Página inicial > Antiguidade > Neoplatonismo (245-529 dC) > Plotino (204-270 dC) – Tratados Enéadas > Plotino - Tratado 38,23 (VI, 7, 23) — A alma tem acesso ao Bem

ENÉADAS

Plotino - Tratado 38,23 (VI, 7, 23) — A alma tem acesso ao Bem

Enéada VI, 7, 23

domingo 27 de março de 2022, por Cardoso de Castro

Capítulos 15-30: O Intelecto e aquilo que está além dele: a natureza do Bem e as dificuldades que surgem ao redor dele.

  • Cap 15: O Intelecto e a vida inteligível não são senão uma imagem do Bem.
  • Cap 16-18: Em qual sentido o inteligível é uma imagem do Bem? Porque o Intelecto e as formas provêm do Bem.
  • Cap 19-20: Em qual sentido o Bem é um objeto de desejo para a alma?
  • Cap 21-23: A alma deseja o Intelecto que é uma imagem do Bem, e é nesta medida que ela tem acesso ao Bem.
  • Cap 24-25, 16: As dificuldades concernindo a definição do Bem como objeto de desejo da alma.
  • Cap 25, 16-18: O Bem não é tal porque é objeto de desejo.
  • Cap 25, 18-32: O Bem é o que se encontra no topo do real.
  • Cap 26: O Bem não é objeto de desejo porque é uma fonte de prazer.
  • Cap 27: O Bem é, para cada realidade, o que vem antes dela; eis o que explica que para o Bem supremo, que nada tem antes dele, não existe qualquer bem.
  • Cap 28: Pode haver um bem para a matéria?
  • Cap 29-30: O Bem procura uma forma de prazer que corresponde à mistura de prazer e inteligência da qual fala Platão no Filebo  .

Míguez

23. Aquello que el alma persigue y que da luz a la Inteligencia, aquello cuya huella suscita nuestro movimiento, no es en modo alguno admirable que tenga un tal poder de atracción y que nos llame hacia caminos en los que erramos enteramente para descansar por entero en El. Porque es claro que todo viene de El, y nada está por encima de El sino que se subordina a El. ¿Cómo no iba a ser el Bien el mejor de los seres? Si realmente la naturaleza del Bien debe bastarse a sí misma en el más alto grado y no ha de necesitar ya de ninguna otra cosa, ¿podría encontrarse alguna naturaleza que la superase? Ya es lo que es antes de que exista otra cosa, antes incluso de que exista el mal. Si los males se hacen presentes con posterioridad en las cosas que no participan por completo del Bien y que se encuentran en los últimos grados, si en este camino hacia lo peor no se halla nada que exceda a los males, ciertamente hemos de decir que los males son lo contrario del Bien, sin que en esta oposición aparezca intermediario alguno 1 .

Eso es ciertamente el Bien; porque, o el Bien no existe por entero, o si necesariamente existe, eso tiene que ser y no otra cosa. Si se dijese que el Bien no existe, suprimiríamos de raíz el mal. Indiferente resultaría entonces la preferencia por una u otra naturaleza, lo cual parece imposible. Todo lo que cae en el campo de los bienes refiérese a El, pero El en cambio no se refiere a nada. ¿Qué es, pues, lo que produce este Ser? Produjo la Inteligencia, produjo la vida y, por intermedio de la Inteligencia, las almas y todos los seres que participan de la razón y de la vida. Siendo como es la fuente y el principio de todos estos seres, ¿quién podría decir de qué modo y en qué medida es Bien? Pero, ¿qué es lo que hace ahora el Bien? Ahora conserva los seres, hace que piensen los seres inteligentes proveyéndoles de inteligencia, y hace asimismo que vivan los seres vivos insuflándoles la vida. Hace, en fin, que puedan existir los seres que no serían capaces de vivir.

