Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 14

The Oxhma-PNEUMA of the Neo-Platonists and the De Insomniis of Synesius of Cyrene

Author(s): Robert Christian Kissling


Source: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 43, No. 4 (1922), pp. 318-330
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/288931 .
Accessed: 15/09/2014 09:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
American Journal of Philology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
II.-THE OXHMA-IINEYMA OF THE NEO-PLATONISTS
AND THE DE INSOMNIIS OF SYNESIUS
OF CYRENE.
The
theory
of the
XraM-7revEia,
as met with in the Neo-
Platonic
writers, represents
the reconciliation of Plato and
Aristotle on a
subject
which the former never
taught
and the
latter was
incapable
of
defining intelligibly.
The
fusing pro-
cess that
sought
to combine and harmonize the statements of
these two
protagonists
of Greek
philosophy early
manifested
itself
owing
to the fact that the chief Platonists studied and
taught
Aristotle in their schools side
by
side with Plato. The
desire for
making
the differences of these thinkers
appear
less
chasmic was inevitable. The excess to which this
tendency
was
carried finds a
quasi-palliation
in the recourse to the
allegorical
sense
everywhere
descried
by
them. The cultivation of this
deeper
meaning
produced
monstrosities of
expository versatility.
The
o'Xp7a-7rvwua theory belongs
to the
melting-pot
of Neo-
Platonism. It centers in the
assumption
that the soul in its
descent from the sidereal and astral bodies
employs
a vehicle
to
convey
it downward
through
the successive
spheres.1
This
vehicle served at the same time to
join
the
incorporeal
soul
with the
body,2
or as
Simplicius
S and Proclus4
put it,
the
oxrpam
made the soul
eycKo'rupto.
It was conceived to be
brought
down from the
spheres.6
What is the Platonic and what is the
Aristotelian element that were combined in the
theory?
Plato did not invest the
pre-existent
souls with a sidereal
1Augustine Ep. 1,
13 b
(Migne):
"Necesse est te meminisse
quod
crebro inter nos sermone iactatum est . . .de
animae . . .
corpore
. .
quod
. . . dici vehiculum recordaris . . .
corpus quo
inniti anima
ut de loco ad locum transeat
putatur."
' This was a crucial
question. Porphyry quizzed
his teacher Plotinus
for three
days
on rvCs e
Vvx9 aVwearit 'Or aw@'a rt;
Cf. Vita Plotini c.
13;
Enn. IV
3, 9; (IV 8.
2);
Stob. I 926
(H.);
Stob. I 904-906.
Simpl.
in
Phys.
VI
4, p.
966.
Simplicius
meets the
objections
of
Alexander of
Aphrodisias, p. 964,
who
charges
the Neo-Platonists with
gaining nothing by attaching
a
corporeal 6X.Lwa
to the soul.
4
Procl. in Tim. 311 C.
Cf.
Porphyry,
Sent. c.
32;
Procl. in Rem Publ.
II, p.
161.
318
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE OXHMA-IINETMA AND THE DE INSOMNIIS.
body,6
but in his Timaeus he
speaks
of a certain
oSxrpa assigned
to each of them:7
W.fiaS
ES OU
pa 3 v TOV iravros
crtv,
etc.
The
Vxfa
here can be
nothing
else than the star itself. In two
other
passages
of the Timaeus
8
the word
6xqa
is used with
no reference to the soul. The Phaedo afforded even a smaller
handle for
foisting
an extraneous
thought
on Plato.9 Yet it
was
precisely
these Platonic
passages
into which
allegorical
commentators
imported
a
mystical meaning10?
to make them
comport
with a
perverse exposition
of the Phaedrus
myth."
Consequently,
the
oxvUa
was
regarded
as
something
attached to
the
soul,12
grown
together
with the soul."3
This
interpretation
was
helped
by
the Aristotelian
assump-
tion of the
7vepa.
According
to Aristotle14 the soul is com-
pletely incorporeal. According
to his
philosophy
this is natural
enough,
since the soul is
only
the formal cause.
However,
it is
not
XopUh4
To)
optafroq,
but has its seat in a certain substance
transmitted in the act of
procreation.
This substance he
designates
both as
Ocpuo'v
and as
7revpa.
The nature of this
wevCpa
he defines
"I
as
avdXoyov
,rw. rv
ao'rpov
aTrotXcd, that
is,
the
7rE.'r-ov r.
w
a,
the aether. Aristotle
speaks
of this
rv4vpa
as
7rvpEVa
o'-#vrov and
assigned
it to all animals.'8
The
harmonizing interpretation
of the commentators resulted
in the identification of Plato's
gxvpa
and the Aristotelian
7rvevpa.
So
Philoponus
7
speaks
of the veva To
Oeplp.ov.
It is with him
the seat of movement in the
body,
as the soul
according
to Aris-
Zeller II 14,
p. 820, note 3.
