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

After this manner, therefore, we answer the doubts. ᾿

Itis requisite, however, to observe how Plato proposing to himself the problems, renders each of them manifest, both affirmatively and negatively. But viving an answer to each, in perpetual being, indeed, he assumes the affirmative alone, but in that which is generated, the negative, adding to italso, * ad which is destroyed.” He, also, explains the words, * but which is never being,” through the assumption of, “ never truly is.” For since being is characterized by existence alone, but that which is generated by non-existence, he assumes the one, alone defining it, and says, subsisting invariably the same; but he assumes the other together with hegation, yet not with negation alone, because definitions respect affirmations, and signify that which in each thing is inherent. Itis not, however, wonderful, if he not only says * which is generated,” ut also, “ and corrupted.” Vor as he adds to beimg, the words, “ subsisting with meariable sameness,” and not only says, if is akeays ; 50. likewise to that which ty venerated he adds, “ and corrupted.” For this so faras it is generated, is different from perpetual bemg; but so far as it is corrupted, it differs from that which is invariably the same, Por that which is generated, so far as it is generated and corrupted, is incapable of connecting itself; since if it were, it would also be able to produce itself. Assuming therefore each by itself, i.e. being and that which is generated, he assumes the former as that which is above generation, but the latter, ἀπ. that which is not indestructible. So that when the representation of being accedes to that which is generated, it is able after a certain manner to abide in a condition of always becoming to be.

p. 205

that which is not indestructible. So that when the representation of being accedes to that which is generated, it is able after a certain manner to abide in a condition of always becoming to be.

p. 205

Let us however, consider each of the words by itself, through which he ccmposes the propositions ; and in the first place, let us see in how many ways intelligence subsists, and collect by a reasoning process the other progressions of it. The first intelligence therefore, is the intelligible, which passes into the same with the intelligible, and is not any thing different from it. This also is essential intelligence, and essence itself, because every thing in the intelligible subsists after this manner, viz. essentially and intelligibly. The second intelligence is that which®onjoins intellect with the intelligible, possessing a peculiarity which is connective and collective of the extremes, and existing as life and power, filling indeed intellect from the intelligible, but establishing it in the intelligible. The third is the®eonjoined intelligence in a divine intellect" itself, being the energy of intellect, through which it comprehends the intelligible it contains, and according to which it intellectually perceives, and is what itis. Por this intelligence is energy, and intelligence itself, but is not intelligible intelligence. Nor does it exist as power, but (as we have said), as energy, and intellectual intelligence. The Yntellige ‘nce of partial intellects has the fourth order. For each of these possesses this * and entirely contains in itself a certain conjoined intelligible and intelligence. Or rather each has all these partially, viz. intellect, intelligence, and the intelhetble, through which also it is conjoined to total intellects, intellectually perceives each of these, and likewise the whole intellizible world. The fitth : intelligence is that of the rational soul. For as the rational soul is called intellect, thus also the knowledge of it is intelligence, and transitive intelligence, and has time connascent with ᾿ self. But the sixth intelligence, if you are willing also to connumerate this, isphantastic knowledze, or the knowledge of the imagination, which by some is denominated intelligence; and the phantasy is called by them passive intellect, δ because it knows such things as it does know, inwardly, and accompamed with resemblances and figures. For itis common to all intelligence lo have the chjects of tts knowledge inward. For in this also intelligence diflers from. sense. In one order however, intelligence is the thing known itself. In another it ranks asx the second, but sees that which is first totally. In another it is partially the thing Known, but sees wholes also through that which is partial. In another it sces indeed wholes, but at the same time partially and not at once, And in

In another it ranks asx the second, but sees that which is first totally. In another it is partially the thing Known, but sees wholes also through that which is partial. In another it sces indeed wholes, but at the same time partially and not at once, And in

• * Ta the original, τρίτη δε ἢ ev avty Geup συξυγος vonoes, But it is necessary alter θείῳ to supply oy.
• * For τοῦτον here, it is requisite to read ravrny. ὁ The phantasy is thus called by Aristotle.

p. 206

another, the vision is accompanied with passion. So many therefore, are the differences of intelligence.