Acceso usuarios
Daniela Patrizia Taormina
Iamblichus took a clear stand in the late-antique debate on the origin of matter: in his view, matter is generated, in the sense that it is brought about by a higher principle (primary causes) outside physical time. Two passages testify to this conception: "In Tim, fr, 38 Dillon" (=Procl. "In Tim. I, p. 386.8-13 D.) and "Ad Porph." ("De myst.") p. 196, 14-19 Saffrey-Segonds (=VIII 3, p. 265.6-10 Parthey). The relation between the two, however, is rather problematic and scholars stand divided: some maintain that Proclus drew the conception expounded in "In Tim." fr. 38 from Iamblichus commentary by the same title, others that he drew it from "Ad Porph". The question is a far from marginal one. It is connected to the problem of the attribution of "Ad Porph." and strongly bears upon the issues of Iamblichus work method and of his doctrine.Moreover, the very reconstruction of the text of "Ad Porph." closely depends on how the analogy connecting it to "In Tim". fr. 38 is understood. A reading of the two passages, first each in its own context and then in the light of one another, reveals that "In Tim. fr. 38" is based on the lost commentary on the "Timeaeus". Consequently, the two passages are seen to adopt a reverse perspective on the subject, so to speak: "In Tim.fr 38" elucidates Plato through Hermes, while "Ad Porph." elucidates Hermes by introducing Platonic notions. Finally, with regard to "Ad Porph." p. 196. 14-19, a suggestion is made to retain the transmitted text.