Tim. 41 D.
Tim. 44 E, 69 C.
'
Phaedo 113 B.
"
Prod. in Tim. 311
C, 312 B, 321
C,
D; in Rem Pub. II,
p.
257;
of. also Plato's
Rep.
621 B and Prodl. in Tim. 320 D. Proclus in Rem
Pub. II, p. 161 derives the
"
sowing
"
of the
xia-ra
from Tim. 41 A.
Hierocles in Mullach
I, p. 478 makes the assertion that Plato took over
the 5xn7ga from
Pythagoras.
tHierocles in Mullach
I,
pp.
478, 480.
"
xnI%a en ot,dvov vs
vxvis.
e-TeOreaft& recurs
frequently.
138
aIofvevs
Xn/tAa, frequent.
'
Zeller II
23, pp.
483 ff. and notes.
"De Gen. An. 736 b 29.
Zeller II
2, p. 483,
long
note.
7
On De Anima III 10,
p.
588.
319
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
totle was immovable.18 So Hierocles 19 defines the
7rvevUac
pre-
cisely
in the
way
that Aristotle defines his vvrev4a.
Accordingly
no distinction was made between the
oX/iua
and the rvevda 20
and both were
comprehended
under the
appellation
of the
7rVEVLCTtLKOV
oX
2a.20
Various names were
employed
to
desig-
nate it.21
Although
Aristotle defines the nature of the
7rvevpua
as
avdXoyov,
etc.
(vide supra),
he was far from
accepting
the
soul's
mystical
residence in the
stars; yet
his
language
lent
itself to emotional
interpretations.
From the Aristotelian
7rvevija ao-vvTov
the Platonic
XVrpa
took on the
epithet
avpfrve;,
and from his definition
davXoyov
ro rTv
arTpW(v crTOLXEc
the
epithet avyoet3e,22
the "luminosi cor-
poris"
amictus of
Macrob.,
Somn.
Scip.,
I
12,
13.
An instructive
passage
that contributes to bear out the con-
tention advanced is found in Themistius:
23
7rapa
IIXdTarwvtL
TO
avyoetLe
oXrl/a TlaVT7
(EXTaL
Ty7 V7rovolas, 7rapa 'ApWTroT07'XEa
TO
avaXoyov
rw
7rE/7rT)
o-WxarTt. Now there is nowhere in Plato an
avyoceSE
o'Xqjpxa,
but there is in
Aristotle,
as we have seen, a
7rvevpa dowered with the radiance of the fifth element. What
Themistius has in mind with the
avdXoyov
Tr)
7r17rTz'r
ac(o/tar
is the 7rvevdia of De Gen. An. 736 b 29
quoted
above.24 Sim-
plicius
tells us that the substance of the
oX?)pa
is not the ordi-
nary visible,
but the
heavenly
fire.25
We look in vain in Plato for
any
elucidation. The learned
Neo-Platonic commentators that
carry
over Aristotle's doctrine
of the
oav'XVTrov
Trvevvpa,
afford some miscellaneous information.
It
appears
that the
oXrlja-7rvev/,a
was
fundamentally
connected
On De Anima III
10, p.
588.
"'
Mullach
I, p.
478.
0a
Simpl.
on De
Anima, pp. 213-214;
Procl. in Tim. 34
E; Procl.
in
)Rem. Pub.
I, p.
119.
20b
E. g. Procl. in Tim. 311 A.
21
repifX?iLc1a TrveUev/IacKov, oXr/La I/VXLKOV, 2VXLKOv TrvevULa, SXILYa avyoe&Les,
etre.
22 Observe
quotations
that are to follow. On
aviyoetss 6X?17a
cf. Procl.
in Rem Pub.
I, p. 119;
De
Myst.
III c. 14: r
TrepLKeijeEvOv 7.v vX- aiOep0wes
Kal
av'yoetis 6Xrl.a.
23
On De
Anima, p. 19; p. 32,
Berlin
(1899)
ed.
24
Cf. Procl.
in Tim. 2 D
6XI)X/a alOpLov
d avXoyov
TC
oVpavy.
2
Simpl.
on De
Anima, p.
73 ov rb
0pav6tvbevov
TroUO
Tvrp
etc.
320
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE OXHMA-IINETMA AND THE DE INSOMNIIS.
with the functions of
sense-perception
and
imagination.
Sim-
plicius
writes
26
aOttKov
yap
KaL favrarov
KtaOa TC K 7T aWepW8e3s
Trs
^cfTrepaT
iEvXxa
ZXrnpa.
This twofold functional
activity
is as-
signed
to it also
by
Priscian.27 In its first
activity
it is most
intimately
related to the
sensorium,28
and is the
rveviua
Tr
7rpYrws
aiTcrOTTKov
described
by
Themistius (on De Anima,
pp.
