The Commentaries on the Timaeus of Plato — trans. Thomas Taylor
The text is shown on its own: no facing layer is held for this issue.
In short, as the assertions concerning intelligibles, are not adapted to dianoetic objects, so neither is what is said of scientific objects adapted to sensibles. For intelligibles are the paradigms of dianoetic natures, and dianoetic natures of sensibles. Forp. 204 it is soul which adorns the mighty heaven, and adorns it in conjunction with the father. So that when we speak of circles in the heavens, of contacts, bisections, and equalities, we speak accurately, as not speaking about sensibles. Since therefore things of this kind may be asserted of all material natures, the objection is trifling.
If, however, some one should.ask us, is not that which is truly equal impartible, and that which is truly a circle, without interval? Por each is a universal; but universal is an impartible reason and form. But the natures in’ the heavens are partible, and not indivisible, and are inasubject, Here again, we do not say that either circles, or equalities, or any thing else of this kind are in sensibles ; and thus we are consistent with ourselves. We summarily, say, therefore, that Plato at one time defines science, by an explanation of causes alone ; at another time, by the subjects of tt, possessing anessence perfectly stable, tovether with an caplanation of cause ; and at another, by the principles not being hypotheses. And according to this last form, indeed, he asserts that there is one science (i.e. dialectic] which ascends as far as to the principle of being. Por this science pre-establishes the principle which is truly principle, to be unhypothetical, Ttalse has for its subject truly exisiting being, and produces its reasonings from cause, But according tothe second form, he also calls dianoetic knowledge science. And according to the first alone, he allows the appellation of science to be given to phystology. Now therefore looking to the first’ form he thinks fit to call it conjectural knowledye. And thus much in answer to the doubt, the whole of what is here said being attended with difficulty on account of the construction of the words, which may thus be corrected with a small addition. “JA O Socrates, asserting many things about many,” afterwards showing what these many things are, he adds, “ concerning the Gods, and the gencration of the universe. And these are the many he alludes τον. Uf therefore, he says, many things being asscrted about many, concerning the generation of the universe, and the Gods tt contains, cach of these being many, we should not be able to employ accurate language, you must not ΟΝ He says this, however, because itis not w onderful, to be oceupicd in things of a necessary nature, But it is necessary that a discussion should not be accurate in a twofold respect, viz. on account of the thing known, not being stable and clear, and on aecount of our nature being human. So great therefore is the caution on account of the thing known, not being stable and clear, and on aecount of our nature being human. So great therefore is the caution
' Itis evidently necessary instead of Seurepor ertus iv this plece, to read πρωτὸν etSos. Vor diunvetc hnowledge is by nu means conjectural.
p. 295
which Plato employs in what he says. This however is not the case with others. But Heraclitus, by asserting of himself that he knew all things, makes all other mento be destitute of science. And Empedocles announces that he imparts truth herself, and that, in what he writes.
‘To Wisdom’s summit rapidly he leaps.
For these assertions are not conformable to philosophic caution. But the Stoics say that there is the same virtue of Gods and men, being very far from emulating the piety of Plato, and the modesty of Socrates.
“ Tf therefore we shall afford arguments no less probable than others, it is proper to be satisfied, calling to mind that I who speak, and that: you who are my judges, have the human nature [in common]. 80. that if you reccive a probable narration concerning these things, it is fit to seek for nothing farther than this.”
Timeus reminds us ina twofold respect of the privation of stability and aceuracy in physical discussions ; first, from the essence of the things. For from immaterial natures becoming material, from impartble partible, from separate hatures, such as are situated in a foreign seat, and from universal, becoming individual and partial natures, they do not receive the definition of things scientific and irreprehensible, which is adapted to: immaterial and imparuble forms. But in the second respect, from the imbecility of that by which physical objects are surveyed. For if it be requisite to know any thing concerning them, it is also requisite to embrace a knowledge co-ordinate to them. But this is sense. And if indeed we were in the heavens, we should perhaps be less deceived ; but here dwelling in the last part of the universe, and being most remote from them, we employ sense in a gross and erroncous manner. For we are allotted the human nature. But the human nature brings with ita life which is material and darkened by the body, and which is partible, and in want of irrational knowledge. The Gods, however, know' that which is generated, in a way perfectly remote from generation, that which is temporal, eternally, and that which is contingent, necessarily. For by intellectually perceiving they generate all things, so that they
* The word yeywosover is wanting in the original.
p. 906
For by intellectually perceiving they generate all things, so that they
* The word yeywosover is wanting in the original.
p. 906
intellectually perceive them after the above- mentioned manner. For we must not fancy that knowledge is characterized by the natures of the things known, or that what is not stable is also not stable with the Gods, as the pInlosopher Porphyry says; for this is asserted by lim which it would have been better not to have said ; but we must admit that the mode of knowledge varies with the diversities of gnostic natures. For the same thing is known by divinity indeed unitedly, by intellect totally, by reason universally, by the phantasy morphotically," and by sense passively. Nor does it follow, that because the thing known is one, the knowledge also is one. Farther still, if knowledges are essential in the Gods, and their intellizence is not adventitious, such as they are, such also is their Knowledge. But they are immaterial, eternal, united, and undefiled; and, therefore, they know immaterially, eternally, unitedly, and with uncontaminated purity, Hence they antecedently comprehend that w hich ismaterial, immeatertally 5 dispersed multitude, uniformly ; that which is changed according to time, stably and eternally 5 and every thing preternatural, dark and impure, ina manner ftranscendently luminous and] pure, Would it not therefore be superfluous to add any further contirmation of this truth?
Again however this? may be assumed from what has been said, that the want of accuracy in the theory of the images of being, arises from our imbecility Por to the knowledge of them we require phantasy, sense, and many other organs. But the Gods contractedly comprehend these in their unity, and divine intellection, For in sublunary natures, we are satisfied in apprehending that which for the most part takes place, on account of the instability of their subject matter, But again, in celestial natures, we are filled with much of the conjectoral, through employing sense, and material instruments, On this account, we must he satisticd wath proximity in the apprehension of them, since we dwell remotely, at the bottom, as itis said, of the universe. This also is evident from those that are conversant with them, who collect the same things respecting them from diferent hypotheses 5 some things, indeed, through eccentrics, others through epicyeles, and others through evolvents, (in all these} preserving the phenomena, What then, some one may say, are we to be satisfied with Plato im physiologizing, and in affording us arguments no less probable than others? May we not reply, that it especially becomes prudent men thus to speak about things of this kind, and to pursue the
No commentary for this page under the selected tracks.
There is commentary on page 1.