Strange to say, neither he nor others seem to
have perceived that our forger speaks in riddles
here for the simple reason that he wants to
reproduce the substance of the metaphysics in
Ep. vii, and is unable properly to understand
them. How far he actually does understand Ep.
vii 342 A sqc[. is perhaps impossible to determine,
but we can, I think, quite certainly discern his
meaning here by comparing the doctrine which
Plato enunciates there.
I do not wish in this place to explain that
doctrine in detail. It is enough to say that Plato
enumerates there five things, viz., Svo/ia, Myog,
eWco^ov, ImoTi^/ii], and avro o br) yvcoazov re xal
d^rjQwg sorlv bv, which may be distinguished
with regard to any object of inquiry. Furthers
he distinguishes the apprehension of the first four
and the apprehension of the fifth (the Idea) as
that of nowv zi and to r'l respectively.
This latter distinction our writer doubtless does
not understand, though he probably alludes to it
m TioV axxa sariv (in place of which, if we desire
to make him a little more intelligible we might
read not iirra a eariv), and in the words rov
dfj ^aaiMcog neqi teal wv elnov ovdev iariv xoiovxov.