86
sq.):
rit ToV
7rvevpuaTro5 /fErBKVL
TOV
7rpToaTW5
aiO'rTLKoi.29
In this
setting
the statement of
Syrian
30 becomes invested
with
meaning:
KCLVO yE
ecTLv aXv0r0e',
Ort
-7
ILEV
OvT rK) T &as aKrTvas Tas
7retu7ro,evaS
a7r6 roV
avyoaeoovS
oX/LuaTroV
7rT Ta
opara
etc.
According
to its second function it is
capable
of
becoming
the
receptacle
of the
imaginative impressions.31
The
passage
to be
quoted
from
Simplicius
affords additional illumination.
Speaking
of
the
operation
of the
imagination (avavrara)
he
says
that it
employs
the same instrument:
opyav
dvw v rw
avir Xpywotev
a'XX'
oVX
US
aaTo'/07TtKW
Kalt E$wO'V Tt
7raQOatvo/eLvw, c)sg
8e
favTaWTtKW Kal
vro
trj5 avTao-TatK7SJ
etc.
Porphyry's
statements
concerning
the
function of the
oXr~ma-
rvcivta are in the same vein:32 cK
'?
TrpOS
TO
ao'wia
7rporaraOetas
. . .
evaT7rO/JpyvvraL
TVrOS T7rS
aVTaCra
s etc.33
The difference of the
4
avTaci'a and its
operation
from the
6Xr,fa-7rvei,aj
is set forth
by Simplicius:
34
avirr 4 avrTaca
etc.
With this
agrees
the statement of
Synesius
as illuminated
by
Augustine. Synesius says
35 that
philosophers
called the
7rvevia
of which he is
speaking
also
7rvevjuaTLKx
ovX'.
Now the 7rvevta-
tK/
1vUX
of which Synesius is
speaking
is the
oXrwa-7rv6vpa
and
identical with
Augustine's
"anima
spiritalis
qua
corporalium
'
Simpl.
on De
Anima, p.
17. Cf. also
Beare,
Greek Theories of
Elementary Cognition, pp.
333-336.
27
Metaphrasis 7repl Obavraalas
p.
264.
2"
Themistius on De
Anima, pp. 86,
87.
29,Cf. Procl. in Rem Pub.
II, p.
167.
$" In
Metaphysica
888 b 17.
1
Simpl.
on De
Anima, p.
214.
39 Sent. e. 32.
3Porph. 7rpos ravpov
VI 1 is
quoted by Mommert, p.
13. It
may
be
mentioned in
passing
that Mommert was misled
by
the external simi-
larity
of the
quotation
from
Porphyry
in
Wolff, p.
160. The
rveiJLa
there is
something entirely different,
as Wolff
proceeds
to
explain, p.
161,
and as
Porphyry's
words show.
34
Simpl.
on De
Anima, p.
214.
'
De Ins. c. 5 1293 A
(Migne).
3
321
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
rerum
capiuntur imagines."
This
Augustine distinguishes
from
the "intellectualis anima
qua
rerum
intellegibilium percipitur
veritas."
This then is the nature of the
oX,/a-7rvepta.
Plotinus has
the
evdpa (Enn.
II
2,
2
7rap' j1tv
TO
irvevap
TO
rCpL; T?]v XrXv),
but Plotinus does not
apply
the
epithet
auyoeSECs
to it nor the
term
0Xrna.
It seems that the identification of Plato's
$ovxx
and Aristotle's
7rvdfjpa
is
posterior
to Plotinus. Enn. III
4,
6
shows that he did not
mystify
the Timaeus
passage.
Cf. Enn.
I
6,
7;
IV
3, 10;
IV
3, 9,
where he
speaks
of successive uJaUT7a
assumed and laid aside
by
the
descending
soul.
Porphyry,36 Iamblichus,37 Syrian,38 Hierocles,89
and Proclus
accept
it. In the hands of
Proclus,04
it becomes a means of
recognition
for
posthumous
souls. It underlies the words of
Boethius,4l'
" Tu causis animas
paribus vitasque
minores
|
Provehis et levibus sublimes curribus
aptans
|
In caelum ter-
ramque
seris."
Philoponus4lb
creates a confusion. He distin-
guishes
the
avyoeuSEs JXrlma
from the
7rvevtJrLKOVv
ZXrtZa (cf. p. 18).
His
7rv?EVJaTtKOV
o3xr]a
is the
&EvTrpov xr7/Xa
of Proclus to which
we shall refer
subsequently.
And
yet he,
like
Themistius,
re-
lates the
TrvevtmTtLKOv Xrp
to the sensorium
(p. 481):
'
KicoL
aLaOrOr7Ys
avrCT)
uiv
a
C/aTo
crO-TLV
. . v.
ev
TW
TV&v/JTLKW
ytVovTaL,
The
explanation
seems to lie in the
assumption
that
Philoponus
was
a late writer who took over Proclus' view of the
oevrepov oXrnpa
and ascribed to this the
predication
made
by
the Neo-Platonists
(who accepted
no e~vTEpov
Xr]Xpa
of the irrational
soul)
of the
avyoeLSes
oXVllua.
