This also accords with what we have said. For in natures which are more causal and divine, quantity is always contracted, and multitude diminished, but power transcends. And this also is a dogma of the Pythagoreans, with whom the triad is more venerable than the tetrad, the tetrad than the decad, and all the numbers within, than those posterior to the decad: And in short, that which is
* For ἀρίστως here, it is necessary to read αοριστως.
* Instead of o bn rotovros axpoarns, ov parny ay παρεγένετο ros Aoyous, it appears to me to be neces-
sary to read ὁ δὴ rovovros ἀκροατὴς ovy, parny κ.λ.
20 PROCLUS ON THE [Βοοκ 1.
nearer to the principle, has a more primordial nature. But that which is more primordial is more powerful; since all power is antecedently comprehended in the principle, and from the principle is imparted to other things, If, therefore, the principle of things was multitude, it would be requisite that what is more multitudinous, should be more primordial and powerful than what is less so. Since, however, the principle is a monad, that which is more monadic, is more excellent and more powerful than things which are more separated from their cause. Hence Socrates very properly makes a diminution of number to bea symbol of superior perfection, which antecedently comprehends according to power all secondary natures, and fills up their deficiency. But since, as we have before observed, Socrates is the summit of this triad of auditors, and he conjoins himself to the monad that disposes the conference, conformably to the image of demiurgic Gods, it is worth while to observe, how he exempts Timwus from the rest, and how he is extended to him, as to the dispensator of the whole discussion. He conjoins, however, the other auditors to himself, as being inferior to him in desert. For these things may be referred to divine causes, in which the first of the [demiurgic] triad is united to the primary monad, and extends the other parts of the triad to it. Tt also calls forth, indeed, the productive energy of the monad, but excites the energies of the rest to fabrication. These things, therefore, are conformable to what has been before said. But according to Por- phyry, the ethical doctrine contained in these words is this, that friends ought to endure all things for each other, both in words and deeds, and to supply their wants, and cause them to be unindigent, by filling up their deficiency.’ For these are the peculiarities of pure and genuine friendship. Tamblichus, however, having supposed that the anonymous person was superior to those that were present, and was a lover of the contemplation of intelligibles, says, that Socrates indicates by these words, that though generated fall short of the nature of truly- existing beings, yet a certain sinulitude is divulsed from these beings. And conformably to this, the theory which is conversant with nature, participates ina certain respect of the science of intelligibles, and this the filling up the part of the
absent person manifests.
“Tim. Entirely so, Socrates. And we shall endeavour to the utmost of our ability, to leave nothing belonging to such an employment
* For τὸ ἐκείνων here, it is necessary to read ro e\Aciwor.
Book 1.) Tim.Eus of Plato. 21
unaccomplished. For it would not be just, that we, who were yesterday entertained by you, in such a manner as guests ought to be received, should not return the hospitality with readiness and delight.”
The manners of Timeus are indicated by these words; for they are shown to be superb and modest, elevated and elegant, friendly and philanthropic. For the words “ Entirely so,” indicate his promptitude respecting the absent person, and the perfection of the science according to which he is readily dis- posed to fill up what is wanting in others; and they also indicate his genuine sincerity. But the words, “ We shall endeavour to the utmost of our ability, to leave nothing belonging to such an employment unaccomplished,” sufficiently present to our view, his firmness in the fulfilment of his promises, and his modesty in speaking of himself. Such, therefore, are the ethical indications that may be surveyed in these words. But the physical indications are these, that the remuneration of discussion, conveys an image of tiie communion and compensation of powers, through which all things are co-ordinated, and contribute to the one harmony of the universe. Likewise, that the energies of nature are changed according to time, different energies operating at different times on different subjects. For to these indications the words, “return the hospitality to you, by whom we were yesterday entertained in such a manner as guests ought to be received,” are similar. That which is theologically indicated is this, that the demiurgic cause proceeds through, and fills all things, aad cuts off every deficiency through his own power, and his pro- lific abundance, according to which he leaves nothing destitute of himself. For he is characterised by the super-plenary, the sufficient, and the all-perfect. More- over, the expression, return the hospitality, is derived from the banqueting in divine fables, according to which the Gods pledge each other:
In golden goblets they each other pledge. Iliad IV. v. 2.
being filled with nectar from the mighty Jupiter. Nor is it simply said, to feast, but fo return the hospitality (or to feast in return). For a reciprocation of feasting," comprehends the entire, and completely perfect plenitude of banqueting. But this also is scen in wholes. For the visible orders of things call forth invisible powers, through their own consummate aptitude; and the latter through tran- scendency of goodness perfect the former. All these likewise, are conjoined with each other, and the communication of perfection, becomes the retnbution of
* For αφεστιασις here, it is necessary to read αγταφεστιασιε.