Bouillet

XXIII. Puisque c’est ce Principe que poursuit l’âme, qui illumine l’Intelligence, et que la vue d’une simple trace de lui nous cause tant d’émotion, il ne faut pas s’étonner s’il possède la puissance d’attirer à lui les êtres, et si tous se reposent en lui sans chercher rien au delà. Si tout en effet procède de ce principe, il n’y a rien de meilleurque lui, et tout est au-dessous de lui. Or, comment le meilleur des êtres ne serait-il pas le Bien ? Si le Bien doit se suffire pleinement à lui-même, n’avoir besoin de rien autre, que pourrait-il être si ce n’est Celui qui était ce qu’il est avant toutes les autres choses, quand le mal n’existait pas encore ? Si les maux lui sont postérieurs, s’ils ne se trouvent que dans les objets qui ne participent en rien du Bien et qui occupent le dernier rang, s’il n’existe enfin aucun mal dans les intelligibles, et s’il n’y a rien de pire que le mal [comme il n’y a rien de meilleur que le Bien], les maux sont en opposition complète avec ce principe, sans qu’il y ait entre eux aucun intermédiaire. Ce principe est donc le Bien: car, ou le Bien n’existe pas, ou, s’il existe nécessairement, il est ce principe et il ne saurait être rien d’autre. Pour nier l’existence du Bien, il faudrait nier aussi celle du mal; il enrésulterait qu’il serait indifférent de préférer telle chose à telle autre; or cela est impossible. Toutes les autres choses qu’où nomme des hiens se rapportent à lui, tandis que lui il ne se rapporte à rien (82).

Si telle est la nature du Bien, qu’a-t-il fait? — II a fait l’Intelligence, il a fait la Vie; il a fait par l’intermédiaire de l’Intelligence les âmes et tous les autres êtres qui participent à l’intelligence, ou à la raison, ou à la vie. Quant à Celui qui est leur source et leur principe, qui pourrait exprimer quelle est sa bonté? — Mais que fait-il maintenant? — Il conserve ce qu’il a engendré, il fait penser ce qui pense, il fait vivre ce qui vit, il envoie aux êtres par son souffle (83) et l’intelligence et la vie, tout au moins l’existence, quand ils ne peuvent recevoir la vie.

Guthrie

THE SUPREME IS THE GOOD BECAUSE OF HIS SUPREMACY.

23. Since it is this Principle which the soul pursues, which illuminates Intelligence, and whose least trace arouses in us so great an emotion, there is no ground for astonishment if it possess the power of exerting its fascination on all beings, and if all rest in Him without seeking anything beyond. If indeed everything proceeds from this principle, then there is nothing better, and everything else is below Him. Now, how could the best of beings fail to be the Good? If the Good be entirely self-sufficient, and have need of nothing else, what could it be except the One who was what He is before all other things, when evil did not yet exist? If all evils be posterior to Him, if they exist only in the objects that in no way participate in the Good, and which occupy the last rank, if no evil exist among the intelligibles, and if there be nothing worse than evil (just as there is nothing better than the Good), then evils are in complete opposition to this principle, and it could be nothing else. To deny the existence of the Good, we would also have to deny the existence of evil; and the result would be a complete indifference of choice between any two particular things; which is absurd. All other things called good refer to Him, while He refers to nothing else.

THE GOOD AS CREATOR AND PRESERVER.

But if this be the nature of the Good, what does He do? He made Intelligence, and life. By the intermediation of Intelligence, He made the souls and all the other beings that participate in Intelligence, in Reason, or in Life. Moreover, who could express the goodness of Him who is their source and principle? But what is He doing at the present time? He preserves what He has begotten, He inspires the thought in those who think, He vivifies the living, by His spirit, He imparts to all (beings) intelligence and life, and to those who are unable to receive life, at least existence.

MacKenna

23. That which soul must quest, that which sheds its light upon Intellectual-Principle, leaving its mark wherever it falls, surely we need not wonder that it be of power to draw to itself, calling back from every wandering to rest before it. From it came all, and so there is nothing mightier; all is feeble before it. Of all things the best, must it not be The Good? If by The Good we mean the principle most wholly self-sufficing, utterly without need of any other, what can it be but this? Before all the rest, it was what it was, when evil had yet no place in things.

If evil is a Later, there found where there is no trace of This - among the very ultimates, so that on the downward side evil has no beyond - then to This evil stands full contrary with no linking intermediate: This therefore is The Good: either good there is none, or if there must be, This and no other is it.

And to deny the good would be to deny evil also; there can then be no difference in objects coming up for choice: but that is untenable.

To This looks all else that passes for good; This, to nothing.

What then does it effect out of its greatness?

It has produced Intellectual-Principle, it has produced Life, the souls which Intellectual-Principle sends forth and everything else that partakes of Reason, of Intellectual-Principle or of Life. Source and spring of so much, how describe its goodness and greatness?

But what does it effect now?

Even now it is preserver of what it produced; by it the Intellectual Beings have their Intellection and the living their life; it breathes Intellect in breathes Life in and, where life is impossible, existence.