4

The Arabic

Commentary on the Golden Verses Attributed to

Proclus, and Its abstract The modern edition of the Arabic commentary to a Greek Pythagorean Neoplatonic poem known as the Golden Verses, attributed to Proclus, was first Context published in 1984, more than a quarter century ago. Despite the fact that this Graeco-Arabic text is an interesting Anna IzDeBska example of a late antique Neoplatonic Max Planck Institute for the History of Science philosophical commentary and Berlin, Germany it offers a Neoplatonic interpretation of various elements of the Pythagorean Institute for Religious Studies tradition, it has hardly been studied Jagiellonian University in Krakow as such at all. In this article I argue Poland that there exist enough arguments to conclude that this text contains [email protected] a number of genuine Neoplatonic elements and should be studied along with the other late antique texts from this tradition. Moreover, I demonstrate that in all probability this text actually comes from the inner circle of Proclus Diado­chus’ students, or from the philosopher himself.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 5 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

The Arabic commentary to the Golden Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques, as Verses1 that is attributed to Proclus the last item on a list of “falsely attrib- has been classified by Concetta Luna uted writings” (“ouvrages faussement at- and Alain-Philippe Segonds, the au- tribués”) of Proclus.2 According to them, thors of the entry about Proclus in the the “attribution of this text to Proclus, which without doubt utilises a Greek and 1 It is a philosophical poem (71 verses) in hexameter, and attributed to Pythagoras Neoplatonic model, is very controver- or generally seen as originating in sial”, and “there is nothing specifically the circle of the first Pythagoreans. In fact it was probably composed in the Proclean in the text that could support Hellenistic or Early Roman period. It its attribution to Proclus Diadochus”.3 consists of admonitions from a teacher Obviously, a text that has been la- (Pythagoras) to his students, mainly about the proper philosophical way of belled as an Arabic translation of some- life, with some elements of metaphysics thing “falsely attributed” to Proclus and theology. It became very popular as does not sound particularly attractive a source of Pythagorean wisdom in the Late Roman period and was treated as a classical Pythagorean text by late an- 2 Luna & Segonds 2012, pp. 1652–53. tique authors such as Iamblichus (who 3 This entry is followed in turn by an entry commented on the last verses of the devoted to Proclus’ writings preserved in poem in his Protrepticus) and Hierocles Arabic where both the Arabic commen- (who wrote the commentary to this poem tary to the Golden Verses and the dis- which is fully preserved). Thom 1995; van cussion about its authorship are briefly der Horst 1932. summarised. Endress 2012, pp. 1673–74.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 6

or worthy of study. Unsurprisingly, de- a Syriac bishop and church official, phi- spite the fact this text is an interesting losopher, physician and theologian. Ibn example of a late antique Neoplatonic al- ayyib was a prolific author of biblical philosophical commentary and it offers commentaries, but he also commented a Neoplatonic interpretation of various on a huge amount of works of Aristotle, elements of the Pythagorean tradition, Galen and Hippocrates.6 The most fa- it has hardly been studied as such at all.4 mous and influential of those works In this paper, therefore, I will argue that were his commentaries on Porphyry’s there exist enough arguments to con- Isagoge and Aristotle’s Categories.7 His clude that this text contains a number knowledge of Greek philosophy was pro- of genuine Neoplatonic elements and found, which is visible in the manuscript should be studied along with the other Escorial Arab. 888, which contains his late antique texts from this tradition. collection of translations, summaries Moreover, I will demonstrate that in all and abridgements of various Greek and probability this text actually comes from Arabic works. the inner circle of Proclus Diadochus’ The text that is the object of this students, or from the philosopher study is also presented as an abridge- himself. ment made by Ibn al- ayyib. The exact title at the beginning of the text is: The Proclus Diadochus essentials of the treatise of Pythagoras of Lycia or Proclus Procleius known as the Golden Proclus’ commentary of Laodicea? (Istithmār muqāla fithāghūras maʽarūfa The commentary is preserved in a single bi-l-dhahabiya tafsīr bruqlus). The prov- manuscript, Escorial Arab. 888, which enance of this extract (thamarat) from contains a collection of various texts the commentary of Proclus is again and summaries translated from Greek emphasised at the very end of the text. and Syriac into Arabic, entitled Kitāb Istithmār means literally “extracting the an-nukat wa- - imār a - ibbīya wa-l-fal- fruit” and thamarat “a fruit”. According safīya (Book of Medical and Philosoph- to F. Rosenthal, it was Ibn al- ayyib’s “fa- ical Gifts and Fruits) (it is the 14th of vourite word for the numerous brief the 18 sections, on fols. 91a–114a).5 The summaries of the contents of Greek author of this collection is Abū-l-Farağ works prepared by him”.8 Rosenthal Abdallāh Ibn al- ayyib (d. AD 1043), compared another istithmār from this manuscript, an excerpt from the Arabic 4 Although this avenue of research has been suggested by the current author in synopsis of Plato’s Laws, with the same her earlier work: Izdebska 2011; Izdebska text preserved elsewhere and attributed 2016. to al-Fārābī, and he concluded that “it is 5 An incomplete list of the contents of this manuscript is available in Brockelmann 1943–49, I 635, and Brockelmann 1937–42, 6 Faultless 2010, p. 668. I 884. More on this manuscript: Daiber 1995, p. 630, n. 8; Wakelnig 2013, p. 39 7 Gyekye 1975; Gyekye 1979; Ferrari 2006. n. 108; Ferrari 2006, p. 28. 8 Rosenthal 1990, p. 274.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 7 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context a true abridgement, often using the same al- ayyib had access to a commentary by words”9 and “using the abridgement Proclus on the Χρυσᾶ ἔπη and made use of the Laws as the basis of judgment, of it as a basis for his own work.”14 it can be said that Ibn al- ayyib’s work In the Arabic tradition the existence as an abbreviator was quite skilful, if of a commentary to the Golden Verses at- thoroughly prosaic and uninspired”.10 tributed to Proclus which Ibn al- ayyib The text was edited and translated would have read and abbreviated is at- into English by N. Linley,11 who unfor- tested by a famous scholar and bibli- tunately died tragically before finish- ographer Ibn al-Nadīm (10th c.) in his ing his edition and only expressed his Catalogue (Fihrist, 264, ed. G. Flügel). initial thoughts about the authorship He listed it among other works of Proclus of this text in a short introduction. He Diadochus: rejected12 R. Walzer’s hypothesis13 that it could have been a summary based on Commentary on the Golden testaments the preserved Commentary on the Golden of Pythagoras – it is about one hundred Verses of Hierocles (Walzer based his leaves and extant in Syriac. He wrote it hypothesis on the fact that the names for his daughter. Thabit translated three Proclus and Hierocles look almost the of its leaves, but [then] died, so that he same in Arabic). The two texts have al- did not complete it. (p. 608, tr. B. Dodge, most nothing in common, so this hy- The Fihrist of al-Nadīm: A Tenth-Century pothesis can indeed be easily rejected. Survey of Islamic Culture, vol. 2, New York However, Linley was still sceptical 1970) about the Proclean authorship of the text that served as the basis for Ibn Therefore, there probably existed al- ayyib’s summary: “there is no posi- a Greek text of a commentary to the tive ground to support the view that Ibn Golden Verses attributed to Proclus that was already translated into Syriac in 9 Rosenthal 1990, p. 276. The fact that Ibn the times of Ibn al-Nadīm. It was this al-Tayyib was a scrutinous translator text that Ibn al- ayyib abbreviated and compilator was also pointed out by Daiber in his review of Linley’s edi- from a Greek, Syriac or Arabic version. tion of the Commentary (1988, p. 135). The information that Proclus wrote it However, E. Wakelnig remarked that for his daughter is suspicious since we this manuscript containing Ibn al-Tayy- ib’s collection “has not been properly know that he had neither a wife nor any studied yet” (Wakelnig 2013, p. 39). children.15 10 Rosenthal 1990, pp. 276–77. Also H. Daiber The other trace of the existence in his review of the Linley’s edition of the Commentary points out the fact that Ibn of this text and of its translation into al-Tayyib was a scrutinous translator and Arabic is a fragment of it that survives compilator (Daiber 1988, p. 135). 11 Linley 1984. 14 Linley 1984, x. 12 Linley 1984, p. vi. 15 Marinus, Proclus (17); Damascius, 13 R. Walzer, Encyclopaedia of Islam, I (New Philosophical history / Life of Isidore 56 Edition, Leiden, 1960), s.v. Buruklus. (ed. Athanassiadi, p. 159).

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 8

in the manuscript Oxford Marsh 539, authored by this Neoplatonic philoso- edited and translated by E. Wakelnig pher in the Greek texts. This is why the as Philosophy Reader from the Circle of majority of modern scholars follow the Miskawayh (passage # 16, pp. 74–75). idea of L. G. Westerink, who in the most As. E. Wakelnig remarked: “Passage 16 extensive paper about the authorship of of the Philosophy Reader is strikingly this text ever published suggested that parallel to Ibn al- ayyib’s Istithmar its author was not Proclus Diadochus, in content, but completely different in but Proclus Procleius of Laodicea.17 wording. The simplest explanation for This other Proclus is known from this parallel is to assume a common two sources, and no work that he would source for both texts, namely an Arabic have authored survives in the Greek cor- translation of Proclus’ commentary.”16 pus, even in fragments. Our knowledge The striking differences in wording be- of his writings comes only from the tween this passage and the version by 10th-century Byzantine lexicon-ency- Ibn al- ayyib indicate that there existed clopaedia known as the Souda (Pi, 2472): an Arabic translation of the commen- tary independent from Ibn al- ayy- Proclus, the one surnamed Prokleios; ib’s summary; in other words, they are son of Themesion, of Laodikeia in Syria, not the same text. However, given the a hierophant. He wrote a Theology, On the fact that the differences are so substan- Myth of Pandora in Hesiod, On the Golden tial and that according to F. Rosenthal Verses, On the Introduction to Arithmetic Ibn al-Tayyib was usually quite straight of Nicomachus; and some other geomet- in his abridgements, it is also possible rical works.18 that he abbreviated a Syriac or Greek version or had a different Arabic trans- As I have already mentioned, none of lation at his disposal. In summary, we the writings listed by the author of this can conclude that the text that we have entry are preserved in Greek and their in Ibn al- ayyib’s abridgement certainly existence is not attested by any other existed in Greek and reached the Ara- Greek author. However, Damascius in bic world through various channels of the Commentary to Plato’s Philebus (19) transmission. Moreover, Ibn al-Nadīm mentions Proclus of Laodicea in the con- and Ibn al- ayyib were both convinced text of the cult of Hedone as a deity. As that the original text was written by he says, this cult “is testified by Proclus Proclus Diadochus. of Laodicea”.19 The reason why the mider schol- 17 Westerink 1987a. arship has problems with attributing 18 “Proclus.” Suda On Line. Tr. Ronald this text to Proclus Diadochus is the fact Allen. 1 August 2008. Accessed 7 August that there is now no surviving evidence 2007 . 19 Westerink 2010, pp. 12–14; Damascius 2008, pp. 7–8. See also Westerink 1987a, 16 Wakelnig 2013, p. 39. p. 75. According to Westerink, Damascius’

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 9 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

Given this paucity of sources, we There is also one more extant Arabic should actually ask if this other Proclus commentary to this Pythagorean poem, really existed, or – rather – if he pro- which is attributed to Iamblichus.22 duced the works that the Souda lists Nicomachus’ Introduction as well as the for him.20 From among the titles that Golden Verses belonged to the Neopla- the Souda attributes to him, only the tonic teaching curriculum in Late An- commentary to the myth of Pandora is tiquity and such titles in a dossier of an a distinctive title and the rest is very alleged Neoplatonic author would be an general. The Theology could somehow obvious element. Some other writings reflect the Proclean Platonic theology or concerning geometry could have also the Elements of theology. The Nicoma- been connected with Proclus, such as the chean Introduction to arithmetic was very Commentary to Euclid, and they are also popular among the late antique Neopla- something we would expect in a late an- tonists and many of them wrote a com- tique Neoplatonic philosopher’s dossier. mentary to this text, with Iamblichus As I have already mentioned, the being the most famous among them and only distinctive title is the commentary his commentary the only one that is pre- to Hesiod’s myth of Pandora. However, served.21 Neither is the Commentary to there is a commentary to Hesiod’s Works the Golden Verses an unusual title: there and Days attributed to Proclus in which survives such a commentary written by the myth of Pandora is also described.23 Hierocles of Alexandria, and the poem Thus, again, as with the Theology, it was also commented by Iamblichus in could have been a work “inspired” by his Protrepticus (but only verses 45–71). a work of the “real” Proclus that was added by mistake. We do not know if mention of Proclus of Laodicea in the Proclus Diadochus wrote commentaries context of this cult informs us that his al- leged lost Theology was rather about cult to Nicomachus and the Golden Verses, and not about theology per se. but they were so popular among the 20 In fact, Westerink also described one other Neoplatonists that it is very plau- more possible reference to the name of this Proclus in Greek literature, in the sible that he himself also wrote such commentary to Aristotle of Pseudo- commentaries or some of his students Alexander (CAG II 3, 8.28–9.1). The author wrote them down from his lectures and refers to Proclus as the author of the work entitled List of feasts. However, later attributed them to him. In fact, Westerink himself qualified this passage a hypothesis (that is nonetheless re- as a very improbable mention of Proclus jected by L. G. Westerink) that Proclus of Laodicea, because the manuscripts do not even allow us to decide if the wrote a commentary to the Nicomachus’ name mentioned is Proclus or Patrocles. Introduction has also been made and, in There is also no mention of Laodicea. Therefore I will not use this reference as an argument in favour of the existence of 22 Daiber 1995. Proclus Procleius. See Westerink 1987a, 23 This text is now considered to be based pp. 75–76. on an earlier commentary of Plutarch 21 Robbins, D’Ooge & Karpinski 1926, that was slightly reworked by Proclus. pp. 124–132. See Faraggiana di Sarzana 1987.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 10

