But there is another mode which he delivers in the Phaedrus. And this consists in every where preserving theological fables, unmixed with physical narrations, and being careful in no respect to confound or exchange theology, and the physical theory with each other. For, as a divine essence is separate from the whole of nature, in like manner, it is
Digitized by Google
ON THE THEOLOGY BOOK t
perfectly proper that discourses respecting the Gods should be pure from physical disquisitions. For a mixture of this kind is, says he, laborious : and to make physical passions the end of mythological conjecture, is the employment of no very good man ; such for instance, as considering through his [pretended] wisdom, Chimaera, Gorgon, and things of a simi- lar kind, as the same with physical figments. Socrates, in the Phtedrus, reprobating this mode of mythologizing, represents its patrons as saying under the figure of a fable, that Orithya sporting with the wind Boreas, and being thrown down the rocks, means nothing more, than that Orithya who was a mortal, was ravished by Boreas through love. For it appears to me, that fabulous narrations about the gods, should always have their concealed meaning more venerable than the apparent. So that if certain persons introduce to us physical hypotheses of Platonic fables, and such as are conversant with sublunary affairs, we must say that they entirely wander from the intention of the philosopher, and that those hypotheses alone, are interpreters of the truth contained in these fables, which have for their scope, a divine, immaterial, and separate hypostasis, and which looking to this, make the compositions and analyses of the fables, adapted' to our inherent anticipations of divine concerns.
As we have therefore enumerated all these modes of the Platonic theology, and have shown what compositions and analyses of fables are adapted to the truth respecting the Gods, let us consider, in the next place, whence, and from what dialogues principally, we think the dogmas of Plato concerning the Gods may be collected, and by a spe- culation of what types or forms we may be able to distinguish his genuine writings, from those spurious compositions which are ascribed to him.
The truth then concerning the Gods pervades, as I may say, through
• For <>.«.„(, it is necwaaiy to read «*««,.
Digitized by Google
all the Platonic dialogues, and in all of them conceptions of the first philosophy, venerable, clear, and snpernatural, are disseminated, in some indeed, more obscurely, but in others more conspicuously ; con* ceptions which excite those that are in any respect able to participate of them, to the immaterial and separate essence of the Gods. And, as in each part of the universe, and in nature herself, the demiurgus of all that the world contains, established resemblances of the unknown hyparxis of the Gods, that all things might be converted to a divine na- ture, through their alliance with it, in like manner I am of opinion, that the divine intellect of Plato weaves conceptions about the Gods in all his writings, and leaves nothing deprived of the mention of divinity, that from the whole of them, a reminiscence of wholes may be obtained, and imparted to the genuine lovers of divine concerns.
If however, it be requisite to lay before the reader those dialogues out of many, which principally unfold to us the mystic discipline about the gods, I should not err in ranking among this number, the Phsedo and Phedrus, the Banquet, and the Philebus, and together with these, the Sophista and Politicus, the Cratylus and the Timaeus. For all these are full through the whole of themselves, as I may say, of the divine science of Plato. But I should place in the second rank after these, the fable in the Gorgias, and that in the Protagoras ; likewise the assertions about the providence of the Gods in the Laws, and such things as are delivered about the Fates, or the mother of the Fates, or the circulations of the universe, in the tenth book of the Republic. Again, you may, if you please, place in the third rank those Epistles, through which we may be able to arrive at the science about divine natures. For in these, mention is made of the three kings ; and very many other divine dogmas worthy the Platonic theory are delivered. It is necessary therefore, looking to these, to explore in these each order of the Gods.
Thus from the Philebus, we may receive the science respecting the one good, and the two first principles of things, together with the triad* which is unfolded into light from these. For you will find all these
' rpm&>( is omitted in the origin*].
Digitized by Google
!6 ON THE THEOLOGY BOOK I.
distinctly delivered to us by Plato in that dialogue. But from the Ti- njaeus, you may obtain the theory about intelligibles, a divine narration about the demiurgic monad: and the most full truth about the mundane Gods. But from the Phaedrus, [you may acquire a scientific knowledge of] all the intelligible and intellectual genera, and of the liberated orders of Gods, which are proximately established above the celestial circula- tions. From the Politicus, you may obtain the theory of the fabrica- tion in the heavens, of the uneven periods of the universe, and of the intellectual causes of those periods. But from the Sophista, the whole sublunary generation, and the peculiarity of the Gods who are allotted the sublunary region, and preside over its generations and corruptions. But with respect to each of the Gods, we may obtain many conceptions adapted to sacred concerns from the Banquet, many from the Cratylus, and many from the Phsedo. For in each of these dialogues, more or less mention is made of divine names, from which it is easy for those who are exercised in divine concerns to discover by a reasoning process the peculiarities of each.
