PLOTINUSPLOTINUS ANDAND THE THE PPRESOCRATICSRESOCRATICS A APhilosophical Philosophical Study Study of of Presocratic Presocratic InfluencesInfluences in in Plotinus Plotinus’ Enneads’ Enneads GIANNISGIANNIS STAMATELLOS STAMATELLOS Plotinus and the Presocratics SUNY series in Ancient Greek Philosophy Anthony Preus, editor Plotinus and the Presocratics A Philosophical Study of Presocratic Influences in Plotinus’ Enneads Giannis Stamatellos State University of New York Press To my grandparents Nikos and Elpinike Tetradi Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xi INTRODUCTION 1 1 THE ORIGINS OF PLOTINUS’ PHILOSOPHY 3 1.1 Plotinus’ Predecessors 3 1.2 Plotinus’ Philosophical Method 4 1.2.1 Lectures and Writings 5 1.2.2 Language, Simile, and Metaphor 6 1.2.3 Quoting Predecessors 8 1.3 Plotinus’ Philosophical Sources 10 1.3.1 Plato 11 1.3.2 Aristotle 14 1.3.3 Stoics and Epicureans 14 1.3.4 Middle-Platonists, Aristotelians, and Neopythagoreans 15 1.3.5 Gnostics, Christians, the Orient, and Other Contemporary Movements 17 1.4 Plotinus and the Presocratics 19 2 ONE AND UNITY 23 2.1 The One in Plotinus 23 2.2 The Presocratic One in the Enneads 26 2.3 Parmenides’ Monism 30 2.4 The Ineffable One 33 2.4.1 The Apophatism of the First Principle 35 2.4.2 The Pythagorean Apophatism of the Monad 36 vii viii Contents 2.5 The One as First Principle 42 2.5.1 Heraclitus’ One 44 2.5.2 Empedocles’ Philia 48 2.5.3 Anaxagoras’ Mind 53 3 INTELLECT AND BEING 59 3.1 Plotinus’ Theory of Intellect 59 3.2 Eleatic Being in the Enneads 64 3.3 The Nature of Being 65 3.3.1 Parmenides’ Theory of Being 66 3.3.2 Plotinus on Parmenides’ Being 70 3.3.3 Thinking and Being 72 3.4 The Predicates of Being 80 3.4.1 Ungenerated and Indestructible 81 3.4.2 Indivisible and Self-identical 83 3.4.3 Imperturbable and Changeless 84 4 ETERNITY AND TIME 89 4.1 Plotinus’ Theory of Eternity and Time 89 4.2 Eternity and Time in the Presocratics 94 4.3 The Presocratic Theories of Eternity and Time in the Enneads 96 4.4 The Timelessness of Being 99 4.4.1 Philolaus’ Eternal Continuance and Plato’s Eternity of the Forms 101 4.4.2 Parmenides’ Timelessness of Being 105 4.4.3 Plotinus’ Timelessness of Eternity 111 4.5 The Eternal Life of Intellect 112 4.5.1 Eternity in Heraclitus 114 4.5.2 Eternal Life in Empedocles 117 Contents ix 4.6 The Everlastingness of Time 120 4.6.1 The Myth of Time 121 4.6.2 The Everlastingness of the Cosmos 123 4.6.3 The Movement of the Spheres, Eternal Recurrence, and Spiral Time 129 5 MATTER AND SOUL 135 5.1 Matter and Ensouled Body in Plotinus 135 5.2 Plotinus’ Criticism of Presocratic Matter 138 5.2.1 Anaximander’s apeiron 139 5.2.2 Empedocles’ Theory of the Four Elements 142 5.2.3 Anaxagoras’ Theory of Matter 145 5.2.4 The Atomic Theory of Matter 150 5.3 Plotinus’ Theory of the Ensouled Body 156 5.3.1 The Presocratic Theories of the Ensouled Body in the Enneads 158 5.3.2 Heraclitus’ Theory of Soul and Physical Alteration 158 5.3.3 The daimo¯n in Empedocles 166 6 CONCLUSION 173 APPENDIX: TEXT OF PRESOCRATIC FRAGMENTS IN PLOTINUS’ ENNEADS 177 NOTES 197 BIBLIOGRAPHY 239 INDEX FONTIUM 255 INDEX OF CONCEPTS AND PROPER NAMES 259 Acknowledgments Gratefully, I would like to acknowledge all those who have assisted me in this work. First and foremost, I would like to thank Professor Rosemary Wright for her constant encouragement, insightful instruction, and philosophical inspira- tion throughout this project. Her help was invaluable and I owe her gratitude for her unconditional support. I would like to express my special thanks to Professor Andrew Smith and Professor David Cockburn for their invaluable comments. I am also thankful to the Blegen Library of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens and the Library of the American College of Greece for offering me all the necessary facilities to accomplish my research project. In addition, I would like to acknowledge Dr. Paul Kalligas and Dr. Evangellos Roussos for provid- ing me with important bibliographical sources and notes not only on the par- ticular subject, but also generally on Plotinus. I am also grateful to my wife Alexandra, my daughter Antonia, my son Aristoteles, and my mother Antonia for their care and support. Without their perennial patience and encouragement, I would not have completed this book. Finally, I wish to thank my friends Kostas Andreou, Kostantinos Andro- nis, Fotis Terzakis, David Lewis, Dr. Spyridon Rangos, and Dr. Dionysis Met- zeniotis for their support and the creative inspiration during our philosophical discussions. xi Introduction Plotinus (ad 204–205) and the Presocratic thinkers (ad c. 6th–5th c.) desig- nate the historical boundaries of ancient Greek philosophy. Whereas the Pre- socratics determine the beginning of Greek philosophy, Plotinus initiates the last period of Greek intellection which is usually marked by the closure of Plato’s Academy in Athens by the emperor Justinian (ad 529). Plotinus’ phi- losophy is a clear innovation in the development of Platonism and for this rea- son his work is regarded as the