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

οὐ Jupiter) fibricates uniformly 3 the second fi. e. Neptune} generatively, and the last (i.e. Pluto} convertively.

And in one way in the ruling, in another in the liberated and in another, in the mundane order. But after this triad, we must survey fabrication proceeding after | a different manner to the many demiursie Gods, who from these receive and are allotted paternal powers. After these, also, it proceeds In one way to demiurgie angels, but in another to demiurzic damons, the attendants of this order. farther still, we must likewise survey the undefiled forms of life, which contribute to the demiurgic series, and the genera of partial souls, which follow. the demiurgic choir, For the peculiarity and the mode of production, and of looking to the intelligible, extend diflerently to diflcrent natures, as far as to these, Itis also necessary to admire this in Plato, that he does not sity that what is generated on

' Por a\\q@ here, itis necessary to read adiwo.

Book 11.} ΤΊΜΕῸΝΟΕΡΙΑΤΟ. v7

account of! an eternal paradigm is Jwautiful, but that what is generated by the Demiurgus who looks to it. is most beautiful; since that which is confused and disordered is generated, for it is visible and sensible. But every thing of this kind is and was generated, as he says further on, receiving from the intelligible certain vestiges of forms prior to fabrication, and is not most beautiful, though it is ina certain respect beautiful, as with reference to the formless nature of matter. Hence that which is generated on account of an eternal paradigm, such for instance as that disorderly and confused nature, is not simply beautifal, but that which was generated by the Demiurgus looking to it. For from that confused nature the Demiurgus was absent; but the intelligible prior to the Demiurgus, uminated that disorderly essence. So far, however, as it was generated by the Demiurgus, it was also generated by the eternal paradigm, energizing on it through the Demiurgus as a medinm. And so far indeed as it was generated by the paradigm, it was invested with form, but so far as by the Demiurgus, it was arranged, For the Demiurgus is the cause of order ; but the paradigm is simply the cause of form to its participants.

And so far indeed as it was generated by the paradigm, it was invested with form, but so far as by the Demiurgus, it was arranged, For the Demiurgus is the cause of order ; but the paradigm is simply the cause of form to its participants.

Farther still, from the paradigm itself the difference of demiurgic powers may be assumed. For some of these powers, indecd, looking to the whole of intelligibles, produce according to the whole of them ; but others produce partially. And some, indeed, survey the whole of intelligibles through union 3. but others through intelligence. Some, again, do not produce according to the whole of the intelligible; but some are divided according to the four primary causes ; others proceed into a greater number; and others make the last forms the paradigms of their productions, Hence through these, there is one shepherd of men, but another of horses, as Plato says in the Politicus, and in a similar manner in’ other forms. As the demiurgie series therefore is various, and there are different paradizins of diferent things, some of which are more total, but others more partial, Timwus very properly does not say, that he who uses this intelligible paradigm, makes that which is generated to be beautiful, bnt he who uses a paradigm of this kind. In the intelligible paradigms therefore, the part is in a certain respect the whole, on account of the union of intelligibles; and the multitude is most similar to the monad, through the domination of sameness. Since also the whole Demiurgus looks indeed to the intelligible and all-perfect animal, but employs the paradigm which is in himself, possessing intellectually the intelligible ; which paradigm also

' For προαιωνίον in this place, we must read προς awwrior.

p. 298

-

Since also the whole Demiurgus looks indeed to the intelligible and all-perfect animal, but employs the paradigm which is in himself, possessing intellectually the intelligible ; which paradigm also

' For προαιωνίον in this place, we must read προς awwrior.

p. 298

- is such as the intelligible through similitude to it, but is of a more partial nature ; hence Timwus adds the words a certain to a thing of this kind. Yor these intelligibles participate of the eternal paradigm, and are more partial than all-perfect animal.. Hence, too, he calls idea, τὸ, a certain thing, assimilating that which is vencrated to the paradigm. But fabrication imparts essences and powers to the things that are generated. Why, however, of eternal being does he say “ employing a paradigm of this kind,” but of that whichis generated, he no longer adds the expression ‘ of this kind,” but instead of this, adduces the term venerated? Is it not because the intelligible has something similar to itself, as having the highest rank, but that which is generated being the last of things, has nothing else similar to itself? For that which is produced on account of it, is generated, and to this the dissimilar is appropriate ; but to the intelligible, the similar, the same, and every thing of this kind, is athed. And = thus much concerning these partieilars, But) the term αὐδάν must be conjoined: to aw subsistence according to mameness, In order that there may be that whieh looks to a nature always possess- Ing a sameness of subsistence, For thus the plulosopher Porphyry properly decides. Por Tinwus does not say that the Deniurgus in fabricating all things, always beholds, as Atticus thought, but that the intelligible always subsists after the same manner. Untess it should be said, that on this account he assumes the beholding always, lest by seeing at one time, but at another not, he should latently introduce into his production, that which is not beautiful. The Demiurgus, therefore, looks to that whichis eternal, in order that he may produce that which is similar to it, and beautiful.

“Let therefore this universe be denominated by us, all heaven, or the world, or whatever other appellation it may be especially adapted to receive.”

This is the last of the axioms, giving a name to the subject [of discussion) conformably to geometricians, When they speak about the gnomon in parallelograms, for they say any one thing consisting of two complements ts to” be called a gnomon, For since Plato intends to call the same thing both heaven and the world, in order that you may not think he disturbs the doctrine, by employing at different times different names, he previously determines something about the

' Vor ews yap hese, read eres yup.

p. 299