Concerning the Crater in the Timæus, a theology teaching what the genera are that are mingled in it, and how it is the cause of the essence of souls.
CHAPTER XXXI.
That the Crater in the Timæus is fontal. And admonitions from the writings of Plato, concerning the principle and fountain of souls.
CHAPTER XXXII.
That the three vivific fountains co-arranged with the demiurgus, may be assumed from what is said in the Timæus, viz. the fountain of souls, the fountain of the virtues, and the fountain of natures.
CHAPTER XXXIII.
Admonitions concerning the undefiled Gods; that there are such Gods according to Plato; and what the peculiarity is of their essence.
CHAPTER XXXIV.
More manifest demonstrations of the hypostasis of the undefiled Gods, according to Plato.
CHAPTER XXXV.
Admonitions through many arguments how it is proper to denominate the undefiled Gods according to Plato. In which also, the union of them, what their separation, and what their peculiarity are, is delivered.
CHAPTER XXXVI.
How from what is mystically asserted by Plato, auxiliaries may be obtained, concerning the seventh monad of intellectuals.
CHAPTER XXXVII.
How Plato delivers in the Parmenides the summit of the intellectual Gods.[81] CHAPTER XXXVIII.
How Parmenides unfolds the middle order of the intellectual breadth, and through what signs.
CHAPTER XXXIX.
How Parmenides defines the third order of intellectuals, and through what peculiarities.
CHAPTER XL.
A common theory of the intellectual hebdomad, from the conclusions of Parmenides.
CONTENTS OF THE CHAPTERS OF BOOK VI.
CHAPTER I.
That the ruling order of Gods is in continuity with the intellectual Gods. And that the division into fountains and principles may be assumed from the writings of Plato, through the theory about souls.
CHAPTER II.
How the ruling Gods proceed. And that the supermundane peculiarity pertains to these Gods alone.
CHAPTER III.
What the peculiarity is of the ruling Gods. That the assimilative is especially characteristic of them. And how the causes of assimilation are antecedently assumed in the demiurgus; and how in the intelligible paradigm.
CHAPTER IV.
What the powers are of the assimilative Gods. What their energies.
And how many goods are imparted by them to the world, and to all mundane natures.
CHAPTER V.
What the divisions are of the assimilative Gods. And that the greatest part of the discourse about them is concerning the middle orders in them.
CHAPTER VI.
Many demonstrations, that both according to Plato and other theologists, there is one demiurgus prior to the three demiurgi.
CHAPTER VII.
That Jupiter is twofold; one indeed, being prior to the three sons of Saturn, [but the other being one of them.] And how the three proceed from Saturn, and the one Jupiter.
CHAPTER VIII.
That according to Plato also, the demiurgic monad subsists prior to the three sons of Saturn. Demonstrations of this from what is said in the Politicus, and in the Laws.
CHAPTER IX.
More manifest admonitions of the same things from what is said in the Gorgias, and in the Cratylus.
CHAPTER X.
Who the three demiurgi are, and what order they have with reference to each other. Likewise what their progressions are, and their divisions about the world.
CHAPTER XI.
What the vivific triad is among the ruling Gods. And whence we may derive auxiliaries from the writings of Plato concerning the union and division of this triad.
CHAPTER XII.
What the convertive triad of the ruling Gods is; and what the monad which it contains. In which also, the union of Apollo with the sun is demonstrated; and it is shewn, how from what is said about Apollo we may be led to the theory of the solar orders.
CHAPTER XIII.
What the undefiled order is of the ruling Gods. And how from the writings of Plato conceptions about it may be obtained.
CHAPTER XIV.
How Parmenides forms his conclusions about the ruling Gods, in continuity with the demiurgic order. And that he characterizes the whole order of them, through similitude and dissimilitude.
CHAPTER XV.
What the supermundane and at the same time mundane genus of Gods is. And how through their own medium they preserve the continuity of the Gods that proceed from the demiurgus.
