Men directing their weapons against each other — under doom of death yet neatly lined up to fight as in the pyrrhic sword-dances of their sport — this is enough to tell us that all human intentions are but play, that death is nothing terrible, that to die in a war or in a fight is but to taste a little beforehand what old age has in store, to go away earlier and come back the sooner. So for misfortunes that may accompany life, the loss of property, for instance ; the loser will see that there was a time when it was not his, that its possession is but a mock boon to the robbers, who will in their turn lose it to others, and even, that to retain property is a greater loss than to forfeit it.
Murders, death in all its guises, the reduction and sacking of cities, aU must be to us just such a spectacle as the changing scenes of a play ; aU is but the varied incident of a plot, costume on and off, acted grief and lament. For on earth, in all the succession of life, it is not the Soul within but the Shadow outside of the authentic man, that grieves and complains and acts out the plot on this world stage which men have dotted with stages of their own constructing. All this is the doing of
man knowing no more than to live the lower and outer life, and never perceiving that, in his weeping and in his graver doings alike, he is but at play ; to handle austere matters austerely is reserved for the thoughtful ; the other kind of man is himself a futility. Those incapable of thinking gravely read gravity into frivolities which correspond to their own frivolous Nature. Anyone that joins in their trifling and so comes to look on life with their eyes must understand that by lending himself to such idleness he has laid aside his own character. If Socrates himself takes part in the trifling, he trifles in the outer Socrates.
We must remember, too, that we cannot take tears and laments as proof that anything is wrong ; children cry and whimper where there is nothing amiss.
But if all this is true, what room is left for evil ? Where are we to place wrong-doing and sin ?
How explain that in a world organised in good, the efficient agents (human beings) behave unjustly, commit sin ? And how comes misery if neither sin nor injustice exists ?
Again, if all our action is determined by a natural process, how can the distinction be maintained between behaviour in accordance with nature and behaviour in conflict with it ?
And what becomes of blasphemy against the divine ? The blas- phemer is made what he is : a dramatist has written a part insulting and maligning himself and given it to an actor to play.
These considerations oblige us to state the Logos (the Reason- Principle of the Universe) once again, and more clearly, and to justify its nature.
This Reason-Principle, then — let us dare the definition in the hope of convejdng the truth— this Logos is not the Intellectual Principle unmingled, not the Absolute Divine Intellect ; nor does it descend from the pure Soul alone ; it is a dependent of that Soul while, in a sense, it is a radiation from both those divine Hypostases : the Intellectual Principle and the Soul — the Soul as conditioned by the Intellectual
III. 2. l6]
Principle — engender this Logos which is a Life holding restfully a certain measure of Reason.
Now all life, even the least valuable, is an activity, and not a blind activity like that of flame ; even where there is not sensation the activity' of life is no mere haphazard play of Movement : any object in which life is present, any object which participates in Life, is at once enreasoned in the sense that the activity peculiar to life is formative, shaping as it moves.
Life, then, aims at pattern as does the pantomimic dancer with his set movements ; the mime, in himself, represents life, and, besides, his movements proceed in obedience to a pattern designed to symbolise life.
Thus far to give us some idea of the nature of Life in general.
But this Reason-Principle which emanates from the complete unity, divine Mind, and the complete unity Life (=Soul) — is neither a uniate complete Life nor a uniate complete divine Mind, nor does it give itself whole and all-including to its subj ect . (By an imperfect communication) it sets up a conflict of part against part : it produces imperfect things and so engenders and maintains war and attack, and thus its unity can be that only of a sum-total not of a thing undivided. At war with itself in the parts which it now exhibits, it has the unity, or harmony, of a drama tom with struggle. The drama, of course, brings the conflicting elements to one final harmony, weaving the entire story of the clashing characters into one thing ; while in the Logos the conflict of the divergent elements rises within the one element, the Reason-Principle : the com- parison therefore is rather with a harmony emerging directly from the conflicting elements themselves, and the question becomes what intro- duces clashing elements among these Reason-Principles.
Now in the case of music, tones high and low are the product of Reason-Principles which, by the fact that they are Principles of harmony, meet in the unit of Harmony, the absolute Harmony, a more compre- hensive Principle, greater than they and including them as its parts. Similarly in the Universe at large we find contraries — white and black, hot and cold, winged and wingless, footed and footless, reasoning and unreasoning — but all these elements are members of one living body.
their sum-total ; the Universe is a self-accordant entity, its members everywhere clashing but the total being the manifestation of a Reason- Principle. That one Reason-Principle, then, must be the unification of conflicting Reason-Principles whose very opposition is the support of its coherence and, almost, of its Being.
