For the spiral is there. And it ^ves form to the sublunary region, and ike lasit matter by the rectilinear. For the motions according to a right line me in this region. Hence, the first triad is uniformly the cause of the division of the worlds. But the second has a more abundant repK»entation of section, and of progreission into parts; yet does not exhibit to us the multitude of the worlds. And the third unfolds the seven worlds, and the monad together with two triads. So great is the divine conception of Plato, that from these things we may survey the causes of what after his time became apparent.
For <i>is, indeed, from what has been said appears to be very admir- able, that according to each of the triads, the middle is characteristic of the vho\e triad. Thus for instance, in the unknown triad, difference is established as the middle between the one and being. But in the connective triad whole is the characteristic, which is the middle of the oncy and the finite. And in the perfective triad, the perfect is the ' V [itKTov is omitted in the original.
308 ON THE THEOLOGY 1560^ IK clWiract eristic, which is itself established as the middle of that which has^^ extremes, and of figure* For difference is the feminine itself/ and the prolific nature of the Gods. And whole is itself the form of connected comprehension, binding together many parts. And the perfect is itself the good of perfection, possessing a beginning, middle, and end, mxd conjoining the end to the beginning, according to the peculiarity of conversion. Being also nothing else than a perfect governor it is the cause of the peculiarity of these Gods subsisting every where according to the middle centres. Hence the whole order of the intelligible, and at the same time, intellectual Gods, may be surveyed as having its subsistence in the middle. For the intelligible Gods, indeed, are especially defined according to hyparxes and summits; on which account also, they are called fathers, and unical Gods. For the one and father are in them the same. But the intellectual Gods are defined according to ends or extremities; and on this account, all of them are denominated intellects and intellectual. The intelligible, and at the same time» intellectual Gods, however, being middles, especially present themselves to the view according to the middles of the triads.
Farther still, this also may be considered in common about all these triads, that each accoixling to the end proceeds to infinity. For the end of the first triad is number; of the second, th^e infinite in multitude; and of the third, the rectilinear, which itself participates of the nature of the infinite. And of this the cause is, that each of the triads according to its extremity is carried as in a vehicle in the material worlds, and comprehends according to one cause the infinity of the natures that are generated in them. In addition, likewise, to what has been said, we may survey the order of the triads, from the ends that are in them. For the end of the first triad is number: but of the second, tiie finite and the infinite; and of the third, the orbicular, the mixed figure, and the rectilinear. It is evident, therefore, that the first triad is monadic; but the second dyadic; and the third triadic. And the first of these indeed is analogous to the one being; but the second to the intelligible whole; and the third, to the all-perfect whole. But that these have this order with respect to each oth^r, has been before observed. In shorty there- CHAP, XXXIX. OP Pl.ATO« sog fore, every intelligiUe, and at the same time intellectual triads is according to its summit indeed conjoined to the intelligible; but according to its middle, unfolds its proper power; and according to its termination^ comprehends the infinity of secondary natures. And here we shall end the doctrine concerning the intelligible and intellectual Gods^ $10 ON THE THEOLOGY BOOK V.
BOOK V.
CHAPTER L In the next place, let us survey another order of Gods, which is called intellectual, being indeed conjoined to the orders prior to it, but termi- nating the total progressions of the Gods, converting them to their principle, and producing one circle of the primarily-efficient and all« perfect orders. Let us also extend the intellect that is in us to the imparticipable and divine intellect, and distinguish the orders and diminutions of essence that are in it,^ according to the narration of Plato.
