npltnsm

Neoplatonism

Neoplatonism was the last of the great schools of Classical pagan

philosophy. A synthesis of Platonism, Aristotlism, Stoicism, and

Pythagoreanism, which provided an esoteric interpretation of

classical Greek Paganism, it incorporated philosophy, mysticism,

theosophy, and theurgy (higher occultism). For three centuries it

served as a last bastion of Pagan wisdom and Esoteric philosophy

in an increasingly hostile Christian dominated empire. Even after

the light of Classical Learning was extinguished, the Neoplatonic

current remained, undergoing new metamorphoses, in Christian

Mysticism, Islamic Philosophy, Ishraqi and Sufi Esotericism, and

Judaic Kabbalah. Now with the decline of materialistic scepticism

and religious intolerance, and the rise of diversity and multiplicity

in the new information-rich society, may the light of

Neoplatonism shine once more!

Neoplatonism was the last of the great schools of Greek

philosophy; and the most mystical. It's founder Plotinus and his

successors taught an elaborate emanationist cosmology.

The Roots of Neoplatonism

As the last great school of Greek philosophy and mysticism,

Neoplatonism borrowed from all preceding schools. The

influence of Aristotle himself can be found in the Neoplatonic

philosophical method and propositions of logic. In its scepticism

of empirical knowledge it draws from the Cynic and Pyrrhic line.

In its dualistic emanationist metaphysics and aspiring to the Good

in a transcendent spiritual sphere it is clearly a continuation of

the Platonic school. Its derivation of all realities from a

transcendent One is pure Neopythagoreanism. Its ethics have

been adopted from Stoicism. And its conception of the action of

the Divine in the world, and the essence and origin of matter, is

clearly derived from the dynamic pantheism of Stoicism. Indeed,

Neoplatonism could be seen as the culmination of Greek

metaphysical thought, not as a mere eclecticism but a true

synthesis.

Ammonius Saccus

Although Ammonius Saccus was reputedly the founder of the

Neoplatonic school in Alexandria, none of his writings, and very

little information about his life, has survived. In addition to

Plotinus, his pupils include a number of others.

Ammonius's students:

Erennius was, along with Plotinus and Origen, a member of

Ammonius' inner circle. Nothing else is known about him.

Longinus was considered by Plotinus a scholar but not a

philosopher. In contrast to conventional Platonism he located

the Forms at a level beneath the Nous. He was Porphyry's

teacher before the latter met Plotinus.

Origen has been confused with the great Christian theologian

of the same name. He rejected Plotinus' concept of the One

and regarded the Nous the highest principle

Plotinus - see below.

Plotinus (204-270 c.e.)

Plotinus is one of the giants of western spirituality - both mystic

and philosopher - who in his Enneads describes reality in terms of

a series of divine hierarchies or hypostases. He taught the

rejection of worldly things and purification of the soul as the

means for returning to the One.

Later Neoplatonists

Whilst Plotinus was the founder and dominant theorist of the

Neoplatonic movement, his successors developed a more

sophisticated cosmology and metaphysic within the general

framework he laid out. And here we find two tendencies.

First is the reduction in the number of hypostases postulated (for

example the identification of the One and the Nous), such as was

taught by the Plotinian and Porphyrian schools. Plotinus and his

immediate successors such as Porphyry and an anonymous

commentator tended to "telescope" the Hypostases, to reduce

them to a single pantheistic One1 analogous to the immanent

Absolute of Eastern Monism (Advaita Vedanta, Mahayana

Buddhism, etc). Here we see the "mystical" side of Neoplatonism.

In contrast to this is the tendency to increase the number of

hypostases, for example in th teachings of the

Syrian Iamblichus (died c.326) and the Athenian Proclus (412-

485). These later philosophers not only multiplied Plotinus' three

hypostases, formulating a large number of metaphysical

1 R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.111f

principles, but also introduced greater systematisation and

complexity, and indeed also a strong element of rigidity, into

Neoplatonic metaphysics.

On this basis we can distinguish three periods of post-Plotinian

development:2

1. the teaching of Plotinus' immediate pupils such as Porphyry and Amelius;

2. the Syrian and Pergamene schools deriving from the teachings of Iamblichus; and

3. the fifth and sixth century schools of Athens and Alexandria

Porphyry and Amelius

Amelius Gentilianus was Plotinus' senior disciple. He emphasised

the unity between individual souls and the Nous, adopted

Numenius' idea of a triple division with of the Nous, considered

(unusually) the Forms to be infinite in number and (equally

unusually) postulated a Form of Evil. He put great value on the

prologue of the Gospel of John and wrote a forty-volume

refutation of a Gnostic text.3

Although Porphyry c.232-c.305) is best known for organizing

and editing Plotinus's writings and lectures, he also made several

original contributions regarding the nature of the hypostases,

tending to adopt a more "monistic" and pantheistic position than

Plotinus. His simplification of Plotinus' thought appealed to the

2 R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.1.

3 Adolph Harnack and John Malcolm Mitchell, "Neoplatonism", in

Encyclopaedia Brittanica, vol XIX, p.376, (Eleventh Edition, 1911); R. T.

Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.94

practically-minded Romans, and influenced both pagans like

Macrobius and Christians like Augustine.4 [More on Porphyry]

Iamblichus and the Syrian School

Iamblichus was the chief representative of Syrian Neoplatonism.

He modified the basic Plotinian metaphysic through a greater

elaboration of the hypostases, a more systematic application of

Pythagorean number-symbolism, and, under the influence of

Oriental systems, less of an emphasis on the intellectual approach

and more the occult-magical and mythical. By this latter he

presented a philosophical interpretation of popular Hellenistic

religion. His influence extends even to the Theosophists of the

late 19th and early 20th century.

Aedesius was Iamblichus' chief student. He founded a school in

Pergamum (now Albania). the school seems to have placed some

emphasis on the Plotinian philoophical-mystical way of

purification, rather than solely the theurgic.

Theodorus of Asine was another student; he broke away from the

master and taught a synthesis of a number of different teachings,

combining elements from Numenius, Plotinus, Amelius,

Porphyry, and Iamblichus.5 He does not seem to have had any

long-term influence.

Iamblichus and his successors rejected the pure philosophical

speculation of early Neoplatonists and increasingly emphasised

theurgy,6 thus paralleling the greater emphasis on ritual magical

procedures in later, Tantric, forms of Hinduism and Buddhism.

There was also a tendency towards increasing scholasticism and

textual fundamentalist adherence to Classical sources, along with

an increasing metaphysical complexity; in contrast to the

4 R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.96

5 Ibid, p.95

6 R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.93,

simplicity of Plotinus' hierarchy, the Iamblichus and the post-

Iamblichean schools formulated a proliferation of Hypostases,

with ever more rigid divisions between them.7

[More on Iamblichus]

Proclus and the Athenian School

Until the beginning of the fifth century, Neoplatonic schools still

flourished in the major cities of the Empire. But the murder of the

female mathematician Hypatia by a mob of fanatical Christians

showed that the Church would no longer endure the presence of

"heathenism". Although the school in Alexandria maintained a

lingering existence until the middle of the sixth century, it was

elsewhere that Hellenistic philosophy found its last refuge. In

Athens, which was by now a mere provincial town, a Neoplatonic

centre still flourished.

In a time when classical civilisation was in decline, the Athenian

academy returned to a stricter philosophical method and

scholarship. It sought to interpret the entire Greek tradition,

undertook in the light of Plotinus, to a comprehensive and tightly-

knit system. Hence the earlier mysticism and magic was replaced

by a drier and more intellectual approach; in other words

scholasticism. For these Athenian Neoplatonists, the works of

Plato, the Chaldean Oracles, the Orphic poems, and much more

which was assigned to a great antiquity, were inspired divine

writings, and formed the basic material, which was then

elaborated through dialectic hermeneutics.

The first head of the school was Plutarch of Athens (d.432 c.e.)

not to be confused with the great Roman biographer of the same

name. The school flourished under his disciple Syrianus (d. c.437)

an important commentator on Plato and Aristotle, and Proclus

7 Ibid, p.93, 123.

(412-85). the last great thinker of Greek thought, and the best

known and most important of the later Neoplatonists.

Thenceforth under Marinus, Isidorus, Hegias and Zenodotus a

period of decline set in. Under the talented Damascius there was a

revival of Platonism, and it could be speculated that this

encouraged the emperor Justinian to close the school.8 [More on

Proclus]

The Alexandrian School

The school of Alexandria is not the same as the vibrant academy

under Ammonius. It seems to date back to the late fourth and

early fifth centuries, represented by the mathematician Theon and

his daughter Hypatia, who was martyred by a Christian mob

under the instigation of the infamous church leader Cyril.

Persecution seems to have been common. Hierocles was flogged

by the authorities in Constantinople, despite the fact that his

teachings were more monotheistic than those of other pagan

Neoplatonists. (Ironically, the school of Alexandria also included

among its members a number of Christian philosophers, such as

Aeneas and John Philoponus.)

It was only with Heimonius and his son Ammonius that a definite

succession can be traced at Alexandria. Olympiodorus the

Platonic commentator was the last pagan head of the school, after

his death it passed into Christian hands under the Aristotlean

commentators Elias and David. The school's last head, Stephanus,

moved to and became head of an academy in Constantinople in

610. In 641 the Alexandrian school was captured by the Arabs. It

thus played an important part in the transmission of Neoplatonic

thought to both the Byzantine and the Islamic civilisations.

8 Ibid, p.138

Whereas the Athenian school was strongly influenced by

Iamblichus, and shared his enthusiasm for metaphysics, ritual,

and paganism, the Alexandrian school concentrated instead on

pure scholarship. But despite rivalry between them, the

relationships between the two schools were close and

intermarriage between their members common; and most

representatives taught or studied in both cities before settling

down in one.9

The End of Neoplatonism

Proclus' works exerted a great influence on the next thousand

years. They not only formed one of the bridges by which

medieval thinkers rediscovered Plato and Aristotle, but also

determined scientific method up until the sixteenth century, and

through "Pseudo"-Dionysius gave rise to and nurtured the

Christian mysticism of the middle ages.

In 529, Justinian closed the school of Athens. Damascius, the

Aristotlean commentator Simplicius, and five other Neoplatonists

set out for Persia, hoping they would be able to teach and

continue there under Chosroes I. But conditions were

unfavourable, and they were allowed to return to Athens.

Neoplatonism was the last of the great Hellenistic systems of

thought to fall. Yet quite a lot of it did survive in Christian and

Islamic form. In the West, Christian neoplatonism exerted a

strong influence on philosophy and theology at least until the rise

of scientific materialism in the seventeenth and eighteenth

centuries. Neoplatonism had a profound effect on mediaeval

Christian and Islamic mystical thought and on Jewish Kabbalah,

Renaissance Hermeticism, the Cambridge Platonism of the 18th

century, and 19th century Theosophy. In the more philosophical

Islamic circles it is still going strong, appearing in the works of

9 Ibid, pp.139-140

modern Islamic philosophers such as Fritjof Schuon and Sayyed

Hossien Nasr.

And through Theosophy its traces can be seen in the modern day

"New Age" movements, and through Islam and Sufism (e.g.,

modern day writers like Fritjof Schuon) it made its way into the

"New Paradigm" and transpersonal psychology arena.

Yet for all its influence, it is surprising how little it is in evidence

on the electronic frontier of the Net itself (a few entries in on-line

philosophy and theology encyclopaedias, and a digital version of

Plotinus' Enneads.. It is hoped this small project will go some

small way to rectifying that shortcoming.

Plotinus

Plotinus (204/5-270 c.e.) was an Egyptian by birth but Greek (or

Hellenistic) by upbringing. He studied philosophy in Alexandria

under Ammonius Saccus, before joining a military campaign

against Persia, where he encountered Indian ideas. He went to

Rome c 244, where he taught until about 268. His lectures were

only committed to writing later in life. As the central figure of

Neoplatonism, Plotinus was the representative of a spiritual-

philosophical tradition that begins with Plato or before, and

passes through the stages of early post-Platonism and Middle

Platonism.

Plotinus' metaphysics

Emanation

Central to Plotinus' metaphysics is the process of ceaseless

emanation and outflowing from the One. Plotinus gives

metaphors such as the radiation of heat from fire or cold from

snow, fragrance from a flower or light from the sun.10

This basic theme reappears in the scholastic maxim that "good

diffuses itself" (bonum diffusivum sui); entities that have

achieved perfection of their own being do not keep that perfection

to themselves, but spread it out by generating an external image

of their internal activity.11

This then leads to the idea that Arthur Lovejoy, in his book The

Great Chain of Being, calls "the principle of plenitude". What this

means is that emanation from the One cannot terminate until

10

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.61 11

Ibid, p.61

everything that has possibly come into existence has done so.

Creation cannot stop at the world of the Gods, but must continue

downwards through all possible levels of being and imperfection.

Things cannot all be good, and indeed, as Plotinus says, the

universe would be less perfect if they were, just as it may be

necessary for a beautiful work of art that not all its parts are

beautiful in isolation.12

In contrast to the monotheistic idea of a God who creates through

a deliberate act of will, Plotinus sees the activity of the Divine

Hypostases is more like the spontaneous operation of nature than

the laborious deliberations of a human craftsman.13

Emanation: Further Clarification

The Emanation of Worlds in Lurianic Kabbalah

The word "Emanation" comes from the Latin e-manare, "to flow

forth". The cosmos and finite beings are all seen as having

emerged out of the Absolute Reality through a sort of "out-

12

Ennead III. 2. 11; & R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.65 13

(Ennead IV. 3. 10; IV. 4. 11), R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.63, 65.

flowing". Metaphors are with the ocean (the Absolute) and the

waves (the Universe); the Sun (the Absolute) and the Light that

shines from it (the Universe); a fountain (the Absolute) which

overflows (the universe); and so on.

According to Emanationism, Creation occurs by

a process of emanation - "out-flowing". The

entire cosmos, and even all the Gods and

Godheads beyond the Cosmos, has come about

through emanation. Just as the ocean forms its

surface into waves, so the Absolute forms upon

and as Itself successive manifestations,

successive entities. And these in turn create - or

rather, emanate - further entities, and so on, with

all these entities combining and interacting in

the extraordinary network of existence.

Each of the levels of reality in the Emanationist

Cosmology could be termed a "World". Here,

"World" is a general term meaning any self-

contained realm or universe of existence. One

could equally well say "Universe", "Cosmos", "Sphere", "Realm",

"Plane", "horizon", "reality", "state of existence", "state of

consciousness", etc. The term "World" has been chosen simply

because it is a useful general term.

One could think of the relationship between each of these levels

as being like "body and soul", "spirit and matter", or "Creator and

creature", in that each higher level is the Soul, Spirit, and Creator

of the level immediately below it; and the Body, Matter, and

Creature (created being) of the level immediately above it.

Jaina diagram of

progressively

denser bands of

matter projecting

into the Universe

The Emanationist position then, is based, not a single Creator-

Created Dichotomy, but rather on a series or "hierarchy" of

realities or "Worlds", arranged "vertically" (inverted commas are

used because these terms are simply metaphoric, and should not

be taken literally). Each higher world "generates" the one below it

through a process of emanation, and each therefore stands in the

position of "God" or "Creator" to the level or grade below it.

Thus, Creation is not Creation out of nothing, but creation out of

the being of the higher hypostasis.

Each of the levels or stages in this "spectrum" or "great chain of

being" has its own specific characteristics. So you could speak of

the psychic world (or "astral plane"), the angelic world, the

archangelic world, the Divine world, and so on; hierarchy upon

hierarchy, world upon world, a kind of epiphany or manifestation

of the Divine; all looking downwards to matter, and also looking

upwards to the godhead.

Such a Cosmology has to be lived. It cannot be a mere theoretical

thing. It must be an actual Vision of Reality. The Vision of

Worlds beyond Worlds, of hierarchies of Angels or Gods

arranged in order upon order, Light above Light, is a truly

magnificent and awe-inspiring one. It is not abstract speculation.

It is contemplative reality.

diagram of the relation-

ship between spirit and

matter, according to the

emanationist paradigm

Emanationism: Even More Clarification

In contrast to the familiar Judaeo-Christian mono-

theistic view, according to which the whole universe

just appears ready- made through Divine Fiat (or

command), and the materialistic view which simply

ignores first principles, Emanationism explains creation as a

gradual process of emanation and descent from a transcendental

Absolute to mundane reality. Thus there is no Creator

God standing apart from, even if intimately connected with, the

universe as in monotheism; but rather a series of stages of down-

grading of Consciousness-Being, by means of which the Absolute

principle actually becomes the multiplicity of entities and objects

It has been suggested (by Professor Huston Smith, in his

book Forgotten Truth) that the basic cosmology, arrived at

independently by many different philosophies and spiritual

traditions, shows Reality to be divided into a very minimum

of four levels or planes of reality: the Infinite or Absolute (the

topic of Monism), the Celestial or Divine, the Intermediate or

Psychic (with which occultism deals), and the Terrestrial or

Physical (the level considered by Materialism). Each of these can

in turn be sub-divided

Thus, applying this in an emanationist perspective, the process of

creation, in the emanationist cosmogony and cosmology,

proceeds through a number of distinct stages. First the Absolute

produces the Spiritual reality (or "God"). The Spiritual reality in

turn produces the Psychic reality. And finally, the Psychic reality

produces the Physical reality; the material world. Each reality

constitutes a specific stage of manifestation

Emanationism understands the more subtle and spiritual realities

as preceding and generating the grosser and more material ones,

and not vice-versa as materialism assumes; and that moreover

those grosser realities are the result of an out-flowing from the

subtle, rather than being created ex nihilo - out of nothing - as

the Theistic religions claim

Emanationism also avoids the Monist's dilemma of how to

reconcile Unity (the Absolute) and Multiplicity (the World) by

recognising that both the universe and the Absolute are "equally"

real and valid, but they simply have a different position or status

in the spectrum of being.

Plotinus' Mysticism

For Plotinus, and other Greek mystics, such as Plotinus'

predecessors Plato and Pythagoras, Spirituality means the ascent

from the lower sense-reality to the higher spiritual reality. Like

twentieth century scientists such as Albert Einstein, these ancient

Greek mystics derived meaning and purpose from the

contemplation of nature. But instead of contemplating the wonder

of visible physical reality, they contemplated the wonder of the

invisible spiritual reality which they saw as the cause and ultimate

meaning behind the physical reality.

Plotinus believed that man should reject material things and

should purify his soul and to lift it up to a communion with the

One.

The Hypostases

Also central in Plotinus' cosmology is the a chain of hypostases.

...With regard to the existence that is supremely perfect [i.e.

"The One"], we must say it only produces the very greatest

of the things that are found below it. But that which after it

is the most perfect, the second principle, is Intelligence

(Nous). Intelligence contemplates the One and needs

nothing but it. But the One has no need of Intelligence [i.e.

being the Absolute Principle, it is totally self-sufficient].

The One which is superior to Intelligence produces

Intelligence which is the best ex-istence after the One, since

it is superior to all other beings. The (World-)Soul is the

Word (Logos) and a phase of the activity of Intelligence

just as Intelligence is the logos and a phase of the activity

of the One. But the logos of the Soul is obscure being only

an image of Intelligence. The Soul therefore directs herself

to Intelligence, just as the latter, to be Intelligence, must

contemplate the One....Every begotten being longs for the

being that begot it and loves it... 14

The Hypostases in Neoplatonist Metaphysics

The word hupostasis means "underlying state", or underlying

substance. In other words, that fundamental realitry that supports

all else. Neoplatonist worldview teaches that behind the surface

phenomena that presents themselves to the senses are three

such higher spiritual principles or hypostases: each one more

sublime thna the preceeding. These are: the One or Absolute,

the Nous or Divine Mind, and the Psuche or World-Soul. Each

higher principle emanates the next, as its image. The One is

the transcendent, ineffable Source of all. From this arises the

Nous, the eternal, blissful, Divine Consciousness. The Nous in

turn generates the World-Soul, the creative consciousness which

exists in time. From and through the World-Soul is fashioned the

material cosmos. The Philosopher through contemplating the

spiritual realities returns back to the Source, thus completing the

cycle of precession (emanation) and return.

So much for philosophy and mysticism, but Neoplatonic thinkers

also equated the hypostases with deities of the Greek pantheon.

14

Ennead V:i:6; translated by Joseph Katz, The Philosophy of Plotinus,

pp.15-6 (Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc, New York, 1950)

The hypostases of Neoplatonism constitute a well defined

example of an emanationist representation of Reality - the idea

that Reality begins with an original transcendent ineffable infinite

Godhead or Absolute, and that this goes through various stages of

diminuation or deprivation, the gradation from spirit to matter.

The Neoplatonic hypostases in relation to other esoteric systems

of thought:

Plotinus (Neoplatonism) Mahayana

Buddhism

Kashmir

Shaivism

Ibn Arabi

(Sufism) Kabbalah

hypostasis trikaya kala hadrath olam

(World)

One Dharmakaya

Paramashiva En Sof

Shiva tattwa

Divine Mind (Nous) Sambhogakaya

Pure tattwas

Atzilut

Pure-Impure

Beriah

World Soul Nirmanakaya

(subtle and gross

bodies)

Impure

Yetzirah

Asiyah hyle (sense -world) Earth

The Logos

As the relationship between a Hypostasis and its products, the

Logos denotes the plan or formative principle from which the

lower realities evolve and by which their development is

governed.15

Plotinus uses the term not to indicate a separate hypostasis

(contra Philo, Christianity, etc), but to express the relationship

between a Hypostasis and its source or its products or both.16

For Plotinus therefore, the relation between the grades of being,

or hypostases, is a two-fold process. There is a downward process

of Emanation or "outflowing", and a corresponding upward

process of return through Contemplation. This can be represented

diagrammatically as follows:

THE ONE

The Absolute and Source

|

emanation contemplation

|

N O U S

The "Divine Mind";

Eternal and Transcendent.

|

emanation contemplation

|

P S Y C H E

"Soul"; the dynamic, creative temporal

power, both cosmic ("World-Soul") and

individual (e.g. human consciousness).

The world of the senses

15


Ibid, p.68

Procession and Reversion

Plotinus distinguishes two stages of emanation. The first,

prohodros or Procession is the formless, infinite stream of life that

flows forth from the One. But it is impossible for beings to

receive any shape as long as the descent into multiplicity

continues unchecked; they must turn back upon themselves and

imitate the perfection of their Origin to the best of their ability.

Hence in the second stage, epistrophe, Reversion, being turns

back, contemplates the One, and so receives form and order. In

the subdivision of the second hypostasis into Being, Intelligence,

and Life, Life the Second Hypostasis in its unformed stage

(Procession), and Intelligence to the second stage, Reversion,

when it has received form and limit.17

This theme has been more recently taken up in

the Theosophical idea of "Life-waves" or "monadic essence" that

have emanated from the Absolute, but are still on the involu-

tionary or descending arc, and hence still formless.

The Three Hypostases

The One

Plotinus taught that Reality is an ontological gradation; that is, a

gradation of levels of being. The highest reality, or First Principle

which Plotinus called The One (to hen) is the most perfect and creative of all.

That [The One] which is eternally perfect is eternally

productive. That which it produces [the Nous] is eternal

too, though inferior to the generating principle...

In Plotinus' view, multiplicity is a fragmentation of the original

Unity. Hence each stage of emanation is a descent into greater

17

Ibid, pp.65-66

multiplicity, which means greater restriction, more needs, and the

dispersion and weakening of the power of previous stages.

Hence the Supreme principle must constitute the Negation of

Duality, in other words, the One. And, in a manner that was very

controversial to the Greeks, with their abhorrence of infinity,

Plotinus describes the One as Formless, Unmeasured, and

Infinite.

Plotinus was thus an early advocate in the West of what later

came to be called Negative Theology, which says that words and

conceptions can only tell us what the Absolute is not, no what it

is. While to deny, for example, that the One is motion does not

mean that it is rest, but rather that it is on a level where the duality

of motion and rest does not apply.

In Indian mysticism Negative Theology goes back to the earliest

Upanishads (mystical treatises, the oldest dating from the 7th and

8th Century B.C.E.), where it is said that Brahman (the Absolute)

is neti neti - "not this, not this". In Buddhism too, especially the

schools of Madhyamika and Zen, the dialectic of Negative

Theology was and is of central importance.

Plotinus applies Plato's term the Good to the One's role as the

supreme object of aspiration for all lower realities, due to its utter

freedom from limitation and lack of want.

The One has no need for its products and would not care if it had

no products at all; the process of emanation leaves the One totally

unaffected and unconcerned

The Nous

The beginning of each hypostasis constitutes a particular

discontinuity in the ontological spectrum. So The One is

characterised by absolute Unity, perfection, eternity, and

creativity. The Nous is still eternal, creative, perfect blissful, and

totally spiritual, but it is no longer unitary. Rather, this is the

region of Plato's Spiritual Forms. This idea has its roots ultimately

in the Middle Platonic view of Forms as thoughts of God.

At the level of the Nous, the individual still has his own identity,

but his contemplation embraces the whole Intelligible world and

everything in it. And since on this level subject and object are

identical, each member of the Intelligible order is identifiable

with the whole of that order, and every other member thereof. So

Universal Intelligence is a sort of unity-in-plurality. This is an

idea advocated earlier by the Neopythagorean philosopher

Numenius, the "all is in all"

Intelligence (Nous) is the level of intuition, where discursive

thought is bypassed and the mind attains a direct and

instantaneous vision of truth. The distinction between Soul and

Intelligence corresponds to the difference between discursive and

intuitive thought. Discursive thought means reasoning from

premise to conclusion, or being aware of first one thing, then

another

The Soul

With the Soul there is the beginning of time, and therefore of

Creation (because Creation by its very nature requires sequence in

which to occur). Whereas the Nous embraces the whole of the

Noetic world in one timeless vision, the Soul's contemplation is

forced to change from one thing to another.

The Soul thus constitutes the Nous projected into Time. Although

still creative and spiritual, is no longer eternal, or perfect in its

consciousness. It cannot see things in a holistic and all-embracing

way, but only successively, imperfectly, moment by moment, in

terms of past and future. In keeping with Greek thought generally,

Plotinus refers to an original cosmic and therefore Divine World-

Soul, which is the creator of the visible cosmos, and the

individual, for example the human, soul.

The Stoics conceived of individual souls as parts of the World-

Soul. For Plotinus in contrast, the World-Soul is herself an

individual soul, albeit a very large one, whose body is the cosmos

which she forms and administers. But both the individual and the

World- souls are manifestations of the one Universal Soul. This is

essentially the same as the monistic Hindu philosopher Shankara's

statement that the individual soul or Jiva and Ishwara or God the

creator and ruler of the universe are both the result of super-

imposition or Maya over the one Absolute or Atman-Brahman.18

As well as this "horizontal" division there is also a "vertical" one.

Plotinus and his successors integrated the Platonic distinction

between the rational and irrational souls with the Aristotlean

distinction of vegetative, sentient (animal), and rational soul-

levels. They thus postulated a whole range of levels of psychic

consciousness.

Being an intuitive and inspirational rather than a systematic

thinker, Plotinus sometimes divides the Soul into higher/rational

and lower/irrational, and sometimes into three or even more

levels, the various classifications often being contradictory with

each other.19

Sometimes the rational soul as a whole is identified

with the "unfallen" soul. Plotinus went so far as to say that the

soul, as an "intelligible cosmos", contains not only all other soul-

principles (or Logoi) but also the levels of Intelligence and the

One, and is therefore able to attain any of those principles; an idea

close to the Vedantic and Buddhist concept of Enlightenment or

Liberation.

Plotinus' psychology is as follows:

18

Vivekachudamani, vv. 243-246 19

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.73-4

The summit of Soul is an unfallen level which does not

descend into this world; the Noetic Soul. It is in constant

transcendent contemplation of the eternal Nous.

The Rational Soul is the highest level of the ordinary human

psyche, which is able to approach the spiritual.

The Irrational or Animal Soul, which is limited to the bodily or

animal passions and desires; the equivalent perhaps of the

Catholic "seven deadly sins". This is the bodily or "vegetative"

soul (phytikon) responsible both for physical growth and

nutrition, and also for the bodily appetites and emotions.20

The soul is thus an "amphibian", belonging to both the physical

and the intelligible (noetic) worlds.

This concept of "vertical psychology" was later to figure

prominently in Kabbalah and Sufism, and is still with us (minus

the higher or spiritual/noetic element) in the Freudian

psychoanalytical distinction of Ego (= Rational Soul) and Id (=

Irrational Soul). In modern Theosophy and Occultism also, this

gradation appears as the distinction between the Mental and the

Astral (or Emotional or Desire) bodies.

Sometimes Plotinus adds a further hypostasis, phusis or Nature,

as the lowest projection of Soul and the dim consciousness within

plants, between Soul and the Sensible World. The Theosophical

version of this is the "etheric plane".

The Soul is the lowest hypostasis, the lowest irradiation of the

Divine. Deficient as it is, it still retains a trace of the original on-

tological authenticity or Spiritual-Being-ness of the higher

principles. Below the Soul there is only non-conscious matter -

hyle - which Plotinus equated with "non-being" and total

deprivation. Plotinus describes Matter as "non-being", in view of

20

Ibid, pp.73-4.

its formlessness and utter unsubstantiality, although he denies that

this means absolute non-existence.21

Plotinus's Influence - the Islamic Connection

Plotinus' teachings were to exert an influence not only on later

Neoplatonists and Gnostics, but on the Islamic world too. This

happened quite by accident. An Arabic translation of a section of

Plotinus, padded out with his student Porphyry's commentary,

appeared, titled the Theology of Aristotle. Since the medieval

Islamic thinkers thought very highly of Aristotle, this work

exerted a strong formative influence on Islamic philosophical

thought. Thus, whereas Neoplatonism is no longer respected in

the West, except as an intellectual curiosity or historical

movement, the same is most definitely not the case with the

intelligent and the mystic Moslem. An Islamicised neoplatonism

has retained its popularity among progressive philosophers down

to the present day. Indeed, anyone who reads the works of

Frithjof Schuon, the important contemporary Sufi-inspired

theologian and Traditionalist, will notice the strongly Plotinian

bent to his metaphysics.

The Neoplatonism of Plotinus by Nima Hazini. Page one

of Neoplatonism: Framework for a Bah' Metaphysics. A very

good synopsis of Plotinus' teachings as presented in The

Enneads.

The complete text of The Enneads of Plotinus is avaliable

from

21

Ibid, p.48.

The Six Enneads - translated by Stephen MacKenna and B. S.

Page

The Internet Classics Archive (uses frames - select Plotinus from

the list of authors) divided into chapters for easier viewing

The Enneads (Gopher) - this is the complete text, all in one go, so

be prepared for a lareg download.

Plotinus (205-270) : Library of Congress Citations

parallels

QBL and Neoplatonism - Meredith Humensky - similarities

between Plotinian metaphysics and Hermetic Qabalah

Neoplatonism: A Metaphysical Precedent for the Structural

Dialectics Paradigm by Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. Has some material

on Plotinus about half-way down the page. Most of the page is on

Bahai'ism.

Porphyry

Porphyry (c.232/4-c.305) or Porphyrios was born in Tyre [now

Lebanon] or Batanaea [now Syria], and studied in Athens, before

joining the Neoplatonic group of Plotinus in Rome. In 263-268 or

thereabouts, Porphyry studied philosophy in Rome under

Plotinus, who rescued him from a suicidal depression.

In 301 Porphyry completed The Enneads, a systematized and

edited collection of the works of Plotinus, including a short but

very informative biography. The name Enneads means "Nines",

so-called because they were sorted into chapters of nine sections

each. (This arrangement of course was purely Porphyry's idea).

The Enneads became a book of great significance and influence,

not only in the Hellenistic-Roman world, but later in the Islamic

and Renaissance Christian worlds as well.

Although not an original thinker in the league of his teacher

Plotinus, or his student Iamblichus, Porphyry nevertheless was

possessed of great learning, an interest in and great talent for

historical and philological criticism, and an earnest desire to

uproot false teachings in order to ennoble people and turn them to

the Good. He declared the salvation of the soul as the ultimate

purpose of philosophy.

Even more than Plotinus, Porphyry emphasised the mystic path of

"flight from the body" (although never in the context of the

Gnostics who considered the material world as "evil"). He also

played down the emanationist hierarchies of the Middle Platonists

and Plotinus, and seemed sometimes to combine One and

Intellect, a process of "telescoping the hypostases" taken even

further by an anonymous student and commentator on

Plato's Parmenides. Yet at the same time he represented the

beginnings of the later Neoplatonic tendency of organising reality

in both vertical and "horizontal" triads; this became a very

important element in later Neoplatonic metaphysics. For

Porphyry, Being, Life, and Intellect were phases in the eternal

self-determination of the ultimate reality. (compare the Kashmir

Shaivite "Pure Tattwas" and Sri Aurobindo's "Upper Hemisphere"

or "Supreme Nature" (Paraprakriti), regarding the manifestation

of the Absolute)

Among his many philosophical works were

Against the Christians, a work of 15 volumes directed not

against Christ or his teachings, but against the Christians of his

own day and their sacred books, which, he argued, were the

work of ignorant people and deceivers, and whose doctrines he

attacked on both philosophical and exegetical grounds.

Although as to be expected banned in 448 and ordered

destroyed, copious extracts remain in the writings of

Augustine and others.

Aids to the Study of the Intelligibles, a basic summary of

Neoplatonism.

Introduction to Categories is a commentary on

Aristotle's Categories, describing how qualities attributed to

things may be classified. Perhaps Porphyry's most influential

contribution to philosophy, it incorporated Aristotle's logic

into Neoplatonism, in particular the doctrine of the categories

interepreted in terms of entities (in later philosophy,

"universal"). Boethius' Isagoge was a Latin translation of the

introduction, and became a standard medieval textbook, which

set the stage for medieval philosphical-theological

developments of logic and the problem of universals. In

medieval textbooks, the "Porphyrian Tree" illustrates his

logical classification of substance.

Letter to Marcella, his wife, a discourse on the spiritual path

On Abstinence, an argument in favour of vegetarianism.

and a number of other works, including many since lost.

Iamblichus

Iamblichus of Chalcis (d. c.326) was the pupil of Porphyry, and

after Plotinus the most important figure in Neoplatonism. He

ushered in a totally new phase of Neoplatonism, changing it from

a system of philosophy to one of theology and occultism.

Theurgy

Iamblichus denied that philosophy or thought alone (the mystical

philosophical contemplation of Plotinus) is unable to unite the

philosopher with the gods. There is need also of the appropriate

ritual magical actions; or Theurgy, the power conferred by divine

grace on the rituals and the symbolic objects they employ.22

The term theurgy means not only "divine work" but also perhaps

"god-making" or "making gods of men", and was intended as a

contrast to theology, which merely talks about the gods, and

theoria, the purely philosophical intuitive contemplation

advocated by Plotinus.23

It was actually a form of ritual magic,

with the aim of incarnating a divine force either in a material

object like a statue or, more plausibly in a human being,

producing a state of visionary trance.

The difference between Neoplatonic theurgy and the

contemporary Christian and Gnostic sacramentalism was that the

former saw itself as employing forces that were part of the natural

world-order, the latter forces that were the result of supernatural

divine intervention over and above that world-order.24

Of course,

22


R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.107 & footnote 24

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.108, 121

the forces in both case are the same; the difference lies in where

you draw the line between "natural" and "supernatural". What the

Christians and Gnostics - being of a dualistic persuasion (the

Divine as something over and above the cosmos) - considered

"supernatural", the Neoplatonists, being emanationist or monistic-

emanationist orientated, saw as "natural".

Iamblichus admitted the possibility of the soul being able to

ascend to a higher rank, but unlike Plotinus saw this as coming

about not through the soul's own powers or possession of Logoi,

but through association (by means of theurgy) with the soul's

transcendent causes, the gods. Here we see the substitution of

Magic for Mysticism. This does not mean that the gods are

constrained by the theurgist, for the lower cannot com-mand the

higher. But the rituals invoke the gods only through a voluntary

bestowal of divine power; "the god's good will and the

illumination imparted from them", as Iamblichus puts it. And so,

Iamblichus says, rather than the gods being drawn down into

material world, they purify their worshippers and so raise them

into the Intelligible or Divine world.25

Emanation and Triads

Plotinus distinguished two phases in the emanation process,

refering to the Self-Creation of Intelligence (Nous), and on a

lower degree Soul. These are Procession (prohodos), a formless

infinite stream of life flowing forth from the One; and Reversion

(epistrophe), whereby the emanated entity turns back,

contemplates the One, and so receives form and order.

Plotinus related this also in terms of Aristotle's theory of

cognition, with Procession corresponding say to the power of

25

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.120-1.

sight when it is still groping for vision, and Reversion to the same

power actualised by the contemplation of the object.

Plotinus' successors interpreted this somewhat more elaborately.

An anonymous commentator on Plato's Parmenides, who would

seem to belong to the School of Porphyry (although whether or

not he actually was Porphyry is more dubious, although still

possible), recognised in Plotinus' account of the emanation of the

Nous a phase of Rest prior to Procession and Reversion, during

which the Nous is identical with the Primal One.

Such a telescoping of the hypostases and identification of the

Nous with the One was unacceptable to later Neoplatonists.

However, both Iamblichus and Proclus still agreed with the

commentator in dividing emanation into three phases, those

of Abiding, or immanence in the Cause, Procession from that

Cause, and Reversion back upon it.

This triad was also no longer applied simply to the emanation of

one Hypostasis from another, but thanks to the principle of

correspondence became a universal law inherent in the structure

of everything that exists. It is equated with the Plotinian triad

(also adopted and modified by Gnosticism) of Being, Life and

Intelligence, the Chaldaean triad of Existence, Power and

Intelligence, the Aristotelian triad of Substance, Potentiality and

Actuality, Plato's Philebus' triad of Limit, Unlimited and the

Mixture of the two, and the mythological triad (as interpreted

through the Orphic poemms and the Chaldean Oracles) of Cronos,

Rhea and Zeus.

Iamblichus' Hierarchy of Spiritual Entities

The cosmology of the Iamblichean school is summarised by

Annie Besant as follows:

There is One, prior to all beings, immovable, abiding in the

solitude of His own unity. From That arises the Supreme

God, the Self-begotten, the Good, the Source of all things,

the Root, the God of Gods, the First Cause, unfolding

Himself into Light. From Him springs the Intelligible

World, or ideal [archetypal] universe, the Universal Mind

(or) Nous, and the incorporeal or intelligible Gods

belonging to this. From this the World-Soul, to which

belong the "divine intellectual forms which are present with

the visible bodies [i.e. the planets] of the Gods". Then come

the various hierar-chies of superhuman beings, Archangels,

Archons (Rulers) or Cosmocratores [Creators], Angels,

Daimons, etc... 26

We can distinguish here between the higher divine spiritual

hierarchies and the more intermdiate beings.

The Highest Spiritual Realities

These can be listed from higher to lower:27

The First One is the absolutely ineffable first principle

The Second One is the Absolute as the Creative Source or

First Principle, from which successive manifestation unfolds.

The Dyad of Limit and Unlimited, or Many and One

constitutes the first manifest of the Absolute, and naturally

evokes parallels with the Indian Tantric concept of Shiva and

Shakti

The One Existent or Noetic Monad represents the lowest entity

in the realm of the One. It is a transitional principle, which

partakes of the nature of both the Absolute and the eternal and

inconceivable noetic reality.

26

Annie Besant, Esoteric Christianity, pp.22-3 27

John M. Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), pp.29-39

The Paradigm, the first element of the Noetic triad, or Pure

Being. Here are located the monads of the Spiritual Forms or

Ideas, as opposed to the actual Idaes themselves.

From Being emanates the second element of the Noetic triad,

spiritual Life

Finally there emanates the Nous and its archetypes (Ideas)

The Psychic Monad is transitional between the Eternal Noetic

and the temporal Noeric realm; it is the transcendent source of

both the Soul of the Cosmos and of individual Souls.

Three categories of psychic Gods are postulated.28

The first of these is supramundane (supracosmic) and beyond

ordinary understanding.

The second category is comprehensible to the rational mind.

The third category, the mundane or intracosmic gods, includes

a great diversity of minor deities - gods, angels, demons, and

heros - of various position, function and rank.

Minor deities and intermediate spiritual beings

These minor deities (are enumerated in various ways; for example

the twelve or thirty-six or three hundred and sixty heavenly gods;

which give rise to seventy-two other gods. In addition there are

twenty-one chiefs (hegemones) and forty-two nature-gods (theoi

genesiourgoi), as well as guardian deities of particular individuals

and nations. Indeed, according to the important Iamblichan

text De Mysteriis, not only are all things full of gods (panta plere

Theon, as the philosopher Thales put it), but each person had a

special deity - an idios daimon (what would later come to be

referred to in Christian thought as a "guardian angel") as his own

guard and companion. The Iamblichan cosmos was therefore a

28

William Ritchie Sorley, "Iamblichus", in Encyclopaedia Brittanica, vol

XIV, p.214, (Eleventh Edition, 1911)

magical one, populated by a great diversity of superhuman

spiritual beings, influencing natural events, communicating

spiritual and prophetic knowledge, and accessible to prayers and

offerings.

Daimons

According to Iamblichus, between the gods and the pure (or

purified) souls, and bridging the gap between the two, are two

intermediate classes, the heros and the daimons.29

The daimons

have nothing to do with the "demons" of medieval Christianity,

being more equivalent, like the "heros", to the Christian idea of

"angels".

The daimons "serve the will of the gods, make manifest their

hidden goodness, and give form to their superior formlessness."30

The gods have general and universal power in the universe,

whereas the daimons have only partial power.31

They are

produced "through the generative and demiurgic powers of the

gods in the furthest extremity of their procession and of their

ultimate divisions."32

In other words, at the lowest subplane of

the gods, where there is the greatest multiplicity, they emanate

and give rise to subordinate beings, the daimons. Although

Iamblichus describes the daimons as the active principles of the

gods, and the heros as concerned with saving souls and leading

them upwards, the two groups would seem to overlap

somewhat.33

Personal Daimons - a good essay on the subject of daimons

in Neoplatonic thought. By Patrick Harpur.

29

John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), p.49-52 30

John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), p.49. 31

John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), p.50 32

John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), pp.50-51 33

John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), p.51

Heros

In Iamblichus' cosmology, the heros have very little to do with the

heros of classical mythology, being totally spiritual beings. Like

the daimons, they help bridge the gap between the gods and the

souls. But whereas the daimons represent the lowest extension of

the gods, one could say that the heros represent the highest degree

of souls.

Pure Souls

The lowst category of higher beings, the psuchai achrantoi or pure

souls, although possessing only partial powers relative to the

daimons and heros, are nevertheless able to associate with or

withdraw from whomever they please, and can join themselves to

the gods. "Through the goodwill of the gods they can ascend even

to the rank of angel"

The Unparticipated-Participated-Participant Triad

Iamblichus introduced the triad - taken up by later neoplatonists,

especially Proclus - of Transcendent Form, immanent universal,

and material particular, or Unparticipated, Participated, and

Participant (ametekhomenon-metekhomenon-metekhon, from the

Greek meteko, traditionally translated as "to participate"). This

complex term refers to the "informing" or radiating into the lower

principle (the Participant) by the higher (the Participated). So for

example a body is informed by its soul, and the soul by its

intelligence. There is also the distinction between the

transcendent, universal, Unparticipated Soul which is not related

to any particular body, and the individual souls in which bodies

(the Participants) participated. This same principle also applies as

regards the relationship between the Nous or Intelligence and the

Soul.34

L. J. Rosen suggests that instead of "participate" it would be more

philosophically accurate to say "possess", which gives the triad

Unpossessed-Possessed-Possessor.35

In any case the terminology

is con-fusing for it refers to the Cause in the passive voice and the

Effect in the active voice - e.g. Proclus statement that "Every

possessor (or participant) is inferior to its possessed (or

participated) characteristic."36

In view of this, Proclus sometimes

"uses the opposite arrangement and calls the possessed

characteristic "the giver" (khoregoun) since it gives itself to that

which possesses (or participates in) it, whereas the possessor (or

participant) is called "that to which the characteristic is given"

(khoregounenon)." Although this latter is preferable in explaining

in terms of cause and effect, it is the former that is more usually

used. Moreover, the translation of "possession" is doubly bad, at

least for modern readers, who would tend to associate it with the

more negative phenomenon of "spirit possession". "Participation"

is a more neutral term, and will therefore be used here.

Participated and Unparticipated Realities

In Proclus's cosmology, the Unparticipated Monads of each plane

is the "universal" aspect of that plane [Proclus, Elements of

Theology, prop.108]. They are "Unparticipated" because they do

not incarnate or manifest (participate) in any lower-hypostatic

reality; and "Monad" because they are the fundamental unity, the

Monad, from which all subsequent multiplicity on that plane

originates. Every multiplicity can be traced back to an original

unity, which is not the Absolute unity, but only the unity, the

Monad, of that particular plane [Elements of Theology, prop.21].

34


Laurence Jay Rosen, The Philosophy of Proclus, (Cosmos, New York,

1949) p.81 n.54, 36

Laurence Jay Rosen, The Philosophy of Proclus, p.81 n.56

And from each Unparticipated Monad, the succession of

particular Participated members (which emanate and manifest in

lower orders of being) emerge. In addition, each of these

emanations are in touch with a corresponding Universal - what

Proclus calls henadic, i.e. "Unitary" - member. In this way, all the

manifest hypostases can be traced back to their origin.

So for example all individual souls are the joint result of the one

Unparticipated or Universal Soul and their own transcendent and

Participated Intelligence [Ibid, pp151-2]. So, by the law of effects

reverting upon their causes, the soul may make contact with either

of these higher principles to which it is connected [ET 108-9, Ibid

p.152]. Proclus makes the curious assertion that because the

members of the higher Hypostases, being closer to the One, must

be fewer in number, not all souls would have their own

transcendent Intelligence, and not all and Intelligences their own

divine Henad [ET 110-11]. From this there is the division of souls

into three classes:

Divine souls, which are the participants of Intelligences that in

turn participate in their own divine Henad;

Daimonic souls, which likewise participants in a transcendent

Intelligence, but that Intelligences does not participate in a

divine Henad; and

Human souls, which lack even a transcendent Intelligence.

[Elements of Theology 184-5, 202].

Because it is only through the intermediary of a superhuman soul

or some other transcendent force that the human soul can make

contact with the Intelligible world, let alone the Divine, the

importance of theurgy, rather than philosophy, which is limited

only to the soul-level, as a means of attaining illumination,

becomes evident [R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.152-3]. There is

an increasing distance between the individual consciousness and

the Absolute. Proclus even states that terms like "Henad",

"Intelligence", and "Soul" can be used to refer either to the self-

subsistent gods the Unparticipated and Participated monads,

which are complete in themselves; or to the "irradiations" or

"images" of the former, which being incomplete require a

substrate for their existence. Thus whereas some souls belong to

themselves, others are dependent on their bodies, and are mere

phantasms of souls [ET 64]. Similarly, some Intelligence exist

independently, but others exist only as an irradiation within a

Soul. A common objection against Proclus' theory is that beings

cannot directly interact with the One; they can only interact with

beings immediately above them on the hierarchy of reality.

The Knowable and the Unknowable Godhead

When dealing with the ineffable, we are never able to describe

that reality itself. But we can understand the dynamics of the

Godhead by analogy with the created realities, such as the Gods,

which are in a sense the first manifestations of the unmanifest.

This is what Proclus did. As R. T. Wallis explains:

The view of some Neoplatonists that the Supreme Principle

contains the causes of (the lower) realities...Proclus rejects

as inconsistent with the One's absolute unity...(So he makes

a) distinction between the One, which...must be wholly

unknowable, and the Henads, for although the latter are

unknowable in themselves, some conception can none the

less be formed of their nature from the beings that

participate [i.e. express or embody or "incarnate"] them

[ET 123]. As Dodds observes [p.266], Proclus is thereby

enabled to devote more than 400 pages of his Platonic

Theology to his "unknowable" gods... R. T. Wallis,

Neoplatonism, pp150-1

Like Iamblichus, Proclus understood supra-human reality to be

made up of Spiritual hierarchies, mediating between the Absolute

and the phenomenal. Regarding Plotinus' first two hypostases,

the One (or Absolute) and the Nous (or Divine Mind), Proclus

replaced the Nous with a triad Being-Life-Nous, and between

Being and the One inserted a further series of principles, the

Henads ("Unities") or Gods, to mediate between the One's

unknowable unity and lower realities. As the intermediate

principles between the Unmanifest Absolute and manifest

existence, the Henads can be compared to the Logos of Philo

and Ibn Arabi, the Gnostic Aeons, and even more strikingly to the

Worlds which emanate from the transcendent Adam Kadmon of

Lurianic Kabbalah. Regarding the latter, Rabbi Moses Luzzatto

writes:

...We cannot say anything whatsoever about the Primordial

Man, but can treat only of the branches that ramify him to

the outside. [General Principles of the Kabbalah, p.14]

In both cases we have reference to unknowable realities within

the Godhead itself, and the projection, or emanation, of those

realities into phenomenal existence, where they become

knowable. As Proclus explains:

every particular intelligence participates the first Henad

(i.e. the One, or Absolute) both through the universal

(Monadic) Intelligence and through the particular henad it

coresponds to"; [Elements of Theology, prop.109]).

Similarly, "every particular soul participates of the

universal (Monadic) Intelligence both through the

Universal Soul and its own particular intelligence; and

every corporeal nature participates the universal Soul both

through Universal Nature and through a particular soul. [R.

T. Wallis, Neoplatonism]

The two-fold causation

This led to a two-fold theory of causation, according to which

each individual principle derives its generic characteristics from

its own orders Unparticipated Monad, and its specific

characteristics from the Participated principle immediately above

it. To quote Wallis:

...the Henads are arranged in a hierarchical order

prefiguring the structure of the lower orders of the universe.

There are thus Noetic Henads (corresponding to

Unpartcipated [the original hypostasis of] Being), Noetic-

Noeric Henads (to Unparticipated Life [or Power]), Noeric

Henads (to Unparticipated Nous), Supercosmic Henads (to

Unparticipated Soul [Psyche]), and Intracosmic Henads (to

Divine Participated Souls and the bodies they animate)

[ET 162-5]. In each case the Henads in question are not

members of the order whose name they bear..., but the

transcendent source of that orders distinctive

characteristics... [p.151]

This is all rather complex, although it can be represented in

diagrammatic form, as follows:

The

One Noetic Henads

Noetic-Noeric

Henads Noeric Henads Supracosmic Henads

Intracosmic

Henads

Unparticipated

Being

Noetic-Noeric

Participated Being

Noeric

Participated Being

Supracosmic

Participated Being

Intracosmic

Participated Being

Unparticipated Life Participated Life Supracosmic

Participated Life

Intracosmic

Participated Life

Unparticipated

Nous

Supracosmic

Participated Nous

Intracosmic

Participated Nous

Unparticipated

Divine Soul

Participated

Divine Soul

Divine Body

Note that the Henads form a decreasing sequence. Those which

are closest to the One (The Absolute) partake of the latter's nature,

while those which are further are consequently more ontologically

impoverished, although of course still incomparably superior to

the human grade.

Proclus's Life and Teachings

Proclus' life

Proclus Diadochus (410/412 - 485 c.e.) was the last of the great

Platonic teachers. Born in Constantinople into a well-off family,

he was sent to Alexandria for schooling and was taught

philosophy by the Aristotlean philosopher Olympiodorus the

Elder, and mathematics by Heron (not to be confused with a more

famous mathematician of the same name). It seemed he was not

satisfied there, for while still a teenager he moved to Athens

where he studied at Plato's Academy under the philosophers

Plutarch and Syrianus. He was soon teaching at the Academy, and

succeeded Syrianus as administrator of the Athenian School,

eventually becoming director, a position he held for the rest of his

life. The title Diadochus was given to him at this time, the

meaning of the word being successor. He refined and systematize

the teachings of Iamblichus, whose school stressed elaborate

metaphysical speculation.

As well as being a poet, philosopher, and scientist, Proclus was

also an exponent of religious universalism. He believed the true

philosopher should pay homage to the gods of all nations,

becoming "a priest of the entire universe." He was initiated into a

number of mystery schools, composed hymns to the gods, fasted

in honor of the Egyptian divinities, and practiced theurgy. Like

Prophyry and Iamblichus, Proclus opposed Christianity, with it's

expectation of the end of the world [see On the Eternity of the

World], and passionately defended paganism. He was

a vegetarian, never married, and was very highly regarded by his

contemporaries. His student and biographer Marinus of Samaria

stated that he was inspired, and that when philosophizing his

countenance shone with preternatural light.

Proclus was author not only of many Platonic commentaries but

also numerous astronomical, mathematical, and grammatical

works. Aside from his commentaries on the works of Plato, the

most important of Proclus's surviving works are Elements of

Theology, a systematic evaluation of Neoplatonic metaphysics,

and the Platonic Theology.

Proclus' Metaphysics

As with his predecessors, Proclus taught the existence of

an ultimate, indescribable reality, the One. The One is the

originator of all things and is equivalent to the Good. The highest

level of reality subsists in an objective mind of the One (compare

this with Indian Vedanta). From the One all other realities,

including gods, daimons, humanity and the material universe, are

produced by a process of emanation. The further removed from

the One something is, the less real it is.

Proclus took the complex metaphysics of Iamblichus to even

greater lengths. He replaced Iamblichus' distinction of Noetic and

Psychic worlds with a complex six-fold classification of One-

Being-Life-Nous-Soul-Body. These various principles are

described as the higher causes of the lower creation. According to

Proclus, the higher in the scale of being a principle is, the further

downwards its influence extends [Dodds, Iamblichus, p.236].

This can be represented diagrammatically as follows:

are lifted up away from the wanderings in the world of becoming

towards their own source." Proclus used theurgical hymns and

ritual, based on sympatheia, (equivalent to what in

modern hermeticism is called the law of correspondence), to

attract the leader-gods in order to be elevated towards the Nous. It

is fascinating to note the similarities with the late 19th

century Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn occult-magickal

system, and in all subsequent Western hermetic occultism.

More on Poclus' Theurgy

Later Influence

Proclus was the last major Greek philosopher. More than anyone

else, he was influential in spreading Neoplatonic ideas throughout

the post-pagan Byzantine, Islamic, and Roman worlds.

In the Christian world his writings were adpted by Pseudo-

Dionysius the Areopagite, through whom they influenced

Christian mysticism and theology. In the Arab world Abu Ya'qub

al-Sijistani (fl. 971) Liber de Causis ("Book of Causes") was

thought to be a work of Aristotle, but was actually rearrangement

of a number of chapters of Proclus's Elements of Theology

In the 13th century, William of Moerbeke's Latin translation of

the Elements of Theology (as Institutio Theologica) became the

principal sources for medieval knowledge of Platonic philosophy,

and helped to lay the foundation for the Renaissance revival of

Neoplatonism.

The German-Jewish scholar Leo Baeck (1873-1956) makes

the controversial propsal that the Gnostic-Proto-Kabbalistic text

the Sefer Yetzirah "in its thought as well as in its terminology, is

dependent upon the teaching of Proclus, the last great

Neoplatonist. Furthermore, the decisive passages of the Sefer

Yetzirah are none other than the transference of this Greek

scholastic's system into Jewish thought and biblical language."

This means that not only Christian Mysticism and Renaissance

Platonism, but Kabbalah as well can in part be traced back to

Proclus. Both of these latter streams of thought in fact merge in

the synthesis that is Western Hermeticism.

Today and for the last several centuries Proclus has been

relegated to the status of mere systematizer rather than original

thinker. Slowly modern scholarship is coming around to a full

recognition of Proclus' genius. Along with Plotinus and

Iamblichus, he surely stands as one of the great figures of the late

classical wisdom tradition.

The Influence of Neoplatonism

Influence on Christian Mysticism

The influence of Neoplatonism upon the West and Middle East

cannot be exaggerated. Proclus' concept of Spiritual hierarchies

was adopted and modified by his Syrian Christian

student, "Pseudo"- Dionysius the Aerogatite (c. 500 C.E.), who

could practically be considered the Father of Christian Mysticism.

Indeed, the term "mysticism" itself in its present usage derives

from him. Through Dionysius, the idea of Angelic hierarchies

was established in Medieval and Renaissance Europe, and more

recently in the teachings of the early 20th century esoteric

philosopher and occultist, Rudolph Steiner.

But from the eleventh and twelfth centuries onwards it was

Aristotle, not Plato or Plotinus, who shaped the understanding of

Western man through religious philosophers such as the Jew

Maimonides, the Moslem Averroes, and the Christian Thomas

Aquinas.

Islamic Neoplatonism

But if the Neoplatonic influence upon the Medieval West was

great, it was no less in the Islamic Middle East, mainly through

the pseudononymus Theology of Aristotle (derived from Plotinus

and Porphyry)

Islmic Neoplatonism by Nima Hazini. Page two

of Neoplatonism: Framework for a Bah' Metaphysics. A very

good synopsis

Contemporary Neoplatonic Influences

Finally, in the late nineteenth century occult West, Platonic and

Neoplatonic ideas figured strongly in the Theosophy of H.P.

Blavatsky.

Such influence however did not continue in later Theosophical

writers, and the pop-esoteric New Age metaphysics that appeared

in the 70's is pretty much a synthesis of the post-Blavatsky

Theosophy, Monistic Vedanta (brought to the West through the

various pop-spiritual Gurus), watered down Taoist elements

(especially the Yin-Yang theme), and a somewhat superficial

mysticising of quantum physics (Fritjof Capra's Tao of Physics

and it's innumerable spin-offs).

There was however something of a Neoplatonic influence in the

early New Paradigm movement of the late 70's and 80's, due to

the Islamic connection; specifically the writings of

the Traditionalist and neo-Sufi Frithjof Schuon and others who

have been influenced by him, such as the scholar of comparative

religions Huston Smith and the Transpersonal Psychologist Ken

Wilber, the latter still a foremost theorist in the New Paradigm

and serious alternative spirituality movement.

Dionysius the Areopagite (c. 500 C.E.)

M.Alan Kazlev and David Hildner

Dionysius "the Areopagite" was thought for many centuries to be

one of those converted to Christianity on the Areopagos hill in

Athens after the apostle Paul's speech there (see Book of Acts

17.34). With the rise of modern scholarship it was realised that he

was actually a 5th/6th century Syrian monk. His profound

mystical books contained large sections lifted without crediting

from the works of Proclus (412-85), the last of the great

Neoplatonists.

Dionysius can be considered the founder of Christian mysticism.

Indeed, the term "mysticism" itself in its present usage derives

from him.

His "De Celestia Hierarchia" translated the Neoplatonic hierarchy

of intermediate beings between man and the Godhead into the

Christian paradigm and established the idea of Angelic

hierarchies in Medieval and Renaissance Europe.

His treatise "On the Divine Names", which was just as important

(or sometimes even more important) in the history of religious

thought than the "De Celestia Hierarchia". It was fundamental in

the current of "apophantic" theology, that is, the doctrine that we

can say more about what God is NOT than about what He is.

In the early 20th century Dionysius's angelogy was revived

and given new interpretations by the esoteric philosopher and

occultist, Rudolph Steiner.

Rudolf Steiner's Angelology

detail of a drawing dated August 3,

1924 illustrating THE REALM OF

THE ANGELS -

"It is so, that from the relatively

singular realm of the angels a split

realm arises. One part tends

upward into the heavens, the other

down to Earth."

from Rudolph Steiner - blackboard

drawings

Just as, Steiner asserts, there is the sequence mineral-plant-

animal-man, so there are nine more stages (three triads) of

evolution before Godhead, these being referred to as the

"Spiritual Hierarchies". The current Spiritual Hierarchies had

evolved to their present office through previous eras. These

Spiritual beings, the nomenclature for which Steiner takes from

the Christian Neoplatonist Dionysius, are the creative beings who

shaped the world and human consciousness.

GODHEAD

Father

Son

Holy Ghost

FIRST

HIERARCHY

Seraphim

Cherabim

Thrones or Spirits of Will

SECOND

HIERARCHY

Spirits of Motion

Spirits of Wisdom

Spirits of Form, Creators

THIRD

HIERARCHY

Spirits of the Age (Zietgeist)

Archangels (Spirits of Races)

Angels (Guiding spirits)

Man

Animals

Plants

Minerals

Of course, the idea of a succession of hierarchies of Divine beings

is an old and widespread idea; prominant in Buddhism,

Gnosticism, Neoplatonism (Iamblichus and Proclus), Suhrawardi,

Kabbalah, and Theosophy, to give just a few examples.

Steiner differed though in his evolutionary or ascending

emphasis. And here again we see his Theosophical, and

ultimately crypto-Darwinian, heritage. He considered that the

spiritual hierarchies were stages of evolution from the physical

(i.e. the next stage beyond the human is the "angel"), rather than

stages of emanation or descent, as all the other sources

unanimously assert. But if we ignore this eccentricity, we find

that his description of the actual spiritual hierarchies themselves

is pretty much in keeping with the consensus "perennial

philosophy". In fact, perhaps the most detailed and compre-

hensive account of the angelic or creative Demiurges available in

English at least is to be had from Steiner's teachings. Drawing

from the writings of the 5th/6th century Christian

Neoplatonist Dionysius the Aeropagite, Steiner spoke of three

hierarchies, each of which is divided into three sub-hierachies.

Sometimes he would add a fourth triad, which he called "the

Godhead", above these three, although this highest triad was not

given any part to play in the scheme of cosmic (or Solar

Systemic - for Steiner's cosmology rarely extended beyond this

solar system) evolution.

The following tables summarise Steiner's angelology.

Hierarchy Objective

Consciousness Subjective Consciousness

First World-creation Creation of Beings

Second Self-creation Simulation of Life

Third Manifestation Being filled with Spirit

Man Perception Inner Life

A few words of explanation from Steiner are necessary regarding

some of these categories:

When man directs his gaze outwards..., he lives with the

outer world...of nature. But when he diverts his gaze from

outside, he enters his own inner being and lives an in-

dependent inner [i.e. subjective] life.... (With) the beings

of the Third Hierarchy - instead of perception they have

manifest, and in this manifestation they reveal themselves.

Instead of inner life they have the experience of higher

spiritual worlds, that is to say, they are filled with Spirit.

What in the beings of the Third Hierarchy is manifestation of self,

is in [the beings of the Second Hierarchy] self-realisation, self-

creation, a stamping of impressions of their own being; and what

in the (former)...is being filled with spirit, is in them stimulation

of life, which consists in severance, in objectifying themselves....

The beings of the First Hierarchy can also objectify themselves,

they can also stamp their own being; it is separated from them as

in a sort of skin or shell.... (But) a higher degree of objectivity is

attained by them than by the Second Hierarchy. When the beings

of the Second Hierarchy create, if their creations are not to fall

into decay, they must remain connected with them....What they

create has independent objective existence; but only so long as

they remain linked with it. On the other hand that which is

detached from the beings of the First Hierarchy ... remain in

existence, self-acting, objective.

In the First Hierarchy...we have a form of creation in which the

part created is detached - we have not only self creation, but

world creation. That which proceeds from the beings of the First

Hierarchy is a detached world, such (as)...this (physical) world-

phenomenon is....(T)he inner experience of the beings of the First

Hierarchy lies in creation, in forming independent beings...To

create...(and) live in other beings is the inner experience of

the...First Hierarchy. Creation of worlds is their external life -

creation of beings their inner life."

Rudolph Steiner, The Spiritual Beings in the Heavenly Bodies

and the Kingdoms of Nature - ten lectures, Helsinki, 3-14 April

1912 (Steiner Book Centre, N. Vancouver, 1981)

With Steiner's spiritual hierarchies in the celestial spheres we see

an obvious identify to Suhrawardis "Lords of Species" who "move the heavens through love and guard all the creatures of the

Earth " And his cosmic Christ, as the composite of the six solar

Spirit of Form and central pivot in his cosmology, as well as

being the occult being behind the human Christ, is clearly no

different to the Master of Ishraqi's Gabriel, the archetype of

humanity, identified with the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of the

Prophet Muhammad, and thus also with the function of revelation

as such, being the supreme revealer of all knowledge. This

compatibility between these two spiritual teachers, who lived in

very different cultures and times, is made all the more remarkable

by the fact that Steiner had obviously never heard of Suhrawardi,

or of the Ishraqi tradition he founded.

Concerning the lowest member of the Spiritual Hierarchies,

the Angeloi, Steiner says that when people pray to God - god

help me with this

npltnsm

Documents

Transcript of npltnsm