← Home
Iamblichus: On the Mysteries · 14 of 218 · tr. Thomas Taylor

Chapter Xa

After these things, you again subjoin another division for yourself, “ in which you separate the essences of the more excellent genera by the difference of passive and impassive .” But neither do I admit this division. For no one of the more excellent genera is passive, nor yet impassive in such a way as to be contradistinguished from that which is passive; nor is naturally adapted to receive passions, but liberated from them through virtue, or some other worthy condition of being. But because they are entirely exempt from the contrariety of action and passion; and because they are not at all adapted to suffer, and have essentially an 49 immutable firmness, on this account I place the impassive and the immutable in all the divine genera. For consider, if you are willing, the last of divine natures, viz. a soul purely liberated from bodies. What does such a soul want with the generation which is in pleasure, or the restitution which is in it to a natural condition, since such a soul is above nature, and lives an unbegotten life? Why, also, should it participate of the pain which leads to corruption and dissolves the harmony of the body, since it is beyond all body, and the nature which is divided about body, and is entirely separate from the harmony which descends from the soul into the body? But neither is it in want of the passions which precede sensation: for neither is it detained in body, nor inclosed by it, so as to require corporeal organs, in order to apprehend certain other bodies which are external to these organs. And, in short, being impartible, and abiding in one and the same form, and also being essentially incorporeal, and having no communication with a generated and passive body, it cannot suffer any thing either according to division, or according to a change in quality, nor can have any thing which is allied to any kind of mutation or passion. But neither does the [rational] soul, when it 50 accedes to body, either itself suffer, or the reasons which it imparts to the body. For these reasons are forms , and being simple and uniform, they receive no perturbation in themselves, and no departure from their proper mode of subsistence. That which remains, therefore [or the participant of the rational soul], becomes the cause of suffering to the composite. Cause, however, is not the same with its effect. Hence, as soul is the first origin of generable and corruptible composite animals, but is itself by itself ingenerable and incorruptible; thus, also, though the participants of the soul suffer, and do not wholly [ i. e. truly] possess life and existence, but are complicated with the indefiniteness and diversity of matter, yet the soul is itself by itself immutable, as being essentially more excellent than that which suffers, and not as possessing impassivity, in a certain deliberate choice, which verges both to the impassive and the passive, nor as receiving an adscitious immutability in the participation of habit or power. Since, therefore, we have demonstrated that it is impossible for even the last genus of the more excellent order of beings, viz. the soul, to participate of suffering, how can it be proper to adapt this participation to dæmons and heroes, who are perpetual, and the attendants 51 of the Gods, and who always invariably preserve the same divine order, and never desert it? For we know this indeed, that passion is something disorderly, confused, and unstable, never having any proper authority of its own, but being devoted to that by which it is detained, and to which it is subservient for the purposes of generation.
Themes
Apophatic Theologytheology

Describing the divine only by negation—God transcends all positive categories and concepts; the via negativa.

The text defines divine natures by negating categories like passivity and suffering.

All passages →
Body As Obstacleanthropology

The material body viewed as a prison, tomb, or source of error that hinders spiritual knowledge and return.

The passage explicitly argues that the soul is above nature and beyond body, which hinders participation in passions.

All passages →
Cosmic Dualismtheology

Ontological opposition between two primal principles (light/darkness, truth/lie, spirit/matter) as the fundamental structure of reality.

A clear distinction is drawn between impassive/divine natures and passive/corporeal ones.

All passages →
Divine Simplicitytheology

The doctrine that God has no parts, divisions, or composite attributes; pure undivided being.

The text emphasizes that divine forms are simple, uniform, and not perturbed by external changes.

All passages →
Evil As Privationtheology

Augustinian and Plotinian doctrine that evil has no positive being of its own but is a lack, distortion, or absence of the good — denying ontological dualism while preserving moral seriousness.

Passion is described as disorderly and unstable, lacking proper authority of its own.

All passages →
Gnosis Direct Knowledgesoteriology

Salvation through direct experiential knowledge of the divine nature, not through faith, ritual, or moral works alone.

The text discusses the soul's ability to apprehend bodies without corporeal organs through rational forms.

All passages →
Kingdom Withinanthropology

The claim that the divine realm is present inside the individual, accessible without external mediation.

The divine order is said to be preserved within the soul's nature rather than external conditions.

All passages →
Living Godtheology

The divine conceived as active, present, and dynamic—not an abstract principle but a personal responsive reality.

Divine genera are characterized by immutable firmness and divine order rather than abstract principles.

All passages →
Mystical Unionsoteriology

The merging of the individual soul or self with the divine, transcending personal identity.

The text discusses the soul's state of being above nature and living an unbegotten life.

All passages →
Opposites Transcendedanthropology

The dissolution of binary oppositions (male/female, inner/outer, above/below) as a mark of spiritual completion.

The divine is described as exempt from the contrariety of action and passion.

All passages →
Paradox As Teachingethics

Using apparent contradiction, reversal, or riddle to destabilise ordinary understanding and induce insight.

The text uses the paradox that the soul, when it accedes to body, neither itself suffers nor does it impart suffering to the composite.

All passages →
Return To Sourcesoteriology

The soul's journey back to its divine origin, reversing the fall into matter through stages of purification or illumination.

The passage describes a soul liberated from bodies living an unbegotten life above nature.

All passages →
Self Knowledgesoteriology

The recognition of one's own true divine nature as the primary path to liberation; 'know thyself' as soteriology.

Understanding the nature of the soul is presented as a key to knowing its exemption from suffering.

All passages →
Separation From Sourcesoteriology

The felt condition of exile from one's divine origin — Rumi's reed flute torn from its bed, Plotinus's 'we have forgotten,' the Gnostic forgetfulness; the affective wound that complements return_to_source and gives the return its motive.

The text contrasts the liberated soul with the composite body that suffers due to being divided about body.

All passages →
Spiritual Ascentpraxis

A staged journey of the soul upward through heavenly realms or levels of being toward the divine source.

The passage implies a movement from the passive state of body to the impassive state of soul.

All passages →
Theosis Deificationsoteriology

The doctrine — central to Eastern Orthodox and Maximian theology — that the human person is progressively transformed into a partaker of the divine nature by grace, not merely justified or united in passing ecstasy.

The text describes the soul's liberation from bodies and participation in divine order as a state of being more excellent than that which suffers.

All passages →
Related passages · 3 parallels
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 11, Section 1b
Plotinus says the Godhead is indivisibly divided. doth not leave Its own Unity, but, even in the act of going forth to all things, remains entirely within Itself through the excess of that all-transcendent Unity: concerning these things ‘t…”
Both passages discuss the nature of divine beings and their relationship to passivity and unity. Iamblichus emphasizes the impassivity and immutability of divine genera, while Plotinus describes the indivisible unity and peace of the Godhead. Both texts explore the transcendence and perfection of divine entities.
christian_mysticism|The Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme|Chapter 2 (part 4)
She is passive, but the Spirit of God is active, like the soul in the body." ( Clavis , v. 18.) This eternal Trinity is inconceivable in its aspect as a spiritual potentiality, in the same sense as a fire is inconceivable if it does not bu…”
Both passages discuss the nature of divine beings and their relationship to passivity and activity. They explore the idea of divine immutability and the distinction between the divine and the material or corporeal, though from different mystical traditions.
renaissance_hermeticism|The Heroic Enthusiasts, Part I (Gli Eroici Furori)|Third Dialogueh
In which generation finding themselves once more through the changes which permutably succeed, they return again to the superior forms. Cic . So that they mean, that souls are impelled by the necessity of fate, and have no proper counsel…”
Both passages discuss the nature of the soul and its relationship to the body and passions. They explore the idea of the soul being impassive and immutable, though they use different frameworks and terminology to express these concepts.