alexandria and her schools(亚历山大和她的学校)-第20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！
must allow another theory； which brought them into awful depths； which
may bring any generation which holds it into the same depths。
If Clement had asked the Neoplatonists： 〃You believe； Plotinus； in an
absolutely Good Being。 Do you believe that it desires to shed forth its
goodness on all？〃 〃Of course；〃 they would have answered； 〃on those
who seek for it； on the philosopher。〃
〃But not； it seems； Plotinus； on the herd； the brutal； ignorant mass；
wallowing in those foul crimes above which you have risen？〃 And at
that question there would have been not a little hesitation。 These brutes
in human form； these souls wallowing in earthly mire； could hardly； in the
Neoplatonists' eyes； be objects of the Divine desire。
〃Then this Absolute Good； you say； Plotinus； has no relation with them；
no care to raise them。 In fact； it cannot raise them； because they have
nothing in common with it。 Is that your notion？〃 And the
Neoplatonists would have； on the whole； allowed that argument。 And if
Clement had answered； that such was not his notion of Goodness； or of a
Good Being； and that therefore the goodness of their Absolute Good；
careless of the degradation and misery around it； must be something very
different from his notions of human goodness； the Neoplatonists would
have answered indeed they did answer〃After all； why not？ Why
should the Absolute Goodness be like our human goodness？〃 This is
Plotinus's own belief。 It is a question with him； it was still more a question
with those who came after him； whether virtues could be predicated of the
Divine nature； courage； for instance； of one who had nothing to fear； self…
restraint； of one who had nothing to desire。 And thus； by setting up a
different standard of morality for the divine and for the human； Plotinus
gradually arrives at the conclusion； that virtue is not the end； but the
means； not the Divine nature itself； as the Christian schools held； but only
the purgative process by which man was to ascend into heaven； and which
was necessary to arrive at that naturethat nature itself beingwhat？
And how to answer that last question was the abysmal problem of the
whole of Neoplatonic philosophy； in searching for which it wearied itself
out； generation after generation； till tired equally of seeking and of
61
… Page 62…
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
speaking； it fairly lay down and died。 In proportion as it refused to
acknowledge a common divine nature with the degraded mass； it deserted
its first healthy instinct； which told it that the spiritual world is identical
with the moral world； with right； love； justice； it tried to find new
definitions for the spiritual； it conceived it to be identical with the
intellectual。 That did not satisfy its heart。 It had to repeople the
spiritual world； which it had emptied of its proper denizens； with ghosts；
to reinvent the old daemonologies and polytheismsfrom thence to
descend into lower depths； of which we will speak hereafter。
But in the meanwhile we must look at another quarrel which arose
between the two twin schools of Alexandria。 The Neoplatonists said that
there is a divine element in man。 The Christian philosophers assented
fervently； and raised the old disagreeable question： 〃Is it in every man？
In the publicans and harlots as well as in the philosophers？ We say that it
is。〃 And there again the Neoplatonist finds it over hard to assent to a
doctrine； equally contrary to outward appearance； and galling to Pharisaic
pride； and enters into a hundred honest self… puzzles and self…
contradictions； which seem to justify him at last in saying； No。 It is in
the philosopher； who is ready by nature； as Plotinus has it； and as it were
furnished with wings； and not needing to sever himself from matter like
the rest； but disposed already to ascend to that which is above。 And in a
degree too； it is in the 〃lover；〃 who； according to Plotinus； has a certain
innate recollection of beauty； and hovers round it； and desires it； wherever
he sees it。 Him you may raise to the apprehension of the one incorporeal
Beauty； by teaching him to separate beauty from the various objects in
which it appears scattered and divided。 And it is even in the third class；
the lowest of whom there is hope； namely； the musical man； capable of
being passively affected by beauty； without having any active appetite for
it； the sentimentalist； in short； as we should call him nowadays。
But for the herd； Plotinus cannot say that there is anything divine in
them。 And thus it gradually comes out in all Neoplatonist writings which
I have yet examined； that the Divine only exists in a man； in proportion as
he is conscious of its existence in him。 From which spring two
conceptions of the Divine in man。 First； is it a part of him； if it is
62
… Page 63…
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
dependent for its existence on his consciousness of it？ Or is it； as Philo；
Plutarch； Marcus Aurelius would have held； as the Christians held；
something independent of him； without him； a Logos or Word speaking to
his reason and conscience？ With this question Plotinus grapples；
earnestly； shrewdly； fairly。 If you wish to see how he does it； you should
read the fourth and fifth books of the sixth Ennead； especially if you be
lucky enough to light on a copy of that rare book； Taylor's faithful though
crabbed translation。 Not that the result of his search is altogether
satisfactory。 He enters into subtle and severe disquisitions concerning
soul。 Whether it is one or many。 How it can be both one and many。
He has the strongest perception that； to use the noble saying of the
Germans； 〃Time and Space are no gods。〃 He sees clearly that the soul；
and the whole unseen world of truly existing being； is independent of time
and space： and yet； after he has wrestled with the two Titans； through
page after page； and apparently conquered them； they slip in again
unawares into the battle… field； the moment his back is turned。 He denies
that the one Reason has partsit must exist as a whole wheresoever it
exists： and yet he cannot express the relation of the individual soul to it；
but by saying that we are parts of it； or that each thing； down to the lowest；
receives as much soul as it is capable of possessing。 Ritter has worked
out at length； though in a somewhat dry and lifeless way； the hundred
contradictions of this kind which you meet in Plotinus； contradictions
which I suspect to be inseparable from any philosophy starting from his
grounds。 Is he not looking for the spiritual in a region where it does not
exist； in the region of logical conceptions and abstractions； which are not
realities； but only； after all； symbols of our own； whereby we express to
ourselves the processes of our own brain？ May not his Christian
contemporaries have been nearer scientific truth； as well as nearer the
common sense and practical belief of mankind； in holding that that which
is spiritual is personal； and can only be seen or conceived of as residing in
persons； and that that which is personal is moral； and has to do； not with
abstractions of the intellect； but with right and wrong； love and hate； and
all which； in the common instincts of men； involves a free will； a free
judgment； a free responsibility and desert？ And that； therefore； if there
63
… Page 64…
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
were a
