What then is Love?' I asked; 'Is
he mortal?'
'No.'
'What then?'
'As in the former instance, he
is neither mortal nor immortal, but in a mean between the two.'
'What is he, Diotima?'
'He is a great spirit (daimon),
and like all spirits he is intermediate between the divine and the
mortal.'
'And what,' I said, 'is his power?'
'He interprets,' she replied, 'between
gods and men, conveying and taking across to the gods the prayers
and sacrifices of men, and to men the commands and replies of the
gods; he is the mediator who spans the chasm which divides them,
and therefore in him all is bound together, and through him the
arts of the prophet and the priest, their sacrifices and mysteries
and charms, and all prophecy and incantation, find their way. For
God mingles not with man; but through Love all the intercourse and
converse of God with man, whether awake or asleep, is carried on.
The wisdom which understands this is spiritual; all other wisdom,
such as that of arts and handicrafts, is mean and vulgar. Now these
spirits or intermediate powers are many and diverse, and one of
them is Love.'
'And who,' I said, 'was his father,
and who his mother?'
'The tale,' she said, 'will take
time; nevertheless I will tell you. On the birthday of Aphrodite
there was a feast of the gods, at which the god Poros or Plenty,
who is the son of Metis or Discretion, was one of the guests. When
the feast was over, Penia or Poverty, as the manner is on such occasions,
came about the doors to beg. Now Plenty who was the worse for nectar
(there was no wine in those days), went into the garden of Zeus
and fell into a heavy sleep, and Poverty considering her own straitened
circumstances, plotted to have a child by him, and accordingly she
lay down at his side and conceived Love, who partly because he is
naturally a lover of the beautiful, and because Aphrodite is herself
beautiful, and also because he was born on her birthday, is her
follower and attendant. And as his parentage is, so also are his
fortunes.
'In the first place he is always
poor, and anything but tender and fair, as the many imagine him;
and he is rough and squalid, and has no shoes, nor a house to dwell
in; on the bare earth exposed he lies under the open heaven, in
the streets, or at the doors of houses, taking his rest; and like
his mother he is always in distress. Like his father too, whom he
also partly resembles, he is always plotting against the fair and
good; he is bold, enterprising, strong, a mighty hunter, always
weaving some intrigue or other, keen in the pursuit of wisdom, fertile
in resources; a philosopher at all times, terrible as an enchanter,
sorcerer, sophist. He is by nature neither mortal nor immortal,
but alive and flourishing at one moment when he is in plenty, and
dead at another moment, and again alive by reason of his father's
nature.
'But that which is always flowing
in is always flowing out, and so he is never in want and never in
wealth; and, further, he is in a mean between ignorance and knowledge.
The truth of the matter is this: No god is a philosopher or seeker
after wisdom, for he is wise already; nor does any man who is wise
seek after wisdom. Neither do the ignorant seek after wisdom. For
herein is the evil of ignorance, that he who is neither good nor
wise is nevertheless satisfied with himself: he has no desire for
that of which he feels no want.'
'But who then, Diotima,' I said,
'are the lovers of wisdom, if they are neither the wise nor the
foolish?'
'A child may answer that question,'
she replied; 'they are those who are in a mean between the two;
Love is one of them. For wisdom is a most beautiful thing, and Love
is of the beautiful; and therefore Love is also a philosopher or
lover of wisdom, and being a lover of wisdom is in a mean between
the wise and the ignorant. And of this too his birth is the cause;
for his father is wealthy and wise, and his mother poor and foolish.
Such, my dear Socrates, is the nature of the spirit Love. The error
in your conception of him was very natural, and as I imagine from
what you say, has arisen out of a confusion of love and the beloved,
which made you think that love was all beautiful. For the beloved
is the truly beautiful, and delicate, and perfect, and blessed;
but the principle of love is of another nature, and is such as I
have described.'
I said, 'O thou stranger woman,
thou sayest well; but, assuming Love to be such as you say, what
is the use of him to men?'
'That, Socrates,' she replied,
'I will attempt to unfold: of his nature and birth I have already
spoken; and you acknowledge that love is of the beautiful. But some
one will say: Of the beautiful in what, Socrates and Diotima?—or
rather let me put the question more clearly, and ask: When a man
loves the beautiful, what does he desire?'
I answered her 'That the beautiful
may be his.'
'Still,' she said, 'the answer
suggests a further question: What is given by the possession of
beauty?'
'To what you have asked,' I replied,
'I have no answer ready.'
'Then,' she said, 'let me put the
word "good" in the place of the beautiful, and repeat the question
once more: If he who loves loves the good, what is it then that
he loves?'
'The possession of the good,' I
said.
'And what does he gain who possesses
the good?'
'Happiness,' I replied; 'there
is less difficulty in answering that question.'
'Yes,' she said, 'the happy are
made happy by the acquisition of good things. Nor is there any need
to ask why a man desires happiness; the answer is already final.'
'You are right.' I said.
'And is this wish and this desire
common to all? and do all men always desire their own good, or only
some men?—what say you?'
'All men,' I replied; 'the desire
is common to all.'
'Why, then,' she rejoined, 'are
not all men, Socrates, said to love, but only some of them? whereas
you say that all men are always loving the same things.'
'I myself wonder,' I said, 'why
this is.'
'There is nothing to wonder at,'
she replied; 'the reason is that one part of love is separated off
and receives the name of the whole, but the other parts have other
names.'
'Give an illustration,' I said.
She answered me as follows: 'There
is poetry, which, as you know, is complex and manifold. All creation
or passage of non-being into being is poetry or making, and the
processes of all art are creative; and the masters of arts are all
poets or makers.'
'Very true.'
'Still,' she said, 'you know that
they are not called poets, but have other names; only that portion
of the art which is separated off from the rest, and is concerned
with music and metre, is termed poetry, and they who possess poetry
in this sense of the word are called poets.'
'Very true,' I said.
'And the same holds of love. For
you may say generally that all desire of good and happiness is only
the great and subtle power of love; but they who are drawn towards
him by any other path, whether the path of money-making or gymnastics
or philosophy, are not called lovers—the name of the whole is appropriated
to those whose affection takes one form only—they alone are said
to love, or to be lovers.'
'I dare say,' I replied, 'that
you are right.'
'Yes,' she added, 'and you hear
people say that lovers are seeking for their other half; but I say
that they are seeking neither for the half of themselves, nor for
the whole, unless the half or the whole be also a good. And they
will cut off their own hands and feet and cast them away, if they
are evil; for they love not what is their own, unless perchance
there be some one who calls what belongs to him the good, and what
belongs to another the evil. For there is nothing which men love
but the good. Is there anything?'
'Certainly, I should say, that
there is nothing.'
'Then,' she said, 'the simple truth
is, that men love the good.'
'Yes,' I said.
'To which must be added that they
love the possession of the good?'
'Yes, that must be added.'
'And not only the possession, but
the everlasting possession of the good?'
'That must be added too.'
'Then love,' she said, 'may be
described generally as the love of the everlasting possession of
the good?'
'That is most true.'
'Then if this be the nature of
love, can you tell me further,' she said, 'what is the manner of
the pursuit? what are they doing who show all this eagerness and
heat which is called love? and what is the object which they have
in view? Answer me.'
'Nay, Diotima,' I replied, 'if
I had known, I should not have wondered at your wisdom, neither
should I have come to learn from you about this very matter.'
'Well,' she said, 'I will teach
you:—The object which they have in view is birth in beauty, whether
of body or soul.'
'I do not understand you,' I said;
'the oracle requires an explanation.'
'I will make my meaning clearer,'
she replied. 'I mean to say, that all men are bringing to the birth
in their bodies and in their souls. There is a certain age at which
human nature is desirous of procreation—procreation which must be
in beauty and not in deformity; and this procreation is the union
of man and woman, and is a divine thing; for conception and generation
are an immortal principle in the mortal creature, and in the inharmonious
they can never be. But the deformed is always inharmonious with
the divine, and the beautiful harmonious. Beauty, then, is the destiny
or goddess of parturition who presides at birth, and therefore,
when approaching beauty, the conceiving power is propitious, and
diffusive, and benign, and begets and bears fruit: at the sight
of ugliness she frowns and contracts and has a sense of pain, and
turns away, and shrivels up, and not without a pang refrains from
conception. And this is the reason why, when the hour of conception
arrives, and the teeming nature is full, there is such a flutter
and ecstasy about beauty whose approach is the alleviation of the
pain of travail. For love, Socrates, is not, as you imagine, the
love of the beautiful only.'
'What then?'
'The love of generation and of
birth in beauty.'
'Yes,' I said.
'Yes, indeed,' she replied.
'But why of generation?'
'Because to the mortal creature,
generation is a sort of eternity and immortality,' she replied;
'and if, as has been already admitted, love is of the everlasting
possession of the good, all men will necessarily desire immortality
together with good: Wherefore love is of immortality.'
All this she taught me at various
times when she spoke of love. And I remember her once saying to
me, 'What is the cause, Socrates, of love, and the attendant desire?
See you not how all animals, birds, as well as beasts, in their
desire of procreation, are in agony when they take the infection
of love, which begins with the desire of union; whereto is added
the care of offspring, on whose behalf the weakest are ready to
battle against the strongest even to the uttermost, and to die for
them, and will let themselves be tormented with hunger or suffer
anything in order to maintain their young. Man may be supposed to
act thus from reason; but why should animals have these passionate
feelings? Can you tell me why?'
Again I replied that I did not
know.
She said to me: 'And do you expect
ever to become a master in the art of love, if you do not know this?'
'But I have told you already, Diotima,
that my ignorance is the reason why I come to you; for I am conscious
that I want a teacher; tell me then the cause of this and of the
other mysteries of love.'
'Marvel not,' she said, 'if you
believe that love is of the immortal, as we have several times acknowledged;
for here again, and on the same principle too, the mortal nature
is seeking as far as is possible to be everlasting and immortal:
and this is only to be attained by generation, because generation
always leaves behind a new existence in the place of the old. Nay
even in the life of the same individual there is succession and
not absolute unity: a man is called the same, and yet in the short
interval which elapses between youth and age, and in which every
animal is said to have life and identity, he is undergoing a perpetual
process of loss and reparation—hair, flesh, bones, blood, and the
whole body are always changing. Which is true not only of the body,
but also of the soul, whose habits, tempers, opinions, desires,
pleasures, pains, fears, never remain the same in any one of us,
but are always coming and going; and equally true of knowledge,
and what is still more surprising to us mortals, not only do the
sciences in general spring up and decay, so that in respect of them
we are never the same; but each of them individually experiences
a like change.
'For what is implied in the word
"recollection," but the departure of knowledge, which is
ever being forgotten, and is renewed and preserved by recollection,
and appears to be the same although in reality new, according to
that law of succession by which all mortal things are preserved,
not absolutely the same, but by substitution, the old worn-out mortality
leaving another new and similar existence behind—unlike the divine,
which is always the same and not another? And in this way, Socrates,
the mortal body, or mortal anything, partakes of immortality; but
the immortal in another way. Marvel not then at the love which all
men have of their offspring; for that universal love and interest
is for the sake of immortality.'
I was astonished at her words,
and said: 'Is this really true, O thou wise Diotima?'
And she answered with all the authority
of an accomplished sophist: 'Of that, Socrates, you may be assured;—think
only of the ambition of men, and you will wonder at the senselessness
of their ways, unless you consider how they are stirred by the love
of an immortality of fame. They are ready to run all risks greater
far than they would have run for their children, and to spend money
and undergo any sort of toil, and even to die, for the sake of leaving
behind them a name which shall be eternal. Do you imagine that Alcestis
would have died to save Admetus, or Achilles to avenge Patroclus,
or your own Codrus in order to preserve the kingdom for his sons,
if they had not imagined that the memory of their virtues, which
still survives among us, would be immortal? Nay,' she said, 'I am
persuaded that all men do all things, and the better they are the
more they do them, in hope of the glorious fame of immortal virtue;
for they desire the immortal.
'Those who are pregnant in the
body only, betake themselves to women and beget children—this is
the character of their love; their offspring, as they hope, will
preserve their memory and giving them the blessedness and immortality
which they desire in the future.
'But souls which are pregnant —for
there certainly are men who are more creative in their souls than
in their bodies—conceive that which is proper for the soul to conceive
or contain. And what are these conceptions?—wisdom and virtue in
general. And such creators are poets and all artists who are deserving
of the name inventor. But the greatest and fairest sort of wisdom
by far is that which is concerned with the ordering of states and
families, and which is called temperance and justice. And he who
in youth has the seed of these implanted in him and is himself inspired,
when he comes to maturity desires to beget and generate. He wanders
about seeking beauty that he may beget offspring—for in deformity
he will beget nothing—and naturally embraces the beautiful rather
than the deformed body; above all when he finds a fair and noble
and well-nurtured soul, he embraces the two in one person, and to
such an one he is full of speech about virtue and the nature and
pursuits of a good man; and he tries to educate him; and at the
touch of the beautiful which is ever present to his memory, even
when absent, he brings forth that which he had conceived long before,
and in company with him tends that which he brings forth; and they
are married by a far nearer tie and have a closer friendship than
those who beget mortal children, for the children who are their
common offspring are fairer and more immortal. Who, when he thinks
of Homer and Hesiod and other great poets, would not rather have
their children than ordinary human ones? Who would not emulate them
in the creation of children such as theirs, which have preserved
their memory and given them everlasting glory? Or who would not
have such children as Lycurgus left behind him to be the saviours,
not only of Lacedaemon, but of Hellas, as one may say? There is
Solon, too, who is the revered father of Athenian laws; and many
others there are in many other places, both among Hellenes and barbarians,
who have given to the world many noble works, and have been the
parents of virtue of every kind; and many temples have been raised
in their honour for the sake of children such as theirs; which were
never raised in honour of any one, for the sake of his mortal children.
