LIKE A CIRCLE, INTELLIGENCE IS INSEPARABLY SINGLE AND MANIFOLD.

Since both are identical, the unity that they form became manifold

because it does not contemplate unity, or it does not contemplate

unity so far as it is one; otherwise it would not be intelligence.

After having begun by being one, it ceased being one; unconsciously

it became manifold as a result of the fruitful germs it contained.

It developed to become all things, though it would have been better

for it not to have desired this. Indeed, it thus became the second

principle, as a circle which, by developing, becomes a figure and a a

surface, whose circumference, centre, and rays are distinct, occupying

different points. The origin of things is better than their goal. The

origin is not equivalent to the origin and goal, and that which is

both origin and goal is not identical with that which is no more than

origin. In other words, intelligence itself is not the intelligence

of a single thing, but universal intelligence; being universal,

it is the intelligence of all things.[192] If then intelligence be

universal Intelligence, and the intelligence of all things, then

each of its parts must also be universal, also possess all things.

Otherwise, intelligence would contain a part that was not intelligence;

intelligence would be composed of non-intelligences; and it would

resemble a conglomeration of things which would form an intelligence

only by their union. Thus intelligence is infinite. When something

proceeds from it, there is no weakening; neither for the things that

proceed from it, for this is also all things, nor for the intelligence

from which the thing proceeds, because it is not a summation of

parts.[193]

TO THE INTELLIGENCE THAT SIMULTANEOUSLY IS THE INTELLIGIBLE THERE MUST

BE A SUPREME.

9. (8). Such is the nature of Intelligence. Therefore it does not

occupy the first rank. Above it must be a Principle, whose discovery is

the object of this discussion. Indeed, the manifold must be posterior

to unity. Now intelligence is a number; and the principle of number

is unity, and the principle of the number that constitutes unity

is absolute Unity. Intelligence is simultaneously intelligence and

the intelligible; it is therefore two things at once. If then it be

composed of two things, we must seek what is prior to this duality.

Could this principle be Intelligence alone? But Intelligence is always

bound to the intelligible. If the Principle we seek cannot be bound

to the intelligible, neither will it be Intelligence. If then it be

not Intelligence, and transcend duality, it must be superior thereto,

and thus be above Intelligence. Could it be the Intelligence alone?

But we have already seen that the intelligible is inseparable from

Intelligence. If this Principle be neither Intelligence, nor the

intelligible, what can it be? It must be the Principle from which are

derived both Intelligence and its implied intelligible.

THE BEGETTER OF INTELLIGENCE MUST BE SIMPLER THAN IT, AND IS REACHED

NOT BY INTELLIGENT REASONING BUT A SIMPLE INTUITION.

But what is this Principle, and how are we to conceive it? It must be

either intelligent or not intelligent. If it be intelligent, it will

also be Intelligence. If it be not intelligent, it will be unconscious

of itself, and will not be in any way venerable. Though true, it would

not be clear or perspicuous to say that it is the Good itself, since we

do not yet have an object on which we could fasten our thought when we

speak of it. Besides, since the knowledge of the other objects in all

beings who can know something intelligent, occurs through Intelligence

and lies in Intelligence, by what rapid intellection (or intuition)

could we grasp this Principle that is superior to Intelligence? We

may answer, by that part of us which resembles it; for there is in

us something of it; or rather, it is in all things that participate

in Him. Everywhere you approach the Good, that which in you can

participate receives something of it. Take the illustration of a voice

in a desert, and the human ears that may be located there. Wherever

you listen to this voice, you will grasp it entirely in one sense,

and not entirely in another sense. How then would we grasp something

by approximating our intelligence (to the Good)? To see up there the

Principle it seeks, Intelligence must, so to speak, return backwards,

and, forming a duality, it must somehow exceed itself; that means, it

would have to cease being the Intelligence of all intelligible things.

Indeed, intelligence is primary life, and penetration of all things,

not (as the soul does) by a still actualizing movement,[194] but by a

movement which is ever already accomplished and past.[195] Therefore,

if Intelligence be life, which is the penetration of all things, if

it possess all things distinctly, without confusion--for otherwise

it would possess them in an imperfect and incomplete manner--it must

necessarily proceed from a superior Principle which, instead of being

in motion, is the principle of motion (by which Intelligence runs

through all things), of life, of intelligence, and of all things. The

Principle of all things could not be all things, it is only their

origin. Itself is neither all things, nor any particular thing,

because it begets everything; neither is it a multitude, for it is the

principle of multitude. Indeed that which begets is always simpler than

that which is begotten. Therefore if this principle beget Intelligence,

it necessarily is simpler than Intelligence. On the theory that it is

both one and all, we have an alternative, that it is all things because

it is all things at once, or that it is everything individually. On

the one hand, if it be all things at once, it will be posterior to

all things; if on the contrary it be prior to all things, it will be

different from all things. For if the One co-existed with all things,

the One would not be a principle; but the One must be a principle, and

must exist anteriorly to all things, if all things are to originate

from it. On the other hand, if we say that the One is each particular

thing, it will thereby be identical with every particular thing; later

it will be all things at once, without being able to discern anything.

Thus the One is none of these particular things, being prior to all

things.

Plotinos: Complete Works, v. 2 In Chronological Order, Grouped in Four Periods · 第 296 / 381 题