Página inicial > Antiguidade > Neoplatonismo (245-529 dC) > Plotino (204-270 dC) – Tratados Enéadas > Plotino - Tratado 8,3 (IV, 9, 3) — Explicação da simpatia universal e unidade (...)

ENÉADAS

Plotino - Tratado 8,3 (IV, 9, 3) — Explicação da simpatia universal e unidade universal

Enéada IV, 9, 3

segunda-feira 16 de maio de 2022, por Cardoso de Castro

Capítulos 2 e 3: Respostas às dificuldades e às objeções

  • Cap. 2. A alma é una e indivisível enquanto alma, mas se divide na multiplicidade dos corpos.
  • Cap. 3, 1-9. Explicação da simpatia universal como efeito da unidade da alma
  • Cap. 3, 10-fim. A diversidade das faculdades da alma não contraria sua unidade universal.

Míguez

3. Ciertamente, otro razonamiento nos dice, por el contrario, que mantenemos unos con otros una simpatía reciproca, que ante algo que ven nuestros ojos compartimos con los demás nuestros sufrimientos y alegrías, y que, igualmente, nos vemos arrastrados de manera natural hacia el sentimiento de la amistad. Y no hay duda de que la amistad descansa en esa misma simpatía. Pues si los conjuros y, en general, las artes mágicas nos aproximan y nos hacen sentir las mismas cosas a grandes distancias, ello habrá de atribuirse por entero a la unidad del alma. Y así, una frase pronunciada levemente puede ejercer un efecto lejano e incluso dejarse oír a distancias inmensas, de todo lo cual se deduce la unidad de todas las cosas, que es resultado de la unidad del alma.

Ahora bien, si existe una sola alma, ¿cómo pueden darse un alma racional, un alma irracional y un alma vegetativa? Sin duda, porque la esencia indivisible del alma, que no se divide en los cuerpos, aparece ordenada según la razón, en tanto la esencia que se divide en los cuerpos y que, a pesar de todo, es una y la misma, produce en todas partes la facultad de sentir, como consecuencia de esa división. Esa será precisamente la primera facultad, y la segunda la capacidad que aquella esencia tiene para modelar y producir los cuerpos. Pero no porque tenga varias facultades deberá dejar de ser una. Porque en la simiente hay también más de una potencia, que es, sin embargo, una, aunque de esta unidad provenga una multiplicidad. Pero, si es así, ¿cómo no se dan todas las facultades en cualquier ser? Si nos fijamos en el alma individual que, según se dice, se encuentra en todas partes, comprobamos que la facultad de sentir no es la misma en todas ellas, y también que la razón no se halla en todo el cuerpo. En cuanto a la facultad vegetativa, se aparece en partes que no experimentan la sensación, aunque ello no impide que vuelva de nuevo a la unidad una vez que el cuerpo ha desaparecido. Pero si el alma tiene del universo la facultad vegetativa, también la tendrá del alma universal. ¿Por qué, entonces, esta facultad no puede proceder de nuestra alma? Pues sabido es que la facultad vegetativa del universo es la que sufre la sensación, en tanto en cada uno de nosotros la facultad de sentir, ayudada por la inteligencia, juzga de los objetos, pero en nada ayuda al poder de modelar el cuerpo que el alma recibe del universo. Y, ciertamente, podría hacerlo, si esta facultad no hubiera de encontrarse en el universo.

Bouillet

[III] D’un autre côté, l’observation nous apprend que nous sympathisons les uns avec les autres, que nous ne pouvons voir la souffrance d’un autre homme sans la partager, que nous sommes naturellement portés à nous épancher, à aimer : car l’amour est un fait dont l’origine se rattache à la question qui nous occupe. Enfin, si les enchantements et les charmes magiques attirent des individus l’un vers l’autre, amènent à sympathiser des personnes éloignées, ces effets ne peuvent s’expliquer que par l’unité d’âme. Des paroles prononcées à voix basse affectent une personne éloignée et lui font entendre ce qui est à une grande distance. Par là on voit l’unité de tous les êtres (ἑυοτης ἁπάντων), unité qui résulte de ce que l’Âme est une.

