The Commentaries on the Timaeus of Plato — trans. Thomas Taylor

Again therefore, from the beginning we must say, that the elements being con-

‘Madey is emitted in this place in the original, ev aa ae Sen eee oe te ee! ee δὰ τρια»

BOOK 111. TIM.GUS OF PLATO. 427

ceived in one way as unmingled, but in another as mingled, the first’ mixture of them produces the heavens, which contain all things according to a fiery characteristic. [But the second mixture of them produces the sublunary rezion]," in which all things subsist according to a middle characteristic. And the last mixture of them produces the subterranean realins, in which the dregs of all things are contained, Pyriphlegethon, as they say, and Acheron, Ocean and Cocytus. Hence it may be said, that the four unmingled elements are every where, and that there are five, all heaven being assumed as one element; but that the last elements are comprehended in she earth. The five elements however, are said to be the elements of the world ; and on this account the world derives. its completion from them. But it must be said that the four elements are the elements both of the heavens and of generation. Hence the heavens are of a fifth essence, besides the four elements ; but are mingled from the simple elements. For these sublunary four are not in the heavens, but the summits of them are there, and all the four elements unmingled, and separated from each other by their proper forms. And these assertions are most concordant with Plate, who at one time says that the heavens consist of the four elements, bound together by analogy, and that the whole world is constituted from these; but shortly after fashions the five fizures, and calls them five worlds. For these things give a fifth essence to the heavens, introduce a tetractys of the elements, and accord with truth. For all things are inthe heaven according to a fiery mode; and on this account it is a simple body, different from that which is sublunary, and. truly comprehends all things pertaining to these material masses. We must not therefore admit that all earth is heavy, nor that all fire is light; but sublunary earth aud fire are perhaps things of this kind, while those in’ the heavens subsist after another manner. For the solidity and stability which are there are derived from earth. And hence each of the spheres is not moved according to the whole of itself [but revolves round an immoveable centre]. But the celestial light, and facility of motion, are derived from fire. The connective and transparent nature of the heavens are from air 5 and their equability and smoothness, from water.

That Plato however, affords us these auxiliaries, he clearly shows shortly after, whenhe says, “ that hewho constituted the world composed itfromall fire water, airand earth, leaving nopartnor power ofany oncof them externally.” For he does not sa y from

“ae appears.that the words τῆς ἕε deurepas τον υποσεληνὴῆν τόπον, are wanting in this place, in the orginal. ;

;

p. 428

tire or water simply, but from a// fire and all water, through which he indicates that there is much fire in the universe, and of a different nature, and also much water, and which is essentially different. Moreover, the theology of the Assyrians hich was unfolded into light from divinity, delivers the same Wangs. For in that theology, the Demiurgus is said to have made the whole world from fire, water, carth, and all-nourishing ether or air; and the artificer is said to liave fashioned the world as it were withhis own hands. For it says,“ there was a certain other inass of fire.” But he fashioned, as it were manually, all things, in order that he might conglomerate the mundane body, “ that the world might) become manifest, and might not appear membrancous ;” which is the same thing as to say, that it might not alone bear the obscure and imbecile vestiges of forms. For the word membrancous signifies the ladistinct subsistence of reasons (or forms). As we have said therefore, the Oracles also bear witness to what is asserted by Plato, since they too generate the world from the four elements. And thus much concerning the concord of philosophers about this particular: for we shall see in what follows, if there is any difference respecting it in the doctrine of Plato,

It is manifest however, that the elements are every where bound to each other by analogy." For analogy, as we lave said, imitates divine union, and is a demiurgic bond. And the analogy indeed in mathematics, possesses the accurate and the scientific: for the ratios there are immaterial. Bat in physies this is no longer similarly the case. For the analogy which is in’ the heavenly bodies participates of a certain accuracy 3 but in sublunary natures the analogy is less accurate, because it is Conversant with matter. Again therefore, the order of the elements becomes apparent, and we see that Plato very properly procures from the mathematics belief in. physical reasons. For they are causes, and the demiurgic progression is effected through soul. The veneration also of physical essences appropriately proceeds through media; and celestial matures are ina certain respect more allied to accurate reasons, but sublunary natures have an obscure truth. Plato therefore knowing these things, adds, * as much as possible,” in order that you may not entirely require in’ physical reasons a mathematical accuracy. For if you are willing to evamine each of the elements, you will perceive an abundant mirturein it. Thus, for instance, air is not simply a thing of attenuated parts. Furit has also sumcthing gross, nebulous, and aqueous. Nor ts water simply casily moved. And the part of fire itself which is mingled with air, resembles the

1 Instead of ors de avadoyia δεδεικται ἰὼ this place, it is necessary to read, ore δε avaduyeg δεδησεται.

p. 429

Furit has also sumcthing gross, nebulous, and aqueous. Nor ts water simply casily moved. And the part of fire itself which is mingled with air, resembles the

1 Instead of ors de avadoyia δεδεικται ἰὼ this place, it is necessary to read, ore δε avaduyeg δεδησεται.

p. 429

obtuseness of air; and this necessarily. For it is requisite to conjoin the summits of secondary with the dregs of primary natures.

Farther stall, we ought also to understand the manner in which Plato constitutes the analogy. Hor he begins from the media, and preserves the order of the terms, just as the Demiurgus made all things to be in each other,’ together with preserving the distinction of them; and he denominates all this contexture a bond and composition, For it is a bond indeed, as imparting union and analogy from the demiurgic cause 5 but it is a composition, as being thence produced according to essence itself Por some one may bind things which he did not compose. ‘This however, is not the case with the Demiurgus, but he is the father, he is the unifying cause, and he is the guardian of all his own works. In addition to these things also, it must be observed that Plato assumes here, as we have said, the geometric mean, and indicates that this is analogy, For it is the peculiarity of this middle to have the same ratio, Tlence some persons properly call. it analogy, The other media therefore, appear to be the suppliers of more partial goods to the world, and not to be the sources: of the order which proceeds through all things, and of uninterrupted connexion, For in the generation of the soul the other* media are assumed for the sake of binding together the geometric ratios, and are comprehended in the whole geometric middle, as in that which is alone analogy.

“Hence from these and things of this kind, which are four in number, the body of the world was generated, being concordant through analogy, and possessing friendship through these, so as to conspire into union with itself, and to be indissoluble by any other nature than by him through whom it was bound.”

That the tetrad itself of the elements, primarily proceeded from all-perfeect animal, (or it was the intelligible tetrad) and that on this account. all things enist _tetradically, becomes 1 think evident through the words before us + and also that generation proceeds to the tetrad from the monad through the duad. For the world is only-begotten and one. Afterwards we find it is nec essary that there should be the visible and tangible in it; in the next place, we find that these being much separated from each other, are in want of a certain third thing; and in the

" For ev ἀλλοις here, it is necessary to read ey αλληλοι». * There is an owission in this place of at adda.

p. 420