Anaxagoras, Origen, and Neoplatonism: The Legacy of Anaxagoras to Classical and Late Antiquity

1805 Pages·2016·14.72 MB·English

by  Panayiotis Tzamalikos

Panayiotis Tzamalikos
Anaxagoras, Origen, and Neoplatonism I
Brought to you by | La Trobe University
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/26/16 9:18 PM
Arbeiten zur
Kirchengeschichte
Founded by
Karl Holl † and Hans Lietzmann †
Edited by
Christian Albrecht and Christoph Markschies
Volume 128/I
Brought to you by | La Trobe University
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/26/16 9:18 PM
Panayiotis Tzamalikos
Anaxagoras, Origen,
and Neoplatonism
The Legacy of Anaxagoras
to Classical and Late Antiquity
Volume I
Brought to you by | La Trobe University
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/26/16 9:18 PM
ISBN 978-3-11-041946-7
e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-042010-4
e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-042019-7
ISSN 1861-5996
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress.
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.
© 2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Printing: CPI books GmbH, Leck
♾ Printed on acid-free paper
Printed in Germany
www.degruyter.com
Brought to you by | La Trobe University
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/26/16 9:18 PM
ἡτοίμασας ἐνώπιόν μου τράπεζαν
ἐξ ἐναντίας τῶν θλιβόντων με.
Psalm 22:55
πλεονάκις ἐπολέμησάν με ἐκ νεότητός μου,
καὶ γὰρ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησάν μοι.
Psalm 128:1
καὶ περιέζωσάς με δύναμιν εἰς πόλεμον.
Psalm 17:40
ἔστρεψας τὸν κοπετόν μου εἰς χορὸν ἐμοί,
διέρρηξας τὸν σάκκον μου
καὶ περιέζωσάς με εὐφροσύνην.
Psalm 29:12
Brought to you by | La Trobe University
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/26/16 9:18 PM
Ὁ πιστός ὄψεται τοὺς λόγους τοῦ ἦν ὁμοῦ πάντα χρήματα, νοῦς δὲ αὐτὰ
κόσ μου τούτου, οὕστινας χρήματα τρο­ διακρίνας διεκόσμησεν.
πι κῶς τοῦ νοῦ προσηγόρευσεν.
Anaxagoras, apud Simplicius, In Aristotelis
Origen, Expositio in Proverbia, Quattuor Libros De Caelo Commentaria, p. 590.
PG.17: 196.26‒31 & 197.35‒37.
χρυσίον δὲ καθαρὸν πολλαχοῦ τηρήσας Ἀναξαγόρας … ἀρχήν γε τὸν νοῦν
συμβολικῶς λέγεσθαι τὸν καθαρὸν καὶ τίθεται μάλιστα πάντων· μόνον γοῦν
ἀμιγῆ πρὸς ὕλην νοῦν. φησιν αὐτὸν τῶν ὄντων ἁπλοῦν εἶναι
καὶ ἀμιγῆ τε καὶ καθαρόν.
Origen, Commentarii in Romanos (P.Cair.
88748 & cod. Vaticanus graecus 762), p. 158. Aristotle, De Anima, 405a15‒17.
Everything is generated from some­ Πολλοὶ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἐν φιλοσοφίᾳ νόθοι.
thing which is existent, but it is exis­ (For also in philosophy there are many
tent potentially, whereas it is nonexis­ phoney ones).
tent actually (ἐξ ὄντος γίγνεται πάντα,
Origen, Contra Celsum, IV.27.
δυνάμει μέντοι ὄντος, ἐκ μὴ ὄντος δὲ
ἐνεργείᾳ).
And this is the one of Anaxagoras.
For [my own phrasing] ‘all things were
together potentially but not actually’
(ἦν ὁμοῦ πάντα δυνάμει, ἐνεργείᾳ δ᾿ οὐ)
is better than [Anaxagoras’] ‘all things
were together’ (ὁμοῦ πάντα χρήματα
ἦν).
Aristotle, Metaphysica, 1069b19‒23.
