Enneads III 5: On Love

[sdi]

III 5: On Love

Love is simply the action of the soul: when we say that soul moves in orbits, the soul is the lover, the focus of the orbit the beloved, and the gravitational attraction binding one to the other is desire.

This is what is meant when the Theologists speak of Aphrodite: Aphrodite Ourania is the highest divine Soul itself, being the daughter of Kronos, the highest divine Mind. Aphrodite Pandemos is a lower divine soul, being the daughter of Zeus, the demiurge. Eros, said to be Aphrodite's son, is the desire that prompts Her motion.

Lower souls act in imitation of these higher ones: we have spoken of this process already, and this is why Eros is said by Plato to be a dæmon: He is the production of a soul, and a production must be of a lower category. In this sense, Eros is not one but many: just as superdivine Aphrodite begets a divine Eros, so too does a divine soul—like our own—beget a dæmonic Eros in imitation of Her.

So too does Plato speak of Poverty and Plenty and the garden of Zeus and so on: these are not meant literally, but as metaphors for this process by which the soul imitates and strives toward the Good.

I think it's elegant how Plotinus makes Ouranos to be that which is beyond, Kronos to be the definition of Beauty, Aphrodite Ourania is the most beautiful thing so defined, and Eros to be the mediator by which She operates, weaving all the while a fractal universe out of this. (The above is the hypercosmic order; the same process repeats a level down to produce the cosmic; the same process repeats a level down to produce the microcosmic; etc.) In a sense, Plotinus' whole philosophy is a philosophy of Love. Plotinus' own discussion of this is in §§2–4.

As for Plato, well, Diotima did say that she was speaking of the "higher mysteries" of Love, so I guess Plotinus is justified in taking her words to be veiled. Still, as an open and frank person, I rather dislike it. Plotinus' unpacking of Plato begins in §5.

Comments

[boccaderlupo]

There is a lot to process in this one, and I'm going to have to reread it several times to better understand it. Some beautiful (ha) passages on Aphrodite and Eros and their natures, but also some really compelling thoughts on the striving towards the Good and how it finds expression in different souls (and may even result in less-than-good outcomes).

[sdi]

That's just it, right? In Plotinus' schema, you can't not strive towards the Good—it is the only thing a being is capable of. Put another way, all we can do is Love. Now, one may lack with capacity and wisdom to strive for the highest Good of which they're capable, but that doesn't mean they're Evil, it simply means that they got turned around somewhere and lack the senses to see that they could be doing much Better.

I'm repeatedly struck by the kind nature that Plotinus' work exhibits. Socrates comes across with carefully-cultivated provocativeness; Plato reads like he's by far the smartest person in the room and he knows it; Sallustius reads like he's an exasperated schoolteacher patiently trying to get the lesson across to willful students (Sunzi always struck me this way, too); but while Plotinus is very, very smart, he despises this as a "necessary evil" and comes across gentle and sweet. The only other major work I've read that exudes the same character is Laozi.

[boccaderlupo]

I think those characterizations are on point. Said Russell of Plotinus: "Whatever one may think of him as a theoretical philosopher, it is impossible not to love him as a man."

I found it intriguing that he muses whether Love (a version of Love) is the daemon "which they say accompanies each of us, our personal Love?" (Using the Boys-Stones, Dillon, Gerson, et al. translation.) Provocative.

[sdi]

It's funny because, before reading him, I had been wondering the same thing!

My personal take is that our guardian dæmons tend towards expressing themselves by way of one or another of the planets—as they must, in order to reach down through the ætherial, right?—and that Plotinus is like me in that his falls under the light of Venus, hence our confusion of love and guidance.