the six enneads- 第167部分

　is　either　not　later　but　concomitant　or；　being　essential　to　the　existence；　is　precedent。　In　our　view；　Unity　and　Number　are　precedent。　　　　　11。　It　may　be　suggested　that　the　decad　is　nothing　more　than　so　many　henads；　admitting　the　one　henad　why　should　we　reject　the　ten？　As　the　one　is　a　real　existence　why　not　the　rest？　We　are　certainly　not　compelled　to　attach　that　one　henad　to　some　one　thing　and　so　deprive　all　the　rest　of　the　means　to　unity：　since　every　existent　must　be　one　thing；　the　unity　is　obviously　common　to　all。　This　means　one　principle　applying　to　many；　the　principle　whose　existence　within　itself　we　affirmed　to　be　presupposed　by　its　manifestation　outside。　　　　　But　if　a　henad　exists　in　some　given　object　and　further　is　observed　in　something　else；　then　that　first　henad　being　real；　there　cannot　be　only　one　henad　in　existence；　there　must　be　a　multiplicity　of　henads。　　　　　Supposing　that　first　henad　alone　to　exist；　it　must　obviously　be　lodged　either　in　the　thing　of　completest　Being　or　at　all　events　in　the　thing　most　completely　a　unity。　If　in　the　thing　of　completest　Being；　then　the　other　henads　are　but　nominal　and　cannot　be　ranked　with　the　first　henad；　or　else　Number　becomes　a　collection　of　unlike　monads　and　there　are　differences　among　monads　＇an　impossibility＇。　If　that　first　henad　is　to　be　taken　as　lodged　in　the　thing　of　completest　unity；　there　is　the　question　why　that　most　perfect　unity　should　require　the　first　henad　to　give　it　unity。　　　　　Since　all　this　is　impossible；　then；　before　any　particular　can　be　thought　of　as　a　unit；　there　must　exist　a　unity　bare；　unrelated　by　very　essence。　If　in　that　realm　also　there　must　be　a　unity　apart　from　anything　that　can　be　called　one　thing；　why　should　there　not　exist　another　unity　as　well？　　　　　Each　particular；　considered　in　itself；　would　be　a　manifold　of　monads；　totalling　to　a　collective　unity。　If　however　Nature　produces　continuously…　or　rather　has　produced　once　for　all…　not　halting　at　the　first　production　but　bringing　a　sort　of　continuous　unity　into　being；　then　it　produces　the　minor　numbers　by　the　sheer　fact　of　setting　an　early　limit　to　its　advance：　outgoing　to　a　greater　extent…　not　in　the　sense　of　moving　from　point　to　point　but　in　its　inner　changes…　it　would　produce　the　larger　numbers；　to　each　number　so　emerging　it　would　attach　the　due　quantities　and　the　appropriate　thing；　knowing　that　without　this　adaptation　to　Number　the　thing　could　not　exist　or　would　be　a　stray；　something　outside；　at　once；　of　both　Number　and　Reason。　　　　　12。　We　may　be　told　that　unity　and　monad　have　no　real　existence；　that　the　only　unity　is　some　definite　object　that　is　one　thing；　so　that　all　comes　to　an　attitude　of　the　mind　towards　things　considered　singly。　　　　　But；　to　begin　with；　why　at　this　should　not　the　affirmation　of　Being　pass　equally　as　an　attitude　of　mind　so　that　Being　too　must　disappear？　No　doubt　Being　strikes　and　stings　and　gives　the　impression　of　reality；　but　we　find　ourselves　just　as　vividly　struck　and　impressed　in　the　presence　of　unity。　Besides；　is　this　attitude；　this　concept　itself；　a　unity　or　a　manifold？　When　we　deny　the　unity　of　an　object；　clearly　the　unity　mentioned　is　not　supplied　by　the　object；　since　we　are　saying　it　has　none；　the　unity　therefore　is　within　ourselves；　something　latent　in　our　minds　independently　of　any　concrete　one　thing。　　　　　＇An　objector　speaks…＇　〃But　the　unity　we　thus　possess　comes　by　our　acceptance　of　a　certain　idea　or　impression　from　things　external；　it　is　a　notion　derived　from　an　object。　Those　that　take　the　notion　of　numbers　and　of　unity　to　be　but　one　species　of　the　notions　held　to　be　inherent　in　the　mind　must　allow　to　numbers　and　to　unity　the　reality　they　ascribe　to　any　of　the　others；　and　upon　occasion　they　must　be　met；　but　no　such　real　existence　can　be　posited　when　the　concept　is　taken　to　be　an　attitude　or　notion　rising　in　us　as　a　by…product　of　the　objects；　this　happens　when　we　say　〃This；〃　〃What；〃　and　still　more　obviously　in　the　affirmations　〃Crowd；〃　〃Festival；〃　〃Army；〃　〃Multiplicity。〃　As　multiplicity　is　nothing　apart　from　certain　constituent　items　and　the　festival　nothing　apart　from　the　people　gathered　happily　at　the　rites；　so　when　we　affirm　unity　we　are　not　thinking　of　some　Oneness　self…standing；　unrelated。　And　there　are　many　other　such　cases；　for　instance　〃on　the　right；〃　〃Above〃　and　their　opposites；　what　is　there　of　reality　about　this　〃On…the…right…ness〃　but　the　fact　that　two　different　positions　are　occupied？　So　with　〃Above〃：　〃Above〃　and　〃Below〃　are　a　mere　matter　of　position　and　have　no　significance　outside　of　this　sphere。　　　　　