CHAPTER XX
NEO-PYTHAGOREANISM AND NEO-PLATONISM

During the Greco-Oriental period of its history philosophy seemed to turn to the supernatural for light and assistance. While, however, Philo sought to supply this supernatural element by bringing to bear on philosophical problems the whole wealth of Jewish religious ideas, Neo-Platonism looked for supernatural light, not in any system of religion, but in such communication with the Divine as each man may, by his own individual effort, attain. Neo-Platonism was, therefore, the last effort which pagan philosophy made to save itself from dissolution.

In the Neo-Platonic movement we may distinguish (1) the transition schools; (2) Neo-Platonism in its earlier form; (3) the Syrian school, (4) the school of Constantinople; (5) the Athenian school; (6) the Alexandrian school.

1. Transition Schools. The way was prepared for the Neo-Platonic movement by Neo-Pythagoreans and Pythagorizing Platonists who, before the time of Plotinus, agreed in admitting that philosophical knowledge is to be supplemented and perfected by communication with a more or less vaguely defined transcendent, divine something.

The chief Neo-Pythagoreans were Figulus (45 B.C.), of whom Cicero speaks; Apollonius of Tyana and Moderatus of Gades, both of whom lived in Nero's time; and Nicomachus of Gerasa, who lived in the time of the Antonines.

The philosophy of the Neo-Pythagoreans is a blending of Pythagorean traditions with Platonism, Aristotelianism, and Stoicism. The Neo-Pythagoreans taught a highly spiritual notion of God, in accordance with which they interpreted the numbers and the Ideas of their predecessors to mean Ideas in the mind of God. They attached great importance to the spiritual element in human life, to mysticism, ecstasy, and prophecy, and around the lives of Pythagoras and Apollonius they threw a halo of superturalism, exalting these philosophers into ideals of human conduct, into prophets and servants of God.

Of the Pythagorizing Platonists, the best known are Eudorus of Alexandria (died about 25 B.C.), Thrasyllus (died A.D. 36), Plutarch (A.D. 50-125), Maximus of Tyre (end of second century), Celsus (about A.D. 200), the opponent of Christianity, and Numenius (end of second century). To this school belong also the so-called Hermetic books, the writings of the pretended Hermes Trismegistus, which date from the latter part of the third century, and come apparently from an Egyptian branch of the school.

All these writers manifest an inclination on the part of the Platonists to admit the religious ideas of the East as supplementary of philosophy. They lay stress on the antagonism between the spiritual and the carnal in man, between the spiritual and the material in the universe, and in order to bridge over the chasm between these antithetical elements they admit the existence of creatures intermediate between God and the material world.

2. Neo-Platonism in its Earlier Form. Ammonius Saccas (A.D. 176-242) of Alexandria is regarded as the founder of Neo-Platonism. He did not commit his teachings to writing. It is to his disciple, Plotinus, that we owe the first written exposition of his system.

PLOTINUS

Life. Plotinus, a native of Lycopalis in Egypt, lived from 205 to 270. In 253 he went to Rome, and there won over to his philosophy the Emperor Gallienus and his wife Salonina. In 263 he retired to Campania, where he died six or seven years later.

Sources.^{1} The works of Plotinus consisted originally of fifty-four opuscles. After having, as some maintain, undergone a previous recension at the hands of Eustochius, these opuscles were collected by Porphyry and arranged, according to subject-matter, in six Enneads.

DOCTRINES

General Character of Neo-Platonism. The Neo-Platonists made use of the agrapha dogmata,^{2} and, in general, were more influenced by Platonic tradition than by the teaching of the Dialogues. In this way they were led to accentuate more and more the mystical element in human thought, to separate matter from spirit, and to have recourse to the doctrine of emanations.

The philosophy of Plotinus centers round three ideas, -- the One, the Nous, and the world-soul, -- which for him constitute a kind of philosophical trinity.

The One. Plotinus, like Philo, starts with the notion of God. God is described as the One, the Good, rather than as Being or Mind; for He transcends all Being, and all rational nature. He is the Primal Reality; therefore, He is not properly styled lntelligence, because intelligence (Nous) implies two elements, the act of knowing and the object known, and duality cannot be primal, because it presupposes unity. God, therefore, is absolute unity, undifferentiated by any act of His will or intellect, or by any predication on our part except the predication of unity and goodness. But goodness leads to emanation, which is at least an apparent breaking up of the unity of the One into the multiplicity of the manifold. Plotinus, however, explains that created things come from the Primal One, not by a transference of part of the nature of the One, nor by an act of will, but by a process called emanation. The process, then, is not one of creation; nor is it a process of emanation in the pantheistic sense; it is an overflow of the perfection of the One Supreme Reality, a beam sent forth from the Infinite Light, -- and with these metaphorical expressions Plotinus seems to have contented himself, being unable to describe more definitely the nature of the process of emanation.

