Iamblichus on the mysteries of the Egyptians, Chaldeans,...

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.

121. Here too for Αβυδῳ I read αδυτῳ.

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;