Skip to content
Wellsprings
greek-metaphysicsfeatured in 40 works

The One

In Neoplatonism, the One (τὸ ἕν) is the ineffable source beyond Being from which all reality emanates — distinct from Parmenides' One, which is Being itself, single and indivisible.

The One (to hen) is the supreme first principle of Neoplatonism, given its definitive form by Plotinus in 3rd-century-CE Rome. It is an absolutely simple, undivided source beyond being and knowledge, from which all reality 'emanates,' or overflows: first Intellect (Nous), then Soul, then the material world. Plotinus built the idea from Parmenides' unity and from Plato's 'Parmenides' and 'Republic,' where the Good is said to lie 'beyond being.' The doctrine became the master template for mystical and negative theology across Christian, Islamic, and Jewish traditions, in which God is described not by what He is but by what He is not.

A note on the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4): readers sometimes hear in its declaration — "Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one (echad)" — an early statement of the Neoplatonic One, the supreme metaphysical principle. The resemblance is verbal, and it does not survive a look at what the verse is actually saying.

In its own setting, echad asserts that the LORD alone is Israel's God — the single, unique deity to whom this people owes its undivided loyalty, against the many gods of the surrounding nations. The claim is at once about God's oneness and about covenant: "you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart" follows immediately (Deuteronomy 6:5). This God speaks, commands, remembers, and acts in history; the surrounding verses are about teaching children, binding words upon the hand, writing them on the doorposts (Deuteronomy 6:7-9). "One" here means there is no other beside Him (compare Deuteronomy 4:35, "the LORD is God; there is none else besides Him"). It is the oneness of a personal sovereign, not a description of His metaphysical rank.

Plotinus's One is a different kind of claim entirely. It is not a person who chooses or commands, but a supra-essential source "beyond being" — so utterly simple that it transcends even existence and knowledge, ineffable because every predicate would introduce multiplicity into it. From it all reality necessarily overflows by emanation, descending through a graded hierarchy of hypostases (Intellect, then Soul, then the sensible world). The One does not love a people or enter a covenant; it does not act by will at all. Its "oneness" is the absence of all plurality at the summit of a metaphysical ladder — a very different thing from the numerical and exclusive oneness the Shema proclaims of a God who redeems and commands.

These are genuinely distinct ideas: the covenantal uniqueness of a personal God is not the supra-essential One beyond being. Neoplatonic emanation entered Jewish thought only later — decisively in the medieval period, when philosophers working in the wake of the falasifa drew on emanationist language to interpret Scripture. Reading the One back into Deuteronomy is therefore anachronistic, and that is why the Shema is kept separate from this concept.

How it traveled

  1. Parmenides
    Athens · -370
    explains
  2. Metaphysics
    Chalcis · -322
    explains
  3. Enneades
    Rome · 270
    explains
  4. Duties of the Heart
    Zaragoza (Saragossa) · 1080
  5. Guide for the Perplexed
    Cairo · 1190
  6. Sha'arei Orah
    Guadalajara · 1260
  7. Sha'arei Tzedek
    Castile · 1265
  8. Zohar
    Guadalajara · 1280
  9. Tikkunei Zohar
    Guadalajara · 1280
  10. Zohar Chadash
    Guadalajara · 1290
  11. Sefer HaKanah
    Castile · 1380
  12. Sefer HaIkkarim
    Soria · 1425
  13. Akeidat Yitzchak
    Tarragona · 1490
    exposition
  14. Abarbanel on Torah
    Naples · 1505
  15. Avodat HaKodesh (Ibn Gabbai)
    Cairo · 1523
  16. Pardes Rimmonim
    Tzfat · 1548
  17. Ketem Paz on Zohar
    Tzfat · 1561
  18. Sha'ar HaKavanot
    Tzfat · 1570
  19. Sha'ar HaGilgulim
    Tzfat · 1570
  20. Sha'ar Ma'amarei Rashbi
    Tzfat · 1570
  21. Sha'ar Ma'amarei Razal
    Tzfat · 1570
  22. Pri Etz Chaim
    Tzfat · 1572
  23. Reshit Chokhmah
    Tzfat · 1575
  24. Sha'ar HaHakdamot
    Tzfat · 1610
  25. Sha'ar Ruach HaKodesh
    Damascus · 1610
  26. Ohr HaChammah on Zohar
    Tzfat · 1620
  27. Mikdash Melekh, RaMaZ Commentary on Zohar
    Tzfat · 1680
  28. Kalach Pitchei Chokhmah
    Padua · 1730
  29. Da'at Tevunot
    Padua · 1735
  30. Mikdash Melekh on Zohar
    Tzfat · 1750
  31. Yahel Ohr on Zohar
    Vilna (Vilnius) · 1790
  32. Tanya
    Liadi · 1797
  33. Maor VaShemesh
    Krakow (Cracow) · 1817
  34. Sha'arei HaYichud VeEmunah
    Strashelye · 1820
  35. Sha'arei Avodah
    Strashelye · 1820
  36. Likutei Halakhot
    Breslov (Ukraine) · 1840
  37. BePardes HaChasidut VeHakabbalah
    Warsaw · 1910
  38. Talmud Eser HaSefirot
    Jerusalem · 1939
  39. Sulam on Zohar
    Jerusalem · 1945
  40. Ohr Penimi on Talmud Eser HaSefirot
    Jerusalem · 1948

