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
If again, you are willing [to consider the affair] according to the
Parmenides of Plato, since in the Saturnian order there are both
wholeness and parts, if you assume the subsistence there of _that
which is in another_, according to whole, but of _that which is in
itself_, according to parts, Jupiter indeed, who is prior to the three,
proceeds from his father according to whole; but the three demiurgi,
according to parts. Hence, Jupiter reigns, possessing in himself, as
Socrates says in the Philebus, a royal intellect. But they reign in
a divided manner, and are allotted the universe according to parts.
Hence therefore, the Elean guest in the Politicus, celebrates these
two intellectual kings, one indeed, being the cause of the unapparent
life to wholes, and of the other circulation, but the other being the
source of the manifest order of things, and of the present period; and
he attributes to Jupiter the cause of both these periods. But at one
time indeed, he ascribes this cause to Jupiter, as leading all things
in the universe to the kingdom of Saturn; but at another, as binding
to himself the providence of secondary natures. For he is united to
his father by intellectual bonds, of which Socrates makes mention in
the Cratylus. He is likewise a whole extended to a whole, and as it
were adapts himself by his own light to the light of his father, and
possesses a second dominion. Hence also, he is said to define the
providence of his father. The Athenian guest however [in the Laws,]
extending us to the one demiurgic kingdom, to the law, and the total
justice which are there asserts, “that God, as it is said, possesses
the beginning, middle, and end of all beings, and bounds all things by
a circular progression according to nature, in a direct path.” For
because we do not think it right to consider Plato here as speaking
of the first God, or of any other of the intellectual or intelligible
fathers, but of the whole demiurgus, it is sufficient for those who
are moderately able to understand things of this kind, that he is
said to bound all things in a direct path, and to proceed circularly
according to nature. It is also sufficient, that Justice is said to be
the attendant of this God, being the avenger of those who transgress
the divine law. For the first God, and all the Gods who are established
above the perfective order, are exempt from this rectilinear, and also
from the circular progression, as Parmenides teaches us. They likewise
transcend all motion. But the first that proceeds after motion, is
the whole and all-perfect demiurgus. To this divinity therefore, it
pertains to bound wholes in a direct path, to proceed circularly, and
to be followed by Justice. For we say indeed, that the thing which
follows, follows that which is moved.