may warmest thanks are due to Professor Gerhard Endress for his corrections on this article. For all its weaknesses and oversights I obviously remain the sole responsible. F. Rosenthal, As-5'ayhal-Yunaniand the Arabic Plotinus Sottrce. In: Orientalia 21. 1952. P. 461-492; 22. 1953. P. 370-400; 23. 1954. P. 42-65 (repr. in: Greek Philosophy in the Arab World. A Collection of essays. Greath Yarmouth 1990). 2 The first to point to the Neoplatonic sources of the "Sayings of the Greek Sage" pre- served in al-Šahrastani's Kitabal-milalwa-l-nihal was F. Gabrieli, PlotinePorfirioinuneresiografomu.sulmano. In: La parola del passato 3. 1946. P. 338-346. 3 P. Kraus, PlotinchezlesArabes.Remarquessurunnouveau Ji-agmentdelaparaphrasearabedesEnneades. In: Bulletin de I'lnstitut d'Egypte 23. 1940-41. P. 263-295.
4 F. Rosenthal, OnIheKnowledgeq/'Plalo'sphilo.sophyinthe(Islamicworld. In: Islamic Culture 14. 1940. P. 384-422 [p. 396 quoted]. 5 The two overlapping passages identified by Rosenthal come from IV 7, 8�.23-82.22 - called "B" in Rosenthal's edition of the "Sayings of the Greek Sage" -, and from V l [ 10], 6.12-19, called "A2". 6 Rosenthal, As-Sayhal-Yunknf, p. 467. The reverse explanation, namely that the pseudo- Theology was quoting from the "Saying of the Greek Sage", is ruled out by the fact that the passage in the "Greek Sage" omits a short text coming from Plotinus and faithfully repro- duced in the pseudo-Theology. 7 Rosenthal, As-Sayhal-YCindni, p. 467.
8PlotiniOpera t. I-III, ed. P. Henry et H.-R. Schwyzer, t. II, PlotinianaArabica ad codicum fidem anglice vertit G. Lewis. Paris - Bruxelles 1959 (Museum Lessianum. Series Philosophica. 34). 9 I wish to thank very much Dr. Doris Nicholson, Bodleian Library, Department of Ori- ental Books, for her kind help in providing me with the microfim of the ms Marsh 539. The ms has been examined by F. W. Zimmermann, TheOriginsof the ,so-calledTheologyofAristotle. In: Pseudo-Aristotle in the Middle Ages. The Theology and other texts, ed. by J. Kraye, W.F. Ryan and C.B. Schmitt. London 1986. P. 110-240, in part. p. 209-217.
In At a moment about which scholars disagree, the pseudo-Theology received substantial additions; the so-called "longer version" which resulted from these additions is found in some Jewish-Arabic fragments and is reflected in the Latin translation. An extremely useful statusquaestionis has been made by M. Aouad, LaTheologied'Aristoteetautrestextesdu'Plotinus
Arabus'. In: Dictionnaire des Philosophes Antiques publi6 sous la direction de R. Goulet. I. Paris 1989. P. 541-590, in part. p. 564-570 on the "longer version". 11 G. Endress, ProclusArabus.ZwanzigAbschnittausderInstitutioTheologicainarabischenflberzetzung. Wiesbaden-Beirut 1973 (Beiruter Texte und Studien, 10). i2 The up-to-date account of facts and problems concerning the "Kindi's circle" has been provided by G. Endress, TheCircleof'al-Kindi.EarlvArabicTranslations.fromtheGreekandtheRiseof IslamicPhilosophy. In: The Ancient Tradition in Christian and Islamic Hel- lenism. Studies on the Transmission of Greek Philosophy and Sciences dedicated to H.J. Drossaart Lulofs on his ninetieth birthday, ed. by G. Endress and R. Kruk. Leiden 1997. P. 43-76. �3 DiesogenannteTheologiedesAristoteles aus arabischen Handschriften zum ersten Mal herausgegeben von F. Dieterici. Leipzig 1882 (repr. Rodopi, Amsterdam 1965). P. 1.4-5; 'A. Badawi, Aflutin'inda1- 'arab.PlotinusapudArabes.TheologiaAristoteleset,fragmentaquae.supersunt. Cairo 1955, 1966, Kuwait 1977 (Dirasat Islamiyya, 20). P. 3.7. 