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！
Plotinus and his school man is seeking for God： with Clement and his； God is seeking for man。 With the former； God is passive； and man active： with the latter； God is active； man is passivepassive； that is； in so far as his business is to listen when he is spoken to； to look at the light which is unveiled to him； to submit himself to the inward laws which he feels reproving and checking him at every turn； as Socrates was reproved and checked by his inward Daemon。
Whether of these two theorems gives the higher conception either of the Divine Being； or of man； I leave it for you to judge。 To those old Alexandrian Christians； a being who was not seeking after every single creature； and trying to raise him； could not be a Being of absolute Righteousness； Power； Love； could not be a Being worthy of respect or admiration； even of philosophic speculation。 Human righteousness and love flows forth disinterestedly to all around it； however unconscious； however unworthy they may be； human power associated with goodness； seeks for objects which it may raise and benefit by that power。 We must confess this； with the Christian schools； or； with the Heathen schools； we must allow another theory； which brought them into awful depths； which may bring any generation which holds it into the same depths。
If Clement had asked the Neoplatonists： 〃You believe； Plotinus； in an absolutely Good Being。 Do you believe that it desires to shed forth its goodness on all？〃 〃Of course；〃 they would have answered； 〃on those who seek for it； on the philosopher。〃
〃But not； it seems； Plotinus； on the herd； the brutal； ignorant mass； wallowing in those foul crimes above which you have risen？〃 And at that question there would have been not a little hesitation。 These brutes in human form； these souls wallowing in earthly mire； could hardly； in the Neoplatonists' eyes； be objects of the Divine desire。
〃Then this Absolute Good； you say； Plotinus； has no relation with them； no care to raise them。 In fact； it cannot raise them； because they have nothing in common with it。 Is that your notion？〃 And the Neoplatonists would have； on the whole； allowed that argument。 And if Clement had answered； that such was not his notion of Goodness； or of a Good Being； and that therefore the goodness of their Absolute Good； careless of the degradation and misery around it； must be something very different from his notions of human goodness； the Neoplatonists would have answered indeed they did answer〃After all； why not？ Why should the Absolute Goodness be like our human goodness？〃 This is Plotinus's own belief。 It is a question with him； it was still more a question with those who came after him； whether virtues could be predicated of the Divine nature； courage； for instance； of one who had nothing to fear； self… restraint； of one who had nothing to desire。 And thus； by setting up a different standard of morality for the divine and for the human； Plotinus gradually arrives at the conclusion； that virtue is not the end； but the means； not the Divine nature itself； as the Christian schools held； but only the purgative process by which man was to ascend into heaven； and which was necessary to arrive at that naturethat nature itself beingwhat？
And how to answer that last question was the abysmal problem of the whole of Neoplatonic philosophy； in searching for which it wearied itself out； generation after generation； till tired equally of seeking and of speaking； it fairly lay down and died。 In proportion as it refused to acknowledge a common divine nature with the degraded mass； it deserted its first healthy instinct； which told it that the spiritual world is identical with the moral world； with right； love； justice； it tried to find new definitions for the spiritual； it conceived it to be identical with the intellectual。 That did not satisfy its heart。 It had to repeople the spiritual world； which it had emptied of its proper denizens； with ghosts； to reinvent the old daemonologies and polytheismsfrom thence to descend into lower depths； of which we will speak hereafter。
But in the meanwhile we must look at another quarrel which arose between the two twin schools of Alexandria。 The Neoplatonists said that there is a divine element in man。 The Christian philosophers assented fervently； and raised the old disagreeable question： 〃Is it in every man？ 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 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