the six enneads-第4节

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！


s　no　reason　why　we　should　not；　by　virtues　peculiar　to　our　state；　attain　Likeness　to　a　model　in　which　virtue　has　no　place。　　　　　But　is　that　conceivable？　　　　　When　warmth　comes　in　to　make　anything　warm；　must　there　needs　be　something　to　warm　the　source　of　the　warmth？　　　　　If　a　fire　is　to　warm　something　else；　must　there　be　a　fire　to　warm　that　fire？　　　　　Against　the　first　illustration　it　may　be　retorted　that　the　source　of　the　warmth　does　already　contain　warmth；　not　by　an　infusion　but　as　an　essential　phase　of　its　nature；　so　that；　if　the　analogy　is　to　hold；　the　argument　would　make　Virtue　something　communicated　to　the　Soul　but　an　essential　constituent　of　the　Principle　from　which　the　Soul　attaining　Likeness　absorbs　it。　　　　　Against　the　illustration　drawn　from　the　fire；　it　may　be　urged　that　the　analogy　would　make　that　Principle　identical　with　virtue；　whereas　we　hold　it　to　be　something　higher。　　　　　The　objection　would　be　valid　if　what　the　soul　takes　in　were　one　and　the　same　with　the　source；　but　in　fact　virtue　is　one　thing；　the　source　of　virtue　quite　another。　The　material　house　is　not　identical　with　the　house　conceived　in　the　intellect；　and　yet　stands　in　its　likeness：　the　material　house　has　distribution　and　order　while　the　pure　idea　is　not　constituted　by　any　such　elements；　distribution；　order；　symmetry　are　not　parts　of　an　idea。　　　　　So　with　us：　it　is　from　the　Supreme　that　we　derive　order　and　distribution　and　harmony；　which　are　virtues　in　this　sphere：　the　Existences　There；　having　no　need　of　harmony；　order　or　distribution；　have　nothing　to　do　with　virtue；　and；　none　the　less；　it　is　by　our　possession　of　virtue　that　we　become　like　to　Them。　　　　　Thus　much　to　show　that　the　principle　that　we　attain　Likeness　by　virtue　in　no　way　involves　the　existence　of　virtue　in　the　Supreme。　But　we　have　not　merely　to　make　a　formal　demonstration：　we　must　persuade　as　well　as　demonstrate。　　　　　2。　First；　then；　let　us　examine　those　good　qualities　by　which　we　hold　Likeness　comes；　and　seek　to　establish　what　is　this　thing　which；　as　we　possess　it；　in　transcription；　is　virtue　but　as　the　Supreme　possesses　it；　is　in　the　nature　of　an　exemplar　or　archetype　and　is　not　virtue。　　　　　We　must　first　distinguish　two　modes　of　Likeness。　　　　　There　is　the　likeness　demanding　an　identical　nature　in　the　objects　which；　further；　must　draw　their　likeness　from　a　common　principle：　and　there　is　the　case　in　which　B　resembles　A；　but　A　is　a　Primal；　not　concerned　about　B　and　not　said　to　resemble　B。　In　this　second　case；　likeness　is　understood　in　a　distinct　sense：　we　no　longer　look　for　identity　of　nature；　but；　on　the　contrary；　for　divergence　since　the　likeness　has　come　about　by　the　mode　of　difference。　　　　　What；　then；　precisely　is　Virtue；　collectively　and　in　the　particular？　The　clearer　method　will　be　to　begin　with　the　particular；　for　so　the　common　element　by　which　all　the　forms　hold　the　general　name　will　readily　appear。　　　　　