This intellectual hypostasis therefore of the Gods, is suspended indeed from more ancient causes, and is filled from them with total goodness and self-sufficiency. But after these causes, it establishes an illustrious empire over all secondary natures, binding to its dominion all the partial progressions of the Gods. And it is denominated indeed intellectual, because it generates an impartible and divine intellect. But it is filled from intelligibles, not as from those intelligibles which are co-arranged CHAP. r.. OF PLATO. 311 with intellect^ nor as with those which are alone divided from intellect* by the conception of the mind, but as establishing in itself unically all multitudes^ and occultly containing the evolutions of the Gods into li^t,^ and the hyparxes of intelligibles. It is likewise allotted the toted intellect of intellectuals, the variety of beings^ and the multiform orders of divine natures; and it convolves the end- of the whole progression' [of the Gods] to the one intelligible principle. For intellectuals are converted to intelligibles. And some intellectuals indeed are united and* firmly established prior to the divided Gods; but others are multiplied and through conversion are conjoined to primarily-efficient causes. The^ intellectual Gods however proceed from all the Gods prior to them,^ receiving indeed unions from the one that is prior to intelligibles; but essences from intelligibles; and being allotted lives all-perfect, connective- and generative of divine natures, from the intelligible and at the same time intellectual Gods; but Uie intellectual peculiarity from themselves. • They likewise convert to themselves all the divided orders, but establish themselves in intelligibles, existing wholly through the whofe, pure and ^ imknown knowledges, and fervid lives. Besides these things also, they- are all-perfect essences, producing all secondary natures through sub- sisting from themselves, and being neither diminished by their progres-- sion, nor receiving an addition by their progeny; but through their own ^ never-faiUng and infinite powers, being the fathers, causes, and leaders c^ all things*. Nov are they co-divided with their progeny, nor do they depart from themselves in their progressions; but at once, and according: to union they govern total multitudes, and all orders,. and convolve them: to the intelligible, and to occult good.
Whether therefore I may speak of life, it is not proper to think that it is^ such a life as we surveyed a little before. For that was impartici- pable, but this is participated. And that indeed, was generative, but this is vivific. But it is not immanifest that these differ from each othei*. - For the vivific cause indeed, is also evidently generative; but the* generative cause is not entirely vivific. For it imparts figure to things > ' For irfjioSov it is necessary to read wgcoiov.
* After x«i it is necessarj to supply ta fny mvTM xcu..
312 ON THE THEOLOGY BOOK V.
unBgurcd, bound ta things indefinite, and perfection to things imperfect X)r whether I may denominate the cause in intellectuals intelligible^ it must not immediately be conceived to be such an intelligible, as that of which we have before spoken. For that was imparticipable, and prior to intellectuals, itself pre-existing by itself, and exempt from wholes; not being denominated intelligible, as the plenitude of intellect, but as the prior-cause of it, and the object of desire and love to it, subsisting uniformly uncoordinaled with it The intelligible however which is now the subject of consideration, is participated, and co-arranged with intellect, is multiform, and contains in itself the divided causes of all things. Or whether we may call the Gods in this order fathers and fabricators, it must be admitted that this paternal and fabricative t:haracteristic, is different from the hyparxis of the intelligible' fathers. For they indeed were generative of whole essences; but these pre-exist ^is the causes of divisible emanations, and of definite productions of form* And they indeed contained in themselves powers fabricative of the divine progressions; but these separate from themselves prolific causes, and are not conjoined to them according to union, but according to a communion subordinate to union. For the marriages which are celebrated by fables, and the concordant conjunction of divine natures, are in the intellectual Gods. But the demiurgic being mingled with the vivific ^effluxions, every genus of the Gods is unfolded into light, both the supermundane, and the mundane. This, however, will be hereafter ^discussed.
' Por vof f 0^1 it is necoMdxy td read yoijraxy.
CHAP. II. OF PLATO. 313 CHAPTER II.
Since however, we have, in short, surveyed the peculiarity of the iatellectual Gods, it remains that we should deliver an appropriate theory concerning the division of them. For the intellectual order is not ^ne and indivisible, but is allotted progressions more various than those of the more elevated genera. There will therefore be here also three fathers, who divide the whole intellectual essence; one indeed, being arranged according to the intelligible, but another according to l\fe, and another according to intellects They also imitate the intelligible fathers, who divide the intelligible breadth in a threefold manner, and who are allotted a diflPerence of this kind with respect to each other. For one of these intellectual fathers proceeds analogous to the first [intelligible^ father, and is intelligible. But another proceeds analogous to the second [intelligible] father, and binds to himself the whole of intellectual life. And another proceeds analogous to the third father, and closes the whole intellectual^ in the same manner as he closes the intielligible order.
