of the Pythagorean Also Xenophanes the Colophonian the Founder of the Eleatick Sect another branch of the Pythagorean Sect held the Sun consists of a collection of little Fires c. Plato also held the Heavens to be Fire as August lib. 8. c. 11. which seemes most consonant to Scripture story for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies both Light and Fire as also the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Fire as well as Light so Mark. 14.54 of which more in Plato's Philosophie where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Stoicks also made Fire the chief Principle of all things § 11. Pythagoras and his followers were much versed in Medicine or active Physick So Iamblichus de vita Pythagorae cap. 20. saies That amongst the Sciences which the Pythagoreans were versed in Medicine was one of the chief then he addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The chiefest part of their Medicine consisted in an exact Regiment or right order of Diet. Where Iamblichus subjoynes many other particulars of the Pythagorean Medicine So Cornelius Celsus in Praefat. amongst the famous Professors of Medicine reckons up Pythagoras for one who flourished under Cyrus Cambyses and Darius as Laertius Solinus Eusebius and Vossiuâ— That Pythagoras was very severe in his Prescripts or Rules of Dyet both to himself and his Followers we have already shewn how that he Prescribed to himself and his Followers Abstinence from all Meats that might too much heate the bloud as from Flesh and Wine also from such meats as did load the stomack and were not easily digested likewise from such as were obstructive and bred ill humours as Beanes c. Lastly from all such meats as might bring a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an ill habitude of bodie or mind For the great end and scope of all the Pythagorean Prescripts and Abstinencies was to preserve an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a good Healthfull Complexion of Bodie and cleannes of Mind As for the original of Pythagoras's Medicinal skill Apuleius tels us That he received it from the Chaldeans i. e. as I concieve the Jews who in Pythagoras's time lived amongst and were subject to the Chaldeans and therefore might well passe under their name as before Neither do we find any considerable mention of the Chaldeans their skill in Medicine but that the Jews were excellently versed therein we have sufficient proof both from what is mentioned of Solomon 1. Kings 4.3 4. touching his skill in Plants and Animals c. Also by Eusebius who saies he was excellently skilled in Medicine and curing of Diseases c. as book 1. cap. 1. par 11. Likewise from what Cunaeus de repub Jud. relates of the Jewish Physicians that belonged to the Temple for curing the sick Priests and Levites But amongst the Jews none more famous for skill in Medicine than the Essenes who had a particular inclination and devotion to this Studie whom the Pythagoreans affected an imitation of in this as in other parts of their Discipline as before § 12. As Pythagoras was well skilled in Physicks or Natural Sciences both Contemplative and Active so was he likewise no lesse versed in Moral Philosophie which according to the Third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Relation of men· 1. To Themselves or 2. To their Families or 3. To the Cities or Common-wealths they live in admits of a Three-fold Distribution 1. Into Ethicks 2. Into Oeconomicks 3. Into Politicks The Pythagoreans were skill'd in all these 1. As for that part of Moral Philosophie the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ethicks which concerns the right government of man's self Pythagoras and his Adherents were much in the Studie and Practice thereof Yea indeed Pythagoras esteemed all Philosophie but Vain which did not some way conduce to the mâ—liorating or bettering of a man's self Thus Stobaeus Serm. 80. brings in Pythagoras thus Philosophizing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That discourse of a Philosopher is Vain which cures not some passion of a man For look as that Medicine is uselesse which frees not the bodie from diseases so likewise Philosophie which drives not away evil from the soul The Learned divide Ethicks into 3 parts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dogmatick 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exhortative or Preceptive 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Characteristical Pythagoras and his Disciples were versed in each of these Concerning the Dogmatick part of Ethicks the Pythagoreans laid down many wholesome Principles relating to the Object Subject and End c. of Moral Philosophie viz· That the Souls happines lay only in God its chiefest Good That the proper Subject of Ethicks was the Humane Soul as capable of the chiefest Good That its chief End was to cure the Soul of its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it s sick diseased passions and to bring it to an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or good healthie complexion which consisted in vittuous Dispositions and Acts. These Dogmes albeit they were not Formally and Methodically treated of according to that accurate Method of Definition Division c. to which Aristotle reduced them yet were they all seminally and virtually comprised in the Pythagorean Philosophie And particularly Pythagoras expresly asserted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That virtue consisted in Harmonie yea that all health of bodie and minde yea all good yea God himself and so all things else consisted in Harmonie as Diogenes Laertius informs us Pythagoras farther taught his Scholars 3 Mediums by which they might become Masters of Philosophie and better themselves 1. By conversation with the Gods 2. By Well doing for that is proper to God and therein they were imitators of God 3. By Death whence he affirmed that the most considerable of all things is to instruct the Soul aright touching Good and Evil and that men have perfect felicitie in having a good Soul as Iamblichus and Stanly out of him of Pythagoras's Philosophie part 3. chap. 1. fol. 83. And as the Pythagoreans held many useful Dogmes of Moralitie so were they not lesse versed in the Hortative and Preceptive part of Ethicks as it appears by the model of their Discipline before mentioned as also from that great Apothegme of Pythagoras which he frequently inculcated on his Disciples as the summe of his Philosophie viz. That in all things they should endeavour to avoid excesse c. of which hereafter § 13. But the chief part of the Pythagorean Ethicks was Characteristical for Pythagoras taught moralitie mostly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Ethick Characters i. e. Lively descriptions of Virtues and Vices by Symbols Fables Emblems Images or Signes and Effects answerable to Aesops-Fables Philostratus's Fables and also the Scriptural Types and Parables Pythagoras also exhorted his Scholars to Virtue under that Symbolick letter Y as Lactant. l. 6. c. 3. which was thence called Pythagoras's Letter not that he was the first Inventor of it
Plato saies he teacheth us that the Bodies of the Pious should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be raised again to life And the Comment or Invention of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Transmigration of Souls was but a corrupt derivation from this Truth of the Resurrection That the Jews had the like perswasion touching the Transmigration of Souls appears from that of Herod who thought that John Baptist's Soul revived in Christ That the Pharisees held this Opinion is affirmed by Josephus l. 18. Antiq. c. 2. and 't is possible the more ancient Jews held the same and Pythagoras from them though Vossius denies it That Pythagoras's and Plato's Metempsychosis or Transmigration of the humane Soul after death was by them taken up to signifie the Souls first infusion into and thence by death separation from and at the Resurrection re-union with the Bodie is asserted by John Reuchlin Art Cabal l. 2. This is saies he the meaning of Pythagoras concerning his Metempsychosis or Transmigration of Souls after death and their descension into life Others thought the Soul educed out of Matter Pythagoras thought it infused by God into the Bodie and therefore before it not in time but in dignitie and puritie This infusion he termed the descent of the Soul c. or if he meant historically 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Soul separate from the Bodie may by the power of God be brought the same into the same bodie whence he acknowledgeth God only to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the animation of all things God infuseth the soul into every man and being infused taketh it away and being taken away restoreth it when and as oft as he pleaseth Thus he some understand this Pythagorean Metempsychosis Symbolically with relation to the several passions dispositions and morals of men as hereafter § 14. Lastly To give a general Idea of Pythagoras's Theologie we must know that it was Mystical much the same with that of Pherecydes his Master as also with that of Orpheus from whom he borrowed much of it who all affected a mystical mode of Theologizing partly from their own Ignorance being unacquainted with the true import or meaning of those Jewish Traditions which were very imperfectly delivered to them and partly from an affected Singularitie they being unwilling that any should be acquainted with their Mysteries but such as were of their own Tribe and Sect. This is the meaning of many of Pythagoras's Symbols whereby he strictly enjoyned his Disciples not to communicate his Mysteries to Strangers and those without as before from Grot. Matth. 7.6 c. That Pythagoras and his Adherents were generally sensible of their great Ignorance of Divine Mysteries appears by several of his Symbols as that Look not in a Glasse by Candle-light i. e. saies Iamblichuâ— Philosophize pursuing not the fantasies of sense which gives a kind of light to comprehensions like a Candle neither natural nor true c. This answers to Prov. 13.9 Thence another of his Symbols runs thus Discourse not of Pythagorean things without light i. e. saies Iamblichuâ— because it is impossible to understand Pythagorean Doctrines without light But that which was the foundation of all the Pythagorean mystical Theologie and a great argument of their sense of Ignorance in Divine things was their credulous inquisitive humor which inclined them to receive ev'ry Tradition though never so broken or corrupt touching Divine things This is fully expressed by that great Symbol of Pythagoras viz. Concerning the Gods dis-believe nothing wonderful nor yet concerning Divine things This saies Iamblichus declareth the superlative Excellence of God's instructing us and puts us in mind that we ought not to estimate the Divine power by our own Judgement which Comment of Iamblichus if applyed to Divine Revelation is excellent and excellently useful the same with what the Scripture universally teacheth us viz. that concerning God and Divine things we should dis-believe nothing though never so wonderful if we have a Divine word for it But the Pythagoreans stretched this excellent Scriptural Rule beyond the line of Divine Revelation even to the belief of every corrupt Oriental Tradition as hereafter § 15. We should now proceed to the black and Satanick part of Pythagoras's Metaphysicks or Supernatural Philosophie namely his Magick or Art of Divination But this we shall refer to Chap. 10. Touching the Vanitie or corruptions of the Pythagorean Philosophie Only in general that this black Art of Divination wherein the Pythagoreans were greatly versed had its original from Satanick imitation of God's sacred Oracles and the various ways of his revealing himself in the Jewish Church I think will be very evident when the parallel is drawn betwixt the one and the other For as God revealed his Oracles by Dreams and Visious so the Devil 's were frequently delivered in the same manner Of which more in its place CHAP. IX Of Pythagoras's Symbols and their Jewish Original c. Pythagoras's Symbols from the Jews 1. Give thy right hand to none but Pythagoreans as Gal. 2.9 Abstain from the dead Matth. 8.22 Set down Salt Lev. 2.13 Ethick Symbols Jewish Pythagoras's Metempsychosis Symbolical from Dan. 4.32 33. Pythagorean Abstinences from Jewish Symbols Pythagorean Numbers Symbolical Pythagoras's Symbols of Divine Worship of Jewish extract particularly that Worship bare-foot from Exod. 3.5 Eccles 5.1 Of Pythagoras's Works that he left nothing in Writing The Pythagorean Sect their ruines Pythagoras's Followers and their Writings Pythagorizing Philosophers â—lato c. The pride of the Pythagoreans and all other Sects §. 1 HAving finished our Discourse touching the matter of the Pythagorean Philosophie we now proceed to its Forme or Mode together with its Traduction from the Jewish Church Porphyrie in the Life of Pythagoras informes us that he used a two-fold Forme or manner of Philosophizing the one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was more open and easie the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was mystick and obscure The choicest parts of Pythagoras's Philosophie especially his Theologie was wrapped up and expressed in a Symbolick Forme or Mode Thus Iamblichus in the Life of Pythagoras l. 1. c. 29. Pythagoras saies he used by short sentences to express various significations to his Disciples after a Symbolick Mode as Apollo by short enigmatick Oracles vaticinated many abstruse things and Nature by little seeds exhibits difficult effects the same Iamblichus lib. 1. cap. 5. Thus also Clemens Alexandrinus 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 attributes to Pythagoras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Symbolick Mode of teaching So Justin Martyr in his cohortation to the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pythagoras the son of Mnesarchus who delivered the Dogmes of his Philosophie Mystically by Symbols as the Historiographers of his Life manifest § 2. That Pythagoras traduced this his Symbolick Forme or Mode of Philosophizing originally from the Scriptures or Jewish Church is not without good grounds affirmed by the Learned and will farther appear
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 conservative and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 curative As for Prophylactick or conservative Medicine we have many excellent Praescripts and Rules given us by Plato Hippocrates and others for the right management and improvement thereof Plato informs us that an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a good habitude and Crasis of bodie is extreamly advantagious for the due motions and exercises both of body and soul So in his Timaeus fol. 88. he tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is one preservation to both for neither is the soul moved without the body nor yet the bodie without the soul So again in his Timaeus fol. 103. Plato assures us That the beginnings of all evils are from inordinate Pleasures Griefs Desires and Fears which are kindled from the ill habitude and temperature of the bodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the ill Crases of the bodie produce these c. but to descend to particulars 1. One Rule given us for the conservation of health is to consider well and diligently to avoid the causes of diseases Plato in his Timaeus fol. 102. tells us what are the principal causes of all diseases First saies he The primarie and principal cause of all diseases is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an assymmetrie or disproportion of the first qualities namely if they are either redundant or defective This others term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 2. Hence follows another cause of diseases which Plato calls The mutations or alterations of the blood by reason of some corruption or preternatural fermentation for hence saies he springs bile and pituite or flegme as all other sick humours 3. The last cause of diseases he here mentions is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Ataxie or disorder of humours namely when choler or bile flegme or melancholie admit any extravasasion or flowing forth from their proper seats into any other parts of the body where fixing their seat they cause a solution and dissolution To these causes of diseases mentioned by Plato we may add others as 4. That of Hippocrates Aphorism 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all excess is destructive to nature This regards all excesses in repletions or evacuations sleep or watchings c. 5. Sudden mutations are apt to produce diseases This is imâ—lyed in that Canon of Hippocrates Aphoris 51. Sect. 2. Nature makes no sudden changes and every sudden change is dangerous 6. Another cause of diseases is an ill stomack or concoction accordâ—ng to that Canon an errour in the first concoction is never cured in the rest 7. Whence also follows another pregnant cause of diseases namely cruditie according to that great Aphorisme Cruditie is the Mother of all diseases For indeed almost all diseases under which men labour ordinarily spring from repletion and indigestion when more food is taken in than nature requires or the stomack can digest Yea Physitians say That a Plethora or full estate of bodie even though it be without impurity of blood is dangerous as to health because nature if weak cannot weild it But they make cruditie the seminarie of all diseases For say they health consists in two things 1. In the due proportion of the humours as well in quantitie as qualitie 2. In a certain spongious habitude of the whole body free from all obstructions that so the spirits and blood may have a free circulation throughout all parts Now cruditie obstructs both of these 8. Hence follows Obstruction which is reputed another seminal parent or cause of Diseases especially if the obstruction be seated in any principal part as the head heart liver spleen whence flow Convulsions Apoplexies Epilepsies if the obstruction be in the head Jandise if in the liver c. 9. Catarrhes also are judged another fountain of diseases c. 10. A dislocation or solution of parts tends much to the impairment and affliction of the whole according to that Physical Canon all grief ariseth from the solution of the Continuum 11. Lastly the weakness of any part tendeth greatly to the decay of the whole for as Physicians observe the stronger parts thrust their superfluities on the weaker Thus much for the causes of Diseases § 17. A second great Prophylactick Canon for the conservation of health is this To maintain nature in her due functions exercises and operations This is laid down by Plato in his Timaeus fol. 90. where he tells us that Medicine chiefly consists in this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to render all their due operations This is more fully exprest by Hippocrates 6. Epid. Comm. 5. Tit. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Natures are the Physicians of diseases whence Physitians are stued the Ministers of Nature id est to assist her in the exerting her proper offices and exercises which are these 1. One great and proper exercise of Nature is a natural excretion of humours which is usually accomplished by perfective fermentation or ebullition of the blood whereby the excrementitious parts are severed and the whole masse of blood purified besides natural flâ—xes of the haemorrhoides and haemorrhages c. 2. Another great office or exercise of Nature is Perspiration insensible or sensible which requires a spongious habitude of body free from all obstructions And indeed no one can duly apprehend the sovereign influence natural perspiration has for the conservation of health as also for the expelling all noxious humours and malignant vapours That which assists nature herein is the keeping the bodie under exercises motion in the open air whereby the pores are kept open c. 3. Another office of Nature is to keep the spirits both natural vital and animal in their due vigour activity and exercises For it 's well known that the spirits are the great fabricators and opificers of whatever is transacted in the bodie Now the spirits are fed and conserved by a regular commixture of radical moisture and congenial heat for bodies frigid have but a jejune and slender spirit whereas things moderately hot are spirituous Also things grateful to the spirits do most foment and emprove them 4. Another exercise of Nature consists in the due evacuation of excrements which requires that the body be soluble and laxe not costive for costiveness of bodie breeds many diseases c. 5. Another office of Nature is to keep the bodie and all parts thereof permeable which is necessarie in order to a due circulation of the blood 6. Another office of Nature is to keep the Lungs in their due crasis and exercise whence that Canon to live well is to breath well § 18. A third Canon for the conservation of health regards the Non-naturalls as they call them namely Aliment Air Exercise c. 1. As for Aliment or food Plato as Pythagoras before him layes much stresse on a good regiment or government in diet Plato seems to make the whole of Medicine to consist in allowing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proper or due food