beginning of the Neoplatonic movement. His thought assimilates nearly eight centuries of philosophy and intellectual his- tory, and the attentive reader of the Enneads is able to detect various direct and indirect citations of ancient authors from the Presocratic, Classical and Hel- lenistic periods. Plotinus mentions by name leading Greek philosophers span- ning these centuries such as Pherecydes, Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans, Heraclitus, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, and the Epicureans. It is noteworthy that Plotinus never refers by name to any philosopher later than Epicurus. Despite the fact that the Presocratic philosophers are present in the En- neads, in modern scholarship on Plotinus, scant attention has been paid to the Presocratic origins of his thought. As well as the lack of consideration of Pre- socratics in the Enneads, the general attitude is deflationary, but a detailed study of the text points in the opposite direction. Plotinus’ references to the Presocratics are not without purpose and significance. In many cases, he refers directly to eminent Presocratic thinkers along with Plato and sometimes Aris- totle in the same respectful manner and without making any distinction re- garding their philosophical ability and authority. Particularly, throughout the Enneads, Plotinus refers by name four times to Heraclitus, five times to Empe- docles, twice to Parmenides and Anaxagoras, four times to Pythagoras and the early Pythagorean School and once to Pherecydes. In addition, there are a large number of indirect allusions to other important Presocratics such as Anaximander, Philolaus, and the early Atomists. These direct and indirect references show the Presocratics appearing in different areas of Plotinus’ philosophy. Plotinus returns to Presocratic accounts in his discussions of (1) the One and the unity of Being; (2) the structure of the living Intellect and the predicates of Being; (3) the nature of eternity and time; and (4) the life of the ensouled bodies and the formation of the material world. 1 2 Introduction Within this framework, Plotinus’ One, the First Hypostasis of Being, is to some extent foreshadowed by the concept of the Presocratic first principle found in Heraclitus’ One, Empedocles’ Philia, the Pythagorean Monad and Anaxagoras’ Mind. Plotinus’ self-thinking Intellect, the Second Hypostasis of Being, reflects the predicates of Parmenides’ Being, the fundamental ontological connection between thinking and being and Anaxagoras’ self-inclusiveness principle. The non-durational nature of eternity is strongly influenced by Parmenides’ time- lessness of Being and the association of eternity with the life of Intellect may be traced back to Heraclitus’ concept of ever-living fire and Empedocles’ eternal life. With regard to the Soul, the Third Hypostasis of Being, the descent of liv- ing bodies reflects Heraclitus’ cosmic alterations of soul and Empedocles’ cy- cles of the daimo¯n. Furthermore, Presocratic self-knowledge is for Plotinus the goal of the Soul’s ascent to the One, and the unity of Plotinus’ universe echoes the unity of the Presocratic cosmos. Finally, Plotinus interacts with Presocratic concepts of matter found in Anaximander’s apeiron, Empedocles’ theory of the four roots, Anaxagoras’ primordial mixture and early Atomic materialism. In the detailed analysis of these topics, the aim of this monograph is threefold: (1) to reinstate the significance of the Presocratic tradition for Ploti- nus; (2) to offer a comparative philosophical study between fundamental Preso- cratic and Plotinian concepts; and (3) to suggest possible new references to Presocratic fragments within the Enneads, beyond those mentioned in modern studies and commentaries. In pursuit of this aim, the thesis will focus mainly on the following Enneads, since they include the most striking references to the Presocratics: II.1 [40] On Heaven; II.4 [12] On Matter; III.7 [45] On Eternity and Time; IV.8 [6] On the Descent of the Soul into the Bodies; V.1 [10] On the Three Primary Hypostases; and VI.6 [34] On Numbers. A study of these trea- tises forms the kernel of the book, although the research extends to relevant passages throughout the Enneads. The main Presocratics involved are Heracli- tus, Parmenides, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, the early Pythagoreans, and the early Atomists, since Plotinus refers directly to them and their theories are fun- damental to his thought. The study will not, however, be limited to these Preso- cratics but aims to present the wider Presocratic tradition in the Enneads. Within this framework and after an introductory chapter on the origins of Plotinus’ philosophy, the four main sections of the book, showing the sig- nificance of Presocratic tradition in Plotinus’ philosophy, follow the main on- tological levels of Plotinus’ system of the Three Hypostases: One and Unity in chapter 2, Intellect and Being in chapter 3, Eternity and Time in chapter 4, and Matter and Soul in chapter 5.