Ἐννεὰς Ε´

[1] Περὶ τῶν τριῶν ἀρχικῶν ὑποστάσεων

[1] Τί ποτε ἄρα ἐστὶ τὸ πεποιηκὸς τὰς ψυχὰς πατρὸς θεοῦ ἐπιλαθέσθαι, καὶ μοίρας ἐκεῖθεν οὔσας καὶ ὅλως ἐκείνου ἀγνοῆσαι καὶ ἑαυτὰς καὶ ἐκεῖνον; Ἀρχὴ μὲν οὖν αὐταῖς τοῦ κακοῦ ἡ τόλμα καὶ ἡ γένεσις καὶ ἡ πρώτη ἑτερότης καὶ τὸ βουληθῆναι δὲ ἑαυτῶν εἶναι. Τῷ δὴ αὐτεξουσίῳ ἐπειδήπερ ἐφάνησαν ἡσθεῖσαι, πολλῷ τῷ κινεῖσθαι παρ' αὐτῶν κεχρημέναι, τὴν ἐναντίαν δραμοῦσαι καὶ πλείστην ἀπόστασιν πεποιημέναι, ἠγνόησαν καὶ ἑαυτὰς ἐκεῖθεν εἶναι· ὥσπερ παῖδες εὐθὺς ἀποσπασθέντες ἀπὸ πατέρων καὶ πολὺν χρόνον πόρρω τραφέντες ἀγνοοῦσι καὶ ἑαυτοὺς καὶ πατέρας. Οὔτ' οὖν ἔτι ἐκεῖνον οὔτε ἑαυτὰς ὁρῶσαι, ἀτιμάσασαι ἑαυτὰς ἀγνοίᾳ τοῦ γένους, τιμήσασαι τἆλλα καὶ πάντα μᾶλλον ἢ ἑαυτὰς θαυμάσασαι καὶ πρὸς αὐτὰ ἐκπλαγεῖσαι καὶ ἀγασθεῖσαι καὶ ἐξηρτημέναι τούτων, ἀπέρρηξαν ὡς οἷόν τε ἑαυτὰς ὧν ἀπεστράφησαν ἀτιμάσασαι· ὥστε συμβαίνει τῆς παντελοῦς ἀγνοίας ἐκείνου ἡ τῶνδε τιμὴ καὶ ἡ ἑαυτῶν ἀτιμία εἶναι αἰτία. Ἅμα γὰρ διώκεται ἄλλο καὶ θαυμάζεται, καὶ τὸ θαυμάζον καὶ διῶκον ὁμολογεῖ χεῖρον εἶναι· χεῖρον δὲ αὐτὸ τιθέμενον γιγνομένων καὶ ἀπολλυμένων ἀτιμότατόν τε καὶ θνητότατον πάντων ὧν τιμᾷ ὑπολαμβάνον οὔτε θεοῦ φύσιν οὔτε δύναμιν ἄν ποτε ἐν θυμῷ βάλοιτο. Διὸ δεῖ διττὸν γίγνεσθαι τὸν λόγον πρὸς τοὺς οὕτω διακειμένους, εἴπερ τις ἐπιστρέψει αὐτοὺς εἰς τὰ ἐναντία καὶ τὰ πρῶτα καὶ ἀνάγοι μέχρι τοῦ ἀκροτάτου καὶ ἑνὸς καὶ πρώτου. Τίς οὖν ἑκάτερος; Ὁ μὲν δεικνὺς τὴν ἀτιμίαν τῶν νῦν ψυχῇ τιμωμένων, ὃν ἐν ἄλλοις δίιμεν ἐπιπλέον, ὁ δὲ διδάσκων καὶ ἀναμιμνήσκων τὴν ψυχὴν οἷον τοῦ γένους καὶ τῆς ἀξίας, ὃς πρότερός ἐστιν ἐκείνου καὶ σαφηνισθεὶς κἀκεῖνον δηλώσει. Περὶ οὗ νῦν λεκτέον· ἐγγὺς γὰρ οὗτος τοῦ ζητουμένου καὶ πρὸ ἔργου πρὸς ἐκεῖνον. Τὸ γὰρ ζητοῦν ἐστι ψυχή, καὶ τί ὂν ζητεῖ γνωστέον αὐτῇ, ἵνα αὑτὴν πρότερον μάθῃ, εἰ δύναμιν ἔχει τοῦ τὰ τοιαῦτα ζητεῖν, καὶ εἰ ὄμμα τοιοῦτον ἔχει, οἷον ἰδεῖν, καὶ εἰ προσήκει ζητεῖν. Εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἀλλότρια, τί δεῖ; Εἰ δὲ συγγενῆ, καὶ προσήκει καὶ δύναται εὑρεῖν.

[2] Ἐνθυμείσθω τοίνυν πρῶτον ἐκεῖνο πᾶσα ψυχή, ὡς αὐτὴ μὲν ζῷα ἐποίησε πάντα ἐμπνεύσασα αὐτοῖς ζωήν, ἅ τε γῆ τρέφει ἅ τε θάλασσα ἅ τε ἐν ἀέρι ἅ τε ἐν οὐρανῷ ἄστρα θεῖα, αὐτὴ δὲ ἥλιον, αὐτὴ δὲ τὸν μέγαν τοῦτον οὐρανόν, καὶ αὐτὴ ἐκόσμησεν, αὐτὴ δὲ ἐν τάξει περιάγει φύσις οὖσα ἑτέρα ὧν κοσμεῖ καὶ ὧν κινεῖ καὶ ἃ ζῆν ποιεῖ· καὶ τούτων ἀνάγκη εἶναι τιμιωτέραν, γιγνομένων τούτων καὶ φθειρομένων, ὅταν αὐτὰ ψυχὴ ἀπολείπῃ ἢ χορηγῇ τὸ ζῆν, αὐτὴ δὲ οὖσα ἀεὶ τῷ μὴ ἀπολείπειν ἑαυτήν. Τίς δὴ τρόπος τῆς χορηγίας τοῦ ζῆν ἔν τε τῷ σύμπαντι ἔν τε τοῖς ἑκάστοις, ὧδε λογιζέσθω. Σκοπείσθω δὲ τὴν μεγάλην ψυχὴν ἄλλη ψυχὴ οὐ σμικρὰ ἀξία τοῦ σκοπεῖν γενομένη ἀπαλλαγεῖσα ἀπάτης καὶ τῶν γεγοητευκότων τὰς ἄλλας ἡσύχῳ τῇ καταστάσει. Ἥσυχον δὲ αὐτῇ ἔστω μὴ μόνον τὸ περικείμενον σῶμα καὶ ὁ τοῦ σώματος κλύδων, ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶν τὸ περιέχον· ἥσυχος μὲν γῆ, ἥσυχος δὲ θάλασσα καὶ ἀὴρ καὶ αὐτὸς οὐρανὸς ἀμείνων. Νοείτω δὲ πάντοθεν εἰς αὐτὸν ἑστῶτα ψυχὴν ἔξωθεν οἷον εἰσρέουσαν καὶ εἰσχυθεῖσαν καὶ πάντοθεν εἰσιοῦσαν καὶ εἰσλάμπουσαν· οἷον σκοτεινὸν νέφος ἡλίου βολαὶ φωτίσασαι λάμπειν ποιοῦσι χρυσοειδῆ ὄψιν διδοῦσαι, οὕτω τοι καὶ ψυχὴ ἐλθοῦσα εἰς σῶμα οὐρανοῦ ἔδωκε μὲν ζωήν, ἔδωκε δὲ ἀθανασίαν, ἤγειρε δὲ κείμενον. Ὁ δὲ κινηθεὶς κίνησιν ἀίδιον ὑπὸ ψυχῆς ἐμφρόνως ἀγούσης ζῷον εὔδαιμον ἐγένετο, ἔσχε τε ἀξίαν οὐρανὸς ψυχῆς εἰσοικισθείσης ὢν πρὸ ψυχῆς σῶμα νεκρόν, γῆ καὶ ὕδωρ, μᾶλλον δὲ σκότος ὕλης καὶ μὴ ὂν καὶ ὃ στυγέουσιν οἱ θεοί, φησί τις. Γένοιτο δ' ἂν φανερωτέρα αὐτῆς καὶ ἐναργεστέρα ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ φύσις, εἴ τις ἐνταῦθα διανοηθείη, ὅπως περιέχει καὶ ἄγει ταῖς αὐτῆς βουλήσεσι τὸν οὐρανόν. Παντὶ μὲν γὰρ τῷ μεγέθει τούτῳ, ὅσος ἐστίν, ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὴν καὶ πᾶν διάστημα καὶ μέγα καὶ μικρὸν ἐψύχωται, ἄλλου μὲν ἄλλῃ κειμένου τοῦ σώματος, καὶ τοῦ μὲν ὡδί, τοῦ δὲ ὡδὶ ὄντος, καὶ τῶν μὲν ἐξ ἐναντίας, τῶν δὲ ἄλλην ἀπάρτησιν ἀπ' ἀλλήλων ἐχόντων. Ἀλλ' οὐχ ἡ ψυχὴ οὕτως, οὐδὲ μέρει αὐτῆς ἑκάστῳ κατακερματισθεῖσα μορίῳ ψυχῆς ζῆν ποιεῖ, ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ζῇ τῇ ὅλῃ, καὶ πάρεστι πᾶσα πανταχοῦ τῷ γεννήσαντι πατρὶ ὁμοιουμένη καὶ κατὰ τὸ ἓν καὶ κατὰ τὸ πάντη. Καὶ πολὺς ὢν ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἄλλος ἄλλῃ ἕν ἐστι τῇ ταύτης δυνάμει καὶ θεός ἐστι διὰ ταύτην ὁ κόσμος ὅδε. Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἥλιος θεός, ὅτι ἔμψυχος, καὶ τὰ ἄλλα ἄστρα, καὶ ἡμεῖς, εἴπερ τι, διὰ τοῦτο· νέκυες γὰρ κοπρίων ἐκβλητότεροι. Τὴν δὲ θεοῖς αἰτίαν τοῦ θεοῖς εἶναι ἀνάγκη πρεσβυτέραν θεὸν αὐτῶν εἶναι. Ὁμοειδὴς δὲ καὶ ἡ ἡμετέρα, καὶ ὅταν ἄνευ τῶν προσελθόντων σκοπῇς λαβὼν κεκαθαρμένην, εὑρήσεις τὸ αὐτὸ τίμιον, ὃ ἦν ψυχή, καὶ τιμιώτερον παντὸς τοῦ ὃ ἂν σωματικὸν ᾖ. Γῆ γὰρ πάντα· κἂν πῦρ δὲ ᾖ, τί ἂν εἴη τὸ καῖον αὐτοῦ; Καὶ ὅσα ἐκ τούτων σύνθετα, κἂν ὕδωρ αὐτοῖς προσθῇς κἂν ἀέρα. Εἰ δ' ὅτι ἔμψυχον διωκτὸν ἔσται, τί παρείς τις ἑαυτὸν ἄλλον διώκει; Τὴν δὲ ἐν ἄλλῳ ψυχὴν ἀγάμενος σεαυτὸν ἄγασαι.

