Table Of ContentEROS AND PSYCHE
STUDIES IN
PLATO, PLOTINUS,
AND ORIGEN
JOHN M. RIST
PHOENIX
JOURNAL OF THE CLASSICAL
ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
SUPPLEMENTARY VOLUME VI
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE
MARY E. WHITE
CHAIRMAN
A. DALZELL
G. M. A. GRUBE
L. E. WOODBURY
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS 1964
Printed in Canada
TO ANNA
PREFACE
THIS book clearly could never have existed without the unending
inspiration of the Greek philosophers, especially of Plato and
Plotinus. After them, I owe an unrepayable debt to my former
teacher Mr. F. H. Sandbach, of Trinity College, Cambridge, on whose
immense knowledge of antiquity I have often called, and whose high
ideals of scholarship have often been a challenge. Professor A. H.
Armstrong has offered a number of valuable and detailed suggestions,
and has drawn my attention to passages in the Enneads which I would
otherwise have overlooked. My thanks go to him and also to Miss
A. N. M. Rich and others who have read the manuscript. Last but
not least, my wife, to whom this book is dedicated, has been a source
of help both literary and practical at all stages of its composition.
The manuscript was prepared for publication by Dr. R. M. Schoeffel
of the University of Toronto Press. He has lavished much care on it,
and it owes many improvements to him. It has been published with
the help of a grant from the Humanities Research Council of Canada
using funds provided by the Canada Council.
J.M.R.
University College, University of Toronto
CONTENTS
PREFACE Vll
2
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
3
INTRODUCTION
PART ONE
Plato and Neoplatonism 7
The attitude of the Neoplatonists to Plato, 7-8. MCfios
and λόγοϊ, 8-13. Modern attitudes to Plato and Neopla
tonism, 14-15.
π The Good, the Forms, and Eros in Plato 16
i. Anthropomorphism and theomorphism, 16-19. Gods
and Forms, 19. Purification and mathematics, 20-22. The
Forms as the objects of love, 22-23; "Epws means more
than desire, 23-30. Creation and the goodness of Gods,
30- 31. Overflowing love and the germs of emanation,
31- 34. Two kinds of Έ pws; the view of Markus re
examined, 35-40.
ii. The relation between Forms and souls, 40-41.
Difficulties arising from the supposedly Platonic Form of
Being, 41-46. The separation of Forms and souls, 46-47.
in. The lifelessness of Forms and the Third Man, 47-50.
iv. The Good and the One, 50-52. The relationship of
the Good and the Forms, 53-54. Platonic contradictions
and the “unity” of Plato’s thought, 54-55.
hi The One, Eros, and the Progression of the
Soul in Plotinus 56
i. Plotinus’ attitude to the Platonic writings, 56-59. Self
predication in Plotinus, 59-60. NoOs and the Forms;
Plotinus’ view different from Plato’s, 60-61. History of
the Forms from Plato to Plotinus; the roles of the early
Stoics, Posidonius, Antiochus of Ascalon, Philo, Albinus,
61-67. Plotinus “humanizes” the doctrine of Forms,
67-68. The One as Being and “beyond Being”; the
positive and negative approaches, 68-69. The One as
cause and “Father”; quasi-lifelike terms applied to it,
69-73. Metaphors of emanation, 74. Difficulties in motive
for the One and the Demiourgos, 75-76. The One de
scribed in voluntarist terms; the view of Trouillard;
the One as’Tpcus, 76-79. Nygren on "Ερως and Άγάτη;,
79-80. The transcendence, immanence, and “Epa>s of
the One, 80-84. Plato and Plotinus on Έρωϊ, 84—85.
Plotinus excludes doctrines of salvation, 85. The One
“supra-personal” rather than impersonal, 86-87.
ii. The mystical union as a clue to the understanding
of the One; two ways of approach; deification, 87-89.
Preliminary studies, including mathematics out of
deference to Plato, 89-91. The via negativa is platonic,
91- 92. Plotinus’ attitude to mystic union and δαίμονβs,
92- 94. Dialectic, 94. Όμοίωσts θβω, 94. Ecstasy de
scribed; Έρω$ as the link between the two approaches
to the One, 95-97. Higher replaces lower in union, 97-99.
No Christian influence, 99. The sublimations of hetero
sexual and homosexual love, 100-102. The Good and the
Beautiful, 103. Tactual imagery in the description of
ecstasy, 103. The transcendence of self and Plato’s views
on immortality, 104-109. Forms of individuals and the
transcendence of self, 109-110. 'Ομοίωσα and Έρωϊ in
Plato and Plotinus, 110-111. Plotinus, his contempor
aries, and personal religion, 111-112.
PART TWO
i Knowing How and Knowing That 115
The theory of Gould, 115-117. “Knowing how” in Plato,
117. Τβχνη and βπιστήμη, 118-120. Definitions of
σωφροσύνη, 120-121. Has the Platonic Socrates a theory
of the object?, 121-128. The Memorabilia on “knowing
how” and “knowing that,” 128-130. The priority of
“knowing that,” 130-137. Knowing oneself, 137. Gould’s
distinction anachronistic, 138. Learning to “know how,”
139-141. Virtue as knowledge of the Good, 142.
ii Virtue in the Middle and Late Dialogues 143
True opinion, virtue, and φρόνησα, 143-144. The kinds
of virtue, 144-148. Virtue as health or harmony, 148-150.
