The Enneads — trans. Stephen MacKenna

therefore, descend from Eternity to the investigation of Time, to the realm of Time : till now we have been taking the upward way ; we must now take the downward — ^not to the lowest levels but within the degree in which Time itself is a descent from Eternity.

If the venerable sages of former days had not treated of Time, our method would be to begin by linking to (the idea of) Eternity (the idea of) its Next (its inevitable downward or outgoing subsequent in the same order), then setting forth the probable nature of such a Next and proceeding to show how the conception thus formed tallies with our own doctrine.

But, as things are, our best beginning is to range over the most noteio6

PLOTINUS

worthy of the ancient opinions and see whether any of them accord with ours.

Existing explanations of Time seem to fall into three classes : —

Time is variously identified with what we know as Movement, with a moved object, and with some phenomenon of Movement : obviously it cannot be Rest or a resting object or any phenomenon of rest, since, in its characteristic idea, it is concerned with change.

Of those that explain it as Movement, some identify it with Absolute Movement (or with the total of Movement), others with that of the All. Those that make it a moved object would identify it with the orb of the All. Those that conceive it as some phenomenon, or some period, of Movement treat it, severally, either as a standard of measure or as something inevitably accompanying Movement, abstract or definite.

8.

Movement Time cannot be — whether a definite act of moving is meant or a united total made up of all such acts — since movement, in either sense, takes place in Time. And, of course, if there is any movement not in Time, the identification with Time becomes all the less tenable.

In a word, Movement must be distinct from the medium in which it takes place.

And, with all that has been said or is still said, one consideration is decisive : Movement can come to rest, can be intermittent ; Time is continuous.

We will be told that the Movement of the All is continuous (and so may be identical with Time).

But, if the reference is to the Circuit of the heavenly system (it is not strictly continuous, or equable, since) the time taken in the return path is not that of the outgoing movement ; the one is twice as long as the other : this Movement of the All proceeds, therefore, by two different degrees ; the rate of the entire journey is not that of the first half.

since) the time taken in the return path is not that of the outgoing movement ; the one is twice as long as the other : this Movement of the All proceeds, therefore, by two different degrees ; the rate of the entire journey is not that of the first half.

Further, the fact that we hear of the Movement of the outermost sphere being the swiftest confirms our theory. Obviously, it is the swiftest

111.7.8]

TIME AND ETERNITY

p. 107

of movements by taking the lesser time to traverse the greater space — the very greatest — all other moving things are slower by taking a longer time to traverse a mere segment of the same extension ; in other words, Time is not this movement.

And, if Time is not even the movement of the Kosmic Sphere much less is it the sphere itself though that has been identified with Time on the ground of its being in motion.

Is it, then, some phenomenon or connection of Movement ?

Let us, tentatively, suppose it to be extent, or duration, of Movement.

Now, to begin with. Movement, even continuous, has no unchanging extent (as Time the equable has), since, even in space, it may be faster or slower ; there must, therefore, be some unit of standard outside it, by which these differences are measurable, 8ind this outside standard would more properly be called Time. And failing such a measure, which extent would be Time, that of the fast or of the slow — or rather which of them all, since these speed-differences are limitless ?

Is it the extent of the subordinate Movement ( = movement of things of earth) ?

Again, this gives us no unit since the movement is infinitely variable ; we would have, thus, not Time but Times.

The extent of the Movement of the All, then ?

The Celestial Circuit may, no doubt, be thought of in terms of quantity. It answers to measure — in two ways. First there is space ; the movement is commensurate with the area it passes through, and this area is its extent. But this gives us, still, space only, not Time. Secondly, the circuit, considered apart from distance traversed, has the extent of its continuity, of its tendency not to stop but to proceed indefinitely : but this is merely amplitude of Movement ; search it, tell its vastness, and, still. Time has no more appeared, no more enters into the matter, than when one certifies a high pitch of heat ; all we have discovered is Motion in ceaseless succession, like water flowing ceaselessly, motion and extent of motion.

io8

PLOTINUS

Succession or repetition gives us Number — dyad, triad, etc.

ters into the matter, than when one certifies a high pitch of heat ; all we have discovered is Motion in ceaseless succession, like water flowing ceaselessly, motion and extent of motion.

io8

PLOTINUS

Succession or repetition gives us Number — dyad, triad, etc. — and the extent traversed is a matter of Magnitude ; thus we have Quantity of Movement — in the form of number, dyad, triad, decade, or in the form of extent apprehended in what we may call the amount of the Movement : but, the idea of Time we have not. That definite Quantity is (not Time but) merely something occurring within Time, for, otherwise Time is not everywhere but is something belonging to Movement which thus would be its substratum or basic-stuff : once more, then, we would be making Time identical with Movement ; for the extent of Movement is not something outside it but is simply its continuousness, and we need not halt upon the difference between the momentary and the continuous, which is simply one of manner and degree. The extended movement and its extent are not Time ; they are in Time. Those that explain Time as extent of Movement must mean not the extent of the movement itself but something which determines its extension, something with which the movement keeps pace in its course. But what this something is, we are not told ; yet it is, clearly. Time, that in which all Movement proceeds. This is what our discussion has aimed at from the first : “ What, essentially, is Time 7 ” It comes to this : we ask " What is Time ? ” and we are answered, “ Time is the extension of Movement in Time ! ”

On the one hand Time is said to be an extension apart from and outside that of Movement ; and we are left to guess what this extension may be : on the other hand, it is represented as the extension of Movement ; and this leaves the difficulty what to make of the extension of Rest — though one thing may continue as long in repose as another in motion, so that we are obliged to think of one thing Time that covers both Rest and Movements, and, therefore, stands distinct from either.

What then is this thing of extension ? To what order of beings does it belong ?

It obviously is not spatial, for place, too, is something outside it.

III. 7. 9l

TIME AND ETERNITY

p. 109

9-

“ A Number, a Measure, belonging to Movement ? ”

This, at least, is plausible since Movement is a continuous thing ; but let us consider.