But these fathers being three, and the first indeed, abiding in himself, but the second proceeding and vivifying all things, and the third glit^ tering with fabricative productions, it jis evidently necessary, that other triple Gods should be conjoined with them; of which, one indeed will be the source to the first intellectual God, of stable purity; but another,, of undefiled progression, to the second God; and another of exempt. £ibrication, to the third. For in the Gods prior to these, the undefiJleA deities were according to cause, through union without separation, and a. sameness collective of powers which are not in want of the communion of these. But in the intellectual Gods> where there is an all-perfect Proc. Vol. L 2 R 314 ON THE THEOLOGY BOOK V.
separation^ as in total orders, and a greater habitude to secondary natures, unpolluted deity or power is necessary, which has the ratio of sameness, and undeviating subsistence, to the paternal cause, and which is co-divided with the fathers, so that each of the undefiled Gods is conjoined with a peculiar father.
These two triads therefore have presented themselves to our view, one indeed, of the intellectual fathers, but the other of the undefiled Gods. There is however, besides these two, a third other triadic monad, which is the cause of separation to intellectuals, and which subsists together with the above mentioned triads. For the fathers indeed are the suppliers of all essence; but the inflexible Gods, of sameness. But it is «videndy fit that there should be also the cause of separation, and that this should be one and at the same time triple, separating the intdiectual Gods from the above mentioned orders, from themselves, and from inSerior natures. For why are they the leaders of another order, if they ire not divided from the first orders? Why are they multiplied, and why do they differ from each other in their kingdoms, unless they are separated? Why also do they transcend the partial [Gods] unless they are also separated from these? Tlie cause of separation therefore, will be for us one and a triple monad. But the paternal and nndefiled causes will be each of them a uniform triad. And what is most paradoxical of all, the separative cause is more monadic; but the paternal and also the undefiled cause, are each of them more triadic. For the separative monad indeed, is the cause of separation to the other monads; but the others are the sources of communion and union to it. Hence each of these, being separated, becomes triadic; but the separative monad is monadic, in consequence of being united by these. For all intellectuals pervade through each other, and are in each other, according to a certain admirable communion, imitating the union of intelligibles, through being present and mingled with each other. The sphere also which is thefe, is the intellectual order, energizing in and about itself, and proceeding into itsdf hebdomatically, being a monad and a hebdomad, the image, if it be lawful so to speak, of the all-perfect intdligible monad, and unfolding CHAP. n. OF PLATO. gj^ its occult union^ through progression and separation. This first pro- gression therefore of the intellectual Gods, which is separated by us into> a heptady we have perfectly celebrated.
Other secondary seven hebdomads, however, are to be considered finder this, which produce as far as to the last of things, the monads of this heptad. For each monad is the leader of an intellectual hebdomad conjoined with it, and extends this hebdomad from on high, from t}ie summit of Olympus, as far as to the last, and terrestrial orders. I say, for instance, the first paternal monad, indeed, constitutes seven such Bionads. But the second again constitutes seven vivific monads. And^ the third, seven demiurgic monads. Each likewise of the undefiled: monads constitutes a number equal to that produced by the fiEithers^ And the monad of separation constitutes seven {^separative monads]:. Fof all these causes proceed in conjunction with each other. And ad the first triad of the fathers subsists together with the undefiled triad,. ^ and the divisive monad, after the sante manner also, the second triads are allotted seven coordinate undefiled triads, and separative monads.. Whence,, therefore, doe& so great a number of intellectual Gods present itself to our view? It is evident, indeed, from what has been said. For* the first hebdomad, indeed, the cause^of the second hebdomads, and which has the relation of a monad to them, and which a little before we^ denominated an intellectual sphere, subsists according to the intelligible breadth, imitating the paternal nature of it through the paternal triad;: but the eternity of its power, through undefiled sameness; and the multitude shining forth in its extremities, through the monad which is- divisive of wholes. The remaining hebdomads, however, which are derived from this, proceed according to the intelligible and intellectual; genera. For each monad, conformably to the summits of those genera,, constitutes a monad co^rranged with the multitude proceeding from it;: since every summit is uniform [i. e. has the form of the one,] as we have before demonstrated. But according to the middle and third pr<^rt;ssionH of those genera, each monad generates two triads. For the separation of them was apparent in the middle and ultimate progressions^ as we have before observed. As,, therefore, the intelligible^ 316 ON THE THEOLOGY BOOK V.
