FIRST ENNEAD, BOOK SIXTH.Of Beauty.
FOURTH ENNEAD, BOOK SEVEN.Of the Immortality of the Soul: Polemic Against Materialism.
THIRD ENNEAD, BOOK FIRST.Concerning Fate.
FOURTH ENNEAD, BOOK FIRST.Of the Being of the Soul.
FIFTH ENNEAD, BOOK NINE.Of Intelligence, Ideas and Essence.
FIFTH ENNEAD, BOOK FOUR.How What is After the First Proceeds Therefrom; of the One.
SIXTH ENNEAD, BOOK NINE.Of the Good and the One.
FIFTH ENNEAD, BOOK ONE.The Three Principal Hypostases, or Forms of Existence.
FIFTH ENNEAD, BOOK TWO.Of Generation, and of the Order of things that Rank Next After the First.
SECOND ENNEAD, BOOK FOUR.Of Matter.
THIRD ENNEAD, BOOK NINE.Fragments About the Soul, the Intelligence, and the Good.
SECOND ENNEAD, BOOK TWO.About the Movement of the Heavens.
THIRD ENNEAD, BOOK FOUR.Of Our Individual Guardian.
FIRST ENNEAD, BOOK NINE.Of Suicide.
SECOND ENNEAD, BOOK SIX.Of Essence and Being.
FIRST ENNEAD, BOOK TWO.Concerning Virtue.
FIRST ENNEAD, BOOK THREE.Of Dialectic, or the Means of Raising the Soul to the Intelligible World.
FOURTH ENNEAD, BOOK TWO.How the Soul Mediates Between Indivisible and Divisible Essence.
FIRST ENNEAD, BOOK SIXTH.Of Beauty.
REVIEW OF BEAUTY OF DAILY LIFE.
1. Beauty chiefly affects the sense
of sight. Still, the ear perceives it also, both in the harmony of
words, and in the different kinds of music; for songs and verses are
equally beautiful. On rising from the domain of the senses to a
superior region, we also discover beauty in occupations, actions,
habits, sciences and virtues. Whether there exists a type of beauty
still higher, will have to be ascertained by discussion.
PROBLEMS CONCERNING HIGHER BEAUTY.
What is the cause that certain
bodies seem beautiful, that our ears listen with pleasure to rhythms
judged beautiful, and that we love the purely moral beauties? Does
the beauty of all these objects derive from some unique, immutable
principle, or will we recognize some one principle of beauty for the
body, and some other for something else? What then are these
principles, if there are several? Or which is this principle, if
there is but one?
WHAT IS THE PRINCIPLE BY
PARTICIPATION IN WHICH THE BODY IS BEAUTIFUL?
First, there are certain objects,
such as bodies, whose beauty exists only by participation, instead of
being inherent in the very essence of the subject. Such are beautiful
in themselves, as is, for example, virtue. Indeed, the same bodies
seem beautiful at one time, while at another they lack beauty;
consequently, there is a great difference between being a body and
being beautiful. What then is the principle whose presence in a body
produces beauty therein? What is that element in the bodies which
moves the spectator, and which attracts, fixes and charms his
glances? This is the first problem to solve; for, on finding this
principle, we shall use it as a means to resolve other questions.
POLEMIC AGAINST SYMMETRY, THE STOIC
DEFINITION OF BEAUTY.
(The Stoics), like almost everybody,
insist that visual beauty consists in the proportion of the parts
relatively to each other and to the whole, joined to the grace of
colors. If then, as in this case, the beauty of bodies in general
consists in the symmetry and just proportion of their parts, beauty
could not consist of anything simple, and necessarily could not
appear in anything but what was compound. Only the totality will be
beautiful; the parts by themselves will possess no beauty; they will
be beautiful only by their relation with the totality. Nevertheless,
if the totality is beautiful, it would seem also necessary that the
parts be beautiful; for indeed beauty could never result from the
assemblage of ugly things. Beauty must therefore be spread among all
the parts. According to the same doctrine, the colors which, like
sunlight, are beautiful, are beautiful but simple, and those whose
beauty is not derived from proportion, will also be excluded from the
domain of beauty. According to this hypothesis, how will gold be
beautiful? The brilliant lightning in the night, even the stars,
would not be beautiful to contemplate. In the sphere of sounds, also,
it would be necessary to insist that what is simple possesses no
beauty. Still, in a beautiful harmony, every sound, even when
isolated, is beautiful. While preserving the same proportions, the
same countenance seems at one time beautiful, and at another ugly.
