← Home
Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names · 23 of 39 · tr. C.E. Rolt

Chapter 4, Section 1w

For, were they such, they would not have sprung from the Good, nor have a place amongst existent creatures, nor have fallen from Goodness (being by their very nature always evil). Moreover, are they evil with respect to themselves or to others? If the former 344 344 i. e. If totally and essentially by very nature evil with respect to themselves. In so far as they continue to exist they are good with respect to themselves. they must also be self-destructive; if the latter, how do they destroy, and what do they destroy? 345 345 Evil is the contrary of the Good. Hence since the Good is by Its very nature productive, evil must be destructive. Hence the devils, if essentially evil, must be essentially destructive. Now they are not essentially self-destructive, for, were they such, they could not exist. Therefore, if essentially evil, they must under all circumstances be destructive of other things. Do they destroy Essence, or Faculty, or Activity? 346 346 The essence of (e. g.) an apple-tree is self-identity; its faculty is its latent power of producing leaves, apples, etc.; its activity is the actual production of the leaves, apples, etc. If Essence, then, first, they cannot destroy it contrary to its own nature; for they cannot destroy things which by their nature are indestructible, but only the things which are capable of destruction. And, secondly, destruction itself is not evil in every case and under all circumstances. Nor can any existent thing be destroyed so far as its being and nature act; for its destruction is due to a failure of its natural order, whereby the principle of harmony and symmetry grows weak and so cannot remain unchanged. 347 347 (1) The devils do not destroy all things (e. g. they do not annihilate the human soul). Therefore they are not essentially evil. Evil passions are good things misdirected. (2) Often the destruction of a thing is beneficial (e. g. the falling of the faded leaf). In fact, nothing could be destroyed if it had not grown feeble and so become worthy to be destroyed. (D. here, in his zeal to explain evil away, countenances the base doctrine that might is right. What is wrong with the whole system of the universe is that its underlying law is the survival of the fittest. The enlightened conscience of humanity rebels against this law.) But 121 the weakness is not complete; for, were it complete, it would have annihilated both the process of destruction and the object which suffers it: and such a destruction as this must be self-destructive. Hence such a quality is not evil but imperfect good; for that which is wholly destitute of the Good can have no place among things that have being. 348 348 The weakness is an imperfect good, and therefore the process of destruction which co-operates with the weakness is an imperfect good. And the same is true of destruction when it works upon a faculty or activity. Moreover, how can the devils be evil since they are sprung from God? For the Good produceth and createth good things. But it may be said that they are called evil not in so far as they exist (for they are from the Good and had a good existence given them), but in so far as they do not exist, haying been unable (as the Scripture saith) to keep their original state. For in what, pray, do we consider the wickedness of the devils to consist except their ceasing from the quality and activity of divine virtues? Otherwise, if the devils are naturally evil, they must be always evil. But evil is unstable. 349 349 The Good is permanent. Hence its contrary must be unstable.
§ Ask Guru about this passage →
Themes
Apophatic Theologytheology

Describing the divine only by negation—God transcends all positive categories and concepts; the via negativa.

The text defines evil by negation, stating it is the contrary of the Good and that destruction is not evil in every case.

All passages →
Emanation Hierarchycosmology

A chain of divine beings or principles flowing downward from a single transcendent source (the One or the Father), each level less perfect than the one above.

The passage describes creatures springing from the Good and falling from it, implying a hierarchical flow of being.

All passages →
Evil As Privationtheology

Augustinian and Plotinian doctrine that evil has no positive being of its own but is a lack, distortion, or absence of the good — denying ontological dualism while preserving moral seriousness.

The text centrally argues that evil is not a positive existence but a lack or distortion of the Good, stating 'Evil is the contrary of the Good' and that devils are called evil only in so far as they cease from divine virtues.

All passages →
Monadcosmology

The absolutely simple, undivided first principle from which all multiplicity and existence flows.

The reference to the 'Good' as a singular source from which all things spring implies a first principle.

All passages →
Return To Sourcesoteriology

The soul's journey back to its divine origin, reversing the fall into matter through stages of purification or illumination.