this case, the Souda entry about Proclus the entire entry preserved in the Souda of Laodicea would actually provide evi- even more suspicious. Such a list could dence for that – assuming that the au- have easily been made up on the basis thor of this entry or its source mistook of the author’s knowledge about a usual the two Procluses.24 To sum up, there is Neoplatonic dossier and in particular nothing in the Souda that could not be about the dossier of Proclus Diadochus a vague mention of the works authored himself. In fact, there is a possibility by Proclus Diadochus himself. that the author of this biographical note Despite this fact, L. G. Westerink knew the name of Proclus of Laodicea, defends the actual existence of Proclus the hierophant from Damascius’ com- Procleius as the author of the writings mentary, and within the scope of some listed in the Souda.25 He rejects the possi- early medieval project of collecting all bility that this list could derive from the the possible information about all Greek known works of Proclus Diadochus, an philosophers and scientists he “in- idea already suggested by L. J. Rosán.26 vented” his plausible list of writings.28 According to Westerink, in the case of 28 The author of this note was probably each of the pairs of writings (of Proclus one of the earlier authors of late antique Diadochus and Proclus of Laodicea) the and Byzantine Onomatologoi (Tables of obvious correspondence is “not com- Eminent Writers), which were used by the author/authors of the Souda for the com- 27 plete nor exact”. However, it is still piling of the lexicon. The most famous astonishing that these works are, in the of such works was the Onomatologos by Hesychius of Miletus (5th—6th c. AD), end, astonishingly similar, even if they who is mentioned as an important cannot be easily identified as being one source in the Souda itself (“of which the and the same. Moreover, the fact that we present book is an epitome”; however, this is probably not a statement about have no writings by the other Proclus the Souda itself, but about some epito- at all, and almost no other information me that was at its author(s) disposal). In fact, Hesychios’ Onomatologos became about him and his works, should actu- so famous in Byzantium that many other, ally cast doubt on the testimony of the later Onomatologoi were also attributed late Byzantine lexicon. to him. By the 19th century there was already a lively debate on the extent to Another important fact is that the which Hesychius’ work was the source for list of works of this otherwise unknown the Souda. The most prevalent opinion Proclus of Laodicea is so stereotypical nowadays is that the Souda was based on a broader collection of such sources. and unspecific that it can easily be con- Moreover, it is possible that Hesychius’ nected not only with a list of the works Onomatologos covered only the au- thors of the classical period and all later of Proclus Diadochus, but with any other material comes from other sources. late Neoplatonic author. This makes A. Adler, the editor of the Souda (Suidae Lexicon, Leipzig 1928–1935) tried to iden- 24 See the summary of this discussion in tify a possible source for every entry and Luna & Segonds 2012, pp. 1641–1642. she attributed the entry about Proclus Procleius to Hesychius himself. This at- 25 Westerink 1987a, p. 74. tribution was later accepted and repeat- 26 Rosan 1949, p. 11, n. 1. ed by L. G. Westerink (p. 74) and more 27 Westerink 1987a, pp. 74–75. recently by E. Wakelnig (p. 38). However,

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 11 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

E. Wakelnig, who edited and trans- one Proclus (i.e., Proclus Diadochus) lated the manuscript Oxford Marsh 539, and might have simply been convinced in which the Arabic commentary attri- that Proclus Diadochus was from Laodi- buted to Proclus is quoted, addressed cea, and not from Lycia. Prior to Wakel- the question of the authorship of the nig, G. Endress actually suggested that commentary in her introduction.29 She Ibn Bu lān might have simply mistaken argued in favour of Westerink’s hypoth- Lycia with Latakia (Laodicea).33 esis about Proclus Procleius, pointing This hypothesis is even more proba- to the “hitherto rather puzzling fact ble given the fact that the Arabic authors that Ibn Bu lān, according to Yāqūt, were not aware of where Proclus was claims that Proclus was from Latakia, born. One can find such names for his the ancient Laodicea. This claim must home town as A ā āriya (Fihrist, 252.13), surely refer to Proclus Procleius, who A ā ūla (al-Qifti, 89.3), a - ara ūsī (in is said to have been from Laodicea in the manuscripts containing the Arabic Syria (Souda, Pi, 2472) and has thus left translation of Proclus’ On the Eternity his trace in Arabic.”30 As she adds in of the World).34 Thus, Arabic authors the note, Yāqūt “further calls Proclus were probably not aware of Proclus’ the author of the Arguments for the home town of Xanthos in Lycia (and Eternity of the World, which may indi- in fact Proclus was actually born in cate confusion on the part of either Ibn Constantinople, which his parents were Bu lān or a later transmitter or Yāqūt visiting at the time of his birth, to only who wanted to display his familiarity later return to Xanthos, where Proclus with Proclus and thus added this mis- spent his childhood).35 Furthermore, matched reference to the Arguments.”31 Arabic authors (or at least most of them) However, this argument should possibly were probably not aware of what Lycia be inverted. Ibn Bu lān (and the same was, since this name of a Roman prov- statement was also repeated, quoting ince ceased to play an important role in him, by al-Qifti32), a later transmitter, Byzantine administrative usage after or Yāqūt, might have known about only the 9th century36 and it was probably unknown to Arabic geographers.37 More- there is no evidence that it was he who over, the Arabic version of the names was the source of this entry, especially given the fact that this alleged Proclus 33 Endress 1973, p. 14. Procleius would have probably been al- 34 Endress 1973, pp. 13–14. most contemporaneous with Hesychius. 35 Marinus, Life of Proclus 6. See the summary of the discussion about Hesychius’ Onomatologos as the 36 Hellenkemper & Hild 2004, pp. 79 and 120. possible source of Souda in: Kaldellis 37 None of the following knows Lycia, 2005, esp. pp. 384–389; Wilson, 1983, while they do know the names of some pp. 145–147; Dickey 2007, pp. 90–91. other “ancient” provinces and the me- 29 Wakelnig 2013, pp. 38–39. dieval geography of Byzantine Anatolia: Khurradādhbih 1889; Jaʿfar 1889; 30 Wakelnig 2013, p. 38. Bosworth 1970; Ibn al-Fakîh al-Hama- 31 Wakelnig 2013, p. 38, n. 105. dânî, “Description of the Land of the 32 Endress 1973, p. 14. Byzantines”, in Brooks 1901; Ibn Ḥawqal

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 12

Latakia (Lādhaqiya) and Lycia (Līqīya) decided that one dubious testimony in look very similar in the Arabic script the Souda is more convincing than the and one might have been changed into Arabic tradition contemporary with the the other by any author or scribe in the Byzantine lexicon (and in fact the Arabic process of transmission. Therefore, it tradition probably had better access to would have been easy for them to iden- the Greek sources at that time, either in tify Laodicea as the place of origin of the Greek original or in various trans- Proclus Diadochus, who was probably lations). Moreover, because of the testi- the only Proclus they knew of. The con- mony of the Souda, Westerink dismissed nection might have been reinforced by the arguments based on the text’s con- the fact that some other late Neoplatonic tents, which I discuss and expand on philosophers also came from Laodicea, below. Yet, even if Proclus Procleius re- and thus this city might have anyway ally existed and even if he actually wrote been known as having a Neoplatonic a commentary to the Golden Verses, this episode in its history.38 does not mean that he is the author of L. G. Westerink concludes his the Greek text that survives in the Arabic analyses with three alternative hypoth- translation. TheGolden Verses were very eses: (1) the commentary is a summary popular among the late antique Neopla- of a lost work of Proclus Diadochus; tonic philosophers and in all probability (2) it is a summary of a lost work by commentaries to this text were written Proclus Procleius; (3) it is a summary not only by Hierocles and Iamblichus, of a work by another Neoplatonic author. but also by other philosophers, among He then states that he regards the second whom could well have been both Proclus hypothesis as being corroborated by the Procleius and Proclus Diadochus.40 information in the Souda.39 Still, in the same paper Westerink himself showed 40 Westerink’s hypothesis about the au- thorship of Proclus Procleius was re- many ideas that the Arabic commentary peated with even greater confidence shares with the preserved works of Pro- by: Luna & Segonds 2012, pp. 1652–1653; clus Diadochus, or the works of other Wakelnig 2013, pp. 38–39; Zampaki 2017. More cautious, but in principle accepting significant Neoplatonic authors. There- of Westerink’s hypothesis were: O’Meara fore, it actually looks as if Westerink 1989, pp. 231–232; Thom 1995, pp. 23–25; Endress 2012. In this context, however, it is worth emphasising that H. Daiber in 1964. I would like to thank Professor John his review of Linley’s edition criticised Haldon for his help with these references. Linley as being too cautious in his opin- 38 Damascius, in the Philosophical history, ion about the authorship of the text. He writes about “Domninus, the philoso- pointed at the most obvious analogies pher, was of Syrian stock from Laodicea with both the Greek works of Proclus and and Larissa in Syria, a pupil of Syrianus with the Greek tradition in general and and the fellow-student of Proclus” the Pythagorean tradition in particular. (Damascius 1999, 89a, translation by These include: elements of Pythagoras’ P. Athanassiadi on p. 223). He also men- biography, the organisation of the first tions another Neoplatonist, Maras, from Pythagorean community, the idea of Laodicea (90d). tetractys and number symbolism, the as- 39 Westerink 1987a, p. 78. cetic flavour of the text, the belief that

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 13 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

The intellectual horizons it is striking that it still has the form of of the commentator a consistent narrative. It is a text that can The preserved Arabic text is an abridge- easily be read as a coherent whole rather ment of what was probably already than as a mere collection of excerpts a Syriac or Arabic translation of the from a lost text. However, only some of Greek text. This means there was the verses of the poem are included in a whole chain of translators, trans- and commented on within this narra- mitters and authors who could have tive, which suggests that it is indeed an changed the original text. However, it abridgement of the original work. Still, is not clear which elements of the text it is conceivable that even this selective that survived should be qualified as character of the commentary was the in- later changes and which derive directly tention of its author from the very begin- from the Greek original. For example, ning. Most of the verses are not quoted, in Westerink’s opinion, the monotheist but paraphrased and summarised. In character of the text, as well as its au- addition, the commentary very often thor’s opinion that Empedocles was the goes quite far into digressions, treating author of the Golden Verses, were both the poem as just a pretext to express later changes.41 In fact, both ideas might the author’s own philosophical ideas. have been shared by a late Neoplatonic Nonetheless, it has to be emphasised Greek author; moreover, both have sig- that as far as its structure is concerned, nificant analogies with the writings of this commentary differs a lot from the Proclus himself (I address these ques- Greek commentary to the Golden Verses tions later on). of Hierocles of Alexandria42 and from Given the fact that this version is so another Arabic commentary to the heavily reworked, consisting of excerpts Golden Verses attributed to Iamblichus.43 that possibly underwent some changes, Both comment on subsequent lemmata from the poem and quote them in their Empedocles was a Pythagorean, among entirety. others. Daiber also referred to the evi- dence of Ibn al-Nadim and brought out The text begins with a short biog- the context in which the text of the com- raphy of Pythagoras. It is said that he mentary is transmitted (the manuscript was from Samos, that his birth was pre- of Ibn al-Ṭayyib). Daiber was thus quite strongly convinced about the Greek and dicted by a prophecy and that he was Neoplatonic character of this text and said to have been born of a virgin. The did not see any reason to doubt that it topos of Pythagoras’ birth of a virgin was in fact Proclus Diadochus who wrote it originally (“Inhaltliche Kriterien spre- can be traced back to the biographies chen nicht gegen eine Zuschreibung of Pythagoras that started to be com- dieses Kommentars an Proclus” [p. 137]. Nonetheless, Daiber was not aware of the posed from around the 1st century BC. existence of Westerink’s paper about the They were presenting him as a holy man authorship of the Commentary, nor of Westerink’s arguments and the hypothe- sis of Proclus Procleius. See Daiber 1988. 42 Köhler 1974. 41 Westerink 1987a, p. 65. 43 Daiber 1995.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 14

and a pagan saint. Elements pointing is also very close to the image of the Py- at the miraculous circumstances of thagorean community presented by Iam- Pythagoras’ birth are also present in blichus in On the Pythagorean way of life: the preserved late antique biographies of Porphyry (Vita Pyth., 2), Iamblichus (Vita He used to command his pupils to main- Pythag. II),44 and Diogenes Laertius tain silence for five years, whereupon (VIII 1, 4, who follows Heraclides of he would teach them some philosophy Pontus; Pythagoras is said to have been and mathematics. During this period, claiming that Hermes was his father).45 they would curb their appetites, im- The author of our Arabic commentary is prove themselves spiritually, and un- fully aware of the discussions that con- dergo training in ethical conduct. These cerned Pythagoras’ divine origins. For philosophers kept silence so as to allow instance, later on in the commentary he their intellects to revert to their essen- writes that “there were people who were tial nature, and to prevent their dis- convinced that Pythagoras was a god, course with themselves from reaching while others regarded him as a mortal” outsiders, and, should they hold con- (107a).46 verse with an outsider, they would have Then, it is said that Pythagoras kept to purify themselves in the manner ap- company with Thales and travelled to propriate for one who had become pol- Egypt, a fact mentioned in the biogra- luted by having his intellect won over to phies by Porphyry (Vita Pyth. 6–12) and something alien. (91a–b)47 Iamblichus (Vita Pythag. II–IV). It is also mentioned that masses of people from This five-year period of silence in the all countries were coming to him for Pythagorean student community was healing and that he performed mira- well known and described by many au- cles – again, this is part of the image thors.48 This is yet another argument of Pythagoras depicted as a pagan showing that the commentator was very saint, in particular in the late antique well aware of the late antique legend biographies. about the first Pythagorean communi- After this short biographical section, ty.49 Another example of the acquain- the commentator presents the first Py- tance of the author of the commentary thagorean community in a way which with at least the Iamblichean vision of the first Pythagorean community can be

