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
to devise how this can be effected. For these being distributed about
material bulks, and divided together with their subjects, require
a boundary and connexion. But they are not naturally adapted to be
bounded or connected from themselves; because they have not an essence
self-begotten and self-subsistent. That however, which neither produces
nor perfects itself, cannot connect itself. And moreover, every habit,
and every material form is alter-motive, and depends on another more
ancient cause, and on this account is inseparable from subjects, not
being able to verge to itself.
But if abandoning these, we should assert that souls which are
incorporeal and self-begotten, are the first efficient causes of
connexion, where shall we place the partible and at the same time
impartible nature of souls, that which is mixed from the partible
and impartible, that which participates of the genera of being,
and that which is divided into harmonic reasons? For souls indeed,
connect bodies and natures, because they participate of an impartible
peculiarity; but they are in want of another connective nature which
may impart the first principle of mixture to the genera, and of
connexion to divided reasons. For the self-motive nature of souls
being transitive, and extended to time, requires that which may
connect its one life, and may render it total and indivisible. For
the whole which is connective of parts, exists prior to parts; since
the whole which consists of parts receives connexion introduced from
something different from itself. But if proceeding with the reasoning
power beyond souls, we survey intellect, whether the intellect which
is participated, or if you are willing, that which is imparticipable
and divine, and in short, if we survey at once the intellectual genus
of the Gods, if this is primarily connective of beings, we shall
find also in this all-various multitude, divisions of genera, and as
Socrates says, many and blessed visions, and discussive energies. For
the separation of divine natures, and the variety of forms, present
themselves to the view in intellectuals, and also fabulous sections and
generative powers. How therefore, can that which connects be primarily
here, where the divisive genus shines forth? And how is it possible
that intellectual multitude should not refer to another more ancient
cause the participation of its proper connexion? For intellectual
multitude is that which is primarily connected (since it is that which
is primarily divided, and that which requires connexion is divisible,
but the indivisible itself is beyond the connective hyparxis), but
it is not that which primarily connects. For every thing which is
connected, is connected by another thing which primarily possesses
the power of connexion. It is evident therefore, from what has been
said, that the connective order of beings is established prior to the
intellectual Gods.