Chap. V. A N T I E N T M E T A P H Y S I C S. 41 



ther there was any being intirely feparated from body^ appears to have 

 been a doubt In the time of Arlftotle as well as now: And it appear^;, 

 from feveral paiTages In his metaphyfics, that it was the chief 

 purpofe of that work, to prove, that fuch bangs did exift ; and, ac- 

 cordingly, wlih that proof he concludes the work. It is therefore e- 

 vident, that, according to Ariftotle's notion, mind^ and that moH: per- 

 fect mind^ which is feparated from ail matter^ was the chief fubject of 

 metaphyfics. But, as 7nind is one kind of beings it is not poiTible 

 perfedly to underftand the nature of m'lnd^ without knovving what 

 being is, and its general attributes, which muft belong to m'lnd^ as well 

 as other beings : And there is one kind of being which it is abfolutely 

 neceffary to know, in order to underftand the nature of ;;/i«./, and 

 that is body ; for, as body^ according to the definition that Is given of 

 it, is as oppofite to zw/W, as negation is to affirmation ; and as of op- 

 pojites there is the fame fcience, it is impofiible that the one can be 

 underftood without the otlier. And it is for this reafon, that, in this 

 fcience, though the chief fubjed of it be mind^ I have thought' 

 proper to fay fo much of body^ and fhall ftill fay a great deal more of 

 it. 



Further, all beings are contained in the univerfe ; and the umver/e 

 itfelf is a being, and one being, according to the notion of all the an- 

 tient philofophers that were not Atheifts, and, according to the no- 

 tion of fon^e of them, an anmiate being *. Now, if there be any phi- 

 lofophy, or fcience of any kind, to which the knowledge of this being 

 belongs, it muft be metaphyfics ; nor is there any philofophy to which 



F the 



* This was undoubtedly the do^lrlne of the Pythagorean fchool, as is evident from 

 that muft valuable fragment of it, ftill prcfcrved in the treatife of Timaeus the Lo- 

 crian, De anima mundi. And in this, as in other things, Plato follows the philofophy 

 of Pythagoras, as is evident from the dialogue which bears the name of TimafUSf 

 pag. io/}8. edith Ficini* 



