The six books of Proclus, the Platonic successor, on the theology of Plato (vol. 1 of 2) : $b translated from the Greek, to which a seventh book is added, in order to supply the deficiency of another book on this subject, which was written by Proclus, but since lost, also, a translation from the Greek of Proclus' Elements of theology, to which are added a translation of the treatise of Proclus, On providence and fate, a translation of extracts from his treatise, entitled, Ten doubts concerning
Plato · en
CHAPTER XXIX.
Thus much therefore may suffice concerning the unbegotten hyparxis
of the Gods. It now remains, I think, to speak of divine names. For
Socrates in the Cratylus thinks fit to unfold in a remarkable degree
the rectitude of names in divine natures. And Parmenides indeed, in
the first hypothesis, as he denies of _the one_ every thing else
that is known, and all knowledge, so likewise he denies of it name and
language. But in the second hypothesis, besides all other things he
shows that this one may be spoken of and[134] that it has a name. In
short therefore, it must be admitted that the first, most principal and
truly divine names are established in the Gods themselves. But it must
be said that the second names, which are the imitations of the first,
and which subsist intellectually, are of a dæmoniacal allotment.
And again, we may say that those names which are the third from the
truth, which are logically devised, and which receive the ultimate
resemblance of divine natures, are unfolded by scientific men, at one
time energizing divinely, and at another intellectually, and generating
moving images of their inward spectacles. For as the demiurgic
intellect establishes resemblances about matter of the first forms
contained in himself, and produces temporal images of things eternal,
divisible images of things indivisible, and adumbrated images as it
were of true beings,--after the same manner I think the science that is
with us representing intellectual production, fabricates resemblances
of other things, and also of the Gods themselves, representing that
which is void of composition in them, through composition; that
which is simple, through variety; and that which is united, through
multitude; and thus fashioning names, ultimately exhibits images of
divine natures. For it generates every name as if it were a statue of
the Gods. And as the theurgic art through certain symbols calls forth
the exuberant and unenvying goodness of the Gods into the illumination
of artificial statues, thus also the intellectual science of divine
concerns, by the compositions and divisions of sounds, unfolds the
occult essence of the Gods. Very properly therefore, does Socrates
in the Philebus say, that on account of his reverence of the Gods,
he is agitated with the greatest fear respecting their names. For it
is necessary to venerate even the ultimate echos of the Gods, and
venerating these to become established in the first paradigms of
them. And thus much concerning divine names, which at present may be
sufficient for the purpose of understanding the theology of Plato. For
we shall accurately discuss them when we speak of partial powers.
BOOK II.
CHAPTER I.