[3] Οὕτω δὴ τιμίου καὶ θείου ὄντος χρήματος τῆς ψυχῆς, πιστεύσας ἤδη τῷ τοιούτῳ θεὸν μετιέναι μετὰ τοιαύτης αἰτίας ἀνάβαινε πρὸς ἐκεῖνον· πάντως που οὐ πόρρω βαλεῖς· οὐδὲ πολλὰ τὰ μεταξύ. Λάμβανε τοίνυν τὸ τοῦ θείου τούτου θειότερον τὸ ψυχῆς πρὸς τὸ ἄνω γειτόνημα, μεθ' ὃ καὶ ἀφ' οὗ ἡ ψυχή. Καίπερ γὰρ οὖσα χρῆμα οἷον ἔδειξεν ὁ λόγος, εἰκών τίς ἐστι νοῦ· οἷον λόγος ὁ ἐν προφορᾷ λόγου τοῦ ἐν ψυχῇ, οὕτω τοι καὶ αὐτὴ λόγος νοῦ καὶ ἡ πᾶσα ἐνέργεια καὶ ἣν προΐεται ζωὴν εἰς ἄλλου ὑπόστασιν· οἷον πυρὸς τὸ μὲν ἡ συνοῦσα θερμότης, ἡ δὲ ἣν παρέχει. Δεῖ δὲ λαβεῖν ἐκεῖ οὐκ ἐκρέουσαν, ἀλλὰ μένουσαν μὲν τὴν ἐν αὐτῷ, τὴν δὲ ἄλλην ὑφισταμένην. Οὖσα οὖν ἀπὸ νοῦ νοερά ἐστι, καὶ ἐν λογισμοῖς ὁ νοῦς αὐτῆς καὶ ἡ τελείωσις ἀπ' αὐτοῦ πάλιν οἷον πατρὸς ἐκθρέψαντος, ὃν οὐ τέλειον ὡς πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐγέννησεν. Ἥ τε οὖν ὑπόστασις αὐτῇ ἀπὸ νοῦ ὅ τε ἐνεργείᾳ λόγος νοῦ αὐτῇ ὁρωμένου. Ὅταν γὰρ ἐνίδῃ εἰς νοῦν, ἔνδοθεν ἔχει καὶ οἰκεῖα ἃ νοεῖ καὶ ἐνεργεῖ. Καὶ ταύτας μόνας δεῖ λέγειν ἐνεργείας ψυχῆς, ὅσα νοερῶς καὶ ὅσα οἴκοθεν· τὰ δὲ χείρω ἄλλοθεν καὶ πάθη ψυχῆς τῆς τοιαύτης. Νοῦς οὖν ἐπὶ μᾶλλον θειοτέραν ποιεῖ καὶ τῷ πατὴρ εἶναι καὶ τῷ παρεῖναι· οὐδὲν γὰρ μεταξὺ ἢ τὸ ἑτέροις εἶναι, ὡς ἐφεξῆς μέντοι καὶ ὡς τὸ δεχόμενον, τὸ δὲ ὡς εἶδος· καλὴ δὲ καὶ ἡ νοῦ ὕλη νοοειδὴς οὖσα καὶ ἁπλῆ. Οἷον δὲ ὁ νοῦς, καὶ ταὐτῷ μὲν τούτῳ δῆλον, ὅτι κρεῖττον ψυχῆς τοιᾶσδε οὔσης.

[4] Ἴδοι δ' ἄν τις καὶ ἐκ τῶνδε· κόσμον αἰσθητὸν τόνδε εἴ τις θαυμάζει εἴς τε τὸ μέγεθος καὶ τὸ κάλλος καὶ τὴν τάξιν τῆς φορᾶς τῆς ἀιδίου ἀποβλέπων καὶ θεοὺς τοὺς ἐν αὐτῷ, τοὺς μὲν ὁρωμένους, τοὺς δὲ καὶ ἀφανεῖς ὄντας, καὶ δαίμονας καὶ ζῷα φυτά τε πάντα, ἐπὶ τὸ ἀρχέτυπον αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ ἀληθινώτερον ἀναβὰς κἀκεῖ πάντα ἰδέτω νοητὰ καὶ παρ' αὐτῷ ἀίδια ἐν οἰκείᾳ συνέσει καὶ ζωῇ, καὶ τούτων τὸν ἀκήρατον νοῦν προστάτην, καὶ σοφίαν ἀμήχανον, καὶ τὸν ὡς ἀληθῶς ἐπὶ Κρόνου βίον θεοῦ κόρου καὶ νοῦ ὄντος. Πάντα γὰρ ἐν αὐτῷ τὰ ἀθάνατα περιέχει, νοῦν πάντα, θεὸν πάντα, ψυχὴν πᾶσαν, ἑστῶτα ἀεί. Τί γὰρ ζητεῖ μεταβάλλειν εὖ ἔχων; Ποῦ δὲ μετελθεῖν πάντα παρ' αὑτῷ ἔχων; Ἀλλ' οὐδὲ αὔξειν ζητεῖ τελειότατος ὤν. Διὸ καὶ τὰ παρ' αὐτῷ πάντα τέλεια, ἵνα πάντη ᾖ τέλειος οὐδὲν ἔχων ὅ τι μὴ τοιοῦτον, οὐδὲν ἔχων ἐν αὑτῷ ὃ μὴ νοεῖ· νοεῖ δὲ οὐ ζητῶν, ἀλλ' ἔχων. Καὶ τὸ μακάριον αὐτῷ οὐκ ἐπίκτητον, ἀλλ' ἐν αἰῶνι πάντα, καὶ ὁ ὄντως αἰών, ὃν μιμεῖται χρόνος περιθέων ψυχὴν τὰ μὲν παριείς, τοῖς δὲ ἐπιβάλλων. Καὶ γὰρ ἄλλα καὶ ἄλλα αὖ περὶ ψυχήν· ποτὲ γὰρ Σωκράτης, ποτὲ δὲ ἵππος, ἕν τι ἀεὶ τῶν ὄντων· ὁ δὲ νοῦς πάντα. Ἔχει οὖν [ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ] πάντα ἑστῶτα ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ, καὶ ἔστι μόνον, καὶ τὸ "ἔστιν" ἀεί, καὶ οὐδαμοῦ τὸ μέλλον ‑ ἔστι γὰρ καὶ τότε ‑ οὐδὲ τὸ παρεληλυθός ‑ οὐ γάρ τι ἐκεῖ παρελήλυθεν ‑ ἀλλ' ἐνέστηκεν ἀεὶ ἅτε τὰ αὐτὰ ὄντα οἷον ἀγαπῶντα ἑαυτὰ οὕτως ἔχοντα. Ἕκαστον δὲ αὐτῶν νοῦς καὶ ὄν ἐστι καὶ τὸ σύμπαν πᾶς νοῦς καὶ πᾶν ὄν, ὁ μὲν νοῦς κατὰ τὸ νοεῖν ὑφιστὰς τὸ ὄν, τὸ δὲ ὂν τῷ νοεῖσθαι τῷ νῷ διδὸν τὸ νοεῖν καὶ τὸ εἶναι. Τοῦ δὲ νοεῖν αἴτιον ἄλλο, ὃ καὶ τῷ ὄντι· ἀμφοτέρων οὖν ἅμα αἴτιον ἄλλο. Ἅμα μὲν γὰρ ἐκεῖνα καὶ συνυπάρχει καὶ οὐκ ἀπολείπει ἄλληλα, ἀλλὰ δύο ὄντα τοῦτο τὸ ἓν ὁμοῦ νοῦς καὶ ὂν καὶ νοοῦν καὶ νοούμενον, ὁ μὲν νοῦς κατὰ τὸ νοεῖν, τὸ δὲ ὂν κατὰ τὸ νοούμενον. Οὐ γὰρ ἂν γένοιτο τὸ νοεῖν ἑτερότητος μὴ οὔσης καὶ ταυτότητος δέ. Γίνεται οὖν τὰ πρῶτα νοῦς, ὄν, ἑτερότης, ταυτότης· δεῖ δὲ καὶ κίνησιν λαβεῖν καὶ στάσιν. Καὶ κίνησιν μέν, εἰ νοεῖ, στάσιν δέ, ἵνα τὸ αὐτό. Τὴν δὲ ἑτερότητα, ἵν' ᾖ νοοῦν καὶ νοούμενον. Ἢ ἐὰν ἀφέλῃς τὴν ἑτερότητα, ἓν γενόμενον σιωπήσεται· δεῖ δὲ καὶ τοῖς νοηθεῖσιν ἑτέροις πρὸς ἄλληλα εἶναι. Ταὐτὸν δέ, ἐπεὶ ἓν ἑαυτῷ, καὶ κοινὸν δέ τι ἓν πᾶσι· καὶ ἡ διαφορὰ ἑτερότης. Ταῦτα δὲ πλείω γενόμενα ἀριθμὸν καὶ τὸ ποσὸν ποιεῖ· καὶ τὸ ποιὸν δὲ ἡ ἑκάστου τούτων ἰδιότης, ἐξ ὧν ὡς ἀρχῶν τἆλλα.

[5] Πολὺς οὖν οὗτος ὁ θεὸς ἐπὶ τῇ ψυχῇ· τῇ δὲ ὑπάρχει ἐν τούτοις εἶναι συναφθείσῃ, εἰ μὴ ἀποστατεῖν ἐθέλοι. Πελάσασα οὖν αὐτῷ καὶ οἷον ἓν γενομένη ζῇ ἀεί. Τίς οὖν ὁ τοῦτον γεννήσας; Ὁ ἁπλοῦς καὶ ὁ πρὸ τοιούτου πλήθους, ὁ αἴτιος τοῦ καὶ εἶναι καὶ πολὺν εἶναι τοῦτον, ὁ τὸν ἀριθμὸν ποιῶν. Ὁ γὰρ ἀριθμὸς οὐ πρῶτος· καὶ γὰρ πρὸ δυάδος τὸ ἕν, δεύτερον δὲ δυὰς καὶ παρὰ τοῦ ἑνὸς γεγενημένη ἐκεῖνο ὁριστὴν ἔχει, αὕτη δὲ ἀόριστον παρ' αὐτῆς· ὅταν δὲ ὁρισθῇ, ἀριθμὸς ἤδη· ἀριθμὸς δὲ ὡς οὐσία· ἀριθμὸς δὲ καὶ ἡ ψυχή. Οὐ γὰρ ὄγκοι τὰ πρῶτα οὐδὲ μεγέθη· τὰ γὰρ παχέα ταῦτα ὕστερα, ἃ ὄντα ἡ αἴσθησις οἴεται. Οὐδὲ ἐν σπέρμασι δὲ τὸ ὑγρὸν τὸ τίμιον, ἀλλὰ τὸ μὴ ὁρώμενον· τοῦτο δὲ ἀριθμὸς καὶ λόγος. Ὁ οὖν ἐκεῖ λεγόμενος ἀριθμὸς καὶ ἡ δυὰς λόγοι καὶ νοῦς· ἀλλὰ ἀόριστος μὲν ἡ δυὰς τῷ οἷον ὑποκειμένῳ λαμβανομένη, ὁ δὲ ἀριθμὸς ὁ ἐξ αὐτῆς καὶ τοῦ ἑνὸς εἶδος ἕκαστος, οἷον μορφωθέντος τοῖς γενομένοις εἴδεσιν ἐν αὐτῷ· μορφοῦται δὲ ἄλλον μὲν τρόπον παρὰ τοῦ ἑνός, ἄλλον δὲ παρ' αὐτοῦ, οἷον ὄψις ἡ κατ' ἐνέργειαν· ἔστι γὰρ ἡ νόησις ὅρασις ὁρῶσα ἄμφω τε ἕν.