Key passages(20)

Chapter 11.—How Plato Has Been Able to Approach So Nearly to Christian Knowledge. Certain partakers with us in the grace of Christ, wonder when they hear and read that Plato had conceptions concernin

Tap to expand

Parmenides · Plato

Very high

Ceph. The others are, then, not like nor unlike nor both. For if they were like or unlike, they would partake of one of the two elements, and if they were both, of the two opposites and that was shown

Tap to expand

Very high
Very high

Guide for the Perplexed · Moses ben Maimon (Rambam) · 1190 CE

Very high

ואילו מחויב המציאות, הפשוט באמת, שאין חלה בו מורכבות כלל – הרי כפי שמקרה הריבוי בלתי אפשרי בו כך מקרה האחדות בלתי אפשרי בו; כוונתי שאין האחדות עניין נוסף על עצמותו, אלא הוא אחד ולא על ידי אחדות.

Tap to expand

Recanati on the Torah · Menachem Recanati · 1250 CE

Very high

בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ. לפי דעת רז"ל ומה שנראה מכוונתם בספר הזוהר כי מלת ראשית רומזת לחכמה העליונה הנקראת חכמת אלהים ונקראת בספר הזוהר נקודה חדא סתימא עילאה היא הספירה השנייה הנאצלת מן הספ

Tap to expand

Handbook of Platonism · Alcinous

Very high

Metaphysics · Aristotle

Very high

We must inquire, with regard to the substance and nature of unity, in which sense it exists. This is the same question which we approached in our discussion of difficulties: what unity is, and what vi

Tap to expand

Very high

These would be Being and Unity; for these, if any, might best be supposed to embrace all existing things, and to be most of the nature of first principles, because they are by nature primary; for if t

Tap to expand

Damascius: Fragments & Testimonia · Damascius

Very high

Doxographic testimonia: Damascius is credited with originating gr-the-one.

Tap to expand

De Mysteriis · Iamblichus

Very high

Hymn to King Helios Dedicated to Sallust · Julian, Emperor of Rome

Very high

Fragmenta · Numenius of Apamea

Very high

Parmenides · Plato

Very high

Ceph. And yet I feel very much like the horse in the poem of Ibycus —an old race-horse who was entered for a chariot race and was trembling with fear of what was before him, because he knew it by expe

Tap to expand

Parmenides · Plato

Very high

Ceph. Then it does not change its place by going anywhere or into anything, nor does it revolve in a circle, nor change. Apparently not. Then the one is without any kind of motion. It is motionless. F

Tap to expand

Parmenides · Plato

Very high

Ceph. And again it will not be like or unlike anything, either itself or another. Why not? Because the like is that which is affected in the same way. Yes. But we saw that the same was of a nature dis

Tap to expand

Parmenides · Plato

Very high

Ceph.Then it has no being even so as to be one, for if it were one, it would be and would partake of being; but apparently one neither is nor is one, if this argument is to be trusted. That seems to b

Tap to expand

Parmenides · Plato

Very high

Ceph. And again each of the parts possesses unity and being, and the smallest of parts is composed of these two parts, and thus by the same argument any part whatsoever has always these two parts; for

Tap to expand

Parmenides · Plato

Very high

Ceph. And because the parts are parts of a whole, the one would be limited by the whole; or are not the parts included by the whole? They must be so. But surely that which includes is a limit. Of cour

Tap to expand

Parmenides · Plato

Very high

Ceph. It is at rest, no doubt, if it is in itself; for being in one, and not passing out from this, it is in the same, namely in itself. It is. But that which is always in the same, must always be at

Tap to expand