pilgrim praise songs backgrounds

in his book on Proclus hymns, R M Van Den Berg

hymns are both prayers and praises p. 14
praises are prayers
prayers, praises
prayers between praises
praises first
and finally
we note that in Ti. 47b3ff. Timaeus asks rhetorically why we should
praise (mnomen humnoimen) something less than the universe. Taylor 1928: 295 comments on
this use of mnen humnein that it means not hymn, celebrate, but harp on. However,
given the setting of the dialogue at the Panatheneae-festival, hymn seems to me a
defensible translation
praise the origin in praising the present grace
praise the whole by praising the part
there are mythical hymns
metaphysical hymns
and physical hymns phusikoi humnoi
and there is the graceless harping on things
that is counter all praises
16: It should be stressed that these fusiko mnoi [as Menander called them] could indeed play a
role in the worship of the divine. An epigram (IG II 3816) found on the westwall of the
Parthenon and dated to the time of Plutarch of Chaeronea, for example, commemorates such a
hymn by a certain
Platonist called Laetus:
17:
T. 2.2 Having heard the sublime hymn of the theologian Laetus,
I saw heaven opening itself for humans.
If, as Pythagoras says, a soul reincarnates,
then it is in you, Laetus, that Plato, appearing again, lives.
Bowersock 1982: 276 identifies the hymn of Laetus as an example of
the fusiko mnoi described by Menander. Bowersock argues that this must be the
supreme god. He explains that for a Platonist the supreme god was
beyond the heights of heaven, and that in order to evoke it, the
speaker would have, quite literally, to imagine the opening of heaven
and the divinity beyond it.

The hymn was sublime in the sense that

it was about the highest realm of the cosmos, heaven, and what lay
beyond: a hymn per metarsvn. peri metarsiOn
17:
Bowersocks interpretation calls to
mind the above-mentioned interpretation of the Timaeus as a hymn on the universe which deals
with the cosmos and the heavenly realm.
sermons were regarded as a type of hymn
hymning and other forms of worship
as movement of a spritual kind in a spiritual direction
The Neoplatonists redefined the essence of worship in accordance
with the goal of their ethics: becoming like god as far as possible

18:
Porphyry Abst. II 34, 2-4 admonishes us that we should not try to
honour the highest god with anything sensible, either burnt offerings
or words. We should bring our own elevation as a holy offer to god
by uniting ourselves with him, by becoming like him. This offer is
both our hymn and our salvation.
Lower gods, Porphyry adds, can
be honoured with hymns that consist of words (tn k to lgou
mndan).
2: Our
19:

Proclus expresses him likewise in Chal. Phil. Fr.

19: Proclus, following Iamblichus but contrary to Porphyry,

puts his trust in theurgy in order to become like god.
Becoming like the divine consists in the process of ascent of the
human soul to its divine origin. Proclus views this ascent in the
context of his circular theory of causation. He explains the working
of the cyclic process with great clarity in the Elements of Theology. First
there is the cause of a product. The product both remains in the
producing cause and proceeds from it (El. 30, p. 35, 12-13). For, if
the product would wholly proceed from its cause, it would have
nothing in common with it anymore, and therefore lose all likeness
to its cause. However, procession is accomplished by means of like
ness (El. 29). What comes down, must go up: everything inevitably
desires the Good. This can only be attained through the mediation of

its proximate cause.

20: [the gods are pleased by our worship and praises] Not because the gods out of vanity want to
hear our thank-yous, but because being good, their wish is that we
too participate in the good. It is precisely through reverting to the
gods that we are filled with the greatest goods that save us.
Since everything reverts upon its proximate cause, hymns are sung by all beings,
whether god, man, or plant. To start with plants, in a passage that most probably inspired
William Blakes poem Ah! Sun-flower we read:
T. 2.3 Or why do heliotropes move together with the sun and the
moonplants with the moon, accompanying the lights of the cosmos in
as far as possible? Because, since everything prays according to its own
order and celebrates in hymns the leaders of the whole series
noerically or with words or physically or perceptibly, the heliotrope
too moves to the extent that it is flexible. And if someone would be
capable of hearing it hitting the air as it turns around, he would
observe that by means of this sound it renders to the King a kind of
hymn, that a plant is capable of singing. (De Sacrificio 148, 10ff.; for a
discussion of De Sacrificio , see chapter IV 4.4)
The basic idea is clear:
everything turns towards the leaders of its causative chain (its proxi
mate cause) as best it can in a hymn or prayer (we note that hymn
and prayer are here once again employed more or less as synonyms,
cf. 2.1). In the case of these plants, their hymns consist in produc
ing a sound by beating the air while they move around.
21:

