Plotinian Metaphysics

Introduction

Those whose eyes of the heart are opened to the metaphysical realities, as they have reached the highest echelons of the Intellect – intellectual intuition – in comparing the treasures they have left behind, that which is evident is that they speak the same Truth. Why shouldn’t it be such when the Truth alone is One. Universal ideas transcend spatio-temporal limitations, hence for those whom the veils have been lifted and they see nothing but the Divine; their mode of communication might differ amongst them; for language pertains to the realm of change, however, the Idea that is being communicated is one, and its none other than that of Absolute or Universal All. Absolute is metaphysical Infinity and metaphysical Infinity is Absolute. There is no distinction for these are two words that point to the same and One Reality, The Truth. The transcendent unity of The Idea dictates that every true tradition will possess the idea of Absolute-Infinite. True tradition has its foundation in revelation. For it is revelation that is the mode of communication of the Supreme Principle, hence it being the only true mode of knowledge. Now revelation is the most noblest and purest form of knowledge, the access of which is only to the prophets. That being said, revelation has degrees, one of them being intellectual intuition; which is potentially accessible to all men. It is only via intellectual intuition that man serves his raison d’etre. As stated beautifully surah Al-Dariyat verse 55 of the Quran.

And I did not create jinn and man except the worship me

It is reported from Imam Sadiq (a) that worship here is Gnosis of the Supreme Principle. Gnosis here is knowledge by presence accessed only via intellectual intuition. Since the object of the knowledge is one and the same that is the Supreme Principle, therefore the expositors of this knowledge will be articulating the one and the same Truth albeit dressed in different colors.

One of the people in the great lineage of people of intellectual intuition is Plotinus. The paper at hand discusses the metaphysical doctrine of Plotinus. It is divided into four main sections: the first section is a brief biography of Plotinus and his works, next section is exploring The One, via navigating the Ennead itself reading that which the divine sage himself has said. The following section provides a detailed metaphysical exposition of his doctrine of The One. Section four compares the Plotinian metaphysical doctrine of The One with the Islamic Tradition followed by a conclusion.

Biography of Plotinus

Plotinus was born in Egypt in the year 204 A.D^[1]. It is said that his early education was in Alexandria, however as a seeker of Truth he wasn’t content with the level of knowledge that was being provided, thus as every true seeker has done, he went on to the quest to quench his thirst. In the quest he was able to find his master Ammonias Saccus. Plotinus remained his student until the year 242 AD^[2]. After which he went on for his travels teaching the inherited wisdom. It was in Rome where he served as the spiritual master for those who were seeking and were lost on the path. As a true metaphysician the intellectual wisdom he possessed was translated in practical wisdom. The glimpses of kindness and generosity are seen from the fact that his house was a safe haven for orphans^[3]. He had many friends and no enemies^[4]. At the same time of living among the people, he never lived in them, for he only lived in God, as in him was the summation of theoretical-practical intellect.

It was at the age of sixty when Plotinus met his celebrated student Porphyry, who is known for writing the life of his master, and more importantly arranged the magnum opus of Plotinus, The Ennead^[5]. The Ennead is Plotinus’ greatest work. It is six books each having nine chapters, in accord with mystical science of numbers practiced by Pythagoreans and ancient Egyptian priests^[6]. Plotinus wanted to revive metaphysics. His book explores the metaphysical doctrines of The One, the intellect and the soul. According to him like his ancient predecessors, the purpose of human life is to ascend to The One. It’s probably St. Augustine who best describes Plotinus as “a man in whom Plato lived again”^[7].

Metaphysical Doctrine of Plotinus

The Heart of Plotinus’ metaphysics lies in the three great realities in ascending order; Soul, Intellect and the One^[8] (or the Good). The paper at hand discusses his doctrine of the One (or the Good). For Plotinus The One or The Good transcends all forms which might dominate it and determine it because the Good is not a thing and is external to all things in a word because the Good is infinite^[9].

Prior to having a detailed analysis of the metaphysical doctrine of Plotinus, it is important to taste the doctrine itself from its original source. Therefore, in this section selected excerpts from the Ennead pertaining to the doctrine of The One are provided, creating a metaphysical map for the reader such that navigating through it becomes easier. The excerpts are from Ennead translated by A.H. Armstrong, published by Loeb classical library.