and at the same time, intellectual genera, produced the intelligible i)readth, which is of a unical nature, into a triadic multitude, after the same manner also the intellectual monads call forth the intelligible, and at the same time intellectual triads, into intellectual hebdomads. And they constitute indeed the monads which are coarranged with the hebdomads, according to the summits of the triads; but the two triads, .according to the second and third decrements of those triads. Hence every hebdomad has the first monad indeed intelligible; but the second after this, and which is triadic, intelligible and intellectual; and the third triad, which is the next in order, intellectual. All these likewise subsist as in intellectuals. For they are characterized aca)rding to the peculiarity of tlie constitutive monad.
In short, the intellectual powers proceed according to the intelligible orders; but they constitute these seven hebdomads according to the first intellectual orders. For it is indeed necessary that exempt causes should he assimilated to the intelligible Gods; but that co-arranged causes; and which proceed every where, should be assimilated to the intelligible, and at the same time, intellectual Gods; sincb these also are the first that divide the worlds triadically, and pervade as far as to the last of things, connectedly containing and perfecting all things. But the intelligible Gods contain the causes of wholes uniformly, and occultly. You may also say, that the intelligible Gods produce all things uniformly; for numbers subsist in them monadically. But the intelligible and inteU lectual Gods produce all thing:» triadically. For the monads in these are divided according to number. And what the monad was in the former, that number is in the latter. And the intellectual Gods produce all things hebdomadically. For they evolve the intelligible, and at the same time, intellectual triads, into intellectual hebdomads, and expand their contracted powers into intellectual variety; since they define multitude itself and variety by numbers which are nearest to the monad, for the numbers of the partial are different from the numbers of the total orders in the Gods. And the whole of. this intellectual number is indeed more expanded than the natures prior.to it, and is divided into more various progressions, yet it does not desert its alliance with the CHAP. III. OF PLATO. 317 monad. For hebdomadic multitude has an abundant affinity with the nature of the monad j since it is measured according to it, and primarily subsists from it. And the Pythagoreans, when they denominate the heptad light according to intellect^ evidently admit its hyparxis to Be intellectual, and on this account suspended from the monad. For the unioal^ which light manifests, is inherent from this in all the divine numbers. And thus much concerning the division of these intellectual Gods'* CHAPTER III.
CHAPTER III.
It follows in the next place, that we should adapt the theory of Plato to this order, and show that he does not dissent from any of the theological dogmas concerning it. Since, therefore, we have demonstrated, that the celestial order, which we find in the Cratylus perfectly celebrated^ possesses the middle bond of the intellectual, and at the same time, intelligible Gods, but that under this another order of Gods is imme- diately arranged, as Socrates shows in the Phsedrus, called the subce- lestial arch, and which we have considered as not divided from the heaven, — ^this being the case, what order is it which divides itself from the kingdom of the heaven, but is the leader of the intellectual order of the Gods, and is primarily the supplier of intellect, according to the doctrine of Plato, as Socrates says in the Cratylus, except that which the mi^ty Saturn comprehends? For he calls this God the first and piost pui^ intellect. This God> ther^ore, is the summit of a divine intellect, and, as he says, the purest part of it; separating himself indeed from the celestial order, but reigoing over all the intellectual Gods; 313 ON THE THEOXiOGY fiOOKiir^ because be is full of intellect, but of a pure intellect, and is a God extended to the summit of the intellectual hypostasis. Hence also, be is the father of the mighty Jupiter, and is simply father. For he who is the father of the father of all things, is evidently allotted in a much greater degree the paternal dignity. Saturn, therefore, ia the first intellect; but the mighty Jupiter is also an intellept, containing, as &x:rates says in the Philebus, a royal souU and a royal intellect.