CHAPTER XVI.
How the liberated Gods are characterized. And how from their liberated peculiarity they are exempt from the universe, and are co-arranged with the mundane Gods.
CHAPTER XVII.
What the common powers, and what the common energies are of the liberated Gods, according with the essence that has been delivered of them.
CHAPTER XVIII.
Concerning the twelve leaders or rulers mentioned in the Phædrus, and that they have a liberated order.
CHAPTER XIX.
Many and clearer demonstrations that the great leader Jupiter, and all the dodecad of leaders, are liberated.
CHAPTER XX.
An explanation from precedaneous causes whence the number of the dodecad in the liberated Gods is derived.
CHAPTER XXI.
What the division of the liberated leaders is into two monads and one decad. And what the one division of them is.
CHAPTER XXII.
The theology concerning each of the twelve Gods, unfolding the peculiarities of them from the subjects of their government.
CHAPTER XXIII.
Concerning the mother of the Fates mentioned in the Republic.
Likewise concerning the triad of the Fates. What orders they have with reference to each other. What powers of them are delivered through divine symbols. What their energies are. And how Plato characterizes the liberated peculiarity.
CHAPTER XXIV.
How Parmenides forms his conclusions concerning the liberated Gods immediately after the assimilative Gods. And how he characterizes the order of them by _touching_ and _not touching_.
CONTENTS OF THE CHAPTERS OF BOOK VII.
CHAPTER I.
On the mundane Gods in general,--the source of their progression,--their orders, powers, and spheres.
CHAPTER II.
On the division, and allotments of the mundane Gods.
CHAPTER III.
That the mundane do not differ from the supermundane Gods in habitudes to bodies, &c.--That the providence of the Gods is not circumscribed by place.--That it pervades all things, and like the light of the sun, fills whatever is capable of receiving it.
CHAPTER IV.
After what manner the visible celestial orbs are Gods.--That a celestial body is eminently allied to the incorporeal essence of the Gods.--That the visible are connected with the intelligible Gods.--And that the perfectly incorporeal are united to the sensible Gods, through the essence of each being characterized by _the one_.
CHAPTER V.
The nature of the mundane Gods unfolded from the speech of the Demiurgus to them, in the Timæus.--And what the whole conception of the speech is according to Proclus.
CHAPTER VI.
What the demiurgus effects in the multitude of mundane Gods by the first words of his speech.--That the words of the Demiurgus are addressed to the composite from soul and animal, viz. to the animal which is divine and partakes of a soul.--The meaning of the words, “Of whom I am the demiurgus and father,” &c.
CHAPTER VII.
The meaning of the words unfolded in the speech of the Demiurgus, “Every thing therefore which is bound is dissoluble, but to be willing to dissolve that which is beautifully harmonized and well composed, is the province of an ill nature.”
CHAPTER VIII.
The following part of the speech of the Demiurgus to the mundane Gods unfolded.--The difference between the primarily and secondarily immortal, and the primarily and secondarily indissoluble.--And that the mundane Gods are neither primarily immortal, nor primarily indissoluble.
CHAPTER IX.
That part of the speech of the Demiurgus unfolded, in which he says to the mundane Gods, “Learn now therefore what I say to you indicating my desire.”
CHAPTER X.
The developement of the remaining part of the speech of the Demiurgus.
CHAPTER XI.
Who the junior Gods are, and why they are thus called.
CHAPTER XII.
Farther important particulars respecting the fabrication of the mundane Gods, collected from the Timæus, and unfolded.
CHAPTER XIII.
Continuation of the developement of these particulars.
CHAPTER XIV.
The peculiarities of the celestial Gods separately discussed.--Why the one sphere of the fixed stars comprehends a multitude of stars, but each of the planetary spheres convolves only one star.--And that in each of the planetary spheres, there is a number of satellites, analogous to the choir of the fixed stars, subsisting with proper circulations of their own.
CHAPTER XV.
