Iamblichus: On the Mysteries · 165 of 218 · tr. Thomas Taylor
Chapter VIII-e
“The divine Iamblichus, however, doubts how the Gods are said to be allotted certain places according to definite times, as, by Plato in the Timæus, Minerva is said to have been first allotted the guardianship of Athens, and afterwards of Saïs.
For if their allotment commenced from a certain time, it will also at a certain time cease.
For every thing which is measured by time is of this kind.
And farther still, was the place which at a certain time they are allotted, without a presiding deity prior to this allotment, or was it under the government of other Gods?
For if it was without a presiding deity, how is it to be admitted that a certain part of the universe was once entirely destitute of divinity?
How can any place remain without the guardianship of superior beings?
And if any place is sufficient to the preservation of itself, how does it afterwards become the allotment of some one of the Gods?
But if it should be said, that it is afterwards under the government of another God, of whom it becomes the allotment, this also is absurd.
For the second God does not divulse the government and allotment 343 of the former, nor do the Gods alternately occupy the places of each other, nor dæmons change their allotments.
Such being the doubts on this subject, he solves them by saying, that the allotments of the Gods remain perpetually unchanged, but that the participants of them at one time, indeed, enjoy the beneficent influence of the presiding powers, but at another are deprived of it.
He adds, that these are the mutations measured by time, which sacred institutes frequently call the birthday of the Gods .
P.
23 .
Which also the art of divine works perceiving, &c.
This art of divine works is called theurgy , in which Pythagoras was initiated among the Syrians, as we are informed by Iamblichus in his Life of that philosopher.
(See p.
9 of my translation of that work.) Proclus also was skilled in this art, as may be seen in the Life of him by Marinus.
Psellus, in his MS.
treatise on Dæmons, says, as we have before observed, “that magic formed the last part of the sacerdotal science”; in which place by magic he doubtless means that kind of it which is denominated theurgy.
And that theurgy was employed by the ancients in their mysteries, I have fully proved in my treatise on the Eleusinian and Bacchic Mysteries.
This theurgy, too, is doubtless the same as the magic of Zoroaster, which Plato in the First Alcibiades says, consisted in the worship of the Gods; on which passage the following account of theurgy by Proclus was, I have no doubt, originally part of a commentary.
For the MS.
Commentary of Proclus, which is extant on this dialogue, does not extend to more than a third part of it; and this Dissertation on Theurgy, which is only extant in Latin, was published by Ficinus the translator, immediately after his Excerpta, from this Commentary.
So that it seems highly probable that the manuscript from which Ficinus translated his Excerpta, was much more perfect than that which has been preserved to us, in consequence of containing this account of the theurgy of the ancients.
“In the same manner as lovers gradually advance from that beauty which is apparent in sensible forms, to that which is divine; so the ancient priests, when they considered that there is a certain alliance and sympathy in natural things to each other, and of things manifest to occult powers; and discovered that all things subsist in all, they 344 fabricated a sacred science from this mutual sympathy and similarity.
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 explicitly states that ancient priests discovered 'an alliance and sympathy in natural things to each other' as the foundation for fabricating the sacred science.
Pronoia — the doctrine that the divine actively orders the unfolding of the cosmos and human affairs toward intelligible ends, against pure chance or blind necessity.
Iamblichus argues that the allotments of the Gods remain perpetually unchanged and are governed by a fixed order.
Diotima's staged ascent from love of beautiful bodies → beautiful souls → beautiful pursuits → beautiful knowledge → Beauty itself; the canonical scala amoris that grounds Plotinus's On the Beautiful and Bruno's Eroici Furori — distinct from generic spiritual_ascent in that eros is the specific motive force.
The text describes lovers advancing from the beauty of sensible forms to that which is divine, mirroring an ascent toward higher truth.
Using apparent contradiction, reversal, or riddle to destabilise ordinary understanding and induce insight.
Iamblichus presents paradoxical statements such as Gods not changing places or places becoming allotments without presiding deities to challenge conventional understanding.
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 participants enjoying the beneficent influence of presiding powers and advancing toward divine beauty.
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 centrally defines 'theurgy' as an art of divine works that ancient priests fabricated from mutual sympathy in natural things and was employed in mysteries.