NEOPLATONISM. - A philosophical current and school inspired principally by Plato, which arose in Alexandria toward the end of the 2nd century A.D.
I. HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENTS
While it is relatively easy to trace the historical reasons that explain Neoplatonism as a continuation of doctrines linked to the Platonic Academy, the same cannot be said for the aspects that constitute the originality of Neoplatonism, distinguishing it from the philosophy of Plato. It is certain that various currents of thought converged in the formation of the Neoplatonic school or movement, including, besides Platonism, Aristotelianism, Stoicism and various other philosophical tendencies present in the era in which Neoplatonism was taking shape (end of the 2nd century AD). In this genesis, the importance of Jewish thought, above all represented by Philo, must not be forgotten. Among the philosophers from whom the historical premises of Neoplatonism derive is Posidonius of Apamea, considered the greatest representative of syncretism before Plotinus, and to him must be added Numenius of Apamea, who sought to link the plurality of the Platonic ideas to the plurality of the gods. The influence of the Gnostic current must not be overlooked, aimed at an elaboration on the rational plane of a knowledge of God, whose obscure transcendence is accentuated.
The founder of Neoplatonism is commonly held to be Ammonius Saccas, to whom is attributed the attempt to reconcile the religious currents of the Eastern world with Christianity and together with Greek philosophy, according to the Hellenistic formula. Disciples of Ammonius were a Platonic Origen (whose existence was nevertheless contested by Cadiou) and Cassius Longinus, who particularly emphasized a new aesthetics linked to the renewed use of the Platonic ideas. The greatest representative and systematizer of the Neoplatonic current nevertheless remains Plotinus, to whom belongs not so much the synthetic capacity of an eclecticism as was maintained, but rather the living originality of the philosopher, beyond mere membership in a particular school. To understand his period one must turn to the often fragmentary and analytical exposition, even if apparently coordinated, given by the Enneads, the supreme expression and code of authentic Neoplatonism. The very way in which Plotinus expresses his thought explains, at least in part, how he was able to give rise to schools and currents that depend on him and at the same time differ from him. What in the master's doctrine is essentially coordinated in a laborious but achieved synthesis often takes on, in his disciples and epigones, the meaning of an inspiration toward new and sometimes subsequent developments. This can already be seen in the Neoplatonic schools of antiquity, among them the school of Syria, which had Iamblichus as its head and in which one already notes the intersection of new hypotheses that complicate the three (One, Intellect, Soul: 'Ev, Νοῦς, Ψυχή) in which, according to Plotinus, the Absolute expresses itself. The attempt to understand the relationship between the Absolute and the world is further shifted by the intervention of intermediaries that recall the Gnostic doctrines to which Plotinus had instead sharply opposed himself. The school of Athens, represented above all by Proclus, has been understood historically as the ideal continuation of the school of Syria and at the same time more directly linked to the Academy; it had in reality already begun before Proclus with Plutarch of Athens and was represented, after Proclus, above all by Damascius and Simplicius. Proclus insists on the dialectical significance of the relationship of the hypotheses among themselves and with the world. Logic and metaphysics tend to identify with each other. Hence the motif (only partially explicit in Plotinus) according to which the Absolute posits itself, then goes out from itself, and finally returns to itself (μονή, πρόοδος, ἐπιστροφή) becomes fundamental. The triadism of Proclus would be further elaborated and would notably influence the thought of certain medieval philosophers.
To the schools of Syria and Athens, of a more properly philosophical-metaphysical character, two others must be added. One, the school of Pergamon (which can find in Aedesius the connecting link with the school of Syria), has a character of more pronounced religious interest and must be traced back to the effort to mount a defense of pagan traditions in the face of the development of Christianity. A typical representative of this school is, in the 4th century, the emperor Julian the Apostate. Among the disciples of Aedesius must be remembered Chrysanthius, Priscus, Eusebius. The other school, of an essentially erudite type, is the so-called school of Alexandria, which rather set aside the metaphysical and religious syncretistic aspects of the school of Athens and of the preceding Neoplatonic schools, devoting itself to the commentary on the classical philosophers (including Aristotle) and at the same time to more properly scientific inquiry. Christian authors also belonged to it (Synesius of Cyrene, Hierocles of Alexandria), while others came under its influence. If the study of the indicated schools does not exhaust Neoplatonism as belonging to Greek philosophy, it nevertheless constitutes a useful scheme for grouping its representatives.
As regards the influence of Neoplatonism on Christian thought (v. PLATONISMO), it should be noted that Neoplatonism (through which Plato was often studied) occupies a notable place, besides in Augustine, in the whole of Greek patrology (Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, Maximus the Confessor) and acts upon it especially through certain theses proper to it (God, Providence, the supersensible and divine of which the sensible world is an image, the spirituality of the soul and its superiority with respect to the body, the illumination of the soul by God, the immortality of the soul and the idea of a possible otherworldly sanction). It is clear that the Neoplatonism of the Fathers differs, also in certain of these theses, from the more ancient Neoplatonism. Nevertheless its importance remains. Eusebius of Caesarea (Praeparatio evangelica, IV, xi) also cites certain Neoplatonists who would have prepared the preaching of the Gospel, and among these Porphyry, Numenius, Plotinus and Plutarch (v.). Reminiscences of Plotinus are also found in Cyril of Alexandria, as well as in Gregory of Nazianzus and in Basil.
