[Discussion] On the Gods and the World, Ch. V

[sdi]

Good morning, everyone! Once again, I wish you all a happy Wednesday. Let's pick the puzzle-box back up, shall we?

V. On the First Cause.

Next in order comes knowledge of the First Cause and the subsequent orders of the gods, then the nature of the world, the essence of intellect and of soul, then Providence, Fate, and Fortune, then to see Virtue and Vice and the various forms of social constitution good and bad that are formed from them, and from what possible source Evil came into the world.

Each of these subjects needs many long discussions; but there is perhaps no harm in stating them briefly, so that a disciple may not be completely ignorant about them.

It is proper to the First Cause to be One—for unity precedes multitude—and to surpass all things in power and goodness. Consequently all things must partake of it. For owing to its power nothing else can hinder it, and owing to its goodness it will not hold itself apart.

If the First Cause were Soul, all things would possess Soul.* If it were Mind, all things would possess Mind. If it were Being, all things would partake of Being.† And seeing this quality (i. e. Being) in all things, some men have thought that it was Being. Now if things simply were, without being good, this argument would be true, but if things that are are because of their goodness, and partake in the good, the First thing must needs be both beyond-Being and good. It is strong evidence of this that noble souls despise Being for the sake of the good, when they face death for their country or friends or for the sake of virtue.—After this inexpressible power come the orders of the Gods.

* Gilbert Murray notes (in an earlier note prefacing this work), "[I translate] ψυχή ['psyche'] always 'Soul,' to keep it distinct from ζωή ['zoe'], 'physical life,' though often 'Life' would be a more natural English equivalent." Soul, then, is the animating principle. Indeed, Taylor translates this line, "But if the first cause were soul, all things would be animated."

† Murray notes (in the same footnote as above), "[I translate] οὐσία ['ousia'] sometimes 'essence', sometimes 'being' (never 'substance' or 'nature')."

Comments

[boccaderlupo]

Interesting observations on "Love" and on "The Good." I think this part may benefit, once again, from going to Proclus's Elements. Early on, his makes an argument about The One as both a principle of Unity, and then equates this with the "Good." These are interesting arguments in and of themselves, and it seems as though Sallustius is working from the same playbook, although he's condensing these points significantly.

I am assuming here that his First Cause is equivalent to "The One," which remains inexpressible and ineffable, although transcendent. I would suggest a comparison to 1 itself, where every number (barring 0, which is absence) could be construed as "participating" in 1 (2 = 1 + 1, 3 = 1 + 1 + 1...ad infinitum).

Partial digression: Currently reading Pseudo-Dionysius, whom I had read ages ago outside of the Neoplatonic context (as a mere youth I was into Alan Watts, and there's a Watts-Dionysius connection). But finding now a ton of resonance in his description of the Super-Essential Godhead in the Divine Names.

Axé

[sdi]

I'm also equating "the First Cause," "the One," and "the Good."

A while back, I worked my way through some Sacred Geometry texts, and I agree that there clearly appears to be a relationship between Unity in Neoplatonism and Unity in arithmetic. (In fact, other numbers—√2,√3, φ, etc.—each seem to bear a relationship to one or the other of the Gods of Neoplatonism.) I don't remember if this relationship was made explicitly or if it's just my brain squishing it all together, though.

I'm not very familiar with Pseudo-Dionysius, but I too have read a lot of Watts! I found him very helpful for getting re-started with spirituality in a non-Christian context.

[boccaderlupo]

Ha, I read (and listened to) a lot of Watts over the years, but if braced in an alleyway I couldn't tell you a thing the man said. He did, however, write some more complex material about the relationship between Eastern metaphysics and Christianity (The Supreme Identity) that I remember being compelling, but also that he apparently did something on Pseudo-Dionysius, and I suspect that Christianized Neoplatonism plays a larger role in his thought that is generally recognized.

[temporaryreality]

I'd love to hear which sacred geometry texts you worked through. I'm eagerly awaiting JMG's upcoming book/course so I can work on the topic more systematically, but knowing you, you've got some spiffy recommendations up your sleeve. :)

[sdi]

The one I recommend is Robert Lawlor's Sacred Geometry: Philosophy and Practice. Be advised it's written like an introductory textbook, as if for a class—there are homework assignments, and you should do them! Make sure you have a sketch pad, compass, and straightedge :)

(And, if you're anything like me, something to keep the drool off of the pages... there's lots of enchanting geometric constructions in there!)

[temporaryreality]

Textbooks are a-ok. Will check that out, thanks!