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 — John Shaqi
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
because it participates of _the one_; and it is biformed, so far
as it proceeds from the two principles; but it is a triad, so far as in
every mixture, these three things are necessary according to Socrates,
viz. beauty, truth, and symmetry. Concerning these things however, we
shall speak again.
In what manner, however, essence is that which is first mixed, we shall
now explain. For this is of all things the most difficult to discover,
viz. what that is which is primarily being, as the Elean guest also
somewhere says; for it is most dubious how being is not less than
non-being. In what manner therefore essence subsists from bound and
infinity must be shown. For if bound and infinity are superessential,
essence may appear to have its subsistence from non-essences. How
therefore can non-essences produce essence? Or is not this the
case in all other things which subsist through the mixture of each
other? For that which is produced from things mingled together, is
not the same with things that are not mingled. For neither is soul
the same with the genera, from which, being mingled together, the
father generated it, nor is a happy life the same with the life which
is according to intellect, or with the life which is according to
pleasure, nor is _the one_ in bodies the same with its elements.
Hence it is not wonderful, if that which is primarily being, though
it is neither bound nor infinity, subsists from both these, and is
mixed, superessential natures themselves not being assumed in the
mixture of it, but secondary progressions from them coalescing into
the subsistence of essence. Thus therefore being consists of these,
as participating of both, possessing indeed the uniform from bound,
but the generative, and in short, occult multitude from infinity.
For it is all things occultly, and on this account, is the cause of
all beings; which also the Elean guest indicating to us, calls being
the first power, as subsisting according to the participation of the
first power, and participating of hyparxis from bound, and of power
from infinity. Afterwards however, the Elean guest defines being to
be power, as prolific and generative of all things, and as being all
things uniformly. For power is every where the cause of prolific
progressions, and of all multitude; occult power indeed being the cause
of occult multitude; but the power which exists in energy, and which
unfolds itself into light, being the cause of all-perfect multitude.
Through this cause therefore, I think, that every being, and every
essence has connascent powers. For it participates of infinity, and
derives its hyparxis indeed from bound, but its power from infinity.
And being is nothing else than a monad of many powers, and a multiplied
hyparxis, and on this account being is one many. The many however
subsist occultly and without separation in the first natures; but with
separation in secondary natures. For by how much being is nearer to