44 According to Iamblichus, the name of found in two places in the text: Pythagoras’ mother was at first Parthenis (“virgin”) and then it was later changed 47 Linley 1984, pp. 4–5. by her husband Mnesarchus into Pythais 48 Hippolytus, Ref. haer. I 2, 16; Plutarch, (after Pythia from the Delphic oracle). He De curiositate 519c 6–7; Clement of also refers to the stories about Apollo as Alexandria, Strom. V 11, 67, 3; Porphyry, the real father of Pythagoras. Vita Pyth. 19; Iamblichus, Vita Pythag. XVII 45 Cf. Westerink 1987a, pp. 62–63; Daiber 72, 5. 1988, pp. 135–136. 49 Cf. Westerink 1987a, p. 63; Daiber 1988, 46 Linley 1984, pp. 76–77. p. 136.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 15 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

The Pythagoreans used to employ mel- shows that the author of the commen- ancholy music to subdue these appe- tary inherited the Iamblichean image tites; they did this particularly when it of Pythagoras and his vision of the was time for sleep, so as to ensure that first Pythagorean community. It is very there remained in the imagination no probable that Iamblichus was his main impressions which might disturb their source of knowledge about the early sleep. (98b)50 Pythagoreanism and about the figure For the period of sleep, they would em- of Pythagoras. ploy music such as would purge the soul The affinity of our commentary with of malignant fantasies, and they would the Neoplatonic tradition is also visible think about what they had done during in the fact that the words in which our the day. (106b) author describes the scope of the poem are very similar to how the Golden Verses Those passages are similar to the were seen by the other Neoplatonic phi- chapter of the Pythagorean way of life losophers. The commentary summarises that discusses Pythagoras’ ideas about the poem in the following way: music and the ways in which he used it to influence the souls of his students: The object of theGolden Sayings is to in- spire souls with longing for their perfec- For he corrected each of these [emo- tion and purity, to make people human, tions] by the rule of virtue, attempering and to guide them towards a proper way them through appropriate melodies, as of life; man achieves perfection by means through certain salutary medicines. In of absolute virtue, certain knowledge, the evening, likewise, when his disciples and virtuous conduct. Some maintain were retiring to sleep, he liberated them that the Golden Sayings act as a guide by these means from diurnal pertur- towards divine life, the imitation of God bations and tumults and purified their and liberation from matter. (91b)52 intellective power from the influxive and effluxive waves of a corporeal nature; This represents a typical Neopla- rendered their sleep quiet, and their tonic reading of the poem shared also by dreams pleasing and prophetic. (XV, Iamblichus (Protr. 40,7–8) and Hierocles trans. T. Taylor)51 of Alexandria (Comm. Aur. carm., 11–6,1). This reading not only focuses Altogether, the number of the anal- on the ethical meaning of the poem and ogies between the Iamblichean Life and its role as a guide to the philosophical our Arabic commentary is astonishing way of life, but also underlines the idea (I discuss the rest of them in more de- of divination, imitation of God and im- tail in the final section of this paper). It mortality. It was the reason why the late antique Neoplatonists made the Golden 50 Linley 1984, pp. 40–41. 51 Taylor 1965, p. 32. 52 Linley 1984, p. 7.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 16

Verses an element of their teaching cur- so as to fit with his monotheistic ideas. riculum and used it as a propaedeutic Interestingly, the very same verses are work. Hierocles presents it as such in quoted by Proclus Diadochus himself in the introduction to his commentary, and the Commentary on Timaeus (vol. 1, 203, Iamblichus comments on the poem in 25–26, ed. Diehl), but in that case the the most propaedeutic of his texts, the original version is given. In our case, in Protrepticus – which can be translated theory the change could have been made as “Exhortation to philosophy”.53 The in the process of the transmission of the Platonic idea of “becoming like God” text itself, perhaps even by Ibn al- ayyib (homoiosis theo) that here seems to be or by a translator. However, this seems the main goal of the Golden Verses was improbable, as these “monotheistic” also well known to Proclus, developed verses are then followed by an extensive by him and incorporated into his own commentary which addresses the very philosophical system.54 question of One God who is above the hi- Another strongly Neoplatonic as- erarchy of gods. Therefore, if the verses pect of the commentary is its religiosity, were modified in the process of trans- which very much resembles the late an- mission, they were modified so as to fit tique pagan religiosity of the philoso- the commentary itself. Furthermore, the phers. It is actually the first question idea of the one, highest God above the hi- on which the author comments (after erarchy of other gods was familiar to the the biographical introduction about late antique Neoplatonists, including Pythagoras), as it occurs in the very first Proclus.57 In fact, this particular kind of verses of the poem: monotheism – the theory of a transcend- ent One-God above the entire hierarchy The first of theGolden Exhortations is the of intellectual and divine beings – repre- reminder that “among the immortals, sents the core of Proclus’ philosophy and the first to be honoured according to the it was not at all in conflict with the belief statutes of the law is God”, for God is the in an entire hierarchy of regular “pagan” cause of all that exists and the source of gods, subordinated to the Highest one.58 all the good things that are present in However, despite being monothe- Totality. (92a)55 ist, the commentary has a clearly pa- gan character and elements of the pagan In this quotation, the commentator Greek religion, theology and cult play paraphrases the first verse of the poem: an important role in it, exactly as they “Honour the immortal gods first, in the did in the work and life of Proclus him- order appointed by custom.”56 What the self. They are relatively numerous and commentator quotes is already modified detailed, which is interesting given that

53 Cf. Izdebska 2016, pp. 45–50. 57 See for example the studies collected in: 54 Berg 2003; Baltzly 2004. Nuffelen 2010; Mitchell & Nuffelen 2010; 55 Linley 1984, p. 9. Athanassiadi and Frede 1999. 56 Thom 1995, p. 95. 58 Chlup 2012, pp. 47–62; 112–136.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 17 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context the text we have in fact passed through elevated, and glimpse the things that are the hands of a Christian intermediary. divine,” (94a–b).60 It is striking that he decided to leave all This description of the three kinds of those elements of the Greek pagan cult divine beings, with the One-God above in the text, elements that in his time the entire hierarchy, is quite similar to and his cultural and religious context the theology described in the Platonic were completely anachronistic, strange, Theology (books 2–6). However, in the foreign and antiquated. However, this commentary this theology is presented fact may actually serve as a yet another in an abbreviated form, while in the proof that the text of the commentary Platonic theology it is spread into several did not undergo substantial modifi- books. As a consequence, the Greek ex- cations, either by Ibn al- ayyib or by position of Proclus’ theology is much a translator. This means that the surviv- more sophisticated and covers much ing Arabic summary can serve as a relia- more of the metaphysical and soterio- ble approximation of the contents of the logical details. Greek original. The most significant difference be- The late antique monotheism is tween Proclus’ theology and the theol- not the only recognisable element of ogy presented in the Arabic commentary the commentator’s pagan religiosity. is the lack of the category of angels in A discussion of the hierarchy of divine the latter. In fact, angels do not occur and semi-divine beings (God, gods, in the text of the commented poem, demons, and heroes) appears as well which seems to be the reason why the at the beginning of the commentary, commentator does not mention them since, again, the beginning of the Golden at all. However, the author does men- Verses recommends honouring them.59 tion the angels at a different place in God is presented as the “Master and Su- the commentary: “The demons are de- preme Being”, underneath are gods and servedly the witnesses of humankind, demons that are “similar to gods and since they are close to being the angels serve them”, but “they do not descend who are entrusted with their care,” into human life”; they are “near to being (111b).61 Therefore, it is probable that the united with God and are accordingly author’s own theology was much more greatly glorified because of their close- complicated that the one presented in ness to God and are held in honour, and the commentary, but the actual discus- have sacrifices offered to them”. Heroes, sion was limited because of the contents in turn, “are souls which have passed of the poem – and perhaps also by the lives as humans and have remained with propaedeutic goals of the text (contrary humans without becoming polluted, and to the Platonic Theology, which was writ- were causes of their goods. After their ten for more advanced and theologically departure, they go to the Truth, and are 60 Linley 1984, pp. 19–21. 59 Linley 1984, pp. 19–21. 61 Linley 1984, p. 95.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 18

aware readers). What is common is of are responsible for injustice, but should course the importance of the classes believe that sickness and poverty and so of demons and heroes, as well as the on are not divinely premeditated, and be description of heroes as human souls courageous when hardships afflict us, who managed to purify themselves and and not give in to them. (…) “separate from mankind”. Also, both the The skills, the knowledge of which author of the Commentary and Proclus in we have derived from the gods, are of Platonic Theology are very attached to the help to us in the hardships that beset importance of the cult which should be us during the course of our lives, for, given to demons and heroes. They both since we are parts of this Whole, we emphasise that people owe them honour are affected throughout our lives by its and should perform specific ancient reli- upheavals, although, by virtue of the gious practices to show this attitude. The capacity of thinking which we possess, commentary speaks even about specific we are in a position to heal ourselves. priests for various classes of demons, (101b–102a)63 particular dates of their celebration, etc. Another important Proclean element This concept of the combination of connected to religious ideas and raised divine providence with some sort of in- already by Westerink62 is the question of fluence of the heavenly bodies and with Providence and of the influence of the the free will of a reasonable man is in astral bodies on humans and the scale complete agreement with the main ar- of their freedom. gument of the Proclean On Providence: The commentator is clear in admit- ting that the astral bodies have some Truly wise people (…) make the god power over us and that there exists jus- from whom comes the good for all, the tice that gives good to the virtuous and primordial cause of all that happens. bad to the evil. After him, they posit as cause the pe- riodic revolution of the world and the The coming of fate to us is the result of appropriate time, in which the events the generated bodies and of freedom, are adjusted and ordered to the whole, which is to say, of heavenly motions whereby there is nothing episodic in and those of ourselves; we should not the government of the whole. They con- therefore become annoyed because these sider themselves to be a third cause things happen to us, nor should we sup- whenever they obtain something after pose that they befall us because we have making choices and contribute by their deserved them; instead we should be- own impulses to the accomplishment of have rationally, so as to be able to accept what is to be done. (34, trans. C. Steel)64 the gift of those who gave us life. We must not think, either, that the gods 63 Linley 1984, pp. 53–55. 62 Westerink 1987a, p. 68. 64 Proclus 2007, p. 57.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 19 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

In Proclus’ theology, as well as in the slave of what does not depend on them. Arabic commentary, a man is shown as (61, trans. C. Steel)67 a free, powerful force in the world – one that can resist bad fate and respond to Therefore, it is almost certain that the divine powers that are above him. the author of the Arabic commentary It is the Proclean’ solution to the co- made use of the Proclean theory of Prov- nundrum of connecting fate and provi- idence, because we can find exactly the dence on the one hand, and free human same answers to the same questions. choice on the other. He had a debate Of course, it does not prove beyond any about this with a certain “Theodore, an doubt that the commentator is Proclus engineer”, for which his On Providence himself. is the evidence (it is a polemical reply Finally, an even more significant ele- to a letter that this Theodore wrote to ment connecting this Commentary with Proclus).65 Proclus refers here explicitly the preserved Greek works of Proclus to the idea, described by Plato in the is an anecdote about a Pythagorean Laws (IV 709 b–c), of the three factors woman, Theano: playing roles in human life, which he popularized by using them as an argu- It is said of Theano that when she was ment in this debate. angry with one of her servants, she told According to the commentator, to the servant “If I were not angry, I would the extent that we realise our rational, hurt you.” (98a)68 divine abilities, we can escape misfor- tune and bad happenings. According to This anecdote was attributed to Proclus, the faculty of choice between various Greek philosophers, among good and bad is something specific to them to Plato and Archytas (DL III 38, humans (in contrast to animals and di- 39) but it is only Proclus who in the vine beings) and it gives man a chance Ten doubts concerning Providence (86) to approach the divine: attributed it, in exactly the same form, to Theano.69 This is a yet another strong For a willed life is in accordance with link between Proclus’ Greek writings the good and it makes what depends on and the commentary, which suggests us extremely powerful and it is really that the author of the Greek text that lies godlike: thanks to this life of the soul be- beneath the Arabic summary was well comes god and governs the whole world, acquainted with the world of Proclean as Plato says. (60, trans. C. Steel)66 ideas. Hence the virtuous are said to be free More generally, as has been and are indeed free, because their ac- demonstrated by Westerink, the tivity depends upon them and is not the 67 Proclus 2007, p. 70. 65 See the introduction to Proclus 2007 by 68 Linley 1984, p. 39. Steel, pp. 1–37. 69 Westerink 1987a, pp. 69–70; Daiber 1988, 66 Proclus 2007, p. 69. p. 135.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 20