As far as Proclus own hymns are concerned, it has been observed

more than once that their main theme is that of the ascent
(nagvg) (
) and hence the reversion of the soul towards the
intelligible world. In H. I 34 Helios is invoked in his function of
nagvgew cuxn,

in H. II Aphrodite is invoked as the mistress of the

Erotes who cause the naggia kntra

(II 5) with their arrows. In H.
III 1 an appeal is made to the Muses as the naggion fw
. The gods
of H. IV 2 are said to kindle the human souls with naggion pr

the song the hymn the prayer the praise as theurgic instruments
33: Although it
had been a long-standing tradition to call some of Platos dialogues
hymns (especially in the case of the Timaeus), Proclus and others
sought to show that other dialogues too had been intended as hymns.
to turn toward to move (back) toward ones cause
is to hymn that cause
reversion toward the causes
reversion toward the causes of the human soul
is ascent thru the divine hierarchy
from Wikip.
For Plotinus, and Iamblichus' teachers Anatolius and Porphyry, the emanations are as follows:
To Hen ( ), The One: Deity without quality, sometimes called The Good.
Nous (), Mind: The Universal consciousness, from which proceeds
Psych (), Soul: Including both individual and world soul, leading finally to
Physis (), Nature.
Plotinus urged contemplations for those who wished to perform theurgy, the goal of which was
to reunite with The Divine (called henosis). Therefore, his school resembles a school of
meditation or contemplation. Iamblichus of Calcis (Syria), a student of Porphyry (who was
himself a student of Plotinus) taught a more ritualized method of theurgy that involved
invocation and religious, as well as magical, ritual.[6] Iamblichus believed theurgy was an
imitation of the gods, and in his major work, On the Egyptian Mysteries, he described theurgic
observance as "ritualized cosmogony" that endowed embodied souls with the divine
responsibility of creating and preserving the cosmos.
to work as the divine works
to ascend throu a purification of our works to god, before god

Iamblichus' analysis was that the transcendent cannot be grasped with mental contemplation
because the transcendent is supra-rational. Theurgy is a series of rituals and operations aimed at
recovering the transcendent essence by retracing the divine 'signatures' through the layers of
being.[7] Education is important for comprehending the scheme of things as presented by
Aristotle, Plato and Pythagoras but also by the Chaldaean Oracles.[8] The theurgist works 'like
with like': at the material level, with physical symbols; at the higher level, with mental and
purely spiritual practices. Starting with correspondences of the divine in matter, the theurgist
eventually reaches the level where the soul's inner divinity unites with The Divine.[9]
VDB 38:
We cannot undertake to give a full presentation of the divine hierar
chy in the present context. Instead we give a schematic presentation
(Figure 1) based on a valuable discussion by Saffrey-Westerink
of
Proclus theology as presented in the Theol. Plat., together with a
correction by Steel.
10
Starting from above with the One, we can distinguish in descend
ing ontological order nine groups of gods. These can be organized in
three classes:
(a) the First God consisting of I. The One and II. The Henads
(the latter are the participable representatives of the One);
(b) the gods transcending the cosmos consisting of those belong
ing to III. Being, IV. Life and V. Nous;
(c) the gods of the cosmos consisting of those belonging to the
groups of VI. The Hypercosmic Gods (the gods that are above the
cosmos), VII. The Hyper-Encosmic Gods (the gods that are both
above and in the cosmos), VIII. The Encosmic Gods (the gods that
are in the cosmos) and IX. Lower Gods.
41: The Muses in H. III are not attested in the Theol. Plat. From the
commentary on the Cratylus we learn that they belong to the series of
Apollo (see my commentary on H. III 2) who acts as their leader.
Which Apollo does Proclus have in mind here: the one who con
stitutes the reverting triad among the hypercosmic gods, or the
member of the reverting triad of the hyper-encosmic gods? Probably
the latter, for in the extensive discussion of the former Apollo no
mention is made of the Muses. Of the second Apollo, however, it is
said that he perfects everything and makes everything revert by
means of mousik and pulls everything up by means of harmony and
rhythm towards the noeric truth and the light there (Theol. Plat. VI
22, p. 98, 20-4: ka di' rmonaw ka =uymo prw tn noern nlkvn
lyeian ka t ke fw).