'These are the lesser mysteries
of love, into which even you, Socrates, may enter; to the greater
and more hidden ones which are the crown of these, and to which,
if you pursue them in a right spirit, they will lead, I know not
whether you will be able to attain. But I will do my utmost to inform
you, and do you follow if you can. For he who would proceed aright
in this matter should begin in youth to visit beautiful forms; and
first, if he be guided by his instructor aright, to love one such
form only—out of that he should create fair thoughts; and soon he
will of himself perceive that the beauty of one form is akin to
the beauty of another; and then if beauty of form in general is
his pursuit, how foolish would he be not to recognize that the
beauty in every form is and the same!
'And when he perceives this he
will abate his violent love of the one, which he will despise and
deem a small thing, and will become a lover of all beautiful forms;
in the next stage he will consider that the beauty of the mind is
more honourable than the beauty of the outward form. So that if
a virtuous soul have but a little comeliness, he will be content
to love and tend him, and will search out and bring to the birth
thoughts which may improve the young, until he is compelled to contemplate
and see the beauty of institutions and laws, and to understand that
the beauty of them all is of one family, and that personal beauty
is a trifle; and after laws and institutions he will go on to the
sciences, that he may see their beauty, being not like a servant
in love with the beauty of one youth or man or institution, himself
a slave mean and narrow-minded, but drawing towards and contemplating
the vast sea of beauty, he will create many fair and noble thoughts
and notions in boundless love of wisdom; until on that shore he
grows and waxes strong, and at last the vision is revealed to him
of a single science, which is the science of beauty everywhere.
To this I will proceed; please to give me your very best attention:
'He who has been instructed thus
far in the things of love, and who has learned to see the beautiful
in due order and succession, when he comes toward the end will suddenly
perceive a nature of wondrous beauty (and this, Socrates, is the
final cause of all our former toils)—a nature which in the first
place is everlasting, not growing and decaying, or waxing and
waning; secondly, not fair in one point of view and foul in another,
or at one time or in one relation or at one place fair, at another
time or in another relation or at another place foul, as if fair
to some and foul to others, or in the likeness of a face or hands
or any other part of the bodily frame, or in any form of speech
or knowledge, or existing in any other being, as for example, in
an animal, or in heaven, or in earth, or in any other place; but
beauty absolute, separate, simple, and everlasting, which without
diminution and without increase, or any change, is imparted to the
ever-growing and perishing beauties of all other things.
'He who from these ascending under
the influence of true love, begins to perceive that beauty, is not
far from the end. And the true order of going, or being led by another,
to the things of love, is to begin from the beauties of earth and
mount upwards for the sake of that other beauty, using these as
steps only, and from one going on to two, and from two to all fair
forms, and from fair forms to fair practices, and from fair practices
to fair notions, until from fair notions he arrives at the notion
of absolute beauty, and at last knows what the essence of beauty
is.
'This, my dear Socrates,' said
the stranger of Mantineia, 'is that life above all others which
man should live, in the contemplation of beauty absolute; a beauty
which if you once beheld, you would see not to be after the measure
of gold, and garments, and fair boys and youths, whose presence
now entrances you; and you and many a one would be content to live
seeing them only and conversing with them without meat or drink,
if that were possible—you only want to look at them and to be with
them. But what if man had eyes to see the true beauty—the divine
beauty, I mean, pure and clear and unalloyed, not clogged with the
pollutions of mortality and all the colours and vanities of human
life—thither looking, and holding converse with the true beauty
simple and divine? Remember how in that communion only, beholding
beauty with the eye of the mind, he will be enabled to bring forth,
not images of beauty, but realities (for he has hold not of an image
but of a reality), and bringing forth and nourishing true virtue
to become the friend of God and be immortal, if mortal man may.
Would that be an ignoble life?'
Such, Phaedrus—and I speak not
only to you, but to all of you—were the words of Diotima; and I
am persuaded of their truth. And being persuaded of them, I try
to persuade others, that in the attainment of this end human nature
will not easily find a helper better than love: And therefore, also,
I say that every man ought to honour him as I myself honour him,
and walk in his ways, and exhort others to do the same,
and praise the power and
spirit of love according to the measure of my ability now and ever.
The words which I have spoken,
you, Phaedrus, may call an encomium of love, or anything else which
you please.