commentator shows profound familiar- the same as the Greek theriotes: wild, ity with the works of Plato, including:70 animal, bestial.73 The commentary uses Alcibiades I (the opinion that the mageia this word several times and always in the of Zoroaster means the cult of gods); same context in which the Greek word Republic (attributes of God described would have been used. When we add to in the second book of this dialogue; that the arguments listed by Westerink, the idea that that if there were no jus- there is no doubt that the author of our tice, there would also be no injustice commentary knew very well the contents [I 351c7–352d1]; four cardinal virtues of Plato’s Republic. [book IV]; the mind as the eye of the soul Westerink also lists several ideas [VII 533d2]; the Laws (the commentator that the Arabic commentary shares with talks about showing respect to parents the Greek Neoplatonic tradition, such in very similar words); Philebus (the as: the triad of being – living – intellect central idea of this dialogue regarding (already noted by Linley and Daiber74); the bodily pleasures not being real plea- the hierarchy of divine and quasi-di- sures, but only absence of the opposite vine beings (even those elements in the of real pleasures – pain); Timaeus (four commentary that may seem heterodox genera of living creatures: celestial, at first glance are actually in agreement aerial, aquatic, and terrestrial). with Proclus’ texts); the question of Another purely Platonic element that human free will and the influence of could be added to Westerink’s list is the the celestial bodies on his action; four juxtaposition of the “divine part of the classes of numbers: those associated soul” and the “animal part” (theriotes) with the divine, the intellect, the soul, (in Plato, it plays an important role in and the physical numbers (cf. Proclus’ the Republic: 589d; 590b; 591b); this Commentary on Timaeus II 161,26–28); division corresponds with the division the division of philosophy (and of the into the rational and irrational parts of the soul. In fact, the very word therion 73 The Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic (Arabic–English), ed. J. M. is not a general world for an animal, but Cowan, Urbana, Il. 1994, p. 97. rather refers to a wild animal or even 74 Linley 1984, p. ix; Westerink 1987a, p. 66; a beast,71 and so the use of this particu- Daiber 1988, p. 135. However, this is an lar adjective for the description of the analogy not only with the writings of Proclus, but also with the writings of lower part of the soul puts emphasis on many other philosophers who developed its irrational nature. In the Arabic com- this theory after the times of Plotinus. R. Dodds demonstrates that the triad mentary, the lower, irrational part of being – life – intellect played an impor- the soul is very often described with the tant role in the theologies of Porphyry, Arabic adjective bahīmī,72 which means Iamblichus, Theodor of Asine, the un- known author of the Commentary to Parmenides and Syrianus (and of course Proclus). In Proclus’ Elements of theolo- 70 Westerink 1987a, pp. 63–64. gy the triad occurs in L. 115 (pp. 101–103 71 A Greek–English Lexicon, p. 800. Dodds). Dodds 1992; Saffrey & Westerink 72 Proclus Arab. 97b; 98b; 99a; 100b. 1968, I:I: LXV–LXVI; Chlup 2012, pp. 92–99.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 21 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

Golden Verses and its commentary) into Empedocles as one of the students of practical and theoretical parts; the mind Pythagoras: as hieratikos; aether as the abode of the souls after death (although in the Greek Prominent amongst Pythagoras’ disci- works of Proclus aether is rather the ples – who numbered about two hundred place where the souls are being judged, and fifty – was Empedocles, the author and their ultimate abode); symbolic as- of the Golden Sayings. Empedocles held sociation of the adjective “golden” in the that the elements were four and believed title of the poem with purity.75 that the regimen of philosophy reaches To conclude, the intellectual hori- completion when the soul becomes di- zons of the author of the Greek com- vine, and that when the soul is separated mentary that we have in the Arabic sum- from the body, it travels, bloodless and mary were defined by the late antique immortal, into the ether. Empedocles Neoplatonic philosophy, in particular was a rigorous ascetic, and a lover of with what we call today the “Neopythag- purity. (91b)76 orean” current. He was well acquainted with the writings of Plato, as well as with The beginning of this passage the literary tradition on Pythagoras and is reminiscent of the famous list of the Pythagoreans that was available to Pythagoreans transmitted at the end of late antique authors. Moreover, the com- Iamblichus’ On Pythagorean Life (with mentator shows very close familiarity which this short biographical introduc- with the theology and anthropology of tion has a lot in common), a list that Proclus. This does not necessarily mean probably comes from Aristoxenus.77 It that the commentator was Proclus him- names 235 Pythagoreans, among whom self, but probably somebody close to the there is also Empedocles. Diogenes Proclean community. Laertius (VIII 1, 3), in turn, gives the number of three hundred students Proclus, Empedocles, of Pythagoras, following Antiphon. and the Pythagorean tradition Therefore, the Arabic text that speaks In the context of the Proclean charac- of “about two hundred and fifty” is very ter of the Arabic commentary, there re- close to the number transmitted in the mains one possible problem that needs late antique biographies of Pythagoras to be resolved: the surprising identifica- and once again shows a strong familiar- tion of Empedocles as the author of the ity with this material. Golden Verses. However, the statement that At the beginning of the Arabic Empedocles is the author of the Golden commentary, the author finishes his short historical sketch on Pythagoras 76 Linley 1984, pp. 4–7. and Pythagoreans by introducing 77 Rohde 1871–1872, p. 171; Diels 1965, p. 23; Timpanaro-Cardini 1958–1964, III 38ff.; Burkert 1972a, p. 105, n. 40; Zhmud 2012b, 75 Westerink 1987a, pp. 66–70. pp. 235–244; Huffman 2008a.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 22

Verses is quite unusual and needs to be Greek and in Arabic texts.79 Several addressed, in particular in the context Greek authors believed that Empedocles of the question of the authorship of the was a Pythagorean or at least was closely commentary. As I mentioned above, connected with Pythagoreanism.80 Westerink thought that it could be Olympiodorus calls him Pythagorean a later Syriac or Arabic addition to the every time he evokes him in his original Greek text. However, the author Commentary on Gorgias.81 The author of of this text seemed to be convinced that the Theologoumena arithmeticae (Theolog. Empedocles was a Pythagorean and that arithm. p. 22), wrongly attributed to he wrote the Golden Verses (he mentions Iamblichus, identified Empedocles as this twice in the text, see 91b and 107a), the author of the so-called Pythagorean although even more often he refers to oath, which is included into the Golden the verses of the poem as something that Verses (as v. 47–8): “Yes, by him who im- Pythagoras said or commended. How- parted to our soul the tetractys, the fount ever, he could have been convinced that of ever-flowing nature.”82 it was a collection of real admonitions of Oliver Primavesi pointed to Pythagoras that were written down by the Empedoclean elements in the his student Empedocles. Furthermore, Pythagorean oath, namely the use of he also refers twice to the Empedoclean the words pege for “source” and rhid- philosophy, which he considers the ap- zomata for “elements” (these words oc- propriate context for a proper inter- cur in another version of the oath, but pretation of the contents of the poem they are omitted in the Golden Verses).83 (109a; 110b). The figure of Empedocles Furthermore, this is not the only link and his philosophy, as well as its role in between Empedocles and the Golden the understanding of the Pythagorean Verses. Another is the word katharmoi philosophy, seems to be important for 79 For the Arabic tradition see: S. M. Stern, the commentator and it would be diffi- “Anbadu līs”, in EI2, vol. I, Leiden 1954, cult to remove Empedocles from the text pp. 483–484; De Smet 1998, p. 123. and treat it simply as a later addition, 80 Diog. Laert. VIII 2, 54–55; Sextus Emp., as Westerink suggested. As Daiber ob- Math. IX 127; Hippol., Haer. VI 26, 3; cf. Proclus, In Parm. 723, 22. See also served, the fact that the commentator Burkert 1972, p. 220, n. 12; Kingsley 1995, connected Empedocles with Pythago- p. 112; Huffman 1999, pp. 66–87; 75–78; Primavesi 2016. reanism is rooted in the Greek tradition 81 Olympiodorus, In Gorg., intr. 930, 5, 1; and may serve as another argument in 35, 12, 3. favour of the Greek origin of this text.78 82 Thom 1995, p. 97. Indeed, the alleged connection be- 83 Primavesi 2016, pp. 14–15. At the same tween Empedocles and the Pythagorean time, he stressed that the word “na- ture” (physis) is post-Empedoclean and tradition is very well attested both in that it leads to the conclusion that the oath, which was widely quoted outside of the context of the poem, was influ- enced by Empedoclean ideas, but not by 78 Daiber 1988, p. 3. Empedocles himself.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 23 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

(“purifications”) in verse 67, which ac- in the Arabic text that I already men- cording to Johan C. Thom may be the tioned, someone is clearly making allu- title of a work to which the poem refers, sions to this topos of “being immortal and we know that there existed a poem in the aether” which is Empedocles’ own of Empedocles whose title was exactly statement, and at the same time is also the same.84 However, it was certainly not present in the Golden Verses. It is en- understood as a title of a separate text tirely possible that this analogy led the by the author of the Arabic commentary. author of the commentary to the conclu- Moreover, there are even more striking sion that it must have been Empedocles similarities between the last verses of himself who wrote the poem. He also the poem (“Then, if you leave the body described him as a “rigorous ascetic” behind and go to the free aither you will and a “lover of purity”. These statements be immortal, an undying god, no longer might allude to the Empedoclean poem mortal.”85) and a sentence attributed to Katharmoi (Purifications), and to the Empedocles, who according to Clement presence of the word “purifications” in of Alexandria (Stromata VI 30; frg. 112, the Golden Verses. v. 4) dared to describe himself as “an Of course, it remains to be investi- immortal god, no longer mortal” (theos gated whether it is at all plausible that ambrotos ouketi thnetos). Although this Proclus Diadochus or some of his stu- formula is probably Orphic,86 according dents were convinced about the Empe- to Thom, the author of the poem was doclean authorship of the Golden Verses. quoting it as a sentence attributed to TheCommentary on Plato’s Timaeus, the Empedocles and as such it may be proof most Pythagorean of the all the pre- of the post-Empedoclean authorship of served works of Proclus,88 is the only the poem itself.87 text in which he mentions the Golden Given these common places and Verses by its title. He refers to it when similarities between the Empedoclean he writes about the Pythagorean idea of heritage and the Golden Verses, and the the tetractys: “the father of the Golden fact that Empedocles himself wrote po- Verses also glorifies the Tetrad calling it ems, it is not surprising that someone in ‘the fountain of ever-flowing Nature’.”89 Late Antiquity considered Empedocles It is interesting that he did not mention to be the author of the Golden Verses. In Pythagoras here, so it is not clear whom the description of Empedocles found he meant by “the father of the Golden Verses”. One sentence earlier he also 84 Thom 1995, p. 216. quoted another Pythagorean poem, 85 Thom 1995, p. 99. 86 Thom 1995, pp. 226–229; van der Horst 1932, p. 72. 88 “But one should also bear in mind that 87 This fragment of Empedocles is consid- the dialogue is Pythagorean, and one ered to be the source for the inclusion of should make one’s interpretative com- these verses in the Golden Verses, which ments in a manner that is appropriate to would be later than the fragment. See them.” (15, 24–28) Tarrant 2006, p. 110. Thom 1995, pp. 226–229. 89 Baltzly 2007, p. 104.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 24

a “hymn to number”, and he called it strongly Pythagorean (i.e. Parmenides), “Pythagorean”, but neither did he point Proclus recalls Empedocles in the con- at Pythagoras as its actual author (vol. 2, text of the Parmenidean discussion p. 53, ed. Diehl). Earlier in the same about the unity and plurality, and the commentary, Proclus quoted the first “divine number”: verses of the Golden Verses, introducing them with the words: “it is said among This is what Empedocles saw later, being the Pythagoreans” (vol. 1, 203, 25–26, a Pythagorean himself, when he called ed. Diehl)90. In his Commentary on the whole intelligible reality a sphere Plato’s Republic, he also quoted the same and says that it converges upon itself by verse about the tetractys, this time again virtue of the goddess of love who beau- mentioning the poem as a Pythagoreios tifies and unifies. For, as he says, all logos (vol. 2, p. 69, ed. W. Kroll). Fur- things, in their love and desire for one thermore, in the Commentary on Plato’s another, are unified with one another Timaeus he evoked the poem Hieros for eternity; and their love is an intel- logos (Sacred discourse; not to be iden- ligible love, and their communion and tified with the Golden Verses91) twice, mingling are ineffable. But the mass of this time attributing the poem to men have deserted unity and the monad Pythagoras himself (vol. 3, p. 161, 5; of things; and their own intrinsically 168, 14, ed. W. Diehl). Therefore, on the divided and unorganized life carries ground of the preserved Proclean works, them down into plurality, to opinions it is possible to assume that he thought of all sorts, to vague fancies, to feelings that the Hieros logos was written by Py- and sensations, to physical desires. thagoras himself, but that the Golden (Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides 723, Verses, which he considered to be some- 22, trans. G. R. Morrow, J. M. Dillon)92 thing different, were written by one of the Pythagoreans. Beyond doubt, here Proclus por- However, does it mean that he could trays Empedocles and his teaching as have considered Empedocles to be the Pythagorean, placing emphasis on his author of the Golden Verses? In his com- idea of love as the unifying force in the mentary to another Platonic dialogue, world and recognising in the idea of a dialogue that Proclus also considered Empedocles the Pythagorean concept of one versus plurality. Although the 90 Tarrant 2006, p. 303. fact that Empedocles is here considered 91 However, it is not clear what this text was and how it was related to the Golden a Pythagorean has also been noticed by Verses as they are known to us today. Westerink,93 he did not connect this lo- According to A. Delatte, the Hieros logos cus with the Arabic commentary to the was an older Pythagorean poem of which fragments were used by someone who Golden Verses. However, here too, the compiled the Golden Verses. Delatte 1915, pp. 1–79; Thesleff 1961, pp. 18–19, 107; see also Thesleff 1965, pp. 158–166; Thom 92 Morrow & Dillon 1987, pp. 101–102. 1995, pp. 7–8. 93 Westerink 1987b, pp. 110–111.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 25 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context philosophy of Empedocles is presented statement about those matters in Pro- in a very similar, Pythagorean way: clus’ Greek writings.