Evidently, there is but one conclusion: namely, that proportion is
not beauty itself, but that it derives its beauty from some superior
principle. (This will appear more clearly from further examples). Let
us examine occupations and utterances. If also their beauty depended
on proportion, what would be the function of proportion when
considering occupations, laws, studies and sciences? Relations of
proportion could not obtain in scientific speculations; no, nor even
in the mutual agreement of these speculations. On the other hand,
even bad things may show a certain mutual agreement and harmony; as,
for instance, were we to assert that wisdom is softening of the
brain, and that justice is a generous folly. Here we have two
revoltingly absurd statements, which agree perfectly, and harmonize
mutually. Further, every virtue is a soul-beauty far truer than any
that we have till now examined; yet it could not admit of proportion,
as it involves neither size nor number. Again, granting that the soul
is divided into several faculties, who will undertake to decide which
combination of these faculties, or of the speculations to which the
soul devotes itself, will produce beauty? Moreover (if beauty is but
proportion), what beauty could be predicated of pure intelligence?
BEAUTY CONSISTS IN KINSHIP TO THE
SOUL.
2. Returning to our first
consideration, we shall examine the nature of the element of beauty
in bodies. It is something perceivable at the very first glance,
something which the soul recognizes as kindred, and sympathetic to
her own nature, which she welcomes and assimilates. But as soon as
she meets an ugly object, she recoils, repudiates it, and rejects it
as something foreign, towards which her real nature feels antipathy.
That is the reason why the soul, being such as it is, namely, of an
essence superior to all other beings, when she perceives an object
kindred to her own nature, or which reveals only some traces of it,
rejoices, is transported, compares this object with her own nature,
thinks of herself, and of her intimate being as it would be
impossible to fail to perceive this resemblance.
BEAUTY CONSISTS IN PARTICIPATION IN
A FORM.
How can both sensible and
intelligible objects be beautiful? Because, as we said, sensible
objects participate in a form. While a shapeless object, by nature
capable of receiving shape (physical) and form (intelligible),
remains without reason or form, it is ugly. That which remains
completely foreign to all divine reason (a reason proceeding from the
universal Soul), is absolute ugliness. Any object should be
considered ugly which is not entirely molded by informing reason, the
matter, not being able to receive perfectly the form (which the Soul
gives it). On joining matter, form co-ordinates the different parts
which are to compose unity, combines them, and by their harmony
produces something which is a unit. Since (form) is one, that which
it fashions will also have to be one, as far as a composite object
can be one. When such an object has arrived at unity, beauty resides
in it, and it communicates itself to the parts as well as to the
whole. When it meets a whole, the parts of which are perfectly
similar, it interpenetrates it evenly. Thus it would show itself now
in an entire building, then in a single stone, later in art-products
as well as in the works of nature. Thus bodies become beautiful by
communion with (or, participation in) a reason descending upon it
from the divine (universal Soul).
THE SOUL APPRECIATES THE BEAUTIFUL
BY AN AESTHETIC SENSE.
3. The soul appreciates beauty by an
especially ordered faculty, whose sole function it is to appreciate
all that concerns beauty, even when the other faculties take part in
this judgment. Often the soul makes her (aesthetic) decisions by
comparison with the form of the beautiful which is within her, using
this form as a standard by which to judge. But what agreement can
anything corporeal have with what is incorporeal? For example, how
can an architect judge a building placed before him as beautiful, by
comparing it with the Idea which he has within himself? The only
explanation can be that, on abstracting the stones, the exterior
object is nothing but the interior form, no doubt divided within the
extent of the matter, but still one, though manifested in the
manifold? When the senses perceive in an object the form which
combines, unites and dominates a substance which lacks shape, and
therefore is of a contrary nature; and if they also perceive a shape
which distinguishes itself from the other shapes by its elegance,
then the soul, uniting these multiple elements, fuses them, comparing
them to the indivisible form which she bears within herself, then she
pronounces their agreement, kinship and harmony with that interior
type.
INSTANCES OF CORRESPONDENCE OF OUTER
SENSE BEAUTY WITH ITS IDEA.
Thus a worthy man, perceiving in a
youth the character of virtue, is agreeably impressed, because he
observes that the youth harmonizes with the true type of virtue which
he bears within himself. Thus also the beauty of color, though simple
in form, reduces under its sway that obscurity of matter, by the
presence of the light, which is something incorporeal, a reason, and
a form. Likewise, fire surpasses all other bodies in beauty, because
it stands to all other elements in the relation of a form; it
occupies the highest regions;29 it is the subtlest of bodies because
it most approaches the incorporeal beings; without permitting itself
to be penetrated by other bodies, it penetrates them all; without
itself cooling, it communicates to them its heat; by its own essence
it possesses color, and communicates it to others; it shines and
coruscates, because it is a form. The body in which it does not
dominate, shows but a discolored hue, and ceases being beautiful,
merely because it does not participate in the whole form of color.