Intellect. The first emanation from the One is that of the Nous. The One sheds around itself an ousia, or essence, which, like a light, conveys the luster of the One, and is also its image. The image, turning to the One, recognizes itself as an image; thus does the essence become intellect, a dual principle, the source of all subsequent differentiation of the One.

The intellect is, like the Logos of Philo, the agglomerate of Ideas: it is, indeed, expressly identified by Plotinus with Plato's world of Ideas. Now, the Ideas are differentiated in the intellect by an act of reflection, precisely in the same way as the intellect differentiated itself from the One by an act of reflection. But the act of reflection, while it distinguishes the Ideas in the intellect, does not dissociate or separate them from it. They sever themselves, because they are essentially operative powers. By this separation they give rise to the world of phenomena, not, indeed, immediately, but through the further mediation of the world-soul.

The World-Soul. As the Nous is an image of the One, the world-soul is an image of the Nous. Being the image of an image, it is, as it were, doubly dual. In fact, while it is in part akin to the intellect, it is in part unlike the intellect, for it is in part essentially inclined to realize the Ideas in concrete phenomena.

However, before we come to the material phenomenon there is still another step, another intermediate emanation. The world-soul gives rise to individual souls, or, more properly, to plastic forces (logoi spermatikoi); these in turn give rise to matter, with which they combine to constitute material phenomena. Matter, therefore, emanates from the plastic forces, which emanate from the world-soul; the world-soul, as we have seen, emanates from intellect, and intellect emanates from the One. In this way, light, in the series of emanations, becomes darkness; for matter is the antithesis of the One. Matter is multiplicity, change, not-being, privation, the source of all evil, the prôton kakon. It is present everywhere in the world of phenomena in composition with the plastic forces, in the heavens, where it is united with a most perfect soul; in the stars, where it is united with the visible gods; in the powers of air and sky, where it is united with the demons, who mediate between the stars and the souls of men; in the body of man, where it is united with the human soul; and in inorganic bodies, where it is united with the lowest of the plastic forces. Wherever it is present, it is the principle of imperfection, limitation, and evil.

Psychological Doctrines. Man is, therefore, a compound of matter and that plastic force which is the human soul. The soul is immaterial: it existed before its union with the body; it was united to the body in punishment for some primordial guilt. It survives the body, but is liable to be sent back into the bodies of animals or plants according to the degree in which it attached itself to material things during its union with the body. This doctrine of future retribution implies freedom on the part of the soul, and Plotinus maintains the doctrine of freedom in opposition to the teaching of the Stoics.

Return of the Soul to God. Plotinus, following Plato, attaches little importance to the senses as means of acquiring knowledge of reality. In order to attain a knowledge of the ideal, which alone is real, the soul must retire into itself, and there contemplate the intellect which is indwelling in each of us. Proceeding along this path of self-contemplation, the soul rises from the contemplation of the intellect within us to a contemplation of the One. This final step is not, however, to be attained unless the One Himself sheds upon the soul a special light whereby the soul is enabled to see the One. In the splendor of that light all apprehension and all consciousness disappear; the soul is rapt in ecstasy (ekstasis) and is reunited with the One whence all things have emanated. This ecstasy is the supreme happiness of man.

It is, therefore, man's duty first to withdraw from the world of sense by a process of purification (katharsis) then, freed from the bonds of sense, to rise in contemplation to God, and thus beome truly spiritual, the man of God, the prophet, the wonder-worker (thaumatourgos).

Historical Position. The philosophy of Plotinus is an elaborate attempt to bring the transcendent spiritual element of religion into harmony with the philosophy of Plato, or, more correctly, with the philosophy of the Platonists. Plotinus the pagan attempted to accomplish what Philo the Jew had attempted to accomplish two centuries before. He imagined that by his doctrine of emanations he had bridged over the chasm between the One and the world of sense-phenomena. But, like all monists, he was doomed to failure. His exclusion of volition and thought from the concept of the Deity forbade the introduction of a principle of differentiation; he could not consistently maintain the origin of the multiple from the One.

Among the disciples of Plotinus, Porphyry (A.D. 233-304) is best known on account of his treatse, Eisagôgê eis tas katêgorias, an introduction to the logic of Aristotle. It was he who reduced the works of Plotinus to their present form. His exposition of the doctrines of Plotinus contains some material additions to his master's teaching in regard to questions of asceticism, the use of magic, and the worship of demons.

3. Syrian School. Iamblichus of Syria (died about A.D. 330), pupil of Porphyry, developing the mystico-religious ideas of the Neo-Platonists, elaborated a systematic defense of polytheism. Above the One he places the absolutely first; the Nous he divides to an intelligible and intellectual, each of which he subdivides to triads: these are the superterrestrial gods. The terrestrial gods he divides into three hundred and sixty celestial beings, twenty-two orders of subcelestial and forty-two orders of natural gods. Inferior to these are angels, demons, and heroes.

Iamblichus endeavored to introduce the worship of Pythagoras, writing for this purpose a life of Pythagoras, full of legend and fable, -- peri tou Puthagorikou biou.

4. School of Constantinople. After the failure of the Neo- Platonic attempt to restore pagan philosophy, an attempt which received the imperial sanction of Julian (who reigned from A.D. 361 to 363), the Neo-Platonists went back once more to the works of Plato and Aristotle, inaugurating an era of more eager study and more elaborate exegesis of the writings of these great masters. At Constantinople, under the patronage of the Christian emperors, Themistius devoted himself to the task of commentating the works of Aristotle. Though he remained a pagan, Themistius was obliged to make concessions to the Christian religion, which was just then emerging victorious from its struggle with pagan civilization. Constantinople, however, did not long remain the center of the new movement; its place was taken by Athens, which once more became the focus of the Hellenistic philosophy, and Constantinople disappeared from the history of philosophy, to reappear in Byzantine times.

5. Athenian School. About the beginning of the fifth century a new school of Platonism arose in Athens. Its chief representatives were Plutarchus, Syrianus, and Proclus.

Proclus (A.D. 410-485) endeavored by means of Aristotelian dialectic to synthesize and systematize the Neo-Platonic doctrines. He retained the essential elements of Neo-Platonism, -- monism, doctrine of the Nous, emanation, antithesis of matter and spirit, mysticism, belief in demons, magic, etc. The principle on which he endeavored to unify all these was that of triadic development. That which is produced is similar to that which produces it; at the same time it differs from it, as the derivative differs from the original. By reason of its difference from the original, the derivative differentiates or produces; while by reason of its identity with the original, it tends to return to it. Thus we have the original, the emergence from the original, and the return (in a lower form) to the original, monê, proodos, epistraphê, -- the three stages of the triadic development.

The Absolute Original is the One, superior to all created unity, to all being, to all knowledge. From the One come, by the first emanation, the henades (henades). They alone are related to the world; they are the supreme gods; it is they who exercise providence over worldly affairs. Next, from the henades come, by a second emanation, the triad, intelligible, intelligible-intellectual, and intellectual being, having for chief properties being, life, and thought. Each member of the triad is further differentiated into a hebdomad; a series is thus formed, of which each member corresponds to one of the divinities of the pagan pantheon.

The most important point of difference between Proclus and Plotinus is in the doctrine of the origin of matter. According to Proclus, matter is derived immediately from the unlimited, the first of the intelligible triads; according to Plotinus, on the contrary, matter is derived from the plastic forces and thus ultimately, through the world-soul and the intellect, from the One.

Proclus maintained that the duty of man is to rise from the sensuous to the supersensuous, in the hope of reaching the mystical union with God which constitutes supreme happiness. Like Plotinus, he believed that such a union is impossible without a special illumination from on high, and he advocated as means of attaining this illumination, all the religious helps -- magic, demon worship, hero worship -- which a decadent paganism could offer.

It was Proclus who gave to Neo-Platonism its final and most complete form. His successor, Simplicius, is more important as a commentator than as an independent thinker.

6. Alexandrian School. Among the pupils of Proclus was Ammonius, who taught at Alexandria during the fifth century. With him are associated the names of Damascius, John Philoponus (sixth century), Simplicius, and Olympiodorus. It was at Alexandria that Hypatia, during the first decade of the fifth century, attempted to restore pagan philosophy. After her time, Philoponus and Olympiodorus, the last representatives of Neo-Platonism in the East, became converts to Christianity, and the warfare so long waged between the new religion and the old philosophy came to an end: pagan Platonism gave way before the Platonism of the Christian Church.

Historical Position. Neo-Platonism is Platonism in the condition of senile debility. The contrast between Plato and Proclus is sufficient to show that philosophy degenerated rather than developed in its unequal struggle with the new religion. And the degeneracy was not confined to the speculative portion of Plato's philosophy. That it extended also to ethics is manifest from the substitution of the practice of magic for the practice of virtue.

What prolonged the life of Neo-Platonism was the opposition of the pagan world, and especially of the learned world of paganism, to Christianity. When (A.D. 529) Justinian forbade the teaching of philosophy at Athens, the Platonists emigrated to Persia. Thirty years later there was no Platonism outside the Christian Church.

Neo-Platonism is the last phase of pagan philosophy. Although the most important systems of Neo-Platonism fall within the Christian era, they belong in spirit and in contents to the pagan world. With the history of Neo-Platonism, therefore, the history of ancient philosophy comes to an end.

{1} For bibliography of Neo-Platonism, cf. Ritter and Preller, op. cit., p. 519. Add Whittaker, The Neo-Platonists (London, 1901).

{2} Cf. p. 95.