[6] Πῶς οὖν ὁρᾷ καὶ τίνα, καὶ πῶς ὅλως ὑπέστη καὶ ἐξ ἐκείνου γέγονεν, ἵνα καὶ ὁρᾷ; Νῦν μὲν γὰρ τὴν ἀνάγκην τοῦ εἶναι ταῦτα ἡ ψυχὴ ἔχει, ἐπιποθεῖ δὲ τὸ θρυλλούμενον δὴ τοῦτο καὶ παρὰ τοῖς πάλαι σοφοῖς, πῶς ἐξ ἑνὸς τοιούτου ὄντος, οἷον λέγομεν τὸ ἓν εἶναι, ὑπόστασιν ἔσχεν ὁτιοῦν εἴτε πλῆθος εἴτε δυὰς εἴτε ἀριθμός, ἀλλ' οὐκ ἔμεινεν ἐκεῖνο ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ, τοσοῦτον δὲ πλῆθος ἐξερρύη, ὃ ὁρᾶται μὲν ἐν τοῖς οὖσιν, ἀνάγειν δὲ αὐτὸ πρὸς ἐκεῖνο ἀξιοῦμεν. Ὧδε οὖν λεγέσθω θεὸν αὐτὸν ἐπικαλεσαμένοις οὐ λόγῳ γεγωνῷ, ἀλλὰ τῇ ψυχῇ ἐκτείνασιν ἑαυτοὺς εἰς εὐχὴν πρὸς ἐκεῖνον, εὔχεσθαι τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον δυναμένους μόνους πρὸς μόνον. Δεῖ τοίνυν θεατήν, ἐκείνου ἐν τῷ εἴσω οἷον νεῷ ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ ὄντος, μένοντος ἡσύχου ἐπέκεινα ἁπάντων, τὰ οἷον πρὸς τὰ ἔξω ἤδη ἀγάλματα ἑστῶτα, μᾶλλον δὲ ἄγαλμα τὸ πρῶτον ἐκφανὲν θεᾶσθαι πεφηνὸς τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον· παντὶ τῷ κινουμένῳ δεῖ τι εἶναι, πρὸς ὃ κινεῖται· μὴ ὄντος δὲ ἐκείνῳ μηδενὸς μὴ τιθώμεθα αὐτὸ κινεῖσθαι, ἀλλ' εἴ τι μετ' αὐτὸ γίνεται, ἐπιστραφέντος ἀεὶ ἐκείνου πρὸς αὐτὸ ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστι γεγονέναι. Ἐκποδὼν δὲ ἡμῖν ἔστω γένεσις ἡ ἐν χρόνῳ τὸν λόγον περὶ τῶν ἀεὶ ὄντων ποιουμένοις· τῷ δὲ λόγῳ τὴν γένεσιν προσάπτοντας αὐτοῖς αἰτίας καὶ τάξεως αὐτοῖς ἀποδώσειν. Τὸ οὖν γινόμενον ἐκεῖθεν οὐ κινηθέντος φατέον γίγνεσθαι· εἰ γὰρ κινηθέντος αὐτοῦ τι γίγνοιτο, τρίτον ἀπ' ἐκείνου τὸ γιγνόμενον μετὰ τὴν κίνησιν ἂν γίγνοιτο καὶ οὐ δεύτερον. Δεῖ οὖν ἀκινήτου ὄντος, εἴ τι δεύτερον μετ' αὐτό, οὐ προσνεύσαντος οὐδὲ βουληθέντος οὐδὲ ὅλως κινηθέντος ὑποστῆναι αὐτό. Πῶς οὖν καὶ τί δεῖ νοῆσαι περὶ ἐκεῖνο μένον; Περίλαμψιν ἐξ αὐτοῦ μέν, ἐξ αὐτοῦ δὲ μένοντος, οἷον ἡλίου τὸ περὶ αὐτὸ λαμπρὸν ὥσπερ περιθέον, ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἀεὶ γεννώμενον μένοντος. Καὶ πάντα τὰ ὄντα, ἕως μένει, ἐκ τῆς αὐτῶν οὐσίας ἀναγκαίαν τὴν περὶ αὐτὰ πρὸς τὸ ἔξω αὐτῶν ἐκ τῆς παρούσης δυνάμεως δίδωσιν αὐτῶν ἐξηρτημένην ὑπόστασιν, εἰκόνα οὖσαν οἷον ἀρχετύπων ὧν ἐξέφυ· πῦρ μὲν τὴν παρ' αὐτοῦ θερμότητα· καὶ χιὼν οὐκ εἴσω μόνον τὸ ψυχρὸν κατέχει· μάλιστα δὲ ὅσα εὐώδη μαρτυρεῖ τοῦτο· ἕως γάρ ἐστι, πρόεισί τι ἐξ αὐτῶν περὶ αὐτά, ὧν ἀπολαύει ὑποστάντων ὁ πλησίον. Καὶ πάντα δὲ ὅσα ἤδη τέλεια γεννᾷ· τὸ δὲ ἀεὶ τέλειον ἀεὶ καὶ ἀίδιον γεννᾷ· καὶ ἔλαττον δὲ ἑαυτοῦ γεννᾷ. Τί οὖν χρὴ περὶ τοῦ τελειοτάτου λέγειν; Μηδὲν ἀπ' αὐτοῦ ἢ τὰ μέγιστα μετ' αὐτόν. Μέγιστον δὲ μετ' αὐτὸν νοῦς καὶ δεύτερον· καὶ γὰρ ὁρᾷ ὁ νοῦς ἐκεῖνον καὶ δεῖται αὐτοῦ μόνου· ἐκεῖνος δὲ τούτου οὐδέν· καὶ τὸ γεννώμενον ἀπὸ κρείττονος νοῦ νοῦν εἶναι, καὶ κρείττων ἁπάντων νοῦς, ὅτι τἆλλα μετ' αὐτόν· οἷον καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ λόγος νοῦ καὶ ἐνέργειά τις, ὥσπερ αὐτὸς ἐκείνου. Ἀλλὰ ψυχῆς μὲν ἀμυδρὸς ὁ λόγος ‑ ὡς γὰρ εἴδωλον νοῦ ‑ ταύτῃ καὶ εἰς νοῦν βλέπειν δεῖ· νοῦς δὲ ὡσαύτως πρὸς ἐκεῖνον, ἵνα ᾖ νοῦς. Ὁρᾷ δὲ αὐτὸν οὐ χωρισθείς, ἀλλ' ὅτι μετ' αὐτὸν καὶ μεταξὺ οὐδέν, ὡς οὐδὲ ψυχῆς καὶ νοῦ. Ποθεῖ δὲ πᾶν τὸ γεννῆσαν καὶ τοῦτο ἀγαπᾷ, καὶ μάλιστα ὅταν ὦσι μόνοι τὸ γεννῆσαν καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον· ὅταν δὲ καὶ τὸ ἄριστον ᾖ τὸ γεννῆσαν, ἐξ ἀνάγκης σύνεστιν αὐτῷ, ὡς τῇ ἑτερότητι μόνον κεχωρίσθαι.

[7] Εἰκόνα δὲ ἐκείνου λέγομεν εἶναι τὸν νοῦν· δεῖ γὰρ σαφέστερον λέγειν· πρῶτον μέν, ὅτι δεῖ πως εἶναι ἐκεῖνο τὸ γενόμενον καὶ ἀποσῴζειν πολλὰ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἶναι ὁμοιότητα πρὸς αὐτό, ὥσπερ καὶ τὸ φῶς τοῦ ἡλίου. Ἀλλ' οὐ νοῦς ἐκεῖνο. Πῶς οὖν νοῦν γεννᾷ; Ἢ ὅτι τῇ ἐπιστροφῇ πρὸς αὐτὸ ἑώρα· ἡ δὲ ὅρασις αὕτη νοῦς. Τὸ γὰρ καταλαμβάνον ἄλλο ἢ αἴσθησις ἢ νοῦς· †αἴσθησιν γραμμὴν καὶ τὰ ἄλλα· †ἀλλ' ὁ κύκλος τοιοῦτος οἷος μερίζεσθαι· τοῦτο δὲ οὐχ οὕτως. Ἢ καὶ ἐνταῦθα ἓν μέν, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἓν δύναμις πάντων. Ὧν οὖν ἐστι δύναμις, ταῦτα ἀπὸ τῆς δυνάμεως οἷον σχιζομένη ἡ νόησις καθορᾷ· ἢ οὐκ ἂν ἦν νοῦς. Ἐπεὶ καὶ παρ' αὐτοῦ ἔχει ἤδη οἷον συναίσθησιν τῆς δυνάμεως, ὅτι δύναται οὐσίαν. Αὐτὸς γοῦν δι' αὐτὸν καὶ ὁρίζει τὸ εἶναι αὐτῷ τῇ παρ' ἐκείνου δυνάμει καὶ ὅτι οἷον μέρος ἕν τι τῶν ἐκείνου καὶ ἐξ ἐκείνου ἡ οὐσία, καὶ ῥώννυται παρ' ἐκείνου καὶ τελειοῦται εἰς οὐσίαν παρ' ἐκείνου καὶ ἐξ ἐκείνου. Ὁρᾷ δὲ αὐτῷ ἐκεῖθεν, οἷον μεριστῷ ἐξ ἀμερίστου, καὶ τὸ ζῆν καὶ τὸ νοεῖν καὶ πάντα, ὅτι ἐκεῖνος μηδὲν τῶν πάντων· ταύτῃ γὰρ πάντα ἐξ ἐκείνου, ὅτι μή τινι μορφῇ κατείχετο ἐκεῖνος· μόνον γὰρ ἓν ἐκεῖνο· καὶ ὁ μὲν πάντα ἐν τοῖς οὖσιν ἂν ἦν. Διὰ τοῦτο ἐκεῖνο οὐδὲν μὲν τῶν ἐν τῷ νῷ, ἐξ αὐτοῦ δὲ πάντα [ἐν τοῖς οὖσιν ἂν ἦν]. Διὸ καὶ οὐσίαι ταῦτα· ὥρισται γὰρ ἤδη καὶ οἷον μορφὴν ἕκαστον ἔχει. Τὸ δὲ ὂν δεῖ οὐκ ἐν ἀορίστῳ οἷον αἰωρεῖσθαι, ἀλλ' ὅρῳ πεπῆχθαι καὶ στάσει· στάσις δὲ τοῖς νοητοῖς ὁρισμὸς καὶ μορφή, οἷς καὶ τὴν ὑπόστασιν λαμβάνει. Ταύτης τοι γενεᾶς ὁ νοῦς οὗτος ἀξίας νοῦ τοῦ καθαρωτάτου μὴ ἄλλοθεν ἢ ἐκ τῆς πρώτης ἀρχῆς φῦναι, γενόμενον δὲ ἤδη τὰ ὄντα πάντα σὺν αὐτῷ γεννῆσαι, πᾶν μὲν τὸ τῶν ἰδεῶν κάλλος, πάντας δὲ θεοὺς νοητούς· πλήρη δὲ ὄντα ὧν ἐγέννησε καὶ ὥσπερ καταπιόντα πάλιν τῷ ἐν αὐτῷ ἔχειν μηδὲ ἐκπεσεῖν εἰς ὕλην μηδὲ τραφῆναι παρὰ τῇ Ῥέᾳ, ὡς τὰ μυστήρια καὶ οἱ μῦθοι οἱ περὶ θεῶν αἰνίττονται Κρόνον μὲν θεὸν σοφώτατον πρὸ τοῦ Δία γενέσθαι ἃ γεννᾷ πάλιν ἐν ἑαυτῷ ἔχειν, ᾗ καὶ πλήρης καὶ νοῦς ἐν κόρῳ· μετὰ δὲ ταῦτά φασι Δία γεννᾶν κόρον ἤδη ὄντα· ψυχὴν γὰρ γεννᾷ νοῦς, νοῦς ὢν τέλειος. Καὶ γὰρ τέλειον ὄντα γεννᾶν ἔδει, καὶ μὴ δύναμιν οὖσαν τοσαύτην ἄγονον εἶναι. Κρεῖττον δὲ οὐχ οἷόν τε ἦν εἶναι οὐδ' ἐνταῦθα τὸ γεννώμενον, ἀλλ' ἔλαττον ὂν εἴδωλον εἶναι αὐτοῦ, ἀόριστον μὲν ὡσαύτως, ὁριζόμενον δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ γεννήσαντος καὶ οἷον εἰδοποιούμενον. Νοῦ δὲ γέννημα λόγος τις καὶ ὑπόστασις, τὸ διανοούμενον· τοῦτο δ' ἐστὶ τὸ περὶ νοῦν κινούμενον καὶ νοῦ φῶς καὶ ἴχνος ἐξηρτημένον ἐκείνου, κατὰ θάτερα μὲν συνηγμένον ἐκείνῳ καὶ ταύτῃ ἀποπιμπλάμενον καὶ ἀπολαῦον καὶ μεταλαμβάνον αὐτοῦ καὶ νοοῦν, κατὰ θάτερα δὲ ἐφαπτόμενον τῶν μετ' αὐτό, μᾶλλον δὲ γεννῶν καὶ αὐτό, ἃ ψυχῆς ἀνάγκη εἶναι χείρονα· περὶ ὧν ὕστερον λεκτέον. Καὶ μέχρι τούτων τὰ θεῖα.