Plotinus’ doctrine of The One(or The Good)

Ennead 1.7.1

…It must not be The Good by activity or thought, but by reason of its abiding. For because it is “beyond-being” it transcends activity and transcends mind and thought. For to put it another way one must assume the Good to be that on which everything else depends and which itself depends on nothing … it must stay still, and things must turn back to it, as a circle does to the center from which all the radii come to. The sun, too, is since it is like centre in relation to the light which comes from it and depends on it; for the light is everywhere with it and is not cut off from it. Even if you want to cut it off on one side, the light remains with Sun.

Ennead 5.3.12

One is beyond intellect so is beyond knowledge … it is without thing. For if it is one thing it would not be absolute: for absolute comes before one

Ennead 5.3.13

It is therefore truly ineffable: for you say about it you will always be speaking of “something” but “beyond all things and beyond the supreme majesty” is the only one of all the ways of speaking of it which is true…has no name because we can say nothing of it…

Ennead 5.4.1

If there is anything after the First it must necessarily come from the First. It must either come from it directly or have its ascent back to it through the beings between, and there must be an order of seconds and thirds, the second going back to the first and the third to the second. For there must be something simple before all things and this must be other than all things which come after it, existing by itself, not mixed with the things which derive from it and all same able to be present: in a different way to these other things, being really one, and not a different being then one…it is indeed said to be beyond being…A reality of this kind must be one alone…

Ennead 6.5.6

To Real Being we go back, all that we have and are; to that we return as from that we came…

Ennead 6.8.7

…it would be more absurd to deprive the Good itself of self-determination because it is good and because it remains on its own and does not need to move to something else since the other things move to it and it has no need of anything…

Ennead 6.8.8

… we could find nothing to say which is applicable to it or even really about it; for all noble and majestic things come after. For he himself is the origin of these…

Ennead 6.8.16

…for if he is nowhere he has not happened to anywhere and if he is everywhere he is as much as he is nowhere. So that the “everywhere” and “in every way” are himself. He is not in that everywhere, but is this himself and gives the others their being there with him in the everywhere. But he, since he has the highest place or rather does not have it but is himself the highest, has all things as slaves…He then is active actuality above intellect and thought and life but these are from him and not from the another. His being then comes by and from himself. He is not therefore as he happened to be but he is Himself as he willed

Ennead 6.9.1

It is by The One that all beings are beings both those which are primarily beings and those which are in any sense said to be among beings. For what could anything be if it was not one? For if things are deprived of one which is predicated of them, they are not those things…

Ennead 6.9.3

…Nature of One is generative of all things it is not in any of them. It is not in something or qualified or quantitative or intellect or soul; it is not in movement or at rest, not in any place, not in time but “itself by itself of itself of single form” or rather formless being before all form, before movement and before rest…

Ennead 6.9.4

…One is not absent from any and absent from all…

Ennead 6.9.5

…One is simple and Principle of all things…

Ennead 6.9.6

In what sense then do we call it one and how are we to fit into our thought? One must be understood in a larger sense than that in which a unity and point are unified…it must be understood as infinite not because its size and number cannot be measured or counted but because its power cannot be comprehended…He transcends your thought is more than you imagined to be for he is by himself without any incidental attributes…Since he is the most sufficient and independent of all things he must also be the most without need; but everything which is many is also in need unless it becomes one from many…The One doesn’t need itself for it is itself. Certainly, anything which is many needs all things which it is and each of the things in it, since it is with other and not by itself and exist in need of others makes a thing like this needy both in each single part and as a whole. Given, then there must be something supremely self-sufficient, it must The One which is the only thing of this kind as not to be in need either in relation to itself or to anything else…the other things are established through Him…A principle is not in need of things which come after it; and the principle of all things needs none of them…so that there is nothing good for the One. So then it wishes for nothing and transcends good…the cause is not the same as what is caused. But the cause of all things is none of them. So, we must not even call this One good, the good which he gives but The Good in another way beyond all goods.

From the following excerpts of the Ennead, it becomes clear that for Plotinus The One or The Good is absolutely simple. In The One there are no determinations: it is The Absolute and while Absolute it is Infinite – it is inconceivable for something to be Absolute, while it is not Infinite – He is with His Essence present in all things. Being formless(amorphon) and infinite(aperion) the One as a perfect actuality (energia) contains everything and lacks nothing thus having the supreme power…Since the One is the universal cause of all things, it is not only transcendent but also immanent. Its omnipresence fills all things^[10].  

