Porphyry of Tyre #2: Practical Theosophy

'These things I beg you to conceal as the most unutterable of secrets, for even the gods did not make a revelation concerning them openly, but by enigmas.' (Philosophy from Oracles, 305F Smith, transl. E. H. Gifford)

Introduction

While it seems that Porpyhry's On Images was a short book - I personally think that what is extant probably represents at least half of the original -, his On the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles was both considerably longer (multiple volumes = papyrus scrolls) and of broader scope. The former work gave brief interpretations of the meanings of the sculptural representations of the gods. These amount to barely more than a definition of the deity in question. On the Philosophy has a fundamentally analogous structure, being a kind of catalogue of items followed by their respective interpretations, but these items are complete verse oracles, some of them quite long, and their explanations can also run to some length.

The church father Eusebius, our main source for the text, but manifestly a hostile witness, introduces it as follows:

[Porphyry], in the book which he entitled Of the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles, made a collection of the oracles of Apollo and the other gods and good daemons, which he especially chose out of them as thinking that they would suffice both for proof of the excellence of the [theologoumena]*, and for the encouragement of what he is pleased to call 'Theosophy.' 

*'Theological assertions' - on the meaning of theologia, see Porphyry of Tyre #1.

Now, what is theosophy? If you've heard of modern Theosophy, try to forget all the associations. Consider: what could a pagan philosopher of the third century mean by it, having no tradition of that name to look back to - he may actually have coined the word himself -, and not meaning to found a new tradition either? Pier Franco Beatrice, Anonymi Monophysitae Theosophia: An Attempt at Reconstruction (2001), p. xxix, puts it as follows:

As Eusebius points out, Porphyry had set himself the [...] aim [...] of exhorting his followers to attain that intellectual wisdom which he, with a word particularly dear to him, liked to call 'theosophy' [...]. John Philoponus confirms Eusebius' information when he says that Porphyry called theurgy 'practical philosophy' (τὴν τε πρακτικὴν θεοσοφίαν, οὕτω τὴν μαγείαν καλῶν).

But this is of little help; intellectual wisdom, well and good, but of what kind? The reference to theurgy is actually a complete red herring, and the Greek that is cited here disproves the English gloss: Philoponus, in a tone of disparagement, says that Porphyry uses "practical theosophy" for what is really (from Philoponus' Christian perspective) mageia, magic. This is drawn from a polemical discussion of pagan forms of divination, and as for Porphyry himself, there is no evidence that he even knew the word theurgy at the time he wrote On the Philosophy, much less that the work was about theurgy. (I will come back to this issue in a moment.)

Well, let me give my own attempt at an explanation. I would say that theosophy is coined on the model of the word 'philosophy', and means something like '(philosophical) knowledge of the gods'; "practical knowledge of the gods" is the technical competence to perform rituals relating to the gods. The usefulness of these words is readily apparent, I think, in a context where there is no term or category like "religion", and where theologia, as I discussed in the previous post on Porphyry, had a confusingly imprecise meaning. Not a few of Porphyry's pagan contemporaries may also have felt, like the Christian Philoponus later did, that some of the practices in question were illicit, or magical; this could have been another motivation to look for a more positive term. One might compare Apuleius' discussion of the term magia in his defense against a charge of magic, the Apologia de magia. He argues that magia in an original sense of knowledge of pious worship is actually a good thing and something he does concern himself with, but that he would never perform illicit magical acts.

Now, what kind of practices were these, and why did Porphyry deem it necessary to write about them, when pagans had managed without his book for centuries? Moreover, what were these oracles, and where did they come from? We find something of an answer to all these questions in the emperor Julian's anti-Christian polemic, Against the Galilaeans, written about a century after On the Philosophy:

For the spirit that comes to men from the gods is present but seldom and in few, and it is not easy for every man to share in it or at every time. Thus it is that the prophetic spirit has ceased among the Hebrews also, nor is it maintained among the Egyptians, either, down to the present. And we see that the indigenous oracles of Greece have also fallen silent and yielded to the course of time. Then lo, our gracious lord and father Zeus took thought of this, and that we might not be wholly deprived of communion with the gods has granted us through the sacred arts (hierôn tekhnôn) a means of enquiry by which we may obtain the aid that suffices for our needs. (transl. Wilmer Cave Wright)

In modern terms, the phenomenon Julian is describing is that of miniaturization: late antique paganism was increasingly a matter, not of large temples and public festivals, but of private practice and the consultation of independent religious experts. This involved the reinvention of temple rituals on a smaller scale - hence miniaturization -, and was influenced by no other group to as great an extent as Egyptian priests*, whether in Egypt itself** or outside it***. Porphyry himself, in his later Epistle to Anebo, critiques many of the practices he had once advocated by associating them with a (probably fictitious) Egyptian priest.

*To the extent that Servius, prologue to the commentary on Aeneid 6, seems to use 'Aegyptus' for '(Egyptian) priest', somewhat in the same way that 'Chaldaeus' meant 'astrologer'.
**As in the (fictional) framing narrative of Pseudo-Thessalus; see Ian Moyer, "Thessalos of Tralles and Cultural Exchange".
***As with the wise priest Kalasiris visiting Delphi in Heliodorus' novel The Ethopian Tale, and - more tangibly - with the Egyptian priest who summoned Plotinus' guardian spirit to appear to the philosopher according to Porphyry's Life of Plotinus.

These miniaturized practices stood in continuity with temple ritual, not just in Egypt, but also elsewhere; Porphyry's text gives me the impression that temple priests in the rest of the Greek-speaking world were substantially involved in this late antique (re-)formulation of ritual practice. Oracles were an important tool in this process, as they created a path of innovation within the existing tradition: an old ritual could be used to receive new revelations, including instructions for methods of divination better suited to novel circumstances, which could be used to receive new revelations, etc.

Theurgy?

Theurgy [...] describes the practice of rituals, sometimes seen as magical in nature, performed with the intention of invoking the action or evoking the presence of one or more deities, especially with the goal of achieving henosis (uniting with the divine) and perfecting oneself. (Wikipedia s.v. Theurgy as of 08.03.2019)

I said in the previous post that I don't believe Porphyry knew Plotinus' philosophy when he wrote On Images or On the Philosophy, and I moreover said a moment ago that Porphyry is unlikely to have heard of theurgy at this point. My reasoning for this is slightly circular, but less circular than the opposing argument, which holds that there are some commonalities between the oracles he discusses here and the Chaldaean Oracles* (from which the term "theurgy" originates), and therefore they must all be "theurgic", and Porphyry must be predominantly influenced by the latter. My argument rather runs the opposite way: since the commonalities between the other Porphyrian oracles and the Chaldaean Oracles can in fact be explained in other ways (as I will explain), and Porphyry is known to have made great use of the Chaldaean corpus later on**, it is unreasonable to assume that he would have made no clear references to it (or to theurgy) in a work that has such closely related subjects.

(*Little or no relation to the Chaldaeans = Babylonians; more details below.
**"Later" under the assumption that my chronology is correct.)

In fact, if Porphyry had already been aware of the word theurgy, and had seen it as a peculiar kind of ritual practice, there would have been no need for him to make up another obscure term, "practical theosophy", and he might have been content with the pair "theology and theurgy", which he would use in the Epistle to Anebo (on which in a future post).

That scholars have wanted to call On the Philosophy Neoplatonic and theurgic, rather than, as I think it is, Middle Platonic and simply pagan, is due to some old prejudices against Neoplatonism and, frankly, a lack of good scholarship on pagan thought in late antiquity. There is a mass of writing, admittedly, on pagan philosophical thought, but very little of substance on what the philosophers' contemporaries believed. Traditionally, everything "superstitious" and "oriental" has been attributed to the effete, irrational Neoplatonists, and even as the overtly pejorative language has ebbed away, there is still very little effort to understand the continuity of their ideas with the earlier thought of the Roman period. As a result, all kinds of things that seem superficially mystical or theurgic are just assumed to radiate out from Neoplatonism, even though there is a plethora of relevant sources that either predate Porphyry or, even though they come later, share many important traits with Neoplatonic texts without showing any influence from Neoplatonism itself.

Consider the following passage, from Eunapius' Lives of the Philosophers 474f, widely taken as typical of the role of Chaldaean theurgy in 4th-century Neoplatonism, several decades after Porphyry's death:

At the close of his exposition (the philosopher) Eusebius would add that (dialectical discussions) are the only true realities, whereas the impostures of witchcraft (magganeiai, 'trickery') and magic (goêteuousai, 'sorcery') that cheat the senses are the works of conjurors (thaumatopoiôn, 'miracle-workers') who are insane men led astray into the exercise of earthly and material powers. The sainted (theiotatos, 'most divine') Julian (the later emperor) frequently heard the closing words [...] Julian boldly asked him what was the meaning of the epilogue that he perpetually recited. Thereupon Eusebius spread the sails of the eloquence that was his by nature, and giving free rein to his powers of speech said: 

“Maximus is one of the older and more learned students, who, because of his lofty genius and superabundant eloquence scorned all logical proof in these subjects and impetuously resorted to the acts of a madman. Not long since, he invited us to the temple of Hecate and produced many witnesses of his folly. When we had arrived there and had saluted the goddess: ‘Be seated,’ said he, ‘my well-beloved friends, and observe what shall come to pass, and how greatly I surpass the common herd.’ When he had said this, and we had all sat down, he burned a grain of incense and recited to himself the whole of some hymn or other, and was so highly successful in his demonstration that the image of the goddess first began to smile, then even seemed to laugh aloud. We were all much disturbed by this sight, but he said: ‘Let none of you be terrified by these things, for presently even the torches which the goddess holds in her hands shall kindle into flame.’ And before he could finish speaking the torches burst into a blaze of light. Now for the moment we came away amazed by that theatrical miracle-worker. But you must not marvel at any of these things, even as I marvel not, but rather believe that the thing of the highest importance is that purification of the soul which is attained by reason.” 

However, when the sainted Julian heard this, he said: “Nay, farewell and devote yourself to your books. You have shown me the man I was in search of.” After saying this he kissed the head of Chrysanthius and started for Ephesus.

On the usual view, Eusebius would be one of the last representatives of rational philosophy, soon to be eclipsed by theurgists like Maximus who follow the teaching of the Chaldaean Oracles. But although the word theurgy is connected with Maximus elsewhere in Eunapius, that word does not appear here; Eusebius sees his practices as thaumatopoiia, 'miracle-working', we might almost say 'stage magic'. This does not necessarily tell us anything about how Eusebius used the word theurgy, especially about whether he used it in a positive or negative sense (if he used it much at all, which may not be the case). Eusebius' concern is rather that Maximus, rather than striving for philosophical insight, is chasing after showmanlike effect, and the disdain for 'miracle-workers' was very old.

The best evidence that this is not the same as a dispute between rational and theurgic philosophy comes from Pollux' Onomasticon, the first extant text to use the Chaldaean word theourgos, 'theurgist'. (The Chaldaean Oracles themselves, the work of a 2nd-century CE father and son team, Julian the Chaldaean and Julian the theurgist, come to us only in scattered fragments.)

Pollux includes theurgists in a list of names for "the servants of the gods" (1.14):

priests (hiereis), temple-custodians (neôkoroi), temple-attendants (zakoroi), interpreters (pro-phêtai), expounders (hypo-phêtai), sacrificers (thytai), initiators (telestai), sacrificer-priest (hierourgoi), purifiers (kathartai), diviners (manteis), god-diviners (theomanteis), oracle-singers (khrêsmôidoi), oracle-sayer (khrêsmologoi), oracle-giver (khrêsmodotai), all-hallowed ones (panageis), fire-carriers (pyrphoroi), assistants (hupêretai), theurgists (theourgoi); the word thuêpoloi being rather poetical. But the female (servants of the gods are called) priestesses, prophetesses, and prophantessess of mystical acts; and the rest (of the appellations) are (of) common (form) with the male ones. The prophetess in Delphi specifically is (called) Pythia.

These are all respectable positions, and Pollux is mostly thinking of people employed at a temple; the theourgoi are even etymologically parallel to the theo-manteis and the hier-ourgoi. While we could not guess from this passage what exactly a theurgist does, the entry is at any rate not repeated in a later passage (7.188f), where independent, itinerant and (partly) disreputable ritual experts are listed:

Begging-priests (agyrtai), begging-priests (mên-agyrtai), begging-priests of the goddess Meter (mêtr-agyrtai), begging-priestcraft, collection of money for the gods, to collect by begging.

Portent (teras), diviners from portents (teraskopoi), interpretation of portents (teraskopikê, teraskolia, teraskopia, teratologia), of portentous (teratologôi) nature - but you would also say portent-interpreting (teratologôi) man -, monstrous/portentous birth (teratogonia), interpreters of portents (terôn hypokritai), from whom (derives) also the (verb) "to interpret portents" (terateuesthai). diviners (manteis)*, diviners from barley-meal (alphitomanteis), star-diviners (astromanteis), night-diviners (nyktomanteis), diviners by ventriloquism (sternomanteis), spindle-diviners (sphondylomanteis), diviners from flour (aleuromanteis); Philippides mentions diviners by a sieve (koskisomanteis). Magnes, in The Lydians, (says) "for dream-interpreting deliverers" (oneirokritaisin analytais), dream-interpreting purifieresses (kathartriai oneiropoloi), interpreters of dreams (oneiratôn hypokritai). Diviners from birds (orneoskopoi, oiônistai, ornithoskopoi, oiônopoloi). 

Sacrificers (thytai), Sacrifice-lovers (philothytai), magi, sorcerers (goêtes), exegetes**, purifiers (kathartai), initiators (telestai), "cleaner" (apomaktai)***, "cleaneress", and the verb "to clean". 

Miracle-worker (thaumatopoios), miracle-working, craftsman of miracles.

*Repeats from Onomasticon 1.14 are underlined.
**Of ritual regulations.
***Only here in such a sense, so somewhat unclear.

We cannot say whether Eusebius would have located the theurgists where Pollux did, but we know that he located Maximus among the magi, the sorcerers, and the miracle-mongers - exactly the sort of folk against whom the Christian church father Hippolytus of Rome had written in the early third century, before Porphyry and certainly without any reference to the Julians and their Chaldaean lore:

And that a fiery Hecate seems to career through air, (the magos) contrives in the mode following. Concealing a certain accomplice in a place which he wishes, and taking aside his dupes, he persuades them to believe him[], alleging that he will exhibit a flaming demon riding through the air. Now he exhorts them immediately to keep their eyes fixed until they see the flame in the air, and that then, veiling themselves, they should fall on their face until he himself should call them; and after having given them these instructions, he, on a moonless night, in verses speaks thus:

"Infernal, and earthy, and supernal Bombo, come!
[Einodiê, Trioditi], and brilliant one, that strays by night;
Foe of radiance, but friend and mate of gloom;
In howl of dogs rejoicing, and in crimson gore,
Wading 'mid corpses through tombs of lifeless dust,
Panting for blood; with fear convulsing men.
Gorgo, and Mormo, and [Mênê, 'moon'], and of many shapes,
Come, propitious, to our sacrificial rites!"

And while speaking these words, fire is seen borne through the air; but the spectators)being horrified at the strange apparition, and covering their eyes, fling themselves speechless to earth. But the success of the artifice is enhanced by the following contrivance. The accomplice whom I have spoken of as being concealed, when he hears the incantation ceasing, holding a kite or hawk enveloped with tow, sets fire to it and releases it. The bird, however, frightened by the flame, is borne aloft, and makes a proportionably quicker flight, which these deluded persons beholding, conceal themselves, as if they had seen something divine. The winged creature, however, being whirled round by the fire, is borne whithersoever chance may have it, and burns now the houses, and now the courtyards. Such is the divination of the sorcerers (magôn, 'magi').

(Refutation 4.35.4f-36.2, transl. John Henry MacMahon)

The equivalence is not exact, but we can see that Maximus was participating in a tradition of flashy practices relating to (among other gods) Hecate that were seen by some as trickery, by others as perfectly respectable and in fact unusually holy. That Maximus' exploit took place in a temple of Hecate suggests that he would have rather called what he did priestly art (hieratikê) or, in Julian's term, sacred art (hiera tekhnê). For the moment, then, let us say that theurgy is simply another synonym for this category, and leave discussions of the niceties for future posts. I will try to pay attention to how the practices in On the Philosophy line up with Pollux' categories, and we can use that later to compare them to rituals that are called "theurgic".

Porphyry's Introduction to On the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles

The fragments of Porphyry's work are too numerous to deal with in one post, especially when I have spent so many words on simply contextualizing it. But I at least want to give his introduction here, to get something of a sense of how the Tyrian himself wanted his work to be seen:

Sure, then, and steadfast is he who draws his hopes of salvation (sôthênai, 'being saved') from this (unclear reference) as from the only sure source, and to such thou wilt impart information without any reserve. For I myself call the gods to witness, that I have neither added anything, nor taken away from the meaning of the responses, except where I have corrected an erroneous phrase, or made a change for greater clearness, or completed the metre when defective, or struck out anything that did not conduce to the purpose; so that I preserved the sense of what was spoken untouched, guarding against the impiety (asebeian) of such changes, rather than against the avenging justice that follows from the sacrilege (hierosylias). 

And our present collection will contain a record of many doctrines of philosophy, according as the gods declared the truth to be; but to a small extent we shall also touch upon the practice of divination, such as will be useful both for contemplation, and for the general purification of life. And the utility which this collection possesses will be best known to as many as have ever been in travail with the truth, and prayed that by receiving the manifestation of it from the gods they might gain relief from their perplexity by virtue of the trustworthy teaching of the speakers. (303F)

As with On Images, so the preface to On the Philosophy also declared the work to be appropriate only for worthy readers:

And do thou endeavour to avoid publishing these above all things, and casting them even before the profane for the sake of reputation, or gain, or any unholy flattery. For so there would be danger not only to thee for transgressing these injunctions, but also to me for lightly trusting thee who couldst not keep the benefits secret to thyself. We must give them then to those who have arranged their plan of life with a view to the salvation (sôtêrian) of the soul. (304F)

(Note that, although Porphyry was very familiar with Christianity and influenced by it at least in minor ways, "salvation of the soul" is not as Christian a collocation as it sounds - the phrase already occurs in Plato's Laws 909a: there he suggests that those of evil opinions, like would-be tyrants and "those who plot by means of peculiar initiation rites", are to be held in sôphronistêria, 'houses of correction', for the sake of their soul's "salvation" or "saving".)

These things I beg you to conceal as the most unutterable of secrets, for even the gods did not make a revelation concerning them openly, but by enigmas. (305F Smith)

This admonition to secrecy is not just a common feature of certain strands of philosophical writing, especially when the gods are concerned, but also of ritual texts (such as the so-called Greek Magical Papyri) and divination manuals (e.g. Firmicus Maternus' Mathesis, on astrology). Since On the Philosophy belongs in all three genres, this is a fitting generic marker indeed.