This first enquiry obliges us to consider at the outset the NATURE OF THE SOUL – that is whether a distinction is to be made between Soul and Essential Soul (between an individual Soul and the Soul-Kind in itself). (NA: All matter shown in brackets is added by the translator for clearness’ sake and, therefore, is not canonical. S.M.) Enneads I,1,2
It is in this sense that we read of the Soul: “We saw it as those others saw the sea-god Glaukos.” “And,” reading on, “if we mean to discern the NATURE OF THE SOUL we must strip it free of all that has gathered about it, must see into the philosophy of it, examine with what Existences it has touch and by kinship to what Existences it is what it is.” Enneads I,1,12
The Soul that declined, they tell us, saw and illuminated the already existent Darkness. Now whence came that Darkness? If they tell us that the Soul created the Darkness by its Decline, then, obviously, there was nowhere for the Soul to decline to; the cause of the decline was not the Darkness but the very NATURE OF THE SOUL. The theory, therefore, refers the entire process to pre-existing compulsions: the guilt inheres in the Primal Beings. Enneads II,9,12