0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
39 просмотров14 страниц
The theory of the XraM-7revEia, as met with in the NeoPlatonic writers, represents the reconciliation of Plato and. Aristotle on a subject which the former never taught and the latter was incapable of. Defining intelligibly.
Исходное описание:
Оригинальное название
R.C. Kissling. the Oxhma-PNEUMA of the Neo-Platonists and the de Insomniis of Synesius of Cyrene
The theory of the XraM-7revEia, as met with in the NeoPlatonic 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 theory of the XraM-7revEia, as met with in the NeoPlatonic 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 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>La, 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
Being in Numenius and Plotinus: Some Points of Comparison Author(s) : Dominic J. O'Meara Source: Phronesis, Vol. 21, No. 2 (1976), Pp. 120-129 Published By: Stable URL: Accessed: 25/08/2013 21:25