The translation of mousik as lart des

Muses by Saffrey-Westerink may be somewhat poetical, but is never
theless justified. From the quotations taken from the In Crat. and
discussed in my commentary in vss. 1 and 2, it appears that the Muses
are supposed to do just this. Moreover, the image of being pulled up
towards the divine light by harmony and rhythm reoccurs almost
verbatim in H. III 15 in connection with the Muses
.

The Muses, belonging to the series of

Apollo as they do, are of course his inferiors, so we may suppose
them to rank below the hyper-encosmic gods.
42:
For Aphrodite in H. V the same more or less applies as for Aphro
dite in H. II. She too has a clear anagogic component (vss. 14-15),
although she has also downward directed concerns with this material
world; see the part of the hymn, especially vss. 5-11, with my
commentary.
43:
The unification of the soul
Ultimately Neoplatonism pivots on a single principle: unity. At the top of reality is the absolute
One. It transcends all things and causes them. The further that entities are removed from this
ultimate cause, the more their degree of unity diminishes and the greater their degree of plurality
becomes. Absolute plurality comes down to nonbeing, for being demands some degree of oneness, everything that is, is an one something. This also helps to explain why the One is the
absolute cause of all things, even causing and transcending Being (see above Figure 1). Since,
according to the Neoplatonists, causes are more perfect than their products, and since all things
strive after perfection, all things ultimately strive after unity.
43:
Proclus adds:
T. 3.1 and indeed, if we may express our own opinion, in so far as all things are
deified; for each thing, even the lowest grade of being you could mention, becomes god
in participating in unity according to its rank. For if God and the One are the same
because there is nothing greater than God and nothing greater than the One, then to be
unified is the same as to be deified. [In Parm. I 641, 6-12 (translation Morrow/Dillon
1987: 36
In chapter II 3, we have seen that the goal of Platonic ethics and Neoplatonic worship is to
become like God. Here, becoming like God is linked with the unification of the human soul.

44: The soul striving after its unification is hampered in its efforts by
its present state. All souls that descend suffer from forgetfulness as far
as their celestial origin is concerned. Most even forget completely
about it and subsequently do not try to ascend towards a divine uni
fied existence. The soul that does, however, has to cleanse itself from
all influences of matter.

Proclus
prays that a daemon, doing cruel things, may not keep me in the
streams of forgetfulness, far away from the blessed ones, that a
chilling Penalty may not bind my soul with the fetters of life, which,
fallen in the waves of icy-cold birth, does not want to roam there all
too long (H. IV 7-12)

The soul, then, has to cleanse itself from the influences of matter
and try to awake the memories it has of its divine origin. Partially this
was done by purifying rites to which the hymns refer (e.g. H. IV 4, VI
7), but it also involved changes in the condition of the soul brought
about by the philosophical life.

These people have been completely absorbed by the

material world. We, on the contrary, should flee the irrational
pleasures (=donw lgouw) and the multifarious desires, which
divide us in the body,
the sensory perceptions which lead our
thinking astray (asyseiw tw tn dinoian patsaw), in short this
whole world of images and fantasies.

46:

46: In
Proclus exhortation to the philosophical life discussed above, he is

afraid that his readership may misunderstand what he means by the

noeric life of the soul:
T. 3.2 I do not mean the Nous which transcends the soul, but the illumination itself which
descends from above on the soul. Aristotle [47] too refers to this one when he says that it
is by means of nous that we know the definitions, and also Timaeus when he says that it
only appears in the soul.
53: As Steel has shown, the Proclean soul never changes in respect of its being or substance
(osa). In the process of descent into the material realm, it is only the faculties and the activities
of the soul which suffer. The term henosis does not force us to assume something like a
substantial change. In Proclus, there is something like an unmixed henosis (nvsiw sgxutow).
An example of this is the human soul, which consists of different parts,
some superior to others, which none the less constitute an unity. Thus the human soul can be in a
state of henosis with Nous without losing its own nature. Since the contact with Nous stimulates
the faculties and acts of the soul which had become damaged in the process of descent, the soul
will now act in a more unified and noeric way than before the unification with Nous.
[nous here = spirit, as distinct from soul
soul is in itself, following lineages of forms, but with separation, opposition
nous = spirit in itself, illumination without separation which is the life of soul
iamblichus on pythagoras
tr. not given
Since wise people are in the habit of invoking the divinities at the beginning of any philosophic
consideration, this is all the more necessary on studying that one which is justly named after the
divine Pythagoras. Inasmuch as it emanated from the divinities it could not be apprehended
without their inspiration and assistance. Besides, its beauty and majesty so surpasses human
capacity, that it cannot be comprehended in one glance. Gradually only can some details of it be
mastered when, under divine guidance we approach the subject with a quiet mind. Having
therefore invoked the divine guidance, and adapted ourselves and our style to the divine
circumstances, we shall acquiesce in all the suggestions that come to us. Therefore we shall not
begin with any excuses for the long neglect of this sect, nor by any explanations about its having
been concealed by foreign disciplines, or mystic symbols, nor insist that it has been obscured by
false and spurious writings, nor make apologies for any special hindrances to its progress. For us
it is sufficient that this is the will of the Gods, which all enable us to undertake tasks even more
arduous than these.

Pythagoras adds that the survey of the whole heaven, and of the stars that revolve therein, is
indeed beautiful, when we consider their order which is derived from participation in the first
and intelligible essence. But that first essence is the nature and number of reasons (or, productive
principles), which pervades everything, and according to which all these (celestial) bodies are
arranged elegantly, and adorned fittingly. veritable wisdom is a science conversant with the
first beautiful objects (the intelligible property so called); which subsist in invariable sameness,
being undecaying and divine, by the participation in which other things also may well be called

beautiful. The desire for something like this is philosophy. Similarly beautiful is devotion to
erudition; and this notion Pythagoras extended, order to effect the improvement of the human
race.

vandenberg 72
Iamblichus
T. 4.2 It is because of such a will (i.e. the free will of the gods to do good to the theurgists,
RMB), that the gods, being gracious and propitious, illuminate the theurgists ungrudgingly; they
call the souls of the theurgists upwards to themselves and furnish them with an union with
themselves, accustoming them, although they are still in a body, to detaching themselves from it
and to turning towards their eternal and noetic principle. Myst. I 12 (41, 4-11)

73:
For Iamblichus it is philia instead of sympatheia that connects us to
the gods. He distinguishes between the two. He understands sympa
thy as a power at work within the material cosmos only, whereas the
divine love surpasses the limits of the cosmos and ties the material
cosmos to the divine, noetic one. In Proclus, however, sympathy is
taken in a wider sense and is equated with divine love. Iamblichus
had good reason to make this somewhat artificial distinction. Plotinus
had explained magic in terms of cosmic sympathy, and so did
Plotinus student and Iamblichus opponent Porphyry. Therefore
Iamblichus, in his attempts to vindicate theurgy, did not want to
associate it with sympathy in any way whatsoever. By Proclus time,
the advocates of theurgy had carried the day, and he did not feel the
need to avoid the term sympathy. He uses it as an equivalent of the
Iamblichean philia (a term also used by Proclus) between causes and
effects at different levels of reality, not as the magic cosmic sympathy
which Iamblichus had sought to exclude.
As Iamblichus explains, illumination and unification cannot be
obtained through contemplative philosophy as advocated by Plotinus.
The unification with the gods is the work of the gods, for thinking
does not link the theurgists with the gods. For, if so, what would
prevent those who philosophize theoretically

