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
This therefore must also be supposed by us, and likewise in addition to
this, that this order of Gods (the subcelestial arch,) is proximately
arranged under the heaven. Hence, since the heaven being one and
triple, is allotted the connective order, but the supercelestial place
is allotted the highest order of the intelligible and at the same time
intellectual Gods, it is undoubtedly necessary that the subcelestial
arch should terminate the middle progression of the Gods, should
close this whole order, and convert it to its principle, and that it
should receive an order which is secondary indeed to the heaven, but
which it convolves to the highest union, and should be connascently
conjoined with the middle genera, but exist prior to intellectuals.
For these indeed separate their kingdom from the celestial power; but
the subcelestial arch is united to the heaven, and is comprehended
by the celestial order. Whence also it is denominated subcelestial.
As it is conjoined therefore, to the celestial circulation, and
subsists proximately from it, it converts all secondary natures to
intelligibles, and perfects them according to the intellectual place
of survey. For since the intellectual Gods are generated according to
conversion, and are convolved to themselves according to one spherical
union, it is necessary that the perfective empire should be proximately
established above them.
Hence, I am led to wonder at those who are ignorant of this divine
order, and do not maintain the whole fountain of perfection; but some
of them betake themselves to _entelechias_, of whom we admit thus much
alone, that they also conjoin the perfect with the form of connexion.
They are ignorant therefore, of the perfection which is separate from
subjects, willingly embrace the resemblances of true perfections, and
are conversant with these. Others again assign soul as the cause of
perfection, who are ignorant that they do not vindicate to themselves
a perfection preexisting in eternity, and who begin from the life
which energizes according to time, and possesses its perfection in
periods. It is necessary, however, that a perfection the whole of
which subsists at once, should be prior to that which is divided, and
that stable perfection should be prior to that which is moved. For
the motion itself which is according to time, is indigent of end, and
of the desirable, and is evolved about it according to parts. In the
third place, after these, others recur to intellect, and suppose the
first perfection to be intellectual. For intellect indeed, is energy
and intellectual perfection; but it aspires after divine perfection,
subsists about it, and is converted to itself through it. It is
necessary therefore, that the cause of conversion should exist prior
to the intellectual genera which are converted to divine perfection,
and that the leader of the perfection which is one, should be expanded
above the natures which are perfected.