c. So that we may conclude that 't is not any subjective Right Reason or Light of Nature which is the measure of moral good and Evil but an objective Right reason or the Common Law of Nature which is the same with God's Law called Moral because it gives Forme and measure to all moral good So that Aristotle's Right reason which he makes the measure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the rectitude and mediocritie of Virtue must be resolved into God's moral Law which is but a new promulgation of the Law of Nature as the alone adequate Rule and measure of all moral good and Evill Thence the perfection or defect of all goodnesse or Virtue must be measured by its accesse and conformitie to or recesse and difformitie from this first moral Rule or Law for moral goodnesse being nothing else but a relation or conformitie to the Rule of moralitie it necessarily follows that every moral being is so far morally good or Evil as it conformes to or difformes from this moral Rule or Law And albeit the least declenâ—ion or aberration from this moral Law will denominate an humane act morally Evill yet there is required a perfect concurrence of all causes or an entire conformitie to this Rule to bespeak an act morally good according to that approved maxime in the Scholes founded on the light of nature and general consent Good requires all its causes but Evil springs from every defect Hence also it follows that this moral Law must necessarily be most perfect For otherwise it cannot be the first measure or Rule of moral goodnesse according to that of Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A defective measure is not a measure for what is imperfect cannot measure any thing This perfection of the natural or moral Law consisteth in two things 1. In the perfection of its End Plat. Legib. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. All Laws must tend to the best End 2. In its amplitude or Extention to all objects aâ—l Lawgiver saies Plato must regard all virtue as Psal 119.96 § 32. Having gone thorough all the causes of moral virtue which are first its subject 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a voluntarie Agent and Act. 2 it s Genus which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an habit 8. It s Forme which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mediocritie or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rectitude 4 the Rule and measure of this Forme which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Right Reason called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Common Law of Nature it is easie hence to forme a Definition of moral Virtue which Aristotle has done to our hands Arist Eth. l. 2. c. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue is an Elective habit consisting in mediocritie of things relating to us defined by reason and so as a wise man defines In which definition are these observables 1. The Genus whis is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an habit not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a power not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a passion 2. The specifick difference which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elective whereby moral habits or Virtues are distinguished from Intellectual Arts and Sciences which are also habits 3. Here is the subject matter or object of moral virtue expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what relates to us or is in our power which is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what is voluntarie 4. Here is the Forme of Virtue which consists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in mediocritie or reâ—â—itude 5. Here is the formal measure of this mediocritie expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—ight â—eason as before We find the same repeated more particularlie though not so exactly by Aristotle Eth. lib. 3. cap. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have said of Virtues that they are mediocrities and that they are habits and that they are of themselves desireable and that they are of things in our power and voluntarie and so as right reason prescribes Wherein we have all the several ingredients of Virtue enumerated We find a definition of Virtue much the same for substance given by Plato Meno 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue is an habit of the Soul by the concurrence of the natural power working that which is best according to reason and tending to the best End From these Essential Ideas of Virtue we may draw these conclusions 1. That true Virtue requires not only a good work or matter but the best End which must informe this matter as the Soul the bodie 2. Hence also it follows that all Virtues have one and the same uniforme harmonious simple Idea in that they proceed all from the same divine habits or principles and tend to the same divine End Thus Aristotle Eth. lib. 2. cap. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Good men act simplie and uniformelie but wicked men variously Whence he addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For sin is infinite but good is definite and uniforme So Plato Protag fol 379. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue is one but its parts are Righteousnesse temperance and holinesse So Plato Rep. 4. fol. 445. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to me the face of Virtue seems to be one whence virtue is stiled by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concent and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 symmetrie and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 harmonie Whence also the Stoicks held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all virtues are equal or alike § 33. Having given a full Idea of Virtue and that according to Aristotle's mind we need not spend time in extracting his Idea of Vice or sin for he himself acquaints us Ethic. lib. 5. cap. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a contrarie habit is known by its contrarie As in Logick the affirmative being well stated the negative is easilie discovered so in Morals virtue being well explicated the Idea or face of vice is soon unmask'd Thus as virtue requires an integritie of causes and full concurrence of all circumstances so Aristotle tels us that vice proceeds from any defect of either moral cause or circumstance as Ethic. lib. 3. cap. 10. Art 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vices arise either when men do what they ought not or as they ought not or when they ought not or the like i. e. when there is any defect in matter or forme and manner or time or such like Agen Aristot Eth. lib. 2. cap. 5. tels us as good is bounded by mediocritie and Right Reason and therefore uniforme so Evil is boundlesse and infinite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sin is various for Evil is infinite Agen whâ—â—eas he defines Virtue a mediocritie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to Right Reason he tels us Eth. lib. 1. cap. 13. that Vice is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 somewhat besides or beyond Reason So Stobaeus Ser. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sin is a transgression besides right reason Farther Aristotle in his Eth. lib. 5. tels us that 〈◊〉
and Moses their Philosophie to which we shall adde 1. that of Ludovicus Vives on August de Civit Dei lib. 8. cap. 9. The Philosophie of the Egyptians saies he is very ancient but for the most part derived from the Chaldeans especially from Abraham though they as Diodorus writes refer it to Isis Osiris Vulcan Mercurie and Hercules Thus Lud. Vives First this old Tradition that the Egyptian Philosophie and thence the Grecian sprang from the Chaldeans is and that not without great probabilitie by the Learned interpreted of the Hebrews for Abraham their Ancestor was a Chaldean and the Hebrews themselves lived under the Chaldean Empire at that time when this old saying began amongst the Grecians mentioned by Plato c of which more hereafter 2. Lud. Vives expresly saies that the Egyptian Philosophie came principally from Abraham for which he has much of Pagan Antiquitie on his side as we mentioned on Abraham Josephus Aâ—tiquit sud lib. 1. cap. 16. judgeth that the Egyptians learned their Arithmetick and Astrologie from the Patriarch Abraham who brought these Sciences from Chaldea But the Egyptians are wont to refer their Philosophie to Isis Osiris Vulcan Mercurie and Hercules as Diodorus Siculus The Doctors of this wisdom are by Clemens Alexandrinus called Prophets by Suidas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as amongst the Ethiopians by Eusebius in an Egyptian name Arsepedonaptae These drew their wisdom from Abraham as before and perhaps from Joseph also who first taught the Egyptians the use of Geometrie as Artapanus in Josephus testifies And this opinion as some think may be founded on Psal 105.22 It is credible also that they got some things from the Israelites who also descended from Abraham and hence Aristophanes in Avibus cals them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Suidas also observes Thus Ger. Vossius de philosoph sectis l. 2. c. 2. § 2. 3. The Confession of the Egyptians themselves related by Diodorus seems clearly to intimate and prove our Assertion For in that they refer their Philosophie originally to Isis Osiris Mercurie c. it is very probable that these feigned names were originally given to the Patriarchs especially to Joseph by the Egyptians who being unwilling to own the Hebrews as Authors of their Wisdom gave these borrowed names unto Joseph c. according to the custome of that infant Age. Athan. Kircher Oedipi Aegypt Tom. 3. c. 1. makes Hermâ—s Trismegistus the Author of the Egyptians Hieroglyphick Philosophie Yet so as that we received the first Lineaments thereof from the Patriarchs His words are Hermes Trismegistus contemplating this world composed of so great varietie of things as a Scene distinguisht with most polite Images he rightly supposed that these creature-images were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Symbols of God c. And hence the first rudiments of Hieroglyphick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proceeded which being adumbrated by the first Patriarchs Adam Enoch Noah Câ—am and perfected by Hermes sprang up unto the forme by the stupendious architecture of Hieroglyphicks That Mercurie called by the Grecians Hermes could be no other than Joseph has been already proved in the Storie of Joseph's Philosophie as also Part 1. Book 2. Chap. 7. § 10. of the Egyptian Theogonie But Serranus that great Philologist in his Preface to Plato speaks more fully and expresly touching the traduction of the Egyptian Philosophie from the Patriarchs and Scripture Revelation His words are these That the Egyptians retained many things from the Traditions of the Patriarchs the ancient Historie of Moses demonstrates that they derived many things from the clear fountains of the Scriptures which yet they contaminated by their own mud or fables is no way to be doubted Thus Serranus but of this more hereafter in the life of Pythagoras and Plato The like Hornius Hist philos l. 2. c. 10. which see in what precedes of Joseph chap. 1. § 9. § 9. To make good yet farther our assertion touching the Traduction of the Egyptian Philosophie from the Jewish Church we now shall endeavor to give some Artifiicial Argument or Demonstration from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or cause by shewing what influence the Patriarchs and Jewish Church had on the Egyptian Wisdom as well in its first rise as after improvement First that the Egyptians were no way famous for Wisdom or Philosophie before the abode of the Patriarchs with them is evident by their own concessions for they confesse they owe all their wisdom to their Gods Isis Osiris but principally to Mercurie or Theuth whom they call Hermes c. So Plato in Phaedro brings in Socrates relating that the Egyptians worshipped a certain God whom they called Theuth who found out and taught them all Arts and Letters in that time when Thamus held the Empire of Egypt This Theuth is the same with the Egyptian Mercurie of whom Iamblichus most skilful in the Egyptian Theologie lib. de Myster Aegipt cap. 1. thus writeth The Egyptians report Mercurie to be the Mâ—derator and God of Wisdom and Eloquence and they declared that by him not only Letters were found out and reduced into order but also that the principles of all Learning were collected and published in many thousand books by him Now that all the Egyptian Gods were younger than the Patriarchs or at least but borrowed names given to them is generally asserted by the Learned especially that Mercurie or Hermes was Joseph or Moses Carion in his Châ—oniâ—on lib. 2. of Abraham tels us that after the great Famine in Egypt Joseph altered the constitution or forme of the Egyptian Kingdom he having bought in all the Land that belonged to the people and erected a College for the Priests which was endowed c. His words are these After the Famine the forme of the Egyptian Kingdom was constituted and Tributes appointed and Revenues for the College of the Priests that so they might be conservators of Learning And although the Knowledg of God was after Joseph's death changed yet the Knowledge of the Celestial motions and of the nature of things was conserved in Egypt throughout all the four Monarchies of the Assyrians the Persians the Greeks and Romans even unto the Barbarians of the Mahometans almost 3000 years Jacob saw the flourishing state of this Kingdom which then had a pious King with whom he had frequent conference and who took care that the true Doctrine should be propagated far and near and in the famine afforded relief to many neighboring Nations Thus far Carion or Melancthon By which we see what care Joseph took for informing the Egyptian Priests in the Knowleedge of the true God and sound Philosophie The Scripture also makes an honorable mention of Joseph's care of and provision for the Priests as Gen. 47.22 by assigning them Portions and setling their Lands And as he took this care for their Bodies and Succession in following Ages so we cannot conceive but that he took much more care for their Souls and the Souls
may presume he received the Bodie of his Politie now that the Locrian Laws were many of them of Jewish extract and original is evident I shall only mention one which Aristotle in his Politicks takes notice of telling us that the Locrenses were forbid to sell their Ancestors possessions which was plainly a Mosaick institute I might instance in the Roman 12 Tables the Agrarian Laws and others which were traduced originally from the Mosaick Laws by the hands of Pythagoras or some other § 16. Pythagoras as he had an high esteem of this Science of Politicks so it was the last piece of Philosophie he acquainted his Disciples with as Varro and out of him Augustin in his last Book de ordine Iamblichus cap. 20. tels That the Pythagoreans imployed their time after Dinner in Political affaires And that the chief Politicians of Italie proceeded from Pythagoras his Schole we are assured by Iamblichus l. 1. c. 29. and by Vossius de philos sect l. 2. c. 6. § 27. This saies he was the great glorie of Pythagoras that in Italie so many excellent Rectors of Common-wealths proceeded out of his Schole Amongst these the most famous were 1 Zalencus who gave Laws to the Locrenses and is supposed to have been the first who committed his Laws to writing For Strabo saies of the Locrenses That they are beleived to be the first that enjoyed written Laws As for the Laws of Lycurgus he forbad the writing of them 2. Also Charondas the Catanean another of Pythagoras's Disciples who gave Laws to the Thurii c. § 17. The great Maximes of Politie or Reasons of State which Pythagoras instilled into his Disciples as the main Foundations of Human Politie and Government were these Two 1. The extirpation of Tyrannie and Preservation of Libertie 2. The Prevention and removing of Dissentions These Principles he endeavoured to put in Practice where ever he came So Porphyrie pag. 14 and Iamblichus cap. â— informe us That whatsoever Cities Pythagoras in his travels through Italie and Sicilie found subjected one to the other he instilled into them Principles of Libertie by his Scholars of whom he had some in every Citie Thus he freed Croto Sybaris Catana Rhegium Himera Agrigentum c. To whom he sent Laws by Charondas the Catanean and Zaleucus the Locrian by means whereof they lasted a long time well governed He wholly took away dissention for he did frequently utter his great Apothegme which was a kind of abstract of his Philosophie That we ought to avoid with our utmost endeavour and to cut off even with Fire and Sword from the Bodie Sicknes from the Soul Ignorance from the Bellie Luxurie from a Citie Sedition from a Familie Discord from all things Excess Which Apothegme comprehends the summe of all his Morals both Ethicks Oeconomicks and Politicks of which see Stanly of Pythag. cap. 17. CHAP. VIII Pythagoras's Theologie traduced from the Jewish Church Pythagoras's Theologie the center of his Philosophie his Tetractie from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Exod. 3.14 His Scriptural notions of Gods Unitie Simplicitie c. His Divine Ideas the same with the Scripture descriptions of Gods Decrees and founded on that Oriental Maxime All things are one and many Parmenides's opinion of Ideas Timaeus â—ocâ—us of Ideas His primarie Idea the same with Gods Idea of things possible His exemplar answers to God's Decree of things future Gen. 1.31 With Timaeus's Tradition thence Of Gods Creation and Providence Of Divine Worship against images Exod. 20.4 That God is to be worshipped according to his own Will Their exactnes in Divine Worship Eccles 5.1 Pythagoras's Damons their Nature and Office according to Plato's description Pythagoras's Aeones His traditions of the Soul its Immortalitie c. His Metempsychosis The Pythagorean Theologie mystical c. § 1. HAving finished Pythagoras's Philosophie both Natural and Moral we now proceed to his Supernatural or Metaphysicks which is either Theologick and Divine or Magick and Diobolick We shall begin with Pythagoras's Theologie which indeed comprehended the best part of his Philosophie and gave foundation to Plato's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Natural Theologie as also to Aristotle's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Metaphysicks That Plato received much of his Natural Theologie from this of Pythagoras is generally granted and shall be hereafter proved our present work is to shew what Pythagoras's Theologie was and how he traduced it from the Jews and Scriptures That Pythagoras received the choicest of his Theologick contemplations immediately from the Jews while he was in Judea Egypt and Babylon I conceive may be groundedly conjectured by what has been before laid down chap. 5. § 2. 6. But supposing this be denyed yet I suppose no one can rationally denie that he received his Theologie from the Phenicians Egyptians Chaldeans Pherecydes and Orpheus who had theirs origionally from the Jews as before He is said to have a particular affection for and inclination unto Orpheus's Theologie whose Philosophie if we may believe Iamblichus he had continually before his eyes § 2. Pythagoras according to Iamblichus's relation chap. 29 made Theologie or the Knowledge of God the first most universal Being to be the Center of all his Philosophie for saies he Pythagoras who first gave the name to Philosophie defined it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plato termes it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a friendship or love to Wisdom Wisdom is the knowledge of the truth of things that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Things that are he called immaterials eternals and Sole Agents Other things are equivocally called such by participation with these For Corporeals indeed are not further then they depend upon incorporeals c. Hence Pythagoras defined Philosophie The knowledge of things that are as things that are again the knowledge of things Divine and Humane also the meditation of Death daily endeavouring to free the soul from the Prison of the bodie Lastly he defined it the resemblance of God c. Which Definitions are properly applicable to no part of Philosophie but Metaphysicks or Natural Theologie whence Pythagoras judged the supreme end of all Philosophie to be the contemplation and knowledge of Vnitie which Architas interprets of the Principles of all Principles and Plutarch of the Intelligent and Eternal Nature and Simplicius of the Divine Majestie i. e. God Hence we see the reason why Pythagoras was by way of Eminencie called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and his Philosophie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theologie namely because he treated chiefly of God his Nature and Worship and delivered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Science of the worship of God which is properly the office of a Divine So greatly was the Idea and perswasion of Divinitie impressed on his minde as that without it he judged there could be no true Philosophie Yea Aristotle himself 10 Metaph. cap. 6. and elsewhere stiles his Metaphysicks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Theologick Science The Rabbins
Government from which proceeds moderation and order But Pythagoras affirmed the Gods to have a peculiar Providence towards Men such as were at Friendship with them So Diogenes Laertius saies Pythagoras held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Men are akâ—â— to the Gods and therefore God has a special Providence over us as Gen. 1. 26. so saies Iamblichus Pythagoras demonstrated there is a friendship of the Gods towards men c. Grotius on Matth. 10.29 tells us that some of the Hebrews held Gods providence about men but not about beasts which Pythagoras seems to have learned from them and to have taught the Grecians § 10. Hence Pythagoras was a great Devoto or Advocate for God his Worship and sacred Institutes So Iamblichus tells us That Pythagoras proposed that all things we resolve to do should tend to the solemne acknowledgement of the Divinitie that the whole of mans life should consist in the following God which is the ground of all Philosophie For since there is a God saies he we must acknowledge it is in his power to do us good Now all give good things to such as they love and delight in therefore it is manifest that such things are to be performed in which God delights from whom alone good is to be sought for The like foundation of Divine Worship Plato who did in this point greatly Pythagorize asserts of which in it's place And as to the Mode of Divine Worship Pythagoras and his Adherents give us many wholesome Institutes such as these 1. That God being an Incorporeal and Spiritual Being should not be Worshipped under any Corporeal Forme or Visible Likenes Thus Plutarch in the Life of Numa Pompilius tells us That Numa forbad the Romans to believe that God had any Forme or likenes of Beast or Man which is agreeable to the Pythagoreans who thought the Gods Invisible Incorruptible and Intelligible Beings only so that in these former times there was in Rome no Image of God either painted or graven for 170 Years c. Some think that Numa had this Institute from Pythagoras but Ludo. Vives on August Civit. l. 7. c. 35. refutes this shewing that Numa dyed many Years before Pythagoras was born We may therefore more fitly with Clemens Alexandr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. and out of him Selden de Jure Gent. Hebr. l. 1. c. 2. affirm That Numa received this by Tradition originally from the Jews though perhaps immediately from the Phenicians who frequented Italy in and before his time That Pythagoras had it immediately from the Jews and particularly from that great Moral Command Thou shalt not make any graven Image c. is most likely Conformable whereto is that great Pythagorean Symbol Grave not the Image of God in a Ring i. e. saies Iamblichus Philosophize and above all things conceive that the Gods are incorporeal This Symbol is saith he above all other the Seminarie of the Pythagorick Doctrines c. 2. Hence Pythagoras instituted that God should be Worshipped with a pure mind and such decent Ceremonies as were by him appointed So Diogenes Laertius Pythagoras saies he held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That honors are to be performed to the Gods according to their own appointment with a white garment and chaste bodie and soul which purification is acquired by expurgations washings sprinklings and separation from what ever is unclean c. I know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred by the Latin Version cum laudibus with praises which agrees well enough with our present designe but yet that it signifies in this place such a Worship as was appointed by the Gods I gather by the like usage of the Word in Plato his Alcibiades fol. 149. where bringing in the Athenians complaining to Ammon their Oracle that their Enemies the Lacedemonians who offered few or no Sacrifices should prevail against them who offered such costly Sacrifices The Oracle makes answer that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the plain simple instituted worship of the Lacedemonians was more acceptable to the Gods than all their pompous will-worship This we need not doubt but that Pythagoras learned from the Jews as Plato also who in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fol. 6. tells us that all Divine Worship must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. saith Serranus measured by the will and good pleasure of God And whereas Pythagoras required his Followers to worship in a white Garment that is apparently a Jewish Rite answerable to the Ephod Such were also all those â—urifications Washings Sprinklings and Separations from all unclean things which Pythagoras enjoyned This likewise is affirmed of Iamblichus that Pythagoras said Puritie is acquired by Expiations Bathings Sprinklings Abstinences from the flesh of things that dye of themselves and viperous Creatures c. which were all Jewish Ceremonies Laertius also informs us that Pythagoras held things dedicated to God were holy and not to be used for common use thence he forbad the eating of Fishes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as much as they were holy for it was not meet that what was proper to the Gods should be common to Men. Farther Vossius de Philos sect l. 2. c. 6. § 5. tells us it appears out of Clemens Alexandrinus that Pythagoras was circumcised c. which if true gives us a great demonstration that he was initiated in the Jewish Ceremonies which agrees with what was before mentioned out of Diogenes Laertius that Pythagoras whilst he was in Babylon was cleansed from the Pollutions of his life past by one Zabratus who according to Selden de Gente Hebr. l. 1. c. 2. was Ezekiel See more of this in chap. 6. § 6 7 8. of Pythagoras's symbolizing with the Jews in Rites 3. Pythagoras required of his Disciples a very great exactnes and solemnitie in the Worship of God This is evident by many of his Symbols and Iamblichus's explication thereof As Symbol 1. When you go to the Temple to Worship neither do nor say any thing concerning life i. e. saith Iamblichus Worship the Deity after such a manner as is most pure and immixed He takes care that no worldly affairs insinuate into Divine Worship So Symbol 2. If a Temple lye in your way go not in No though you pass by the very doors i. e. saies Iamblichus the Supreme Being ought to have the Principal Worship but if any Man doth it upon the occasion of any other thing he makes that the second which is the first and chiefest of all and by that means he subverts the whole order of Worship The most excellent Good ought not to be ranked in the latter place as inferior to humane Good Again Symbol 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacrifice and Worship bare-foot i. e. saies Iamblichus serve the Gods 1. decently and orderly 2. Being free from fetters this is to be observed not in the Bodie only but in the acts of the Soul also Now that this Pythagorean exactnes in Divine Worship had
of Parmenides but originally of Tarsis or according to others of Sidon as Suidas whence we may presume he could not but have some Traditions or Notices of the Jewish Mysteries This Zeno is said to be the first that Invented Logick So Aristotle in Sophista and Laertius in Zeno the Eleatick so Galen or Aëtius in his Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zeno the Eleatick is reported to be the first Author of Contentions or Dialectick Philosophie Yet others make Euclid the Megarick Scholar to Socrates and first Institutor of the Megarick Sect to be the Author of Eristick or Dialectick Philosophie But the Reconcilement is easie For although Parmenides and his Scholar Zeno the Eleatick were the first who brought up Dialectick or Logick Disputations yet Euclid who as Diogenes reports was much versed in Parmenides's Books might much improve the same and commend it to those of his Sect so Voss de Phil. l. 2. c. 11. Parag. 3. § 5. Next follows Leucippus Disciple of Zeno the Eleatick whom some make to be an Eleatick others a Milesian others an Abderite He is said to be the first amongst the Grecians that asserted Atomes to be the first principles of all things So Laertius in Leucippus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Leucippus first laid down Atomes as the Principles c. where Laertius more fully explains this Doctrine Thus also Galen or Aëtius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having spoken of Zeno the Eleatick addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of this man Leucippus the Abderite being hearer first conceived the Invention of Atomes Clemens Alexandrinus calls him a Milesian and saies that he placed as first Principles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiphanes saies he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lactantius lib. 3. Institut makes him the first that dreamt of Atomes from whom Democritus received them as Epicurus from him Yet Aristotle lib. 1. de Generat saies that Empedocles Disciple of Pythagoras and Parmenides held the same Opinion of Atomes The same is affirmed by Plutarch de Placit Phil. l. 1. c. 24. Laertius also tells us that Anaxagoras asserted the same And 't is probable that Pythagoras and Parmenides Empedocles's Preceptors held Atomes to be the first Principles which Dogmes they received as we may presume from Mochus the great Phenician Phisiologist who was the first among the Pagan Philosophers that asserted this Doctrine of Atomes which he received by Tradition from Moses's storie of the Creation as before Book 1. chap. 3. parag 18. § 6. Democritus the Abderite as to Physicks Disciple of Lencippus followed him in this Doctrine of Atomes for he held there was an infinitie of Atomes scattered up and down the Vacuum which the Phenicians called Chaos which being coagmentated or semented together were the material Principle of all Bodies yea of the humane Soul and that all Motion was caused by these Atomes to which he ascribed three Properties First Magnitude though the least yet some Secondly Figure which was various and infinite Thirdly Pondus or impetus which caused their swift Motion Lud. Vives in August Civit. l. 11. c. 5. gives this account of these Dogmes Democritus saies he affirmed that the first Principles of Nature were little Bodies flying up and down through the immense Vacuum which had Figure and Magnitude yet were indivisible wherefore he called them Atomes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epicurus followed him who added to them Pondus weight or impetus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus these small individuous Bodies being endowed with various Figures or Formes Magnitudes Pondus's extreamly divers as also by a fortuitous agitation tossed up down through the immense Vacuum were by various chances mix'd together and coagmentated into infinite Worlds produced increased and destroyed without any certain Cause or Counsel Thus Lud. Vives Of which more hereafter in Epicurus § 7. Democritus writ also according to Suidas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the greater World its Government c. but this Piece Theophrastus ascribes to Leucippus Likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Tract of the nature of the World Laertius addes amongst the genuine Works of Democritus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his little Government of the World He had an excellent skill in the Experimental part of Natural Philosophie Plin. lib. 21. c. 11. saies he left behind him many things of Plants Petronius Arbiter saies of him That he drew forth the Juices of all Herbs neither was the virtue of Stones hid from him That he was an excellent Anatomist appears by Hippocrates's Character of him who being sent for by Democritus's Friends to cure him of a Frenetick Distemper which they fancied him by reason of his continual Smiling to labor under Hippocrates found him busied in the Anatomizing of Animals and skilful therein so that ever after they contracted an intimate Friendship and correspondence by Letters Democritus was exactly skilled in Medicine also wherein he writ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an order for Diet and Cures For which skill Democritus is greatly extolled by Celsus lib. 2. cap. 5. what his opinions were see Laertius Sextus Empericus but principally Stobaeus in his Physicks § 8. Democritus was in like manner skilled in Ethicks wherein he made the end of humane life to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tranquillitie which he called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a good perpetual state of things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Hesychius and Suidas in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea Democritus seems to be well skilled in the whole Encyclopaedia or bodie of Philosophie Laertius saies he was accounted in Philosophie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as having joyned together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Physicks Ethicks Mathematicks the Circle of the Liberal Sciences all Mechanicks He was a great Traveller in the Oriental parts He went to Babylon and there conversed with the Chaldeans and as it 's likely also with the Jews who were called Chaldeans as Aelian Var Hist lib. 4. c. 20. from whom he learned Theologie and Astrologie He is said to have written a book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the sacred letters in Babylon perhaps from Jewish traditions and another called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Laertius He was also in Egypt whence he had his Geometrie and as we may suppose many Jewish traditions also especially concerning Solomon's experimental Philosophie wherein Democritus excelled He flourished about the LXXV Olympiad and was contemporarie with Socrates § 9. There were other branches of the Italick or Pythagorick Sect as the Heraclitian instituted by Heraclitus an Ephesian a person of a great spirit who flourished about the 69 Olympiad and was famous for his skill in Natural Philosophie from whom Plato is said to have derived his Physicks He in some things Pythagorized especially in that great Pythagorean Principle That Fire is the Principle of all things They reckon also as branches of the Pythagorick Sect the Epicurean which sprang immediately from the Eleatick
Conversation he divided his Philosophie into Metaphysick or Contemplative and Moral or Active 1. As to his Metaphysicks or Divine Contemplations he took it for granted whilest man was subject to and under the impression of corporeal Images sensible Formes and terrene Affections he was not rightly disposed for Divine Contemplation which required a mind defecated and separated from corporeal Phantasmes and Passions This some give as the reason why in his Philosophick Institutes he so much addicted himself to moralitie because he found his Scholars not capable of those more sublime Metaphysick Contemplations therefore he endeavoured to prepare them for the same by Moral Institutes This he made the chief subject of his last Philosophick Lecture to his Scholars after he had taken his Poyson immediately before his Death as we find it related at large by Plato in his Phaedo where he gives us Socrates's Dying Philosophizings touching the souls immortalitie and separate state and particularly that none could rightly Philosophize of these Divine Mysteries but such as had their souls stripped of abstracted from all Corporeal images impresses and affections for 'till the soul was loose from the prison of the bodie it could not be free for the Contemplation of God c. Whence he defines Philosophie a mediation of death i. e. of the separation of the soul and bodie in which state the soul being purged from those corporeal dregs by which it was contaminated whilest confined to the bodie it is rendred capable of contemplating God and Divine things For saies he it is great impietie to suppose that the Most Pure Divine Truth and Being will be touched by an impure mind Thence he judged that the Friends of God knew more of him and his Divine Mysteries than impure souls who followed not God And Plato in his Cratylus brings him in affirming that only Good men were Wise and skilful in Divine Mysteries c. So August de civit Dei l. 8. c. 3. giving a reason why Socrates Philosophized so much on Moralitie he saies Socrates would not that minds clogged with terrene passions should extend themselves to contemplate Divine things which he conceived could not be comprehended but by a refined judgment and therefore he thought men should be very intent on getting a reformed Life that the minde being exonerated of its depressing Lusts might by a natural vigor lift up it self to Eternals and by that puritie of Intelligence contemplate the Nature of that Eternal Incommutable Light where the causes of all created Natures live in stabilitie c. Thus August Whereby we are informed why Socrates was so sparing in communicating his Divine Contemplations to his Scholars though it seems to me very evident by what I find ascribed to him by Plato that of all the Grecian Philosophers Pythagoras not excepted Scocrates had as if not more clear Notions as any touching God his Nature Vnitie and other sacred Mysteries which he could never have attained unto but by some borrowed Tradition originally Jewish or Scriptural Particularly Socrates asserted 1. The Spiritual Infinite Eternal Nature of God and his Vnitie which was the great Article for which he suffered a kind of Martyrdome 2. The corâ—uption of Humane Nature or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 3. A Native blindnes in which all men were inveloped c. 4. That Virtue was not teachable and acquitable by Nature or Art but the product of Divine inspiration Thus Plato in Meno fol. 89. brings in Socrates thus discoursing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Having therefore often sought if there were any Praeceptors of Virtue after all my endeavours I could find none so fol. 99. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue is neither teachable neither gained by science Then he brings in Socrates concluding more positively thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue then is neither from Nature nor Teachable but it comes by a divine inspiration without the concurrence of humane understanding in those to whom it is communicated c. Thus Plato Yea he adds in the same fol. 99. That God useth the most unskilful instruments in communicating this Grace to men c. 5. When also Socrates asserted That all true knowledge of God came by Divine Infusion So Plato in his Alcibiad fol. 124. brings in Socrates thus bespeaking Alcibiades We have need of a Common Council by what means we may become best Neither doe I affirm this only of thee Alcibiades that thou wantest Discipline but that I my self mostly need it Neither doe I at all differ from thee this one thing being excepted â—hat my Tutor namely God is better and Wiser than thine viz. Pericles So again Plato Alcibiad fol. 135. brings in Socrates thus Dialogizing with Alcibiades Socrates Dost thou know by whâ—â— meâ—ns thou mayst avoid this inordinate motion of thy mind Alcibiades Yes Soc. How Alcib If thou wilt Socrates Socrat. Thou speakest not rightly Alcibiades Alcib How then must I speak Socrat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If God will c. Again Plato in his Theaet fol. 151. brings in Socrates alluring Theaetetus a young man of an happie ingenie to his Philosophie in order whereto he affirms that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. endowed with a Midwifes facultie to draw forth the conceptions of mens minds But withall he adds that God alone was the Efficient and he only a Midwife employed by God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God has compelled me to play the Midwife but forbad me to generate and fol. 210. he expresly saies I and my Mother received this Midwifes facultie from God c. 6. Hence Socrates pretended to have a familiar Daemon alwaies attending and inspiring of him So Plato Theagnes 128. brings in Socrates thus discoursing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. There is by Divine Grace a Daemon which has folloâ—ed me from my Childhood This Daemon is a voice which signifies to me what I must doe yet it does not compel me to do every thing But if any of my friends communicate somewhat to me and that voice dâ—hort me me from the same it also suffers me not to doe it c. So it 's said of Socrates that when one of his Scholars offered him Money for instructing him he refused it saying his Daemon would not permit it And Plato in his Symposion brings in Socrates discoursing at large of this Daemon his Office c. And Serranus in Plato's Apologie for Socrates tells us That Socrates called his Divine Inspiration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Daemon a Voice and a Signe And by the assistance of this tutelar Daemon Socrates affirmed that he instituted his whole life even from his childhood Whâ—t this Daemon was whether a good or bad Angel whereof the latter is most probable it concerns us not to debate only this is evident from the whole that Socrates acknowledged a necessitie of a supernatural Divine assistance for instruction and direction c. 7. Socrates acknowledgeth a necessitie of some