from experiencing the theurgical unification

with the gods? [Myst. II 11 (96, 14-16).
Iamblichus argues that if our
thinking would indeed stimulate the divine to unify itself with us, the
inferior would act on the superior. This is against the rules of
nature. [Myst. II 11 (97, 9-11).
Something surpassing mere rational thinking by far
could not be brought about by philosophizing. Iambli
chus here cashes in the consequences of his rejection of Plotinian
psychology. In Plotinus theory, unification with the gods of the world
of Nous meant unification with what one is, at least partially, oneself.
However, since Iamblichus downgrades the nature of the human
soul, contact with the gods becomes contact with superior beings. He
is thus able to turn the tables on Porphyry. It is the theoretical
philosopher who as an inferior being seeks to manipulate the gods,
just as a magician would have done.
NOTE THAT THE SPIRIT/SOUL DISTINCTION SOMEWHAT ANSWERS THIS DIFF. BETW. PLOT AND
IAMBLICHUS THE SOUL IS IN THE WORLD, THE SPIRIT IN THE WORLD BUT LINKED TO THE
DIVINE, AND IN A SENSE IN BUT NOT OF
H2K -- KNOWLEDGE OF GOD CANNOT COME ABOUT JUST BY THINKING
ATTENTION, AND WORK

IT REQUIRES PRAYER,

THEURGY ONA VARIETY OF LEVELS TO WORK THE WORKS OF GOD

74:
In the case of theurgy, on the contrary, the gods are moved not by
means of our inferior thought but by means of their own

T. 4.3 For in fact, even when we do not think, the signs themselves of their own accord
do their characteristic work, and the ineffable power of the gods, to whom these signs
belong, recognizes of its own accord its proper images, but not because it is woken up by
our thinking.
These symbols may be a variety of things. He mentions material symbols like an animal or a
plant here on earth, which preserves the intention of its creator in an unmixed and pure fashion,
[Myst. V 9 (209, 15-17), see Nasemann 1991: 129-131 for a discussion of this
passage.] stones and aromatic substances [
],
but also symbolic pictures, names and musical compositions and numbers. These signs originate
from the gods who respond to them of their own accord. The theurgist, then, does not force the
gods to do anything.

74: In his interpretation,

theurgy was not so much about working on the gods as making gods,
i.e. turning men into gods by means of unification of the former with
the latter. In this way, he hoped to reach the goal of all Platonic
philosophy: to become like god.*
*

Proclus passion for theurgy is clear both from his own writings and
his biography written by Marinus. The latter even dedicates a whole
chapter to Proclus theurgical excellence. He was initiated into the
Chaldaean wisdom by Asclepigenia, the granddaughter of Nestorius.
Apparently, this was a gradual process:
T. 4.4 [T]he philosopher was cleansed by the Chaldaean purification; then he held
converse, as he himself mentions in one of his works, with the luminous apparitions of
Hecate, which he saw with his own eyes; then he caused rainfalls by correctly moving the
iunx; by this means he saved Attica from a severe drought. He proposed means to
prevent earthquakes; he tested the divinatory power of the tripod; and even uttered verses
about his own destiny. [Marinus Vita Procli 28, trans. after Rosn 1949: 29:

77: hard to see the unity of nature magic and divine unification in theurgy, however much they
may depend on the same techniques of attracting the gods by means of symbols.
thus lower and higher forms of theurgy are commonly distinguished
The contribution of Anne Sheppard (1982) to the debate about
lower and higher forms of theurgy in Proclus takes the foregoing
discussion into account, as well as texts hitherto left out of considera
tion. It therefore provides a good starting-point for the present dis
cussion. She distinguishes between three sorts of theurgy. The lowest
form of theurgy she equates with white magic, surely a somewhat an
unhappy term in the light of Iamblichus attempts in Myst. to deny
that theurgy has anything to do with magic. This lowest form of
theurgy is concerned with operations in the material world. The
miracles performed by Proclus mentioned in T. 4.4 come under this
heading.
The next two types of theurgy are to be distinguished from white magic, because they are
directed towards the ascent of the human soul, whereas white magic is not. Sheppard suggests
that Pro clus therefore did not regard this white magic of much importance. The task of the

second type of theurgy is to unify the soul at the level of Nous and make it thus noerically active.
It takes the ascend ing human soul as far as the point where the noetic world joins the noetic-andnoeric world. According to Sheppard, it is not clear whether this form of theurgy implies rites
and if so, which sort of rituals we should be thinking of. She guesses that these rituals, if any, are
purifying ones.
78: The last and highest type of theurgy is the one that brings about the mystical union with the
One, sometimes described as assimilation with the Father (Chal. Phil. Fr. 2, p. 207, 24, cf.
chapter II 3.1). The one in us contacts the one of the gods (see chapter III 3). It functions as
a theurgical symbolon.
79: I agree with Sheppards tripartite division of Proclean theurgy,
although it needs a qualification. In the next chapter, I hope to show
that Proclus hymns may be understood as theurgical devices. If so,
this fact will shed new light on our understanding of theurgy. As I
have argued in the previous chapter, most of the hymns aim at
unification with Nous, which corresponds to the second type of
theurgy in Sheppards division. In that case, we would have dis
covered an example of the second type of theurgy. We could then
know that the second type involved ritual, which may have included
purifying rites, but certainly hymns.
What is a symbol for Proclus? It is something immaterial which marks someone or something as
the product of a cause. These causes, which are the gods of Proclus metaphysical system, are
situated at the various levels of reality and even seem to include the One itself. It is due to such
symbols that we are able to return to the causes of which we bear the symbols. Sometimes
Proclus also uses the term to designate something which, since it contains such a mark, can be
used in the theurgical ritual to attract the god who is its cause. Thus, both a certain man and a
certain stone may have the sun as their cause. Of the man we will say that he has an immaterial
symbol of the sun engraved in his soul. The stone too contains such an immaterial symbol.
However, this same material stone, used in a theurgical ritual to attract the support of the god
Sun, may also be called a symbol.
WE BEAR THE MARKS OF THIS MARK
ORIGINARY MARK UPON THE FIELD

80: It is these material symbols to which the few remaining pages of De

Sacrificio are dedicated. Starting-point is the famous Neoplatonic
golden rule of all in all but appropriately
: we can see sun and moon on earth
) in an earthly manner (
plants and stones and living creatures can be seen in heaven in a
heavenly way
), living noerically (
).
Once the wise of old came to see this, and were able to link things
here to celestial things, they led the divine powers towards the
mortal place and attracted it through likeness. For likeness is suffi
cient to join the beings together.

), whereas

Note that it is likeness (

) which lends the material symbols its efficiency.
91: Innate symbols can of course not be shown in a hymn. However,
there are two occasions in the hymns on which Proclus underlines
that he belongs to the series of the deity invoked. In his hymn to
Athena, Proclus begs Athena to come to his aid since I profess to
belong to you (vs. 42 ti tew exomai enai). As Marinus explains in
his biography (quoted in the commentary ad loc.), Proclus was born
in Byzantium, a city dedicated to Athena. Thus she became the cause
of his birth. Hence Proclus belongs to the series of Athena, and she
is therefore bound to exercise providence towards him because of
sympatheia.
WE ARE MADE IN MULTIPLE SERIES
WITH MULTIPLE IMAGES SYNTHEMATA ETC.
IN US SIGNS SYMPATHETIC SHAPES
TRACKS AND TRACES
OF SUN, MOON, CONSTELLATIONS, PLANTS

93: However, since the Neoplatonists of the

Athenian school accepted the claims of Homer and Hesiod to be
divinely inspired, they were unwilling to discard them as authorities
on divine matters. In their efforts to save Homer and Hesiod they
resorted to an allegorical reading of their poetry, which neutralized
offensive elements and turned the old poets into state of the art
Neoplatonic philosophers instead.

one used in the context of theurgy, one cannot help wondering

whether there is some connection between Proclus theory of litera
ture and that of theurgy. Anne Sheppard has convincingly argued
that there indeed is. Just as the gods cast innate symbols into their
products, they inspire some poets with stories. Just as the gods may be
attracted by means of these symbols, the recitation of these inspired
stories in the context of a ritual may attract the gods.
94:
T. 5.2 to a small number of people who have woken up to understanding, myths reveal
the sympathy which they have towards reality, and the theurgical rites themselves
guarantee that their power is connatural to the gods. For the gods themselves rejoice at
hearing such symbols and they are persuaded willingly by those who call upon them and
they show what is peculiar to them through these signs because they are appropriate to
them and especially familiar. <If we really want to ban these myths completely>, let
us then not say that such myths of the Greek theologians do not help to educate (sc. the

young, RMB) in virtue, but let us show that they are not as much in harmony with the
hieratic rites as they can possibly be. Let us then not say that they imitate the divine in a
dissimilar way by means of incongruous symbols, but let us demonstrate that they do not
prepare in us beforehand an ineffable sympathy with a view to communion with the
gods. Proclus, In RP. I 83, 15-84, 2: