31 http://www.practical-philosophy.org.

uk
One of the most significant foundations of Neoplatonism
is the idea that philosophy as an intellectual discipline
cannot be separated from the way in which one lives.
Platonists taught that the pursuit of wisdom requires the
purification of body and soul otherwise, the soul will be
distracted or contaminated. The later Platonists,
particularly Proclus and Iamblichus, made extensive use
of ritual and polytheistic religious practices, which they
considered to be a requirement for the purification of the
soul and an aid for attaining union with divinity. In his
biography of his master, Marinus presents Proclus life as
being completely infused with reverence for the divine,
and there is a constant emphasis on ritual practice as
essential to the philosophical life. Iamblichus and
Porphyry also frequently discuss the significance of oracles
and religious practices in their writings. Late Neoplatonic
praxis inherently embodied a spiritual discipline and
worship of the gods which was viewed by its practitioners
as an integral part of the philosophical life; it represents a
worldview that is greatly misunderstood, and, therefore,
often unjustly dismissed and neglected by contemporary
Western society. This paper will examine the way in which
oracles and ritual practices were used by the Neoplatonists,
the reasons that such practices were considered so
important and their relationship with philosophy. There
is also evidence for earlier philosophers corroborating these
views, which, although not mentioned explicitly, are
alluded to in numerous ways: this evidence will also be
briefly examined.
Marinus presents Proclus life as constantly permeated by
divinity and the biographer emphasises his teachers
extensive inclusion of ritual practices in his life. According
to Marinus, it was Proclus tutelary goddess, Rhea, who
acted as the main catalyst for his philosophical life by
appearing to him in a dream and exhorting him to go to
Athens to study philosophy (Marinus, Life of Proclus,
Chapters 6, 9). The practice of theurgy (which literally
means, god-working), a type of religious ritual which
was designed to attain union with the divine (anagog) and
the Chaldaean Oracles, a mystical collection of oracles,
were two key types of ritual praxis endorsed by both
Iamblichus and Proclus. Marinus describes Proclus ritual
observances:
The purificatory virtuesseparate and liberate them
from the truly leaden world of generation and produce
an uncurbed flight from the present world. And it was
these that the philosopher pursued throughout the
whole of his life, eloquently explaining in his discourses
what they are and how one comes to possess these
also, and living strictly in accordance with them, doing
on all occasions the things that produce separation for
the soul. Day and night he made use of apotropaic,
lustratory and other purifications, sometimes the
Orphic, sometimes the Chaldaean, going down to the
sea without fear at the beginning of every monthand
this he did not only in the prime of his life, but even as
he was approaching the evening of his life he observed
these customs unceasingly, as though they were
mandatory. (Marinus, Life of Proclus, Chapter 18).
One should understand here, that in traditional Graeco-
Roman religion, salt water was thought to purify the
religious participant. This is just one example of Proclus
ritual activity reported by Marinus. The biographer also
tells us that when Proclus was a youth, he spontaneously
worshipped the moon goddess at the propitious time. He
also celebrated the rites of the Great Mother Goddess (the
Phrygian goddess Cybele) and constantly performed
theurgy, the ritual practice espoused by the Chaldaean
Oracles (Marinus, Life of Proclus, Chapters 11, 19, 26, 28).
Iamblichus was also an active advocate of ritual practices:
indeed, his main surviving work, On the Mysteries of the
Egyptians, Chaldaeans and Assyrians,
1
is an apologia for the
practice of theurgy and examines the theological,
philosophical and theurgical basis for ritual, worship of
the gods and divination. The biographer Eunapius asserts
that Iamblichus, gained an easy access to the ears of the
gods, had a multitude of followers and sometimes
performed certain rites alone, when he worshipped the
Divine Being (Eunapius, Lives of the Philosophers and
Sophists, 458a). This seems to refer to theurgic ritual, which
encompassed divination.