The　Civic　Virtues；　on　which　we　have　touched　above；　are　a　principle　or　order　and　beauty　in　us　as　long　as　we　remain　passing　our　life　here：　they　ennoble　us　by　setting　bound　and　measure　to　our　desires　and　to　our　entire　sensibility；　and　dispelling　false　judgement…　and　this　by　sheer　efficacy　of　the　better；　by　the　very　setting　of　the　bounds；　by　the　fact　that　the　measured　is　lifted　outside　of　the　sphere　of　the　unmeasured　and　lawless。　　　　　And；　further；　these　Civic　Virtues…　measured　and　ordered　themselves　and　acting　as　a　principle　of　measure　to　the　Soul　which　is　as　Matter　to　their　forming…　are　like　to　the　measure　reigning　in　the　over…world；　and　they　carry　a　trace　of　that　Highest　Good　in　the　Supreme；　for；　while　utter　measurelessness　is　brute　Matter　and　wholly　outside　of　Likeness；　any　participation　in　Ideal…Form　produces　some　corresponding　degree　of　Likeness　to　the　formless　Being　There。　And　participation　goes　by　nearness：　the　Soul　nearer　than　the　body；　therefore　closer　akin；　participates　more　fully　and　shows　a　godlike　presence；　almost　cheating　us　into　the　delusion　that　in　the　Soul　we　see　God　entire。　　　　　This　is　the　way　in　which　men　of　the　Civic　Virtues　attain　Likeness。　　　　　3。　We　come　now　to　that　other　mode　of　Likeness　which；　we　read；　is　the　fruit　of　the　loftier　virtues：　discussing　this　we　shall　penetrate　more　deeply　into　the　essence　of　the　Civic　Virtue　and　be　able　to　define　the　nature　of　the　higher　kind　whose　existence　we　shall　establish　beyond　doubt。　　　　　To　Plato；　unmistakably；　there　are　two　distinct　orders　of　virtue；　and　the　civic　does　not　suffice　for　Likeness：　〃Likeness　to　God；〃　he　says；　〃is　a　flight　from　this　world's　ways　and　things〃：　in　dealing　with　the　qualities　of　good　citizenship　he　does　not　use　the　simple　term　Virtue　but　adds　the　distinguishing　word　civic：　and　elsewhere　he　declares　all　the　virtues　without　exception　to　be　purifications。　　　　　But　in　what　sense　can　we　call　the　virtues　purifications；　and　how　does　purification　issue　in　Likeness？　　　　　As　the　Soul　is　evil　by　being　interfused　with　the　body；　and　by　coming　to　share　the　body's　states　and　to　think　the　body's　thoughts；　so　it　would　be　good；　it　would　be　possessed　of　virtue；　if　it　threw　off　the　body's　moods　and　devoted　itself　to　its　own　Act…　the　state　of　Intellection　and　Wisdom…　never　allowed　the　passions　of　the　body　to　affect　it…　the　virtue　of　Sophrosyne…　knew　no　fear　at　the　parting　from　the　body…　the　virtue　of　Fortitude…　and　if　reason　and　the　Intellectual…Principle　ruled…　in　which　state　is　Righteousness。　Such　a　disposition　in　the　Soul；　become　thus　intellective　and　immune　to　passion；　it　would　not　be　wrong　to　call　Likeness　to　God；　for　the　Divine；　too；　is　pure　and　the　Divine…Act　is　such　that　Likeness　to　it　is　Wisdom。　　　　　But　would　not　this　make　virtue　a　state　of　the　Divine　also？　　　　　No：　the　Divine　has　no　states；　the　state　is　in　the　Soul。　The　Act　of　Intellection　in　the　Soul　is　not　the　same　as　in　the　Divine：　of　things　in　the　Supreme；　Soul　grasps　some　after　a　mode　of　its　own；　some　not　at　all。　　　　　Then　yet　again；　the　one　word　Intellection　covers　two　distinct　Acts？　　　　　Rather　there　is　primal　Intellection　and　there　is　Intellection　deriving　from　the　Primal　and　of　other　scope。　　　　　