[8] Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο καὶ τὰ Πλάτωνος τριττὰ τὰ πάντα περὶ τὸν πάντων βασιλέα ‑ φησὶ γὰρ πρῶτα ‑ καὶ δεύτερον περὶ τὰ δεύτερα καὶ περὶ τὰ τρίτα τρίτον. Λέγει δὲ καὶ τοῦ αἰτίου εἶναι πατέρα αἴτιον μὲν τὸν νοῦν λέγων· δημιουργὸς γὰρ ὁ νοῦς αὐτῷ· τοῦτον δέ φησι τὴν ψυχὴν ποιεῖν ἐν τῷ κρατῆρι ἐκείνῳ. Τοῦ αἰτίου δὲ νοῦ ὄντος πατέρα φησὶ τἀγαθὸν καὶ τὸ ἐπέκεινα νοῦ καὶ ἐπέκεινα οὐσίας. Πολλαχοῦ δὲ τὸ ὂν καὶ τὸν νοῦν τὴν ἰδέαν λέγει· ὥστε Πλάτωνα εἰδέναι ἐκ μὲν τἀγαθοῦ τὸν νοῦν, ἐκ δὲ τοῦ νοῦ τὴν ψυχήν. Καὶ εἶναι τοὺς λόγους τούσδε μὴ καινοὺς μηδὲ νῦν, ἀλλὰ πάλαι μὲν εἰρῆσθαι μὴ ἀναπεπταμένως, τοὺς δὲ νῦν λόγους ἐξηγητὰς ἐκείνων γεγονέναι μαρτυρίοις πιστωσαμένους τὰς δόξας ταύτας παλαιὰς εἶναι τοῖς αὐτοῦ τοῦ Πλάτωνος γράμμασιν. Ἥπτετο μὲν οὖν καὶ Παρμενίδης πρότερον τῆς τοιαύτης δόξης καθόσον εἰς ταὐτὸ συνῆγεν ὂν καὶ νοῦν, καὶ τὸ ὂν οὐκ ἐν τοῖς αἰσθητοῖς ἐτίθετο "τὸ γὰρ αὐτὸ νοεῖν ἐστί τε καὶ εἶναι" λέγων. Καὶ ἀκίνητον δὲ λέγει τοῦτο ‑ καίτοι προστιθεὶς τὸ νοεῖν ‑ σωματικὴν πᾶσαν κίνησιν ἐξαίρων ἀπ' αὐτοῦ, ἵνα μένῃ ὡσαύτως, καὶ ὄγκῳ σφαίρας ἀπεικάζων, ὅτι πάντα ἔχει περιειλημμένα καὶ ὅτι τὸ νοεῖν οὐκ ἔξω, ἀλλ' ἐν ἑαυτῷ. Ἓν δὲ λέγων ἐν τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ συγγράμμασιν αἰτίαν εἶχεν ὡς τοῦ ἑνὸς τούτου πολλὰ εὑρισκομένου. Ὁ δὲ παρὰ Πλάτωνι Παρμενίδης ἀκριβέστερον λέγων διαιρεῖ ἀπ' ἀλλήλων τὸ πρῶτον ἕν, ὃ κυριώτερον ἕν, καὶ δεύτερον ἓν πολλὰ λέγων, καὶ τρίτον ἓν καὶ πολλά. Καὶ σύμφωνος οὕτως καὶ αὐτός ἐστι ταῖς φύσεσι ταῖς τρισίν.

[9] Ἀναξαγόρας δὲ νοῦν καθαρὸν καὶ ἀμιγῆ λέγων ἁπλοῦν καὶ αὐτὸς τίθεται τὸ πρῶτον καὶ χωριστὸν τὸ ἕν, τὸ δ' ἀκριβὲς δι' ἀρχαιότητα παρῆκε. Καὶ Ἡράκλειτος δὲ τὸ ἓν οἶδεν ἀίδιον καὶ νοητόν· τὰ γὰρ σώματα γίγνεται ἀεὶ καὶ ῥέοντα. Τῷ δὲ Ἐμπεδοκλεῖ τὸ νεῖκος μὲν διαιρεῖ, ἡ δὲ φιλία τὸ ἕν ‑ ἀσώματον δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς τοῦτο ‑ τὰ δὲ στοιχεῖα ὡς ὕλη. Ἀριστοτέλης δὲ ὕστερον χωριστὸν μὲν τὸ πρῶτον καὶ νοητόν, νοεῖν δὲ αὐτὸ ἑαυτὸ λέγων πάλιν αὖ οὐ τὸ πρῶτον ποιεῖ· πολλὰ δὲ καὶ ἄλλα νοητὰ ποιῶν καὶ τοσαῦτα, ὁπόσαι ἐν οὐρανῷ σφαῖραι, ἵν' ἕκαστον ἑκάστην κινῇ, ἄλλον τρόπον λέγει τὰ ἐν τοῖς νοητοῖς ἢ Πλάτων, τὸ εὔλογον οὐκ ἔχον ἀνάγκην τιθέμενος. Ἐπιστήσειε δ' ἄν τις, εἰ καὶ εὐλόγως· εὐλογώτερον γὰρ πάσας πρὸς μίαν σύνταξιν συντελούσας πρὸς ἓν καὶ τὸ πρῶτον βλέπειν. Ζητήσειε δ' ἄν τις τὰ πολλὰ νοητὰ εἰ ἐξ ἑνός ἐστιν αὐτῷ τοῦ πρώτου, ἢ πολλαὶ αἱ ἐν τοῖς νοητοῖς ἀρχαί· καὶ εἰ μὲν ἐξ ἑνός, ἀνάλογον δηλονότι ἕξει ὡς ἐν τοῖς αἰσθητοῖς αἱ σφαῖραι ἄλλης ἄλλην περιεχούσης, μιᾶς δὲ τῆς ἔξω κρατούσης· ὥστε περιέχοι ἂν κἀκεῖ τὸ πρῶτον καὶ κόσμος νοητὸς ἔσται· καὶ ὥσπερ ἐνταῦθα αἱ σφαῖραι οὐ κεναί, ἀλλὰ μεστὴ ἄστρων ἡ πρώτη, αἱ δὲ ἔχουσιν ἄστρα, οὕτω κἀκεῖ τὰ κινοῦντα πολλὰ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἕξει καὶ τὰ ἀληθέστερα ἐκεῖ. Εἰ δὲ ἕκαστον ἀρχή, κατὰ συντυχίαν αἱ ἀρχαὶ ἔσονται· καὶ διὰ τί συνέσονται καὶ πρὸς ἓν ἔργον τὴν τοῦ παντὸς οὐρανοῦ συμφωνίαν ὁμονοήσει; Πῶς δὲ ἴσα πρὸς τὰ νοητὰ καὶ κινοῦντα τὰ ἐν οὐρανῷ αἰσθητά; Πῶς δὲ καὶ πολλὰ οὕτως ἀσώματα ὄντα ὕλης οὐ χωριζούσης; Ὥστε τῶν ἀρχαίων οἱ μάλιστα συντασσόμενοι αὖ τοῖς Πυθαγόρου καὶ τῶν μετ' αὐτὸν καὶ Φερεκύδους δὲ περὶ ταύτην μὲν ἔσχον τὴν φύσιν· ἀλλ' οἱ μὲν ἐξειργάσαντο ἐν αὐτοῖς αὐτῶν λόγοις, οἱ δὲ οὐκ ἐν λόγοις, ἀλλ' ἐν ἀγράφοις ἐδείκνυον συνουσίαις ἢ ὅλως ἀφεῖσαν.

