Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
1The opinion to which T allude is this, that Plotinus and his followers, or in other words, all the Platonists that existed from his time to the fall of the Roman empire, and the destruction of the schools of the philosophers by Justinian, cor- rupted the philosophy of Plato, by filling it with jargon and revery, and by ascribing dogmas to him, which are not to be found in his writings, and which are perfectly absurd. It might naturally be supposed that the authors of this calumny were men deeply skilled in the philosophy, the corruptors of which they profess to have detected ; and that they had studied the writings of the men whom they so grossly defame. This however is very far from being the case. For since the philosophy of Plato, as 1 have elsewhere shown, is the offspring of the most consummate science, all the dogmas of it being deduced by a series of geometrical reasoning, some of them ranking as prior, and others as posterior, and the latter depending on the former, like the propositions in’ Eucla, certain preparatory disciplines are requisite to the perfect comprehension of these doc- trines. Hence a legitimate student of this philosophy must be skilled in mathe- matics, have been exercised in all the logical methods, and not be unacquainted with physics. [16 must also be an adept in the writings of Aristotle, as pre- paratory to the more sublime speculations of Plato. And in addition to all this, he must possess those qualifications enumerated by Plato in the 7th book of his Re- public; viz. he must have naturally a good memory, learn with facility, be magnifi- cent and orderly, and the friend and ally of justice, truth, fortitude, and temperance. Since the revival of letters however, this philosophy has not been studied by men, who have had the smallest conception that these requisites were indispensably 1 Itis well said by Petwin, alluding to this philosuphy, ‘that there are certain truths acquired by a long exercise of reason, both in particular, and likewise in those subjects that are most general, as much, perhaps, out of the reach of the greatest mathematician, as the speculations of Newton are above the capacity of some that are now called matbematicians.” vi INTRODUCTION.
2necessary, or who have attempted the acquisition of it, in this regular and scienti- fic method. Hence, they have presumed to decide on the excellence of works, with the true ments of which, as they were thus unqualified, they were wholly unacquainted, and to calumniate what they could not understand, They appear likewise to have been ignorant, that Plato, conformably to all the other great philosophers of antiquity, wrote in such a way as to conceal the sublimest of his doctrines from the vulgar, as well knowing, that they would only be profaned by them without being understood; the eye of the multitude, as he says, not being sufficiently strong to bear the Jight of truth. Hence, as Proclus well observes, ! “it is needless to mention, that it is unbecoming to speak of the most divine of dogmas before the multitude, Plato himself asserting that all these are ridiculous to the many, butin an admirable manner are esteemed by the wise. Thus also, the Pythagoreans said, that of discourses some are mystical, but others adapted to be delivered openly. With the Peripatetics likewise, some are esoteric, and others exoteric; and Parmenides himself, wrete some things co.formable to truth, but others to opinion; and Zeno calls some assertions true, but others adapted to the necessary purposes of life.” The men therefore, who have defamed the latter Platonists, being thus unqualified, and thus ignorant of the mode of writing adupted by the great ancients, finding from a superficial perusal of the most genuine disciples of Plato many dogmas which were not immediately obvious in his writings, and which were to them incomprehensible, confidently asserted that these dogmas were spurious, that the authors of them were delirious, and that they had completely corrupted and polluted the philosophy of their master. It may also be added, as Olympiodorus justly observes, that the writings of Plato like those of Homer, are to be considered physically, ethically, theologically, and in short, multifariously; and that he who does not thus consider them, will in vain attempt to unfold the latent meaning they contain. By the latter Platonists however, they have been explored in this way, and he who is capable of availing himself of the clucidations of these most benevolent and most sagacious men, will find the arduous sublimities of Plato accessible, his mystic narrations conformable to scientific deductions, and his apparent obscurity, the veil of conceptions, truly * Ore de azxpern ra Oewrara των Soyparwy ἐστιν, εἰς ἀκοὰς φερομέναᾳ τῶν woAwY, οὐδὲν dec λεγειν, avrov WAarwios εἰπονῦτον, ws παντα ravra καταγέλαστα μεν ἐστι τοις πολλοῖς, θαυμαστως δὲ alia τοις ovgus. ovrw be και οι luda yope (ut τῶν λυγων TOUS μεν εφασκον εἰναι μυστικους, TOUS δε νπαιθριονς, καὶ οἱ ex τὸν Tlepexarov, τοὺς μεν ἐσωτερικονς, τους δε εξωτερικους, και avtos Παρμενίδης, τα per xpos αληθειαν : E
3ovrw be και οι luda yope (ut τῶν λυγων TOUS μεν εφασκον εἰναι μυστικους, TOUS δε νπαιθριονς, καὶ οἱ ex τὸν Tlepexarov, τοὺς μεν ἐσωτερικονς, τους δε εξωτερικους, και avtos Παρμενίδης, τα per xpos αληθειαν : E eypaye, ta be xpos Solar, καὶ o Zyvwy ke rovs μεν adnfers exader των λόγων, τοὺς δε χρειωξεις. Procl. MS. Comment. in Parmenid, INTRODUCTION, vik luminous and divine. And thus much as to the cause of the prevailing iniqui- tous opinion, respecting the writings of the latter Platonists; for the authors of jt, I have not been able to discover. But of this I am certain, and posterity will confirm the decision, that whoever they were, they were no less ignorant than arrogant, no less contemptible than obscure. With respect to the following translation, 1 have only to observe, that [have endeavoured to the utmost of my ability to unite in it faithfulness with perspicuity, and to preserve the manner as well as the matter of the original, Independent of the difliculties snseparable from such an undertaking, and which arise from the abstruseness of the subjects that are discussed in this work, the original abounds with errors, not of a trifling, but of the most important nature; errors, which so materially affect the sense, that no one can read these Commentaries, unless he corrects them, and yet no one can correct the greater part of them, unless he is well acquainted with the philosophy of Plato. Of this the reader may be con- vinced by perusing the notes which accompany this translation, in which he will find upwards of eleven hundred necessary emendations. I call them necessary, because they are not the offspring of conjecture, but such as the sense indubitably demands, Of translations too, of this work, I could not avail myself; for ofthe whole of it there are none; and a Latin translation of a part of the 3d book. by Nicholwus Leonicus Thomeus," is the only aid that has been afforded me in this arduous undertaking, From this translation I have been able, as the learned reader will perceive, to give many important emendations of the printed original, and not unfrequently to add to it, not only particular words, but entire sentences that were wanting. And now 1 shall conclude with observing, that though like most others who have laboured greatly for the good, not merely of their country, but of all man- kind, I have only met with ingratitude from the public for those labours ; and that though on this account Iam not much indebted, yet I sincerely wish well to my native Jand, and to every individual in it. That 1 have neither been influ- enced by the expectation of sordid emolument, nor of the honours of the multi- tude, in the prosecution of these labours, must be evident from the nature of them, to the most careiess observer. The most perfect conviction indeed, that a greater. good than the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle was never imparted by divinity
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
1The opinion to which T allude is this, that Plotinus and his followers, or in other words, all the Platonists that existed from his time to the fall of the Roman empire, and the destruction of the schools of the philosophers by Justinian, cor- rupted the philosophy of Plato, by filling it with jargon and revery, and by ascribing dogmas to him, which are not to be found in his writings, and which are perfectly absurd. It might naturally be supposed that the authors of this calumny were men deeply skilled in the philosophy, the corruptors of which they profess to have detected ; and that they had studied the writings of the men whom they so grossly defame. This however is very far from being the case. For since the philosophy of Plato, as 1 have elsewhere shown, is the offspring of the most consummate science, all the dogmas of it being deduced by a series of geometrical reasoning, some of them ranking as prior, and others as posterior, and the latter depending on the former, like the propositions in’ Eucla, certain preparatory disciplines are requisite to the perfect comprehension of these doc- trines. Hence a legitimate student of this philosophy must be skilled in mathe- matics, have been exercised in all the logical methods, and not be unacquainted with physics. [16 must also be an adept in the writings of Aristotle, as pre- paratory to the more sublime speculations of Plato. And in addition to all this, he must possess those qualifications enumerated by Plato in the 7th book of his Re- public; viz. he must have naturally a good memory, learn with facility, be magnifi- cent and orderly, and the friend and ally of justice, truth, fortitude, and temperance. Since the revival of letters however, this philosophy has not been studied by men, who have had the smallest conception that these requisites were indispensably 1 Itis well said by Petwin, alluding to this philosuphy, ‘that there are certain truths acquired by a long exercise of reason, both in particular, and likewise in those subjects that are most general, as much, perhaps, out of the reach of the greatest mathematician, as the speculations of Newton are above the capacity of some that are now called matbematicians.” vi INTRODUCTION.