Next, we would like to again refer to the Ennead in exploring how The One is the cause of everything and how His omnipresence fills all things.

The Cause of all things and His Omnipresence

Ennead 5.1.7

…Life and thought and things come from the One, because that God is not one of all things; for this how all things come from him because he is not confined by any shape; That One is one alone: if he was all things he would be numbered among beings. For this reason that One is none of the things in the intellect but all things come from him…purest Intellect should spring from nowhere else but the first Principle and when it has come into existence should generate all realities…

Ennead 5.3.15

…how does multiplicity come from Him?…one can speak radiance from Him, as from a light…now what comes from him could not be the same as him. If then it is not the same it cannot of course be better, for what can be better than the One or in any way transcend him? It must be then deficient. When then is more deficient than the One? That which is not one it is therefore many; but all the same it aspires to the One: so it is one-many…

Ennead 5.3.16

 …since in things which are generated, it is not possible to go upwards but towards downwards and more further towards multiplicity, the principle of each group is simpler than they are themselves. Therefore that which makes the world of sense cant be the world of sense itself but must be an intellect and an intelligible world; and that which is before this and generates it could be not be an intellect and simpler than the intelligible world. For many does not come from many but this [intelligible] many comes from what is not many: for this would not be the principle if it was also many itself, but something else before it. There must therefore be a concentration into a real one outside all multiplicity and any sort of ordinary simplicity, if it is to be really simple…

Ennead 5.3.17

…All things…participated in the Absolute One and continues to participate in it, it is not the One itself…it is by the presence of the One that the multitude individual things exist in Intellect…

Ennead 6.5.1

The integral omnipresence of a unity numerically identical is in fact universally received; for all men instinctively affirm the god in each of us to be one, the same in all…we affirm unquestionably that all things seek their good; for this universal quest of good depends on the fact that all aim at unity and possess unity and that universally effort is towards unity. Now this unity in going forth, so far as it may, towards the Other Order must become manifest as multiplicity and in some sense become multiple; but the primal nature and the appetition of the good, which is appetition of unity, lead back to what is authentically one; to this every form of Being is urged in a movement towards its own reality. For the good to every nature possessing unity is to be self-belonging, to be itself, and that means to be a unity. In virtue of that unity the Good may be regarded as truly inherent. Hence the Good is not to be sought outside; it could not have fallen outside of what is; it cannot possibly be found in non-Being; within Being the Good must lie, since it is never a non-Being. If that Good has Being and is within the realm of Being, then it is present, self-contained, in everything; we, therefore, are not separated from Being; we are in it; nor is Being separated from us: therefore all beings are one.

Ennead 6.5.4

… Again, if we think of the divine nature as infinite—and certainly it is confined by no bounds—this must mean that it nowhere fails; its presence must reach to everything; at the point to which it does not reach, there it has failed; something exists in which it is not. Now, admitting any sequent to the unity itself, that sequent must be bound up with it; any third will be about that second and move towards it, linked to it as its offspring. In this way all participants in the later will have share in the first. The Beings of the Intellectual are thus a plurality of firsts and seconds and thirds attached like one sphere to one center, not separated by interval but mutually present; where, therefore, the Intellectual tertiaries are present the secondaries and firsts are present too.

Ennead 6.5.5

Often for the purpose of exposition—as a help towards stating the nature of the produced multiplicity—we use the example of many lines radiating from one center; but while we provide for
individualization we must carefully preserve mutual presence. Even in the case of our circle we need not think of separated radii; all may be taken as forming one surface: where there is no distinction even upon the one surface but all is power and reality undifferentiated, all the beings may be thought of as centers uniting at one central center: we ignore the radial lines and think of their terminals at that center, where they are at one. Restore the radii; once more we have lines, each touching a generating center of its own, but that center remains coincident with the one first center; the centers all unite in that first center and yet remain what they were, so that they are as many as are the lines to which they serve as terminals; the centers themselves appear as numerous as the lines starting from them and yet all those centers constitute a unity. Thus we may liken the Intellectual Beings in their diversity to many centers coinciding with the one center and themselves at one in it but appearing multiple on account of the radial lines—lines. which do not generate the centers but merely lead to them. The radii, thus, afford a serviceable illustration for the mode of contact by which the Intellectual Unity manifests itself as multiple and multipresent.

Ennead 6.5.6

The Intellectual Beings, thus, are multiple and one; in virtue of their infinite nature their unity is a multiplicity, many in one and one over many, a unit-plurality…the soul of the individual is identically present in every part of the body: it is in this latter mode that Being is omnipresent.

