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

For from these, generation also is changed.

' For exarepas here, it is requisite to read ecarepwes.

p. 460

And again you see that the natures which are above the moon, have increase and consumption according to analogy only; but that sublunary natures are essentially the recipients of both these. But the moon is between these, and is truly an isthmus, exrhibiting in herself the beginning of mutation according to an increase and diminution of lisht. For in the bodies prior to it the same form perfectly remains, in their increase and consumption; and in the bodics posterior to it, their very existence is naturally adapted to reciprocate. But in the moon the essence remains, but the light is changed evternally according to daninution and increase, which is not the case with the luminaries that are above it. WWence it is not proper to say, that the heavenly bodies are nourished from exhalations, as some fancy they are. For things which are in want of an intlux externally, and receive addition and ablation, have not indissoluble bonds. Hence the celestial bodies remain immutable ; as of the ancients Proclus, Mulotes, and Philonides assert, and of those that are more modern, al! the Platonists from DPlotinus. For as Plato has not yet delivered to us the generation of the heavens and stars, how could he speak about the nutriment of them? And it seems, that now gencrating the elements alone, and perceiving that these proceed through each other, and that all are in all, he calls this mutual transition, the nutriment of the universe, of itself by itself; since it both acts upon anid suffers in itself, by imparting to all things, all the things of whieh it consists. Hence When he likewise constitutes the other natures (i. 6. the celestial), then he introduces their iluminations, and the communion of all of them with each other, through these. Alone therefore, directing his attention to the composition of the four elements of the universe, and perceiving that in these, there are certain communications with each other, he says, that the consumption of some, is the nutriiment of other parts of the universe. But it is not yet manifest what each of these may be. Now however, thus much is evident, that all the parts confer something on each other, in order that the universe may become one, and are in each other, so as to nourish each other, and this without any diminution of themselves. For all things of which the universe consists, are in the earth, and ἃ} of them are hkewise in the middle elements; and thus the whole world is nourished by itself, from its own parts, having all things in all.

For all things of which the universe consists, are in the earth, and ἃ} of them are hkewise in the middle elements; and thus the whole world is nourished by itself, from its own parts, having all things in all.

Farther sull, this also may be said, that if nothing proceeds to the universe, there is no body external to it, and that if nothing departs from it, there is no vacuum out of the world. For it would be in vain not being the recipient of any thing, as that is which receives the world: which things were particularly emp. 401braced by Aristotle, who subverts the existence of a vacuum in energy, and preserves the world only-begotten, But that nothing departs froin, or accedes to the universe, Plato infers, the latter indeed, becanse there is nothing external to it, and the former, from the universe making the consumption of itself, its proper nutriment. As therefore, not having the organs of nutrient in itself, it has nutriment, and is that which itself nourishes itself, and is at the same time nourished ; thus also, not having senses extended outwardly, it possesses sense in itself, and is itself sensible to itself. And that Plato intended the latter should be inferred as well as the tormer, I think he clearly manifests by saying, that “ the universe suffers and acts all things tn itself, and from its own peculiar operations.” But if all that is gencrated, is the consequence of the universe acting on and suffering from itself, it must not be said, that either consumptions or corruptions are simply evils. For neither does a worthy man, and much less the universe, do any evil to himself. And this indeed, is a divine corollary, which is to be assumed from what Plato says.

For neither does a worthy man, and much less the universe, do any evil to himself. And this indeed, is a divine corollary, which is to be assumed from what Plato says.

Again however, he recurs to the true cause of all mundane effects, viz. the demiurgie art, and the principle which is perfective of wholes. For from thence art also proceeds into the demiurgic order. Hence the Oracles call the Demiurgus of the universe ove who produces works by art; which expression Plato divides, at one time calling the things contained in the world, the works of the Demiurgus, [as when he represents the maker of the world saying] “ ofwhom Iam the Demiurgus and father of works ;° just as the Oracles also when they say; for understanding the works of the paternal self-begotten intellect ; but at another denominating the energy of the Demiurgus art, which in the end becomes the cause of the sufficiency of the universe to itsclf, For the Demiurgus being good, raade all things simitar to himself; i. e. he made all things perfect and self-sufficient. For self-sufficiency is an element of the good. By no means however is the world, as possessing the power of beng sufficient to itself, diculsed through this self-sufficiency from its maker, but is ina greater degrec united tohim. For by how niuch the more self-sufficient it is, by so much the more is it constituted ina similitude to him. And by how much the more it is assimilated, by so much the more perfictly is it united, to the deniurgic.gooduess. The universe therefore is self-sufficient, as being the object of sense to itself," and as not being in want of other sensibles. For to these the appellation of indigence belongs. But it is in want of the Gods, as being

" Eavry is omitted in the origiual. .

p. 111

always filled by them. Or rather neither is it in want of these, for divinity is every where present, and the universe is always prepared for the reception of divine goods.» And as the similar is better than the dissimilar according to the judgenent of Jupiter; so likewise, the self-suflicient is more divine than that which is indigent. For the self-suflicient has dominion in the Gods, and similitude in beings. And this is another dogma of the mighty Jupiter.

“ But he neither thought that hands were necessary to the world, as there was nothing for it either to receive or resist ; nor yet feet, nor any other members which are subservient to progression and rest.”