Mais, si l’Âme est une, pourquoi telle âme particulière est-elle raisonnable, telle autre irraisonnable, telle autre végétative ? C’est que la partie indivisible de l’Âme consiste dans la raison, qui ne se divise pas dans les corps, tandis que la partie de l’Âme divisible dans les corps (qui, étant une en elle-même, se divise cependant dans les corps, parce qu’elle répand partout le sentiment] doit être regardée comme une autre puissance de l’Âme [la puissance sensitive] (07); de même, la partie qui façonne et produit les corps est encore une autre puissance [la puissance végétative]; toutefois, cette pluralité de puissances ne détruit pas l’unité de l’Âme (08). Dans une semence, il y a aussi plusieurs puissances; cependant cette semence est une, et de cette unité naît une multiplicité qui forme une unité. — Mais pourquoi toutes les puissances de l’Âme ne s’exercent-elles pas partout? C’est que, si l’on considère l’Âme qui est une partout, on trouve que la sensation n’est pas semblable dans toutes les parties, [c’est-à-dire dans toutes les âmes particulières], que la raison n’est pas dans le Tout [mais dans certaines âmes seulement], que la puissance végétative est donnée aux êtres qui ne possèdent pas la sensation, et que toutes ces puissances reviennent à l’unité en se séparant du corps (09). — Mais, si le corps tient sa puissance végétative du Tout et de cette Âme qui est une, pourquoi ne la tient-il pas aussi de notre âme? C’est que ce qui est nourri par cette puissance forme une partie de l’univers, qui n’est sensible qu’à la condition de pâtir. Quant à la puissance sensitive qui s’élève jusqu’au jugement, et qui est unie à chaque intelligence, elle n’avait pas besoin de former ce qui était déjà formé par le Tout; mais elle aurait pu donner des formes si ces formes n’étaient des parties du Tout qui les produit (10).

Guthrie

UNITY OF ALL BEINGS IMPLIED BY SYMPATHY, LOVE, AND MAGIC ENCHANTMENT.

3. On the other hand, observation teaches us that we sympathize with each other, that we cannot see the suffering of another man without sharing it, that we are naturally inclined to confide in each other, and to love; for love is a fact whose origin is connected with the question that occupies us. Further, if enchantments and magic charms mutually attract individuals, leading distant persons to sympathize, these effects can only be explained by the unity of soul. (It is well known that) words pronounced in a low tone of voice (telepathically?) affect a distant person, and make him hear what is going on at a great distance. Hence appears the unity of all beings, which demands the unity of the Soul.

WHAT OF THE DIFFERENCES OF RATIONALITY, IF THE SOUL BE ONE?

If, however, the Soul be one, why is some one soul reasonable, another irrational, or some other one merely vegetative? The indivisible part of the soul consists in reason, which is not divided in the bodies, while the part of the divisible soul in the bodies (which, though being one in herself, nevertheless divides herself in the bodies, because she sheds sentiment everywhere), must be regarded as another power of the soul (the sensitive power); likewise, the part which fashions and produces the bodies is still another power (the vegetative power); nevertheless, this plurality of powers does not destroy the unity of the soul. For instance, in a grain of seed there are also several powers; nevertheless this grain of seed is one, and from this unity is born a multiplicity which forms a unity.

THE POWERS OF THE SOUL ARE NOT EXERCISED EVERYWHERE BECAUSE THEY DIFFER.

But why do not all the powers of the soul act everywhere? Now if we consider the Soul which is one everywhere, we find that sensation is not similar in all its parts (that is, in all the individual souls); that reason is not in all (but in certain souls exclusively); and that the vegetative power is granted to those beings who do not possess sensation, and that all these powers return to unity when they separate from the body.

THE BODY’S POWER OF GROWTH IS DERIVED FROM THE WHOLE, AND THE SOUL; BUT NOT FROM OUR SOUL.

If, however, the body derive its vegetative power from the Whole and from this (universal) Soul which is one, why should it not derive it also from our soul? Because that which is nourished by this power forms a part of the universe, which possesses sensation only at the price of "suffering." As to the sense-power which rises as far as the judgment, and which is united to every intelligence, there was no need for it to form what had already been formed by the Whole, but it could have given its forms if these forms were not parts of the Whole which produces them.

MacKenna

3. Yet, looking at another set of facts, reflection tells us that we are in sympathetic relation to each other, suffering, overcome, at the sight of pain, naturally drawn to forming attachments; and all this can be due only to some unity among us.

Again, if spells and other forms of magic are efficient even at a distance to attract us into sympathetic relations, the agency can be no other than the one soul.

A quiet word induces changes in a remote object, and makes itself heard at vast distances - proof of the oneness of all things within the one soul.

But how reconcile this unity with the existence of a reasoning soul, an unreasoning, even a vegetal soul?

[It is a question of powers]: the indivisible phase is classed as reasoning because it is not in division among bodies, but there is the later phase, divided among bodies, but still one thing and distinct only so as to secure sense-perception throughout; this is to be classed as yet another power; and there is the forming and making phase which again is a power. But a variety of powers does not conflict with unity; seed contains many powers and yet it is one thing, and from that unity rises, again, a variety which is also a unity.

But why are not all the powers of this unity present everywhere?

The answer is that even in the case of the individual soul described, similarly, as permeating its body, sensation is not equally present in all the parts, reason does not operate at every point, the principle of growth is at work where there is no sensation - and yet all these powers join in the one soul when the body is laid aside.

The nourishing faculty as dependent from the All belongs also to the All-Soul: why then does it not come equally from ours?

Because what is nourished by the action of this power is a member of the All, which itself has sensation passively; but the perception, which is an intellectual judgement, is individual and has no need to create what already exists, though it would have done so had the power not been previously included, of necessity, in the nature of the All.