Exposition of The Metaphysical Doctrine of Plotinus

The stage is set to give an exposition of the metaphysical doctrine of Plotinus pertaining to The One. There are five cornerstone ideas to the metaphysics of Plotinus, these include: The Absolute or Universal All that is metaphysical Infinity, Beyond-Being and Being, Unity and Multiplicity, Manifestation or Emanation and Omnipresence.

Before we start however, a few words on language. It is the limitation of language such that inexpressible cant be expressed. As soon as Truth is clothed in the form of words it has become limited and hence one True idea is only in a self-evident manner present to the seeker. That which is inexpressible cannot be brought down to the level of expressible. It is imperative that this must be kept in mind when writing anything about the Supreme Principle for it is too exalted for to be clothed in words, nonetheless from the aspect that a word is a symbol and it symbolizes the idea, then there are certain words that may point towards the Supreme Principle and are only pointers and in no sense encompass that Reality Therefore, Truth remains in its purest form when it is unexpressed.

Infinite

The most primordial notion of all and the self-evident of self-evident principles, which is the foundation of all metaphysics is the notion of Absolute or metaphysical Infinity. It is Absolute to which the Supreme Reality is referred to. Absolute is total plenitude of Reality that is Reality in itself and totality simultaneously. It is beyond iteration, integration, multiplication, division, and deduction. It is pure Totality and sheer Itself. Thus, it is also Infinite.

To understand what metaphysical Infinity is, we start from the word Infinite. The word infinity is a noun and its from the Latin word infinitatem meaning boundlessness^[11], which itself is borrowed from the Greek word apeiria ‘Infinity’ from apeiros to mean endlessness. To better understand its etymology we use the adjective form of the word Infinite, where ‘in’ is used as a prefix meaning “not, opposite of, without ”^[12], while finitus meaning “defining, definite” from finis ‘end’^[13]. Thus, the word infinite means that which is unbounded and has no limits. In order to use this word in its strict sense that is to use as it is formed, it is imperative to preserve its absoluteness. Such that it has absolutely no limits where limits can be of any order that is physical, mental or intellectual. By removing it of all limits, considerations, restrictions, determinations we don’t have the degenerate caricatured form of the word that is currently in use by the moderns, rather Infinite is a profound metaphysical notion and is the principle of all metaphysics. All limitations and restrictions are negated from it because setting a limitation implies to leave something out, however nothing can be left out of it. So, if to set a limit is to distinguish something that which it includes from something that which it excludes, then negation of limit will be all inclusion such that nothing is excluded from it. Thus, Infinite becomes total and absolute affirmation because it embraces, comprehends and encompasses all particular affirmations. Due to the restrictive nature of all languages we know that to affirm something is consequently to deny the thing of the very negation of it. For example, to affirm whiteness for a body is to deny of it everything that is not white. Thus, to convey the idea of total and absolute affirmation we must utilize the negative form. In conclusion, Infinite due to its negative form expresses the idea of non-limitation in its pure sense of the word, hence is beyond all description, definition, and distinction. If it has already not become apparent there are certain immediate conclusions that follow:

1. As all limits are negated and excluded from it implies as a necessary consequence it is all encompassing, embracing and comprehending. Thus, its very close relationship with All-Possibility.
2. It is self-evident that Infinite cannot have any definition or description; because to define or describe is to affirm something for something, and affirmation implies limitation and Infinite has absolutely no limits as discussed above
3. Infinite can only be one and one alone. To say two is to deprive each of them of something of the other – for absolute sameness means oneness, for distinction can only arise when there is a limitation
4. To say Infinite is to say All-Perfect and pure Perfection, for to say anything else would be limiting it.

Someone can object here that if Infinity is affirmed as the one and only existence then where is the multiplicity? For there is either oneness or multiplicity both can’t exist thus Infinity is a contradiction – for we observe multiplicity.

Here we answer this as follows: when you say something exists or doesn’t exist, what do you imply? Is it that an existing thing exists by its very essence or by something else or if it doesn’t exist by its essence or by something else. If one considers multiplicity from the point of view that it is existence by its essence then one is correct to say that non-existence by its essence. However, it is possible for A to be existing by B and that B could be existing by its essence. In addition, if something else is not existing by its essence it doesn’t mean that thing absolutely has no existence. As mentioned above a thing can exists through something else. Hence, it is important to clarify what kind of existence we are referring to; existence existing by itself or existence existing through something else. That which is a contradiction is either existence existing in its essence and non-existence in its essence; or existence by something else and non-existence by something else. However, as mentioned multiplicity has no existence in of itself rather it derives existence from something else. To emphasize, this doesn’t mean it has no existence.