The nature of the Moon, Mercury, Venus, and the Sun unfolded.
CHAPTER XVI.
Extract from the Oration of the Emperor Julian to the Sovereign Sun.
CHAPTER XVII.
Extract from the MS. Scholia of Proclus on the Cratylus of Plato concerning Apollo, in which the principal powers of the God are unfolded.
CHAPTER XVIII.
The nature of the Muses unfolded from the above MS. Scholia.
CHAPTER XIX.
The nature of Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, unfolded.--The manner in which each of the seven planetary divinities becomes an animal, and is suspended from a more divine soul; and what kind of perfection it affords to the universe.
CHAPTER XX.
That all the celestial Gods are beneficent, and after a similar manner the causes of good.--And that the participation of them, and the mixture of material with immaterial influences, become the causes of the abundant difference in secondary natures.
CHAPTER XXI.
The nature of Minerva unfolded from the Commentaries of Proclus on the Timæus.--The spear and shield with which this Goddess, in the statues of her, is represented as armed, explained from Iamblichus.--And observations respecting the mundane allotment of this Goddess.
CHAPTER XXII.
The nature of the great mundane divinity, the earth, unfolded from Proclus on the Timæus of Plato.
CHAPTER XXIII.
The manner in which the earth is said to be the most ancient, and the first of the Gods within the heavens, explained.
CHAPTER XXIV.
On the essence of the sublunary deities.--What Plato says of them in the Timæus unfolded.
CHAPTER XXV.
Where the sublunary Gods are to be arranged.--And the meaning of the subsequent words of Plato developed.
CHAPTER XXVI.
The nature of the sublunary Gods more fully unfolded.--On the dæmoniacal order.--And that about each of the fabricators of generation, there is a coordinate angelical, dæmoniacal, and heroical multitude, which retains the appellation of its producing monad.
CHAPTER XXVII.
What Pythagoras says in the _Sacred Discourse_.--What the Orphic traditions are concerning Phanes, Night, Heaven, Saturn, Jupiter, and Bacchus.--That Plato begins the Theogony of the sublunary Gods from Heaven and Earth, and not from Phanes and Night.--And why he does so.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
On the two principles Heaven and Earth.--What each of them is; and particularly concerning the power of Heaven.
CHAPTER XXIX.
The whole theory of Earth unfolded.--And also the theory of Ocean and Tethys.--That the causes of these are in the intellectual Gods, and likewise in the sensible universe.
CHAPTER XXX.
The theory of Phorcys, Saturn, and Rhea, unfolded.
CHAPTER XXXI.
The nature of the sublunary Jupiter and Juno unfolded.--And why Plato comprehends in this ennead, viz. Heaven and Earth, Ocean and Tethys, Phorcys, Saturn, Rhea, Jupiter, and Juno, the Gods who are the fabricators of generation.
CHAPTER XXXII.
Why Plato denominates the sublunary deities, “such as become apparent when they please.”--General observations respecting the Gods that govern generation.
CHAPTER XXXIII.
On the summit, or monad of all the mundane Gods, Bacchus.--And on the mundane soul which is the immediate participant of the Bacchic intellect.
CHAPTER XXXIV.
How the mundane Gods are characterized in the Parmenides of Plato.
CHAPTER XXXV.
A developement of what Plato says in the Phædrus, about Boreas and Orithya, the Centaurs, Chimæras, Gorgons, Pegasuses, Typhons, Achelous, and the Nymphs.
CHAPTER XXXVI.
The meaning of Plato unfolded, in what he says about Pan, Tartarus, Prometheus, Cadmus, and the Syrens.
CHAPTER XXXVII.
A developement of Plato’s theological conceptions respecting Nature, Fate, and Fortune.
CHAPTER XXXVIII.
What Time, Day and Night, Month and Year are, so far as they are deities, according to the theology of Plato.
CHAPTER XXXIX.
A discussion of the order of divine souls, who are deified by always participating of the Gods.
