IAMBLICHUS ON The Mysteries OF THE EGYPTIANS, CHALDEANS, AND ASSYRIANS.
Transcriber’s Note:
New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the public domain.
TRANSLATED FROM THE GREEK
BY
THOMAS TAYLOR.
Ο δε Αριστοτελης προς Αντιπατρον περι Αλεξανδρου γραφων, εφη μη μονον εκεινῳ
προσηκειν οτι πολλων κρατει μεγαφρονειν, αλλ’ ουδεν ηττον ει τις ορθως γινωσκει
περι θεων.
Plutarch.
Second Edition.
LONDON:
BERTRAM DOBELL,
77 CHARING CROSS ROAD, W.C.
AND
REEVES AND TURNER,
5 WELLINGTON STREET, STRAND.
MDCCCXCV.
ADVERTISEMENT.
v
The various translations and original works of
Thomas Taylor, though still in request by the
more zealous students of ancient philosophy
and occult science, have now become so scarce
and expensive that it is only within the power
of comparatively wealthy collectors to obtain
them. This is a matter for regret, inasmuch
as it cannot be affirmed that his writings have
been, or are likely to be superseded, or that
they are without value. They can hardly be
neglected without loss by those who desire to
understand the systems of philosophy which
satisfied the spiritual needs of the antique
world. It is not possible, even for the most
fervent believer in modern “progress,” to dismiss
the speculations of the ancient philosophers
as antiquated notions which have had
their day and no longer possess interest or
value. The names of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle
can never grow dim with age, nor is it
possible to conceive a time when men shall
cease to study and reverence them. As the
disciple, the translator, and the expounder of
vithese and of other sages of antiquity, Thomas
Taylor deserves to be held in honour and remembrance,
and it would be a misfortune if
his labours remained unknown because of the
scarcity of his books. It is for this reason that
the present reprint has been undertaken; and
it is hoped that it will meet with such a
measure of success as may encourage the republication
of various other works by the same
author. It has been printed in handsome
style and published at a moderate price in
order that it may be regarded as a desirable
addition to the scholar’s library, while yet it
will not tax severely the means of the not
too wealthy student. For the rest it is only
necessary to say that this reprint is, in size,
number of pages, type, and general get-up, an
almost exact facsimile of the original edition,
which was first printed in 1821. No alterations
or additions have been made in or to
the original text, as it is thought that those
who care for Taylor’s writings will prefer to
have them in their integrity. Should it be
found possible, however, to continue the series
it is intended to prefix to a future volume
an essay on Taylor, which will contain a biography
of him, and a critical estimate of his
writings.
May, 1895.
INTRODUCTION.
vii
It appears to me that there are two descriptions
of persons by whom the present work
must be considered to be of inestimable
worth, the lovers of antiquity and the lovers
of ancient philosophy and religion. To the
former of these it must be invaluable, because
it is replete with information derived
from the wise men of the Chaldeans, the
prophets of the Egyptians, the dogmas of
the Assyrians, and the ancient pillars of
Hermes; and to the latter, because of the
doctrines contained in it, some of which
originated from the Hermaic pillars, were
known by Pythagoras and Plato, and were
the sources of their philosophy; and others
are profoundly theological, and unfold the
mysteries of ancient religion with an admirable
conciseness of diction, and an inimitable
vigour and elegance of conception. To
viiiwhich also may be added, as the colophon
of excellence, that it is the most copious,
the clearest, and the most satisfactory defence
extant of genuine ancient theology.
This theology, the sacred operations pertaining
to which called theurgy are here
developed, has for the most part, since the
destruction of it, been surveyed only in its
corruptions among barbarous nations, or
during the decline and fall of the Roman
empire, with which, overwhelmed with pollution,
it gradually fell, and at length totally
vanished from what is called the polished
part of the globe. This will be evident to
the intelligent reader from the following
remarks, which are an epitome of what has
been elsewhere more largely discussed by
me on this subject, and which also demonstrate
the religion of the Chaldeans, Egyptians,
and Greeks to be no less scientific
than sublime.
In the first place, this theology celebrates
the immense principle of things as something
superior even to being itself; as
exempt from the whole of things, of which
it is nevertheless ineffably the source; and
ixdoes not, therefore, think fit to enumerate
it with any triad[1] or order of beings. Indeed
it even apologizes for giving the appellation
of the most simple of our conceptions
to that which is beyond all knowledge
and all conception. It denominates this
principle however, the one and the good;
by the former of these names indicating its
transcendent simplicity, and by the latter
xits subsistence as the object of desire to all
beings. For all things desire good. At
the same time, however, it asserts that these
appellations are in reality nothing more than
the parturitions of the soul, which, standing
as it were in the vestibules of the adytum
of deity, announce nothing pertaining to the
ineffable, but only indicate her spontaneous
tendencies towards it, and belong rather to
the immediate offspring of the first God
than to the first itself. Hence, as the result
of this most venerable conception of the
supreme, when it ventures not only to denominate
it, though ineffable, but also to
assert something of its relation to other
things, it considers this as preeminently its
peculiarity, that it is the principle of principles;
it being necessary that the characteristic
property of principle, after the same
manner as other things, should not begin
from multitude, but should be collected into
one monad as a summit, and which is the
principle of all principles.
The scientific reasoning from which this
dogma is deduced is the following. As
the principle of all things is the one, it is
xinecessary that the progression of beings
should be continued, and that no vacuum
should intervene either in incorporeal or
corporeal natures. It is also necessary that
every thing which has a natural progression
should proceed through similitude. In consequence
of this, it is likewise necessary
that every producing principle should generate
a number of the same order with itself,
viz. nature, a natural number; soul, one
that is psychical (i. e. belonging to soul);
and intellect an intellectual number. For if
whatever possesses a power of generating,
generates similars prior to dissimilars, every
cause must deliver its own form and characteristic
peculiarity to its progeny; and before
it generates that which gives subsistence
to progressions, far distant and separate
from its nature, it must constitute
things proximate to itself according to essence,
and conjoined with it through similitude.
It is, therefore, necessary from these
premises, since there is one unity, the principle
of the universe, that this unity should
produce from itself, prior to every thing
else, a multitude of natures characterized
xiiby unity, and a number the most of all
things allied to its cause; and these natures
are no other than the Gods.
According to this theology, therefore,
from the immense principle of principles,
in which all things causally subsist, absorbed
in superessential light, and involved
in unfathomable depths, a beauteous progeny
of principles proceed, all largely partaking
of the ineffable, all stamped with the
occult characters of deity, all possessing
an overflowing fulness of good. From these
dazzling summits, these ineffable blossoms,
these divine propagations, being, life, intellect,
soul, nature, and body depend; monads
suspended from unities, deified natures proceeding
from deities. Each of these monads,
too, is the leader of a series which
extends from itself to the last of things, and
which, while it proceeds from, at the same
time abides in, and returns to, its leader.
And all these principles, and all their progeny,
are finally centred and rooted by
their summits in the first great all-comprehending
one. Thus all beings proceed
from, and are comprehended in, the first
xiiibeing: all intellects emanate from one first
intellect; all souls from one first soul; all
natures blossom from one first nature; and
all bodies proceed from the vital and luminous
body of the world. And, lastly, all
these great monads are comprehended in
the first one, from which both they and all
their depending series are unfolded into
light. Hence this first one is truly the unity
of unities, the monad of monads, the principle
of principles, the God of Gods, one
and all things, and yet one prior to all.
No objections of any weight, no arguments
but such as are sophistical, can be
urged against this most sublime theory,
which is so congenial to the unperverted
conceptions of the human mind, that it can
only be treated with ridicule and contempt
in degraded, barren, and barbarous ages.
Ignorance and impious fraud, however,
have hitherto conspired to defame those
inestimable works[2] in which this and many
other grand and important dogmas can
xivalone be found; and the theology of the
ancients has been attacked with all the insane
fury of ecclesiastical zeal, and all the
imbecile flashes of mistaken wit, by men
whose conceptions on the subject, like those
of a man between sleeping and waking,
have been turbid and wild, phantastic and
confused, preposterous and vain.
Indeed, that after the great incomprehensible
cause of all, a divine multitude
subsists, cooperating with this cause in the
production and government of the universe,
has always been, and is still, admitted by
all nations and all religions, however much
they may differ in their opinions respecting
the nature of the subordinate deities, and
the veneration which is to be paid to them
by man; and however barbarous the conceptions
of some nations on this subject
may be, when compared with those of
others. Hence, says the elegant Maximus
Tyrius, “You will see one according law
and assertion in all the earth, that there is
one God, the king and father of all things,
and many Gods, sons of God, ruling together
with him. This the Greek says, and
xvthe Barbarian says, the inhabitant of the
continent, and he who dwells near the sea,
the wise and the unwise. And if you proceed
as far as to the utmost shores of the
ocean, there also there are Gods, rising very
near to some, and setting very near to
others.”[3]
The deification, however, of dead men,
and the worshiping men as Gods, formed
no part of this theology, when it is considered
according to its genuine purity.
Numerous instances of the truth of this
might be adduced, but I shall mention for
this purpose, as unexceptionable witnesses,
the writings of Plato, the Golden Pythagoric
Verses,[4] and the Treatise of Plutarch
xvion Isis and Osiris. All the works of Plato,
indeed, evince the truth of this position,
xviibut this is particularly manifest from his
Laws. The Golden verses order that the
immortal Gods be honoured first, as they
are disposed by law; afterwards the illustrious
Heroes, under which appellation the
author of the verses comprehends also angels
and dæmons, properly so called; and
in the last place, the terrestrial dæmons,
i. e. such good men as transcend in virtue
the rest of mankind. But to honour the
Gods as they are disposed by law, is, as
Hierocles observes, to reverence them as
they are arranged by their demiurgus and
father; and this is to honour them as beings
not only superior to man, but also to
dæmons and angels. Hence, to honour
men, however excellent they may be, as
Gods, is not to honour the Gods according
to the rank in which they are placed by
their Creator; for it is confounding the
divine with the human nature, and is thus
acting directly contrary to the Pythagoric
xviiiprecept. Plutarch too, in his above mentioned
treatise, most forcibly and clearly
shows the impiety of worshiping men as
Gods.[5]
“So great an apprehension indeed,”
says Dr. Stillingfleet,[6] “had the Heathens
of the necessity of appropriate acts of divine
worship, that some of them have chosen to
die, rather than to give them to what they
did not believe to be God. We have a
remarkable story to this purpose in Arrian
and Curtius[7] concerning Callisthenes. Alexander
arriving at that degree of vanity as to
desire to have divine worship given him,
and the matter being started out of design
among the courtiers, either by Anaxarchus,
as Arrian, or Cleo the Sicilian, as Curtius
says; and the way of doing it proposed,
viz. by incense and prostration; Callisthenes
vehemently opposed it, as that which
would confound the difference of human and
xixdivine worship, which had been preserved inviolable
among them. The worship of the
Gods had been kept up in temples, with
altars, and images, and sacrifices, and
hymns, and prostrations, and such like;
but it is by no means fitting, says he, for us
to confound these things, either by lifting up
men to the honours of the Gods, or depressing
the Gods to the honours of men. For if Alexander
would not suffer any man to usurp
his royal dignity by the votes of men; how
much more justly may the Gods disdain for
any man to take their honours to himself.
And it appears by Plutarch,[8] that the
Greeks thought it a mean and base thing for
any of them, when sent on any embassy to
the kings of Persia, to prostrate themselves
before them, because this was only allowed
among them in divine adoration. Therefore,
says he, when Pelopidas and Ismenias
were sent to Artaxerxes, Pelopidas did nothing
unworthy, but Ismenias let fall his
ring to the ground, and stooping for that,
was thought to make his adoration; which
xxwas altogether as good a shift as the Jesuits
advising the crucifix to be held in the mandarin’s
hands while they made their adorations
in the Heathen temples in China.
Conon[9] also refused to make his adoration,
as a disgrace to his city; and Isocrates[10]
accuses the Persians for doing it, because
herein they showed that they despised the Gods
rather than men, by prostituting their honours
to their princes. Herodotus mentions Sperchies
and Bulis, who could not with the
greatest violence be brought to give adoration
to Xerxes, became it was against the law
of their country to give divine honour to men.[11]
And Valerius Maximus[12] says, “the Athenians
put Timagoras to death for doing it; so
strong an apprehension had possessed them,
that the manner of worship which they used
to their Gods, should be preserved sacred
and inviolable.” The philosopher Sallust
also, in his Treatise on the Gods and the
World, says, “It is not unreasonable to
suppose that impiety is a species of punishment,
and that those who have had a knowledge
xxiof the Gods, and yet despised them,
will in another life be deprived of this
knowledge. And it is requisite to make
the punishment of those who have honoured
their kings as Gods to consist in being expelled
from the Gods.”[13]
When the ineffable transcendency of the
first God, which was considered as the
grand principle in the Heathen religion by
the best theologists of all nations, and particularly
by its most illustrious promulgators,
Orpheus, Pythagoras, and Plato, was
forgotten, this oblivion was doubtless the
principal cause of dead men being deified
by the Pagans. Had they properly directed
their attention to this transcendency
they would have perceived it to be so immense
as to surpass eternity, infinity, self-subsistence,
and even essence itself, and
that these in reality belong to those venerable
natures which are, as it were, first unfolded
into light from the unfathomable
xxiidepths of that truly mystic unknown, about
which all knowledge is refunded into ignorance.
For, as Simplicius justly observes,
“It is requisite that he who ascends to the
principle of things should investigate whether
it is possible there can be any thing
better than the supposed principle; and if
something more excellent is found, the
same inquiry should again be made respecting
that, till we arrive at the highest conceptions,
than which we have no longer any
more venerable. Nor should we stop in
our ascent till we find this to be the case.
For there is no occasion to fear that our
progression will be through an unsubstantial
void, by conceiving something about
the first principles which is greater and
more transcendent than their nature. For
it is not possible for our conceptions to
take such a mighty leap as to equal, and
much less to pass beyond, the dignity of the
first principles of things.” He adds, “This,
therefore, is one and the best extension [of
the soul] to [the highest] God, and is, as
much as possible, irreprehensible; viz. to
know firmly, that by ascribing to him the
xxiiimost venerable excellences we can conceive,
and the most holy and primary
names and things, we ascribe nothing to
him which is suitable to his dignity. It is
sufficient, however, to procure our pardon
[for the attempt], that we can attribute to
him nothing superior.”[14] If it is not possible,
therefore, to form any ideas equal to
the dignity of the immediate progeny of
the ineffable, i. e. of the first principles of
things, how much less can our conceptions
reach that thrice unknown darkness, in the
reverential language of the Egyptians,[15]xxivwhich is even beyond these? Had the
Heathens, therefore, considered as they
ought this transcendency of the supreme
God, they would never have presumed to
equalize the human with the divine nature,
and consequently would never have worshiped
men as Gods. Their theology, however,
is not to be accused as the cause of
this impiety, but their forgetfulness of the
sublimest of its dogmas, and the confusion
with which this oblivion was necessarily
attended.
But to return to the present work. To
some who are conversant with the writings
of Porphyry, who know how high he ranks
among the best of the Platonists, and that
he was denominated by them, on account of
his excellence, the philosopher, it may seem
strange that he should have been so unskilled
in theological mysteries, and so
ignorant of the characteristics of the beings
superior to man, as by his epistle to Anebo
he may appear to have been. That he was
not, however, in reality thus unskilful and
xxvignorant, is evident from his admirable
Treatise on Abstinence from Animal Food,
and his Αφορμαι προς τα νοητα, or Auxiliaries to
Intelligibles. His apparent ignorance, therefore,
must have been assumed for the purpose
of obtaining a more perfect and copious
solution of the doubts proposed in his Epistle,
than he would otherwise have received. But
at the same time that this is admitted, it
must also be observed, that he was inferior
to Iamblichus in theological science, who so
greatly excelled in knowledge of this kind,
that he was not surpassed by any one, and
was equaled by few. Hence he was denominated
by all succeeding Platonists the
divine, in the same manner as Plato, “to
whom,” as the acute Emperor Julian remarks,
“he was posterior in time only, but
not in genius.”[16]
The difficulties attending the translation
of this work into English are necessarily
great, not only from its sublimity and novelty,
xxvibut also from the defects of the original.
I have, however, endeavoured to
make the translation as faithful and complete
as possible; and have occasionally
availed myself of the annotations of Gale,
not being able to do so continually, because
for the most part, where philosophy is concerned,
he shows himself to be an inaccurate,
impertinent, and garrulous smatterer.
THE EPISTLE OF PORPHYRY TO THE EGYPTIAN ANEBO.
1
Porphyry to the Prophet Anebo greeting.
I commence my friendship towards you from
the Gods and good dæmons, and from those
philosophic disquisitions, which have an affinity
to these powers. And concerning these particulars
indeed, much has been said by the
Grecian philosophers; but, for the most part,
the principles of their belief are derived from
conjecture.
In the first place, therefore, it is granted
that there are Gods. But I inquire what the
peculiarities are of each of the more excellent
genera, by which they are separated from each
other; and whether we must say that the cause
of the distinction between them is from their
energies, or their passive motions, or from things
2that are consequent, or from their different
arrangement with respect to bodies; as, for
instance, from the arrangement of the Gods
with reference to etherial, but of dæmons to
aerial, and of souls to terrestrial, bodies?
I also ask, why, since [all] the Gods dwell in
the heavens, theurgists only invoke the terrestrial
and subterranean Gods? Likewise, how
some of the Gods are said to be aquatic and
aerial? And how different Gods are allotted
different places, and the parts of bodies according
to circumscription, though they have
an infinite, impartible, and incomprehensible
power? How there will be a union of them
with each other, if they are separated by the
divisible circumscriptions of parts, and by the
difference of places and subject bodies?
How do theologists, or those who are wise in
divine concerns, represent the Gods as passive,
to whom on this account, it is said, erect phalli
are exhibited, and obscene language is used?
But if they are impassive, the invocations of
the Gods will be in vain, which announce that
they can appease the anger of the divinities,
and procure a reconciliation with them; and
still more, what are called the necessities of
the Gods, will be vain. For that which is
impassive cannot be allured, nor compelled,
nor necessitated. How, therefore, are many
3things, in sacred operations, performed to them
as passive? Invocations,—likewise, are made
to the Gods as passive; so that not dæmons
only are passive, but the Gods also, conformably
to what Homer says,
But if we assert with certain persons, that the
Gods are pure intellects, but that dæmons, being
psychical, participate of intellect; in a still
greater degree will pure intellects be incapable
of being allured, and will be unmingled with
sensible natures. Supplications, however, are
foreign to the purity of intellect, and therefore
are not to be made to it. But the things which
are offered [in sacred rites] are offered as to
sensitive and psychical essences.
Are, therefore, the Gods separated from dæmons,
through the former being incorporeal,
but the latter corporeal? If, however, the Gods
are incorporeal alone, how will the sun and
moon, and the visible celestials, be Gods?
How, likewise, are some of the Gods beneficent,
but others malefic?
What is it that connects the Gods in the
heavens that have bodies, with the incorporeal
Gods?
4What is it that distinguishes dæmons from
the visible and invisible Gods, since the visible
are connected with the invisible Gods?
In what do a dæmon, hero, and soul, differ
from each other? Is it in essence, or in power,
or in energy?
What is the indication of a God, or angel, or
archangel, or dæmon, or a certain archon, or
soul being present? For to speak boastingly,
and to exhibit a phantasm of a certain quality,
is common to Gods and dæmons, and to all
the more excellent genera. So that the genus
of Gods will in no respect be better than that
of dæmons.
Since the ignorance of, and deception about,
divine natures is impiety and impurity, but a
scientific knowledge of the Gods is holy and
beneficial, the ignorance of things honourable
and beautiful will be darkness, but the knowledge
of them will be light. And the former,
indeed, will fill men with all evils, through the
want of erudition, and through audacity; but
the latter will be the cause to them of every
good. [I wish you, therefore, to unfold to me
the truth respecting these particulars.[18]]
[And, in the first place, I wish you to explain
5to me distinctly[19]] what that is which is effected
in divination? For we frequently obtain a
knowledge of future events through dreams,
when we are asleep; not being, at that time,
in a tumultuous ecstasy, for the body is then
quiescent; but we do not apprehend what
then takes place, in the same manner as when
we are awake.
But many, through enthusiasm and divine
inspiration, predict future events, and are then
in so wakeful a state, as even to energize
according to sense, and yet they are not conscious
of the state they are in, or at least, not
so much as they were before.
Some also of those who suffer a mental
alienation, energize enthusiastically on hearing
cymbals or drums, or a certain modulated
sound, such as those who are Corybantically
inspired, those who are possessed by Sabazius,
and those who are inspired by the mother of
the Gods. But some energize enthusiastically
by drinking water, as the priest of Clarius, in
Colophon; others, by being seated at the
mouth of a cavern, as those who prophesy at
Delphi; and others by imbibing the vapour
from water, as the prophetesses in Branchidæ.
Some also become enthusiastic by standing on
6characters, as those that are filled from the intromission
of spirits. Others, who are conscious
what they are doing in other respects,
are divinely inspired according to the phantastic
part; some, indeed, receiving darkness
for a cooperator, others certain potions, but
others incantations and compositions: and
some energize, according to the imagination,
through water; others in a wall, others in the
open air, and others in the sun, or in some
other of the celestial bodies. Some also establish
the art of the investigation of futurity
through the viscera, through birds, and through
the stars.
I likewise ask concerning the mode of divination,
what it is, and what the quality by
which it is distinguished? All diviners, indeed,
assert, that they obtain a foreknowledge of
future events through Gods or dæmons, and
that it is not possible for any others to know
that which is future, than those who are the
lords of futurity. I doubt, therefore, whether
divinity is so far subservient to men, as not to
be averse to some becoming diviners from
meal.
But, concerning the causes of divination, it is
dubious whether a God, an angel, or a dæmon,
or some other power, is present in manifestations,
or divinations, or certain other sacred
7energies, as is the case with those powers that
are drawn down through you [priests] by the
necessities with which invocation is attended.
Or does the soul assert and imagine these
things, and are they, as some think, the passions
of the soul, excited from small incentives?
Or is a certain mixed form of subsistence
produced from our soul, and divine inspiration
externally derived?
Hence it must be said, that the soul generates
the power which has an imaginative perception
of futurity, through motions of this
kind, or that the things which are adduced
from matter constitute dæmons, through the
powers that are inherent in them, and especially
things adduced from the matter which is taken
from animals.
For in sleep, when we are not employed
about any thing, we sometimes obtain a knowledge
of the future.
But that a passion of the soul is the cause of
divination, is indicated by this, that the senses
are occupied, that fumigations are introduced,
and that invocations are employed; and likewise,
that not all men, but those that are more
simple and young, are more adapted to prediction.
The ecstasy, also, of the reasoning power is
8the cause of divination, as is likewise the mania
which happens in diseases, or mental aberration,
or a sober and vigilant condition, or suffusions
of the body, or the imaginations excited
by diseases, or an ambiguous state of mind,
such as that which takes place between a sober
condition and ecstasy, or the imaginations artificially
procured by enchantment.
Nature, likewise, art, and the sympathy of
things in the universe, as if they were the parts
of one animal, contain premanifestations of
certain things with reference to each other.
And bodies are so prepared, that there is a
presignification of some by others, which is
clearly indicated by the works performed in
predicting what is future. For those who invoke
the divinities for this purpose, have about
them stones and herbs, bind certain sacred
bonds, which they also dissolve, open places
that are shut, and change the deliberate intentions
of the recipients, so as from being depraved
to render them worthy, though they
were before depraved. Nor are the artificers
of efficacious images to be despised. For they
observe the motion of the celestial bodies, and
can tell from the concurrence of what star
with a certain star or stars, predictions will be
true or false; and also whether the things that
are performed will be inanities, or significant
9and efficacious, though no divinity or dæmon is
drawn down by these images.
But there are some who suppose that there
is a certain obedient genus of dæmons, which
is naturally fraudulent, omniform, and various,
and which assumes the appearance of Gods
and dæmons, and the souls of the deceased;
and that through these every thing which appears
to be either good or evil is effected; for
they are not able to contribute any thing to
true goods, such as those of the soul, nor to
have any knowledge of them, but they abuse,
deride, and frequently impede those who are
striving to be virtuous. They are likewise full
of pride, and rejoice in vapours and sacrifices.
Jugglers likewise fraudulently attack us in
many ways, through the ardour of the expectations
which they raise.
It very much indeed perplexes me to understand
how superior beings, when invoked, are
commanded by those that invoke them, as if
they were their inferiors; and they think it
requisite that he who worships them should
be just, but when they are called upon to act
unjustly, they do not refuse so to act. Though
the Gods, likewise, do not hear him who invokes
them, if he is impure from venereal connexions,
yet, at the same time, they do not refuse
to lead any one to illegal venery.
10[I am likewise dubious with respect to sacrifices,
what utility or power they possess in the
universe, and with the Gods, and on what
account they are performed, appropriately indeed,
to the powers who are honoured by
them, but usefully to those by whom the gifts
are offered.[20]]
Why also do the interpreters of prophecies
and oracles think it requisite that they should
abstain from animals, lest the Gods should be
polluted by the vapours arising from them;
and yet the Gods are especially allured by the
vapours of animals?
Why is it requisite that the inspector [who
presides over sacred rites] ought not to touch a
dead body, though most sacred operations are
performed through dead bodies? And why,
which is much more absurd than this, are
threats employed and false terrors, by any
casual person, not to a dæmon, or some departed
soul, but to the sovereign Sun himself,
or to the Moon, or some one of the celestial
Gods, in order to compel these divinities to
speak the truth? For does not he who says
that he will burst the heavens, or unfold the
11secrets of Isis, or point out the arcanum in the
adytum, or stop Baris, or scatter the members
of Osiris to Typhon, [or that he will do something
else of the like kind[21]], does not he who
says this, by thus threatening what he neither
knows nor is able to effect, prove himself to be
stupid in the extreme? And what abjectness
does it not produce in those who, like very silly
children, are possessed with such vain fear,
and are terrified at such fictions? And yet
Chæremon, who was a sacred scribe, writes
these things, as disseminated by the Egyptians.
It is also said, that these, and things of the like
kind, are of a most compulsive nature.
What also is the meaning of those mystic
narrations which say that a certain divinity is
unfolded into light from mire, that he is seated
above the lotus, that he sails in a ship, and
that he changes his forms every hour, according
to the signs of the zodiac? For thus, they
say, he presents himself to the view, and thus
ignorantly adapt the peculiar passion of their
own imagination to the God himself. But if
these things are asserted symbolically, being
symbols of the powers of this divinity, I request
an interpretation of these symbols. For
12it is evident, that if these are similar to passions
of the Sun, when he is eclipsed, they would be
seen by all men who intently survey the God.
What also is the design of names that are
without signification? and why, of such, are
those that are barbaric preferred to our own?
For if he who hears them looks to their signification,
it is sufficient that the conception remains
the same, whatever the words may be
that are used. For he who is invoked is not
of the Egyptian race; nor, if he was an Egyptian,
does he use the Egyptian, or, in short, any
human language. For either all these are the
artificial contrivances of enchanters, and veils
originating from our passions, which rumour
ascribes to a divine nature; or we ignorantly
frame conceptions of divinity, contrary to its
real mode of subsistence.
I likewise wish you to unfold to me, what
the Egyptians conceive the first cause to be;
whether intellect, or above intellect? whether
alone, or subsisting with some other or others?
whether incorporeal, or corporeal; and whether
it is the same with the Demiurgus, or prior to
the Demiurgus? Likewise, whether all things
are from one principle, or from many principles?
whether the Egyptians have a knowledge
of matter, or of primary corporeal qualities;
and whether they admit matter to be
13unbegotten, or to be generated? For Chæremon,
indeed, and others, do not think there is
any thing else prior to the visible worlds; but
in the beginning of their writings on this subject,
admit the existence of the Gods of the
Egyptians, but of no others, except what are
called the planets, the Gods that give completion
to the zodiac, and such as rise together
with these; and likewise, the sections into
decans, and the horoscopes. They also admit
the existence of what are called the powerful
leaders, whose names are to be found in the
calendars, together with their ministrant offices,
their risings and settings, and their significations
of future events. For Chæremon saw that
what those who say that the sun is the Demiurgus,
and likewise what is asserted concerning
Osiris and Isis, and all the sacred fables,
may be resolved into the stars and the phases,
occultations and risings of these, or into the increments
or decrements of the moon, or into
the course of the sun, or the nocturnal and
diurnal hemisphere, or into the river [Nile].
And, in short, the Egyptians resolve all things
into physical, and nothing into incorporeal and
living essences. Most of them likewise suspend
that which is in our power from the
motion of the stars; and bind all things, though
I know not how, with the indissoluble bonds
14of necessity, which they call fate. They also
connect fate with the Gods; whom, nevertheless,
they worship in temples and statues, and
other things, as the only dissolvers of fate.
Concerning the peculiar dæmon, it must be
inquired how he is imparted by the lord of the
geniture, and according to what kind of efflux,
or life, or power, he descends from him to us?
And also, whether he exists, or does not exist?
And whether the invention of the lord of the
geniture is impossible, or possible? For if it
is possible he is happy, who having learned the
scheme of his nativity, and knowing his proper
dæmon, becomes liberated from fate.
The canons, also, of genethlialogy [or prediction
from the natal day] are innumerable and
incomprehensible. And the knowledge of this
mathematical science cannot be obtained; for
there is much dissonance concerning it, and
Chæremon and many others have written
against it. But the discovery of the lord, or
lords, of the geniture, if there are more than
one in a nativity, is nearly granted by astrologers
themselves to be unattainable, and yet
they say that on this the knowledge of the
proper dæmon depends.
Farther still, I wish to know whether the
peculiar dæmon rules over some one of the
parts in us? For it appears to certain persons,
15that dæmons preside over the parts of our
body, so that one is the guardian of health,
another of the form of the body, and another
of the corporeal habits, and that there is one
dæmon who presides in common over all these.
And again, that one dæmon presides over the
body, another over the soul, and another over
the intellect; and that some of them are good,
but others bad.
I am also dubious whether this dæmon is not
a certain part of the soul, [such, for instance, as
the intellectual part;] and if so, he will be
happy who has a wise intellect.
I see likewise, that there is a twofold worship
of the peculiar dæmon; the one being the
worship as of two, but the other as of three.
By all men, however, the dæmon is called upon
by a common invocation.
I farther ask, whether there is a certain
other latent way to felicity, separate from the
Gods? And I am dubious whether it is requisite
to look to human opinions in divine divination
and theurgy? And whether the soul
does not devise great things from casual circumstances?
Moreover, there are certain other
methods, which are conversant with the prediction
of future events. And, perhaps, those
who possess divine divination, foresee indeed
what will happen, yet are not on this account
16happy; for they foresee future events, but do
not know how to use this knowledge properly.
I wish, therefore, that you would point out to
me the path to felicity, and show me in what
the essence of it consists. For with us [Greeks]
there is much verbal contention about it, because
we form a conjecture of good from human
reasonings. But by those who have devised
the means of associating with beings more excellent
than man, if the investigation of this
subject is omitted, wisdom will be professed by
them in vain; as they will only disturb a divine
intellect about the discovery of a fugitive slave,
or the purchase of land, or, if it should so
happen, about marriage, or merchandize. And
if they do not omit this subject, but assert what
is most true about other things, yet say nothing
that is stable and worthy of belief about felicity,
in consequence of employing themselves about
things that are difficult, but useless to mankind;
in this case, they will not be conversant
either with Gods or good dæmons, but with
that dæmon who is called fraudulent; or, if
this is not admitted, the whole will be the invention
of men, and the fiction of a mortal
nature.
SECTION I. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V. — CHAP. VI. — CHAP. VII. — CHAP. VIII. — CHAP. IX. — CHAP. X. — CHAP. XI. — CHAP. XII. — CHAP. XIII. — CHAP. XIV. — CHAP. XV. — CHAP. XVI. — CHAP. XVII. — CHAP. XVIII. — CHAP. XIX. — CHAP. XX. — CHAP. XXI.
Hermes, the God who presides over language,
was formerly very properly considered as common
to all priests; and the power who presides
over the true science concerning the Gods
18is one and the same in the whole of things.
Hence our ancestors dedicated the inventions
of their wisdom to this deity, inscribing all
their own writings with the name of Hermes.
If, therefore, we participate of a portion of this
God, adapted and commensurate to our powers,
you do well to propose your theological doubts
to the priests, as friends, and to make these
doubts known to them. I also very properly
conceiving that the epistle sent to my disciple
Anebo was written to me, shall give you a true
answer to your inquiries. For it would not
be becoming, that Pythagoras and Plato, Democritus
and Eudoxus, and many other of
19the ancient Greeks, should have obtained appropriate
instruction from the sacred scribes
of their time, but that you who are our contemporary,
and think conformably to those
ancients, should be frustrated of your wish by
those who are now living, and who are called
common preceptors. I, therefore, thus betake
myself to the present discussion; and do you,
if you please, conceive that the same person to
whom you sent the letter returns you an answer.
Or, if it should seem fit to you, admit it to be
me who discourses with you in writing, or
some other prophet of the Egyptians, for this is
of no consequence. Or, which I think is still
better, dismiss the consideration whether the
speaker is an inferior or a superior character,
but direct your attention to what is said, so as
readily to excite your mind to survey whether
what is asserted is true or false.
In the first place, therefore, we shall divide
the genera of the proposed problems, in order
that we may know the quantity and quality of
them. And, in the next place, we shall show
from what theologies the doubts are assumed,
and according to what sciences they are investigated.
For some things that are badly
confused, require a certain distinction; others
are conversant with the cause through which
20they subsist, and are apprehended; others,
which we propose according to a certain contrariety,
draw our decision on both sides; and
some things require from us the whole development
of mystic doctrines. Such, therefore,
being the nature of the subjects of discussion,
they are assumed from many places, and from
different sciences. For some things introduce
animadversions from what the wise men of the
Chaldeans have delivered; others produce objections
from what the prophets of the Egyptians
teach; and there are some that, adhering
to the theory of philosophers, make inquiries
conformably to them. There are now likewise
some, that from other opinions, which do
not deserve to be mentioned, elicite a certain
dubitation; and others originate from the common
conceptions of mankind. These things,
therefore, are of themselves variously disposed,
and are multiformly connected with each other.
Hence, through all these causes, a certain discussion
is requisite for the management of them
in a becoming manner.
21
We shall, therefore, deliver to you the peculiar
dogmas of the Assyrians; and also clearly
develop to you our own opinions; collecting
some things from the infinite writings of the
ancients, but others from those particulars
which were comprehended by the ancients in
one treatise, and pertain to the whole knowledge
of divine natures. If also you should
propose any philosophic inquiry, we shall discuss
it for you, according to the ancient pillars
of Hermes, which Plato and Pythagoras knew
before, and from thence constituted their philosophy.
But such things as exhibit foreign
inquiries, or which are contradictory and contentious,
we shall assist mildly and aptly, or
we shall demonstrate their absurdity. Such,
likewise, as proceed conformably[23] to common
conceptions, we shall endeavour to discuss in
a way perfectly known and clear. And things,
indeed, which require the experience of divine
operations to an accurate knowledge of them,
we shall explain, as far as this is possible to
be effected by words alone; but such as are
22full of intellectual theory, we shall develop
with a view to the purification of the soul.
But indications of this theory worthy of notice
may be mentioned, by which it is possible for
you, and those who resemble you, to be conducted
by intellect to the essence of [real]
beings. And with respect to such things as
become known by a reasoning process, we
shall leave no one of these without a perfect
demonstration. But in all things we shall
give to each that which is appropriate. And
such questions, indeed, as are theological, we
shall answer theologically; such as are theurgic,
theurgically; but such as are philosophical,
we shall, in conjunction with you, philosophically
explore. Of these, also, such as
extend to first causes, we shall unfold into
light, by following them conformably to first
principles. But such as pertain to morals, or
to ends, we shall fitly discuss, according to the
ethical mode. And, in a similar manner, we
shall examine other things methodically and
appropriately. Let us, therefore, now betake
ourselves to your inquiries.
23
In the first place, therefore, you say, “it must
be granted that there are Gods.” Thus to
speak, however, is not right on this subject.
For an innate knowledge of the Gods is coexistent
with our very essence; and this knowledge
is superior to all judgment and deliberate
choice, and subsists prior to reason and demonstration.
It is also counited from the beginning
with its proper cause, and is consubsistent
with the essential tendency of the soul
to the good. If, indeed, it be requisite to speak
the truth, the contact with divinity is not knowledge.
For knowledge is in a certain respect
separated [from its object] by otherness.[24] But
prior to the knowledge, which as one thing
knows another, is the uniform connexion with
divinity, and which is suspended from the
Gods, is spontaneous and inseparable from
them. Hence, it is not proper to grant this, as
24if it might not be granted, nor to admit it as
ambiguous (for it is always unically established
in energy); nor are we worthy thus to explore
it, as if we had sufficient authority to approve
or reject it. For we are comprehended in it,
or rather we are filled by it, and we possess
that very thing which we are, [or by which
our essence is characterized] in knowing the
Gods.
I shall likewise say the same thing to you,
concerning the more excellent genera that follow
the Gods, I mean dæmons, heroes, and
undefiled souls.[25] For it is necessary to understand
respecting these, that there is always in
them one definite reason of essence, and to
remove from them the indefiniteness and instability
of the human condition. It is likewise
requisite to separate from them that inclination
25to one side of an argument rather
than another, arising from the equilibrium of a
reasoning process. For a thing of this kind is
foreign from the principles of reason and life,
and rather tends to secondary natures, and to
such things as pertain to the power and contrariety
of generation. But it is necessary that
the more excellent genera should be apprehended
uniformly.
The connascent perception, therefore, of
the perpetual attendance of the Gods, will
be assimilated to them. Hence, as they have
an existence which is always invariably the
same, thus also the human soul is conjoined
to them by knowledge, according to a sameness
of subsistence; by no means pursuing
through conjecture, or opinion, or a syllogistic
process, all which originate in time, an
essence which is above all these, but through
the pure and blameless intellections which the
soul received from eternity from the Gods, becoming
united to them. You, however, seem
to think, that there is the same knowledge of
divine natures as of any thing else, and that
one thing, rather than another, may be granted
from opposites, in the same manner as it is
usual to do in dialectic discussions. There is,
however, no similitude whatever between the
two kinds of knowledge. For the knowledge of
divine natures is different from that of other
26things, and is separated from all opposition. It
likewise neither subsists in being now granted,
or in becoming to be, but was from eternity,
uniformly consubsistent with the soul. And
thus much I say to you concerning the first
principle in us, from which it is necessary those
should begin who speak or hear any thing
about the natures that are superior to us.
With respect to your inquiry, “what the peculiarities
are in each of the more excellent genera,
by which they are separated from each other?”
if you understand by peculiarities the specific
differences under the same genus, which are
distinguished by opposite qualities, as the
rational and irrational under animal; we by
no means admit peculiarities of this kind, in
things which neither have one common essence,
nor an equal contradistinction, nor receive a
composition from something common, which is
indefinite, and defines the peculiarity. But if
you apprehend the peculiarity to be, as in prior
and secondary natures, differing in their whole
essence and whole genus, a certain simple condition
of being, definite in itself; in this case,
27your conception of peculiarities will be reasonable.
For these peculiarities of things, which
have an eternal subsistence, are simple, and
entirely exempt. The inquiry, however, proceeds
imperfectly. For it was necessary, in
the first place, to inquire what the peculiarities
are of the more excellent genera, according to
essence; in the next place, what they are
according to power; and thus afterwards, what
they are according to energy. But, as your
question now stands, with respect to the peculiarities
by which these genera are separated,
you alone speak of the peculiarities of energies.
Hence you inquire concerning the difference in
the last things pertaining to them; but you
leave uninvestigated such things as are first,
and most honourable in them, and which are
the elements of their difference. In the same
place, also, something is added concerning
“efficacious and passive motions,” which is a
division by no means adapted to the difference
of the more excellent genera. For the contrariety
of action and passion is not inherent in
any one of them; but their energies are unrestrained,
immutable, and without habitude to
their opposites. Hence, neither must we admit
in them motions of such a kind as arise
from action and passion. For neither do we
admit in the soul a self-motion, which consists
28of the mover and that which is moved; but
we conceive that it is a certain simple essential
motion, subsisting from itself,[26] and not possessing
a habitude to another thing, and exempt
from acting on, and suffering from, itself. Who,
therefore, can endure that the peculiarities of
the genera superior to the soul, should be
distinguished according to active or passive
motions?
That also which is added by you, “or of
accidents,” is foreign from these genera. For
in composites, and things which exist together
with, or in others, or are comprehended by
others, some things are conceived to be precedaneous,
but others consequent; and some as
essences, but others, as afterwards acceding to
essences. For there is a certain coarrangement
of them, and incongruity and interval intervenes.
But, in the more excellent genera,
all things must be conceived in τῳ ειναι, i. e. in
merely existing; and wholes have a precedaneous
subsistence, are separate by themselves,
and have not their hypostasis from, or in others;
so that there is not any thing in them which is
accidental. Hence the peculiarity of them is
not characterized from accidents.
At the end, likewise, of your inquiry, you
29introduce a distinction according to nature.
For your question asks, “How essences are
known by energies, by physical motions, and by
accidents?” The very contrary, however, to all
this takes place. For if energies and motions
were constitutive of essences, they would be
the lords of the difference which is between
them. But if essences generate energies, the
former being separate prior to the latter, will
impart to motions, energies, and accidents, that
by which they differ from each other. This,
therefore, subsists contrarily to what you suppose,
for the purpose of discovering the peculiarity
which you now investigate.
In short, whether you think that there is one
genus of the Gods, one of dæmons, and in a
similar manner of heroes, and souls essentially
incorporeal; or whether you admit that these
are severally many, you inquire what the difference
of them is according to peculiarities.
For if you apprehend that each of these is one
[and the same genus] the whole arrangement of
scientific theology is confounded. But if, as
truth requires, you admit that they are genetically
distinguished, and that there is not in
them one common essential definition, but that
those of them which are prior, are exempt from
those that are inferior, it is not possible to discover
their common boundaries. And even if
30this were possible, this very thing would destroy
their peculiarities. In this way, therefore,
the object of investigation cannot be found.
He, however, he who directs his attention to the
analogous sameness which exists in superior
natures, as, for instance, in the many genera of
the Gods, and again in dæmons and heroes,
and, in the last place, in souls, will be able to
define their peculiarities. Hence through this,
it is demonstrated by us what the rectitude is
of the present inquiry, and what its [accurate]
distinction, and also in what manner it is impossible,
and in what manner it is possible,
for it to subsist.
In the next place, let us direct our attention to
the solution of your inquiries. There is, therefore,
the good itself which is beyond essence,
and there is that good which subsists according
to essence; I mean the essence which is
most ancient and most honourable, and by
itself incorporeal. And this is the illustrious
peculiarity of the Gods, which exists in all
the genera that subsist about them, preserving
31their appropriate distribution and order, and
not being divulsed from it, and at the same
time being inherent with invariable sameness in
all the Gods, and their perpetual attendants.
In souls, however, which rule over bodies,
and precedaneously pay attention to them, and
which, prior to generation, have by themselves
a perpetual arrangement, essential good is not
present, nor the cause of good, which is prior to
essence; but to these a certain participation[27]
and habit, proceeding from essential good, accedes;
just as we see that the participation of
beauty and virtue is very different [in these
souls] from that which we behold in men. For
the latter is ambiguous, and accedes to composite
natures as something adventitious. But
the former has an immutable and never failing
establishment in souls, and neither itself ever
departs from itself, nor can be taken away by
any thing else. Such, therefore, being the beginning
and end in the divine genera, conceive
two media between these extreme boundaries,
viz. the order of heroes, which has an arrangement
more elevated than that of souls, in
power and virtue, in beauty and magnitude,
and in all the goods which subsist about souls,
and which, though it entirely transcends the
32psychical order, yet, at the same time, is proximately
conjoined to it, through the alliance of
a similar formed life. But the other medium,
which is suspended from the Gods, though it is
far inferior to them, is that of dæmons, which is
hot of a primarily operative nature, but is subservient
to, and follows the beneficent will of
the Gods. It likewise unfolds into energy the
invisible good of the Gods, being itself assimilated
to it, and gives completion to its fabrications
conformably to it. For it renders that
which is ineffable in the good of the Gods
effable, illuminates that which is formless in
forms, and produces into visible reasons [or
productive forms] that which in divine good is
above all reason. Receiving also a connascent
participation of things beautiful, it imparts and
transfers it, in unenvying abundance, to the
genera posterior to itself. These middle genera,
therefore, give completion to the common bond
of the Gods and souls, and cause the connexion
of them to be indissoluble. They also bind
together the one continuity of things from on
high as far as to the end; make the communion
of wholes to be inseparable; cause all
things to have the best, and a commensurate
mixture; in a certain respect, equally transmit
the progression from more excellent to inferior
natures, and the elevation from things posterior
33to such as are prior; insert in more imperfect
beings order and measures of the communication
which descends from more excellent natures,
and of that by which it is received; and
make all things to be familiar and coadapted to
all, supernally receiving the causes of all these
from the Gods.
You must not, therefore, think that this division
is the peculiarity of powers or energies,
or of essence; nor assuming it separately, must
you survey it in one of these. But by extending
it in common through all the genera, you
will give perfection to the answer concerning
the peculiarities of Gods, dæmons, and heroes,
and also of those in souls which are now the
subjects of your inquiry.
Again, however, according to another mode
of considering the subject, it is necessary to
ascribe to the Gods the whole of that which is
united, of whatever kind it may be; that which
is firmly established in itself, and which is the
cause of impartible essences; the immoveable,
which also is to be considered as the cause of
all motion, and which transcends the whole of
things, and has nothing in common with them;
and the unmingled and the separate, understood
in common in essence, power and energy, and
every thing else of this kind. But that which
34is now separated into multitude, and is able to
impart itself to other things, and which receives
from others bound in itself, and is sufficient in
the distributions of partible natures, so as to
give completion to them; which also participates
of the primarily operative and vivific,
having communion with all real and generated
beings; receives a commixture from all things,
imparts a contemperation to all things from
itself, and extends these peculiarities through
all the powers, essences, and energies, in itself;
all this we shall truly ascribe to souls, by asserting
that it is naturally implanted in them.
What, therefore, shall we say concerning the
media? I think, indeed, that from what has
been before said, they will be manifest to every
one; for these give completion to the indivisible
connexion of the extremes. Nevertheless,
it is necessary to be more explicit. I consider,
therefore, the dæmoniacal tribe to be multiplied,
but, unitedly, to be comingled, but in an unmingled
manner, and to comprehend all other
35things of a subordinate nature, according to the
idea of that which is more excellent. But
again, the tribe of heroes supernally presides
over a more obvious division and multitude,
and likewise over motion, commixture, and
things allied to these. It also receives gifts of
a more excellent nature, concealed as it were
inwardly; I mean union, purity, a firm establishment,
impartible sameness, and a transcendency
above other things. For one of these
middle genera is proximate to the first, but the
other to the last, of the extremes. But it reasonably
follows, according to continuity of
alliance, that the medium which begins from
the most excellent natures, should proceed to
such as are less excellent; but that the medium
which primarily produces a contact with the
last of things, should also in a certain respect
communicate with the natures that transcend
it. From these media, also, the completion
may be seen of the first and last genera, and
this entirely connascent, in a similar manner,
in existence, in power, and in energy. As we
have, therefore, in these two ways, perfectly
completed the division of the four genera, we
shall deem it sufficient in the others, to exhibit
the extreme peculiarities alone, for the sake of
conciseness, and because what remains, i. e.
the comprehension of the media, is in a certain
36respect evident. But the media themselves,
as being known from the extremes, we shall
omit; making a definition of the extremes in
the shortest way, as follows.
Of the extremes, therefore, one is supreme,
transcendent, and perfect; but the other is last
in dignity, deficient, and more imperfect. And
the former, indeed, is capable of accomplishing
all things at once, uniformly in an instant; but
the latter is neither able to effect all things,
nor at once, nor suddenly, nor impartibly. The
former also generates and governs all things,
without being inclined towards them; but the
latter is naturally disposed to verge, and be
converted to the things which it generates
and governs. And the former, indeed, as
primordial and cause, precedes all things in
power; but the latter, being suspended from
the will of the Gods, as from a cause, is from
eternity consubsistent with it. The former,
likewise, according to one vigorous acme, comprehends
the ends of all energies and essences;
but the latter passes from some things to others,
37and proceeds from the imperfect to the perfect.
Farther still, to the former that which is highest
and that which is incomprehensible pertain,
and also that which is better than all measure,
and is in such a manner formless, as not to be
circumscribed by any form; but the latter is
vanquished by inclination, habitude, and propensity;
and is detained by appetites directed
to that which is less excellent, and by familiarity
with secondary natures. Hence, in the
last place, it is formalized by all-various measures
derived from them. Intellect, therefore,
which is the leader and king of all beings, and
which is the demiurgic art of the universe, is
always present with the Gods with invariable
sameness, perfectly, and without indigence,
being purely established in itself, according to
one energy. But soul participates of a partible
and multiform intellect, having its attention
directed to the government of the whole. It
also providentially attends to inanimate natures,
becoming at different times ingenerated in different
forms.
From the same causes, therefore, order and
beauty itself are consubsistent with the more
excellent genera; or, if some one had rather
admit it, the cause of these is consubsistent
with them. But with soul, the participation of
intellectual order and divine beauty is always
present. And with the former, indeed, the
38measure of wholes, or the cause of this, perpetually
concurs. But soul is terminated by
the divine boundary, and participates of this
in a partible manner. To the former, also,
empire over all beings, through the power and
domination of cause, may be reasonably ascribed.
But soul has certain distinct boundaries,
as far as to which it is able to have dominion.
Such, therefore, being the different
peculiarities in the extremes, it will not be
difficult to understand what we have now said,
and to perceive the middle peculiarities of
dæmons and heroes, which are allied to each
of the extremes, possessing a similitude, to
each, departing from both to the medium, and
embracing a concordant communion comingled
from them, and connected with it in appropriate
measures. Such, therefore, must be
conceived to be the peculiarities of the first
divine genera.
But neither must we admit that cause of the
distinction of these genera which you subjoin,
viz. “that it is an arrangement with
reference to different bodies; as, for instance,
39of Gods to etherial bodies, but of dæmons to
aerial bodies, and of souls to such as are terrene.”
For such an arrangement as this, which
resembles that of Socrates to a tribe, when
he is a senator, is unworthy of the divine
genera, because all of them are essentially unrestrained
and free. To which may be added,
that it is dreadfully absurd to ascribe to bodies
a principal power of giving a specific distinction
to the first causes of themselves. For
bodies are in servile subjection to these causes,
and are ministrant to generation. And farther
still, the genera of the more excellent natures
are not in bodies, but the former externally
rule over the latter. Hence they are not
changed in conjunction with bodies. Again,
they impart from themselves to bodies every
such good as they are able to receive, but they
themselves receive nothing from bodies; so
that neither will they derive from them certain
peculiarities. For if they were as the habits
of bodies, or as material forms, or were in
some other way corporeal-formed, it would,
perhaps, be possible for them to be changed
together with the differences of bodies. But
if they are separate from bodies, and essentially
preexist unmingled with them, what reasonable
distinction, produced from bodies, can be
transferred to them? To which also may be
40added, that this assertion of yours makes
bodies to be more excellent than the divine
genera, since the former afford a seat to superior
causes, and insert in them peculiarities
essentially. He, therefore, who coarranges
allotments, distributions, and consociations of
governors with the governed, will evidently
assign a principal authority to more excellent
natures. For, because the presiding powers
are such [as we have shown them to be], on
this account they have such an allotment, and
give to it an essential specific distinction, but
they are not assimilated to the nature of their
receptacles.
It is necessary, therefore, to admit a thing of
this kind in partial souls. For such as is the
life which the soul received, prior to its insertion
in a human body, and such as the form which
it readily exerted; such also is the organical
body which it has suspended from itself, and
such the consequent corresponding nature,
which receives the more perfect life of the
soul. But with respect to more excellent
natures, and which, as wholes, comprehend
the principle [of parts] in these, inferior are
produced in superior natures; bodies, in incorporeal
essences; things fabricated, in the fabricators;
and, being circularly comprehended in,
are directed and governed by, them. Hence,
41the circulations of the celestial bodies, being
primarily inserted in the celestial circulations
of the etherial soul, are perpetually inherent
in them; and the souls of the worlds [i. e. of
the spheres], being extended to their intellect,
are perfectly comprehended by it, and are primarily
generated in it. Intellect, also, both
that which is partial and that which is universal,
is in a similar manner comprehended
in the genera that are more excellent than intellect.
Since, therefore, second are always
converted to first natures, and superior are the
leaders of inferior essences, as being the paradigms
of them, hence essence and form accede
to subordinate from superior natures, and
things posterior are primarily produced in such
as are more excellent; so that order and measure
are derived from primary to secondary
beings, and the latter possess that which they
are from the former. But the contrary must
not be admitted, viz. that peculiarities emanate
from things less excellent to the natures which
precede them.
Hence, through these things such a corporeal-formed
division as you introduce, is demonstrated
to be false. It is, indeed, especially
necessary not to propose any thing of this
kind; but if this should appear to you to be
requisite, yet you must not think, that what is
42false deserves to be discussed. For such a
discussion does not exhibit a copiousness of
arguments; but he wearies himself in vain,
who, proposing things that are false, endeavours
afterwards to subvert them, as things that are
not true. For how is it possible that an
essence, which is of itself incorporeal, and
which has nothing in common with the bodies
that participate of it, should be distinguished
from other things by corporeal qualities? How
can that which is not locally present with
bodies, be separated by corporeal places? And
how can that which is not inclosed by the
partible circumscriptions of subjects, be partibly
detained by the parts of the world? What,
also, is that which can prevent the Gods from
being every where? And what can restrain
their power from extending as far as to the
celestial arch? For to effect this, must be the
work of a more powerful cause, which is able
to inclose and circumscribe them in certain
parts. But truly existing being, and which is
essentially incorporeal, is every where, wherever
it may wish to be. And that which is
divine, and which transcends all things, would
[if what you say were admitted] be transcended
by the perfection of the whole world, and, as
a certain part, would be comprehended by it.