The
destiny
of the
Xtpiua-7rvevpa
was
closely
bound
up
with
the
destiny
of the soul to which it
belonged.42
After
having
been
purified
it reascended
together
with the soul to its astral
seat.43 It was
capable
of
purification through
the double
pro-
36Procl. in Tim. 311
A;
Sent. c. 32.
a7Procl. in Tim. 311
B;
321
A;
324 D.
38
Cf.
quotations
that follow.
3
Comm. in Aur. Carm. Mullach
I, p. 478,
483.
40
Comm. in Rem Pub.
II, p.
174.
a"
De Phil. Cons. III 9.
4b
Philoponus
on De Anima.
2
Procl. Inst. Theol. 209.
43Procl. in Tim. 333
B;
cf. in Rem Pub.
II, p.
162.
322
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE OXHMA-IINETMA AND THE DE INSOMNIIS.
cess of a clean life and the
religious
rites. So
Augustine44
writes: "Confiteris
(sc. Porphyry)
tamen etiam
spiritalem
animam sine teletis
posse
continentiae virtute
purgari"
and
again45 "Porphyrius
quandam
quasi purgationem per
theur-
gian
. . .
promittit
. . .
porro
autem
(sc. dicit)
a
theurgo
spiritalem purgari."
Hierocles also
speaks
of the
purification
of the
OXrvjal-rvev,a.46
Proclus makes the same statements con-
cerning
his
8EVTrpOV 3JXpa
in In Tim. 331
B,
emphasizing
the
lAo'o-o(os
ly and the
7TXEc0arU
.47
Through
such
purification
it
became
adapted
to attract
good spirits
and to obtain the vision
of God.48 Hence
Augustine
writes "Per
quasdam
consecra-
tiones
theurgicas quas
teletas vocant idoneam fieri
atque aptam
susceptioni spirituum
et
angelorum
et ad videndos deos" and
Hierocles
49
7rpo
Trqv
TWV
KaOapWv
irvev/Larv 'avvov'Iav etc.
Moreover,
the
xw-ua-rvev,a
was
capable
in its
extra-corporeal
state of
being
thickened
by moisture,
of
becoming
dark and
murky through hylic
attraction and thus visible. Thus Pro-
clus
o
writes
TO
ojx7
,aTa T
ieSpT7rpUeva
avrwiv etc. That the
avyoESts o'X71pa
is meant is discernible from the
preceding pas-
sage.
Cf. also
p.
119
'7rEpL,Xrjpaa
. . .
ei7t0oXovt,cva
V{ro TWv
vvXOwv.
Porphyry
writessl ra's
,tXoo-/jaTrov
. . .
VEVO-Ca),
and
again'2
?raxvvOevTos
. . .
opaTra y7tvwea.-at
In it the soul suffered
post-
letal
punishment.64
Proclus
developed
the
o'Xrja theory
and assumed a second
intermediate
oxrpa
between the
'XCa
o svpes and the human
body (EaxaTov a&gtLa, o'aTpE&8S awcia).
This
8&vrepov
or
wrpoo'4vse
"
De Civ. Dei X c.
28, p.
446.
"
De Civ. Dei X c.
9, pp.
415 and 416.
" Mullach
I, p.
479. The
purification
of the
IX'tsua
is an aid to the
soul. The 26th
chapter
of Hierocles is the best
commentary
on the
KaOapaos
of the
tSXVta.
47
Cf.
Hiero.les
in Mullach
I, p.
482 for a defense of
TeXeoTKcj.
"De Civ. Dei X c.
9, p.
415.
" Mullach
I,
p. 481.
"?In Rem Pub.
I, p. 119; p. 121; II, p. 156; Porphyry
Sent. c.
32,
whole
chapter.
,1
De Ant.
Nymph.
11.
62
See reference in Note 51.
63Cf. In Rem
Pub., p.
119.
1 Sent. c.
32;
Philoponus
on De Anima
I, p.
18.
323
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
oxrVLa
was
interpreted
out of Plato
65
and attached to the irra-
tional soul.56 It was
composed
of the four elements.57 It was
laid aside
by
those
thoroughly purified through philosophy
58
and was resolved into its elements. In the case of those who
had lived a life of
right
conduct
apart
from
philosophy
it con-
tinued in an illuminated
condition,
attending
their
rvpIvEes
oxvrn
as comets attend stars.59
The functions of the three
oX77ara
are summarized
by
Pro-
lus:
60 TO T v oLV o'V
0vipve5
)/La Tro i
aTNvTv
(=the soul) EyKo'/.Lov,
T'O 8E 8VTEpOV
yEVEMoEWS;
roXiLTV,
TO E OcTpE&8eS o
XOovav.
