On the other hand, if the soul were absolutely one, essentially indivisible and one within herself, if her nature were incompatible with manifoldness and division, she could not, when penetrating into the body, animate it in its entirety; she would place herself in its centre, leaving the rest of the mass of the animal lifeless. The soul, therefore, must be simultaneously one and manifold, divided and undivided, and we must not deny, as something impossible, that the soul, though one and identical, can be in several parts of the body simultaneously. If this truth be denied, this will destroy the "nature that contains and administers the universe" (as said the Stoics); which embraces everything at once, and directs everything with wisdom; a nature that is both manifold, because all beings are manifold; and single, because the principle that contains everything must be one. It is by her manifold unity that she vivifies all parts of the universe, while it is her indivisible unity that directs everything with wisdom. In the very things that have no wisdom, the unity that in it plays the predominating "part," imitates the unity of the universal Soul. That is what Plato wished to indicate allegorically by these divine words[361]: "From the "Being" that is indivisible and ever unchanging; and from the "being" which becomes divisible in the bodies, the divinity formed a mixture, a third kind of "being." The (universal) Soul, therefore, is (as we have just said) simultaneously one and manifold; the forms of the bodies are both manifold and one; the bodies are only manifold; while the supreme Principle (the One), is exclusively an unity. Paragraph 3 of this book (iv. 2,--21) will be found in its logical position--judging by the subject matter,--on pages 75 to 78, in the middle of iv. 7,--2. FOOTNOTES: [1] See 7. [2] See vi. 7, 8. [3] A.D. 262. [4] See vi. 5, 1. [5] See 20. [6] iii. 4. [7] See above, 6. [8] See iv. 2. [9] Often quoted by Porphyry in his Cave of the Nymphs. [10] See 3. [11] Euseb. Prep. Ev. xi. 2; xv. 4-9, 12-13. [12] See 3. [13] See ii. 3; iii. 1, 2, 4. [14] See v. 5. [15] This suggests that Suidas was right in claiming that Amelius was the teacher of Porphyry. [16] See 11. [17] See 7. [18] See 3. [19] See 3. [20] Mentioned in Porphyry's Life of Pythagoras, 48, living under Nero. [21] Living under Tiberius, see Suetonius, Life of Tiberius, 14. [22] See vi. 5. [23] See 17. [24] See 18. [25] See 17. [26] See ii. 3. 17. [27] See 23. [28] The fragments of all this are probably the Principles of the Theory of the Intelligibles, by Porphyry. [29] See ii. 1. [30] See i. 3. [31] As pilot, perhaps, iv. 3. 21. [32] See ii., 4. 6. [33] See ii. 7. 1. [34] See i. 1. 10. [35] See i. 9. 8. 10. [36] See iv. 3. 20, 21. [37] Ecl. Phys., p. 797, Heeren and Aristotle, de Anima, i. 2. [38] See Nemesius, de Nat. Hom. 2. [39] See ii. 7, 1. [40] See ii. 7, 3. [41] Stob. Ecl. Phys. 797. [42] See ii. 3, 5.