Taurus, in his Commentaries on the Timæus of Plato, says: “In the
investigation, whether according to Plato the world is unbegotten,
philosophers differ in their opinions. For Aristotle asserts that
Timæus says the world was generated[31]. And Theophrastus also, in his
treatise On Physical Opinions, says that, according to Plato, the world
was generated, and therefore writes in opposition to him. At the same
time, however, he asserts that Timæus perhaps supposed the world to be
generated, for the sake of perspicuity. Certain other persons also infer,
that, according to Plato, the world was generated. But, again, others
contend that Plato believed the world to be unbegotten. Since, however,
those who assert that the world was generated, cite many other words
of Plato, and likewise the passage in which Plato[32] says, ‘the world
was generated, for it is visible and tangible;’ this being the case, it
is requisite to direct our attention to the different ways in which a
thing is said to be generated, and thus we shall know that Plato asserts
the world to be generated, not according to the signification in which
we affirm this of things which derive their subsistence from a certain
temporal beginning. For this it is which deceives the multitude, when
they conceive the word _generated_ to imply a temporal origin. A thing,
therefore, is said to be generated, which never indeed had a beginning
in time, but yet is in the same genus with generated natures. Thus we
call a thing visible, which is not seen, nor has been seen, nor will be
seen, but yet is in the same genus with things of a visible nature. And
this will take place with a body which may exist about the centre of the
earth. That also is said to be generated, which, in mental conception,
subsists as a composite, though it never has been a composite. Thus, in
music, the middle chord is said to be composed of the lowest and highest
chord. For though it is not thus composed, yet there is perceived in it
the power of the one with reference to the other. The like also takes
place in flowers and animals. In the world, therefore, composition and
mixture are perceived; according to which, we are able to withdraw
and separate qualities from it, and resolve it into a first subject.
The world also is said to be generated, because it always subsists in
becoming to be, like Proteus changing into all-various forms; hence,
with respect to the world, the earth, and the natures, as far as to the
moon, are continually changed into each other. But the natures above the
moon are as to their subject nearly the same, sustaining only a small
mutation. They change, however, according to figure; just as a dancer
being one and the same according to subject, is changed into various
forms by a certain gesture and motion of the hands. The celestial bodies,
therefore, are thus changed, and different habitudes of them take place,
between the motions of the planets with reference to the fixed stars, and
of the fixed stars with respect to the planets.
“The world, likewise, may be said to be generated, because it derives
its existence from something different from itself, viz. from God, by
whom it is adorned. Thus, also, with those who directly admit that the
world is perpetual, the moon possesses a generated light from the sun,
though there never was a time when the former was not illuminated by
the latter. If, therefore, some one asserts that the world is generated
according to Plato, conformably to these significations of the word, what
he says may be admitted. But so far as the term ‘generated’ signifies a
certain time, and that the world, formerly not existing, was afterwards
generated, this signification, when applied to the world, must by no
means be granted. Plato himself, indeed, indicates how what he asserts
is to be understood, when he says, ‘It must be investigated, whether
the universe always was, having no principle whatever of generation,
or whether it was generated, commencing its generation from a certain
cause.’ For the words, ‘no principle whatever,’ and ‘from a certain
cause,’ manifest he does not intend that a temporal principle should
be assumed; but that what he says, is to be understood in the same
way, as when we say that the history of the Ephori commenced in the
descendants of Hercules. Others say, that the world had a beginning from
the Demiurgus. For the Demiurgus is a principle, and so likewise is the
paradigm of the universe, and matter. But matter cannot be properly said
to be a principle. Again, Plato does not say that the world is a body,
but that it has a body; indicating by this, that so far as it possesses a
corporeal nature, the very being of which consists in _becoming to be_,
it may be said to be generated.”
Again, Taurus, in the same Commentaries on the Timæus, having cited the
following passage from that dialogue, viz. “We who are about to speak
concerning the universe, whether it is generated, or without generation,”
observes: “Plato says this, though the world is unbegotten. And the poet,
‘Though in their race posterior found,’
Plato, however, for the sake of discipline, speaks of the world which
is unbegotten, as if it was generated.” Shortly after this, Taurus
says, “What, therefore, are the causes through which the world being
unbegotten, is supposed to be generated?” Both these inquiries[33],
indeed, deserve to be philosophically investigated. For one of them
excites to piety, but the other is assumed for the sake of elucidation.
For Plato, knowing that the multitude apprehend that alone to be a cause
which has a precedency in time, and not conceiving it to be possible for
anything otherwise to be a cause, and also inferring, that, from this
opinion, they might be led to disbelieve in the existence of Providence;
wishing likewise to inculcate this dogma, that the world is governed by
Providence, he tacitly manifests it to those who are abundantly able to
understand that the world is unbegotten according to time; but to those
who are not able to understand this, he indicates that it is generated.
He is also anxious that they may believe this, in order that at the
same time they may be persuaded in the existence of Providence. But the
second cause which induced Plato thus to write, is this,—that assertions
are then more clear, when we meet with them as with things which
actually take place. Thus geometricians compose diagrams as if they were
generated, though they are not composites. And Euclid defines a circle,
as being more simple, to be a plane figure, comprehended under one line,
to which all lines falling from one point within the figure are equal
to each other. But wishing to explain a sphere, he defines it, as if it
was among the number of things generated, to be formed by the revolution
of a semicircle about the diameter, until it returns to the same point
from which it began to be moved. If, however, he had intended to explain
the sphere which already existed, he would have defined it to be a solid
figure, comprehended under one superficies, to which all right lines
falling from one point within the figure, are equal to each other. But
it was usual with Plato, for the sake of discipline, to unfold things
which are without generation[34], as if they were generated. Thus, in
the Republic, he introduces the city as being made, in order that in the
formation of it, the generation of justice might become more manifest.
When, however, Theophrastus says, that perhaps Plato speaks of the world
as generated for the sake of elucidation, just as we consider geometrical
diagrams to be generated, perhaps generation does not subsist similarly
in diagrams. Aristotle also asserts the same thing; for he says, that
in diagrams it is not proper in the beginning to suppose contraries,
but this is to be admitted in the generation of the world; just as if
some one should suppose motion and rest, order and disorder. Neither,
therefore, do all things require invariable paradigms; but the examples
show that it is not more obvious to assert that the world is generated,
than that it is unbegotten. But how is it possible to suppose contraries
in diagrams? For can it be supposed that a triangle is at one and the
same time stationary and moved? Hence, the world is, according to itself,
unbegotten. Nor should any one fatigue himself in endeavouring to prove
from the Atlanticus and Politicus of Plato, that the world is generated.
For we have shown after what manner the world is unbegotten, and how it
is said by Plato to be generated. So far, therefore, as it is supposed
to be generated, it will be incorruptible through the will of God;
but so far as it is unbegotten, it will be incorruptible from its own
nature. And this Plato knew. For everything else that is unbegotten, is
incorruptible.”