Hence, it would be inferior to corporeal magnitude.
43I do not, however, see after what manner
these sensible natures could be produced
and specifically distinguished, if there was no
divine fabrication, and if no participation of
divine forms, extended through the whole
world.
In short, this opinion wholly subverts sacred
institutions, and the theurgic communion of the
Gods with men; since it exterminates from the
earth the presence of the more excellent genera.
For it says nothing else than that divine dwell
remote from earthly natures, and that this our
place of abode is deserted by them. According
to this assertion, therefore, neither can we,
that are priests, learn any thing from the Gods,
nor do you rightly inquire of us, as knowing
more than others, since we shall differ in no
respect from other men.
No one, however, of these assertions is sane.
For neither are the Gods detained in certain
parts of the world, nor are terrene natures
destitute of their providential attention. But
the divinities are characterized by this, that
they are not comprehended by any thing, and
that they comprehend all things in themselves.
But terrestrial natures possess their existence
in the pleromas[28] of the Gods; and when they
become adapted to divine participation, then
44prior to their own proper essence, they immediately
possess the Gods, which [latently] preexisted
in it.
Through these things, therefore, we have
shown that the whole of this division is false;
that the method [employed by you] of investigating
peculiarities is irrational; and that to
suppose the government of the Gods is fixed in
a certain place, is by no means to apprehend
the whole essence and power which is in them.
It would have been proper, therefore, to have
omitted the opposite inquiry made by you,
about this distribution of more excellent natures,
as not contradicting in any respect true
conceptions. Because, however, it is necessary
rather to direct the attention to true science,
but not to dispute with men, on this account,
we also shall adapt the present inquiry to a
certain rational and theological apprehension.
I consider you, therefore, as asking, for it is
your inquiry, “Why, since the Gods dwell in
the heavens alone, there are invocations by theurgists
of terrestrial and subterranean Gods?” For
45what you assert in the beginning is not true,
that the Gods circumvolve in the heavens alone:
since all things are full of them. You also inquire,
“How some of the Gods are said to be
aerial, and different Gods are allotted different
places, and circumscribed portions of bodies,
though they possess infinite, impartible, and incomprehensible
power? And how, likewise, there
will be a union of them with each other, as they
are separated by divisible circumscriptions of
parts, and by difference of places and subject
bodies?” Of all these, therefore, and an infinite
number of other similar questions, one and the
best solution will be obtained by surveying the
mode of divine allotment.
A divine nature, therefore, whether it is
allotted certain parts of the universe, such as
heaven or earth, or sacred cities and regions,
or certain groves, or sacred statues, externally[29]
illuminates all these, in the same manner as
the sun externally irradiates all things with his
rays. Hence, as light comprehends the things
which are illuminated by it, thus also the
power of the Gods externally comprehends
its participants. As, likewise, the solar light
is present with the air in an unmingled manner;
but this is manifest from no light being left
46in the air, when once that which illuminated it
has departed, though heat is still present with
it, when that which heated it is entirely withdrawn;
thus also the light of the Gods illuminates
separately, and being firmly established
in itself, wholly proceeds through all beings.
Moreover, the light which is the object of sensible
perception, is one, continuous, and every
where the same, whole; so that it is not possible
for any part of it to be separate and cut off
from the whole, nor to be inclosed in a circle,
nor at any time to depart from its illuminating
source. After the same manner, therefore,
the whole world being partible, is divided
about the one and impartible light of the Gods.
But this light is every where one and the same
whole, and is impartibly present with all things
that are able to participate of it; through an
all perfect power fills all things, and by a certain
causal comprehension, incloses and terminates
the whole of things in itself, and is every
where united to itself, and conjoins ends to
beginnings. This too, all heaven and the world
imitating, revolve with a circular motion, are
united to themselves, and lead the elements
which are carried round in a circle. Hence
the world causes all things to be in each other,
and to tend to each other, makes the end of one
thing to coalesce with the beginning of another,
47as, for instance, earth with heaven, and produces
one connexion and concord of wholes
with wholes.
Will not, therefore, he who surveys this conspicuous
statue of the Gods, thus united to
itself, be ashamed to have a different opinion
of the Gods, who are the causes of it, so as to
introduce among them sections, and separations,
and corporeal-formed circumscriptions?
I, indeed, should think, that every one would
be thus disposed. For if there is no ratio, no
habitude of symmetry, no communion of essence,
nor a connexion either in capacity or in
energy, between that which is adorned and the
adorning cause; if this be the case, there will
neither be found in the world a certain extension
according to interval, nor local comprehension,
nor partible interception, nor any other
such like connascent equalization in the presence
of the Gods [with mundane natures].
For in things which are of a kindred nature,
according to essence and power, or which are,
in a certain respect, of the same species, or
homogeneous, a certain comprehension, or conservation,
may be discovered. But in such
things as are entirely exempt from all mundane
wholes, what opposing circumstance, or transition
through all things, or partible circumscription,
or local comprehension, or any thing
48else of this kind can justly be perceived? I
think, therefore, that the several participants
of the divinities are of such a nature, that
some partake of them etherially, others aerially,
and others aquatically; which also, the art of
divine works perceiving, employs adaptations
and invocations, conformable to such a division.
And thus much concerning the distribution of
the more excellent genera into the world.
After these things, you again subjoin another
division for yourself, “in which you separate
the essences of the more excellent genera by the
difference of passive and impassive.” But neither
do I admit this division. For no one of the
more excellent genera is passive, nor yet impassive
in such a way as to be contradistinguished
from that which is passive; nor is
naturally adapted to receive passions, but liberated
from them through virtue, or some other
worthy condition of being. But because they
are entirely exempt from the contrariety of
action and passion; and because they are not
at all adapted to suffer, and have essentially an
49immutable firmness, on this account I place
the impassive and the immutable in all the
divine genera.
For consider, if you are willing, the last of
divine natures, viz. a soul purely liberated from
bodies. What does such a soul want with the
generation which is in pleasure, or the restitution
which is in it to a natural condition, since
such a soul is above nature, and lives an unbegotten
life? Why, also, should it participate
of the pain which leads to corruption and dissolves
the harmony of the body, since it is beyond
all body, and the nature which is divided
about body, and is entirely separate from the
harmony which descends from the soul into
the body? But neither is it in want of the
passions which precede sensation: for neither
is it detained in body, nor inclosed by it, so as
to require corporeal organs, in order to apprehend
certain other bodies which are external
to these organs. And, in short, being impartible,
and abiding in one and the same form, and
also being essentially incorporeal, and having
no communication with a generated and passive
body, it cannot suffer any thing either
according to division, or according to a change
in quality, nor can have any thing which is
allied to any kind of mutation or passion.
But neither does the [rational] soul, when it
50accedes to body, either itself suffer, or the
reasons which it imparts to the body. For
these reasons are forms, and being simple and
uniform, they receive no perturbation in themselves,
and no departure from their proper
mode of subsistence. That which remains,
therefore [or the participant of the rational
soul], becomes the cause of suffering to the
composite. Cause, however, is not the same
with its effect. Hence, as soul is the first
origin of generable and corruptible composite
animals, but is itself by itself ingenerable and
incorruptible; thus, also, though the participants
of the soul suffer, and do not wholly
[i. e. truly] possess life and existence, but are
complicated with the indefiniteness and diversity
of matter, yet the soul is itself by itself
immutable, as being essentially more excellent
than that which suffers, and not as possessing
impassivity, in a certain deliberate choice,
which verges both to the impassive and the
passive, nor as receiving an adscitious immutability
in the participation of habit or power.
Since, therefore, we have demonstrated that
it is impossible for even the last genus of the
more excellent order of beings, viz. the soul,
to participate of suffering, how can it be proper
to adapt this participation to dæmons and
heroes, who are perpetual, and the attendants
51of the Gods, and who always invariably preserve
the same divine order, and never desert
it? For we know this indeed, that passion is
something disorderly, confused, and unstable,
never having any proper authority of its own,
but being devoted to that by which it is detained,
and to which it is subservient for the
purposes of generation. This, therefore, rather
pertains to some other genus, than to that
which always exists, and is suspended from
the Gods, and which, in conjunction with them,
observes the same order, and accomplishes the
same period. Hence dæmons are impassive,
and all the more excellent genera, which follow
them [and the Gods].
“How therefore,” you ask, “are many things
performed to them in sacred operations, as if they
were passive?” I reply, that this is asserted
through an ignorance of sacerdotal mysticism.
For of the things which are perpetually effected
in sacred rites, some have a certain arcane
cause, and which is more excellent than reason;
others are consecrated from eternity to the
52superior genera, as symbols; others preserve a
certain other image, just as nature, which is
effective of invisible reasons, expresses certain
visible formations; others are adduced for the
sake of honour, or have for their end some
kind of similitude, or familiarity and alliance;
and some procure what is useful to us, or in a
certain respect purify and liberate our human
passions, or avert some other of those dire
circumstances which happen to us. It must
not, however, be on this account granted, that
a certain portion of sacred institutions is employed
in the service of Gods or dæmons, as if
they were passive. For an essence which is
by itself perpetual and incorporeal, is not naturally
adapted to receive a certain mutation
from bodies.
Nor, even though we should admit that this
essence is especially in want of such things,
will it require the aid of men to a sacred
worship of this kind; since it is itself filled
from itself, and from the nature of the world,
and the perfection which is in generation; and,
if it be lawful so to speak, prior to being in
want it receives the self-sufficient, through the
never failing wholeness of the world and its
own proper plenitude, and because all the
more excellent genera are full of appropriate
good. Let this, therefore, be a lenitive for us
53in common, concerning the worship of the undefiled
genera, as being appropriately coadapted
to the beings that are more excellent than we,
and because pure things are introduced to
pure, and impassive things to impassive, natures.
But directing our attention to particulars,
we say that the erection of the phalli is a certain
sign of prolific power, which, through this,
is called forth to the generative energy of the
world. On which account, also, many phalli
are consecrated in the spring, because then the
whole world receives from the Gods the power
which is productive of all generation. But I
am of opinion, that the obscene language which
then takes place, affords an indication of the
privation of good about matter, and of the deformity
which is in material subjects, prior to
their being adorned. For these being indigent
of ornament, by so much the more aspire after
it, as they in a greater degree despise their own
deformity. Again therefore, they pursue the
causes of forms, and of what is beautiful and
good, recognizing baseness from base language.
And thus, indeed, the thing itself, viz. turpitude,
is averted, but the knowledge of it is
rendered manifest through words, and those
that employ them transfer their desire to that
which is contrary to baseness.
54Another reason, also, of these things may be
assigned. The powers of the human passions
that are in us, when they are entirely restrained,
become more vehement; but when they are
called forth into energy, gradually and commensurately,
they rejoice in being moderately[30]
gratified, are satisfied; and from hence, becoming
purified, they are rendered tractable,
and are vanquished without violence. On this
account, in comedy and tragedy, by surveying
the passions of others, we stop our own passions,
cause them to be more moderate, and
are purified from them. In sacred ceremonies,
likewise, by certain spectacles and auditions
of things base, we become liberated from the
injury which happens from the works effected
by them.[31] Things of this kind, therefore, are
introduced for the sake of our soul, and of the
diminution of the evils which adhere to it
55through generation, and of a solution and liberation
from its bonds. On this account, also,
they are very properly called by Heraclitus
remedies, as healing things of a dreadful nature,
and saving souls from the calamities with which
the realms of generation are replete.
You also say, “that invocations are directed to
the Gods as to beings that are passive, so that
not only dæmons are passive, but likewise the
Gods.” This, however, is not the case. For
the illumination which takes place through invocations,
is spontaneously visible and self-perfect;
is very remote from all downward
attraction; proceeds into visibility through divine
energy and perfection, and as much surpasses
our voluntary motion as the divine will
of the good transcends a deliberately chosen
life. Through this will, therefore, the Gods,
being benevolent and propitious, impart their
light to theurgists in unenvying abundance,
calling upwards their souls to themselves, procuring
them a union with themselves, and
accustoming them, while they are yet in body,
56to be separated from bodies, and to be led
round to their eternal and intelligible principle.
But it is evident, from the effects themselves,
that what we now say is the salvation of the
soul. For the soul in contemplating blessed
spectacles, acquires another life, energizes according
to another energy, and is then rightly
considered as no longer ranking in the order of
man. Frequently, likewise, abandoning her
own life, she exchanges it for the most blessed
energy of the Gods. If, therefore, the ascent
through invocations imparts to the priests purification
from passions, a liberation from generation,
and a union with a divine principle,
how is it possible to connect with it any thing
of passion? For an invocation of this kind
does not draw down the impassive and pure
Gods, to that which is passive and impure;
but, on the contrary, it renders us, who have
become passive through generation, pure and
immutable.
Neither do the invocations which implore
the Gods to incline to us, conjoin the priests to
them through passion; but procure for them
the communion of an indissoluble connexion,
through the friendship which binds all things
together. Hence, it does not, as the name
seems to imply, incline the intellect of the
57Gods to men; but, according to the decision
of truth, renders the will of man adapted to
the participation of the Gods, elevates it to
them, and coharmonizes the former with the
latter, through the most appropriate persuasion.
On this account also, such names of the
Gods as are adapted to sacred concerns, and
other divine symbols, are able, as they are of
an anagogic or elevating nature, to connect invocations
with the Gods themselves.
Moreover, “the pacifications of anger” will
become manifest, if we understand what the
anger of the Gods is.[32] This, therefore, is not,
as it appears to be to some, a certain ancient
and inveterate rage, but an abandonment of
the beneficent care of the Gods, from which we
turn ourselves away, withdrawing, as it were,
58from meridian light, hiding ourselves in darkness,
and depriving ourselves of the beneficent
gift of the Gods. Hence pacification is able
to convert us to the participation of divinity
and the providential care of the Gods, from
which we were divulsed, and to bind together,
commensurately, participants and the participated
natures. So far, therefore, is pacification
from accomplishing its work through passion,
that it separates us from the passive and
tumultuous abandonment of the Gods.
But “the oblation of victims,” when some
evil is present in places about the earth, procures
a remedy for the evil, and secures us
from the incursion of any mutation or passion.
Hence, whether a thing of this kind is effected
through Gods or dæmons, it invokes these as
the expellers of evil, and [our true] saviours,
and through them exterminates all the injury
which may accede from the calamities. Those
powers, also, who avert genesiurgic[33] and physical
punishments, do not expel them through
passions. And if some one should think that
the suppression of the guardian care of the
Gods, introduces a certain spontaneous injury,
in this case the persuasion arising from pacification
59recalls the benevolence of the more
excellent genera, to a providential attention to
our affairs, and takes away our privation of
good, being itself perfectly pure and immutable.
Farther still, with respect to “what are called
the necessities of the Gods,” the whole truth of
this is, that necessities are peculiar to, and
subsist in such a way as accords with the nature
of, the Gods.[34] Hence they do not subsist as
if they were externally derived, or were the
effect of violence, but after such a manner as
the good ought to be from necessity, so the
Gods entirely exist, and are by no means otherwise
disposed. This necessity, therefore, is
mingled with beneficent will, and is the friend
of love; through an order adapted to the Gods,
possesses identity and immutability; and because
it is contained in one boundary, abides
in this, and never departs from it. Hence,
60through all these particulars, the contrary to
what you infer takes place. For it happens
that a divine nature is incapable of being
allured, is impassive and uncompelled, if there
are in reality such powers in theurgy, as we
have demonstrated there are.
After this, you pass on to another division
into contraries, viz. the division of Gods with
reference to dæmons. For you say, “that the
Gods are pure intellects;” but you propose this
opinion as an hypothesis, or you narrate it as
a dogma adopted by certain persons. And
you infer, “that dæmons are psychical essences
participating of intellect.” Neither, therefore,
am I ignorant that this is the opinion of many
philosophers; but to you, I do not think it is
proper to conceal what appears to me to be
the truth. For all such opinions are full of
confusion; since they wander from dæmons
to souls, which also participate of intellect;
and from the Gods to an immaterial intellect
in energy, which the Gods entirely excel by a
priority of nature. Why, therefore, is it requisite
61to attribute to them these peculiarities,
which are by no means appropriate? And
thus much concerning this division, for it would
be superfluous to make any further mention of
it. But it is requisite that your doubts respecting
this distinction should be properly
considered, as the discussion of them pertains
to the sacerdotal province.
Farther still, having said “that pure intellects
are inflexible, [i. e. not to be changed or altered]
and unmingled with sensibles,” you doubt,
“whether it is requisite to pray to them.” But
I think it is necessary to pray to no others
than these. For that in us which is divine, intellectual,[35]
and one, or intelligible, if you are
willing so to call it, is most clearly excited in
prayer; and, when excited, vehemently seeks
that which is similar to itself, and becomes
copulated to perfection itself. But if it should
appear to you to be incredible, that an incorporeal
nature can be capable of hearing sounds,
and it should be urged by you, that for this
purpose the sense of hearing is requisite, that
it may apprehend what is said by us in prayer;
you willingly forget the excellency of primary
causes, which consists in both knowing and
62comprehending in themselves at once the whole
of things. The Gods, therefore, do not receive
prayers in themselves, through any corporeal
powers or organs, but rather contain in themselves
the energies of pious invocations; and
especially of such as, through sacred ceremonies,
are established in, and united to, the
Gods. For then, in reality, a divine nature is
present with itself, and does not communicate
with the intellectual conceptions in prayer, as
different from its own.
“Supplications, however,” you say, “are too
foreign to the purity of intellect to be offered to
the Gods.” But this is by no means the case.
For on this very account, because we fall short
of the Gods in power, purity, and every thing
else, we shall act in the most opportune manner,
by invoking them with the most vehement
supplications. For the consciousness of our
own nothingness, when we compare ourselves,
with the Gods, causes us to betake ourselves
spontaneously to suppliant prayer. But from
supplication, we are in a short time led to the
object of supplication, acquire its similitude
from intimate converse, and gradually obtain
divine perfection, instead of our own imbecility
and imperfection.
If, indeed, it is considered that sacred prayers
63are sent to men from the Gods themselves,
that they are certain symbols of the divinities,
and that they are only known to the Gods, with
whom, in a certain respect, they possess the
same power,—how can it any longer be justly
apprehended, that a supplication of this kind is
sensible, and not divine and intellectual? Or
what passion can accede to a thing of this kind,
the purity of which the most worthy human
manners cannot easily equal?
You say, however, “that the things which
are offered in supplications are offered as to
sensitive and psychical natures.” And, indeed,
if the offerings consisted of corporeal and composite
powers alone, or of such things as are
merely subservient to corporeal organs, your
assertion would be true. But as the offerings
participate of incorporeal forms, of certain reasons,
and more simple measures, the aptitude
of them is to be surveyed according to this
alone. And if a certain alliance, or similitude,
is present, which is either proximate or remote,
it is sufficient to effect the contact of
which we are now speaking. For there is not
any thing which in the smallest degree is adapted
to the Gods, to which the Gods are not immediately
present, and with which they are not conjoined.
The connexion, therefore, of supplications with
the Gods, is not as with sensitive or psychical
64natures, but as with divine forms, and with the
Gods themselves [as Gods, i. e. as superessential
hyparxes]. So that we have sufficiently
spoken in opposition to this division.
The difference which separates “Gods from
dæmons by the corporeal and incorporeal,” is the
next thing that follows in what you have written;
this being much more common than the former
difference, and yet it is so far from expressing
the peculiarities of their essence, that it does
not afford a conjectural knowledge of them,
nor of any accidents which pertain to them.
For neither is it possible from these things to
apprehend whether they are animals or not,
and whether they are deprived of life, or are
not at all in want of it. Farther still, neither
is it easy to conjecture how these names are
predicated, whether in common, or of many
different things. For if in common, it is absurd
that a line and time, God and dæmons, fire
and water, should be under the same incorporeal
genus. But if of many things, what
reason is there when you speak of the incorporeal,
65that you should rather manifest by it
Gods than points; or when you speak of the
corporeal, that you should not be thought to
speak of the earth rather than of dæmons?
For neither is this very thing defined, whether
Gods and dæmons have bodies, or are carried
in bodies, as in a vehicle, or use them, or comprehend
them, or are alone the same[36] with body.
But, perhaps, it is not proper to examine this
distinction very minutely. For you do not
propose it as your own decision, but you exhibit
it as the opinion of others.
We will exchange, therefore, this division for the
doubt which may be adduced by you against
the present opinion. “For,” it may be said
by you, “how, conformably to what we assert,
can the sun and moon, and the visible natures in
the heavens, be Gods, if the Gods are alone incorporeal?”
To this we reply, that the celestial
divinities are not comprehended by bodies,
but contain bodies in their divine lives and
66energies; that they are not themselves converted
to body, but they have a body which
is converted to its divine cause; and that body
does not impede their intellectual and incorporeal
perfection, nor occasion them any molestation
by its intervention. Hence it does
not require an abundant attention, but follows
the divinities spontaneously, and after a certain
manner, self-motively, not being in want of
manual direction; but, through an anagogic
tendency, being itself uniformly coelevated by
itself, to the one of the Gods.
It may also, if requisite, be said that a celestial
body is most allied to the incorporeal
essence of the Gods. For as the latter is one,
so the former is simple; as the latter is impartible,
so the former is indivisible;[37] and as that is
immutable, so this is unchanged in quality.
If, likewise, it is admitted that the energies of
the Gods are uniform, a celestial body also,
has one circulation. To which may be added,
that it imitates the sameness of the Gods, by a
perpetual motion, which is invariably the same,
and which subsists according to one reason
67and one order. It also imitates a divine life,
by the life which is connascent with etherial
bodies. Hence, this celestial body does not
consist of things contrary and different, as is
the case with our body; nor does the soul of
the celestial Gods coalesce with the body into
one animal from two things; but the celestial
animals of the Gods are entirely similar and
counited, and are throughout wholes, uniform,
and incomposite. For things of a more excellent
nature are always transcendent in them,
after the same manner; and things of an inferior
nature are suspended from the dominion
of such as are prior, yet so as never to draw
down this dominion to themselves. But all
these are congregated into one coarrangement
and perfection; and, after a certain manner,
all things in the celestial Gods are incorporeal,
and wholly Gods; because the divine form
which is in them predominates, and inserts
every where throughout one total essence.
Thus, therefore, the visible celestials are all of
them Gods, and after a certain manner incorporeal.
68
Your next inquiry doubts, “how some of the
Gods are beneficent, but others malefic.” This
opinion, therefore, is assumed from the predictors
of nativities. It is, however, entirely
remote from the truth. For all the Gods are
good, and invariably the causes of good; and
all of them are uniformly convolved to one
good, according to the beautiful and good alone.
The bodies, likewise, which are subject to
them possess immense powers; some of which
are firmly established in the divine bodies themselves,
but others proceed from them into the
nature of the world, and into the world itself,
descending in an orderly manner through the
whole of generation, and extending without
impediment as far as to things which have a
partial subsistence.
With respect to the powers, therefore, which
remain in the heavens in the divine bodies
themselves, there can be no doubt that all of
them are similar. Hence, it remains that we
should discuss those powers which are thence
transmitted to us, and are mingled with generation.
These, therefore, descend with invariable
sameness for the salvation of the universe,
69and connectedly contain the whole of generation
after the same manner. They are likewise
impassive and immutable, though they
proceed into that which is mutable and passive.
For generation being multiform, and consisting
of different things, receives the one of the
Gods, and that in them which is without difference,
with hostility and partibility, conformably
to its own contrariety and division. It also
receives that which is impassive, passively;
and, in short, participates of them according to
its own proper nature, and not according to
their power. As, therefore, that which is
generated [or has a subsistence in becoming
to be,] participates of being generatively, and
body participates of the incorporeal, corporeally;
thus, also, the physical and material
substances which are in generation, participate
of the immaterial and etherial bodies, which
are above nature and generation, in a confused
and disorderly manner. Hence they are absurd
who attribute colour, figure, and contact
to intelligible forms, because the participants
of them are things of this kind; as likewise
are those who ascribe depravity to the celestial
bodies, because their participants sometimes
produce evils. For the participation
from the first could not be a thing of this
kind, unless the recipient had some mutation.
70But if that which is participated is received as
in another and different thing, this other thing
in terrene natures is evil and disorderly. The
participation, therefore, becomes the cause of
the abundant difference in secondary natures,
and also the commixture of material substances
with immaterial effluxions; and besides
these, another cause is this, that what is
imparted in one way, is received in another by
terrestrial substances. Thus, for instance, the
efflux of Saturn is constipative, but that of
Mars is motive; but the passive genesiurgic
receptacle in material substances receives the
former according to congelation and refrigeration,
but the latter according to an inflammation
which transcends mediocrity. Do not,
therefore, the corruption and privation of symmetry
arise from an aberration which is effective
of difference, and which is material and
passive? Hence the imbecility of material and
terrene places, not being able to receive the
genuine power and most pure life of the etherial
natures, transfers its own passion to first
causes. Just as if some one having a diseased
body, and not being able to bear the vivific
heat of the sun, should falsely dare to say, in
consequence of looking to his own maladies,
that the sun is not useful to health or life.
A certain thing of this kind also may take
71place in the harmony and crasis of the universe:
for the same things may be the salvation of the
whole, through the perfection of the things
inherent and the recipients; but may be noxious
to the parts, through their partible privation
of symmetry. In the motion, therefore, of the
universe, all the circulations preserve the whole
world invariably the same; but some one of
the parts is frequently injured by another part,
which we see is sometimes the case in a
dance.
Again, therefore, corruptibility and mutability
are passions connascent with partial natures.
But it is not proper to ascribe these
to wholes and first causes, either as if they
existed in them, or as if they proceeded to
terrestrial substances from them. Hence,
through these things it is demonstrated, that
neither the celestial Gods, nor their gifts, are
effective of evil.
In the next place, therefore, we shall answer
your question, “What it is which conjoins the
Gods that have a body in the heavens with the
incorporeal Gods.” What this is, therefore, is
evident from what has been before said. For
72if these Gods, as incorporeal, intelligible, and
united, ride in the celestial spheres, they have
their principles in the intelligible world, and
intellectually perceiving the divine forms of
themselves, they govern all heaven according
to one infinite energy. And if they are present
with the heavens in a separate manner, and
lead the perpetual circulations of them by their
will alone, they are themselves unmingled with
a sensible nature, and exist together with the
intelligible Gods.
It will be better, however, to answer you
more particularly, as follows: I say, therefore,
that the visible statues of the Gods originate
from divine intelligible paradigms, and are
generated about them. But being thus generated,
they are entirely established in them,
and being also extended to,[38] they possess an
image which derives its completion from them.
These images likewise fabricate another order;
sublunary natures are in continuity with them,
according to one union; and the divine intellectual
forms, which are present with the
visible bodies of the Gods, exist prior to them
in a separate manner. But the unmingled and
supercelestial intelligible paradigms of them,
abide by themselves in unity, and are at once
73all things, according to the eternal transcendency
of themselves.
There is, therefore, one common indivisible
bond of them according to intellectual energies;
and there is also this bond according to the
common participations of forms, since there is
nothing which intercepts these, nor any thing
which comes between them. For indeed, an
immaterial and incorporeal essence itself, being
neither separated by places, nor by subjects,
nor defined by the divisible circumscriptions
of parts, immediately concurs, and is connascent
with sameness. The progression also,
from, and the regression of all things to, the
one, and the entire domination of the one, congregates
the communion of the mundane Gods
with the Gods that preexist in the intelligible
world.
Farther still, the intellectual conversion of
secondary to primary natures, and the gift of
the same essence and power imparted by the
primary to the secondary Gods, connects the
synod of them in indissoluble union. For
in things of different essences, such as soul
and body, and also in those of a dissimilar
species, such as material forms, and those
which are in any other way separated from
each other, the connascent adventitious union
is derived from supernal causes, and is lost in
74certain definite periods of time. But by how
much the higher we ascend, and elevate ourselves
to the sameness both in form and
essence, of first natures, and proceed from
parts to wholes, by so much the more shall
we discover the union which has an eternal
existence, and survey the essence, which has
a precedaneous and more principal subsistence,
and possesses about, and in itself, difference
and multitude.[39]
Since, however, the order of all the Gods is
profoundly united, and the first and second
genera of them, and all the multitude which is
spontaneously produced about them, are consubsistent
in unity, and also every thing which
is in them is one,—hence the beginning, middles,
and ends in them are consubsistent according
to the one itself; so that in these, it is
not proper to inquire, whence the one accedes
to all of them. For the very existence in
them, whatever it may be, is this one[40] of their
75nature. And secondary genera, indeed, remain
with invariable sameness in the one of such as
are primary; but the primary impart from
themselves union to the secondary genera,
and all of them possess in each other the communion
of an indissoluble connexion.
From this cause, therefore, the perfectly incorporeal
Gods are united to the sensible Gods
that have bodies. For the visible Gods also
are external to bodies, and on this account
are in the intelligible world; and the intelligible
Gods, through their infinite union, comprehend
in themselves the visible Gods; and both
are established according to a common union
and one energy. In a similar manner, also,
this is the illustrious prerogative of the cause
and orderly distribution of the Gods, on which
account the same union of all the divinities
extends from on high, as far as to the end of
the divine order. But if this deserves to be
doubted, the contrary would be wonderful,
viz. that there should not be this union of
the visible and intelligible Gods. And thus
much concerning the contact with, and establishment
of, the sensible in the intelligible
Gods.
76
After this, you again resume the same inquiries,
of which what has been already said may
be considered as a sufficient solution. Since,
however, it is necessary, according to the proverb,
frequently to speak of and consider things
that are beautiful, neither shall we pass over
these particulars, as if they had been now
sufficiently answered, but by repeatedly discussing
them we may, perhaps, obtain from all
of them a certain perfect and great scientific
good. For you doubt “what it is which distinguishes
dæmons from the visible and invisible
Gods, since the visible are conjoined with the invisible
divinities.” But I, beginning from this
as the first thing, shall demonstrate what it is
in which they differ. For, because the visible
are united to the intelligible Gods, and have
the same idea with them, but dæmons are far
distant from them, according to essence, and
scarcely adumbrate them through similitude,
on this account they are separated from the
visible Gods; and they differ from the invisible
Gods, according to the difference itself of
the invisible.[41] For dæmons, indeed, are invisible,
77and by no means to be apprehended
by sense; but the Gods transcend rational
knowledge and material intelligence. And,
because they are unknown and unapparent to
these, they are thus denominated; but are said
to be invisible in a way very different from that
in which this is asserted of dæmons. What,
therefore, have the invisible Gods, so far as
they are invisible, more excellent than the
visible Gods? Nothing. For that which is
divine, wherever it may be, and whatever allotment
it may possess, has the same power and
dominion over all the natures that are arranged
under it. Moreover, though the invisible Gods
should become visible, yet they rule over invisible
dæmons. For neither the place, which
is the recipient of divinity, nor a certain part
of the world, produces any mutation in the
dominion of the Gods. But the whole essence
of the Gods remains everywhere the same, indivisible
and immutable, which all subordinate
beings similarly venerate, in the order assigned
them by nature.
By the assistance also of this reasoning, we
may discover another difference between Gods
and dæmons. For both the visible and invisible
Gods, indeed, comprehend in themselves
the whole government of whatever is contained
78in all heaven and the world, and in the total
invisible powers in the universe. But those
powers that are allotted a dæmoniacal prefecture,
distributing certain divisible portions of
the world, govern these, and have themselves
a partible form of essence and power. They
are, likewise, in a certain respect, connascent
with, and inseparable from, the subjects of their
government. But the Gods, though they may
ride in bodies, are entirely separated from them.
The providential attention, therefore, to bodies,
produces no diminution in those to whom body
is subservient: for it is connectedly contained
by a more excellent nature, is converted to it,
and is not the cause of any impediment to it.
But the adhering to a genesiurgic nature, and
the being divided about it, necessarily give to
dæmons a more subordinate condition. In
short, that which is divine is of a ruling nature,
and presides over the different orders of beings;
but that which is dæmoniacal is of a
ministrant nature, and receives whatever the
Gods may announce, promptly employing manual
operation, as it were, in things which the
Gods intellectually perceive, wish, and command.
The Gods, therefore, are liberated
from the powers which verge to generation;
but dæmons are not entirely purified from
79these. And thus much concerning this distinction;
and we trust, that from the former
and the present exposition, the difference between
Gods and dæmons will become more
known.
The division, however, of the passive from the
impassive, which you adopt, may perhaps be
rejected by some one, as not adapted to either
of the more excellent genera, through the
causes which we have before enumerated; and
it also deserves to be subverted, because it is
inferred that these genera are passive, from
what is performed in religious ceremonies.
For what sacred institution, what religious
cultivation, which is conformable to sacerdotal
laws, is effected through passion, or produces a
certain completion of passions? Is not each
of these legislatively ordained from the first,
conformably to the sacred laws of the Gods,
and intellectually? Each also imitates both
the intelligible and celestial order of the Gods;
and contains the eternal measures of beings,
and those admirable signatures which are sent
hither from the Demiurgus and father of
wholes, by which things of an ineffable nature
80are unfolded into light through arcane symbols,
things formless are vanquished by forms, things
more excellent than every image are expressed
through images, and all things are accomplished
through a divine cause alone, which is
in so great a degree separated from passions,
that reason is not able to come into contact
with it.
This, therefore, is nearly the cause of our
aberration to a multitude of conceptions. For
men being in reality unable to apprehend the
reasons of sacred institutions, but conceiving
that they are able, are wholly hurried away
by their own human passions, and form a conjecture
of divine concerns from things pertaining
to themselves. In so doing, however,
they err in a twofold respect; because they
fall from divine natures; and because, being
frustrated of these, they draw them down to
human passions. But it is requisite not to
apprehend after the same manner, things which
are performed both to Gods and men, such as
genuflexions, adorations, gifts, and first fruits,
but to establish the one apart from the other,
conformably to the difference between things
more and things less honourable; and to reverence
the former, indeed, as divine, but to
despise the latter as human, and as performed
to men. It is proper, likewise, to consider,
81that the latter produce passions, both in the
performer and those to whom they are performed;
for they are human and corporeal-formed;
but to honour the energy of the former
in a very high degree, as being performed
through immutable admiration, and a venerable
condition of mind, because they are referred
to the Gods.
SECTION II. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V. — CHAP. VI. — CHAP. VII. — CHAP. VIII. — CHAP. IX. — CHAP. X. — CHAP. XI.
82
It is also necessary to demonstrate to you, in
what dæmons, heroes, and souls differ from
each other, and whether this difference is
according to essence, or according to power,
or according to energy. I say, therefore, that
dæmons are produced according to the generative
and demiurgic powers of the Gods, in the
most remote termination of progression, and
ultimate distribution into parts. But heroes
are produced according to the reasons [or
effective principles], of life in divine natures;
and from these, the first and perfect measures
of souls receive their termination and distribution
into parts.
Since, however, the nature of dæmons and
heroes is thus generated from different causes,
it is also necessary that the essence of the one
should be different from that of the other.
Hence, the essence of dæmons is effective, and
perfective of mundane natures, and gives completion
to the superintendence of generated individuals.
83But the essence of heroes is vital
and rational, and is the leader of souls. And,
with respect to the powers of each, those of
dæmons must be defined to be prolific, inspective
of nature, and of the bond by which
souls are united to bodies. But it is requisite
to attribute to heroes vivific powers, which are
the leaders of men, and are liberated from
generation.
It follows, therefore, that in the next place we
should define the energies of them. And those of
dæmons, indeed, must be surveyed as occupied
about the world, and more widely extended in
their effects; but those of heroes as less extended,
and as converted to the order of souls.
Hence, these being thus distinguished, soul
succeeds, which proceeds as far as to the end
of the divine orders; and, being allotted from
these two genera certain portions of powers, is
redundant with partible additions, and other
prerogatives derived from itself. It also produces
at different times different forms and
reasons and manners, which originate from
different sources; and, according to each part
of the world, employs various lives and ideas;
84becoming, connascent with, and likewise receding
from, whatever natures it pleases; being,
assimilated to all things, and at the same time,
through difference, being separated from them;
drawing forth reasons allied to real beings and
generated natures; and connecting itself with
the Gods, according to other harmonies of
essences and powers, than those by which,
dæmons and heroes are united to the divinities.
It likewise possesses the eternity of a
similar life and energy in a less degree than
dæmons and heroes; yet, through the beneficent
will of the Gods, and the illumination imparted
by them, it frequently proceeds higher,
and is elevated to a greater, i. e. to the angelic,
order; when it no longer remains in the boundaries
of soul, but the whole of it is perfected
into an angelic soul and an undefiled life.
Hence, also, soul appears to comprehend in
itself all-various essences and reasons, and forms
or species of every kind. If, however, it be
requisite to speak the truth, soul is always defined
according to one certain thing, but adapting
itself to precedaneous causes, it is at different
times conjoined to different causes.
So great, therefore, being the difference between
the energies of dæmons, heroes, and
souls throughout, it is no longer proper to
doubt, what it is which separates them from
85each other; but they are to be distinguished
by the peculiar nature of each. And so far as
they are able to form one conjunction, so far
the communion of them must be surveyed.
For thus it will be possible truly to comprehend
and define separately the conception
which ought to be formed of them.
Let us, however, now proceed to the appearances
of the Gods and their perpetual attendants,
and show what the difference is in their
appearance. For you inquire, “by what indication
the presence of a God, or an angel, or an
archangel, or a dæmon, or a certain archon [i. e.
ruler], or a soul, may be known.” In one word,
therefore, I conclude that their appearances
accord with their essences, powers, and energies.
For such as they are, such also do they
appear to those that invoke them, and they
exhibit energies and ideas consentaneous to
themselves, and proper indications of themselves.
But that we may descend to particulars,
the phasmata, or luminous appearances, of
the Gods are uniform; those of dæmons are
various; those of angels are more simple than
those of dæmons, but are subordinate to those
86of the Gods; those of archangels approximate
in a greater degree to divine causes; but those
of archons, if these powers appear to you to be
the cosmocrators,[42] who govern the sublunary
element, will be more various, but adorned
in order; but if they are the powers that preside
over matter, they will indeed be more
various, and more imperfect, than those of the
archons [properly so called]; and those of souls
will appear to be all-various. And the phasmata,
indeed, of the Gods will be seen shining
with salutary light; those of archangels will
be terrible, and at the same time mild; those
of angels will be more mild; those of dæmons
will be dreadful; those of heroes (which you
have omitted in your inquiry, but to which we
shall give an answer for the sake of truth) are
milder than those of dæmons; but those of
archons, if their dominion pertains to the world,
produce astonishment, but if they are material,
they are noxious and painful to the spectators;
and those of souls are similar to the heroic
phasmata, except that they are inferior to
them.
Again, therefore, the phasmata of the Gods
are entirely immutable, according to magnitude,
87morphe,[A] and figure, and according to all things
pertaining to them; those of archangels approximate
to those of the Gods, but fall short
of the sameness of them; those of angels are
subordinate to these, but are immutable; and
those of dæmons are at different times seen in
a different form, and appear at one time great,
but at another small, yet are still recognized to
be the phasmata of dæmons. Moreover, those
of such archons as are leaders are immutable;
but those of such as are material are multiformly
changed; those of heroes are similar
to those of dæmons; and those of souls
imitate in no small degree the dæmoniacal
mutation. Farther still, order and quiet pertain
to the Gods; but with archangels, there is
an efficacy of order and quiet. With angels,
the adorned and the tranquil are present, but
not unattended with motion. Perturbation and
disorder follow the dæmoniacal phasmata; but
spectacles attend the archons, conformable to
each of the particulars which we have already
mentioned; the material archons, indeed, being
borne along tumultuously; but those of a
leading characteristic, presenting themselves to
the view, firmly established in themselves. The
phasmata of heroes are subject to motion and
mutation; but those of souls resemble, indeed,
[Sidenote A: Morphe pertains to the colour, figure, and magnitude of
superficies.]
88the heroic, but at the same time are less than
these. In addition also to these peculiarities,
divine beauty, indeed, shines with an immense
splendour as it were, fixes the spectators in
astonishment, imparts a divine joy, presents
itself to the view with ineffable symmetry, and
is exempt from all other species of pulchritude.
But the blessed spectacles of archangels have
indeed themselves the greatest beauty, yet are
not so ineffable and admirable as those of the
Gods. Those of angels divide, in a partible
manner, the beauty which they receive from
archangels. But the dæmoniacal and heroical
self-visive spirits, have both of them beauty in
definite forms, yet the former is adorned in
reasons which define the essence, and the latter
exhibits fortitude. The phasmata of archons
may be divided in a twofold respect. For some
of them exhibit a beauty which is spontaneous,
and of a ruling characteristic; but others, an
elegance of form which is fictitious and renovated.
And the phasmata of souls are, indeed,
adorned in definite reasons, but these reasons
are more divided than those in heroes, are
partibly circumscribed, and are vanquished by
one form. If, however, it be requisite to define
all of them in common, I say that each
participates of beauty according to its arrangement,
the peculiar nature which it possesses,
and its allotment.
89
Proceeding, therefore, to other peculiarities
of them, we say, that with the Gods, indeed,
there is acuteness and rapidity in the energies,
which shine forth with greater celerity than
those of intellect itself, though in themselves
they are immoveable and stable. With archangels,
the celerities are, in a certain respect,
mingled with efficacious energies. Those of
angels partake of a certain motion, and do not,
similarly with archangels, possess a power
which is effective by speaking. The operations
of dæmons appear to be more rapid than they
are in reality. In the motions of the heroic
phasmata, a certain magnificence presents itself
to the view; but in accomplishing what
they wish to effect, their energies are not so
rapid as those of dæmons. In the phasmata of
archons, the first energies appear to be most
excellent and authoritative; but the second
have a more abundant representation, yet in
actions fall short of the end. And the phasmata
of souls are seen to be more moveable,
yet are more imbecile, than those of heroes.
In addition to these things also, the magnitude
of the epiphanies [or manifestations] in
the Gods, indeed, is so great as sometimes to
90conceal all heaven, the sun and the moon; and
the earth itself, as the Gods descend, is no
longer able to stand still. When archangels
appear, certain parts of the world are moved,
and a divided forerunning light precedes them.
But they exhibit a magnitude of light commensurate
to the magnitude of their domination.
The angelic light is less than the archangelic,
and more divided, but in dæmons it is
still more divided, and the magnitude of the
manifestation is not always equal in them.
The manifestation of heroes is still less than
that of dæmons, but exhibits more of an elevated
condition. Again, the manifestation of
such archons as preside over mundane forms,
presents itself to the view as above measure
great; but such of them as are distributed
about matter, exhibit in their manifestations an
abundance of pride and arrogance. Those of
souls are not all of them seen to be equal, but
appear to be less than those of heroes. And,
in short, the magnitude of the manifestation is
appropriately present in each of these, according
to the magnitude of their powers, and the
amplitude of the empire through which they
extend themselves, and in which they exercise
their authority.
After these things, therefore, we shall define
the reasons of the self-apparent statues [or
91images]. Hence, in the forms of the Gods
which are seen by the eyes, the most clear
spectacles of truth itself are perceived, which
are also accurately splendid, and shine forth
with an evolved light. The images of archangels
present themselves to the view true and
perfect; but those of angels preserve, indeed,
the same form, but fail in plenitude of indication.
The images of dæmons are obscure;
and those of heroes are seen to be still inferior
to these. With respect, also, to archons, the
images of such as are mundane, are clear; but
of such as are material, obscure. Both, however,
are seen to be of an authoritative nature.
And the images of souls appear to be of a
shadowy form.
In a similar manner, likewise, we must determine
concerning the light of these powers.
For the images of the Gods, indeed, are replete
with a fulgid light. Those of archangels are
full of supernatural light. Those of angels are
luminous; but dæmons present themselves to
the view with a turbid fire. The light of
heroes is mingled with many things. And, with
respect to archons, the light of those that have
the government of the world is more pure;
but of those that preside over matter, exhibits
itself mingled from things of a dissimilar and
contrary nature. And the light of souls manifests
92itself to be partibly filled with many of the
mixtures which exist in generation.
Conformably, also, to what has been said, the
fire of the Gods, indeed, shines forth with an
indivisible and ineffable light, and fills all the
profundities of the world, in an empyrean,[43]
but not in a mundane, manner. But the fire of
archangels is impartible indeed, but is seen to
possess about itself an abundant multitude,
either preceding or following after itself. The
fire of angels is divided, except that it exhibits
itself in the most perfect ideas. That of dæmons
is still more shortly circumscribed by a distribution
into parts, is effable, and does not
astonish the sight of those that have seen more
excellent natures. The fire of heroes has, after
a certain manner, the same things as that of
dæmons, but at the same time falls short of the
most accurate similitude to it. Moreover, with
respect to archons, the fire of those that are of
a more elevated order, is more pellucid; but
of those that are material, is more dark. And
the fire of souls is seen to be much divided
and multiform, and is comingled from many of
the natures that are in the world. Again, the
fire of the Gods appears to be entirely stable.
93That of archangels is tranquil; but that of
angels is stably moved. The fire of dæmons
is unstable; but that of heroes is, for the most
part, rapidly moved. The fire of those archons
that are of the first rank is tranquil; but of
those that are of the last order is tumultuous.
And the fire of souls is transmuted in a multitude
of motions.
Moreover, that which purifies souls is perfect
in the Gods; but in archangels it is anagogic.
Angels alone dissolve the bond of generation.
Dæmons draw souls down into nature; but
heroes lead them to a providential attention
to sensible works. Archons either deliver to
them the government of mundane concerns, or
the inspection of material natures. And souls,
when they become apparent, tend in a certain
respect to generation.
Farther still, consider this, also, that you
should attribute everything which is pure and
stable in the visible image to the more excellent
genera. Hence, you should ascribe to the
Gods that which in the image is transcendently
splendid, and which is firmly established in
itself. That which is splendid, but is established
94as in another thing, you should give to
archangels; but that which remains in another
to angels. To all these, therefore, you should
oppose, that which is rashly borne along, is
unestablished, and filled with foreign natures,
the whole of which is adapted to inferior orders.
These, also, may now be divided according
to the difference of commixture. For mundane
vapours are mingled with dæmons, and
are unstably borne along, contrary to the motion
of the world. Genesiurgic compositions
of pneumatic substances are mingled with heroes,
about which substances, also, they are
moved. The archons of the world remain invariably
the same, exhibiting the mundane nature
which they possess. But the archons of
matter are full of material substances. And
souls are filled with an abundance of stains and
foreign spirits, together with which, when they
become visible, each of these genera presents
itself to the view.
The following, also, will be no small indications
to you [of the difference of these powers].
With the Gods matter is immediately consumed.
With archangels it is consumed in a
short time. With angels there is a solution of,
and elevation from, matter. By dæmons matter
is elegantly adorned. With heroes there is a
coadaptation to it, in appropriate measures,
95and a skilful providential attention to it. And
with respect to archons, those that are the
governors of the world are present with matter
in a transcendent manner, and in this way unfold
themselves into light. But those that are
material, exhibit themselves as entirely replete
with matter. With respect to souls, also, those
that are pure, present themselves to the view
out of matter, but those of a contrary description
are seen surrounded with it.
Moreover, the gifts arising from the manifestations
are not all of them equal, nor have the
same fruits. But the presence[44] of the Gods,
indeed, imparts to us health of body, virtue of
soul, purity of intellect, and in one word elevates
every thing in us to its proper principle.
And that, indeed, in us which is cold and destructive
it annihilates; that which is hot it
increases, and renders more powerful and predominant;
and causes all things to accord
with soul and intellect. It also emits a light,
accompanied with intelligible harmony, and
96exhibits that which is not body as body to the
eyes of the soul, through those of the body.
The presence of archangels imparts likewise
the same things, except that it does not impart
them always, nor in all things, nor does it bestow
goods which are sufficient, perfect, and
incapable of being taken away; nor is their
appearance accompanied with a light equal to
that of the Gods. The presence of angels imparts
divisibly still more partible goods, and
the energy through which it becomes visible
falls very short of comprehending in itself a
perfect light. That of dæmons renders the
body, indeed, heavy, afflicts with diseases,
draws down the soul to nature, does not depart
from bodies, and the sense allied to bodies, and
detains about this terrestrial place those who
are hastening to divine fire, and does not liberate
from the bonds of Fate. The presence of
heroes is in other respects similar to that of
dæmons, but is attended with this peculiarity,
that it excites to certain generous and great
undertakings. The appearance which is visible
by itself, of the mundane archons, imparts
mundane goods, and every thing pertaining to
human life; but that of the material archons
extends material benefits, and such works as
are terrestrial. Moreover, the vision of souls
that are undefiled, and established in the order
97of angels, is anagogic, and the saviour of the soul,
is accompanied with sacred hope, and imparts
those goods which sacred hope vindicates to
itself. But the vision of other souls draws down
to generation, corrupts the fruits of [sacred]
hope, and fills the spectators with passions
which fix them to body.
Moreover, in the manifestations there is an
indication of the order which the powers that
are seen possess. For the Gods are surrounded
by either Gods or angels; but archangels have
angels either preceding or coarranged with
them, or following them behind, or are accompanied
by a certain other multitude of angels,
who attend on them as guards. Angels exhibit,
together with themselves, the peculiar
works of the order to which they belong.
Good dæmons permit us to survey, in conjunction
with themselves, their own works, and
the benefits which they impart; but avenging
dæmons exhibit the species of punishments
[which they inflict]; and such other dæmons
as are depraved are surrounded by certain noxious,
98blood-devouring, and fierce wild beasts.[45]
Archons [of the first rank] exhibit, together
with themselves, certain portions of the world;
but other archons attract to themselves the inordination
and confusion of matter. With respect
to soul, if it ranks as a whole, and does
not belong to any particular species, it presents
to the view a formless fire, extended through
the whole world, which is indicative of the
total, one, indivisible, and formless soul of the
universe; but a purified soul exhibits a fiery
form, and a pure and unmingled fire. Then,
also, the most inward light of it is seen, and
an undefiled and stable form, and it most
willingly and joyfully follows its elevating
leader, and unfolds, by its works, its own appropriate
order. But the soul which verges
downward draws along with it the signs of
bonds and punishments, is heavy with material
spirits, is detained by the anomalous tumults of
matter, and exhibits before itself, genesiurgic
presiding dæmons. And, in short, all these
genera exhibit their proper orders; viz. the
aerial genera exhibit aerial fire; the terrestrial
99a terrestrial and blacker fire; and the celestial
a more splendid fire. But in these three boundaries
all the genera are distributed according
to a triple order of beginning, middle, and end.
And the Gods, indeed, exhibit the supreme
and most pure causes of this triple order. But
the genera of angels depend on those of archangels.
The genera of dæmons appear to be
subservient to those of angels; and in a similar
manner to these, the genera of heroes are
ministrant. They are not, however, subservient
to angels in the same way as dæmons. Again,
the genera of archons, whether they preside
over the world or over matter, exhibit the
order which is adapted to them. But all the
genera of souls present themselves to the view
as the last of more excellent natures. Hence,
also, they exhibit places in conjunction with
themselves; souls of the first rank primary,
but those of the second rank secondary, places,
and the rest conformably to their arrangement,
in each of these three genera.
Moreover, with respect to the tenuity and
subtilty of light, the Gods extend a light so
subtle that corporeal eyes cannot sustain it,
100but are affected in the same manner as fishes,
when they are drawn upward from turbid and
thick water into attenuated and diaphanous
air. For men who survey divine fire are not
able to breathe, through the subtilty of it, but
become languid as soon as they perceive it,
and are deprived of the use of their connascent
spirit. Archangels, also, emit a light which is
intolerable to respiration, yet their splendour is
not equally pure with that of the Gods, nor
similarly overpowering. The presence of angels
renders the temperature of the air tolerable, so
that theurgists are capable of being united to
it. But when dæmons are present, the whole
air is not at all affected; nor does the air, which
surrounds them, become more attenuated; nor
does a light precede them, in which, being previously
received and preoccupied by the air,
they unfold the form of themselves; nor are
they surrounded by a certain splendour, which
diffuses its light everywhere. When heroes
appear, certain parts of the earth are moved,
and sounds are heard around them; but, in
short, the air does not become more attenuated,
nor incommensurate to theurgists, so as to render
them unable to receive it. But when
archons are present, an assemblage of many
luminous appearances runs round them, difficult
to be borne, whether these appearances
101are mundane or terrestrial. They have not,
however, a supermundane tenuity, nor even
that of the supreme elements. And to the
psychical appearances the air is more allied,
and, being suspended from them, receives in
itself their circumscription.
In the last place, the dispositions of the soul
of those that invoke the Gods to appear receive,
when they become visible, a liberation
from the passions, a transcendent perfection,
and an energy entirely more excellent, and participate
of divine love and an immense joy.
But when archangels appear, these dispositions
receive a pure condition of being, intellectual
contemplation, and an immutable power. When
angels appear, they participate of intellectual
wisdom and truth, pure virtue, stable knowledge,
and a commensurate order. But when
dæmons are seen, they receive the appetite of
generation and a desire of nature, together with
a wish to accomplish the works of Fate, and a
power effective of things of this kind. If heroes
are seen, they derive from the vision other such
like manners and many impulses, which contribute
to the communion of souls. But when
102these dispositions come into contact with
archons, mundane or material, motions are
excited in conjunction with the soul. And,
together with the vision of souls, the spectators
derive genesiurgic tendencies and connascent
providential inspections, for the sake of paying
attention to bodies, and such other peculiarities
as are allied to these.
