279

INSTANCE OF ARABIAN FORGERY.

ON N perusing Mr. Thomas TAYLOR's Dissertation on the Philosophy of Aristotle, which accompanies his translation of Aristotle's works, the following instance of Arabian forgery extracted from that work appearing to me to be no less novel than singular, I thought it deserved a place in your Journal, particularly as this Dissertation is but in the hands of a few, and you will therefore oblige many of your readers by inserting it, besides

AMICUS.

Having therefore shown by extracts from the works of Albertus Magnus, as a specimen, instar omnium, to what a great extent the writings of the Greek philosophers, and particularly those of Aristotle, were perverted by the schoolmen, in consequence of their becoming acquainted with them through the medium of translations from the Arabic, I shall conclude my collection of instances of Arabian fraud, with those which I have discovered in the 14 books ascribed to Aristotle, De Secretiore Parte Divina Sapientiæ secundum Ægyptios, or On the more secret part of divine wisdom according to the Egyptians. This work is said to have been found at Damascus, and to have been translated from Greek into Arabic, and from Arabic into Latin, in the last of which languages it is extant in the editions of Aristotle's works by Casaubon and Du Vall. Fabricius justly conjectures that this work is supposititious; but neither he nor any other critic has demonstrated that it is so. From the following extracts, however, it will appear that it is in a great measure compiled from the works of Plotinus, though what is extracted from the writings of that philosopher is barbarized as is usual with the Arabians; for this work, instead of being a translation first from Greek into Arabic, was doubtless originally an Arabian forgery. A few of these extracts both from Plotinus and the Arabian treatise, I shall translate for the sake of the English reader, and refer the learned reader to other passages of the languages in which they are extant.

In the first place then the following passage from cap. iv. lib. 1. appears to have been barbarized from the beginning of the 8th book of the 4th Ennead of Plotinus. "Ego sæpius animo contemplans relicto corpore visus sum perfrui summo bono cum VO luptate incredibili. Quare hæsi quodammodo attonitus, agnoscens me esse partem quandam superioris mundi, atque adeptum sentiens vitæ immortalitatem, sub luce maxima: quæ neque oratione exprimi potest, neque auribus percipi, neque cogitatione comprehendi. Tandem vero hac contemplatione defessus, intellectus re

:

cidit in phantasiam, tumque, illa luce deficiente, factus sum tristior, Rursus relicto corpore, eo reversus deprehendi animum luce abundantem, huncque tum in corpus influentem, tum supra hoc excitatum. Hæc igitur Plato." The words of Plotinus are as follow πολλακις εγειρομενος εις εμαυτόν εκ του σώματος, και γινόμενος των μεν άλλων εξω, εμαυτου δε είσω, θαυμαστον ηλίκον όρων καλλος, και της κρειττονος μοιρας πιστευσας τοτε μαλιστα είναι ζωήν τε αρίστην ενεργήσας, και τῳ θείῳ εις ταυτον γεγενημένος και εν αυτῷ ιδρυθεις εις ενεργειαν ελθων εκείνην, υπερ παν τε αλλο νοητον εμαυτον ιδρύσας, μετα ταυτην την εν τῷ θείῳ στασιν, εις λογισμόν εκ νου καταβας, απορω πως ποτε και νυν καταβαινω, και οπως ποτε μοι ενδον η ψυχη γεγενηται του σώματος, τουτο ουσα οιον εφανη καθ' εαυτην, καιπερ ούσα εν σωματι. i. e. “ Frequently when excited from body to myself, and becoming external to other things, but within or converted to myself, I perceive a most admirable beauty, and believe myself to be a partaker of a more excellent allotment; for then especially I energize according to the best life, and becoming the same with divinity, and being firmly fixed in it, I arrive at an energy by which I establish myself above every other intelligible. But after this establishment in divinity, descending from intellect into the discursive energy of reason, I am dubious how formerly and now I descended, and how my soul once became situated within the body, being such [i. e. so pure] as it appears to be in itself, though connected with body." The intelligent reader need not, I trust, be told that the former of these extracts is derived from the latter, nor how much the beautiful passage of Plotinus is deformed and barbarized by the Arabian plagiary.

