Thomas Taylor's Creed

[sdi]

Sallustius' On the Gods and the World is often described, following Gilbert Murray, as a sort of creed or catechism of pagan faith. But did you know that Thomas Taylor—bless him, he's nearly as consistent as the stars themselves—penned a literal Platonist creed? He cribs from Sallustius here and there, but in the main it's Proclus all the way.

Comments

[boccaderlupo]

Good find!!

Axé!

[boccaderlupo]

In going through this, it's interesting that Taylor seems to use the term "him" for The One (if I am reading right). If true, he would be commit what to some is the "sin" of "hypostasizing The One," in effect, personalizing it (Butler has written about this, and tied it to Proclus's thought).

This not problematic, generally, for Christian Platonists, but I wonder if it chafes for those more inclined to the "hard" polytheism side of things, as it seems to suggest a specific hierarchy. Will have to read through this all more closely.

Regardless, very interesting find...

[sdi]

I agree. That drove me bananas.

Same with, I think, that the Intellect produces intellects, and that the Soul produces souls, and all that. In my opinion, this misconstrues each level of reality and the nature of unities. But, it has authority, as Proclus is all into it and almost everyone interprets Plotinus according to Proclus.

In fairness, it seems Plotinus is somewhat inconsistent; in some places he talks of an All-Soul, in others he's firm that while there's a greatest soul, the nature of soul-as-a-level-of-being is that it's inherently divided (but not infinitely so). I've been wondering why: does he use "the" All-Soul as a stand-in for the entire level of being (e.g. treating a divided thing as a whole for the sake of argument)? is he using it as interchangeable with the World-Soul (e.g. Gaia, rather than all souls)? he penned his essays over the course of a couple decades, did his opinion change over time? do I just completely misunderstand? I've got a lot of study ahead of me.

But for the moment, my working hypothesis is that the One is one, the Intellect is many-as-one, souls are many ones, and bodies are many. The many things polytheists consider gods are thus the greatest souls; if one considers the Intellect as a god, then it is the greatest god (and I can support, say, a Christian Platonist treating the Intellect as the god), but I personally would tend to think of it as superdivine and beyond godness (e.g. it is more like "heaven" than "god"). But this seems to me a matter of taste and I find it reasonable to consider Neoplatonism to transcend mere monotheism or polytheism—Plotinus may be read both ways. (Though I also find both to be way above my pay grade and I focus on dæmons; it seems weird to me that people focus so much on something that transcends us so very far and I wonder why it matters! We have to crawl before we can walk, and most of us aren't even crawling yet!)

As for the One, it is definitely both/neither a god and/nor not a god and to treat it as either strikes me as all kinds of misguided. Plotinus was surely firm on that.