The second
OxVta
was likewise
designated
as
7rvcvWarLKov
and foisted
by
him
on Aristotle.61 It is this second
oxn,ia
that is intended
by
Philoponus
who
constantly speaks
of it as
7rveVarTtLKOv,
the seat of
OvUos'
and
rtLOv[!Ja.
Philoponus recognizes
the
avyoetus oXrln'a
as
a
higher
o
xna
S distinct from it.62
According
to Proclus and
Philoponus
the
Sevrepov o
x7ira
was
perishable.63
The
destructibility
of the
oxrtIa-7rveatL
was
greatly disputed.64
There were those who
regarded
only
the rational soul as im-
mortal,
whilst
they
considered the
oXnpla-nrvEvua
and the irra-
tional soul as
perishable. Porphyry
65 and his
"gentler
"
fol-
lowers allowed a dissolution of them into their
original
elements
to be followed
by
an
avaarotXeoTrt.66 Iamblichus
and his fol-
6r
Tim. 42
C,
D
rpoa0-tvrra
IK
rvpbs Kal
laroms Kal
adpos
Kat
y^S. Procl.
censures the commentators
(331 A)
who failed to observe the dis-
tinction.
6l
Prodl. in Tim. 330 C.
67
See Note 56.
R
Procl. in Tim. 330 D.
Cf. in Rem Pub.
II, p.
300. Kroll fails to understand the
&er7epov
5X-va,
as his
note, p. 300,
evinces.
o0
Procl. in Tim. 330 E.
81Procl. in Tim. 312 C.
a2
Philoponus
on De Anima
I, p. 17,
rT6re
roivv
Kal
Tbv
Ov^6v
Kal rhv ^it-
Ov,Aiav arorlOeo-Oat
etc.;
cf.
I, p.
12; I, p.
49. This first-named
x,/Iua
survives for a
while;
cf. his
argument, p.
17. Like the
6eCrepov ZXrta
of
Proclus,
it is
composed
of the elements
(p.
17).
In this the soul
endures its
punishments
in
Hades, pp.
17-18. The two
irvevlctara
of
Philoponus
differ in
nothing
from those ascribed to the " Chaldaeans
by
Psellus,
Expos.
Orac. Chald.
(Migne), p.
1137.
63
Philoponus
on De Anima
I, p. 18;
also Proclus in Tim. 312 C.
64 Proclus in Tim. 311 A fol.
6 See Note 64.
Procl. in Tim. 311
E,
157 D.
324
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE OXHMA-IINETMA AND THE DE INSOMNIIS.
lowers reinstated the
imperishability
of all three.67
Simplicius
limits the
oX/a-vEi7repa
to the aerial life of the soul and does
not seem to
regard
it as
necessary
to its
earthly
life.68
The
theory
of the
5Xrja-7rvevJula
was not confined to Neo-
Platonism. The Chaldaic
XAyLa taught
it.69 Proclus writes:70
TOi
a7ro rcv
Xoy[wv
()pAp-EVOL
etc. The oracles also maintained
that the soul in its descent
gathers particles
of the
planets
and
the elements.7' If we can trust
Hierocles,
the
theory
of the
oXVra
was held
by
the
Pythagoreans
and
promulgated through
the
XptfuOl.7o
Besides the
oX-vua-7rvdwp
of the
descending
souls the Neo-
Platonists
spoke
of various
garments, XLTrves.72
These
garments
were elemental substances and
loosely
were also called
oxi-,ara.
Their
laying
aside
73
was furthered
by
a
philosophic
life and
by religious
rites.74 Proclus so
interprets
the
oxXos
of Tim. 42
C,
D.
However,
this view was held
by
thinkers before Proclus
75
and was not
universally accepted.76
That Proclus refined the
first or
ov?uvEs oX'lpa
after the introduction of the second can
be discerned from Inst. Theol. 207-210 where he makes it
aKlvrTov,
avXov and &araOs
contrary
to the views of
preceding
Neo-Platonists. He even held that it was "sown" into the
stars
together
with the soul itself.77
Not
only
was a
rvcvpua
ascribed to the
soul,
but also to the
daemons. The
rvdepa
of the daemons was a
subject
of
early
dispute.
Plotinus refers to it.78
Porphyry
ascribes the
nrvvupa
a
roa7o8'oE
to them in his lecture on
demonology.79
It deter-
7
See note 66.
e8
Simpl.
in
Physica
VI
4, p.
966.
"Kroll,
De Orac.
Chal., p.
47.
70 Prol. in Tim. 184 C.
nProcl. in Tim. 311
B,
331 B.
71a
Comm. Aur. Carm. Mullach
I, p.
478.
72
Prol. Inst. Theol.