1� This translator is mentioned in the Fihrisi, p. 244.5 Flugel; p. 304.26 Tagaddud. Zimmermann, TheOriginsof theso-calledTheologyofAristotle, p. 135 convincingly argues that, since Kindi's FirstPhilosophy seems to postdate the pseudo-Theology, this fact, due to the dedication of Kindi's work to caliph al-Mu'tasim (833-42) gives «a reasonably secure upper limits. 15 Ed. Dieterici, p. 1.5-6; ed. Badawi, p. 3.8-9. Zimmermann, TheOriginsnf rheso-calledTheologyofAristotle,p. 1 I 8-119, interprets the verb aslaha which appear in the incipit in the sense that «Hims1 was responsible for all but a final crossing of 't's and dotting of 'i's carried
out by Kindi» (p. 1 18). He raises the question whether or not this verb can indicate a substan- tial revision made by a]-Kindi, and answers in the negative. In so far as he is convinced that «there is no rational plan behind the choice and order of passages in K»- namely, the pseudo- Theologv (p. 112) -, he thinks that the question «Could it be that it was Kindi who selected and arranged the passages included in K (...) ? (...) can roundly be denied» (p. 119). z. On Kindi's position at the Caliphal court and its significance for the translation move- ment see F. Rosenthal, Al-KindialsLiterat. In: Orientalia 2. 1942. P. 262-288, in part. p. 265, n. 1; A. L. Ivry, Al-KindiandtHeMu'tazila:PhilosophicalandPoliticalReevaluation. In: Oriens 25-26. 1976. P. 69-85; Endress, TheC'ircleol'al-Kindi, in part. p. 46-47; D. Gutas, GreekThought,ArabicCulture.TheGraeco-ArabicTranslationMovementinBaghdadandEarly'AbbdsidSociety(2nd-4th/8th-10thcenturies). London 1998, in part. p. 121-126. 17Fihri.rt, p. 251.28 Flugel; p. 312.14 Tagaddud. Endress, TheCircleofal-Kindi, p. 44, mentions Aristotle's Meteorolngica too as a work whose translation was made upon a de- mand by a]-Kind!. On the works translated within the circle of al-Kindi and possibly commis- sioned by him, see ibidem, p. 52-58. 18 G. Endress, DiearabischeLlbersetzungent:onAristoteles'SchrifiDecaelo. Frankfurt am Main 1966. For a comprehensive account of the distinctive features of the translations made within this circle see Endress, TheCircleofal-Kindi, in part. p. 58-62; Endress' results play an important role in Gutas' account of what he calls "translation complexes": see GreekThought,ArabicCulture, p. 141-150. �9 This translator is mentioned in the Fihrist, p. 244.3 Flugel; p. 304.25 Tagaddud. See on him Endress, DiearabischeÜbersetzungenvnnAristoteles''SchriftDecaelo, p. 89-95. 20 Endress, DiearabischeClbersetzungenvonAristoteles,'SchriftDecaelo, p. 118-134. 21 Endress, ProclusArabus, p. 185-193. ZZ F. Zimmermann, TheOriginsof the so-calledTheologyofAristotle (quoted supra,n. 9).
ZS Zimmermann, TheOriginsof theso-calledTheologyof Ari.stotle, p. ]28. 26 "K" is, in Zimmermann's system of sigia, «the so-called Theologe, misascribed to Aristotle)> (p. 112). 27Ibid., p. 130.
28 IV 8, 1.1-2 (transl. Armstrong). 2Y See on this point W. Burkert, Plnttn,PlutarchunddieplatonlsierendeInterpretationvonHeraklitundEmpedocle.s. In: Kephalaion. Studies in Greek Philosophy and its continu- ation offered to prof. C.J. de Vogel, ed. by J. Mansfeld and L.M. de Rijk. Assen ]975. P. 137-146. More details on Plotinus' exegesis of Plato will be found in the running commen- tary which accompanies the Italian translation both of IV 8 and its Arabic paraphrase: AA.VV. Plotino, Ladiscesadell'animaneicorpi(Enn. IV 8). PlotinianaArabica(p.seudo-TeologiadiAristotele, capitoli I e 7; "DettidelSapienteGreco "), forthcoming.
