Imregh Mónika
THE INFLUENCE OF PLOTIN ON RENAISSANCE PHILOSOPHERS IN THE 15TH CENTURY : MARSILIO FICINO AND
GIOVANNI PICO DELLA MIRANDOLA
The subject of my PhD dissertation is the influence of Plotin’s philosophy in Ficin’s and Pico’s writings.
In the preface I examine the relevance of studying antiquity and the spiritual horizon wich could help the
contemporary materialistic mind of man in everyday life. In the introduction I deal with Plotin’s rediscovery in Italy from
obtaining and copying manuscripts to the translation with abundant commentaries of Ficino, edited in print.
Since in the Theologia platonica’s composition (shaping) Ficin shows much more the effect of Jamblichos
and Psellos, I concentrate on his earlier Commentary of Platon’s Symposium, finished in 1469 examining the
speculativ elements taken over from Plotin by Ficin in his cosmography and ontological structure.
First of all in the Commentary of Platon’s Symposium I demonstrate that Ficin takes over Plotins
ontology in the description of creation. The role of light in Creation and the parallel between Sence and eyes and seeing
drawn by Ficin has its archetype in Plotin’s writings. By Plotin for every level of existence the light is the Hypostasis
above, and contemplates it like an eye. The Sun in Plotin’s analogies is either the symbol of the One or of Sense, in
the first case the aureole rising from it and surrounding it is the Intelligence, in the second is the Soul. Ficin as Plotin,
makes Love a means to become perfect and reach God. I examine other elements of Plotin’s influence on Ficin principally
following the contents of Enneads III, 5. I compare the two writings (Commentary of Symposium and
Enneads III, 5) on the following four aspects: 1. the love as a state of mind; 2. the two Venus; 3. the caste of
daimons; 4. Poros and Penia. Beauty according to Ficin as Plotin, is equal to the spiritual principle springing from God
which emanates continuosly from him nourishing all the levels of the lower creation and shapes it including Sense and
matter. It’s similar to the light, the brilliance of wich guides the spectator to its source. It is this Beauty which leads to
desire in everything. In Ficin, as in Plotin’s view the aspiration to Beauty and its source, Good, and the love kindled by
them is the promoter of the realization of the man re-united to the Origin, which is the highest level of human existence.
This leading motif intersperses the whole Commentary of Symposium.
Out of the 900 theses intended for the philosophical dispute to be organized in Rome, 15 is concerned with the
philosophy of Plotin selected by Pico. They are formulated by himself on the basis of his studies, so they aren’t direct
quotations. Nine of his own theses mention Plotin or deal with typical Plotinean problems. Three times he refutes Plotin’s
point of view: on the basic categories, on the immortality of Soul, and the reincarnation of human Soul in animals. Two
times Pico interprets him: on the two Venus and on celestial love. Three times his opinion is exactly the same as that of
Plotin’s: on spiritual and physical beauty , on the marriage of Poros and Penia, and on the love appearing in the
Symposium.
In the Heptaplus the Neo-Platonist author appears on the following subjects: 1. the One; 2. the birth of the
Angel (Sense); 3. the Soul is a cycle; 4. God is not equal with Sense; 5. every life derives from a divine principle; 6.
preparation for realization – the happiness of man.
In his analysis written to Benivieni’s Canzona d’amore Pico makes a mention of Plotin’s etimologization,
according to which the name of Eros derives from contemplation or seeing
(”ñáóéò).
In the III, 1. chapter treating the
Angel’s (coming from Sense) and the human’s (coming from Soul) love, Pico dedicates a whole page to the explanation
of the conception of love in Plotin’s Enneads III, 5. In the IV, 4 chapt. analysing the forth stanza he declares that
the beauty of the body comes from the quality of the soul, and the light of the soul suffuses the body by which it
becomes nice. First he referes to Moses, then to Plotin, on whose face according to Porphyr some radiation could be seen
during his meditation.
So it’s obvious that in Pico’s earlier writings, before his denigration by the Church of Rome, Plotin is his model
quoted by name. Afterwards he mostly avoided those „speculative excesses” wich could be suspicious for some cardinals.