Έτηστήμη, φρόνησα, and άρβτή, 150-155. 'Ομοίωσα
θβω and virtue, 155-156.
hi The Disintegration of the Platonic Doctrine of
Virtue and Knowledge 157
i. Aristotle on the “theoretical” and practical life; mo
tives for moral behaviour, 157-160.
ii. The Stoics on virtue, 160-161. 'Ομοίωσα and
το όμο\θΎονμβνωί ζην, 161-163. Virtue and knowledge
in the Stoa, 164.
hi. ‘Ομοίωσα and the Epicureans, 165.
iv. Albinus on ομοίωσα, 165-167. Knowledge and
virtue in Albinus, 167-168.
iv Plotinus and Virtue 169
Civic and philosophic virtue, 169-170. No return to the
Cave, 170-171. Platonopolis, 171-173. Contemplation
and action, 173. Knowledge and True Opinion, 174. The
divine spark and natural immortality, 175-180. The
return to the Cave and salvation, 180-181. 'Ομοίωσα
and virtue, 181-184. The Gnostics on ομοίωσα and
virtue, 184-185. The meaning of ομοίωσα, 186. The
Symposium, Albinus, Philo, and Plotinus on ecstasy,
187-190. Virtue, knowledge, and love, 190-191.
PART THREE
Origen 195
Polytheism and the cultured elite, 195-196. ’Απάθεια
in Clement and Origen, 197. God as Being and “beyond
Being,” 197-198. Faith, love, and wisdom, 198-200.
The “spiritual” Christian supplements Faith, 200.
Origen’s neglect of the Dark Night of the Soul, 201.
θεοποιείσαι, 202. Bride-mysticism and Plato, 203-204.
’Έpωs-Άyάπη contrast denied by Origen, who sees
the dual nature of Έρωϊ in Platonism; the Symposium
and Philo, 204-207. "Epois, ayaOorps, and φιλανθρωπία,
207. No evidence for Ammonius as source, 208. Creative
contemplation in Origen and Plotinus, 208-209. Origen
and Plato on subsidiary studies, 209. Though Origen does
not regard his work on ’Έρω$ as a new departure, his
emphasis on personality corrects a weakness in Plato, 210.
The significance of Origen’s use of "Epws, 210-211.
”Εκστασα in Origen and the Plotinian transcendence of
self, 211-212.
Epilogue 213
The salvation-motif in pagan Neoplatonism, 213. Sub-
ordinationism, 213-214. "Epics in Proclus confuses
Nygren, 214-216. Divinization, 216-218. Faith, theurgy,
and the descent of the soul, 218-220.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 221
INDICES 229
EROS AND PSYCHE
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AJP American 'Journal oj Philology
CP Classical Philology
CQ Classical Quarterly
DK Diels-Kranz, Fragmente der Vorsokratiker
DTC Dictionnaire de theologie catholique
GCS Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der Ersten Drei
Jahrhunderte.
HTR Harvard Theological Review
JH I Journal oj the History of Ideas
JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies
JRS Journal of Roman Studies
LSJ Liddell-Scott-Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed.
Mus. Helv. Museum Helveticum
PG Patrologia Graeca, ed. J. P. Migne
PR Philosophical Review
Rh. Mus. Rheinisches Museum fiir Philologie
RE Paulys Real-Encyclopddie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft
SVF Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, ed. von Arnim
ΤΑΡΑ Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological
Association
INTRODUCTION
OF all the philosophies of antiquity, Platonism had by far the
most fluctuations. After Aristotle and Theophrastus, the Peri
patetics concentrated almost exclusively on commentaries on
their master and on the building up of various fields of specialized
knowledge; the later Epicureans hardly added a word to the Founder’s
teaching, which they professed in the form of a creed; the Stoics only
developed their doctrines when the criticisms of rivals, especially the
Sceptics of the New Academy, made it essential for them to do so.
The theories of the Platonists, however, varied radically. Speusippus,
for example, the successor of Plato himself as head of the Academy,
dispensed with the Theory of Forms. The next head, Xenocrates,
revived it—only to amalgamate it with Plato’s theory of the objects of
mathematics.
Among the reasons for this unusual variety of doctrines even within
the Old Academy is the fact that Plato’s thought could not easily be
reduced to a system or taught systematically. It contained within itself
unresolved, but—as it is the purpose of this study to demonstrate—
philosophically fruitful divergences of opinion on the highest topics:
the Good, the nature of love, the aim of the life of virtue. Plato himself,
by writing in dialogue form, gives an indication that he thought of his
writings largely as compositions ad hominem. What is written here is
intended to suggest that the unity of his thought consists only in cer
tain general beliefs, such as that there are supra-sensible realities and
that some aspect of the human soul is immortal. It protests, in passing,
against those who look on Plato as the author of a series of tracts:
one on the Theory of Forms, one on Aesthetics, another on Statesman
ship, and so on.
The Theory of Forms is a faith: a faith expressed in general terms and
not explained in detail. Plato himself, at sundry times in his life, sug
gested ways of understanding its relevance, but he probably did not
regard even his final opinions as conclusive. Many of his successors,
however, including Plotinus and Origen, assumed that they could
“explain” or “correct” his “system” as though it were a compact
