Página inicial > Antiguidade > Neoplatonismo (245-529 dC) > Plotino (204-270 dC) – Tratados Enéadas > Plotino - Tratado 27,4 (IV, 3, 4) — Alma e Alma-do-Mundo: uma coisa em todas (...)

ENÉADAS

Plotino - Tratado 27,4 (IV, 3, 4) — Alma e Alma-do-Mundo: uma coisa em todas as outras?

Enéada IV, 3, 4

terça-feira 21 de junho de 2022, por Cardoso de Castro

      

Cap 3-6: Resposta   ao argumento   4 (participamos da alma do mundo   da mesma maneira que as partes de nosso corpo participam de nossa alma): a analogia   do macrocosmo e do microcosmo, se tratando das relações da alma e do corpo, não é capaz de recepção senão com o custo de certas precisões. [BPT27-29  ]


Si todas las almas son una sola, o todas estarán en el cuerpo, o todas fuera del cuerpo.— Respuesta [IGAL  ]
Chapter 4 — Comprises a reply to the objection that, if all souls are one, the soul will be both in body and outside body, if it is true that our souls leave our bodies periodically, and that of the world does not. [DBEnneadIV  ]
      

Míguez

4. Si el alma   es, pues, una unidad de esta clase, ¿qué hemos de contestar a los que plantean dificultades como las siguientes? En primer lugar, si es posible que una sola cosa se encuentre a la vez en todas las otras, y en segundo lugar, si puede haber un alma que se dé en el cuerpo y otra no —porque quizá debiera afirmarse que toda alma, y especialmente el alma del universo  , asentará siempre en un cuerpo, y no decir que ha de abandonar el cuerpo, como se hace con la nuestra, aunque algunos sean de la opinión que si ha dé abandonar este cuerpo no por eso quedará fuera de todo cuerpo—; pues si alguna alma tiene que quedar enteramente fuera del cuerpo, ¿cómo es que un alma ha de abandonarlo y otra no, tratándose en todo caso de la misma alma? En cuanto a la inteligencia, por su misma alteridad aparece dividida en partes distintas, pero unidas unas a otras, porque, siendo su sustancia indivisible  , aquella separación no ofrece dificultad alguna; mientras que, en lo tocante al alma, considerada como divisible según los cuerpos, muchas son las dificultades que se oponen a su unidad.

Sin embargo, podría hablarse de la unidad como existente en sí misma y no precipitada en el cuerpo. De ella procederían todas las almas, tanto el alma del universo como las demás. En cierto modo, se presentar  ían reunidas y formando una sola alma, que no correspondería a ningún ser particular. Así, suspendidas por sus extremos y relacionadas entre sí, se lanzarían aquí y allá, cual una luz que, tan pronto se acerca a la tierra, se introduce en nuestras casas, aunque no por ello se divida y pierda algo de su unidad. El alma del universo permanece siempre por encima de nosotros, porque no desciende hacia la tierra ni se muestra solícita por las cosas de aquí abajo; nuestras almas, en cambio, no siempre se encuentran en ese estado  , porque están limitadas por una porción del cuerpo en cuyo cuidado   han de poner toda su atención. El alma del universo, por su parte inferior  , se parece al alma de un gran árbol, que dirige la vida sin fatiga ni ruido alguno; la parte inferior de nuestra alma resulta algo así como los gusanos que nacen en las ramas podridas del árbol, pues eso y no otra cosa es el ser animado en el universo; pero, además de esa alma, hay otra alma semejante a la parte superior del alma del universo y comparable a un agricultor que, preocupado por los gusanos del árbol, dirigiese hacia él todos sus cuidados. Como si se dijese que un hombre que disfruta de buena salud, en unión de los otros hombres en sus mismas condiciones, se aplica a todo aquello que debe hacer o contemplar; en tanto, si se encuentra enfermo, aparece entregado a los cuidados de su cuerpo, atento y predispuesto hacia él.

Bouillet

IV. Si c’est ainsi que l’Âme universelle [pasa psyche] est une, que faudra-t-il répondre quand on demandera quelles conséquences en dérivent, quand d’abord on exprimera le doute que l’Âme universelle puisse à la fois être une et être dans tous les êtres, quand ensuite on demandera comment il se fait que telle âme soit dans un corps et que telle autre n’y soit pas? Car on ne dit pas que cette Âme abandonne son corps comme la nôtre, et, bien que quelques-uns avancent qu’elle-même quittera un jour son corps, on ne prétend pas qu’elle doive être jamais en dehors de tout corps. En admettant même qu’elle doive un jour être séparée de tout corps, comment se fait-il qu’une âme puisse ainsi se séparer, et qu’une autre ne le puisse pas, puisqu’elles ont au fond la même nature? On ne saurait élever une pareille question pour l’Intelligence : les parties entre lesquelles elle se divise ne sont distinguées les unes des autres que par leur différence individuelle, et elles existent toutes ensemble éternellement (car l’Intelligence n’est pas divisible). Tout au contraire, l’Âme universelle étant, comme on le dit, divisible dans les corps, il est fort difficile de comprendre comment toutes les âmes procèdent de l’Essence qui est une.

