the six enneads- 第94部分

rd　if　there　were　no　separate　being　in　previous　actuality？　Even　on　the　absurd　supposition　that　the　potentially　existent　brings　itself　to　actuality；　it　must　be　looking　to　some　Term；　and　that　must　be　no　potentiality　but　actual。　　　　　No　doubt　the　eternally　self…identical　may　have　potentiality　and　be　self…led　to　self…realization；　but　even　in　this　case　the　being　considered　as　actualized　is　of　higher　order　than　the　being　considered　as　merely　capable　of　actualization　and　moving　towards　a　desired　Term。　　　　　Thus　the　higher　is　the　earlier；　and　it　has　a　nature　other　than　body；　and　it　exists　always　in　actuality：　Intellectual…Principle　and　Soul　precede　Nature：　thus；　Soul　does　not　stand　at　the　level　of　pneuma　or　of　body。　　　　　These　arguments　are　sufficient　in　themselves；　though　many　others　have　been　framed；　to　show　that　the　soul　is　not　to　be　thought　of　as　a　body。　　　　　8。　D。　（12）　Soul　belongs；　then；　to　another　Nature：　What　is　this？　Is　it　something　which；　while　distinct　from　body；　still　belongs　to　it；　for　example　a　harmony　or　accord？　　　　　The　Pythagorean　school　holds　this　view　thinking　that　the　soul　is；　with　some　difference；　comparable　to　the　accord　in　the　strings　of　a　lyre。　When　the　lyre　is　strung　a　certain　condition　is　produced　upon　the　strings；　and　this　is　known　as　accord：　in　the　same　way　our　body　is　formed　of　distinct　constituents　brought　together；　and　the　blend　produces　at　once　life　and　that　soul　which　is　the　condition　existing　upon　the　bodily　total。　　　　　That　this　opinion　is　untenable　has　already　been　shown　at　length。　The　soul　is　a　prior　＇to　body＇；　the　accord　is　a　secondary　to　the　lyre。　Soul　rules；　guides　and　often　combats　the　body；　as　an　accord　of　body　it　could　not　do　these　things。　Soul　is　a　real　being；　accord　is　not。　That　due　blending　＇or　accord＇　of　the　corporeal　materials　which　constitute　our　frame　would　be　simply　health。　Each　separate　part　of　the　body；　entering　as　a　distinct　entity　into　the　total；　would　require　a　distinct　soul　＇its　own　accord　or　note＇；　so　that　there　would　be　many　souls　to　each　person。　Weightiest　of　all；　before　this　soul　there　would　have　to　be　another　soul　to　bring　about　the　accord　as；　in　the　case　of　the　musical　instrument；　there　is　the　musician　who　produces　the　accord　upon　the　strings　by　his　own　possession　of　the　principle　on　which　he　tunes　them：　neither　musical　strings　nor　human　bodies　could　put　themselves　in　tune。　　　　　Briefly；　the　soulless　is　treated　as　ensouled；　the　unordered　becomes　orderly　by　accident；　and　instead　of　order　being　due　to　soul；　soul　itself　owes　its　substantial　existence　to　order…　which　is　self…caused。　Neither　in　the　sphere　of　the　partial；　nor　in　that　of　Wholes　could　this　be　true。　The　soul；　therefore；　is　not　a　harmony　or　accord。　　　　　8。　E。　（13）　We　come　to　the　doctrine　of　the　Entelechy；　and　must　enquire　how　it　is　applied　to　soul。　　　　　It　is　thought　that　in　the　Conjoint　of　body　and　soul　the　soul　holds　the　rank　of　Form　to　the　Matter　which　here　is　the　ensouled　body…　not；　then；　Form　to　every　example　of　body　or　to　body　as　merely　such；　but　to　a　natural　organic　body　having　the　potentiality　of　life。　　　　　Now；　if　the　soul　has　been　so　injected　as　to　be　assimilated　into　the　body　as　the　design　of　a　statue　is　worked　into　the　bronze；　it　will　follow　that；　upon　any　dividing　of　the　body；　the　soul　is　divided　with　it；　and　if　any　part　of　the　body　is　cut　away　a　fragment　of　soul　must　go　with　it。　