Chapter 1. Letter of Porphyry to Anebo
Chapter 2. Reply of Abammon the Teacher to The Letter of Porphyry to Anebo.
Chapter 3. The Superior Races
Chapter 4. Rites, Symbols, and Offerings
Chapter 5. The Superior Races and their Manifestations
Chapter 6. The Order Exhibited at the Rites
Chapter 7. Origin of the Art of Divination
Chapter 8. The Divining Art Universal.
Chapter 9. Demons
Chapter 10. Concerning the Powers Invoked
Chapter 11. The Question Stated
Chapter 12. Notions of the Egyptian Priests Criticized
Chapter 13. Concerning the Mystic Rites
Chapter 14. Conditions for Successful Results
Chapter 15. Origin of Egyptian Symbolism
Chapter 16. Questions Proposed
Chapter 17. The Personal Demon
Chapter 18. Eudaemonia, or the True Success
Chapter 1. Letter of Porphyry to Anebo
Porphyry to the Prophet Anebo. 1 Greeting.
I will begin this friendly correspondence with thee with a
view to learning what is believed in respect to the gods and good
demons and likewise the various philosophic speculations in regard
to them. Very many things have been set forth concerning these
subjects by the (Grecian) philosophers, but the for the most part
have derived the substance of their belief from conjecture.
1. The Gods and their peculiarities
In the first place, therefore, it is to be taken for granted
that there are gods. I ask then: what are the peculiarities of the
superior races, by which they are differentiated from each other?
Are we to suppose the cause of the distinction to be their energies
or their passive motions, or things consequent: or is it a
classification established by difference of bodies -- the gods
being distinguished by aetherial bodies, the demons by aërial
bodies, and souls by bodies pertaining to the earth?
As the gods dwell in heaven only, I ask therefore, why are
invocations at the Theurgic Rites directed to them as being of the
Earth and Underworld? How is it that although possessing power
unlimited, undivided, and unrestricted, some of them are mentioned
as being of the water and of the atmosphere, and that others are
allotted by definite limitations to different places and to
distinct parts of bodies? If they are actually separated by
circumscribed limitations of parts, and according to diversities of
places and subject-bodies, how will there be any union of them one
to another?
How can the Theosophers 2 consider them as impressionable?
For it is said that on this account phallic images are set up and
that immodest language is used at the Rites? 3 Certainly if they
are impassive and unimpressionable the invocations of the gods,
announcing favorable inclinations, propitiations of their anger and
expiatory sacrifices, and still further what are called
"necessities of the gods," will be utterly useless. For that which
is impassive is not to be charmed or forced 4 or constrained by
necessity.
Why, then, are many things performed to them in the Sacred
Rites, as to impressionable beings? The invocations are made as to
gods that are impressionable beings: so that it is implied that not
the demons only are impressionable, but the gods likewise, as was
declared in Homer:
"Even the gods themselves are yielding."
Suppose, then, we say, as certain individuals have affirmed,
that the gods are pure mental essences and that the demons are
psychic beings participating of mind. 5 The fact remains,
nevertheless, that the pure mental essences are not to be charmed
or mingled with things of sense, and that the supplications which
are offered are entirely foreign to this purity of mental
substance. 6 But on the other hand the things that are offered are
offered as to sensitive and psychic natures.
Are gods, then, separated from demons by the distinction of
bodied and unbodied? If, however, only the gods are incorporeal,
how shall the Sun, the Moon, and the visible luminaries in the sky
be accounted as gods?
How is it that some of them are givers of good and others
bring evil?
What is the bond of union that connects the divinities in the
sky that have bodies with the gods that are unbodied?
The gods that are visible (in the sky) being included in the
same category with the invisible, what distinguishes the demons
from the visible, and likewise the invisible, gods?
2. The superior races and their manifestations
In what does a demon differ from a hero or half-god or from a
soul? 7 It is it in essence, in power, or in energy? 8
What is the token (at the Sacred Rites) of the presence of a
god or an angel, or an archangel, or a demon, or of some archon, or
a soul? For it is a common thing with the gods and demons alike,
and with all the superior races, to speak boastfully and to project
an unreal image into view. 9 Hence the race of the gods is thus
made to seem to be in no respect superior to that of the demons.