All-Possibility

The very idea of Infinite also implies the very idea of plenitude of possibility. If All-Possibility were not to be an ‘aspect’ of the Infinite then that would inherently imply a limitation, however it was already mentioned that it is inconceivable to associate any limitation with the idea of Infinite.

As it was said regarding Infinite that its total and absolute affirmation, consequently All Possibility is total, absolute and sheer possibility. Thus, here there can be a division between possibility of non-manifestation and possibility of manifestation, this division is exclusive as there is no third option. As long as there is a possibility of a thing either being manifested or non-manifested then by the very fact that it is a possibility the respective possibilities will become possible. That is, those possibilities that are non-manifested will remain in a non-manifested state. While the possibilities of manifestation will be manifested by the very fact, they are possibilities of manifestation^[14] and it’s All Possibility that dictates that.  Possible being nothing, is a contradiction, by being possible it is real, hence it cannot be nothing. Therefore, to deny either possibilities would be limiting the possible, however, as already mentioned All-Possibility is total and absolute affirmation of possibilities. Therefore, encompassing, and comprehending all particular possibilities

Beyond-Being and Being

The current section is a necessary consequence of the analysis of the preceding section. In the preceding it was mentioned that by the very fact All Possibility is Absolute and Universal hence, it must contain the totality of possibilities of manifestation and the totality of possibilities of non-manifestation^[15], and denying either of them would result in Universal Possibility be not Universal rather would be particular. Limiting All Possibility would be in consequence limiting Infinite, however, that which has already been stated is Infinite by the very fact it is Infinite, cannot be limited and is Absolute affirmation.

The distinction that has been made between the possibilities of manifestation and possibilities of non-manifestation is essential in understanding the notion of Beyond-Being and Being. We would first like to explore Being so that the understanding of Beyond-Being is easier.

Each of the two possibilities; possibilities of manifestation and possibilities of non-manifestation require a principle from which these respective possibilities proceed. The procession of possibilities shouldn’t be conceived as such that possibilities stand in opposition to the principle, such that there are ‘two distinct sides’ rather, its only one affair. It is the principle as such which is manifesting these possibilities, while these possibilities never leave the presence of the principle. It is important to mention here once again that the possibilities of manifestation pertain to only the possibilities which possess the very possibility of manifestation; anything that doesn’t possess the possibility of manifestation, is distinct from possibilities of manifestation and would be classified under the possibilities of non-manifestation. As already mentioned, the principle of manifestation is only principle as long as the possibilities are being manifested that having an actualized state for otherwise being a principle will have no meaning. We call the principle of manifestation, Being. Moreover, Being as the principle of possibility of manifestation encompasses all the possibilities of manifestation. Thus, it can’t be such that it itself is a possibility of manifestation, for otherwise Being would be encompassing the possibilities of manifestation, while being Being. This is an impossibility for a thing that can’t encompass itself. Thus, Being is a possibility of non-manifestation^[16]. A necessary consequence is that Being can’t be Infinite. The reason for that is; Being as being the principle of manifestation is only a principle as long as the possibilities of manifestations possess an actualized state. The very quality of possessing an actualized state of manifestation limits the Being by that very quality. As any particular affirmation is a limit, since it excludes all which don’t possess that very affirmation. While, it has already been mentioned that Infinite possesses absolutely no limits. Secondly, Being as the principle of possibility of manifestation it is only the principle of manifestation and hence is distinct from the principle of non-manifestation. Thus, Being cant be equated with Absolute Possibility, rather it is the latter which encompasses it and has dominion over it.

The analysis of Beyond-Being becomes much easier to understand, now that the notion of Being has been made clear. As abovementioned, Being is a non-manifestation, although being the principle of manifestation. The distinction between the possibilities of non-manifestation and possibilities of manifestation implies that their principles would as well be distinct. The name given to the possibilities of manifestation was Being, thus it would be correct to name the possibilities of non-manifestation as Beyond-Being. Beyond-Being is much more than Being for it is its principle and as its principle it encompasses Being. Therefore, All-Possibility as mentioned before is the total possibility of manifestation and the total possibility of non-manifestation. It is the totality of Beyond-Being and Being^[17].