And indeed, if it were not multiple, it could not be a Universal Principle, it could not even be at all a Reason-Principle ; in the fact of its being a Reason-Principle is contained the fact of interior difference. Now the maximum of difference is contrariety ; admitting that this differentiation exists and creates, it will create difference in the greatest and not in the least degree ; in other words, the Reason-Principle, bringing about differentiation to the uttermost degree, will of necessity create contrarieties ; it will be complete only by producing itself not in merely diverse things but in contrary things.
The nature of the Reason-Principle is adequately expressed in its Act and, therefore, the wider its extension the nearer will its productions approach to full contrariety : hence the world of sense is less a unity than is its Reason-Principle ; it contains a wider multiplicity and contrariety : its partial members will, therefore, be urged by a closer intention towards fullness of life, a warmer desire for unification.
But desire often destroys the desired ; it seeks its own good, and if the desired object is perishable, the ruin follows : and the partial thing (a human being, for example) straining towards its completing principle draws towards itself all it possibly can.
Thus, with the good we have the bad : we have the opposed move- ments of a dancer guided by one artistic plan ; we recognise in his steps the good as against the bad, and see that in the opposition lies the merit of the design.
But, thus, the wicked disappear ?
No : their wickedness remains ; simply, their role is not of their own planning.
But, surely, this excuses them ?
ni-2. 17] PROVIDENCE 33
No ; excuse lies with the Reason- Principle — and the Reason- Principle does not excuse them.
No doubt all are members of this Principle but one is a good man, another is bad — the larger class, this — and it goes as in a play ; the poet while he gives each actor a part is also using them as they are in their own persons : he does not himself rank the men as leading actor, second, third ; he simply gives suitable words to each, and by that assignment fixes each man’s standing.
Thus, every man has his place, a place that fits the good man, a place that fits the bad : each within the two orders of men makes his way, naturally, reasonably, to the place, good or bad, that suits him, and takes the position he has made his own. There he talks and acts, in blasphemy and crime or in all goodness : for the actors bring to this play what they were before it was ever staged.
In the dramas of human art, the poet provides the words but the actors add their own quality, good or bad — for they have more to do than merely repeat the author’s words — in the truer drama which dramatic genius imitates in its degree, the Soul displays itself in a part assigned by the creator of the piece.
As the actors of our stages get their masks and their costume, robes of state or rags, so a Soul is allotted its fortunes, and not at haphazard but always under a Reason : it adapts itself to the fortunes assigned to it, attunes itself, ranges itself rightly to the drama, to the whole Principle of the piece ; then it speaks out its business, exhibiting at the same time all that a Soul can express of its own quality, as a singer in a song. A voice, a bearing, naturally fine or vulgar, may increase the charm of a piece ; on the other hand, an actor with his ugly voice may make a sorry exhibition of himself, yet the drama stands as good a work as ever : the dramatist taking the action which a sound criticism suggests, dis- graces one, taking his part from him, with perfect justice : another man he promotes to more serious roles or to any more important play he may have, while the first is cast for whatever minor work there may be.
Just so the Soul, entering this drama of the Universe, making itself a part of the Play, bringing to its acting its personal excellence or defect.
set in a definite place at the entry and accepting from the author its entire role — superimposed upon its own character and conduct — just so, it receives in the end its punishment and reward.
But these actors, Souls, hold a peculiar dignity : they act in a vaster place than any stage : the Author has made them masters of all this world ; they have a wide choice of place ; they themselves determine the honour or discredit in which they are agents since their place and part are in keeping with their quality : they therefore fit into the Reason- Principle of the Universe, each adjusted, most legitimately, to the appropriate environment, as every string of the lyre is set in the pre- cisely right position, determined by the Principle diiecting musical utterance, for the due production of the tones within its capacity. All is just and good in the Universe in which every actor is set in his own quite appropriate place, though it be to utter in the Darkness and in Tartarus the dreadful sounds whose utterance there is well.
This Universe is good not when the individual is a stone, but when everyone throws in his own voice towards a total harmony, singing out a life — thin, harsh, imperfect, though it be. The Syrinx does not utter merely one pure note ; there is a thin obscure sound which blends in to make the harmony of Syrinx music : the harmony is made up from tones of various grades, all the tones differing, but the resultant of all forming one sound.
Similarly the Reason-Principle entire is One, but it is broken into unequal parts : hence the difference of place found in the Universe, better spots and worse ; and hence the inequality of Souls, finding their appropriate surroundings amid this local inequality. The diverse places of this sphere, the Souls of unequal grade and unlike conduct, are well exemplified by the distinction of parts in the Syrinx or any other instru- ment : there is local difference, but from every position every string gives forth its own tone, the sound appropriate, at once, to its particular place and to the entire plan.
What is evil in the single Soul will stand a good thing in the universal system ; what in the unit offends nature will serve nature in the total event — and still remains the weak and wrong tone it is, though its