the six enneads-第167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！


ject　of　our　discussion　is　the　Sensible　realm：　Sensible　Existence　is　entirely　embraced　by　what　we　know　as　the　Universe：　our　duty；　then；　would　seem　to　be　clear　enough…　to　take　this　Universe　and　analyse　its　nature；　classifying　its　constituent　parts　and　arranging　them　by　species。　Suppose　that　we　were　making　a　division　of　speech：　we　should　reduce　its　infinity　to　finite　terms；　and　from　the　identity　appearing　in　many　instances　evolve　a　unity；　then　another　and　another；　until　we　arrived　at　some　definite　number；　each　such　unit　we　should　call　a　species　if　imposed　upon　individuals；　a　genus　if　imposed　upon　species。　Thus；　every　species　of　speech…　and　similarly　all　phenomena…　might　be　referred　to　a　unity；　speech…　or　element…　might　be　predicated　of　them　all。　　　　　This　procedure　however　is　as　we　have　already　shown；　impossible　in　dealing　with　the　subject　of　our　present　enquiry。　New　genera　must　be　sought　for　this　Universe…genera　distinct　from　those　of　the　Intellectual；　inasmuch　as　this　realm　is　different　from　that；　analogous　indeed　but　never　identical；　a　mere　image　of　the　higher。　True；　it　involves　the　parallel　existence　of　Body　and　Soul；　for　the　Universe　is　a　living　form：　essentially　however　Soul　is　of　the　Intellectual　and　does　not　enter　into　the　structure　of　what　is　called　Sensible　Being。　　　　　Remembering　this　fact；　we　must…　however　great　the　difficulty…　exclude　Soul　from　the　present　investigation；　just　as　in　a　census　of　citizens；　taken　in　the　interests　of　commerce　and　taxation；　we　should　ignore　the　alien　population。　As　for　the　experiences　to　which　Soul　is　indirectly　subject　in　its　conjunction　with　Body　and　by　reason　of　Body's　presence；　their　classification　must　be　attempted　at　a　later　stage；　when　we　enquire　into　the　details　of　Sensible　Existence。　　　　　2。　Our　first　observations　must　be　directed　to　what　passes　in　the　Sensible　realm　for　Substance。　It　is；　we　shall　agree；　only　by　analogy　that　the　nature　manifested　in　bodies　is　designated　as　Substance；　and　by　no　means　because　such　terms　as　Substance　or　Being　tally　with　the　notion　of　bodies　in　flux；　the　proper　term　would　be　Becoming。　　　　　But　Becoming　is　not　a　uniform　nature；　bodies　comprise　under　the　single　head　simples　and　composites；　together　with　accidentals　or　consequents；　these　last　themselves　capable　of　separate　classification。　　　　　Alternatively；　Becoming　may　be　divided　into　Matter　and　the　Form　imposed　upon　Matter。　These　may　be　regarded　each　as　a　separate　genus；　or　else　both　may　be　brought　under　a　single　category　and　receive　alike　the　name　of　Substance。　　　　　But　what；　we　may　ask；　have　Matter　and　Form　in　common？　In　what　sense　can　Matter　be　conceived　as　a　genus；　and　what　will　be　its　species？　What　is　the　differentia　of　Matter？　In　which　genus；　Matter　or　Form；　are　we　to　rank　the　composite　of　both？　It　may　be　this　very　composite　which　constitutes　the　Substance　manifested　in　bodies；　neither　of　the　components　by　itself　answering　to　the　conception　of　Body：　how；　then；　can　we　rank　them　in　one　and　the　same　genus　as　the　composite？　How　can　the　elements　of　a　thing　be　brought　within　the　same　genus　as　the　thing　itself？　Yet　if　we　begin　with　bodies；　our　first…principles　will　be　compounds。　　　　　Why　not　resort　to　analogy？　Admitted　that　the　classification　of　the　Sensible　cannot　proceed　along　the　identical　lines　marked　out　for　the　Intellectual：　is　there　any　reason　why　we　should　not　for　Intellectual…Being　substitute　Matter；　and　for　Intellectual　Motion　substitute　Sensible　Form；　which　is　in　a　sense　the　life　and　consummation　of　Matter？　The　inertia　of　Matter　would　correspond　with　Stability；　while　the　Identity　and　Difference　of　the　Intellectual　would　find　their　counterparts　in　the　similarity　and　diversity　which　obtain　in　the　Sensible　realm。　　　　　But；　in　the　first　place；　Matter　does　not　possess　or　acquire　Form　as　its　life　or　its　Act；　Form　enters　it　from　without；　and　remains　foreign　to　its　nature。　Secondly；　Form　in　the　Intellectual　is　an　Act　and　a　motion；　in　the　Sensible　Motion　is　different　from　Form　and　accidental　to　it：　Form　in　relation　to　Matter　approximates　rather　to　Stability　than　to　Motion；　for　by　determining　Matter's　indetermination　it　confers　upon　it　a　sort　of　repose。　　　　　In　the　higher　realm　Identity　and　Difference　presuppose　a　unity　at　once　identical　and　different：　a　thing　in　the　lower　is　different　only　by　participation　in　Difference　and　in　relation　to　some　other　thing；　Identity　and　Difference　are　here　predicated　of　the　particular；　which　is　not；　as　in　that　realm；　a　posterior。　　　　　As　for　Stability；　how　can　it　belong　to　Matter；　which　is　distorted　into　every　variety　of　mass；　receiving　its　forms　from　without；　and　even　with　the　aid　of　these　forms　incapable　of　offspring。　　　　　This　mode　of　division　must　accordingly　be　abandoned。　　　　　3。　How　then　do　we　go　to　work？　　　　　Let　us　begin　by　distinguishing　Matter；　Form；　the　Mixture　of　both；　and　the　Attributes　of　the　Mixture。　The　Attributes　may　be　subdivided　into　those　which　are　mere　predicates；　and　those　serving　also　as　accidents。　The　accidents　may　be　either　inclusive　or　included；　they　may；　further；　be　classified　as　activities；　experiences；　consequents。　　　　　Matter　will　be　found　common　to　all　substances；　not　however　as　a　genus；　since　it　has　no　differentiae…　unless　indeed　differentiae　be　ascribed　to　it　on　the　ground　of　its　taking　such　various　forms　as　fire　and　air。　　　　　It　may　be　held　that　Matter　is　sufficiently　constituted　a　genus　by　the　fact　that　the　things　in　which　it　appears　hold　it　in　common；　or　in　that　it　presents　itself　as　a　whole　of　parts。　In　this　sense　Matter　will　indeed　be　a　genus；　though　not　in　the　accepted　sense　of　the　term。　Matter；　we　may　remark；　is　also　a　single　element；　if　the　element　as　such　is　able　to　constitute　a　genus。　　　　　Further；　if　to　a　Form　be　added　the　qualification　〃bound　up　with；　involved　in　Matter；〃　Matter　separates　that　Form　from　other　Forms：　it　does　not　however　embrace　the　whole　of　Substantial　Form　＇as；　to　be　the　genus　of　Form；　it　must＇。　　　　　We　may；　again；　regard　Form　as　the　creator　of　Substance　and　make　the　Reason…Principle　of　Substance　dependent　upon　Form：　yet　we　do　not　come　thereby　to　an　understanding　of　the　nature　of　Substance。　　　　　We　may；　also；　restrict　Substance　to　the　Composite。　Matter　and　Form　then　cease　to　be　substances。　If　they　are　Substance　equally　with　the　Composite；　it　remains　to　enquire　what　there　is　common　to　all　three。　　　　　The　〃mere　predicates〃　fall　under　the　category　of　Relation：　such　are　cause　and　element。　The　accidents　included　in　the　composite　substances　ire　found　to　be　either　Quality　or　Quantity；　those　which　are　inclusive　are　of　the　nature　of　Space　and　Time。　Activities　and　experiences　comprise　Motions；　consequents　Space　and　Time；　which　are　consequents　respectively　of　the　Composites　and　of　Motion。　　　　　The　first　three　entities　＇Matter；　Form；　Composite＇　go；　as　we　have　discovered；　to　make　a　single　common　genus；　the　Sensible　counterpart　of　Substance。　Then　follow　in　order　Relation；　Quantity；　Quality；　Time…during…which；　Place…in…which；　Motion；　though；　with　Time　and　Space　already　included　＇under　Relation＇；　Time…during…which　and　Place…in…which　become　superfluous。　　　　　Thus　we　have　five　genera；　counting　the　first　three　entities　as　one。　If　the　first　three　are　not　massed　into　a　unity；　the　series　will　be　Matter；　Form；　Composite；　Relation；　Quantity；　Quality；　Motion。　The　last　three　may；　again；　be　included　in　Relation；　which　is　capable　of　bearing　this　wider　extension。　　　　　4。　What；　then；　we　have　to　ask；　is　the　constant　element　in　the　first　three　entities？　What　is　it　that　identifies　them　with　their　inherent　Substance？　　　　　Is　it　the　capacity　to　serve　as　a　base？　But　Matter；　we　maintain；　serves　as　the　base　and　seat　of　Form：　Form；　thus；　will　be　excluded　from　the　category　of　Substance。　Again；　the　Composite　is　the　base　and　seat　of　attributes：　hence；　Form　combined　with　Matter　will　be　the　basic　ground　of　Composites；　or　at　any　rate　of　all　posteriors　of　the　Composite…　Quantity；　Quality；　Motion；　and　the　rest。　　　　　But　perhaps　we　may　think　Substance　validly　defined　as　that　which　is　not　predicated　of　anything　else。　White　and　black　are　predicated　of　an　object　having　one　or　other　of　these　qualities；　double　presupposes　something　distinct　from　itself…　we　refer　not　to　the　half；　but　to　the　length　of　wood　of　which　doubleness　is　affirmed。　father　qua　father　is　a　predicate；　knowledge　is　predica