The six books of Proclus, the Platonic successor, on the theology of Plato (vol. 2 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 p
Plato · en
Neither therefore, are the mundane Gods entirely indissoluble; for this
pertains to the most simple natures. Nor are they dissoluble according
to time; for the composition of them proceeds from the demiurgic
union. As therefore in the cause union precedes things of a simple
nature, after the same manner here also, a bond precedes dissolution;
for it is more excellent, and the resemblance of a more divine power.
And this is seen in souls; for there were bonds and media in them,
as has been before observed in the generation of the soul. It is
also seen in bodies; for analogy is a bond. And likewise in animals;
for being bound with animated bonds they became animals. Hence, the
immortal and the indissoluble, do not entirely pertain to the mundane
Gods; yet at the same time they do pertain to them. And because they
are not in every respect present with them nor in such a manner as
in intelligibles, immortality must be taken from them. For in the
Banquet also, Plato does not think fit to call Love immortal, yet he
does not denominate it mortal; but asserts it to be something between
both these. For there is a great extent of the mortal and immortal,
and they are bound together by many media. It appears likewise, with
respect to the immortal, that one kind of it is common to all the
beings that differ from a mortal nature,[82] and which consists in not
being deprived of the life which it possesses. According to this sense
of the word, Plato says that the demiurgus is the cause of immortal
natures, but the junior Gods, of such as are mortal. But another kind
of the immortal is the peculiarity of intelligibles, being eternally
so. And another belongs to the mundane Gods, which is an immortality
perpetually rising into existence, and having its subsistence in always
becoming to be. Hence, it may be said that the immortal and mortal are
oppositely divided without a medium, if the common signification of
the immortal is assumed; and that they are not opposed to each other
without a medium, if that which is primarily immortal is considered;
and this is that which _is_ always immortal. For the medium between
this and the mortal, is that which is always _becoming to be_ immortal.
But that which is properly immortal possesses the whole of its life in
eternity. That however which has its life evolved through the whole
of time, and has not always one and the same indivisible life, this
possesses an immortality co-extended with the flux of generation, but
is not immortal according to the stability of being. And again, the
medium between the immortality of the mundane Gods and that of partial
souls, is that which has a life always rising into existence, and
which ascends and descends in intellectual energy, so as to be nearer
to mortal natures, leaving indeed a more excellent intellection, but
transferring itself into one that is subordinate, and again recurring
to its pristine condition without oblivion. And of these, the former