Proclus' Commentary on Plato's "Parmenides" [Paperback]

Proclus (Author), Glenn R. Morrow (Translator), John M. Dillon (Translator)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0691020892 | ISBN-13: 978-0691020891 | Publication Date: October 1, 1992

An English translation of a major work by the great Neoplatonist philosopher, whose commentary greatly influenced later medieval and Renaissance thought. It comprises a full account of Proclus's own metaphysical system, disguised in the form of commentary.

Editorial Reviews

Language Notes

Text: English, Greek (translation) --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Product Details

• Paperback: 406 pages
• Publisher: Princeton University Press (October 1, 1992)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0691020892
• ISBN-13: 978-0691020891
• Product Dimensions: 8.8 x 6.1 x 1.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.9 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,349,410 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A great survey of the Neo-Platonic philosophy, November 23, 2000

By 

"cuba-si" (Brno, the Czech republic) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Proclus' Commentary on Plato's "Parmenides" (Paperback)

This is one of the best books by Proclus Diadochus and we are also lucky to have this excellent translation by G.R. Morrow and J.M. Dillon. If anybody is interested in the Neo-Platonic philosophy, or in the ancient philosophy, he should not miss this book. Even if it is rather difficult for a beginner to read long discourses of Proclus on the most important topics of the philosophy, noone should leave this book without careful reading. If you have read the Elements of Theology by Proclus, then you are able to understand everything Proclus is telling us. This book thinks about the most difficult dialogue of Plato - about the Parmenides. In the beginning you are connected with the amazing world of Proclus' allegorical interpretation of Plato's dialogue. Then you can study the world of Ideas as seen by Proclus - you can learn about four problems concerning the Ideas, i.e. whether there are Ideas; what things have Ideas; what is the participation like; and finally where are the Ideas. Proclus shows you all the levels of the realms of the One (Hen) and the Mind (Nous) and you can enjoy also the Proclus' dialectics in the end of the Commentary. The author also tells us a lot of Ideas about the negative theology tells in the last book. The translation is as well of the best value.

6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Interesting work by key Neo-Platonist, October 14, 2006

By 

Greg (Australia) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Proclus' Commentary on Plato's "Parmenides" (Paperback)

Proclus was one of Plato's most devout followers, along with Plotinus. He was also one of the most brilliant.

His commentary on Parmenides is a very long 'drawing out' of what Proclus considered to be the hidden meaning of Plato's dialogues; in effect, Plato was not just a philosopher but also a sage and divinely inspired figure who discovered the secret structure of the universe itself, visible and invisible.

In commenting on this difficult metaphysical dialogue of Plato, in which Plato himself tried to reach an understanding of Parmenides' philosophy of Being, Proclus 'discovers' a vast metaphysical reality beyond the realm of the senses. The structures Proclus outlines are quite complex and best left to the introductory essay in the translation itself. Suffice to say there is a transcendant 'One' which the source of all Being, and which then radiates itself to lower objects called 'Henads' which in turn produce visible reality. Along the way there is also a mixture of magic and prayer to various Gods and daimons.

Proclus was an important philosophical influence on Christian Neo-Platonists, such as Eckhart, Dionysius the Aeropagite and possibly Eriugena. Proclus was also an important influence in Renaissance Neo-Platonism and the influence of this philosopher continues today.

The book is very long (about 900 pages) and Proclus's digressions are exceedingly long winded. His work is not easy to read and will probably put off all but the most determined student of philosophy.

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Proclus, the Platonic Parmenides and the Divine, Mystical Dialectic, August 29, 2009

By 

Johannes Platonicus (South Bend, Indiana) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: Proclus' Commentary on Plato's "Parmenides" (Paperback)

