；　it　is　true；　grasp　it　by　knowledge；　but　that　does　not　mean　that　we　are　utterly　void　of　it；　we　hold　it　not　so　as　to　state　it；　but　so　as　to　be　able　to　speak　about　it。　And　we　can　and　do　state　what　it　is　not；　while　we　are　silent　as　to　what　it　is：　we　are；　in　fact；　speaking　of　it　in　the　light　of　its　sequels；　unable　to　state　it；　we　may　still　possess　it。　　　　　Those　divinely　possessed　and　inspired　have　at　least　the　knowledge　that　they　hold　some　greater　thing　within　them　though　they　cannot　tell　what　it　is；　from　the　movements　that　stir　them　and　the　utterances　that　come　from　them　they　perceive　the　power；　not　themselves；　that　moves　them：　in　the　same　way；　it　must　be；　we　stand　towards　the　Supreme　when　we　hold　the　Intellectual…Principle　pure；　we　know　the　divine　Mind　within；　that　which　gives　Being　and　all　else　of　that　order：　but　we　know；　too；　that　other；　know　that　it　is　none　of　these；　but　a　nobler　principle　than　any…thing　we　know　as　Being；　fuller　and　greater；　above　reason；　mind　and　feeling；　conferring　these　powers；　not　to　be　confounded　with　them。　　　　　15。　Conferring…　but　how？　As　itself　possessing　them　or　not？　How　can　it　convey　what　it　does　not　possess；　and　yet　if　it　does　possess　how　is　it　simplex？　And　if；　again；　it　does　not；　how　is　it　the　source　of　the　manifold？　　　　　A　single；　unmanifold　emanation　we　may　very　well　allow…　how　even　that　can　come　from　a　pure　unity　may　be　a　problem；　but　we　may　always　explain　it　on　the　analogy　of　the　irradiation　from　a　luminary…　but　a　multitudinous　production　raises　question。　　　　　The　explanation　is　that　what　comes　from　the　Supreme　cannot　be　identical　with　it　and　assuredly　cannot　be　better　than　it…　what　could　be　better　than　The　One　or　the　utterly　transcendent？　The　emanation；　then；　must　be　less　good；　that　is　to　say；　less　self…sufficing：　now　what　must　that　be　which　is　less　self…sufficing　than　The　One？　Obviously　the　Not…One；　that　is　to　say；　multiplicity；　but　a　multiplicity　striving　towards　unity；　that　is　to　say；　a　One…that…is…many。　　　　　All　that　is　not　One　is　conserved　by　virtue　of　the　One；　and　from　the　One　derives　its　characteristic　nature：　if　it　had　not　attained　such　unity　as　is　consistent　with　being　made　up　of　multiplicity　we　could　not　affirm　its　existence：　if　we　are　able　to　affirm　the　nature　of　single　things；　this　is　in　virtue　of　the　unity；　the　identity　even；　which　each　of　them　possesses。　But　the　all…transcendent；　utterly　void　of　multiplicity；　has　no　mere　unity　of　participation　but　is　unity's　self；　independent　of　all　else；　as　being　that　from　which；　by　whatever　means；　all　the　rest　take　their　degree　of　unity　in　their　standing；　near　or　far；　towards　it。　　　　　In　virtue　of　the　unity　manifested　in　its　variety　it　exhibits；　side　by　side；　both　an　all…embracing　identity　and　the　existence　of　the　secondary：　all　the　variety　lies　in　the　midst　of　a　sameness；　and　identity　cannot　be　separated　from　diversity　since　all　stands　as　one；　each　item　in　that　content；　by　the　fact　of　participating　in　life；　is　a　One…many：　for　the　item　could　not　make　itself　manifest　as　a　One…and…all。　　　　　Only　the　Transcendent　can　be　that；　it　is　the　great　beginning；　and　the　beginning　must　be　a　really　existent　One；　wholly　and　truly　One；　while　its　sequent；　poured　down　in　some　way　from　the　One；　is　all；　a　total　which　has　participation　in　unity　and　whose　every　member　is　similarly　all　and　one。　　　　　What　then　is　the　All？　　　　　The　total　of　which　the　Transcendent　is　the　Source。　　　　　