Since　an　Entelechy　must　be　inseparable　from　the　being　of　which　it　is　the　accomplished　actuality；　the　withdrawal　of　the　soul　in　sleep　cannot　occur；　in　fact　sleep　itself　cannot　occur。　Moreover　if　the　soul　is　an　Entelechy；　there　is　an　end　to　the　resistance　offered　by　reason　to　the　desires；　the　total　＇of　body　and　Entelechy…Soul＇　must　have　one…uniform　experience　throughout；　and　be　aware　of　no　internal　contradiction。　Sense…perception　might　occur；　but　intellection　would　be　impossible。　The　very　upholders　of　the　Entelechy　are　thus　compelled　to　introduce　another　soul；　the　Intellect；　to　which　they　ascribe　immortality。　The　reasoning　soul；　then；　must　be　an　Entelechy…　if　the　word　is　to　be　used　at　all…　in　some　other　mode。　　　　　Even　the　sense…perceiving　soul；　in　its　possession　of　the　impressions　of　absent　objects；　must　hold　these　without　aid　from　the　body；　for　otherwise　the　impression　must　be　present　in　it　like　shape　and　images；　and　that　would　mean　that　it　could　not　take　in　fresh　impressions；　the　perceptive　soul；　then；　cannot　be　described　as　this　Entelechy　inseparable　from　the　body。　Similarly　the　desiring　principle；　dealing　not　only　with　food　and　drink　but　with　things　quite　apart　from　body；　this　also　is　no　inseparable　Entelechy。　　　　　There　remains　the　vegetal　principle　which　might　seem　to　suggest　the　possibility　that；　in　this　phase；　the　soul　may　be　the　inseparable　Entelechy　of　the　doctrine。　But　it　is　not　so。　The　principle　of　every　growth　lies　at　the　root；　in　many　plants　the　new　springing　takes　place　at　the　root　or　just　above　it：　it　is　clear　that　the　life…principle；　the　vegetal　soul；　has　abandoned　the　upper　portions　to　concentrate　itself　at　that　one　spot：　it　was　therefore　not　present　in　the　whole　as　an　inseparable　Entelechy。　Again；　before　the　plant's　development　the　life…principle　is　situated　in　that　small　beginning：　if；　thus；　it　passes　from　large　growth　to　small　and　from　the　small　to　the　entire　growth；　why　should　it　not　pass　outside　altogether？　　　　　An　Entelechy　is　not　a　thing　of　parts；　how　then　could　it　be　present　partwise　in　the　partible　body？　　　　　An　identical　soul　is　now　the　soul　of　one　living　being　now　of　another：　how　could　the　soul　of　the　first　become　the　soul　of　the　latter　if　soul　were　the　Entelechy　of　one　particular　being？　Yet　that　this　transference　does　occur　is　evident　from　the　facts　of　animal　metasomatosis。　　　　　The　substantial　existence　of　the　soul；　then；　does　not　depend　upon　serving　as　Form　to　anything：　it　is　an　Essence　which　does　not　come　into　being　by　finding　a　seat　in　body；　it　exists　before　it　becomes　also　the　soul　of　some　particular；　for　example；　of　a　living　being；　whose　body　would　by　this　doctrine　be　the　author　of　its　soul。　　　　　What；　then；　is　the　soul's　Being？　If　it　is　neither　body　nor　a　state　or　experience　of　body；　but　is　act　and　creation：　if　it　holds　much　and　gives　much；　and　is　an　existence　outside　of　body；　of　what　order　and　character　must　it　be？　Clearly　it　is　what　we　describe　as　Veritable　Essence。　The　other　order；　the　entire　corporeal　Kind；　is　process；　it　appears　and　it　perishes；　in　reality　it　never　possesses　Being；　but　is　merely　protected；　in　so　far　as　it　has　the　capacity；　by　participating　in　what　authentically　is。　　　　　9。　（14）　Over　against　that　body；　stands　the　principle　which　is　self…caused；　which　is　all　that　neither　enters　into　being　nor　passes　away；　the　principle　whose　dissolution　would　mean　the　end　of　all　things　never　to　be　restored　if　once　this　had　ceased　to　be；　the　sustaining　principle　of　things　individually；　and　of　this　kosmos；　which　owes　its　maintenance　and　its　ordered　system　to　the　soul。　　　　　This　is　the　starting　point　of　motion　and　becomes　the　leader　and　provider　of　motion　to　all　else：　it　moves　by　its　own　quality；　and　every　living　material　form　owes　life　to　this　principle；　which　of　itself　lives　in　a　life　that；　being　essentially　innate；　can　never　fail。　　　　　Not　all　things　can　have　a　life　merely　at　second　hand；　this　would　give　an　infinite　series：　there　must　be　some　nature　which；　having　life　primally；　shall　be　of　necessity　indestructible；　immortal；　as　the　source　of　life　to　all　else　that　lives。　This　is　the　point　at　which　all　that　is　divine　and　blessed　must　be　situated；　living　and　having　being　of　itself；　possessing　primal　being　and　primal　life；　and　in　its　own　essence　rejecting　all　change；　neither　coming　to　be　nor　passing　away。　　　　　Whence　could　such　a　being　arise　or　into　what　could　it　disappear：　the　very　word；　strictly　used；　means　that　the　thing　is　perdurable。　Similarly　white；　the　colour；　cannot　be　now　white　and　now　not　white：　if　this　〃white〃　were　a　real　being　it　would　be　eternal　as　well　as　being　white：　the　colour　is　merely　white　but　whatsoever　possesses　being；　indwelling　by　nature　and　primal；　will　possess　also　eternal　duration。　In　such　an　entity　this　primal　and　eternal　Being　cannot　be　dead　like　stone　or　plank：　it　must　be　alive；　and　that　with　a　life　unalloyed　as　long　as　it　remains　self…gathered：　when　the　primal　Being　blends　with　an　inferior　principle；　it　is　hampered　in　its　relation　to　the　highest；　but　without　suffering　the　loss　of　its　own　nature　since　it　can　always　recover　its　earliest　state　by　turning　its　tendency　back　to　its　own。　　　　　10。　（15）　That　the　soul　is　of　the　family　of　the　diviner　nature；　the　eternal；　is　clear　from　our　demonstration　that　it　is　not　material：　besides　it　has　neither　shape　or　colour　nor　is　it　tangible。　But　there　are　other　proofs。　　　　　Assuming　that　the　divine　and　the　authentically　existent　possesses　a　life　beneficent　and　wise；　we　take　the　next　step　and　begin　with　working　out　the　nature　of　our　own　soul。　　　　　Let　us　consider　a　soul；　not　one　that　has　appropriated　the　unreasoned　desires　and　impulses　of　the　bodily　life；　or　any　other　such　emotion　and　experience；　but　one　that　has　cast　all　this　aside；　and　as　far　as　possible　has　no　commerce　with　the　bodily。　Such　a　soul　demonstrates　that　all　evil　is　accretion；　alien；　and　that　in　the　purged　soul　the　noble　things　are　immanent；　wisdom　and　all　else　that　is　good；　as　its　native　store。　　　　　If　this　is　the　soul　once　it　has　returned　to　its　self；　how　deny　that　it　is　the　nature　we　have　identified　with　all　the　divine　and　eternal？　Wisdom　and　authentic　virtue　are　divine；　and　could　not　be　found　in　the　chattel　mean　and　mortal：　what　possesses　these　must　be　divine　by　its　very　capacity　of　the　divine；　the　token　of　kinship　and　of　identical　substance。　　　　　Hence；　too；　any　one　of　us　that　exhibits　these　qualities　will　differ　but　little　as　far　as　soul　is　concerned　from　the　Supernals；　he　will　be　less　than　they　only　to　the　extent　in　which　the　soul　is；　in　him；　associated　with　body。　　　　　This　is　so　true　that；　if　every　human　being　were　at　that　stage；　or　if　a　great　number　lived　by　a　soul　of　that　degree；　no　one　would　be　so　incredulous　as　to　doubt　that　the　soul　in　man　is　immortal。　It　is　because　we　see　everywhere　the　spoiled　souls　of　the　great　mass　that　it　becomes　difficult　to　recognize　their　divinity　and　immortality。　　　　　To　know　the　nature　of　a　thing　we　must　observe　it　in　its　unalloyed　state；　since　any　addition　obscures　the　re