undistinguishable　unity；　nor　could　a　universal　unity　find　anything　upon　which　to　exercise　any　act；　all；　one　and　desolate；　would　be　utter　stagnation；　in　so　far　as　there　is　action；　there　is　diversity。　If　there　be　no　distinctions；　what　is　there　to　do；　what　direction　in　which　to　move？　An　agent　must　either　act　upon　the　extern　or　be　a　multiple　and　so　able　to　act　upon　itself：　making　no　advance　towards　anything　other　than　itself；　it　is　motionless　and　where　it　could　know　only　blank　fixity　it　can　know　nothing。　　　　　The　intellective　power；　therefore；　when　occupied　with　the　intellectual　act；　must　be　in　a　state　of　duality；　whether　one　of　the　two　elements　stand　actually　outside　or　both　lie　within：　the　intellectual　act　will　always　comport　diversity　as　well　as　the　necessary　identity；　and　in　the　same　way　its　characteristic　objects　＇the　Ideas＇　must　stand　to　the　Intellectual…Principle　as　at　once　distinct　and　identical。　This　applies　equally　to　the　single　object；　there　can　be　no　intellection　except　of　something　containing　separable　detail　and；　since　the　object　is　a　Reason…principle　＇a　discriminated　Idea＇　it　has　the　necessary　element　of　multiplicity。　The　Intellectual…Principle；　thus；　is　informed　of　itself　by　the　fact　of　being　a　multiple　organ　of　vision；　an　eye　receptive　of　many　illuminated　objects。　If　it　had　to　direct　itself　to　a　memberless　unity；　it　would　be　dereasoned：　what　could　it　say　or　know　of　such　an　object？　The　self…affirmation　of　＇even＇　a　memberless　unity　implies　the　repudiation　of　all　that　does　not　enter　into　the　character：　in　other　words；　it　must　be　multiple　as　a　preliminary　to　being　itself。　　　　　Then；　again；　in　the　assertion　〃I　am　this　particular　thing；〃　either　the　〃particular　thing〃　is　distinct　from　the　assertor…　and　there　is　a　false　statement…　or　it　is　included　within　it；　and；　at　once；　multiplicity　is　asserted：　otherwise　the　assertion　is　〃I　am　what　I　am；〃　or　〃I　am　I。〃　　　　　If　it　be　no　more　than　a　simple　duality　able　to　say　〃I　and　that　other　phase；〃　there　is　already　multiplicity；　for　there　is　distinction　and　ground　of　distinction；　there　is　number　with　all　its　train　of　separate　things。　　　　　In　sum；　then；　a　knowing　principle　must　handle　distinct　items：　its　object　must；　at　the　moment　of　cognition；　contain　diversity；　otherwise　the　thing　remains　unknown；　there　is　mere　conjunction；　such　a　contact；　without　affirmation　or　comprehension；　as　would　precede　knowledge；　the　intellect　not　yet　in　being；　the　impinging　agent　not　percipient。　　　　　Similarly　the　knowing　principle　itself　cannot　remain　simplex；　especially　in　the　act　of　self…knowing：　all　silent　though　its　self…perception　be；　it　is　dual　to　itself。　Of　course　it　has　no　need　of　minute　self…handling　since　it　has　nothing　to　learn　by　its　intellective　act；　before　it　is　＇effectively＇　Intellect；　it　holds　knowledge　of　its　own　content。　Knowledge　implies　desire；　for　it　is；　so　to　speak；　discovery　crowning　a　search；　the　utterly　undifferentiated　remains　self…centred　and　makes　no　enquiry　about　that　self：　anything　capable　of　analysing　its　content；　must　be　a　manifold。　　　　　11。　Thus　the　Intellectual…Principle；　in　the　act　of　knowing　the　Transcendent；　is　a　manifold。　It　knows　the　Transcendent　in　very　essence　but；　with　all　its　effort　to　grasp　that　prior　as　a　pure　unity；　it　goes　forth　amassing　successive　impressions；　so　that；　to　it；　the　object　becomes　multiple：　thus　in　its　outgoing　to　its　object　it　is　not　＇fully　realised＇　Intellectual…Principle；　it　is　an　eye　that　has　not　yet　seen；　in　its　return　it　is　an　eye　possessed　of　the　multiplicity　which　it　has　itself　conferred：　it　sought　something　of　which　it　found　the　vague　presentment　within　itself；　it　returned　with　something　else；　the　manifold　quality　with　which　it　has　of　its　own　act　invested　the　simplex。　　　　　If　it　had　not　possessed　a　previous　impression　of　the　Transcendent；　it　could　never　have　grasped　it；　but　this　impression；　originally　of　unity；　becomes　an　impression　of　multiplicity；　and　the　Intellectual…Principle；　in　taking　cognisance　of　that　multiplicity；　knows　the　Transcendent　and　so　is　realized　as　an　eye　possessed　of　its　vision。　　　　　It　is　now　Intellectual…Principle　since　it　actually　holds　its　object；　and　holds　it　by　the　act　of　intellection：　before；　it　was　no　more　than　a　tendance；　an　eye　blank　of　impression：　it　was　in　motion　towards　the　transcendental；　now　that　it　has　attained；　it　has　become　Intellectual…Principle　henceforth　absorbed；　in　virtue　of　this　intellection　it　holds　the　character　of　Intellectual…Principle；　of　Essential　Existence　and　of　Intellectual　Act　where；　previously；　not　possessing　the　Intellectual　Object；　it　was　not　Intellectual　Perception；　and；　not　yet　having　exercised　the　Intellectual　Act；　it　was　not　Intellectual…Principle。　　　　　