30 Plato's primacy with respect to his predecessors, according to P]otinus, is due to his greater oaq>1ívEta or &xoi(3eva: see for instance V 1 [ 10], 8.23-24, where the literary Pannenides of Plato's dialogue is said to express himself in a more precise and clearer way with respect to the historical one (6 Se Jtagà II7�aiwvt IlaQ(iEvi6r|g axOt(3eaie�ov �yMv). Cf. on this point Th. A. Szlezak, PlatonundAri.stotele.sinder NuslehrePlotins. Basel-Stuttgart 1979. P. 28-31. 31 V 1, 8.10-12: xal Elvul Toug X6yoi)� Touo6E [111 r,awov5 �6E vuv, u7�7`a naval |xev dgfjo8m [l� avaarn�riapevw5, tovs 6E vûv ¡,oY01J<; >;�Tlyrltct5 Exdvwv yeyovevcu (...).
11 plus the first seven lines of chapter 2. H.-R. Schwyzer, Diepseur�oaristotc:lischeTheologeunddiePlotin-Au.sgahede.sYorphyrios. In: Museum Ilelveticum 90. I 941. P. 216-236, provided a list of seven cases against the hypothesis that the Arabic paraphrase was grounded on a draft of Plotinus' treatises an- tedating Porphyry's edition. The most famous case against this hypothesis is the beginning of the second chapter of the pseudo-Theolu�y, which reproduces the innatural division made by Porphyry when he broke a Plotinian sentence in the middle, due to the editorial cutting of the long treatise Ondifficultiesaboutthesoul.
34 Ed. Dieterici, p. 4.13-5.1; ed. Badawl, p. 18.13-16; Lewis's translation, p. 219 in PlotiniOpera. The Arabic passage contains a blatant translation mistake the present question does not compel us to discuss (see my Porphyry,UniversalSoulandtheArabicPlotinus. In: Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 9, 1. 1999. P. 47-88). �5 Ed. Dieterici, p. 8.2-3; ed. Badawi, p. 21.16-17; Lewis' translation, p. 223 in PlotiniOpera (emphasis added by Lewis).
3� Lewis's translation, p. 225 in PlotiniOpera. In the only ms of the pseudo- TheologyI was able to consult, Istanbul, Aya Sofya 2457, f. I 13r8-9, this heading belongs in the body of the text, albeit written in a different ink, probably red. My thanks are due to the Director of the Orient-Institut der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft as well as to Dr. Ch.K. Neumann (Istanbul) for their kind help in providing me with the microfilm of the ms Aya Sofya 2457. 37 Ed. Dieterici, p. 44.3; ed. Badawi, p. 56.5. The context makes clear that the cross-reference is to the beginning of IV 8: «Wethanhewlaoiscapableof doffing his body and putting to rest his senses and promptings and motions, as the Allegorist has described of his own soul, and is capable too in his thought of returning to himself and raisinghismindtotheworldofmind...» (Ed. Dieterici, p. 44.2-4; ed. Badawi, p. 56.4-6; Lewis' translation, p. 375 in PlotinOpera; emphasis added by Lewis). This sentence expands Plotinus' words !Ejtel6t| 4)U�tEV T6V ev Oea wü vorliov x6(y[iou yEyE'VTjUE'vo'v xai T6 zou àAT]8LVOÜ vou xma- vo�auvm X6�kO� ... (V 8, l. I-2), in a way which is clearly reminiscent of IV 8, 1. 1 - 3. 'R To the question are devoted Appendix VI (p. 143-149) and, partly, Appendix XXI (p. 217-221). From what he calls «a falsely drawn boundary line between Plato and Plotinus» (p. 148), Zimmermann infers that it was an habit with Hims! to extend Plato's role and presence in the Enneads, crediting him with many sentences uttered in reality by Plotinus himself. If I am not wrong, this is meant to be an additional argument against the "Porphyrian" hypo- thesis, in so far as such a difference between the Arabic and Greek Plotinus can hardly be ascribed to the alleged Porphyry's adaptation. I confess I am not able to judge whether or not the «Allcgorist» was Plato in the eyes of the translator; in general, the possibility to account for the contents of the Arabic Plotinus on the basis of an adaptation made by Porphyry seems very remote to me, as I tried to say in the article quoted .supra, n. 34. 3y IV 8, 1.27: ou TOL�T6v \iymv JtUVTlXX11 4)CtVEITCXI. The Platonic doxography occu- pies lines 29-50 of chapter t.
