The three Paradigms of Approaching to the First Principle in Post-Plotinian Neoplatonism

Abstract

From the very beginning, the question about the nature of a first principle was the central problem of Neoplatonism. The problem is that the first principle must completely transcend totality of all things – yet because it causes all things, it must anticipate all things within itself. The aim of the given paper is to demonstrate the three paradigms of approaching to the first principle in postPlotinian Neoplatonism, according to Damascius (Dam. Pr. I, 86, 3-10 Ruelle) known as ‘the last of the  Neoplatonists’. The first paradigm makes a contrast between the completely ineffable first principle and the causally efficient One, which is the One itself or the One-all. This paradigm is represented by Iamblichus and Damascius. The second paradigm, represented mainly by Proclus, combines ineffability and causality within one single principle – the One itself uncoordinated with the noetic triad, which is conceived by Proclus as completely excluding any kind of multiplicity. In the third paradigm, the single first principle of all things coincides with the Father of the noetic triad. It seems like Porphyry abandoned the idea of an absolutely transcendent principle.