“Hence,” Proclus adds, “these things being thus determined, let us physically adapt them to the words of Plato. We call a [physical] plane or superficies, therefore, that which has two powers only, but a [physical] solid that which has three powers. And we say, that if we fashion bodies from two powers, one medium would conjoin the elements to each other. But since, as we assert, bodies possess triple powers, they are bound together by two media. For there are two common powers of the adjacent media, and one power which is different. And the extremes themselves, if they consisted of two powers, would be conjoined through one medium. For let fire, if you will, be alone attenuated and easily moved; but earth, on the contrary, have alone grossness of parts and immobility. One medium, therefore, will be sufficient for these. For grossness of parts and facility of motion, and tenuity of parts and difficulty of motion, are all that is requisite to the colligation of both. Since, however, each of the elements is triple, the extremes require two media, and the things themselves that are adjacent are bound together through two powers. For solids, and these are things that have triple contrary powers, are never co-adapted by one medium.”
FOOTNOTES:
[26] For το εναντιωτατα here, read τα εναντιωτατα, and for τῳ θερμον τῳ ψυχρῳ, read το θερμον, κ. τ. λ.
[27] For απηρτημενα in this place, I read διῃρημενα.
[28] For μιαν here, it is obviously necessary to read ἑκατεραν.
[29] For ὑπατικον in this place, read ὑπακτικον.
[30] Instead of ακινητον here, it is necessary to read ευκινητον.
FRAGMENTS OF TAURUS,
A PLATONIC PHILOSOPHER,
ON THE ETERNITY OF THE WORLD.
EXTRACTED FROM PHILOPONUS AGAINST PROCLUS.
Taurus, in his Commentaries on the Timæus of Plato, says: “In the investigation, whether according to Plato the world is unbegotten, philosophers differ in their opinions. For Aristotle asserts that Timæus says the world was generated[31]. And Theophrastus also, in his treatise On Physical Opinions, says that, according to Plato, the world was generated, and therefore writes in opposition to him. At the same time, however, he asserts that Timæus perhaps supposed the world to be generated, for the sake of perspicuity. Certain other persons also infer, that, according to Plato, the world was generated. But, again, others contend that Plato believed the world to be unbegotten. Since, however, those who assert that the world was generated, cite many other words of Plato, and likewise the passage in which Plato[32] says, ‘the world was generated, for it is visible and tangible;’ this being the case, it is requisite to direct our attention to the different ways in which a thing is said to be generated, and thus we shall know that Plato asserts the world to be generated, not according to the signification in which we affirm this of things which derive their subsistence from a certain temporal beginning. For this it is which deceives the multitude, when they conceive the word generated to imply a temporal origin. A thing, therefore, is said to be generated, which never indeed had a beginning in time, but yet is in the same genus with generated natures. Thus we call a thing visible, which is not seen, nor has been seen, nor will be seen, but yet is in the same genus with things of a visible nature. And this will take place with a body which may exist about the centre of the earth. That also is said to be generated, which, in mental conception, subsists as a composite, though it never has been a composite. Thus, in music, the middle chord is said to be composed of the lowest and highest chord. For though it is not thus composed, yet there is perceived in it the power of the one with reference to the other. The like also takes place in flowers and animals. In the world, therefore, composition and mixture are perceived; according to which, we are able to withdraw and separate qualities from it, and resolve it into a first subject. The world also is said to be generated, because it always subsists in becoming to be, like Proteus changing into all-various forms; hence, with respect to the world, the earth, and the natures, as far as to the moon, are continually changed into each other. But the natures above the moon are as to their subject nearly the same, sustaining only a small mutation. They change, however, according to figure; just as a dancer being one and the same according to subject, is changed into various forms by a certain gesture and motion of the hands. The celestial bodies, therefore, are thus changed, and different habitudes of them take place, between the motions of the planets with reference to the fixed stars, and of the fixed stars with respect to the planets.