The Philosopher: Before discussing the content of Proclus' masterful 'Commentary on Plato's Parmenides,' let a few things be said as to the man and philosopher himself. Proclus (412-487 AD) was a native of Lycia in southern Asia Minor and it was in the nearby metropolis of Xanthus that his early education began. From there he was sent to Alexandria to receive a legal education, like his own father, who was reputed to be a successful pleader of the courts [G. Morrow, Proclus pg. 15]. Yet, while on a sojourn to Byzantium, Proclus underwent a conversion to the philosophic life, which his own pupil and biographer Marinus described as a "divine call" [Vita Procli, ch. 6]. This apotheosis of Proclus moved him such, that he abandoned his legal vocation and began to hear the lectures of Olympiodorus on Aristotle and Heron on mathematics; and though he excelled in these studies, Proclus nonetheless felt dissatisfied. Like Porphyry nearly two centuries before him, Proclus was looking for his Plotinus. It was in Athens, not in Alexandria, that Proclus would find the teacher and the ultimate destiny he was looking for. Proclus arrived at the Platonic school of Athens, in his early twenties, during the tenure of Plutarch the Athenian, a thinker of some weight and influence during his own era. This Plutarch was the teacher of Syrianus--the Syrianus who was to do for Proclus what Plotinus did for Porphyry. Syrianus introduced Proclus to the neo-Platonic curriculum, which began with an intensive study of the whole science of Aristotle, which culminated with a theoretic and mystical exegesis on core Platonic dialogues such as 'Parmenides' and 'Timaeus' [Dillon, N-Platonism pg. 15]. Syrianus also introduced Proclus to the theological poetry of the Orphics and the Chaldean Oracles, of which the former gave Proclus an understanding of the gods in an elevated metaphysical sense, while the latter, as interpreted by Iamblichus, assisted him in a theurgical union [henosis] with the incomprehensible One, which neither rational or theological gnosis could effect. The influence of Syrianus on Proclus was so great that he frequently alludes to his master in his own writings, calling him a "fellow Bacchant with Plato" and a "true hierophant of the divine doctrines" [In Parmenides, 1.1]. After Syrianus' tenure as head of the Academy, Proclus was designated as "diadochos," that is, the successor of Plato; and he headed the school for a remarkable fifty years until his passing (ca. 487 AD). Under Proclus' tenure, the most comprehensive system of neo-Platonic philosophy was realized and, even though some of his writings are lost, the massive corpus that is left to us, is of inestimable value and is marked with a philosophical wisdom that is truly extraordinary. The writings of Proclus comprehend every field of science, religion and philosophy and they are representative of the last great flowering of the genius of Hellenism. Among Proclus' distinguished pupils names such as John Philoponus, pseudo-Dionysius, Simplicius and Damascius stand out ,who were all themselves notable philosophers in their own right. In retrospect, from Spuessipus (ca. 347 BC), the first successor of Plato, to Proclus, the last Platonic successor of real standing, the life of the Academy and of scholastic Platonism was running desperately out of air, until at last, it breathed its last under the final death throe of Justinian, who banned all Hellenes from the academies of the Byzantine Empire (529 AD). From that point on, neo-Platonism was converted to Christian theology, until it once again reared its head in the Florence of the Medicii.