It is also acknowledged that ignorance and delusion in
respect to the gods is irreligiousness and impurity, and that the
superior knowledge in respect to them is holy and helpful: the
former being the darkness of ignorance in regard to the things
revered and beautiful, and the latter the light of knowledge. The
former condition will cause human beings to be beset with every
form of evil through ignorance and recklessness, 10 but the latter
is the source of everything beneficial.
3. Oracles and Divination
What is it that takes place in divination? For example, when
we are asleep, we often come, through dreams, to a perception of
things that are about to occur We are not in an ecstasy full of
commotion, for the body lies at rest, yet we do not ourselves
apprehend these things as clearly as when we are awake.
In like manner many also come to a perception of the future
through enthusiastic rapture and a divine impulse, when at the same
time so thoroughly awake as to have the senses in full activity.
Nevertheless, they by no means follow the matter closely, or at
least they do not attend to it as closely as when in their ordinary
condition. So, also, certain others of these ecstatics become
entheast or inspired when they hear cymbals, drums, or some choral
chant; as for example, those who are engaged in the Korybantic
Rites, those who are possessed at the Sabazian festivals, and those
who are celebrating the Rites of the Divine Mother. Others, also,
are inspired when drinking water, like the priest of the Klarian
Apollo at Kolophon; others when sitting over cavities in the earth,
like the women who deliver oracles at Delphi; others when affected
by vapor from the water, like the prophetesses at Branchidæ; and
others when standing in indented marks like those who have been
filled from an imperceptible inflowing of the divine plerome.
Others who understand themselves in other respects become inspired
through the Fancy: some taking darkness as accessory, others
employing certain potions, and others depending on singing and
magic figures. Some are affected by means of water, others by
gazing on a wall, others by the hypethral air, and others by the
sun or in some other of the heavenly luminaries. Some have likewise
established the technique of searching the future by means of
entrails, birds, and stars.
What, I ask, is the nature of divination, and what is its
peculiar character? The diviners all say that they arrive at the
foreknowledge of the future through gods or demons, and that it is
not possible for others to have any inkling of it only those who
have command over the things to be. I dispute, therefore, whether
the divine power is brought down to such subserviency to human
beings as, for instance, not to hold aloof from any who are
diviners with barley-meal.
In regard, however, to the origins of the oracular art, it is
to be doubted whether a god, or angel, or demon, or some other such
being, is present at the Manifestations, 11 or at the divinations,
or at any other of the Sacred Performances, as having been drawn
thither through you by the necessities created by the invocations.
Some are of opinion that the soul itself both utters and
imagines these things, and that there are similar conditions of it
which have been produced from little sparks; others, that there is
a certain mingled form of substance produced from our own soul and
from the divine in breathing; others, that the soul, through such
activities, generates from itself a faculty of Imagination in
regard to the future, or else that the emanations from the realm of
matter bring demons into existence through their inherent forces,
especially when the emanations are derived from animals.
These conjectures are put forth for the following statements:
1. That during sleep, when we are not engaged with anything,
we sometimes chance to obtain perception of the future.
2. That likewise, an evidence that a condition of the Soul is
a principal source of the art of divining is shown by the facts
that the senses are held in check, fumes and invocations being
employed for the purpose; and that by no means everybody, but only
the more artless and young persons, are suitable for the purpose.
3. That likewise, ecstasy or alienation of mind is a chief
origin of the divining art; also the mania which occurs in
diseases, mental aberration, abstinence from wine, suffusions of
the body. fancies set in motion by morbid conditions or equivocal
states of mind, such as may occur during abstinence and ecstasy, or
apparitions got up by technical magic. 12
4. That both the realm of Nature, Art, and the feeling in
things of common throughout the universe, as of the parts in one
animal, contain foreshadowings of certain things with reference to
others. Moreover, there are bodies so constituted as to be a
forewarning from some to others. Examples of this kind are manifest
by the things done, namely: that they who make the invocations (at
the Rites) carry stones and herbs, tie sacred knots and unloose
them, open places that are locked, and change the purposes of
individuals by whom they are entertained, so that from being paltry
they are made worthy. They also who are able to reproduce the
mystic figures are not to be held in low esteem. For they watch the
course of the heavenly bodies, and tell from the position and
relation of one with another whether the oracular announcements of
the ruling planet will be false or true, or whether the rites which
have been performed will be to no purpose, or will be expressive or
archaic, although no god or demon is drawn down to them.