As　speech　is　the　echo　of　the　thought　in　the　Soul；　so　thought　in　the　Soul　is　an　echo　from　elsewhere：　that　is　to　say；　as　the　uttered　thought　is　an　image　of　the　soul…thought；　so　the　soul…thought　images　a　thought　above　itself　and　is　the　interpreter　of　the　higher　sphere。　　　　　Virtue；　in　the　same　way；　is　a　thing　of　the　Soul：　it　does　not　belong　to　the　Intellectual…Principle　or　to　the　Transcendence。　　　　　4。　We　come；　so；　to　the　question　whether　Purification　is　the　whole　of　this　human　quality；　virtue；　or　merely　the　forerunner　upon　which　virtue　follows？　Does　virtue　imply　the　achieved　state　of　purification　or　does　the　mere　process　suffice　to　it；　Virtue　being　something　of　less　perfection　than　the　accomplished　pureness　which　is　almost　the　Term？　　　　　To　have　been　purified　is　to　have　cleansed　away　everything　alien：　but　Goodness　is　something　more。　　　　　If　before　the　impurity　entered　there　was　Goodness；　the　Goodness　suffices；　but　even　so；　not　the　act　of　cleansing　but　the　cleansed　thing　that　emerges　will　be　The　Good。　And　it　remains　to　establish　what　this　emergent　is。　　　　　It　can　scarcely　prove　to　be　The　Good：　The　Absolute　Good　cannot　be　thought　to　have　taken　up　its　abode　with　Evil。　We　can　think　of　it　only　as　something　of　the　nature　of　good　but　paying　a　double　allegiance　and　unable　to　rest　in　the　Authentic　Good。　　　　　The　Soul's　true　Good　is　in　devotion　to　the　Intellectual…Principle；　its　kin；　evil　to　the　Soul　lies　in　frequenting　strangers。　There　is　no　other　way　for　it　than　to　purify　itself　and　so　enter　into　relation　with　its　own；　the　new　phase　begins　by　a　new　orientation。　　　　　After　the　Purification；　then；　there　is　still　this　orientation　to　be　made？　No：　by　the　purification　the　true　alignment　stands　accomplished。　　　　　The　Soul's　virtue；　then；　is　this　alignment？　No：　it　is　what　the　alignment　brings　about　within。　　　　　And　this　is。。。？　　　　　That　it　sees；　that；　like　sight　affected　by　the　thing　seen；　the　soul　admits　the　imprint；　graven　upon　it　and　working　within　it；　of　the　vision　it　has　come　to。　　　　　But　was　not　the　Soul　possessed　of　all　this　always；　or　had　it　forgotten？　　　　　What　it　now　sees；　it　certainly　always　possessed；　but　as　lying　away　in　the　dark；　not　as　acting　within　it：　to　dispel　the　darkness；　and　thus　come　to　knowledge　of　its　inner　content；　it　must　thrust　towards　the　light。　　　　　Besides；　it　possessed　not　the　originals　but　images；　pictures；　and　these　it　must　bring　into　closer　accord　with　the　verities　they　represent。　And；　further；　if　the　Intellectual…Principle　is　said　to　be　a　possession　of　the　Soul；　this　is　only　in　the　sense　that　It　is　not　alien　and　that　the　link　becomes　very　close　when　the　Soul's　sight　is　turned　towards　It：　otherwise；　ever…present　though　It　be；　It　remains　foreign；　just　as　our　knowledge；　if　it　does　not　determine　action；　is　dead　to　us。　　　　　5。　So　we　come　to　the　scope　of　the　purification：　that　understood；　the　nature　of　Likeness　becomes　clear。　Likeness　to　what　Principle？　Identity　with　what　God？　　　　　The　question　is　substantially　this：　how　far　does　purification　dispel　the　two　orders　of　passion…　anger；　desire　and　the　like；　with　grief　and　its　kin…　and　in　what　degree　the　disengagement　from　the　body　is　possible。　　　　　Disengagement　means　simply　that　the　soul　withdraws　to　its　own　place。　　　　　It　will　hold　itself　above　all　p