4° IV 8, 2.1-8: "Q01:l: tjwlv av�t�3aivet JTE.OI r�5 �[tET�Qa; �DX� reap' atixoij wa6siv ŠT]T�OaOlv è; txVàYXT]Ç Èci° 1/)uX� �V8LaTdT(XL ÉXOVOU eira åvayxao8Eloa eixe rt5 a>v7�o; xqojtoc1 xai 7[EL)i JTOLTJTOTJ 6E, eI'xe oQ8ÜJe; E'LlE u�5 T|UEXEQai 1/)llxalYowç, as �6EL 06�t(X-U(t ijtotxoriaa5 XdQw 8t' ot�TCOV svaw troAv 6i3vai (...). 41 6d. Dieterici, p. I 1.9-18; ed. Badawi, p. 25.6-14; Lewis' translation, p. 229-231 in PlotiniOpera (emphasis added somehow differently from Lewis). QZ Plotinus' words mgl rrl5 tjye2£oa5 ��)X�)5. line 1, are rendered strangely enough by al-nafsallatinahnu,fiha, which is freely translated by Dieterici as «... der Seele, die wir haben» (DiesogenannteTheologiedesAristotelesausdemArabischenabersetztundmitAnmerkungenver.sehen. Leipzig 1883. P. 12) and by Lewis, as we saw, by « the soul that is in us»; Rubio translates literally «... del alma en la cual estamos nosotros [alma humana]» (L. Rubio, Pseudo-Aristoteles,Teologia.Traducciondelkrabe,introducciónynotas. Madrid 1978. P. 73). The ms Istanbul, Aya Sofya 2457 reads here (f.115r5) as the editions do. 43 With respect to Plotinus' words naeL VuXflc 6�(o;, the adverb o)\w5 is mistakenly re- ferred to soul, and generates al-nafsal-kulhya, as if it were *mQl Tfjg 6�71; 1/)uxfje;, taken in the sense of *nFNi r�j5 �vx�5 TOD 3TCLVT6;.
�4 Zimmermann, TheOriginsof"theso-calledTheologyof Aristotle, p. 144-145.
45 Only at the end of a detailed examination of the relationship between the Arabic and the Greek Plotinus we shall be in a position to evaluate, first, whether the actual state of the text allows or disallows the hypothesis of an editorial project also for the rest of the pseudo- Thenlogy and, second, to what extent the project, if any, was successfully carried on until the end of the work. The Italian translation and commentary mentioned above, n. 29, is meant also to be a contribution to such an examination.
46 The two horns of the alternative he sets down at IV 8, 2.6-8: xai nEpi notrltou 6�, EHE 6q8wc cite 6g rpeTEQai 1jJuxal �ow5. åç E6EL (Y(6�LO(Ta 8totxovoa5 xEk>(0 bt' Ui'T(I)V F'�(3(o noAv 6,Ovcti, apparently compare the deeds of the Demiurge and of our souls on the basis of the sinking or not into bodies, whereas it is evident that such a possibility does not
really exist for the Demiurge. For this reason some editors of the Ennead.s, in the past, sup- posed a lacuna here. We think that the passage, as brachylogical as it may be, stands and translate it as follows: «Quanto poi all'artefice del cosmo, ci chiediamo se si sia comportato in modo retto, o se forse abbia agito in modo analogo alle nostre anime che, trovandosi a governare corpi inferiori, vi si devono immergere profondamentc». �� Ed. Dieterici, p. 11.18-19; ed. Badawi, p. 25.15-16; Lewis' translation, p. 231 in PlotiniOpera. 4R Lewis' translation quoted. mad a minor change, rendering al-anniyycit by "beings" instead of keeping Lewis' "essences".
Metaph. A 3, 983 b 6-8: 2cuv IHl1t()(!>nuv Phaedo 96 A 6 - 97 B 6 lies in its background, but its transformation into what I called a "progress pattern" is genuinely Aristotelian.