However the thought of Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite may be placed historically (and while the thesis of C. Pera on the matter, which places him close to the Cappadocian Fathers, must be kept in mind), the fact remains that through him one of the most important sources of the transmission of Neoplatonic doctrines to the Middle Ages is established, especially with the De divinis nominibus. It is well known, moreover, that the Middle Ages often failed to establish with true exactness the attribution of works of Neoplatonic inspiration. Thus with the (pseudo) Theologia Aristotelis, which is directly indebted to the theses of Plotinus, and with the work De Caustis, falsely considered Peripatetic. Platonism entered Scholasticism both through St. Augustine and through authors of Neoplatonic inspiration. To these belong Apuleius of Madaura, with the Asclepius attributed to him, and the Hermetic writings (in which Neoplatonic influence is mingled with Neo-Pythagorean), cited especially with regard to speculations on the nature of God and His relations with the world; furthermore Macrobius with his commentary on the Somnium Scipionis; Calcidius, who is of notable importance for having oriented the Middle Ages toward the intellectualistic psychology of Plato rather than toward the "entelecheia" of Aristotle. It is in the same period in which the writings of Aristotle beyond the Organon come into contact with the West, that is particularly in the 12th century, that the translation of Neoplatonic works or works inspired by Neoplatonism is introduced (cf. C. Baeumker, La filosofia europea e il medioevo, Italian trans., Milan 1945, pp. 39-40). In 1268 William of Moerbeke published the Latin translation of Proclus's Elementa theologiae. Of the works more directly oriented toward Neoplatonism, mention should be made above all of the De divisione naturae of John Scotus Eriugena (v.). Close to the Neoplatonic tendency are the exponents of the school of Chartres, Bernard and Theodoric and others; among these, Amalric of Bena (v.) and David of Dinant (v.) inclined toward the pantheistic conception. Their derivation is more directly connected to Scotus Eriugena. A broader study of medieval mysticism, especially speculative mysticism and its relations with Neoplatonism, would deserve a fuller examination than historians of philosophy have so far managed to trace.
Different is the aspect of Renaissance Neoplatonism. Neoplatonic influence becomes prevalent, not only in the well-known examples of George Gemistos Plethon, Cardinal Bessarion, Pico della Mirandola and Marsilio Ficino, but also, and above all, in those who found in Neoplatonism both the inspiration and the speculative framework. Among these, a place apart is held by Nicholas of Cusa, in whom Neoplatonism constitutes the nucleus around which the philosophical system is organized. One may even say that while in him Neoplatonism is associated with an effort of rethinking that seeks to remain, and partly succeeds in remaining, adherent to the fundamental theses of Christian theodicy, the position is reversed instead in those other philosophers of the Renaissance (in particular Giordano Bruno), who effectively constitute a pagan humanism, dissolving and critical of the classical philosophy of the Middle Ages.
It is certainly possible to speak of Neoplatonism present in more modern currents of thought; but here there escapes the possibility of a framework that goes beyond influences and observations, though these are highly noteworthy, and in which it is not permissible to say that Neoplatonism acted as a whole, but rather in certain of its aspects. Thus one has been able to speak of the presence of Neoplatonic elements in German idealism (Schelling) or in contemporary philosophers.
II. PHILOSOPHICAL MEANING
The most integral interpretation of Neoplatonism is theoretico-metaphysical. The fundamental element is to be found in the way Neoplatonism understands the Absolute in itself, in its existence and nature, and in its relations with the spiritual and physical world.
A characteristic of Neoplatonism is, although differently in Plotinus and in the Neoplatonic schools of the Hellenistic world, the emanatist orientation which understands reality as a necessary derivation from the Absolute. The bond uniting the Absolute and the world is more or less profound. Sometimes the tendency toward the unity of the real prevails in Neoplatonism, and there is an attitude oriented toward monism; sometimes, instead, dualistic orientations persist in Neoplatonism, owing above all to the conception of matter as not totally reducible to the world of spirit; or else the Absolute is centralized in a Supreme Principle, separate from every other reality, so as to be essentially extraneous to it. It should be noted that Neoplatonism takes a position on all the greatest problems of philosophy: those of man, of the cosmos and of freedom, of ethics and of religion. With regard to the religious problem, some have sometimes sought to identify in it the essential and almost exclusive motive of Neoplatonism. Certainly the problem of the Absolute is the speculative center of Neoplatonism; yet it is not accurate that religious interest comes almost to replace the more properly theoretical one. This could happen only in certain orientations and currents that do not adequately express the true philosophical significance of Neoplatonism. In it, rather, there is the certainty that is born from a theoretical foundation of the relationship between the Absolute and the world and man. Philosophy introduces one to religion, is integrated into it, and therefore religious experience (v.) does not replace philosophy but rather constitutes its spiritual crowning. Theurgy, magic, the renewed gnosis that has sometimes been able to link itself to Neoplatonism is rather a degenerate and spurious appendage of it. The most authentic and original Neoplatonism, represented by Plotinus, strives to maintain unity not so much and not only between the world and the Absolute, between human living and the One on which it depends, but at the same time between philosophy and religion, between knowledge and life, between contemplation and action. Neoplatonism, moreover, intends to provide man with a path to travel that is realized through philosophical speculation and at the same time through an ascetic reform of life, in solidarity with it. It is in these fundamental motives that the characteristic and the unity of Neoplatonism are to be sought, beneath the particular determinations and sometimes contaminations of the Hellenistic Neoplatonic currents.