Divine Purgatorie or purgation to expel all noxious humours from the soul So Plato Charmides 154. Socrates artificially feignes himself saies he a Physician and testifies that his Medicament would be ineffectual unless there preceed some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preparatorie Pill or enchantment by the words whereof the disease may be driven out This he illustrates by an excellent similitude drawn from Medicine which teacheth that general purgatives are to precede particulars 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. So agen fol 157. he adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrates said that the soul was to be purged by certain Epoda's or preparatories and these Epoda's were Good and Divine words 8. Socrates seems to have some imperfect notices of Faith and Prayer according to the Scriptures notion thereof So Plato Epinom fol. 980. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Trust on the Gods and pray unto them that meet apprehensions of the nature of the Gods may come into thy minde 9. Lastly that Socrates had very clear apprehensions of the soul's immortalitie and it 's separate state will be evident to any that views his dying discourse of this Theme as related by Plato in his Phaedo By all which laid together it's evident that Socrates had very Metaphysical contemplations of Divine Mysteries and that originally from the Jewish Church § 5 Though Socrates was not without sublime and deep contemplations of Divine things yet the most of his Philosophical discourses in his Schole concerned Morals and that for the reasons afore mentioned So August Civit. l. 8. c. 4. In as much as the studie of wisdom consists in Contemplation and Action Socrates is said to excel most in Active Philosophie whereas Pythagoras insisted more upon Contemplative c. Not but that Socrates spent much time in Contemplation as well as Pythagoras for so Plato lib. 7. de Repub. brings in Adimantus thus speaking unto Socrates Thou hast consumed thy whole life in nothing else but Speculation c. Only herein lay the difference Socrates made all his Contemplations subservient unto Action and valued not speculative sciences farther then they conduced to practice for he made Man the whole subject of his philosophie So Plato in his Apologie for Socrates tells us how much time he spent in Contemplative Inquisitions but only so far as they referred to Action whereas Pythagoras so Plato in many of their inquiries made Truth the ultimate Object or End of their Contemplation or Motion Now it 's well known that the specifick differrence betwixt Contemplative and Active Philosophie ariseth not so much from their different Acts as Objects and Effects for Active Philosophie supposeth some Contemplation of Truth as well as Contemplative only in the latter Truth is the ultimate Object and sole Effect whereas the former considers Truth only as influential on Practice according to that ancient determination 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Practick Philosophie is effective of Virtue but Theoretick of Truth Thus we see how Socrates's Philosophie may be termed Active though not exclusive of Contemplation Namely as it is not only speculative and apprehensive of Truth but also practick and causative of Virtue wherein he was followed by the Cynicks and Stoicks who acknowledged a Fraternitie as being both descended from Socrates's schole and herein agreed with him in making the chief end of Philosophie to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To live according to Virtue So Plato who according to vniversal consent received his Morals from Socrates follows his Master therein telling us that Philosophie is the way to true Felicitie which has chiefly these two Offices to Contemplate God and to sever the minde from Corporeal Phantasmes So agen Plato in his Euthydemus tells us that Use in things holds the principal place and the possession of any thing therefore of science it self which without the use thereof is vain So that if there could be a science which should give us Immortalitie yet were it of no value if we understood not how to use it whence he concludes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wisdom therefore alwaies makes men to live happily Agen he saies That he deserves very ill of Philosophie who lives not Philosophically i. e. according to the precepts of Philosophie And elsewhere he give us this principally as the spirits of all his Philosophie To Philosophize is to know to love and to imitate God Yea Aristotle his scholar who abounds in speculation does yet herein symbolize with him and Socrates his Master affirming that he alone is a true Philosopher who lives Philosophically So Arist Eth. l. 2. c. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many doe not these things but flying to their reason they think to Philosophize and so to be virtuous doing like to sick men who hear their Physitian diligently but yet doe nothing of what he prescribeth As therefore these playing thus the Physicians will never cure the bodie so the other thus Philosophizing will never cure the soul But the Stoicks as it has been already hinted follow Socrates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 foot by foot reducing all Philosphie to Moralitie So Epictetus bid his Disciples Not to tell the world they were Philosophers by words but by deeds to act as Philosophers As saies he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The sheep do not bring their grasse to the shepherd to shew how much they eate but digesting their food within they bring forth a good Fleece and Milk And so do you don't teach men how they ought to eate but eate as you ought c. So Seneca Epist 75. He is not blessed who knowes these things but who does them Epist 94. What else is Philosophie but a law of Life The like Seneca Epist 90. Wisdom sets deeper neither does she teach the hands but is the Mistress of Minds she is a Queen and Governess Arts serve but wisdom governs the life Seneca Epist 117. The minde is wont to delight rather then to heal it self and to make Philosophie a Recreation whereas it ought to be a Remedie c. To which we may adde that of Plutarch de placit philos l. 1. It behoves saies he a man truly wise blessed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To be not only Theoretick of Beings but also practick of things wanting as to well-being By all which we see what a general reception this active and moral Philosophie which Socrates first brought into the Scholes found amongst all the following Sects especially the Stoicks That Socrates reduced the whole of his Philosophie to an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtuous operation is evident by what is mentioned of him in Stobaus Serm. 1. fol. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some one asking Him i. e. Socrates what seemed to him the best instruction He answered Eupraxie or Well-doing For he said they were best and most grateful to God in husbandrie who transacted their husbandrie affaires well In Physicks who acted as good Physicians In Politicks who dispatched the Politick concerns
mean the Hebrews Bochart Phaleg l. 4. c. 34. tells us that Herodotus calls the Jews Phenicians So Xenophon tells us the Jews were called Syrians as before Part 1. Book 1. Chap. ◠Parag. 9. 3. Plato makes mention of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an ancient Discourse o◠Tradition which he elsewhere calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Divine Word o◠Tradition received from the Ancients who lived near the Gods c. which cannot be understood of any more probably then of some Jewish Traditions as appears by particulars 1. Plato in his Philebus fol. 17. confesseth that The knowledge of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. one infinite Being was from the Gods who communicated this knowledge to us by a certain Prometheus together with a bright Fire and then he addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. This Storie of One and many is a Tradition which the Ancients who were better and dwelt nearer the Gods than we transmitted to us c. This Tradition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One and many was Originally traduced from the Jewish Church and the Scripture account of God the Unitie of his Essence and the Pluralitie of his Decrees which Pythagoras first brought into Greece and after him Parmenides assumed the same as the foundation of his Metaphysick Philosophizings about the Divine Ideas as before Part. 1. B. 1. C. 2. § 6. 2. Plato de leg l. 3. makes mention of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Ancient Tradition which affirmed God to be the beginning the end and middle of all things c. This Plutarch calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the old Faith which surely could be nothing else but the old Jewish Tradition which they had received touching God's Creation of and Providence over all things Thus Steuchus Eugubinus de Peren. Philos l. 2. c. 2. Justin Martyr conceiveth that where you find in Plato or other Philosophers mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ancient Fame they meant it of Moses The like Plato in his Philebus affirmes that all wise Men grant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Divine mind is to us King both of Heaven and Earth neither does any thing happen fortuitously This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he elsewhere calls the Soul of the World informing and governing all things as the Soul the Bodie which the Learned suppose to be but a Tradition from Gen. 1.2 The Spirit c. 3. Plato in his Phaedo fol. 85. treating of the immortalitie of the Soul confesseth that the safest and most certain way to prove it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by some Divine Word or Tradition Now what this Divine Word should be if not some Jewish or Scriptural Tradition cannot be imagined This Divine Word he elsewhere calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Traditional Knowledge c. Of which see more Part 1. Book 1. Chap. 2. § 5. 4. Plato in his Timaeus fol. 29. being about to treat of the Origine of the Universe laies down this preliminarie Conclusion It is just that both I who discourse and you that judge should remember that we have but humane nature and therefore receiving 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the probable Fable or Mythologick Tradition it 's meet that we enquire no farther into them That this probable Fable was some Jewish or Scriptural Tradition of the Origine of the Universe will be sufficiently evident when we come to prove that all Plato's Philosophizings touching the Origine of the Universe were but Traditions from Moses's description of the Creation 5. Plato in his Politicus fol. 272. gives us a large account of Adam's state of Innocencie under the Symbolick Image of Saturn's Golden Age he tells us the Fruits of the Earth grew of their own accord without labour that Men were naked and had conference with the Beasts And then he concludes But these things we must omit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 until there appear to us some fit Interpreter Serranus on these Words fol. 251. tells us that Plato acknowledgeth he received this Narration from elsewhere in that he calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Fable for the unfolding whereof he expected a fit Interpreter Wherefore he signifies that the truth hereof was delivered to him by Tradition from the Primitive Times c. And I think it will appear very evident to any that considers the whole Storie that Plato refers to some Jewish Records or Traditions whence he traduced these his Notions about the Golden Age. So in like manner Plato in his Symposium describes the fall of Man under the Fable of Porus c. And I conceive whereever we find Plato making mention of any Barbarick Egyptian or Phenician Fables handed over to him from the Ancients especially if they relate unto any Scripture Narration we may safely conclude that by these Ancients he meant the Jewish Church or Patriarchs whose names he conceled as also clothed those Jewish Traditions with a Grecian Mythologick habit thereby to avoid that odium which lay upon the Jewish Nation as also to gratifie the curiositie of the Fabulous Greeks and render himself more esteemed amongst them That this was the reason why Plato disguised his Jewish Traditions and conceled the names of the Jews whence they came is asserted by Origen against Celsus lib. 4. of which hereafter Thus Sir Walter Raleigh Hist Part. 1. B. 1. C. 6. § 7. But whether it were out of the same vanitie which possest all those Learned Philosophers and Poets that Plato also published not under the right Authors names those things which he had read in the Scriptures or fearing the severitie of the Areopagites and the example of his Master Socrates by them put to death by Poyson I cannot judge Justin Martyr as it seemeth ascribeth it wholly to Plato's fear whose Words are these Plato fearing the Areopagites thought it not safe for him among the Athenians to make mention of Moses that he taught there is but one God But for that Divinitie which he hath written in Timaeo he discoursed and taught the same of God saith Justin Martyr which Moses did 6. Yea farther Plato seems to use the very same expressions though in another Tongue that Moses does in his Description of God For whereas Moses describeth God Exod. 3.14 I AM Plato termes him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. which differs only in Gender not really from Moses's description Whence the Learned both Moderne and Ancient have concluded that Plato drew this Notion of God out of Mose◠So Justin Martyr and Ludovicus Vives after him as also Raleigh Hist Part. 1. B. 1. C. 6. § 7. For where it pleased God by his Angel to answer Moses Ego sum existens which is I AM and existens misi◠me ad vos I AM hath sent me unto you herein did Plato saith Justin Martyr no otherwise differ than that Moses used the Word Qui and Plato the Word Quod Moses enim qui existit inquit Plato quod
's evident Plato distinguisheth the Intelligible world which he calls the exemplar subsisting in the Divine mind from the sensible which is but the imitate of the former And it seems evident that Plato by his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Intelligible World which he here calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Exemplar as else where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ideal self-living alwaies-living world I say by these he meant no other than that Divine Idea Image or Exemplar inherent in the Divine Essence according to which the whole Universe was delineated and fashioned For the more full understanding whereof take these propositions 1. Plato supposeth that God who is the most wise Agent acted not rashly but as a skilful Artificer had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some most beautiful End or Design which was the measure rule or square in this great work of Creating the World 2. Hence the infinite Wisdome of God which the Scholes call His Simple Intelligence having a full comprehension of all possible meanes which might any way conduce to the promotion of Divine Glorie the supreme end of this undertaking and the Divine Sovereign Will or Pleasure Decreeing what it judged most expedient in order hereto seems to pass according to Plato's mind under the Forme or Notion of Divine Ideas which he makes to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immaterial Eternal Immixed and the original Prototype of the Universe 3. These original Idea's which comprehend the Divine Wisdome and Decrees Plato makes to be productive of a Secondarie Idea yet still immanent in the Divine Essence which he calls sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Exemplar sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Image The original Idea he supposeth to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the self-subsistent indivisible and eternal efficient of the Second Idea or Exemplar which he makes to be the more immediate Delineation or Image of the whole work For thus his words run 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 making use of this Exemplar he frames the Idea and Power i. e. the sensible World So that 't is evident he distinguisheth his original Idea from his Exemplar making the formeâ— to be first more Noble and Causative of the lâ—tter this seems to be much the same with that which the Scholes call Gods Science of Vision whereby he contemplates things Future which is the result of his Decrees and so differing from his Simple Intelligence whereby he contemplates things Possible I find all this excellently explicated to us by Learned Serranus in his Comment on Plato's Timaeus fol. 12. whence saies he the first and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sovereign cause of this whole worke which existed in the Divine mind was his supreme End For the effecting this end there was an Idea i. e. an Eternal Decree This Idea delineated to it self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Exemplar of the future work which was various according to the varietie of the work Or else we may if we please refer this Original Idea of Plato to Gods Simple Intelligence and his Exemplar to Gods Science of Vision of which see Book 2. chap. 8. § 8. of Pythagorick Idea's This gives us a more full account what Plato meant by his Intelligible Ideal and Eternal World which he so stiled analogically only with relation to Divine Decrees The foundation of these Divine Idea's Plato seems to have taken from Moses Gen. 1.31 And God saw every thing that he had made and behold it was very good i. e. answerable to his own Divine Exemplar or Platforme Plato in his Timaeus fol. 37. speaks almost in Moses's words thus After the Father of the Universe had beheld his workmanship the framed image of the Eternal Gods he recreated himself and rejoyced therein That Plato herein imitated Moses see Joannes Grammaticus of Creation lib. 7. cap. 11 12. of which more hereafter This gives to understand how unjustly Aristotle and his followers have with so great heat contended against Plato's Universal Idea's as though they were but Brain-sick figments no where existing but in Plato's vain imagination whereas it seems evident that Plato by these Vniversal Idea's understood no other though more darkly than what our Divines generally understand by the Vniversal Idea's inherent in the mind of God as the Exemplar of all things created Thus much for Gods Ideal Efficiencie 2. As for Gods Executive or Productive Efficiencie according to Plato's Philosophizing he is in general stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the supreme Fabricator Perfecter and Essentializer of things The notions by which Plato sets forth this Divine Efficiencie are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He adorned ordered figured constituted framed all things c. And more particularly as to the mode or manner how God framed all things we are told 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ev'ry thing was Essentialized by certain Prolifick or Efformative words This seems exactly to answer to that of the Psalmist Psal 33.6 By the word of the Lord were the Heavens made and all the Host of them by the breath of his Mouth which the Author to the Hebrews chap. 11.3 more fully explains The worlds were framed by the Word of God i. e. Gods Fiat or word was the Seminal prolifick principle of all beings as Gen. 1.3 So the Stoicks reducing the whole of the Universe to two principles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the efficient and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the matter as to the former they say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this being the Spermatick or Seminal Word of the Universe which formes and shapes it as the Seed the Faetus Which suits well with the Scripture account hereof or else we may reduce this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Spermatick Word which the Platonists and Stoicks speak so much of to Christ who is by Solomon stiled Wisdom Prov. 8.27 28. and by John 1.1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Essential word and made Coeffector with God the Father in the Creation of the Universe though the former seems more adequate to the Platonick mind § 5. We may reduce also to the foregoing Divine Efficiencie that which Plato stiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the soul of the Vniverse or the Vniversal spirit which is so much spoken of but as little understood in the Scholes For the full understanding whereof we must remember that Plato according to his Allegorick humour fancies the Universe to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a living and intelligent creature composed of bodie and soul As for the bodie of the Vniverse what he means thereby is evident for he calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the visible and tractable matter All the difficultie lies in stating what he intends by the soul of the World For the understanding whereof we are to remember which is a general Clavis to Plato's Philosophie that Plato affected an Allegorick mode of Philosophizing wherefore his sense is more to be attended than his words as Caelius Rhodig l. 9. c. 40. hath well observed And this discovers the
