the six enneads-第185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！


　appropriate　path　but　towards　the　strange；　to　the　possession　of　the　self　the　way　is　inward。　　　　　Consider　the　thing　that　has　taken　extension；　broken　into　so　many　independent　items；　it　is　now　those　several　parts　and　not　the　thing　it　was；　if　that　original　is　to　persist；　the　members　must　stand　collected　to　their　total；　in　other　words；　a　thing　is　itself　not　by　being　extended　but　by　remaining；　in　its　degree；　a　unity：　through　expansion　and　in　the　measure　of　the　expansion；　it　is　less　itself；　retaining　unity；　it　retains　its　essential　being。　　　　　Yet　the　universe　has　at　once　extension　and　beauty？　　　　　Yes；　because　it　has　not　been　allowed　to　slip　away　into　the　limitless　but　is　held　fast　by　unity；　and　it　has　beauty　in　virtue　of　Beauty　not　of　Magnitude；　it　needed　Beauty　to　parry　that　magnitude；　in　the　degree　of　its　extension　it　was　void　of　beauty　and　to　that　degree　ugly。　Thus　extension　serves　as　Matter　to　Beauty　since　what　calls　for　its　ordering　is　a　multiplicity。　The　greater　the　expansion；　the　greater　the　disorder　and　ugliness。　　　　　2。　What；　then；　of　the　〃Number　of　the　Infinite〃？　　　　　To　begin　with；　how　is　Number　consistent　with　infinity？　　　　　Objects　of　sense　are　not　unlimited　and　therefore　the　Number　applying　to　them　cannot　be　so。　Nor　is　an　enumerator　able　to　number　to　infinity；　though　we　double；　multiply　over　and　over　again；　we　still　end　with　a　finite　number；　though　we　range　over　past　and　future；　and　consider　them；　even；　as　a　totality；　we　still　end　with　the　finite。　　　　　Are　we　then　to　dismiss　absolute　limitlessness　and　think　merely　that　there　is　always　something　beyond？　　　　　No；　that　more　is　not　in　the　reckoner's　power　to　produce；　the　total　stands　already　defined。　　　　　In　the　Intellectual　the　Beings　are　determined　and　with　them　Number；　the　number　corresponding　to　their　total；　in　this　sphere　of　our　own…　as　we　make　a　man　a　multiple　by　counting　up　his　various　characteristics；　his　beauty　and　the　rest…　we　take　each　image　of　Being　and　form　a　corresponding　image　of　number；　we　multiply　a　non…existent　in　and　so　produce　multiple　numbers；　if　we　number　years　we　draw　on　the　numbers　in　our　own　minds　and　apply　them　to　the　years；　these　numbers　are　still　our　possession。　　　　　3。　And　there　is　the　question　How　can　the　infinite　have　existence　and　remain　unlimited：　whatever　is　in　actual　existence　is　by　that　very　fact　determined　numerically。　　　　　But；　first；　if　multiplicity　holds　a　true　place　among　Beings；　how　can　it　be　an　evil？　　　　　As　existent　it　possesses　unity；　it　is　a　unit…multiple；　saved　from　stark　multiplicity；　but　it　is　of　a　lessened　unity　and；　by　that　inwoven　multiplicity；　it　is　evil　in　comparison　with　unity　pure。　No　longer　steadfast　in　that　nature；　but　fallen；　it　is　the　less；　while　in　virtue　of　the　unity　thence　retained　it　keeps　some　value；　multiplicity　has　value　in　so　far　as　it　tends　to　return　to；　unity。　　　　　But　how　explain　the　unlimited？　It　would　seem　that　either　it　is　among　beings　and　so　is　limited　or；　if　unlimited；　is　not　among　beings　but；　at　best；　among　things　of　process　such　as　Time。　To　be　brought　to　limit　it　must　be　unlimited；　not　the　limited　but　the　unlimited　is　the　subject　of　limitation；　since　between　the　limited　and　the　unlimited　there　is　no　intermediate　to　accept　the　principle　of　limitation。　The　unlimited　recoils　by　very　nature　from　the　Idea　of　limit；　though　it　may　be　caught　and　held　by　it　from　without：…　the　recoil；　of　course；　is　not　from　one　place　to　another；　the　limitless　can　have　nothing　to　do　with　place　which　arises　only　with　the　limiting　of　the　unlimited。　Hence　what　is　known　as　the　flux　of　the　unlimited　is　not　to　be　understood　as　local　change；　nor　does　any　other　sort　of　recognisable　motion　belong　to　it　in　itself；　therefore　the　limitless　cannot　move：　neither　can　it　be　at　rest：　in　what；　since　all　place　is　later？　Its　movement　means　little　more　than　that　it　is　not　fixed　in　rest。　　　　　Is　it；　then；　suspended　at　some　one　point；　or　rocking　to　and　fro？　　　　　No；　any　such　poising；　with　or　without　side　motion；　could　be　known　only　by　place　＇which　Matter　precedes＇。　　　　　How；　then；　are　we　to　form　any　conception　of　its　being？　　　　　