And these Gods are two intellects, and intellectual fathers; the ooe^ indeed^ being intellectual; but the other intelligible, in intellectuals. Tot the Saturnian bonds which Socrates mentions in the Cratyhis, are Hnific of the intelligence of Jupiter about the intelligible of bis &ther,. smd fill the Jovian intellect with the alUperfect intelligence of the Saturnian intellect. And this I think is likewise evident from the analogy ci souls ta Huto. For as he binds souk about himself, filling them with wisdom and intertigenoe, thu» also Saturn being the object of desire and lore to Jupiter, contains him in himself by indissoluble bonds^ And these things Socrates indicates in the Cratylus, jesting, and at the- same time being seriousr in what he says. The object of desire therefore^ and the intdHgibb ta Jupiter, is Saturn. But the mighty Jupiter himself is a divine and demimrgic intellect. Hence^ it is necessary that there should be a third other intellectual cause, generative of life. For Japicer indeed is the cause of life, as Socrates says, but intellectually and secondarily. But we say that life is every where arranged prior to^ intellect. Hence, we must say that the queen Rhea, being the mother ef Jupiter, but subordinate to the father Saturn,, gives completion to this middle, existing as a vivific wbrld, and.estabhshing in herself the causes of the whole of life. I'hese three paternal orders, therefore, have appeared to us in intellectuals: one of them indeed subsisting according to the intelligible power of intellectuals;.' but another according to divine and intellectual life; and aqother according to intellectual intellect. For we celebrate the middle deity, herself by herself, as the mother of the demiurgus, and of wholes. When, however, we survey * It appears from the version of Portus, that the words o /xtv xara r^v wifnpf hvofMv r«y voifuty, are omitted in the original. Indeed, the sense requires that they should be inserted.
CHAP. ni. OF PLATO. 3I9 her together with the extremes, we deDominate her a paternal cause, as being comprehended in the fathers; and as generating some things together with Saturn, but others in conjunction with Jupiter.
Moreoyer, Plato following Orpheus, calls the inflexible and undefiled triad of the intdlectual Gods Curetic, as is evident from what the Athe- nian guest sajrs in the Laws, celebrating the armed sports of the Curetes, and their rythmical dance. For Orpheus represents the Curetes who are three, as the guards of Jupiter. And the sacred laws of the Cretani^ and all the Grecian theology, refer a pure and undefiled life and energy to this order. For to Hopt^w to koron^ indicates nothing dse than the piMre and tncorniptible. Hence, we have before said, that the mighty Satkim^ as being essentially united to the cause of undefiled purity, is a piii|| intellect The paternal Gods therefore are three, and the undefiled Godb also are three. Hence it remains tlmt we should survey the seventh monad.
If, therefore^ we consider the febukras elections^ both the Satumian and the Celestial, of which Plato makes mention, and thisiks tb«t such like narrations should always be concealed in ^lence, that the arcane tmth of them should be surveyed, and thnt they are indicative of mystic con^ ceptionA, because these things are not fit fot* young men to hear,— [if we consider these] w^ may obtain from them what the separative deity is, who accomplishes the divisions, and segregates the Satumian genera indeed from the Celestial, and the Jovian from the Satumian, and who separates the whole intellectual order from the natures prior and posterior to it, disjoins the difierent causes in it from each other, and always im-* parts to secondary natures, secondary measures of dominion. And let not any one be disturbed, or oppose me on hearing these things. How therefore does Plato reject exections, bonds, and the tragical apparatus of fables? For he thinks that all such particulars will be condemned by the multitude and the stupid, through ignorance of the arcana they con* tain; but that they will exhibit to the wise certain admirable opinions. Hence, he indeed does not admit such a mode of fiction, but thinks it proper to be persuaded by the ancients who were the o&pring of the Gods, and to investi^te their arcane conceptions* A9 therefore he SJO ON THE THEOLOGY BOOK V.