Once more, thus do the hidden harmonies of sound produce audible
harmonies, and also yield to the soul the idea of beauty, though
showing it in another order of things. Audible harmonies can be
expressed in numbers; not indeed in any kind of numbers, but only in
such as can serve to produce form, and to make it dominate.
TRANSITION FROM SENSE BEAUTY TO
INTELLECTUAL BEAUTY.
So much then for sense-beauties
which, descending on matter like images and shadows, beautify it and
thereby compel our admiration. 4. Now we shall leave the senses in
their lower sphere, and we shall rise to the contemplation of the
beauties of a superior order, of which the senses have no intuition,
but which the soul perceives and expresses.
INTERIOR BEAUTIES COULD NOT BE
APPRECIATED WITHOUT AN INTERIOR MODEL.
Just as we could not have spoken of
sense-beauties if we had never seen them, nor recognized them as
such, if, in respect to them, we had been similar to persons born
blind, likewise we would not know enough to say anything about the
beauty either of the arts or sciences, or of anything of the kind, if
we were not already in possession of this kind of beauty; nor of the
splendor of virtue, if we had not contemplated the ("golden)
face of Justice," and of temperance, before whose splendor the
morning and evening stars grow pale.
MORAL BEAUTIES MORE DELIGHTFUL THAN
SENSE-BEAUTIES.
To see these beauties, they must be
contemplated by the faculty our soul has received; then, while
contemplating them, we shall experience far more pleasure,
astonishment and admiration, than in contemplation of the
sense-beauties, because we will have the intuition of veritable
beauties. The sentiments inspired by beauty are admiration, a gentle
charm, desire, love, and a pleasurable impulse.
THEY WHO FEEL THESE SENTIMENTS MOST
KEENLY ARE CALLED LOVERS.
Such are the sentiments for
invisible beauties which should be felt, and indeed are experienced
by all souls, but especially by the most loving. In the presence of
beautiful bodies, all indeed see them; but not all are equally moved.
Those who are most moved are designated "lovers."30
THE CAUSE OF THESE EMOTIONS IS THE
INVISIBLE SOUL.
5. Let us now propound a question
about experiences to these men who feel love for incorporeal
beauties. What do you feel in presence of the noble occupations, the
good morals, the habits of temperance, and in general of virtuous
acts and sentiments, and of all that constitutes the beauty of souls?
What do you feel when you contemplate your inner beauty? What is the
source of your ecstasies, or your enthusiasms? Whence come your
desires to unite yourselves to your real selves, and to refresh
yourselves by retirement from your bodies? Such indeed are the
experiences of those who love genuinely. What then is the object
which causes these, your emotions? It is neither a figure, nor a
color, nor any size; it is that (colorless) invisible soul, which
possesses a wisdom equally invisible; this soul in which may be seen
shining the splendor of all the virtues, when one discovers in
oneself, or contemplates in others, the greatness of character, the
justice of the heart, the pure temperance, the imposing countenance
of valor, dignity and modesty, proceeding alone firmly, calmly, and
imperturbably; and above all, intelligence, resembling the divinity,
by its brilliant light. What is the reason that we declare these
objects to be beautiful, when we are transported with admiration and
love for them? They exist, they manifest themselves, and whoever
beholds them will never be able to restrain himself from confessing
them to be veritable beings. Now what are these genuine beings? They
are beautiful.
LOVE OF BEAUTY EXPLAINED BY AVERSION
FOR OPPOSITE.