209;
cf. in Tim. 35
A;
in
Alcib., p.
502;
Macro-
bius,
Somn.
Sc.,
I
11,
12.
79 Procl. in Tim. 330 C.
7
Prodl. in Tim. 331 B:
els Trv d&TrO-KeV 7Vi
r'
TOL0t6rW X-dtrwv...
.a-
Trei
L'v K6al
Kj LX\60oq5o0S
fs . . .
TreXeTTrLKj.
7' See note 72.
76
Stob. Ecl. I 926.
77
Prodl. in Tim. 333
B,
C.
's
Enn. III
5,
6 vrcs
yap
Kal rivos i\X7s
/iereXovriv
etc.
78
De Abst. II 39 rb 8& Irvevea
/Lv orL
t o-w/aTrLK6V etc.
325
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
mined their
character,80 was
"
patibile
"
and in the end
perish-
able.81 Iamblichus
accepts
the
theory
of the daemonical
7rvevpa,
but is unable to define its nature
except by negative
state-
ments.82 So also Proclus.83
In
fact,
the Neo-Platonists were not
chary
in
assigning
o7jnara.
Porphyry
84
made the
light
of the
Republic-myth
the
oXVra
of the world-soul. Proclus 85
gave
an
?X-pa
to the visible
golds,
Hierocles to the
ppwes.
Let us now consider how the
3Xrn,a-7rvEvjVa appears
in
Syne-
sius. He
designates
it
promiscuously
as vvevia and
oX7/pa
with
a
preference
for the former
appellation
1292 B
(Migne)
raitEL
etc. Here transition is made from one term to the other with-
out
change
of
meaning.
That the Neo-Platonic
3X?pa-7rvevp~a
demonstrated above is meant is discernible from his statement
86
that in irrational animals-Aristotle ascribed a 7rvEvpa
to all
living
creatures-it is no
longer
the
vehicle,
but becomes itself
the chief
function,
the animals reason.
Compare
also 1293 B
KELVr?7S (7rv?VuaTLKT
rvXY
=
7rvEvia) cTirEp
-TKcaOV ovs
7r3naa.
Hence
also the terms
oG/,a 7rpwTrov, rju1a
OeacrwoLov.
Synesius applies
a
variety
of names to it:
bavTaarTLKOV
'rVFia
1292
A,
1309
C,
1313
A,
1293
A,
1300
B,
1309
C--rvEvICart7x
trX
1293
A-simply
rvde,a
1289
C,
1292 B, 1296 C D, 1297
D,
1300
A,
1300
B-D,
1312
B,
1313
B,
1316
B,
1316
B; Hymn
III
277, 506; Hymn
IV 252-
cioAXicK, vuLts
1297
B--aowpaTrLK
ova'a 1297
D--KqpaTro
a/,ua
1297
C--aLqtova
VatLs
1300
A--avraaoTtiK aJtLs
1305
B,
1300
D-,uEar)
v'ts 1297
C-uie'aov
rZua 1289
C,
1312 B.
This
irvfiua
is
brought
down
by
the souls from the
spheres:
yv
saveieTrat
87 etc. 1293
B, orep
avwOEv
-7pavC-avTO
1293
C,
o'
yap
.Lov-v
? t
Tra'
aCatupas
avayeLV
vOLKE
T?JV KeiOeCV fKoVaYv fVcLV
1297
B,
Kat
Ta'i o'(catpas
ivapt oo'r9jva
1297 D.
80 De Abst. II 38.
81
See note 79.
82
De
Myst.
V 12 4s
7y&p
a7rXws eiTrel oOre
&drb \Xrs
etc.
83 Procl. in Tim. 321 E. The demons are called
a&c,6vowt 6vXal.
8 Procl.
in Rem Pub.
II, p.
196.
s5Prodl.
in Tim. 301
D, E,
302 B.
=2
12.92
(! KwaTaala
etv
Yo 7rot XPL %p
V Ot O
KTLd TrdpeaT,L
vOVS
oiG &aTrtv 5XqAa
OeTorTpas gV,XvS
etc. The
OeorTepa ipvx7
is the
XoyLKh
'lvxj
called also
by
him with a
terminology differing
from that of Aristotle
7rpwrl ,uvXj.
7
saveiteaOat
in this
application
is Platonic and Neo-Platonic. Cf.
Tim. 42
E; Procl.
in Tim. 321
B,
337 D.
326
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE OXHMA-IINETMA AND THE DE INSOMNIIS.
327
On the fact that the different
OX6/ara
descend from the dif-
ferent
spheres Synesius
founds his
rejection
of a
general
oniro-
critic manual in 1313 A. A science is
possible,
he
says,
of the
human
body,
but
ovX oTro)S c=r
ro)v /avraTctKo v
7rvev/aTros.
