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 — John Shaqi
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
Plato then, intending now to speak of the sublunary Gods, says,
that the discourse about them is admirable, and beyond our ability
to perform, if we intend to discover the generation of them, and
promulgate it to others. For what he before said of the demiurgus,
that it is difficult to discover him, and impossible to speak of him
to all men, this he now says of the sublunary Gods, that to know and
to speak of the generation of them, surpasses our ability. What,
therefore, does Plato mean by this mode of indication? For as he has
delivered so many and such admirable things concerning all heaven, and
the intelligible paradigm, how is it that he says, that to speak of
the Gods who are the fabricators of generation, is a task beyond our
ability to perform? Perhaps it is because many physiologists considered
these sublunary elements to be inanimate natures casually borne along,
and destitute of providential care. For they acknowledged that the
celestial bodies, on account of their orderly motions, participate
of intellect and the Gods; but they left generation, as being very
mutable and indefinite, deprived of providential inspection. In order,
therefore, that we might not be affected in the same manner as they
were, he antecedently celebrates and proclaims the generation of the
sublunary Gods to be divine and intellectual, requiring no such mode
of indication in speaking of the celestial Gods. Perhaps also it may
be said, that souls more swiftly forget things nearer to themselves,
but have a greater remembrance of superior principles. For they in a
greater degree operate upon them through transcendency of power, and
appear through energy to be present with them. The same thing also
happens with respect to our sight. For though we do not see many things
that are situated on the earth, yet at the same time we appear to see
the inerratic sphere, and the stars themselves, because they illuminate
our sight with their light. The eye of the soul, therefore, becomes
in a greater degree oblivious of, and blind to, more proximate than
to higher and more divine principles. Thus, all religions and sects
acknowledge that there is a first principle of things, and all men
invoke God as their helper; but all do not believe that there are Gods
posterior to this principle, and that a providential energy proceeds
from them into the universe. For _the one_ is seen by them in a
clearer manner than multitude. Others, again, believe indeed that there
are Gods, but after the Gads, admitting the dæmoniacal genus, they are
ignorant of the heroic order. And in short, this is the greatest work
of science, subtilly to distinguish the media and the progressions of
beings. If, therefore, we rightly assert these things, Plato, when
speaking of the celestial Gods, very properly indicates nothing of the
difficulty of the subject; but when speaking of the sublunary Gods,
says that it surpasses our ability. For the discussion of these is