Unity and Multiplicity

Failing to understand the relationship between unity and multiplicity will collapse the entire metaphysics as it will comprise Absolute-Infinite itself. The doctrine of unity and multiplicity pertains to the domain of manifestation, for there can’t be any talk of unity and multiplicity at the level of non-manifestation. Therefore, prior to discussing the doctrine of unity-multiplicity it should be clear for the reader that there is neither unity nor any multiplicity in Beyond-Being. It is the Principle Being hence by extension Principle of the doctrine of unity-multiplicity. Thus, the only appropriate name it can have is metaphysical zero^[18].

Now that it has been established that unity-multiplicity only pertains to the domain of manifestation, exploring its relationship next. The age-old question that has withstood the passage of time is that how does multiplicity proceed from unity?^[19] From that which has already been discussed it should be evident that the question is wrongly posed^[20]. Multiplicity doesn’t proceed from Unity anymore than possibilities of non-manifestation or manifestation do not proceed from All-Possibility.²¹ The incorrect understanding of the word ‘proceed’ is due to the word emanation and its prevalence in academia that is used to portray the idea of manifestation. As All-Possibility is the principle of Beyond-Being and Being, and it would be inconceivable for respective two to lie outside All-Possibility, for that would mean they lie outside Infinite, hence limiting it. As it has already been emphasized, Infinite cannot be limited. Similarly, Unity is the principle of multiplicity, hence, there can’t be any talk of procession of multiplicity from Unity, rather its Unity that encompasses it.

Let’s use the analogy of numbers to better understand the relationship of unity and multiplicity. Consider the numbers. In each number one is present in it and that number would be that number if the number one was absent that number would not be there, thus each number except for one is derived from one, and one is its principle and is in it, thus the very existence of numbers is through one. Therefore, it is said that one is the principle of all numbers. Transposing the analogy on the metaphysical plane it is unity that is the principle of multiplicity and is in multiplicity, such that multiplicity would not be there if it weren’t of Unity.

Manifestation (Emanation)

The etymology of the word emanation is that it is from the Latin emanationem (nominative emanatio) noun of action from past-participle stem of Latin emanare “flow out, spring out of” where ex means “out” and  manare means “to flow”^[21]. Considering this meaning, a fundamental problem separating the Principle and emanation is inevitable. For that which has been already said and that which will come, separation between the Principle and Emanation is false and an impossibility. In order to avoid all ambiguities we will use the word manifestation instead of emanation as it more accurately derives the relationship between unity and multiplicity.

It follows from the previous discussion that manifestation is real and has a reality. Manifestation has a reality because All Possibility by the very fact it is Absolute-Infinite means that it contains within it totality of possibilities of manifestation and totality of possibilities of non-manifestation^[22]. Each of the respective possibilities require their own principle. It is the very principle of possibilities of manifestation that is Being, that makes these possibilities of manifestation into actual realities and it must do so by the very it is their principle and they are possibilities as such. For if they could never have an actualized state that would mean they are not a possibility, which would mean that they are either necessity or an impossibility. Either of these two are impossible. Infinite alone is and All Possibility is one of its aspects, now to say something that which is contained in it and is comprehended by it is an impossibility plain and simple, for it is Infinite that comprehends and encompasses and is itself beyond comprehension and encompassment. Impossibility is false because it makes no sense to say a thing has a principle, however that thing is an impossibility, as having a principle implies something being there, otherwise principle has no meaning.

Moreover, to deny manifestation would be to limit the Infinite, however as mentioned before Infinite cannot in any way be limited. Manifestation by the very fact it is a possibility it is in the Infinite. Furthermore, to deny degrees in manifestation, one would be limiting the Absolute Possibility by a twofold order and inconsequential one would be limiting Infinite and Infinite cannot be limited by no-thing. It should be pointed out that ‘in the infinite’ is not to say that there are two mutually exclusive things and one is being placed in the other as it might be done on the mental or physical plane, rather manifestation in of itself is pure nothingness it is Infinite which is its principle that bestows manifestation with reality, while the Infinite in of itself is One and only and it’s The Reality, thus there can be no conception manifestation there.  Manifestation is not just utter poverty and dependency on its Principle but at the same time its participation in the Principle and it is through this very participation in the Principle that manifest beings can transcend their state.