III. RELATIONS BETWEEN NEOPLATONISM AND CHRISTIANITY
The relations between Neoplatonism and Christianity were historically unfolded, as indicated above, first of all in the philosophical and theological speculation of the Church Fathers. This must not be understood as a dependence of patristic theology on Neoplatonism in its properly dogmatic content. Rather, Neoplatonism helped to provide the foundations of a philosophy of Platonic orientation that stood substantially in accord with Christianity.
Alongside a Neoplatonism that sought to reinvigorate paganism, there indeed appears a Neoplatonism that furnishes diverse and complex rational elements to theological speculation on the revealed datum. It must be asked, on the other hand, whether Christianity in turn exercised an influence on Neoplatonism and, in particular, on Plotinus. This latter question is still far from a solution. The more authentic Neoplatonism acknowledges the transcendence of the Absolute, placing it above every reality. The Absolute, on the other hand, is not reducible to a single aspect; indeed Neoplatonism insists on finding various stages in the process that links the Absolute to other realities that belong to it and, indirectly, to the world. Thus arises the problem of the relationship between the "hypostases" that constitute the Absolute, and of the world with the Absolute itself. Christianity established a clear distinction between God and the world, between God's operations ad extra concerning creatures and his activity ad intra in which his eternal life is expressed, in the Unity of nature and in the Trinity of Persons. For Christianity the Trinity is God himself, whereas in Neoplatonism the hypostases are the fruit of a freedom-necessity of God. As for the relationship between the Absolute and the world, Greek Neoplatonism lacks the concept of creation (v.). It will be introduced only through Christian philosophers and thinkers. Primitive Neoplatonism is pantheistic (v. PANTEISMO): God does not freely create the world; not only is there a necessity of communion between the world and God (the world cannot exist without God), but God cannot exist without the world. In the Neoplatonism of Plotinus there is an oscillation between an emanatistic monism (v. EMANATIEMO), in which the freedom of creation is abolished, and a dualism (v.) tied to the existence of matter.
Nevertheless the conception of the divine unity of the world lent itself to a valorization in a Christian sense. St. Augustine and Pseudo-Dionysius will develop the theme of the itinerarium by which it is given to reach the successive stages that lead ab exterioribus ad interiora and subsequently to the Absolute. It is on this theme that the philosophy of Neoplatonism meets more properly with the mystical conception, which undoubtedly constitutes a relevant aspect of Neoplatonism. Man, before the reality that surrounds him, grasps its fragile caducity; he is therefore led to transcend the world for a Reality that can be reached not only logically, but in a further experience, the fruit of intuitive knowledge. There is consequently a "mysticism" connected to the human incapacity to express the Absolute with one's own sensible and significative language. It culminates in the ineffable encounter with God, ecstasy (v.). The mysticism of Neoplatonism is intellectualist and only subordinately experimental. It is personal and rigorously limited in time and space. Christian mysticism differs from it by its content, bound to Revelation, and by the manner in which it is enacted and which constantly presupposes the mediation of Christ, the Word of God made man. Not without reason could Neoplatonism give rise rather to expressions of religiosity than to a true and proper religion.
From this point of view Neoplatonism is clearly eclectic and imposed a broad need for correction and integration on the part of the Christian philosophers, theologians, and mystics who drew inspiration from it. Its divergences from Christianity were historically imposed and clearly manifested in St. Augustine. At a given moment of his spiritual itinerary St. Augustine was not so much concerned to "Christianize" Neoplatonism as to set aside what in it is insufficient and in contrast with Christian doctrine, that is, both the rationalism and naturalism often implicit in Neoplatonism and its irrationalistic aspects and motifs. Nevertheless the resolute affirmation of the primacy of contemplation over action (already present in Greek philosophy but more typically explicit in Neoplatonism), the decisive valorization and centrality of the Reality of God in his Transcendence, are among the most valid and perennial motifs of Neoplatonism, together with the question it poses, and does not fully resolve, of the relationship between the Absolute and the world, between God and man.