Again, in the following extract, the Arabian author uses frequently the very words of Plotinus. The extract is from the latter part of the 5th chapter of the first book. "Plato igitur olim plura animo attribuit quæ nos ex ejus viva voce excepimus: sed ea non sunt ab illo literarum monumentis mandata: ex quibus alioqui facile lector hujus mentem deprehendisset. Ejusmodi autem attributa diversa sunt. Quoniam intellectus cum sensu conjungitur, nec in omnibus hunc despicit, sed conjunctionem cum corpore: a quo ligatus peneque extinctus detinetur. Animus enim in hoc, ut in loco est, sicut etiam Anticles arbitratur: sed amplius hoc addit, corpus illius esse carcerem. Ex quo etiam a Platone dic

tum est animum corpore solutum ascendere atque illustrari: eundem descendentem obscurari, sed postea purgatum rursum ascendere. Hujus autem descensus causæ sunt permultæ. Quarum

Here the memory of the Arabian plagiary failed him; for it is well known to be a dogma universally received by the Platonists that the soul is not in the body as in place. For being incorporeal it is impossible that it should be contained locally in the body.

prima in peccato est, ut scilicet pro eo pœnas det, nonnihilque promereatur, atque dei leges subeat. Alii ob aliam causam descendunt, quam ille non commemorat. Sed colligens animi descensum execratur: additque, quoniam mundus hic substantiæ suæ præstantiam quandam habet et excellentiam, in eo animum extare oportere, devincto intellectu, quemadmodum in superiore mundo idem sempiternus habetur. Non enim rationi consentaneum ut mundus hic, latissime patens et perfecte couformatus, intellectus sit expers. Neque vero hujus particeps esse potuit, nisi in eodem animus antecederet. Quare summus opifex animum cum illo conjunxit, et cum ea animi parte, cujus est ratio, species permiscuit. Siquidem animi partes sine quadam dissensione inter se minime esse videntur. De quibus in plantis paucæ sunt, in belluis plures, in homine plurimæ. Ut iste mundus suam perfectionem habeat, quanquam ei, quæ in superiore est, minime parem. Quia ab illo conformatus est, omnisque interitus originem continet. Quare mundo in sensum cadenti inesse oportet ea etiam animalium genera, quæ intelligibili insunt.”

The passage of Plotinus, from which the Arabian plagiary has evidently taken all this, is the following, and forms the latter part of the above cited Chap. 1. Book 8th of the 4th Ennead, On the descent of the soul into bodies. λείπεται δε ημιν ο θενός πλατων, ως πολλα τε και καλα περι ψυχης ειπε. περί τε αφίξεως αυτής πολλαχή ειρηκεν εν τοις αυτού λόγοις, ώστε ελπίδα ημιν είναι λαβείν πως αυτός σαφες τι. τι ουν λεγει ο φιλόσοφος αυτός, ου τω τον λεγω πανταχή φαίνεται, ινα αν τις εκ ραδίας το του ανδρος βούλημα είναι. αλλα το αυτ θητον παν πανταχου ατίμασας, και την προς το σώμα κοινωνίας της ψυχής μεμψαμενος, εν δεσμῳ τε ειναι, και τελαξίας εν αυτή την ψυχή λέγει, και τον εν απορρητοις λεγόμενον λογον μέγαν είναι, ως εν φρουρα, την Αργα χην φησιν ειναι. και το σπήλαιον απο ωσπερ Εμπενει το αντίο, τοδε το παν δοκῳ μοι λεγουσιν, όπου γε λύσιν των λες μου και απλά και του σπηλαίου τῇ ψυχῇ φησιν είναι, την προς το νήτων πύρινων, οι τα φαιδρῳ πτερορρυησιν, αιτίαν της εντωνία αφίξεις και περνούν απ ανελθουσαν παλιν φέρουσι τηλε. και κρίσεις θα καταπέμπονται αλλα ενταυθα, και κληροι, και τυχαι, και ανάγκας. Και εν τοις απατη μαμα ψάμενος την της ψυχής αφιξιν προς σώμα. εν τιμηνη περι τώρα της κας μου τος λεγων, τον τε κόσμον επαινεί, και θεον λέγει είναι εννόμονα, την τε ψυχην παρα αγαθου του δημιουργού προς το είναι τέλος το παν είναι δεδοσθαι. επειδη εννούν μεν αυτό είναι είναι, αντί τα ψυχής, σας είναι τι είναι τουτο γενεσθαι. ητε ουν ψυχή η του παντός τούτον χαρά τις αντι παρα του θεου επέμφθη, ητι εκαστου ημων, προς το τέλος αυτό είναι εκείνη εδει οσον εν νοητῳ κόσμο, τα αυτά τωνα γεσ ζωνων, και εν τη ανόνητη υπάρχειν. "The divine Plato remains, who has said many and beautiful things about the soul, and has spoken in many parts of his works about its descent, so that we may hope to recone from