It is necessary however, to evince that each of the dogmas accords with Platonic principles, and the mystic traditions of theologists. For all the Grecian theology is the progeny of the mystic tradition of Or- pheus ; Pythagoras first of all learning from Aglaophemus the orgies of the Gods, but Plato in the second place receiving an all-perfect science of the divinities from the Pythagoric and Orphic writings. For in the Philebus referring the theory about the two species of principles [bound and infinity] to the Pythagoreans, he calls them men dwelling with the Gods, and truly blessed. Philolaus therefore, the Pythagorean, has left us in writing many admirable conceptions about these principles, cele- brating their common progression into beings, and their separate fabri- cation of things. But in the Timjeus, Plato endeavouring to teach us • about the sublunary Gods, and their order, flies to theologists, calls them the sons of the Gods, and makes them the fathers of the truth about those divinities. And lastly, he delivers the orders of the sublu- nary Gods proceeding from wholes, according to the progression deli- vered by them of the intellectual kings. Again, in the Cratylus he fol-
Digitized by Google
CHAP. VI. OF PLATO. yj
lows the traditions of theologtsts, respecting the order of the divine pro- cessions. But in the Gorgias, he adopts the Homeric dogma, respect- ing the triadic hypostasis of the demiurgi. And in short, he every where discourses concerning the Gods agreeably to the principles of theologists ; rejecting indeed, the tragical part of mythological fiction, but establislung first hypotheses in common with the authors of fables.
CHAFrER VI.
Perhaps, however, some one may here object to as, that we do not in a proper manner exhibit the every where dispersed theology of Plato, and' that we endeavour to heap together different particulars from different dia- logues, as if we were studious of collecting together many things into one mixture, instead of deriving them all from one and the same fountain. For if this were the case, we might refer different dogmas to different treatises of Plato, but we shall by no means have a preccdaneoos doc* trine concerning the Gods,' nor will there be any dialogue which presents us with an all-perfect and entire procession of the divine genera, and their co-ordination with eacH other. But we shall be similar to those who "en- deavour to obtain a whole from parts, through the want of a whole prior to parts, and to weave together the perfect from things imperfect; when,' on the contrary, the imperfect ought to have the first cause of its genera- tion in the perfect. For the Timseus, for instance, will teach us the theory of the intelligible genera; and the Phaedrus appears to present us with a methodical account of the first intellectual orders. But where will' he the coordination of intellectuals to intelligibles ? And what will be the generation of second from first natures ? In short, after what manner the progression of the divine orders takes place from the one principle of all things, and how in the generations of the Gods, the orders between the one, and .all-perfect number, are -filled up, we 'shall be unable to' evince.
Farther still, it may be said, where- will -be the venerableness of your Troc. Vol. I. C
Digitized by Google
Ib
boasted science about divine natures ? For it is absurd to call these dog* mas which are collected from many places Platonic ; and which, as yoo acknowledge, are introduced from foreign names to the philosophy of Plato ; nor are you able to evince one whole entire truth about divine na- tures. Perhaps, indeed, they will say, certain persons, junior to Plato, hare delivered in their writings, and left to their disciples, one perfect form of theology. You, therefore, are able to produce one entire theory about nature from the Timoeus ; but from the Republic, or Laws, the most beautiful dogmas about manners, and which tend to one form of philoso- phy. Alone, therefore, neglecting the treatise of Plato, which contains all the good of the first philosophy, and which may be called the summit of the whole theory, you will be deprived of the most perfect knowledge of beings, unless you are so much infatuated, as to boast on account of fabulous fictions, though an analysis of things of this kind abounds with much of the probable, but not of the demonstrative. Besides, things of this kind are only delivered adventitiously in the Platonic dialogues ; as the fable in the Protagoras, which is inserted for the sake of the politic science, and the demonstrations respecting it. In like manner, the fable in the Republic is inserted for the sake of justice; but in the Gorgias, for the sake of temperance. For Plato combines fabulous narrations with investigations of ethical dogmas, not for the sake of the fables, but for the sake of the leading design, that we may not only exercise the in- tellectual part of the soul, through contending reasons, bat that the divine, part of the soul may more perfectly receive the knowledge of beings, through its sympathy with more mystic concerns. For, from other dis- courses, we appear similar to those who are compelled to the reception of truth ; but from fables we suffer in an ineffable manner, and call forth our un perverted conceptions, venerating the mystic information which they contain.
Hence, as it appears to me, Timoeus with great propriety thinks it fit that we should produce the divine genera, following the inventors of fa- bles as the sons of the Gods,' and subscribe to their always generating
• tmhm, m omitted is tbt original.
CHAP. VI.
secondary natures from such as are first, though they should speak with- out demonstration. For this kind of discourse is not demonstrative, but entheastic, and was invented by the ancients, not through necessity, but for the sake of persuasion, not regarding mere discipline, but sympathy with things themselves. But if you are willing to speculate not only the, causes of rabies, but of other theological dogmas, you will find that some of them nre scattered in the Platonic dialogues for the sake of ethical,' and others for the sake of physical considerations. For in the Philebus, Plato discourses concerning bound and the infinite, for the sake of pleasure and a life according to intellect For I think the latter are species of the for- mer. In the Timams, the discourse about the intelligible Gods, is assum-. ed for the sake of the proposed physiology. On which account it is every where necessary that images should be known from paradigms; but that the paradigms of material things should be immaterial, of sen- sibles, intelligible, and that the paradigms of physical forms should be separate.