Emanation in Plotinus

Mind Association

"Emanation" in Plotinus Author(s): A. H. Armstrong Source: Mind, New Series, Vol. 46, No. 181 (Jan., 1937), pp. 61-66 Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the Mind Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2250032 . Accessed: 07/03/2014 16:41 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Oxford University Press and Mind Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Mind.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 181.118.153.57 on Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:41:54 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

"EMANATION" IN PLOTINUS. PERHAPS the mostdifficult conceptin the wholesystemof Plotinus inwhichthelowerhypostases, is thatof" emanation", orthemanner proceedfromtheOne. The difficulty Novsand *v'vxy, is notso much to discoverwhatPlotinusmeantby " emanation".1 His accountof the doctrinein all partsof the Enneadsis fairlyclear and on the wholeconsistent.The lowerhypostasesare producedby a spontaneousand necessaryeffluxof lifeor powerfromthe One, which leaves theirsourcein itselfundiminished.This effluxis always describedmetaphorically.The metaphorswhich Plotinus uses arethoseoftheradiationoflightfromtheluminous almostinvariably and growthfroma seed.3 The doctrine source2 or of development to him,and in somepassages4 he is one of the greatestimportance insistson it withsuchemphasisas almostto invertthescaleofvalues is to see whattheprecisephilosophical ofhissystem. The difficulty as it is fairlyclearthatit has meaningofthisconception is, orrather, not got any precisephilosophical meaning,to explainhow a great likePlotinuscame,at a mostcriticalpointin his and subtlethinker ofthought to conceala confusion undera cloudofmetaphors. system, fromZelleronwards,have been contentto note Manyinterpreters, the confusionand leave it at that. Thereis muchreasonin this attitude. We must be carefulnot to go withDean Inge to the oppositeextremeand practicallydenythat the problemexistsat all. But it is not altogether satisfactory.Plotinusis generallyan acute criticof his own metaphors.5Further,in one passage6 he methodofcriticism, applieshischaracteristic themetaphor byvarying to makeit fitmorecloselyto theidea in hismind,to thisverydoctrine ofemanation.Thepassageruns: " If youtakea smallluminous mass as centreand surroundit witha largertransparent sphere,so that thelightwithinshowsoverthewholeofthatwhichsurrounds it . . . shallwe notsay thattheinner(luminous) massis notaffected in any way but remainsin itselfand reachesoverthe wholeof the outer 1 I use thiswordnot as representing any singletermin the philosophical vocabularyofthe Enneadsbut as the most convenient Englishexpression forthe doctrinereferred " begs to; thoughperhapsBrehier's" procession fewerquestions. 2., 7, 1; V., 1, 2; V., 1, 7; 2, 1; 3, 10; 3, 12; 6, 4; VI., 8, 18; 9, 9. 3III., 3, 7; III., 8, 9; V., 9, 6. 4IV., 8, 5; I., 9, 3. ofthe soul at the beginning E.g., in the discussionofthe partibility of IV., 3; also the simileoftheradiiin VI., 5, 5. 6VI., 4, 7.

This content downloaded from 181.118.153.57 on Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:41:54 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

62

A. H.

ARMSTRONG:

mass,and thatthe lightwhichis seenin the littlecentralbodyhas the outer? . . . Now if one takes away the material encompassed massand keepsthepowerofthelightyoucannotsurelysaythatthe over any longer,but thatit is equallydistributed lightis anywhere in yourmind the wholeoutersphere,you can no longerdetermine whereit was situatedbefore,nor can you say whenceit came nor how . . . but can only puzzle and wonder,perceivingthe light the sphere." Now it is clear simultaneously presentthroughout removedall idea of thatthisvariationofthe metaphorhas in effect ofemanationis radiacharacteristic emanation. The distinguishing tionfroma centre. If the centre,as here,is removed,we have no longeremanationbut immanentomnipresence.The treatisesin whichthispassageoccurs(VI., 4 and 5) standmidwayin Porphyry's Plotinus'sprofoundest listandrepresent on the thought chronological questionof emanation.1Throughoutthem thereseems to be a omniofemanationand oneofimmanent betweena doctrine struggle 2 issuesin an outspoken whichfinally pantheism. Plotinus presence, to reconcile thetwoconceptions bytheidea thatthe makesattempts One is presentin the lowerlevels of beingthroughits 8VV,4uEtg,3 but " wherepowersaretheirsourcemustbe ".4 He seemsto findit of emanationto explainthe origin to keepthe conception necessary it adequateto expressthe withoutfinding of the lowerhypostases, telationbetweenthose hypostasesand the One, and especiallyits relationto the humansoul. But the fact that he goes so far in boththeidea ofemanationand themetaphor and revising criticising that he did expressedmakesit surprising in whichit is commonly not realise its inadequacyand attemptto escape fromit more completely. is increasedwhenweturnto theearlierhistory ofthe Thedifficulty doctrineof emanation.5This seemsfairlycertainlyto derivefrom theStoics,and in paiticularfromthelaterStoicismwhichgoesunder the nameof Posidonius. This " Posidonian" systemof emanation is concernedmainlywiththe adventuresof the soul. Hence the whichthe divinesubstanceenduresin the cosmologies modifications oftheolderStoicism6 disappear: wefinda genuinesystemofemana-