But reason is not yet satisfied;
reason wonders why these veritable beings give the soul which
experiences them the property of exciting love, from which proceeds
this halo of light which, so to speak, crowns all virtues. Consider
the things contrary to these beautiful objects, and with them compare
what may be ugly in the soul. If we can discover of what ugliness
consists, and what is its cause, we shall have achieved an important
element of the solution we are seeking. Let us picture to ourselves
an ugly soul; she will be given up to intemperance; and be unjust,
abandoned to a host of passions, troubled, full of fears caused by
her cowardliness, and of envy by her degradation; she will be longing
only for vile and perishable things; she will be entirely depraved,
will love nothing but impure wishes, will have no life but the
sensual, and will take pleasure in her turpitude. Would we not
explain such a state by saying that under the very mask of beauty
turpitude had invaded this soul, brutalized her, soiled her with all
kinds of vices, rendering her incapable of a pure life, and pure
sentiments, and had reduced her to an existence obscure, infected
with evil, poisoned by lethal germs; that it had hindered her from
contemplating anything she should, forcing her to remain solitary,
because it misled her out from herself towards inferior and gloomy
regions? The soul fallen into this state of impurity, seized with an
irresistible inclination towards the things of sense, absorbed by her
intercourse with the body, sunk into matter, and having even received
it within herself, has changed form by her admixture with an inferior
nature. Not otherwise would be a man fallen into slimy mud, who no
longer would present to view his primitive beauty, and would exhibit
only the appearance of the mud that had defiled him; his ugliness
would be derived from something foreign; and to recover his pristine
beauty he would have to wash off his defilement, and by purification
be restored to what he once was.
UGLINESS IS ONLY A FOREIGN
ACCRETION.
We have the right to say that the
soul becomes ugly by mingling with the body, confusing herself with
it, by inclining herself towards it. For a soul, ugliness consists in
being impure, no longer unmingled, like gold tarnished by particles
of earth. As soon as this dross is removed, and nothing but gold
remains, then again it is beautiful, because separated from every
foreign body, and is restored to its unique nature. Likewise the
soul, released from the passions begotten by her intercourse with the
body when she yields herself too much to it, delivered from exterior
impressions, purified from the blemishes contracted from her alliance
with the body—that is, reduced to herself, she lays aside that
ugliness which is derived from a nature foreign to her.
VIRTUES ARE ONLY PURIFICATIONS.
6. Thus, according to the ancient
(Platonic or Empedoclean) maxim, "courage, temperance, all the
virtues, nay, even prudence, are but purifications." The
mysteries were therefore wise in teaching that the man who has not
been purified will, in hell, dwell at the bottom of a swamp; for
everything that is not pure, because of its very perversity, delights
in mud, just as we see the impure swine wallow in the mud with
delight. And indeed, what would real temperance consist of, if it be
not to avoid attaching oneself to the pleasures of the body, and to
flee from them as impure, and as only proper for an impure being?
What else is courage, unless no longer to fear death, which is mere
separation of the soul from the body? Whoever therefore is willing to
withdraw from the body could surely not fear death. Magnanimity is
nothing but scorn of things here below. Last, prudence is the thought
which, detached from the earth, raises the soul to the intelligible
world. The purified soul, therefore, becomes a form, a reason, an
incorporeal and intellectual essence; she belongs entirely to the
divinity, in whom resides the source of the beautiful, and of all the
qualities which have affinity with it.
THE SOUL'S WELFARE IS TO RESEMBLE
THE DIVINITY.
Restored to intelligence, the soul
sees her own beauty increase; indeed, her own beauty consists of the
intelligence with its ideas; only when united to intelligence is the
soul really isolated from all the remainder. That is the reason that
it is right to say that "the soul's welfare and beauty lie in
assimilating herself to the divinity," because it is the
principle of beauty and of the essences; or rather, being is beauty,
while the other nature (non-being, matter), is ugliness. This is the
First Evil, evil in itself, just as that one (the First Principle) is
the good and the beautiful; for good and beauty are identical.
Consequently, beauty or good, and evil or ugliness, are to be studied
by the same methods. The first rank is to be assigned to beauty,
which is identical with the good, and from which is derived the
intelligence which is beautiful by itself. The soul is beautiful by
intelligence, then, the other things, like actions, and studies, are
beautiful by the soul which gives them a form. It is still the soul
which beautifies the bodies to which is ascribed this perfection;
being a divine essence, and participating in beauty, when she seizes
an object, or subjects it to her dominion, she gives to it the beauty
that the nature of this object enables it to receive.
APPROACH TO THE GOOD CONSISTS IN
SIMPLIFICATION.
We must still ascend to the Good to
which every soul aspires. Whoever has seen it knows what I still have
to say, and knows the beauty of the Good. Indeed, the Good is
desirable for its own sake; it is the goal of our desires. To attain
it, we have to ascend to the higher regions, turn towards them, and
lay aside the garment which we put on when descending here below;
just as, in the (Eleusynian, or Isiac) mysteries, those who are
admitted to penetrate into the recesses of the sanctuary, after
having purified themselves, lay aside every garment, and advance
stark naked.
THE SUPREME PURPOSE OF LIFE IS THE
ECSTATICAL VISION OF GOD.
