梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈��梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈��梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何��
!!!!隆堋響頼��紗秘慕禰厮宴和肝写偬堋響��
´ Page 60´
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
nature of Being�察�and this Truth is that concerning which the Lord Himself
said�此 �'I am the Truth。' And when the initiated find�察�or rather receive�察�the
true philosophy�察�they have it from the Truth itself�察�that is from Him who is
true。;
While�察 �then�察 �these two schools had so many grounds in common�察�
where was their point of divergence�拭 �We shall find it�察 �I believe�察 �fairly
expressed in the dying words of Plotinus�察�the great father of Neoplatonism。
;I am striving to bring the God which is in us into harmony with the God
which is in the universe。; Whether or not Plotinus actually so spoke�察�that
was what his disciples not only said that he spoke�察�but what they would
have wished him to speak。 That one sentence expresses the whole object
of their philosophy。
But to that Pantaenus�察 �Origen�察 �Clement�察 �and Augustine would have
answered�此 �And we�察�on the other hand�察�assert that the God which is in
the universe�察 �is the same as the God which is in you�察 �and is striving to
bring you into harmony with Himself。; There is the experimentum crucis。
There is the vast gulf between the Christian and the Heathen schools�察�
which when any man had overleaped�察�the whole problem of the universe
was from that moment inverted。 With Plotinus and his school man is
seeking for God�此 �with Clement and his�察�God is seeking for man。 With
the former�察�God is passive�察�and man active�此 �with the latter�察�God is active�察�
man is passivepassive�察�that is�察�in so far as his business is to listen when
he is spoken to�察�to look at the light which is unveiled to him�察�to submit
himself to the inward laws which he feels reproving and checking him at
every turn�察�as Socrates was reproved and checked by his inward Daemon。
Whether of these two theorems gives the higher conception either of
the Divine Being�察 �or of man�察 �I leave it for you to judge。 To those old
Alexandrian Christians�察 �a being who was not seeking after every single
creature�察 �and trying to raise him�察 �could not be a Being of absolute
Righteousness�察 �Power�察 �Love�察 �could not be a Being worthy of respect or
admiration�察 �even of philosophic speculation。 Human righteousness and
love flows forth disinterestedly to all around it�察 �however unconscious�察�
however unworthy they may be�察�human power associated with goodness�察�
seeks for objects which it may raise and benefit by that power。 We must
60
´ Page 61´
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
confess this�察�with the Christian schools�察�or�察�with the Heathen schools�察�we
must allow another theory�察�which brought them into awful depths�察�which
may bring any generation which holds it into the same depths。
If Clement had asked the Neoplatonists�此 �You believe�察�Plotinus�察�in an
absolutely Good Being。 Do you believe that it desires to shed forth its
goodness on all�拭─ �Of course�察─ �they would have answered�察 �on those
who seek for it�察�on the philosopher。;
;But not�察 �it seems�察 �Plotinus�察 �on the herd�察 �the brutal�察 �ignorant mass�察�
wallowing in those foul crimes above which you have risen�拭─ �And at
that question there would have been not a little hesitation。 These brutes
in human form�察�these souls wallowing in earthly mire�察�could hardly�察�in the
Neoplatonists' eyes�察�be objects of the Divine desire。
;Then this Absolute Good�察�you say�察�Plotinus�察�has no relation with them�察�
no care to raise them。 In fact�察 �it cannot raise them�察 �because they have
nothing in common with it。 Is that your notion�拭─ �And the
Neoplatonists would have�察�on the whole�察�allowed that argument。 And if
Clement had answered�察�that such was not his notion of Goodness�察�or of a
Good Being�察 �and that therefore the goodness of their Absolute Good�察�
careless of the degradation and misery around it�察�must be something very
different from his notions of human goodness�察 �the Neoplatonists would
have answered indeed they did answer;After all�察 �why not�拭 �Why
should the Absolute Goodness be like our human goodness�拭─ �This is
Plotinus's own belief。 It is a question with him�察�it was still more a question
with those who came after him�察�whether virtues could be predicated of the
Divine nature�察�courage�察�for instance�察�of one who had nothing to fear�察�self´
restraint�察 �of one who had nothing to desire。 And thus�察 �by setting up a
different standard of morality for the divine and for the human�察�Plotinus
gradually arrives at the conclusion�察 �that virtue is not the end�察 �but the
means�察�not the Divine nature itself�察�as the Christian schools held�察�but only
the purgative process by which man was to ascend into heaven�察�and which
was necessary to arrive at that naturethat nature itself beingwhat�拭�
And how to answer that last question was the abysmal problem of the
whole of Neoplatonic philosophy�察�in searching for which it wearied itself
out�察 �generation after generation�察 �till tired equally of seeking and of
61
´ Page 62´
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
speaking�察 �it fairly lay down and died。 In proportion as it refused to
acknowledge a common divine nature with the degraded mass�察�it deserted
its first healthy instinct�察�which told it that the spiritual world is identical
with the moral world�察 �with right�察 �love�察 �justice�察 �it tried to find new
definitions for the spiritual�察 �it conceived it to be identical with the
intellectual。 That did not satisfy its heart。 It had to repeople the
spiritual world�察�which it had emptied of its proper denizens�察�with ghosts�察�
to reinvent the old daemonologies and polytheismsfrom thence to
descend into lower depths�察�of which we will speak hereafter。
But in the meanwhile we must look at another quarrel which arose
between the two twin schools of Alexandria。 The Neoplatonists said that
there is a divine element in man。 The Christian philosophers assented
fervently�察�and raised the old disagreeable question�此 �Is it in every man�拭�
In the publicans and harlots as well