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
Farther still, in the Phædo, teaching us what the mode of the cathartic
life of souls is, he says “that the soul when it does not associate
with the body, comes into contact with [true] being.” Through all these
particulars, therefore, he indicates that contact is the work of an
inseparable providence, and of a co-arranged administration; but that
the negation of contact is the business of a prefecture, separate,
unrestrained, and exempt from the subjects of government. _The
one_, therefore, which touches and does not touch other things, is
conjoined with other things, and established above them. Hence, at one
and the same time it is allotted the power of things established above
the world, and of mundane natures. For being in the middle of both,
it comprehends in one the divided peculiarities of the extremes. And
moreover, it touches, and does not touch itself prior to other things;
because there are in it multitude, a separation of wholeness, and the
parts of wholeness, and a union collective of all the multitude. For
if it has proceeded from its principles, and if it energizes partibly,
it is various and multiform. For every progression diminishes indeed,
the powers of the proceeding natures, but increases the multitude
which is in them, and if it has not entirely proceeded, the uniform
nature of its essence shines forth to the view, at one and the same
time, with the multitude it contains. This genus of Gods, therefore, is
co-arranged with the mundane Gods, and transcends the subjects of its
government. It is also liberated, being separated from things which are
perfectly divided. Hence, if it is one and multitude, producing indeed
into secondary natures the many rivers of the fountains, but surpassing
partible allotments, it will at one and the same time touch and not
touch itself. On account of its separate union indeed, it is not in
want of contact; but on account of its progression into multitude, it
touches itself. “For it comprehends many things in itself, and touches
itself, so far as it is in itself,” says Parmenides.[1] In short, so
far as it is without contact, it is separate; but so far as it proceeds
from itself, and is again established in itself, it touches itself.
And so far indeed, as it is in other things, it comes into contact
with other things; but so far as it is uncoarranged with others, and
so far as it has not a co-ordinate number in them, it is separated
from them. At one and the same time therefore, this genus of Gods
is uniform and multiplied, and is uniformly varied. It also abides
and proceeds, and is participated by more imperfect natures, and is
imparticipable, existing prior to them. All these particulars, however,
are the elements of the supercelestial order, presenting to our view an
hypostasis mingled from perfectly divided peculiarities. And thus much
concerning the essence and hyparxis of these Gods, which Parmenides
exhibits to us in the above citation.