tionof the 7rveG,Ja

VOOEYVKa'L

vp 3E,

the hegemonikon, fromthe

withthedistinctive giving" theoryof" undiminished sun,7combined

1 Brehier,Philosophie de Plotin,pp. 116-117,thinksthat theymay be ofthe prevailing" solartheology". This maywellbe a definite criticism was deeply affectedby this theology, true; but Plotinusnevertheless perhapsmoredeeplythanhe knew. 2

VI., 5, 12; cp. VI., 5, 7.

4 VI., 4, 9. Plotinusand Posidonius", C.Q. 24 (1930), p. 198,and especiallypp. 205-207. 6 Von Arnim, StoicorumVeterum FragmentaI., 102,etc. 7Plutarch, De Facie in OrbeLunae, 943A,ff.(mixedwitha good deal of confuseddemonology). GalenDe Plac., 643 f., Mueller,MacrobiusSat., I., 23. E. R. Dodds,Proclus'Elements ofTheology, pp.315-318. Reinhardt, Kosmosu. Sympathie, pp. 353-365. 3 VI., 4, 3. 5 On thisquestionsee Witt,"

This content downloaded from 181.118.153.57 on Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:41:54 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

" EMANATION

IN PLOTINUS.

63

of light' whichis the basis of Plotinus'slight metaphor. The thingto noticeforthe presentpurposeis thatthe theory important materialistic.Whatcomesfromthe visible,material is completely sun and returnsto it again is a fierybreath. GivenStoic physics ofthematerial thisidea ofa materialoutflowing andStoicmaterialism naturalandin place. But it is byno means is perfectly hegemonikon in placein theaccountoftherelationsofspiritualbeingsin a system between likethatofPlotinuswhichis veryclearaboutthedistinction consciousof materialand spiritual. Further,Plotinusis extremely as thesupremedefectof the Stoicsystemand criticises materialism it vigorously.2 Thereforethe confusionof thought involved in the

whenwe realise ofemanationbecomesevenmoreremarkable doctrine intothe thatit involvesa concealedadmissionof Stoic materialism ? system. How,then,are we to explainits presenceand importance whichmake generalconsiderations We can, ofcourse,bringforward the problemappearless alarming. We can say thatthisconfusion ofthought was thepricewhichhadto be paidto maintaintheorganic unityof the cosmos,an indispensablepostulatealike of magic, Greek religion,and Greek philosophy. We can maintainwith Plotinusis describing Brehier3 that at thispointin his philosophy a philosophically satisfactory the spiritualliferatherthanoutlining we can agree aretrue. Further, cosmology. Boththesecontentions vocabulary withArnou4that everytermin Plotinus'sphilosophical bringsa littlepieceofits parentsystemwithit; in otherwordsthat was too richand complexforhimto mastercompletely. histradition That this is true can be seen clearlyin everypart of Plotinus's if we couldmake an apphilosophy.But it wouldbe satisfactory ofmetaphorand proachto a moredetailedsolution. Thisincursion outphilosophy intothemiddleofa rationalandwell-worked confusion incurred bythenatureofthatphilosophy. maybe a penaltyinevitably whichmake But it maybe possibleto discoversomecircumstances thesituationmoreunderstandable.I thinkthattherearetwo. The of light.5 It is necessary firstis the doctrineof the incorporeality to rather passagesreferred to notetheprecisemeaningofthedifferent or at least as theyseem to show a certaindevelopment carefully, II., 1, and IV., 5, ofthedoctrine. In thelatertreatises, modification thoughdewe have simplythe statementthat lightis incorporeal

onbody,an pendent

ofbody. E'vEpyEya

In IV.,5,6-7,thisstatement

6 according to which doctrine oftheAristotelian appearsas a criticism in the diabut is simply" a phenomenon lightis also incorporeal, phanous", the presencein it of the luminarysource. Aristotle, a o-i4oLa, regardedit thatlightwas nottechnically whilemaintaining 2 1Witt,loc. cit. II*, 4, 1. 3Philosophie de Plotin,especiallychap. iv., p. 35. de Plotin,pp. 62-63. 4De'sir de Dieu dans la Philosophie 5 II., 1, 7 ; IV., 5, 6 and 7; I., 6, 3. Zeller,III., 2, p. 553 (4thed.). pp. 57 Cognition, TheoriesofElementary 6 De Anima,418a. Beare,Greek seqq.

This content downloaded from 181.118.153.57 on Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:41:54 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

64

A. H. ARMSTRONG:

as simply a physical phenomenon. Plotinus is concerned to give lighta moreaugu-ststatus. His own doctrineis doubtlessdependent on the account of colour as a material abroppoq of particlesgiven by Plato 1 and is deeply affectedby the Posidonian theory of light.2 What seems to be his own is the combinationof the doctrinesthat lightis incorporealand that it is the outflowfromthe luminary,and also the very close parallelism that he findsto exist between light and life,the Act or 'VEYyELa of the soul.3 It is importantto notice this last point, as it at once raises the status of light in the universe enormously. It is no longer a mere physical incident but a manifestation of the spiritual principle of reality and activity in the luminary,its Xo'yosor EJ"oIs. In I., 6, 3, Plotinus goes even furtherthan he does explicitlyin the passages above quoted and says that light is itself Xo'-yosand ,7os, the principle of form in the material world. Moreover, he goes on to make the surprisingstatementthat fire" holds the position of Form in relation to the other elements", though itselfa body, and that it is near to the incorporealinasmuchas it is the subtlestof bodies,that the othersreceiveit intothemselvesbut it does not receive the others.4 This is all commonplaceStoic physics,but it is startling to findit in Plotinus, even in an early treatise. The whole passage is on the border-line between Neo-Platonism and Stoicism. It combinesthe doctrinethat thereis no clear frontierbetweenmaterial and spiritualbecause the principleof realityin even material things is spiritual,with the doctrinethat there is no clear frontierbecause " spirit" is only the finestand subtlestformof matter. The unguarded remark about the nature of fireis, I think, unparalleled in Plotinus. He is not usually in danger of lapsing into naive confusionsbetweenmatterand spiritof this sort. But I think it is clear fromall the passages quoted above that Plotinus's assertion of the incorporealityof lightis not, as mightat firstappear, a simple assertionthat lightis not a body but an incidentof a body. It gives to light a very special status on the frontiersof spirit and matter. This conclusionis supported by anotherpassage 5 in which the same form. The eleventhchapter type of thoughttakes a ratherdifferent of the firsttreatise on the Problems of the Soul begins with an exposition of the doctrine of " appropriate physical receptacles" of soul. This is a furtherdevelopmentofthe doctrineof " analogy ", of the exact correspondenceof the visible and Noetic universes.6 As applied hereto the makingofshrinesand images 7 it impliesthat'some physical bodies are naturally more receptive of soul than others. Plotinus then goes on to describethe connectionbetweenthe worldof 2 Witt, loc. Cit. ' Timaeus, 67D. 3 IV., 5, 7, JulianOration,IV., 133D-134A. 4 Cp. JulianOration, IV., 141C-D.

5 IV., 3, 11.

6 VI., 7, 6, 12. themorecrudelymagicalbut analogousidea of " makinggods" in Asclepius,III., 23b-24d.

7 Cp.

This content downloaded from 181.118.153.57 on Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:41:54 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

" EMANATION

IN PLOTINUS.