[10] Ὅτι δὲ οὕτω χρὴ νομίζειν ἔχειν, ὡς ἔστι μὲν τὸ ἐπέκεινα ὄντος τὸ ἕν, οἷον ἤθελεν ὁ λόγος δεικνύναι ὡς οἷόν τε ἦν περὶ τούτων ἐνδείκνυσθαι, ἔστι δὲ ἐφεξῆς τὸ ὂν καὶ νοῦς, τρίτη δὲ ἡ τῆς ψυχῆς φύσις, ἤδη δέδεικται. Ὥσπερ δὲ ἐν τῇ φύσει τριττὰ ταῦτά ἐστι τὰ εἰρημένα, οὕτω χρὴ νομίζειν καὶ παρ' ἡμῖν ταῦτα εἶναι. Λέγω δὲ οὐκ ἐν τοῖς αἰσθητοῖς ‑ χωριστὰ γὰρ ταῦτα ‑ ἀλλ' ἐπὶ τοῖς αἰσθητῶν ἔξω, καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον τὸ "ἔξω" ὥσπερ κἀκεῖνα τοῦ παντὸς οὐρανοῦ ἔξω· οὕτω καὶ τὰ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, οἷον λέγει Πλάτων τὸν εἴσω ἄνθρωπον. Ἔστι τοίνυν καὶ ἡ ἡμετέρα ψυχὴ θεῖόν τι καὶ φύσεως ἄλλης, ὁποία πᾶσα ἡ ψυχῆς φύσις· τελεία δὲ ἡ νοῦν ἔχουσα· νοῦς δὲ ὁ μὲν λογιζόμενος, ὁ δὲ λογίζεσθαι παρέχων. Τὸ δὴ λογιζόμενον τοῦτο τῆς ψυχῆς οὐδενὸς πρὸς τὸ λογίζεσθαι δεόμενον σωματικοῦ ὀργάνου, τὴν δὲ ἐνέργειαν ἑαυτοῦ ἐν καθαρῷ ἔχον, ἵνα καὶ λογίζεσθαι καθαρῶς οἷόν τε ᾖ, χωριστὸν καὶ οὐ κεκραμένον σώματι ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ νοητῷ τις τιθέμενος οὐκ ἂν σφάλλοιτο. Οὐ γὰρ τόπον ζητητέον οὗ ἱδρύσομεν, ἀλλ' ἔξω τόπου παντὸς ποιητέον. Οὕτω γὰρ τὸ καθ' αὑτὸ καὶ τὸ ἔξω καὶ τὸ ἄυλον, ὅταν μόνον ᾖ οὐδὲν ἔχον παρὰ τῆς σώματος φύσεως. Διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἔτι ἔξωθέν φησιν ἐπὶ τοῦ παντὸς τὴν ψυχὴν περιέβαλεν ἐνδεικνύμενος τῆς ψυχῆς τὸ ἐν τῷ νοητῷ μένον· ἐπὶ δὲ ἡμῶν ἐπικρύπτων ἐπ' ἄκρᾳ εἴρηκε τῇ κεφαλῇ. Καὶ ἡ παρακέλευσις δὲ τοῦ χωρίζειν οὐ τόπῳ λέγεται ‑ τοῦτο γὰρ φύσει κεχωρισμένον ἐστίν ‑ ἀλλὰ τῇ μὴ νεύσει καὶ ταῖς φαντασίαις καὶ τῇ ἀλλοτριότητι τῇ πρὸς τὸ σῶμα, εἴ πως καὶ τὸ λοιπὸν ψυχῆς εἶδος ἀναγάγοι τις καὶ συνενέγκαι πρὸς τὸ ἄνω καὶ τὸ ἐνταῦθα αὐτῆς ἱδρυμένον, ὃ μόνον ἐστὶ σώματος δημιουργὸν καὶ πλαστικὸν καὶ τὴν πραγματείαν περὶ τοῦτο ἔχον.

[11] Οὔσης οὖν ψυχῆς τῆς λογιζομένης περὶ δικαίων καὶ καλῶν καὶ λογισμοῦ ζητοῦντος εἰ τοῦτο δίκαιον καὶ εἰ τοῦτο καλόν, ἀνάγκη εἶναι καὶ ἑστώς τι δίκαιον, ἀφ' οὗ καὶ ὁ λογισμὸς περὶ ψυχὴν γίγνεται. Ἢ πῶς ἂν λογίσαιτο; Καὶ εἰ ὁτὲ μὲν λογίζεται περὶ τούτων ψυχή, ὁτὲ δὲ μή, δεῖ τὸν ‹μὴ› λογιζόμενον, ἀλλ' ἀεὶ ἔχοντα τὸ δίκαιον νοῦν ἐν ἡμῖν εἶναι, εἶναι δὲ καὶ τὴν νοῦ ἀρχὴν καὶ αἰτίαν καὶ θεόν ‑ οὐ μεριστοῦ ἐκείνου ὄντος, ἀλλὰ μένοντος ἐκείνου, καὶ οὐκ ἐν τόπῳ μένοντος ‑ ἐν πολλοῖς αὖ θεωρεῖσθαι καθ' ἕκαστον τῶν δυναμένων δέχεσθαι οἷον ἄλλον αὐτόν, ὥσπερ καὶ τὸ κέντρον ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ ἐστιν, ἔχει δὲ καὶ ἕκαστον τῶν ἐν τῷ κύκλῳ σημεῖον ἐν αὐτῷ, καὶ αἱ γραμμαὶ τὸ ἴδιον προσφέρουσι πρὸς τοῦτο. Τῷ γὰρ τοιούτῳ τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐφαπτόμεθα καὶ σύνεσμεν καὶ ἀνηρτήμεθα· ἐνιδρύμεθα δὲ οἳ ἂν συννεύωμεν ἐκεῖ.

[12] Πῶς οὖν ἔχοντες τὰ τηλικαῦτα οὐκ ἀντιλαμβανόμεθα, ἀλλ' ἀργοῦμεν ταῖς τοιαύταις ἐνεργείαις τὰ πολλά, οἱ δὲ οὐδ' ὅλως ἐνεργοῦσιν; Ἐκεῖνα μέν ἐστιν ἐν ταῖς αὐτῶν ἐνεργείαις ἀεί, νοῦς καὶ τὸ πρὸ νοῦ ἀεὶ ἐν ἑαυτῷ, καὶ ψυχὴ δέ ‑ τὸ ἀεικίνητον ‑ οὕτως. Οὐ γὰρ πᾶν, ὃ ἐν ψυχῇ, ἤδη αἰσθητόν, ἀλλὰ ἔρχεται εἰς ἡμᾶς, ὅταν εἰς αἴσθησιν ἴῃ· ὅταν δὲ ἐνεργοῦν ἕκαστον μὴ μεταδιδῷ τῷ αἰσθανομένῳ, οὔπω δι' ὅλης ψυχῆς ἐλήλυθεν. Οὔπω οὖν γιγνώσκομεν ἅτε μετὰ τοῦ αἰσθητικοῦ ὄντες καὶ οὐ μόριον ψυχῆς ἀλλ' ἡ ἅπασα ψυχὴ ὄντες. Καὶ ἔτι ἕκαστον τῶν ψυχικῶν ζῶν ἀεὶ ἐνεργεῖ ἀεὶ καθ' αὑτὸ τὸ αὑτοῦ· τὸ δὲ γνωρίζειν, ὅταν μετάδοσις γένηται καὶ ἀντίληψις. Δεῖ τοίνυν, εἰ τῶν οὕτω παρόντων ἀντίληψις ἔσται, καὶ τὸ ἀντιλαμβανόμενον εἰς τὸ εἴσω ἐπιστρέφειν, κἀκεῖ ποιεῖν τὴν προσοχὴν ἔχειν. Ὥσπερ εἴ τις ἀκοῦσαι ἀναμένων ἣν ἐθέλει φωνήν, τῶν ἄλλων φωνῶν ἀποστὰς τὸ οὖς ἐγείροι πρὸς τὸ ἄμεινον τῶν ἀκουστῶν, ὁπότε ἐκεῖνο προσέλθοι, οὕτω τοι καὶ ἐνταῦθα δεῖ τὰς μὲν αἰσθητὰς ἀκούσεις ἀφέντα, εἰ μὴ καθόσον ἀνάγκη, τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς εἰς τὸ ἀντιλαμβάνεσθαι δύναμιν φυλάττειν καθαρὰν καὶ ἕτοιμον ἀκούειν φθόγγων τῶν ἄνω.

V Ennead

5.1 (10) On the Three Primary Hypostases

§5.1.1. What can it be, therefore,¹Indicating a continuation of the line of thought in the previous treatise, 6.9 (9). that has made the souls forget the god who is their father²Probably a reference to Intellect, not to the One. Cf. 6.9.5.10–15. and be ignorant of themselves and him even though they are parts of the intelligible world and completely belong to it?
The starting point for their evil³The word κακόν, translated throughout as evil, here has a connotation that extends beyond the moral to include all ‘badness’. is, then, audacity, generation, primary difference,⁴I.e., the difference from the ‘father’ that results from ‘willing that they belong to themselves’. Cf. 3.7.11.15; 4.8.4.11. and their willing that they belong to themselves.⁵Cf. 4.4.3.1–3; 4.7.13.9–13; 4.8.4.13–18, 5.28; 6.9.8.31–32. See Pl., Phdr. 248D1–2; Tim. 41E3.5 Since they appeared actually to take pleasure in their autonomy, and to have made much use of their self-motion, running in the opposite direction and getting as far away from home as possible, they came not to know even that they themselves were from the intelligible world. They were like children who at birth are separated from their fathers 10and, being raised for a long time far away, are ignorant both of themselves and of their fathers. They can, then, no longer see their father or themselves, and they dishonour themselves, due to their ignorance of their lineage, honouring instead other things, in fact, everything more than themselves. They marvel at these things and are awestruck by them; they love them and are dependent on them; they severed themselves 15as much as possible from the things from which they turned away and which they dishonoured.
So, it follows that it is honouring these things and dishonouring themselves that is the cause of their absolute ignorance of god. For to pursue and marvel at something is at the same time to accept that one is inferior to that which one is pursuing and to that at which one is marvelling. If one supposes oneself inferior to things that come to be20 and perish and assumes oneself to be the most dishonoured and mortal of the things one does honour, neither the nature nor the power of god could ever ‘be impressed in one’s heart’.⁶See Homer, Il. 15.566.
For this reason, the way of arguing with those so disposed should be twofold – that is, if one is indeed going to turn them around in the opposite direction and towards the things that are primary and lead them up to that which is highest or first, that is, the One. What, then, are 25the two ways?
The first is to show how the things now honoured by the soul are in fact dishonourable; we will discuss this further elsewhere.⁷It is difficult to know exactly what, if any, texts Plotinus is alluding to. 2.4, 3.4, 3.6, and 6.4 have all been suggested. The second is to teach the soul to remember the sort of lineage it has and what its worth is – a line of reasoning that is prior to the other one and, once it is clear, makes that other one evident, too. This is what needs to be spoken of now; it is close to what we are seeking and provides the groundwork 30for it. For what is doing the seeking is a soul, and it ought to know what it is that is doing the seeking, so that it should first of all learn about itself; whether it has the ability for seeking such things, whether it has the right sort of ‘eye’ that is able to see,⁸Pl. [?], Alc. 1 133B–C; Rep. 533D2; Soph. 254A10. and whether it is fitting for it to seek these things. For if the things sought are alien to it, why should it seek them? But if they are of the same lineage, it is fitting for it to seek 35them, and it is possible to find that which it is seeking.⁹See Pl., Tim. 35Aff. See also Phd. 79D3; Rep. 409B4, 611E1ff.; Lg. 899D7.