great injustice of Aristotle and his Adherents in their Disputes against Plato in that quarelling with and triumphing over his words they regard not his sense or mind wrapped up under those Symbolick and Metaphorick Notions Thus here when Plato Philosophizeth of the soul of the Universe or the Universal spirit that animates this Universe noâ— minding his hidden sense they cavil against his Notion as if he did indeed make the Universe a Monstre But to come to the right understanding of this Notion We shall endeavour to draw forth Plato's mind in these Propositions 1. The original and primarie notion or mind of Plato's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vniversal spirit or soul of the Universe seems to be but a broken Tradition from Gen. 1.2 And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the Waters and so an imperfect reference to the third person in the Trinitie whom Moses makes to be the more immediate fomenter and influencer of all things Hence the Platonists in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Trinitie make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Universal spirit to be the third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or person That Plato by his Spirit of the Vniverse or Vniversal spirit meant the Spirit of God or God is evident by his description thereof in his de Legib. lib. 10. fol. 896. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Soul or Spirit of all things is most ancient and the principle of motion and of all good this Soul also is the cause of all things honest and evil of all things just and unjust and of all contraries This is a full description of the spirit's operation and influx on all things both good and evil materially considered But Plato discourseth more fully particularly concerning this Universal Divine Spirit his Prolifick Seminal Efformation of the Universe in what precedes fol. 395. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Soul or Spirit permeâ—ting and enhabiting all things c. Plato here proves that God is the Soul of the World from the Analogie or Proportion he bears to the living Soul For look as the Sensitive Soul conveighed from the Paâ—ent together with and in the Seed does by its Prolifick Efformative Virtue forme and shape the faetus till it be perfected So God whom he here stiles the Vniversal soul permeating and enhabiting all things is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and as before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first fashiâ—ner or the Efformative and Spermatick principle of the Vniverse Or look as the humane spirit though precedent to and no way depending on the bodie is notwithstanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Aristotle phraseth it the perfection or perfective principle of the man so Plato's Universal Spirit or Spirit of the Vniverse though it be precedent to and independent on the said Universe yet is it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Efformative and perfective principle thereof This Plato's indwelling soul of the Universe is the same with that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plastick Efformative Power Spirit or Principle which our Chymists take to be the Vniversal spirit informing all things And that all these Platonick â—otions of this Soul or Spirit of the Vniverse were but broken traditions derived originally from Gen. 1.2 The Spirit of God moved c. will I think be evident to any that shall consider how parallel they are For whereas 't is said Gen. 1.2 the Spirit moved some will have the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to imply such a motion or agitation as carries with it an Efformative fomentation like to that of a Broodie Hen fomenting her Egges The Spirit of God as it were to speake with Reverence set abrood upon the Waters till it be Hatâ—hed and brought forth the Vniverse To which Plato's Spermatick Efformativs spirit of the Universe exactly answers as also to that Psal 33.6 By the breath of his mouthâ— Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Spirit of his Mouth Neither is this only a Novel Observation for Ludovicus Vives who was well veriâ— in Plato is fully of this persuasion as he layes it down in his Comment on August Civit. lib. 10. cap. 23. If we will saies he more exactly follow Plato its easie to defend that the Soul of the world is that spirit which moved upon the Waters Gen. 1.2 which they seem to make imparting life and essence to all things through the masse of the Universe Thus he who gives us a good explication of Plato's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 2. Plato's Soul of the Universe seems to refer sometimes to the Divine Spirit his Providential influence on and concurse with all things This indeed follows upon and differs not really from the foregoing notion of Plato's Universal spirit For look as the spirit of God was the first Fomenter Framer and Perfectioner of the Universe so does he still continue the supreme Governour Orderer and Influencer of it and of all its motions c. Parallel hereto does Plato make his Universal spirit to be not only the first Composer but also the Disposer and Orderer of the Universe and all its Motions so in his de Legib. lib. 10. fol. 897. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It 's manifest that we must confesse the supreme soul provides for the whole world and acts it c. This is another reason why Plato stiles the Universe a living Creature as he himself acquaints us in his Timaeus fol. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we ought to say that this world is truly a Living and Intelligent Creature because it comes under the Providence of God Hence Plato stiles this Universal Divine spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that he does most wisely and methodically dispose and order all Providential occurrences and natural affairs So in his Phileb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All wise men agree that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Divine mind is King to us both of Heaven and Earth So agen Phaedo fol. 97. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And we judge if it be so that the Divine Mind adorning adorneth all things and placeth ev'ry thing in the best forme and station that may be which is more briefly yet fully in the Platonick Definitions thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Divine Mind is that which adornes and is the cause of all things we have all this fully expressed by the Stoicks according to the relation of Laertius in Zeno thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The world is enhabited by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Mind and Providence the Mind dispensing administrating or ordering every part thereof as the Soul in you which is a full Explication of Plato's Universal spirit and doth exactly answer to the Scripture's relation of the Spirit of God his preservation of and providence over all things as Psal 104.30 Thou sendest forth thy spirit c. So that we need no way doubt but that Plato traduced this second Notion of his Universal spirit from the Sacred fountain 3. Plato seems
Universe is constituted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Friendship and Analogie 'twixt these Elements c. Plato here in pursuit of his former Allegorie supposeth the Universe to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a living intelligent thing consisting of bodie and soul the Bodie he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the visible and tractable part or the Elements themselves but the Soul he stiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Analogie and Symmetrie by which things in themselves contrarie are friendly and by a kind of agreeable discord conjoyned together in the masse of the Universe This Harmonie Proportion and Consent which is found amongst the parts of the Universe Plato makes to be the effect of the Divine Spirit his Disposition Providence which is by him on the same account but in a more eminent manner stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Soul of the World as before § 5. But here we are to take notice that Plato make a twofold Forme of the Vniverse the first Intelligible inhering in the Divine mind the second Sensible infused into singulars consisting in their proportion order c. So in his Timaeus fol. 49. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plato here asserts a Twofold Forme of the Vniverse the One Intelligible which is that Idea or Paradeigme subsisting in the Divine mind proportionable whereto all things were framed the other Sensible consisting in that Proportion Harmonie and Order which God has put into every Creature and their mutual combinations This he more fully expresseth in the same Timaeus fol. 69. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Elements lying confusedly together God inspired into each of them both in regard to themselves and to other things a Symmetrie so that they are so far as 't is possible Analogous and Symmetrous These Platonick notions of the Forme of the Vniverse seem very proportionable unto and therefore but derivations from Gen. 1.31 where 't is said that God saw all things that they were good i. e. Harmonious and proportionable amongst themselves as also exactly proportionable to their Divine Idea and Exemplar So Austin de Civ Dei lib. 12. cap. 5. All Natures saies he because they are therefore also have they their Measure Beautie or Forme and a certain peace amongst themselves wherefore also they are good c. Hence the Ancients made Love to be the bond of the Vniverse namely because it's Perfection and Goodness proceeded from the Harmonie Order and Beautie of the parts All which is fully comprehended under Plato's Forme of the Vniverse whereby he understood no other than the Harmonie Beautie Order and Perfection of the Universe and its parts though never so contrarie amongst themselves answerable to Gen. 1.31 which is also Essentially couched under the notion of Forme for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by an easie transposition of φ and μ is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies Beautie c. Plato never dreamed of that essential Forme which Aristotle introduced as educible out of the passive power of the first matter c. No he conforming himself to Moses's stile by Forme understands nothing but that Beautie Perfection and Goodness which was in things resulting from their Order Proportion and Harmonie amongst themselves as also from their conformitie to the Divine Exemplar and original Idea § 10. Having discoursed of the Principles of Natural bodies both Effective and Constitutive we now proceed to their Adjuncts or Affections which essentially and naturally flow from their Principles And the first great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Affection which Plato attributes to the Universe and it's parts is Perfection So in his Timaeus fol. 32. discoursing of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Affections of the Universe he saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first is that the whole Universe because it is an animal greatly perfect consists of perfect parts This Perfection of the Vniverse he had before given some intimation of under the notion of Goodness So Timaeus fol. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God would that all things should be good and nothing evil For 't was never neither is it now lawfull for him who is the best Good to make any thing but what is most beautiful and perfect Plato here sheweth how God of the first confused matter and Elements efformed a most Beautiful World the words he expresses this by is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he beautifi'd adorn'd the world whence 't was called by the Ancients 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Agen he saie◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he shaped configured or conformed the Universe i. e. made it conformable to the Eternal and most perfect Exemplar of his own Decrees whence we read 1. Cor. 7.31 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Scene Figure or Forme of this World Farther Plato saies that God did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accurately dispose order or methodize the Vniverse placing each part in it's proper place and rank 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reducing every Creature from that Ataxie or disorder it lay under in the confused Chaos unto an admirable order and goodness which he elsewhere stiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the good order or right disposition of every thing Lastly he saies that God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituted or gathered into one Systeme each part of the Creation whence Aristotle his Scholar following his Master herein defines the World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. a Systeme or ordinate compages of natural bodies c. By all these expressions Plato sets forth to the life the incomparable Structure and admirable perfection of the Universe as it came forth of the hands of God and that exactly conformable unto and as we have reason enough to judge by traduction from Moses's description thereof Gen. 1.31 And God saw every thing that he had made and behold it was very good i. e. most perfect Indeed Plato gives us an excellent comment on these words of Moses wherein we have Moses his sense fully and that almost in his own words laid open to us So in his Timaeus fol. 37. Therefore saies Plato after the Father of the Universe had animadverted or considered his work 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the made image of the Eternal Gods or Trinitie he rejoyced and recreated himself therein Thus Plato who does here as the Learned conclude speak by tradition from Moses So Jo. Grammaticus Of Creation lib. 7. cap. 11 12. Rightly therefore does that great Moses concluding the Creation of the world say Gen. 1.31 And God saw every thing c. And Plato here agen does imitate him who speaking of Gods making the Universe saies that when the Father beheld this Mobile Animal the image of the Eternal Gods which he had begotten he rejoyced and was recreated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by so much the more when he considered that it was made exactly conformable to it's Paradeigme or Eternal exemplar Thus Jo. Grammaticus touching the parallel betwixt Moses and Plato Austin de Civit. Dei lib. 11. cap.
of the ingenerable time called Eternitie for look as this Universe is created according to the exemplar of the Intelligible Ideal World so is this Time composed in some sort according to the exemplar of Eternitie Thus Plato Lastly as to the formal measure and product of Time we find a good description thereof in the Platonick Definitions fol. 411. thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Time is the motion of the Sun and the measure of motion which agrees well with Moses's description in Gen. 1.14 for seasons and for days and years c. 7. Hence follows another Affection which Plato attributes to the Universe and natural Bodies namely Mobilitie So in his Parmenides fol. 145. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus therefore is it not necessarie that One i. e. the Universe be capable both of Motion and Rest c. Herein also Aristotle follows him making Motion and Rest affections of natural Bodies 8. Hence also follows Generation which may be ranked amongst the Affections which Plato gives to natural Bodies and is thus described Platon definit fol. 411. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Generation is a motion to Essence Agen 't is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a participation of Essence c. 9. Whence lastly follows Duration which Plato makes another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or affection of the Universe So in his Timaeus fol. 32. having spoken of the Worlds perfection and unitie he addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It must also continue without old age and sickness c. He persues his Allegorie wherein he stiles the World a Living Creature which saies he must continue in youthful vigor and healthie His meaning is that though Individuals and Singulars decay daily yet the Species and whole of the Vniverse is continued durable and vigorous by means of successive generations For they are Individuals only not the Species that dye thus according to Aristotle's Maxime the Corruption of one is but the Generation of another Thus much of the affections of the Vniverse § 12. The parts of Physiologie are either General or Particular the General part of Physiologie treats of the first Principles and Affections of Nature which we have dispatched Physiologie in particular discourseth of the Severals or Particulars of the Vniverse which make up the whole of Nature Now of these in their order so far as they come under Plato's Philosophizings And here we may begin with Angelick Beings who are called the first-born Sons of God and are indeed the most noble Pieces of the Universe which Plato makes the first-fruits of Gods Creation So Lud. Vives in August Civit. Dei lib. 11. c. 9. The Greek Divines saies he will that Spiritual Beings precede Corporeal and that the great Parent of the Vniverse used them i. e. Angels as Ministers for the procreation of other things which Opinion Plato follows in his Origine of the Universe So Sanchoniathon sets forth the Creation of the Angels under the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Contemplators of the Heavens Whence also Aristotle's conceit of the Heavens being moved by Intelligences seems to have had its origination All which Contemplations about Angelick natures and their production seem to have been but corrupt Derivations from Job 38.7 When the morning Stars sang together c. But because the Discourse of Angels belongs not properly to Physicks but to Metaphysicks we shall engage no farther on it at present To descend therefore to the material and more natural parts of the Universe and first to the Heavens which Plato in his Timaeus fol. 36. describes after his Metaphorick mode thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bodie of the Heavens is visible but the Soul of these Intelligences partakes of invisible reason and harmonie Thus Plato whence I presume Aristotle derived his Celestial Intelligences which he presumed to be the first movers of the Celestial Spheres But as to the Matter and Nature of the Heavens what Plato's Opinion was is somewhat difficult to conjecture Austin affirmes peremptorily that Plato made the Heavens to be of an ignifick or fierie nature and that herein he followed Moses Gen. 1.1 So Aust de Civit. Dei lib. 8. c. 11. Plato in his Timaeus affirmes saith he that God in the first Creation joyned the Earth and Fire together It 's manifest that he attributes to Fire the place of Heaven This Opinion therefore has some similitude with what is said Gen. 1.1 In the beginning God made heaven and earth Thus Austin And Ludo. Vives on these Words addes that Plato thought the Heavens to be fierie though the Stars to be composed of the four Elements because they seemed more solid Not that the Heavens were of the same nature with our Culinarie fire for he supposeth there are several sorts of Fire So Lud. Vives And indeed that these Celestial Bodies at least the more lightsome and glorious namely the Sun c. are of an ignite or fierie nature seems probable from the very origination of the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heaven which is apparently derived from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our or Ur which signifies both Light and Fire as hereafter I am not ignorant that some make the Heavens to be of a fluid waterie as others of an aerial nature So Paulus Fagius on Gen. 1. tells us that amongst the Hebrews the Heaven is called from its extension 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Firmament and from its Waterie matter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Waters there which he also gathers from Gen. 1.6 a Firmament in the midst of the Waters c. But this being granted that the Firmament is of a waterie or fluid matter see Wendeline de Coelo which is also the Opinion of some New Philosophers yet it followeth not hence but that the Sun and those other more lightsome and glorious Celestial Bodies may be composed of a fierie substance which seemeth to have been the Opinion of the Jews whence Plato and other of the Greeks derived the same and that on these Probabilities 1. That the Sun and Stars are composed of Fire appears first from the very Text Gen. 1.3 Let there be Light where the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our whereby the Sun is expressed Job 31.26 signifies as well Fire as Light This we have proved at large out of Richardson and others in our former part of Philologie Book 3. C. 3. § 9. So Amesius in his Medulla Theol. lib. 1. cap. 8. Thes 50. treating of the Creation of this Light saies that Light namely lightsome Fire was made out of the most subtile part of this Mass taken up c So Grotius in his Annotations on 2 Pet. 3.7 The Fire saies he was not in that first humid Mass but afterward created by God which Moses calls Light because Light and Heat are one and the same Out of this Light compacted were the Stars composed whence they diffuse Fires upon the Earth whence also Fires are generated under the Earth From these