In addition to these things, also, the manifestation
of the Gods imparts truth and power,
rectitude of works, and gifts of the greatest
goods; but the manifestation of other powers is
appropriately accompanied by such things as
are commensurate to their several orders. Thus
the manifestation of archangels imparts truth,
not simply about all things, but definitely of
certain things; and this not always, but sometimes;
nor indefinitely to all, or every where,
but with limitation, in a certain place, or to a
certain individual. In like manner it does not
impart a power effective of all things, nor
always without distinction, nor every where;
but a power which is effective sometimes, and
in a certain place. But the manifestation of
angels, in a still greater degree than that of
archangels, divides, in imparting good, the circumscriptions
which are always defined by
them in more contracted boundaries. Again,
the manifestation of dæmons does not impart
103the goods of the soul, but either those of the
body, or goods pertaining to the body. And
they impart these when the order of the world
permits them. After the same manner, likewise,
the manifestation of heroes imparts second
and third goods, and regards as its scope the
whole terrestrial and mundane polity of souls.
With respect to archons, the manifestation of
some of these imparts mundane benefits, and
all the goods of life; but that of others of an
inferior rank imparts not a few of the prerogatives
of material natures. And souls, when
they appear, procure for those that behold
them things which contribute to the benefit of
human life. Thus, therefore, we have appropriately
defined the gifts of these powers, conformably
to the proper order of each; and the
particulars in the manifestations about which
you inquired, have received a fit reply. And
thus much for these questions.
What you introduce, however, for the purpose
of obtaining a knowledge of these things, whether
it be your own opinion, or whether you
have heard it from others, is neither true nor
rightly asserted. For you say, “that to speak
104boastingly, and to exhibit an adumbrative phantasm,
are common to Gods and dæmons, and to
all the more excellent genera of beings.” But
the thing is not as you apprehend it to be. For
a God, an angel, and a good dæmon, instruct
men in what their proper essence consists;
and never use an addition in their language
which transcends their power, or their appropriate
good. For truth is coexistent with the
Gods, in the same manner as light with the
sun. And, at the same time, we say, that
divinity is not in want of any beauty or virtue
which it is possible to add to him through language.
Moreover, angels and dæmons always
receive truth from the Gods, so that they never
assert any thing contrary to this, each of them
being essentially perfect, nor can they add any
thing to it for the sake of commendation.
When, therefore, does the deception mentioned
by you “of speakingly boastingly” take
place. For when a certain error happens in
the theurgic art, and not such autoptic, or self-visible,
images are seen as ought to occur, but
others, instead of these, then inferior powers
assume the form of the more venerable orders,
and pretend to be those whose forms they
assume; and hence arrogant words are uttered
by them, and such as exceed the authority
which they possess. For, as it appears to me,
105if any fraud germinates from the first principle,
much falsehood is derived from the perversion,
which it is necessary the priest should learn
from the whole order in the phasmata, and by
the proper observation of which they are able
to confute and reject the fictitious[46] pretext of
these inferior powers, as by no means pertaining
to true and good spirits. Nor is it proper
to introduce errors in the true judgment of
things; for neither in other sciences or arts do
we judge of their works from the aberrations
which may happen to take place in them. You
should not, therefore, here characterize things
which are scarcely performed with rectitude
through ten thousand labours, from the errors
which may, through ignorance, befall them;
but rather assert something else of them. For
if the works which take place from the appearance
of these powers are such as you say, viz.
if they are arrogant and false, yet the operations
about fire of true spirits are genuine and true.
For, as in all other things, such as are principal
primarily begin from themselves, and impart
to themselves that which they give to others;
as, for instance, in essence, in life, and in motion;
thus also the natures which supply all beings
with truth, primarily proclaim the truth of
106themselves, and precedaneously unfold the essence
of themselves to the spectators. Hence,
likewise, they exhibit to theurgists a fire which
is of itself visible. For it is not the province of
heat to refrigerate, nor of light to darken or
conceal any thing; nor with any other nature
which essentially performs a certain thing, is a
power present of at the same time effecting the
contrary. But things which do not possess a
[true] nature, and which are contrary to things
that exist essentially; these are able to receive
contraries, and are adapted to fall into evil.
We must say the same thing, therefore, concerning
phantasms. For if these are not true,
but other things are so which have a real existence,
thus also in the appearances of spirits,
they seem to be such as things which are true
beings; at the same time they participate of
falsehood and deception, in the same manner as
the forms which present themselves to the view
in mirrors; and thus vainly attract the mind
about things which never take place in any of
the more excellent genera. These phantasms,
likewise, will consist in deceptive perversions.
For that which is an imitation of [real] being,
and is an obscure assimilation, and becomes
the cause of deception, pertains to no one of
the true and clearly existing genera. But the
Gods, indeed, and those powers that follow the
107Gods, reveal true images of themselves, but by
no means extend phantasms of themselves,
such as exist in water, or in mirrors. For on
what account should they exhibit these? Shall
we say, as bringing with them an indication of
their own essence and power? This, however,
is by no means the case. For these phantasms
become the cause of deception to those that
believe in them, and withdraw the spectators
from the true knowledge of the Gods. Shall
we say, then, that it is because they afford a
certain utility to those that behold them? But
what advantage can be derived from falsehood?
If, therefore, this is not the case, may it not be
natural to divinity to extend a phantasm from
itself? But how can that which is firmly established
in itself, and which is the cause of
essence and truth, produce in a foreign seat a
certain deceitful imitation of itself? By no
means, therefore, does divinity either transform
himself into phantasms, nor extend these from
himself to other things, but emits, by illumination,
true representations of himself, in the true
manners of souls. Conformably to this, also,
the attendants of the Gods are emulous of the
self-visible truth of the Gods. But that which
you now say, “that it is common to Gods and
dæmons, and the rest of the more excellent genera,
to produce fictitious images, and to speak boastingly
108of themselves,” confounds all the genera
of superior beings in each other, and leaves no
difference whatever between them. For thus
all things will be common to them, and nothing
singularly excellent will be given to transcendent
natures. It will, therefore, be more just
to ask, in opposition to you, in what will the
genus of the Gods be superior to that of dæmons?
These genera, however, have nothing
in common, nor is the communion between them
phantastic, nor is it fit from such natures as are
last, and from the errors which take place in
them, to estimate first essences, and the true
impressions of forms which are in them. For
by thus thinking concerning these essences,
we shall think justly, and in a way pleasing to
the Gods.
In what follows, in which you think that
ignorance and deception about these things are
impiety and impurity, and in which you exhort
us to the true developement of these particulars,
is not, indeed, attended with any ambiguity,
but is acknowledged by all men. For who will
not grant that the science which apprehends
real being, is most adapted to a divine cause,
109but that ignorance which is hurried along to
nonbeing, since it is most remote from a divine
cause, falls off from truly existing forms? Since,
however, what is said by you is not sufficient,
I will add what is wanting; and because what
you assert is rather philosophical and logical,
than conformable to the efficacious art of priests,
on this account I think it is necessary to say
something more theurgical about these particulars.
For, let “ignorance and deception be error
and impiety,” yet it does not follow that, on
this account, things which are offered to the
Gods, and divine works, are false. For a conception
of the mind does not conjoin theurgists
with the Gods; since, if this were the case,
what would hinder those who philosophize
theoretically, from having a theurgic union with
the Gods? Now, however, in reality, this is
not the case. For the perfect efficacy of ineffable
works, which are divinely performed in
a way surpassing all intelligence, and the power
of inexplicable symbols, which are known only
to the Gods, impart theurgic union. Hence,
we do not perform these things through intellectual
perception; since, if this were the case,
the intellectual energy of them would be imparted
by us; neither of which is true. For
when we do not energize intellectually, the
110synthemata[47] themselves perform by themselves
their proper work, and the ineffable power of
the Gods itself knows, by itself, its own images.
It does not, however, know them, as if excited
by our intelligence; for neither is it natural
that things which comprehend should be excited
by those that are comprehended, nor perfect
by imperfect natures, nor wholes by parts.
Hence, neither are divine causes precedaneously
called into energy by our intellections;
but it is requisite to consider these, and all the
best dispositions of the soul, and also the purity
pertaining to us, as certain concauses; the
things which properly excite the divine will being
divine synthemata themselves. And thus,
things pertaining to the Gods, are moved by
themselves, and do not receive from any inferior
nature a certain principle in themselves
of their own proper energy.
I have, however, been thus prolix, in order
that you may not think all the authority of the
energy in theurgic operations is in our power,
and that you may not suppose the true work
of them consists in our conceptions, or the
falsehood of them in our deception. For though
we may know the peculiarities which are consequent
to each genus, yet we may not obtain
111the truth which is in their works. Nevertheless,
efficacious union [with divine natures] is
not effected without knowledge; yet knowledge
does not possess a sameness with this
union. So that neither is divine purity obtained
through right knowledge, as neither is
purity of body procured through health; but
divine purity is more undefiled than knowledge,
and is more transcendently united. Hence
neither this, nor any thing of the like kind
which is in us, and is human, cooperates any
thing to the end of divine actions.
Accept, therefore, this, which is said indeed
incidentally, but is a sufficient reply to the
whole of your conception concerning the theurgic
art. Those assertions, also, of yours
pertain to the same thing, in which you say,
“that the science of the Gods is sacred and
useful, and call the ignorance of things honourable
and beautiful darkness, but the knowledge
of them light; and also add, that the ignorance
of these things fills men with all evils, through
inerudition and audacity, but the knowledge of
them is the cause of all good.” For all these
assertions tend to the same thing with the
preceding, and obtain together with them an
appropriate discussion. It is necessary, therefore
to omit them, and to pass on to the inquiries
concerning divination, and concisely
dissolve them.
SECTION III. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V. — CHAP. VI. — CHAP. VII. — CHAP. VIII. — CHAP. IX. — CHAP. X. — CHAP. XI. — CHAP. XII. — CHAP. XIII. — CHAP. XIV. — CHAP. XV. — CHAP. XVI. — CHAP. XVII. — CHAP. XVIII. — CHAP. XIX. — CHAP. XX. — CHAP. XXI. — CHAP. XXII. — CHAP. XXIII. — CHAP. XXIV. — CHAP. XXV. — CHAP. XXVI. — CHAP. XXVII. — CHAP. XXVIII. — CHAP. XXIX. — CHAP. XXX. — CHAP. XXXI.
112
In the first place, therefore, you ask me to explain
to you distinctly, “what that is which is
effected in the foreknowledge of future events?”
Immediately, however, that which you endeavour
to learn is impossible. For, according
to the meaning of your question, you think
that foreknowledge is something which is generated,
or subsists in becoming to be, and pertains
to things which have a natural subsistence.
It is not, however, one of the things
which have their existence in becoming to be,
nor is it effected after the manner of physical
mutation, nor is it invented and devised as
something useful for the purposes of life, nor
in short, is it a human work, but is divine and
supernatural, and is supernally sent to us from
the heavens. It is also unbegotten and eternal,
and spontaneously has a precedaneous subsistence.
The greatest remedy, therefore, for all such
doubts is this, to know the principle of divination,
113that it neither originates from bodies, nor
from the passions about bodies, nor from a certain
nature, and the powers about nature, nor
from any human apparatus, or the habits pertaining
to it. But neither does it originate from a
certain art, externally acquired, about a certain
part of such things as are subservient to life.
For the whole authority of it pertains to the
Gods, and is imparted by them; it is also
effected by divine works, or signs; and it possesses
divine spectacles, and scientific theorems.
All other things, however, are subjected as instruments
to the gift of foreknowledge transmitted
from the Gods; viz. such things as pertain
to our soul and body, and such as are in
the nature of the universe, or are inexistent in
particular natures. But some things are previously
subjacent, as in the order of matter,
such as places, or certain other things of the
like kind.
If some one, however, dismissing primordial
causes, should refer divination to secondary
offices, such as the motions of bodies, or the
mutations of passions, or certain other motions,
or the energies of human life, or animal or physical
reasons, and should think that in so doing
he asserts something manifest; or if, considering
the symmetries of these with reference to
each other, as causes, he should apprehend
114that he can assign something accurate concerning
divination, he wholly deviates from the
truth. But the one right boundary, and the
one principle of all these particulars, is by no
means to produce without a cause the foreknowledge
of futurity, from things which have
no prescience in themselves, but to survey from
the Gods who contain in themselves the terminations
of all the knowledge of beings, divination
distributed about the whole world, and
about all the natures that are separately contained
in it. For such a cause as this is primordial,
and is especially most common, containing
in itself primarily those things which it
gives to its participants, and particularly imparting
truth, of which divination is in want;
and antecedently comprehending the essence
and cause of future events, from which foreknowledge
necessarily and incessantly proceeds.
Let such a principle as this, therefore,
be the origin in common of all divination, from
which it is possible to discover scientifically
all the species of it; which we shall now unfold,
conformably to the questions proposed
by you.
115
Concerning the divination, therefore, which
takes place in sleep, you say as follows: “We
frequently obtain through dreams, when we are
asleep, a knowledge of future events, not being
in an ecstasy, through which we are much agitated,
for the body is quiet, but we do not apprehend
what we see in the same clear manner as
when we are awake.” It is usual, however, for
what you here say, to happen in human dreams,
and in dreams which are excited by the soul,
or by some of our conceptions, or by reason, or
by imaginations, or certain diurnal cares. And
these, indeed, are sometimes true and sometimes
false; and in some things they apprehend
reality, but in many deviate from it. But
the dreams which are denominated theopemptoi,
or sent from God, do not subsist after the manner
which you mention; but they take place
either when sleep is leaving us, and we are
beginning to awake, and then we hear a certain
voice, which concisely tells us what is to be
done; or voices are heard by us, between
sleeping and waking, or when we are perfectly
awake. And sometimes, indeed, an invisible
and incorporeal spirit surrounds the recumbents,
116so as not to be perceived by the sight,
but by a certain other cosensation and intelligence.
The entrance of this spirit, also, is
accompanied with a noise, and he diffuses himself
on all sides without any contact, and
effects admirable works conducive to the liberation
of the passions of the soul and body.
But sometimes a bright and tranquil light
shines forth, by which the sight of the eyes is
detained, and which occasions them to become
closed, though they were before open. The
other senses, however, are in a vigilant state,
and in a certain respect have a cosensation of
the light unfolded by the Gods; and the recumbents
hear what the Gods say, and know,
by a consecutive perception, what is then done
by them. This, however, is beheld in a still
more perfect manner, when the sight perceives,
when intellect, being corroborated, follows what
is performed, and this is accompanied with the
motion of the spectators. Such, therefore, and
so many being the differences of these dreams,
no one of them is similar to human dreams.
But wakefulness,[48] a detention of the eyes, a
117similar oppression of the head, a condition between
sleeping and waking, an instantaneous
excitation, or perfect vigilance, are all of them
divine indications, and are adapted to the reception
of the Gods. They are also sent by
the Gods, and a part of divine appearances antecedes
according to things of this kind.
Take away, therefore, from divine dreams,
among which also divination is contained, “the
being asleep,” and also the assertion, “that we
do not apprehend what we see in sleep, in the
same clear manner as when we are awake.” For
the Gods are no less clearly present with us in
these dreams than when we are awake. And,
if it be requisite to speak the truth, the presence
of the Gods, in the former case, is necessarily
clearer and more accurate, and produces
a more perfect perception than in the latter.
Some, therefore, not knowing these indications
of prophetic dreams, and conceiving that they
have something in common with human dreams,
rarely and casually obtain a foreknowledge of
futurity, and in consequence of this, reasonably
doubt how dreams contain any truth. And
this, also, appears to me to disturb you, in consequence
118of your not knowing the true indications
of dreams. It is necessary, however,
that, admitting these to be the elements of the
true knowledge of dreams, you should attend
to the whole of the discussion concerning
divination in sleep.
The wise,[49] therefore, speak as follows: The
soul having a twofold life, one being in conjunction
with body, but the other being separate
from all body; when we are awake we
employ, for the most part, the life which is
common with the body, except when we separate
ourselves entirely from it by pure intellectual
and dianoetic energies. But when we are
asleep, we are perfectly liberated, as it were,
from certain surrounding bonds, and use a life
separated from generation. Hence, this form
of life, whether it be intellectual or divine, and
whether these two are the same thing, or
whether each is peculiarly of itself one thing,
is then excited in us, and energizes in a way
119conformable to its nature. Since, therefore,
intellect surveys real beings, but the soul contains
in itself the reasons of all generated natures,
it very properly follows that, according
to a cause which comprehends future events,
it should have a foreknowledge of them, as
arranged in their precedaneous reasons. And
it possesses a divination still more perfect than
this, when it conjoins the portions of life and
intellectual energy to the wholes from which it
was separated. For then it is filled from
wholes with all scientific knowledge, so as for
the most part to attain by its conceptions to the
apprehension of every thing which is effected
in the world. Indeed, when it is united to the
Gods, by a liberated energy of this kind, it
then receives the most true plenitudes of intellections,
from which it emits the true divination
of divine dreams, and derives the most
genuine principles of knowledge. But if the
soul connects its intellectual and divine part
with more excellent natures, then its phantasms
will be more pure, whether they are
phantasms of the Gods, or of beings essentially
incorporeal, or, in short, of things contributing
to the truth of intelligibles. If, also, it elevates
the reasons of generated natures, contained in
it to the Gods, the causes of them, it receives
power from them, and a knowledge which
120apprehends what has been, and what will be;
it likewise surveys the whole of time, and the
deeds which are accomplished in time, and is
allotted the order of providentially attending
to and correcting them in an appropriate manner.
And bodies, indeed, that are diseased it
heals; but properly disposes such things as
subsist among men erroneously and disorderly.
It likewise frequently delivers the discoveries
of arts, the distributions of justice, and the
establishment of legal institutions. Thus in
the temple of Esculapius, diseases are healed
through divine dreams; and, through the order
of nocturnal appearances, the medical art is
obtained from sacred dreams. Thus, too, the
whole army of Alexander was preserved, which
would otherwise have been entirely destroyed
in the night, in consequence of Bacchus appearing
in sleep, and pointing out a solution of the
most grievous calamities. The city Aphutis,
likewise, when besieged by King Lysander,
was saved through a dream sent to him by
Jupiter Ammon. For afterwards, he most
rapidly withdrew his army from thence, and
immediately raised the siege.
What occasion, however, is there to be prolix
in mentioning every particular of things
which happen daily, and which exhibit an
energy superior to all language? What, therefore,
121has been said concerning divine divination
in sleep is sufficient to show what it is, how
it is effected, and what advantage it affords to
mankind.
Afterwards, also, you say, “that many,
through enthusiasm and divine inspiration, predict
future events, and that they are then in so
wakeful a state, as even to energize according to
sense, and yet they are not conscious of the state
they are in, or at least, not so much as they were
before.” I wish, therefore, here to point out to
you the signs by which those who are rightly
possessed by the Gods may be known. For
they either subject the whole of their life, as a
vehicle or instrument to the inspiring Gods;
or they exchange the human for the divine
life; or they energize with their own proper
life about divinity. But they neither energize
according to sense, nor are in such a vigilant
state as those who have their senses excited
from sleep (for neither do they apprehend
future events); nor are they moved as those
are who energize according to impulse. Nor,
again, are they conscious of the state they are
in, neither as they were before, nor in any
122other way; nor, in short, do they convert to
themselves their own intelligence, or exert any
knowledge which is peculiarly their own.
The greatest indication, however, of the truth
of this is the following. Many, through divine inspiration,
are not burned when fire is introduced
to them, the inspiring influence preventing the
fire from touching them. Many, also, though
burned, do not apprehend that they are so, because
they do not then live an animal life.
And some, indeed, though transfixed with
spits, do not perceive it; but others that are
struck on the shoulders with axes, and others
that have their arms cut with knives, are by no
means conscious of what is done to them.
Their energies, likewise, are not at all human.
For inaccessible places become accessible to
those that are divinely inspired; they are thrown
into fire, and pass through fire, and over rivers,
like the priest in Castabalis, without being injured.
But from these things it is demonstrated,
that those who energize enthusiastically are
not conscious of the state they are in, and that
they neither live a human nor an animal life,
according to sense or impulse, but that they
exchange this for a certain more divine life, by
which they are inspired and perfectly possessed.
123
There are, therefore, many species of divine
possession, and divine inspiration is multifariously
excited; whence, also, the signs of it
are many and different. For either the Gods
are different, by whom we are inspired, and
thus produce a different inspiration; or the
mode of enthusiasms being various, produces
a different afflatus. For either divinity possesses
us, or we give up ourselves wholly to
divinity, or we have a common energy with
him. And sometimes, indeed, we participate
of the last power of divinity, sometimes of his
middle, and sometimes of his first power.
Sometimes, also, there is a participation only,
at other times communion likewise, and sometimes
a union of these divine inspirations.
Again, either the soul alone enjoys the inspiration,
or the soul receives it in conjunction with
the body, or it is also participated by the common
animal.
From these things, therefore, the signs of
those that are inspired are multiform. For the
inspiration is indicated by the motions of the
[whole] body, and of certain parts of it, by the
perfect rest of the body, by harmonious orders
and dances, and by elegant sounds, or the
124contraries of these. Either the body, likewise,
is seen to be elevated, or increased in
bulk, or to be borne along sublimely in the air,
or the contraries of these, are seen to take
place about it. An equability, also, of voice,
according to magnitude, or a great variety of
voice after[50] intervals of silence, may be observed.
And again, sometimes the sounds
have a musical intension and remission, and
sometimes they are strained and relaxed after
a different manner.
That, however, which is the greatest thing is
this, that he who [appears to] draw down a
certain divinity, sees a spirit descending and
entering into some one, recognizes its magnitude
and quality, and is also mystically persuaded
and governed by it. But a species of
fire is seen by the recipient, prior to the spirit
being received, which sometimes becomes manifest
to all the spectators, either when the
divinity is descending, or when he is departing.
And from this spectacle the greatest truth and
power of the God, and especially the order he
125possesses, as likewise about what particulars
he is adapted to speak the truth, what the
power is which he imparts, and what he is
able to effect, become known to the scientific.
Those, however, who, without these blessed
spectacles, draw down spirits invisibly, are
without vision, as if they were in the dark, and
know nothing of what they do, except some
small signs which become visible through the
body of him who is divinely inspired, and certain
other things which are manifestly seen,
but they are ignorant of all the most important
particulars of divine inspiration, which are
concealed from them in the invisible. But to
return from this digression: if the presence of
the fire of the Gods, and a certain ineffable
species of light, externally accede to him who
is possessed, and if they wholly fill him, have
dominion over and circularly comprehend him
on all sides, so that he is not able to exert any
one proper energy, what sense, or animadversion,
or appropriate projection of intellect,
can there be in him who receives a divine
fire? What human motion, likewise, can then
intervene, or what human reception of passion
or ecstasy, or of aberration of the phantasy,
or of any thing else of the like kind, such as
is apprehended by the multitude, can take
place? Let such, therefore, be the divine indications
126of true inspiration from the Gods,
which he who attends to will not wander from
a right knowledge concerning it.
It is not, however, sufficient to learn these
things alone, nor will he who only knows these
become perfect in divine science. But it is
requisite also to know what enthusiasm is, and
how it is produced. It is falsely, therefore,
supposed to be a motion of dianoia, in conjunction
with dæmoniacal inspiration. For
human dianoia is not moved, if it is thus enthusiastically
affected; nor is the inspiration produced
by dæmons, but by the Gods. Neither
is enthusiasm simply an ecstasy; for it is a reelevation
and transition to a more excellent
condition of being. But delirium and ecstasy
evince a perversion to that which is worse.
Hence, he who is an advocate for the latter,
speaks, indeed, of things which happen to
those that energize enthusiastically, yet does
not teach that which is precedaneous. But
this consists in being wholly possessed by divinity,
which is afterwards followed by mental
alienation. No one, therefore, can justly apprehend
that enthusiasm is something pertaining
127to the soul, or to some one of its powers,
or to intellect or energies, or to corporeal
imbecility, or that it cannot subsist without the
debility of the body. For neither is the work
of divine inspiration human, nor does the whole
of it depend on human powers and energies;
but these, indeed, have the relation of a subject,
and divinity uses them as instruments.
He accomplishes, however, the whole work of
divination through himself, and being separated
in an unmingled manner from other things,
neither the soul nor the body being at all
moved, he energizes by himself. Hence, when
divinations are rightly effected in the way
which I have mentioned, then they subsist
without falsehood. But when the soul has
been previously disturbed, or is moved in the
interim, or the body intervenes, and confounds
the divine harmony, then divinations become
turbulent and false, and the enthusiasm is no
longer true nor genuine.
If, therefore, true divination was a solution of
the divine part of the soul from the other parts
of it, or if it was a separation of intellect, or a
certain extension of it; or if it was a vehemence
128and extension of energy or passion, or
an acuteness and motion of dianoia, or a fervour
of intellect; then, since all such like particulars
are excited by our soul, enthusiasm might
be reasonably supposed to be the offspring of
the soul. If, however, the body, on account
of certain temperaments, whether they are such
as are melancholic, or any other, or, to speak
more particularly, on account of heat, or cold,
or moisture, or a certain specific quality of
these, or the mixture or temperature of these
in a certain proportion, or the pneumatic part
of the soul, or the more and the less of these;
if any one of these is established as the cause
of enthusiastic alienation, in this case, the alienation
will be a corporeal passion, and will be
excited by physical motions. But if its excitation
originates from both the soul and the
body, so far as these coalesce with each other,
a motion of this kind will be common to the
animal [produced by the union of the two].
The enthusiastic energy, however, is not the
work either of the body or the soul, or of both
conjoined. For these do not contain in themselves
a certain cause of divine alienation, nor
are things of a more excellent nature adapted
to be generated by such as are less excellent.
But it is necessary to investigate the causes
of divine mania. And these are the illuminations
129proceeding from the Gods, the spirits
imparted by them, and the all perfect domination
of divinity, which comprehends indeed
every thing in us, but exterminates entirely
our own proper consciousness and motion.
This divine possession, also, emits words which
are not understood by those that utter them;
for they pronounce them, as it is said, with an
insane mouth, and are wholly subservient, and
entirely yield themselves to the energy of the
predominating God. The whole of enthusiasm
is a thing of this kind, and is effected by these
causes, though this must not be considered as
asserted with consummate accuracy.
What you afterwards say is as follows: “That
some of those who suffer a mental alienation,
energize enthusiastically on hearing cymbals or
drums, or a certain modulated sound, such as
those who are Corybantically inspired, those
who are possessed by Sabazius, and those who
are inspired by the mother of the Gods.” It is
necessary, therefore, to discuss the causes of
these things, and to show how they are definitely
produced.
That music, therefore, is of a motive nature,
130and is adapted to excite the affections, and
that the melody of pipes produces or heals the
disordered passions of the soul, changes the
temperaments or dispositions of the body, and
by some melodies causes a Bacchic fury, but
by others occasions this fury to cease;[51] and,
131likewise, how the differences of these accord
with the several dispositions of the soul, and
132that an unstable and variable melody is adapted
to ecstasies, such as are the melodies of Olympus,[52]
and others of the like kind; all these
appear to me to be adduced in a way foreign
to enthusiasm. For they are physical and
human, and the work of our art; but nothing
whatever of a divine nature in them presents
itself to the view.
We must rather, therefore, say, that sounds
and melodies are appropriately consecrated to
the Gods. There is, also, an alliance in these
sounds and melodies to the proper orders and
powers of the several Gods, to the motions in
the universe itself, and to the harmonious
sounds which proceed from the motions. Conformably,
133therefore, to such like adaptations of
melodies to the Gods, the Gods themselves
become present. For there is not any thing
which intercepts; so that whatever has but a
casual similitude to, directly participates of, them.
A perfect possession, likewise, immediately
takes place, and a plenitude of a more excellent
essence and power. Not that the body
and the soul are in each other, and sympathize,
and are copassive with the melodies; but because
the inspiration of the Gods is not separated
from divine harmony, but is originally
adapted and allied to it, on this account it is
participated by it in appropriate measures.
Hence also, it is excited and restrained according
to the several orders of the Gods. But
this inspiration must by no means be called an
ablation, purgation, or medicine. For it is not
primarily implanted in us from a certain disease,
or excess, or redundance; but the whole
principle and participation of it are supernally
derived from the Gods.
Neither is it proper to say that the soul
primarily consists of harmony and rythm. For
thus enthusiasm would be adapted to the soul
alone. It is better, therefore, to deny this, and
to assert that the soul, before she gave herself
to body, was an auditor of divine harmony;
and that hence, when she proceeded into body,
134and heard melodies of such a kind as especially
preserve the divine vestigie of harmony, she
embraced these, from them recollected divine
harmony, and tends and is allied to it, and as
much as possible participates of it. Hence the
cause of divine divination may, after this manner,
be assigned in common.
Let us, however, discuss what pertains to
divination more particularly; not asserting this,
that nature leads each thing to its like; for the
enthusiastic energy is not the work of nature;
nor again asserting that the temperature of the
air, and of that which surrounds us, produces
also a different temperature in the body of
those that energize enthusiastically; since inspiration,
which is the work of the Gods, is
not changed by corporeal powers or temperaments.
Nor must we say, that the much celebrated
inspiration of divinity is adapted to
passions and generated natures. For the gift
of the proper energy of the Gods to men is
impassive and superior to all generation. But
since the power of the Corybantes is, in a
certain respect, of a guardian and efficacious
135nature,[53] and that of Sabazius appropriately
pertains to Bacchic inspiration, the purifications
136of souls,[56] and the solutions of ancient
divine anger,[57] on this account the inspirations
of them entirely differ from each other.
137With respect, however, to the mother of the
Gods, you, indeed, seem to think that those
138who are possessed by the Goddess are males;
for, conformably to this, you denominate them
Metrizantes. But the thing is not truly so.
For those who are precedaneously inspired by
the mother of the Gods are women; but the
males that are thus inspired are very few in
number, and such as are more effeminate.
139This enthusiasm, however, has a vivific and
replenishing power,[58] on which account, also,
it in a remarkable degree differs from all other
mania.
Proceeding, therefore, in this way, in what
remains of the present discussion, and fitly
distinguishing the inspirations of the Nymphs,
or of Pan, and the other differences of them,
according to the powers of the Gods, we shall
separate them conformably to their appropriate
peculiarities; and we shall also be able to
explain through what cause they leap and
dwell in mountains, why some of them appear
to be bound, and why they are worshiped
through sacrifices. All these, likewise, we
shall ascribe to divine causes, as containing in
themselves all the authority of these particulars;
but we shall not say that either a certain
collected redundancy of body or soul requires
to be purified, or that the periods of the seasons
are the causes of such like passions, or
that the reception of the similar, and the ablation
of the dissimilar, bring with them a certain
140remedy for an excess of this kind. For all
such like particulars are corporeal-formed, and
are entirely separated from a divine and intellectual
life. But each thing energizes conformably
to its nature; so that the spirits
which are excited by the Gods, and which
produce in men Bacchic inspiration, expel
every other human and physical motion; and
it is not proper to assimilate their energies to
those which are usually exerted after our manner;
but it is fit to refer them to perfectly
different and primordial divine causes. One
species, therefore, of divine inspiration is of
this kind, and is after this manner produced.
Another species of divine divination which is
much celebrated, most manifest and manifold,
is that of oracles, about which you say as
follows: “There are some who drink water, as
the priest of Clarius, in Colophon;[59] but others
are seated at the mouth [of a cavern], as those
who prophesy at Delphi; and others imbibe
the vapour from water, as the prophetesses in
141Brandchidæ.”[60] You have, therefore, made
mention of these three oracles by name, not
that there are only these, for there are many
more which you have omitted, but as these are
more celebrated than the rest, and, at the same
time, because through these you may be sufficiently
instructed in the mode of divination
sent to men from the Gods, hence, as it appears
to me, you were satisfied with these. We,
therefore, likewise shall discuss these three,
omitting to speak about the many other oracles
that exist.
It is acknowledged then by all men, that the
oracle in Colophon gives its answers through
the medium of water. For there is a fountain
in a subterranean dwelling from which the
prophetess drinks; and on certain established
nights, after many sacred rites have been previously
performed, and she has drank of the
fountain, she delivers oracles, but is not visible
to those that are present. That this water,
therefore, is prophetic, is from hence manifest.
But how it becomes so, this, according to the
proverb, is not for every man to know. For it
appears as if a certain prophetic spirit pervaded
through the water. This is not, however, in
reality the case. For a divine nature does not
142pervade through its participants in this manner,
according to interval and division, but comprehends
as it were externally, and illuminates
the fountain,[61] and fills it from itself with a
prophetic power. For the inspiration which
the water affords is not the whole of that which
proceeds from a divine power, but the water
itself only prepares us, and purifies our luciform
spirit,[62] so that we may be able to receive the
divinity; while, in the mean time, there is a
presence of divinity prior to this, and illuminating
from on high. And this, indeed, is not
absent from any one, who through aptitude is
capable of being united to it. But this divine
illumination is immediately present, and uses
the prophetess as an instrument; she neither
being any longer mistress of herself, nor capable
of attending to what she says, nor perceiving
where she is. Hence, after prediction, she
is scarcely able to recover herself. And before
she drinks the water, she abstains from
food for a whole day and night; and retiring
to certain sacred places, inaccessible to the
143multitude, begins to receive in them the enthusiastic
energy. Through her departure,
therefore, and separation from human concerns,
she renders herself pure, and by this means
adapted to the reception of divinity: and from
hence she possesses the inspiration of the God,
shining into the pure seat of her soul, becomes
full of an unrestrained afflatus, and receives
the divine presence in a perfect manner, and
without any impediment.
But the prophetess in Delphi, whether she
gives oracles to mankind through an attenuated
and fiery spirit, bursting from the mouth of the
cavern, or whether being seated in the adytum
on a brazen tripod, or on a stool with four feet,
she becomes sacred to the God; whichsoever
of these is the case, she entirely gives herself
up to a divine spirit, and is illuminated with a
ray of divine fire. And when, indeed, fire
ascending from the mouth of the cavern circularly
invests her in collected abundance, she
becomes filled from it with a divine splendour.
But when she places herself on the seat of the
God, she becomes coadapted to his stable prophetic
power: and from both these preparatory
operations she becomes wholly possessed by
the God. And then, indeed, he is present
with and illuminates her in a separate manner,
and is different from the fire, the spirit, the
144proper seat, and, in short, from all the visible
apparatus of the place, whether physical or
sacred.
The prophetic woman too in Brandchidæ,
whether she holds in her hand a wand,[63] which
was at first received from some God, and becomes
filled with a divine splendour, or whether
seated on an axis, she predicts future events,
or dips her feet or the border of her garment in
the water, or receives the God by imbibing the
vapour of the water; by all these she becomes
adapted to partake externally[64] of the God.
But the multitude of sacrifices, the sacred
law of the whole sanctimony, and such other
things as are performed in a divine manner,
prior to the prophetic inspiration, viz. the baths
of the prophetess, her fasting for three whole
days, her retiring into the adyta, and there
receiving a divine light, and rejoicing for a
considerable time—all these evince that the
God is entreated by prayer to approach, that
145he becomes externally present, and that the
prophetess, before she comes to her accustomed
place, is inspired in a wonderful manner; and
that, in the spirit which rises from the fountain,
another more ancient God, who is separate
from the place, shines forth to the view,
and who is also the cause of the place, of the
country, and of the whole divination.
It appears, therefore, that the divination of
oracles accords with all the hypotheses which
we have before adduced concerning prediction.
For if a power of this kind was inseparable from
the nature of places, and of the bodies which
are the subjects of it, or proceeded[65] according
to a motion defined by number, it would not
be able to foreknow, with invariable sameness,
things which exist every where and always.
But being separate and liberated from places
and things which are measured by the numbers
of time, and also from those which are detained
in place, it is equally present with all things
wherever they may be, and subsists simultaneously
with all the natures that are produced
146according to time. It likewise comprehends
in one the truth of all things, through
its separate and transcendent essence.
Hence, if this is rightly asserted by us, the
prophetic power of the Gods is not partibly
comprehended by any place, or partible human
body, nor by the soul, which is detained in one
certain species of divisible natures; but being
separate and indivisible, it is wholly every
where present with the natures which are capable
of receiving it. It likewise externally illuminates
and fills all things, pervades through
all the elements, comprehends earth and air,
fire and water, and leaves nothing destitute of
itself, neither animals nor any of the productions
of nature, but imparts from itself a certain
portion of foreknowledge, to some things
in a greater, and to others in a less, degree.
Moreover, existing itself prior to all things, by
its own separate nature, it becomes sufficient
to fill all things, so far as each is able to partake
of it.
Let us, therefore, now direct our attention to
another species of divination, which is not
public, but of a private nature, concerning
147which you say, “that some become enthusiastic
by standing on characters, as those that are filled
from the intromission of spirits.” This species,
therefore, through those who badly use it, cannot
easily be comprehended in one definition.
But it is obvious and superficial, and known to
many, and employs a falsehood and deception
which are not to be endured; nor is it at all
attended with the presence of a certain divinity,
but it produces a certain motion of the soul,
which is adverse to the Gods, and attracts
from them an obscure and adumbrative representation,
which, through the evanescent nature
of its power, is usually disturbed by dæmoniacal
depraved spirits. That, however, which
is truly a representation of the Gods, is in other
respects genuine and pure, immutable and true,
and is inaccessible to, and unimpeded by, spirits
of a contrary nature. For, as darkness is not
adapted to sustain the splendour of the glittering
light of the sun, but suddenly becomes
totally invisible, entirely recedes, and immediately
vanishes; thus, also, when the power
of the Gods, which fills all things with good,
abundantly shines forth, no place is left for the
tumult of evil spirits, nor can it present itself
to the view; but, as if it was nothing, it departs
into nonentity, not being able to be at all
moved, when more excellent natures are present,
148or to disturb[66] such natures in their illuminations.
149Since, therefore, these differ so greatly, I
shall not use any other indications, in order to
distinguish them, than those which are adduced
by you. For when you say, “some standing
on characters,” you seem to signify nothing
else than the cause of all the evils pertaining
to these things. For there are some who,
neglecting the whole business of the telesiurgic
theory, both concerning the invoking [priest]
and the inspector (εποπτης), and also despising
the order of religion, and the most holy endurance
of labours for a long time, and rejecting
the sacred laws and ordinances, and other religious
ceremonies, think that the standing on
characters is alone sufficient, and that by doing
150this for one hour, they can cause a certain
spirit to enter; though how is it possible that
any thing beautiful or perfect can be effected
by these? Or how, by ephemeral works, can
a contact he produced with the eternal and
true essence of the Gods in sacred deeds?
Through these things, therefore, it appears
that such like rash men entirely err, and that
they do not deserve to be ranked among
diviners.
Concerning another kind of divination, also,
you say as follows: “Others who are conscious
what they are doing in other respects, are
divinely inspired according to the phantastic
part, some indeed receiving darkness for a cooperator,
others certain potions, but others in
cantations and compositions. And some energize
according to the imagination through
water,[67] others in a wall, others in the open air,
151and others in the light of the sun, or some other
celestial body.” The whole, however, of this
kind of divination of which you now speak,
since it is multiform, may be comprehended in
one power, which may be called the eduction
of light.[68] But this illuminates with divine
light the etherial and luciform vehicle[69] with
which the soul is surrounded, from which
divine visions occupy our phantastic power,
these visions being excited by the will of the
Gods. For the whole life of the soul and all
the powers that are in it, being in subjection to
the Gods, are moved in such a way as the
Gods, the leaders of the soul, please.
152And this takes place in a twofold manner,
either from the Gods being present with the
soul, or imparting to the soul from themselves
a certain forerunning light; but, according to
each of these modes, the divine presence and
the illumination have a separate subsistence.
The attentive power, therefore, and dianoia[70]
of the soul, are conscious of what is effected,
since the divine light does not come into contact
with these; but the phantastic part is
divinely inspired, because it is not excited to
the modes of imaginations by itself, but by the
Gods, the phantasy being then entirely changed
from human custom.
Since, however, a contrary is receptive of a
contrary, according to a mutation and departure
from itself, and that which is allied to another
thing, and familiar[71] with it through similitude,
is capable of receiving it, hence the illuminators
153receive darkness as a cooperator, and employ
in illuminating the light of the sun, or of the
moon, or, in short, of the air.
Sometimes, likewise, they use collocations
of such things as are adapted to the Gods that
are about to descend, or they employ incantations
or compositions, and these appropriately
prepared for the reception, presence, and manifestation
of the Gods. And again, sometimes
they introduce light through water, because
this being diaphanous, is aptly disposed to the
reception of light. But at other times, they
cause light to shine forth on a wall, having
previously prepared the wall for the reception
of light in the best manner by the sacred descriptions
of characters; and, at the same time,
they fix the light in a certain solid place, so
that it may not be widely diffused.
Many other modes, also, of introducing light
might be mentioned; but all of them may be
referred to one mode, that of irradiation, wherever
it may be effected, and through whatever
instruments the Gods may illuminate. Since,
therefore, this illumination accedes externally,
and has every thing which it possesses subservient
to the will and intelligence alone of the
Gods, and as the greatest thing pertaining to
it, possesses a sacred irradiating light, either
supernally derived from ether, or from the air,
154or the moon, or the sun, or from some other
celestial sphere,—this being the case, it is
evident from all these particulars, that such a
mode of divination as this is unrestrained, primordial,
and worthy of the Gods.
Let us, therefore, pass on to the mode of divination
which is effected through human art,
and which possesses much of conjecture and
opinion. But concerning this you say as follows:
“Some also establish the art of the investigation
of futurity through the viscera, through birds, and
through the stars.” And there are, indeed, many
other arts of this kind, but the above are sufficient
to exhibit the whole artificial species of
divination. Universally, therefore, this art employs
certain divine signs, which derive their
completion from the Gods, according to various
modes. But from divine portents, according
to an alliance of things to the signs which are
exhibited, art in a certain respect decides,
and from certain probabilities conjecturally
predicts. The Gods, therefore, produce the
signs, either through nature, which is subservient
both generally and particularly to the
generation of effects; or through genesiurgic
155dæmons, who presiding over the elements of
the universe, partial bodies, and every thing
contained in the world, conduct with facility
the phænomena, conformably to the will of the
Gods. But these signs symbolically premanifest
the decrees of divinity and of futurity, as
Heraclitus says, “neither speaking nor concealing,
but signifying;”[72] because they express
the mode of fabrication through premanifestation.
As, therefore, the Gods generate all
things through forms[73], in a similar manner
they signify all things through signs, impressed
as it were by a seal (δια συνθηματων). Perhaps,
likewise, they render by this mean our intelligence
more acute. And thus much has been
said by us in common concerning the whole of
this kind of human art.
Descending, however, to particulars, the soul
of animals, the dæmon who presides over them,
the air, the motion of the air, and the circulation
of the heavens, variously change the viscera,[74]156conformably to the will of the Gods.
But an indication that they are so changed is
this, that they are frequently found without a
heart,[75] or deprived of the most principal parts,
without which it is not at all possible for
animals to be supplied with life. With respect
to birds, likewise, the impulse of their proper
soul moves them, and also the dæmon who
presides over animals; and, together with these,
the revolution of the air, and the power of the
heavens which descends into the air, accord
with the will of the Gods, and consentaneously
lead the birds to what the Gods ordained from
the first. Of this the greatest indication is,
that birds frequently precipitate themselves to
the earth, and destroy themselves, which it is
157not natural for any thing to do; but this is
something supernatural, so that it is some other
thing which produces these effects through
birds.
Moreover, the lations of the stars approximate
to the eternal circulations of the heavens,
not only locally, but also in powers, and the
irradiations of light. But these are moved
conformably to the mandates of the celestial
Gods. For the most pure, agile, and supreme
part of the air, is adapted to be enkindled
[i. e. is most inflammable], so that when the
Gods assent, it is immediately set on fire. And
if some one thinks that certain effluxions of the
celestial bodies are imparted to the air, his
opinion will not be discordant with what is
frequently effected by the divine art. The
union, also, and sympathy of the universe, and
the simultaneous motion of the most remote
parts, as if they were near, and belonged to
one animal, cause these signs to be sent from
the Gods to men in the most luminous manner,
primarily, indeed, through the heavens, but
afterwards through the air.
From all that has been said, therefore, this
becomes manifest, that the Gods, employing
many instruments as media, send indications
to men; and that they also use the ministrant
aid of dæmons and souls, and the whole of
158nature, and of every thing in the world which
is willingly obedient to them, they being the
primordial leaders of all these, and transmitting
the motion which descends from them wherever
they please. Hence, they being separate from all
things, and liberated from all habitude and coarrangement
with things in generation, lead all
that generation and nature contains, according
to their own proper will. This explanation,
therefore, of divination accords with the doctrine
of the fabricative energy and providence
of the Gods. For it does not draw down the
intellect of more excellent natures to sublunary
concerns and to us, but this intellect being
established in itself, converts to itself signs and
the whole of divination, and discovers that
these proceed from it.
In the next place you inquire “concerning the
mode of divination, what it is, and what the
quality is by which it is distinguished,” which
we have already explained, both generally and
particularly. But you, in the first place, represent
diviners as asserting, “that all of them
obtain a foreknowledge of future events through
Gods or dæmons, and that it is not possible for
159any others to know that which is future, than
those who are the lords of futurity.” Afterwards
you doubt, “whether divinity is so far
subservient to men, as not to be averse to some
becoming diviners from meal.” You do not,
however, properly apprehend the abundance
of the power of the Gods, their transcendent
goodness, and the cause which comprehends
all things, when you denominate their providential
care and defence of us subserviency.
And, besides this, you are ignorant of the mode
of divine energy, that it is not drawn down
and converted to us, but that it has a separate
precedency, and gives itself, indeed, to its participants,
yet neither departs from itself, nor
becomes diminished, nor is ministrant to those
that receive it; but, on the contrary, uses all
things as subservient to itself. The present
doubt also appears to me to be erroneous in
another respect, for supposing the works of the
Gods to be like those of men, it inquires how
they are effected. For because we are converted
to our works, and sometimes adhere to
the passions of the things which we providentially
attend to, on this account you badly
conjecture that the power of the Gods is subservient
to the natures which are governed by
them. But this power is never drawn down
to its participants either in the production of
160the worlds, or in the providential inspection of
the realms of generation, or in predicting concerning
it. For it imparts to all things good,
and renders all things similar to itself. It
likewise benefits the subjects of its government
most abundantly, and without envy, and by
how much the more it abides in itself, by so
much the more it is filled with its own proper
perfection. And it does not itself, indeed, become
any thing belonging to its participants,
but it causes the things which receive it to
partake of its peculiarities, and preserves them
in an all perfect manner. It also abides at the
same time perfectly in itself, and comprehends
them at once in itself, but is neither vanquished
nor comprehended by any one of them. In
vain, therefore, are men disturbed by a suspicion
of this kind. For divinity is not divided
together with the above mentioned modes of
divination, but produces all of them impartibly.
Nor does he effect different things at a different
time, in a distributed manner, but produces all
of them according to one energy, collectively
and at once. Nor is he detained about signs,
being comprehended in, or divided about, them;
but contains them in himself, and in one order,
and comprehends them in unity, and produces
them from himself, according to one invariable
will.
161If, also, the power of the Gods proceeds in
premanifestation as far as to things inanimate,
such as pebble stones, rods,[76] pieces of wood,
stones, corn, or wheat, this very thing is most
admirable in the presignification of divine prophesy;
because it imparts soul to things inanimate,
motion to things immoveable, and makes
all things to be clear and known, to partake of
reason, and to be defined by the measures of
intellection, though possessing no portion of
reason from themselves. Another divine miracle
162also divinity appears to me to exhibit through
signs in these things. For, as he sometimes
makes some stupid man to speak wisely,
through which it becomes manifest to every
one, that this is not a certain human but a divine
work; thus, also, he reveals through things
which are deprived of knowledge, conceptions
which precede all knowledge. And, at the
same time, he declares to men that the signs
which are exhibited are worthy of belief, and
that they are superior to nature, from which
he is exempt. Thus he makes things to be
known which are naturally unknown, and
things which are without knowledge gnostic.
Through them, also, he inserts in us wisdom,
and through every thing which is in the world
excites our intellect to the truth of real beings,
of things which are in generation, and of future
events. From these things, therefore, I think
it is manifest, that the mode of divination is
perfectly contrary to what you suspected it to
be. For it is of a ruling and primordial nature,
of an unrestrained power, and transcendent
nature, comprehending in itself all things, but
not being comprehended by any thing, nor
enclosed by its participants. For it ascends
into, and rules over, all things simultaneously,
and without circumscription, and collectively
signifies future events. Hence, from what has
163been said, you may easily dissolve these vulgar
doubts, which disturb most men, and may in a
becoming manner elevate yourself to the intellectual,
divine, and irreprehensible presignification
of the Gods from all things. Through
this, therefore, we have evinced, that divinity is
not drawn down to the signs employed by
divination.
Another contest, however, awaits us, not less
than that in which we have been before engaged,
and which you immediately announce,
concerning the causes of divination, “whether
a God, an angel, or a dæmon, or some other
power, is present in manifestations, or divinations,
or certain other sacred energies.” But
our reply to your question is simply this, that
it is not possible for any thing to be performed
in a manner adapted to sacred concerns in
divine works, without the presence of some
one of the more excellent natures, as inspecting
and giving completion to the sacred energy.
And where the felicitous operations are perfect,
sufficient to themselves, and unindigent, of
these the Gods are the leaders. But where
they are media, and in a small degree fall short
164of the extremes, they have angels as the powers
that perfect and unfold them into light. And
it is the province of dæmons to effect those
operations which rank as the last. But the
right performance of actions which are effected
in a divine manner, is entirely to be ascribed
to some one of the more excellent natures.
For since it is not possible to speak rightly
about the Gods without the Gods, much less
can any one perform works which are of an
equal dignity with divinity, and obtain the foreknowledge
of every thing without [the inspiring
influence of] the Gods. For the human race
is imbecile, and of small estimation, sees but a
little, and possesses a connascent nothingness;
and the only remedy of its inherent error, perturbation,
and unstable mutation, is its participation,
as much as possible, of a certain
portion of divine light. But he who excludes
this, does the same thing as those who attempt
to produce soul from things inanimate, or to
generate intellect from things unintelligent.
For without the cooperation of a cause, he
constitutes divine works from things which are
not divine.
Let it be granted, therefore, that a God, a
dæmon, or an angel, gives completion to more
excellent works, yet we must not on this account
admit what you adduce as a thing acknowledged,
165“that they affect these things, in consequence
of being drawn through us by the necessities
with which invocation is attended.” For
divinity is superior to necessity, and this is
likewise the case with all the choir of more
excellent natures that is suspended from him.
Nor is he alone exempt from the necessity
which is introduced by men, but also from that
which comprehends in itself the world; because
it is not the province of an immaterial
nature, and which does not receive any adventitious
order, to be subservient to any necessity
introduced from any thing else. And in the
next place, invocation, and the things performed
by a scientific operator, accede and are conjoined
to more excellent natures through similitude
and alliance, and do not accomplish
their energies through violence. Hence, the
effects which are seen to take place in diviners,
do not happen as you think, from the scientific
theurgist being passively affected; nor is divination
thus effected through necessity, passion
preoccupying the predictor; for these things
are foreign from, and incongruous to, the essence
of more excellent natures.
166
But neither does the cause [of the energies] of
more excellent natures subsist as a certain
middle instrument,[77] nor does he who invokes
operate through him who prophesies; for to
assert these things is impious. And it is much
more true to say, that God is all things, is able
to effect all things, and that he fills all things
with himself, and is alone worthy of sedulous
attention,[78] esteem, the energy of reason, and
167felicitous honour; that which is human being
vile, of no account, and ludicrous, when compared
with that which is divine. Hence I
laugh, when I hear it said, that divinity is spontaneously
present with certain persons or things,
168either through the period of generation, or
through other causes. For thus that which is
unbegotten will no longer be more excellent, if
it is led by the period of generation; nor will
it be primarily the cause of all things, if it is
coarranged with certain things, according to
other causes. These assertions, therefore, are
unworthy of the conceptions which we should
frame of the Gods, and foreign from the works
which are effected in theurgy.[79] But an investigation
of this kind suffers the same thing
as the multitude suffer, about the fabrication
of the universe and providence. For not being
able to learn what the mode is in which
these are effected, and refusing to ascribe
human cares and reasonings to the Gods, they
wholly abolish the providential and fabricative
energy of divinity. As, therefore, we are accustomed
to answer these, that the divine mode
of production and providential inspection is
very different from that which is human, and
which it is not proper wholly to reject through
169ignorance, as if it had not from the first any
subsistence; thus, also, it may be justly contended
against you, that all prediction, and the
performance of divine works, are the works of
the Gods, as they are not effected through other
and these human causes, but through such as
are alone known to the Gods.
Omitting, therefore, these things, we may
reasonably adduce a second cause, assigned
by you, of the above mentioned particulars:
viz. “that the soul says and imagines these
things, and that they are the passions of it,
excited from small incentives.” Neither, however,
does nature possess these passions, nor
does reason admit them. For every thing
which is generated is generated from a certain
cause, and that which is of a kindred nature
derives its completion from a kindred nature.