CHAPTER XL.
A developement of the nature of Love, from the MS. Commentary of Proclus on the First Alcibiades of Plato.
CHAPTER XLI.
A continuation of the same subject.
CHAPTER XLII.
The nature of dæmons more fully disclosed.--An extract from the MS. Commentary of Proclus on the First Alcibiades, on this subject.
CHAPTER XLIII.
On the dæmons who are allotted the superintendence of mankind.
CHAPTER XLIV.
On the dæmon of Socrates.--The peculiarity of this dæmon; and that it belonged to the Apolloniacal series.
CHAPTER XLV.
Important information concerning dæmons from the MS. Scholia of Proclus on the Cratylus of Plato.--And also from the MS.
Commentary of Olympiodorus on the Phædo of Plato.
CHAPTER XLVI.
The nature of those human souls that are of an heroic characteristic unfolded.--What Plato says of these souls in the Cratylus.--His meaning elucidated from the MS. Scholia of Proclus on that dialogue.
CHAPTER XLVII.
How the triple genera that are the perpetual attendants of the Gods, are indicated in the Parmenides of Plato.
CHAPTER XLVIII.
An elucidation from Proclus of what Plato says in the Timæus, in celebration of the divinity of the World, so far as the whole of it is a God.
CHAPTER XLIX.
A further elucidation from Proclus of the same subject.
CHAPTER L.
The meaning of the words of Plato, “And causing circle to revolve in a circle, he established heaven (i.e. the world) one, only, solitary nature,” unfolded from Proclus.
CHAPTER LI.
What Plato says in the Timæus about the name of the World,--with the elucidations of Proclus.
_An explanation of certain terms which are unusual, or have a meaning different from their common acceptation, and which there was a necessity of introducing in the translation of this work._ COMPOSITE, συνθετος. I have used the word composite instead of _compounded_, because the latter rather denotes the mingling than the contiguous union of one thing with another, which the former, through its derivation from the Latin word _compositus_, solely denotes.
DEMIURGUS OF WHOLES, δημιουργος των ολων. The artificer of the universe is thus denominated, because he produces the universe so far as it is a _whole_, and likewise all the wholes it contains, by his own immediate energy; other subordinate powers co-operating with him in the production of parts. Hence he produces the universe _totally_ and _at once_.
DESIRE, επιθυμια. Is an irrational appetite solely directed to external objects, and to the gratification arising from the possession of them.
DIANOIA, διανοια, from whence _dianoetic_, is the discursive energy of reason; (διεξοδικη του λογου ενεργεια) or according to its most accurate signification, it is that power of the soul which reasons scientifically, deriving the principles of its reasoning from intellect, or the power which sees truth intuitively.
DOXASTIC, formed from δοξα, _opinion_, is the last of the gnostic powers of the rational soul; and knows _that_ a thing is, but is ignorant of the cause of it, or _why_ it is. The knowledge of the διοτι, or _why_ a thing is, being the province of dianoia.
GUEST, ξενος. This word, in its more ample signification in the Greek, denotes a _stranger_, but properly implies one who receives another, or is himself received at an entertainment. In the dialogues of Plato therefore, (and consequently in this work of Proclus when he cites the dialogues in which this word occurs) wherever one of the speakers is introduced as a ξενος, I have translated this word _guest_, as being more conformable to the genius of Plato’s dialogues, which may be justly called rich mental banquets, and consequently the speakers in them may be considered as so many guests. Hence in the Timæus, the persons of that dialogue are expressly spoken of as guests from having been feasted with discourse.
HYPARXIS, υπαρξις. The first principle, or foundation as it were, of the essence of a thing. Hence, also, it is the summit of essence.
IMPARTICIPABLE, αμεθεκτος. One thing is said to be imparticipable with respect to another, to which it is superior, when it is not consubsistent with it.
INTELLECTUAL PROJECTION. The immediate energy of intellect is thus denominated, because it is an intuitive perception, or an immediate darting forth, as it were, to its proper object, the intelligible.