According to the doctrine of Empedocles The commentary and the we have in us Love and Strife; through Life of Proclus by Marinus Strife we become dissolved and dis- Since the core of the Golden Verses is de- sipated, and encounter pain, while voted to practical ethics and the proper through Love we are unified and meet way of life, the Arabic commentary – with delight. By the agency of Love we apart from some passages devoted to are elevated, and by that of Strife we are theology and metaphysics – also focuses made to sink, and our falling into evils mainly on ethical matters and on pre- of our own choosing occurs when we scribing the perfect philosophical way sink to the lower level, and our intellects of life. Therefore, it is very interesting enter the world of coming-to-be. (110b)94 to compare this text with another text from the circle of Proclus devoted to this As we can see, the connection be- subject: Proclus or On Happiness, known tween both texts – the two commentar- also as the Life of Proclus. This text was ies, Proclean and Arabic, is very strong. delivered as a speech in the form of a eu- In both cases, Empedocles’ idea of Love logy by his student and successor in the and Strife is used as a tool to comment Academia, Marinus, one year after the on the Pythagorean theory of unity in death of Proclus.95 its “psychological” aspect, applied to hu- Marinus’ idea was to show Proclus man beings and not in its cosmogonic, as a perfect example of human happi- metaphysical aspect. ness and the incarnation of all sorts of To conclude, the fact that the author virtues man can achieve. Marinus very of the commentary was convinced that often evokes his master’s humility and Empedocles was the author of the Golden the fact that he always considered him- Verses, and that he closely connected self as being a servant of the gods – as Empedocles with the Pythagorean tra- if he wanted to show that he never for- dition, cannot be considered to stand in got the words that we read in the Arabic contradiction with the preserved works commentary: of Proclus. If it were, such a contradic- tion would indeed exclude Proclus Di- We must seek divine aid to help us in our adochus as the possible author of the exertions, rather than act as those who commentary. On the contrary, there is say: “I do not need to pray or beseech, nothing in the way in which the com- because I have already attained virtue”. mentary describes Empedocles and his People who say this are misguided, since philosophy that would disagree with any 95 For a more comprehensive discussion of this text, see the introduction to its edi- tion and translation: Saffrey & Segonds 94 Linley 1984, p. 93. 2001, pp. IX–CLXXVI.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 26

whatever derives its existence and its friendship”98 was certainly a well-known virtue from a source that is other than topos at that time.99 Iamblichus, who itself, must cling everlastingly and devoted two separate chapters of the unceasingly to that other source, and Pythagorean Way of Life (XXII; XXXIII) because all except God needs Him for to friendship, writes that it was actually its perfection, even though it may have Pythagoras who “discovered” the philo- attained the acme of virtue. (108a–b)96 sophical idea of friendship and that his followers were so perfect an example of Furthermore, Marinus (17) devoted it that the notion of the “Pythagorean an entire passage of his biography to friendship” had become proverbial in show Proclus as a perfect friend, al- his times.100 Iamblichus concluded: most an incarnation of the Pythagorean model of friendship. He writes that al- For they perpetually exhorted each though he did not have his own wife other, not to divulse the God within and children, he cared for his friends them. Hence all the endeavour of their and their families as if they were his friendship, both in deeds and words, own. He was always present when was directed to a certain divine mixture, someone did not feel well and tried to to a union with divinity, and to a com- help as much as he could. He was also munion with intellect and a divine soul. very kind and caring towards his serv- (XXXIII, 240, trans. T. Taylor)101 ants. Among his many friendships, the one with Archiades, the grandson of The author of the commentary pre- Plutarch of Athens, was exceptional served in Arabic also devoted much of and Marinus described it as belonging his text to the subject of friendship, as to the special category of “Pythagorean this topic occurs in verses 5–7 of the friendship” (pythagoreion philia).97 Strik- Golden Verses.102 He gives advice on how ingly, this is one of only three places in 98 Vogel 1966, pp. 150–159; Saffrey & Segonds the entire Life of Proclus where Mari- 2001, pp. 124–125; Cornelli 2013, pp. 67–69. nus directly evokes the Pythagorean 99 See for example Damascius, 103. tradition (the second is in chapter 15, 100 “According to the general opinion it was Pythagoras who discovered it [i.e. friend- where he evokes the Pythagorean saying ship] and gave it legal form. He taught “live unknown”, while the third is in his followers a friendship so admirable chapter 28, where he writes about Pro- that even today it is popularly said of people who are well disposed towards clus’ dream that he had a soul of the Py- each other: they are Pythagoreans.” thagorean Nicomachus). “Pythagorean (Iamblichus, Vita Pythag. XXXIII, 230, trans. C. J. Vogel) Vogel 1966, p. 151. 101 Taylor 1965, p. 123. 102 “Among others, choose as your friend him who excels in virtue. 96 Linley 1984, pp. 82–83. Yield to his gentle words and useful 97 About Archiades and his special role actions, in the Proclean Academy as its “public And do not hate your friend for a small voice” see: Watts 2006, pp. 107–108. fault” (trans. Thom 1995, p. 95)

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 27 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context one should look for a friend and how unifying force in the Commentary on to care for friendship. Just like the late Alcibiades: antique works on Pythagoreans,103 the commentator emphasises that for them Let those who are at peace observe friendship was even more important another, greater and more perfect good, than kinship. As he explains, it was vol- viz. friendship and unity. This is the aim untary and based on the communion of of virtue as a whole, so the Pythagoreans values higher than that of blood, these assert and also Aristotle, who rightly ob- being intellect, virtues and the unifying served that “when all people are friends connection with God: we have no need of justice” and “mine” and “thine” are annulled, but “when Friendship was venerated among the Py- everyone is just we still have the need of thagoreans, who regarded it as a symbol friendship to unite us.” (221.18–222.2; of union with the gods. (95a)104 trans. W. O’Neill).106

Then, the commentator explains Proclus evokes here Aristotle’s Nico- why friendship should be based on the machean Ethics, more precisely its chap- virtues of the soul and not on physical ter devoted to friendship and the saying: beauty, wealth, possessions, power, etc. “when the citizens, indeed, are friends, Once again he evokes the unifying as- there is no need of justice; but though pect of the friendship, this time quoting they are just they require friendship,” Plato: (1155a26–9, trans. T. Taylor).107 The author of the Arabic commentary In his prayers, Plato used to ask and call also seems to be influenced strongly by upon God to make hearing, sight, and Aristotle’s ideas. We see that in his pas- senses common to all. The saying “I have, sages commenting on the question of or I do not have, a share” is meaningless friendship. It is visible not only in the within the context of friendship. fact that he makes connections between (…) And the more abundant is the vir- friendship, virtue and justice, but also in tue, the more stable will be the friend- how he perceives the three types of vir- ship, and anyone who exhibits a genu- tues: “those belonging to the soul, those ine ardour for virtue will be a staunch to the body and those that are external” friend.” (96a)105 (95b). He also says that the “choice of a friend should be made from the stand- Similarly, Proclus connects friend- point of his virtue of soul” – which alto- ship with virtue and describes it as the gether reflects Aristotle’s division into

103 For example, Iamblichus, Vita Pythag. XXXV, 257. 104 Daiber 1988, pp. 24–25. 106 Westerink 2011, p. 292. 105 Linley 1984, pp. 26–29. 107 Taylor 2002, p. 370.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 28

three kinds of good (Nic. Eth. 1098b it was also connected with the legends 12–14).108 of Pythagorean friendship and treated Furthermore, in the above quoted by some authors as directly referring passage from the Commentary on Alcib- to the community of property between iades, Proclus wrote that “‘mine’ and the Pythagoreans.112 This shows that ‘thine’ are annulled” in friendship. The the author of the Arabic commentary Arabic commentary reads: “‘I have, or was not only well educated in classical I do not have, a share’ is meaningless Greek paideia and was thinking within within the context of friendship.” All the framework of classical Greek philos- these statements are very similar and ophy, but he was also very well aware of point to the same source (if not the all the Pythagorean legends and topoi same author). They may be an echo of circulating, especially in the Neopla- the famous Greek proverb “all things tonic milieus of Late Antiquity. are common among friends” (koina Later on, the commentator offers an ta ton philon) which is also quoted by interesting explanation of the verses Aristotle in the Nicomachean Ethics. This of the poem in which he recommends phrase appears in a chapter devoted to forgiveness for small errors when they friendship, with a comment that it is are committed by a friend, but adds right because “friendship consists in a warning that this forbearance has communion”109 (1159b, 31–32), and to end when there is something which again in the same chapter, together with “cause(s) alienation from God, and other proverbs on friendship, that is arouse(s) His anger” (97a). Therefore, “[friends] are one soul” and “Friendship his idea of Pythagorean friendship was is equality” (1168a, 7–8).110 This classic basically the same as that of Iamblichus. Aristotelian locus seems to be reflected They both underlined the same elements once again in the Arabic commentary, and both saw Pythagorean friendship as where the author writes that friendship a way of becoming similar to One-God “is sharing one’s worldly possessions through unification of minds and souls and placing one’s friend on an equal among friends. footing with oneself” (96b, p. 29). This Proclus himself wrote about Pythag- is also probably a reference to the ques- orean friendship several times. We read tion of alleged “communism” between in his Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides: the first Pythagoreans. Although koina ta ton philon is an old Greek proverb111 Again we learn that souls are perfected by friendship and worthy associations. 108 Cf. Westerink 1987a, pp. 64–65. This was the rule of the Pythagoreans 109 Taylor 2002, p. 381. 110 Taylor 2002, p. 402. especially, who made the most sincere 111 See for example: Euripides, Orestes 735; Plato, Phaedrus 279c 6; Leges 739c 2; Respublica V 449c; Aristotle, Ethica 490e 4; Diog. Laert. IV, 53, 8–54, 1; VI, 37, 6; Eudemia 1238a 16; 1237b 33; Politica Clem. Alex., Protrepticus XII, 122, 3. 1263a 30; Plutarch, De fraterno amore 112 Minar 1944; Cornelli 2013, pp. 64–67.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 29 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context friendship the end of life for themselves. name for the process of unification that (677)113 brings all hypostases and all particular For the unity among the gods is not to beings back to the One. This is the idea be expressed in words and is hard for shared by Proclus and Iamblichus, as lesser beings to grasp; likewise the com- well as our commentator, and probably munity of thought among good men es- also by Marinus, who shows Proclus as capes those not acquainted with them. a perfect example of such a friendship. Indeed the affection that unites them Moreover, the entire Arabic commen- has a great affinity with the Pythago- tary shares a lot in common with the rean life (for the Pythagoreans made passage from Proclus’ Commentary on friendship the end of their life together Parmenides I just discussed. It is focused and directed all their efforts to this on the subject of the unity of man with end) and with the whole subject of this God and on the theme of unity in general dialogue [Parmenides]. For unity and (for example, showing Empedoclean fellowship come to all things from the Love and Pythagorean friendship as One, the inferior beings ever united with important unifying forces). As such, it their superiors, being grouped together complements the other works of Proclus around their henads, and these around by showing the practical way to achieve the One. (702)114 this main goal of man and philoso- pher.117 Marinus, in turn, shows Proclus Proclus recalls the Pythagorean idea as someone who actually fulfilled this of friendship in some other commen- Pythagorean model with his own life. taries as well,115 but it is in the These are not the only common Commentary on Parmenides that his un- places between Marinus’ Life of Proclus, derstanding of this subject is presented our Arabic commentary and Iamblichus’ in most detail. True friendship is a union Pythagorean Life. Most of these similari- of good men, which is analogous to the ties are related to the practical side of the union of the gods-henads with the One- philosophical way of life. For example, God.116 As such, friendship is another Marinus (24) writes that Proclus used to sleep as little as possible, considering 113 Morrow & Dillon 1987, p. 60. 114 Morrow & Dillon 1987, pp. 78–79. sleep to be “laziness of the soul” and 115 “But one should also bear in mind that that he used to wake up a way before the the dialogue is Pythagorean, and one sunrise. And thus, we read in the Arabic should make one’s interpretative com- commentary: ments in a manner that is appropriate to them. You could surely derive from it Pythagorean moral doctrines of the They used not to countenance sleeping at following kind: those gentlemen made friendship and the life of concord the sunrise, so that the giver of light and life target of all their philosophy.” (I, 15,27–30) Tarrant 2006, p. 110. 116 About Proclus’ theory of gods-henads as 117 About Proclus’ idea of unification of the participating in the One-God see Chlup human soul and the ways of obtaining it 2012, pp. 112–136. see Chlup 2012, pp. 163–184.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 30

should not rise while they were asleep. commentary in the same literary (106b)118 tradition. In the same context, the Golden This alleged Pythagorean cult of the Verses exhort to moderation in eating rising sun is also attested by Iamblichus: and drinking, as well as in everything that affects the body (verses 32–35).123 Conformably likewise to the precepts of The author of the Arabic commentary their master, the Pythagoreans always explains how this moderation can be rose from bed before the rising of the achieved. Food should always be mod- sun; (…). They also carefully observed erated not only in terms of quantity, but to adore the rising sun. (XXXV, 256; also quality, and it should be as simple trans. T. Taylor)119 and pure as possible. He writes:

The cult of the sun-Helios as a god is Pythagoras commands that we “reject very well attested among the late Neopla- the body”, because to those who possess tonists, including Proclus. We have Pro- intelligence, a life of freedom from the clus’ Hymn to Helios, as well as emperor body is sweeter than with it (…); one Julian’s hymn or oration to King Heli- who rejects the life of the body is not os.120 Proclus expresses his devotion to readily envied but is rather praised (…). the sun as a god in several places of his Good conduct is to be achieved through preserved works.121 According to Saffrey co-operating well with people, through and van den Berg, the strong interest moderation in dealings with them, good of the Neoplatonists in the cult of the social comportment, courteous behav- sun emerged both from the traditional iour, grace of speech, and helpfulness Hellenic religious practice and from towards others. (105a)124 Platonic texts (in particular the com- 123 “You should not be careless about your parison of the Good to the sun in Plato’s physical health, Republic).122 Therefore, this is actually But you should practice due measure in drinking, eating and physical exercises. a description of a late antique Neo- By due measure I mean that which will platonic practice of waking up before not distress you. the sunrise and praying to the rising Become accustomed to have a pure way of life, not an enervated one.” (32–35, sun, and it is a topos common to all trans. J. C. Thom, p. 97). three texts, which places the Arabic 124 Linley 1984, pp. 66–69. The same mo- tif is repeated later in the text (112a–b, pp. 98–99): “The starting-point towards intellectual purity is the undertaking of 118 Linley 1984, p. 75. practices such as will loosen the bonds 119 Taylor 1965, pp. 131–132. attaching it to the body, and release it from its submission to the bestiality that 120 See the translation of Proclus’ Hymn to is in it (...). We must not allow ourselves Helios with introduction and commentary to be beguiled by variety or sweetness in R. M. van den Berg 2001, pp. 145–189. of foodstuffs, but should rely upon foods 121 Saffrey 2000. that are beneficial and those that are 122 Saffrey 2000; Van Den Berg 2001, p. 146. simplest and most delicate.”