§5.1.2. So, let every soul first consider that soul itself¹⁰See Pl., Tim. 39E10–40A2. The soul of the cosmos is meant. made all living beings by breathing life into them, those that are nourished by the earth and the sea, those in the air, and the divine stars in heaven. Soul itself made the sun and this great heaven, and it ordered it, and makes it 5circulate in a regular way, being a nature different from that which it orders, from that which it moves, and from that which it makes to be alive.¹¹See Pl., Phdr. 246B6–7; Lg. 896E8–897A1. And it is necessarily more honourable than these, since while these are generated and destroyed whenever soul departs from them or supplies them with life, soul itself exists forever by ‘not departing from itself’.¹²Cf. 4.7.9.6–13. See Phdr. 245C5–246A2; Phd. 105C9–107A1.
As for the actual manner in which it supplies life to the whole 10universe¹³See Pl., Tim. 30B5, 31B2–3. and to each individual, this is how soul should reckon the matter: let it consider the great soul,¹⁴I.e., the soul of the cosmos. as being itself another soul of no small value having already been released from deception, and from the things that have enchanted other souls, and that it is in a state of tranquillity. Let not only its encompassing body and its surging waves 15be tranquil, but all that surrounds it;¹⁵See Pl., Tim. 43B5. let the earth be tranquil, the sea and the air be tranquil, and heaven itself, its better part.¹⁶Presumably, ‘the better part’ is the soul. Let this soul, then, think of the great soul as, in a way, flowing or pouring everywhere into immobile¹⁷Correcting ἑστῶσα to ἑστῶτα as per HS4. heaven from ‘outside’,¹⁸See Pl., Tim. 36E3. inhabiting and completely illuminating it. Just as rays from the sun light up a dark cloud, make it 20shine, and give it a golden appearance, so soul entered into the body of heaven and gave it life, gave it immortality, and wakened it from sleep.
And heaven, moved with an everlasting motion by the ‘wise guidance’¹⁹Cf. 5.9.3.30–32. See Pl., Tim. 36E4. of soul, became ‘a happy living being’,²⁰See Pl., Tim. 34B8. and acquired its25 value from soul’s dwelling within it, before which it was a dead body, mere earth and water, or rather the darkness of matter or non-being²¹Cf. 1.8.3–5; 2.4.16.3. and ‘that which the gods hate’, as the poet says.²²Homer Il. 20.65, said of Hades. The power and nature of soul would be more apparent, or clearer, if one were to reflect here on how soul encompasses and directs heaven by its own acts of will. For 30soul has given itself to the entire extent of heaven, however much that is, and every interval both great and small is ensouled, even as one body lies apart from another, one here and one there, some separated by the contraries of which they are composed, and some separated in other ways.
The soul is, however, not like that, and it does not make something 35alive by a part of itself being broken up and put into each individual, but all things are alive by the whole of it, and all soul, being the same as the father who begat it,²³Father, Demiurge, and Intellect are here identified. Cf. infra 8.5; 2.1.5.5; 2.3.18.15; 5.9.3.26. See Pl., Tim. 37C7. is present everywhere in each thing and in everything. And though heaven is multiple and diverse, it is one by the power 40of soul, and this cosmos is a god due to this.²⁴Cf. 3.5.6.14–24. See Pl., Tim. 92C6–7. The sun is also a god – because it is ensouled – and the other stars; as, for this reason are we, if indeed anything [is a god], ‘for corpses are more apt for disposal than dung’.²⁵See Heraclitus, fr. 22 B 96 DK.
But the explanation for gods, being gods, must necessarily be a god older than they. Our soul is of the same kind, and when you examine it without the accretions, taking it in its ‘purified condition’,²⁶See Pl., Rep. 611C3–4. you will 45find that it has the identical value that soul was found to have, more valuable than everything that is corporeal. For all corporeal things are earth. But even if they were fire, what would be the cause of its burning? And so, too, for everything composed of these, even if you add water and air. But if the body is worth pursuing just because it is ensouled, why 50would one²⁷Reading τις with HS5. ignore oneself to pursue another? If you love the soul in another, then love yourself.

§5.1.3. Since the soul is indeed such an honourable and divine thing, you should by now already be confident in your pursuit of a god like this, and with this explanation in mind, ascend to him. You will certainly not have to cast far, ‘nor are the intermediary steps many’.²⁸See Homer Il. I. 156. So, understand soul’s higher ‘neighbouring region’,²⁹This is Intellect. See Pl., Lg. 705A4. which is more divine than the 5divine soul, after which and from which the soul comes. For even though soul is the kind of thing shown by the argument, it is an image of Intellect.³⁰Cf. infra 7.1; also, 2.9.4.25; 5.3.4.15–21, 8.46ff.; 5.9.3.30–37. Just as spoken words are an expressed principle of thinking, so, too, Soul is an expressed principle of Intellect,³¹Λόγος (‘expressed principle’) is the manifestation or expression of that which is hierarchically inferior in relation to that which is superior. The intelligible content of the higher is maintained in the lower. and its whole activity, and the life which it sends forth to make something else really exist.³²The discursive intellectual part of the embodied soul. Cf. 5.3.4.15–21. See Pl., Tht. 189E6–7; Soph. 263E3–9; Ar., AP 1.10.76b24–25. It is just like fire that has both internal heat and radiant heat.³³Ar., Meta. 2.1.993b25. 10But in the intelligible world, one should understand that the internal activity does not flow out of it; rather, one activity remains in it, and the other is that which comes into existence.³⁴Cf. 4.7.10.19–21, 32–37, 13.1–3.
Since, then, Soul is derived from Intellect, it is intellectual, and its own intellect is found in its acts of calculative reasoning,³⁵Soul will include both individual souls and the soul of the cosmos. The intellectual activity of these is discursive; that of Intellect itself (and undescended intellects) will be non-discursive. Cf. 4.7.10.32–37. and its perfection, too, comes from Intellect, like a father raising a child whom he begat as imperfect in relation to himself. Its real existence, 15then, comes from Intellect, and its actuality as an expressed principle derived from Intellect occurs when Intellect is seen in it. For whenever Soul looks into Intellect, what it thinks and actualizes are objects that belong to it and come from within itself. And these alone should be called activities of Soul, namely, those that are intellectual and those that belong to it. The inferior activities come from elsewhere, and are states of an inferior soul.³⁶Referring to embodied souls or to their lower parts. Cf. 3.6.4.30–38.20
Intellect, then, makes Soul even more divine by being its father and by being present to it. For there is nothing in between them but the fact of their being different, Soul as next in order and as receptive, and Intellect as form. Even the matter of Intellect is beautiful,³⁷I.e., intelligible matter. Cf. infra 5.6–9, 13–17; 2.4.2–5; 3.8.11.4; 5.3.8.48. since it is like Intellect and simple.³⁸See Ar., DA 3.5.430a10–15. What Intellect is like, then, is clear from the above, namely, that it is superior to Soul thus described.25

§5.1.4. One could also see this from the following. Take someone who starts by marvelling at this sensible cosmos, looking at its expanse and its beauty and its everlasting motion and the gods in it, both the visible and the invisible ones, and the daemons, and all the animals and plants; let 5him then ascend to the archetype of this cosmos and the truer reality, and in the intelligible world let him see all that is intelligible and eternal in it with its own comprehension and life,³⁹Cf. 3.7.3.9–17; 5.3.5.31–37; 6.7.17.12–26. See Pl., Tim. 37D1, 39E1; Soph. 248E6–249A2; Ar., Meta. 12.7.1072a26, 1072b20–31; 12.9.1074b34–35. and ‘pure Intellect’ presiding over these, and indescribable wisdom, and the life that is truly that under the reign of Kronos, a god of ‘fullness’ and intellect.⁴⁰The fanciful etymology of Κρόνος, κόρος (‘fullness’) plus νοῦς (‘intellect’), comes from Pl., Crat. 396B6–7. For it 10encompasses every immortal within itself, that is, every intellect, every god, every soul, and is always stable. For why should it seek to change from its happy condition?⁴¹See Ar., Meta.12.7.1072b22–24, 9.1074b25–27. Where could it go, when it has all things within itself? It does not even seek to enlarge itself, since it is absolutely perfect.
For this reason, in addition, all the things in it are perfect so as to be15 perfect in every way, having nothing which is not like this, nothing in it that it does not think and it thinks not by way of enquiring but by having what it thinks.⁴²See Pl., Tht. 197B8–10; Ar., Meta.12.7. 1072b23. Its blessedness is not acquired; rather, everything is in it eternally, and it is true eternity, which time imitates, moving around it⁴³Reading παραθεών with Atkinson. HS5 suggests deleting ψυχὴν. Cf. 3.7.11.35–59. See Pl., Tim. 37D1–7. along with Soul, dropping some things and picking up others. For at the level of Soul, thoughts are always changing; now it thinks of Socrates, 20now of a horse – always some particular being – whereas Intellect just is everything. It has, then, all Beings stable in it,⁴⁴Reading in lines 21–22: ἐν [τῷ] αὐτῷ ἐν τῷ <αἰῶνι> with Atkinson. The whole line is then: ἔχει οὖν ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα ἑστῶτα ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι. and it alone is, and the ‘is’ is always,⁴⁵See Pl., Tim. 37E6. and the future is nothing to it – for it ‘is’ then, too – nor is there a past for it – for nothing in the intelligible world has passed away – but all Beings are set within it always inasmuch as they are identical and 25in a way pleased to be in this condition.
Each of them is Intellect and Being,⁴⁶‘Being’ refers to the μέγιστον γένος Being and all the intelligibles that share in it as seen from the following lines. Cf. 5.3.5.26ff.; 5.5.3.1; 5.9.5.13, 8.2–4; 6.7.41.12. See Pl., Soph. 254B–D. that is, the totality consists of all Intellect and all Being – Intellect, insofar as it thinks, making Being come to exist, and Being, by its being thought, giving to Intellect its thinking, which is its existence.⁴⁷Cf. 5.9.5.12–13. But the cause of thinking is something else, something that is also the cause of Being:⁴⁸I.e., the One. Cf. 6.7.16.22–31. in other words, the cause of both is something else. For those coexist simultaneously and do 30not abandon each other, but this one thing is nevertheless two: Intellect and Being, thinking and what is being thought – Intellect, insofar as it is thinking, Being insofar as it is what is being thought.⁴⁹Cf. 5.3.1.1–12, 5.1–3; 6.7.1.7–9, 12–13, 39.12–13. For thinking could not occur if there was not Difference as well as Identity.
The first things that occur, then, are Intellect, Being, Difference, and 35Identity. And one should include Motion and Stability – Motion if Intellect is thinking, and Stability so that it remains the identical thing.⁵⁰Cf. 6.2.7–8. See Pl., Soph. 254D4–5, 254E5–255A1; Parm. 145E. There must be Difference, so that there can be both thinking and what is being thought; in fact, if you were to remove Difference, it would become one and fall silent. It also must be that things that are thought are different from each other.⁵¹Cf. 5.3.10.30–32, 40–42. There must also be Identity, 40since Intellect is one with itself, that is, there is a certain commonality in⁵²Reading ἐν in l. 40 with Kirchhoff. all its objects, but ‘differentiation is Difference’.⁵³See Ar., Meta. 4.2.1004a21, 9.1018a12–13. And in becoming many, they produce Number and quantity, and quality is the unique character of each of these, and from these as principles all the other things arise.⁵⁴Cf. 6.2.21.11–32. See Pl., Parm. 142D1–143A3.