Indeed, even the earlier Platonist philosopher Porphyry, a
disciple of Plotinus and a learned polymath, seems to have
considered religious practices to be an essential
consideration for the true philosopher. Porphyry wrote a
work entitled Philosophy from Oracles, which survives only
in fragments which are reported in the works of various
Church Fathers such as Eusebius and Augustine.
2
Eusebius quotes a section of the prologue of Porphyrys
Philosophy from Oracles, which reveals something about
Porphyrys intention in using oracles:
For I myself call the gods to witness, that I have neither
added anything, nor taken away from the meaning of
the responses [i.e. oracles], except where I have
corrected an erroneous phrase, or made a change for
greater clearness, or completed the metre when
defective, or struck out anything that did not conduce
to the purpose; so that I preserved the sense of what
Oracles, Religious Practices And Philosophy In
Late Neoplatonism
Crystal Addey
1 The original title of the work is The Reply of the Master Abammon
to the Letter of Porphyry to Anebo, and the Solutions to the
Questions it Contains. However the text has been known as
On the Mysteries since Ficino gave it the title De mysteriis
Aegyptiorum, Chaldaeorum, Assyriorum, in the fifteenth century.
Cf. E.C. Clarke, J.M. Dillon and J.P. Hershbell (2003), xlviii.
32 http://www.practical-philosophy.org.uk
Practical Philosophy Special Edition Autumn 2007
was spoken untouched, guarding against the impiety
of such changes (Porphyry, Philosophy from Oracles,
F303 (Smith) in: Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel,
IV.7).
In the first and last lines of this fragment, Porphyry clearly
asserts that to change the inherent meaning of oracular
responses would be impious, demonstrating clearly his
reverence for the gods since all oracles were thought to be
divine utterances. Porphyry continues his prologue by
stating that:
And our present collection will contain a record of
many doctrines of philosophy, according as the gods
declared the truth to be; but to a small extent we shall
also touch upon the practice of divination, such as will
be useful both for contemplation, and for the general
purification of life. And the utility which this collection
possesses will be best known to as many as have ever
been in travail with truth, and prayed that by receiving
the manifestation of it from the gods they might gain
relief from their perplexity by virtue of the trustworthy
teaching of the speakers. (Porphyry, Philosophy from
Oracles, F303 (Smith) in: Eusebius, Preparation for the
Gospel, IV.7).
Here Porphyry claims that an accurate interpretation of
traditional oracles could help the philosopher in his search
for salvation and divine truth. This introductory
programmatic statement, and indeed the title itself (the
Philosophy to be derived from Oracles) clearly show
Porphyrys conviction that philosophical truth and insight
could be received through oracles, the key religious
practice through which gods spoke to mortals in traditional
Graeco-Roman religion. Bidez view that Porphyry wrote
this book in his youth before he had become a disciple of
Plotinus and consequently, when he was more
superstitious and less rational, is now largely discounted
by scholars (Bidez, 1913, 19-20. For the rejection of Bidez
view cf. OMeara, 1959, 34; Smith, 1987, 717, 773, 733;
Beatrice, 1992, 350). Indeed, Porphyrys Life of Plotinus,
the biography of his master which was written by the
philosopher in his old age, culminates in a long, poetical
oracle about the fate of Plotinus soul (Porphyry, Life of
Plotinus, Chapter 22). According to Porphyry, this
prophetic verse came from an Oracle of Apollo, and
although he does not explicitly report whether this oracle
came from Delphi, Didyma or some other oracular shrine,
it seems quite likely that this oracle came from Apollos
Delphic Oracle.
3
Many scholars still see a fundamental
division between Porphyry, as a follower of the
rationalistic Plotinus, and more mystical or
superstitious Platonists such as Iamblichus and Proclus
(Edwards, 1991; Dodds, 1951). However, Porphyrys Life
of Plotinus contains a very interesting account of an incident
in Plotinus school, where at the celebration of Platos
birthday, Porphyry read a poem entitled The Sacred
Marriage of which he says:
because many things were mystically and
enigmatically stated in a rapturous style, someone
exclaimed that Porphyry was raving; but he [i.e.
Plotinus] said in the hearing of all: You have proved
yourself simultaneously a poet, a philosopher and a
teacher of sacred truth (hierophantes) (Porphyry, Life of
Plotinus, Chapter 15).
Whether or not one agrees that Plotinus actually said these
things or even if the incident occurred at all, it certainly
strongly indicates the way in which Porphyry wished to
be viewed: not just as a conceptual philosopher, but as a
poet and a hierophant, a priest. Additionally, in Porphyrys
Letter to Marcella, we see the philosopher advocating the
observance of traditional religious rites:
The chief fruit of piety is to honour God according to
the laws of our countrywe are not harmed by
reverencing Gods altars, nor benefited by neglecting
them (Porphyry, Letter to Marcella, Chapter 15).
This may constitute only a very cautious approval of
traditional religion, but in the same treatise Porphyry
speaks of philosophy in connection with divine rites when
advising his wife Marcella:
deem it no trivial matter to remember these words
by which you were with divine rites initiated into true
philosophy, approving by your deeds the fidelity with
which they have been apprehended. For it is a mans
actions that naturally afford demonstrations of his
opinions, and whoever holds a belief must live in
accordance with it (Porphyry, Letter to Marcella,
Chapter 8).
Here, not only does Porphyry connect divine rites with
philosophy, but he also emphasises the importance of
experience and action in true philosophy. Thus, we have
seen that Porphyry, Iamblichus and Proclus all viewed
religious and ritual practices, including oracles, as
important concomitants to philosophy: they all believed,
to a greater or lesser extent, that religious practice was a
vital part of the true philosophical life.
Why were ritual and religious practices such as these
considered so important by these Neoplatonist
philosophers? In order to understand the integration of
polytheistic religious phenomena (which contemporary
western society often views as irrational superstition) with
philosophy, it is important to consider Neoplatonic views
about the nature of truth, the hierarchical structure of the
universe and the idea of sympatheia, similar to the
microcosm-macrocosm view of the cosmos. These ideas,
which were inherent in the Neoplatonic worldview, are
key in understanding how religious practices were seen as
part of a philosophical life.
To begin with, it is vital to understand that for the
Neoplatonists, the idea of truth is hierarchical: there are
2 Fragments from Porphyrys Philosophy from Oracles are
primarily preserved in the works of Eusebius and Augustine,
although some fragments are preserved by John Philoponus,
Firmicus Maternus, Theodoret and in the anonymous
Tbingen Theosophy. Cf. A. Smith (1993), 351-407.
3 Ibid, Chapter 22. Before quoting the Oracle on Plotinus,
Porphyry quotes an extract from Herodotus Histories, 1.47,
which are words reported by Herodotus as coming from the
Oracle of Apollo at Delphi. Cf. Edwards (2000), 40, n.226-228.
33 http://www.practical-philosophy.org.uk
different ontological levels of truth, or reality, in the
cosmos. The goal of philosophy, according to the
Neoplatonists, is to reach the highest levels of truth possible
and thus to attain union with divinity, since they believed
that truth is divine, following the Platonic definition of
truth as universal, eternal (and therefore immortal) and
unchanging. This point is very important, since what the
Neoplatonists meant by truth is far more than merely
being the result of empirical and mechanistic logic which
is often taken today as a definition of truth.
The later Platonists thought that discursive thought could
only go so far: the highest level of truth could only be
gained by direct experience of the divine, in other words
the performance of ritual and the comprehension of oracles,
which acted as direct links to divinity. Damascius, one of
the last of the Platonic philosophers, asserted that those
who practice philosophy without performing rituals of
purification and initiation will never bring their souls into
union with divinity (Damascius, In Phaed, I.168).
Iamblichus emphasised that theurgic rituals and oracular
practices give mortals the direct experiential activity
necessary to induce pure vision of the highest levels of
truth. He also emphasised the fact that divine possession,
and thus oracular activity, come from the gods. The highest
level of truth is divinely bestowed upon mortals and can
only be achieved by experiencing divinity in a direct way
rather than by the conceptual word play of discursive
thinking:
It is not pure thought that unites theurgists to the gods.
Indeed what then would hinder those who are
theoretical philosophers from enjoying a theurgic union
with the gods? But the situation is not so: it is the
accomplishment of acts not to be divulged and beyond
all conception, and the power of the unutterable
symbols, understood solely by the gods, which
establishes theurgic union. Hence, we do not bring about
these things by intellection alone; for thus their efficacy would
be intellectual, and dependent upon us. But neither
assumption is true. [my italics] (Iamblichus, De
Mysteriis, II.11 (96.13-97.4).
Gregory Shaw eruditely explains that Iamblichus is
describing a process by which the god acts through the
philosopher-theurgist, who becomes a vehicle for a deeper
reality, a god (Shaw, 2004). To explain this another way,
discursive thinking works within a dualistic framework,
trapping the thinker within the subject-object dichotomy
as knowing the other as other so it could never lead to
a complete union with the divine (Shaw, 1995, 96).
However, the act of discursive thought is a vital
preparation for theurgy; the theurgist must also be a
philosopher:
Effective union certainly never takes place without
knowledge, but nevertheless it is not identical with it.
Thus, divine purity does not come about through right
knowledgebut divine union and purification actually
go beyond knowledge. (Iamblichus, De Mysteriis, II.11
(98.6-10).
The most profound levels of truth can therefore be
experienced by humans only in moments of divine
inspiration. Iamblichus describes divine possession as
coming from the gods:
Divine possession is not a human action nor does its
power rest on human attributes or actions, for these
are otherwise receptively disposed and the god uses
them as his instruments. The god completes the entire
work of divination by himselfwith neither the soul
nor the body being moved at all, the god acts by
himself (Iamblichus, De Mysteriis, III.7 (115.3-7).
Translation is that of Shaw (2004), 5).
Thus, according to Iamblichus, prophetic experiences
transcend our modes of discourse (Shaw, 2004, 5); through
oracular inspiration the gods give humans unified and
complete insight. Plato expresses this idea in the Phaedrus:
The greatest of blessings come to us through madness,
when it is sent as a gift of the gods. (Plato, Phaedrus,
244a8-9).
The first type of mania, or madness discussed by Socrates
in this dialogue after the above statement, is divination.
Socrates also includes poetry as a type of mania which is a
divine gift, clarifying the ancient practice of invoking the
Muses at the beginning of every poem. Plato then contrasts
this type of divine inspiration which is entirely god-given
with rational and discursive faculties:
So also, when they gave a name to the investigation of
the future which rational persons conduct through
observation of birds and by other signs, since they
furnish mind and information to human thought from
the intellect they called it the oionostic artThe
ancients, then testify that in proportion as prophecy
(mantik) is superior to augury, both in name and in
fact, in the same proportion madness, which comes
from god is superior to sanity, which is of human
origin. (Plato, Phaedrus, 244c4 - d7).
Plato speaks of this contrast in terms of the difference
between prophecy and augury, or inspired and inductive
modes of divination.
How did rituals and oracular practices actually work?
Neoplatonism is based on a locative view of the cosmos,
which is founded on five basic principles: firstly, there is a
cosmic order that permeates every level of reality (or
truth), secondly, this cosmic order is the divine society of
the gods, thirdly, the structure and dynamics of this society
can be discerned in the movements and patterned
juxtapositions of the heavenly bodies, fourthly: human
society should be a microcosm of the divine society and
finally, the chief responsibility of priests is to attune human
order to the divine world (Smith,1978, 132). As an extension
of this, a key element in the Neoplatonist worldview is the
concept of cosmic sympathy (sympatheia), the idea that
everything in the universe is connected and different truths
are reflected in different ontological levels of the universe
in the way most appropriate or fitting to that level.
Consequently, the later Platonists used physical objects,
such as plants, herbs and incantations, in their theurgic
practices because these objects, or symbola (symbols), were
thought to contain divinity and to express particular divine
Oracles, religious practices and philosophy in late Neoplatonism Crystal Addey
34 http://www.practical-philosophy.org.uk
Practical Philosophy Special Edition Autumn 2007
truths. For example, the sun, the lion and the sunflower
were all symbola of the god Apollo-Helios, according to
Proclus (Proclus, On the Hieratic Art, 150.10-15). Gregory
Shaw points out that theurgy is founded on the Platonic
theory of Recollection, where the symbola acted as memory-
prods for the Forms, evoking a memory of the primary
and divine principles in the humans who used them (Shaw,
1995, 24). Thus through religious ritual the later Platonists
used symbola to tap into divine reality and open
themselves in a direct way to the powers of the gods.
Oracles, uttered by those who were divinely inspired, can
also be considered as symbola, using divine words to give
insight into truth. Since oracles were thought to derive
ultimately from the gods themselves, the wisdom and truth
contained within them allowed mortals a very direct access
to divinity.
At the beginning of this paper I mentioned that some earlier
philosophers seemed to corroborate these views. The most
obvious example is Plutarch, a Middle Platonist
philosopher, biographer and historian. Plutarch was a
priest at Delphi, the most famous and renowned oracle
centre in the ancient world. He wrote various dialogues
about the operation of the Delphic Oracle, which express
his philosophical ideas about the foundation of Delphi
(Plutarch, The Oracles at Delphi (De Pythiae Oraculis); The
Obsolescence of Oracles (De Defectu Oraculorum); The E at
Delphi (De E apud Delphos). All treatises are contained in
Plutarch, Moralia, Volume V, Loeb edn). Hence, Plutarch
evidently considered religion and philosophy to constitute
the same spectrum of truth and formed connective modes
of honouring the gods. Additionally, the ideas underlying
the ritual and oracular practices endorsed by the late
Platonists seem to at least stem from Platos philosophical
doctrines. For instance, the Theory of Forms and the
Theory of Recollection underlie and indeed make possible
the ideas of sympatheia and symbola. Platos view of the
Ideal City as corresponding to the harmonious and
perfectly balanced soul in the Republic could be seen as an
expression of sympatheia; at the very least it encapsulates
the microcosm-macrocosm idea so essential to theurgic
ritual.
Thus, for the later Platonists oracular and ritual practices
were the culmination of the philosophical life, allowing
the philosopher direct access to divine truth which was
considered unattainable by discursive, conceptual thinking
alone. By combining rational thought with practices that
honoured and imitated the divine order, the Platonists
believed they could gain union with divinity. The subject
of this paper is a vast, complex and profound area; however
I hope to have given an introduction to some of the key
ideas of the late Platonists which lay at the heart of their
ideal of a truly philosophical life lived in accordance with
the gods.
Crystal Addey is currently undertaking a PhD at the
University of Bristol, examining the role, development and
integration of divination and religious practices in Late
Platonist Philosophy during the Late Antique period. Her
research interests include all forms of Platonic philosophy,
divination, religion, magic and mystery cults in Antiquity,
and she has a deep interest in philosophy as a guide for
living and spirituality.
References
Primary Sources
Damascius, Commentary on Platos Phaedo, L.G. Westerink
(trs) (1977) The Greek Commentaries on Platos Phaedo: Volume
I. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing.
Eunapius, Lives of the Philosophers and Sophists, W.C. Wright
(trs) (1992) Loeb. London and New York: William
Heinemann.
Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel, E.H. Gifford (trs) (1981)
Volume I. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Iamblichus, De Mysteriis, E.C. Clarke, J.M. Dillon and J.P.
Hershbell (trs and eds) (2003). Atalanta: Society of Biblical
Literature.
Marinus, Life of Proclus, M.J. Edwards (trs) (2000)
Neoplatonic Saints: The Lives of Plotinus and Proclus by their
Students. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
Plato, Phaedrus, in H.N. Fowler (trs) (1982) Plato: Volume I,
Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Loeb.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Porphyry, Letter to Marcella, A. Zimmern (trs) (1986). Grand
Rapids: Phanes Press.
Porphyry, Life of Plotinus, M.J. Edwards (trs) (2000)
Neoplatonic Saints: The Lives of Plotinus and Proclus by their
Students. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
Porphyrii Philosophi Fragmenta, A. Smith (ed) (1993). Leipzig:
Teubner.
Proclus, On the Hieratic Art, cited in: B. Copenhaver (1988)
Hermes Trismegistus, Proclus and the Question of a
Philosophy of Magic in the Renaissance, in: I. Merkel and
A.G. Debus (eds), Hermeticism and the Renaissance.
Washington: Folger.
Secondary Works
Athanassiadi, P. (1992) Philosophers and Oracles: Shifts of
Authority in Late Paganism, Byzantion 62, 45-62.
Athanassiadi, P. (1993) Dreams, Theurgy and Freelance
Divination: The Testimony of Iamblichus, Journal of Roman
Studies 83, 115-30.
Beatrice, P.F. (1992) Towards a new edition of Porphyrys
Fragments Against the Christians, in: M.-O. Goulet-Caz,
G. Madec and D. OBrien (eds.) Chercheurs de sagesse.
Hommage Jean Ppin. Paris: tudes Augustiniennes, 347-
55.
Bidez, J. (1913) Vie de Porphyre, le philosophe no-platonicien.
Ghent: E. van Goethem.
Clarke, E.C. (1998) Communication, Human and Divine:
Saloustios Reconsidered, Phronesis 43, 326-350.
35 http://www.practical-philosophy.org.uk
Dodds, E.R. (1951) The Greeks and the Irrational. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Edwards, M.J. (1991) Two Episodes in Porphyrys Life of
Plotinus, Historia 40, 456-464.
Edwards, M.J. (1993) A Portrait of Plotinus, Classical
Quarterly 43, 480-490.
Fowden, G. (1986) The Egyptian Hermes: A Historical
Approach to the Late Pagan Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
OMeara, J.J. (1959) Porphyrys Philosophy from Oracles in
Augustine. Paris: tudes Augustiniennes.
Shaw, G. (1993) The Geometry of Grace: A Pythagorean
Approach to Theurgy, in: H.J. Blumenthal and E.G. Clark
(eds) The Divine Iamblichus: Philosopher and Man of Gods.
Bristol: Bristol Classical Press, 116-137.
Shaw, G. (1995) Theurgy and the Soul: The Neoplatonism of
Iamblichus. University Park, Pennsylvania: The
Pennsylvania State University Press.
Shaw, G. (2004) The Talisman: Magic and True
Philosophers. Paper given at the Imaginal Cosmos:
Astrology, Divination and the Sacred Conference,
University of Kent, Canterbury, 1-2 October 2004.
Sheppard, A. (1982) Proclus Attitude to Theurgy, Classical
Quarterly 32.1, 212-224.
Sheppard, A. (1993) Iamblichus on Inspiration: De Mysteriis
3.4-8, in: H.J. Blumenthal and E.G. Clark (eds.) The Divine
Iamblichus: Philosopher and Man of Gods. Bristol: Bristol
Classical Press, 138-143.
Smith, A. (1974) Porphyrys Place in the Neoplatonic Tradition:
A Study in Post-Plotinian Neoplatonism. The Hague: Martinus
Nijhoff.
Smith, A. (1987) Porphyrian Studies since 1913, ANRW
II.36.2.
Smith, A. (1993) Iamblichus Views on the Relationship of
Philosophy to Religion in De Mysteriis, in: H.J. Blumenthal
& E.G. Clark (eds.) (1993), The Divine Iamblichus: Philosopher
and Man of Gods. Bristol: Bristol Classical Press, 74-86.
Smith, J.Z. (1978) Map is not Territory. Leiden: Brill.
Swain, S. (1991) Plutarch, Hadrian and Delphi, Historia 40,
318-330.
Oracles, religious practices and philosophy in late Neoplatonism Crystal Addey