65

in a way that givesa positionof peculiar Noi3sand thesense-world importance to thesun. Novs;is described, as frequently in Plotinus, as " thesun of the otherworld"-o4 E'KEZ vXos. The soul is said to be an int3rmediary,obov

PbLr-VEVTtKc,

between this sun of the other

worldand our own sun. With this may be comparedanother passage,'wherethe " visiblegodsas faras the moon", i.e. the sun as its radiance and thestars,are said to be relatedto theVoo0TOt to a star. Here we findnotonlylightbut theluminousbodiesand especiallythe sun, broughtinto a speciallyclose relationwiththe Noeticuniverse, standingon the frontiers of visibleand invisible. Thispeculiarpositionofthesunis ofcoursewellknownin thelater of of Neo-Platonism, and is particularly characteristic developments to the theologyof the EmperorJulian.2 It is, however, interesting discovertracesof the " solartheology"in the worksof a writerso independent ofcontemporary religious ideas as Plotinus,particularly

as the passages in question occur in treatises3 writtenapparently later than the very penetratingcriticismof this very theology of radiationcontainedin Enneads, VI., 4 and 5.4 The interestof these passages is furtherenhanced by comparison with a passage in the Hermeticawhich may well be roughlycontemporary-withPlotinus.5 In this passage the light of the sun, source of all being and life in the visible world,is said to be the receptacle of vT7 ov-ta, " but of what that substance consistsor whence it flowsGod (or the sun) only knows ". The Hermeticwriteris ratherclumsilytryingto solve the problem created by the superimposition,on the organic universe of the " Posidonian " solar theology,of the Platonic Intelligible Universe, whose existence he rather grudginglyadmits. This is basically very much the same problemas Plotinus is tryingto solve by his theoryof emanation. And the solutionproposedby the Hermetistcorrespondsverycloselywiththe doctrineof " appropriate physical receptacles" and the importantplace given to the sun in Enneads, IV., 3, 11. I do not wish to suggestthat Plotinus was influencedby Hermetic teaching, either through that unknown and probably unknowable intermediarythe philosophyof AmmoniusSaccas, or in any other way. Still less do I wishto suggestthat Plotinus could at any period of his lifehave been called a " solar theologian" or a sun-worshipper. But I do wish to suggest that Plotinus was familiarwith a type of solar theory (perhaps partly his own invention) in which the sun's light was thought of either as the appropriate receptacle of the III., 5, 6. Or.,IV., 132D-133, 135D, 139D-140A. Or.,V., 172B-C. Cp. Macrobius Sat., I., 23. 3 IV., 3; III., 5 (27 and 26 in Porphyry's chronological order). 4 22 and 23 in Porphyry's chronological order. 5 Libelus, XVI., 6 (Scott). For commentary and discussionof date,see Scott,Hermetica, II., p. 428 ff.; also I., Introduction, p. 8. 6 Cp. JulianOr.,V., 172B-C. 1 2

5

This content downloaded from 181.118.153.57 on Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:41:54 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

66

A. H. ARMSTRONG:

" EMANATION

IN

PLOTINUS.

substanceof the intelligible immaterial world,as the intermediary oras itselfincorporeal, closelyparallel betweenmaterialandspiritual, ofspiritualand material to thelifeofsoul,and againon thefrontier ofPlotinus'sown). (thislastformofthetheorymaybe a refinement of " analogy",' wouldprovidea Thistheory,alliedto the principle verygood groundforthe growthof Plotinus'stheoryof emanation. It wouldbe muchbettersuitedforthis purposethan the original " Posidonian" theoryof the emanationof the fierysoul fromthe sun, the materialismof which would naturallyrepel Plotinus, and the influenceof whichis more clearlyperceptiblein Neo-

Platonictheoriesabout 7rvEVLa and astralbodies2 than in the

Plotiniantheoryof emanationitself. The theoryof emanationexofradiationbelongsto a typeofthoughtin pressedin themetaphor betweenmatterand whichthereis a wideand doubtfulborderland spirit. What seemsto lie behindit is not simplythe late Stoic in thesun but an attemptto theoryof an organicuniversecentring of of a hierarchy reconcilethistheorywiththe Platonicconception throughthe mediationof a halfreality,sensibleand intelligible, realmof light. Thisis the theorywhichwe spiritual,half-material findin Hermetica, XVI., and the passagesI have quotedfromthe Enneadsseem to show that Plotinusknew it and foundit acceptable. A. H. ARMSTRONG. I1V.,3, 11; VI., 7, 6, 12.

2 Dodds, Proclus,pp. 315-318.

This content downloaded from 181.118.153.57 on Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:41:54 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions