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

Le says, therefore, that it is the property of the sphere to have all the right lines every way equal from the middle, in order to distinguish it from the circle. For the term every way, or from all parts, does not pertain to this, since it has only two intcrvals.

Plato likewise uses the expression lo fashion as with a wheel, because bodies with us are rendered more accurately round throngh a wheel which cuts off the inequalities of the bodies. And that the simi/ar and the perfect especially pertain to the spherical peculiarity, is evident. The similar, therefore, is analogous to the one, but the perfect to the good, so that through both he refers the spherical peculiarity to the first principle of things, by saying that itis most similar to itself, and most perfect ; equallizing that which is most unical and most boniform. For neither the mixed perfect or similar, nor the right line, which always receives an addition and may become angular; but the spherical peculiarity alone, is most similar and most perfect. After this, he adds, which is evident, “ that the similar ts better than the dissimilar.” For similitude is of an uniting, but dissimilitude of a

• * Which the Coryphean philosopher mentioned by Plato in the Thextetus, is said to do.
• * Instead of rns voepas cSuorgros in this place, it is neccssary to read ras voqrys ἐδιστητοε.

p. 452

* Instead of rns voepas cSuorgros in this place, it is neccssary to read ras voqrys ἐδιστητοε.

p. 452

dividing nature. And the former belongs to the co-ordination of sameness, but the latter to that of difference. And the former is the cause of simplicity, but the fatter of variety to things. As the artiticer therefore of the universe found, that among things naturally visible, the intellectual is more beaatifal than that whieh is desttute of intellect, thus also he thought that the similar is better than the dissimilar. For in intelligibles, similitude is better than dissimilitude, in powers, πὶ intellectual perceptions, and in productions. Whenee also some one may wonder at those Platonists, who admit that difference is better than) sameness, though Plato says that the similar is infinitely more beautiful than the dissimilar, At the same time, also, dissimilitade is ima certain respect secretly introduced into beings from matter, but similitade accedes from forms alone, and intellizible causes. Sinilitude, therefore, is infinitely better than dissimilitude ; 50 that sameness is also more excellent than difference. ‘This is the judgment of Jupiter. Through this, also, in the universe the similar is better than the dissimilar, in essences, in motions, in figures, and in all other things. For the progression of things Is very properly effected through the similitude of productions to the cause of the production; and again, conversion is the primary leader of another similitude. Very properly therefore is the world, on account of these things, under the dominion of similitude, being a God according to form itself. Hence Plato also endeavours to show what the figure of the world is, from similitude, and the Py thagoric Timeus himself, assigns this as the first cause of its fisure, in conjunction with making a physical mention of it. “ For a sphere alone, says he, both when it is quiescent, and when it is moved, is capable of bem co-adapted in the same place; so as never to fail nor receive another place.” Aristotle likewise after finn, well knew, that with whatever other figure you may surround the universe, you will make a vacuum, through the alternate mutation of the angles, and the unequal distance of the extremes from the middle.

“He also accurately elaborated the external circumference of the universe, and rendered it smooth, for the sake of many things.”

Some one may think that the same thing which was before asserted, is again here repeated. For in what docs this smouthness differ from rotundity, or what mutation is there of similitude? In acertain respect, therefore, this universe comprehends what has been said about similitude; but at the same time, there isa difference between surveying what the nature is of the whole figure which per-

p. 153

In acertain respect, therefore, this universe comprehends what has been said about similitude; but at the same time, there isa difference between surveying what the nature is of the whole figure which perp. 153vades as far as to the centre of the earth, and alone considering itself by itself, the most external superficies of the universe. And what is here said about smoothness, conteads as it appears to one thing, viz. to show that the universe is neither in want of gnostic, nor of partible motive organs, for the purpose of acting upon, orsuflering from other things ; introdaciny this as the fifth deminreie cilt to the world. What is said, therefore, about the sindothness, is a medium between what is asserted respecting the bulk, and the soul of the universe. For the proximate boundary of body is smoothness 3 but the exempt boundary is soul, and prior to soul, intellect. For this is the boundary of soul itself. And prior to intellect, the one deity which connects the whole mundane multitude, is the boundary of the body of the world. You may therefore speak after this manner.

But you may also say, according to a more perfect mode, that. the universe being a luminous whole, it is most Juminous according to its external superticies, and is full of divine splendour. For on this account also poets place Olympus on the summit of the world, being wholly luminous, and light itself.

Nor clouds, nor rain, nor winter there are found,"
But dazziing spleodour spreads its radiance round.

Of this luminous subsistence, smoothness is a symbol. Why therefore are the summits of the universe smooth? Plato says, for the sake of many things. For they are so, in order that it may be spontaneously conjoined with soul and intellect, and may be adapted to supermundane lights, through a similitude to them, Smoothness, therefore, is sixnificant * of the highest aptitude, through which the universe is able to receive the illaminations from iniclicca and soul ; in the same manner as mirrors receive the representations of things by their smoothness. Formerly also by theologists, a mirror was assumed as a symbol of aptitude, to the intellectual completion of the universe. Hence they say, Vulean made a mirror for Dionysius, or Bacehus, into which the God looking, and beholding the image of himself, proceeded: into the whole partuble fabrication of things. You may say therefore, that Plato reminds os of this catoptnc apparatus, ino what he now says of the sniouthness of the external superiicies of the world, Hence the corporeal

* fom, Odyss. vi, v. 45. Butin Proclus for ava bad \or aibon, read a\\a μαλ᾽ αιθρη.

ἢ For συμμακτικη here, read σημαντικη.

ie, PROCLUS ON THE [βοοκ 111.