Another proof for manifestation is via an analogy. Consider yourself as yourself, that is the ‘I’ that is your identity. Self-evidently we know that the ‘I’ possess certain faculties and states. According to Aristotelian classification there are four main faculties: namely faculty of intellect, faculty concupiscence, faculty of irascibility and faculty of estimation. Each of these faculties have indefinite levels, the highest level of intellect is where being transcends his own individuality corresponding to intellectual intuition, while the lowest level is reason which is only a refraction of the light of Intellect. The faculty of irascibility is the power allowing repulsion and anger, the faculty of concupiscence is the power allowing desire and attraction and the faculty of estimation is the power allowing conjecture and delusion. Reason that is the lowest level of the intellect and the three faculties namely irascibility, concupiscence and estimation can be grouped together and be referred to as the mind. Here we see that although these faculties might be distinct from each other, they are all the dimensions of the one ‘I’. It’s the very ‘I’ that has manifested itself as these faculties and to deny these faculties would be to deny the ‘I’. In every homestead of the respective faculty the I is present transcendently and immanently, for faculty is a faculty through the I and its presence in it. The distinction of the faculties among themselves doesn’t limit the ‘I’ in any way, for it is present in all the homesteads of faculties via its absolute simplicity. Transposing this analogy on the metaphysical plane, the same can be said about the Infinite. It is the very reason it is Infinite that there is manifestation and degrees in manifestation, where Infinite is present with all. Denying any of these three would be to limit the Infinite.

The geometrical symbolism that represents the relationship of Principle and manifestation is of a point and circumference. There are two primary ways to study this symbolism either from inward towards the outward, or from the outward towards the inward. The former represents the process of exhalation while the latter represents reabsorption. If we consider the former point view, then the center that is the metaphysical zero is nowhere and everywhere and is the Principle of manifestation. The entire cosmic manifestation represented by the concentric circles is the exhalation of The Principle. Each concentric circle represents a particular cosmic manifestation, that which has the closest metaphysical distance to the Principle is the most ‘similar’ to it, while that which has the greatest metaphysical distance with The Principle is the least ‘similar’. In addition, that which is the ‘nearest’ to The Principle is present the most and that which is ‘furthest’ away the Principle is present the least. The point of view is purely from the aspect of transcendence that is the metaphysical zero is nowhere, while the aspect of Immanent is such that the metaphysical zero is everywhere, for the Principle is both Absolute and Infinite. Further, contemplation on the geometrical reveals that each concentric circle is separate from the other, representing a qualitative difference between each level of manifestation.

All Encompassing Distinction

The notion of all encompassing distinction is such that the thing encompassing and that which is being encompassed are distinct from the aspect that encompassor can’t be encompassed and vice versa. Thus the encompassor from the fact it is encompassing is distinct from that thing which is being encompassed. However, the encompassor from the very fact it is encompassing something it is present in the very heart of that thing being encompassed. Here we can use the example of genus and specie. Genus encompasses specie, from one point of view genus is the very specie because of the very fact that specie is being encompassed, however while their being identicality there is also distinction in that genus qua genus is genus and specie qua specie is specie and the two are distinct. Therefore, the Absolute is all encompassing and it is in its very essence with its manifestation for it is Principle in consequence manifestation is always in participation with its Principle. Two main corollaries that follow from the idea of all-encompassing distinction is Possessor of Contraries and Transcendence and Immanence. The notion of possessor of contraries follows from the fact that upon accepting the idea of Universal All as also an Absolute Encompassor, it becomes evident that He is with manifestation in its totality. As it has already been established that there are degrees in manifestation, and that each homestead of manifestation is distinct thus it is concluded that Absolute is Possessor of Contraries. The second corollary that follows from Absolute-Infinite as an Absolute Encompassor is Transcendence and Immanence.  Transcendence is connected more to the idea of Absolute, while immanence to that of Infinite. According to the first relationship it is Absolute which alone is – that there is no-thing, no manifestation, He alone is. From the second relationship manifestation is, that is participating in Infinite such that He is the Principle of all manifestation and is the very heart of all manifestation. It is extremely important to understand and comprehend the doctrine of transcendence and immanence, leading to any one of the sides could collapse the entire metaphysical system and compromise the Infinite. In transcendence there is immanence and in immanence there is transcendence. The Infinite so to speak is the intrinsic dimension of plenitude proper to the Absolute; to say Absolute is to say Infinite. the one being inconceivable without the other^[23].