We　must　fasten　on　the　bare　notion　and　take　what　that　gives　us…　opposites　that　still　are　not　opposed：　we　think　of　large　and　small　and　the　unlimited　becomes　either；　of　stationary　and　moving；　and　it　will　be　either　of　these。　But　primarily　it　can　be　neither　in　any　defined　degree；　or　at　once　it　is　under　limit。　Limitless　in　this　unlimited　and　undefined　way；　it　is　able　to　appear　as　either　of　a　pair　of　opposites：　draw　near；　taking　care　to　throw　no　net　of　limit　over　it；　and　you　have　something　that　slips　away；　you　come　upon　no　unity　for　so　it　would　be　defined；　approach　the　thing　as　a　unit；　and　you　find　it　manifold；　call　it　a　manifold；　and　again　you　falsify；　for　when　the　single　thing　is　not　a　unity　neither　is　the　total　a　manifold。　In　one　manifestation　it　takes　the　appearance　of　movement；　in　another　of　rest；　as　the　mind　envisages　it。　　　　　And　there　is　movement　in　its　lack　of　consciousness；　it　has　passed　out　of　Intellectual…Principle；　slid　away。　That　it　cannot　break　free　but　is　under　compulsion　from　without　to　keep　to　its　circling　with　no　possibility　of　advance；　in　this　would　be　its　rest。　Thus　it　is　not　true　to　speak　of　Matter　as　being　solely　in　flux。　　　　　4。　We　have　to　enquire　into　the　existence　of　the　Numbers　in　the　Intellectual。　Are　they　Ideas　added　to　the　other　Ideas？　Or　are　they　no　more　than　necessary　concomitants　to　the　Ideas？　　　　　In　the　latter　case；　Being；　as　the　first　＇in　the　Intellectual＇　would　give　us　the　conception　of　the　Monad；　then　since　Being　produces　motion　and　rest；　Three　exists；　and　so　on　for　all　the　other　members　of　the　realm　of　Being。　Or　perhaps　there　is　one　monad　for　each　member；　or　a　monad　for　the　first；　with　a　dyad　for　its　next；　since　there　exists　a　series；　and　a　corresponding　number　for　every　successive　total；　decad　for　ten；　and　so　on。　　　　　If；　on　the　contrary；　Number　is　a　direct　production　of　the　Intellectual…Principle　＇an　Idea　in　itself＇；　there　is　the　question　whether　it　preceded　or　followed　the　other　Ideas。　　　　　Plato；　where　he　says　that　men　arrived　at　the　conception　of　Number　by　way　of　the　changes　of　day　and　night…　thus　making　the　concept　depend　upon　variation　among　things…　seems　to　hold　that　the　things　numerable　precede　and　by　their　differences　produce　number：　Number　then　would　consist　in　a　process　within　the　human　mind　passing　onwards　from　thing　to　thing；　it　results　by　the　fact　that　the　mind　takes　count；　that　is　when　the　mind　traverses　things　and　reports　their　differences；　observing　pure　identity　unbroken　by　difference；　it　says　One。　But　there　is　the　passage　where　he　tells　us　that　the　veritable　Number　has　Being；　is　a　Being；　this　is　the　opposed　view　that　Number　is　no　product　of　the　reckoning　mind　but　a　reality　in　itself；　the　concept　of　which　is　reawakened　in　the　mind　by　changes　in　things　of　sense。　　　　　5。　What　then　is　the　veritable　nature　of　Number？　　　　　Is　it　an　accompaniment　upon　each　substance；　something　seen　in　the　things　as　in　a　man　we　see　one　man；　in　a　being　one　being　and　in　the　total　of　presentations　the　total　of　number？　　　　　But　how　explain　the　dyad　and　triad？　How　comes　the　total　to　be　unitary　and　any　particular　number　to　be　brought　under　unity？　The　theory　offers　a　multiplicity　of　units；　and　no　number　is　reducible　to　unity　but　the　simple　〃one。〃　It　might　be　suggested　that　a　dyad　is　that　thing…　or　rather　what　is　observed　upon　that　thing…　which　has　two　powers　combined；　a　compound　thing　related　to　a　unity：　or　numbers　might　be　what　the　Pythagoreans　seem　to　hold　them　in　their　symbolic　system　in　which　Justice；　for　example；　is　a　Tetrad：　but　this　is　rather　to　add　the　number；　a　number　of　manifold　unity　like　the　decad；　to　the　multiplicity　of　the　thing　which　yet　is　one　thing。　Now　it　is　not　so　that　we　treat　the　ten　things；　we　bring　them　together　and　apply　the　figure　ten　to　the　several　items。　Or　rather　in　that　case　we　say　ten；　but　when　the　several　items　form　a　unity　we　say　decad。　This　would　apply　in　the　Intellectual　as　in　the　sensible。　　　　　But　how　then　can　number；　observed　upon　things；　rank　among　Real　Beings？　　　　　One　answer　might　be　that　whiteness　is　similarly　observed　upon　things　and　yet　is　real；　just　as　movement　is　observed　upon　things　and　there　is　still　a　real　existence　of　movement。　But　movement　is　not　on　a　par　with　number：　it　is　because　mov