§5.1.5. The god, then, who is above Soul is multiple, and it is possible for Soul to exist within this, connected to it, so long as it does not want to be ‘separated’ from it.⁵⁵See Pl., Parm. 144B2. When it, then, approaches Intellect and in a way becomes one with it, it seeks to know who it is that produced it.⁵⁶Reading ζητεῖ in l. 3 with the mss followed by a comma with HS5. It is that which is simple and prior to this multiplicity, which is the cause 5of this god’s existence and its being multiple;⁵⁷Cf. 5.3.16.10–16. it is the producer of Number. For Number is not primary.
Before the Dyad is the One; the Dyad is second and, having come from the One, the One imposes definiteness on it, whereas it is in itself indefinite.⁵⁸Cf. 5.4.2.4–10; 6.6.3.12–15 for the identification of the Indefinite Dyad with Intellect. That the One imposes definiteness does not mean that it itself is definite. Cf. 5.3.11.1–12; 6.7.17.15–16. When it has been made definite, it is henceforth Number, Number as Substance.⁵⁹Cf. 5.4.2.7–8; 5.5.4.16–17; 6.6.1.1–2. See Ar., Meta. 1.6.987b14; 13.7.1081a14; Alex. Aphr., In Meta. 55.20–56.35. Soul, too, is Number;⁶⁰Cf. 6.6.16.45ff. See Xenocrates, fr. 60 Heinze. for the first things are 10neither masses nor magnitudes. The things that have thickness, those things that sense-perception takes to be beings, come later. Nor is it the moist part in seeds that is valuable, but the part that is not seen. This is number and an expressed principle.⁶¹Cf. 3.8.2.20–30; 6.7.11.17–28. What are, then, called Number and the Dyad in the intelligible world are expressed principles and Intellect. But whereas the Dyad, understood as a sort of substrate, is 15indefinite,⁶²Cf. 2.4.5.22–23; 5.4.2.7–8. See Ar., Meta. 13.7.1081a14–15. each Number that comes from it and the One is a Form, Intellect in a way having been shaped by the Forms that come to be in it.⁶³Cf. infra 7.5–18. In one manner, it is shaped by the One, and in another by itself, as in the way the power of sight is actualized.⁶⁴Cf. 3.8.11.1–8; 5.2.1.7–13; 5.3.11.4–6; 6.7.15.21–22, 16.10–13. See Ar., DA 3.2.426a13–14, 3.3.428a6–7. For intellection is a vision in which seeing and what is seen are one.⁶⁵See Ar., Meta. 12.9.1074b29–1075a10.

§5.1.6. How, then, does Intellect see, and what does it see, and how in general did it get to exist or come to be from the One in such a way that it can see? For the soul now grasps that these things must of necessity be, but in addition it longs to grasp the answer to the question much discussed indeed among the ancient wise men, too, of how from a unity, such as we say the One is, anything acquired real existence, 5whether multiplicity or duality or number;⁶⁶Cf. 5.2.1.3–5; 5.9.14.2–6. why it did not remain by itself, but why instead such a multiplicity flowed from it – a multiplicity which, though seen among Beings, we judge appropriate to refer back to it.
Let us speak of this matter, then, in the following manner, calling to god himself, not with spoken words, but by stretching our arms in 10prayer to him in our soul, in this way being able to pray alone to him who is alone.⁶⁷Cf. 1.6.7.9; 6.7.34.7–8; 6.9.11.51. So, since god is by himself, as if inside a temple, remaining tranquil while transcending everything,⁶⁸See Pl., Rep. 509B9. the contemplator should contemplate the statues which are in a way fixed outside the temple already – or rather the first statue displayed, revealed to sight in the 15following manner.
It must be that for everything in motion there is something towards which it moves.⁶⁹See Ar., Phys. 4.11.219a10–11; 5.1. 224b1–10. Since the One has nothing towards which it moves, let us not suppose that it is moving. But if something comes to be after it, it has necessarily come to be by being eternally turned towards it [the One].⁷⁰Reading αὐτὸ with Atkinson instead of αὑτὸ (‘itself’) in HS. With the latter, the end of the sentence reads ‘while that [the One] is always turned towards itself’. In support of the former, cf. supra 5.17–19 and infra 7.5–18; for the latter, cf. 6.8.8.11–13, 15.1. Let the sort of coming to be that is in time not get in our way, 20since our discussion is concerned with things that are eternal. When in our discussion we attribute ‘coming to be’ to them, we are doing so in order to give their causal order.⁷¹Reading αἰτίας <τι> τάξεως αὐτοῖς ἀποδώσειν with Atkinson thus enabling us to understand αἰτίας as genitive singular. We should say, then, that that which comes to be from the One in the intelligible world does so without the One being moved. For if something came to be as a result of its having moved, then that which came to be would be third in line from it, after 25the motion, and not second. It must be, then, that if something was second in line from it, that thing came to exist while the One was unmoved, neither inclining, nor having willed anything, nor moving in any way.⁷²Cf. 5.3.12.28–31.
How, then, does this happen, and what should we think about what is near to the One while it reposes? A radiation of light comes from it, though it reposes, like the light from the sun, in a way encircling it, 30eternally coming from it while it reposes. And all beings, so long as they persist, necessarily, due to the power present in them, produce from their own substantiality a real, though dependent, existent around themselves directed to their exterior, a sort of image of the archetypes from which it was generated.⁷³Cf. 4.6.8.8–12; 5.3.7.23–24; 5.4.2.27–33; 6.7.18.5–6; 6.7.21.4–6; 6.7.40.21–24. Fire produces the heat that comes from it, and snow does not only hold its coldness inside itself. Perfumes 35especially witness to this, for so long as they exist, something flows from them around them, the existence of which a bystander enjoys. Further, all things, as soon as they are perfected, generate.⁷⁴See Ar., DA 2.4.415a26–28. That which is always perfect always generates something everlasting, and it generates something inferior to itself.
What, then, must we say about that which is most perfect? Nothing 40can come from it except what is next greatest after it. And the greatest thing after it, the second greatest thing, is Intellect. For Intellect sees the One and is in need of it alone. But the One has no need of Intellect. And that which is generated from something greater than Intellect is Intellect;⁷⁵Cf. 5.3.16.10–16; 5.5.9.9–10; 6.8.18.3. and Intellect is greater than all other things, because other things come after it. For example, Soul is an expressed principle derived 45from Intellect and a certain activity, just as Intellect is an activity of the One. But Soul’s expressed principle is murky, for it is a reflection of Intellect and, due to this, it must look to Intellect. Similarly, Intellect has to look to the One, so that it can be Intellect. It sees it not as having been separated from it, but because it comes after it and there is nothing in between, as there is nothing in between Soul and Intellect. Everything longs for that which generated it and loves this, especially 50when there is just generator and that which is generated. And ‘whenever what is best is the generator’,⁷⁶See Ar., Meta. 14.4.1091b10. that which is generated must necessarily be found with it, since they are only separated by being different.

§5.1.7. We are saying that Intellect is an image of the One,⁷⁷Cf. supra 6.30–34, 43–46; 5.4.2.25–26. first – for we should express ourselves more clearly – because that which is produced must somehow be the One and preserve many of its properties, that is, be the same as it, just like the light that comes from the sun. But the One is not Intellect. How, then, does it generate Intellect?5
In fact, by its reversion to it, Intellect saw the One, and this seeing is Intellect.⁷⁸Cf. 5.3.11.1–5, 9–13; 6.7.15.12–14. For that which grasps anything other than itself is either⁷⁹Reading ἢ with HS4. sense-perception or intellect. Sense-perception is a line, etc.⁸⁰I.e., sense-perception is comparable to a line, Intellect to a circle, and the One to the centre of the circle. The text of this line, αἴσθησιν γραμμὴν καὶ τὰ ἄλλα is taken by HS2 as corrupt. But the circle is the sort of thing that can be divided, and Intellect is not like that.
In fact, there is unity here, but the One is the productive power of 10all things.⁸¹Cf. 5.3.15.31; 5.4.2.38; 6.9.5.36–37. Intellection observes those things of which the One is the productive power, in a way cutting itself off from that power. Otherwise, it would not have become Intellect – since as soon as it is generated, it has from itself, in a way, its self-awareness of this power, the power to produce Substance. For Intellect, by means of itself, also defines its own existence by the power that comes from the One.⁸²With the punctuation from HS5. Cf. 6.7.15.18–22.
And, because it is, in a way, a unitary part of what belongs to the One 15and is the Substance that comes from it, it is strengthened by it and brought to perfection as Substance by it and as derived from it. It sees what is in the intelligible world within itself, a sort of division of the indivisible, and is life and thinking and all things, none of which the One is.⁸³Cf. 5.2.1.5–7; 6.9.3.36–40.
For in this way everything comes from it, because it is not constrained by some shape, for it is one alone. If it were everything, it 20would be among the Beings. This is why the One is none of the Beings in Intellect, although everything comes from it.⁸⁴Cf. 3.8.9.40; 6.9.2.44–45. For this reason, these things are Substances, for each has already been defined, and each has a sort of shape. Being should not be suspended, in a way, in the indefinite, but fixed by definition and stability. Stability among intelligibles 25is definition and shape, by means of which they acquire real existence.⁸⁵Cf. 5.5.6.1–13. See Pl., Parm. 142B5–6.
‘This is the lineage’⁸⁶See Pl., Rep. 547A4–5, quoting Homer, Il. 6.211. of this Intellect, worthy of the purest Intellect, born from nowhere else than from the first principle, and, having been generated, at once generating all Beings which are with itself, both all the beauty of the Ideas and all the intelligible gods. And 30it is full of the Beings it has generated and, in a way, swallows them again by having them in itself and neither letting them fall into matter nor be reared by Rhea⁸⁷The wife of Kronos. – as the mysteries and myths about the gods enigmatically say that Kronos, the wisest god, before the birth of Zeus,35 holds back in himself what he generates, so that he is full and is like Intellect in satiety.
After this, so they say, being already sated, he generates Zeus, for Intellect, being perfect, generates Soul. For since it is perfect, it had to generate and since it was such a great power, it could not be barren. That which was generated by it could, in this case as well, not be superior to it but had to be an inferior reflection of it, first similarly 40undefined, and then defined and made a kind of image by that which generated it. The offspring of Intellect is an expressed principle and a real existent, that which thinks discursively.⁸⁸Referring to Soul and individual souls. Cf. 4.3.5.9–11. This is what moves around Intellect and is a light and trace of Intellect,⁸⁹Cf. 5.5.5.14; 6.8.18.15, 23. dependent on it, on one side attached to Intellect and filled up with it and enjoying it and 45sharing in it and thinking, and on the other side, attached to the things that came after it, or rather itself generating what is necessarily inferior to Soul. These matters should be discussed later.⁹⁰No particular treatise is clearly indicated here. 2.4 is the most likely possibility. This is as far as the divine Beings go.