MONAD, μονας, in divine natures is that which contains _distinct_, but at the same time _profoundly-united_ multitude, and which produces a multitude exquisitely allied to itself. But in the sensible universe, the first monad is the world itself, which comprehends in itself all the multitude of which it is the cause (in conjunction with the cause of all). The second monad is the inerratic sphere. In the third place, the spheres of the planets succeed, each of which is also a monad, comprehending an appropriate multitude. And in the fourth and last place are the spheres of the elements, which are in a similar manner monads. All these monads likewise are denominated ολοτητες, _wholenesses_, and have a perpetual subsistence.
PERMANENCY, στασις. The proper word for rest, in Greek, is ηρεμια.
And Simplicius justly observes, that not every στασις is ηρεμια, but that only which is after motion. This word is employed by Plato in the Sophista, to express one of the five genera of being, viz. _essence_, which place it evidently does not signify rest.
PHANTASY, or _Imagination_, φαντασια, is, μορφωτικη νοησις, i.e. _a figured intelligence_, because all the perceptions of this power are _inward_, and not external, like those of sense, and are accompanied with _figure_.
PSYCHICAL, ψυχικος, i.e. _pertaining to soul_, in the same manner as φυσικος, _physical_, is _something pertaining to nature_.
REASON, λογος. This word in Platonic writers signifies either that inward discursive energy called reasoning; or a certain productive and seminal principle; or that which is indicative and definitive of a thing. Hence λογοι or _reasons_ in the soul, are, gnostically producing principles.
UNICAL, ενιαιος, that which is characterized by unity.
UNIFORM, ενοειδης. This word when it occurs in Proclus, and other Platonic writers, signifies that which has the form of _the one_, and not as in Johnson, that which keeps its tenour, or is similar to itself.
PROCLUS, THE PLATONIC SUCCESSOR, ON The Theology of Plato.
BOOK I.
CHAPTER I.
O Pericles, to me the dearest of friends, I am of opinion that the whole philosophy of Plato was at first unfolded into light through the beneficent will of superior natures, exhibiting the intellect concealed in them, and the truth subsisting together with beings, to souls conversant with generation (so far as it is lawful for them to participate of such supernatural and mighty good); and again, that afterwards having received its perfection, returning as it were into itself, and becoming unapparent to many who professed to philosophize, and who earnestly desired to engage in the investigation of true being, it again advanced into light. But I particularly think that the mystic doctrine respecting divine concerns, which is purely established on a sacred foundation, and which perpetually subsists with the gods themselves, became thence apparent to such as are capable of enjoying it for a time, through one man,[82] whom I should not err in calling the primary leader and hierophant of those true mysteries, into which souls separated from terrestrial places are initiated, and of those entire and stable visions, which those participate who genuinely embrace a happy and blessed life. But this philosophy shone forth at first from him so venerably and arcanely, as if established in sacred temples, and within their adyta, and being unknown to many who have entered into these holy places, in certain orderly periods of time, proceeded as much as was possible for it into light, through certain true priests, and who embraced a life corresponding to the tradition of such mystic concerns. It appears likewise to me, that the whole place became splendid, and that illuminations of divine spectacles every where presented themselves to the view.
These interpreters of the _epopteia_ (or mystic speculations) of Plato, who have unfolded to us all-sacred narrations of divine concerns, and who were allotted a nature similar to their leader, I should determine to be the Egyptian Plotinus, and those who received the theory from him, I mean Amelius and Porphyry, together with those in the third place who were produced like virile statues from these, viz.: Jamblichus and Theodorus, and any others, who after these, following this divine choir, have energized about the doctrines of Plato with a divinely-inspired mind. From these, he[83] who, after the gods, has been our leader to every thing beautiful and good, receiving in an undefiled manner the most genuine and pure light of truth in the bosom of his soul, made us a partaker of all the rest of Plato’s philosophy, communicated to us that arcane information which he had received from those more ancient than himself, and caused us, in conjunction with him, to be divinely agitated about the mystic truth of divine concerns.
To this man, therefore, should we undertake to return thanks adequate to the benefits which we have received from him; the whole of time would not be sufficient. But if it is necessary, not only[84] that we should have received from others the transcendant good of the Platonic philosophy, but that we should leave to posterity monuments of those blessed spectacles of which we have been spectators, and emulators to the utmost of our ability, under a leader the most perfect of the present time, and who arrived at the summit of philosophy; perhaps we shall act properly in invoking the gods, that they will enkindle the light of truth in our soul, and in supplicating the attendants and ministers of better natures to direct our intellect and lead it to the all-perfect, divine, and elevated, end of the Platonic theory. For I think that every where he who participates in the least degree of intelligence, will begin his undertakings from the Gods, and especially in explications respecting the Gods: for we can no otherwise be able to understand a divine nature than by being perfected through the light of the Gods; nor divulge it to others unless governed by them, and exempt from multiform opinions, and the variety which subsists in words, preserving at the same time the interpretation of divine names. Knowing therefore this, and complying with the exhortation of the Platonic Timæus, we in the first place establish the Gods as leaders of the doctrine respecting themselves. But may they in consequence of hearing our prayers be propitious to us, and benignantly approaching, guide the intellect of our soul, and lead it about the Vesta of Plato, and to the arduous sublimities of this speculation; where, when arrived, we shall receive all the truth concerning them, and shall obtain the best end of our parturient conceptions of divine concerns, desiring to know something respecting them, inquiring about them of others, and, at the same time, as far as we are able, exploring them ourselves.
CHAPTER II.
And thus much by way of preface. But it is necessary that I should unfold the mode of the proposed doctrine, what it is requisite to expect it will be, and define the preparatives which a hearer of it ought to possess; that being properly adapted, he may approach, not to our discourses, but to the intellectually-elevated and deific philosophy of Plato. For it is proper that convenient aptitudes of auditors should be proposed according to the forms of discourses, just as in the mysteries, those who are skilful in concerns of this kind, previously prepare receptacles for the Gods, and neither always use the same inanimate particulars, nor other animals, nor men, in order to procure the presence of the divinities; but that alone out of each of these which is naturally capable of participating divine illumination, is by them introduced to the proposed mystic rites.
The present discourse, therefore, will first of all be divided by me into three parts. In the beginning, considering all those common conceptions concerning the Gods, which Plato summarily delivers, together with the power and dignity every where of theological axioms; but in the middle of this work, speculating the total orders of the Gods, enumerating their peculiarities, defining their progressions after the manner of Plato, and referring every thing to the hypotheses of theologists; and, in the end, speaking concerning the Gods which are in different places celebrated in the Platonic writings, whether they are supermundane or mundane, and referring the theory respecting them to the total genera of the divine orders.
In every part of this work, likewise, we shall prefer the clear, distinct, and simple, to the contraries of these. And such things as are delivered through symbols, we shall transfer to a clear doctrine concerning them; but such as are delivered through images, we shall transmit to their exemplars. Such things too as are written in a more affirmative way, we shall examine by causal reasonings; but such as are composed through demonstrations, we shall investigate; and besides this, explain the mode of truth which they contain, and render it known to the hearers. And of things enigmatically proposed, we shall elsewhere discover perspicuity, not from foreign hypotheses, but from the most genuine writings of Plato. But with respect to the things which immediately occur to the hearers, of these we shall contemplate the consent with things themselves. And from all these particulars, one perfect form of the Platonic theology will present itself to our view, together with its truth which pervades through the whole of divine intellections, and the one intellect which generated all the beauty of this theology, and the mystic evolution of this theory. Such, therefore, as I have said, will be my present treatise.
