IT IS AN ERROR TO CONSIDER THE LOVE AS IDENTICAL WITH THE WORLD.

5. What is the nature of this Guardian, and what is, in general, the

nature of guardians, according to (Plato's treatment of the subject in)

his "Banquet"? What is the nature of guardians? What is the nature of

the Love born of Need (Penia) and Abundance (Poros), son of Prudence

(Metis), at the birth of Venus?[132]

(Plutarch)[133] held that Plato, by Love, meant the world. He should

have stated that Love is part of the world, and was born in it. His

opinion is erroneous, as may be demonstrated by several proofs. First,

(Plato) calls the world a blessed deity, that is self-sufficient;

however, he never attributes these characteristics to Love, which

he always calls a needy being. Further, the world is composed of a

body and a Soul, the latter being Venus; consequently, Venus would

be the directing part of Love; or, if we take the world to mean

the world-Soul, just as we often say "man" when we mean the human

soul,[134] Love would be identical with Venus. Third, if Love, which

is a Guardian, is the world, why should not the other Guardians (who

evidently are of the same nature) not also be the world? In this case,

the world would be composed of Guardians. Fourth, how could we apply to

the world that which (Plato) says of Love, that it is the "guardian of

fair children"? Last, Plato describes Love as lacking clothing, shoes,

and lodging. This could not be applied to the world without absurdity

or ridicule.

Plotinos: Complete Works, v. 4 In Chronological Order, Grouped in Four Periods · 第 119 / 382 题