§5.1.8. And it is also because of this that we get Plato’s threefold division: the things ‘around the king of all’ – he says this, meaning the primary things – ‘second around the secondary things’, and ‘third around the tertiary things’.⁹¹See Pl. [?], 2nd Ep. 312E1–4. And he says ‘father of the cause’⁹²Cf. 6.8.14.37–38. See Pl. [?], 6th Ep. 323D4. meaning 5by ‘cause’ Intellect.⁹³See Pl., Phd. 97C1–2, quoting Anaxagoras, fr. 59 B 12 DK. Also, Tim. 39B7, 47E4; Phil. 30C6–D8; Rep. 507C7–8, 530A6; Soph. 265C4; Sts. 270A5. For the Intellect is his Demiurge. And he says that the Demiurge makes the Soul in that ‘mixing-bowl’.⁹⁴See Pl., Tim. 34B3–35B7, 41D4–5. And since the Intellect is cause, he means by ‘father’ the Good, or that which transcends Intellect and ‘transcends Substantiality’.⁹⁵Cf. 5.3.17.13–14; 5.4.1.10; 5.6.6.30; 6.7.40.26; 6.9.11.42. See Pl., Rep. 509B8–9; Aristotle apud Simplicius, In DC 485.22 (= fr 1, p.57 Ross). Often he calls Being and the Intellect ‘Idea’,⁹⁶See Pl., Rep. 507B5–10; Soph. 246B6–7. which shows that Plato understood that the Intellect comes from the 10Good, and the Soul comes from the Intellect. And these statements of ours are not new nor even recent, but rather were made a long time ago, though not explicitly. The things we are saying now comprise exegeses of those, relying on the writings of Plato himself as evidence that these are ancient views.⁹⁷Cf. 3.7.1.8–16.
Parmenides previously touched on this doctrine to the extent that he 15identified Being and Intellect, that is, he did not place Being among sensibles, saying ‘for thinking and Being are identical’.⁹⁸Cf. 1.4.10.6; 3.8.8.8; 5.1.8.17–18; 5.6.6.22–23; 5.9.5.29–30; 6.7.41.18. See Parmenides, fr. 28 B 3 DK: τὸ γὰρ αὐτὸ νοεῖν ἐστίν τε καὶ εἶναι. And he says that Being is ‘immobile’,⁹⁹See Parmenides, fr. 28 B 8, 26 DK. though he does attach thinking to it, eliminating all corporeal motion from it so that it would remain as it is, 20likening it to a ‘spherical mass’,¹⁰⁰Parmenides, fr.28 B 8, 43 DK. because it encompasses all things and because thinking is not external to it, but rather within itself. Saying that it was ‘one’ in his own writings,¹⁰¹Parmenides, fr. 28 B 8, 6 DK. he got blamed for saying that this one thing was found to be many.¹⁰²See Pl., Soph. 245A5–B1.
Plato’s Parmenides speaks more accurately when he distinguishes25 from among each other the primary One, which is one in a more proper sense, a second one, which he calls ‘one-many’, and a third one, ‘one and many’.¹⁰³Cf. 4.8.3.10; 5.3.15.10–22; 5.4.1.20–21; 6.7.14.1–18 on Intellect as one-many. See Pl., Parm. 137C–142A, 144E5, 155E5. In this way, too, he is in harmony with our account of the three natures.

§5.1.9. Anaxagoras, too, in saying that ‘Intellect is pure and unmixed’, is himself positing the first principle as simple and the One as separate, although he neglects to give an accurate account due to his antiquity.¹⁰⁴See Anaxagoras, fr. 59 B 12 DK, which Plotinus is quoting inexactly; Pl., Phd. 97B8–C2; Ar., Meta. 1.3.984B15–19. In addition, Heraclitus knew the One to be everlasting and intelligible, since bodies are always coming into being and are ‘in flux’.¹⁰⁵See Heraclitus, fr. 22 A 1 DK; Pl., Tht. 152D2–E9, 179D6–183B5; Crat. 402A4–C3, 439B10–440E2; Ar., Meta. 1.6.987a33–34. And for 5Empedocles, ‘Strife’ divides and ‘Love’ is the One – he himself makes this incorporeal, too – and the elements are posited as matter.¹⁰⁶Cf. 4.4.40.5–6; 6.7.14.19–20. See Empedocles, fr. 31 B 17. 7–8 DK (= 26.5–6); Ar., Meta. 1.8.989a20–21; 12.10.1075B3.
Aristotle later said that the first principle was ‘separate’¹⁰⁷See Ar., DA 3.430a17; Meta. 12.7.1073a4. and ‘intelligible’,¹⁰⁸See Ar., Meta. 12.7.1072a26. but when he says that ‘it thinks itself’,¹⁰⁹See Ar., Meta. 12.7.1072b20. he no longer makes it the first principle.¹¹⁰Supplying the negative οὐ, which is missing from HS2. Cf. supra 4.31–33, 37–39; 5.6; 6.7.37–41. Further, he makes many other things 10intelligible – as many as there are spheres in heaven, so that each intelligible moves each sphere¹¹¹See Ar., Meta. 12.8.1073a28–b1. – but by doing so he describes intelligibles in a way different from Plato, proposing an argument from plausibility, since he did not have an argument from necessity. One might pause to consider whether it is even plausible, for it is more plausible that all the spheres, contributing to one system, should look to one thing that is the first principle.
And one might enquire if the many intelligibles are, according to 15him, derived from one first principle, or whether he holds that there are many principles among the intelligibles.¹¹²See Ar., Meta. 12.7.1072a23–26, 1072b14, 1074a36–38, 10.1074a36–38. And if they are derived from one, it will be clear that it is analogous to the way that, among sensibles, one sphere encompasses another until you reach the outermost one that is dominant. So, in the intelligible world what is first will also encompass everything, that is, there will be an intelligible cosmos. And just as in the 20sensible world the spheres are not empty, but the first is full of stars, and the others also have stars, so, too, in the intelligible world the movers will have many things within themselves, and the truer Beings will be there. But if each one is a principle, the principles will be an arbitrary collection.
And what will be the explanation for their functioning together¹¹³Reading συνεργήσει in l. 24 with Harder. and agreeing on a single task, namely, the concord of the entire 25universe? How can there be equality in number of the sensible spheres in heaven in relation to the intelligibles or movers? And how can these incorporeals be many in this way, without matter to separate them?¹¹⁴Cf. 2.4.4.2–7, 14–17. See Ar., Meta. 12.8.1074a31; 14.2.1088b14–28.
So, among the ancients, those who adhered most closely to the doctrines of Pythagoras and his followers, and to those of Pherecydes,30 held to this account of the nature of things. But some of them worked out this view among themselves in their own writings, while some did not do so in writings but demonstrated it in unwritten discussions¹¹⁵Probably a reference to Plato’s ‘unwritten teachings’. See Ar., Phys. 4.2.209b11–17, the only explicit reference to such teachings. or altogether left it alone.

§5.1.10. It has already been shown that it is necessary to believe that things are this way: that there is the One which transcends Being, which is such as the argument strove to show to the extent that it is possible to demonstrate anything about these matters; that next in line is Being and Intellect; and that third is the nature that is Soul.¹¹⁶Cf. supra 3.1–16; 4.26–30; 6.12–41.
And just as in nature these aforementioned three are found, so it is 5necessary to believe as well that these are in us. I do not mean that they are among sensibles – for these three are separate from sensibles – but that they are in things that are outside the sensible order, using the term ‘outside ’ in the same manner in which it is used to refer to those things that are outside the whole of heaven. In saying that they belong to a human being, I mean exactly what Plato means by ‘the inner human 10being’.¹¹⁷Cf. 4.8.1.1–11. See Pl., Rep. 589A7–B1.
So, our soul is something divine and of another nature [i.e., other than sensibles], like the nature of all soul; it is perfect by having intellect. One part of intellect is that which engages in calculative reasoning and one part is that which makes calculative reasoning possible.¹¹⁸Cf. supra 3.13. The distinction is between intellect in us and Intellect. The calculative reasoning part of soul is actually in need of no corporeal 15organ for its calculative reasoning,¹¹⁹See Ar., DA 3.4.429a24–27; Alex. Aphr., De an. 84.10–12. having its own activity in purity in order that it also be possible for it to reason purely. Someone who supposed it to be separate and not mixed with body and in the primary intelligible world would not be mistaken. For we should not search for a place in which to situate it; rather, we should make it outside all place. For this is how it is for that which is by itself, outside and immaterial, 20whenever it is alone, retaining nothing from the nature of the body. Because of this, Plato says that the Demiurge ‘in addition’ encircled the soul of the universe from ‘outside’, pointing to the part of the soul that abides in the intelligible world.¹²⁰Cf. 4.8.8.2–3. See Pl., Tim. 34B4, 36D9–E1. In our case, he hid his meaning when he said that it is ‘at the top of our head’.¹²¹See Pl., Tim. 90A5.
And his exhortation ‘to be separate’¹²²Cf. 1.8.6.10–12. See Pl., Phd. 67C6. is not meant spatially – for our 25intellect is separate by nature – but is an exhortation not to incline to the body even by acts of imagination, and to alienate ourselves from the body, if somehow one could lead the remaining part of the soul upwards, or even carry upward that which is situated in the sensible world, that part that alone acts demiurgically on the body and has the 30job of shaping it and caring for it.¹²³Cf. 1.1.3.21–25. See Pl. [?], Epin. 981B7–8.

§5.1.11. Since, then, there is soul that engages in calculative reasoning about just and beautiful things, that is, calculative reasoning that seeks to know if this is just or if this is beautiful, it is necessary that there exists permanently something that is just, from which the calculative reasoning in the soul arises.¹²⁴See Pl., Parm. 132A1–4. How else could it engage in calculative reasoning? And if soul sometimes engages in calculative reasoning about these 5things and sometimes does not, there must be Intellect that does not engage in calculative reasoning, but always possesses Justice, and there must be also the principle of Intellect and its cause and god.¹²⁵See Ar., DA 3.5.430a22. And it must be indivisible and unchanging; and while not changing place, it is seen in each of the many things that can receive it, in a way, as something 10other.¹²⁶Cf. 3.8.9.23–26. Just as the centre of the circle exists in its own right, but each of the points on the circle contains it in itself, the radii add their unique character to it. For it is by something like this in ourselves that we are in contact with [the One] and are with it and depend on it. And if we converge on it, we would be settled in the intelligible world.¹²⁷Cf. 1.6.11.10–12; 5.6.5.1–2; 6.9.8.18–22.15

§5.1.12. How, then, given that we have such great things in us, do we not grasp them, but rather are mostly inactive with respect to these activities; indeed, some people are altogether inactive?
They are always involved with their own activities – I mean, Intellect and that which is prior to Intellect and eternally in itself, and Soul as 5well, which is thus ‘always moving’.¹²⁸See Pl., Phdr. 245C5. For not everything in soul is immediately sensible, but it comes to us whenever it comes to our sense-perception.¹²⁹Cf.1.1.11.2–8; 4.3.30.15–16; 4.8.8.6–7; 4.9.2.13–22. But whenever there is activity that is not being transmitted to the faculty of sense-perception, it has not yet reached the entire soul. We do not yet know it, then, inasmuch as we are the whole soul, including the faculty of sense-perception, not just a part of10 it. Further, each of the parts of the soul, always alive, is always acting by itself with its own object. But cognizing occurs whenever transmission, that is, apprehension, occurs.
So, if there is going to be apprehension of things present in this way, then that which is to apprehend must revert inward, and focus its 15attention there.¹³⁰I.e., to our undescended intellects. Cf. 3.4.3.24; 4.3.5.6, 12.3–4; 4.7.10.32–33, 13.1–3; 4.8.4.31–35, 8.8; 6.4.14.16–22; 6.7.5.26–29, 17.26–27; 6.8.6.41–43. Just as if someone were waiting to hear a voice that he wanted to hear, and, distancing himself from other voices, were to prick up his ears to hear the best of sounds, waiting for the time when it will come – so, too, in this case one must let go of sensible sounds, except insofar as they are necessary, and guard the soul’s pure power of apprehension and be ready to listen to the sounds from above.