ething　other　than　itself：　then　it　would　no　longer　be　self…gathered；　nor　would　it　be　immune；　for　anything　within　which　it　were　lodged　would　affect　it；　immune；　it　is　not　in　anything。　If；　then；　not　standing　away　from　itself；　not　distributed　by　part；　not　taking　the　slightest　change；　it　is　to　be　in　many　things　while　remaining　a　self…concentrated　entire；　there　is　some　way　in　which　it　has　multipresence；　it　is　at　once　self…enclosed　and　not　so：　the　only　way　is　to　recognise　that　while　this　principle　itself　is　not　lodged　in　anything；　all　other　things　participate　in　it…　all　that　are　apt　and　in　the　measure　of　their　aptitude。　　　　　Thus；　we　either　cancel　all　that　we　have　affirmed　and　the　principles　laid　down；　and　deny　the　existence　of　any　such　Nature；　or；　that　being　impossible；　we　return　to　our　first　position：　　　　　The　One；　numerically　identical；　undistributed；　an　unbroken　entire；　yet　stands　remote　from　nothing　that　exists　by　its　side；　but　it　does　not；　for　that；　need　to　pour　itself　forth：　there　is　no　necessity　either　that　certain　portions　of　it　enter　into　things　or　again　that；　while　it　remains　self…abiding；　something　produced　and　projected　from　it　enter　at　various　points　into　that　other　order。　Either　would　imply　something　of　it　remaining　there　while　the　emanant　is　elsewhere：　thus　separated　from　what　has　gone　forth；　it　would　experience　local　division。　And　would　those　emanants　be；　each　in　itself；　whole　or　part？　If　part；　the　One　has　lost　its　nature；　that　of　an　entire；　as　we　have　already　indicated；　if　whole；　then　either　the　whole　is　broken　up　to　coincide　point　for　point　with　that　in　which　it　is　become　present　or　we　are　admitting　that　an　unbroken　identity　can　be　omnipresent。　　　　　This　is　a　reasoning；　surely；　founded　on　the　thing　itself　and　its　essential　nature；　not　introducing　anything　foreign；　anything　belonging　to　the　Other　Order。　　　　　4。　Then　consider　this　god　＇in　man＇　whom　we　cannot　think　to　be　absent　at　some　point　and　present　at　another。　All　that　have　insight　into　the　nature　of　the　divine　beings　hold　the　omnipresence　of　this　god　and　of　all　the　gods；　and　reason　assures　us　that　so　it　must　be。　　　　　Now　all…pervasion　is　inconsistent　with　partition；　that　would　mean　no　longer　the　god　throughout　but　part　of　the　god　at　one　point　and　part　at　another；　the　god　ceases　to　be　one　god；　just　as　a　mass　cut　up　ceases　to　be　a　mass；　the　parts　no　longer　giving　the　first　total。　Further；　the　god　becomes　corporeal。　　　　　If　all　this　is　impossible；　the　disputed　doctrine　presents　itself　again；　holding　the　god　to　pervade　the　Being　of　man；　we　hold　the　omnipresence　of　an　integral　identity。　　　　　Again；　if　we　think　of　the　divine　nature　as　infinite…　and　certainly　it　is　confined　by　no　bounds…　this　must　mean　that　it　nowhere　fails；　its　presence　must　reach　to　everything；　at　the　point　to　which　it　does　not　reach；　there　it　has　failed；　something　exists　in　which　it　is　not。　　　　　Now；　admitting　any　sequent　to　the　absolute　unity；　that　sequent　must　be　bound　up　with　the　absolute；　any　third　will　be　about　that　second　and　move　towards　it；　linked　to　it　as　its　offspring。　In　this　way　all　participants　in　the　Later　will　have　share　in　the　First。　The　Beings　of　the　Intellectual　are　thus　a　plurality　of　firsts　and　seconds　and　thirds　attached　like　one　sphere　to　one　centre；　not　separated　by　interval　but　mutually　present；　where；　therefore；　the　Intellectual　tertiaries　are　present；　the　secondaries　and　firsts　are　present　too。　　　　　5。　Often　for　the　purpose　of　exposition…　as　a　help　towards　stating　the　nature　of　the　produced　multiplicity…　we　use　the　example　of　many　lines　radiating　from　one　centre；　but；　while　we　provide　for　individualization；　we　must　carefully　preserve　mutual　presence。　Even　in　the　case　of　our　circle　we　need　not　think　of　separated　radii；　all　may　be　taken　as　forming　one　surface：　where　there　is　no　distinction　even　upon　the　one　surface　but　all　is　power　and　reality　undifferentiated；　all　the　beings　may　be　thought　of　as　centres　uniting　at　one　central　centre：　we　ignore　the　radial　lines　and　think　of　their　terminals　at　that　centre；　where　they　are　at　one。　Restore　the　radii；　once　more　we　have　lines；　each　touching　a　generating　centre　of　its　own；　but　that　centre　remains　coincident　with　the　one　first　centre；　the　centres　all　unite　in　that　first　centre　and　yet　remain　what　they　were；　so　that　they　are　as　many　as　are　the　lines　to　which　they　serve　as　terminals；　the　centres　themselves　appear　as　numerous　as　the　lines　starting　from　gem　and　yet　all　those　centres　constitute　a　unity。　　　　　Thus　we　may　liken　the　Intellectual　Beings　in　their　diversity　to　many　centres　coinciding　with　the　one　centre　and　themselves　at　one　in　it　but　appearing　multiple　on　account　of　the　radial　lines…　lines　which　do　not　generate　the　centres　but　merely　lead　to　them。　