← Home
Iamblichus: On the Mysteries · 79 of 218 · tr. Thomas Taylor

Chapter XXX

You say, however, “ that the makers of images observe the motion of the celestial bodies, and can tell from the concurrence of what star, with a certain star or stars, predictions will be true or false; and also whether the things that are performed will be inanities, or significant and efficacious .” But neither will these phantasms, on this account, possess any thing divine. For the last of the things which are in generation are moved in conjunction with the celestial courses, and are copassive with the effluxions which descend from the heavenly bodies. Moreover, if any one considers these things accurately, he will find that they demonstrate the contrary to what is here asserted. For how is it possible that things which are in every respect mutable, and this with facility, and which are all-variously turned by external motions, so as to become inefficacious, or prophetic, or significant, or effective, or at different times different, should contain in themselves, by participation, any portion, however small, of divine power? What then, are the powers which are inherent in matter the elements of dæmons? By no means: for no partial sensible bodies generate dæmons; but much more are these 198 generated and guarded by dæmons. Neither is any man able to fashion, as by a machine, certain forms of dæmons; but, on the contrary, he is rather fashioned and fabricated by them, so far as he participates of a sensible body. But neither is a certain dæmoniacal multitude generated from the elements of sensibles; since, on the contrary, this multitude is simple, and energizes uniformly about composite natures. Hence, neither will it have sensibles more ancient, or more stable than itself; but being itself more excellent than sensibles, both in dignity and power, it imparts to them the permanency which they are able to receive. Unless indeed, you denominate idols dæmons, not rightly employing an appellation of this kind. For the nature of dæmons is one thing, and that of idols another. The order of each, likewise, is very different. Moreover, the leader of idols is different from the great leader of dæmons. And this, also, you admit. For you say, “ that no God or dæmon is drawn down by idols .” What, therefore, will be the worth of a sacred deed, or of the foreknowledge of what is future, if it is entirely destitute of divinity and a dæmon? So that it is requisite to know what the nature is of this wonder-working art, but by no means to use or confide in it. 199
Themes
Body As Obstacleanthropology

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

The passage argues that mutable sensible bodies are incapable of containing divine power and are instead fashioned by dæmons.

All passages →
Cosmic Sympathycosmology

The Stoic and Plotinian doctrine that all parts of the cosmos are bound by hidden affinities, so that a movement in one part resonates through the whole; the metaphysical basis for astrology, magic, and divination.

The text states that things in generation are moved in conjunction with celestial courses and copassive with effluxions from heavenly bodies.

All passages →
Divine Hiddennesstheology

The supreme God's radical concealment beyond ordinary knowledge or perception; the Hidden Father.

The passage emphasizes that the true nature of dæmons is distinct from idols and not to be confided in.

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.

The text defines inefficacious things as mutable and lacking any portion of divine power, aligning with the concept that evil is a lack of good.

All passages →
Forbidden Knowledgesoteriology

Transgressive knowing acquired against divine prohibition — the Watchers' teaching of metallurgy, sorcery, and cosmetics in 1 Enoch, the Gnostic Eve narratives, the Promethean mytheme; explicitly contrasted with gnosis_direct_knowledge, which is salvific.

The passage warns against relying on or confiding in the worth of the art of idols, implying it contains transgressive knowledge.

All passages →
Gnosis Direct Knowledgesoteriology

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

The text advocates for knowing the nature of the art rather than using or confiding in it, suggesting a higher form of knowledge over reliance.

All passages →
Hidden Sayingssoteriology

Esoteric teachings reserved for those ready to receive them; outer meaning conceals an inner liberating truth.

The passage warns against confiding in the art and emphasizes knowing its true nature rather than relying on it.

All passages →
Paradox As Teachingethics

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

The text uses apparent contradictions such as mutable things containing divine power to destabilize ordinary understanding.

All passages →
Pneumatic Electsoteriology

A spiritual elite who possess the divine spark and are predestined for salvation, contrasted with psychic (faithful) and hylic (material) persons.

Dæmons are described as more excellent than sensibles and impart permanency to them, implying a spiritual hierarchy.

All passages →
Ritual Puritypraxis

The maintenance of a state of cleanliness—physical, moral, or spiritual—required for encounter with the divine.

The passage warns against confiding in idols, which implies maintaining a state of spiritual cleanliness or integrity.

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 mutable nature of sensibles with the more excellent and stable dæmons, implying a fundamental ontological difference.

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.

Dæmons impart permanency to sensibles, suggesting a transformative influence on material existence.

All passages →
Theurgypraxis

Iamblichean ritual practice that engages the gods directly through consecrated material symbols and actions, on the premise that divine power descends into properly prepared matter — distinct from philosophical contemplation alone.

The passage explicitly critiques the practice of using idols and their art, which is central to Iamblichean theurgical concerns about engaging divine power through material symbols.

All passages →
Related passages · 1 parallel · 1 contrast
platonism|Plato: Republic|Section 1k
True, he replied. The spangled heavens should be used as a pattern and with a view to that higher knowledge; their beauty is like the beauty of figures or pictures excellently wrought by the hand of Daedalus, or some other great artist, wh…”
Both passages discuss the limitations of empirical observation in understanding higher truths. Plato emphasizes the need for abstract reasoning in geometry and astronomy, while the second passage critiques the reliance on celestial observations for divine insights, advocating for a deeper understanding of divine nature.
renaissance_hermeticism|Agrippa: The Philosophy of Natural Magic, Chapter XXXVIII — How We May Draw Not Only Celestial and Vital, but Also Certain Intellectual and Divine Gifts From Above|Chapter XXXVIII, Section 1aCONTRASTS
CHAPTER XXXVIII. How We May Draw Not Only Celestial and Vital, but Also Certain Intellectual and Divine Gifts From Above . Magicians teach that celestial gifts may, through inferiors being conformable to superiors, be drawn down by opport…”
[auto] Both passages discuss the relationship between celestial bodies, divine entities, and material objects, but they take opposing positions. Iamblichus argues against the divine power of images and the ability to manipulate divine entities through material means, while the second passage supports the idea that celestial and divine gifts can be drawn down through natural and celestial correspondences.