I count Plotinus as one who saw very far indeed.

His description of the effort to define Nonduality is the clearest I have ever read. He not only arrives at the essential point of it, he also left us with a clue about all the old Greek gods, when he said that Apollo was the avatar of Nonduality, since his name means “not many.”

To the point of the article, Plotinus stands as a witness, when he said:

“But to speak of being enslaved to one’s own nature is making two things, one which is enslaved and one to which it is enslaved. But how is a simple nature and single active actuality not free, when it does not have one part potential and one actual? For it could not be said to be active according to its nature as if its substance was one thing and it’s activity another if being and acting there are the same. If than the activity is neither because of another or in the power of another, how is it not free? And even if “being in its own power“ is unsuitable language, but there is something higher than being in its power here, even so it is in own power because it is not in the power of another nor is another master of its activity; nor in deed of a substance, if it is principle of its substance.” (Plotinus: ENNEAD VI. 8, pg 239 Loeb Edition)

This argument of his, I take, to clearly support this axiom of Great Responsiveness as a simple responsive naturing of all that appears to be.

Thank you for sharing this.