But the auditor of the proposed dogmas is supposed to be adorned with the moral virtues, and to be one who has bound by the reason of virtue all the illiberal and inharmonious motions of the soul, and harmonized them to the one form of intellectual prudence: for, as Socrates says, it is not lawful for the pure to be touched by the impure. But every vicious man is perfectly impure; and the contrary character is pure. He must likewise have been exercised in all the logical methods, and have contemplated many irreprehensible conceptions about analyses, and many about divisions, the contraries to these, agreeably, as it appears to me, to the exhortation of Parmenides to Socrates. For prior to such a contest in arguments, the knowledge of the divine genera, and of the truth established in them, is difficult and impervious. But in the third place, he must not be unskilled in physics. For he who has been conversant with the multiform opinions of physiologists, and has after a manner explored in images the causes of beings, will more easily advance to the nature of separate and primary essences. An auditor therefore of the present work, as I have said, must not be ignorant of the truth contained in the phenomena, nor unacquainted with the paths of erudition, and the disciplines which they contain; for through these we obtain a more immaterial knowledge of a divine essence. But all these must be bound together in the leader intellect. Being likewise a partaker of the dialectic of Plato, meditating those immaterial energies which are separate from corporeal powers, and desiring to contemplate by intelligence[85] in conjunction with reason [true] beings, our auditor must genuinely apply himself to the interpretation of divine and blessed dogmas, and fill his soul, according to the Oracle, with profound love; since, as Plato somewhere observes, for the apprehension of this theory, a better assistant than love cannot be obtained.
He must likewise be exercised in the truth which pervades through all things, and must excite his intelligible eye to real and perfect truth.
He must establish himself in a firm, immovable, and safe kind of divine knowledge, and must be persuaded not to admire any thing else, nor even to direct his attention to other things, but must hasten to divine light with an intrepid reasoning energy, and with the power of an unwearied life; and in short, must propose to himself such a kind of energy and rest as it becomes him to possess who intends to be such a coryphæus as Socrates describes in the Theætetus. Such then is the magnitude of our hypothesis, and such the mode of the discourses about it. Before, however, I enter on the narration of the things proposed, I wish to speak about theology itself, its different modes, and what theological forms Plato approves, and what he rejects; that these being previously known, we may more easily learn in what follows, the auxiliaries of the demonstrations themselves.
CHAPTER III.
All, therefore, that have ever touched upon theology, have called things first, according to nature, Gods; and have said that the theological science is conversant about these. And some, indeed, have considered a corporeal essence, as that alone which has any existence, and have placed in a secondary rank with respect to essence, all the genera of incorporeal natures, considering the principles of things as having a corporeal form, and evincing that the habit in us by which we know these, is corporeal. But others, suspending indeed all bodies from incorporeal natures, and defining the first hyparxis[86] to be in soul, and the powers of soul, call (as it appears to me) the best of souls, Gods; and denominate the science which proceeds as far as to these, and which knows these, theology. But such as produce the multitude of souls from another more ancient principle, and establish intellect as the leader of wholes, these assert that the best end is a union of the soul with intellect, and consider the intellectual form of life as the most honourable of all things. They doubtless too consider theology, and the discussion of intellectual essence, as one and the same. All these, therefore, as I have said, call the first and most self-sufficient principles of things, Gods, and the science respecting these, theology.
The divine narration however, of Plato alone, despises all corporeal natures, with reference to principles. Because, indeed, every thing divisible and endued with interval, is naturally unable either to produce or preserve itself, but possesses its being, energy, and passivity through soul, and the motions which soul contains. But Plato demonstrates that the psychical essence [i.e. the essence pertaining to soul] is more ancient than bodies, but is suspended from an intellectual hypostasis. For every thing which is moved according to time, though it may be self-moved, is indeed of a more ruling nature than things moved by others, but is posterior to an eternal motion.
He shows, therefore, as we have said, that intellect is the father and cause of bodies and souls, and that all things both subsist and energize about it, which are allotted a life conversant with transitions and evolutions.