Select Works of Plotinus · 566 of 752 · tr. Thomas Taylor
Select Works, Section 543
Section 5 5. A first point demanding consideration: Bodies- those, for example, of animals and plants- are each a multiplicity founded on colour and shape and magnitude, and on the forms and arrangement of parts: yet all these elements spring from a unity. Now this unity must be either Unity-Absolute or some unity less thorough-going and complete, but necessarily more complete than that which emerges, so to speak, from the body itself; this will be a unity having more claim to reality than the unity produced from it, for divergence from unity involves a corresponding divergence from Reality. Since, thus, bodies take their rise from unity, but not "unity" in the sense of the complete unity or Unity-Absolute- for this could never yield discrete plurality- it remains that they be derived from a unity Pluralized. But the creative principle [in bodies] is Soul: Soul therefore is a pluralized unity. We then ask whether the plurality here consists of the Reason-Principles of the things of process. Or is this unity not something different from the mere sum of these Principles? Certainly Soul itself is one Reason-Principle, the chief of the Reason-Principles, and these are its Act as it functions in accordance with its essential being; this essential being, on the other hand, is the potentiality of the Reason-Principles. This is the mode in which this unity is a plurality, its plurality being revealed by the effect it has upon the external. But, to leave the region of its effect, suppose we take it at the higher non-effecting part of Soul; is not plurality of powers to be found in this part also? The existence of this higher part will, we may presume, be at once conceded. But is this existence to be taken as identical with that of the stone? Surely not. Being in the case of the stone is not Being pure and simple, but stone-being: so here; Soul's being denotes not merely Being but Soul-being. Is then that "being" distinct from what else goes to complete the essence [or substance] of Soul? Is it to be identified with Bring [the Absolute], while to some differentia of Being is ascribed the production of Soul? No doubt Soul is in a sense Being, and this is not as a man "is" white, but from the fact of its being purely an essence: in other words, the being it possesses it holds from no source external to its own essence.
Themes
◇Body As Obstacleanthropology
The material body viewed as a prison, tomb, or source of error that hinders spiritual knowledge and return.
[auto] The passage critiques identifying the Real with body and sense-perception, implying material existence hinders access to true first-principles.
All passages →Related passages · 10 parallels
◆christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 13, Section 1f
“Thus in the form “1 x 1” the first figure represents the unity underlying all numbers, the second figure represents unity as a particular number among other numbers.
The first figure may thus be taken as a symbol of the Godhead, the second…”
Both passages discuss the concept of unity and plurality, exploring how multiplicity arises from a fundamental unity. They also touch on the nature of the soul or Godhead as a unified principle that underlies all existence.
◆christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 5, Section 1e
“And if these Universals exist by participating in Existence, far more is this true of the things which participate in them.
6.
Thus the first gift which the Absolute and Transcendent Goodness bestows is that of mere Existence, and so It d…”
Both passages discuss the concept of unity and plurality, exploring how multiplicity arises from a singular source. They both delve into the nature of being and the role of a higher, unifying principle in creation, reflecting a genuine conceptual parallel across different mystical traditions.
◆christian_mysticism|The Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme|Chapter 2 (part 1)
“p.
58 CHAPTER II.
THE UNITY OF THE ALL.
"We are all one body in Christ, and have all the Spirit of Christ within our reach.
If, then, we enter into the Christ, we may see and know everything by the power of His Spirit." ( Forty Question…”
Both passages discuss the limitations of human perception and intellect in understanding ultimate reality. They critique the reliance on sensory perception and emphasize the need for a higher, more abstract understanding of existence.
◆platonism|Plato: Timaeus|Section 1y
“He, however, who raises the question whether they are to be truly regarded as one or five, takes up a more reasonable position.
Arguing from probabilities, I am of opinion that they are one; another, regarding the question from another poi…”
Both passages explore the nature of fundamental elements and their interactions, with a focus on unity and plurality. Plato discusses the elemental forms and their transformations, while the second passage delves into the unity and plurality of the soul and its creative principles. Both texts emphasize the underlying unity from which multiplicity arises.
◆western_esoteric|Tertium Organum (P.D. Ouspensky)|Chapter I (part 5)
“It is not true because our experimental knowledge is not a confused perception of a real world .
It is a very acute perception of an entirely unreal world appearing round about us at the moment of our contact with the world of true causes,…”
Both passages explore the nature of reality and the limitations of human perception. They question the reliability of sensory experience and the existence of an underlying reality that is not directly accessible through our senses. The passages share a philosophical inquiry into the nature of existence and the constraints of human understanding.
◆western_esoteric|Tertium Organum (P.D. Ouspensky)|Chapter I (part 6)
“Or, as a logical conclusion from Kant's ideas, shall we recognize the validity of Berkeley's idea, and deny the existence of the world itself except in imagination?
______ Positive philosophy stands in a very ambiguous relation to Kant's v…”
Both passages discuss the limitations and subjectivity of sensory perception and the philosophical implications of relying on it. They explore the tension between empirical observation and the nature of reality, questioning the validity of sense perception as a guide to first principles.
◆western_esoteric|Tertium Organum (P.D. Ouspensky)|Chapter II (part 7)
“A man easily admits his incompetency in music, dancing, or higher mathematics, but he always maintains the privilege of having an opinion and being a judge of questions relating to "first principles." It is difficult to discuss with such me…”
Both passages discuss the nature of reality and the limitations of human perception and understanding. They explore the idea that our sensory experiences and perceptions may not accurately reflect the true nature of reality, and they question the primacy of material existence.
◆western_esoteric|Tertium Organum (P.D. Ouspensky)|Chapter XVI (part 7)
“From the STANDPOINT OF LOGIC such a theory is more correct than the theory of two classes of actions—REASONED AND UN-REASONED.
It at least establishes the principle of NECESSARY UNIFORMITY.
It is really impossible to suppose that in an im…”
Both passages explore the nature of reality and consciousness, questioning the primacy of physical phenomena and mechanical explanations. They both argue for a more unified and conscious understanding of the world, though from different philosophical and mystical perspectives.
◆western_esoteric|Tertium Organum (P.D. Ouspensky)|Chapter XIX (part 2)
“A little more, and in every separate branch of science that which it does not know will become greater than that which it knows .
In every department science itself is beginning to repudiate its p.
234 own foundations.
A little more, and…”
Both passages critique the limitations of empirical and positivistic approaches to understanding reality. They highlight the inadequacy of these methods in addressing fundamental questions about existence, consciousness, and the nature of reality.
◆western_esoteric|Tertium Organum (P.D. Ouspensky)|Page 28 (part 2)
“We know that it must give it , but FROM WHAT could he know that?
None of his contemporaries ever united sanctity with the idea of the comprehension of space; and in general there was no discussion at all about "space" at that time, at leas…”
Both passages critique a dominant philosophical approach (positivism in Passage A and sense-perception-based philosophy in Passage B) for limiting the scope of thought and understanding. They both argue for a deeper, more mystical or intellectual understanding of reality beyond superficial or materialistic interpretations.