← Home
Select Works of Plotinus · 725 of 752 · tr. Thomas Taylor

Select Works, Section 693

Section 11 11. But this Unoriginating, what is it? We can but withdraw, silent, hopeless, and search no further. What can we look for when we have reached the furthest? Every enquiry aims at a first and, that attained, rests. Besides, we must remember that all questioning deals with the nature of a thing, its quality, its cause or its essential being. In this case the being- in so far as we can use the word- is knowable only by its sequents: the question as to cause asks for a principle beyond, but the principle of all has no principle; the question as to quality would be looking for an attribute in that which has none: the question as to nature shows only that we must ask nothing about it but merely take it into the mind if we may, with the knowledge gained that nothing can be permissibly connected with it. The difficulty this Principle presents to our mind in so far as we can approach to conception of it may be exhibited thus: We begin by posing space, a place, a Chaos; into this existing container, real or fancied, we introduce God and proceed to enquire: we ask, for example, whence and how He comes to be there: we investigate the presence and quality of this new-comer projected into the midst of things here from some height or depth. But the difficulty disappears if we eliminate all space before we attempt to conceive God: He must not be set in anything either as enthroned in eternal immanence or as having made some entry into things: He is to be conceived as existing alone, in that existence which the necessity of discussion forces us to attribute to Him, with space and all the rest as later than Him- space latest of all. Thus we conceive as far as we may, the spaceless; we abolish the notion of any environment: we circumscribe Him within no limit; we attribute no extension to Him; He has no quality since no shape, even shape Intellectual; He holds no relationship but exists in and for Himself before anything is. How can we think any longer of that "Thus He happened to be"? How make this one assertion of Him of whom all other assertion can be no more than negation? It is on the contrary nearer the truth to say "Thus He has happened not to be": that contains at least the utter denial of his happening.
Themes
Divine Simplicitytheology

The doctrine that God has no parts, divisions, or composite attributes; pure undivided being.

The description of power as 'entire' and reserved to one alone suggests an undivided divine nature.

All passages →
Apophatic Theologytheology

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

[auto] It scrutinizes the ascription of power to the All-Transcendent, warning against equating divine power with essential act or potentiality.

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.

[auto] The text distinguishes between the All-Transcendent, the Firsts, and the rest of beings with varying degrees of power and freedom.

All passages →
Living Godtheology

The divine conceived as active, present, and dynamic—not an abstract principle but a personal responsive reality.

[auto] The passage explicitly questions whether gods have voluntary action and freedom of action, implying a dynamic and active divine nature.

All passages →
Monadcosmology

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

[auto] The passage reserves entire power and freedom of action to 'one alone,' reflecting the singular first principle.

All passages →
Related passages · 4 parallels
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 7, Section 1d
Furthermore, we must ask how it is that we know God when He cannot be perceived by the mind or the senses and is not a particular Being. Perhaps ‘tis true to say that we know not God by His Nature (for this is unknowable and beyond the rea…”
Both passages discuss the nature of the divine as being beyond human comprehension and existing outside of space and time. They also explore the idea that the divine can only be known through its manifestations or effects, rather than through direct perception or understanding.
christian_mysticism|The Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme|Chapter 5 (part 7)
2.) "Lucifer had within himself the fire and the light. He p. 113 was free. Why then did he imagine (project his consciousness) into the fire? The light and the power of God did not draw him into the fire, but the wrath of nature. Why…”
Both passages explore the concept of free will and its limitations within a divine context. Passage A discusses the nature of divine and human freedom, while Passage B examines Lucifer's use of free will and its consequences, both touching on the theme of voluntary action and its constraints.
christian_mysticism|The Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme|Chapter 7 (part 3)
2.) "The inner man stood in heaven; his essences were the Paradise; his body was indestructible. He knew the language of God and the angels, and the language of nature, as may be seen by Adam giving names to all creatures, to each accordin…”
Both passages explore the concept of divine power and human freedom, with Passage A discussing the nature of divine omnipotence and human free will, while Passage B describes Adam's state of divine-like power and freedom before the fall. Both texts grapple with the idea of power, knowledge, and the relationship between the divine and human.
platonism|Plato: Timaeus|Section 1h
First then, in my judgment, we must make a distinction and ask, What is that which always is and has no becoming; and what is that which is always becoming and never is? That which is apprehended by intelligence and reason is always in the…”
Both passages explore the nature of the ultimate reality or principle. Plotinus discusses the Unoriginating, which is beyond all attributes and exists alone, while Timaeus describes the creator of the universe as good and unchangeable, emphasizing the eternal and unchangeable nature of the original pattern. Both texts grapple with the concept of a transcendent, uncreated principle.