7. Thus, in her ascension towards
divinity, the soul advances until, having risen above everything that
is foreign to her, she alone with Him who is alone, beholds, in all
His simplicity and purity, Him from whom all depends, to whom all
aspires, from whom everything draws its existence, life and thought.
He who beholds him is overwhelmed with love; with ardor desiring to
unite himself with Him, entranced with ecstasy. Men who have not yet
seen Him desire Him as the Good; those who have, admire Him as
sovereign beauty, struck simultaneously with stupor and pleasure,
thrilling in a painless orgasm, loving with a genuine emotion, with
an ardor without equal, scorning all other affections, and disdaining
those things which formerly they characterized as beautiful. This is
the experience of those to whom divinities and guardians have
appeared; they reck no longer of the beauty of other bodies. Imagine,
if you can, the experiences of those who behold Beauty itself, the
pure Beauty, which, because of its very purity, is fleshless and
bodiless, outside of earth and heaven. All these things, indeed are
contingent and composite, they are not principles, they are derived
from Him. What beauty could one still wish to see after having
arrived at vision of Him who gives perfection to all beings, though
himself remains unmoved, without receiving anything; after finding
rest in this contemplation, and enjoying it by becoming assimilated
to Him? Being supreme beauty, and the first beauty, He beautifies
those who love Him, and thereby they become worthy of love. This is
the great, the supreme goal of souls; this is the goal which arouses
all their efforts, if they do not wish to be disinherited of that
sublime contemplation the enjoyment of which confers blessedness, and
privation of which is the greatest of earthly misfortunes. Real
misfortune is not to lack beautiful colors, nor beautiful bodies, nor
power, nor domination, nor royalty. It is quite sufficient to see
oneself excluded from no more than possession of beauty. This
possession is precious enough to render worthless domination of a
kingdom, if not of the whole earth, of the sea, or even of the
heavens—if indeed it were possible, while abandoning and scorning
all that (natural beauty), to succeed in contemplating beauty face to
face.
THE METHOD TO ACHIEVE ECSTASY IS TO
CLOSE THE EYES OF THE BODY.
8. How shall we start, and later
arrive at the contemplation of this ineffable beauty which, like the
divinity in the mysteries, remains hidden in the recesses of a
sanctuary, and does not show itself outside, where it might be
perceived by the profane? We must advance into this sanctuary,
penetrating into it, if we have the strength to do so, closing our
eyes to the spectacle of terrestrial things, without throwing a
backward glance on the bodies whose graces formerly charmed us. If we
do still see corporeal beauties, we must no longer rush at them, but,
knowing that they are only images, traces and adumbrations of a
superior principle, we will flee from them, to approach Him of whom
they are merely the reflections. Whoever would let himself be misled
by the pursuit of those vain shadows, mistaking them for realities,
would grasp only an image as fugitive as the fluctuating form
reflected by the waters, and would resemble that senseless
(Narcissus) who, wishing to grasp that image himself, according to
the fable, disappeared, carried away by the current. Likewise he
would wish to embrace corporeal beauties, and not release them, would
plunge, not his body, but his soul into the gloomy abysses, so
repugnant to intelligence; he would be condemned to total blindness;
and on this earth, as well as in hell, he would see naught but
mendacious shades.
HOW TO FLY TO OUR FATHERLAND.
This indeed is the occasion to quote
(from Homer) with peculiar force, "Let us fly unto our dear
fatherland!" But how shall we fly? How escape from here? is the
question Ulysses asks himself in that allegory which represents him
trying to escape from the magic sway of Circe or Calypso, where
neither the pleasure of the eyes, nor the view of fleshly beauty were
able to hold him in those enchanted places. Our fatherland is the
region whence we descend here below. It is there that dwells our
Father. But how shall we return thither? What means shall be employed
to return us thither? Not our feet, indeed; all they could do would
be to move us from one place of the earth to another. Neither is it a
chariot, nor ship which need be prepared. All these vain helps must
be left aside, and not even considered. We must close the eyes of the
body, to open another vision, which indeed all possess, but very few
employ.
HOW TO TRAIN THIS INTERIOR VISION.