But a divine work is neither casual, for a thing
of this kind is without a cause, and is not entirely
arranged, nor is it produced by a human
cause. For this is a thing foreign and subordinate;
but that which is more perfect cannot
be produced from the imperfect. All works,
170therefore, which have a similitude to divinity
germinate from a divine cause. For the human
soul is contained by one form, and is on all
sides darkened by body, which he who denominates
the river of Negligence, or the water
of Oblivion, or ignorance and delirium,[80] or a
171bond through passions,[81] or the privation of
life, or some other evil, will not by such appellations
sufficiently express its turpitude. How,
therefore, is it possible that the soul, which is
detained by so many evils, can ever become
sufficient to an energy of this kind? It is, indeed,
by no means reasonable to suppose that
she can. For if at any time we appear to be
capable of effecting this, it is alone through
participating of, and being illuminated by, the
Gods, that we enjoy the divine energy. Hence
the soul does not participate of divine works,
so far as she possesses her own proper virtue
and wisdom; though if works of this kind pertained
to the soul, every soul would perform
them, or that soul alone which possessed its
proper perfection. Now, however, neither of
these is sufficiently prepared for this purpose;
but even the perfect soul is imperfect as with
reference to divine energy. The theurgic energy,
172therefore, is a different thing, and the felicitous
accomplishment of divine works is imparted
by the Gods alone. For if this were not the
case, the worship of the Gods would not, in
short, be requisite, but divine goods might be
present with us from ourselves, without the
exercise of religion. If, therefore, these opinions
are insane and stupid, it is proper to
abandon an hypothesis of this kind, as not
affording a cause which deserves to be mentioned
of the accomplishment of divine works.
Is, therefore, what you add in the third place
more true; viz. “that there is a certain mixed
form of hypostasis, consisting of our soul and
divine inspiration externally derived?” Consider
this then more accurately, lest we should be
deceived by it, being impeded by its plausibility.
For wherever one thing is effected
from two, this one thing is wholly of a similar
species, nature, and essence. Thus the elements
which concur in the same thing, produce one
certain thing from many, and many souls coalesce
in one total soul. That, however, which
is perfectly exempt, can never become one
173with that which departs from itself;[82] so that
neither will there be one certain form of hypostasis
174with the soul and divine inspiration. For
if divinity is unmingled, the soul will not be
mingled with it; and if he is immutable, he
will not be changed through a concretion into
that which is common, from the simplicity of
his subsistence. Some, therefore, prior to us,
were of opinion that certain small sparks excite
in us divine forms. It is impossible, however,
that these sparks, whether they are physical,
or in some other way corporeal-formed, should
be transferred from things of a casual nature
to things which are divine. But in what is
now asserted by you, the soul is said to be a
concause of the divine commixture; and it is
evident, this being admitted, that the soul becomes
of an equal dignity with the Gods, that
it gives a certain part to them and receives a
part from them, and that it also affords a
measure to natures more excellent than itself,
and is itself bounded by them. That likewise
follows which is asserted by some, and is most
dire, that the Gods precedaneously subsisting
in the order of elements, are inherent in their
175effects, and there will be a certain thing produced
in time, and from a mixture according
to time, which will contain the Gods in itself.
What, likewise, is this comingled form of subsistence?
For if it is both [soul and divine inspiration
externally derived], it will not be one
thing consisting of two, but a certain composite,
and a coacervation from two things. But
if it is as something different from both, eternal
natures will be mutable, and divine natures
will in no respect differ from physical substances
in generation.[83] And as it is absurd
176to admit that an eternal nature is produced
through generation, it is still more absurd to
suppose that any thing which consists of eternal
natures can be dissolved. Neither, therefore,
is this opinion concerning divination by any
means reasonable; and besides this, it is also
paradoxical, whether it is considered as one
supposition or as two.
You say, therefore, “that the soul generates
the power which has an imaginative perception
of futurity, through motions of this kind, or
177that the things which are adduced from matter
constitute dæmons through the powers that are
inherent in them, and especially things adduced
from the matter which is taken from animals.”
It appears to me, however, that what is now
asserted by you exhibits a dire illegality with
reference to the whole of theology and the
theurgic energy. For one absurdity in it, and
which is the first that presents itself to the view,
is this, that it makes dæmons to be generable
and corruptible. And another, which is more
dire than this, is that things which are prior
will be produced from things which are posterior
to themselves. For dæmons exist prior
to soul, and to the powers which are distributed
about bodies. In addition to these
things, also, how can the energies of a partible
soul which is detained in body, become essence,
and be by themselves separate out of
soul? Or how can the powers which are divided
about, be separated from bodies, though
they have their very being in bodies? And
who is it that liberating them from a corporeal
condition of subsistence, again collects the corporeal
dissolution, and causes it to coalesce in
one thing? For thus a thing of this kind will
be a dæmon, who will have an existence prior
to his being constituted. This assertion, likewise,
is attended with certain common doubts.
178For how can divination be produced from
things which have no divining power? And how
can soul be generated from things which are
without soul? And, in short, how can things
which are more perfect be the progeny of such
as are more imperfect? The mode, likewise,
of production appears to me to be impossible.
For it is impossible that essence should be
produced through the motions of the soul, and
through the powers which are in bodies. For
from things which are without essence, it is
impossible that essence should be generated.
Whence, also, does the imagination, receiving
from a certain thing a divining power, become
prophetic of futurity? For we do not
see that any one of the things which are sown
through generation possess any thing more
than what is imparted to it by its first generating
cause. But, in the present instance, the
imagination will receive a certain more excellent
addition from that which has no existence.
Unless some one should say, that dæmons
preside over the matter which is derived from
animals, and that when this matter is adduced,
the presiding dæmon is sympathetically moved
towards it. According to this opinion, therefore,
dæmons are not generated from the powers
in bodies; but preceding and having an existence
prior to bodies, they are moved in conformity
179to them. Let it, however, be admitted,
that dæmons are thus sympathetic, yet I do
not see after what manner there will be something
true respecting futurity. For the foreknowledge
and premanifestation of futurity is
not the province of a copassive and material
power, which is detained in a certain place and
body; but, on the contrary, this pertains to a
power which is liberated from all these. Such,
therefore, are the corrections of this opinion.
The animadversions which are after this adduced,
at first, indeed, doubt about the mode
of divination, but as they proceed, endeavour
entirely to subvert it. We shall, therefore,
discuss both these. And, in the first place,
we shall begin to dissolve the former of these
doubts. “For in sleep, when we are not employed
about any thing, we sometimes obtain a
knowledge of the future.” Not that the cause
of divination is derived both from us and externally:
for in things the principle of which
definitely subsists in us, and that which is consequent
is externally derived, if these two have
a coarrangement and connexion with each other,
in this case the works of the two are definitely
180effected, and the things which are suspended
from them follow their precedaneous causes.
But when the cause is independent of us, and
preexists by itself, the end is not defined on
account of us, but the whole depends on things
external to us. Now, therefore, since the truth
which is in dreams does not entirely concur
with our works, but frequently shines forth
from itself, it shows that divination is externally
derived from the Gods, that it possesses an independent
power, and that it benevolently unfolds
futurity when it pleases, and in such a
way as it pleases. These things, therefore,
should have an answer of this kind.
In what follows, while you endeavour to unfold
divination, you entirely subvert it. For if a
passion of the soul is admitted to be the cause
of it, what wise man will attribute to an unstable
and stupid thing orderly and stable foreknowledge?
Or how is it possible that the
soul, which is in a sane and stable condition
according to its better powers, viz. those that
are intellectual and dianoetic, should be ignorant
of futurity; but that the soul which suffers
according to disorderly and tumultuous motions,
181should have a knowledge of what is
future? For what has passion in itself adapted
to the theory of beings? And is it not rather
an impediment to the more true intellection of
things? Farther still, therefore, if the things
contained in the world were constituted through
passions, in this case passions, through their
similitude, would have a certain alliance to
them. But if they are produced through reasons
and through forms, there will be another
foreknowledge of them, which is liberated from
all passion. Again, passion alone perceives that
which is present, and which now has a subsistence;
but foreknowledge apprehends things
which do not yet exist. Hence, to foreknow is
different from being passively affected.
Let us, however, consider your arguments
in support of this opinion. That “the senses
are occupied,” therefore tends to the contrary
to what you say; for it is an indication that no
human phantasm is then excited. But “the
fumigations which are introduced,” have an alliance
to divinity, but not to the soul of the
spectator. And “the invocations” do not excite
the inspiration of the reasoning power, or
corporeal passions in the recipient; for they
are perfectly unknown and arcane, and are
alone known to the God whom they invoke.
But that “not all men, but those that are more
182simple and young are more adapted to divination,”
manifests that such as these are more
prepared for the reception of the externally
acceding and inspiring spirit. From these indications,
however, you do not truly conjecture
that enthusiasm is a passion. For it follows
from these signs, that the influx of it, in the
same manner as the inspiration, is externally
derived. In this way, therefore, these things
subsist.
That which follows in the next place, descends
from a divine alienation of mind to an
ecstasy of the reasoning power which leads it
to a worse condition, and absurdly says, “that
the cause of divination is the mania which happens
in diseases.” For, as we may conjecture,
it assimilates enthusiasm to the redundancy of
the black bile, to the aberrations of intoxication,
and to the fury which happens from mad
dogs. It is necessary, therefore, from the beginning,
to divide ecstasy into two species, one
of which leads to a worse condition of being,
and fills us with stupidity and folly; but the
other imparts goods which are more honourable
than human temperance. One species
183also deviates to a disorderly, confused, and
material motion; but the other gives itself to
the cause which rules over the orderly distribution
of things in the world. And the one,
indeed, as being deprived of knowledge, wanders
from wisdom; but the other conjoins
with natures that transcend all our wisdom.
The one, likewise, is unstable, but the other is
immutable. The one is preternatural, but the
other is above nature. The one draws down
the soul, but the other elevates it. And the
one entirely separates us from a divine allotment,
but the other connects us with it.
Why, therefore, does your assertion so much
wander from the proposed hypothesis, as to
decline from things primary and good to the
last evils of insanity? For in what is enthusiasm
similar to melancholy, or intoxication, or
any other delirium excited by the body? Or
what prediction can ever be produced from
diseases of the body? Is not a derivation of
this kind a perfect corruption, but divine inspiration
the perfection and salvation of the
soul? And does not depraved enthusiasm take
place through imbecility, but the enthusiasm
which is more excellent through a plenitude
of power? In short, the latter being quiescent,
according to its own proper life and intelligence,
gives itself to be used by another
184[power which is superior to itself]; but the
former, energizing according to its proper energies,
renders these most depraved and turbulent.
This, therefore, is a difference the most
manifest of all others, because all the works of
divine natures differ [in a transcendent degree]
from the works of other beings. For as the
more excellent genera are exempt from all
others, thus also their energies do not resemble
those of any other nature. Hence, when you
speak of divine mania, immediately remove
from it all human perversions. And if you
ascribe a sacred “sobriety and vigilance” to
divine natures, you must not consider human
sobriety and vigilance as similar to it. But by
no means compare the diseases of the body,
such as suffusions, and the imaginations excited
by diseases, with divine imaginations.
For what have the two in common with each
other? Nor again, must you compare “an
ambiguous state,” such as that which takes
place between a sober condition of mind and
ecstasy, with sacred visions of the Gods, which
are defined by one energy. But neither must
you compare the most manifest surveys of the
Gods with the imaginations artificially procured
by enchantment. For the latter have
neither the energy, nor the essence, nor the
truth of the things that are seen, but extend
185mere phantasms, as far as to appearances
only.
All such doubts as these, however, which
are adduced foreign to the purpose, and tend
from contraries to contraries, we do not consider
as pertinent to the present hypothesis.
Hence, as we have shown the unappropriateness
of them, we do not think it requisite to
discuss them any further, because they are contentiously
introduced, and not with philosophical
investigation.
There are many other contentious innovations
also, which may be the subject of wonder.
But some one may justly be astonished at the
contrariety of opinions produced by admitting
either that the truth of divination is with enchanters,
the whole of which subsists in mere
appearances alone, but has no real existence;
or that it is with those who are incited by
passion or disease, since every thing which
they have the boldness to utter is fraudulently
asserted. For what principle of truth, or what
auxiliary of intelligence, either smaller or greater,
can there be in those who are thus insane?
It is necessary, however, not to receive truth of
186such a kind as that which may be fortuitous;
for this, it is said, may happen to those that are
rashly borne along. Nor must such truth be
admitted as that which subsists between agents
and patients, when they are concordantly homologous
with each other; for truth of this
kind is present with the senses and imaginations
of animals. Hence this truth has nothing
peculiar, or divine, or superior to common
nature. But the truth of divination is established
in energy with invariable sameness, has
the whole knowledge of beings present with it,
and is connascent with the essence of things.
It likewise employs stable reasons, and perfectly,
aptly, and definitely knows all things.
This truth, therefore, is adapted to divination.
Hence, it is very far from being a certain natural
prescience, such as the preperception which
is inherent in some animals of earthquakes and
rain. For this arises from sympathy, when
certain animals are moved in conjunction with
certain parts and powers of the universe; or
when, through the acuteness of a certain sense,
they antecedently perceive things which happen
in the air, before they accede to places
about the earth.
If, therefore, these assertions are true, though
we derive from nature impressions by which
we obtain a knowledge of things, or come into
187contact with futurity, it is not proper to consider
an impression of this kind as prophetic
foreknowledge; but it is, indeed, similar to
this knowledge, yet falls short of it in stability
and truth, is conversant with that which frequently,
but not always, happens, and apprehends
the truth in certain, but not in all things.
Hence, if there is a discipline which foresees
the future in the arts, as, for instance, in the
piloting or medical art, this does not all pertain
to divine foreknowledge. For it conjectures
the future by certain signs, and these such as
are not always credible, nor such as have that
of which they are the signs, connected with
them with invariable sameness. But with divine
providence, a stable knowledge of the
future precedes; [and this is attended with]
an immutable faith suspended from causes; an
indissoluble comprehension of all things in all;
and a perpetually abiding and invariable knowledge
of all things as present and definite.
Moreover, neither is it sufficient to assert,
“that nature, art, and the sympathy of things
in the universe, as if they were the parts of one
animal, contain premanifestations of certain
188things with reference to each other; nor that
bodies are so prepared, that there is a presignification
of some by others.” For these things,
which are very clearly seen, exhibit a certain
divulsed vestige of divine prediction, in a greater
or less degree; since it is not possible for any
thing to be perfectly destitute of divine divination.
But as in all things the image of good
exhibits a similitude of divinity; thus, likewise,
in all things a certain obscure or more manifest
image of divine prediction shines forth to the
view. Nevertheless, no one of these is such as
the divine species of divination; nor must the
one, divine, and unmingled form of it be characterized
from the many phantasms which
proceed from it into generation. Nor, if there
are certain other false and deceitful resemblances,
which are still more remote from
reality, is it fit to adduce these in forming a
judgment of it. But the divine form or species
of divination is to be apprehended according
to one intelligible and immutable truth;
and the mutation which subsists differently at
different times is to be rejected as unstable
and unadapted to the Gods. If, therefore,
that which is truly divination is a thing of this
kind, i. e. is a divine work, who would not
blush to ascribe it to nature, which produces
its effects without reason and intellect, as if
189nature elaborated in us a certain prophetic
apparatus, and inserted this aptitude in some
things in a greater but in others in a less degree?
For in those things in which men receive
auxiliaries from nature in the attainment
of their proper perfection, in these, also, certain
aptitudes of nature precede; but in things in
which no human work is proposed [to be
effected], in these neither does the end pertain
to us. And when a certain good, which is
more ancient than our nature, has a prior
arrangement, it is not possible in this case that
a certain natural excellence should become the
prepared subject of it. For in those things of
which there are perfections, in these imperfect
preparations are ingenerated; but both these
are the habits of men [and not of Gods]. Hence,
of those things which are not present with us,
so far as we are men, there will not be a preparative
from nature. There is not, therefore,
a natural seed in us of divine prediction. If
some one, however, should in a more general
way assert, that there is a certain human divination,
of this there will be a certain physical
preparation. But with respect to that which
may be truly denominated divination, and which
pertains to the Gods, it is not proper to think
that this is ingrafted by nature. For both
other things, and also the indefinite, according
190to the more and the less, are the attendants on
this. Hence it is separated from divine divination,
which abides in stable boundaries. On
this account, also, it is requisite strenuously to
contend against him who asserts that divination
originates from us. You likewise adduce clear
indications of this from the works performed in
predicting what is future. For you say, “that
those who invoke [the divinities for the purposes
of divination] have about them stones and herbs,
bind certain sacred bonds, which they also dissolve,
open places that are shut, and change the
deliberate intentions of the recipients, so as to
render them worthy, though they were before
depraved.” All these particulars, therefore,
signify that the inspiration accedes externally.
It is requisite, however, not only to preassume
this, but also to define what the inspiration of
divine origin is, which produces divine divination.
For if this is not done, we shall not previously
know what its peculiarity is, in consequence
of not attributing to it its proper character,
and adapting this to it as a certain seal.
And this, indeed, has been accurately done by
us a little before.
191
You adduce, however, as a thing by no means
to be despised, “the artificers of efficacious
images.” But I should wonder if these were
admitted by any one of the theurgists who
survey the true forms of the Gods. For why
should any one exchange truly existing beings
for images, and descend from the first to the last
of things? Or do we not know that all things
effected by an adumbration of this kind, have
an obscure subsistence, are the phantasms only
of that which is true, and appear to be good,
but in no respect are so? Other things, also,
of this kind that accede, are borne along in a
flowing condition of being; but obtain nothing
genuine, or perfect, or manifest. But this is
evident from the mode of their production:
for not divinity, but man is the maker of them.
Nor are they produced from uniform and intelligible
essences, but from matter, which is
assumed for this purpose. What good, therefore,
can germinate from matter, and from the
material and corporeal-formed powers which
are in bodies? Or is not that which derives
its subsistence from human art, more imbecile
than men themselves, who impart existence to
it? By what kind of art, likewise, is this image
192fashioned? For it is said, indeed, to be fashioned
by demiurgic art; but this is effective of true
essences, and not of certain images. Hence the
image-producing art is distant by a great interval
from the seminal production of realities. Besides,
neither does it preserve a certain analogy
with divine fabrication. For divinity does not
fabricate all things, either through the celestial
physical motions, or through a partial matter,
or through powers thus divided; but he produces
the worlds by conceptions, will, and immaterial
forms, and through an eternal and
supermundane soul. The maker of images,
however, is said to elaborate them through
the revolving stars. But the thing does not
in reality subsist so as it appears to do. For
since there are certain infinite powers in the
celestial Gods, the last genus of all the powers
in them is physical. But again, of this power
one portion being inherent in spermatic reasons
[or productive powers], and prior to these
reasons being established in immoveable natures,
essentially precedes generation. But
another portion being inherent in sensible and
visible motions and powers, and in celestial
effluxions and qualities, has dominion over the
whole visible order of things. This last power,
therefore, in all these rules over the circumterrestrial
manifest generation in places about
193the earth. Many other arts, however, as for
instance, the medical[84] and gymnastic, use this
power, which has dominion over visible generation,
and the qualities of the effluxions sent
from the heavens employ it, and likewise all
such arts as in their operations communicate
with nature. And moreover, the image-making
art attracts a certain very obscure genesiurgic
portion from the celestial effluxions.
Such, therefore, as the truth is, such also it
is requisite to unfold it to others. It must be
said, then, that the maker of images neither
uses the celestial circulations, nor the powers
which are inherent in them, nor those powers
194which are naturally established about them;
nor, in short, is it possible to come into contact
with them. But he artificially, and not
theurgically, applies himself to the last effluxions
which openly proceed from the nature of them,
about the last part of the universe. For these
effluxions, I think, being mingled with a partial
matter, are capable of being changed and transformed
differently at different times. They
likewise receive the transposition, from some
things to others, of the powers which are in
partial natures. The variety, however, of such
like energies, and the composition of a multitude
of material powers, are not only entirely
separated from divine fabrication, but also from
natural production. For nature produces her
proper works collectively, and at once, and
accomplishes all things by simple and incomposite
energies. Hence it remains that a commixture
of this kind, about the last and manifest
celestial effluxion, and about the things
which are moved by a celestial nature, is artificial.
Why, therefore, does the maker of images, who
effects these things, desert himself, though he
is better than these images, and consists of
195things of a more excellent nature, and confide
in inanimate idols, which are inspired with the
representation alone of life, contain a renovated
harmony, and which is externally multiform,
and are in reality diurnal? Shall we say that
something genuine and true is inherent in them?
Nothing, however, which is fashioned by human
art is genuine and pure. But you will say,
that simplicity and uniformity of energy predominate
in the whole of their composition.
This is very far from being the case. For the
idol, according to its visible composition, is
mingled from all-various and contrary qualities.
Shall we say then, that a certain pure and perfect
power is manifest in them? By no means.
For a thing of this kind possesses an adventitious
multitude of effluxions, collected from
many places, and which shows itself to be imbecile
and evanescent. But if these particulars,
which we have enumerated, are not found
to take place in images, is stability present
with them, as it is said to be [by the patrons of
these images]? By no means, likewise, is this
the case. For these idols are extinguished
with much greater rapidity than the images
which are seen in mirrors. For they are immediately
formed by the accession of fumigations
from exhaling vapours; but when the
fumigation is mingled with, and diffused through,
196the whole air, then the idol is likewise immediately
dissolved, and is not naturally adapted
to remain for the smallest portion of time.
Why, therefore, should the man who is a lover
of truth, pay attention to these useless delusions?
I, indeed, do not think them to be of
any value. For if the makers of these images
know that the fictions about which they are
busily employed, are nothing more than the
formations of passive matter, the evil arising
from an attention to them will be simple. But
in addition to this, these idol-makers are similar
to the images in which they confide. And
if they pay attention to these idols as if they
were Gods, the absurdity will be so great, as
neither to be effable by words, nor to be endured
in deeds. For a certain divine splendour
never illuminates a soul of this kind, because
it is not adapted to be imparted to things
which are entirely repugnant to it; neither
have those things which are detained by dark
phantasms a place for its reception. This delusive
formation, therefore, of phantasms, will
be conversant with shadows, which are very
remote from the truth.
197
You say, however, “that the makers of images
observe the motion of the celestial bodies, and can
tell from the concurrence of what star, with a
certain star or stars, predictions will be true or
false; and also whether the things that are performed
will be inanities, or significant and efficacious.”
But neither will these phantasms,
on this account, possess any thing divine. For
the last of the things which are in generation
are moved in conjunction with the celestial
courses, and are copassive with the effluxions
which descend from the heavenly bodies. Moreover,
if any one considers these things accurately,
he will find that they demonstrate the
contrary to what is here asserted. For how is
it possible that things which are in every respect
mutable, and this with facility, and which
are all-variously turned by external motions,
so as to become inefficacious, or prophetic, or
significant, or effective, or at different times
different, should contain in themselves, by participation,
any portion, however small, of divine
power? What then, are the powers which are
inherent in matter the elements of dæmons?
By no means: for no partial sensible bodies
generate dæmons; but much more are these
198generated and guarded by dæmons. Neither is
any man able to fashion, as by a machine, certain
forms of dæmons; but, on the contrary, he is
rather fashioned and fabricated by them, so far
as he participates of a sensible body. But
neither is a certain dæmoniacal multitude generated
from the elements of sensibles; since, on
the contrary, this multitude is simple, and
energizes uniformly about composite natures.
Hence, neither will it have sensibles more ancient,
or more stable than itself; but being
itself more excellent than sensibles, both in
dignity and power, it imparts to them the permanency
which they are able to receive. Unless
indeed, you denominate idols dæmons, not
rightly employing an appellation of this kind.
For the nature of dæmons is one thing, and
that of idols another. The order of each, likewise,
is very different. Moreover, the leader of
idols is different from the great leader of dæmons.
And this, also, you admit. For you
say, “that no God or dæmon is drawn down by
idols.” What, therefore, will be the worth of a
sacred deed, or of the foreknowledge of what
is future, if it is entirely destitute of divinity
and a dæmon? So that it is requisite to know
what the nature is of this wonder-working art,
but by no means to use or confide in it.
199
Again, therefore, still worse than this is the
explanation of sacred operations, which assigns
as the cause of divination, “a certain genus of
dæmons, which is naturally fraudulent, omniform,
and various, and which assumes the appearance
of Gods and dæmons, and the souls of the
deceased.” I shall, therefore, relate to you, in
answer to this, what I once heard from the
prophets of the Chaldeans.
Such Gods as are truly divinities, are alone
the givers of good; alone associate with good
men, and with those that are purified by the
sacerdotal art, and from these amputate all
vice, and every passion. When these, also,
impart their light, that which is evil, and at the
same time dæmoniacal, vanishes from before
more excellent natures, in the same manner as
darkness when light is present; nor is it able
to disturb theurgists in the smallest degree,
who receive from this light every virtue, obtain
worthy manners, become orderly and elegant
in their actions, are liberated from passions,
and purified from every disorderly motion, and
from atheistical and unholy conduct. But
those who are themselves flagitious, and who
leap, as it were, to things of a divine nature in
200an illegal and disorderly manner, these, through
the imbecility of their proper energy, or through
indigence of inherent power, are not able to
associate with the Gods. Because, likewise,
they are excluded, through certain defilements,
from an association with pure spirits, they become
connected with evil spirits, are filled
from them with the worst kind of inspiration,
are rendered depraved and unholy, become
replete with intemperate pleasures, and every
kind of vice, are emulous of manners foreign
to the Gods, and, in short, become similar to
the depraved dæmons, with whom they are
connascent. These, therefore, being full of
passions and vice, attract to themselves, through
alliance, depraved spirits, and are excited by
them to every kind of iniquity. They are also
increased in wickedness by each other, like a
circle conjoining the beginning to the end, and
similarly making an equal compensation. Hence
deeds which are the nefarious offences of impiety,
which are introduced into sacred works
in a disorderly manner, and which are also
confusedly performed by those who betake
themselves to such works, and at one time, as
it seems, cause one divinity to be present instead
of another, and again, introduce depraved
dæmons instead of Gods, whom they call equal
to the Gods (αντιθεους)—such deeds as these you
201should never adduce in a discourse concerning
sacerdotal divination. For good is more contrary
to evil than to that which is not good.
As, therefore, the sacrilegious are in the most
eminent degree hostile to the religious cultivation
of the Gods; thus, also, those who are
conversant with dæmons who are fraudulent,
and the causes of intemperance, are undoubtedly
hostile to theurgists. For from these
every depraved spirit departs, and when they
are present, is entirely subverted. Every vice,
too, and every passion, are by these perfectly
amputated: for a pure participation of good is
present with the pure, and they are supernally
filled with truth from a divine fire. These,
therefore, suffer no impediment from evil spirits,
nor are these spirits any obstacles to the goods
of their souls. Nor are theurgists disturbed by
pride, or flattery, or the enjoyment of exhalations,
or any violence; but all these, as if
struck by lightning, yield and recede, without
touching the theurgist, or being able to approach
to them. Hence this genus of divination is
undefiled and sacerdotal, and is truly divine.
This, also, does not, as you say it does, require
me, or any other as an arbiter, in order that I
may prefer it to a multitude of other things;
but it is itself exempt from all things, is supernatural,
and has an eternal preexistence, neither
202receiving a certain opposition, nor a certain
transcendency, which has a prearrangement in
many things, because it is of itself liberated,
and uniformly precedes all things. And to
this it is requisite that you, and every one who
is a genuine lover of the Gods, should give himself
wholly; since by this mean irreprehensible
truth will be obtained in divinations, and perfect
virtue in souls; and through both these,
an ascent will be afforded to theurgists to intelligible
fire, which ought to be preestablished
as the end of all foreknowledge, and of every
theurgic operation. Hence you in vain adduce
the opinion of those who think that divination
is effected by an evil dæmon, since these do
not deserve to be mentioned in speculations
concerning the Gods. At the same time, likewise,
they are ignorant of the means of distinguishing
truth from falsehood, because they are
from the beginning nourished in darkness, and
are wholly incapable of knowing the principles
from which these are produced. Here, therefore,
we shall terminate our discussion concerning
the mode of divination.
SECTION IV. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V. — CHAP. VI. — CHAP. VII. — CHAP. VIII. — CHAP. IX. — CHAP. X. — CHAP. XI. — CHAP. XII. — CHAP. XIII.
203
Let us then, in the next place, consider the
opposing arguments, what they are, and what
reason they possess. And if we should discuss
some things a little more abundantly, in
consequence of speaking freely and at leisure,
it is requisite that you should promptly attend
to, and endure what, we say. For it is necessary
that great labour should be bestowed on
the greatest disciplines, and that they should
be accurately explored for a long time, if you
intend to know them perfectly. Do you, therefore,
conformably to the present hypothesis,
propose the arguments which occasion the
doubt, and I will answer you. Say then, “it
very much perplexes me to understand how superior
beings, when invoked, are commanded by
those that invoke them, as if they were their inferiors.”
But I will unfold to you the whole
division, which is worthy of regard, concerning
the powers that are invoked; from which you
will be able clearly to define what is possible
204and what is impossible, in the subjects of your
investigation. For the Gods, indeed, and the
natures that are more excellent than we, through
the wish of what is beautiful, and from an unenvying
and exuberant fulness of good, benevolently
impart to those that are worthy, such
things as are fit for them, commiserating the
labours of sacerdotal men, but being delighted
with those that they have begotten, nourished,
and instructed. But the middle genera are the
inspective guardians of judgment. These inform
us what ought to be done, and from what
it is fit to abstain. They also give assistance
to just works, but impede such as are unjust;
and as many endeavour to take away unjustly
the property of others, or basely to injure or
destroy some one, they cause these to suffer
the same things as they have done to others.
But there is, likewise, another most irrational
genus of dæmons,[85] which is without judgment,
and is allotted only one power, through an
arrangement by which each of these dæmons
presides over one work alone. As therefore,
it is the province of a sword to cut, and to do
205nothing else than this, thus also of the spirits
which are distributed in the universe, according
to the partible necessity of nature, one
kind divides, but another collects, things which
are generated. This, however, is known from
the phænomena. For the Charonean[86] spiracles,
as they are called, emit from themselves
a certain spirit, which is able to corrupt promiscuously
every thing that falls into them.
Thus, therefore, of certain invisible spirits, each
is allotted a different power, and is alone
adapted to do that which it is ordained to perform.
He, therefore, who turns from their
natural course things which contribute to the
universe in an orderly manner, and illegitimately
performs a certain thing, in this case
receives the injury arising from that which he
uses badly. This, however, pertains to another
mode of discussion.
206
But we sometimes see that take place which
is now proposed to be considered. For it
happens that spirits are commanded [to do this
or that] who do not use a reason of their own,
and have not the principle of judgment. Nor
does this occur irrationally. For our dianoia
naturally possessing the power of reasoning
about and judging of things as they are, and
comprehending in itself many powers of life, is
accustomed to command the most irrational
spirits, and such as derive their perfection from
one energy alone. Hence, it invokes these as
more excellent natures, because it endeavours
to attract to particulars from the whole world,
in which we are contained, things which contribute
to wholes.[87] And it commands them
as inferior natures, because frequently certain
parts of things in the world [such as our reasoning
power] are more pure and perfect than
things which extend themselves to the whole
world. Thus, for instance, if one thing is intellectual
[as is the case with our dianoia], but
another is wholly inanimate or physical, then
207that which proceeds to a less extent has a
more principal power than that which is more
extended, though the former falls far short of
the latter in magnitude and multitude of domination.
For these things, also, another reason
may be assigned, and which is as follows: in
all theurgical operations the priest sustains a
twofold character; one, indeed, as man, and
which preserves the order possessed by our
nature in the universe; but the other, which is
corroborated by divine signs, and through these
is conjoined to more excellent natures, and is
elevated to their order by an elegant circumduction,
this is deservedly capable of being
surrounded with the external form of the Gods.
Conformably, therefore, to a difference of this
kind, the priest very properly invokes, as more
excellent natures, the powers derived from the
universe, so far as he who invokes is a man;
and again, he commands these powers, because
through arcane symbols, he, in a certain respect,
is invested with the sacred form of the Gods.
Dissolving, however, the doubts in a way still
more true, we think it requisite, in invoking
superior natures, to take away the evocations
208which appear to be directed to them as to men,
and also the mandates in the performance of
works, which are given with great earnestness.
For if the communion of concordant friendship,
and a certain indissoluble connexion of
union, are the bonds of sacerdotal operations,
in order that these operations may be truly
divine, and may transcend every common action
known to men, no human work will be adapted
to them; nor will the invocations of the priest
resemble the manner in which we draw to
ourselves things that are distant; nor are his
mandates directed as to things separated from
him, in the way in which we transfer one thing
from others. But the energy of divine fire
shines forth voluntarily, and in common, and
being self-invoked and self-energetic, energizes
through all things with invariable sameness,
both through the natures which impart, and
those that are able to receive, its light. This
mode of solution, therefore, is far superior,
which does not suppose that divine works are
effected through contrariety, or discrepance, in
the way in which generated natures are usually
produced; but asserts that every such work is
rightly accomplished through sameness, union,
and consent. Hence, if we separate from each
other that which invokes and that which is invoked,
that which commands and that which is
209commanded, that which is more and that which
is less excellent, we shall, in a certain respect,
transfer the contrariety of generations to the
unbegotten goods of the Gods. But if we despise
all such things, as it is just we should, as of an
earth-born nature, and ascribe that which is
common and simple, as being more honourable,
to the powers who transcend the variety which
is in the realms of generation, the first hypothesis
of these questions will be immediately subverted,
so that no reasonable doubt concerning
them will be left.
What then shall we say concerning the next
inquiry to this, viz. “why the powers who are
invoked think it requisite that he who worships
them should be just, but they when called upon to
act unjustly do not refuse so to act?” To this I
reply, that I am dubious with respect to what
you call acting justly, and am of opinion that
what appears to us to be an accurate definition
of justice does not also appear to be so to the
Gods. For we, looking to that which is most
brief, direct our attention to things present,
and to this momentary life, and the manner in
which it subsists. But the powers that are
210superior to us know the whole life of the soul,
and all its former lives; and, in consequence
of this, if they inflict a certain punishment
from the prayer of those that invoke them, they
do not inflict it without justice, but looking to
the offences committed by souls in former
lives;[88] which men not perceiving think that
they unjustly fall into the calamities which
they suffer.
The multitude, also, are accustomed to doubt
in common the very same thing concerning
providence, viz. why certain persons are afflicted
undeservedly, as they have not done any thing
unjustly prior to their being thus afflicted.
For neither here is it possible to understand
[perfectly] what the soul is, and its whole life,
how many offences it has committed in former
lives, and whether it now suffers from its former
guilt. In this life, also, many unjust actions
are concealed from human knowledge, but are
known to the Gods, since neither is the same
211scope of justice proposed to them as to men.
For men, indeed, define justice to be the soul’s
performance of its own proper business,[89] and
the distribution of desert, conformably to the
established laws, and the prevailing polity.
But the Gods, looking to the whole orderly
arrangement of the world, and to the subserviency
of souls to the Gods, form a judgment
of what is just. Hence the judgment of
just actions with the Gods is different from
what it is with us. Nor is it wonderful, if we
are unable, in most things, to arrive at the supreme
and most perfect judgment of more excellent
natures. What also hinders, but that
to each thing by itself, and in conjunction with
the whole alliance of souls, justice may in a
very transcendent manner be decreed by the
Gods? For if a communion of the same nature
in souls, both when they are in and when they
are out of bodies, produces a certain identical
connexion and common order with the life of
the world, it is likewise necessary that, a fulfilment
of justice should be required by wholes,
and especially when the magnitude of the unjust
deeds antecedently committed by one
soul transcends the infliction of one punishment
212due to the offences. But if any one should
add other definitions, through which he can
show that what is just subsists with the Gods
in a way different from that in which it is
known by us, from these also our design will
be facilitated. For me, however, the beforementioned
canons are alone sufficient for the
purpose of manifesting the universal genus,
and which comprehends every thing pertaining
to the medicinal punishments inflicted by divine
justice.
In order, therefore, that from an abundance of
arguments we may contend against the objection
which is now adduced, we will grant, if
you please, the contrary to what we have
asserted, viz. that certain unjust things are
performed in this business of invocations. That
the Gods, however, are not to be accused as
the causes of these is immediately manifest.
For those that are good are the causes of good;
and the Gods possess good essentially. They
do nothing, therefore, that is unjust. Hence
other causes of guilty deeds must be investigated.
And if we are not able to discover
these causes, it is not proper to throw away
213the true conception respecting the Gods, nor
on account of the doubts whether these unjust
deeds are performed, and how they are effected,
to depart from notions concerning the Gods
which are truly clear. For it is much better
to acknowledge the insufficiency of our power
to explain how unjust actions are perpetrated,
than to admit any thing impossible and false
respecting the Gods; since all the Greeks and
Barbarians truly opine the contrary to be the
case with divine natures. After this manner,
therefore, the truth respecting these particulars
subsists.
Moreover, it is necessary to add the causes
whence evils[90] sometimes arise, and to show
how many and of what kind they are. For the
form of them is not simple; but, being various,
is the leader of the generation of various evils.
For if what we a little before said, concerning
images and evil dæmons, who assume the appearance
of Gods and good dæmons, is true, an
abundant evil-producing tribe, about which a
214contrariety of this kind usually happens, will
from hence appear to flow. For an evil dæmon
requires that his worshipper should be just, because
he assumes the appearance of one belonging
to the divine genus; but he is subservient to
what is unjust, because he is depraved. The
same thing, likewise, that is said of good and
evil may be asserted of the true and the false.
As, therefore, in divinations we attribute true
predictions to the Gods alone, but when we
detect any falsehood in predictions we refer
this to another genus of cause, viz. that of
dæmons; thus, also, in things just and unjust,
the beautiful and the just are to be alone
ascribed to Gods and good dæmons; but such
dæmons as are naturally depraved, perpetrate
what is unjust and base. And that, indeed,
which consents and accords with itself, and
always subsists with invariable sameness, pertains
to more excellent natures; but that which
is hostile to itself, which is discordant, and
never the same, is the peculiarity in the most
eminent degree of dæmoniacal dissension, about
which it is not at all wonderful that things of
an opposing nature should subsist; but perhaps
the very contrary, that this should not be the
case, would be more wonderful.
215
We may, however, beginning from another
hypothesis, demonstrate the same thing. We
must admit that the corporeal parts of the
universe are neither sluggish nor destitute of
power, but as much as they excel our concerns
in perfection, beauty, and magnitude, by so
much also is the power which is present with
them greater. Each, likewise, by itself is capable
of effecting different things, and produces
certain different energies. They are also capable
of effecting things much more numerous on
each other. And besides this, a certain multiform
production extends to parts from wholes;
partly from sympathy, through similitude of
powers, and partly from the aptitude of the
agent to the patient. If, therefore, certain evils
and destructions happen to parts, they are
salutary and good as with reference to wholes
and the harmony of the universe, but to parts
they introduce a necessary corruption, either
from not being able to bear the energies of
wholes, or from a certain other commixture and
temperament of their own imbecility, or, in the
third place, from the privation of symmetry in
the parts to each other.
216
After the body of the universe, also, many
things are generated by the nature of it. For
the concord of similars, and the contrariety of
dissimilars, effect not a few things. Farther
still, the assemblage of many things into the
one animal of the universe, and the powers in
the world, whatever the number and quality of
them may be, effect, in short, one thing in
wholes and another in parts, on account of the
divided imbecility of parts. Thus, for instance,
the friendship, love, and contention which subsist
in energy in the universe, become passions
in the partial natures by which they are participated.
Those things, likewise, that are
preestablished in forms and pure reasons in
the nature of wholes, participate of a certain
material indigence, and privation of morphe, in
things which subsist according to a part. And
things which are conjoined to each other in
wholes are separated in parts. Hence partible
natures, which participate of wholes in conjunction
with matter, degenerate from them in
all things, and also from what is beautiful and
perfect. But some parts are corrupted, in order
that wholes may be preserved in a condition
217conformable to nature. Sometimes, likewise,
parts are compressed and weighed down, though
at the same time wholes remain impassive to a
molestation of this kind.
We shall collect, therefore, what happens from
these conclusions. For if certain invocators
employ the physical or corporeal powers[91] of
the universe, an involuntary gift of energy
[from these powers], and which is without vice,
takes place. He, likewise, who uses this gift
[sometimes] perverts it to things of a contrary
nature, and to base purposes. And the gift,
indeed, is moved contrarily together with the
passions, and sympathetically through similitude;
but he who uses the thing which is imparted,
deliberately draws it, contrary to justice,
to what is evil and base. And the gift, indeed,
causes things which are most remote to cooperate
through the one harmony of the world.
But if some one understanding this to be the
case should iniquitously endeavour to draw
certain portions of the universe to other parts,
218these parts are not the cause of the evil that
ensues; but the audacity of men, and the
transgression of the order in the world, pervert
things that are beautiful and legal. Hence
neither do the Gods effect what appears to be
base, but this is accomplished by the natures
and bodies that proceed from them; nor do
these very natures and bodies impart improbity
from themselves, as it is thought they do; but
they send their proper effluxions to places about
the earth, for the salvation of wholes, and those
who receive them transmute them by their
commixture and perversion, and transfer what
is given to a purpose different from that for
which it was imparted. From all these particulars,
therefore, it is demonstrated that a
divine nature is not the cause of evils and unjust
deeds.
Moreover, you inquire, and at the same time
doubt, “how it comes to pass that the Gods do
not hear him who invokes them, if he is impure
from venereal connexions; but, at the same time,
they do not refuse to lead any one to illegal
venery.” You have, indeed, a clear solution
of these things from what has been before said;
219if they are done contrary to [human] laws, but
are effected according to another order and
cause more excellent than laws. Or if it happens
that things of this kind are conformable
to the mundane harmony and friendship, yet
produce a conflict in parts through a certain
sympathy. Or if the communication of good,
which is beautifully imparted, is perverted by
those that receive it to the contrary.
It is, necessary, however, to discuss these
things particularly, and to show how they subsist,
and what reason they possess. It is requisite,
therefore, to understand that the universe
is one animal; and that the parts in it are, indeed,
separated by places, but through the
possession of one nature hasten to each other.[92]
The whole collective power, however, and the
cause of mixture, spontaneously draws the
220parts to a mingling with each other. But it is
also possible for this spontaneous attraction to
be excited and extended by art more than is
fit. The cause itself, therefore, of this mixture
extending from itself to the whole world, is
good, and the source of plenitude; has the
power of harmonically procuring communion,
consent, and symmetry; and inserts, by union,
the indissoluble principle of love, which principle
retains and preserves both things that
are in existence, and such as are becoming
to be. But in the parts, through their separation
from each other and from wholes, and
because, from their own proper nature, they
are imperfect, indigent, and imbecile, their
mutual connection is accompanied with passion;
by which, in most of them, desire and
a connascent appetite are inherent. Art[93] therefore,
221perceiving this innate desire thus implanted
by nature, and distributed about it
222(art itself also being multiformly distributed
about nature), variously attracts and derives it
as through a channel. Hence it transfers that
which in itself is orderly and arranged into the
privation of order, and fills that which is beautiful
and commensurate with deformity. But
the venerable end in each particular thing,
which is connascent with union, it transfers to
another indecorous plenitude, which is an
223assemblage of different things according to a
common passion. It likewise imparts a matter
from itself, which is unadapted to the whole
generation of what is beautiful, either because
it does not entirely receive it, or because it
transfers it to other things. It also mingles
many different physical powers, which it manages
as it pleases for the purposes of generation.
Hence we have universally shown, that
the apparatus of a venereal connexion of this
kind proceeds from a certain human art, and
not from a certain dæmoniacal or divine necessity.
Consider, therefore, also another genus of
causes; how a stone or a herb frequently
possess from themselves a nature corruptive, or
again collective of generated natures. For this
is not only the case with these, but this physical
power is also in greater natures and greater
things, which those who are not able to infer by
a reasoning process, will perhaps transfer the
works and energies of nature to more excellent
beings [i. e. to Gods, angels, and dæmons].
Now, therefore, it is acknowledged that the
tribe of evil dæmons has a very extended
224power in generation, in human affairs, and in
such things as subsist about the earth. Hence,
why is it wonderful that a tribe of this kind
should effect such works as these? For every
man is not able to distinguish a good from an
evil dæmon, or by what peculiarities the one is
separated from the other. Hence those, who
are not able to perceive the difference between
the two, absurdly reason concerning the cause
of them, and refer this cause to genera superior
to nature and the dæmoniacal order. If, also,
certain powers of a partial soul are assumed in
order to effect these things, whether such a soul
is detained in body, or has left the testaceous
and terrestrial body, but wanders about the
places of generation in a turbid and humid
spirit; this, indeed, will be a true opinion, but
separates the cause of these things at the greatest
distance from more excellent natures. By no
means, therefore, is that which is divine, or any
good dæmon, subservient to the illegal desires
of men in venereal concerns. For of these
things there are many other causes.
SECTION V. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V. — CHAP. VI. — CHAP. VII. — CHAP. VIII. — CHAP. IX. — CHAP. X. — CHAP. XI. — CHAP. XII. — CHAP. XIII. — CHAP. XIV. — CHAP. XV. — CHAP. XVI. — CHAP. XVII. — CHAP. XVIII. — CHAP. XIX. — CHAP. XX. — CHAP. XXI. — CHAP. XXII. — CHAP. XXIII. — CHAP. XXIV. — CHAP. XXV. — CHAP. XXVI.
225
The doubt mentioned by you in the next place,
is, as I may say, an inquiry which is made in
common both by the learned and the unlearned,
I mean concerning sacrifices, “what utility or
power they possess in the universe, and with the
Gods, and on what account they are performed,
appropriately indeed to the powers who are
honoured by them, but usefully to those by whom
the gifts are offered.” In the same place, also,
another objection occurs, viz. “that the interpreters
of prophecies and oracles ought to abstain
from animals, lest the Gods should be polluted
by the vapours arising from them. For this is
contrary to the assertion, that the Gods are
especially allured by the vapours of animals.”
The hostile opposition, therefore, in the things
that are now proposed, may be easily dissolved
by demonstrating the dignity of wholes with
226respect to parts, and by recalling to your
recollection the exempt transcendency of the
Gods above men. But what I mean is this,
that the soul, which ranks as a whole, presides
over all the mundane body,[94] and that the
227celestial Gods ascend, as into a vehicle, into a
celestial body, neither receiving any injury
from thence, nor any impediment in their intellections.
But to a partial soul, the communion
with body is noxious in both these
respects. If, therefore, some one perceiving
this, should nevertheless introduce such a doubt
as the following, that if the body is a bond to
our soul, it will also be a bond to the soul of
the universe, and that if a partial soul is converted
to the body on account of generation, in
a similar manner the power of the Gods is converted
to generation; in answer to this every
one may reply, that he who thus doubts does
not know how much superior beings transcend
men, and wholes parts. Since, therefore, the
objections pertain to things different from each
other, they do not produce any ambiguity.
Here, therefore, the same reasoning is likewise
sufficient. For with us the enjoyment of
bodies which once were united to soul, impresses
in us heaviness and defilement, ingenerates
in us voluptuousness, and produces many
other diseases in the soul. But with the Gods,
and with mundane and total causes, this is by
228no means the case. For the exhalation which
ascends after a divine manner from animals
that are sacrificed, as it is comprehended by,
and does not comprehend, the Gods, and as it
is also connected with the universe, but does
not conjoin wholes and the Gods to itself, is in
consequence of this coadapted to superior beings
and to total causes, but does not restrain
them and coadapt them to itself.
Nor is that which so greatly disturbs you, and
for which you so strenuously contend, attended
with any difficulty, I mean abstinence from
animals,[95] if it is rightly understood. For those
who worship the Gods do not abstain from animals,
lest the Gods should be defiled by the
vapours arising from them. For what exhalation
from bodies can approach those who, before
any thing material can come into contact
with their power, intangibly amputate matter?
Nor is it the power of the Gods only that
abolishes all bodies, and causes them to vanish,
229without any approximation to them; but a
celestial body, also, is unmingled with all the
material elements;[96] nor does it receive into
itself any thing extraneous, nor impart any
portion of itself to things of a foreign nature.
How, therefore, can any terrestrial vapour,
which is not elevated five stadia from the earth
before it again flows down to the earth, either
nourish a circulating and immaterial body, or,
in short, produce in it a certain defilement, or
any other passion? For it is acknowledged
that an etherial body is void of all contrariety,
is liberated from all mutation, is entirely pure
from the possibility of being transmuted into
any thing else, and is perfectly free from a tendency
to, and from the middle, because it is
either without any tendency, or is convolved
in a circle. Hence, it is not possible that
bodies, which consist of different powers and
motions, which are all-variously changed, and
are moved either upwards or downwards,
should have any communion of nature or power
with celestial bodies, or that any exhalation of
the former should be mingled with the latter.
As the former, therefore, are entirely separated
230from the latter, they will not effect any thing in
them. For celestial bodies being unbegotten,
are not capable of receiving any mutation from
generated natures. How, therefore, can the
Gods be defiled by such like vapours, who
suddenly, as I may say, at one stroke, amputate
the vapours ascending from all matter and
material bodies?
This, therefore, it is not fit to suspect of the
Gods [viz. that they can be defiled by vapours];
but it is much more requisite to think that
things of this kind are foreign to us and to our
nature. For things which are divided, and
also material and kindred natures, are able to
have a certain communion with each other in
acting and suffering; but things which are
essentially different, and such as are entirely
transcendent, and which employ other natures
and powers, these cannot act on or receive any
thing from each other. The defilement, therefore,
produced by material natures, falls on
things which are detained by a material body;
and from these it is necessary those should be
purified who are capable of being defiled by
matter. But how can those beings be defiled
by material essences who neither have a divisible
nature nor possess the power of receiving
in themselves the passions of matter? How,
likewise, can divinity, who has nothing in common
231with us, in consequence of antecedently
existing superior to human imbecility, be polluted
by my passions, or by those of any other
man?
Neither of these, therefore, at all pertains to
the Gods; neither our being filled with material
bodies; (for there is nothing, in short, of
this kind with them, nor are they defiled by our
stains, since they are entirely pure and incorruptible),
nor if there are certain material
vapours of bodies which are emitted about the
earth; for these vapours are most remote from
the essence and power of the Gods. Hence
the whole hypothesis of contrariety is subverted
if no part of it pertains to the Gods. For how,
in short, can that which is not possess in itself
a certain contest [with any thing]? You in
vain, therefore, suspect things of this kind to
be absurd, and you adduce doubts unworthy of
the Gods, since they cannot be reasonably
applied even to good men. For no man who
possesses intellect, and is free from passion,
would ever permit himself to be allured by the
exhalation of vapours, and much less would
any one of the beings more excellent than man
suffer himself to be thus allured. These things,
however, will be discussed shortly after. But
now, since this contrariety is, through many
solutions, subverted, we shall here finish what
we have to say about the first doubt.
232
Your next inquiry is of greater consequence,
and is concerning things of a greater nature.
How, therefore, shall I be able, briefly and
sufficiently, to give you an answer to a question
which is extremely difficult, and requires a
long explanation? Nevertheless I will answer
it, and without failing in alacrity. I will also
endeavour to follow what you have concisely
indicated and tacitly signified. But I will unfold
to you my dogma concerning sacrifices
[which is as follows]. It is by no means requisite
that sacrifices should be offered for the
sake of honour alone, in the same manner as
we honour benefactors; nor for the sake of
returning thanks for the goods imparted to us
by the Gods; nor yet for the sake of first
fruits, or as a remuneration by certain gifts of
more venerable goods bestowed on us by the
Gods. For these things are also common to
men, and are assumed from the common polity
of mankind, but by no means preserve the
transcendency of the Gods and the order of
them as exempt causes.
233
But the greatest thing in sacrifices, viz. their
efficacious power, and why especially they are
so very beneficial that without them we are
neither liberated from pestilence, nor famine,
nor sterility of fruits, nor obtain seasonable
showers of rain, nor things of much greater
consequence than these, I mean such as contribute
to the purification of the soul, or an
emancipation from generation; these are not at
all indicated by such modes of sacrifices as you
adduce. Hence no one can justly approve of
them, because they assign a cause of the works
performed in sacrifices unadapted to their dignity.
And if some one should approve of them
it will be only in a secondary way, and as suspended
from primary, more ancient, and venerable
causes.
The discussion therefore requires that we
should show what it is through which sacrifices
are effective of things, and are suspended
from the Gods, the precedaneous causes of
234effects. If then we say that the communion
of similar powers, or the dissension of contraries,
or a certain aptitude of the agent to the
patient in the universe, as in one animal, every
where possessing one and the same life, coexcites
adapted similars, pervading with invariable
sameness according to one sympathy,
and existing most near in things most remote:
if we should say this, we should thus assert
something of what is true, and which necessarily
accompanies sacrifices, yet we should
not demonstrate the true mode of their subsistence.
For the essence of the Gods is not
placed in nature and in physical necessities, so
as to be coexcited by physical passions, or by
the powers which extend through all nature;
but independently of these, it is defined by itself,
having nothing in common with them, neither
according to essence, nor according to power,
nor any thing else.
The same absurdities likewise happen from
assigning, as the causes of what is effected by
sacrifices, either certain numbers that are with
us, such, for instance, as assuming the number
235sixty in the crocodile,[97] as adapted to the sun;
or physical reasons, as the powers and energies
of animals, for instance, of the dog[98], the
236cynocephalus,[99] and the weasel[100], these being
common to the moon; or material forms, such
as are seen in sacred animals[101] according to
237the colours, and all the forms of the body;
238or any thing else pertaining to the bodies of
239animals, or of other things which are offered;
240or a certain member, as the heart of a cock;[106]
or other things of the like kind which are surveyed
about nature, if they are considered as
the causes of the efficacy in sacrifices. For
from these things the Gods are not demonstrated
to be supernatural causes; nor, as such,
to be excited by sacrifices. But they are considered
as physical causes detained by matter,
and as physically involved in bodies, and coexcited
and becoming quiescent together with
them, these things also existing about nature.
