the six enneads-第132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！


nce　it　actually　holds　its　object；　and　holds　it　by　the　act　of　intellection：　before；　it　was　no　more　than　a　tendance；　an　eye　blank　of　impression：　it　was　in　motion　towards　the　transcendental；　now　that　it　has　attained；　it　has　become　Intellectual…Principle　henceforth　absorbed；　in　virtue　of　this　intellection　it　holds　the　character　of　Intellectual…Principle；　of　Essential　Existence　and　of　Intellectual　Act　where；　previously；　not　possessing　the　Intellectual　Object；　it　was　not　Intellectual　Perception；　and；　not　yet　having　exercised　the　Intellectual　Act；　it　was　not　Intellectual…Principle。　　　　　The　Principle　before　all　these　principles　is　no　doubt　the　first　principle　of　the　universe；　but　not　as　immanent：　immanence　is　not　for　primal　sources　but　for　engendering　secondaries；　that　which　stands　as　primal　source　of　everything　is　not　a　thing　but　is　distinct　from　all　things：　it　is　not；　then；　a　member　of　the　total　but　earlier　than　all；　earlier；　thus；　than　the　Intellectual…Principle…　which　in　fact　envelops　the　entire　train　of　things。　　　　　Thus　we　come；　once　more；　to　a　Being　above　the　Intellectual…Principle　and；　since　the　sequent　amounts　to　no　less　than　the　All；　we　recognise；　again；　a　Being　above　the　All。　This　assuredly　cannot　be　one　of　the　things　to　which　it　is　prior。　We　may　not　call　it　〃Intellect〃；　therefore；　too；　we　may　not　call　it　〃the　Good；〃　if　〃the　Good〃　is　to　be　taken　in　the　sense　of　some　one　member　of　the　universe；　if　we　mean　that　which　precedes　the　universe　of　things；　the　name　may　be　allowed。　　　　　The　Intellectual…Principle　is　established　in　multiplicity；　its　intellection；　self…sprung　though　it　be；　is　in　the　nature　of　something　added　to　it　＇some　accidental　dualism＇　and　makes　it　multiple：　the　utterly　simplex；　and　therefore　first　of　all　beings；　must；　then；　transcend　the　Intellectual…Principle；　and；　obviously；　if　this　had　intellection　it　would　no　longer　transcend　the　Intellectual…Principle　but　be　it；　and　at　once　be　a　multiple。　　　　　12。　But　why；　after　all；　should　it　not　be　such　a　manifold　as　long　as　it　remains　one　substantial　existence；　having　the　multiplicity　not　of　a　compound　being　but　of　a　unity　with　a　variety　of　activities？　　　　　Now；　no　doubt；　if　these　various　activities　are　not　themselves　substantial　existences…　but　merely　manifestations　of　latent　potentiality…　there　is　no　compound；　but；　on　the　other　hand；　it　remains　incomplete　until　its　substantial　existence　be　expressed　in　act。　If　its　substantial　existence　consists　in　its　Act；　and　this　Act　constitutes　multiplicity；　then　its　substantial　existence　will　be　strictly　proportioned　to　the　extent　of　the　multiplicity。　　　　　We　allow　this　to　be　true　for　the　Intellectual…Principle　to　which　we　have　allotted　＇the　multiplicity　of＇　self…knowing；　but　for　the　first　principle　of　all；　never。　Before　the　manifold；　there　must　be　The　One；　that　from　which　the　manifold　rises：　in　all　numerical　series；　the　unit　is　the　first。　　　　　But…　we　will　be　answered…　for　number；　well　and　good；　since　the　suite　makes　a　compound；　but　in　the　real　beings　why　must　there　be　a　unit　from　which　the　multiplicity　of　entities　shall　proceed？　　　　　Because　＇failing　such　a　unity＇　the　multiplicity　would　consist　of　disjointed　items；　each　starting　at　its　own　distinct　place　and　moving　accidentally　to　serve　to　a　total。　　　　　But；　they　will　tell　us；　the　Activities　in　question　do　proceed　from　a　unity；　from　the　Intellectual…Principle；　a　simplex。　　　　　By　that　they　admit　the　existence　of　a　simplex　prior　to　the　Activities；　and　they　make　the　Activities　perdurable　and　class　them　as　substantial　existences　＇hypostases＇；　but　as　Hypostases　they　will　be　distinct　from　their　source；　which　will　remain　simplex；　while　its　product　will　in　its　own　nature　be　manifold　and　dependent　upon　it。　　　　　Now　if　these　activities　arise　from　some　unexplained　first　activity　in　that　principle；　then　it　too　contains　the　manifold：　if；　on　the　contrary；　they　are　the　very　earliest　activities　and　the　source　and　cause　of　any　multiple　product　and　the　means　by　which　that　Principle　is　able；　before　any　activity　occurs；　to　remain　self…centred；　then　they　are　allocated　to　the　product　of　which　they　are　the　cause；　for　this　principle　is　one　thing；　the　activities　going　forth　from　it　are　another；　since　it　is　not；　itself；　in　act。　If　this　be　not　so；　the　first　act　cannot　be　the　Intellectual…Principle：　the　One　does　not　provide　for　the　existence　of　an　Intellectual…Principle　which　thereupon　appears；　that　provision　would　be　something　＇an　Hypostasis＇　intervening　between　the　One　and　the　Intellectual…Principle；　its　offspring。　There　could；　in　fact；　be　no　such　providing　in　The　One；　for　it　was　never　incomplete；　and　such　provision　could　name　nothing　that　ought　to　be　provided。　It　cannot　be　thought　to　possess　only　some　part　of　its　content；　and　not　the　whole；　nor　did　anything　exist　to　which　it　could　turn　in　desire。　Clearly　anything　that　comes　into　being　after　it；　arises　without　shaking　to　its　permanence　in　its　own　habit。　It　is　essential　to　the　existence　of　any　new　entity　that　the　First　remain　in　self…gathered　repose　throughout：　otherwise；　it　moved　before　there　was　motion　and　had　intellectual　act　before　any　intellection…　unless；　indeed；　that　first　act　＇as　motionless　and　without　intelligence＇　was　incomplete；　nothing　more　than　a　tendency。　And　what　can　we　imagine　it　lights　upon　to　become　the　object　of　such　a　tendency？　　　　　The　only　reasonable　explanation　of　act　flowing　from　it　lies　in　the　analogy　of　light　from　a　sun。　The　entire　intellectual　order　may　be　figured　as　a　kind　of　light　with　the　One　in　repose　at　its　summit　as　its　King：　but　this　manifestation　is　not　cast　out　from　it：　we　may　think；　rather；　of　the　One　as　a　light　before　the　light；　an　eternal　irradiation　resting　upon　the　Intellectual　Realm；　this；　not　identical　with　its　source；　is　yet　not　severed　from　it　nor　of　so　remote　a　nature　as　to　be　less　than　Real…Being；　it　is　no　blind　thing；　but　is　seeing　and　knowing；　the　primal　knower。　　　　　The　One；　as　transcending　Intellect；　transcends　knowing：　above　all　need；　it　is　above　the　need　of　the　knowing　which　pertains　solely　to　the　Secondary　Nature。　Knowing　is　a　unitary　thing；　but　defined：　the　first　is　One；　but　undefined：　a　defined　One　would　not　be　the　One…absolute：　the　absolute　is　prior　to　the　definite。　　　　　13。　Thus　The　One　is　in　truth　beyond　all　statement：　any　affirmation　is　of　a　thing；　but　the　all…transcending；　resting　above　even　the　most　august　divine　Mind；　possesses　alone　of　all　true　being；　and　is　not　a　thing　among　things；　we　can　give　it　no　name　because　that　would　imply　predication：　we　can　but　try　to　indicate；　in　our　own　feeble　way；　something　concerning　it：　when　in　our　perplexity　we　object；　〃Then　it　is　without　self…perception；　without　self…consciousness；　ignorant　of　itself〃；　we　must　remember　that　we　have　been　considering　it　only　in　its　opposites。　　　　　If　we　make　it　knowable；　an　object　of　affirmation；　we　make　it　a　manifold；　and　if　we　allow　intellection　in　it　we　make　it　at　that　point　indigent：　supposing　that　in　fact　intellection　accompanies　it；　intellection　by　it　must　be　superfluous。　　　　　Self…intellection…　which　is　the　truest…　implies　the　entire　perception　of　a　total　self　formed　from　a　variety　converging　into　an　integral；　but　the　Transcendent　knows　neither　separation　of　part　nor　any　such　enquiry；　if　its　intellectual　act　were　directed　upon　something　outside；　then；　the　Transcendent　would　be　deficient　and　the　intellection　faulty。　　　　　The　wholly　simplex　and　veritable　self…sufficing　can　be　lacking　at　no　point：　self…intellection　begins　in　that　principle　which；　secondarily　self…sufficing；　yet　needs　itself　and　therefore　needs　to　know　itself：　this　principle；　by　its　self…presence；　achieves　its　sufficiency　in　virtue　of　its　entire　content　＇it　is　the　all＇：　it　becomes　thus　competent　from　the　total　of　its　being；　in　the　act　of　living　towards　itself　and　looking　upon　itself。　　　　　Consciousness；　as　the　very　word　indicates；　is　a　conperception；　an　act　exercised　upon　a　manifold：　and　even　intellection；　earlier　＇nearer　to　the　divine＇　though　it　is；　implies　that　the　agent　turns　back　upon　itself；　upon　a　manifold；　then。　If　that　agent　says　no　more　than　〃I　am　a　being；〃　it　speaks　＇by　the　implied　dualism＇　as　a　discoverer　of　the　extern；　and　rightly　so；　for　being　is　a　manifold；　when　it　faces　towards　the　unmanifold　and　says；　〃I　am　that　being；〃　it　misses　both　itself　and　the　being　＇since　the　sim