The text emphasizes that devils are called evil in so far as they cease from their original state and are sprung from God.

All passages →
Separation From Sourcesoteriology

The felt condition of exile from one's divine origin — Rumi's reed flute torn from its bed, Plotinus's 'we have forgotten,' the Gnostic forgetfulness; the affective wound that complements return_to_source and gives the return its motive.

The passage describes the devils' wickedness as consisting in their ceasing from the quality and activity of divine virtues, indicating a state of exile from their origin.

All passages →
Unity Of Beingtheology

The doctrine that all existence is ultimately one substance or one divine reality; non-duality as a theological claim.

The Good is described as a singular source that produceth and createth good things.

All passages →
Related passages · 7 parallels
neoplatonism|Select Works of Plotinus|Select Works, Section 448
“Section 16 16. We have, of course, already seen that a secondary must follow upon the First, and that this is a power immeasurably fruitful; and we indicated that this truth is confirmed by the entire order of things since there is nothing,…”
Shared concept: Monad — The absolutely simple, undivided first principle from which all multiplicity and existence flows. (derived)
neoplatonism|Select Works of Plotinus|Select Works, Section 451
“Section 1 1. Anything existing after The First must necessarily arise from that First, whether immediately or as tracing back to it through intervenients; there must be an order of secondaries and tertiaries, in which any second is to be re…”
Shared concept: Monad — The absolutely simple, undivided first principle from which all multiplicity and existence flows. (derived)
theosophy|The Secret Doctrine|Page 19 (part 1)
“The Secret Doctrine by H. P. Blavatsky -- Vol. 1 [[Vol. 1, Page]] 325 THE IMPARTIALITY OF SCIENTIFIC DENIALS. [[This page continued from previous section ]] § III. PRIMORDIAL SUBSTANCE AND DIVINE THOUGHT. "As it would seem irrational…”
Shared concept: Unity Of Being — The doctrine that all existence is ultimately one substance or one divine reality; non-duality as a theological claim. (derived)
theosophy|The Secret Doctrine|Page 3 (part 7)
“Herbert Spencer has of late so far modified his Agnosticism, as to assert that the nature of the "First Cause,"* which the Occultist more logically derives from the "Causeless Cause," the "Eternal," and the "Unknowable," may be essentially…”
Shared concept: Unity Of Being — The doctrine that all existence is ultimately one substance or one divine reality; non-duality as a theological claim. (derived)
western_esoteric|Tertium Organum (P.D. Ouspensky)|Chapter XIX (part 7)
“In the reduction of your soul to its simplest self, its divine essence, you realize this union—this identity. But this sublime condition is not of permanent duration. It is only now and then that we can enjoy this elevation above the limi…”
Shared concept: Separation From Source — The felt condition of exile from one's divine origin — Rumi's reed flute torn from its bed, Plotinus's 'we have forgotten,' the Gnostic forgetfulness; the affective wound that complements return_to_source and gives the return its motive. (derived)
sufism|The Masnavi, Book I (Rumi)|PROLOGUE-a
“HEARKEN to the reed-flute, how it complains, Lamenting its banishment from its home: "Ever since they tore me from my osier bed, My plaintive notes have moved men and women to tears. I burst my breast, striving to give vent to sighs, And t…”
Shared concept: Separation From Source — The felt condition of exile from one's divine origin — Rumi's reed flute torn from its bed, Plotinus's 'we have forgotten,' the Gnostic forgetfulness; the affective wound that complements return_to_source and gives the return its motive. (derived)
neoplatonism|Iamblichus: On the Mysteries|Chapter VIII-r
“But there are a certain few who by employing a certain supernatural power of intellect, are removed from nature , &c. The class to which these few belong is beautifully unfolded, as follows, by Plotinus, in the beginning of his Treatise on…”
Shared concept: Separation From Source — The felt condition of exile from one's divine origin — Rumi's reed flute torn from its bed, Plotinus's 'we have forgotten,' the Gnostic forgetfulness; the affective wound that complements return_to_source and gives the return its motive. (derived)