9. But how shall we train this
interior vision? At the moment of its (first) awakening, it cannot
contemplate beauties too dazzling. Your soul must then first be
accustomed to contemplate the noblest occupations of man, and then
the beautiful deeds, not indeed those performed by artists, but those
(good deeds) done by virtuous men. Later contemplate the souls of
those who perform these beautiful actions. Nevertheless, how will you
discover the beauty which their excellent soul possesses? Withdraw
within yourself, and examine yourself. If you do not yet therein
discover beauty, do as the artist, who cuts off, polishes, purifies
until he has adorned his statue with all the marks of beauty. Remove
from your soul, therefore, all that is superfluous, straighten out
all that is crooked, purify and illuminate what is obscure, and do
not cease perfecting your statue until the divine resplendence of
virtue shines forth upon your sight, until you see temperance in its
holy purity seated in your breast. When you shall have acquired this
perfection; when you will see it in yourself; when you will purely
dwell within yourself; when you will cease to meet within yourself
any obstacle to unity; when nothing foreign will any more, by its
admixture, alter the simplicity of your interior essence; when within
your whole being you will be a veritable light, immeasurable in size,
uncircumscribed by any figure within narrow boundaries, unincreasable
because reaching out to infinity, and entirely incommensurable
because it transcends all measure and quantity; when you shall have
become such, then, having become sight itself, you may have
confidence in yourself, for you will no longer need any guide. Then
must you observe carefully, for it is only by the eye that then will
open itself within you that you will be able to perceive supreme
Beauty. But if you try to fix on it an eye soiled by vice, an eye
that is impure, or weak, so as not to be able to support the splendor
of so brilliant an object, that eye will see nothing, not even if it
were shown a sight easy to grasp. The organ of vision will first have
to be rendered analogous and similar to the object it is to
contemplate. Never would the eye have seen the sun unless first it
had assumed its form; likewise, the soul could never see beauty,
unless she herself first became beautiful. To obtain the view of the
beautiful, and of the divinity, every man must begin by rendering
himself beautiful and divine.
THE LANDMARKS OF THE PATH TO
ECSTASY.
Thus he will first rise to
intelligence, and he will there contemplate beauty, and declare that
all this beauty resides in the Ideas. Indeed, in them everything is
beautiful, because they are the daughters and the very essence of
Intelligence.
Above intelligence, he will meet Him
whom we call the nature of the Good, and who causes beauty to radiate
around Him; so that, to repeat, the first thing that is met is
beauty. If a distinction is to be established among the
intelligibles, we might say that intelligible beauty is the locus of
ideas, and that the Good, which is located above the Beautiful, is
its source and principle. If, however, we desire to locate the Good
and the Beautiful within one single principle, we might regard this
one principle first as Good, and only afterwards, as Beauty.
REFERENCES.
Page 40, line 4, Equally Beautiful,
Phaedrus p. 250, Cary 63–65; Hippias Major, 295, Cary 44; Philebus
p. 17, Cary 20, 21.
Page 41, line 11, Stoic definition,
Cicero, Tusculans, iv. 13.
Page 44, line 30, Obscurity of
Matter, Timaeus, p. 31, Cary 11; Philebus, p. 29, Cary 52.
Page 45, line 22, Superior Order,
Banquet 210, Cary 34; Timaeus, p. 31, Cary 11.
Page 45, line 35, Golden Face of
Justice, Athenaeus, Deipnosophistae, xii. 546.
Page 46, line 10, Pleasurable
Impulse, Banquet, p. 191, Cary 17, 18; Cratylos, p. 420, Cary 78–80.
Page 47, line 5, Justice of the
Heart, Banquet, p. 209, Cary 33; Republic, iii. 402, Cary 12.
Page 48, line 23, Ugliness, Banquet,
p. 215–217, Cary 39, 40; Philebus, p. 66, Cary 158, 159.
Page 49, line 4, Purifications,
Phaedo, p. 69, Cary 37.
Page 49, line 32, Assimilating to
Divinity, Republic x. p. 613, Cary 12.
Page 50, line 1, Good and Beautiful,
Timaeus, p. 35, Cary 12.
Page 50, line 5, Identical with
Good, Philebus, p. 64, Cary 153–155; First Alcibiades, p. 115, Cary
23, 24.
Page 51, line 1, 2, He who Beholds,
Phaedrus, p. 278, Cary 145.
Page 51, line 8, Ardor without
Equal; line 15, Very Purity; Banquet, p. 210, 211; Cary 34, 35.
Page 51, line 29, Confers
Blessedness, Phaedrus, p. 250, Cary 64.
Page 53, line 16, Interior Vision,
Republic, x., p. 533, Cary 13.
Page 53, line 34, Temperance Seated,
Phaedrus, p. 279, Cary 147.
Page 54, line 19, Organ of Vision,
Timaeus, p. 45, Cary 19.
Page 54, line 23, Assumed its form,
Republic, vi., p. 508, Cary 19.
Page 54, line 29, Rise to
Intelligence, Philebus, p. 64, Cary 153–155.