Voici ce qu’on peut répondre à cette question :

L’Essence qui est une [savoir l’Intelligence] subsiste en elle-même sans descendre dans les corps ; de l’Essence qui est une procèdent l’Ame universelle et les autres âmes, qui existent toutes ensemble jusqu’à un certain point et ne forment qu’une seule Ame en tant qu’elles n’appartiennent à aucun être particulier [contenu dans le monde sensible  ]. Mais, si par leurs extrémités supérieures elles se rattachent à l’unité, si elles coïncident en son sein, elles divergent ensuite [par leurs actes], comme la lumière se divise sur la terre entre les diverses habitations des hommes et néanmoins reste une et indivise. Dans ce cas, l’Âme universelle; est toujours élevée au-dessus des autres parce qu’elle n’est point capable de descendre, de déchoir, d’incliner vers le monde sensible ; les nôtres, au contraire, descendent ici-bas, parce qu’une place déterminée leur est assignée dans ce monde et qu’elles sont obligées de s’occuper d’un corps qui exige une attention soutenue. L’Âme universelle ressemble par sa partie inférieure au principe vital qui anime une grande plante et qui y administre tout paisiblement et sans bruit ; nos âmes sont semblables par leur partie inférieure à ces animalcules auxquels donnent naissance les parties de la plante qui se putréfient. C’est là l’image du corps vivant de l’univers. Quant à la partie supérieure de notre âme qui est conforme à la partie supérieure de l’Âme universelle, elle peut être comparée à un agriculteur qui, ayant remarqué les vers dont la plante est rongée, s’appliquerait à les détruire et s’occuperait de la plante avec sollicitude. C’est comme si l’on disait que l’homme bien portant et entouré d’hommes bien portants est tout entier aux choses qu’il a à faire ou à étudier : que malade, au contraire, il est tout entier à son corps et en devient dépendant.

Guthrie

INTELLECTUAL DIFFICULTY OF THE SOUL BEING ONE AND YET IN ALL BEINGS.

4. If the universal   Soul (pasa psyche) be one in this manner, what about consequences of this (conception) ? Might we not well   doubt the possibility of the universal Soul’s simultaneously being one, yet present in all beings? How does it happen that some souls are in a body, while others are discarnate? It would seem more logical to admit that every soul is always in some body, especially the universal Soul. For it is not claimed, for the universal Soul, as it is for ours, that she ever abandons her body, and though it be by some asserted that the universal Soul may one day leave her body, it is never claimed that she would ever be outside of any body. Even admitting that some day she should be divided from all body, how does it happen that a soul could thus separate, while some other could not, if at bottom both are of the same nature? As to Intelligence, such a question would be impossible; the parts into which it is divided are not distinguished from each other by their individual difference, and they all exist together eternally, for Intelligence is not divisible. On the contrary, as the universal Soul is divisible within the bodies, as has been said, it is difficult to understand how all the souls proceed from the unitary (pure) Being.

THE HEALTHY SOUL CAN WORK, THE SICK SOUL IS DEVOTED TO HER BODY.

This question may be answered as follows. The unitary Being (that is Intelligence), subsists in itself without descending into the bodies. From unitary Being proceed the universal Soul and the other souls, which, up to a certain point, exist all together, and form but a single soul so far as they do not belong to any particular individual (contained in the sense  -world). If, however, by their superior extremities they attach themselves to Unity, if within it they coincide, they later diverge (by their actualization), just as on the earth light is divided between the various dwellings of men, nevertheless remaining one and indivisible. In this case, the universal Soul is ever elevated above the others because she is not capable of descending, of falling, of inclining towards the sense-world. Our souls, on the contrary, descend here below, because special place is assigned to them in this world, and they are obliged to occupy themselves with a body which demands sustained attention. By her lower part, the universal Soul resembles the vital principle which animates a great plant, and which there manages everything peaceably and noiselessly. By their lower part our souls are similar to those animalcule born of the decaying parts of plants. That is the image of the living body of the universe. The higher part of our soul, which is similar to the higher part of the universal Soul, might be compared to a farmer who, having noticed the worms by which the plant is being devoured, should apply himself to destroying them, and should solicitously care for the plant. So we might say that the man in good health, and surrounded by healthy people, is entirely devoted to his duties or studies; the sick man, on the contrary, is entirely devoted to his body, and becomes dependent thereon.