i. e.

cidit in phantasiam, tumque, illa luce deficiente, factus sum tristior, Rursus relicto corpore, eo reversus deprehendi animum luce abundantem, huncque tum in corpus influentem, tum supra hoc excitatum. Hæc igitur Plato." The words of Plotinus are as follow: πολλακις εγειρομενος εις εμαυτόν εκ του σώματος, και γινομενος των μεν άλλων εξω, εμαυτου δε είσω, θαυμαστον ηλίκον όρων καλλος, και της κρειτο τονος μοιρας πιστευσας τοτε μαλιστα είναι ζωήν τε άριστην ενεργήσας, και τῳ θείῳ εις ταυτον γεγενημένος και εν αυτῷ ιδρυθείς εις ενεργειαν ελθων εκείνην, υπερ παν τε άλλο νοητον εμαυτον ιδρύσας, μετα ταυτην την εν τῳ θείῳ στασιν, εις λογισμόν εκ νου καταβας, απορω πως ποτε και νυν καταβαινω, και οπως ποτε μοι ενδον η ψυχη γεγενηται του σώματος, τουτο ουσα οιον εφανη καθ' εαυτην, καιπερ ούσα εν σωματι. i. e. “ Frequently when excited from body to myself, and becoming external to other things, but within or converted to myself, I perceive a most admirable beauty, and believe myself to be a partaker of a more excellent allotment; for then especially I energize according to the best life, and becoming the same with divinity, and being firmly fixed in it, I arrive at an energy by which I establish myself above every other intelligible. But after this establishment in divinity, descending from intellect into the discursive energy of reason, am dubious how formerly and now I descended, and how my soul once became situated within the body, being such [i. e. so pure] as it appears to be in itself, though connected with body." The intelligent reader need not, I trust, be told that the former of these extracts is derived from the latter, nor how much the beautiful passage of Plotinus is deformed and barbarized by the Arabian plagiary.

Again, in the following extract, the Arabian author uses frequently the very words of Plotinus. The extract is from the latter part of the 5th chapter of the first book. "Plato igitur olim plura animo attribuit quæ nos ex ejus viva voce excepimus: sed ea non sunt ab illo literarum monumentis mandata: ex quibus alioqui facile lector hujus mentem deprehendisset. Ejusmodi autem attributa diversa sunt. Quoniam intellectus cum sensu conjungitur, nec in omnibus hunc despicit, sed conjunctionem cum corpore: a quo ligatus peneque extinctus detinetur. Animus enim in hoc, ut in loco est, sicut etiam Anticles arbitratur: sed amplius hoc addit, corpus illius esse carcerem. Ex quo etiam a Platone dictum est animum corpore solutum ascendere atque illustrari: eundem descendentem obscurari, sed postea purgatum rursum ascendere. Hujus autem descensus causæ sunt permultæ. Quarum

Here the memory of the Arabian plagiary failed him; for it is well known to be a dogma universally received by the Platonists that the soul is not in the body as in place. For being incorporeal it is impossible that it should be contained locally in the body.