Brought to you by | La Trobe University
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/26/16 9:18 PM
However, if one were to follow his Listen to the discussion between
[Anaxagoras’] doctrine, and rephrase any two philosophers, one of whom
what he means to say, then he might upholds determinism, and the other
appear propounding a novel doc­ liberty: it is always the determinist who
trine (ὅμως εἴ τις ἀκολουθήσειε συν­ seems to be in the right. He may be a
διαρθρῶν ἃ βούλεται λέγειν, ἴσως ἂν beginner, and his adversary a seasoned
φανείη καινοπρεπεστέρως λέγων). philosopher. He can plead his cause
negligently, while the other sweats
Aristotle, Metaphysica, 989b4‒6.
blood for his. It will always be said of

him that he is simple, clear, and right.
Aristotle wrote this ‘rephrasing the
He is easily and naturally so, having
proposition along with Anaxagoras
only to collect thought ready to hand
accordingly, so as to help him express
and phrases ready­made: science, lan­
himself properly’:
guage, common sense, the whole of
προσβοηθῶν δὲ τῇ λέξει αὐτοῦ καὶ intelligence is at his disposal.
διαρθρῶν αὐτῆς τὸ βούλημα, … ὡς Criticism of an intuitive philoso­
αὐτὸς αὐτῷ βοηθῶν εἴρηκεν αὐτὸν phy is so easy and so certain to be
βούλεσθαι λέγειν. well received that it always tempts
the beginner. Regret may come later –
Alexander of Aphrodisias, In Aristotelis
Metaphysica Commentaria, p. 68 & Asclepius unless, of course, there is a native lack
of Tralles, In Aristotelis Metaphysicorum of comprehension and, out of spite,
Libros Commentaria, pp. 61‒2. personal resentment toward every­
thing that is not reducible to the letter,
To be sure, selfishness can magnify towards all that is properly spirit.
one’s own doing and glorify it greatly, That can happen because philoso­
while belittling and disparaging those phy, too, has its own Scribes and Phari­
of others. It is because of this [selfish­ sees.
ness] that paltry people oftentimes rep­
Henri Bergson, The Creative Mind,
resent themselves as more eminent than An Introduction to Metaphysics.
others who are in fact far more superior.
ἱκανὴ γὰρ ἡ φιλαυτία τὰ μὲν ἴδια με γα­
λοποιῆσαι καὶ ἀποκιδᾶναι, τὰ δὲ τῶν
ἄλλων κατασμικρῦναι καὶ διαφαυλίσαι·
πολλὰ γοῦν διὰ ταύτην οἱ κακί ους σφᾶς
αὐτοὺς προκρίνουσι τῶν κατὰ πολὺ
βελτιόνων.
Hierocles the Stoic (second century AD), Frag-
menta Ethica, p. 59, apud Stobaeus, Antholo-
gium, 4.27.20.
Brought to you by | La Trobe University
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/26/16 9:18 PM
Brought to you by | La Trobe University
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/26/16 9:18 PM
Preface
This book is part of my struggle to learn who Origen really was. In order for this
stage of my research to be realized, it took full exposition of the philosophy of
Anaxagoras and its impact on Classical and Late Antiquity, right through the
dawn of the Renaissance. It has been quite a long time since I noticed that Ori­
gen’s theology had a bearing on Anaxagoras’ philosophy, which was mostly
ob scured by apparent affinities with Stoicism. Subsequently, the more I studied
Origen, the more Anaxagoras’ influence appeared to be there, too.
Origen has been always studied as a theologian and too much credit has
been given to Eusebius’ implausible hagiography of him. This book explores who
Origen really was by pondering into his philosophical background, which deter­
mines his theological exposition implicitly, yet decisively. In order for this back­
ground to come to light, it took a systematic exposition of Anaxagoras’ philoso­
phy and its legacy to Classical and Late Antiquity (Plato, Aristotle, Stoics, Origen,
Neoplatonism), which also involves critical assessment of Aristotle’s perverted
representation of Anaxagoras that unfortunately has determined almost all of the
later accounts of this philosophy.