Taylor

IV. What, therefore, shall we say, if it is thus one, when any one inquires, in the first place doubting, whether soul can after this manner be at once one in all things ? And in the next place, when one soul is in body, but another not, [how this takes place ?] For perhaps it follows that every soul is always in body, and especially the soul of the universe. For this soul does not, as ours is said to do, leave the body; though some say that even this soul abandons its body, and yet is not entirely out of the body. But if the soul of the universe is entirely out of the body, how is it that one soul leaves the body, but another does not, though both are [essentially] the same ? In intellect, therefore, which is separated from itself by difference, according to parts especially distinguished from each other, but which always subsist together at once, the essence of intellect being impartible, no such doubt can arise. But in the soul which is said to he divisible about bodies, how this which is one certain thing can be all souls, is attended with many doubts ; unless that which is one is established in itself, without falling into body, and afterwards all souls proceed from it, both the soul of the universe, and others to a certain extent; existing as it were together with it, and being one in consequence of not belonging to any thing else [i.e. of not being consubsistent with something of a nature subordinate to themselves]. They must, likewise, be suspended from their boundaries, and conspire with each other in their tendencies to supernal natures, by the projecting energies of intellect; like a light which is now on the earth, and is distributed in different habitations, yet is not divided into parts separated from the whole, but is nevertheless one. Hence, the soul of the universe is always transcendent, because it does not belong to it to descend, and be converted to these inferior realms. But our souls are subordinate, because a certain part of their essence is limited to this terrene abode, and to a conversion to body which requires solicitude and care. The soul of the world, therefore, in its most inferior part, resembles a great vegetable soul, which without labour and silently governs the plant of which it is the soul [i.e. in the same manner as worms are generated in wounds]. But the government of the inferior part of our soul, resembles the worms that are generated in the putrified part of a plant. For thus the animated body of the universe subsists. Another soul, however, which is similar in species to the superior part of the soul of the world, resembles in its government the husbandman whose attention is directed to the worms that are generated from putrefaction in a plant, and who is solicitously employed in the cultivation of the plant. Or as if some one should say that a man who is well, and is with other men that are in health, is with those persons with whom he co-operates either in acting or contemplating; but that a diseased man, and who is employed in procuring remedies for the body, is with the body, and becomes corporeal through his attention to it.

MacKenna

4. But if this is the true account of the unity of soul, we must be able to meet the problems that ensue: firstly, the difficulty of one thing being present at the same moment in all things; and, secondly, the difficulty of soul in body as against soul not embodied.

We might be led to think that all soul must always inhabit body; this would seem especially plausible in the case of the soul of the universe, not thought of as ever leaving its body as the human soul does: there exists, no doubt, an opinion that even the human soul, while it must leave the body, cannot become an utterly disembodied thing; but assuming its complete disembodiment, how comes it that the human soul can go free of the body but the All-Soul not, though they are one and the same?

There is no such difficulty in the case of the Intellectual-Principle; by the primal   differentiation, this separates, no doubt, into partial things of widely varying nature, but eternal unity is secured by virtue of the eternal identity of that Essence: it is not so easy to explain how, in the case of the soul described as separate among bodies, such differentiated souls can remain one thing.

A possible solution may be offered:

The unit soul holds aloof, not actually falling into body; the differentiated souls - the All-Soul, with the others - issue from the unity while still constituting, within certain limits, an association. They are one soul by the fact that they do not belong unreservedly to any particular being; they meet, so to speak, fringe to fringe; they strike out here and there, but are held together at the source much as light is a divided thing upon earth, shining in this house, and that, and yet remains uninterruptedly one identical substance.

The All-Soul would always remain above, since essentially it has nothing to do with descent or with the lower, or with any tendency towards this sphere: the other souls would become ours [become "partial," individual in us] because their lot is cast for this sphere, and because they are solicited by a thing [the body] which invites their care.

The one - the lowest soul in the to the All-Soul - would correspond to that in some great growth, silently, unlaboriously conducting the whole; our own lowest soul might be compared to the insect life in some rotted part of the growth - for this is the ratio of the animated body to the universe - while the other soul in us, of one ideal nature with the higher parts of the All-Soul, may be imaged as the gardener concerned about the insects lodged in the tree and anxiously working to amend what is wrong; or we may contrast a healthy man living with the healthy and, by his thought or by his act, lending himself to the service of those about him, with, on the other side, a sick man intent upon his own care and cure, and so living for the body, body-bound.


Ver online : ENÉADAS III-IV (Gredos)