With him as with the Neo-Platonists the 7rvdepa is function-
ally
related to the sensorium. This
appears
from his
descrip-
tion of it 1289 C-D TO
o]avTaac'TKov 7rvCevJua
KOLv'raTOv E o-tv
aleOrl-
rjptov.88
In 1292 B he writes of the 7rvev/la: AXws yap
TroO
/eCT-
aLuYxtov
ecTL aXoyuag
Kca
Xoyov
. . Kat Kotvo9
opo0
ad/loilv. In 1309
C he calls it 7rdvTrOv TWv
a7roppeovrTOv
c
iL8)XWo
K7'aT07r7pov
E(aVETraroV.
Because of this
function,
relating
it to the
imagination,
he
speaks
of it as the cfavTractLKov 7rvEvja and
qavTaTcrTtKV Vf'CTLv.
The
7rvvIza
was closer to the soul than to the
body
and inti-
mately
connected with
it, acting upon
the soul and
being
re-
acted
upon by
it for better or for
worse;
cf. 1292
B,
1293
A,
1296 B.89
Consequently
soul and 7vfda form excellent
gauges
of mutual
conditions;
cf. 1300 A.90
Synesius
nowhere
employs
the term
avyoe&s&&
with reference
to
it, yet
it is indubitable that he means the first
rrvvyua
or
oXr,/a-7ervdv,a throughout.
'To
Synesius
it likewise admits of
purification
and nurture
through philosophy,
a clean life and
the rites:
KaOaLpo'Lvov
Sa TEXcTOrv 1292
A;
ta TE
LtXoc-oLs
. . .
KaL
8Sa E rTpLar StaiLT77
KatL
crwopovos
1312
A;
Kara T?)V
E7rLfXr7TLKrV
V SV-
vat.Lv
evepyelv
1300
B;
&8a rTOV KcaTa
vcnLv
ftiovp
Tr7p KaOapov
1292 B.
Being purified
it is
capable
of
attracting good spirits
and of
being brought
into relation with God:
XaKL
Trj
o
vyyEve4 rvVpVa
OEov 1300
B, C;
avyylvcTaL yap
aVTp
Kal
OeOS
EyKoL'pLoS
O'VTo
Xodc'
1309
A; 7rapo-rTLv
o
ro'ppw
6eo'
1301
C;
cf. 1305 C.
Moreover,
the associations of
dryness
and moisture with the
extra-corporeal
Trvev,a and its resultant barometric
rising
or fall-
ing
to the earth is Neo-Platonic:
oraXwvTra
Kal yaLovTra
. . .
6XKa
ovv
. .
vypoLs
7rvevJLaroL
1292 B.
Compare
this with
Porphyry,
De
Ant.
Nymph
11 where the
saying
of Heraclitus is likewise
quoted,
and with
Porphyry's
Sent.
? 32, S&rjKr
TO
fapv
TrvEt/.ja
Ka
Evvypov
8
Compare
with this Themistius on De
Anima, p.
87.
8
Cf. Procl. in Rem Pub.
II, p.
164.
o0
Cf. Prodl. in Rem Pub.
II, p.
165. Proclus here makes the
JdXJ/ara
a means of
posthumous recognition.
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
axpt
Twv
vjroyEdwv
TOrro.
So
Synesius
in 1300 A
speaks
of the
oj,tXXA
eE of the
7rvevMa.
This
suggests
what
Porphyry says
of
the
vgeos;
cf. also
dXXvoOVra Synesius
1297 B.
Furthermore,
Synesius' dxua-7rvEipa
is
inseparable
from the
soul and indestructible. In 1293 B he
speaks
as if the
separa-
tion of the soul from its
7rvevpa
were
possible;
but this must
either be understood in the
light
of other
passages
or be re-
garded
as
exceptional,
for he writes in 1293 C: ov'tv 8e
xeL
.
..
&7ravo8ov.
Cf. also 1297 D. Hence he also calls it
au6a
acrparov
in 1297 B.
Synesius accepted
the
imperishability
of the
6Xv/a-WrvevOa.
Did he also believe in the
imperishability
of the irrational soul?
To answer this
question
the
interpretation
of the oracle
quoted
by
him
il
1297 B
requires
a little note. A
priori,
this view
might
be found in
Synesius
as it
appears already
in
Porphyry
91
and in Iamblichus.92 The
question
is raised
by
the
commentary
of Psellus.93 Psellus
interprets
this oracle and understands the
vX,rs
(Kv,faXov
to be the human
body
and the Ec8wXov to be the
Xaoyos
Hvx7.
He writes
AEyeL
ovv T
Xoytov
. . .
aivTrv
avayet.
Prima
facie
the
interpretation
of Psellus
may
be
correct, though
he is
inaccurate,
because he
generalizes
what he calls the 'EXXAv-
Kos
AXyos.
But since the
interpretation given by Synesius
is
wholly different,
the
commentary
of Psellus cannot be adduced
to
explain Synesius.