But　in　what　way　is　it　that　source？　In　the　sense；　perhaps；　of　sustaining　things　as　bestower　of　the　unity　of　each　single　item？　　　　　That　too；　but　also　as　having　established　them　in　being。　　　　　But　how？　As　having；　perhaps；　contained　them　previously？　　　　　We　have　indicated　that；　thus；　the　First　would　be　a　manifold。　　　　　May　we　think；　perhaps；　that　the　First　contained　the　universe　as　an　indistinct　total　whose　items　are　elaborated　to　distinct　existence　within　the　Second　by　the　Reason…Principle　there？　That　Second　is　certainly　an　Activity；　the　Transcendent　would　contain　only　the　potentiality　of　the　universe　to　come。　　　　　But　the　nature　of　this　contained　potentiality　would　have　to　be　explained：　it　cannot　be　that　of　Matter；　a　receptivity；　for　thus　the　Source　becomes　passive…　the　very　negation　of　production。　　　　　How　then　does　it　produce　what　it　does　not　contain？　Certainly　not　at　haphazard　and　certainly　not　by　selection。　How　then？　　　　　We　have　observed　that　anything　that　may　spring　from　the　One　must　be　different　from　it。　Differing；　it　is　not　One；　since　then　it　would　be　the　Source。　If　unity　has　given　place　to　duality；　from　that　moment　there　is　multiplicity；　for　here　is　variety　side　by　side　with　identity；　and　this　imports　quality　and　all　the　rest。　　　　　We　may　take　it　as　proved　that　the　emanation　of　the　Transcendent　must　be　a　Not…One　something　other　than　pure　unity；　but　that　it　is　a　multiplicity；　and　especially　that　it　is　such　a　multiplicity　as　is　exhibited　in　the　sequent　universe；　this　is　a　statement　worthy　of　deliberation：　some　further　enquiry　must　be　made；　also；　as　to　the　necessity　of　any　sequel　to　the　First。　　　　　16。　We　have；　of　course；　already　seen　that　a　secondary　must　follow　upon　the　First；　and　that　this　is　a　power　immeasurably　fruitful；　and　we　indicated　that　this　truth　is　confirmed　by　the　entire　order　of　things　since　there　is　nothing；　not　even　in　the　lowest　ranks；　void　of　the　power　of　generating。　We　have　now　to　add　that；　since　things　engendered　tend　downwards　and　not　upwards　and；　especially；　move　towards　multiplicity；　the　first　principle　of　all　must　be　less　a　manifold　than　any。　　　　　That　which　engenders　the　world　of　sense　cannot　itself　be　a　sense…world；　it　must　be　the　Intellect　and　the　Intellectual　world；　similarly；　the　prior　which　engenders　the　Intellectual…Principle　and　the　Intellectual　world　cannot　be　either；　but　must　be　something　of　less　multiplicity。　The　manifold　does　not　rise　from　the　manifold：　the　intellectual　multiplicity　has　its　source　in　what　is　not　manifold；　by　the　mere　fact　of　being　manifold；　the　thing　is　not　the　first　principle：　we　must　look　to　something　earlier。　　　　　All　must　be　grouped　under　a　unity　which；　as　standing　outside　of　all　multiplicity　and　outside　of　any　ordinary　simplicity；　is　the　veritably　and　essentially　simplex。　　　　　Still；　how　can　a　Reason…Principle　＇the　Intellectual＇；　characteristically　a　manifold；　a　total；　derive　from　what　is　obviously　no　Reason…Principle？　　　　　But　how；　failing　such　origin　in　the　simplex；　could　we　escape　＇what　cannot　be　accepted＇　the　derivation　of　a　Reason…Principle　from　a　Reason…Principle？　　　　　And　how　does　the　secondarily　good　＇the　imaged　Good＇　derive　from　The　Good；　the　Absolute？　What　does　it　hold　from　the　Absolute　Good　to　entitle　it　to　the　name？　　　　　