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 31 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

This is very similar to the way in to Proclus. They all agreed on the right- which Marinus described Proclus in eousness of vegetarianism, and the his eulogy and Iamblichus described author of the Arabic commentary and Pythagoras in the Pythagorean Way of Iamblichus both connected it with the Life. Obviously, it was a mere topos, but authority of Pythagoras. again it is shared by these three authors. Finally, the Life of Proclus and our Interestingly, all three authors consid- commentary show surprising affinity ered vegetarianism to be part of this in matters of religiosity. Throughout his topos of a moderate life (Procl. Arab., eulogy, Marinus emphasises Proclus’ pp. 66, 99; Marinus 12; 19; Iamblichus devotion to various pagan deities and his Vita Pythag. III; XXIV). Such a recom- care for all the details of the practice of mendation is not explicitly made in the their cult (11; 19; 28–34). It goes along Golden Verses, yet it had been connected with the commentary, which addresses with Pythagoreanism by late antique the question of the cult of goods, de- authors, starting with Porphyry, in mons and heroes several times and gives his work devoted to vegetarianism (On some details concerning proper worship Abstinence 2, 28).125 The Arabic commen- practices (92a–93a; 94a–b). At the same tary is very clear about that precept: time, the commentary has a strongly monotheistic character and it is obvious [Pythagoras] advises that food be sim- that its author placed one God above the ple and pure. Most foods that are easily entire hierarchy of gods and semi-divine digested by the eater come from inan- creatures. Also, Proclus himself strongly imate sources, and those who believe defends the monotheistic theology and that we ought to nourish ourselves on monistic metaphysics against all dualist food that is animate, are being foolish. theories in his theology and in his the- (104b–105a)126 ory of the cause of the evil.127 According to Marinus, Proclus’ as- This is a very decisive voice in the late tonishing devotion to the cult encom- antique Neoplatonic debate on whether passed even the worship of heroes and a man should or should not eat meat. The of dead ancestors and relatives: commentator uses the Golden Verses – which do not address this question – as Under no circumstances did he neglect well as the very authority of Pythagoras to render the customary homages, and to promote his own point of view. This on fixed yearly dates he went to visit the actually tells us a lot about his philo- tombs of the Attic heroes, those of phi- sophical “affiliation”. We can certainly losophers, of his friends and acquaint- place him very close to Iamblichus as ances; he performed the rites prescribed well as to Marinus, and probably also by religion (…). After having fulfilled this pious duty towards each of them, he

125 Cornelli 2013, pp. 70–71. 127 Dodds 1992; Phillips 2007; Chlup 2012, 126 Linley 1984, pp. 66–67. pp. 201–233.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 32

went to the Academy, in a certain par- greater honour to certain individuals ticular place, and by vows and prayers, because of the virtue which has made he invoked the souls of his ancestors, them good, and make them partners in collectively and separately; and (…) he our lives. (94b–95a)130 made libations in honour of all those who had participated in philosophy. Thus, the commentary presents the (36, trans. K. S. Guthrie)128 Pythagoreans as people who observed the prescription to worship the “most Let us compare this passage with the virtuous dead” and Pythagoras (and the Arabic commentary: Golden Verses) as the authority who rec- ommended this practice; the commen- For these [the souls of the dead] the law tary also gives the reason for undertak- prescribes celebration for one day per ing these practices. Likewise, Marinus year; for the heroes, the regulation is for portrays Proclus as someone who with one day’s celebration per month, while great care and piety obeys similar rec- for the demons perpetual celebration is ommendations in every detail, in exactly ordinated. (94a–b)129 the same way as the ancient Pythagore- Pythagoras held the heroes in esteem ans did.131 also, and we honour them by believing Until now, I have been focusing on that they requite with evil or good who- the numerous similarities between ever does harm or good to them. For the Arabic commentary and Marinus them there are prescribed exaltation, Life of Proclus, as well as the writings incense and sacrifice on the twenty-fifth of Iamblichus. However, there is one day of January. point in the matters of religiosity on Pythagoreans enjoined long journeys to which our commentary and the eulogy visit the most virtuous dead, and to pray of Proclus disagree: whereas, according over their graves, and lay it down that to Marinus, Proclus worshipped Hel- God gives rewards for this and punishes lenic and foreign gods on equal terms, those who do not do their duty. our commentary recommends worship- (…) Pythagoras makes it a duty to hon- ping only one’s “native” deities. our good men (…) and to show affection Thus, Marinus emphasises that to relatives, and to treat them with re- Proclus used to worship as many gods as spect, since we have them through na- possible and celebrated religious feasts ture. We should honour them in a meas- and fasts, not only Hellenic but also for- ure commensurate with their merits (…) eign. According to him, Proclus wrote We should give preferential treatment to hymns not only to the Hellenic gods, but our relatives as against those who are also to several foreign gods (“without not related to us; we should also show 130 Linley 1984, pp. 20–23. 131 See also a commentary to this passage 128 Guthrie 1986, p. 53. in: Fowden 2005, pp. 152–153; and Dillon 129 Linley 1984, pp. 19–21. 2007, 130–131.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 33 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context exception”), such as Marnas of Gaza, (In Parm. 618) who described his teacher Asclepius Leontouchos of Ascalon, Syrianus in a very similar way, as some- Thyandrites, who was worshipped by the one who as a philosopher can “recom- Arabs, and Isis of Philae (Egypt).132 He pense for the statues, the temples and was doing it according to his statement the whole ritual of worship” and that he that “it behoves the philosopher to be no himself was able to be “the chief author minister of any one city, nor even of any of salvation for men”.136 particular people’s customs, but to be Furthermore, thanks to the partially a sacral hierophant of the entire world preserved Platonic Theology, as well as in common,” (19, 47–48).133 Thus, in the the Elements of Theology, we are very image of Proclus drawn by Marinus, the well informed about Proclus’ theology actual religious practice is presented as and that he considered particular pa- extremely eclectic and embracing every gan gods as henads that were placed in possible cult from the entire oikumene his elaborated metaphysical hierarchy and it is explained by Proclus’ state- below the transcendent One (but at the ment about the philosopher as the “hi- same time somehow participating in it). erophant of the entire world”. However, In his Platonic Theology, Proclus man- this very statement does not seem to aged to fit every single Olympic, Orphic fit this context well, since it can be un- and Chaldean (i.e., from the Chaldean derstood in a completely opposite way Oracles) god, placing them on subse- to how Marinus presented it in his eu- quent levels of the “Platonic” hierarchy logy. Garth Fowden, who commented of beings emanating from the One and on this passage by Marinus, referred to at the same time being unified with it.137 Porphyry’s idea (De Abst. 2.49.1) that It is possible, therefore, to read this a philosopher as a priest “is responsible sentence of Proclus’ about him being not merely for the statues of the gods, a hierophant of the entire world as re- but for making himself into a statue”.134 ferring to this universal character of It was probably Porphyry’s allusion to his philosophical theology, hidden be- the anecdote of Plotinus described by neath the traditional pagan mythology Porphyry (Vita Plot. 10.35–6). Plotinus and religious practices. This would be being asked about participating in a re- the actual meaning of the traditional ligious ceremony replied that “they religion that only a philosopher can ought to come to me, not I to them”.135 truly comprehend.138 Consequently, it Fowden quoted in this context Proclus traditional religion see van den Berg 132 See the commentary to this passage 1999; and Chlup 2012, pp. 260–261 and the information about those gods in 136 Fowden 2005, p. 154; Morrow & Dillon Saffrey & Segonds 2001, pp. 132–133 and 1987, p. 20. Edwards 2000, pp. 87–88. 137 Chlup 2012, pp. 112–136; Butler 2008. 133 Translation by Luz 2017, p. 146. 138 This is how J.M. Dillon (2007, p. 133) un- 134 Fowden 2005, p. 154. derstood Marinus’ statement of Proclus 135 About this anecdote and more about as a hierophant of the entire world. Plotinus’ and Porphyry’s approach to According to him this statement was

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 34

is possible that Marinus added this sen- gods.141 Therefore, there is no trace in tence, which he might have remembered Proclus’ preserved writings, neither re- as something that his master actually ligious nor philosophical, that would had said and he referred it to Proclus’ attest that he actually worshipped any religious practice.139 This hypothesis foreign minor deities like those men- could be corroborated by the fact that tioned by Marinus. It is possible that Marinus was considered by others schol- Marinus described Proclus as a wor- ars from the circle of Proclus as lacking shipper of every possible god because understanding of the intricacies of the he himself was a convert from a foreign Platonic philosophy which means basi- cult, so he did not mean to describe cally metaphysics and theology.140 In this honestly the actual religious practice context, it is striking that those hymns of his teacher. There is also a possibil- of Proclus that survive until today are ity that this list of foreign gods alleg- only devoted to the traditional Hellenic edly worshipped by Proclus, as given by Marinus, reflects domestic cults of some students in the Athenian Academy under Proclus. It would suggest that Proclus connected with a concern of intellectuals showed a welcoming attitude to all of like Proclus to “fit all local divinities into the system” it is to identify every lo- them and to their religious and cultural cal deity with one of the Hellenic gods. background – rather than his own actual However, this syncretic approach de- 142 scribed by Dillon is not consistent with religious practice. Marinus’ description of Proclus worship- However, there is no doubt that reli- ping every single local deity possible gious practice was important for Proclus (since there is no sense in committing to the cult of every one of them as they can and that he considered himself a philo- be easily identified with Greek Olympic sophical and religious leader, obliged to gods). M.J. Edwards, in turn, considered this statement to be “a variation on the preserve and guard the elements of Hel- notion that a philosopher should be lenic traditional cult that were seriously a ‘cosmopolitan’ or citizen of the world, threatened by Christians.143 The only which is ascribed to Diogenes, founder of the Cynics”. Edwards 2000, p. 88. Finally, question is how far his piety reached R. Chlup (2012, pp. 264–265) under- from the cult of the traditional Hellenic stands this statement as an expression of “the burden of cultural responsibility gods toward the gods of barbarian cit- the Neoplatonists were taking on their ies and nations, which is what Marinus shoulders”; it is the responsibility of con- claims about him. tinuation of the traditional Hellenic cults (however, it does not really apply to the passage by Marinus in which he shows Proclus as devoted to cults of gods other 141 Van Den Berg 2001; Saffrey & Segonds than traditional Hellenic ones). 2001, pp. 131–132; Luz 2017, pp. 148–149. 139 Van Den Berg 2001, pp. 29–30; Luz 2017, 142 I owe this remark to Peter Brown, whom pp. 146–147. See more about Proclus’ reli- I would also like to thank for his help and gious practice in Festugière 1966. support in the process of writing this 140 See. Damascius, Philosophical histo- paper. ry / Life of Isidorus 97 (ed. Athanassiadi, 143 Fowden 2005, pp. 154–157; Chlup 2012, pp. 237–239); Cf. Watts 2006, p. 113. pp. 264–265; Dillon 2007.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 35 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

It is in this context that we could his own ancestral religious practices, probably understand the recommenda- and nobody should get involved in the tions made by the Arabic commentary. religions of other nations. We read: This opinion stands in obvious con- tradiction to what Marinus presented Doing good varies according to the in the Life of Proclus. However, accord- doer and his station, and so for each ing to Damascius, Marinus himself different rank there are differences in was probably originally a Samaritan sacrifices, incense, the use of pigs and from Neapolis in Palestine who later wine, and festivals, and so on, and in converted to Hellenism.145 According this matter ancestral ruling is followed; to Menahem Luz, this conversion “was this is what is meant by “law” [in the severely reprimanded by other members poem]. The reason why the rulings of of the Platonic school”.146 This is not so the law differ is that they conform to clear, as this statement is based on a re- the difference among the minds, beliefs constructed passage from Damascius, and habitations of men: the law of the probably mixed with other statements Athenians was to sacrifice the pig and to added by Photius to his description of make offerings of diluted wine, whereas Marinus.147 The critique of Marinus’ the Egyptians refuse to sacrifice pigs. conversion might well have been added These are principles which were derived by the Byzantine scholar. However, it is from Hermes, who commanded man very probable that he really was a con- to abide by the laws of his fathers and vert from the Samaritan to the Hellenic ancestors, and to avoid alien practices. faith and that he did abandon his ances- In accordance with the disposition of tors’ religion.148 This would somehow each nation of mankind and its ancestral explain why he tried to show Proclus as rule, the usages established by the wise accepting all kinds of foreign religious men regarding sacrifice, festivals and practices. Furthermore, the surviving incense vary, and they trace back these passages of Damascius Philosophical principles to the gods. This is why, if history / Life of Isidorus reveal that the any nation transgresses against its own 144 custom, it perishes. (92a–b) 145 This information is preserved in Photius’ excerpt from the Philosophical histo- ry / Life of Isidorus, 97 (ed. Athanassiadi, According to this passage, religious p. 237): “Marinus, the successor of Proclus, laws and practices of worship were originated from Neapolis in Palestine, given to humans by gods and they were a city founded near the so-called Mount Argarizos [Gerizim] (…). Born a Samaritan, adapted to the character of every na- Marinus renounced their creed (…) and tion. This idea brings the author to the embraced Hellenism.” point of religious conservatism and the 146 Luz 2017, p. 145. opinion that every nation has to keep 147 See a study of this passage of Damascius about Marinus’ origins in Hult 1993. 148 See also Hult 1993; Schissel von 144 Linley 1984, p. 8–11. Fleschenberg 1930; Saffrey 2005.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 36

