按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
In the publicans and harlots as well as in the philosophers？ We say that it
is。〃 And there again the Neoplatonist finds it over hard to assent to a
doctrine； equally contrary to outward appearance； and galling to Pharisaic
pride； and enters into a hundred honest self… puzzles and self…
contradictions； which seem to justify him at last in saying； No。 It is in
the philosopher； who is ready by nature； as Plotinus has it； and as it were
furnished with wings； and not needing to sever himself from matter like
the rest； but disposed already to ascend to that which is above。 And in a
degree too； it is in the 〃lover；〃 who； according to Plotinus； has a certain
innate recollection of beauty； and hovers round it； and desires it； wherever
he sees it。 Him you may raise to the apprehension of the one incorporeal
Beauty； by teaching him to separate beauty from the various objects in
which it appears scattered and divided。 And it is even in the third class；
the lowest of whom there is hope； namely； the musical man； capable of
being passively affected by beauty； without having any active appetite for
it； the sentimentalist； in short； as we should call him nowadays。
But for the herd； Plotinus cannot say that there is anything divine in
them。 And thus it gradually comes out in all Neoplatonist writings which
I have yet examined； that the Divine only exists in a man； in proportion as
he is conscious of its existence in him。 From which spring two
conceptions of the Divine in man。 First； is it a part of him； if it is
62
… Page 63…
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
dependent for its existence on his consciousness of it？ Or is it； as Philo；
Plutarch； Marcus Aurelius would have held； as the Christians held；
something independent of him； without him； a Logos or Word speaking to
his reason and conscience？ With this question Plotinus grapples；
earnestly； shrewdly； fairly。 If you wish to see how he does it； you should
read the fourth and fifth books of the sixth Ennead； especially if you be
lucky enough to light on a copy of that rare book； Taylor's faithful though
crabbed translation。 Not that the result of his search is altogether
satisfactory。 He enters into subtle and severe disquisitions concerning
soul。 Whether it is one or many。 How it can be both one and many。
He has the strongest perception that； to use the noble saying of the
Germans； 〃Time and Space are no gods。〃 He sees clearly that the soul；
and the whole unseen world of truly existing being； is independent of time
and space： and yet； after he has wrestled with the two Titans； through
page after page； and apparently conquered them； they slip in again
unawares into the battle… field； the moment his back is turned。 He denies
that the one Reason has partsit must exist as a whole wheresoever it
exists： and yet he cannot express the relation of the individual soul to it；
but by saying that we are parts of it； or that each thing； down to the lowest；
receives as much soul as it is capable of possessing。 Ritter has worked
out at length； though in a somewhat dry and lifeless way； the hundred
contradictions of this kind which you meet in Plotinus； contradictions
which I suspect to be inseparable from any philosophy starting from his
grounds。 Is he not looking for the spiritual in a region where it does not
exist； in the region of logical conceptions and abstractions； which are not
realities； but only； after all； symbols of our own； whereby we express to
ourselves the processes of our own brain？ May not his Christian
contemporaries have been nearer scientific truth； as well as nearer the
common sense and practical belief of mankind； in holding that that which
is spiritual is personal； and can only be seen or conceived of as residing in
persons； and that that which is personal is moral； and has to do； not with
abstractions of the intellect； but with right and wrong； love and hate； and
all which； in the common instincts of men； involves a free will； a free
judgment； a free responsibility and desert？ And that； therefore； if there
63
… Page 64…
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
were a Spirit； a Daemonic Element； an universal Reason； a Logos； a
Divine Element； closely connected with man； that one Reason； that one
Divine Element； must be a person also？ At least； so strong was the
instinct of even the Heathen schools in this direction； that the followers of
Plotinus had to fill up the void which yawned between man and the
invisible things after which he yearned； by reviving the whole old Pagan
Polytheism； and adding to it a Daemonology borrowed partly from the
Chaldees； and partly from the Jewish rabbis； which formed a descending
chain of persons； downward from the highest Deities to heroes； and to the
guardian angel of each man； the meed of the philosopher being； that by
self…culture and self…restraint he could rise above the tutelage of some
lower and more earthly daemon； and become the pupil of a God； and
finally a God himself。
These contradictions need not lower the great Father of Neoplatonism
in our eyes； as a moral being。 All accounts of him seem to prove him to
have been what Apollo； in a lengthy oracle； declared him to have been；
〃good and gentle； and benignant exceedingly； and pleasant in all his
conversation。〃 He gave good advice about earthly matters； was a faithful
steward of moneys deposited with him； a guardian of widows and orphans；
a righteous and loving man。 In his practical life； the ascetic and gnostic
element comes out strongly enough。 The body； with him； was not evil；
neither was it good； it was simply nothingwhy care about it？ He would
have no portrait taken of his person： 〃It was humiliating enough to be
obliged to carry a shadow about with him； without having a shadow made
of that shadow。