Select Works of Plotinus · 295 of 752 · tr. Thomas Taylor
Select Works, Section 285 (part 1)
Section 1 1.
In our attempt to elucidate the Essence of the soul, we show it to be neither a material fabric nor, among immaterial things, a harmony.
The theory that it is some final development, some entelechy, we pass by, holding this to be neither true as presented nor practically definitive.
No doubt we make a very positive statement about it when we declare it to belong to the Intellectual Kind, to be of the divine order; but a deeper penetration of its nature is demanded.
In that allocation we were distinguishing things as they fall under the Intellectual or the sensible, and we placed the soul in the former class; now, taking its membership of the Intellectual for granted, we must investigate by another path the more specific characteristics of its nature.
There are, we hold, things primarily apt to partition, tending by sheer nature towards separate existence: they are things in which no part is identical either with another part or with the whole, while, also their part is necessarily less than the total and whole: these are magnitudes of the realm of sense, masses, each of which has a station of its own so that none can be identically present in entirety at more than one point at one time.
But to that order is opposed Essence [Real-Being]; this is in no degree susceptible of partition; it is unparted and impartible; interval is foreign to it, cannot enter into our idea of it: it has no need of place and is not, in diffusion or as an entirety, situated within any other being: it is poised over all beings at once, and this is not in the sense of using them as a base but in their being neither capable nor desirous of existing independently of it; it is an essence eternally unvaried: it is common to all that follows upon it: it is like the circle's centre to which all the radii are attached while leaving it unbrokenly in possession of itself, the starting point of their course and of their essential being, the ground in which they all participate: thus the indivisible is the principle of these divided existences and in their very outgoing they remain enduringly in contact with that stationary essence.
So far we have the primarily indivisible- supreme among the Intellectual and Authentically Existent- and we have its contrary, the Kind definitely divisible in things of sense; but there is also another Kind, of earlier rank than the sensible yet near to it and resident within it- an order, not, like body, primarily a thing of part, but becoming so upon incorporation.
The bodies are separate, and the ideal form which enters them is correspondingly sundered while, still, it is present as one whole in each of its severed parts, since amid that multiplicity in which complete individuality has entailed complete partition, there is a permanent identity; we may think of colour, qualities of all kinds, some particular shape, which can be present in many unrelated objects at the one moment, each entire and yet with no community of experience among the various manifestations.
In the case of such ideal-forms we may affirm complete partibility.
But, on the other hand, that first utterly indivisible Kind must be accompanied by a subsequent Essence, engendered by it and holding indivisibility from it but, in virtue of the necessary outgo from source, tending firmly towards the contrary, the wholly partible; this secondary Essence will take an intermediate Place between the first substance, the undivided, and that which is divisible in material things and resides in them.
Its presence, however, will differ in one respect from that of colour and quantity; these, no doubt, are present identically and entire throughout diverse material masses, but each several manifestation of them is as distinct from every other as the mass is from the mass.
Related passages · 6 parallels
◆christian_mysticism|The Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme|Chapter 11 (part 7)
“48.) "The soul and the Word are not one or one being.
The soul is born from the centre of nature, from the essences, and belongs to the body, for she issues from the essences of the body, and attracts to herself the body; but the Word is f…”
Both passages explore the nature of the soul and its relationship to higher, divine principles. They discuss the indivisibility of higher essences and the soul's connection to these essences, though they use different metaphors and frameworks.
◆platonism|Plato: Phaedo|Section 1q
“Then reflect, Cebes: is not the conclusion of the whole matter this?-that the soul is in the very likeness of the divine, and immortal, and intelligible, and uniform, and indissoluble, and unchangeable; and the body is in the very likeness…”
Both passages explore the nature of the soul and its relationship to the body, emphasizing the soul's divine, indivisible, and eternal qualities in contrast to the body's material, divisible, and perishable nature. They share a mystical perspective on the soul's essence and its connection to the divine.
◆platonism|Plato: Phaedo|Section 1u
“For when I consider the matter either alone or with Cebes, the argument does certainly appear to me, Socrates, to be not sufficient.
Socrates answered: I dare say, my friend, that you may be right, but I should like to know in what respect…”
Both passages explore the nature of the soul and its relationship to the body, with a focus on whether the soul is material or immaterial. Plato's passage uses the analogy of harmony and the lyre to question the immortality of the soul, while Plotinus' passage explicitly denies that the soul is a material fabric or a harmony, asserting its divine and intellectual nature.
◆platonism|Plato: Phaedo|Section 1y
“And I would ask you to be thinking of the truth and not of Socrates: agree with me, if I seem to you to be speaking the truth; or if not, withstand me might and main, that I may not deceive you as well as myself in my enthusiasm, and, like…”
Both passages discuss the nature of the soul and its relationship to the body. Plato's passage explores the idea of the soul as something prior to and more enduring than the body, contrasting it with the theory of the soul as harmony. The second passage also rejects the idea of the soul as harmony and asserts its intellectual and divine nature, aligning with Plato's emphasis on the soul's prior existence and its distinction from material fabric.
◆platonism|Plato: Phaedo|Section 1z
“Having, as I am convinced, rightly accepted this conclusion, and on sufficient grounds, I must, as I suppose, cease to argue or allow others to argue that the soul is a harmony.
Let me put the matter, Simmias, he said, in another point of…”
Both passages explore the nature of the soul and reject the idea that it is a harmony. They both delve into the characteristics of the soul, with Plotinus emphasizing its intellectual and divine nature, while Socrates uses a dialogue to argue against the soul being a harmony, focusing on the implications of such a view.
◆western_esoteric|Tertium Organum (P.D. Ouspensky)|Chapter XXII (part 3)
“These Eleatic ideas—namely that there is and there can be only One Absolute Being, infinite., unchangeable, without a second, without parts and passions—are the same ideas which underlie the Upanishads and have been fully worked out in the…”
Both passages discuss the nature of the soul and its relationship to a higher, indivisible essence or being. Passage A explores the soul's place in the Intellectual Kind and its connection to an unparted, impartible Essence, while Passage B discusses the unity of the soul with the divine, emphasizing the idea that the true self is one with the Absolute Being.