Athenian Academy at that time was not Pythagorean Way of Life. Studying those a homogenous community. There were three texts together – Iamblichus, different factions in the Platonic school Marinus, and the Arabic commentary – after (or probably even before) the death is particularly interesting since they all of Proclus and there occurred disagree- present the same ideal of the perfect, ments about the succession in the school happy, virtuous life of a philosopher. as well as philosophical and religious This is the ideal of the pagan holy man differences between scholars in this cir- (theios aner), so important for the late cle. Conservatism, as expressed by our antique Neoplatonic tradition and so commentator, would have been opposed closely connected with the Pythagorean to the eclecticism embodied in Marinus. tradition itself (as seen by the late Neo- Therefore, this difference in opinions platonists): Pythagoras was seen as the could have originated in the philosophi- first and most important living example cal and interpersonal controversies that of this ideal.150 The three authors speak were tearing apart the Athenian Acad- in unison, even though they adopt three emy in the late fifth century AD.149 different points of view: In this context, it is striking that the 1. Iamblichus, in On the Pythagorean question of the worship of foreign gods is Way of Life, presents a description the only point in which Marinus and the of the life of the legendary figure of Arabic commentary disagree. The rest divine Pythagoras and of the com- of Marinus eulogy shows several com- munity of his first students – who mon elements with the Arabic commen- serve him as perfect examples of the tary, as if Marinus had wanted to show way of life to be followed. Proclus as fulfilling the model of life 2. Marinus, in Proclus, or On Happi- that is described by the commentator. ness, offers a eulogy of the recently In conclusion, the comparison be- deceased teacher who perfectly em- tween Marinus’ Life of Proclus and bodied this Pythagorean ideal of the the Arabic commentary shows a lot pagan holy man. of striking similarities, common atti- 3. The “Arabic” commentator describes tudes to many questions and the use the same model of the perfect way of the same topoi and loci from the of life, but this time based on the Neoplatonic Pythagorean tradition. Golden Verses, the poem considered Furthermore, there is also a num- to be a collection of the admoni- ber of similarities between those tions of Pythagoras, written down two texts and the works of Proclus by his famous student Empedocles; himself as well as with Iamblichus’ the poem focuses exactly on what the proper philosophical way of life 149 For the Athenian Platonic Academy at the times of Proclus as the diadochus should be. and the years after his death, see Watts 2006, pp. 100–128; and the introduction of P. Athanassiadi in Damascius 1999, on pp. 39–48. 150 See Fowden 1982.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 37 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

There is no doubt that all three texts principles of Plato and with the secret were written by Neoplatonic authors revelations of the theologians. For all who shared a similar education, the Greek theology derives from Orphic same literary and philosophical erudi- mystagogy, Pythagoras first learning tion, as well as a common philosophi- from Aglaophemus the secrets concern- cal system through which they saw the ing the gods, Plato after him receiving world, man and history. The differences the complete science of the gods from in their opinions on specific matters, Pythagorean and Orphic writings. such as the question of the worship of (I 5, 25, 24–26, 9, trans. D. O’Meara)151 foreign gods could be explained by the context of their creation, and they actu- Marinus in the Life of Proclus (28) re- ally help us see the Neoplatonic philos- called that Proclus had a dream that the ophers of Late Antiquity as real people, soul of Pythagorean Nicomachus lived who combatted and disagreed with each in him. In turn, in the entry devoted to other. It is clear that we should look into Proclus Diadochus, the Souda (Pi 2473) this inner circle of Proclus’ students if lists a text entitled About the harmony of we are to find the original author of the Orpheus, Pythagoras and Plato among Arabic commentary. the writings attributed to him. If it had indeed existed, it would have probably Conclusions been related to the same idea as the As I tried to demonstrate in the first part one expressed in the passage from the of this paper, the hypothesis of Proclus Platonic Theology, according to which the Procleius as the author of the Arabic Orphic, Pythagorean and Platonic tradi- Commentary on the Golden Verses in Ibn tions are basically one and the same tra- al- ayyib’s abbreviated version is very dition. Moreover, it is possible to iden- problematic and difficult to defend. Con- tify numerous Pythagorean elements in versely, there is a strong affinity between his commentaries to Plato’s dialogues. this text and the preserved works of Pro- In particular, Proclus considered the clus as well as the eulogy of his student Platonic Timaeus to be Pythagorean in and successor Marinus. its very essence,152 but he also made many The surviving works of Proclus leave references to the Pythagorean tradition no doubt that he held Pythagoras and the while commenting on Plato’s Parmenides Pythagoreans in very high esteem and and his other dialogues. As pointed out venerated them together just as much as by Dominic O’Meara, Proclus continued he venerated Plato and the Orphic tradi- the Iamblichean Pythagorean project, tion. This is visible, for example, in his which is plainly visible in his commen- famous statement from the introduction taries, where he shows that Plato’s entire to the Platonic Theology:

151 O’Meara 1989, p. 146. But we must show that each of these 152 See especially Comm. in Tim. I, III 8; doctrines is in harmony with the first cf. Baltzly 2016; O’Meara 1989, pp. 148–149.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 38

work was based on Pythagoras.153 climate of this community, the opinions O’Meara also expressed the opinion shared by its members and their famil- that from this point of view, the Ara- iarity with Proclus and his legacy, as bic commentary attributed to Proclus well as the discussions that must have actually “contains ideas characteristic occurred within this group. of Iamblichus’ Pythagoreanizing pro- Furthermore, it is very probable that gramme, which reappear in Syrianus Proclus used to give lectures about the and in Proclus. If then the precise au- Pythagorean tradition and the Golden thorship of the Arabic commentary can- Verses. He believed that this poem had not yet be determined with certainty, it its origins in the very first stages in the can at least be seen as further evidence development of the tradition that he saw of the influence of Iamblichus’ revival of himself belonging to, and that it was Pythagoreanism.”154 connected with Pythagoras himself. Ne- However, among his preserved writ- oplatonic philosophers also shared the ings there is not a single one devoted opinion that this was a perfect propae- specifically to Pythagoras and his doc- deutic text, ideal for a general introduc- trine. Neither did Proclus write any work tion to philosophy and there is no reason similar to Porphyry’s and Iamblichus’ to think that Proclus’ opinion about it lives of Pythagoras. Nevertheless, his was different.155 Therefore, he could have interest in Pythagoras should have been commented on it during some of his lec- substantial, as was his knowledge about tures and some of his students could him and his philosophy (inasmuch as it have written these comments down in was available to a late antique author). the form of notes. Later on, someone Furthermore, there are many parallels might have reviewed and presented between the Arabic commentary and them as a standalone commentary. the preserved writings of Proclus. Even This would explain the attribution of though Westerink did not consider this the commentary to Proclus and its af- enough to attribute the authorship of finity with his legacy on the one hand, this text to Proclus himself, these sim- and its relatively free form on the other ilarities certainly place this text some- (no lemmata consecutively commented). where in the same philosophical milieu. We know that some Neoplatonic com- When we add to that the parallels mentaries were said to be “apo phones”, between the Arabic commentary and that is notes from a lecture of someone Marinus’ Life of Proclus, this leads us to else than the compiler of the actual text. the hypothesis that the Arabic commen- Marcel Richard in his study of this kind tary was written in the circle of direct of late antique literary works presents students of Proclus. The text reflects very a number of Neoplatonic commentaries well the intellectual and interpersonal which are explicitly presented as “the

155 See Hierocl. Comm. Aur. carm. 122, 1–5 153 O’Meara 1989, pp. 146–149. Hadot 1978, pp. 162–164; Hadot 2004, 154 O’Meara 1989, p. 232. p. 96; Schibli 2002, pp. 17–18.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 39 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context oral teaching of …”, which is one of the (i.e. the Byzantines). Therefore, from the most popular uses of the formula apo modern perspective, there is no reason phones (although not the only one). 156 not to treat the Graeco-Arabic tradition Among the preserved commentaries on a par with the Greek tradition that attributed to Proclus there is actually has survived until the present day. And one which consists of notes taken by whereas for obvious reasons every classi- a student who attended one of Proclus’ cist is reluctant to announce the discov- seminars; it is the Commentary on Plato’s ery of a lost work by Plato or Aristotle in Cratylus.157 The form of this text is very Arabic, we should not give up on the idea similar to the Arabic commentary on that Arabic texts can improve our access the Golden Verses; it does not comment to the ideas and heritage of the greatest on every single passage of the text, it philosophers of Classical Antiquity. makes substantial digressions and it is Therefore, I argue that the Arabic not always clear how the commentary commentary on the Golden Verses attrib- relates to the commented text.158 Both uted to Proclus should receive more at- texts are attributed to Proclus, and both tention than it has. First of all, it is a very comment on classical texts. There is no good exposition of Neoplatonic ethics, reason to reject the hypothesis that the and one that can supplement the Greek Arabic commentary was – just as the corpus of Proclus’ works. Radek Chlup in commentary on Cratylus – not written by his introduction to Proclus’ philosophy Proclus himself, but nevertheless comes begins the chapter about Proclus’ ethics from him and was actually written down acknowledging that although “most of by one of his students. the abstract metaphysical principles” of We must remember that medieval his system “have a number of interesting Arabic authors had access to a differ- ethical consequences”, “most of the time ent source base of Greek philosophical Proclus pays comparatively little atten- texts that we have today – and differ- tion to them”.159 Then he writes: ent, perhaps even more comprehensive, than their medieval Greek counterparts His chief aim is to analyse things on as general a level as possible, so that the 156 Richard 1950; Praechter 1990, pp. 43–45; see also the introduction by D. Baltzly & theorems arrived at in this way might R. Tarrant in Tarrant 2006, pp. 13–14. subsequently be applied to any particu- 157 Van Den Berg 2008, pp. 94–95. lar field of enquiry. Unfortunately, these 158 “[The Commentary on the Cratylus] ap- particular applications are something pears to consist of a series of garbled notes. Even though they apparently fol- Proclus rarely finds sufficient time for. low the text of the Cratylus, it is by no As a result, modern readers, who only means always clear how exactly they re- have access to Proclus’ thought through late to the Cratylus or to each other. (...) The commentary thus consists of ‘useful his texts, may easily miss the fact that excerpts (chresimoi eclogai) from notes Neoplatonic metaphysics was not only (scholia) taken by a student who attended Proclus’ seminar on the Cratylus.” Van Den Berg 2008, p. 94. 159 Chlup 2012, p. 234.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 40

thought but lived and practised as In general, the Arabic commentary well.160 is a very good example of the late an- tique version of Pythagoreanism which, The Arabic commentary to theGolden whether we want it or not, constitutes so Verses ideally fills in this lacuna in our much of the modern source base for the sources for Proclean ethics. It is also reconstruction of any historical facts a perfect example of the idea to which about Pythagoras and his followers, as Chlup refers, namely that in Proclus’ well as his philosophical views. We may system ethics are closely connected with consider it all late, and full of legends metaphysics and theology. Therefore, and myths, but this is also the case with this text – preserved in Arabic – pro- the biographies of Pythagoras written by vides a perfect example of exactly what Porphyry and Iamblichus. Both are still Chlup assumed that Proclus “rarely finds the main sources from which modern sufficient time for”. It is a description of scholars try to draw information about Neoplatonic ethics as part of the entire the most archaic period in the history of coherent philosophical system emerging Pythagorean tradition. Why not add this from metaphysics and theology. Even interesting Arabic text to this corpus, if Proclus found little time to describe and use it to study late antique Neoplato- this ethics in his core writings, he would nism in general and the circle of Proclus have been explaining it to his students. in particular? Furthermore, the Arabic commen- tary attributed to Proclus may also be a valuable source of knowledge about the Neoplatonic image of Pythagoras, his life and philosophy, as well as a fas- cinating description of a philosophi- cal way of life that was believed to be “Pythagorean” in the inner circle of Proclus’ students. As such, the Arabic text brings us a number of interesting elements that can supplement the sur- viving Greek works of Proclus and his students. This includes an extensive and very interesting description of the Pythagorean metaphysics of number, which gives us extraordinary insight into the so-called Neo-Pythagorean number theory and its connection with metaphysics and theology.

160 Chlup 2012, p. 234.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 41 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Athanassiadi, P., Frede, M. (1999). Pagan Brockelmann, C. (1937–1942). Geschichte der Monotheism in Late Antiquity. Oxford: arabischen Literatur. Supplementbande. Clarendon Press. Leiden: Brill.