Conclusion

That which is inexpressible can’t be brought down to the level of expressibility. If it is being expressed it must be one because The Truth is One and the same, all that differs is its mode of expression. Light is one and it is only through a prism that it disperses into distinct colored lights but the distinction doesn’t take away their essence which is light. As the physical distance increases from the Sun its brilliant radiance diminishes in intensity. Transposing the analogy on the metaphysical plane, as the metaphysical distance from The Truth increases the mode of knowledge of The Truth also decreases hence the expression of The Truth becomes putrid. Meanwhile, as the metaphysical distance from The Truth decreases, the mode of knowledge becomes purer until there remains ‘no distance’ that it is directly from the sources; this is the purest form of knowledge that is revelation. Any expression with revelation as its’ foundation will be the purest form of expression – the revealed texts are a testimony to that. Therefore, when comparing that which has been expressed by prophets, saints, and sages, they all speak the One Truth only the level of profundity differs, due to level of their knowledge.

It is only to the modern man these truths have become veiled. By severing its ties with metaphysics and closing the gates of heavens, man has imprisoned himself in decadence, confusion, dispersion, and is in an accelerated descent towards sublimation. Man’s only recourse lies in opening the celestial gates again and regrowing its wings to make ascent towards The Celestial Sun and beyond. For today when false guides reign supreme and man is in search of the true guide. Plotinus and his work can serve as the guide for man, who is seeking to actualize and realize the purpose he was created for, that is nothing except to know(submit, adorn, worship) The Truth, The Supreme Principle.

^[1]  Copleston FC. A history of philosophy: Greece and Rome.pp[463 – 464] Paulist Press; 1976.

^[2] Ibid

^[3] Ibid.

^[4] Ibid.

^[5] Uždavinys, A. (Ed.). (2004). The golden chain: an anthology of Pythagorean and Platonic philosophy pp[118-119]. World Wisdom, Inc.

^[6] Ibid.

^[7] Ibid.

^[8] Atkinson, M. J. (1989). AH Armstrong: Plotinus: with an English Translation. Ennead I. VII–5) (Loeb Classical Library.). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press;

^[9] Pierre Haddot, “Plotinus and Porphyry” in Classical Mediterranean Spirituality Egyptian Greek, Roman ed. A.H.Armstrong  pp245, 246

^[10] Uždavinys, A. (2009). The Heart of Plotinus: The Essential Eneads Including Porphyry’s On the Cave of the Nymphs pp[22]. World Wisdom, Inc.

^[11] from Latin infinitatem (nominative infinitas) “boundlessness, endlessness,” from infinitus boundless, unlimited” (see infinite). Latin infinitas was used as a loan-translation of Greek apeiria “infinity,” from apeiros “endless.”https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=infinity

^[12] ‘in’ word-forming element meaning “not, opposite of, without” (also im-, il-, ir- by assimilation of -n- with following consonant, a tendency which began in later Latin), from Latin in- “not,” cognate with Greek an-, Old English un-, all from PIE root *ne- “not.”  https://www.etymonline.com/word/in-?ref=etymonline_crossreference#etymonline_v_6284

^[13] infinite –  from Latin infinitus “unbounded, unlimited, countless, numberless,” from in- “not, opposite of” (see in- (1)) + finitus “defining, definite,” from finis “end”… https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=infinite

^[14] Guénon, R. (2001). The multiple states of the being chapter: Infinite and Possibility pp[15]. Sophia Perennis.

^[15] Guénon, R. (2001). The multiple states of the being chapter: Being and Non-Being pp[21]. Sophia Perennis.

^[16] Ibid.

^[17] Ibid.

^[18] Guénon, R. (2001). The multiple states of the being chapter: Relationships of Unity and Multiplicity pp[31]. Sophia Perennis

^[19] Ibid.

^[20] Ibid

^[21] from Late Latin emanationem (nominative emanatio), noun of action from past-participle stem of Latin emanare “flow out, spring out of,” figuratively “arise, proceed from,” from assimilated form of ex “out” (see ex-) + manare “to flow,” https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=emanation

^[22] Guénon, R. (2001). The multiple states of the being chapter: Being and Non-Being pp[21]. Sophia Perennis.

^[23] Schuon, F. (1986). Survey of metaphysics and esoterism chapter: Summary of Integral Metaphysics pp[15]. World Wisdom Books.