If, therefore, any thing of this kind takes place
in sacrifices, it follows as a concause, and as
having the relation of that without which a
thing is not effected; and thus it is suspended
from precedaneous causes.
It is better, therefore, to assign as the cause of
the efficacy of sacrifices friendship and familiarity,
and a habitude which binds fabricators
to the things fabricated, and generators to the
241things generated. Hence when, this common
principle preceding, we take a certain animal,
or any thing which germinates in the earth,
and which genuinely and purely preserves the
will of its maker; then, through a thing of this
kind, we appropriately move the demiurgic
cause, which presides over it in an undefiled
manner. But these causes being many, and
some, as the dæmoniacal causes, having a
proximate arrangement; but others, as divine
causes, being arranged above these; and farther
still, one most ancient and venerable cause
being the leader of these; all the causes are
moved in conjunction by a perfect sacrifice.
Each thing, likewise, is in a kindred manner
adapted to the sacrifice, according to the order
which it is allotted. But if any sacrifice is
imperfect, it proceeds to a certain extent, but
is not capable of proceeding any further. Hence
many are of opinion that sacrifices are to be
offered to good dæmons, many to the last powers
of the Gods, and many to the mundane or
terrestrial powers of dæmons or Gods. These
things, therefore, as being a part of sacrifices,
are not falsely asserted; but they do not comprehend
the whole of the power of sacrifice,
and all the goods it contains, which extend to
every thing divine.
242
We, however, admit all these assertions; physical
essences, indeed, being coexcited as in one
animal, according to aptitude or sympathy, as
in another respect being subjects, and following
and being subservient to the cause of the efficacy
of sacrifices; but dæmons, and terrene or
mundane divine powers, being primarily familiarized
to our order; nevertheless, we must
say, that the most perfect and leading cause of
the efficacy of sacrifices is to be conjoined to
demiurgic and the most perfect powers. But
since these comprehend in themselves all the
causes of sacrifice, we say that all the effective
causes of it are at once coexcited together
with these. And from all these a common
utility is imparted to the whole of generation;
sometimes through cities and people, or all
various nations, or circumscriptions more or less
extended than these; but at other times through
houses, or an individual, these causes impart
good with an unenvying and exuberant will,
unaccompanied with passion; conferring their
benefits with an impassive intellect, according
to adaptation and alliance; one friendship at
the same time which connectedly contains all
243things, producing this bond through a certain
ineffable communion.
For these assertions are much more true,
and more characteristic of the essence and
power of the Gods, than what you suspect to
be the case, viz. “that the Gods are especially
allured by the vapours produced in the sacrifices
of animals.” For if dæmons are invested with
a certain body, which some think is nourished
by sacrifices, yet this body is immutable and
impassive, luciform and unindigent; so that
neither does any thing flow from it, nor is it in
want of any influx externally introduced. And
if some one should admit that there is this
influx, yet since the world and the air contained
in it have a never failing abundance of
exhalations from terrene places, an efflux of
this kind being equally diffused on all sides,
what use can there be of sacrifices to dæmons?
But neither do the influxions equally and commensurately
fill the place of the effluxions, so
as that neither excess should at any time predominate,
nor deficiency be produced, but that
there should be a perfect equality and similitude
of the bodies of dæmons, and this invariably
the same. For the Demiurgus of the universe
has not provided abundant nutriment,
and which may be easily obtained, for all the
animals in the earth and the sea, but has made
244the beings superior to us to be in want of it;
nor has he imparted to other animals a native
abundance of what is daily requisite, but given
to dæmons nutriment which is adscititious and
procured by us men; so that if we through indolence,
or some other pretext, should neglect
an offering of this kind, the bodies of dæmons
would be in want of food, and would participate
of incommensuration and disorder. Why,
therefore, do not the authors of these assertions
subvert the whole order of things, so as to
make us to be in a better and more powerful
class of beings? For if we supply dæmons
with nutriment, we shall much more be the
causes of their existence. For every thing receives
nutriment and perfection from that by
which it was generated. And this, indeed, may
be seen in the visible generations of things; but
it may also be surveyed in the heavens and the
earth. For terrestrial are nourished by celestial
natures. But this becomes most eminently
manifest in invisible causes. For soul indeed,
is perfected by intellect; but nature by soul.
And other things are in a similar manner
nourished by their causes. If, therefore, it is
impossible that we should be the primordial
causes of dæmons, it is, for the same reason,
impossible that we should be the causes of
their nutriment.
245
It appears to me, also, that the present question
errs in another respect. For it is ignorant
that the offering of sacrifices through fire has
the power of consuming and destroying the
matter of them in a greater degree; that it
assimilates this matter to itself, but is not itself
assimilated to the matter; and that it elevates
to divine, celestial, and immaterial fire, but
does not tend downwards to matter and generation.
For if the enjoyment of the vapours
from matter allured dæmons, it would be requisite
that the matter should be pure and entire;
since thus there would be a more abundant
efflux from it to its participants. But now all
the matter is enkindled and consumed, and is
changed into the purity and tenuity of fire;
which is itself a clear indication of the contrary
to what you assert. For superior beings [i. e.
dæmons] are impassive, and they are delighted
to amputate matter through fire, and render us
impassive. They likewise assimilate whatever
is in us to the Gods, in the same manner as
fire[107] assimilates all solid and resisting substances
246to luminous and attenuated bodies.
And they elevate us through sacrifices and the
sacrifice fire to the fire of the Gods, in the same
manner as fire elevates to fire, and draws upward
gravitating and resisting substances to
divine and celestial natures.
For, in short, the vehicle[108] which is subservient
to dæmons neither consists of matter, nor of
the elements, nor of any other of the bodies
known to us. What perfect supply of food,
therefore, can there be from one essence to another
[specifically different]? Or what enjoyment
can accede from foreign to foreign natures?
There cannot be any. But much more, as the
Gods by the fire of lightning divide matter,
and separate from it things which are essentially
247immaterial, but which are vanquished
and bound by it, and render them impassive
from being passive; thus also the fire that is
with us, imitating the energy of divine fire,
destroys every thing which is material in sacrifices,
purifies the things which are offered,
liberates them from the bonds of matter, and
renders them, through purity of nature, adapted
to the communion of the Gods. It likewise
liberates[109] us after the same manner from the
bonds of generation, assimilates us to the Gods,
causes us to be adapted to their friendship,
and conducts our material nature to an immaterial
essence.
248
Subverting, therefore, in this manner the
common absurd opinions concerning sacrifices,
we shall introduce in their place true conceptions
about them; omitting the particular discussion
of each species of sacrifice, which the
peculiar and distinct consideration of sacrifices
requires, because this pertains to another inquiry,
and because, at the same time, every
one who is intelligent may be able to accomplish
this from what has been already said, and
from one thing may extend his reasoning power
to many, and may easily know what is omitted
from what has been discussed. And I, indeed,
think that these things have been sufficiently
explained, both in other respects and because
the explanation pays attention in a becoming
manner to the purity of the Gods. Because,
however, it may perhaps appear to others to be
incredible, and not sufficiently manifest, and
the veracity of it may be suspected, as not exciting
the discursive energy of reason, I wish
to consider these things a little more fully;
and, if possible, to add arguments more evident
than those which have been adduced.
249
We shall begin, however, the elucidation of
this subject in the best possible manner, if we
demonstrate that the sacred law of sacrifices is
connected with the order of the Gods. In the
first place, therefore, we say, that of the Gods
some are material, but others immaterial. And
the material, indeed, are those that comprehend
matter in themselves, and adorn it; but
the immaterial are those that are perfectly
exempt from, and transcend, matter. But,
according to the sacrific art, it is requisite to
begin sacred operations from the material Gods
for the ascent to the immaterial Gods will not
otherwise be effected. The material Gods,
therefore, have a certain communion with matter,
so far as they preside over it. Hence they
have dominion over things which happen about
matter, such as the division, percussion, repercussion,
mutation, generation, and corruption
of all material bodies. He, therefore, who
wishes to worship these theurgically, in a manner
adapted to them, and to the dominion
which they are allotted, should, as they are
material, employ a material mode of worship.
For thus we shall be wholly led to a familiarity
with them, and worship them in an allied and
250appropriate manner. Dead bodies, therefore,
and things deprived of life, the slaying of animals,
and the consumption of victims, and, in
short, the mutation of the matter which is
offered, pertain to these Gods, not by themselves,
but on account of the matter over which
they preside. For though they are in the most
eminent degree separate from it, yet at the same
time they are present with it. And though they
comprehend matter in an immaterial power,
yet they are coexistent with it. Things that
are governed, also, are not foreign from their
governors; and things which are subservient
as instruments, are not unadapted to those
that use them. Hence, it is foreign to the immaterial
Gods, to offer matter to them through
sacrifices, but this is most adapted to all the
material Gods.
Let us then, in the next place, direct our
attention to that which accords with what has
been before said, and with our twofold condition
of being. For there is a time when we
become wholly soul, are out of the body, and
sublimely revolve on high, in conjunction with
all the immaterial Gods. And there is also a
251time when we are bound in the testaceous
body, are detained by matter, and are of a
corporeal-formed nature. Again, therefore,
there will be a twofold mode of worship. For
one mode, indeed, will be simple, incorporeal,
and pure from all generation, and this mode
pertains to undefiled souls. But the other is
filled with bodies, and every thing of a material
nature, and is adapted to souls which are
neither pure nor liberated from all generation.
We must admit, therefore, that there are twofold
species of sacrifices; one kind, indeed, pertaining
to men who are entirely purified, which,
as Heraclitus says, rarely happens to one
man, or to a certain easily to be numbered few
of mankind; but the other kind, being material
and corporeal-formed, and consisting in mutation,
is adapted to souls that are still detained
by the body. Hence, to cities and people not
yet liberated from genesiurgic fate and the impeding
communion of bodies, if such a mode of
sacrifice as this latter is not permitted, they
will wander both from immaterial and material
good. For they will not be able to receive
the former, and to the latter they will not offer
what is appropriate. At the same time, likewise,
every one in sacrificing performs the
sacrifice with reference to what he is, and not
with reference to what he is not. It is not
252proper, therefore, that the sacrifice should transcend
the proper measure of him by whom it
is offered. The same thing will also be said by
me concerning the connexion which appropriately
coadapts the men who worship and the
powers that are worshiped. For this connexion
requires that a mode of worship should
be chosen adapted to itself; viz. an immaterial
connexion, a mode of worship immaterially
mingled, and purely conjoining by pure incorporeal
powers, incorporeal natures to themselves;
but a corporeal-formed connexion, a
corporeal-formed mode which depends on bodies,
and is mingled with the essences that preside
over bodies.
Farther still, therefore, we must not disdain
to add what follows; that we frequently perform
something to the Gods who are the inspective
guardians of body, and to good dæmons,
for the sake of the necessary use of the body;
as, for instance, when [by sacrifices] we purify
it from ancient stains, or liberate it from diseases,
and fill it with health, or remove from it
heaviness and torpor, or procure for it any other
good. In this case, therefore, we evidently
253must not busy ourselves with the body in an
intellectual and incorporeal manner. For the
body is not adapted to participate of modes
of this kind; but, obtaining things which are
allied to itself, it is meliorated and purified by
bodies. The rites of sacrifices, therefore, will
necessarily, for a purpose of this kind, be corporeal-formed;
partly cutting off what is superfluous
in us; partly supplying us with that of
which we are in want; and partly leading into
symmetry and order such things in us as are
immoderately disturbed. We also frequently
engage in sacred operations, entreating superior
beings to grant us such things as are
adapted to the wants of human life. And
these are such as preserve the body in health,
or pertain to those things which we procure for
the sake of the body.
What, therefore, shall we derive from the
Gods who are entirely exempt from all human
generation, with respect to sterility, or abundance
or any thing else pertaining to [the
mortal] life? Nothing whatever. For it is not
the province of those who are liberated from
all things to meddle with gifts of this kind.
254But if some one should say that the perfectly
immaterial comprehend in themselves the material
Gods, and that through this they also
contain in themselves their gifts according to
one first cause; such a one will also say, that
in consequence of this an abundance of divine
gifts descend from the immaterial Gods. It
must not, however, be granted to any one to
say that the immaterial Gods bestow these
gifts by proximately interfering with the actions
of human life. For such an administration of
our affairs is partible, is accomplished with a
certain conversion [to the subjects of its care],
is not entirely separate from bodies, and is incapable
of receiving a pure and undefiled domination.
Will not, therefore, that mode of
sacrifice in works of this kind be most appropriate
which is mingled with bodies, and adheres
to generation; and not that which is
entirely immaterial and incorporeal? For the
pure mode of sacrifice is perfectly transcendent
and incommensurate [with our concerns]. But
the mode which employs bodies, and the powers
that subsist through bodies, is in the most eminent
degree allied to human affairs. It is also
capable of producing a certain prosperous condition
of things, and of imparting symmetry and
temperament to the mortal race.
255
According to another division, therefore, the
numerous herd [or the great mass] of men is
arranged under nature, is governed by physical
powers, looks downward to the works of nature,
gives completion to the administration of Fate,
and to things pertaining to Fate, because it belongs
to the order of it, and always employs
practical reasoning about such particulars alone
as subsist according to nature. But there are
a certain few who, by employing a certain
supernatural power of intellect, are removed
indeed from nature, but are conducted to a
separate and unmingled intellect; and these,
at the same time, become superior to physical
powers. Others again, who are the media between
these, tend to things which subsist between
nature and a pure intellect. And of
these, some indeed equally follow both nature
and an immaculate intellect; others embrace a
life which is mingled from both; and others
are liberated from things subordinate, and betake
themselves to such as are more excellent.
This division, therefore, being made, that
which follows will most manifestly take place.
For those who are governed by the nature of
256the universe, who lived conformably to this, and
employ the powers of nature, these should
embrace a mode of worship adapted to nature,
and to the bodies that are moved by nature,
and should choose for this purpose appropriate
places, air, matter, the powers of matter, bodies,
and the habits of bodies, qualities, and proper
motions, the mutations of things in generation,
and other things connected with these, both in
other parts of piety and in that part of it which
pertains to sacrifice. But those who live conformably
to intellect alone, and to the life of intellect,
and are liberated from the bonds of
nature, these should exercise in all the parts of
theurgy the intellectual and incorporeal mode
of worship. And those who are the media between
these, should labour differently in the
paths of piety, conformably to the differences
of this middle condition of life, either by embracing
both modes of piety, or separating
themselves from one of the modes [and adhering
to the other], or receiving both these modes as
the foundation of things of a more honourable
nature. For without these they never can
arrive at things supereminent. Or, in some
other way, they should thus, in a becoming
manner, labour in the paths of sanctity.
257
On this subject, however, there is also the following
division. Of divine essences and powers
some have [a genesiurgic] soul and nature subject
and ministrant to their fabrications, whenever
they wish to use them. But others are
entirely separate from soul and nature, I mean
from a divine, and not only from a mundane
and genesiurgic soul and nature.[110] And others
are the media[111] between these, and afford to
the extremes a communion with each other,
either according to an exuberant participation
of greater good, or according to an unimpeded
reception of less good, or according to a concord
which binds together both the extremes.
When, therefore, we worship the Gods who
258reign over soul and nature, it is not foreign to
these to offer to them physical powers, and
bodies which are governed by nature. For all
the works of nature are subservient to them,
and contribute to their government. But when
we undertake to honour those Gods who are
essentially uniform, then it is requisite to venerate
them with liberated honours. Hence, intellectual
gifts are adapted to these, and things
which pertain to an incorporeal life, together
with the fruits of virtue and wisdom, and whatever
perfect and total goods of the soul there
may be. Moreover, to the Gods who subsist
as media, and who are the leaders of goods of a
middle nature, sometimes twofold gifts will be
adapted, and sometimes such as have a communication
with both these; or such as are
separated from inferiors, and pertain to more
elevated natures; or, in short, such as in one
of the modes give completion to the medium.
Being impelled, therefore, from another principle,
viz. from the world and the mundane
Gods, from the arrangement of the four elements
in the world, and the association of the elements
according to [appropriate] measures, and also
259from the orderly circulation of bodies about
centres, we shall have an easy ascent to the
truth of the piety respecting sacrifices. For if
we are in the world, are contained as parts in
the universe, are primarily produced by it, and
perfected by the total powers that are in it,
and if we consist of its elements, and receive
from it a certain portion of life and nature; if
this be the case, it is not proper to pass beyond
the world and the mundane orders. We
must admit, therefore, that in each part of the
world there is this visible body, and that there
are also incorporeal powers, which are divided
about bodies. Hence the law of religion distributes
similars to similars, and thus extends
from on high, through wholes, as far as to the
last of things; assigning, indeed, incorporeals
to incorporeals, but bodies to bodies, and this
commensurately to the nature of each. If,
however, some theurgist should participate of
the supermundane Gods, which is the rarest
of all things, he, indeed, in the worship of the
Gods will transcend both bodies and matter;
being united to the Gods by a supermundane
power. But that which happens to one person
with difficulty and late, and at the end of the
sacerdotal office, ought not to be promulgated
as common to all men; nor ought it to be
made a thing common to those who are commencing
260theurgic operations, nor to those who
have made a middle proficiency in it. For
these, after a manner, pay a corporeal-formed
attention to sanctity.
I think, therefore, that all who are lovers of
the contemplation of theurgic truth will acknowledge
this, that the piety which pertains to
divine natures ought not to be exercised towards
them partially or imperfectly. Hence,
since prior to the appearance of the Gods, all
such powers as are presubjacent to them are
moved, and when the Gods are about to descend
to the earth, precede them as in a solemn
procession;[112] he who does not distribute to all
these powers that which is adapted to them,
261and does not honour each in an appropriate
manner, will depart imperfect, and destitute of
the participation of the Gods. But he who
propitiates all of them, and offers to each
acceptable gifts, and such as are to the utmost
of his power adapted to them, will always
remain secure and irreprehensible, giving completion
in a proper manner to the perfect and
entire receptacle of the divine choir. Since
this, therefore, is the case, whether is it necessary
that the mode of sanctity should be simple,
and consist of a certain few things, or that it
should be multiform and all-harmonic, and
mingled, as I may say, from every thing contained
in the world? If, indeed, the power
which is invoked, and is excited in the performance
of sacred rites, was simple, the mode
of sacrifice should necessarily be simple. But
if the multitude of powers which are excited
when the Gods descend and are moved, is not
to be comprehended by any one, except theurgists
alone, who accurately know this through
experience in sacred operations; if this be the
case, they alone are capable of knowing what
the perfection is of the sacrific art; and they
also know that the omission, though of a few
things, subverts the whole work of religion;
just as in harmony, from the bursting of one
262chord, the whole becomes dissonant and incommensurate.[113]
As, therefore, in the visible
descents of the Gods, a manifest injury is
sustained by those who leave some one of the
more excellent genera unhonoured,[114] thus also
263in the invisible appearances of the Gods in
sacrifices, it is not proper to honour one of
them, and not honour another, but it is entirely
requisite to honour each of them according to
the order which he is allotted. But he who
leaves some one of them unhonoured, confounds
the whole work of piety, and divulses
the one and whole orderly distribution of it;
not, in so doing, as some one may think, imperfectly
receiving the Gods, but entirely subverting
all the ceremonies of religion.
What then [it may be said], does not the summit
of the sacrific art recur to the most principal
one of the whole multitude of Gods, and
at one and the same time worship the many
essences and principles that are [rooted and
concentred] in it? Entirely so, but this happens
at the latest period, and to a very few, and we
must be satisfied if it takes place when the sun
of life is setting. Our present discussion, however,
264does not ordain laws for a man of this
kind; for he is superior to all law;[115] but it
promulgates a law such as that of which we
are now speaking, to those who are in want of
a certain divine legislation.[116] It says, therefore,
that as the world has one coarrangement
from many orders, thus also it is necessary
that the consummation of sacrifices, being
never failing and entire, should be conjoined to
the whole order of more excellent natures.
If, however, the world is multiform, and all perfect,
and is united from many orders, it is
also necessary that sacred operations should
imitate its omniform variety through the whole
of the powers which they employ. Hence, in
a similar manner, since the things which surround
us are all-various, it is not fit that we
should be connected with the divine causes
265that preside over them, from a certain part
which they contain. Nor is it proper that we
should ascend imperfectly to the primordial
causes of them.
The various mode, therefore, of sanctity in
sacred operations partly purifies and partly
perfects some one of the things that are in us
or about us. And some things, indeed, it restores
to symmetry and order; but others it
liberates from mortal-formed error. But it
renders all things familiar and friendly to all
the natures that are superior to us. Moreover,
when divine causes, and human preparations
which are assimilated to them conspire in
one and the same, then the perfection of sacred
operations imparts all the perfect and great
benefits of sacrifice. It will not be amiss, also, to
add such particulars as the following, in order
to the accurate comprehension of these things.
An exuberance of power is always present with
the highest causes, and at the same time that
this power transcends all things, it is equally
present with all with unimpeded energy. Hence,
conformably to this, the first illuminate the last
of things, and immaterial are present with material
266natures immaterially. Nor should it be
considered by any one as wonderful, if we say
that there is a certain pure and divine matter.[117]
For matter being generated by the father and
demiurgus of wholes, receives a perfection
adapted to itself, in order to its becoming the
receptacle of the Gods. At the same time
nothing prevents more excellent beings from
being able to impart their light to subordinate
natures. Neither, therefore, is matter separated
from the participation of better causes;
so that such matter as is perfect, pure, and
boniform, is not unadapted to the reception of
the Gods. For, since it is requisite that terrestrial
natures should by no means be destitute
of divine communion, the earth also receives
a certain divine portion from it, sufficient
for the participation of the Gods. The theurgic
art, therefore, perceiving this to be the case,
and thus having discovered in common, appropriate
receptacles, conformably to the peculiarity
267of each of the Gods, it frequently connects
together stones, herbs, animals, aromatics,
and other sacred, perfect, and deiform substances
of the like kind; and afterwards, from
all these, it produces an entire and pure receptacle.
For it is not proper to despise all
matter, but that alone which is foreign from
the Gods. But that matter is to be chosen
which is adapted to them, as being able to
accord with the edifices of the Gods, the dedication
of statues, and the sacred operations
of sacrifices. For no otherwise can a participation
of superior beings be obtained by places
in the earth, or by men that dwell in it, unless
a foundation of this kind is first established.
It is also requisite to be persuaded by arcane
assertions, that a certain matter is imparted by
the Gods, through blessed visions. This matter,
therefore, is doubtless connascent with those
by whom it is imparted. Hence, does it not
follow that the sacrifice of a matter of this
kind excites the Gods to present themselves to
the view, immediately calls forth the participation
of them, receives them when they accede,
and perfectly unfolds them into light?
268
The same things also may be learned from
the distribution of the Gods according to places;
and from this, and the partible dominion over
each particular thing, it may be seen how many
allotments, greater or less, superior beings are
assigned according to their different orders.
For it is evident, that to the Gods who preside
over certain places, the things produced by
them are most appropriately offered in sacrifice;
and that what pertains to the governed is
most adapted to be sacrificed to the governors.
For always to makers their own works are
particularly grateful; and to those who primarily
produce certain things, such things are
primarily acceptable. Whether, therefore, certain
animals, or plants, or any other productions
of the earth, are governed by superior
beings, at one and the same time, they participate
of their inspective care, and impart to us
an indivisible communion with the Gods. Some
things, therefore, of this kind, if they are carefully
preserved, increase the familiarity of those
that retain them with the Gods; and these are
such as by remaining entire, preserve the communion
between Gods and men. Of this kind
are some of the animals in Egypt, and man,
269who is everywhere sacred. But some things,
when consecrated, produce a more manifest
familiarity; and these are such as by an analysis
into the principle of the first elements, effect
an alliance more sacredly adapted to superior
causes. For the more perfect this alliance is,
the more perfect always is the good which is
imparted by it.
If, therefore, these things were human customs
alone, and derived their authority through our
legal institutions, it might be said that the
worship of the Gods was the invention of our
conceptions. Now, however, divinity is the
leader of it, who is thus invoked by sacrifices,
and who is surrounded by a numerous multitude
of Gods and angels. Under him, likewise,
a certain common presiding power, is
allotted dominion according to each nation of
the earth. And a peculiar presiding power is
allotted to each temple. Of the sacrifices,
also, which are performed to the Gods, the
inspective guardian is a God; but an angel, of
those which are performed to angels; and a
dæmon, of such as are performed to dæmons.
After the same manner, also, in other sacred
270operations, the presiding power is allotted dominion
over each, in a way allied to his proper
genus. When, therefore, we offer sacrifices to
the Gods, accompanied by the presiding Gods,
who give completion to sacred operations, then
at the same time, it is necessary in sacrifices to
venerate the sacred law of divine sanctity;
and at the same time, also, we ought to be
confident, as sacrificing under the Gods who
are the rulers of such works. We ought, likewise,
to be very cautious, lest we should offer
any gift unworthy of, or foreign from, the
Gods. And, as the last admonition, we should
in a manner entirely perfect, pay attention to
all that surrounds us, and to the Gods, angels,
and dæmons that are distributed according to
genera in the universe. And to all these, in a
similar manner, an acceptable sacrifice should
be offered; for thus alone sanctity can be preserved
in a way worthy of the Gods who preside
over it.
Since, however, prayers are not the smallest
[but on the contrary a very great] part of sacrifices,
especially give completion to them, and
through these the whole operation of them is
corroborated and effected; and since, besides
271this, they afford a common utility to religion,
and produce an indissoluble and sacred communion
with the Gods, it will not be improper
to discuss a few particulars concerning prayer.
For this is of itself a thing worthy to be known,
and renders more perfect the science concerning
the Gods. I say, therefore, that the first
species of prayer is collective; and that it is
also the leader of contact with, and a knowledge
of, divinity. The second species is the
bond of concordant communion, calling forth,
prior to the energy of speech, the gifts imparted
by the Gods, and perfecting the whole
of our operations prior to our intellectual conceptions.
And the third and most perfect
species of prayer is the seal of ineffable union
with the divinities, in whom it establishes all
the power and authority of prayer; and thus
causes the soul to repose in the Gods, as in a
never failing port. But from these three terms,
in which all the divine measures are contained,
suppliant adoration not only conciliates to us
the friendship of the Gods, but supernally extends
to us three fruits, being as it were three
Hesperian apples of gold.[118] The first of these
272pertains to illumination; the second, to a communion
of operation; but through the energy
of the third, we receive a perfect plenitude of
divine fire. And sometimes, indeed, supplication
precedes; like a precursor preparing the
way before the sacrifice appears. But some
times it intercedes as a mediator; and sometimes
accomplishes the end of sacrificing. No
operation, however, in sacred concerns, can
succeed without the intervention of prayer.
Lastly, the continual exercise of prayer nourishes
the vigour of our intellect, and renders the
receptacles of the soul far more capacious for
the communications of the Gods. It likewise
is the divine key, which opens to men the penetralia
of the Gods; accustoms us to the splendid
rivers of supernal light; in a short time
perfects our inmost recesses, and disposes them
for the ineffable embrace and contact of the
Gods; and does not desist till it raises us to
the summit of all. It also gradually and silently
draws upward the manners of our soul, by
divesting them of every thing foreign to a divine
nature, and clothes us with the perfections of
the Gods. Besides this, it produces an indissoluble
communion and friendship with divinity,
nourishes a divine love, and inflames
the divine part of the soul. Whatever is of an
opposing and contrary nature in the soul, it
273expiates and purifies; expels whatever is prone
to generation, and retains any thing of the dregs
of mortality in its etherial and splendid spirit;
perfects a good hope and faith concerning the
reception of divine light; and, in one word,
renders those by whom it is employed the
familiars and domestics of the Gods. If such,
then, are the advantages of prayer, and such
its connexion with sacrifice, does it not appear
from hence that the end of sacrifice is a conjunction
with the Demiurgus of the world?
And the benefit of prayer is of the same extent
with the good which is conferred by the demiurgic
causes on the race of mortals. Again,
from hence the anagogic, perfective, and replenishing
power of prayer appears; likewise
how it becomes efficacious and unific; and
how it possesses a common bond imparted by
the Gods. And, in the third and last place, it
may easily be conceived from hence how prayer
and sacrifice mutually corroborate and confer
on each other a sacred and perfect power in
divine concerns.
Hence, since it appears that there is a perfect
conspiration and cooperation of the sacerdotal
discipline with itself, and that the parts
of it are more connascent than those of any
animal, being entirely conjoined through one
274connexion; this being the case, it is not by any
means proper to neglect this concord, nor to
admit some of its parts and reject others; but
it is fit that all of them should be exercised in a
similar manner, and that those should be perfected
through all of them who wish to be
genuinely conjoined to the Gods. These things
therefore, cannot subsist otherwise.
SECTION VI. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V. — CHAP. VI. — CHAP. VII.
275
It is now, however, time for me to pass on to the
next doubt which you propose, viz. “Why it is
requisite that the inspector [who presides over
sacred rites] ought not to touch a dead body,
though most sacred operations are performed
through dead bodies?” Again, therefore, that
we may dissolve this doubt, we shall direct
our attention to this apparent opposition; for
there is not in reality any, but these things
alone seem to subsist contrarily. For if the
laws of sacred rites ordered that the same dead
bodies should not be touched and should be
touched, this would be a thing contrary to
itself. But if they order that some dead bodies
should be abstained from as impure, but that
others which are consecrated should be touched,
this is not attended with any contrariety. Farther
still, it is not lawful to touch human
bodies when the soul has left them, since a certain
vestige, image, or representation of divine
276life is extinguished in the body by death. But
it is no longer unholy to touch other dead
bodies, because they did not [when living] participate
of a more divine life. To other Gods,
therefore, who are pure from matter, our not
touching dead bodies is adapted; but to those
Gods who preside over animals, and are proximately
connected with them, invocation through
animals is properly made. According to this,
therefore, no contrariety takes place.
After another manner, also, this doubt may be
dissolved. For in men, indeed, who are detained
in matter, bodies deprived of life produce
a certain stain; because that which is
not alive inserts a certain defilement in that
which is living, in the same manner as the impure
in that which is pure, and that which is in
privation in that which is in habit; and also
because that which is dead produces a certain
pollution, through a physical aptitude to a
worse condition, in consequence of having possessed
the power of dying. But a dead body
cannot produce any defilement in a dæmon
who is perfectly incorporeal, and does not receive
any corruption. For it is necessary that
277he should transcend a corruptible body, and
not participate of any representation of corruption
from it. And thus much in answer to
the contrariety of the doubt.
In the next place we shall explain how divination
is effected through sacred animals, such,
for instance, as hawks. We must never say,
therefore, that the Gods accede through bodies
that are thus procured, being employed. For
they do not preside over animals, either partibly,
or proximately, or materially, or with a
certain habitude towards them. But to dæmons
and these such as are very much divided, to
different orders of whom different animals are
allotted, and who proximately exercise a government
of this kind, and do not obtain their
proper dominion in a way perfectly independent
and immaterial, such a contact with the
organs of divination must be ascribed. Or, if
some one is willing so to admit, a seat must be
attributed to them, through which we may be
able to associate with and employ them. It is
necessary, therefore, to think that this seat
should be pure from bodies. For there can
be no communion whatever between the pure
278and its contrary; but it is reasonable to admit
that this seat is conjoined with men, through
the soul of animals. For this soul has a certain
alliance to men, through homogeneity of life;
but it is allied to dæmons, because, being liberated
from body, it has in a certain respect a
separate subsistence. Hence, being a medium
between both, it is subservient to its presiding
dæmon, but announces to those who are yet
detained in body that which its prefect commands.
And it imparts to both these a common
bond with each other.
It is necessary, however, to think that the soul
which uses divination of this kind, not only
becomes an auditor of the prediction, but also
contributes in no small degree from itself to
the consummation of it, and of what pertains
to its operations. For this soul is coexcited
and cooperates, and at the same time foreknows,
through a certain necessary sympathy.
Such a mode, therefore, of divination as this
is entirely different from the divine and true
mode, being alone able to predict respecting
small and diurnal concerns, viz. respecting such
as being placed in a divided nature, are borne
279along about generation, and which impart motions
from themselves to those things that are
able to receive them, and produce multiform
passions in things which are naturally adapted
to be copassive. Perfect foreknowledge, however,
can never be effected through passion.
For that which is itself especially immutable,
immaterial, and entirely pure, is accustomed
to apprehend the future; but that which is
mingled with the most irrational and dark
nature of a corporeal-formed and material
essence is filled with abundant ignorance. An
artificial apparatus, therefore, of this kind does
not deserve to be called divination; nor is it
proper to bestow much attention upon it, nor
to believe in any other person who uses it, as
if it possessed in itself a certain clear and
known indication of truth. And thus much
concerning divination of this kind.
Let us, therefore, now discuss another species
of doubts, the cause of which is occult, and
which, as you say, is accompanied with “violent
threats.” But it is variously divided about
the multitude of threats. “For it threatens
either to burst the heavens, or to unfold the
280secrets of Isis, or to point out the arcanum in
the adytum,[119] or to stop Baris, or to scatter the
members of Osiris to Typhon, or to do something
else of the like kind.” Men do not, however,
as you think, threaten by such words as these
the sun or the moon, or any of the celestial
Gods; for if they did, more dire absurdities
would ensue than those which you lament.
But, as we before observed, there is a certain
genus of powers in the world which is partible,
inconsiderate, and most irrational, and which
receives reason from another, and is obedient
to it; neither itself employing a proper intelligence,
nor distinguishing what is true and
false, or what is possible or impossible. A genus,
therefore, of this kind, when threatenings are
extended, is immediately coexcited and astonished,
because, as it appears to me, it is naturally
adapted to be led by representations, and
to allure other things, through an astounded
and unstable phantasy.
281
These things also admit of another explanation
of the following kind. The theurgist, through
the power of arcane signatures, commands
mundane natures, no longer as man, nor as
employing a human soul; but as existing superior
to them in the order of the Gods, he makes
use of greater mandates than pertain to himself,
so far as he is human. This, however,
does not take place as if he effected every
thing which he vehemently threatens to accomplish;
but he teaches us by such a use of
words the magnitude and quality of the power
which he possesses through a union with the
Gods, and which he obtains from the knowledge
of arcane symbols. This, likewise, may be
said, that the dæmons who are distributed according
to parts, and who guard the parts of
the universe, pay so much attention to the
parts over which they preside, that they cannot
endure a word contrary [to the safety of these],
but they preserve the permanency of mundane
natures immutable. They preserve this permanency,
therefore, in an unchanged condition,
because the order of the Gods remains invariably
the same. Hence they cannot endure even
to hear that threatened in which the aerial and
terrestrial dæmons have their existence.
282
Or this thing may likewise be explained as
follows: Dæmons preside with a guardian
power over arcane mysteries, and this in so
remarkable a degree, because the orderly distribution
of things in the universe is primarily
contained in dæmons. For the parts of the
universe remain in order, because the beneficent
power of Osiris continues sacred and undefiled,
and is not mingled with any opposing
error and perturbation. The life of all things
likewise remains pure and incorruptible, because
the occult vivific beauties of the productive
principles in Isis do not descend into body
which is born along,[120] and is the object of
sight. But all things continue immoveable and
perpetual, because the course of the sun is
never stopped. And all things remain perfect
and entire, because the arcana in the adytum[121]
are never disclosed. Hence, in those particulars
in which the whole of things possesses its
safety, I mean in arcana being always preserved
occult, and in the ineffable essence of the
Gods, never receiving a contrary condition; in
these, terrestrial dæmons cannot endure, even
283in words, to hear that they subsist otherwise
than they do, or that they become profaned;
and on this account threatening language has a
certain power when employed against them.
No one, however, threatens the Gods, nor is
such a mode of invocation addressed to them.
Hence with the Chaldeans, by whom words
used to the Gods alone are preserved distinct
and pure, no threats are employed. But the
Egyptians, mingling dæmoniacal words with
divine signatures, sometimes employ threats.
You have, therefore, an answer to these doubts,
concise indeed, but I think sufficiently free from
error.
SECTION VII. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V.
284
The doubts also that follow in the next place
require for their solution the assistance of the
same divinely-wise Muse. But I am desirous,
previous to this, to unfold to you the peculiarity
of the theology of the Egyptians. For
they, imitating the nature of the universe, and
the fabricative energy of the Gods, exhibit
certain images through symbols of mystic,
occult, and invisible intellections; just as nature,
after a certain manner, expresses invisible
reasons [or productive powers] through visible
forms. But the fabricative energy of the Gods
delineates the truth of forms, through visible
images. Hence the Egyptians, perceiving that
all superior natures rejoice in the similitude to
them of inferior beings, and thus wishing to
fill the latter with good, through the greatest
possible imitation of the former, very properly
exhibit a mode of theologizing adapted to the
mystic doctrine concealed in the symbols.
285
Hear, therefore, the intellectual interpretation
of symbols, according to the conceptions of the
Egyptians; at the same time removing from
your imagination and your ears the image of
things symbolical, but elevating yourself to intellectual
truth. By “mire,” therefore, understand
every thing corporeal-formed and material;
or that which is nutritive and prolific; or
such as the material species of nature is, which
is borne along in conjunction with the unstable
flux of matter; or a thing of such a kind as
that which the river of generation receives, and
which subsides together with it; or the primordial
cause of the elements, and of all the
powers distributed about the elements, and
which must be antecedently conceived to exist
analogous to a foundation. Being, therefore, a
thing of this kind, the God who is the cause of
generation, of all nature, and of all the powers
in the elements, as transcending these, and as
being immaterial, incorporeal, and supernatural,
unbegotten and impartible, wholly derived from
himself, and concealed in himself,—this God
precedes all things, and comprehends all things
in himself. And because, indeed, he comprehends
all things, and imparts himself to all
286mundane natures, he is from these unfolded
into light. Because, however, he transcends
all things, and is by himself expanded above
them, on this account he presents himself to
the view as separate, exempt, elevated, and
expanded by himself above the powers and
elements in the world. The following symbol,
likewise, testifies the truth of this. For by
the God “sitting above the lotus,” a transcendency
and strength which by no means come
into contact with the mire, are obscurely signified,
and also indicate his intellectual and empyrean
empire. For every thing belonging to
the lotus is seen to be circular, viz. both the form
of the leaves and the fruit; and circulation is
alone allied to the motion of intellect, which
energizes with invariable sameness, in one order,
and according to one reason. But the God is
established by himself, and above a dominion
and energy of this kind, venerable and holy,
superexpanded, and abiding in himself, which
his being seated is intended to signify. When
the God, also, is represented as “sailing in a
ship,”[122] it exhibits to us the power which
287governs the world. As, therefore, the pilot
being separate from the ship presides over the
rudder of it, thus the sun having a separate
subsistence, governs the helm of the whole
world. And as the pilot directs all things
from the stem, giving from himself a small
principle of motion to the vessel; thus, also,
by a much greater priority, the God indivisibly
imparts supernally from the first principles
of nature, the primordial causes of motions.
These particulars, therefore, and still more
than these, are indicated by the God sailing
in a ship.
288
Since, however, every part of the heavens,
every sign of the zodiac,[123] all the motion of the
heavens, every period of time according to
which the world is moved, and all things contained
in the wholes of the universe, receive
the powers which descend from the sun, some
of which are complicated with these wholes,
but others transcend a commixture with them,
the symbolical mode of signification represents
these also, indicating “that the sun is diversified
according to the signs of the zodiac, and
that every hour he changes his form.” At the
same time, also, it indicates his immutable,
stable, never failing, and at once collected
communication of good to the whole world.
But since the recipients of the impartible gift
of the God are variously affected towards it,
and receive multiform powers, from the sun,
according to their peculiar motions, hence the
symbolical doctrine evinces through the multitude
of the gifts, that the God is one, and exhibits
his one power through multiform powers.
Hence, likewise, it says that he is one and the
289same, but that the vicissitudes of his form, and
his configurations, must be admitted to exist
in the recipients. On this account it asserts
“that he is changed every hour, according
to the signs of the zodiac,” in consequence
of these being variously changed about the
God, according to the many modes by which
they receive him. The Egyptians use prayers
to the sun, conformable to these assertions, not
only in visions which are seen by the bodily
eyes, but also in their more common supplications,
all which have such a meaning as this,
and are offered to the God conformably to a
symbolic and mystic doctrine of this kind.
Hence it would not be reasonable in any one
to undertake a defence of them.
But the inquiries which follow in the next
place, require a more abundant doctrine, in
order to their elucidation. At the same time,
however, it is necessary to discuss the truth
concerning them with brevity. For you inquire
“what efficacy there is in names that are
not significant.”[124] They are not, however, as
290you think, without signification; but let them
be indeed unknown to us (though some of
them are known to us, the explications of
which we receive from the Gods), yet to the
Gods all of them are significant, though not
according to an effable mode; nor in such a
way as that which is significant and indicative
with men through imaginations; but either
intellectually, conformably to the divine intellect
which is in us; or ineffably, and in a way
more excellent and simple, and conformably to
the intellect which is united to the Gods. It
is requisite, therefore, to take away all conceptions
derived by an abstraction from sensibles,
and all logical evolutions from divine
names;[125] and likewise the connascent physical
291similitudes of language to things which exist
in nature. But the intellectual and divine
292symbolical character of divine similitude must
be admitted to have a subsistence in names.
And, moreover, though it should be unknown
to us, yet this very circumstance is that which
is most venerable in it, for it is too excellent to
be divided into knowledge. But in those
293names which we can, scientifically analyze,[126]
we possess a knowledge of the whole divine
essence, power, and order, comprehended in
the name. And farther still, we preserve in
the soul collectively the mystic and arcane
image of the Gods, and through this we elevate
the soul to the Gods, and when elevated conjoin
it as much as possible with them. But
you ask, “Why, of significant names, we prefer
such as are Barbaric to our own?” Of this,
also, there is a mystic reason. For because
the Gods have shown that the whole dialect of
sacred nations such as those of the Egyptians
and Assyrians, is adapted to sacred concerns;
on this account we ought to think it necessary
that our conference with the Gods should be
in a language allied to them. Because, likewise,
such a mode of speech is the first and
most ancient. And especially because those
who first learned the names of the Gods, having
mingled them with their own proper tongue,
delivered them to us, that we might always
preserve immoveable the sacred law of tradition,
in a language peculiar and adapted to them.
294For if any other thing pertains to the Gods, it
is evident that the eternal and immutable must
be allied to them.
You object, however, “that he who hears words
looks to their signification, so that it is sufficient
the conception remains the same, whatever the
words may be that are used.” But the thing is
not such as you suspect it to be. For if names
subsisted through compact[127] it would be of no
consequence whether some were used instead
of others. But if they are suspended from the
nature of things, those names which are more
adapted to it will also be more dear to the
Gods. From this, therefore, it is evident that
the language of sacred nations is very reasonably
preferred to that of other men. To which
may be added, that names do not entirely preserve
the same meaning when translated into
another language; but there are certain idioms
295in each nation which cannot be signified by
language to another nation. And, in the next
place, though it should be possible to translate
them, yet they no longer preserve the same
power when translated. Barbarous names,
likewise, have much emphasis, great conciseness,
and participate of less ambiguity, variety,
and multitude. Hence, on all these accounts,
they are adapted to more excellent natures.
Take away, therefore, entirely those suspicions
of yours which fall off from the truth, viz. “if
he who is invoked is either an Egyptian or uses
the Egyptian language.” But rather think that
as the Egyptians were the first of men[128] who
296were allotted the participation of the Gods,
the Gods when invoked rejoice in the Egyptian
rites. Again, however, if all these were
the fraudulent devices of enchanters, how is it
possible that things which are in the most
eminent degree united to the Gods, which also
conjoin us with them, and have powers all but
equal to those of superior beings, should be
phantastic devices, though without them no
sacred operation can be effected? But neither
“do these veils [by which arcana are concealed]
originate from our passions, which rumour ascribes
297to a divine nature.” For beginning, not
from our passions, but, on the contrary, from
things allied to the Gods, we make use of
words adapted to them. “Nor do we frame
conceptions of a divine nature, contrary to its
real mode of subsistence.” But conformably to
the nature which it possesses, and to the truth
concerning it, which those obtained who first
established the laws of sacred religion, we
persevere in our conceptions of divinity. For
if any thing else in religious legal institutions is
adapted to the Gods, this must certainly be
immutability. And it is necessary that ancient
prayers,[129] like sacred asyla, should be preserved
invariably the same, neither taking any thing
from them, nor adding any thing to them which
is elsewhere derived. For this is nearly the cause
at present that both names and prayers have
lost their efficacy, because they are continually
changed through the innovation and illegality
of the Greeks. For the Greeks are naturally
studious of novelty, and are carried about
298every where by their volatility; neither possessing
any stability themselves, nor preserving
what they have received from others; but
rapidly relinquishing this, they transform every
thing through an unstable desire of discovering
something new. But the Barbarians are stable
in their manners, and firmly continue to employ
the same words. Hence they are dear to the
Gods, and proffer words which are grateful
to them; but which it is not lawful for any
man by any means to change. And thus much
we have said in answer to you concerning
names, which though they are inexplicable,
and are called Barbaric, yet are adapted to
sacred concerns.
SECTION VIII. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V. — CHAP. VI. — CHAP. VII. — CHAP. VIII.
299
Leaving, therefore, these particulars, you wish
in the next place that I would unfold to you
“What the Egyptians conceive the first cause
to be; whether intellect, or above intellect;
whether alone, or subsisting with some other
or others; whether incorporeal, of corporeal;
and whether it is the same with the Demiurgus,
or is prior to the Demiurgus? Likewise, whether
all things are from one principle, or from many
principles; whether they have a knowledge of
matter, or of primary corporeal qualities; and
whether they admit matter to be unbegotten, or
to be generated?” I, therefore, will in the first
place relate to you the cause why in the books
of the ancient writers of sacred concerns many
and various opinions concerning these things
are circulated, and also why among those that
are still living, and are renowned for their
wisdom, the opinion on this subject is not
simple and one. I say then, that as there are
300many essences, and these differing from each
other, the all-various multitude of the principles
of these, and which have different orders,
were delivered by different ancient priests.
As Seleucus[130] narrates, therefore, Hermes described
the principles that rank as wholes in
two myriads[131] of books; or, as we are informed
by Manetho[132], he perfectly unfolded these
principles in three myriads six thousand five
hundred and twenty five volumes. But different
ancient writers differently explained the
partial principles of essences. It is necessary,
however, by investigation to discover the truth
about all these principles, and concisely to unfold
it to you as much as possible. And, in the
first place, hear concerning that which is the
first subject of your inquiry.
301
Prior to truly existing beings and total principles
[or principles that rank as wholes], there
is one God, prior to [that deity who is generally
believed to be] the first God and king,[133] immoveable,
and abiding in the solitude of his
own unity. For neither is the intelligible connected
with him, nor any thing else; but he is
established as the paradigm of the God who is
the father of himself, is self begotten, is father
alone, and is truly good. For he is something
even greater and prior to this, is the fountain
of all things, and the root of the first intelligible
forms. But from this one deity, the God who
is sufficient to himself unfolds himself, into
light. For this divinity, also, is the principle
and God of Gods, a monad from the one, prior
to essence, and the principle of essence. For
from him entity and essence are derived; and
hence, also, he is denominated the principle of
intelligibles. These, therefore, are the most
ancient principles of all things, which Hermes
302arranges prior to the etherial, empyrean, and
celestial Gods. He likewise delivered to us
the history of the empyrean Gods in one hundred
books; of the etherial in an equal number;
and of the celestial in a thousand books.
According to another order, however, he
arranges the God Emeph[134] prior to, and as the
leader of, the celestial Gods. And he says
that this God is an intellect, itself intellectually
perceiving itself, and converting intellections to
itself. But prior to this, he arranges the impartible
one, which he says is the first paradigm,
and which he denominates Eicton. In
this, also, is contained that which is first intellective,
and the first intelligible, and which is to
be worshiped through silence alone. Besides
these, also, other leaders preside over the fabrication
of visible natures. For the demiurgic
intellect, who is the curator of truth and wisdom,
descending into generation, and leading the
power; of occult reasons into light, is called in
303the Egyptian tongue Amon; but in consequence
of perfecting all things with veracity
and artificially, he is called Ptha. The Greeks,
however, assume Ptha for Vulcan, solely directing
their attention to the artificial peculiarity of
the God. So far, also, as he is effective of
good he is called Osiris; and he has other
appellations through other powers and energies.
With the Egyptians, therefore, there is
another domination of the whole elements in
generation, and of the powers contained in
them; four of these powers being male and
four female, which they attribute to the sun.
And there is, likewise, another government of
the whole of nature about generation, which
they assign to the moon.[135] But dividing the
heavens into two, or four, or twelve, or six-and-thirty
parts, or the doubles of these, they give
to the parts a greater or less number of rulers.
And over all these they place one ruler, who
transcends all the rest. Thus, therefore, the
doctrine of the Egyptians concerning principles,
proceeding from on high as far as to the
last of things, begins from one principle, and
descends to a multitude which is governed by
this one; and every where an indefinite nature
304is under the dominion of a certain definite
measure, and of the supreme unical cause of
all things. But God produced matter by dividing
materiality from essentiality;[136] and this
being vital, the Demiurgus receiving, fabricated
from it the simple and impassive spheres. But
he distributed in an orderly manner the last of
it into generable and corruptible bodies.
These things, therefore, having been accurately
discussed, the solution of the doubts which you
have met with in certain books will be manifest.
For the books which are circulated under
the name of Hermes contain Hermaic opinions,
though they frequently employ the language of
the philosophers: for they were translated from
the Egyptian tongue by men who were not unskilled
305in philosophy. But Chæremon,[137] and
any others who have at all discussed the first
causes of mundane natures, have unfolded the
last rulers of these. And such as have written
concerning the planets, the zodiac, the decans,
horoscopes, and what are called powerful and
leading planets, these have unfolded the partible
distributions of the rulers. The particulars,
also, contained in the Calendars comprehend a
certain very small part of the Hermaic arrangements.
And the causes of such things as pertain
to the phases or occultations of the stars,
or to the increments and decrements of the
moon, are assigned by the Egyptians the last
of all. The Egyptians, likewise, do not say
that all things are physical. For they separate
the life of the soul and the intellectual life from
nature, not only in the universe, but also in us.
And admitting intellect and reason to subsist
by themselves, they say that generated essences
were thus fabricated. They likewise arrange
the Demiurgus as the primary father of things
in generation; and they acknowledge the existence
306of a vital power, prior to the heavens,
and subsisting in the heavens. They also
establish a pure intellect above the world, and
one impartible intellect in the whole world,
and another which is distributed into all the
spheres. And these things they do not survey
by mere reason alone, but through the sacerdotal
theurgy, they announce that they are
able to ascend to more elevated and universal
essences, and to those that are established
above Fate, viz. to God and the Demiurgus;
neither employing matter, nor assuming any
other thing besides, except the observation of a
suitable time.
This deific and anagogic path Hermes, indeed,
narrated, but Bitys, the prophet of King Ammon,[138]
explained it, having found it in the adyta
of Saïs[139] in Egypt, written in hieroglyphics;
307and the same prophet also delivered the name
of God, which pervades through the whole
world.[140] But there are, likewise, many other
coarrangements of the same things; so that
you do not appear to me to act rightly in referring
all things with the Egyptians to physical
causes. For there are, according to them,
many principles and many essences; and also
supermundane powers, which they worship
through sacerdotal sanctimony. To me, therefore
these things appear to afford common
auxiliaries to the solution of all the remaining
308inquiries. But since it is necessary not to
leave any one of them uninvestigated, we shall
add them to these problems, and examine them
on all sides, in order that we may see where
there is any thing futile in your opinions.
You say, therefore, “that according to many of
the Egyptians, that which is in our power depends
on the motion of the stars.” What the
truth, however, is respecting this, it is necessary
to unfold to you from the Hermaic conceptions.
For man, as these writings say, has
two souls. And one, indeed, is derived from
the first intelligible, and participates of the
power of the Demiurgus; but the other is imparted
from the circulation of the celestial bodies,
to which the soul that sees God returns.
These things, therefore, thus subsisting, the
soul that descends to us from the worlds follows
the periods of the worlds; but that which
is intelligibly present from the intelligible,
transcends the genesiurgic motion, and through
this a liberation from fate, and the ascent to
the intelligible Gods, are affected. Such theurgy,
likewise, as leads to an unbegotten nature
is perfected conformably to a life of this kind.
309
Hence that of which you are dubious is not
true, “that all things are bound with the indissoluble
bonds of Necessity,” which we call
Fate. For the soul has a proper principle of
circumduction to the intelligible, and of a separation
from generated natures; and also of a
contact with real being, and that which is divine.
“Nor must we ascribe fate to the Gods,
whom we worship in temples and statues, as the
dissolvers of fate.” For the Gods, indeed, dissolve
fate; but the last natures which proceed
from them, and are complicated with the generation
of the world and with body, give completion
to fate. Hence we very properly worship
the Gods with all possible sanctity, and
the observance of all religious rites, in order
that they may liberate us from the evils impending
from fate, as they alone rule over
necessity through intellectual persuasion. But
neither are all things comprehended[141] in the
nature of fate, but there is another principle of
the soul, which is superior to all nature and
generation, and through which we are capable
of being united to the Gods, of transcending
310the mundane order, and of participating eternal
life, and the energy of the supercelestial Gods.
Through this principle, therefore, we are able
to liberate ourselves from fate. For when the
more excellent parts of us energize, and the
soul is elevated to natures better than itself,[142]
then it is entirely separated from things which
detain it in generation, departs from subordinate
natures, exchanges the present for another
life, and gives itself to another order of
things, entirely abandoning the former order
with which it was connected.
What then, is it not possible for a man to
liberate himself [from fate] through the Gods
that revolve in the heavens, and to consider
the same as the leaders of fate, and yet as
311those that bind our lives with indissoluble
bonds? Perhaps nothing prevents this from
being the case. For if the Gods comprehend
in themselves many essences and powers, there
are also in them other immense differences and
contrarieties. Moreover, this also may be said,
that in each of the Gods, though such as
are visible, there are certain intelligible principles
through which a liberation to souls from
mundane generation is effected. But if some
one leaves only two genera of Gods, viz. the
mundane and supermundane, the liberation to
souls will be effected through the supermundane
Gods. These things, therefore, are more
accurately discussed in our treatise Concerning
the Gods, in which it is shown who are the anagogic
Gods, and according to what kind of
powers they are so; how they liberate from
fate, and through what sacred regressions; and
what the order is of mundane nature, and how
the most perfect intellectual energy rules over
this. So that what you add from Homer, “that
the Gods are flexible,” it is not holy to assert.
For the works of the sacred ceremonies of religion
have long since been defined by pure and
intellectual laws. Subordinate natures, also,
are liberated through a greater order and
power; and when we abandon inferior natures,
we are transferred into a more excellent allotment.
312This, however, is not effected contrary
to any original sacred law, so as to cause the
Gods to be changed, through a sacred operation
being afterwards performed; but from the first
divinity sent souls hither, in order that they
might again return to him. Neither, therefore,
is any mutation produced through a reascent
of this kind, nor do the descents and ascents of
souls oppose each other. For as generation
and this universe are suspended from an intellectual
essence; thus, also, in the orderly distribution
of souls, the liberation from generation
accords with the care employed by them about
generation.
SECTION IX. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V. — CHAP. VI. — CHAP. VII. — CHAP. VIII. — CHAP. IX. — CHAP. X.
313
Let us now, therefore, to the utmost of our
power, endeavour to discuss the manifold doubt
concerning the peculiar dæmon, and which also
is subject to various objections. Since, however,
to speak summarily, the consideration
of the peculiar dæmon is twofold, the one being
theurgic, but the other artificial; and the one
drawing this dæmon down from supernal causes,
but the other from the visible periods in generation;
and the one making no use whatever
of the calculation of nativities, but the other
meddling with methods of this kind; and the
one worshiping this dæmon in a way more
universal and supernatural, but the other partibly
conformable to nature; this being the
case, you appear to me to have absurdly transferred
a more perfect sacred operation to one
that is human, and in this to have exercised
your inquiries.
314
In the next place, here also you appear to me
to have cut off only a certain small part of the
discussion concerning the peculiar dæmon.
For since it is usual with those who artificially
operate about nature to invoke this dæmon in
an orderly manner from the decans, from the
dispensators of influxes, from the signs of the
zodiac, the stars, the sun and moon, from the
greater and lesser bear, from the whole elements,
and from the world, this being the case,
you do not act rightly in assuming one, and
that the smallest part of all these, viz. the lord
of the geniture, and making your inquiries
about this alone. Here, likewise, again from
one of the things proposed to be considered,
you inquire “how the lord of the geniture gives
the peculiar dæmon, and according to what
kind of efflux, or life, or power, it descends to
us from him.” You also speak concerning the
calculation of nativities, and ask “whether
there is any reality in it or not;” and likewise
concerning the invention of the lord of the
geniture, “whether it is impossible to be found,
or possible.” In what respect, however, do
these things pertain to the domination of the
dæmon? For it is evident that our knowledge
315of the manner in which he subsists, contributes
nothing to his essence and the cause of his
existence. For in things which belong to the
empire of nature, such as are generated in the
universe have a proper stability of their own
essence, though we should be ignorant how
they are produced. In this way, therefore, we
reply in common to your doubts. But directing
our attention particularly to the subjects
of your inquiry, we shall endeavour to give you
solutions of them.
You say, then, “that he is happy who having
learned the scheme of his nativity, and knowing
his proper dæmon, is thus liberated from fate.”
To me, however, you appear to assert these
things in a way neither consonant to themselves
nor to truth. For if our proper dæmon is
distributed to us from the scheme of our nativity,
and from thence we are able to discover
him, how can we be liberated from fate, through
a knowledge of the dæmon imparted to us by
fate? But if, as you say, we are truly liberated
from necessity through this dæmon, how is he
allotted to us by fate? Thus, therefore, what
is now said by you opposes what you before
316asserted; and is also discordant with truth.
For the proper dæmon of every one does not
entirely accede from the scheme of the peculiar
nativity; but his origin is more ancient than
this, which we shall hereafter discuss. To
which may be added, that if the descending
dæmon was to be alone surveyed from hence,
he will not be happy who obtains the knowledge
of his genesiurgic dæmon. And who
would [willingly] receive this dæmon as his
leader to a liberation from fate, if he was given
to him for this purpose, that he might accomplish
the distributions of fate? Farther still,
this appears to me to be only a certain and the
last part of the theory pertaining to this dæmon;
and that the whole theory of his essence is
omitted by a method of this kind. But these
things, indeed, though they are falsely asserted,
yet at the same time are not utterly foreign
from the purpose. The doubts, however, adduced
by you in the next place, concerning
“the enumeration of the canons and the genethlialogical
science,” as they are inscrutable, are
not attended with any ambiguity in the present
discussion. For whether these arts are known
or are incomprehensible, yet, at the same time,
the efflux from the stars distributes to us the
dæmon, whether we know it or not. But
divine divination is able to teach us concerning
317the stars, in a way which is most true,
and [when we are in possession of this] we are
not entirely in want of the enumeration of
canons, or of the divining art.
If, however, it be necessary, dismissing these
particulars, to speak what appears to me to be
the truth, you do not rightly infer “that a knowledge
of this mathematical science[143] cannot be
obtained, because there is much dissonance concerning
it, or because Chæremon, or some other,
has written against it.” For if this reason
were admitted, all things will be incomprehensible.
For all sciences have ten thousand
controvertists, and the doubts with which they
are attended are innumerable. As, therefore,
we are accustomed to say in opposition to the
contentious, that contraries in things that are
true are naturally discordant, and that it is not
falsities alone that are hostile to each other;
thus, also, we say respecting this mathematical
science, that it is indeed true; but that those
who wander from the scope of it, being ignorant
of the truth, contradict it. This, however
318happens not in this science alone, but likewise
in all the sciences, which are imparted by the
Gods to men. For time always proceeding
the divine mode of knowledge becomes evanescent,
through being frequently mingled and
contaminated with much of what is mortal.
This divine mode is indeed [in astrology also],
and a certain clear indication of truth, though
it is but small, is at the same time preserved in
it. For it places before our eyes manifest
signs of the mensuration of the divine periods,
when it predicts the eclipses of the sun and
moon, and the concursions[144] of the moon with
the fixed stars, and when the experience of the
sight is seen to accord with the prediction.
Moreover, the observations of the celestial bodies
through the whole of time,[145] both by the Chaldeans
and by us, testify that this science is true.
Indications, also, more known than these might
be adduced, if the present discussion was
precedaneously about these particulars. But
319as they are superfluous, and do not pertain to
the knowledge of the peculiar dæmon, I shall,
as it is fit so to do, omit them, and pass on to
things more appropriate than these.
You say then, in your epistle, “that the discovery
of the lord or lords of the geniture, if
there are more than one in a nativity, can scarcely
be obtained, and by astrologers themselves is confessed
to be unattainable; and yet they say that
the peculiar dæmon is from thence to be known.”
But how can astrologers confess that the knowledge
of the lord of the geniture is not to be
obtained by them, when they deliver clear
methods for the discovery of it, and teach us
rules by which we may discover the doubts;
some, indeed, giving us five,[146] others more and
others less than five rules? Omitting this,
however, let us direct our attention to a thing
of greater consequence, viz. the accidents pertaining
320to both these. For if it is possible to
discover the lord of the geniture, the dæmon
imparted by him will be known; but if this
knowledge is unattainable, we shall be ignorant
of the lord of the geniture according to this
hypothesis, and yet, nevertheless, he will have
an existence, and also the dæmon imparted by
him. What therefore hinders, but that the discovery
of him may be difficult through prediction
from the nativity, and yet through sacred
divination, or theurgy, there may be a great
abundance of scientific knowledge on this subject?
In short, the dæmon is not alone imparted
by the lord of the geniture, but there
are many other principles of it more universal[147]
than this. And farther still, a method of this
kind introduces a certain artificial and human
disquisition concerning the peculiar dæmon.
Hence, in these doubts of yours there is nothing
sane.
321
If, however, it be requisite to unfold to you the
truth concerning the peculiar dæmon, we must
say that he is not distributed to us from one
part of the heavens, or from some one of the
visible elements; but that from the whole
world, the all-various life contained in it, and
the all-various body through which the soul
descends into generation, a certain peculiar
portion is distributed to each of the parts in
us, according to a peculiar prefecture. This
dæmon, therefore, is established in the paradigm
before the soul descends into generation; and
when the soul has received him as its leader,
the dæmon immediately presides over the
soul, gives completion to its lives, and binds it
to body when it descends. He likewise governs
the common animal of the soul, directs its
peculiar life, and imparts to us the principles
of all our thoughts and reasonings. We also
perform such things as he suggests to our intellect,
and he continues to govern us till, through
sacerdotal theurgy, we obtain a God for the inspective
guardian and leader of the soul. For
then the dæmon either yields or delivers his
government to a more excellent nature, or is
322subjected to him, as contributing to his guardianship,
or in some other way is ministrant to
him as to his lord.
From these things, therefore, it is easy to
answer your next question. For the peculiar
dæmon does not rule over one of the parts in
us, but, in short, over all the parts at once, and
extends to every principle within us, in the
same manner as he was distributed to us from
the total orders in the universe. For that
which it appears to you proper to add as an indication
“that dæmons preside over the parts of
our body, so that one is the guardian of health,
another of the form of the body, and another of
the corporeal habits, and that there is one dæmon
who presides in common over all these;” this you
should consider as an argument that there is
one dæmon who is the guardian and governor
of every thing that is in us. You must not,
therefore, distribute one dæmon to the body,
but another to the soul, and another to intellect:
for it is absurd that the animal should
be one, but the dæmon that presides over it
multiform. For every where the natures that
323govern are more simple than the natures that
are governed. And it will be still more absurd
if the many dæmons that rule over the parts
are not connascent, but separated from each
other. But you also make contrariety among
them. For you speak as if “some of them were
good, but others bad.” Evil dæmons, however,
have no where a ruling allotment, nor are they
oppositely divided to such as are good with
equal authority and power.
Afterwards, abandoning these particulars,
you pass on to the opinion of philosophy. But
you subvert the whole hypothesis concerning
the peculiar dæmon. For if [as you say] “this
dæmon is a part of the soul,” such, for instance,
as the intellectual part, “and he is happy who
is in possession of a wise intellect,” there will no
longer be any other more excellent or dæmoniacal
order, presiding over, as transcending the
human soul. But certain parts of the soul, or
a certain divided power, will have dominion
over many of the forms of life that are in us;
and will rule over these, not connascently, but
as naturally exempt, and as transcending the
whole of our composition.
324
After this, therefore, you also mention another
disquisition concerning the peculiar dæmon,
which represents “some as worshiping two, but
others three, dæmons of this kind.” The whole
of this, however, is erroneous. For it is a
false mode of proceeding to divide the causes
that preside over us, and not refer them to
one; since this wanders from the union which
has dominion over all things. The opinion,
likewise, which distributes this dæmon into
body, and the government of body, draws down
his domination to a certain most minute part.
So that what necessity is there for those who
embrace this opinion to direct their attention
to sacred operations, the first principle of them
being futile? There is, therefore, of each of
us one peculiar presiding dæmon; but it is not
proper to think that this dæmon is common to
all men; nor again, that he is common, but is
peculiarly present with each individual. For
division, according to species and difference of
matter, do not receive the communion and
sameness of things essentially incorporeal.
“Why then [you say] is the peculiar dæmon invoked
by a common mode by all men?” Because
the invocation of him is effected through one
325God, who is the lord of dæmons; who from
the first defined to every one his peculiar
dæmon; and who, in sacred operations, unfolds
to every one his proper dæmon, according to
his own proper will. For always in the theurgic
order secondary are invoked through
primary natures. Among dæmons, therefore,
one common leader of the cosmocrators about
generation sends to each of us his peculiar
dæmon. Hence, when the peculiar dæmon is
present with each of us, he then unfolds the
worship which is proper to be paid to him and
his name, and likewise delivers the proper
mode of invoking him.
And this order is adapted to dæmons; one
part of it being allied to those that are invoked;
another being derived from more ancient causes;
and the third part effecting a common completion
from both the others. Do not, therefore,
assimilate divine invocations to such as
are human, nor those that are ineffable to those
that are effable; nor compare those that are
prior to every boundary, and every indefinite
mode, to those that are defined by men, or to
indefinite actions. For our concerns have nothing
326in common with theirs, whose whole
genus and whole order transcend and govern
the whole of our essence and nature. But here,
especially, the greatest errors happen to men,
when from human imbecility they infer any
thing concerning the domination of dæmons,
and from things which are small, of no worth,
and distributed into parts, form a conjecture of
great, excellent, and perfect natures. And thus
much in answer to you concerning the peculiar
dæmon, in addition to what has been before
said.
SECTION X. — CHAP. I. — CHAP. II. — CHAP. III. — CHAP. IV. — CHAP. V. — CHAP. VI. — CHAP. VII. — CHAP. VIII.
327
It now remains, in the last place, that we
should speak concerning felicity, about which
you make various inquiries, first of all proposing
objections, afterwards doubting, and then
interrogating. Adducing, therefore, all that is
said by you, we shall answer it appropriately.
You inquire, then, “whether there is not some
other latent way to felicity.” But how, in that
path which recedes from the Gods, is it probable
there can be an ascent to felicity? For if
the essence and perfection of all good are comprehended
in the Gods, and the first and ancient
power of them is with us priests, and if
by those who similarly adhere to more excellent
natures, and genuinely obtain a union
with them, the beginning and end of all good
is earnestly pursued; if this be the case, here
the contemplation of truth, and the possession
328of intellectual science are to be found.[148] And
a knowledge of the Gods is accompanied with
a conversion to, and the knowledge of, ourselves.
Hence you in vain doubt, “that it is not proper
to look to human opinions.” For what leisure
can he have whose intellect is directed to the
Gods to look downward to the praises of men?
Nor do you rightly doubt in what follows, viz.
“that the soul devises great things from casual
circumstances.” For what principle of fictions
can there be in truly existing beings? Is it not
the phantastic power in us which is the maker
of images? But the phantasy is never excited
when the intellectual life energizes perfectly.
And is not truth essentially coexistent with
the Gods? Is it not, likewise, concordantly
established in intelligibles? It is in vain, therefore,
that things of this kind are disseminated
by you and others. But neither do those
329things for which certain futile and arrogant
men calumniate the worshipers of the Gods,
the like to which have been asserted by you,
at all pertain to true theology and theurgy.
And if certain things of this kind germinate in
the sciences of divine concerns, as in other arts
evil arts blossom forth; these are doubtless
more contrary to such sciences than to any
thing else. For evil is more hostile to good
than to that which is not good.
I wish, in the next place, to reply to such
assertions as calumniate divine prediction. For
you compare with it “certain other methods
which are conversant with the prediction of
future events.” To me, however, it does not
appear to be any thing honourable if a certain
natural aptitude is ingenerated in us to the indication
of the future, just as in animals there
is a foreknowledge of earthquakes, or winds,
or tempests. For an innate presage of this
kind is the consequence of acuteness of sensation,
or sympathy, or some other conjoint
motion of the physical powers, and is not
attended with any thing venerable and supernatural.
Nor if some one, by human reasoning,
330or artificial observation, conjectures from signs
those things of which the signs are indicative
(as physicians foreknow that a fever will take
place from the systole and torpor of the pulse),
neither does he appear to me to possess any
thing honourable and good. For he conjectures
after a human manner, and concludes
from our reasoning power about things which
are acknowledged to be effected naturally, and
forms a judgment not very remote from the
corporeal-formed order. Hence, if there is in
us a certain natural presentiment of the future,
in the same manner as in all other animals, this
power is clearly seen to energize; this presentiment
does not in reality possess any thing
which is most blessed. For what is there
among the things which are implanted in us
by nature in the realms of generation that is a
genuine, perfect, and eternal good?
Divine divination, therefore, which is conjoined
with the Gods, alone truly imparts to
us a divine life; since it participates of [divine]
foreknowledge, and divine intellections, and
renders us in reality divine. It likewise causes
us to be genuine participants of the good, because
331the most blessed intellectual perception
of the Gods is filled with all good. Hence
those who possess this divination “do not,” as
you conjecture, “foresee future events, and are
nevertheless unhappy.” For all divine foreknowledge
is boniform. Nor “do they foresee, indeed,
what is future, but do not know how to
use this knowledge properly.” For, together
with the foreknowledge, they receive the beautiful
itself, and true and appropriate order: and
utility is also present with it. For the Gods,
in conjunction with it, deliver a transcendent
power of defence against the inconveniences
which accede from nature. And when it is
necessary to exercise virtue, and the ignorance
of future events contributes to this, then the
Gods conceal what will be for the sake of rendering
the soul better. But when the ignorance
of what is future does not at all contribute
to this, and foreknowledge is advantageous
to souls, for the sake of their salvation
and reascent [to divinity], then the Gods insert
the foreknowledge which pertains to divination
in the penetralia of the essences of souls.
332
But why am I prolix about these particulars?
For I have abundantly shown, in what has been
before said, the transcendency of divine above
human divination. It is better, therefore, in
compliance with your request, “to point out
to you the way to felicity, and show you in what
the essence of it is placed.” For from this the
truth will be discovered, and at the same time
all the doubts may be easily dissolved. I say,
therefore, that the more divine[149] intelligible
man, who was formerly united to the Gods by
the vision of them, afterwards entered into another
soul, which is coadapted to the human
form, and through this became fettered with the
bonds of necessity and fate. Hence it is requisite
to consider how he may be liberated from
these bonds. There is, therefore, no other dissolution
of them than the knowledge of the Gods. For
to know scientifically the good is the idea of
felicity; just as the oblivion of good, and deception
about evil, happen to be the idea of
evil. The former, therefore, is present with
divinity; but the latter, which is an inferior
destiny, is inseparable from the mortal nature.
333And the former, indeed, measures the essences
of intelligibles[150] by sacred ways; but the latter,
abandoning principles, gives itself up to the
measurement of the idea of body. The former
is a knowledge of the father; but the latter is
a departure from him, and an oblivion of the
God who is a superessential father, and sufficient
to himself. The former, likewise, preserves
the true life of the soul, and leads it
back to its father; but the latter draws down
the generation-ruling[151] man, as far as to that
which is never permanent, but is always flowing.
You must understand, therefore, that
this is the first path to felicity, affording to
souls an intellectual plenitude of divine union.
But the sacerdotal and theurgic gift of felicity
is called, indeed, the gate to the Demiurgus
of wholes, or the seat, or palace, of the good.
In the first place, likewise, it possesses a power
of purifying the soul, much more perfect than
the power which purifies the body; afterwards
it causes a coaptation of the reasoning
power to the participation and vision of the
334good, and a liberation from every thing of a
contrary nature; and, in the last place, produces
a union with the Gods, who are the
givers of every good.
Moreover, after it has conjoined the soul to
the several parts of the universe, and to the
total divine powers which pass through it;
then it leads the soul to, and deposits it in,
the whole Demiurgus, and causes it to be independent
of all matter, and to be counited
with the eternal reason alone. But my meaning
is, that it peculiarly connects the soul with
the self begotten and self-moved God, and with
the all-sustaining, intellectual, and all-adorning
powers of the God, and likewise with that
power of him which elevates to truth, and with
his self-perfect, effective, and other demiurgic
powers; so that the theurgic soul becomes perfectly
established in the energies and demiurgic
intellections of these powers. Then, also, it
inserts the soul in the whole demiurgic God.
And this is the end with the Egyptians of the
sacerdotal elevation of the soul to divinity.
335
With respect to the good, likewise, they conceive
that one kind is divine, and this is the
God who is prior to the intelligible; but that
the other is human, and is a union with the
former. And these two kinds of good Bitys
has unfolded from the Hermaic books. This
part, therefore, is not, as you suspect, omitted
by the Egyptians, but is divinely delivered by
them. Nor do “theurgists disturb the divine
intellect about trifling concerns;” but they consult
it about things which pertain to the purification,
liberation, and salvation of the soul.
Neither do they studiously employ themselves
in things which are indeed difficult, yet useless
to mankind; but, on the contrary, they direct
their attention to things which are of all others
most beneficial to the soul. Nor, in the last
place, are “they deceived by a certain fraudulent
dæmon,” who, having vanquished a fallacious
and dæmoniacal nature, ascend to an intelligible
and divine essence.
336
And thus we have answered, to the utmost of
our ability, your inquiries concerning divination
and theurgy. It remains, therefore, at the end
of this discussion, that I should beseech the
Gods to afford me an immutable guard of true
conceptions, to insert in me truth eternally, and
to supply me abundantly with the participation
of more perfect conceptions of the Gods, in
which the most blessed end of our good is
posited, and the confirmation of our concordant
friendship with each other.
ADDITIONAL NOTES.
337
Page 9. Anebo. Porphyry in his Life of Plotinus, and
also in the second book of his Treatise on Abstinence from
Animals, informs us that he was familiar with a certain
Egyptian priest, who, as Gale conjectures, is probably the
priest to whom Porphyry now writes. The diction, indeed,
as Gale observes, denotes that the person to whom this
Epistle is addressed was a very great prophet, who, nevertheless,
is afterwards said to be a priest. This, however, is
not any thing novel or incongruous. For by Apuleius in
Metamorph. lib. xi. the Egyptian Zaclas is said to be propheta
primarius et sacerdos, a chief prophet and priest.
Page 9. Hermes the God who presides over language.
The Egyptians celebrated two Hermes, the former of which
is here signified by Iamblichus. This deity is the source of
invention, and hence he is said to be the son of Maia; because
search, which is implied by Maia, leads invention into
light. He bestows too mathesis on souls, by unfolding the
will of his father Jupiter; and this he accomplishes as the
angel or messenger of Jupiter. Proclus in MS. Comment.
in Alcibiad. observes, “that this deity is the inspective
guardian of gymnastic exercises; and hence hermæ, or
carved statues of Mercury, were placed in the Palæstræ; of
music, and hence he is honoured as the lyristλυραιος among
the celestial constellations; and of disciplines, because the
invention of geometry, reasoning, and discourse is referred
to this God. He presides, therefore, over every species of
erudition, leading us to an intelligible essence from this
mortal abode, governing the different herds of souls, and
dispersing the sleep and oblivion with which they are
oppressed. He is likewise the supplier of recollection, the
end of which is a genuine intellectual apprehension of
divine natures.”
P. 10. The ancient pillars of Hermes. These pillars,
according to Amm. Marcellinus, lib. xxii. were concealed
prior to the deluge in certain caverns, which were called
338συριγγες, syringes, not far from the Egyptian Thebes. The
second Hermes interpreted these pillars, and his interpretation
formed many volumes, as Iamblichus informs us in
Section viii. of this work. These pillars are mentioned by
Laertius in his Life of Democritus; by Dio Chrysostom in
Orat. 49; by Achilles Tatius on Aratus; and by others of
the ancients.
P. 15. There is, therefore, the good itself which is beyond
essence, and there is that good which subsists according to
essence. There are three orders of good; viz. that which is
imparticipable and superessential; that which is imparticipable
and essential; and that which is essential and participable.
Of these, the last is such as our nature contains; the
good which ranks among forms is essential; and that which
is beyond essence is superessential. Or we say that the
good which subsists in us may be considered as a habit, in
consequence of subsisting in a subject; the next to this
ranks as essence, and a part of essence, I mean the good
which ranks among forms; and the good which is beyond
essence, is neither a habit, nor a part. With respect to the
good, also, which subsists according to essence, it must be
observed, that since forms are twofold, some alone distinguishing
the essences of the things fashioned by form, but
others their perfections, the genus of essence, same and
different, and the form of animal, horse, and man, and every
thing of this kind, give distinction to essence and subjects;
but the form of the good, the beautiful, and the just, and in
like manner the form of virtue, of health, strength, and
every thing of a similar nature, are perfective of the beings
to which they belong: and of some, essence is the leader,
but of others the good. For, as Plato says, every thing
except the one, must necessarily participate of essence; and
whatever preserves, gives perfection to, or defends any being,
must be good. Hence, since these two are leaders, the one
of forms which give subsistence to things, and the other of
such as are the sources of their perfection; it is necessary
that one of these should be subordinate to the other; I mean
that the good which is allotted a coordination among forms
that are the sources of perfection, should be subordinate to
essence, which ranks among causes, whence subsistence
originates, if the good is being, and a certain being. For it
is either the same with, or different from, essence, which the
Elean guest or stranger in the Sophista of Plato shows to be
the genus of being. And if the good is the same with
339essence, an absurdity must ensue: for being and well-being
are not the same. But if the good is something different
from essence, it must necessarily participate of essence, in
consequence of essence being the genus of all forms. But if
genera are more ancient than forms, the good which ranks
among forms, and is posterior to their genus, will not be the
superessential good which reigns over intelligibles; but this
must be asserted of that good, under which this and every
form is arranged, which possesses being, and which is the
leader of the other genera of being.
P. 15. But the other medium, which is suspended from the
Gods, though it is far inferior to them, is that of dæmons.
In addition to what is said in this work by Iamblichus concerning
dæmons, the following information about them from
Olympiodorus, in his MS. Scholia on the Phædo of Plato,
is well worthy the attention of the philosophical reader:
“Since there are in the universe things which subsist
differently at different times, and since there are also natures
which are conjoined with the superessential unities, it is
necessary that there should be a certain middle genus, which
is neither immediately suspended from deity, nor subsists
differently at different times, according to better and worse,
but which is always perfect, and does not depart from its
proper virtue; and is immutable indeed, but is not conjoined
with the superessential [which is the characteristic of deity].
The whole of this genus is dæmoniacal. There are, also,
different genera of dæmons: for they are placed under the
mundane Gods. The highest of these subsists according to
the one of the Gods, and is called an unific and divine genus
of dæmons. The next subsists according to the intellect
which is suspended from deity, and is called intellectual.
The third subsists according to soul, and is called rational.
The fourth, according to nature, and is denominated physical.
The fifth according to body, which is called corporeal-formed.
And the sixth according to matter, and this is
denominated material.” Olympiodorus adds, “or after
another manner it may be said, that some of these are celestial,
others etherial, others aerial, others aquatic, others
terrestrial, and others subterranean. With respect to this
division also, it is evident that it is derived from the parts of
the universe. But irrational dæmons originate from the
aerial governors, whence, also, the Chaldean Oracle says,
Ηεριων ελατηρα κυνων χθονιων τε και υγρων.
340i. e. being the charioteer of the aerial, terrestrial, and aquatic
dogs.” Our guardian dæmons, however, belong to that order
of dæmons which is arranged under the Gods that preside
over the ascent and descent of souls. For a more copious
account of dæmons see the notes on the First Alcibiades in
vol. i. of my translation of Plato.
P. 22. One and the best solution will be obtained by surveying
the mode of divine allotment.
The manner in which divine allotments subsist is admirably
unfolded by Proclus in Tim. p. 43, as follows: “Since,
according to a division of the universe into two parts, we
have distributed allotments into the celestial and sublunary,
there can be no doubt what the former are, and whether
they possess an invariable sameness of subsistence. But the
sublunary allotments are deservedly a subject of admiration,
whether they are said to be perpetual or not. For since
all things in generation are continually changing and flowing,
how can the allotments of the providential rulers of them be
said to be perpetual? For things in generation are not
perpetual. But if their allotments are not perpetual, how is
it possible to suppose that divine government can subsist
differently at different times? For an allotment is neither a
certain separate energy of the Gods, so that sublunary
natures changing, we might say that it is exempt, and
remains immutable, nor is it that which is governed alone,
so that no absurdity would follow from admitting that an
allotment is in a flowing condition, and is conversant with
all-various mutations; but it is a providential inspection,
and unrestrained government of divinity over sublunary concerns.
Such being the doubts with which this subject is
attended, the following appears to be a solution of the difficulty.
“We must say, then, that it is not proper to consider all
the natures that are in generation, and generation itself, as
alone consisting of things mutable and flowing, but that
there is also something immutable in these, and which is
naturally adapted to remain perpetually the same. For the
interval which receives and comprehends in itself all the
parts of the world, and which has an arrangement through
all bodies, is immoveable, lest, being moved, it should require
another place, and thus should proceed from one receptacle
to another, ad infinitum. The etherial vehicles, also, of
divine souls, with which they are circularly invested, and
which imitate the lives in the heavens, have a perpetual
341essence, and are eternally suspended from these divine
souls themselves, being full of prolific powers, and performing
a circular motion, according to a certain secondary
revolution of the celestial orbs. And, in the third place,
the wholeness (ολοτης) of the elements has a permanent subsistence,
though the parts are all-variously corrupted. For
it is necessary that every form in the universe should be
never failing, in order that the universe may be perfect, and
that, being generated from an immoveable cause, it may be
immoveable in its essence. But every wholeness is a form,
or rather it is that which it is said to be through the participation
of one all perfect form.
“And here we may see the orderly progression of the
nature of bodies. For the interval of the universe is immoveable
according to every kind of motion. But the
vehicles of divine souls alone receive a mutation according to
place; for such a motion as this is most remote from essential
mutation. And the wholeness of the elements admits
in its parts the other motions of bodies, but the whole
remains perfectly immutable. The celestial allotments also,
which proximately divide the interval of the universe, codistribute
likewise the heavens themselves. But those in the
sublunary region are primarily, indeed, allotted the parts
which are in the interval of the universe, but afterwards
they make a distribution according to the definite vehicles
of souls. And, in the third place, they remain perpetually
the same, according to the total parts of generation. The
allotments of the Gods, therefore, do not change, nor do
they subsist differently at different times; for they have not
their subsistence proximately in that which may be changed.
“How, therefore, do the illuminations of the Gods accede
to these? How are the dissolutions of sacred rites effected?
And how is the same place at different times under the influence
of different spirits? May it not be said, that since
the Gods have perpetual allotments, and divide the earth
according to divine numbers, similarly to the sections of the
heavens, the parts of the earth also are illuminated, so far
as they participate of aptitude. But the circulation of the
heavenly bodies, through the figures which they possess,
produce this aptitude; divine illumination at the same time
imparting a power more excellent than the nature which is
present with these parts of the earth. This aptitude is also
effected by nature herself as a whole, inserting divine impressions
in each of the illuminated parts, through which
they spontaneously participate of the Gods. For as these
342parts depend on the Gods, nature inserts in such of them as
are different, different images of the divinities. Times too
cooperate in producing this aptitude, according to which
other things, also, are governed; the proper temperature of
the air likewise; and, in short, every thing by which we are
surrounded contributes to the increase and diminution of
this aptitude. When, therefore, conformably to a concurrence
of these many causes, an aptitude to the participation
of the Gods is ingenerated in some one of the natures which
are disposed to be changed, then a certain divinity is unfolded
into light, which, prior to this, was concealed through
the inaptitude of the recipients; possessing, indeed, his
appropriate allotment eternally, and always extending the
participation of himself, similarly to illuminations from the
sun, but not being always participated by sublunary natures,
in consequence of their inaptitude to such participation.
For as with respect to partial souls such as ours, which at
different times embrace different lives, some of them, indeed,
choose lives accommodated to their appropriate Gods, but
others foreign lives, through oblivion of the divinities to
whom they belong; thus, also, with respect to sacred places,
some are adapted to the power which there receives its
allotment, but others are suspended from a different order.
And on this account, as the Athenian guest in Plato says,
some places are more fortunate, but others more unfortunate.
“The divine Iamblichus, however, doubts how the Gods
are said to be allotted certain places according to definite
times, as, by Plato in the Timæus, Minerva is said to have
been first allotted the guardianship of Athens, and afterwards
of Saïs. For if their allotment commenced from a
certain time, it will also at a certain time cease. For every
thing which is measured by time is of this kind. And
farther still, was the place which at a certain time they are
allotted, without a presiding deity prior to this allotment, or
was it under the government of other Gods? For if it was
without a presiding deity, how is it to be admitted that a
certain part of the universe was once entirely destitute of
divinity? How can any place remain without the guardianship
of superior beings? And if any place is sufficient to
the preservation of itself, how does it afterwards become the
allotment of some one of the Gods? But if it should be
said, that it is afterwards under the government of another
God, of whom it becomes the allotment, this also is absurd.
For the second God does not divulse the government and allotment
343of the former, nor do the Gods alternately occupy the
places of each other, nor dæmons change their allotments.
Such being the doubts on this subject, he solves them by
saying, that the allotments of the Gods remain perpetually
unchanged, but that the participants of them at one time, indeed,
enjoy the beneficent influence of the presiding powers,
but at another are deprived of it. He adds, that these are
the mutations measured by time, which sacred institutes frequently
call the birthday of the Gods.
P. 23. Which also the art of divine works perceiving, &c.
This art of divine works is called theurgy, in which Pythagoras
was initiated among the Syrians, as we are informed
by Iamblichus in his Life of that philosopher. (See p. 9 of
my translation of that work.) Proclus also was skilled in
this art, as may be seen in the Life of him by Marinus.
Psellus, in his MS. treatise on Dæmons, says, as we have
before observed, “that magic formed the last part of the
sacerdotal science”; in which place by magic he doubtless
means that kind of it which is denominated theurgy. And
that theurgy was employed by the ancients in their mysteries,
I have fully proved in my treatise on the Eleusinian
and Bacchic Mysteries.[152] This theurgy, too, is doubtless the
same as the magic of Zoroaster, which Plato in the First
Alcibiades says, consisted in the worship of the Gods; on
which passage the following account of theurgy by Proclus
was, I have no doubt, originally part of a commentary.
For the MS. Commentary of Proclus, which is extant on
this dialogue, does not extend to more than a third part of
it; and this Dissertation on Theurgy, which is only extant
in Latin, was published by Ficinus the translator, immediately
after his Excerpta, from this Commentary. So that
it seems highly probable that the manuscript from which
Ficinus translated his Excerpta, was much more perfect
than that which has been preserved to us, in consequence of
containing this account of the theurgy of the ancients.
“In the same manner as lovers gradually advance from
that beauty which is apparent in sensible forms, to that
which is divine; so the ancient priests, when they considered
that there is a certain alliance and sympathy in
natural things to each other, and of things manifest to occult
powers; and discovered that all things subsist in all, they
344fabricated a sacred science from this mutual sympathy and
similarity. Thus they recognised things supreme in such as
are subordinate, and the subordinate in the supreme: in the
celestial regions, terrene properties subsisting in a causal
and celestial manner; and in earth celestial properties, but
according to a terrene condition. For how shall we account
for those plants called heliotropes, that is, attendants on the
sun, moving in correspondence with the revolution of its
orb, but selenitropes, or attendants on the moon, turning in
exact conformity to her motion? It is because all things
pray, and hymn the leaders of their respective orders; but
some intellectually, and others rationally; some in a natural,
and others after a sensible, manner. Hence the sunflower,
as far as it is able, moves in a circular dance towards the
sun; so that if any one could hear the pulsation made by its
circuit in the air, he would perceive something composed by
a sound of this kind, in honour of its king, such as a plant is
capable of framing. Hence, too, we may behold the sun
and moon in the earth, but according to a terrene quality;
but in the celestial regions, all plants, and stones, and
animals, possessing an intellectual life according to a celestial
nature. Now the ancients, having contemplated this
mutual sympathy of things, applied for occult purposes,
both celestial and terrene natures, by means of which,
through a certain similitude, they deduced divine virtues
into this inferior abode. For, indeed, similitude itself is a
sufficient cause of binding things together in union and consent.
Thus, if a piece of paper is heated, and afterwards
placed near a lamp, though it does not touch the fire, the
paper will be suddenly inflamed, and the flame will descend
from the superior to the inferior parts. This heated paper
we may compare to a certain relation of inferiors to superiors;
and its approximation to the lamp, to the opportune
use of things according to time, place, and matter. But the
procession of fire into the paper, aptly represents the presence
of divine light to that nature which is capable of its
reception. Lastly, the inflammation of the paper may be
compared to the deification of mortals, and to the illumination
of material natures, which are afterwards carried upwards,
like the enkindled paper, from a certain participation
of divine seed.
“Again, the lotus, before the rising of the sun, folds its
leaves into itself, but gradually expands them on its rising:
unfolding them in proportion to the sun’s ascent to the
zenith; but as gradually contracting them as that luminary
345descends to the west. Hence this plant, by the expansion
and contraction of its leaves, appears no less to honour the
sun, than men by the gesture of their eyelids, and the
motion of their lips. But this imitation and certain participation
of supernal light is not only visible in plants, which
possess nothing more than a vestige of life, but likewise in
particular stones. Thus the sun-stone, by its golden rays,
imitates those of the sun; but the stone called the eye of
heaven, or of the sun, has a figure similar to the pupil of an
eye, and a ray shines from the middle of the pupil. Thus,
too, the lunar stone, which has a figure similar to the moon
when horned, by a certain change of itself, follows the lunar
motion. Lastly, the stone called helioselenus, i. e. of the
sun and moon, imitates, after a manner, the congress of
those luminaries, which it images by its colour. So that all
things are full of divine natures; terrestrial natures receiving
the plenitude of such as are celestial, but celestial of supercelestial
essences;[153] while every order of things proceeds
gradually, in a beautiful descent, from the highest to the
lowest. For whatever particulars are collected into one
above the order of things, are afterwards dilated in descending,
various souls being distributed under their various
ruling divinities.
“In the next place, there are many solar animals, such
as lions and cocks, which participate, according to their
nature, of a certain solar divinity; whence it is wonderful
how much inferiors yield to superiors in the same order,
though they do not yield in magnitude and power. Hence
it is said, that a cock is very much feared, and, as it were,
reverenced, by a lion; the reason of which we cannot assign
from matter or sense, but from the contemplation alone of a
supernal order. For thus we shall find that the presence of
the solar virtue accords more with a cock than with a lion.
This will be evident from considering that the cock, as it
were, with certain hymns, applauds and calls to the rising
sun, when he bends his course to us from the antipodes; and
that solar angels sometimes appear in forms of this kind,
who, though they are without shape, yet present themselves
to us, who are connected with shape, in some sensible form.
Sometimes, too, there are dæmons with a leonine front, who
when a cock is placed before them, unless they are of a
solar order, suddenly disappear; and this because those
natures which have an inferior rank in the same order
346always reverence their superiors; just as many, on beholding
the images of divine men, are accustomed, from the very
view, to be fearful of perpetrating any thing base.
“In fine, some things turn round correspondent to the
revolutions of the sun, as the plants which we have mentioned,
and others after a manner imitate the solar rays, as
the palm and the date; some the fiery nature of the sun, as
the laurel; and others a different property. For, indeed, we
may perceive that the properties which are collected in the
sun, are every where distributed to subsequent natures constituted
in a solar order, that is, to angels, dæmons, souls,
animals, plants, and stones. Hence the authors of the
ancient priesthood discovered from things apparent the
worship of superior powers, while they mingled some things
and purified others. They mingled many things indeed
together, because they saw that some simple substances
possessed a divine property (though not taken singly) sufficient
to call down that particular power, of which they were
participants. Hence, by the mingling of many things together,
they attracted upon us a supernal influx; and by the
composition of one thing from many, they produced an
assimilation to that one which is above many; and composed
statues from the mixture of various substances conspiring in
sympathy and consent. Besides this, they collected composite
odours, by a divine art, into one, comprehending a multitude
of powers, and symbolizing with the unity of a divine
essence; considering that division debilitates each of these,
but that mingling them together restores them to the idea of
their exemplar.
“But sometimes one herb, or one stone, is sufficient to a
divine operation. Thus a thistle is sufficient to procure the
sudden appearance of some superior power; but a laurel,
raccinum (or a thorny kind of sprig), the land and sea
onion, the coral, the diamond, and the jasper, operate as a
safeguard. The heart of a mole is subservient to divination,
but sulphur and marine water to purification. Hence the
ancient priests, by the mutual relation and sympathy of
things to each other, collected their virtues into one, but
expelled them by repugnancy and antipathy; purifying
when it was requisite with sulphur and bitumen, and sprinkling
with marine water. For sulphur purifies, from the
sharpness of its odour; but marine water on account of its
fiery portion. Besides this, in the worship of the Gods,
they offered animals, and other substances congruous to
their nature; and received, in the first place, the powers of
347dæmons, as proximate to natural substances and operations;
and by these natural substances they convoked into their presence
those powers to which they approached. Afterwards
they proceeded from dæmons to the powers and energies of
the Gods; partly, indeed, from dæmoniacal instruction, but
partly by their own industry, interpreting appropriate symbols,
and ascending to a proper intelligence of the Gods. And
lastly, laying aside natural substances and their operations,
they received themselves into the communion and fellowship
of the Gods.”
The Emperor Julian alludes to this theurgical art, in the
following extract from his Arguments against the Christians,
preserved by Cyril. Το γαρ εκ θεων εις ανθρωπους αφικνουμενον
πνευμα, σπανιακις μεν και εν ολιγοις γινεται, και
ουτε παντα ανδρα τουτου μετασχειν ρᾳδιον, ουτε εν παντι
καιρῳ. ταυτῃ το και το παρ’ Εβραιοις επελιπεν, ουκουν ουδε
παρ’ Αιγυπτιοις εις τουτο σωζεται. Φαινεται δε και τα αυτοφυη
χρηστηρια ταις των χρονων εικοντα περιοδοις. ὃ δε φιλανθρωπος
ημων δεσποτης και πατηρ Ζευς εννοησας, ως αν μη
πανταπασι της προς τους θεους αποστερηθωμεν κοινωνιας δεδωκεν
ημιν δια των ιερων τεχνων επισκεψιν, υφ’ ης προς τας
χρειας εξομεν την αποχρωσαν βοηθειαν.i. e. “For the inspiration
which arrives to men from the Gods is rare, and
exists but in a few. Nor is it easy for every man to partake
of this, nor at every time. This has ceased among the
Hebrews, nor is it preserved to the present time among the
Egyptians. Spontaneous oracles, also, are seen to yield to
temporal periods. This, however, our philanthropic lord
and father Jupiter understanding, that we might not be entirely
deprived of communion with the Gods, has given us
observation through sacred arts, by which we have at hand
sufficient assistance.” For the cause why, at stated times,
sacred arts, oracles, and inspiration fail, see the additional
notes to my translation of Iamblichus’s Life of Pythagoras.
P. 24. The participant of the rational soul becomes the
cause of suffering to the composite. See my translation of
Plotinus on the Impassivity of Incorporeal Natures, in
which this is beautifully and profoundly demonstrated.
Proclus, also, in Tim. lib. v. p. 340, admirably observes, that
the motion of the nutritive power, and the percussions of
sense, are the causes of the perturbation of the soul; but
that we must not fancy that the soul suffers any thing through
these. “For as if,” says he, “some one standing on the
margin of a river should behold the image and form of himself
348in the floating stream, he indeed will preserve his face
unchanged; but the stream, being all-variously moved, will
change the image, so that at different times it will appear to
him different, oblique and erect, and perhaps divulsed and
continuous. Let us suppose too, that such a one, through
being unaccustomed to the spectacle, should think that it
was himself that suffered this distortion, in consequence of
surveying his shadow in the water, and thus thinking, should
be afflicted and disturbed, astonished and impeded. After
the same manner, the soul beholding the image of herself
in body, borne along in the river of generation, and variously
disposed at different times, through inward passions and
external impulses, is indeed herself impassive, but thinks
that she suffers; and being ignorant of, and mistaking her
image for, herself, is disturbed, astonished, and perplexed.”
P. 35. Since, however, the order of all the Gods is profoundly
united.——For the very existence in them, whatever
it may be, is the one of their nature.
The Gods are self-perfect superessential unities, so far as
they are Gods. For the principal subsistence of every
thing is according to the summit of its essence, and this in
the Gods is the one, through which they are profoundly
united to each other and to the one itself, or the ineffable
principle of things, from which they are ineffably unfolded
into light. Concerning this union of them with each other,
Proclus admirably observes as follows, in his MS. Commentary
on the Parmenides of Plato. “All these unities
are in, and are profoundly united to, each other, and their
union is far greater than the communion and sameness which
subsist in beings. For in the latter there is indeed mutual
mixture of forms, similitude, and friendship, and a participation
of each other; but the union of the Gods, as being a
union of unities, is much more uniform, ineffable, and
transcendent: for here all are in all, which does not take
place in forms or ideas;[154] and their unmingled purity, and
the characteristic of each, in a manner far surpassing the
diversity in ideas, preserves their natures unconfused, and
distinguishes their peculiar powers. Hence, some of them
are more universal, and others more particular; some of
them are characterised by permanency, others by progression,
and others by conversion, or regression. Some, again,
are generative, others anagogic, or of an elevating nature,
349and others demiurgic; and universally, there are different
characteristics of different Gods, viz. the connective, perfective,
demiurgic, assimilative, and such others as are
celebrated posterior to these; so that all are in all, and yet
each is at the same time separate and distinct.
“Indeed we obtain this knowledge of their union and
characteristics from the natures by which they are participated.
For, with respect to the visible Gods, we say that
there is one soul of the sun, and another of the earth,
directing our attention to the visible bodies of these divinities,
which possess much variety in their essence, powers,
and dignity among wholes. As, therefore, we apprehend
the difference of incorporeal essences from sensible inspection,
in like manner from the variety of incorporeal essences,
we are enabled to know something of the unmingled distinction
of the first and superessential unities, and of the
characteristics of each. For each unity has a multitude
suspended from its nature, which is either intelligible alone;
or intelligible, and at the same time intellectual; or intellectual
alone; and this last is either participated, or not participated;
and this again, is either supermundane, or mundane.
And thus far does the progression of the unities
extend.” Shortly after he adds, “As trees by their extremities
are rooted in the earth, and through this are
earthly in every part, in the same manner divine natures are
rooted by their summits in the one, and each is a unity and
one, through its unconfused union with the one itself.” See
more on this most important of all subjects in the notes to
my translation of the Parmenides.
P. 50. For as in all other things, such as are principal,
primarily begin from themselves, &c.
Hence every God begins his own energy from himself,
which Proclus thus demonstrates in Prop. 131 of his Elements
of Theology. “For every God first exhibits the
peculiarity of his presence with secondary natures in himself;
because he imparts himself to other things also according
to his own exuberant plenitude. For neither is deficiency
adapted to the Gods, nor fulness alone. For every
thing deficient is imperfect, and not being itself perfect, it is
impossible it should make another thing to be perfect. But
that which is full is alone sufficient to itself, and is not yet
prepared to communicate. It is necessary, therefore, that
the nature which fills other things, and which extends to
other things the communications of itself, should be superplenary,
350or exuberantly full. Hence, if a divine nature fills
all things from itself with the good which it contains in
itself, it is exuberantly full. And if this be the case, establishing
first in itself the peculiarity which it imparts to others,
it will extend to them the communications of superplenary
goodness.
P. 59. It is requisite also to know what enthusiasm is, and
how it is produced.
The following account of enthusiasm, and of the different
kinds of mania mentioned by Plato in the Phædrus, from
the Scholia of Hermeas on that dialogue, is extracted from
the additional notes to my translation of Proclus on the
Timæus, and is given in this place for the sake of the
Platonic English reader, who may not have that translation
in his possession, as a valuable addition to what is here said
by Iamblichus on this subject.
“Since Plato here delivers four kinds of mania, by
which I mean enthusiasm, and possession or inspiration
from the Gods, viz. the musical, the telestic, the prophetic,
and the amatory, previous to the discussion of each, we must
first speak about enthusiasm, and show to what part of the
soul the enthusiastic energy pertains; whether each part of
it possesses this energy; if all enthusiasm is from the Gods;
and in what part of the soul it is ingenerated; or whether it
subsists in something else more excellent than soul. Where,
then, does that which is properly and primarily called enthusiasm
subsist, and what is it? Of the rational soul there
are two parts, one of which is dianoia, but the other opinion.
Again, however, of dianoia, one part is said to be the lowest,
and is properly dianoia, but another part of it is the highest,
which is said to be the intellect of it, according to which the
soul especially becomes intellectual, and which some call intellect
in capacity. There is also another thing above this,
which is the summit of the whole soul, and most allied to the
one, which likewise wishes well to all things, and always
gives itself up to the Gods, and is readily disposed to do
whatever they please. This, too, is said to be the one of the
soul, bears the image of the superessential one, and unites
the whole soul. But that these things necessarily thus subsist,
we may learn as follows: The rational soul derives its
existence from all the causes prior to itself, i. e. from intellect
and the Gods. But it subsists also from itself: for it
perfects itself. So far, therefore, as it subsists from the
Gods, it possesses the one, which unites all its powers, and
351all the multitude of itself, and conjoins them to the one
itself, and is the first recipient of the goods imparted by the
Gods. It likewise makes all the essence of the soul to be
boniform, according to which it is connected with the Gods,
and united to them. But so far as it subsists from intellect
it possesses an intellectual nature, according to which it
apprehends forms, by simple projections, or intuitions, and
not discursively; and is conjoined to the intellect which is
above itself. And so far as it constitutes itself, it possesses
the dianoetic power, according to which it generates sciences
and certain theorems, energizes discursively, and collects
conclusions from propositions. For that it constitutes or
gives subsistence to itself, is evident from its imparting perfection
to itself; since that which leads itself to perfection,
and imparts to itself well-being, will much more impart to
itself existence. For well-being is a greater thing than
being. If, therefore, the soul imparts that which is greater
to itself, it will much more impart that which is less. Hence
that which is primarily, properly, and truly enthusiasm from
the Gods, is effected according to this one of the soul, which
is above dianoia, and above the intellect of the soul; which
one is at another time in a relaxed and dormant state. This
one, likewise, becoming illuminated [by the Gods], all the
life of the soul is illuminated, and also intellect, dianoia, and
the irrational part, and the resemblance of enthusiasm is
transmitted as far as to the body itself.
“Other enthusiasms, therefore, are produced about other
parts of the soul,[155] certain dæmons exciting them,[156] or the
Gods also, though not without the intervention of dæmons.
For dianoia is said to energize enthusiastically, when it discovers
sciences and theorems in a very short space of time,
and in a greater degree than other men. Opinion, likewise,
and the phantasy, are said thus to energize when they
discover arts, and accomplish admirable works, such, for instance,
as Phidias effected in the formation of statues, and
another in another art, as also Homer says[157] of him who
made the belt of Hercules, ‘that he neither did nor would
artificially produce such another.’ Anger, likewise, is said
352to energize enthusiastically, when in battle it energizes
supernaturally.
Like Mars, when brandishing his spear, he raged.[158]
But if some one, yielding to desire, should eat of that which
reason forbids, and through this should unexpectedly become
well, you may say that desire also, in this instance,
energized enthusiastically, though obscurely; so that enthusiasm
is likewise produced about the other parts of the soul.
Enthusiasm, however, properly so called, is when this one
of the soul, which is above intellect, is excited to the Gods,
and is from thence inspired. But at different times it is
possessed about the aptitudes of itself, by different Gods;
and is more or less possessed when intellect or dianoia is
that which is moved. As, therefore, when we inquire what
philosophy is, we do not always accurately define it, but
frequently, from an improper use of the word, call mathematics
or physics philosophy and science; we do the like
also with respect to enthusiasm. For though it should be
the phantasy which is excited, we are accustomed to call the
excitation enthusiasm. Moreover, those who ascribe enthusiasm
to the temperatures of bodies, or the excellent temperament
of the air, or the ascendency of exhalations, or the
aptitudes of times and places, or the agency of the bodies
that revolve in the heavens, speak rather of the cooperating
and material causes of the thing than of the causes of it
properly so called. You have, therefore, for the producing
cause of enthusiasm, the Gods; for the material cause, the
enthusiastically energizing soul itself, or the external symbols;
for the formal cause, the inspiration of the Gods about
the one of the soul; and for the final cause, good.
“If, however, the Gods always wish the soul what is
good, why does not the soul always energize enthusiastically?
May we not say, that the Gods indeed always
wish the soul what is good, but they are also willing that the
order of the universe should prevail, and that the soul,
through many causes, is not always adapted to enthusiasm, on
which account it does not always enthusiastically energize?
But some say that the telestic art extends as far as to the
sublunary region. If, therefore, they mean that no one
of the superlunary and celestial natures energizes in the
sublunary region, they evidently assert what is absurd.
353But if they mean that the Telestæ, or mystic operators, are
not able to energize above the lunar sphere, we say, that if
all the allotments of souls are sublunary, their assertion will
be true; but if there are also allotments of souls above the
moon, as there are (for some are the attendants of the sun,
others of the moon, and others of Saturn, since the Demiurgus
disseminated some of them into the earth, others into the
moon, and others elsewhere), this being the case, it will be
possible for the soul to energize above the moon. For what
the whole order of things impacts to the soul for a very extended
period of time, this the soul is also able to impart to
itself for a short space of time, when assisted by the Gods
through the telestic art. For the soul can never energize
above its own allotment, but can energize to the extent of it.
Thus, for instance, if the allotment of the soul was as far as
to philosophy, the soul would be able, though it should not
choose a philosophic but some other life, to energize in that
life somewhat philosophically. There are also said to be
certain supermundane souls. And thus we have shown
how the soul energizes enthusiastically.
But how are statues said to have an enthusiastic energy?
May we not say, that a statue being inanimate, does not
itself energize about divinity, but the telestic art, purifying
the matter of which the statue consists, and placing round it
certain characters and symbols, in the first place renders it,
through these means, animated, and causes it to receive a
certain life from the world; and, in the next place, after
this, it prepares the statue to be illuminated by a divine
nature, through which it always delivers oracles, as long as
it is properly adapted. For the statue, when it has been
rendered perfect by the telestic art, remains afterwards
[endued with a prophetic power] till it becomes entirely
unadapted to divine illumination; but he who receives the
inspiring influence of the Gods receives it only at certain
times, and not always. But the cause of this is, that the
soul, when filled with deity, energizes about it. Hence, in
consequence of energizing above its own power, it becomes
weary. For it would be a God, and similar to the souls of
the stars, if it did not become weary. But the statue, conformably
to its participations, remains illuminated. Hence
the inaptitude of it entirely proceeds into privation, unless it
is again, de novo, perfected and animated by the mystic
operator. We have sufficiently shown, therefore, that enthusiasm,
properly so called, is effected about the one of the
soul, and that it is an illumination of divinity.
354“In the next place, let us discuss the order and the use of
the four manias, and show why the philosopher makes
mention of these alone. Is it because there are no other
than these, or because these were sufficient for his purpose?
That there are, therefore, many other divine inspirations and
manias Plato himself indicates as he proceeds, and prior to
this, he makes mention of the inspiration from the Nymphs.
But there are also inspirations from Pan, from the mother
of the Gods, and from the Corybantes, which are elsewhere
mentioned by Plato. Here, however, he alone delivers
these four manias; in the first place, because these alone are
sufficient to the soul, in the attainment of its proper apocatastasis,
as we shall afterwards show; and in the next place,
because he delivers the proximate steps of ascent to the
soul. For the gifts of the Gods to all beings are many and
incomprehensible. But now he delivers to us the energies
of the Gods which are extended to souls. He delivers,
however, these four manias, not as if one of them was not
sufficient, and especially the amatory, to lead back the soul
to its pristine felicity; but at present the series and regular
gradation of them, and the orderly perfection of the soul,
are unfolded. As, therefore, it is possible for the tyrannic
life, when suddenly changed, to become aristocratic, through
employing strenuous promptitude and a divine allotment,
but the gradual ascent is from a tyrannic to a democratic,
and from this to an oligarchic life, afterwards to a timocratic,
and at last to an aristocratic life, but the descent and lapse
are vice versa; thus also here, the soul being about to
ascend, and be restored to its former felicity, is in the first
place possessed with the musical mania, afterwards with the
telestic, then with the prophetic, and, in the last place, with
the amatory mania. These inspirations, however; conspire
with, and are in want of, each other; so abundant is their
communion. For the telestic requires the prophetic[159] mania;
since the latter[160] interprets many things pertaining to the
former. And again, the prophetic requires the telestic
mania. For the telestic mania perfects and establishes
oracular predictions. Farther still, the prophetic uses the
poetic and musical mania. For prophets, as I may say,
always speak in verse. And again, the musical uses the
prophetic mania spontaneously, as Plato says. But what
occasion is there to speak about the amatory and musical
355manias? For nearly the same persons exercise both these,
as, for instance, Sappho, Anacreon, and the like, in consequence
of these not being able to subsist without each
other. But it is very evident that the amatory mania contributes
to all these, since it is subservient to enthusiasm of
every kind: for no enthusiasm can be effected without
amatory inspiration. And you may see how Orpheus
appears to have applied himself to all these, as being in
want of, and adhering to, each other. For we learn that he
was most telestic, and most prophetic, and was excited by
Apollo; and besides this, that he was most poetic, on which
account he is said to have been the son of Calliope. He
was likewise most amatory, as he himself acknowledges to
Musæus, extending to him divine goods, and rendering him
perfect. Hence he appears to have been possessed with all
the manias, and this by a necessary consequence. For there
is an abundant union, conspiration, and alliance with each
other, of the Gods who preside over these manias, viz. of
the Muses, Bacchus, Apollo, and Love.
“It remains, therefore, that we should unfold the nature
of each of the manias, previously observing that those which
are internal, and originate from the soul itself, and give
perfection to it, are of one kind; but the external energies
of them, and which preserve the outward man, and our
nature, are of another. The four external, however, are
analogous to the four internal manias. Let us consider,
therefore, in the first place, the internal, and which alone
originate from the soul itself, and let us see what they effect
in the soul. In order, likewise, that this may become
manifest, and also their arrangement, let us survey from on
high, the descent, as Plato says, and defluxion of the wings
of the soul. From the beginning, therefore, and at first, the
soul was united to the Gods, and its unity to their one.
But afterwards the soul departing from this divine union
descended into intellect, and no longer possessed real beings
unitedly, and in one, but apprehended and surveyed them
by simple projections, and, as it were, contacts of its intellect.
In the next place, departing from intellect, and
descending into reasoning and dianoia, it no longer apprehended
real beings by simple intuitions, but syllogistically
and transitively, proceeding from one thing to another, from
propositions to conclusions. Afterwards, abandoning true
reasoning, and the dissolving peculiarity, it descended into
generation, and became filled with much irrationality and
perturbation. It is necessary, therefore, that it should recur
356to its proper principles and again return to the place from
whence it came. To this ascent and apocatastasis, however,
these four manias contribute. And the musical mania, indeed,
leads to symphony and harmony, the agitated and
disturbed nature of the parts of the soul, which were hurried
away to indefiniteness and inaptitude, and were filled with
abundant tumult. But the telestic mania causes the soul to
be perfect and entire, and prepares it to energize intellectually.
For the musical mania alone harmonizes and represses
the parts of the soul; but the telestic causes the
whole of it to energize, and prepares it to become entire, so
that the intellectual part of it may energize. For the soul,
by descending into the realms of generation, resembles a
thing broken and relaxed. And the circle of the same, or
the intellectual part of it, is fettered; but the circle of the
different, or the doxastic part, sustains many fractures and
turnings. Hence, the soul energizes partially, and not
according to the whole of itself. The Dionysiacal inspiration,
therefore, after the parts of the soul are coharmonized,
renders it perfect, and causes it to energize according to the
whole of itself, and to live intellectually. But the Apolloniacal
mania converts and coexcites all the multiplied powers,
and the whole of the soul, to the one of it. Hence Apollo is
denominated as elevating the soul from multitude to the one.
And the remaining mania, the amatory, receiving the soul
united, conjoins this one of the soul to the Gods, and to intelligible
beauty. As the givers, therefore, of these manias
are transcendently united, and are in each other, the gifts
also on this account participate of, and communicate with,
each other, and the recipient, which is the soul, possesses an
adaptation to all the gifts. This, therefore, is the order, and
these are the energies and powers within the soul itself, of
these four manias.
“But let us also consider their external energies on
man, and what they outwardly effect about us. The musical
mania, therefore, causes us to speak in verse, and to act and
be moved rythmically, and to sing in metre, the splendid
deeds of divine men, and their virtues and pursuits; and,
through these, to discipline our life, in the same manner as
the inward manias coharmonize our soul. But the telestic
mania, expelling every thing foreign, contaminating, and
noxious, preserves our life perfect and innoxious, and
banishing an insane and diabolical phantasy, causes us to be
sane, entire, and perfect, just as the internal telestic mania
makes the soul to be perfect and entire. Again, the prophetic
357mania contracts into one the extension and infinity of
time, and sees, as in one present now, all things, the past,
the future, and the existing time. Hence it predicts what
will be, which it sees as present to itself. It causes us,
therefore, to pass through life in an irreprehensible manner;
just as the internal prophetic mania contracts and elevates
all the multiplied and many powers and lives of the soul to
the one, in order that it may in a greater degree be preserved
and connected. But the amatory mania converts
young persons to us, and causes them to become our friends,
being instructive of youth, and leading them from sensible
beauty to our psychical beauty, and from this sending them
to intelligible beauty; in the same manner as the internal
amatory mania conjoins the one of the soul to the Gods.
“All the above mentioned manias, therefore, are superior
to the prudent and temperate energies of the soul. Nevertheless,
there is a mania which is coordinate with temperance,
and which we say has in a certain respect a prerogative
above[161] it. For certain inspirations are produced,
according to the middle and also according to the doxastic
reasons of the soul, conformably to which artists effect
certain things, and discover theorems beyond expectation,
as Asclepius, for instance, in medicine, and Hercules in the
practic[162] life.”
Afterwards, in commenting on what Plato says of the
mania from the Muses, viz. “that it adorns the infinite
deeds of the ancients,” Hermeas observes, “that the inward
energy in the soul of the poetic mania, by applying itself to
superior and intelligible natures, imparts to subordinate
natures harmony and order; but that the external divinely-inspired
poetry celebrates the deeds of the ancients, and instructs
both its contemporaries and posterity, extending
its energies every where.” But Plato says, “that he who
without the divinely-inspired mania of the Muses expects to
become a divine poet, will, by thus fancying, become himself
imperfect, and his poetry will be vanquished and concealed
by the poetry which is the progeny of mania.”
Hermeas adds, “For what similitude is there between the
poetry of Chærilus and Callimachus, and that of Homer and
Pindar? For the divinely-inspired poets, as being filled
358from the Muses, always invoke them, and extend to them
all that they say.” For a fuller and most admirable account
of the poetic mania, and of the different species of poetry by
Proclus, see the notes on the tenth book of the Republic, in
my translation of Plato, and also the Introduction to my
translation of the Rhetoric, Poetic, and Nicomachean Ethics
of Aristotle.
From what is here said by Hermeas about enthusiasm,
the intelligent reader will easily see that none of the Roman
poets, whose works have been transmitted to us, possessed
that which is primarily, properly, and truly enthusiasm, or
that highest species of it in which the one of the soul is illuminated
by a divine nature, and through transcendent
similitude is united to it. As to Virgil, indeed, the prince
of these poets, though he invokes the Muse in the beginning
of the Æneid, yet his invocation of her is but a partial and
secondary thing. For he only calls on her to unfold to him
the causes that involved a man of such remarkable piety as
Æneas in so many misfortunes:
Musa, mihi causa memora, &c.
And, confiding in his own genius, he begins his poem without
soliciting supernal inspiration,
Arma, virumque cano, &c.
To which may be added, that this placing himself before
the Muse, resembles the ego et meus rex of Wolsey. On
the contrary, divinely-inspired poets, as Hermeas well observes,
knock, as it were, at the gates of the Muses, and thus
being filled from thence exclaim,
Εσπετε νυν μοι Μουσαι
And,
Μηνιν αειδε θεα—
And,
Ανδρα μοι εννεπε Μουσα.
For being always extended to them, they dispose the whole
of what they afterwards say as derived from their inspiring
influence. With an arrogance too, peculiar to the Romans,
who, as a certain Greek poet[163] says, were a people
Beyond measure proud.
He associates himself, in his fourth Eclogue, with the
Muses, as their equal:
Sicelides Musæ, paulo majora canamus.
359Which reminds me of what Suetonius relates of Caligula,
that he would place himself between the statues of Castor
and Pollux, and confer privately with Jupiter Capitolinus,
fancying that he was intimate with, and of equal dignity with,
these divinities. And as to the poets that have lived since
the fall of the Roman empire, it would be ridiculous to suppose
that they possessed this highest enthusiasm, as they did
not believe in the existence of the sources from whence it is
alone genuinely derived.
P. 67. The attentive power of the soul. This is that part
or power of the rational soul which primarily apprehends
the operations of the senses. For the rational soul not only
has intellect in capacity, the dianoetic power, will, and
choice, but another power, which is called by the best of the
Greek interpreters of Aristotle, as well as by Iamblichus, το
προσεκτικον, the attentive. This power investigates and
perceives whatever is transacted in man; and says, I understand,
I think, I opine, I am angry, I desire. And, in
short, this attentive part of the rational soul passes through all
the rational, irrational, vegetable, or physical powers. If,
therefore, it is requisite it should pass through all these
powers, it will also proceed through the senses, and say, I
see, I hear; for it is the peculiarity of that which apprehends
energies thus to speak. Hence if it is the attentive
power which says these things, it is this power which apprehends
the energy of sensibles; for it is necessary that the
nature which apprehends all things should be one, since
man also is one. For if one part of it should apprehend
these, and another those things, it is just, as Aristotle says,
as if you should perceive this thing, and I that. It is
necessary, therefore, that the attentive power should be one
indivisible thing.
P. 74. For the human soul is on all sides darkened by
body, which he who denominates the river of Negligence, or
the water of Oblivion, &c.——will not by such appellations
sufficiently express its turpitude. “The whole of generation,
as well as the human body,” says Proclus in Tim.
lib. v. p. 339, “may be called a river, through its rapid,
impetuous, and unstable flux. Thus also in the Republic,
Plato calls the whole genesiurgic nature the river of Lethe;
in which are contained, as Empedocles says, Oblivion, and
the meadow of Ate; the voracity of matter, and the light-hating
world, as the Gods say; and the winding streams
360under which many are drawn down, as the Chaldean oracles
assert.”
P. 105. But there are a certain few who by employing a
certain supernatural power of intellect, are removed from
nature, &c. The class to which these few belong is beautifully
unfolded, as follows, by Plotinus, in the beginning of
his Treatise on Intellect, Ideas, and real Being. “Since
all men from their birth employ sense prior to intellect, and
are necessarily first conversant with sensibles, some proceeding
no farther, pass through life, considering these as the
first and last of things, and apprehending that whatever is
painful among these is evil, and whatever is pleasant is
good; thus thinking it sufficient to pursue the one and avoid
the other. Those, too, among them who pretend to a
greater share of reason than others, esteem this to be
wisdom, being affected in a manner similar to more heavy
birds, who collecting many things from the earth, and being
oppressed with the weight, are unable to fly on high, though
they have received wings for this purpose from nature.
But others are in a small degree elevated from things subordinate,
the more excellent part of the soul recalling them
from pleasure to a more worthy pursuit. As they are, however,
unable to look on high, and as not possessing any
thing else which can afford them rest, they betake themselves,
together with the name of virtue, to actions and the
election of things inferior, from which they at first endeavoured
to raise themselves, though in vain. In the third
class is the race of divine men, who, through a more excellent
power, and with piercing eyes, acutely perceive supernal
light, to the vision of which they raise themselves above
the clouds and darkness, as it were, of this lower world,
and there abiding despise every thing in these regions of
sense; being no otherwise delighted with the place which is
truly and properly their own, than he who after many wanderings
is at length restored to his lawful country.” See my
translation of the whole of this treatise.
P. 117. By mire, therefore, understand every thing corporeal-formed
and material. “Matter,” says Simplicius in
his Commentary on the first book of Aristotle’s Physics,
“is nothing else than the mutation of sensibles, with respect
to intelligibles, deviating from thence, and carried downwards
to nonbeing. Those things, indeed, which are the
properties of sensibles are irrational, corporeal, distributed
361into parts, and passing into bulk and divulsion, through an
ultimate progression into generation, viz. into matter; for
matter is always truly the last sediment. Hence, also, the
Egyptians call the dregs of the first life, which they symbolically
denominate water, matter, being as it were a certain
mire. And matter is, as it were, the receptacle of generated
and sensible natures, not subsisting as any definite
form, but as the state or condition of subsistence; just as
the impartible, the immaterial, true being, and things of
this kind, are the constitution of an intelligible nature; all
forms, indeed, subsisting both in sensibles and intelligibles,
but in the former materially, and in the latter immaterially;
viz. in the one impartibly and truly, but in the other partibly
and shadowy. Hence every form is in sensibles distributed
according to material interval.”
P. 120. Through the innovation and illegality of the
Greeks. Iamblichus says, that through this innovation and
illegality, both names and prayers have at present lost their
efficacy. For during his time, and forborne centuries prior
to it, the genuine religion of the Greeks was rapidly declining,
through their novelty and volatility, of which he here
complains. Hence the Emperor Julian, in the fragments of
his treatise against the Christians, preserved by Ciryl, says,
speaking of the Christians, “If any one wishes to consider
the truth respecting you, he will find that your impiety consists
of the Judaic audacity, and the indolence and confusion
of the heathens. For deriving from both, not that which is
most beautiful, but the worst, you have fabricated a web of
evils.——Hence, from the innovation of the Hebrews, you
have seized blasphemy towards the venerable Gods; but
from our religion you have cast aside reverence to every
nature more excellent than man, and the love of paternal
institutes.” Το γαρ αληθες ει τις υπερ υμων εθελοι σκοπειν,
ευρησει την υμετεραν ασεβειαν, εκ τε της Ιουδαϊκης τολμης
και της παρα τοις εθνεσιν αδιαφοριας και χυδαιοτητος συγκειμενην.
εξ αμφοιν γαρ ουτι το καλλιστον αλλα το χειρον
ελκυσαντες, παρυφην κακων ειργασασθε.——Απο μεν ουν της
Εβραιων καινοτομιας το βλασφημειν τιμωμενους θεους ηρπασατε·
απο δε της παρ’ ημιν θρησκειας το μεν ευλαβες τε
ομου προς απασαν την κρειττονα φυσιν, και των πατριων αγαπητικον,
απολελοιπατε.
P. 122. Prior to truly existing beings, and total principles,
&c. Of the two most ancient principles of all things
362mentioned in this chapter, as celebrated by Hermes, the
first corresponds to the one itself of Plato, and the second to
being itself, or superessential being, the summit of the intelligible
triad; which two principles are beautifully unfolded
by Proclus in the second and third books of his treatise on
the Theology of Plato.
P. 122. He arranges the God Eneph prior to, and as the
leader of, the celestial Gods.—But prior to this he arranges
the impartible one, which he says is the first paradigm, and
which he denominates Eicton. It appears to me that the
former of these two divinities is the same with Saturn, who
is the summit of the intellectual order of Gods; and that the
latter is the animal itself of Plato, or the Phanes of
Orpheus, who subsists at the extremity of the intelligible
triad. For the God Eneph is said by Iamblichus to be an
intellect intellectually perceiving itself, and converting intellections
to itself; and these are the characteristics of
Saturn. And the God Eicton is said to be the first paradigm,
and this is also asserted of Phanes.
P. 123. For the books which are circulated under the
name of Hermes, contain Hermaic opinions, though they
frequently employ the language of the philosophers: for they
were translated from the Egyptian tongue by men who were
not unskilled in philosophy. A few only of these books
are now extant, but what is here said by Iamblichus sufficiently
proves their authenticity, and that they contain the
genuine doctrines of Hermes. They have doubtless, however,
been occasionally interpolated by some of the early
Christians, though not to that extent which modern critics,
and that mitred sophist Warburton, suppose.
P. 123. And such as have written concerning the decans.
The twelve parts, mentioned in the preceding chapter, into
which the Egyptians divide the heavens, are the twelve signs
of the zodiac. But the thirty-six parts are the twelve houses
of the planets, divided into three other portions, which they
call decans. Ptolemy, however, in his Quadripartite, subverts
this doctrine of the Egyptians. Concerning these
decans, see Scaliger ad Manilium, Kircher II. parte Oedipi,
and Salmasius de Annis climactericis. Gale also gives the
following extract from Hermes relative to the decans, which
had not been before published, and which he derived from
a MS. copy of Stobæus in the possession of Vossius.
363Φαμεν ω τεκνον, περιεκτικον των απαντων ειναι το σωμα.
εννοησον ουν αυτο ωσπερ κυκλοειδες σχημα——υπο δε τον
κυκλον του σωματος τουτου τεταχθαι τους λϛ δεκανους, μεσους
του παντος κυκλου του ζωδιακου.——νοησωμεν ωσπερει φυλακας
αυτους προϊστασθαι των εν κοσμῳ απαντων παντα συνεχοντας——και
τηρουντας την των παντων ευταξιαν.——ετι δε
νοησον ω Τατ, οτι απαθεις εισιν ων οι αλλοι αστερες πασχουσιν.
ουτε γαρ επεχομενοι τον δρομον στηριζουσιν, ουτε κωλυομενοι
αναποδιζουσιν, αλλ’ ουδε μην απο του φωτος του ηλιου σκεπονται,
απερ πασχουσιν οι αλλοι αστερες. ελευθεροι δε οντες
υπερανω παντων, ωσπερ φυλακες και επισκοποι ακριβεις του
παντος, περιεχονται τῳ νυχθημερῳ το παν.——εχουσι προς
ημας την μεγιστην δυναμιν.i. e. “We say, O son, that the
body [of the universe] is comprehensive of all things. Conceive,
therefore, this to be as it were of a circular form.——But
under the circle of this body the thirty-six decans are
arranged, as the media of the whole circle of the zodiac.——These,
likewise, must be understood to preside as guardians
over every thing in the world, connecting and containing all
things——and preserving the established order of all things.——Farther
still, understand, O Tat, that these decans
are impassive to the things which the other stars suffer.
For neither being detained, do they stop their course, nor
being impeded do they recede, nor are they, like the other
stars, concealed as with a veil by the light of the sun. But
being liberated above all things, they comprehend the universe
as the guardians and accurate inspectors of it, in the
Nycthemeron [or the space of night and day].——They also
possess, with respect to us, the greatest power.”
P. 125. So that what you add from Homer, “that the
Gods are flexible,” it is not holy to assert. The words of
Homer are στρεπτοι δε τε και θεοι αυτοι, and are to be found
in Iliad ix. v. 493. But when Iamblichus says, it is not holy
to assert the Gods are flexible, he means that it is not holy
according to the literal signification of the words; divine
flexibility indicating nothing more than this, that those who
through depravity were before unadapted to receive the
illuminations of the Gods, and in consequence of this were
subject to the power of avenging dæmons; when afterwards
they obtain pardon of their guilt through prayers and sacrifices,
and through methods of this kind apply a remedy to
their vices, again become partakers of the goodness of the
Gods. So that divine flexibility is a resumption of the participation
of divine light and goodness by those who through
inaptitude were before deprived of it.
364P. 130. Dæmons preside over the parts of our body.
Proclus in the fragments of his Ten Doubts concerning
Providence, preserved by Fabricius in the eighth vol. of his
Bibliotheca Græca, observes, “That the Gods, with an
exempt transcendency, extend their providence to all things,
but that dæmons, dividing their superessential subsistence,
receive the guardianship of different herds of animals, distributing
the providence of the Gods, as Plato says, as far as
to the most ultimate division. Hence some of them preside
over men, others over lions or other animals, and others
over plants; and still more partially, some are the inspective
guardians of the eye, others of the heart, and others of
the liver.” He adds, “all things, however, are full of Gods,
some of whom exert their providential energies immediately,
but others through dæmons as media: not that the Gods are
incapable of being present to all things, but that ultimate
are themselves unable to participate primary natures.” Hence
it must be said that there is one principal dæmon, who is
the guardian and governor of every thing that is in us, and
many dæmons subordinate to him, who preside over our
parts.
P. 134. Hence it is requisite to consider how he may be
liberated from these bonds. “The one salvation of the soul
herself,” says Proclus in Tim. lib. v. p. 330, “which is extended
by the Demiurgus, and which liberates her from the
circle of generation, from abundant wanderings, and an inefficacious
life, is her return to the intellectual form, and a
flight from every thing which naturally adheres to us from
generation. For it is necessary that the soul, which is
hurled like seed into the realms of generation, should lay
aside the stubble and bark, as it were, which she obtained
from being disseminated into these fluctuating realms; and
that purifying herself from every thing circumjacent, she
should become an intellectual flower and fruit, delighting in
an intellectual life, instead of doxastic nutriment, and pursuing
the uniform and simple energy of the period of sameness,
instead of the abundantly wandering motion of the
period which is characterized by difference. For she contains
each of these circles, and twofold powers. And of her
horses one is good, but the other the contrary [as is said in
the Phædrus]. And one of these leads her to generation,
but the other from generation to true being. The one also
leads her round the genesiurgic, but the other round the intellectual
circle. For the period of the same and the similar
elevates to intellect, and an intelligible nature, and to the
365first and most excellent habit. But this habit is that according
to which the soul being winged governs the whole world,
becoming assimilated to the Gods themselves. And this is
the universal form of life in the soul, just as that is the partial
form, when she falls into the last body, and becomes
something belonging to an individual, instead of belonging
to the universe. The middle of these, also, is the partial
universal, when she lives in conjunction with her middle
vehicle, as a citizen of generation. Dismissing, therefore,
her first habit, which subsists according to an alliance to the
whole of generation, and laying aside the irrational nature
which connects her with generation, likewise governing her
irrational part by reason, and extending opinion to intellect,
she will be circularly led to a happy life from the wanderings
about the regions of sense; which life those that are initiated
by Orpheus in the mysteries of Bacchus and Proserpine,
pray that they may obtain, together with the allotments of
the [celestial] sphere, and a cessation of evil. But if our
soul necessarily lives well, when living according to the
circle of sameness, much more must this be the case with
divine souls. It is, however, possible for our soul to live
according to the circle of sameness, when purified, as Plato
says. Cathartic virtue, therefore, alone must be called the
salvation of souls; since this cuts off, and vehemently obliterates,
material natures, and the passions which adhere to us
from generation; separates the soul and leads it to intellect;
and causes it to leave on earth the vehicles with which it is
invested. For souls in descending receive from the elements
different vehicles, aerial, aquatic, and terrestrial; and thus
at last enter into this gross bulk. For how, without a medium,
could they proceed into this body from immaterial spirits?”
THE END.
366Printed byBallantyne, Hanson & Co.
Edinburgh and London
1. According to this theology, as I have elsewhere shown,
in every order of things, a triad is the immediate progeny of
a monad. Hence the intelligible triad proceeds immediately
from the ineffable principle of things. Phanes, or intelligible
intellect, who is the last of the intelligible order, is the
monad, leader, and producing cause of a triad, which is denominated
νοητος και νοερος, i. e. intelligible, and at the same
time intellectual. In like manner the extremity of this order
produces immediately from itself the intellectual triad,
Saturn, Rhea, and Jupiter. Again, Jupiter, who is also the
Demiurgus, is the monad of the supermundane triad.
Apollo, who subsists at the extremity of the supermundane
order, produces a triad of liberated Gods. (Θεοι απολυτοι.)
And the extremity of the liberated order becomes the monad
of a triad of mundane Gods. This theory, too, which is the
progeny of the most consummate science, is in perfect conformity
with the Chaldean theology. And hence it is said
in one of the Chaldean oracles, “In every world a triad
shines forth, of which a monad is the ruling principle.”
(Παντι γαρ εν κοσμῳ λαμπει τριας ης μονας αρχει). I refer
the reader, who is desirous of being fully convinced of
all this, to my translation of Proclus on the Theology of
Plato.
2. Viz. The Philosophical Works of Proclus, together with
those of Plotinus, Porphyry, Iamblichus, Syrianus, Ammonius,
Damascius, Olympiodorus, and Simplicius.
3. Ενα ιδοις αν εν πασα γῃ ομοφωνον νομον και λογον, οτι
θεος εις παντων βασιλευς και πατηρ, και θεοι πολλοι, θεου
παιδες, συναρχοντες θεῳ. ταυτα και ο ελλην λεγει, και ο βαρβαρος
λεγει, και ο ηπειρωτης και ο θαλαττιος, και ο σοφος και
ο ασοφος. κᾳν επι του ωκεανου ελθῃς τας ηϊονας, κᾳκει θεοι, τοις
μεν ανισχοντες αγχου μαλα, τοις δε καταδυομενοι. Dissert. i.
Edit. Princ.
4. “Diogenes Laertius says of Pythagoras, that he charged
his disciples not to give equal degrees of honour to the Gods
and heroes. Herodotus (in Euterpe) says of the Greeks,
That they worshiped Hercules two ways, one as an immortal
deity, and so they sacrificed to him; and another as a Hero,
and so they celebrated his memory. Isocrates (Encom. Helen.)
distinguishes between the honours of heroes and Gods,
when he speaks of Menelaus and Helena. But the distinction
is no where more fully expressed than in the Greek
inscription upon the statue of Regilla, wife to Herodes Atticus,
as Salmasius thinks, which was set up in his temple at
Triopium, and taken from the statue itself by Sirmondus;
where it is said, That she had neither the honour of a mortal
nor yet that which was proper to the Gods. Ουδε ιερα θνητοις,
αταρ ουδε θεοισιν ομοια. It seems by the inscription
of Herodes, and by the testament of Epicteta, extant in
Greek in the Collection of Inscriptions, that it was in the
power of particular families to keep festival days in honour
of some of their own family, and to give heroical honours to
them. In that noble inscription at Venice, we find three
days appointed every year to be kept, and a confraternity
established for that purpose with the laws of it. The first
day to be observed in honour of the Muses, and sacrifices to
be offered to them as deities. The second and third days in
honour of the heroes of the family; between which honour
and that of deities, they showed the difference by the distance
of time between them, and the preference given to the
other. But whereinsoever the difference lay, that there was
a distinction acknowledged among them appears by this passage
of Valerius, in his excellent oration, extant in Dionysius
Halicarnass. Antiq. Rom. lib. ii. p. 696. I call, says he, the
Gods to witness, whose temples and altars our family has
worshiped with common sacrifices; and next after them, I
call the Genii of our ancestors, to whom we give δευτερας
τιμας, the second honours next to the Gods, (as Celsus calls
those, τας προσηκουσας τιμας, the due honours that belong to
the lower dæmons.) From which we take notice, that the
Heathens did not confound all degrees of divine worship,
giving to the lowest object the same which they supposed to
be due to the celestial deities, or the supreme God. So that
if the distinction of divine worship will excuse from idolatry,
the Heathens were not to blame for it.” See Stillingfleet’s
Answer to a book entitled Catholics no Idolaters, p. 510,
513, &c.
5. See the extracts from Plutarch, in which this is shown,
in the Introduction to my translation of Proclus on the
Theology of Plato.
6. Answer to Catholics no Idolaters. Lond. 1676. p. 211.
7. Arrian. de Exped. Alex. l. iv. et Curt. lib. viii.
8. Vit. Artaxerx. Ælian. Var. Hist. lib. i. c. 21.
13. Και κολασεως δε ειδος ειναι αθειαν ουκ απεικος. τους γαρ
γνοντας θεους, και καταφρονησαντας, ευλογον εν ετερῳ βιῳ και
της γνωσεως στερεσθαι, και τους εαυτων βασιλεας ως θεους τιμησαντας,
εδει την δικην αυτων ποιησαι των θεων εκπεσειν.
Cap. xviii.
14. και χρη τον επι τας αρχας αναβαινοντα ζητειν, ει δυνατον ειναι τι
κρειττον της υποτεθεισης αρχης κᾳν ευρεθῃ, παλιν επ’ εκεινου ζητειν,
εως αν εις τας ακροτατας εννοιας ελθωμεν, ων ουκετι σεμνοτερας εχομεν·
και μη στησαι την αναβασιν. ουδε γαρ ευλαβητεον μη κενεμβατωμεν,
μειζονα τινα και υπερβαινοντα τας πρωτας αρχας περι αυτων εννοουντες.
ου γαρ δυνατον τηλικουτον πηδημα πηδησαι τας ημετερας εννοιας, ως
παρισωθηναι τῃ αξιᾳ των πρωτων αρχων, ου λεγω και υπερπτηναι. μια γαρ
αυτη προς θεον ανατασις αριστη, και ως δυνατον απταιστος. και ων
εννοουμεν αγαθων τα σεμνοτατα, και αγιωτατα, και πρωτουργα, και ονοματα
και πραγματα αυτῳ ανατιθεντας ειδεναι βεβαιως, οτι μηδεν ανατεθεικαμεν
αξιον. αρκει δε ημιν εις συγγνωμην, το μηδεν εχειν εκεινων υπερτερον.
Simplic. in Epict. Enchir. p. 207. Lond. 1670. 8vo.
15. Of the first principles, says Damascius in MS. περι
αρχων, the Egyptians said nothing, but celebrated it as a
darkness beyond all intellectual conception, a thrice unknown
darkness. Πρωτην αρχην ανυμνηκασιν, σκοτος υπερ
πασαν νοησιν, σκοτος αγνωστον τρις τουτο επιφημιζοντες.
16. For farther particulars respecting this most extraordinary
man, see the introduction to my translation of his Life
of Pythagoras, and my History of the Restoration of the
Platonic Theology.
18. Gale has omitted to give the original of the sentence
contained in the brackets; the translation of which I have
added from the answer of Iamblichus to this epistle.
19. Here also the original is omitted by Gale, and the
translation of it is given by me from the text of Iamblichus.
20. The paragraph within the brackets is omitted in the
original; but I have supplied it from the following answer
of Iamblichus to this Epistle. This omission is not noticed
by Gale.
21. Here likewise the words within the brackets, which are
omitted in the original, are added from Iamblichus; but the
omission is not noticed by Gale.
22. The following testimony of an anonymous Greek writer,
prefixed to the manuscript of this treatise, which Gale published,
proves that this work was written by Iamblichus:
Ιστεον οτι ο φιλοσοφος Προκλος υπομνηματιζων τας του
μεγαλου Πλωτινου εννεαδας, λεγει οτι ο αντιγραφων εις την
προκειμενην του Πορφυριου επιστολην, ο θεσπεσιος εστιν Ιαμβλιχος·
και δια το της υποθεσεως οικειον και ακολουθον, υποκρινεται
προσωπον Αιγυπτιου τινος Αβαμωνος· αλλα και το της
λεξεως κομματικον και αφοριστικον, και το των εννοιων πραγματικον,
και γλαφυρον, και ενθουν, μαρτυρει τον Προκλον καλως
και κριναντα, και ιστορησαντα.i. e. “It is requisite to know
that the philosopher Proclus, in his Commentary on the Enneads
of the great Plotinus, says that it is the divine Iamblichus
who answers the prefixed Epistle of Porphyry, and who assumes
the person of a certain Egyptian of the name of Abammon,
through the affinity and congruity of the hypothesis.
And, indeed, the conciseness and definiteness of the diction,
and the efficacious, elegant, and divine nature of the conceptions,
testify that the decision of Proclus is just.” That this,
indeed, was the opinion of Proclus, is evident from a passage
in his Commentaries on the Timæus of Plato, which has
escaped the notice of Gale, and which the reader will find in
a note on the fourth chapter of the eighth section of the
following translation.
23. In the original κατα τας κοινας εννοιας, which Gale
erroneously translates contra communes opiniones.
24. Damascius περι αρχων says, “that difference not existing,
there will not be knowledge.” And, “that the contact
as of one with one is above knowledge.” Likewise,
“that the intellectual perception of the first intelligible is
without any difference or distinction. ετεροτητος μη ουσης,
μηδε γνωσις εσται. Et συναφη ως ενος προς εν, υπερ γνωσιν.
Alibi, διακριτος η του πρωτου νοητου νοησις.
25. Between souls that always abide on high with purity,
such as the souls of essential heroes, and those that descend
into the regions of mortality, and are defiled with
vice, such as the souls of the greater part of mankind, the
class of undefiled souls subsists. These descend into the
realms of generation, partly from that necessity by which all
human souls are, at times, drawn down to the earth, and
partly for the benevolent purpose of benefiting those of an
inferior class. But they descend without being defiled with
vice. They are also called heroes, κατα σχεσιν, i. e. according
to habitude, in order to distinguish them from essential
heroes. And, in the Pythagoric Golden Verses, they are
denominated the terrestrial heroes.
26. For αυτην εαυτοις ουσαν in this place, it is necessary to
read αυτην εαυτης ουσαν.
28. Viz. In the plenitudes, or total perfections, of the Gods.
29. i. e. Without habitude, proximity, or alliance to the
things which it illuminates.
30. What is here asserted by Iamblichus is perfectly true,
and confirmed by experience, viz. that the passions, when
moderately gratified, are vanquished without violence. But
Gale, not understanding this, says, “Hoc adeo verum est,
ac si dixisset, ignem extingues, oleum addendo camino.”
For a moderate gratification of the passions does not resemble
the pouring of oil on fire; since this similitude is
only applicable to them when they are immoderately indulged.
31. See my Dissertation on the Eleusinian and Bacchic
Mysteries.
32. In the original, Και δη, και “αι της μηνιδος εξιλασεις”
εσονται σαφεις, εαν την μηνιν των δεων καταμαθωμεν, which
Gale most erroneously translates as follows: “Sed et ratio
possit reddi supplicationum, quibus divinam iram procuramus,
si recte intelligamus, qualis sit deorum ira.”
33. Viz. Punishments produced by the realms of generation,
or the sublunary region.
34. It is well observed by Proclus, “that divine necessity
concurs with the divine will.” Θεια αναγκη συντρεχει τῃ
θειᾳ βουλησει. Procl. in Tim. lib. i.
35. For νοητον here, it is obviously necessary to read νοερον.
36. For τουτο here, it is necessary to read ταυτο.
37. For as a celestial body consists of light so pure and
simple, that, compared with a terrestrial body, it may be said
to be immaterial; hence, like the light of the sun, it cannot
be divided, or in other words, one part of it cannot be separated
from another.
38. For προς αυτην in this place, I read προς αυτα.
39. The nature of the one, as it is all-receptive, and all-productive
(πανδεχης και παντοφυης) exhibits in itself a certain
representation and indication of multitude; for it is all things
prior to all.
40. For the Gods are essentialized in the one; or, as
Damascius observes, speaking Chaldaically, in the paternal
peculiarity. For in every God there is father, power, and
intellect; father being the same as hyparxis and the one.
41. Viz. According to the difference which there is between
the invisibility of Gods and the invisibility of dæmons.
42. The cosmocrators, or governors of the world, are the
planets. See the fourth book of my translation of Proclus
on the Timæus of Plato.
43. For πυριως in this place, I read εμπυριως. For the empyrean
world, according to the Chaldeans, is above the
material worlds, and emits a supermundane fire or light.
44. For περιουσια here, it is necessary to read παρουσια.
45. These are terrestrial dæmons, to whom the Chaldean
oracle alludes, which says, “The wild beasts of the earth
shall inhabit thy vessel,” i. e. as Psellus explains it, the
composite temperature of the soul.
46. For πεπλανημενην here, it seems requisite to read πεπλασμενην.
Gale also, in his version, in this place has fictum.
47. i. e. The inexplicable theurgic signs or symbols.
48. For υπνος here, it is necessary to read αυπνος. For
Iamblichus has before shown that divine dreams are not
produced in sleep, but either when sleep leaves us, or between
sleeping and waking, or when we are perfectly awake.
The necessity of this emendation is also evident from what
Iamblichus shortly after adds, viz. that we must take away
from divine dreams the being asleep; i. e. the being in a
profound sleep.
49. In the original there is nothing more than λεγουσι δε
ταδε in this place; but the sense requires that we should
read λεγουσι δε οι σοφοι ταδε. And this emendation is confirmed
by the versions of Scutellius and Gale.
50. For κατα τα μεταξυ διαλαμβανομενα κ. λ, I read μετα
κ. λ.
51. “Among the deeds of Pythagoras,” says Iamblichus,
in his Life of that father of philosophy, (chap. xxv.) “it is
said, that once through the spondaic [i. e. Doric] song of
a piper he extinguished the rage of a Tauromenian lad,
who had been feasting by night, and intended to burn
the vestibule of his mistress, in consequence of seeing her
coming from the house of his rival. For the lad was inflamed
and excited [to this rash attempt] by a Phrygian
song; which, however, Pythagoras most rapidly suppressed.
But Pythagoras, as he was astronomizing, happened to
meet with the Phrygian piper at an unseasonable time of
night, and persuaded him to change his Phrygian for a
spondaic song; through which the fury of the lad being
immediately repressed, he returned home in an orderly
manner, though a little before this he could not be in the
least restrained, nor would, in short, bear any admonition;
and even stupidly insulted Pythagoras when he met him.
When a certain youth, also, rushed with a drawn sword on
Anchilus, the host of Empedocles, because, being a judge,
he had publicly condemned his father to death, and would
have slain him as a homicide, Empedocles changed the intention
of the youth, by singing to his lyre that verse of
Homer,
Nepenthe, without gall, o’er every ill
Oblivion spreads.
Odyss. lib. 4.
And thus snatched his host Anchilus from death, and the
youth from the crime of homicide. It is also related, that
the youth from that time became the most celebrated of the
disciples of Pythagoras. Farther still, the whole Pythagoric
school produced, by certain appropriate songs, what they
called exartysis, or adaptation; synarmoga, or elegance of
manners; and epaphe, or contact, usefully conducting the
dispositions of the soul to passions contrary to those which
it before possessed. For when they went to bed, they purified
the reasoning power from the perturbations and noises
to which it had been exposed during the day, by certain
odes and peculiar songs, and by this means procured for
themselves tranquil sleep, and few and good dreams. But
when they rose from bed, they again liberated themselves
from the torpor and heaviness of sleep, by songs of another
kind. Sometimes, also, by musical sounds alone, unaccompanied
with words, they healed the passions of the soul and
certain diseases, enchanting, as they say, in reality. And it
is probable that from hence this name epode, i. e. enchantment,
came to be generally used. After this manner, therefore,
Pythagoras, through music, produced the most beneficial
correction of human manners and lives.”
Proclus also, in his MS. Commentary on the First Alcibiades
of Plato, observes, “that of musical instruments
some are repressive, and others motive; some are adapted
to rest, and others to motion. The repressive, therefore,
are most useful for education, leading our manners into
order, repressing the turbulency of youth, and bringing its
agitated nature to quietness and temperance. But the
motive instruments are adapted to enthusiastic energy; and
hence, in the mysteries and mystic sacrifices, the pipe is
useful; for the motive power of it is employed for the purpose
of exciting the reasoning power to a divine nature.
For here it is requisite that the irrational part should be laid
asleep, and the rational excited. Hence those that instruct
youth use repressive instruments, but initiators such as are
motive. For that which is disciplined is the irrational
part; but it is reason which is initiated, and which energizes
enthusiastically.”
See, likewise, on this subject, Ptolem. Harmonic, lib. iii.
cap. 7 and 8, who observes among other things, “that our
souls directly sympathize with the energies of melody,
recognizing, as it were, their alliance to them—and that at
one time the soul is changed to a quiet and repressed condition,
but at another to fury and enthusiasm. Ταις ενεργειαις
της μελῳδιας συμπασχειν ημων αντικρυς τας ψυχας, την
συγγενειαν ωσπερ επιγινωσκουσας——et, ποτε μεν εις ησυχιαν
και κατασολην τρεπεσθαι, ποτε δε εις οἱσρον και ενθυσιασμον.
And, in the last place, see Plato in his Io, and Aristotle
in his Politics.
52. Proclus in Polit. p. 865, says, “that the melodies of
Olympus were the causes of ecstasy.” Τα του Ολυμπου
μελη εκσατικα.
53. The nature of the Corybantes, and the order to which
they belong, is unfolded as follows by Proclus, in Plat.
Theol. lib. vi. cap. 13. “To what has been said we shall
add the theory pertaining to the unpolluted[54] Gods among
the ruling divinities [i. e. among the divinities that subsist
immediately after the intellectual Gods]. For Plato also
gives us an opportunity of mentioning these, since it is
necessary that the rulers and leaders of wholes should subsist
analogous to the intellectual kings, though they make
their progression in conjunction with division, and a separation
into parts. For as they imitate the paternal generative
and convertive powers of the intellectual kings, thus also
it is necessary that they should receive the immutable monads
in themselves, according to the ruling peculiarity, and
establish over their own progressions secondary causes of a
guardian characteristic. And the mystic tradition, indeed,
of Orpheus makes mention of these more clearly. But
Plato being persuaded by the mysteries, and by what is performed
in them, indicates concerning these unpolluted Gods.
And in the Laws, indeed, he reminds us of the inflation of
the pipe by the Corybantes, which represses every inordinate
and tumultuous motion. But in the Euthydemus, he makes
mention of the collocation on a throne, which is performed
in the Corybantic mysteries; just as in other dialogues he
mentions the Curetic order, speaking of the armed sports of
the Curetes. For the Curetes are said to surround and to
dance round the Demiurgus of wholes, when he was unfolded
into light from Rhea. In the intellectual Gods,
therefore, the first Curetic order is allotted its hypostasis.
But the order of the Corybantes, which precedes Core
[i. e. Proserpine], and guards her on all sides, as the theology
says, is analogous to the Curetes in the intellectual order.
If, however, you are willing to speak conformably to Platonic
custom, because these divinities preside over purity,
and preserve the Curetic order undefiled, and also preserve
immutability in their generations, and stability in their progressions[55]
into the worlds, on this account they were called
Corybantes. For το κορον, to koron, is every where significant
of purity, as Socrates says in the Cratylus; since, also,
you may say that our mistress Core was no otherwise denominated
than from purity and an unpolluted life. But, in
consequence of her alliance to this order, she produces twofold
guardian triads, one in conjunction with her father, but
the other herself by and from herself, imitating in this
respect the whole vivific Goddess [Rhea] who constitutes the
first Curetes.”
54. These Gods are called unpolluted, because they are the causes of
purity. For every God begins his own energy from himself, and is that
primarily which his effects are secondarily.
55. For περιοδοις here, it is necessary to read προοδοις.
56. Servius, in commenting on the “Mystica vannus Iacchi”
of Virgil, observes, that the sacred rites of Bacchus pertained
to the purification of souls, “Liberi patris sacra ad
purgationem animarum pertinebant.” And elsewhere he
says, “Animæ aere ventilantur, quod erat in sacris Liberi
purgationis genus.” Euripides also, in Bacchis, exclaims,
Ω μακαρ οστις ευδαιμων τελετας Θεων
Ειδως, βιοταν αγιστευει,
Και θιασευεται ψυχαν,
Εν ορεσι βακχευων
Οσιοισι καθαρμοις.
i. e. “O blessed and happy he, who knowing the mysteries
of the Gods, sanctifies his life, and purifies his soul, celebrating
orgies in the mountains, with holy purifications.”
57. “In the greatest diseases and labours (says Plato in the
Phædrus) to which certain persons are sometimes subject
through the ancient indignation of the Gods, in consequence
of former guilt, mania when it takes place, predicting what
they stand in need of, discovers a liberation from such evils
by flying to prayer and the worship of the Gods. Hence,
obtaining by this means purifications and the advantages of
initiation, it renders him who possesses it free from disasters
both for the present and future time, by discovering to him
who is properly insane, and possessed by divinity, a solution
of the present evils.” And the Platonic Hermias beautifully
unfolds the meaning of this ancient indignation of the Gods,
through former guilt, as follows: “Offences which have
been committed for a great length of a time, are more difficult
to be washed away, and a liberation from them can alone be
effected by the telestic art; but those that have been committed
for a shorter time are more easily cured. Thus, also,
we see in the medical art, that maladies which have existed
but for a little time, if they are paid attention to at their commencement,
are easily remedied, but that when they are of
long standing, they are more difficultly healed. For the
evil in this case becomes as it were natural and confirmed by
habit, and resembles an indurated ulcer. A similar thing
to this, therefore, takes place in guilty conduct. Hence, if
he who has committed an injury, immediately repents, and
acknowledges his guilt to him whom he has injured, he dissolves
the injury, and renders himself no longer obnoxious
to justice. But when some one dissolves an injury committed
by his father, by restoring, for instance, land which
he had unjustly taken, he then makes himself to be unobnoxious
to justice, and lightens and benefits the soul of his
father. These things, however, the telestic art more swiftly
remedies. Moreover, if it should happen that the whole
race of some one successively use land which had originally
been plundered, in this case, the injury in the first place becomes
immanifest, and on this account is more difficult to
be cured; and, in the next place, time causes the evil to become
as it were natural. Hence the Gods frequently predict
to men that they should go to such or such places, and
that an apology should be made to this man, who was never
known to them, and that he should be appeased, in order
that thus they may obtain a remedy and be liberated from
their difficulties, and that the punishments inflicted on them
by the Furies may cease. The Gods, however, predict, not
for the purpose of taking away punishment, but in order that
justice may be done, and that we may be amended. The
telestic art, therefore, renders him better who possesses the
mania which it imparts, and through him saves also many
others. Thus, for instance, it is related of one who was
cutting down an oak, and though he was called on by a
Nymph not to cut it down, yet persisted in felling it,
that he was punished for so doing by the avenging Furies,
that he was in want of necessary food, and that if at any
time he met with it, it was immediately taken from him, till
one who possessed the telestic art told him to raise an altar
and sacrifice to this Nymph, for thus he would be liberated
from his calamities. Another person, likewise, who had
slain his mother, was freed from the punishment inflicted on
him by the Furies by migrating to another country, conformably
to the mandate of divinity, and there fixing his
abode.”
58. This is because Rhea, the mother of the Gods, is a
vivific Goddess, being filled indeed (says Proclus, in Plat.
Theol. lib. v. c. xi.) from the father prior to her [i. e. from
Saturn] with intelligible and prolific power, but filling the
Demiurgus [Jupiter], who derives his existence from her,
with vivific abundance.
59. See, concerning this oracle, Scholiastes Apollonii ad i.
librum, et Tacitus ii. Annal.
60. This oracle is mentioned by Herodotus, l. i., by Strabo,
l. xiv. and by Ammian. Marcell. lib. xxix.
61. See Plutarch in his treatise De Defectu Oraculorum.
62. See Plutarch in the above mentioned treatise. Concerning
this luciform spirit, or vehicle, which is immortal,
and which is called by Olympiodorus αυγοειδες χιτων, a
luciform vestment, see my Translation of the fifth book of
Proclus on the Timæus.
63. It was usual for those who prophesied to carry a wand.
Tiresias had a sceptre, and Abaris an arrow. The Scholiast
on Nicander says, that the Egyptian and Scythian
magi, and also many of those in Europe, prophesied with
wands. And Eustathius on the Odyssey, p. 1657, observes,
“that there is a certain magic in divine wands,” esse in
ραβδοις θειοις τινα μαγειαν.
64. That is, to partake of an illumination, which has no
σχεσις, or habitude, to any thing material.
65. For ἡ προιουσα here, it seems necessary to read ἢ προιουσα.
66. Proclus, in his MS. Commentary on the First Alcibiades
of Plato, observes, “that in the mysteries some one of
the more imperfect dæmons assumes the appearance of one
that is more perfect, and draws down to himself souls that
are not yet purified, and separates them from the Gods.
Hence, in the most holy of the mysteries [i. e. in the Eleusinian
mysteries], prior to the manifest presence of the God
[who is invoked], certain terrene dæmons present themselves
to the view, disturbing those that are initiated, divulsing
them from undefiled good, and exciting them to matter.
On this account the Gods [in the Chaldean oracles] order us
not to behold them, till we are guarded by the powers imparted
by the mysteries. For they say,
Ου γαρ χρη κεινους σε βλεπειν πριν σωμα τελεσθεις.
i. e. It is not proper you should behold them till your body
is purified by initiation. And they add the reason,
Οτι τας ψυχας θελγοντες αει τελετων απαγουσι,
i. e. For these dæmons alluring souls, always draw them
away from the mysteries.
Conformably to this, also, Proclus in Plat. Theol. p. 7,
says, ωσπερ εν ταις των τελετων αγιωταταις φασι τους μυστας,
την μεν πρωτην πολυειδεσι, και πολυμορφοις των θεων προβεβλημενοις
γενεσιν απανταν, εισιοντας δε, ακλινεις, και ταις
τελεταις πεφραγμενους, αυτην την θειαν ελλαμψιν ακραιφνως
εγκολπιζεσθαι, και γυμνιτας (ως αν εκεινοι φαιεν) του θειου
μεταλαμβανειν, τον αυτον οιμαι τροπον και εν τη θεωριᾳ των
ολων. i. e. “As in the most holy of the mysteries, they say,
that the mystics at first meet with the multiform and many
shaped genera [i. e. with evil dæmons], which are hurled
forth before the Gods, but on entering the interior parts of
the temple, unmoved, and guarded by the mystic rites, they
genuinely receive in their bosom divine illumination, and
divested of their garments, as they would say, participate of
a divine nature; the same mode, as it appears to me, takes
place in the speculation of wholes.”
That mitred sophist, Warburton, as I have elsewhere
called him, from not understanding the former part of this
latter extract from Proclus, ridiculously translates the words
πολυειδεσι και πολυμορφοις των θεων προβεβλημενοις γενεσιν,
“multiform shapes and species, that prefigure the first generation
of the Gods.” See his Divine Legation of Moses,
book ii. p. 152, 8vo. a work replete with distorted conceptions
and inaccurate translations. And yet, as great a
sophist as Warburton was, and notwithstanding the work I
have just mentioned abounds with false opinions, and such
as are of the most pernicious kind, yet he is compelled by
truth to acknowledge, in book ii. p. 172, “that the wisest
and best men in the Pagan world are unanimous in this, that
the mysteries were instituted pure, and proposed the noblest
end by the worthiest means.” But this by the way.
67. This divination according to the imagination through
water, may be illustrated by the following extract from
Damascius (apud Photium): Γυνη ιερα θεομοιρον εχουσα
φυσιν παρᾳλογοτατην. υδωρ γαρ εγχεασα ακραιφνες ποτηριῳ
τινι των υαλινων, εωρα κατα του υδατος εισω του ποτηριου τα
φασματα των εσομενων πραγματων, και προυλεγεν απο της
οψεως αυτα απερ εμελλεν εσεσθαι παντως. η δε πειρα του
πραγματος ουκ ελαθεν ημας. i. e. “There was a sacred
woman who possessed in a wonderful manner a divinely
gifted nature. For pouring pure water into a certain glass
cup, she saw in the water that was within the cup the luminous
appearances of future events, and from the view of
these she entirely predicted what would happen. But of
this experiment we also are not ignorant.”
68. “The Platonists,” says Psellus (ad Nazianzenum)
“assert that light is spread under divine substances, and is
rapidly seized, without any difficulty, by some who possess
such an excellent nature as that which fell to the lot of
Socrates and Plotinus. But others, at certain periods, experience
a mental alienation about the light of the moon.”