The　radii；　thus；　afford　a　serviceable　illustration　for　the　mode　of　contact　by　which　the　Intellectual　Unity　manifests　itself　as　multiple　and　multipresent。　　　　　6。　The　Intellectual　Beings；　thus；　are　multiple　and　one；　in　virtue　of　their　infinite　nature　their　unity　is　a　multiplicity；　many　in　one　and　one　over　many；　a　unit…plurality。　They　act　as　entire　upon　entire；　even　upon　the　partial　thing　they　act　as　entire；　but　there　is　the　difference　that　at　first　the　partial　accepts　this　working　only　partially　though　the　entire　enters　later。　Thus；　when　Man　enters　into　human　form　there　exists　a　particular　man　who；　however；　is　still　Man。　From　the　one　thing　Man…　man　in　the　Idea…　material　man　has　come　to　constitute　many　individual　men：　the　one　identical　thing　is　present　in　multiplicity；　in　multi…impression；　so　to　speak；　from　the　one　seal。　　　　　This　does　not　mean　that　Man　Absolute；　or　any　Absolute；　or　the　Universe　in　the　sense　of　a　Whole；　is　absorbed　by　multiplicity；　on　the　contrary；　the　multiplicity　is　absorbed　by　the　Absolute；　or　rather　is　bound　up　with　it。　There　is　a　difference　between　the　mode　in　which　a　colour　may　be　absorbed　by　a　substance　entire　and　that　in　which　the　soul　of　the　individual　is　identically　present　in　every　part　of　the　body：　it　is　in　this　latter　mode　that　Being　is　omnipresent。　　　　　7。　To　Real　Being　we　go　back；　all　that　we　have　and　are；　to　that　we　return　as　from　that　we　came。　Of　what　is　There　we　have　direct　knowledge；　not　images　or　even　impressions；　and　to　know　without　image　is　to　be；　by　our　part　in　true　knowledge　we　are　those　Beings；　we　do　not　need　to　bring　them　down　into　ourselves；　for　we　are　There　among　them。　Since　not　only　ourselves　but　all　other　things　also　are　those　Beings；　we　all　are　they；　we　are　they　while　we　are　also　one　with　all：　therefore　we　and　all　things　are　one。　　　　　When　we　look　outside　of　that　on　which　we　depend　we　ignore　our　unity；　looking　outward　we　see　many　faces；　look　inward　and　all　is　the　one　head。　If　man　could　but　be　turned　about　by　his　own　motion　or　by　the　happy　pull　of　Athene…　he　would　see　at　once　God　and　himself　and　the　All。　At　first　no　doubt　all　will　not　be　seen　as　one　whole；　but　when　we　find　no　stop　at　which　to　declare　a　limit　to　our　being　we　cease　to　rule　ourselves　out　from　the　total　of　reality；　we　reach　to　the　All　as　a　unity…　and　this　not　by　any　stepping　forward；　but　by　the　fact　of　being　and　abiding　there　where　the　All　has　its　being。　　　　　8。　For　my　part　I　am　satisfied　that　anyone　considering　the　mode　in　which　Matter　participates　in　the　Ideas　will　be　ready　enough　to　accept　this　tenet　of　omnipresence　in　identity；　no　longer　rejecting　it　as　incredible　or　even　difficult。　This　because　it　seems　reasonable　and　imperative　to　dismiss　any　notion　of　the　Ideas　lying　apart　with　Matter　illumined　from　them　as　from　somewhere　above…　a　meaningless　conception；　for　what　have　distance　and　separation　to　do　here？　　　　　This　participation　cannot　be　thought　of　as　elusive　or　very　perplexing；　on　the　contrary；　it　is　obvious；　accessible　in　many　examples。　　　　　Note；　however；　that　when　we　sometimes　speak　of　the　Ideas　illuminating　Matter　this　is　not　to　suggest　the　mode　in　which　material　light　pours　down　on　a　material　object；　we　use　the　phrase　in　the　sense　only　that；　the　material　being　image　while　the　Ideas　are　archetypes；　the　two　orders　are　distinguished　somewhat　in　the　manner　of　illuminant　and　illuminated。　But　it　is　time　to　be　more　exact。　　　　　We　do　not　mean　that　the　Idea；　locally　separate；　shows　itself　in　Matter　like　a　reflection　in　water；　the　Matter　touches　the　Idea　at　every　point；　though　not　in　a　physical　contact；　and；　by　dint　of　neighbourhood…　nothing　to　keep　them　apart…　is　able　to　absorb　thence　all　that　lies　within　its　capacity；　the　Idea　itself　not　penetrating；　not　approaching；　the　Matter；　but　remaining　self…locked。　　　　　We　take　it；　then；　that　the　Idea；　say　of　Fire…　for　we　had　best　deal　with　Matter　as　underlying　the　elements…　is　not　in　the　Matter。　The　Ideal　Fire；　then；　remaining　apart；　produces　the　form　of　fire　throughout　the　entire　enfired　mass。　Now　let　us　suppose…　and　the　same　method　will　apply　to　all　the　so…called　elements…　that　this　Fire　in　its　first　material　manifestation　is　a　multiple　mass。　That　single　Fire　is　seen　producing　an　image　of　itself　in　all　the　sensible　fires；　yet　it　is　not　spatially　separate；　it　does　not；　then；　produce　that　image　in　the　manner　of　our　visible　light；　for　in　that　case　all　this　sensible　fire；　supposing　that　it　were　a　whole　of　parts　＇as　the　analogy　would　necessitate＇；　must　have　generated　spatial　positions　out　of　itself；　since　the　Idea　or　Form　remains　in　a　non…spatial　world；　for　a　princi