The Text: Proclus' 'Commentary on the Parmenides of Plato' was of central importance among that author's writings, as is evidenced by the prefatory address, in which he makes a solemn invocation to "all the gods and goddesses" [1.618]. The only other work to begin with invoking the divine, is Proclus' 'Theology of Plato,' so one must assume that he felt the subject-matter of these works to be of the highest order. In the preface, Proclus asks each order of deity (from intelligible gods down to heroes) for their particular blessings so that he may be prepared to enter into what he calls that "most illuminating and mystical vision that Plato reveals to us in the 'Parmenides'." So, implied from the text's very outset, is the commentator's notion that Plato's 'Parmenides' is to be approached and interpreted as something of sacred book, whose content expresses every order of divine being from first to last. Thus, Proclus' exegetical methodology will reveal the 'Parmenides' to be not strictly a gymnastic in logic, as some earlier commentators had construed it, but as a logical exercise, a mystical dialectic, in which Plato, under the guise of hair-splitting logic, has unfolded how all things derive from the One. As to the identity of the One of the 'Parmenides' text, Proclus understands that that there are two ways in which this One may be interpreted, while there is only one that is reasonable. Proclus knows all to well what the historical, philosopher-poet, Parmenides meant [Fr. B 8.1-52] when he spoke about a One--that the poet is theorizing about the One Being, which is itself indivisibly one while containing all things [all existents] in a gathered multiplicity via participation. But Proclus asserts that the dialogue is not solely about Being itself, in Parmenidean terms. Rather, it is the One of Plato--which is non-existent in the sense that it is the transcendent cause of all being--that is the subject of the dialogue. Thus, Proclus states that "Plato, when he discovered that the One was superior to Being and to all existence, by way of correcting Parmenides, presents him as taking his start from the One" [In Parm. 5. 1032]. Proclus' justification for this inference is that Plato often sets out the theories of characters in his dialogues in a better form than their own, so as to advance the theories of his predecessors. Additionally, Proclus attests that Parmenides, in his poem, makes affirmative statements as to the nature of his One, whereas in the dialogue Plato has Parmenides starting his hypotheses from negative statements about the One--about the One "in the true sense," the sense in which nothing may be said of it at all, since it is beyond all being, intellection and knowledge [In Parm. 6. 1079]. Thus, it is what is not said about the One that makes it the Platonic One, rather than the Parmenidean One Being; and what is said about it, in a positive sense in the ensuing hypotheses, is only to demonstrate the relation that all existence has to the One by way of participation, showing ultimately the One's total unconnectedness from all being. Moving on, another poignant aspect of this text is Proclus' understanding of the characters in the dialogue, which is useful to keep in mind while reading the commentary. At the opening of the dialogue Plato's begins by establishing the setting and dramatis peronae. And Proclus, in a characteristically neo-Platonic way, allegorizes the entire dialogue; however, it will be useful only to name those persons which he feels Plato uses as an analogical device in order to invest the text with a divine metaphysical meaning. The three primary persons in the conversation are interpreted by Proclus to be an analogue to the Noetic Triad: Parmenides represents the Patrios Nous, which is united to the One Being, Zeno of Elea represents Nous [Life] which is replete with the Forms and is participated in by Divine Soul and Socrates represents the Particular Nous, so that together they constitute the triad of Being, Life and Intellect. Further, to complete the analogue to the divine order, Proclus sets up Pythodorus to be the Divine Soul and Antiphon to be Daemonic Soul, which "lays hold of nature," thus concluding the divine circuit from the intellectual gods to the daemonic souls [In Parm. 1.628-29]. With that in mind, the commentary as a whole is divided essentially into two parts: books (1-4) consist generally of the metaphysical relation between the Ideas and Matter, first positing the existence of the Ideas, then defining the nature of the Ideas, how they are participated in and just what sorts of entities they are. Proclus tells us that in the first section of the dialogue Parmenides has assisted Socrates in his ascent from Sensibles to Intelligibles, through a logical gymnastic in the Forms, so that he now is anchored "around the level of the One" [In Parm. 5.993]. From this locus--the Intelligible--Proclus now announces the subject-matter for books (5-7). In the foregoing books Proclus views the dialogue as progressing from a gymnastic in the Forms to a mystical revelation of metaphysical truths. Having arrived at the level of the One, Proclus interprets Plato to be explaining how the One is cause of all existence and how the One generates the primal henads, by which all the principles of things are held together [ibid]. Also, Proclus comprehensively surveys and criticizes theories about Parmenides' famous nine hypotheses, which were set forth in the centuries before him--figures such as Origen the Platonist, Amelius, Porphyry, Plotinus and Iamblichus, to name a few. Proclus' critique of his predecessors theories on the nine hypotheses is not only great for elucidating the development of neo-Platonic doctrine, but also accentuates his line of reasoning leading up to his theory on the hypotheses which he adopted from his master Syrianus, which is:

Positive Hypotheses--that "One" has three senses and "Non-Being" two--
1.)the Primal God, the One ["One" as superior to Being]
2.)Divinized Being: Intelligible, Intellectual, Psychical ["One" as coordinate to Being]
3.)Intermediary Souls ["One" as inferior to Being]
4.)Forms-in-Matter [Relative "Non-Being," since Being is mediated to psychical forms]... Read more ›