〈◊〉 that the Sun and Moon and each of the Stars were an Intelligent Wise and Ignite Fire The like Chrysippus asserted Neither was this the persuasion only of the Wiser Philosophers but also of many of the Ancient Greek Poets Euripides in Phaenissis saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Homer though he saies not positively that the Sun is Fire yet he makes it to be of like nature as Stobaus Eclog. Phys fol. 57. 11. Thus also Shepherd in his parable of the Ten Virgins chap. 8. § 2. It is saies he a question whether the beams of the Sun are Fire which some demonstrate thus Take a Glasse and gather together the beams and it burnes and indeed this argument from the Ignifick virtue of Beams contracted in a Burning-glasse gives us a great probabilitie of the Ignite nature of the Sun at least it may suffice to ballance all the seeming probabilities of other opinions Neither may we expect in matters of this nature more than conjectures and probabilities But to return to and conclude this with Plato he frequently calls Light Fire So in his de Repub. 6. speaking of the Natural Cognation which is 'twixt the Eye and Light he addes that when the Eye comes into darkness it looseth or falls from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it 's cognate Fire Light Hence Night is defined in the Platonick definitions thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Night is darkness contrarie to the day the privation of the Sun As also Light is defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Light is contrarie to darkness which answers unto Moses's description Gen. 1.5 And God called the Light Day and Darkness Night § 13. As for Plato's sentiments touching this Lower World I find little therein but what is common and therefore not worthie of any particular remark only he seems somewhat to differ from the commonly received opinion about the Nature of the Wind which in the Platonick Definitions fol. 411. is thus described 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Wind is a motion of the Air round about the Earth As for the Air Serranus on Plato's Timaeus fol. 10. supposeth that Plato made it the same with Moses's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Firmament Gen. 1.6 which he expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word most proper to expresse the Nature of the Air by which is most liquid and expansive Plato's contemplations about the Waters and Sea with those miraculous bounds given thereto by Divine Providence I no way doubt had their original from the Sacred Storie This we find well set forth by Paulus Fagius on Gen. 1.9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the Waters be gathered The Ancients saies he have derived this word from the Noun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a Perpendicule Square or Rule used by Masons c. As if God should have said Let the Waters be gathered together unto one certain place as by Measure and Rule according to the manner of Architects who in the building of Houses to the intent that they may bring the parts to a close and firme consistence and uniformitie measure all by their Perpendicule or Directorie Therefore Moses seems not without great Emphasis to make use of this word thereby to expresse the Infinite power of God whereby he compels that fluid and boundlesse Element possessing the whole superficies of the Earth even as it were by a Measure or Rule into one place This the Scripture alludes unto Job 26.10 He hath compassed the Waters with bounds c. Psal 104.5 6 7 8 9. Thou hast set a bound Psal 33.7 He gathereth the Waters as an heâ—p c. so Job 12.15 Behold he withholdeth the Waters c. which certainly is matter of infinite admiration that an Element so ponderous and boundlesse should be confined against its proper Nature within such exact bounds and measures Farther what Plato's apprehensions were about Exhalations such as received some accidental impression or Forme are commonly called Meteors namely concerning Comets Thunder Lightening Clouds Rain Snow Hail Earthquakes c. is uncertain yet we need no way doubt he might have if he had not the best information he could expect concerning these Mysteries of Nature from Job or Solomon or such like Jewish Philosophers § 14. Another and indeed the most Noble because most experimental part of Physiologie or Natural Philosophie regardeth Plants and Animals wherein Plato seemeth to have had very good skill which we have reason enough to induce us to believe he received by tradition from the Jewish Church especially from Solomon's Writings For it s very evident by Sacred Relation that Solomon was the prime and best Philosopher after Adam's fall that engaged in those Philosophick contemplations as before in the Jewish Philosophie book â— chap. 1. § 11. And I think it is also evident that the choicest parts of Democritus's Natural Experiments of Hippocrates's Medicinal Aphorismes and Observations together with Plato's Physiologick Experiments Aristotle's Historie of Animals and Theophrastus his Scholar's of Plants owe their original and first Idea's to Solomon his Natural Experiments and Philosophizings on Plants Animals and Humane Nature And because this is the most noble and useful part of Natural Philosophie we shall endeavour to produce some of the choicer Experiments Observations and Principles laid down by Plato with others for the Conservation of Humane Nature in health vigour which indeed is the main end and emprovement of Physiologie commonly called Physick or Medicine But before we engage herein we shall give some Historical account of Mans Original that according to Plato's traditions originally Jewish § 15. The Chiefest though last part of Natural Philosophie respects Man his two constitutive parts Bodie and Soul Plato Philosophizeth on both and that as well apart as in Composition and Conjunction As for the Original of Man Plato tells us in positive termes That he made Man after the Image of God So in his lib. 7. de Legib. Plato saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Man is a kind of imitation of God and his master-piece So in his Timaeus what he mentions in general of the whole Vniverse he without doubt more properly understood of Man namely that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the best and greatest image of the intelligible God which description of Man without all peradventure was originally traduced from Gen. 1.26 Let us make man after our Image c. v. 27. Yea Plato seems to have had some Scriptural notices of Adam's first Creation and Eves formation out of his side which in his Symposiack Dialogue he expresseth under his Cabalistick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Man woman which answereth unto Gen. 2.21 22 23. Yea farther Plato seems to have had very considerable hints and traductions touching Adams happie state in Innocencie which he describes under his Mythologick Cabale of the Golden Age and Saturne's Reign therein thus in his Politicus fol. 272. where he saies our First Parents lived
in the Golden Age partaking of the fruits of the Earth without toyl or labour or Apparel having conference with the beasts c. All which were but Fables or traditions he had received from the Ancients whereby he means the Jews or their neighbours the Phenicians c. For so Sanchoniathon expresseth the Creation of mankind to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. saith Bochart according to the Phenician and Hebrew expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col-ri-jah the breath of Gods mouth as 't is expressely mentâ—oned Gen. 1.7 breath of life As Plato had these great traditions or notices touching man's Creation and happie Estate in general so particularly touching the Soul of man its Divine original immaterial infinite capacitie activitie immortalitie and perfection As to the souls Divine original c. he saies in his Phaedrus fol. 245 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the Soul is ingenerable immortal and living c. because it is a self-moving principle In his Phaedo he calls the soul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immortal In his lib. 10. de Repub. he saies the soul is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 incomposite or simple and in his Epinom he calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 incorporeal As to the souls capacitie Plato proves in hâ—â— Phaedo fol. 79. That it was infinite or boundlesâ— never satisfied with any thing but the first Truth and chiefest good The soul saith he contends towards that which is â—ure and alwaies the same most akin unto it so in his Protag fol 322. he makes the soul to be nearly allyed to God the like in his Phaedo fol. 80. Plato saith It becomes the body to serve but the soul to rule because it is most like unto the Divine Immortal Intelligible most uniform and first Being he also proves the immortality of the soul from its 1. incorruptibilitie 2. sollicitude 3. innate appetite 4. uniform self motion 5. connate Idea of God Thus Plato in his Phaedo fol. 55.81 speaking of the souls disunion with and dislodging from the body saies That it returns to that original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 idea to which it is akin i. e. to God as elsewhere Hence Plato concludes the dignitie and perfection of the soul so in his Phaedo fol. 55. he gathers up this conclusion That the soul is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 akin homogeneous or alike in nature to God and that it does in a sober sense participate of a self-goodness and self-beautie with God So again fol. 56. he saies That the soul being allyed to God becomes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a partner of the Divine Nature whence it is in its manner and according to its capacity as God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 incomposite infinite incorruptible immortal and thence de Leg. 5. fol. 726. Plato concludes that of all possessions next to God the soul is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most Divine and peculiar Plato gives us also a good account of the Faculties of the Rational Soul 1. he treats accurately of the humane understanding which he stiles our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Daemon whereby we are elevated from earth to an heavenly alliance and conversation He makes the mind to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a plant of the supream Being not earthly but heavenly The proper object of the mind Plato makes to be Truth which he calls the life and food of the mind so de Repub. 6. fol. 490. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by truth the mind truly lives and is nourished As for the manner how truth is conveighed to the understanding Plato tells us 't is by assimilation i. e. there are certain Ideas images or notions imprest upon the understanding conformable to those natural Ideas which exist in the things themselves which we know He gives us also a particular account of the several sorts of knowledge 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wisdom is by him defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a knowledge of Beings Eternal c. 2. Intelligence is a knowledge of first principles 3. Science is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a demonstrative knowledge 4. Opinion is intermedious 'twixt Science and Ignorance or a conjectural assent 5. Imitation is an image-framing Art 6. Faith is an assent grounded on Authority c. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prudence is a power effective of happiness â—he parts whereof are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 8. Conscience he stiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fame 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Art is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 2. Plato also discourseth of the Will which Definit Platon fol. 413. is thus defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a rational desire c. That these Platonick contemplations about the Soul its original immortalitie c. were derived originally from the Scriptures or Jewish Church seems probable by Plato's own words in his Phaedo fol. 85. where having proved the Souls immortalitie by many demonstrative arguments he concludes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we might proceed herein by a more firm Divine word what this more firm and Divine word should be if not sacred Divine Scriptures traduced to him we cannot imagine Thus Plato received these and such like divine contemplations touching the Soul by some Oriental tradition derived originally from the sacred Fountain as he himself seems to acknowledge and I conceive it cannot rationally be denyed or if it should 't will not be difficult to prove the same in its proper place when we come to treat of Plato's Metaphysicks whereunto these speculations about the Soul its original c. belong § 16. Having given these brief touches of mans original main constitutive part his soul its nature c. we now proceed to the humane bodies to lay down such physick or medicinal Aphorisms and praescripts as are given us by Plato and others for the conservation thereof in an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a good temperament and habitude of health and vigour That the Ancients reduced Medicine to Physicks or Natural Philosophie is evident both from name and thing Hippocrates the great Master of Medicinal Wisdom stiles Medicine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the natural Science And indeed there seems such an essential connexion 'twixt Medicine and Natural Philosophy as that they cannot without violence offered to both be disjoyned each from other which Aristotle and others acknowledge Whence it is that those great Philosophers Plato Aristotle Theophrastus with others mix so many Medicinal Aphorisms with their Natural Philosophizings Hence also saies Apuleius in Apol. Let men cease to wonder if the Philosophers have in their very Doctrine discoursed of the causes and remedies of diseases To speak a little of Medicine in General which is usually described a practick Art of conserving or restoring health whence it is distributed by some into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others add to these parts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but I should rather close with that common distribution of Medicine inâ—o 〈◊〉
Immutabilitie So in his Parmenides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one first Being is immobile and the same Again he saies that God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 4. Plato also demonstrates the Eternitie of God So Timaeo fol. 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is alwayes the same can have no beginning The same he insists on in his Phaedrus 5. Plato Parmen 1 8. proves the omnipresence of God from his Simplicitie and immensitie for that which has no bounds cannot be confined 6. Plato vindicates the Justice of God Parmen 134. With God there is the most exact Government c. So de Leg. 3. He saies That Justice follows God as the vindicator of his Law so de Leg. 10. 7. He philosophizeth also accurately of God's Fidelitie and Veracitie he saith God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Truth it self and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first Truth 8. He greatly defends the puritie of God Rep. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. God can do no Evil neither is he the Author of Evil. 9. He makes mention of the Benignitie of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not God good c. 10. He mentions also the Omniscience of God and demonstrates the same at large Parmen fol. 134. c. where he treats at large of Divine Ideas as also in his Timaeus 11. He discourseth also of God's incomprehensibilitie Parmen 134. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 12. He makes God's will to be the Original Vniversal Soveraign and first cause of all things as also of their futurition Repub. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 13. Farther Plato treats largely and accurately of the providence of God of Religion of the puritie and simplicitie of divine Worship c. Lastly Plato philosophizeth very sublimely of the Human Soul its divine origination immaterialitie infinite capacitie immortalitie perfection and Activity These with many other Metaphysick contemplations Plato philosophizeth much of which greatly demonstrate his acquaintance with and derivations from Judaick Traditions as it may hereafter farther appear BOOK IV. Of Peripatetick Cynick Stoick Sceptick and Epicurean Philosophie CHAP. I. Of Aristotelick or Peripatetick Philosophie it 's Traduction from the Jews The traduction of Aristotle's Philosophie from the Jews proved 1. By Testimonies of Aristobulus Clearchus Clemens Eusebius Steuch Eugub Selden 2. By rational Arguments 1. Aristotle's converse with Jews or 2. with their books 3. his chief notions from Plato 1. His Physicks touching the first matter from Gen. 1.2 Gods being the first mover the souls spirituality 2. His Metaphysicks object Adequate ens Principal God Gods providence and the Souls separate state why Aristotle rejected some Traditions of Plato His Ethicks and Politicks Jewish Aristotle's Life and Character his Parallel with Plato His Doctrines Acroatick and Exoterick His Works which genuine c. His Successor Theophrastus His Interpreters Aphrodiseus c. The Arabian Commentators followed by the Scholemen The general idea of Aristotle's Philosophie and particularly 1. Of Aristotle's Logick 2. His Ethicks 1. of mans happiness both objective and formal 2. of the principles of humane Acts. 1. of the practick Judgment or Prudence 2. of Volition 3. of Consultation 4. Of Election 3. Of Voluntariness and Liberty their identitie and combination with voluntarie intrinsick necessitie c. 4. Of Moral Good or Virtue its genus habit its form mediocritie its rule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Law of Nature its definition c. Of Sin its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 anomie c. 3. His Physicks 4. His Metaphysicks § 1. NExt to the Platonick we shall mention the Peripatetick or Aristotelick Philosophie which received no small advantage and improvement from the Jewish Church and Scripture as we may both from Autoritative and Rational Arguments justly conclude As for Autorities we have first that of Aristâ—bulus a sectator of Aristotle's Philosophie mentioned by Clemens Alexandr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 5. who brings in Aristobulus affirming that Aristotle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 depended much upon Moses's Law and the other Prophets So again Clemens Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. and Eusebius Praep. Evang. lib 9. Make mention of one Clearchus Solensâ—s a Disciple of Aristotle's who testifieth that he saw a certain Jew with whom Aristotle had conversation Eusebius's words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Clearchus a Peripatetick Philosopher in his first Book of Sleep c. In what follows Eusebius quoting Clearchus's own words shews us That whilst Aristotle lived in the maritime Regions of Asia amongst other Students of Philosophie there associated himself to him a certain studious Inquisitive Jew who conversing familiarly with Aristotle and his Disciples 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which according to Clearchus's relation are Aristotle's words he communicated more than he received Then Eusebius addes Honored Clemens makes mention also hereof in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. concerning which he thus speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clearchus the Peripatetick saies he knew a certain Jew who had conversation with Aristotle Thus Euseb Praep. l. 9. f. 240. Edit Paris 1544. August Steuch Eugub abounds much in this argument Namely that the best parts of Aristotle's Philosophie were derived originally from the Mosaick Theologie Thus de Perenni Philosoph lib. 4. cap. 1. Eugubinus gives us Aristotle's confession That there was one God who overraled not only heavenly Motions but also the whole world answerable to Moses's Theologie The same he confirms cap. 7.8.9 The like he proves of the Divine Beatitude consisting in contemplation as cap. 11.12.19 But more particularly cap. 20. he demonstrates how Aristotle confessing that God created man and woman for the preservation of man-kind marvellously accorded with Moses herein For Aristotle in Oeconomicis de Conjugio shewing how necessarie Marriage is saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was thus provided by the Divinitie itselâ— or God that there should be a Nature both of Male and Female for communion Whence Eugubinus collects That as Moses saith He created them male and female so thou hearest Aristotle in this place which is a wonder saying That the Divinitie provided that there should be Male and Female for communion to the intent that Nature which cannot subsist in one Individual might be propagated by the succession of species Thou shalt see therefore in Aristotle and wonder at the same the same Theologie which is in Moses touching the creation of man c. Thus Eugubinus who lib. 9. cap. 7. thoroughout Demonstrates more fully That Aristotle marvellously accorded with the Mosaick Theologie touching mans creation by God the formation of the bodie the difference of Sex and the Infusion of the Soul from without And in what follows cap. 8.9 He proves that Aristotle conceived the same touching the immortalitie of the Soul To which we may add the Testimony of Selden de Jure Nat. Gent. Hebraeor lib. 1. cap. 2. fol 14.15 where having