5o The passage quoted is p. 12.9-14 in Dieterici's edition and p. 26.6-10 in Badawi' one. The translation quoted is still Lewis' one, but I keep rendering anniyya by "being". 5� Resp. 509 B 9-10: ot'x o'aia5 ovrog tow à.ya80u, a7v?�' t ir �:t�.XC.LVCL zil5 ovaia5 rtpea(3cia xai ÕUVá�IEl nepexovio5 - this "Good" is said at 508 E 2-3 t11V tau aya6ov i8eav. As is well known, Plotinus makes systematically use of this passage, which he inter- prets as referred to the same reality Plato deals with in the second half of his Parmenides, in order to argue for the transcendence of the One with respect to being, i.e. the intelligible reality. Sz Two explanations have been proposed for the appearance of this non-Plotinian and non- Proclean feature in the Arabic Plotinus and Proclus. Some scholars (Schlomo Pines, Pierre Thillet, Richard C. Taylor) suggested to trace it back to Porphyry, who maintained in his commentary on the Parmenides such a merging of the One and pure Being one into the other. According to them, Porphyry's own position was influent on the Arabic reworking of Plotinus'
writings, in so far as this reworking is in some way dependent upon a rearrangement of the Ennc:ad.s made by Porphyry or in a Porphyrian vein. On the other side, I tried to argue in favour of an alternative explanation, namely, that this feature in the Arabic Plotinus and Proclus is due to the influence of the peculiar interpretation of Neoplatonism which is given in the pseudo-Dionysian writings (see my LadoctrineneoplatoniciennedeI'etreentre1'antiguitetardiveetleDoyenAge.LeLiberdeCausisparrapportasessources. In: Recherches de Theologie Ancienne et Medievale 59. 1992. P. 41-85 [repr. in RecherchessurleLiberdecausis. Paris 1995], and L'influenceditvocabulairearabe:"CausaPrimaestcessetantum ". In L 'elaborationduvocabulairephilosophiqueauMoyenAge. Actes du Colloque interna- tional de Louvain-la-Neuve et Leuven, 12-14 sept. 1998 edites par J. Hamesse et C. Steel. Turnhout 2000. P. 5 1-97). 53El.Th. 102, Dodds p. 92.1-4. The lemma is the following: TIåVTŒ pev ta 671(i)(30f'V ovxa ex 11:fQatÓ; fan xal &.7rF,�C)ou 0,.<'1 T6 ar�cuiw5 ow 11:ávta O� xd ŠÙJVTŒ `sav2wv xlvJ"]TLxá eam 8L6 T�V šco�v tilV 11:QÓJTrlV" navra b� T6 yvwaitxa �yvG�aeu�5 peiexec 6La T6v voijv T6v jtqcoxov. The proposition 17(18) of the Liberdecausis is grounded in this Proclean propo- sition but changes it substantially as for the meaning it attributes to the Proclean 11:(HÎnúJ; ov, which turns to be identical with the First Principle itself, a squarely non-Proclean thesis. 54Liberdecausi.s, prop. 17(18), ed. O. Bardenhewer, Diepseudo-aristotelischeSchriftueberdasreineGutebekanntunterdemNamenLiberdecau.sis. Freiburg im Breisgau 1882 (repr. Frankfurt a.M. 1961). P. 92.10-93.4; cd. 'A. Badawi, Al-Aflatuniyyaal-muhdata'inda1- 'Arab. Cairo 1955. P. 19.9-12; English translation by R.C. Taylor, The Liber decausis(Kalamjimahdal-hayr).A Study of MedievalNeoplatonism. Doct. Diss. Toronto 1981. P. 312, with some minor changes.
55 end. Dieterici, p. 13.1-10; ed. Badawl, p. 26.16-27.6. Lewis' translation quoted; here too I changed Lewis' "essence" into "being" as a rendering of anniyya. ss See my Ladoctrinedelacreation'mediateinlelligentia'dansleLiberdeCau.sisetdansseessources. In: Revue des Sciences Philosophiqucs et Theologiqucs 76. 1992. P. 209- 233 (repr. in KecherchessurleLiberdecausis). 57 Ed. Dieterici, p. 4.13-17; ed. Badawi, p. 6.7-11. Lewis' translation, p. 487 in PlotiniOpera, with a minor change.
58Liberdecauses, prop. 3, ed. Bardenhewer, p. 64.1-4; ed. Badawi, p. 5.13-16; Taylor's translation quoted, p. 287, with a minor change.