With
Synesius
the viAs aKv,3aXov and the
e8owXov
are identical. It is neither the o
xnua
nor the
aorpeOv
awuia,
but
particles
of the elements attracted and contracted
by
the
descending 6XnyLa-7nv'Exa.
This was the doctrine of the
Aoyua.94
That
Synesius
means this can be observed from 1297 B.
Still he will not
dogmatize;
cf. 1297 C. The
notion, then,
of
the
permanence
of the irrational soul is found neither here nor
elsewhere in
Synesius.
The
question
of the
oXq,pa-7rvevua
and the future life deserves
a brief
investigation.
In 1293 A
Synesius
writes: 0Ow Kal
SaiU/ov
7ravTroa7ros Ka(t
eEL(oAov ylveTra
KaL Tag 7ro&vas
Ev
TOVT'o
TWvEL
fvX.
1
Prodl. in Tim. 311 A. A
qualified imperishability
in the sense of
re-elementation.
9IProcl. in Tim. 311 B.
93 Cf.
pp.
1124 and 1125.
9
Procl. in Tim. 3,11
B,
331 B.
328
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE OXHMA-INETMA AND THE DE INSOMNIIS.
329
The TOVTO) must mean the dS8cov. How the
rv/evua
can become
a God or a daemon we do not
understand,
unless it is to denote
somehow the final life of consummation. If the
7rvdevp
is here
taken to include the soul as
"
pars pro
toto "
the
commentary
of Reitzenstein
95
who treats of the Eastern
mysticism may
throw
light
on our text: "Die Seelen der Menschen werden
zunaechst 8a4LoveO.
EO' OVTwS ELS TOV TW OEV
XvopV XovopevovT. Xopol
8e v'o Oev. o
/uevr Tv
rXVavwpoevlv,
o SE rv a7rXavwv." Cf. also Enn.
I
2,
6. So also
Synesius
writes
(1300 A)
Travr
yap
v7rotETrat, etc.
The
signification
of
atpatov
is not clear. An old variant reads
rvppoov Quid?
What
Synesius
means when he
says
that the
atpatov
becomes a
god
or daemon we do not understand. In
1297 B he
speaks
of the wrvdea as
eiOwXtLK
cvcaLs,
and in 1309 C
he calls it deAoov. The
meaning naturally suggested by
the
word
etsoAov
in relation to the future life is that of "
phantom."
So in 1292 D
CiSOALKa
is
explained by
rois
yvwoLuEvot ,ufavraa-
to',cva.
Porphyry distinguishes
even in Hades the
wrvevpa
from
the soul's
eZW
.ov.96
According
to him the soul attracts an
e8ZoXov
in
Hades,
because the
o'XJa-7rvvF,a,
brought
down from
the
spheres,
abides with the soul after its dissolution from the
body. Upon
this rvevja the soul
imprints
its TrroS
rT7' cavrTaaas,
and thus
fEAKTEraL
TrO d8wXov.
Porphyry
here seems at
pains
to
explain
how the soul is able to attract an
eZAXov.
In his
Nymphs'
Cave
97
the souls desirous of somatic existence attract
a moist
arvdv/a,
condense it into a
cloud,
and
through
excessive
moisture become visible. In this
passage
of
Porphyry
also their
appearances
result from the action on the
7rvdfua
(Kara
favTaalav
Xpoovrat
7
rveifvya).
These
appearances
are called
Ei8Xwv
/l,%awt.
Does
Porphyry
here
imply
that the
rvevmuaa
"
colored
according
to the
imagination"
become
eJSXa,
or are the
appear-
ances of the
Trvc,uara
like those of c8&Xa? Neither
Porphyry
nor Plotinus
98
defines what he means
by
eZ&WXov.9
5
Poimandres,
p. 81,
note 2.
o
Sent. c. 32.
7De Ant.
Nymph.
11.
wEnn. VI
4,
16.
9 The definition of
ei'awov
given by Psellus, p. 1124,
has no
authority.
Nicephoros
Gregoras (Migne, p. 622)
takes it from
Psellus,
as he takes
over
many suggestions,
and
develops
it to suit his
purpose.
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
Finally,
the
rveviea
of the daemons is
implied
in 1292 D of
Synesius.
The
aavraorriux
ov'qVa
at the
beginning
of this
chapter
is not the
imagination,
but the
oX7qLa-7rvev,ua.
We take leave of
this troublesome
oXupa
with the words of
Augustine,00
" Cur
ergo quaeso
te non nobis ad hanc
quaestiunculam
indicimus
ferias ?"
ROBERT CHRISTIAN KISSLING.
S. E. MISSOURI STATE TEACHERS
COLLEGE,
CAPE
GIRARDEAU,
MO.
1
Ep.
I 13b.
330
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:12:38 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Вам также может понравиться