The　Principle　before　all　these　principles　is　no　doubt　the　first　principle　of　the　universe；　but　not　as　immanent：　immanence　is　not　for　primal　sources　but　for　engendering　secondaries；　that　which　stands　as　primal　source　of　everything　is　not　a　thing　but　is　distinct　from　all　things：　it　is　not；　then；　a　member　of　the　total　but　earlier　than　all；　earlier；　thus；　than　the　Intellectual…Principle…　which　in　fact　envelops　the　entire　train　of　things。　　　　　Thus　we　come；　once　more；　to　a　Being　above　the　Intellectual…Principle　and；　since　the　sequent　amounts　to　no　less　than　the　All；　we　recognise；　again；　a　Being　above　the　All。　This　assuredly　cannot　be　one　of　the　things　to　which　it　is　prior。　We　may　not　call　it　〃Intellect〃；　therefore；　too；　we　may　not　call　it　〃the　Good；〃　if　〃the　Good〃　is　to　be　taken　in　the　sense　of　some　one　member　of　the　universe；　if　we　mean　that　which　precedes　the　universe　of　things；　the　name　may　be　allowed。　　　　　The　Intellectual…Principle　is　established　in　multiplicity；　its　intellection；　self…sprung　though　it　be；　is　in　the　nature　of　something　added　to　it　＇some　accidental　dualism＇　and　makes　it　multiple：　the　utterly　simplex；　and　therefore　first　of　all　beings；　must；　then；　transcend　the　Intellectual…Principle；　and；　obviously；　if　this　had　intellection　it　would　no　longer　transcend　the　Intellectual…Principle　but　be　it；　and　at　once　be　a　multiple。　　　　　12。　But　why；　after　all；　should　it　not　be　such　a　manifold　as　long　as　it　remains　one　substantial　existence；　having　the　multiplicity　not　of　a　compound　being　but　of　a　unity　with　a　variety　of　activities？　　　　　Now；　no　doubt；　if　these　various　activities　are　not　themselves　substantial　existences…　but　merely　manifestations　of　latent　potentiality…　there　is　no　compound；　but；　on　the　other　hand；　it　remains　incomplete　until　its　substantial　existence　be　expressed　in　act。　If　its　substantial　existence　consists　in　its　Act；　and　this　Act　constitutes　multiplicity；　then　its　substantial　existence　will　be　strictly　proportioned　to　the　extent　of　the　multiplicity。　　　　　We　allow　this　to　be　true　for　the　Intellectual…Principle　to　which　we　have　allotted　＇the　multiplicity　of＇　self…knowing；　but　for　the　first　principle　of　all；　never。　Before　the　manifold；　there　must　be　The　One；　that　from　which　the　manifold　rises：　in　all　numerical　series；　the　unit　is　the　first。　　　　　But…　we　will　be　answered…　for　number；　well　and　good；　since　the　suite　makes　a　compound；　but　in　the　real　beings　why　must　there　be　a　unit　from　which　the　multiplicity　of　entities　shall　proceed？　　　　　Because　＇failing　such　a　unity＇　the　multiplicity　would　consist　of　disjointed　items；　each　starting　at　its　own　distinct　place　and　moving　accidentally　to　serve　to　a　total。　　　　　But；　they　will　tell　us；　the　Activities　in　question　do　proceed　from　a　unity；　from　the　Intellectual…Principle；　a　simplex。　　　　　By　that　they　admit　the　existence　of　a　simplex　prior　to　the　Activities；　and　they　make　the　Activities　perdurable　and　class　them　as　substantial　existences　＇hypostases＇；　but　as　Hypostases　they　will　be　distinct　from　their　source；　which　will　remain　simplex；　while　its　product　will　in　its　own　nature　be　manifold　and　dependent　upon　it。　　　　　Now　if　these　activities　arise　from　some　unexplained　first　activity　in　that　principle；　then　it　too　contains　the　manifold：　if；　on　the　contrary；　they　are　the　very　earliest　activities　and　the　source　and　cause　of　any　multiple　product　and　the　means　by　which　that　Principle　is　able；　before　any　activity　occurs；　to　remain　self…centred；　then　they　are　allocated　to　the　product　of　which　they　are　the　cause；　for　this　principle　is　one　thing；　the　activities　going　forth　from　it　are　another；　since　it　is　not；　itself；　in　act。　If　this　be　not　so；　the　first　act　cannot　be　the　Intellectual…Principle：　the　One　does　not　provide　for　the　existence　of　an　Intellectual…Principle　which　thereupon　appears；　that　provision　would　be　something　＇an　Hypostasis＇　intervening　between　the　One　and　the　Intellectual…Principle；　its　offspring。　There　could；　in　fact；　be　no　such　providing　in　The　One；　for　it　was　never　incomplete；　and　such　provision　could　name　nothing　that　ought　to　be　provided。　It　cannot　be　thought　to　possess　only　some　part　of　its　content；　and　not　the　whole；　nor　did　anything　exist　to　which　it　could　turn　in　desire。　Clearly　anything　that　comes　into　being　after　it；　arises　without　shaking　to　its　permanence　in　its　own　habit。　It　is　essential　to　the　existence　of　any　new　entity　that　the　First　remain　in　self…gathered　repose　throughout：　otherwise；　it　moved　before　there　was　motion　and　had　intellectual　act　before　any　intellection…　unless；　indeed；　that　first　act　＇as　motionless　and　without　intelligence＇　was　incomplete；　nothing　more　than　a　tend