There are some, however, who suppose there is likewise, the
subject-race of a tricky nature, artful, and assuming all shapes,
turning many ways, that personates gods and demons and souls of the
dead like actors on the stage; and that through these everything
that seems to be good or bad is possible. They are led to form this
judgment because these subject-spirits are not able to contribute
anything really beneficial as relates to the soul, nor even to
perceive such things; but on the other hand, they ill treat,
deride, and often impede those who are returning to virtue.
They are likewise full of conceit, and take delight in vapors
and sacrifices.
5. Because the begging priest with open mouth attempts in
many ways to raise our expectations. 13
4. The invocation of the Theurgic powers
It perplexes me greatly to form a conception how they who are
invoked as superior beings are likewise commanded like inferiors;
also that they require the worshipper to be just, although when
entreated, they themselves consent to perform unjust acts. They
will not hearken to the person who is invoking them if he is not
pure from sexual contamination, yet they themselves do not hesitate
to lead chance individuals into unlawful sexual relations.
5. Sacrifices and Prayers.
(I am likewise in doubt in regard to the sacrifices, what
utility or power they possess in the world and with the gods, and
for what reason they are performed, appropriate for the beings thus
honored and advantageously for the persons who present the gifts.
14)
The gods also require that the interpreters of the oracles
observe strict abstinence from animal substances, in order that
they may not be made impure by the fumes from the bodies; yet they
themselves are allured most of all by the fumes of the sacrifices
of animals.
6. Conditions for successful results
It is also required that the Beholder 15 must be pure from
the contact of anything dead, and yet the rites employed to bring
the gods hither, many of them, are made effective through dead
animals.
What, then, is more preposterous than these things -- that a
human being, inferior in dignity, should make use of threats, not
to a demon or soul of some dead person, but to the Sun-King
himself, or to the Moon, or some one of the divine ones in the sky,
himself uttering falsehood in order that they may be caused to
speak the truth? For the declaration that he will assail the sky,
that he will reveal to view the Arcana of Isis, that he will expose
to public gaze the ineffable symbol in the innermost sanctuary,
that he will stop the Baris; that, like Typhon, he will scatter the
limbs of Osiris, or do something of a similar character, what is it
but an extravagant absurdity, threatening what he neither knows how
nor is able to perform? What dejection of spirit does it not
produce in those who, like children, destitute of intelligence, are
dismayed by groundless fear and terrified by these false alarms?
And yet Chairemon, the Scribe of the Temple, records these
things as current discourse among the Egyptian priests. 16 It is
also said that these threats, and others of like tenor, are very
violent.
7. Sacred names and symbolic expressions
The Prayers also: What do they mean when they speak of the
one coming forth to light from the slime, sitting on the
Lotus-blossom, sailing in a boat, changing forms according to the
season, and assuming a shape according to the Signs of the Zodiac?
For so this is said to be seen at the Autopsias; and they
unwittingly attribute to the divinity a peculiar incident of their
own imagination. If, however, these expressions are uttered
figuratively, and are symbolic representations of his forces, let
them tell the interpretation of the symbols. For it is plain that
if they denote the condition of the Sun, as in eclipses, they would
be seen by every one who looked toward it intently.
Why, also, are terms preferred that are unintelligible, and
of those that are unintelligible why are foreign ones preferred
instead of those of our own language? For if the one who hears
gives attention to the signification it is enough that the concept
remains the same, whatever the term may be. For the divinity that
is invoked is possibly not Egyptian in race; and if he is Egyptian,
he is far from making use of Egyptian speech, or indeed of any
human language at all. Either these are all artful contrivances of
jugglers, and disguises having their origin in the passive
conditions induced about us through being attributed to the divine
agency, or we have left unnoticed conceptions of the divine nature
that are contrary to what it is.
8. The First Cause
I desire you further to declare plainly to me what the
Egyptian Theosophers believe the First Cause to be; whether Mind,
or above mind; and whether one alone, or subsisting with another or
with several others; whether unbodied or embodied, whether the very
same as the Creator of the Universe (Demiurgos) or prior to the
Creator; also whether they likewise have knowledge respecting
Primal Matter; 17 or of what nature the first bodies were; and
whether the Primal Matter was unoriginated, or was generated. For
Chairemon and the others hold that there is not anything else prior
to the worlds which we behold. At the beginning of their discourses
they adopt the divinities of the Egyptians, but no other gods,
except those called Planets, those that make up the Zodiac and such
as rise with these, and likewise those divided into decans, those
which indicate nativities, and those which are called the Mighty
Leaders. The names of these are preserved in the Almanacs, together
with their routine of changes, their risings and settings, and
their signifying of future events. For these men perceived that the
things which were said respecting the Sun-God as the Demiurgos, or
Creator of the Universe, and concerning Osiris and Isis, and all
the Sacred Legends, may be interpreted as relating to the stars,
their phases, occultations, and revolutions in their orbits, or
else to the increase and decrease of the Moon, the course of the
Sun, the vault of the sky as seen by night or by day, or the river
Nile, and, in short, they explain everything as relating to natural
objects, and nothing as having reference to incorporeal and living
essences. 18
More of them likewise attribute to motion of the stars
whatever may relate to us. They bind everything, I know not how, in
the indissoluble bonds of necessity, which they term Fate, or
allotment; and they also connect everything with those gods whom
they worship in temples and with carved images and other objects,
as being the only unbinders of Fate.
9. Nativities and Guardian Demons
The next thing to be learned relates to the peculiar demon or
guardian spirit -- how the Lord of the House 19 assigns it,
according to what purpose or what quality of emanation or life or
power conies from it to us, whether it really exists or does not
exist, and whether it is impossible or possible actually to find
the Lord of the House. Certainly, if it is possible, then the
person has learned the scheme of his nativity; knowing his own
guardian demon, is liberated from fate, is truly favored by
divinity. Nevertheless, the rules for casting nativities are
countless, and beyond comprehension. Moreover, it is impossible for
expertness in astral observations to amount to an actual knowing,
for there is great disagreement in relation to it, and Chairemon,
as well as many others, have spoken against it. Hence the
assumption of a Lord of the House (or Lords of the House, if there
are more than one) pertaining to a nativity is almost confessed by
astrologers themselves to be beyond absolute proving; and yet it is
from this assumption, they say, that the ascertaining of the
person's own personal demon is possible.
But further, I wish to be informed whether our personal demon
presides over some specific one of the regions within us. For it
seems to be believed by some persons that there are demons allotted
to specific departments of the body -- one over the health, one
over the figure, and another over the bodily habits, forming a bond
of union among them; and that one is placed as superior over all of
them in common. And further, they suppose that there is one demon
guardian of the body, another of the soul, and another of the
superior mind; 20 also that some demons are good and others bad.
I am in doubt, however, whether our particular demon may not
be a special part of the soul; and hence he who has a mind imbued
with good sense would be the truly favored one.
I observe, moreover, that there is a twofold worship of the
personal demon; also, that some perform it as to two and others as
to three, but nevertheless he is invoked by all with a common form
of invocation.
10. Eudemonia, or the True Success
I question, however, whether there may not be some other
secret path to true success which is afar from (the Rites of) the
gods. I doubt whether it is really necessary to pay any regard to
the opinions of individuals in regard to the divine endowment of
divination and Theurgy, and whether the Soul does not now and then
form grand conceptions. On the contrary, also, there are other
methods for obtaining premonitions of what will take place.
Perhaps, also, they who exercise the divine art of divining may
indeed foresee, and yet they are not really successful: for they
may foresee future events and not know how to make use of the
foresight properly for themselves. I desire from you, therefore, to
show me the path to success and in what the essence of it consists.
For among us (philosophers) there is much wrangling, as though good
might be derived from human reasonings by comparison of views.
If, however, this part of the inquiry, the intimate
association with the superior race is passed over by those who
devised it, wisdom will be taught by them to trivial purpose, such
as calling the Divine Mind to take part about the finding of a
fugitive slave, or a purchase of land, or, if it should so happen,
a marriage or a matter of trade. Suppose, however, that this
subject of intimate communion with the Superior race is not passed
over, and those who are thus in communication tell things that are
remarkably true about different matters, but nothing important or
trustworthy in relation to the true success -- employing themselves
diligently with matters that are difficult, but of no use to human
beings -- then there were neither gods nor good demons present, but
on the contrary, a demon of that kind called "Vagabond," or it was
all an invention of men or an air-castle of a mortal nature.
Notes:
1.
Porphyry, it is well known, was a distinguished scholar, and
the foremost writer in the later Platonic School. He was a native
of Tyre, and his name Molech, or King, was rendered by Longinus
into Porphurios, denoting the royal purple, as a proper equivalent.
He was a disciple of Plotinus, who had broadened the field of
philosophic study till it included the "Wisdom of the East." In
personal habits he followed the Pythagorean discipline. He was a
severe critic of the Gnostic beliefs then current, and he evidently
included with them also the new Christian faith. His mysticism was
spiritual and contemplative, and he regarded the ceremonial rites
of the Egyptian theurgy with distrust. He favored Mithraism, which
prevailed in Asia, while Iamblichos belonged rather to the cult of
Serapis, which was the State religion of Egypt.
Of Anebo we know little. He is addressed as an Egyptian
priest, and his name is that of Anabu or Anubis, the Egyptian
psyxhopompos and patron of sacred literature. He was a "prophet"
hen niter or servant of divinity, and expounder of the oracles: and
Porphyry himself an "epoptes" or initiated person, asks him
accordingly to explain the Egyptian theosophic doctrines respecting
the divine beings, rites and religious faith.
2.
The Theosophers were regarded as learned in the arcane
knowledge, and especially in Theurgy. Iamblichos appears to have
adopted these Rites and usages from the Egyptian worship, including
with them a philosophic groundwork from the Platonic doctrines.
3.
The use of images and emblems of a sacred character to typify
divine power and energy is universal. Somewhat of the divine was
supposed to inhere in them. The "images" and asheras or "groves"
mentioned in the Bible were of this character. So was the "idol in
a grove," made by Queen Maachah, as well as the simulacrums which,
as Herodotus states, the Egyptian women carried at the festivals.
4.
Compare Gospel according to Matthew, XI, 12. "From the days
of John the Baptist till now, the kingdom of heaven is forced, and
they who are violent seize it."
5.
Xenokrates, who was a disciple of Plato, himself taught these
doctrines. He considered the heavens as divine and that the
substance of the divine nature was mind pure and absolute. He also
described the stars as "visible divinities." The demons were
depicted as of a psychic nature, subordinate to that of the gods,
and therefore subject to emotion and perturbation like human
beings, while at the same time sharing in a degree in the power and
intelligence of the gods.
6.
Greek, the mind or "rational soul," the essence or principle
of intelligence which transcends the understanding or reasoning
faculty, and is capable of knowing truth intuitively and
instinctively from being itself of divine origin.
7.
Here Porphyry has given an ancient classification of
spiritual beings into four orders, the gods, demons or guardians,
the heroes or half-gods, and souls. There were other distinctions
in the Eastern countries, and we find Abammon, the Teacher, adding
to these the archangels, angels, and archons of both the higher and
lower nature. These were named in several of the Gnostic categories
that were extant at that period. "We have no conflict with blood
and flesh," says the Christian apostle, "but with archonates,
authorities, the world-rulers of this dark region, and spiritual
forces of evil in the upper heavens."
8.
By "essence" is signified the underlying principle of being;
by "power" the intermediate agency; and by "energy" the operative
faculty which enables actual results.
9.
This inquiry in regard to the apparitions which the
candidates beheld at the initiation is made plainer by Proklos: "In
the most sacred stages of the Perfective Rites," says he, "before
the gods come into view, there appear intrusive figures of demons
of the Underworld, to draw away the attention of the candidate from
the spotless Good to the gross and material." It may be pertinent
to add that in the several Grottoes or Halls of Initiation there
was machinery ingeniously constructed for the purpose of
representing divine and other personages. See The Epicurean, by
Thomas Moore, and The Great Dionysiak Myth, by Robert Brown, Jr.,
VI, 2, 3.
10.
"I do not see any sin in the world," says George Sand, "But I
see a great deal of ignorance."
11.
Greek, epiphany -- an apparition or manifestation, such as
was exhibited in mystic and theurgic rites.
12.
Goeteia (goetia), or "black magic."
13.
The agurtes or begging priest generally belonged to the
worship of Rhea or Cybele, the Mother. He is frequently depicted in
a most unfavorable light. Apuleius speaks of a company of these
emasculate priests in the eighth book of the Metamorphoses. They
are also described in the Republic of Plato: "Agurtæ and Mantics
frequent the houses of the rich and persuade them that they possess
a power granted by the gods to expiate, by sacrifices and chants
any unjust act that has been committed and that they induce the
gods by blandishments and magic rites to help them. They collected
money in this way, and they also followed the selling of nostrums
and telling of fortunes."
14.
This paragraph is taken from Part V, Chapter I, and is not
found in the text of the Letter as we have it. It is quoted there
as belonging in this place. In the original Greek text the
preceding paragraph appears in unbroken connection with the one
which follows, and in dividing them we find it necessary to add a
clause, to introduce the subject.
15.
Greek, an epopt, seer, or beholder; a person admitted to the
higher degree of initiation. "The Perfective Rite leads the way as
the muesis or mystic initiation," says Proklos, "and after that is
the epopteia or beholding." Theôn describes it as three degrees --
"the Purification, Initiation, and Beholding of the Divine Vision."
Mr. Robert Brown, Jr., explains the last of these very fully. "This
is the Autopsia or Personal Inspection, the Crown of Mysteries, the
Epopteia or Divine Beholding, and he becomes an Epoptes or
Contemplator." (Great Dionysiak Myth, VI, 2, 3.)
As the Autoptic Visions are the principal topic in this work,
the term "Beholder" is adopted uniformly for several words of the
same import.
16.
As the term "Egyptian" is applied only in this work to
individuals of sacerdotal rank, the designation of "priest" is
added. The Hierogrammateus, or Scribe of the Temple, was a priest
of the lower class, and his duty was to keep the records, teach
students the religious observances, and take care that they were
duly obedient. The prophets were superior to the Scribes. The
Temples of Egypt, like those of Babylonia, were seminaries for
instruction, and all departments of Science and philosophy were
included in their teachings as being Sacred Learning.
17.
Greek, hulé; a term first adopted by Aristotle to signify the
objective, negative or passive element upon which the Creative
energy operates. Plato named it the "receptacle," as containing the
creative energy and making it effective.
18.
Plutarch comments somewhat severely upon this mode of
interpretation. In his treatise On Isis and Osiris he remarks that
some individuals do not scruple to say that Osiris is the Sun, Isis
no other than the Moon, and that Typhon is fire, or drouth, or the
Ocean. But he adds in rebuttal: "No one can rationally imagine that
these objects can be gods in themselves; for nothing can be a god
that is either without soul, or under the power of natural
objects." He also remarks that "there is an excellent saying among
philosophers, that they who have not learned the true sense of
words will also mistake in the things that are meant."
19.
Greek, oikoresmotys: Hebrew, Baal Zebul. In astrology a
"house" is a twelfth part of the sky as marked out for the purpose
of horoscopes. Every sign of the Zodiac thus had a "house," which a
planet or planetary genius was considered as occupying, and thence
ruling the days and events of the month to which it belonged.
20.
Compare First Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians, V, 23:
"Spirit and soul and body."