Baltzly, D. (2004). “The Virtues and ‘Be- Brockelmann, C. (1943–1949). Geschichte coming like God’: Alcinous to Proclus”. der arabischen Literatur, 2nd ed. Leiden: Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 26, Brill. pp. 297–321. Brooks, E. W. (1901). “Arabic Lists of the Baltzly, D. 2007. Proclus, Commentary on Byzantine Themes”. The Journal of Hel- Plato’s Timaeus; Book 3, Part 1: Proclus on lenic Studies 21, pp. 67–77. the World’s Body. Cambridge: Cambridge Burkert, W. (1972). Lore and Science in An- University Press. cient Pythagoreanism. Translated by Ed- Baltzly, D. 2016. “Transformations of Py- win L. Minar orig. ed. Nürnberg 1962. thagorean Wisdom and Psychic Askesis Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University in Proclus’ Timaeus Commentary”. In: Press. A.-B. Renger and A. Stavru (eds.), Py- Butler, E. P. (2008). “The Intelligibile Gods thagorean Knowledge from the Ancient to in the Platonic Theology of Proclus” the Modern World: Askesis – Religion – Sci- Methexis 21, pp. 207–29. ence. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Chlup, R. (2012). Proclus: An Introduction. Bosworth, C. E. (ed.), (1970). Hudūd Al- Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ʿĀlam; “The Regions of the World”: A Per- sian Geography, 372 A.H.-982 A.D. Trans- Cornelli, G. (2013). In Search of Pythagore- lated by Vladimir Minorsky and V. V. anism: Pythagoreanism as an Historio- Bartol’d. Second edition. London: Luzac. graphical Category. Studia Praesocratica 4. Boston: De Gruyter.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 42

Daiber, H. (1988). “(Rec.) LINLEY, NEIL: Dickey, E. (2007). Ancient Greek scholarship. Ibn at-Tayyib, Proclus’ Commentary Oxford: Oxford University Press. on the Pythagorean Verses”. Islam 65, Dillon, J. M. (2007). “The Religion of the pp. 134–37. Last Hellenes”. Rites et croyances dans les Daiber, H. (1995). Neuplatonische Pythagori- religions du monde romain. Vandoeuvres – ca in arabischem Gewande: der Kommentar Genève: Fondation Hardt. des Iamblichus zu den Carmina aurea; ein Dodds, E. R. (1992). Proclus, The Elements verlorener griechischer Text in arabischer of Theology. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon. Überlieferung. Amsterdam: North-Hol- land. Edwards, M. J. (2000). Neoplatonic Saints: The Lives of Plotinus and Proclus by Their Damascius (1999). The Philosophical Histo- Students. Translated Texts for Histori- ry. P. Athanassiadi (ed.). Athens: Apamea ans 35. Liverpool: Liverpool University Cultural Association. Press. Damascius (2008). Commentaire sur le Endress, G. (1973). Proclus Arabus. Zwanzig Philèbe de Platon. G. Van Riel, C. Macé, Abschnitte sus der Institutio Theologica and J. Follon (eds.). Paris: Les Belles Let- in Arabischer Übersetzung. Beirut-Wies- tres. baden: Steiner. Delatte, A. (1915). Études sur la littérature Endress, G. (2012). “Proclus de Lycie. Pythagoricienne. Paris: E. Champion. Oeuvres transmises par la tradition ar- De Smet, D. (1998). Empedocles Arabus. Une abe”. In: R. Goulet (ed.), Dictionnaire des lecture néoplatonicienne tardive. Brux- philosophes antiques. Paris: CNRS. elles: KAWLSK.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 43 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

Ferrari, C. (2006). Der Kategorienkommen- Fowden, G. (1982). “The Pagan Holy Man in tar von Abū l-Fara ‛Abdallāh ibn a - ayyib. Late Antique Society”. Journal of Hellenic Leiden–Boston: Brill. Studies 102, pp. 33–59.

Faraggiana di Sarzana, Ch. (1987). “Le Com- Fowden, G. (2005). “Sages, Cities and Tem- mentaire à Hésiode et La Paideia Ency- ples: Aspects of Late Antique Pythago- clopédique de Proclus”. By J. Pépin and rism”. By A. Smith The Philosopher and H. D. Saffrey Proclus Lecteur et Interprète Society in Late Antiquity. Essays in Honour des Anciens (Actes Du Colloque Interna- of Peter Brown. Swansea: Classical Press tional Du CNRS Paris (2–4 Octobre 1985)). of Wales. Paris: CNRS. Guthrie, K. S., trans. (1986). The Life of Pro- Faultless, J. (2010). “Ibn Al- ayyib” By clus or Concerning Happiness by Marinus D. Thomas and A. MallettChristian-Mus - of Samaria. Grand Rapids, Michigan: lim Relations: A Bibliographical History, Phanes Press. Vol. 2 (900–1050). Leiden and Boston: Gyekye, K. (1975). Abū L-Faraj Ibn Al- ayyib, Brill. Tafsīr Kitāb Īsāghūjī li-Furfūriyūs. Beirut: Ferrari, C. (2006). Der Kategorienkommen- Dār al-Mashriq. tar von Abū al-Fara ‛Abdallāh Ibn a - Gyekye, K. (1979). Arabic Logic: Ibn Al- ayyib. Leiden and Boston: Brill. ayyib’s Commentary on Porphyry’s “Eisa- Festugière, A. J. (1966). “Proclus et la reli- goge”. Albany: State University of New gion traditionelle”. Mélanges d’archéolo- York Press. gie et d’histoire offerts à A. Piganiol. Paris: Hadot, I. (1978). Le problème du néoplato- S. E. V. P. E. N. nisme alexandrin: Hiéroclès et Simplicius. Paris: Études augustiniennes.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 44

Hadot, I. (2004). Studies on the Neoplatonist Izdebska, A. (2011). “Pitagorejska metafizy- Hierocles. Philadelphia: American Philo- ka liczb w arabskim komentarzu Proklo- sophical Society. sa do Złotego Poematu”. Przegląd Filozo- ficzny. Nowa Seria 77, pp. 187–199. Hellenkemper, H., Hild, F. (2004). Lykien und Pamphylien. Tabula Imperii Byzanti- Izdebska, A. (2016). “Man, God and the ni 8, Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Apotheosis of Man in Greek and Arabic Akademie der Wissenschaften. Commentaries to the Pythagorean Gold- en Verses”. International Journal of the Horst, P. C. van der. (1932). Les Vers d’or py- Platonic Tradition 10, no. 1, pp. 40–64. thagoriciens. Leiden: Brill. Jaʿfar, Q. ibn. (1889). Kitâb al-Harâj. M. J. de Huffman, C. A. (1999). “The Pythagorean Goeje (ed.), Bibliotheca Geographorum Tradition”. In: A. A. Long (ed.), The Cam- Arabicorum 6. Leiden: Brill. bridge Companion to Early Greek Philoso- phy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Kaldellis, A. (2005). “The Works and Days Press. of Hesychios the Illoustrios of Miletos”. Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 45, Hult, K. (1993). “Marinus the Samaritan: pp. 381–403 A Study of Vit. Isid. Fr 141”. Classica et Mediaevalia 43, pp. 163–175. Khurradādhbih (1889). Kitāb al-masālik wa-al-mamālik. M. J. de Goeje (ed.), Bib- Ibn awqal, M. (1964). Configuration de la liotheca Geographorum Arabicorum 6. terre (Kitab surat al-Ard) (transl. by G. Leiden: Brill. Wiet and J. H. Kramers), Collection UN- ESCO d’œuvres représentatives. Série ar- Kingsley, P. (1995). Ancient Philosophy, Mys- abe. Beyrouth: Commission internation- tery and Magic: Empedocles and Pythago- ale pour la traduction des chefs-d’œuvre. rean Tradition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 45 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

Köhler, F. W. (ed.) (1974). Hieroclis in aure- Morrow, G. R., Dillon, J. M. (1987). Pro- um Pythagoreorum carmen commentarius. clus’ Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides. Stuttgart: Teubner. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Linley, N., (ed.) (1984). Proclus’ Commentary Nuffelen, P. van. (2010). Monotheism Be- on the Pythagorean Golden Verses. Buffalo, tween Pagans and Christians in Late An- N. Y.: Dept. of Classics, State University tiquity. Leuven: Peeters. of New York at Buffalo. O’Meara, D. J. (1989). Pythagoras Revived: Luna, C., Segonds, A.-P. (2012). “Proclus de Mathematics and Philosophy in Late Antiq- Lycie”. In: R. Goulet (ed.), Dictionnaire uity. Oxford: Clarendon Press. des philosophes antiques. Paris: CNRS. Phillips, J. (2007). Order from Disorder: Pro- Luz, M. (2017). “Marinus’ Abrahamic No- clus Doctrine of Evil and Its Roots in An- tions of the Soul and One”. In: D. Layne cient Platonism. Leiden-Boston: Brill. and D. D. Butorac (eds.), Proclus and His Praechter, K. (1990). “Review of the Com- Legacy. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 145–158. mentaria in Aristotelem Graeca”. In: R. Minar, E. L. (1944). “Pythagorean Com- Sorabji (ed.), Aristotle Transformed. Lon- munism”. Transactions and Proceedings don: Duckworth, pp. 1000–1031. of the American Philological Association Primavesi, O. (2016). “Empedocles’ Cosmic 75, pp. 34–46. Cycle and the Pythagorean Tetractys”. Mitchell, S., Nuffelen, P. van. (2010). One Rhizomata 4 (1). pp. 5–29. God: Pagan Monotheism in the Roman Em- Proclus. (2007). On Providence. C. Steel pire. Cambridge: Cambridge University (ed.). London: Bloomsbury / Bristol Clas- Press. sical Press.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 46

Richard, M. (1950). “Apo Phones”. Byzan- Saffrey, H. D., Westerink, L. G. (1968). Pro- tion 20, pp. 191–222. clus, Théologie Platonicienne. Vol. I. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Robbins, F. E., D’Ooge, M. L., Karpin- ski, L. C. (1926). Nicomachus of Gerasa, Schibli, H. S. (2002). Hierocles of Alexandria. Introduction to Arithmetic with Studies in Oxford: Oxford University Press. Greek Arithmetic. New York: The Macmil- Schissel von Fleschenberg, O. (1930). “Mari- lan Company. nos 1”. Paulys Realenzyklopädie. Stuttgart: Rosan, L. J. (1949). The Philosophy of Proclus. Metzler. New York: Cosmos. Tarrant, H. (2006). Proclus, Commentary Rosenthal, F. (1990). “The Symbolism of the on Plato’s Timaeus; Book 1: Proclus on the Tabula Cebetis According to Abū L-Faraj Socratic State and Atlantis. Cambridge: Ibn A - ayyib”. Greek Philosophy in the Cambridge University Press. Arab World. Aldershot: Variorum. Taylor, T., (trans.) (1965). Iamblichus’ Life of Saffrey, H. D. (2000). “La dévotion de Pro- Pythagoras: Or, Pythagoric Life. London: clus au Soleil”. Le Néoplatonisme après JMWatkins. Plotin. Paris: Vrin. Taylor, T. (2002). The Rhetoric, Poetic and Saffrey, H. D. (2005). “Marinus de Neapo- Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle (Volume lis”. In: R. Goulet (ed.), Dictionnaire des IV of the Works of Aristotle). Frome, Som- philosophes antiques. Paris: CNRS. erset: Prometheus Trust.

Saffrey, H. D., Segonds, A.-P. (2001). Mari- Thesleff, H. (1961).An Introduction to the Py- nus, Proclus ou sur le Bonheur. Paris: Les thagorean Writings of the Hellenistic Peri- Belles Lettres. od. Åbo: Åbo Akad.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 Anna IzDeBska 47 The Arabic Commentary on the Golden Verses attributed to Proclus, and its Neoplatonic context

Thesleff, H. (1965).The Pythagorean Texts of Vogel, C. J. (1966). Pythagoras and Early the Hellenistic Period. Åbo: Åbo Akad. Pythagoreanism: An Interpretation of Ne- glected Evidence on the Philosopher Pythag- Thom, J. C. (1995). The Pythagorean Golden oras. Assen: Van Gorcum. Verses: With Introduction and Commen- tary. Leiden: Brill. Wakelnig, E. (2013). A Philosophy Reader from the Circle of Miskawayh: Text, Trans- Van Den Berg, R. M. (2001). Proclus’ Hymns. lation and Commentary. Cambridge: Cam- Essays, Translations, Commentary. Leid- bridge University Press. en: Brill. Watts, E. J. (2006). City and School in Late Van Den Berg, R. M. (2008). Proclus’ Com- Antique Athens and Alexandria. The Trans- mentary on the Cratylus in Context. An- formation of the Classical Heritage 41. cient Theories of Language and Naming. Berkeley: University of California Press. Leiden– Boston: Brill. Westerink, L. G. (1987a). “Proclus commen- Van Den Berg, R. M. (1999). “Plotinus’ Atti- tateur des Vers d’or”. In: G. Boss, G. Seel tude to Traditional Cult: A Note on Por- (eds.), Proclus et son influence. Actes du phyry VP c. 10”. Ancient Philosophy 19, colloque de Neuchâtel, Juin 1985. Zürich: pp. 345–360. Éditions du Grand Midi. Van Den Berg, R. M. (2003). “‘Becoming Westerink, L. G. (1987b). “Proclus et les like God’ According to Proclus’ Inter- Présocratiques”. By J. Pépin and H. D. Saf- pretations of the Timaeus, the Eleusian frey, Proclus lecteur et interprète des An- Mysteries, and the Chaldean Oracles”. ciens (Actes du colloque international du In: R. W. Sharples, A. D. R. Sheppard CNRS Paris (2–4 Octobre 1985)). Paris: (eds.), Ancient Approaches to Plato’s Ti- CNRS. maeus. London: Oxbow.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019 48

Westerink, L. G. (ed.). (2010). Damascius Lectures on the Philebus. Westbury: Wilt- shire.

Westerink, L. G. (2011). Proclus: Commen- tary on the First Alcibiades. L. G. Wester- ink (ed.), W. O’Neill (trans.). Westbury, Wiltshire, UK: Prometheus Trust.

Wilson N.G. (1983). Scholars of Byzantium. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Zampaki, T. (2017). “Ibn Al- ayyib’s Is- tithmār on Proclus’ Commentary on the Pythagorean Golden Verses”. By D. Layne and D. D. Butorac Proclus and His Legacy. Berlin: de Gruyter.

INTERNATIONAL ISSUE NO. 6/2019