2necessary, or who have attempted the acquisition of it, in this regular and scienti- fic method. Hence, they have presumed to decide on the excellence of works, with the true ments of which, as they were thus unqualified, they were wholly unacquainted, and to calumniate what they could not understand, They appear likewise to have been ignorant, that Plato, conformably to all the other great philosophers of antiquity, wrote in such a way as to conceal the sublimest of his doctrines from the vulgar, as well knowing, that they would only be profaned by them without being understood; the eye of the multitude, as he says, not being sufficiently strong to bear the Jight of truth. Hence, as Proclus well observes, ! “it is needless to mention, that it is unbecoming to speak of the most divine of dogmas before the multitude, Plato himself asserting that all these are ridiculous to the many, butin an admirable manner are esteemed by the wise. Thus also, the Pythagoreans said, that of discourses some are mystical, but others adapted to be delivered openly. With the Peripatetics likewise, some are esoteric, and others exoteric; and Parmenides himself, wrete some things co.formable to truth, but others to opinion; and Zeno calls some assertions true, but others adapted to the necessary purposes of life.” The men therefore, who have defamed the latter Platonists, being thus unqualified, and thus ignorant of the mode of writing adupted by the great ancients, finding from a superficial perusal of the most genuine disciples of Plato many dogmas which were not immediately obvious in his writings, and which were to them incomprehensible, confidently asserted that these dogmas were spurious, that the authors of them were delirious, and that they had completely corrupted and polluted the philosophy of their master. It may also be added, as Olympiodorus justly observes, that the writings of Plato like those of Homer, are to be considered physically, ethically, theologically, and in short, multifariously; and that he who does not thus consider them, will in vain attempt to unfold the latent meaning they contain. By the latter Platonists however, they have been explored in this way, and he who is capable of availing himself of the clucidations of these most benevolent and most sagacious men, will find the arduous sublimities of Plato accessible, his mystic narrations conformable to scientific deductions, and his apparent obscurity, the veil of conceptions, truly * Ore de azxpern ra Oewrara των Soyparwy ἐστιν, εἰς ἀκοὰς φερομέναᾳ τῶν woAwY, οὐδὲν dec λεγειν, avrov WAarwios εἰπονῦτον, ws παντα ravra καταγέλαστα μεν ἐστι τοις πολλοῖς, θαυμαστως δὲ alia τοις ovgus. ovrw be και οι luda yope (ut τῶν λυγων TOUS μεν εφασκον εἰναι μυστικους, TOUS δε νπαιθριονς, καὶ οἱ ex τὸν Tlepexarov, τοὺς μεν ἐσωτερικονς, τους δε εξωτερικους, και avtos Παρμενίδης, τα per xpos αληθειαν : E
3ovrw be και οι luda yope (ut τῶν λυγων TOUS μεν εφασκον εἰναι μυστικους, TOUS δε νπαιθριονς, καὶ οἱ ex τὸν Tlepexarov, τοὺς μεν ἐσωτερικονς, τους δε εξωτερικους, και avtos Παρμενίδης, τα per xpos αληθειαν : E eypaye, ta be xpos Solar, καὶ o Zyvwy ke rovs μεν adnfers exader των λόγων, τοὺς δε χρειωξεις. Procl. MS. Comment. in Parmenid, INTRODUCTION, vik luminous and divine. And thus much as to the cause of the prevailing iniqui- tous opinion, respecting the writings of the latter Platonists; for the authors of jt, I have not been able to discover. But of this I am certain, and posterity will confirm the decision, that whoever they were, they were no less ignorant than arrogant, no less contemptible than obscure. With respect to the following translation, 1 have only to observe, that [have endeavoured to the utmost of my ability to unite in it faithfulness with perspicuity, and to preserve the manner as well as the matter of the original, Independent of the difliculties snseparable from such an undertaking, and which arise from the abstruseness of the subjects that are discussed in this work, the original abounds with errors, not of a trifling, but of the most important nature; errors, which so materially affect the sense, that no one can read these Commentaries, unless he corrects them, and yet no one can correct the greater part of them, unless he is well acquainted with the philosophy of Plato. Of this the reader may be con- vinced by perusing the notes which accompany this translation, in which he will find upwards of eleven hundred necessary emendations. I call them necessary, because they are not the offspring of conjecture, but such as the sense indubitably demands, Of translations too, of this work, I could not avail myself; for ofthe whole of it there are none; and a Latin translation of a part of the 3d book. by Nicholwus Leonicus Thomeus," is the only aid that has been afforded me in this arduous undertaking, From this translation I have been able, as the learned reader will perceive, to give many important emendations of the printed original, and not unfrequently to add to it, not only particular words, but entire sentences that were wanting. And now 1 shall conclude with observing, that though like most others who have laboured greatly for the good, not merely of their country, but of all man- kind, I have only met with ingratitude from the public for those labours ; and that though on this account Iam not much indebted, yet I sincerely wish well to my native Jand, and to every individual in it. That 1 have neither been influ- enced by the expectation of sordid emolument, nor of the honours of the multi- tude, in the prosecution of these labours, must be evident from the nature of them, to the most careiess observer. The most perfect conviction indeed, that a greater. good than the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle was never imparted by divinity
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.