FOURTH ENNEAD, BOOK SEVEN.Of the
Immortality of the Soul: Polemic Against Materialism.
IS THE SOUL IMMORTAL?
1. Are we immortal, or does all of us die? (Another possibility
would be that) of the two parts of which we are composed, the one
might be fated to be dissolved and perish, while the other, that
constitutes our very personality, might subsist perpetually. These
problems must be solved by a study of our nature.
THE BODY AS THE INSTRUMENT OF THE SOUL.
Man is not a simple being; he contains a soul and a body, which is
united to this soul, either as tool, or in some other manner.31
This is how we must distinguish the soul from the body, and
determine the nature and manner of existence ("being") of each of
them.
THE BODY IS COMPOSITE, AND THEREFORE PERISHABLE.
As the nature of the body is composite, reason convinces us that it
cannot last perpetually, and our senses show it to us dissolved,
destroyed, and decayed, because the elements that compose it return
to join the elements of the same nature, altering, destroying them
and each other, especially when this chaos is abandoned to the
soul, which alone keeps her parts combined. Even if a body were
taken alone, it would not be a unity; it may be analyzed into form
and matter, principles that are necessary to the constitution of
all bodies, even of those that are simple.32 Besides, as they
contain extension, the bodies can be cut, divided into infinitely
small parts, and thus perish.33 Therefore if our body is a part of
ourselves,34 not all of us is immortal; if the body is only the
instrument of the soul, as the body is given to the soul only for a
definite period, it still is by nature perishable.
THE SOUL IS THE INDIVIDUALITY, AS ITS FORM, AND AS A SKILLED
WORKMAN.
The soul, which is the principal part of man, and which constitutes
man himself,35 should bear to the body the relation of form to
matter, or of a workman to his tool;36 in both cases the soul is
the man himself.
IF THE SOUL IS INCORPOREAL, WE MUST STUDY INCORPOREALITY.
2. What then is the nature of the soul? If she is a body, she can
be decomposed, as every body is a composite. If, on the contrary,
she is not a body, if hers is a different nature, the latter must
be examined; either in the same way that we have examined the body,
or in some other way.
A.—THE SOUL IS NOT CORPOREAL (AS THE STOICS THOUGHT).
(a.) (Neither a material molecule, nor a material aggregation of
material atoms could possess life and intelligence.) First, let us
consider the nature of this alleged soul-body. As every soul
necessarily possesses life, and as the body, considered as being
the soul, must obtain at least two molecules, if not more (there
are three possibilities): either only one of them possesses life,
or all of them possess it, or none of them. If one molecule alone
possesses life, it alone will be the soul. Of what nature will be
that molecule supposed to possess life by itself? Will it be water
(Hippo), air (Anaximenes, Archelaus, and Diogenes), earth, or fire
(Heraclitus, Stobaeus?37) But those are elements that are inanimate
by themselves, and which, even when they are animated, possess but
a borrowed life. Still there is no other kind of body. Even those
(philosophers, like the Pythagoreans) who posited elements other
(than water, air, earth and fire) still considered them to be
bodies, and not souls, not even attributing souls to them. The
theory that life results from the union of molecules of which,
nevertheless, none by itself possesses life, is an absurd
hypothesis. If further any molecule possesses life, then a single
one would be sufficient.
NEITHER MIXTURE NOR ITS PRINCIPLE WILL EXPLAIN LIFE AS A BODY.
The most irrational theory of all is that an aggregation of
molecules should produce life, that elements without intelligence
should beget intelligence. Others (like Alexander of Aphrodisia)
insist that to produce life these elements must be mingled in a
certain manner. That would, however, imply (as thought Gallen and
Hippocrates38) the existence of a principle which produces order,
and which should be the cause of mixture or, temperament,39 and
that should alone deserve being considered as soul. No simple
bodies could exist, much less composite bodies, unless there was a
soul in the universe; for it is (seminal) reason which, in, adding
itself to matter, produces body.40 But surely a (seminal) reason
could proceed from nowhere except a soul.
NO ATOMIC AGGREGATION COULD PRODUCE A SELF-HARMONIZING UNITY.
3. (b.) (No aggregation of atoms could form a whole that would be
one and sympathetic with itself.) Others, on the contrary, insist
that the soul is constituted by the union of atoms or indivisibles
(as thought Leucippus, Democritus and Epicurus.41) To refute this
error, we have to examine the nature of sympathy (or community of
affection, a Stoic characteristic of a living being,42) and
juxtaposition.43 On the one hand an aggregation of corporeal
molecules which are incapable of being united, and which do not
feel cannot form a single sympathetic whole such as is the soul,
which is sympathetic with herself. On the other hand, how could a
body or extension be constituted by (a juxtaposition of) atoms?
SOUL IS A SIMPLE SUBSTANCE, WHILE EVERY BODY IS COMPOSED OF MATTER
AND FORM.
(c.) (Every body is a composite of matter and form, while the soul
is a simple substance.) Inasmuch as matter possesses no quality,44
the matter of no simple body will be said to possess life in
itself. That which imparts life to it must then be its form. If
form is a "being," the soul cannot simultaneously be matter and
form; it will be only matter or form. Consequently, the soul will
not be the body, since the body is not constituted by matter
exclusively, as could be proved analytically, if necessary.
IF SOUL IS ONLY AN AFFECTION OF MATTER, WHENCE THAT AFFECTION?
(d.) (The soul is not a simple manner of being of matter, because
matter could not give itself a form.) Some Stoics might deny that
form was a "being," asserting the soul to be a mere affection (or,
manner of being) of matter.45 From whence then did matter acquire
this affection and animating life? Surely matter itself could not
endow itself with a form and a soul. That which endows matter or
any body with life must then be some principle alien and superior
to corporeal nature.
NO BODY COULD SUBSIST WITHOUT THE POWER OF THE UNIVERSAL SOUL.
(e.) (No body could subsist without the power of the universal
soul.) Besides no body could subsist without the power of the
universal Soul (from Numenius46). Every body, indeed, is in a
perpetual flow and movement (as thought Heraclitus, in Plato,
Cratylus47), and the world would soon perish if it contained
nothing but bodies, even if some one of them were to be called
soul; for such a soul, being composed of the same matter as the
other bodies, would undergo the same fate that they do; or rather,
there would not even be any body, everything would remain in the
condition of shapeless matter, since there would exist no principle
to fashion it. Why, there would not even be any matter, and the
universe would be annihilated to nothingness, if the care of
keeping its parts united were entrusted to some body which would
have nothing but the name of soul, as for instance, to air, or a
breath without cohesion,48 which could not be one, by itself. As
all bodies are divisible, if the universe depended on a body, it
would be deprived of intelligence and given up to chance. How,
indeed, could there be any order in a spirit which itself would
need to receive order from a soul? How could this spirit contain
reason and intelligence? On the hypothesis of the existence of the
soul, all these elements serve to constitute the body of the world,
and of every animal, because all different bodies together work for
the end of all; but without the soul, there is no order, and even
nothing exists any more.
IF THE SOUL IS NOT SIMPLE MATTER, SHE MUST BE A SUBSTANTIAL
FORM.
4. (f) (If the soul is anything but simple matter, she must be
constituted by a substantial form.) Those who claim that the soul
is a body are, by the very force of the truth, forced to recognize
the existence, before and above them, of a form proper to the soul;
for they acknowledge the existence of an intelligent spirit, and an
intellectual fire (as do the Stoics, following in the footsteps of
Heraclitus, Stobaeus49). According to them, it seems that, without
spirit or fire, there cannot be any superior nature in the order of
beings, and that the soul needs a location where she may be built
up. On the contrary, it is bodies alone that need to be built up on
something, and indeed, they are founded on the powers of the soul.
If really we do believe that the soul and life are no more than a
spirit, why add the qualification "of a certain characteristic,"50
a meaningless term employed when forced to admit an active nature
superior to that of bodies. As there are thousands of inanimate
spirits, not every spirit is a soul. If only that spirit is a soul
which possesses that "special characteristic," this "special
characteristic" and this "manner of being" will either be something
real, or will be nothing. If they are nothing, there will be
nothing real but spirit, and this alleged "manner of being" is
nothing more than a word. In that system, therefore, nothing but
matter really exists. God, the soul, and all other things are no
more than a word; the body alone really subsists. If, on the
contrary, that "manner of being" is something real, if it is
anything else than substrate or matter, if it resides in matter
without being material or composed of matter, it must then be a
nature different from the body, namely, a reason (by a pun).51
THE BODY EXERTS A UNIFORM ACTION, WHILE THE SOUL EXERTS A VARIED
ONE.
(g.) (The body exerts an uniform action, while the soul exerts a
very diverse action.) The following considerations further
demonstrate the impossibility of the soul being a body. A body must
be hot or cold, hard or soft, liquid or solid, black or white, or
qualities differing according to its nature. If it is only hot or
cold, light or heavy, black or white, it communicates its only
quality to what comes close to it; for fire could not cool, nor ice
heat. Nevertheless, the soul produces not only different effects in
[...]