Now　in　answer　to　this　series　of　objections　our　first　remark　is　that　there　does　exist　an　actuality　implicit　in　each　one　of　the　relations　cited；　though　this　is　not　the　same　for　all　or　the　same　for　correlatives　or　the　same　for　every　reference　to　unity。　　　　　But　these　objections　must　be　taken　singly。　　　　　13。　It　cannot　reasonably　be　thought　that　the　notion　of　unity　is　derived　from　the　object　since　this　is　physical…　man；　animal；　even　stone；　a　presentation　of　that　order　is　something　very　different　from　unity　＇which　must　be　a　thing　of　the　Intellectual＇；　if　that　presentation　were　unity；　the　mind　could　never　affirm　unity　unless　of　that　given　thing；　man；　for　example。　　　　　Then　again；　just　as　in　the　case　of　〃On　the　right〃　or　other　such　affirmation　of　relation；　the　mind　does　not　affirm　in　some　caprice　but　from　observation　of　contrasted　position；　so　here　it　affirms　unity　in　virtue　of　perceiving　something　real；　assuredly　the　assertion　of　unity　is　not　a　bare　attitude　towards　something　non…existent。　It　is　not　enough　that　a　thing　be　alone　and　be　itself　and　not　something　else：　and　that　very　〃something　else〃　tells　of　another　unity。　Besides　Otherness　and　Difference　are　later；　unless　the　mind　has　first　rested　upon　unity　it　cannot　affirm　Otherness　or　Difference；　when　it　affirms　Aloneness　it　affirms　unity…with…aloneness；　thus　unity　is　presupposed　in　Aloneness。　　　　　Besides；　that　in　us　which　asserts　unity　of　some　object　is　first　a　unity；　itself；　and　the　object　is　a　unity　before　any　outside　affirmation　or　conception。　　　　　A　thing　must　be　either　one　thing　or　more　than　one；　manifold：　and　if　there　is　to　be　a　manifold　there　must　be　a　precedent　unity。　To　talk　of　a　manifold　is　to　talk　of　what　has　something　added　to　unity；　to　think　of　an　army　is　to　think　of　a　multitude　under　arms　and　brought　to　unity。　In　refusing　to　allow　the　manifold　to　remain　manifold；　the　mind　makes　the　truth　clear；　it　draws　a　separate　many　into　one；　either　supplying　a　unity　not　present　or　keen　to　perceive　the　unity　brought　about　by　the　ordering　of　the　parts；　in　an　army；　even；　the　unity　is　not　a　fiction　but　as　real　as　that　of　a　building　erected　from　many　stones；　though　of　course　the　unity　of　the　house　is　more　compact。　　　　　If；　then；　unity　is　more　pronounced　in　the　continuous；　and　more　again　where　there　is　no　separation　by　part；　this　is　clearly　because　there　exists；　in　real　existence；　something　which　is　a　Nature　or　Principle　of　Unity。　There　cannot　be　a　greater　and　less　in　the　non…existent：　as　we　predicate　Substance　of　everything　in　sense；　but　predicate　it　also　of　the　Intellectual　order　and　more　strictly　there…　since　we　hold　that　the　greater　and　more　sovereign　substantiality　belongs　to　the　Real　Beings　and　that　Being　is　more　marked　in　Substance；　even　sensible　Substance；　than　in　the　other　Kinds…　so；　finding　unity　to　exhibit　degree　of　more　and　less；　differing　in　sense…things　as　well　as　in　the　Intellectual；　we　must　similarly　admit　that　Unity　exists　under　all　forms　though　still　by　reference；　only；　to　that　primal　Unity。　　　　　As　Substance　and　Real　Being；　despite　the　participation　of　the　sensible；　are　still　of　the　Intellectual　and　not　the　sensible　order；　so　too　the　unity　observed　present　in　things　of　sense　by　participation　remains　still　an　Intellectual　and　to　be　grasped　by　an　Intellectual　Act。　The　mind；　from　a　thing　present　to　it；　comes　to　knowledge　of　something　else；　a　thing　not　presented；　that　is；　it　has　a　prior　knowledge。　By　this　prior　knowledge　it　recognises　Being　in　a　particular　being；　similarly　when　a　thing　is　one　it　can　affirm　unity　as　it　can　affirm　also　duality　and　multiplicity。　　　　　It　is　impossible　to　name　or　conceive　anything　not　making　one　or　two　or　some　number；　equally　impossible　that　the　thing　should　not　exist　without　which　nothing　can　possibly　be　named　or　conceived；　impossible　to　deny　the　reality　of　that　whose　existence　is　a　necessary　condition　of　naming　or　affirming　anything；　what　is　a　first　need；　universally；　to　the　formation　of　every　concept　and　every　proposition　must　exist　before　reasoning　and　thinking；　only　as　an　existent　can　it　be　cited　to　account　for　the　stirring　of　thought。　If　Unity　is　necessary　to　the　substantial　existence　of　all　that　really　is…　and　nothing　exists　which　is　not　one…　Unity　must　precede　Reality　and　be　its　author。　It　is　therefore；　an　existent　Unity；　not　an　existent　that　develops　Unity；　considered　as　Being…with…Unity　it　would　be　a　manifold；　whereas　in　the　pure　Unity　there　is　no　Being　save　in　so　far　as　Unity　attends　to　producing　it。　As　regards　the　word　〃This；〃　it　is　nat　a　bare　word；　it　affirms　an　indicated　existence　without　using　the　name；　it　tells　of　a　certain　presence；　whether　a　substance　or　some　other　existent；　any　This　must　be　significant；　it　is　no　attitude　of　the　mind　applying　itself　to　a　non…existent；　the　This　show