prima in peccato est, ut scilicet pro eo pœnas det, nonnibilque promereatur, atque dei leges subeat. Alii ob aliam causam descendunt, quam ille non commemorat. Sed colligens animi descensum execratur: additque, quoniam mundus hic substantiæ suæ præstantiam quandam habet et excellentiam, in eo animum extare oportere, devincto intellectu, quemadmodum in superiore mundo idem sempiternus habetur. Non enim rationi consentaneum ut mundus hic, latissime patens et perfecte couformatus, intellectus sit expers. Neque vero hujus particeps esse potuit, nisi in eodem animus antecederet. Quare summus opifex animum cum illo conjunxit, et cum ea animi parte, cujus est ratio, species permiscuit. Siquidem animi partes sine quadam dissensione inter se minime esse videntur. De quibus in plantis paucæ sunt, in belluis plures, in homine plurimæ. Ut iste mundus suam perfectionem habeat, quanquam ei, quæ in superiore est, minime parem. Quia ab illo conformatus est, omnisque interitus originem continet. Quare mundo in sensum cadenti inesse oportet ea etiam animalium genera, quæ intelligibili insunt.”

The passage of Plotinus, from which the Arabian plagiary has evidently taken all this, is the following, and forms the latter part of the above cited Chap. 1. Book 8th of the 4th Ennead, On the descent of the soul into bodies. λείπεται δε ημιν ο θείος πλατων, ος πολλά τε και καλα περι ψυχης ειπε. περι τε αφίξεως αυτής πολλαχη ειρηκεν εν τοις αυτού λόγοις, ώστε ελπιδα ημιν ειναι λαβειν παρ' αυτου σαφές τι. τι ουν λεγει ο φιλοσοφος αυτός; ου ταυτον λεγων πανταχη φαίνεται, ινα αν τις εκ ραδιας το του ανδρος βουλημα ειδεν. αλλα το αισθητον παν πανταχου ατίμασας, και την προς το σωμα κοινωνίαν της ψυχης μεμψάμενος, εν δεσμῳ τε ειναι, και τεθάφθαι εν αυτῷ την ψυχην λέγει, και τον εν απορρητοις λεγομενον λογον μέγαν ειναι, ος εν φρουρα την ψυ χην φησιν ειναι. και το σπηλαιον αυτῳ ωσπερ Εμπεδοκλει το άντρον, τοδε το παν δοκῳ μοι λεγουσιν, όπου γε λυσιν των δεσμων και ανοδον εκ του σπηλαίου τῇ ψυχῇ φησιν είναι, την προς το νοητον πορείαν. εν δε φαιδρῳ πτερορρυησιν, αιτίαν της ενταυθα αφίξεως· και περιοδοι αυτην ανελθουσαν παλιν φερουσι τηδε. και κρισεις δε καταπεμπουσιν ενταυθα, και κληροι, και τυχαι, και αναγκαι. και εν τούτοις απασι μεμ ψάμενος την της ψυχης αφιξιν προς σωμα. εν τιμαίῳ περι τουδε του παντος λεγων, τον τε κοσμον επαινει, και θεον λεγει είναι ευδαιμονα. την τε ψυχην παρα αγαθου του δημιουργου προς το εννουν τοδε το παν είναι δεδοσθαι. επειδη εννουν μεν αυτο εδει ειναι, ανευ δε ψυχης, ουχ οιον τε είναι τουτο γενεσθαι. ητε ουν ψυχη η του παντος τουτου χαριν εις αυτό παρα του θέου επεμφθη. ητι εκαστου ημων, προς το τελεον αυτο ειναι. επειδη εδει οσον εν νοητῷ κόσμῳ, τα αυτα ταυτα γένη ζωων, και εν τω αισθητῳ υπαρχειν. i. e. “ The divine Plato remains, who has said many and beautiful things about the soul, and has spoken in many parts of his works about its descent, so that we may hope to receive from

άλλας