5� l,iber decausis, prop. 8(9), cd. Bardenhewer, p. 77.9-79.4; ed. Badawi, p. 12.8-17; Taylor's translation quoted, p. 299-300, with a minor change. bo The topic of the immediate appearance of intellect from the First Cause, and creation of all the other degrees of reality through the medium of intellect, develops V 1, 6.1-36, a passage which is reflected both in the pseudo-Theology and, partly, in the "Sayings of the Greek Sage". For the pseudo-Theology, see ed. Dieterici, p. 110.19-112.10; ed. Badawi, p. 113.16-114.18; translation Lewis in PlotiniOpera, p. 273-275. The independent passage of the pseudo- Theology,, ed. Dieterici, p. 104.9-105.5; ed. Badawi, p. 108.5-17, which is found after a passage coming from V 1 , 2.10-25 (see Lewis' translation, p. 263), counts in fact as a free reworking of chapter 6 of V I [ 10], because it contains the Arabic rendering of Plotinus' definition of to 0 as the T6 Jtoiotov of the One (V 1, 6.14-15), namely, the definition of `aql as al-mitalal-awwal in which the perfections of the Creator are visible (ed. Dieterici, p. 105.3; ed. Badawi, p. 108.16).
61 Lewis' translation, p. 231 in PlotiniOpera.
62 Cf. M. Baltes, DieWeltentstehungdesplatonischenTimaiosnachdenantikenInterpreten. Leiden 1976 (Philosophia Antiqua, 30). P. 121-123; H. D6rrie t - M. Baltes, Die philosophischeLehredesPlatonismus. Platonische Physik (im antiken Vcrstandnis) II. Banstcine 125-150: Text, übersetzung, Kommentar. Stuttgart - Bad Cannstatt 1998 (Der Platonismus in der Antike. Grundlagen - System - Entwicklung, 5). P. 122-129 and 426-436. K. Verryckcn, Philoponus'interpretationofPlato'.\' cosmogony. In: Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 8. 1997. P. 269-318. 63 DeAet.mundicontraProclus, p. 604.13-610.3 Rabe.
64 M. 'A. Abu Rida (ed.), Rasd'ilal-Kindial falsafiyya. Cairo 1950. P. 102.10-103.5; R. Rashed J. Jolivet, (Euvresphilosophiqueselscienlijiquesd'al-Kindl,vol.1I.Mélaphysiqueetcosmologie. Leiden-Boston-Koln 1999 (Islamic Philosophy, Theology and Science. 29). P. 13.2-16;AI-Kindi'sMetaphysies. ATranslationof Ya`qubibnIshaqal-Kindt'sTreatise"OnFirstPhilosophy " (fial-Falsafahal-ula), with Introduction and Commentary by A. L. Ivry. Albany 1974 (Studies in Islamic Philosophy and Science). P. 57-58. ss Ed. Abu Rida, p. 110.15-16; ed. Rashed - Jolivet, p. 23.15-16, transl. Ivry, p. 64. 66 Fd. Abu Rida, p. 110.19-11 1.G; ed. Rashed - Jolivet, p. 23.19-25.2, transl. Ivry, p. 64- 65. Cf. An.Post. 1 7, 75 a 38-39: Ovx apa EaTtv ei; \nÃ01! Y£V01!ç ixexapdvxa 6CL�(Xt, Olav TO 'IF.(O�tF.TQtx6v åQl8!l11TlXJ1ft. 67 Davidson, ProofsforEternity, p. 108-116.
68 Al-Kindi ontheSubject-MatteroftheFirstPhilosophy.DirectandIndirectSourcesofal-Falsafaal-tila,ChapterOne. In: Was ist Philosophie im Mittelalter? Akten des X. Internationalen Kongresses fur mittelalterliche Philosophie der Societe Internationale pour I'ttude de la Philosophie Medievale 25. bis 30. August 1997 in Erfurt. Herausgegeben von J. A. Aertsen und A. Speer. Berlin - New York 1998. P. 841-855. 69Al-Kindietl'auteurduLiherdeCau.sis. In: RecherchessurleLiberdeCausis. 70 Arnzen, AristotelesDeAnima (quoted supra, p. 91). ).