69. Concerning this vehicle, in which the phantastic power
resides, see vol. ii. of my translation of Proclus on the
Timæus of Plato, p. 407; the Introduction to my translation
of Aristotle on the Soul; and the long extract from Synesius
on Dreams, in vol. ii. of my Proclus on Euclid.
71. Proclus in Plat. Polit. having observed that Socrates in
the Phædrus, when he speaks in a divinely inspired manner,
and poetically adopts such names as are employed by
the poets, and says that it is not possible for one who speaks
with an insane [i. e. with an inspired] mouth to abstain from
them, adds “that an alliance to the dæmoniacal genus, preparing
the soul for the reception of divine light, excites the
phantasy to symbolic narration.” Η προς δαιμονιον γενος
οικειοτης, η προευτρεπιζουσα την του θειου φωτος παρουσιαν,
ανακινει την φαντασιαν εις την συμβολικην απαγγελιαν.
p. 396.
72. These words of Heraclitus are also quoted by Plutarch
in his treatise De Defectu Oraculorum.
74. Herodian, lib. viii. observes, that the Italians very
much believed in the indications of future events through
the viscera: and Strabo, lib. xvii. asserts the same thing.
75. The auspices were said to be pestiferous when there
was no heart in the entrails, or when the head was wanting
in the liver. This was the case with the animals that were
sacrificed by Cæsar on the day in which he was slain. The
same thing also happened to Caius Marius, when he was
sacrificing at Utica. But when Pertinax was sacrificing,
both the heart and the liver of the victim were wanting,
whence his death was predicted, which happened shortly
after. In the sacrifices, likewise, which Marcellus performed
prior to the unfortunate battle with the Carthaginians,
the liver was found to be without a head, as Plutarch
and Livy, Pliny and Valerius Maximus relate.
76. Gale observes that this appears to have been a very
ancient mode of divination, and does not differ from that
which is comprehended under the term wood. Hence the
Scholiast, in Nicandri Theriaca, says, “that the Magi and
Scythians predicted from the wood of the tamarisk.” For in
many places they predict from rods. And that Dinon, in
the first book of his third Syntaxis, observes, “that the
Median diviners predict from rods.” The Scholiast likewise
adds the testimony of Metrodorus, who says, “that the
tamarisk is a most ancient plant, and that the Egyptians, in
the solemnity of Jupiter, were crowned with the tamarisk,
and also the Magi among the Medes.” He adds, “that
Apollo also ordained that prophets should predict from this
plant, and that in Lesbos he wears a tamarisk crown, has
often been seen thus adorned, and that in consequence of
this he was called by the Lesbians μυρικαιον, Muricaion,
[from μυρικη, the tamarisk].” What the Scholiast here
says, is confirmed by Herodotus, in lib. iv. and elsewhere.
To this, also, what every where occurs about prediction
from the laurel pertains. For if the leaves of the laurel
when committed to the fire made a noise, it was considered
as a good omen, but if they made none, a bad one.
77. Gale, in his translation, has totally mistaken the meaning
of the original in this place, and it is not unusual with
him to do so. For the original is αλλ’ ουδε ως οργανον τι
μεσον εξι το των κρειττονων αιτιον, και δρα δια του θεσπιζοντος
ο καλων. This he thus translates: “Sed neque dicendum
est fatidicum animum esse instrumentum intermedium divinorum,
sacerdotem vero invocantem esse tanquam efficientem
causam.” In consequence, also, of this mistake, he erroneously
conceives that Iamblichus dissents from himself.
78. God is all things causally, and is able to effect all
things. He likewise does produce all things, yet not by
himself alone, but in conjunction with those divine powers
which continually germinate, as it were, from him, as from
a perennial root. Not that he is in want of these powers to
the efficacy of his productive energy, but the universe requires
their cooperation, in order to the distinct subsistence
of its various parts and different forms. For as the essence
of the first cause, if it be lawful so to speak, is full of deity,
his immediate energy must be deific, and his first progeny
must be Gods. But as he is ineffable and superessential,
all things proceed from him ineffably and superessentially.
For progressions are conformable to the characteristics of
the natures from which they proceed. Hence the cooperating
energy of his first progeny is necessary to the evolution
of things into effable, essential, and distinct subsistence.
The supreme God, therefore, is, as Iamblichus justly observes,
alone worthy of sedulous attention, esteem, the energy
of reason, and felicitous honour; but this is not to the exclusion
of paying appropriate attention and honour to other
powers that are subordinate to him, who largely participate
of his divinity, and are more or less allied to him. For in
reverencing and paying attention to these appropriately, we
also attend to and reverence him. For that which we sedulously
attend to, honour, and esteem in them, is that alone
which is of a deified nature, and is therefore a portion, as it
were, of the ineffable principle of all things.
Gale, from not understanding this, exclaims, “if these
things are true, (viz. that God is alone worthy of sedulous
attention, &c.) as they are, indeed, most true, to what purpose,
O Iamblichus, is that mighty study and labour about
dæmons and other spirits?” But the answer to this, by
regarding what has been above said, is easy. For mighty
study and labour about these intermediate powers is necessary,
in order to our union with their ineffable cause. For
as we are but the dregs of the rational nature, and the first
principle of things is something so transcendent as to be
even beyond essence, it is impossible that we should be
united to him without media; viz. without the Gods, and
their perpetual attendants, who are on this account the true
saviours of souls. For in a union with the supreme deity
our true salvation consists.
79. For these conceptions and these works teach us, that in
reality we, through sacred operations, approach to divinity,
but that divinity does not draw near to us. Hence Proclus
in Alcibiad. εν ταις κλησεσι, και εν ταις αυτοψιαις προσιεναι
πως ημιν φαινεται το θειον, ημων επανατεινομενων επ’ αυτο.
i. e. “In invocations of the Gods, and when they are clearly
seen, divinity, in a certain respect, appears to approach to
us, though it is we that are extended to him.”
80. Gale, in his note on these words, after having observed
that Porphyry says, that ignorance, darkness, and folly
attend the soul in its lapse into body; and that, according
to Servius, the soul, when it begins to descend into body,
drinks of folly and oblivion, quotes also Irenæus (lib. ii.
c. 59), who makes the following stupid remark: “Souls
entering into this life [it is said] drink of oblivion, before
they enter into bodies, from the dæmon who is above this
ingress. But whence do you know this, O Plato, since your
soul also is now in body? For if you remember the dæmon,
the cup, and the entrance, it is likewise requisite that you
should know the rest.” To this it is easy to reply, that a
soul purified and enlightened by philosophy, like that of
Plato, is able to recognise many things pertaining to its preexistent
state, even while in the present body, in consequence
of partially emerging from corporeal darkness and
oblivion; but that it is not capable of knowing every thing
distinctly, till it is perfectly liberated from the delirium of
the body. And Gale, no less sillily, adds, “respondebunt
Platonici hæc omnia cognovisse Platonem ex narratione,
quæ circumferebatur de Ere Armenio, qui Lethes aquam
non biberat.” i. e. “The Platonists will answer that Plato
knew all these things from the narration of the Armenian
Erus [in the Republic] who did not drink of the water of
Lethe.” For Plato did not obtain this knowledge from any
historical narration, but from possessing in a transcendent
degree the cathartic and theoretic virtues, and from energizing
enthusiastically (or according to a divinely inspired
energy) through the latter of these virtues.
81. Agreeably to this, Porphyry says in his Αφορμαι προς
τα νοητα, or Auxiliaries to Intelligibles, ψυχη καταδειται
προς το σωμα, τῃ επιστροφη τῃ προς τα παθη τα απ’ αυτου.——And
ψυχη εδησεν εαυτην εν τῳ σωματι. i. e. “The soul is
bound to the body, by a conversion to the passions arising
from her union with it.” And, “the soul binds herself in
the body.” Philolaus also says, that the ancient theologists
and prophets asserted, ως δια τινας τιμωριας α ψυχα τῳ
σωματι συνεζευκται, και καθαπερ εν σαματι τουτῳ τεθαπται,
“that the soul is conjoined to the body on account of certain
punishments, and that it is buried in it as in a sepulchre.”
82. This assertion, that the nature which is perfectly exempt
can never become one with that which departs from itself, is
opposed by Gale, who says that man is composed of soul
and body, and yet the latter is far inferior to, and less excellent
than, the former. But in adducing this instance, he
clearly shows that he does not understand what Iamblichus
says. For the human soul being a medium between a certain
impartible and partible essence, so far as it partakes of
the partible essence, has a certain alliance with body, and is
not perfectly exempt from it. But this is not the case with
divine inspiration and our soul: for the former in a perfectly
exempt manner transcends the latter. Let it, therefore, be
granted him that, as Psellus says, “hypostatic union conducts
different essences or natures to one hypostasis,” yet
such a union can never take place between two things, one
of which has no habitude, proximity, or alliance to the other.
Gale was led into this mistake by not properly attending to
the words perfectly exempt, το παντελως εξῃρημενον, which
are here employed by Iamblichus. But such mistakes are
usual with Gale, from his inaccurate and rambling manner
of thinking. He likewise forgot, at the time he was writing
notes on Iamblichus, that he was the master of a grammar
school, and not a philosopher.
From what has been said, the absurdity, also, of their
opinion is immediately obvious, who fancy that the divine
essence can be mingled and united with the mortal nature.
For if such a union were possible, it would benefit and
exalt the latter, but injure and degrade the former. Just as
in the union of the rational soul with the body (as Proclus
beautifully observes in Tim. p. 339), “the former, by verging
to a material life, kindles indeed a light in the body, but
becomes herself situated in darkness; and by giving life to
the body, destroys both herself and her own intellect [in as
great a degree as these are capable of receiving destruction].
For thus the mortal nature participates of intellect, but the
intellectual part of death, and the whole, as Plato observes
in the Laws, becomes a prodigy composed of the mortal and
the immortal, of the intellectual and that which is deprived of
intellect. For this physical law which binds the soul to the
body is the death of the immortal life, but vivifies the mortal
body.”
83. Here again Gale, from not understanding, opposes
Iamblichus. For he says, “sed nec hoc sequitur. S. Maximus,
ubi hypostaticam unionem declarat; hæc inquit, cernuntur
in corpore et anima. Una ex utroque confit hypostasis
composita. Servat autem in se naturam perfectam
utriusque sc. corporis et animæ, και την τουτων διαφοραν
ασυμφυρτον και τα ιδιωματα ασυμφυρτα και ασυγχυτα.” i. e.
“But neither does this follow. S. Maximus, where he unfolds
hypostatic union, says these things are perceived in the
soul and body. One composite hypostasis is produced from
both. But this hypostasis preserves in itself the perfect
nature of each, and likewise the difference of these unmingled,
end the peculiarities unmingled and unconfused.” This
hypostatic union, however; as we have before observed,
cannot take place between divine inspiration and the soul,
because the former is perfectly exempt from the latter.
Gale adds, “Quæro autem quid velit Iamblichus per
αμφοιν? Opinor, ψυχην et την εξωθεν θειαν επιπνοιαν.
Non facile evincet επιπνοιαν esse αιδιον τι, utpote quæ sit
transiens dei actio.” i. e. “I ask what Iamblichus means
by both. I think the soul and divine inspiration externally
derived. But he will not easily prove that inspiration is
something eternal, because it is a transient energy of God.”
Gale is right in his conjecture, that Iamblichus by the word
both in this place, means the soul and divine inspiration externally
derived; for it can admit of no other meaning;
but when he adds, that inspiration cannot be something
eternal, because it is a transient energy of divinity, he shows
himself to be as bad a theologist as he is a philosopher.
For God being an eternal, or rather a supereternal nature,
his energies have nothing to do with time and its transitive
progressions, but are stably simultaneous; so that transition
does not exist in his inspiring influence, but in the recipients
of it, these being of a temporal and mutable nature. Hence
it is just as absurd to call any energy of divinity transient,
as it would be to say that the light of the sun is transient,
because it shines through diaphanous, but not through
opaque, substances.
84. Hippocrates was of opinion that physicians ought to be
skilled in astronomy. And Galen derides those physicians
who deny that astronomy is necessary to their art. See his
treatise entitled Si quis sit Medicus eundem esse philosophum.
And in lib. viii. cap. 20, of his treatise De Ingenio
Sanitatis, he calls physicians that are ignorant of astronomy
homicides. But by astronomy here, both Hippocrates and
Galen intended to signify what is now called astrology. Roger
Bacon also, in his Epistle to Pope Clement, says, “Opera
quæ fiunt hic inferius, variantur secundum diversitatem
cœlestium constellationum, ut opera medicinæ et alkimiæ.”
i. e. “The works which are performed in these inferior
realms are varied according to the diversity of the celestial
constellations, as, for instance, the works of medicine and
alchemy.” If, however, as Galen says, and doubtless with
great truth, physicians that are ignorant of this are homicides,
how numerous must the medical homicides be of the
present age!
85. According to Proclus, in Alcibiad. Prior, there are three
orders of dæmons, the first of which are more intellectual,
the second are of a more rational nature, and the third, of
which Iamblichus is now speaking, are various, more irrational,
and more material.
86. Charonea is a country of Asia Minor, bordering on the
river Meander; and in it there are spiracles which exhale a
foul odour. According to Pliny, there are places of this
kind in Italy, in the country of Puteoli, now Puzzulo. In
Amsanctus, also, a place in the middle of Italy, in the country
of the Samnites, there were sulphureous waters, the
steams of which were so pestilential, that they killed all who
came near them. Hence Cicero, in lib. i. De Divin. “Quid
enim? Non videmus, quam sint varia terrarum genera? Ex
quibus et mortifera quædam pars est, ut et Amsancti in Hirpinis,
et in Asia Plutonia.”
87. And these irrational spirits, so far as they contribute to
wholes, are more excellent than we are, though through being
irrational they are inferior to us.
88. See the justice of providence in this respect most admirably
defended by Plotinus, in the first of his treatises on
Providence, which treatise forms one of the five books of
Plotinus translated by me, in 8vo. 1794.
89. In the original, την ιδιαν της ψυχης αυτοπραγιαν, which
Gale very inadequately translates proprium animæ officium.
90. See my translation of Proclus on the Subsistence of
Evil, at the end of my translation of his six books on the
Theology of Plato.
91. See cap. 40, 41, 42, of Eunead iv. lib. iv. of Plotinus,
from which the doctrine of this chapter is derived.
92. Agreeably to this, Plotinus, also, in Eunead iv. lib. iv.
cap. 32, says, παν τουτο το εν, και ως ζωον εν ζωον τε οντος,
και εις εν τελουντος, ουδεν ουτω πορρω τοπου ως μη εγγυς
ειναι τη του ενος ζωου προς το συμπαθειν ψυσει, i. e. “This
universe is one, and is as one animal. But being an animal
and completely effecting one thing, nothing in it is so distant
in place as not to be near to the nature of the one animal,
on account of its sympathy with the whole of itself.”
93. This art is no other than magic, of which the following
account, from a very rare Greek manuscript of Psellus, On
Dæmons according to the Dogmas of the Greeks, will, I
doubt not, be acceptable to the reader, as it illustrates what
is here said by Iamblichus, and shows that magic is not an
empty name, but possesses a real power, though at present
this art seems to be totally lost. Ficinus published some
extracts from this manuscript in Latin; but Gale does not
appear to have had it in his possession. Η γοητεια δε εστι τεχνη
τις περι τους ενυλους και χθονιους δαιμονας φαντασιοσκοπουσα
τοις εποπταις τα τουτων ειδωλα. και τους μεν ωσπερ εξ αδου
αναγουσα, τους δε υψοθεν καταγουσα, και τουτους κακωτικους.
και ειδωλα αττα υφιστησι φαντασματα τοις θεωροις των
τουτων. και τοις μεν ρευματα τινα εκειθεν κυμαινοντα επαφιησι·
τοις δε δεσμων ανεσεις και τρυφας, και χαριτας επαγγελλεται.
επαγεται δε τας τοιαυτας δυναμεις, και ασμασι και
επασμασιν. η δε μαγεια πολυδυναμον τι χρημα τοις Ελλησιν
εδοξε. μεριδα γουν ειναι ταυτην φασιν εσχατην της ιερατικης
επιστημης. ανιχνευουσα γαρ των υπο την σεληνην παντων
την τε ουσαν και φυσιν, και δυναμιν και ποιοτητα. λεγω
δε στοιχειων και των τουτων μεριδων, ζωων, παντοδαπων φυτων,
και των εντευθεν καρπων, λιθων, βοτανων, και απλως ειπειν,
παντος πραγματος, υποστασιν τε και δυναμιν. εντευθεν αρα
τα εαυτης εργαζεται. αγαλματα τε υφιστησιν υγειας περιποιητικα,
και σχηματα ποιειται παντοδαμα· και νοσοποια δεμιουργηματα
ετερα. και αετοι μεν, και δρακοντες, βιωσιμοι
αυτοις προς υγειαν υποθεσις´ αιλουροι δε και κυνες, και
κορακες αγρυπνητικα συμβολα. κηρος δε και πηλος εις τας
των μοριων συμπλασεις παραλαμβανονται. φανταζει δε πολλακις,
και πυρος ουρανιου εδοσεις, και διαμειδιωσι επι τουτων
αγαλματα· πυρί δε αυτοματῳ λαμπαδες αναπτονται.
i. e. “Goeteia, or witchcraft, is a certain art respecting
material and terrestrial dæmons, whose images it causes to
become visible to the spectators of this art. And some of
these dæmons it leads up, as it were from Hades, but others
it draws down from on high; and these, too, such as are of
an evil species. This art, therefore, causes certain phantastic
images to appear before the spectators. And before
the eyes of some, indeed, it pours exuberant streams; but to
others it promises freedom from bonds, delicacies, and favours.
They draw down, too, powers of this kind by songs
and incantations. But magic, according to the Greeks, is a
thing of a very powerful nature. For they say that this
forms the last part of the sacerdotal science. Magic, indeed,
investigates the nature, power, and quality of every thing
sublunary; viz. of the elements, and their parts, of animals,
all-various plants and their fruits, of stones, and herbs: and
in short, it explores the essence and power of every thing.
From hence, therefore, it produces its effects. And it forms
statues which procure health, makes all-various figures, and
things which become the instruments of disease. It asserts,
too, that eagles and dragons contribute to health; but that
cats, dogs, and crows are symbols of vigilance, to which,
therefore, they contribute. But for the fashioning of certain
parts wax and clay are used. Often, too, celestial fire is
made to appear through magic; and then statues laugh, and
lamps are spontaneously enkindled.”
This curious passage throws light on the following extract
from the first book of the Metaphorsis of Apuleius: “Magico
susurranime, amnes agiles reverti, mare pigrum colligari,
ventos inanimes expirare, solem inhiberi, lunam despumari,
stellas evelli, diem tolli, noctem teneri.” i. e. “By magical
incantation rapid rivers may be made to run back to their
fountains, the sea be congealed, winds become destitute of
spirit, the sun be held back in his course, the moon be forced
to scatter her foam, the stars be torn from their orbits, the
day be taken away, and the night be detained.” For it may
be inferred from Psellus, that witches formerly were able to
cause the appearance of all this to take place. It must also
be observed, that this MS. of Psellus On Dæmons forms no
part of his treatise On the Energy of Dæmons, published by
Gaulminus; for it never was published.
94. Hence Iamblichus (apud Stob. Eclog. Phys. p. 114),
says, Ουχ η αυτη εστι πασων ψυχων κοινωνια προς τα σωματα.
αλλ’ η μεν ολη ωσπερ Πλωτινῳ δοκει, προσιον εαυτῃ το σωμα
εχει εν εαυτῃ, αλλ’ ουκ αυτη προσεισι τῳ σωματι, ουδε περιεχεται
υπ’ αυτου. αι δε μερισται προσερχονται τοις σωμασι, και
των σωματων γιγνονται.i. e. “There is not the same communion
of all souls with bodies; but the soul which ranks as
a whole (as it also appeared to Plotinus), approaching to
itself, contains body in itself, but does not itself approach to
body, nor is comprehended by it. Partible souls, however,
accede to bodies, and give themselves up to them.”
Conformably to this Porphyry also, in his Αφορμαι προς
τα νοητα, No. 30, says, “No whole and perfect essence is
converted to its own progeny; but all perfect natures are led
back to the causes by which they were generated, even as
far as to the mundane body. For this body, being perfect,
is elevated to the mundane soul which is intellectual, and
through this is circularly moved. But the soul of this body
is elevated to intellect, and intellect to that which is first.
All things, therefore, extend themselves to this, beginning
from that which is last, according to the peculiar ability of
each. But the reduction to that which is first is either
proximate or remote. Hence these are not only said to
aspire after divinity, but also to enjoy him as far as they are
able. But in partial natures, and which are able to verge to
many things, a conversion to their progeny belongs. Hence
in these guilt, in these disgraceful perfidy, is found. Matter,
therefore, defiles these, because they decline to it, at the
same time that they possess the power of converting themselves
to a divine nature.”
95. Iamblichus here alludes to the excellent treatise of Porphyry,
περι της των εμψυχων αποχης, On Abstinence from
Animal Food, from which work the English reader will find
several admirable extracts in one of the Introductory Dissertations
prefixed to my translation of Proclus on Euclid.
96. A celestial body, as is beautifully shown by Proclus in
Tim. lib. iii. contains the summits of all the elements, but is
characterized by vivific unburning fire; so that, in short, it
is vitalized extension.
97. The number sixty is no less manifest in the crocodile
than in the sun. For according to Aristotle (in Hist. Anim.
lib. v.) the crocodile brings forth sixty eggs of a white colour
and sits on them for sixty days.
98. “Isis,” says Gale, “is the moon. And a dog attended
Isis when she was diligently seeking her husband Osiris.
But the moon perpetually seeks the sun, and therefore that
sagacious animal, the dog, accords with Isis. In the solemnities,
also, of Isis, dogs preceded the procession.” After
this manner others besides Gale; who have not penetrated
the depths of the philosophy and theology of Plato, would
doubtless explain what is fabulously said of Isis. In reality,
however, Isis is not the moon, but one of the divinities that
revolve in the lunar sphere as an attendant on the moon, and
who, in modern language, is one of the satellites of that
planet. For, as I have shown from Proclus, in the Introduction
to my translation of the Timæus of Plato, every
planetary sphere is an ολοτης, or a part of the universe
having a total subsistence, i. e. ranking as a whole, and is
surrounded with a number of satellites analogous to the
choir of the fixed stars. Of these satellites, likewise, the
leaders of which are the planets, the first in order are Gods;
after these, dæmons revolve in lucid orbicular bodies; and
these are followed by partial souls, such as ours. See
Proclus in Tim. p. 275 and p. 279· This theory, as I have
elsewhere observed, is the grand key to the theology and
mythology of the ancients, as it shows at one view why the
same God is so often celebrated with the names of other
Gods; which induced Macrobius to think that all the Gods
were nothing more than different powers of the sun. The
English reader will find an abundant confirmation of what is
here said in the fourth book of my translation of the above
mentioned admirable work of Proclus.
99. “The Egyptians,” says Horapollo, lib. i. “wishing to
signify the moon, paint a cynocephalus, because this animal
is variously affected by the course of the moon.”
100. In the original μυγαλη. “This word,” says Gale, “is
written variously, viz. as μυγάλη, μυγαλὴ, and μυγαλῆ. It
is also variously translated, for it is either rattus, or mus
araneus.” Plutarch, in the fourth book of his Symposiacs,
Quest. 5, says, “that the Egyptians were of opinion that
darkness was prior to light, and that the latter was produced
from mice in the fifth generation, at the time of the new
moon. And further still, they assert that the liver of the
weasel diminishes in the wane of the moon.”
101. With the Egyptians many animals were sacred; for the
worship of which the following admirable apology is made
by Plutarch in his treatise of Isis and Osiris:
“It now remains that we should speak of the utility of
these animals to man, and of their symbolical meaning;
some of them partaking of one of these only, but many of
them of both. It is evident, therefore, that the Egyptians
worshiped the ox, the sheep, and the ichneumon, on account
of their use and benefit, as the Lemnians did larks, for discovering
the eggs of caterpillars and breaking them; and the
Thessalians storks, because, as their land produced abundance
of serpents, the storks destroyed all of them as soon as
they appeared. Hence, also, they enacted a law, that whoever
killed a stork should be banished. But the Egyptians
honoured the asp, the weasel, and the beetle, in consequence
of observing in them certain dark resemblances of the power
of the Gods, like that of the sun in drops of water. For at
present, many believe and assert that the weasel engenders
by the ear, and brings forth by the mouth, being thus an
image of the generation of reason [or the productive principle
of things]. But the genus of beetles has no female;
and all the males emit their sperm into a sphericle piece of
earth, which they roll about, thrusting it backwards with
their hind feet, while they themselves move forward; just as
the sun appears to revolve in a direction contrary to that
of the heavens, in consequence of moving from west to east.
They also assimilated the asp to a star, as being exempt
from old age, and performing its motions, unassisted by
organs, with agility and ease. Nor was the crocodile
honoured by them without a probable cause; but is said to
have been considered by them as a resemblance of divinity,
as being the only animal that is without a tongue. For the
divine reason is unindigent of voice, and proceeding through
a silent path, and accompanied with[102] justice, conducts mortal
affairs according to it. They also say it is the only animal living
in water that has the sight of its eyes covered with a thin and
transparent film, which descends from his forehead, so that
he sees without being seen, which is likewise the case with
the first God. But in whatever place the female crocodile
may lay her eggs, this may with certainty be concluded to be
the boundary of the increase of the Nile. For not being
able to lay their eggs in the water, and fearing to lay them
far from it, they have such an accurate presensation of
futurity, that though they enjoy the benefit of the river in its
access, during the time of their laying and hatching, yet they
preserve their eggs dry and untouched by the water. They
also lay sixty eggs, are the same number of days in hatching
them, and those that are the longest lived among them live
just so many years, which number is the first of the measures
employed by those who are conversant with the heavenly
bodies.
“Moreover, of those animals that were honoured for both
reasons, we have before spoken of the dog. But the ibis,
killing indeed all deadly reptiles, was the first that taught
men the use of medical evacuation, in consequence of observing
that she is after this manner washed and purified by
herself. Those priests, also, that are most attentive to the
laws of sacred rites, when they consecrate water for lustration,
fetch it from that place where the ibis had been drinking;
for she will neither drink nor come near unwholesome
or infected water; but with the distance of her feet from each
other and her bill she makes an equilateral triangle. Farther
still, the variety and mixture of her black wings about the
white represents the moon when she is gibbous.
“We ought not, however, to wonder if the Egyptians
love such slender similitudes, since the Greeks also, both in
their pictures and statues, employ many such like resemblances
of the Gods. Thus in Crete there was a statue of
Jupiter without ears. For it is fit that he who is the ruler
and lord of all things should hear no one.[103] Phidias also
placed a dragon by the statue of Minerva, and a snail by that
of Venus at Elis, to show that virgins require a guard, and
that keeping at home and silence become married women.
But the trident of Neptune is a symbol of the third region
of the world, which the sea possesses, having an arrangement
after the heavens and the air. Hence, also, they thus
denominated Amphitrite and the Tritons. The Pythagoreans,
likewise, adorned numbers and figures with the
appellations of the Gods. For they called the equilateral
triangle, Minerva Coryphagenes, or begotten from the summit,
and Tritogeneia because it is divided by three perpendiculars
drawn from the three angles. But they called the
one Apollo, being persuaded to this by the obvious meaning
of the word Apollo [which signifies a privation of multitude]
and by the simplicity of the monad[104]. The duad they denominated
strife and audacity, and the triad justice. For
since injuring and being injured are two extremes subsisting
according to excess and defect, justice, through equality, has
a situation in the middle. But what is called the tetractys,
being the number 36, was, as is reported, their greatest oath,
and was denominated the world. For this number is formed
from the composition of the four first even and the four first
odd numbers, collected into one sum.[105] If, therefore, the
most approved of the philosophers did not think it proper to
neglect or despise any occult signification of a divine nature
when they perceived it even in things which are inanimate
and incorporeal, it appears to me that they, in a still greater
degree, venerated those peculiarities depending on manners
which they saw in such natures as had sense, and were endued
with soul, with passion, and ethical habits. We must
embrace, therefore, not those who honour these things, but
those who reverence divinity through these, as through most
clear mirrors, and which are produced by nature, in a becoming
manner, conceiving them to be the instruments or the
art of the God by whom all things are perpetually adorned.
But we ought to think that no inanimate being can be more excellent
than one that is animated, nor an insensible than a sensitive
being, not even though some one should collect together
all the gold and emeralds in the universe. For the divinity
is not ingenerated either in colours, or figures, or smoothness;
but such things as neither ever did, nor are naturally
adapted to participate of life, have an allotment more ignoble
than that of dead bodies. But the nature which lives and
sees, and has the principle of motion from itself, and a knowledge
of things appropriate and foreign to its being, has certainly
derived an efflux and portion of that wisdom which,
as Heraclitus says, considers how both itself and the universe
is governed. Hence the divinity is not worse represented
in these animals than in the workmanships of copper
and stone, which in a similar manner suffer corruption and
decay, but are naturally deprived of all sense and consciousness.
This then I consider as the best defence that can be
given of the adoration of animals by the Egyptians.”
104. Instead of διπλοτατοις μοναδος as in the original, which is nonsense, it
is necessary to read, as in the above translation, απλοτητι της μοναδος.
105. For 2 + 4 + 6 + 8 = 20; and 1 + 3 + 6 + 7 = 16; and 20 + 16 = 36.
106. The cock was sacred to Apollo, and therefore its heart
was believed to be the instrument of divination in sacrifices.
The chemic Olympiodorus says, “that the cock obscurely
signifies the essence of the sun and moon.” See, in the
additional notes, what is said by Proclus concerning the
cock, in his treatise On Magic.
107. It is well observed by Ficinus, in lib. i. Eunead. ii.
Plotin. “that the fire which is enkindled by us is more
similar to the heavens than other terrestrial substances.
Hence it participates of light, which is something incorporeal,
is the most powerful of all things, is as it were vital, is
perpetually moved, divides all things, without being itself
divided, absorbs all things in itself, and avoids any foreign
mixture: and lastly, when the fuel of it is consumed, it suddenly
flies back again to the celestial fire, which is every
where latent.”
108. For this vehicle is luciform, and consists of pure, immaterial,
unburning, and vivific fire. See the fifth book of my
translation of Proclus on the Timæus.
109. Proclus in Tim. lib. v. observes concerning the telestic
art, or the art which operates through mystic ceremonies,
“that, as the oracles teach, it obliterates through divine fire
all the stains produced by generation.” Η τελεστικη δια του
θειου πυρος αφανιζει τας εκ της γενεσεως απασας κηλιδας, ως
τα λογια διδασκει. Hence another Chaldean oracle says,
τῳ πυρι γαρ βροτος εμπελασας θεοθεν φαος εξει. i. e. “The
mortal who approaches to fire will have a light from divinity.”
Hercules, as we also learn from Proclus, was an
example of this telestic purification. For he says, Ηρακλης
δια τελεστικης καθῃραμενος, και των αχραντων καρπων μετασχων,
τελειας ετυχε εις τους θεους αποκαταστασεως, in Plat.
Polit. p. 382. i. e. “Hercules being purified through the
telestic art, and participating of undefiled fruits, obtained a
perfect restoration to the Gods.”
110. In the original, λεγω δε της θειας ψυχης τε και φυσεως,
αλλ’ ουχι της περικοσμιου τε και γενεσιουργου. But it appears
to me that we should here read, conformably to the
above translation, λεγω δε της θειας, ψυχης τε και ψυσεως,
αλλ’ ουχι μονου της περικοσμιου τε και γενεσιουργου.
111. These media consist of the order of Gods denominated
αρχαι, or rulers, and of those called απολυτοι, or liberated;
the former of which also are denominated supermundane,
and the latter supercelestial, in consequence of existing immediately
above the celestial Gods. See, concerning these
media, the sixth book of my translation of Proclus on the
Theology of Plato.
112. Proclus on the First Alcibiades observes, “that about
every God there is an innumerable multitude of dæmons,
who have the same appellations with their leaders. And
that these are delighted when they are called by the names of
Apollo or Jupiter, because they express in themselves the
characteristic peculiarity of their leading Gods.” In the
same admirable commentary, also, he says, “that in the
most holy of the mysteries [i. e. in the Eleusinian mysteries],
prior to the appearance of divinity, the incursions of certain
terrestrial dæmons present themselves to the view, alluring
the souls of the spectators from undefiled good to matter.”
113. It is beautifully observed by Simplicius on Epictetus,
“that as if you take away letters from a sentence, or change
them, the form of the sentence no longer remains, thus also
in divine works or words, if any thing is deficient, or is
changed, or is confused, divine illumination does not take
place, but the indolence of him who does this dissolves the
power of what is effected.” Ωσπερ γαρ εαν στοιχεια του
λογου αφελῃς, ἢ υπαλλαξης, ουκ επιγινεται το του λογου
ειδος, ουτω και των θειων εργων ἢ λογων ει ελλειπει τι, ἢ
υπηλλακται, ἢ συγκεχυται, ουκ επιγινεται η του θειου ελλαμψις,
αλλα και εξυδαροι την των γινομενων δυναμιν η
του ποιουντος ραθυμια.
114. Conformably to this, Servius, in his Annotations on the
words
Diique, deæque omnes—
in the sixth book of the Æneid observes, “more pontificum,
per quos ritu veteri in omnibus sacris post speciales Deos,
quos ad ipsum sacrum, quod fiebat necesse erat invocari,
generaliter omnia numina invocabantur.” i. e. “This is
spoken after the manner of the pontiffs, by whom, according
to ancient rites, in all sacrifices, after the appropriate Gods
whom it was necessary to invoke to the sacrifice, all the
divinities were invoked in general.” And in his Annotations
on the seventh of the Æneid he informs us, “that king
Œneus offered a sacrifice of first fruits to all the divinities
but Diana, who being enraged sent a boar [as a punishment
for the neglect].” With respect to this anger, however, of
Diana, it is necessary to observe with Proclus, “that the
anger of the Gods does not refer any passion to them, but indicates
our inaptitude to participate of them.” Ο γαρ των
θεων χολος, ουκ εις εκεινας αναπεμπει τι παθος, αλλα την
ημων δεικνυσι ανεπιτηδειοτητα της εκεινων μεθεξεως.
115. Plotinus was a man of this description, to whom, most
probably, Iamblichus alludes in what he now says.
116. In the original θυμον τινος: but it is doubtless requisite
to read with Gale, θεσμον τινος. This I have translated
a certain divine legislation, because we are informed by
Proclus, in Platon. Theol. lib. iv. p. 206, “that θεσμος is
connected with deity, and pertains more to intelligibles;
but that νομος, which unfolds intellectual distribution, is
adapted to the intellectual fathers.” Ο γαρ θεσμος συμπλεκεται
τῳ θεῳ, και προσηκει μαλλον τοις νοητοις ο δε νομος
την νοεραν εμφαινων διανομην, οικειος εσι τοις νοεροις πατρασι.
117. “Perhaps,” says Proclus, in MS. Comment, in Parmenid.
“it is necessary that, as in souls, natures, and bodies,
fabrication does not begin from the imperfect; so likewise in
matter, prior to that which is formless, and which has an
evanescent being, there is that which is in a certain respect
form, and which is beheld in one boundary and permanency.”
This, therefore, will be the pure and divine matter of which
Iamblichus is now speaking. Damascius also says, that
matter is from the same order whence form is derived.
118. This particular respecting the apples of gold is added
from the version of Scutellius, who appears to have translated
this work from a more perfect manuscript than that
which was used by Gale.
119. The conjecture of Gale, that for ἢ το εν Αβυδῳ in this
place, we should read ἢ το εν αδυτῳ, is, I have no doubt,
right. For the highest order of intelligibles is denominated
by Orpheus the adytum, as we are informed by Proclus in
Tim. By the arcanum in the adytum, therefore, is meant
the deity who subsists at the extremity of the intelligible
order (i. e. Phanes); and of whom it is said in the Chaldean
Oracles, “that he remains in the paternal profundity, and in
the adytum, near to the god-nourished silence.”
120. For εις το φαινομενον και ορφμενον σωμα, I read εις το
φερομενον κ. τ. λ.
122. Conformably to this, Martianus Capella also, in lib. ii.
De Nuptiis Philol. &c. speaking of the sun, says, “Ibi
quandam navim, totius naturæ cursus diversa cupiditate
moderantem, cunctaque flammarum congestione plenissimam,
et beatis circumactam mercibus conspicatur. Cui
nautæ septem, germani tamen, suique similes præsidebant
in prora. Præsidebat in prora felis forma depicta, leonis in
arbore, crocodili in extimo.” For these animals, the cat,
the lion, and the crocodile were peculiarly sacred to the sun.
Martianus adds, “In eadem vero rate, fons quidem lucis
æthereæ, arcanisque fluoribus manans, in totius mundi lumina
fundebatur.” i. e. “In the same ship there was a fountain
of etherial light flowing with arcane streams, which were
poured into all the luminaries of the world.” Porphyry,
likewise, in his treatise De Antro Nymph. says, “that the
Egyptians placed the sun and all dæmons not connected
with any thing solid or stable, but raised on a sailing
vessel.”
123. In the original παν ζωδιον, which Gale erroneously
translates animalia omnia.
124. Of this kind are the following names in Alexand. Trallian.
lib. ii. Μευ, Θρευ, Μορ, Φορ, Τευξ, Ζα, Ζων, Θε, Λου,
Χρι, Γε, Ζε, Ων, i.e. Meu, Threu, Mor, Phor, Teux, Za,
Zōn, The, Lou, Chri, Ge, Ze, Ōn. By these names Alexander
Trallianus says, the sun becomes fixed in the heavens.
He adds, “Again behold the great name Ιαξ, (lege Ιαω),
Αζυφ, Ζυων, Θρευξ, Βαϊν, Χωωκ, i. e. Iaō, Azuph, Zuōn,
Threux, Baïn, Chōōk.” Among the Latins, also, Cato,
Varro, and Marcellus de Medicamentis Empiricis, there
are examples of these names; the power and efficacy of
which, as Gale observes, are testified by history, though it is
not easy to explain the reason of their operation.
125. Proclus, in commenting on the following words of Plato
in the Timæus, (see vol. i. p. 228, of my translation of his
Commentary), viz. “Let, therefore, this universe be denominated
by us all heaven, or the world, or whatever other
appellation it may be especially adapted to receive,” beautifully
thus observes concerning the divine name of the world.
“As of statues established by the telestic art, some things
pertaining to them are manifest, but others are inwardly
concealed, being symbolical of the presence of the Gods,
and which are only known to the mystic artists themselves;
after the same manner, the world being a statue of the intelligible,
and perfected by the father, has indeed some
things which are visible indications of its divinity; but
others, which are the invisible impressions of the participation
of being received by it from the father, who gave it perfection,
in order that through these it may be eternally
rooted in real being. Heaven, indeed, and the world are
names significant of the powers in the universe; the latter,
so far as it proceeds from the intelligible; but the former, so
far as it is converted to it. It is, however, necessary to
know that the divine name of its abiding power, and which
is a symbol of the impression of the Demiurgus, according
to which it does not proceed out of being, is ineffable and
arcane, and known only to the Gods themselves. For there
are names adapted to every order of things; those, indeed,
that are adapted to divine natures being divine, to the objects
of dianoia being dianoetic, and to the objects of opinion
doxastic. This also Plato says in the Cratylus, where he
embraces what is asserted by Homer on this subject, who
admits that names of the same things are with the Gods
different from those that subsist in the opinions of men,
Xanthus by God, by men Scamander call’d
Iliad xx. v. 74.
And,
Which the Gods Chalcis, men Cymindis call.
Iliad xiv. v. 291.
And in a similar manner in many other names. For as the
knowledge of the Gods is different from that of partial souls,
thus also the names of the one are different from those of the
other; since divine names unfold the whole essence of the
things named, but those of men only partially come into contact
with them. Plato, therefore, knowing that this preexisted
in the world, omits the divine and ineffable name
itself, which is different from the apparent name, and with
the greatest caution introduces it as a symbol of the divine
impression which the world contains. For the words, “or
whatever other appellation” and “it may receive” are a
latent hymn of the mundane name, as ineffable, and as
allotted a divine essence, in order that it may be coordinate
to what is signified by it. Hence, also, divine mundane
names are delivered by Theurgists; some of which are
called by them ineffable, but others effable; and some being
significant of the invisible powers in the world, but others of
the visible elements from which it derives its completion.
Through these causes, therefore, as hypotheses, the mundane
form, the demiurgic cause and paradigm, and the apparent
and unapparent name of the world are delivered. And the
former name, indeed, is dyadic, but the latter monadic.
For the words “whatever other” are significant of oneness.
You may also consider the ineffable name of the universe as
significant of its abiding in the father; but the name world,
as indicative of its progression; and heaven of its conversion.
But through the three, you have the final cause, on account
of which it is full of good; abiding ineffably, proceeding
perfectly, and converting itself to the good as the antecedent
object of desire.”
126. See the additional notes at the end of vol. v. of my
translation of Plato, where many of these names are beautifully
unfolded from the MS. Scholia of Proclus on the
Cratylus.
127. See the additional notes at the end of vol. v. of my
translation of Plato, and also the notes to my translation of
Aristotle de Interpretatione, in which the reader will find a
treasury of recondite information concerning names, from
Proclus and Ammonius.
128. Most historians give the palm of antiquity to the Egyptians.
And Lucian, in lib. De Syria Dea, says, “that the
Egyptians are said to be the first among men that had a
conception of the Gods, and a knowledge of sacred concerns.——They
were also the first that had a knowledge of sacred
names.” Αιγυπτιοι πρωτοι ανθρωπων λεγονται θεων τε εννοιην
λαβειν και ιρα εισασθαι——πρωτοι δε και ονοματα ιρα
εγνωσαν. Conformably to this, also, an oracle of Apollo,
quoted by Eusebius, says that the Egyptians were the first
that disclosed by infinite actions the path that leads to the
Gods. This oracle is as follows:
Αιπεινη γαρ οδος, μακαρων, τρηχειατε πολλον,
Χαλκοδετοις τα πρωτα διοιγομενη πυλεωσιν.
Ατραπιτοι δε εασσιν αθεσφατοι εγγεγαυιαι
Ας πρωτοι μεροπων επ’ απειρονα πρηξιν εφηναν,
Οι το καλον πινοντες υδωρ Νειλωτιδος αιης·
Πολλας και Φοινικες οδους μακαρων εδαησαν,
Ασσυριοι, Λυδοιτε, και Εβραιων (lege Χαλδαιων) γενος ανδρων.
i.e. “The path by which to deity we climb,
Is arduous, rough, ineffable, sublime;
And the strong massy gates, through which we pass
In our first course, are bound with chains of brass.
Those men the first who of Egyptian birth
Drank the fair water of Nilotic earth,
Disclosed by actions infinite this road,
And many paths to God Phœnicians show’d.
This road th’ Assyrians pointed out to view,
And this the Lydians and Chaldeans knew.”
For Εβραιων in this oracle I read Χαλδαιων, because I
have no doubt that either Aristobulus the Jew, well known
for interpolating the writings of the Heathens, or the wicked
Eusebius as he is called by the Emperor Julian, have fraudulently
substituted the former word for the latter.
129. Prayers of this kind are such as those of which Proclus
speaks in Tim. p. 65, when he says, “The cathartic prayer
is that which is offered for the purpose of averting diseases
originating from pestilence, and other contagious distempers,
such as we have written in our temples.” Καθαρτικαι δε
(ευχαἰ, επι αποτροπαις λοιμικων νοσημοτων, ἢ παντοιων μολυσμων’
οιας δε και εν τοις ιεροις εχομεν αναγεγραμμενας.
130. Porphyry, in lib. ii. De Abstinentia, mentions Seleucus
the theologist, and Suidas says that Seleucus the Alexandrian
wrote 100 books concerning the Gods.
131. These books (βιβλοι) were most probably nothing more
than short discourses, such as the treatises now are which
are circulated as written by Hermes, and which, as Iamblichus
informs us, contain Hermaic doctrines.
132. A great priest, a scribe of the Adyta in Egypt, by birth
a Sebanite, and an inhabitant of Heliopolis, as he relates of
himself.
133. In the original, πρωτος και του πρωτου θεου και βασιλεως,
which Gale translates, prior etiam primo Deo, et rege [sole].
But the addition of sole in his translation is obviously most
unappropriate and false: for Iamblichus is evidently speaking
of a deity much superior to the sun.
134. For Ημηφ here, Gale conjectures that we should read
ΚνηφKneph: for Plutarch says that the unbegotten Kneph
was celebrated with an extraordinary degree of veneration
by the Egyptian Thebans.
135. Hence the moon is said by Proclus to be αυτοπτον της
φυσεως αγαλμα, the self-visible statue or image of nature.
136. Proclus in Tim. p. 117, cites what is here said as the
doctrine of the Egyptians, and also cites for it the authority
of Iamblichus. But his words are, και μην και η των
Αιγυπτιων παραδοσις τα αυτα περι αυτης (της υλης) φησιν.
ο γε τοι θειος Ιαμβλιχος ιστορησεν οτι και Ερμης εκ της
ουσιοτητος την υλοτητα παραγεσθαι βουλεται., i. e. “Moreover
the doctrine of the Egyptians asserts the same things
concerning matter. For the divine Iamblichus relates that
Hermes also produces matter from essentiality.”
137. This is most probably the Chæremon who is said by
Porphyry, in lib. iv. De Abstinentia, “to be a lover of truth,
an accurate writer, and very conversant with the Stoic philosophy.”
Τοιαυτα μεν τα κατ’ Αιγυπτιους υπ’ ανδρος φιλαληθους
τε και ακριβους, εντε τοις Στωϊκοις πραγματικωτατα
φιλοσοφησαντος μεμαρτυρημενα.
138. This was the ninth king in the twenty-sixth dynasty of
the Saitan kings.
139. This city is mentioned by Plato in the Timæus, who
represents Critias as saying “that there is a certain region
of Egypt, called Delta, about the summit of which the
streams of the Nile are divided, and in which there is a
province called Saitical.” He adds, “of this province the
greatest city is Saïs, from which also King Amasis derived
his origin. The city has a presiding divinity, whose name
is, in the Egyptian tongue, Neith, but in the Greek Athena,
or Minerva.” It is singular that Gale, who is not deficient
in philology, though but a smatterer in philosophy, should
have omitted to remark in his notes this passage of Plato.
140. Proclus, in MS. Comment, in Alcibiad. cites one of the
Chaldean oracles, which says,
——πορθμιον ουνομα το δ’ εν απειροις
Κοσμοις ενθρωσκον.
i. e. “There is a transmitting name which leaps into the infinite
worlds.” And in his MS. Scholia in Cratyl. he quotes
another of these oracles, viz.
Αλλα εστιν ουνομα σεμνον ακοιμητῳ στροφαλιγγι,
Κοσμοις ενθρωσκον, κραιπνην δια πατρος ενιπην.
i. e. “There is a venerable name with a sleepless revolution,
leaping into the worlds through the rapid reproofs of the
father.”
142. Gale, in his translation of this part, has entirely mistaken
the meaning of Iamblichus, which he frequently does
in other places. For the words of Iamblichus are, οταν γαρ
δη τα βελτιονα των εν ημιν ενεργῃ, και προς τα κρειττονα
αναγεται αυτης η ψυχη; and the version of Gale is “quando
enim pars nostri melior operari incipiat, et ad sui portionem
meliorem recolligatur anima.” For τα κρειττονα is not the
better part of the soul; but when the better parts of the soul
energize, the soul is then intimately converted to itself, and
through this conversion is elevated to superior natures.
145. i. e. Through a period of 300,000 years; and Procl. in
Tim. lib. iv. p. 277, informs us that the Chaldeans had observations
of the stars which embraced whole mundane periods.
What Proclus likewise asserts of the Chaldeans is confirmed
by Cicero in his first book on Divination, who says that they
had records of the stars for the space of 370,000 years; and
by Diodorus Siculus, Bibl. lib. xi. p. 118, who says that their
observations comprehended the space of 473,000 years.
146. “We say,” says Hephestion, “that a star is the lord of
the geniture, which has five conditions of the lord of the
nativity in the horoscope; viz. if that star receives the luminaries
in their proper boundaries, in their proper house, in
their proper altitude, and in the proper triangle.” He also
adds, “and if besides it has contact, effluxion, and configuration.”
See likewise Porphyry in Ptolemæum, p. 191.
147. According to the Egyptians every one received his
proper dæmon at the hour of his birth; nor did they ascend
any higher, in order to obtain a knowledge of it. For they
alone considered the horoscope. See Porphyry apud Stobæum,
p. 201, and Hermes in Revolut. cap. iv.
148. In the original ενταυθα δε ουν και η της αληθειας παρεστι
θεα, και η της νοερας επιστημης. But instead of η της νοερας
απιστημης, which appears to me to be defective, I read η
κτησις της νοερας επιστημης.
150. In the original, by a strange mistake, των θνητων is inserted
here instead of των νοητων, which is obviously the
true reading. The version of Gale also has intelligibilium.
151. i. e. Man, considered as a rational soul, connected with
the irrational life; for this man has dominion in the realms
of generation.
152. See the second edition of this work in Nos. XV. and XVI. of the
Pamphleteer.
153. i. e. Of natures which are not connected with body.
154. For in these, all are in each, but not all in all.
155. By an unaccountable mistake here του σωματος is inserted
instead of της ψυχης; but the mistake is not noticed by the German editor of these
Scholia.
156. And in consequence of this mistake, for αυτο in this place, we must
read αυτα.
162. The German editor of these Scholia, instead of πρακτικῃ which is the
true reading in this place, and which he found in the manuscript, absurdly
substitutes for it πυκτικῃ, as if Hercules was a pugilist. See my translation
of the Dissertation at Maximus Tyrius, on the Practic and Theoretic
Life.
“‘The City of Dreadful Night’ ranks with Omar Khayyam’s Rubaiyat
as a lyrical expression of despair, and it strikes a deeper note.”—Daily News.
“Thomson’s work ... has intensity, it has grip, it has that power of
imaginative realism which gives to conceptions, embodied in words, the
arresting quality of objects present to sense.... He was a creator and a
singer, and in his creation and in his song his powers were finely co-ordinated
to imaginative ends. Even his most repellently pessimistic verse has the
fascination of gloomy grandeur, and when, as in such poems as ‘The Happy
Poet’ and ‘Sunday up the River,’ he rises into an ampler ether, a diviner
air, his verse has not only the impressiveness of power, but the witchery of
delight.”—Westminster Gazette.
“Messrs. Reeves & Turner and Mr. Dobell have published in two volumes
the collected works of James Thomson, the poet of that ‘melancholia which
transcends all wit,’ as he terms it himself. The sad story of his life is told
with sympathy and fairness in a memoir by Mr. Bertram Dobell, who has
edited the work. The pessimistic and heterodox utterances of the author
of ‘The City of Dreadful Night’ were never likely to be very popular, but
this excellent edition will be very welcome to many who know the strength
and true poetry of many of his writings.”—Daily Telegraph.
Crown 8vo, pp. 334. Price 7s. 6d.
THE LIFE OF
JAMES THOMSON
By HENRY S. SALT
WITH A PORTRAIT
“Such is the story which Mr. Salt tells, and tells simply and sympathetically.
He ‘had not the advantage of personal acquaintance with James
Thomson,’ but he writes as if he had. There is a brighter side to the picture,
and to this also the biographer does justice. He throws into relief the
brighter qualities of this unhappy man; his social gifts, his brilliant talk,
his capacity of friendship, receptivity and humour, and above all, his
popularity. We are treated to plenty of his letters, and these really are
a treat.... But whatever the demerits of Mr. Salt’s criticism, this seems
certain: that the perusal of his ‘Life of James Thomson’ will prove in most
cases a prelude to the perusal of James Thomson’s works.”—Scots Observer.
Crown 8vo, pp. 282. Price 6s.
POEMS, ESSAYS, AND FRAGMENTS
By JAMES THOMSON
(“B.V.”)
“Of the essays in this volume, the principal are those on Emerson, Burns,
Shelley, Blake, and Walt Whitman. All these contain solid, though unequal
work,—the first named, for instance, reproducing Emerson’s peculiar
staccato style too closely to be pleasant. Those on Blake and Walt Whitman
are, we think, his best, though we are not sure that we agree with Mr.
Robertson in thinking that Thomson was really more competent in prose
than in poetry.”—The Speaker.
CATALOGUE
OF A
COLLECTION OF PRIVATELY PRINTED BOOKS
COMPILED AND ANNOTATED BY
BERTRAM DOBELL
Parts I. to III. now ready. Price One Shilling each. To be completed in five or six parts.
“Mr. Bertram Dobell has now issued the second part of his ‘Catalogue
of Privately Printed Books,’ coming down to the letter N. This consists,
it may be as well to state, entirely of such books as are in Mr. Dobell’s own
possession; but as he has been collecting them for many years past, and
as he appends copious notes to the titles, the work will always possess a
permanent bibliographical value. We observe that he describes a large
number of pieces printed at the private press of Charles Clark, of Great
Totham, Essex, which possess little interest beyond curiosity; but he seems
to have none of the dialect specimens of Prince L. L. Buonaparte, and the
only examples of Mr. Daniel’s Oxford Press, that we have found are under
the head of Canon Dixon [others have since been noticed]. The Appleton
Press of Mr. W. J. Linton is fairly represented, and so is that of the late
Halliwell-Phillipps. Altogether the curious reader will find here much
to interest him in one of the by-paths of literature.”—The Academy.
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
Silently corrected obvious typographical errors and variations in spelling.
Retained archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings as printed.
Read Iamblichus on the Mysteries (1895) by Iamblichus — Full Text Online Free | Open Old Books