Similarity　to　the　prior　is　not　enough；　it　does　not　help　towards　goodness；　we　demand　similarity　only　to　an　actually　existent　Good：　the　goodness　must　depend　upon　derivation　from　a　Prior　of　such　a　nature　that　the　similarity　is　desirable　because　that　Prior　is　good；　just　as　the　similarity　would　be　undesirable　if　the　Prior　were　not　good。　　　　　Does　the　similarity　with　the　Prior　consist；　then；　in　a　voluntary　resting　upon　it？　　　　　It　is　rather　that；　finding　its　condition　satisfying；　it　seeks　nothing：　the　similarity　depends　upon　the　all…sufficiency　of　what　it　possesses；　its　existence　is　agreeable　because　all　is　present　to　it；　and　present　in　such　a　way　as　not　to　be　even　different　from　it　＇Intellectual…Principle　is　Being＇。　　　　　All　life　belongs　to　it；　life　brilliant　and　perfect；　thus　all　in　it　is　at　once　life…principle　and　Intellectual…Principle；　nothing　in　it　aloof　from　either　life　or　intellect：　it　is　therefore　self…sufficing　and　seeks　nothing：　and　if　it　seeks　nothing　this　is　because　it　has　in　itself　what；　lacking；　it　must　seek。　It　has；　therefore；　its　Good　within　itself；　either　by　being　of　that　order…　in　what　we　have　called　its　life　and　intellect…　or　in　some　other　quality　or　character　going　to　produce　these。　　　　　If　this　＇secondary　principle＇　were　The　Good　＇The　Absolute＇；　nothing　could　transcend　these　things；　life　and　intellect：　but；　given　the　existence　of　something　higher；　this　Intellectual…Principle　must　possess　a　life　directed　towards　that　Transcendent；　dependent　upon　it；　deriving　its　being　from　it；　living　towards　it　as　towards　its　source。　The　First；　then；　must　transcend　this　principle　of　life　and　intellect　which　directs　thither　both　the　life　in　itself；　a　copy　of　the　Reality　of　the　First；　and　the　intellect　in　itself　which　is　again　a　copy；　though　of　what　original　there　we　cannot　know。　　　　　17。　But　what　can　it　be　which　is　loftier　than　that　existence…　a　life　compact　of　wisdom；　untouched　by　struggle　and　error；　or　than　this　Intellect　which　holds　the　Universe　with　all　there　is　of　life　and　intellect？　　　　　If　we　answer　〃The　Making　Principle；〃　there　comes　the　question；　〃making　by　what　virtue？〃　and　unless　we　can　indicate　something　higher　there　than　in　the　made；　our　reasoning　has　made　no　advance：　we　rest　where　we　were。　　　　　We　must　go　higher…　if　it　were　only　for　the　reason　that　the　maker　of　all　must　have　a　self…sufficing　existence　outside　of　all　things…　since　all　the　rest　is　patently　indigent…　and　that　everything　has　participated　in　The　One　and；　as　drawing　on　unity；　is　itself　not　unity。　　　　　What　then　is　this　in　which　each　particular　entity　participates；　the　author　of　being　to　the　universe　and　to　each　item　of　the　total？　　　　　Since　it　is　the　author　of　all　that　exists；　and　since　the　multiplicity　in　each　thing　is　converted　into　a　self…sufficing　existence　by　this　presence　of　The　One；　so　that　even　the　particular　itself　becomes　self…sufficing；　then　clearly　this　principle；　author　at　once　of　Being　and　of　self…sufficingness；　is　not　itself　a　Being　but　is　above　Being　and　above　even　self…sufficing。　　　　　May　we　stop；　content；　with　that？　No：　the　Soul　is　yet；　and　even　more；　in　pain。　Is　she　ripe；　perhaps；　to　bring　forth；　now　that　in　her　pangs　she　has　come　so　close　to　what　she　seeks？　No：　we　must　call　upon　yet　another　spell　if　anywhere　the　assuagement　is　to　be　found。　Perhaps　in　what　has　already　been　uttered；　there　lies　the　charm　if　only　we　tell　it　over　often？　No：　we　need　a　new；　a　further；　incantation。　All　our　effort　may　well　skim　over　every　truth　and　through　all　the　verities　in　which　we　have　part；　and