22 PROCLUS ON THE (Book 1.
calling forth. Farther still, to do all these things, accompanied with justice, conveys an image of the Justice which arranges all things in conjunction with Jupiter. But the becoming {or in such ἃ manner as guests ought to be received] is an image of the cause which illuminates wholes with demiurgic beauty. And the term guests, is an image of the variety which is defined according to divine pecu- liarities. For each of the divine natures possesses appropriate powers and energies. As therefore Socrates feasted Timeus with the discourses of his own philosophy, thus also each of the Gods, energizing conformably to his proper powers, contributes to the one and transcendent providential attention of the Demiurgus to the whole of things. And_ these particulars are exhibited as an exercise to the theory of things, which presents itself to the view! after the manner of an image, in the introduction to the dialogue,
“Soc. Do you remember, therefore, the magnitude and quality of the things which I proposed to you to explain £”
In the first place, it is requisite to attend to the order of the heads of what is said, of which, that concerning the multitude of those that form the conference, is the leader. The next to this pertains to the filling up the part of him who ts absent. And the third is that which is now added, and respects the explication of the things proposed to be discussed. But these are in continuity with each other. And with reference to the order, it is requisite to understand the accuracy of the words. For the words “ Do you remember,” exhibit distributed knowledge in the participations of discourse, Lor in the Demiurgus the recollection of all
' For eugawopeva in this place, I read engancuerns.
Book 1. πε εόβ of Plato. 23
things, is a separate, exempt, and uniform knowledge, according to the Mnemo- syne which he contains, and which is the firm establishment of divine intelligence. And this in the secondary Gods, is a subordinate intellection; of both which the present persons are images. Through this memory likewise, which pre-exists in the universe, whole souls are established in intelligibles, and the demiurgic rea- sons, [or productive principles} possess an imrautable and an immoveable nature ; so that such" beings as are deprived of it, as is the case with partial souls, and the natures of things that are generated, fall off from their proper causes. But the terms “ such things,” and “about which,” are indicative of the quantity and quality of the productive principles, which proceed indeed from the total fabrication, and also proceed trom more partial Gods. And with respect to the words “which 2 proposed to you to caplain,” if they were addressed to Critias and Hermocrates, it is evident how they are to be referred to things, and to the principles of the fabri- cation of the world; but if also to Timeus, they are not a symbol of transcen- dency [in Socrates}, but of an evocation of the intellectual conceptions of Timzus. Besides these things, however, let us survey the answer of Timaus.
“Tim. Some things indeed, I recollect ; but such as I have forgotten, do you recall into my memory.”
That which is ethical in these words, you will find to be this, as Porphyry says, that they are amedium between irony and arrogance. For Timus does not say that he recollects every thing, nor that he recollects nothing; but that he recollects some things, and not others. That which is logical in them is, that they afford a pretext for the summary repetition of the problems: for to do this is the province of dialectic. The physical indication of the words is this, that phy- sical productive principles always remain, and are always refluxive, just as the present remembrance [of Timius] is partly preserved, and partly lost. For what is said by the man must be transferred to the whole of nature. And the theologi- cal indication is, that the one fabrication [which is that of the Demiurgus] pos- sesses indeed from itself, the immutable and undefiled in its generations ; but through secondary and third powers, is sustained as it proceeds, and is in itself separate ; these powers attending it as guards, and running as it were before it repress the tumult of generated natures. Or rather, that this fabrication is such,
* For oens here, it is necessary to read oea.
24 PROCLUS ON THE [Boom t.
through placing secondary powers over the subjects ofits government. Farther still, the recalling into the memory, brings with it an image of the renovation of the productive principles in the universe. For that which is effluxive in them, is cir- cularly recalled to the same, and the similar. And the order of generation re- mains never-failing, through the circular motion of the heavens. But this motion subsists always after the same manner through intellect which connectedly con- tains and adorns all its circulation, by intellectual powers. It is very properly, therefore, Socrates that recalls into the memory the discussions, who is the nar- -rator of the polity, of which the celestial is the paradigm.
“ Orrather, if it be not too much trouble, run over the whole in a cursory manner from the beginning, that it may be more firmly establish-
ed in our memory.”
The polity [of Socrates] being triple, the first description of it was truly dith- cult on account of sophistical contests; the second was easier than that which preceded it; but the third was [perfectly] easy ; containing in itself contractedly every species of a polity. The recapitulation however of it pertains to physical things, through the regeneration which jis in them, and the circular return to the same form; from which also, forms permanently remain in the world, revolution recalling their efllux and their destruction, Through this cause likewise, the hea- vens are perpetually moved, and evolving many periods, return to the same life. What, however, is the reason that in the [first] narration of a polity, Socrates nel- ther makes mention of the persons, nor the promises, but here adds both these? It is because in wholes, paradigms indeed comprehend all the productive princi- ples of images, but the things which proceed from them, have not strength sufhi- cient to comprehend all the power of theircauses, As, therefore, in the second description of a polity, mention is made of the persons that were in the first con- ference in the Pirsus, thus also in the third, he commemorates those that were passed over in silence in the first. For effects may be surveyed more perfectly in their more superior causes. You may also say theologically, that Timeus, as being established analogous to the total fabrication, comprehends all the persons, the promises, and the discussions themselves. But Socrates in the Republic, heing arranged analogous to the summit' of the triple fabrication, fashions only
* For axAornri here, it is necessary to read ἀκροτητι.