happie man for a good life is commonly stiled Eupraxie or good action Thence he proceeds to demonstrate that Beatitude consists not in an habit but action 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. There is a vast difference 'twixt having that which is best in possession or use in habit or operation for a good so long as it exists in habit only is never perfected as it appears in him that sleepeth but 't is the exercise that perfects c. Then he addes Eth. lib. 1. cap. 10. That these Actions proceeding from Virtue are proper to happinesse as hereafter This is well explicated by Stobaeus de virtute Serm. 1. fol. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beatitude consists not in the possession of Virtue but in the exercise thereof for he that has sight does not alwayes see So the Scholes tell us that every Forme is perfected by its Act and every Facultie and Habit is ordained to its Act as to its perfection So Arist Eth. lib. 3. cap. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are perfected by operation the more active things are the more perfect Whence again Arist Eth. lib. 1. cap. 8. tells us that virtuous actions are of themselves sweet and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self-sufficient as in its place 2. As for the proper subject of this operation Aristotle tells us 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the rational soul Thence in his Eth. l. 1. c. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seems we may not stile an Oxe or Horse or any other Animal happy the reason is because they are meerly passive not active in their reduction to their laâ—t end The two main acts of the soul which formalize humane happiness are Vision and Fruition The Scholes place formal happinesse chiefly in the Vision of the mind c. 3. The qualification of the Soul and its operation in order to humane happinesse is expressed under that notion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the best Virtue This is excellently explicated by Aristotle Eth. l. 1. c. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Operations according to Virtue are proper to beatitude but the contrarie Vitious actions to the contrarie Miserie and then he addes the Reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The reason he gives is because these Virtuous actions are more stable and sweet so that a good man is truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immoveable c. This is farther evident by what follows 4. As for the state of humane happiness it is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a perfect life This connotes perfection both extensive intensive and protensive 1. formal happinesse in a perfect state denotes perfection extensive i. e. of parts or kinds a perfect exemption from all evil with a perfect enjoyment of all good Thence Arist Eth. lib. 1. cap. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither can a child be happie because he cannot by reason of his age practise such things This is more fully explicated in definit Platon fol. 412. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beatitude is a good composed of all goods Again 't is defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a facultie self-sufficient to live well 2. This perfect life denotes a perfection Intensive or of degrees i. e. every part of this happie life is in its highest degree of perfection without the least mixture of any degree of miserie So Arist Eth. lib. 1. cap 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beatitude is of things precious and perfect for we all undertake every thing in order hereto and that which is the principle and cause of all good we account precious and Divine Thence in the Platonick Definit fol. 412. Beatitude is defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a perfection according to virtue a self-sufficient provision of life c. 3. This perfect life imports also a perfection protensive or of duration So Arist. Eth lib. 1. cap. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 An happie man is not variable or easily changeable For he cannot easily be removed from his Beatitude So again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. A blessed man is not so for a short time only but for a long and perfect time Farther he saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. a blessed man can never become miserable Thus much for Aristotle's definition of humane happinesse which he himself Ethic. lib. 1. cap. 7. thus explains 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Humane happiness is the operation of the Soul according to the best and most perfect virtue also in a perfect life for one swallow makes not a summer These his contemplations about humane happinesse agree to no state of life but that of the glorified Saints which yet Aristotle seems to have had no belief of at least he seems 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to haesitate touching this future state of the Soul as 't is evident from what he laies down Eth. lib. 1. cap. 10. where teaching that men should endeavour to live thus happily here and die according to reason he gives this as a reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because what is future is to us very obscure but Beatitude is alwaies the end and alwaies perfect Aristotle dreamed of enjoying this happinesse here but Plato seems to refer it to the souls future state § 24. Having done with Aristotle's first Ethick-head touching humane happiness we now proceed to his Philosophizings about the internal principles of humane Acts which may be reduced to these four particulars 1. Vniversal prudence or practick knowledge in general 2. Volition 3. Consultation 4. Election Of each of which in theâ—r order and place The first great principle of humane Acts laid down by Aristotle is universal prudence or practick knowledge in general So Arist Eth. lib. 1. cap. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is very profitable for such as would mannage their affections and actions according to reason to know what belongs to these things and Aristotle farther informes us that this knowledge of things practick must be not only speculative and apprehensive but also practick and causative whence saith he Eth. lib. 2. cap. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many there are who do not these things yet flying to their reason they would needs seem to philosophize and so to approve themselves virtuous These act just like some sick people who diligently hearken to their Physicians but follow nothing of what they prescribe As therefore those who thus use the Physitians never cure their bodies so these who thus Philosophize never cure their Souls Hence that of Ammonius in Arist Categ pag. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the end of contemplation is the beginning of practice and Plutarch lib. 1. de Placit Philos tells us that a blessed man ought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To have not only a Theoretick knowledge of beings but also a Practick of what is needful For speculative reason is only apprehensive of things but practick is causative according to that Philosophick distinction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
the same with forced or not free and forced or not free that which has not its principle in its sâ—lf whence it necessarily follows 1. That Voluntarinesse is the same with Libertie 2. That Voluntarinesse and Libertie exclude not all kind of necessitie but only such as is coactive 3. That Voluntarinesse and Libertie include no more in their essent al Idea but a rational spontaneitie This is farther evident by Plato's Ideas of Voluntarines and Libertie Platon defin fol. 415. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Voluntarie is that which moves it self according to judgment c. which is the same with the following definition of what is free 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is free which acts from it self This rational Spontâ—neitie or Libertie is stiled by Plato sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soul-duction sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self-service as also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self-action Thus also Libertie is defined by the Stoicks Laert. in Zeno 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Libertie is a power of self-action Whence the Greek Fathers Basil c. call free-will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self-power and the Scripture useth a word of the like import 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self-Election 2 Cor. 8.27 This self-moving power which is alone essential to Voluntarinesse or Libertie is expressed by Arist Eth. lib. 3. cap. 8. under this notion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is in our power which we use so or so for which we are said to be voluntarie or free This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he makes only Essential to Libertie and Voluntarinesse is excellently well expressed by Epictetus and Simplicius on him Epict. Ench. cap. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The things in our power are the conception impetus appetition and extension of the Soul and in one word all our acts Simplicius here speaks forth Aristotle's mind as well as Epictetus's fully thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. He saies those things are in our power of which we are Masters and of which we have power Such are the internal motions of the Soul proceeding from our own judgment and Election So again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When the Soul acts according to its own nature then it is moved freely and voluntarily internally from it self and from this spontaneitie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what is free may be well defined Thus Simplicious who makes here all the natural acts of the Soul to be free 2. This freedom to consist in a rational spontaneitie or voluntarie motion of the soul Hence he proves at large in what follows p 23.24 Edit Salmas that all Necessitie is not contrarie to Libertie but only that which is Extrinsick Coactive and Compulsive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore we are to say that there is a twofold necessitie one contrarie to Libertie another consistent therewith Wherefore external necessitie destroyes Libertie for no one externally compelled is said to do or not to do any thing freely but all internal necessitie necessitating to act according to their own nature this does the more preserve Libertie For a self-moved according to the nature of a self-moved is necessarily moved by it self neither is it for this said to be moved by another for the necessitie is not external but complicated with the nature of the self-moved yea preservative thereof and conducing to its proper operations Thus Simplicius who gives us here an excellent description of humane Libertie and its Combination with internal voluntarie necessitie which if well understood and embraced would put an end to all those Scholastick clamours of the Pelagians and Jesuites against God's necessitating determining efficacious concurse which puts only an internal voluntarie not external coactive necessitie on the will and therefore is no way destructive to its Libertie But then Simplicius proceeds to demonstrate that a Libertie of Contrarietie as the Scholes term it or an Indifferencie to this or that is not essential to humane Libertie Take his own words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither must we needs say that in all things free-will Libertie supposeth a power of acting contraries for Souls which allwaâ—es adhere to good and choose good have both Free-will and Election for Election is not forced of that good without Indâ—fferencie to the contrarie c. By which he fully proves that actual Indâ—fferencie is not Essential to Libertie Thence he proceeds to prove that Libertie is essential to the will and an unseparable adjunct of every vital humane Act. So pag. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherefore they that destroy Libertie destroy the natural extension and constitution of the Soul c. So that nothing destroys Libertie but what destroys the natural inclination or Voluntarinesse of an human act This is farther evident by the following definition he gives of a free act Simp. in Epict. cap. 2. pag. 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is free which has the self-power and dominion of its own exercise This he farther explains in the same page thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is manifest that the things in our power are our proper acts and things not in our power but in the power of others are other mens acts Whence it apparently follows 1. That every human act of the Soul is in the Soul 's own power and so free albeit it be necessarily predetermin'd and actâ—ated by God's Efficacious concurse 2. That this Libertie of human acts implies nothing more as essential thereto but a Rational spontaneitie or voluntarie self-motion We have insisted the more largely on these notions of Simplicius about human Libertie and its identitie with Voluntarinesse because he seems of all Aristotle's commentators the best to understand his mind Farther that Aristotle's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is in our power whereby he expresseth Libertie imports no more than voluntarinesse or Rational spontaneitie is evident from that excellent determination of Greg. Ariminensis in Sent. lib. 1. Dist 17. Q. 1. That an action be in the power of an Agent it is not necessarie that every principle be the forme of the Agent for then no act of the will whether good or evil would be in its power because God is the productive principle of every act Therefore I say that there is nothing more required to bespeak an action to be in the power of the Agent than that the action flow from his own will So also Austin That is in our power which willing we do The contemperation and consistence of God's Efficacious necessitating concurse with human Libertie is excellently set forth by Plutarch in the life of Coriolanus fol. 193. thus But in wondrous and extraordinarie things which are done by secret inspirations and motions Homer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doth not make God to take away human Election and Libertie but to move it and then he addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In which God makes not the action involuntarie but openeth the way to the will
and addes thereto courage and successe For addes he either we must say that the Gods meddle not with the causes and beginnings of our actions or else that they have no other way to help and further men by Thus Plutarch And whereas 't is objectâ—d that thus to ascribe unto God a predetermining particular immediate Influence upon and Concurse with the will to every â—ct thereof is to make him the Author of Sin c. Plato Repub. 10. gives us a good solution to this objection in saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—ll blamable Caâ—salitie belongs to the particular Agenâ— which châ—â—seth 〈◊〉 God is a blamelesse cause Agen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In all Evils God workes what is righteous and good only This is more fully explicated by Simplicius in Epict. Enchir cap. 1.24 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God is no way the cause of sin for he being in himself good Acts the Soul in sinning only according to its own nature i. e. voluntarilie out of the riches of his goodnesse but he doâ—s not concurre to its sin otherwise than as the Soul it self wills it His meaning is that God concurreth to sin only as the Vniversal cause of Goodnesse so that God's Concurse thereto does not at all hinder but that the Soul voluntarilie chooseth it Neither is the qualitie of the effect to be ascribed to the Vniversal cause but to the particular which is the alone Moral and therefore culpable cause of Sin whereas God 's Vniversal causalitie thereto is only Physical or natural and therefore not morally Evil. That the Souls Voluntarie agencie is sufficient to render its act Morally good or Evil albeit we allow God a predetermining Influence and Concurse thereto is evident from that of Aristotle Ethic. lib. 3. cap. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in things voluntario praises and dispraises have place i. e. in virtues and vices so agen Eth. lib. 3. cap. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue is voluntarie and sin nothing lesse is likewise voluntarie Whereby 't is evident that Aristotle requires nothing more on the part of the Soul to render its acts Morally good or Evill but that they be voluntarie § 29. Having dispatcht Aristotle's contemplations about the Wil's Voluntarinesse and Libertie which is the Essential adjunct of every humane act we now proceed to his speculations about the Moralitie of humane Acts or their mora clonstitution as good or Evill This moralitie of human acts in general according to Aristotle has for its foundation or basis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a voluntarie free agent as before but the chief measures thereof are 1. the End so Aristotle Ethic. lib. 3. cap. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every thing is defined or measured by its end i. e. the End has the same place in morals as the forme in Naturals or as the first principles in speculatives 2. Not only the End but also the Law of Nature which Aristotle stiles Right reason has an essential influence on the moralitie of human Acts according to which they are denominated morally good or Evill for by conformitie thereto they become morally good and by difformitie morally Evill so Arist Eth. lib. 3. cap. 8. stiles a Virtuous act 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which moves according to the disposition or order of Right reason c. We shall begin with Aristotle's notions about things and Acts morally good which he stiles Virtues whereof we have this general account in his Rhetor. lib. 1. cap. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue is as it seems a power conquisitive and preservative of goods also a power well-productive of many and great matters yea of all things about all But this definition of virtue being too general that which agrees as well to Natural as moral Virtues we proceed to that which is more special The great seat of Aristoâ—e discourse about moral virtue is his Ethicks lib. 2. cap. 3.4.5.6 cap. 3. he gives us this general Idea of Ethick or moral virtue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is supposed therefore that virtue is such as being conversant about pleasures and griefs is productive of that which is best But sin is the contrarie Aristotle Eth. lâ—b 2. cap. 4. bâ—gins to discourse more distinctly of moral virtue and its Genus whether it be a Power Affection or Habit of the Soul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Seing there are in the Soul these three Affections Powers Habits which of these must virtue be so Plutar de Virtut Mor. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There are these three in the Soul a Facultie an Affection and an Habit A Facultie is the Principle and matter of an Affection an Affection is the motion of a Facultie an Habit is the strength and conformitie of a facultie gained by custome Arist· demonstrates 1. That Virtue cannot be an Affection or Passion because Affections are good or bad only from good or bad Habits 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our passions are well or ill disposed from those Habits which possesse them therefore our Passions are in themselves capable neither of virtues nor of vices whence it follows that virtues and vices are habits 2. He demonstrates that Virtues are not Passions because they are Elections 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtues are certain Elections or at least not without Election 3. He demonstrates the same from the different motions of Passion and Virtue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To these we may adde that we are not said to be moved but to be disposed according to Virtues or vices but we are said to be moved according to passions Lambinus on this text of Arist Eth. lib. 2 cap. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Comments thus Every thing so far as it is moved so far it is said pati to suffer Thence amongst the Greeks our Affections are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Passions and so are opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to practice For the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Affection which is moved is moved by External objects and the Passive power as it is moveable is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But in the Action of Virtue albeit External objects concurr yet a good man is not absolutely moved by them as in the Affections but according to the dictate of right reason Therefore in the Affections the principle moving is External and the principle moved internal viz 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But in Virtues the object is External which of it self has no efficacie but as it is admitted by right reason The principle moved is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the passive power but the prinple Acting and moving is some good habit or Virtue And for this cause we are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be moved for we consider not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the passive power in virtues but by Accident but we are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be disposed by Virtues i. e. we are in some sort so framed that we may with facilitie act Virtuously 2.
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Temperance he stiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the harmonie of the affections and Justice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a consent of Virtues and he gives this general Idea of Vice and Virtue Phaedo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vice is a disharmonie but Virtue an harmonie This harmonie or mediocritie of Virtue he makes to be also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a good order and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Symmetrie yea he makes the Virtue not only of the Soul but also of the bodie and of every thing else to consist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in order and rectitude whence he supposeth Eutaxâ—e symmetrie and harmonâ—e to be the forme of the Vniverse Socrates also expressed this mediocritie of Virtue by harmonie as Stobaeus Ser. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The life being like a musical Instrument harmonized by intension and remission becomes sweet So agen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The harmonized life is most pleasant These several Ideas of Virtue are all comprehended under and expressed by Aristotle's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mediocritie which implies the Eutaxie Symmetrie Vniformâ—tie and harmonâ—e of Virtuous affections and acts or if we would have all these notions of Virtue resolved into one we may take that of Plato calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rectitude For indeed the harmonâ—e or mediocritie of Virtue is nothing else but a rectitude of principles and acts This seems fully expressed by Aristotle Eth. lib. 4. cap. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all rectitude is from Virtue and all Virtue implies a Rectitude as 't will appear by and by § 31. As Aristotle placeth the forme and essence of Virtue in the mediocritie or Rectitude of principles and Acts so the formal measure or Rule by which this mediocritie and Rectitude must be regulated he makes to be Right Reason or the Law of Nature For every Act is denominated good from its conformitie to the Law of nature both in matter End measures and all circumâ—tances So Arist Eth. lib. 3. cap. 8. speaking of Virtue and its mediocritie saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so as right reason dictates or regulates So agen Eth. lib. 4. cap. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue is not only consentaneous to right reason but also an habit measured by and conjoyned with Right reason So Stobaeus Serm. 1. de Virtut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Virtue is a Syntaxe or regular disposition according to right Reason So agen Arist Eth. lib. 2. cap. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whereby it 's evident Aristotle makes Right Reason the measure of Virtue and its mediocritie So Amyraldus in his Theses Salmuriensâ—s expounds Aristotle's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Right Reason saies he is the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Criterion of Virtue 's mediocritie So Parker Thes 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Right Reason as it is the same with the Law of Nature gives the forme to a moral act But now all the difficultie is to state what Aristotle meant by his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Right Reason For the clearing whereof we are to know that Aristotle took up this notion from his Master Plato who by Right Reason understood the Law of Nature as we have proved in Plato's Philosophie Chap. 7. § 6. Whence this Right Reason is by him stiled the Royal Law So Plato Minos fol. 317. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Right Reason is the Royal Law i. e. The Law of Nature which received a new edition by Moses called the Moral Law i. e. as 't is the measure of moral good and Evill whereof Plato received many notices and traditions as else where This Right Reason is stiled by the Stoicks the common Law So Diog. Laert. in Zeno saith that the Stoicks held nothing should be done but what was agreeable to the Common Law which is Right Reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Common Law which is Right Reason yea Aristotle himself seems to Enterpret his Right Reason so as that it can be understood of nothing more properly than of the Law of Nature Common to all men So Arist Rhetor. lib. 1. cap. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. There is a twofold Law one private another common The Common Law is that which is according to Nature for it is that whereby all men learn by Nature what is just and what is unjust without any particular consociation or covenant amongst themselves Thus Aristotle wherein he distinguisheth the private Laws of particular Nations or Societies from the Common Law of Nature which he makes the measure of Moral good and Evil. This Common Law of Nature Aristotle makes the Source of all private Laws and that which gives check unto them when in Excesse or defect so Arist Eth. lib. 2. cap. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all private Laws need to be corrected by the Vniversal Law Whence this Law of Nature is made the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Law of Equitie which is to give check to all private constitutions And that Aristotle's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Right Reason is the same with his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Common Law of Nature 't is evident by the definition he gives of Justice or Righteousnesse Arist Rbet lib. 1. cap. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justice or Righteousnesse is a Virtue by which every one has what is his own and as the Law dictates to them who are subject to it Whereby he makes the Law the measure of what is Righteous So in his Eth. lib. 5. cap. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a just man is he that lives by Law and Equitie i. e. according to that Law of Equitie or Nature which is common to all Whence Aristotle Rhet. lib. 3. cap. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Law is the standard or measure in all Judicial proceedings i. e. all moral good and Evil is measured by some Law of Nature Common to all as civil good and Evil by civil private Laws Thence Aristotle Ethic. lib. 5. cap. 2. saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is just therefore which is according to Law and Equitie What Aristotle attributes to Justice is by a paritie of reason applicable to all moral good or virtue By all which it 's evident that Aristotle's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Right Reason which he makes the measure of moral good and Evil is the same with his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Common Law of Nature which gives the forme and measure to Common Justice and all other moral Virtues Whence that of Plato Repub. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is greatly distant from Right reason which is distant from Law and order Hence again Plato Gorg. 504. tells us That as health beautie and other Virtues of the bodie proceed from the regular order or exact temperament thereof so the health beautie and other virtues of the Soul from its regularitie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence the Soul's actions are regular and beautifull Such is Righteousnesse Temperance
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Just is lawfull and equal but unjust illegal and unequal according to the Scriptural definition of sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sin is an Illegalitie or a transgression of the Law This Aristotle Eth. lib. 5. cap. 2. cals 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a transgression of the Law So Art 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an unjust man therefore seems to be a transgressor of the Law The like Art 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what is unjust is a transgressing of the Law and unequal Yea Ariâ—â—otle concludes Art 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Transgreâ—â—ion of the Law comprehends all injustice and is common to all iniquitie The like Aristotle layes down in his Rhetor. lib. 1. cap. 9. where having defined Righteousnesse to be a Virtue according to Law he saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Unrighteousnesse is that whereby we invade other mens rights against Law So Arist Rhet. lib. 1. cap. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to act unjustly is Voluntarilie to hurt againâ—â— law And in his Eth. lib. 2. cap. 1. he saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Will of every Lawgiver is such as that they who act not according to it sin Thus also sin is stiled by his master Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ataxie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 asymmetrie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pleonexie or Exorbitancie opposite to the Eutaxie symmetrie and mediocritie of Virtue So Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vice is an Exorbitancie or intemperate Excesse a metaphor taken from the suâ—â—rabundance of any humour in the bodie called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thence defin Plat. fol. 416. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sin is a practice against right reason So Agen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 injustice is an habit overlooking or neglecting Laws Whence sin also is held by Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But thus much for Aristotle's Ethicks in general § 34. We now proceed to Aristotle's Physicks wherein he asserts and demonstrates 1. God's universal Concurse the first mover in all motions so Johan Grammat in Arist. de Anima proaem fol. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristotle in his Physicks about the End disputing of Motion in quiring into its cause elevated himself to the first cause and priple of motion And he said that the first mover ought to be immobile for if he also should be moved the things moved would not continue in motion as if there were things alwayes mobile it necessarily follows that their mobile would be immobile Thence Aristotle extolling the first mover that he was incorporeous eternal and omnipotent saies that on such a principle depends the heaven and world For it behoveth a perfect Physiologist after he has handled the natural causes not to rest in these but to ascend to the separate or supernatural thus Aristotle has done in his book of Generation and Corruption The same is mentioned by Ammonâ—us in Arist Categ as before § 14. see Simplicius in his comment on Arist Phys lib. 8. large here about 2. Aristotle asserts also in his Physicks the immortalitie and immaterialitie of the humane Soul So Joh. Gramm in Arist de anima proaem fol. 7. Aristotle saith he delivered a Canon proving the Soul to be immortal The Canon is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We ought saies he by the operation to judge of the Essence because everie Essence has an operation suited to it Agen another Canon is this every Essence that has an operation separate from the bodie must of necessitie be separate from the bodie For otherwise the effect will be more noble than the cause Then he proves the minor that the Soul has operations separate from and independent on the bodie as the contemplation of God it self and other spiritual objects And Diogenes in Aristotle saies that Aristotle held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Soul is incorporeous § 35. As for Aristotle's Metaphysicks Ammonius stiles them his Theologicks So Ammon in Arist. Categ pag. 11. Aristotle's Theolologicks are those he writ after his Physick Exercitation which he calls Metaphysicks because it is proper to Theologie to treat of things above Nature Hence Aristotle's Metaphysicks passe in the Scholes under the splendid title of Natural Theologie though indeed it contains nothing but a few fragments he procured from his master Plato and the more ancient Philosophers who traded much in Jewish traditions touching God his Vnitie Veritie Bonitie c. also the Angels which Aristotle cals Intelligenâ—es and of the Soul in its separate state concerning which Aristotle sometimes seems 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to hesitate saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as before § 3. But to come to the generick nature of Aristotle's Metaphysicks which he makes to be Sapience whereof he discourseth at large in the Proëme to his Metaphysicks as 't is well observed by Stobaeus Serm. 3. of Wisdome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T was Aristotle's custome to call the same Science both Wisdome and the first Philosophie and Metaphysicks and Theologie Then Aristotle addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. First we conceive a wise man knows all things so far as 't is possible yet so as that he has not a particular but only universal knowledge of them 2. Thence we count him a wise man who is able to understand things difficult not only such as are easie 3 farther we judge him most wise in all Science who most exactly considers and understands the first causes 4. And of Sciences that which is eligible for it self and for its own knowledge is rather Wisdome than that which is desireable for its effect 5. And that Science which is more principal comes nearer Sapience than that which is subordinate for it becomes not a wise man to take precepts from others but to give precepts 6. And for the most part things most Universal are most difficult to be known by men for such things are most remote from sense 7. Those also are the most accurate of Sciences which are of things mostly first Thus Aristotle in his proeme to his Metaphysicks and Stobaeus out of him Wherein we have a full character of Sapience or Metaphysicks which is here described both in relation to its Object and Nature 1. As for the object of Sapience Aristotle saies it is 1. of things most Vniversal and remote from sense 2. Of things most difficult and excellent or rare 3. Of the first principles and causes of things as of God c. 2. As for the Nature of Sapience Aristotle tels us it is 1. most desireable for it self and for its own knowledge not for any effect that flows from it 2. It is the Architectonick or principal Science not ministerial or Subordinate c Whence also Aristotle addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As we say a man is free who is suâ—juris for himself and not for another so this Sapience is the most free and noble of all Sciences for it alone is for
Schole of Epicurus which when all other Sects failed persisted in continual succession as Laertius boasts of it and Lactantius lib. 3. Institut easilie grants giving this reason thereof The Discipline of Epicurus was alwaies more famous than that of other Philosophers not that it brought any thing of reason with it but because the popular name of Pleasure invites many for all are prone to Vâ—ce Nazianzen Orat. 23. on the praise of Hero Alexandrinus joyns these 3. in Epicurus as containing the chief of his Philosophie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epicurus's Automatum together with his Atomes Pleasure § 5. As for Epicurus's Philosophie the best thereof consisted in Physicks wherein he chiefly embraced the Dogmes of Anaxagoras yet he differed from him in many things Touching the Origine of the Vniverse Epicurus held that all things were composed of Atomes Thence that of Auâ—tin de Civit. Dei lib. 11. cap. 9. Epicurus held that there were innumerable worlds produced by the fortuitous confluxe of Atomes See Lud. Vives on the text Epicurus's Hypothesis is supposed to have been this viz. that before the world was brought into that forme and order it is now in there was an infinite emptie space in which were an innumerable companie of solid particles or Atomes of different sizes and shapes which by their weight were in continual motion and that by the various occursions of these all the bodies of the Universe were framed in that order they now are in These his sentiments of Atomes Epicurus is said to have traduced from Leucippus and Democritus especially from the latter as before though indeed the first great assertor of Atomes was Mochus that famous Phenician Physiologist who traduced them from the Jews as has been proved in the Phenician Philosophie The whole of the Epicurean Physicks is comprehended by Lucretius the Epicurean in 6. books § 6. Epicurus contemned Logick Rhetorick and the Mathematicks His contempt of Logick is mention'd by Laertius in Epicurus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They rejected Logick as that which perverts mens minds for they say that simple words suffice for Physicks Yea Cicero lib. 1. de Nat. Deorum brings in Epicurus denying that either part of Contradictorie Propositions were true In the room of Logick Epicurus introduced his Canonick Ratiocination whence he composed a book styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was as Laertius tels us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning the Rule of judgement and Principle also a Work that delivered the first Elements This Canon or Criterion of judgement Epicurus made to be not Reason but sense So Cicero de Nat. Deor. lib. 1. Epicurus said that the senses were the messengers or judges of truth As for Epicurus's contempt of Rhetorick Laertius gives this account thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he used a proper kind of speech such as was accommodated to things which because it was simple or plain Aristophanes the Grammarian reprehended So Cicero de Finibus lib. 1. acquaints us that Epicurus neglected letters and ornaments of Speech Epicurus's contempt of the Mathematicks is mentioned by Plutarch in his book against Epicurus § 7. In Epicurus's Philosophie nothing was more pleasing to corrupt nature than his Ethicks especially touching the chiefest good which he placed in Pleasure so that he made the first and last cause of all human actions to be Pleasure or Delight arising from that good which the minde enjoys His Canons of Pleasure and Passion according to Gassendus de Epicuri Philos Morali cap. 3. are these 1. All Pleasure which hath no pain joyned with it is to be embraced 2. All pain which hath no Pleasure joyned with it is to be shunned 3. All Pleasure which either hindereth a greater Pleasure or procureth a greater pain is to be shunned 4. All pain which putteth away a greater pain or procureth a greater Pleasure is to be imbraced c. Epicurus's Canons touching Pleasure as the first and last good were according to Gassendus cap. 3.4.5 these 1. That pleasure without which there is no notion of Felicitie is in its own nature good 2. That Felicitie consists in Pleasure because it is the first Connatural Good or the first thing agreeable to nature as also the last of expetibles or End of good things 3. That Pleasure wherein consists Felicitie is Indolence of bodie Tranquillitie of mind for herein the absolute good of man is contained The Indolence of the bodie is preserved by the use of temperance The health of the mind is preserved by Virtues provided and applied by Philosophie Diogenes Laertius gives the like favorable interpretation of Epicurus's Pleasures in his Vindication of him against the imputations of Diotymus the Stoick Epicurus saith Laertius held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the chiefest happinesse was in God 2. Hence he placed happinesse in the Pleasures of the mind and reflexion on former enjoyments 3. Laertius also tels us that he held there was an unseparable connexion 'twixt Virtue and true Pleasure whence he said that Virtues were naturally conjoyned with a pleasant life agen live thou as God in immortal Virtues and thou shalt have nothing common with mortal Ammonius in Aristot Categ pag. 9. gives the like account of the Epicurean Pleasure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Epicureans are called Hedonici because they make Pleasure the last End Pleasure not that of the bodie but the tranquille and indisturbed constitution of the Soul following a Virtuous life but they mistake saying 't is the Carkasse of Virtue or the shadow seeing they make it the last End Seneca affirmes that Epicurus complained men were very ungrateful towards past enjoyments because what ever good they enjoy they reflect not again upon it neither do they reckon it among pleasures where as there is no pleasure so certain as that which is past because it cannot be taken from us Present goods have not yet a compleat solid being and what is future yet hangs in suspence and is uncertain but what is past is most sâ—tâ— Yea Epicurus himself in his Epistle to Idomeneus speaking of the torments he was then under being ready to dye saies that the joy which he had in his mind upon the remembrance of the reasonings which he had in his life time stood in battail of array against all those torments as great as could be imagined of the strangurie he laboured under According to these accounts Epicurus's Pleasures were not so grosse as is generally conceived yet sufficiently blame-worthy in that he placeth mans objective and formal happinesse in Pleasure which is but a consequent thereof § 8. But whatever Epicurus's opinion was about Pleasure certain it is he was fouly mistaken in his Metaphysical Philosophizings about God his Providence c. It s true Epicurus according to Laertâ—us denyed not the Being and spiritual nature of God for he held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that God was incorruptible and most blessed c. Yet he denyed the Providence of
Plato's mind touching the Combination and Proportion betwixt these Elements thus To make a coherence 'twixt Earth and Fire there is necessarily required a Bond wherefore they needed two other Elements which of themselves and of the other Elements they connected might make up one Composite or Bodie Such are Air and Water 'twixt Fire and Earth For the same Analogie or Proportion that Water has to Earth Air has to Fire the same also Water and Air have amongst themselves which as â—onds doe so copulate the extreme Elements Earth and Fire that by the almost imperceptible variations of Nature either ascendent or descendent there may be supposed to be one bodie which waxeth hard in Earth or is rarifyed in Fire Plato also makes each of these Four Elements to have various â—pecies and properties So Timaeus fol. 99. he saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Fire has flame light and splendor by reason of the inequalitie of the Triangles which are in each of these Air is partly pure and drie partly humid and cloudie Water also is either fluid or congeled as Snow Hail Ice Humor is either fluid or compact Fluid as Honey Oil Compact as Pitch Wax Compact humor is either fusile as Gold Silver Brasse Tinne Led Iron or fragile as Sulphur Bitumen Nitre Salt Alume and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Stones Homogeneous Also in the same Timaeus fol. 99. Plato acquaints us that heat has 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a disgregative faculty of the most tenuous parts but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 frigid is constrictive and complicative of the Pores Lastly Plato informes us that the more Noble parts of the Universe as the Sun c. are composed of Fire of which hereafter § 8. That Plato received this distribution of the Vniverse it 's bodie composed of the 4. Elements from the Jewish Church and particularly from Moses's description of the Creation Gen. 1.1 c. is acknowledged both by Ancient and Modern Writers So Austin de Civit. Dei lib. 8. cap. 11. Plato saies he in his Timaeus affirmes that God in the first Creation first joyned Fire and earth together It 's manifest that he gives to Fire the place of Heaven Therefore this opinion has similitude with that which is said Gen. 1.1 that In the Beginning God made Heaven and Earth Thence those two middle Elements by the interposure whereof these extremes are copulated he calls Water and Air whereby he is conceived to understand what is written Gen. 1.2 And the Spirit of God moved upon the Waters For little heeding in what manner the Scripture stiled the Spirit of God because the Air is also called a Spirit he imagined the Four Elements might he commemorated in that Place Thus Austin That Moses in this Gen. 1.1 2. describes the Creation of the Four Elements and that Plato speaks conformable thereto is affirmed by learned Serranus in his Notes on Plato his Timaeus fol. 10. thus This is the common opinion of our Divines that Moses in verse 1. of Gen. 1. teacheth that the first matter was created by God and that in verse 2. he describeth the same by certain Notes Yet as to the genuine and plain interpretation of this place the opinion of Theodore Beza my most Reverend Parent and Praeceptor doth mostly please me who supposeth that Moses in this place doth not treat of the first matter but simply teacheth that the Four Elements viz. Earth Water Fire Air were in their order Created of God and he gives these Reasons of this his opinion First that Moses was wont so to propose things Physical that he might wholly accommodate his speech to the Vulgar Capacitie neither does he treat of them subtily but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sensibly that they might be more comprehended by the ruder sort wherefore the plain and true sense of this place seemed to him this In verse 1. Moses proposeth after this manner a summe of the whole Historie of the Worlds Creation and that in an Analytick order which truly is a forme of Demonstration most apt for the teaching of Sciences Moses therefore teacheth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 summarily that in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth i.e. Gen. 1.1 When yet nothing existed God created this Universe and what ever is comprehended in its compasse which according to the common manner of speech is understood by the termes of Heaven and Earth Moses having laid this summary Substratum of his whole discourse he then proceeds to persue each part thereof and Firstly to treat of the Elements because they are the basis of the Universe and the Matter which the Vulgar might comprehend as being discovered by certain effects Therefore he affirmes that Moses in verse 2. teacheth the Creation of the Elements Earth Water Fire but the Creation of the Air in verse 6. These Elements he describeth as Created 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by themselves before their entering into the composition of Animants Thus therefore Moses explains those first bodies as that he first treats of the Earth affirming that the Earth was informe c. Therefore there was not yet extant any certain Disposition of things neither was there any certain forme in that tenebrous Masse of the Elements which notwithstanding God conserved by an infused natural heat which was as it were the Seminarie of all things and nothing else but the Element of Fire For the Element of Fire in this first Creation was nothing else but that ignifick force and efficacie which is variously diffused in the symmetry of the Vniverse for the fomenting and nourishing of things according to their nature This Natural and Vivifick heat dispersed in things after their mode even in Animants themselves is by Moses properly called the Spirit of God Gen. 1.2 Truly Plato calls this Natural heat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the Opificer of various effects Thus saies Beza Moses shews how the Earth Water Fire were Elements Created by God the first day That therefore the Air was Created the second day which Moses calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expansion Truly Plato makes mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expansion as I conceive in the same sense which word is well accommodated to express the nature of the Air which is most liquid and expansive c. thus Serranus Which accurate Analysis of the first Creation though it has something novel and disputable yet it gives us a good account of the Cognation betwixt Moses and Plato in their description of the first Elements which constitute the Systeme or bodie of the Vniverse § 9. As Plato makes the bodie of the Universe to be composed of the Four Elements so also the Forme thereof according to his persuasion is no other than the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Analogie and Symmetrie or harmonious contexture and friendly conjuncture of these Elements whence results the Order Beautie and Perfection of the Universe So in his Timaeus fol. 32. Plato saies that the Bodie of the