Prime Matter as Extension in Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s “Physics”

Abstract

In the first half of the 6th century AD, John Philoponus and Simplicius simultaneously suggested the definition of prime matter as the unlimited extension. In the treatise “On the Eternity of the World against Proclus” (529 AD), Philoponus defines the first substrate of a generation as unlimited three-dimensionality or a simple bulk. Meanwhile, in the commentary on Aristotle’s “Physics” (532 AD), Simplicius specifies the prime matter as the undetermined and incorporeal extension and dispersion. Both philosophers discuss the
question on an incorporeal matter as a substrate of corporeal change and generation. Both thinkers are also considering the Stoics’ arguments on the matter as a corporeal substrate and Plotinus’ response on these arguments given in the fourth book of the Second Ennead, where the latter exposed the matter as a substrate of mass and corporeality. Nevertheless, while Philoponus rejects the existence of unlimited matter and insists on the concept of three-dimensional extension, or body qua body, as the first substrate of
physical bodies, Simplicius argues the necessity of the prime matter as a principle of extension, volume and divisibility of physical bodies and demonstrates the way the incorporeal and undetermined matter could be considered as a substrate of corporeal volume. In the present paper, I will consider Simplicius’ arguments on the matter and clarify the succession between Plotinus and Simplicius in their understanding of matter as an incorporeal origin of corporeal extension, as well as the difference between Simplicius’ notion of matter and Philoponus’ concept of three-dimensional extension.