>Accordingly, to sum up in a few words, it can be said that, not only in space, but in all that is manifested, what is everywhere is the exterior or the circumference, whereas the centre is nowhere; since it is unmanifested; but (and here the expression "inverse sense" takes on the full force of its meaning) the manifested would be absolutely nothing without that essential point, which in itself is not manifested at all, and which, precisely by reason of its non-manifestation, contains in principle all possible manifestations, being the "motionless mover '' of all things, the immutable origin of all differentiation and modification. This point produces the whole of space (as well as all other manifestations) by as it were issuing from itself and by unfolding its virtualities in an indefinite multitude of modalities, with which it fills space in its entirety; but when we say that it issues from itself to effect this development, such a very imperfect expression must not be taken literally.>In reality, since the principial point is never subject to space, which it brings into existence, and since the relationship of dependence (or causal relationship) is obviously not reversible, this point remains "unaffected by the conditions of any of its modalities and consequently never ceases to be identical with itself. When it has realized its total possibility. it is only to come back (though the idea of "returning" or "beginning again" is in no way applicable here) to the "end which is identical with the beginning", that is, to the primal Unity which contains everything in principle. a Unity which, being Itself (considered as the " Self "), can in no wise become other than Itself (for that would imply a duality). and from which, therefore, when considered in Itself, It had never departed. Further, so long as one is dealing with the being as such, and even with universal Being, all one can speak of is Unity, as we have been doing; but if it were sought to transcend the bounds of Being itself and to envisage absolute Perfection, then it would be necessary at the same time to pass beyond that Unity to metaphysical Zero, which cannot be represented by any symbolism, or named by any name.
>retard word spamming to impress bigger retardsa tale as old as time
>>25130494you made me realize one thing, hard to read philosophy is when there are too many words that refer to a 'relation', so you're constantly trying to tie things back and forth so you have to read slowly to understand anything.
>>25130494OP, do me a favour, kill yourself, OR, tell us in your own words about how this is relevant to your post. I expect no response but until you provide a topic to discuss, you’re simply a retard
