In this series, we have been comparing the thought of Plotinus and Utpaladeva, particularly through looking at structural similarities between their concepts of Vimarśa and Soul. This third part will analyze a further structural similarity, one which is central for both thinkers’ metaphysical systems: both Vimarśa and Soul play a crucial role in theories of causation in Plotinian thought and in Pratyabhijñā.
In explaining the purely actual status of the intelligible world, Plotinus addresses an objection concerning the soul: if the soul at one time not yet living, then living, it seems that the soul was potentially and then actually living. The same could be said about all the qualities and functions of the soul relative to a given body. Plotinus responds that “all these things [which come about from the soul] do not exist potentially; rather, soul is the potentiality of them.” (En. II.5.3.20-25, Gerson et al.). If we return to the original problem, concerning life, we can see how this distinction is important. Plotinus here argues that life has actual existence prior to a soul becoming present to a particular body and giving it life. He wants to deny that life at one point did not have actual existence, and when soul became present to matter (as a body), that life then actualized a merely potential existence.
In their notes, Gerson et. al. connect this argument to a preceding passage: “there is another actuality which corresponds to the potentiality that brings about an actuality.” (Gerson et al 187, footnote 4; En. II.5.2.33-36). Putting this back into the terms of Soul and life, we can say that Soul is an actuality, in this actuality there is a potentiality (life) and this potentiality in the actuality Soul brings about another actuality, Life. In other words, Life does not have merely potential existence prior to the beginning of any particular life, but a real, actual existence in the Soul. This account recalls the passage quoted in a previous post, V.1.3.7-9, concerning logos in the soul and in utterance: Plotinus argues that Soul is a pure actuality, and is the potentiality of Soul’s expressions (logoi). In the exegesis of the Symposium in III.5.9.35-55, he will identify the sum total of this potentiality as Poros (Plenty, the father of Eros), which makes the Soul (Aphrodite) abundant (euporia).
The theory of causality which Plotinus here defends, in Sanskrit, is called satkāryavāda. It holds that the potentiality of an effect exists in an actuality, which is its cause. To use a classic Sanskrit example, the smoke exists in the fire potentially and unmanifest (avyakta), prior to its manifestation (vyakta). Utpaladeva provides a metaphysical explanation for satkāryavāda by discussing the relationship between effects and instruments of action. Firstly, he argues that conceptual frameworks such as action (ĪPK II.2.3), relation (ĪPK II.2.4), and universal and particular (ĪPK II.2.5) are brought about by consciousness. Then, he uses this to locate “[a causal] connection existing between the factors of the action […] based on the awareness of the action [kriyāvimarśaviṣaya]” (ĪPK II.2.6). This awareness of the action – kriyā-vimarśa – ensures abstract categories or conceptualizations of ‘action’, ‘relation’, etc can be brought together in such a way that actor, what is acted upon, and the action can all, manifestly, exist.
As he says later, “[c]ausal efficiency [arthakriyā] is not intrinsic to things, since it is determined by the will of the Lord [īsvarecchayā]”, (ĪPK II.3.12). Having established that will (icchā) is a form of vimarśa in ĪPK I.5.10 (as discussed in a previous post), Utpaladeva defining the scope (viṣaya in kriyāvimarśaviṣaya) of such reflective awareness qua volition to include reflective awareness qua action (kriyā). In doing so, Utpaladeva provides a necessary justification for satkāryavāda.
[Stay tuned for Part 4 on Multilevelled Subjectivity]
References
Gerson, Lloyd P. (ed.) (2018), The Enneads. Boys-Stones, George; Dillon, John M.; Gerson, Lloyd P.; King, R.A.H.; Smith, Andrew; Wilberding, James (trs.). (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Torella, Raffaele (2021) (tr.), The Īśvarapratyabhijñākārikā of Utpaladeva with the Author’s Vṛtti: Critical Edition and Annotated Translation. (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass).