THEURGY

Abstract: The current paper examines the origins and the development of theurgy as a concept, practice, and philosophical-religious theory. It discusses the main characteristics of the ritual-worldview, as it emerged in Late Antiquity, as well as the reactions that theurgy evoked in its followers and opponents (pagans and Christians).

Keywords: theurgy, philosophy, religion, ritual, magic, Iamblichus, Neoplatonism, Christianity, paganism.

The term “theurgy” (Greek. θεουργία, Latin. theurgia)^[1] is a key term for the philosophical currents in Late Antique Neoplatonism and is based on the teachings of Iamblichus of Chalcis in Coele Syria (c. 3^rd century – c. 325), a disciple of Porphyry and teacher of Aedesius^[2].

Tradition presents Iamblichus as a disciple of Porphyry, who was in turn Plotinus’ most distinguished student, as well as, the author of his biography and of numerous works, including the “Introduction to the logical categories of Aristotle” (Isagoge, Εἰσαγωγή). This peculiar syncretism between peripatetic logic and Platonic metaphysics, especially as presented in Plato’s Timaeus and further developed by Plotinus’ teaching of emanations^[3], was characteristic of many representatives of Neoplatonism in Late Antiquity. Plotinus and Porphyry themselves, Iamblichus’s pupil Aedesius and Aedesius’ pupil Eusebius^[4] unfold their reflections of Neoplatonic cosmology and ontology in rational discources related to the reading and interpretation of texts. Union with intelligible entities far beyond the visible material world is achieved through contemplation (θεωρία) of the truths revealed through this speculation process^[5].

Iamblichus’ approach is different: it does not involve speculative contemplation or logical-rhetorical techniques, but direct ritual activity that leads to a close communion with the gods. This “divine action” is designated by the neologism created for this purpose, which is θεουργία, from θεός “god” and ἔργον “work, аct”. The disciples of Aedesius, Maximus of Ephesus, Chrysanthius, the Athenian Neoplatonists of the late fourth and fifth century, Plutarch and Proclus^[6], along with Isidore of Alexandria and the last scholarch of the Neoplatonic Athenian school Damascius before its closure in 529, all of them fit into this theurgic current of Neoplatonism established by Iamblichus^[7].

The literary tradition has preserved several stories, presented as eyewitness accounts about the visible manifestations of theurgy. The students of Iamblichus, especially the more rationally inclined like Aedesius, were asking repeatedly their teacher to demonstrate to them his supernatural abilities, which were the subject of many rumors. Once on a visit to the mineral baths of Gadara, he agreed and got his students to ask the locals for the names of two of the fountains from which the best water flowed. When he found out that one is named after the god Eros, he touched the water in the pool below the spout, recited some obscure formula and as a result of that a child with snow-white skin and golden blond hair emerged from the pool. Iamblichus repeated his actions at the opposite fountain called Anteros (verbatim. “love returned or counter-love”) and from there also emerged a boy similar to the former one, with the only difference that this one had black hair.The two children embraced Iamblichus as if he were their father before diving back into the waters from which they had been emerged^[8]. The biographer of the philosophers Eunapius claims that the story was personally handed down to him by his teacher Chrysanthius, who heard it from his teacher Aedesius, a disciple of Iamblichus. Similar accounts of miracles and divine appearances circulate about Maximus of Ephesus, another of the disciples of Aedesius in his school at Pergamum. Eusebius, a schoolmate of Chrysanthius and more reserved about theurgy (like Aedesius on the above account), describes to Julian the gathering of the philosophers from Pergamum at the invitation of Maximus at the temple of Hecate in the city^[9]. Maxim lights incense and sings a hymn to the goddess, while her statue begins to smile slightly and finally laugh visibly. At that moment there was a general uproar and Maximus declared that the torches in Hecate’s hands would immediately lit – something that indeed happened. Excited, the philosopher’s colleagues left the temple and as Eusebius reports, they were “frightened for the moment by this theatrical wonderworker" (θεατρικὸν θαυματοποιόν).

Other Neoplatonists, who belonged to the more moderate rational current probably had a similar attitude towards these shows. In the biography of Maximus, the same teacher Eusebius explains to Julian that the essence of the teaching is in its lectures, and anything more than that is charlatanism, deceit and bewitching of the senses (τὴν αἴσθησιν ἀπατῶσαι καὶ γοητεύουσαι μαγγανεῖαι)^[10]. The practitioners of the theory are even more vulnerable to criticism from their rival Christians, who equate the practices of the former with the most wicked and base magic^[11]. In the eyes of the uninitiated theurgy remains at best a cheap deception for the senses (which leaves the viewers attached to the material and the apparent), while at worst theurgy is only a sinful communion with demonic beings. In some extreme cases, it can also look like extortion of the gods in order for them to bow to the will of the theurgist (divine-worker)^[12]. On the contrary, for the adherents of theurgy, the practice contains, among other things, a deep spiritual and symbolic meaning. In the accounts of theurgic miracles, this meaning was probably clearer to its contemporaries. However, it is no coincidence that in the account of the miracle of Iamblichus, the two fountains are called Eros and Anteros, embodying perhaps the mutual attraction of opposing elements gathered for a moment around the person of the Neoplatonic miracle worker^[13].

Of the surviving literary heritage of Late Antique Neoplatonism, the work that gives us the clearest insight into the ideological basis of theurgy is “On the Mysteries of the Egyptians” (De mysteriis). In the spirit of literary mystification characteristic of these circles, the composition is presented as the response of the Egyptian priest Abamon to a letter from the philosopher Porphyry. In this letter the interlocutor is presented as skeptical and condemning of theurgic practices, which was probably Porphyry’s actual position on the matter. Abamon-Iamblichus replies in ten books, presenting his exposition in order to reveal the real meaning of ritual practices in Egyptian religion (along with that of the Chaldeans and Assyrians).

The purpose of religious ritual is to cleanse the soul of the evil that has attached to it as a result of its embodiment –in the same way that in tragedy, according to Aristotle, the observation of another’s suffering (πάθη) leads the deliverance of the soul from passions (πάθη)^[14]. The invocations (κλήσεις) to the gods do not imply compulsion for them to manifest and show themselves, as it may seem to be. The gods being completely self-manifesting and self-sufficient, they do appear because of their benevolence and goodwill towards the theurgist. In this way the communicants experience union (ἕνωσις) with the divine, learning to free themselves from their bodies, while they remain still in their bodies, and therein lies the salvation of their soul (τῆς ψυχῆς σωτήριον)^[15]. Through the union caused by theurgic ritual, the soul contemplates blissful visions that separate it completely from the human world.  Thus, although we are born susceptible to influences and passions (ἐμπαθεῖς), while the gods are not such by nature, we become pure (καθαροί) and unchangeable (ἄτρεπτοι). This communion with the gods is made possible by their affectionate regard (φιλία) to the practitioners and is accomplished through the use of appropriate divine names and other συνθήματα – a term that can be understood as “signs”, “passwords” or “symbols”^[16].

Nonetheless, the process does not depend on and is not guided by the intellectual ability of the person performing the theurgic ritual. Words and actions are unutterable (ἄρρητα), while the essence of symbols is unspeakable (ἄφθεγκτα). If it were otherwise, philosophers relying solely on their rational knowledge would reach union with the divine without the aid of theurgy, but they fail to do so. The symbols used in the ritual achieve an effect of their own accord, while the ineffable power of the deities itself recognizes in the human being, that which is their image (εἰκών). This happens independently of reason and before it is rationally realized^[17]. An important element of theurgic ritual is prayer, which is categorized in three types. The first kind of prayer leads to the divine. The second kind connects the human to the divine, while the human being and the deity act in accordance and the deity grants certain gifts to the human being, which start operate in him even before he has uttered the prayer. The third kind, the most perfect, is the union with the divine, which gives full power over the existence of the human being. It fills the latter with the primordial fire (πῦρ) of the sacred beginning^[18].  

Here we see a system of beliefs and practices which, along various lines, has certain similarities, on the one hand with the so-called “Gnosticism” and “Hermeticism”, inasmuch as there are unified currents of thought under these general terms, and on other with orthodox Christianity, as well as with the classical platonic philosophy, and in some respects even with the religious doctrines and practices of Zoroastrianism and Hinduism. The question of the origin of this religious-philosophical system is a complex one with many obscure points, some of which may never be illuminated by modern scholars. Nevertheless, some of the characteristic features of theurgy as we see it in Iamblichus and his followers can be traced in earlier testimonies.

First, the theurgist is one of the last incarnations in ancient literature of the figure of the pagan “holy man” (θεῖος ἀνήρ). This “holy” or “divine man” as a solid and consistent presence in the pagan world is mostly a construction of nineteenth-century scholars, influenced by the later figure of the Christian saint. However, from the 2^nd century onwards we can see a set of recurring biographical motifs in the literature and religious consciousness of the inhabitants of the Roman Empire^[19]. The Greek “divine men” were sages and philosophers, enjoying extreme closeness with the gods and sometimes they were deified at the moment of their death. Perhaps the most famous among them is Apollonius of Tyana (c. 1^st century AD), whose life has been described by Flavius Philostratus in the 3^rd century. In his biography Philostratus mentions, among other things, how Apollonius performed every day at sunrise in private certain rituals of which he told no one except those of his disciples who had taken a four-year vow of silence^[20]. Similarly, in his biography of Iamblichus, Eunapius describes how his disciples constantly questioned him about what he did in secrecy and would not reveal to anyone. They also told him about the rumor that they heard that during prayer their teacher levitates ten cubits (over 4.5 m) above the ground ^[21]. Levitation is also familiar to the heroes of Philostratus: one of them describes to Apollonius the life of Indian ascetics and mentions how they rise 2 cubits (nearly 1 m) above the ground during their prayers to Helios (Sun)^[22].

Another, more direct source of the theurgic system is the so-called “Chaldean Oracles” apparently popular in wider Gnostic and Neoplatonic circles too. These are a collection of verses in Greek hexameter, the poetic meter used in epic poetry and also by the oracles of Apollo, for example, those at Delphi and Claros. The verses are considered to have been “delivered by god”  (θεοπαράδοτα) to Julian the Chaldean and written down by his son, also Julian, somewhere towards the end of the 2^nd century.^[23] The ethnonym Χαλδαῖος, which in its narrow sense can be considered synonymous with “Babylonian” or with “an inhabitant of Mesopotamia”, usually carries also the connotations of a person adept in astrology and magic. This name evokes associations with the wisdom of the Eastern cults in general as it was understood by the average citizen of the Roman Empire in that era. Julian-father, about whom information is very sparse was probably a “Chaldean” in more than one sense of the word, while the Suda Dictionary calls him a “philosopher” too. Julian the son, who recorded the prophecies transmitted by his father (according to some authors he was put into trance by him as part of a theurgic ritual), was also the author of several other unpreserved texts^[24]. The Julian-son is also the first person to go down in history with the epithet “Theurgist”. The word θεουργός itself is first attested in his verses. There, in one fragment, the theurgist is presented as a man elevated above the “herd” of the other human beings, who are subject to the blows of Fate^[25]. Other fragments that have come down to us (often quoted by authors such as Proclus) also allude to symbols, prayers, and rituals that can lead the human soul out of the shackles of the body and upwards to union with the divine^[26]. Apart from these first records of some kind of theurgic rituals and incantations many of the fragments of the “Chaldean Oracles” that survive today contain the basic tenets of a complex cosmogony. As far as we can judge from the textual fragments, it seems to be somewhat analogous to that of Plotinus and somewhat similar to that attested in the Hermetic literature or the accounts of the Gnostic Valentinus.^[27].

At the same time, we can consider the literary mystification, presenting these verses as divine oracles, as part of a broader trend in late paganism. During this period, a significant number of the oracles in the Greek world, from Delphi do Didyma and Claros, began to answer more general questions concerning worldview issues. Their inquirers looked increasingly to Apollo for answers to questions such as, “What is the nature of the gods?” and “What is life after death?”. The answers that these divinatory centers began to give accordingly moved further away from utilitarian answers and were transformed into a kind of “philosophy in verse” bearing the direct authority of the god^[28]. In terms of genre, the “Chaldean Oracles” fall into this current. They draw from and at the same time contribute to the tendency towards syncretism between religious and purely philosophical elements of the ancient Greek cultural tradition.

  In summary, theurgy as a phenomenon is a product of this same syncretic tendency. The philosopher is no longer just an intellectual or an academic scholar. He is a religious leader, the head of the sacred acts, as well as a privileged interlocutor of the gods. On the one hand, this further elevates his status as a spiritual mentor in people’s lives and a healer of their personal psychological weaknesses. On the other hand, it makes the philosopher even more vulnerable to accusations of magic or simple quackery. In any case, the theurgic current of Iamblichus in late antique Neoplatonism influenced the relationship between philosophy and Christianity. Theurgy identifies more closely than ever the role of the philosopher with that of the pagan priest. It urged its followers to realize in themselves a more solid Hellenic identity, encompassing culture, philosophy, and religion. As representatives of such a Late Antique Hellenic identity, the Neoplatonic theurgists were potentially more exclusively hostile towards their fellow-citizens Christians and more likely to see the spread of Christianity as a threat. The clearest manifestation of this attitude was the religious policy of emperor Julian, the so-called Apostate, during his brief reign between 361 and 363, who was a also follower of the philosopher and theurgist Maximus of Ephesus.

^[1] For the name see e.g. Iambl. Myst. IX.6., Aug. Civ. D. X.9.

^[2] PLRE I Iamblichus 1 450-451, Еunap.Vit. soph. V.

^[3] Plot. Aen. V.2.1. The term “emanations” originates from the Latin emano “flow out, spread out from a source” and is the Latin word of Plotinus’ metaphor in the passage, according to which the One (τὸ ἕν) has “overflowed” (ὑπερερρύη) and hence all that follows in the hierarchy of the world was generated.

^[4] Eunap. Vit. soph. VII.2.12.

^[5] Plot. Aen. I.1.7.

^[6] Watts 2006: 90-93.

^[7] For him see. Петрински 2018.

^[8] Eunap. Vit. soph. V.2.2-7.

^[9] Eunap. Vit. soph. VII.2.6-11.

^[10] Eunap. Vit. soph. VI.2.3

^[11] Among the numerous pejorative references to the term “theurgy” and its related words in Christian writers of the era see e.g. Cyrill. Alexandr. In Is. proph. PG LXX.932.

^[12] E.g. Maximus believes that the signs of the gods can be ignored until the latter accepts your judgement: Eunap. Vit.soph. VII.3.12-13

^[13] Shaw 1995:122-126.

^[14] Iambl. De myst. I.11.

^[15] Iambl. De myst. I.12.

^[16] Ibid.

^[17] Iambl. De myst. IΙ.11.

^[18] Iambl. De myst. V.26.

^[19] Liefeld 1973.

^[20] Philostr. V. Apoll. I.16. The practice is well known from the Pythagorean tradition and is a loan from there.

^[21] Eunap. Vit. soph. V. 1.7-10.

^[22] Philostr. V. Apoll. III.15.

^[23] Majercik 1989: 1.

^[24] Suda: iota 433, 434. Majercik 1989: 1-2

^[25] Or. Chald. frg. 153.

^[26] Or. Chald. frg. 108-100, 150.

^[27] Majercik 1989: 4-24.

^[28] Lane Fox 1986: 189-200

Bibliography

 Primary Sources

 Eunapio. Vite di filosofi e sofisti. Testo Greco a fronte. Introduzione, traduzione, note e apparati di Maurizio Civiletti. Milano, 2007.

Jamblichi De mysteriis liber. Rec. Gustavus Parthey. Berolini, 1857.

Philostratus. Apollonius of Tyana, Volume I-II. Edited and translated by Christopher P. Jones. Cambridge Mass., 2005.

Plotinus. Ennads. Vol. I-VII. Ed. By A.H. Armstrong. Cambridge Mass., 1999.

Sancti Aurelii Augustini episcopi De civitate Dei libri XXII, voll. I-II, rec. B. Dombart. Lipsiae, 1877.

 Suda Online: http://www.cs.uky.edu/~raphael/sol/sol-html/

The Chaldean Oracles. Text, translation and commentary R. Majercik.  Leiden, 1989.

Cyrilli Alexandriae Archiepiscopi opera quae reperiri potuerunt omnia. Patrologiae cursus completes. Series graeca. Acc. J.-P. Migne. Vol. LXX. 1864.

Secondary Sources

Lane Fox, R. (1986), Pagans and Christians in the Mediterranean World from the Second Century AD to the Death of Constantine (London). 

Majercik, R. (1989), “Introduction” – in: The Chaldean Oracles. Text, translation and commentary R. Majercik (Leiden), 1-46.

Liefeld, W. L.  (1973) “The Hellenistic “Divine Man” and the figure of Jesus in the Gospels”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 16.4. (Chicago) 95-195.

Shaw, G. (1995), Theurgy and the Soul: The Neoplatonism of Iamblichus (University Park, Pennsylvania).

Watts, E.J. (2006), City and School in Late Antique Athens and Alexandria  (Berkeley).

Петрински, Г., „Дамасций Диадох: образът на интелектуалеца езичник и залезът на античния свят“ - in: Втори четения на АРУКО „Мислене и действане“, 14-15.12.2018 г., достъпно в Youtube: част 1. (https://bit.ly/3DDblAy ) и част 2.  (https://bit.ly/3BSvQbh ) (Last accessed date: 19.09.2022 г., 21:31).