Origen, formerly a Greek philosopher of note, whom Proclus styled anti­Pla­
tonist, is placed in the history of philosophy for the first time. He was indeed an
anti­Platonist only because he was an Anaxagorean philosopher with far­reach­
ing influence, not only on Stoics (particularly Zeno) but also on Neoplatonists,
such as Porphyry, and certainly on such Christians as Gregory of Nyssa, who
made the most of Origen’s Anaxagorean evolutionary theory of generation. More­
over, his doctrine of the soul turns out more orthodox than that of some Christian
stars of the Byzantine imperial orthodoxy. As for Origen being the precursor of
Nicaea, let Appendix II speak for itself.
It turned out that Anaxagoras had much the same fate as Origen: both of
them were famous during their lifetimes; both of them had outstanding men of
their day as pupils; both of them were utterly misunderstood and distorted by
uninformed or spiteful critics; both of them came to be incriminated as danger­
ous blasphemers; both of them were condemned by censorial judicial assemblies
backed by the State; both of them were persecuted and forced to decamp; both of
them died in cities in which they settled in the third place, following decampment
from their native land to conspicuous cities of letters, which were unable to toler­
ate their genius: Anaxagoras moved from Clazomenae to Athens, and then he fled
to Lampsacus, where he taught and was buried with full honours. Origen moved
from Alexandria to Caesarea, and then to Tyre, where his body was honourably
interred in the cathedral basilica of Tyre. Moreover, both Anaxagoras and Origen
Panayiotis Tzamalikos - 9783110420104
Downloaded from De Gruyter Online at 09/25/2016 09:28:44PM
via Cambridge University Library
X   Preface
were acclaimed as great pioneers who inspired brilliant intellectuals during the
peripeteia of human thought in the quest for truth.
Since this is a study about Origen being considered as both a theologian and
a philosopher, the project involved some inherent difficulties, which bear on the
long established tradition of theologians and philosophers largely being indiffer­
ent to each other’s research, as if Greek philosophy and Christian theology were
two fields impervious to each other. Moreover, in his Christian writings, Origen
was loath to reveal his enormous pagan background, except for his polemic trea­
tise against Celsus, in which he felt he should exhibit his equal, indeed superior,
knowledge of pagan sources in order to discredit what he saw as impertinent
attempt of derogation. Consequently, he sought not so much to refute as to over­
whelm. This is why he quoted from numerous pagan sources in order to show
Celsus’ inconsistencies and his gullibility, so as to disgrace his adversary while
bolstering up his own image both as a scholar and as a learned faithful. Not only
did he refute Celsus’ invective, but also cared to show that he was superior to his
adversary on that score.
Once Origen’s references are scrutinized, one can see the great Anaxagorean
ideas that nourished him. However, on no account was he prepared to reveal his
creative flare, which is why, while writing his commentary on the gospel of John,
he caveated that ‘it is possible only for a few to understand those philosophers’
(i.e. Origen himself) ‘who have expounded meticulously the doctrine about the
state prior to creation and the theory of generation of things’. He had no doubt
that his ideas (let alone the pagan provenance of some of them) would embar­
rass those who could make up a fallacious composition of the statements being
involved, only because they were not equipped to realize their origin and impli­
cations. Accordingly, he concluded, it would be precarious to write about this
theory explicitly, even though he was confident that this was the most sound
and consistent one. One of the aims of this book is to cast light on his philosophi­
cal background, which is indispensable for his philosophy concerning both cos­
mogony and function of the universe to be properly grasped beyond the current
self­defeating allegations that surround it.
I thank Editorial Director Dr. Albrecht Döhnert for his kindness and noble
collaboration. My thanks go also to Project Editor Mr. Stefan Selbmann and to
Production Editor Mr. Florian Ruppenstein, both of whom made the process of
production a smooth and gratifying experience, and to Miss Katrin Mittmann for
her assistance.
Most of all, I am grateful to the editors of this distinguished series for having
included this book therein, especially Professor Christoph Markschies for his
considerate reading of the manuscript.
P. T.
Panayiotis Tzamalikos - 9783110420104
Downloaded from De Gruyter Online at 09/25/2016 09:28:44PM
via Cambridge University Library