The relationship between Neoplatonism and magic depends on which philosopher you are reading. The two main and contrasting Neoplatonic takes on Magic are seen in the philosophies of Plotinus and Iamblichus. Plotinus argues that the human soul is directly connected with its higher self whereas Iamblicus believes the human soul is completely separate and inferior to other kinds of souls above it. The latter opened the gates to the practice of magic through theurgy, the notion that the human soul is carried higher up to the gods opened the gates to the practice of magic. So whose side are you on? Team Plotinus or Team Iamblicus?

Summary

The relationship between Neoplatonism and magic varies depending on the philosophers who fall under this philosophical umbrella. Yet, we have a turning point in the Neoplatonist view of magic with Iamblichus – or Ἰάμβλιχος (Iámblikhos), using the Ancient Greek pronunciation – where the contemplative primacy of Plotinus and Porphyry is contrasted by the importance given to Theurgy – working with the Gods – and Sumbola, magic tokens and words.

Let’s learn more together about these two main – and contrasting – Neoplatonic takes on Magic, exploring the philosophy of Plotinus and Iamblichus.

Hello everyone, I’m Dr Angela Puca and welcome to my Symposium. I’m a PhD and a religious studies scholar and this is your online resource for the academic study of Magic, Paganism, Shamanism, and all things occult – including Neoplatonism. This video is part of a big collaboration on Neoplatonism with friends and fellow scholars here on YouTube. Make sure to stick around until the end to learn more about it.

On to our topic now!

Neoplatonism is a philosophical system founded in the third century by Plotinus or Ploteenus using the ancient Greek pronunciation. A central theory of this philosophy is the Emanation theory, the idea that everything is one and comes from the One, a divine source that creates the manifested world because of its overabundance of being and becomes increasingly material and further away – albeit still connected to the divine source – through a series of progressive emanations that eventually lead to the physical realm of manifestation.

I have another video on Neoplatonism where I explain the theory of emanation that I’d recommend you watch before this one, especially if you are unfamiliar with this concept.

An interesting tenet in the emanationist cosmology, that is pertinent to today’s episode, is that every activity in the world is somewhat double insofar as it possesses both an inner and an outer aspect. For example, the inner activity of the sun, or nuclear fusion, has the outer effect of heat and light. Or the inner activity of a tree that is determined by the kind of tree it is its genetic code, we would now say; and the Neoplatonists would have talked about an inherent formative principle, the logos will determine the kind of fruit the specific tree will be bearing; or again, thoughts and feelings internal to human beings express themselves in speech and actions. In each case, the outer effect is not the purpose or end of the inner activity.

The first principle of reality, in Neoplatonism, is conceived as an entity beyond Being, transcending all physical reality of which very little can actually be said except that it is absolute Unity. However, we know empirically of its effect, the entire universe, and we must, therefore, suppose that the One is the carrier of, or rather identical with, a boundless sort of singular activity or energy. (Wildberg, 2021)

With these premises in mind, let’s briefly overview the leading players in Neoplatonism and their views on magic, to then dive deeper into the contrasting perspectives on the matter held by Plotinus and Iamblichus. Let’s start with the founder of Neoplatonism, Plotinus.

Even though Plotinus was once attacked by a magic spell, which he promptly returned back to the sender, he showed no interest in magical techniques, as he dismisses them in favour of and as a distraction from philosophy. However, he thought that nature itself was magical, filled with divine powers and sympathies that are always present, ready to be activated by the magus who knows how to switch them on. (Copenhaver, 2015, pp.34–35)

Porphyry, a student of Plotinus, has similar reservations about practising magic, though he never doubts its reality.

The turning point in the Neoplatonic attitude towards magic occurs with Iamblichus, who turns his full attention to theurgy – literally, ‘god-working’ – to ascend to the divine by first bringing a god down into a material receptacle.

Proclus, the last of the great Neoplatonists who wrote in Greek, left a summary of his ancient theory of magic, On the Priestly Art According to the Greeks, which survives only in a digest. Proclus follows in the footsteps of Iamblichus in the importance given to Theurgy and is the first Neoplatonist to show an acquaintance with the Chaldean Oracles, the writings upon which Theurgy is based as a religious endeavour. (Sheppard, 1982, p.212)(Copenhaver, 2015, pp.34–35)

Let’s now analyse in more detail Plotinus and Iamblichus as they present the two core and opposing views on magic in Neoplatonism. In both cases, their perception of magic is founded upon a specific philosophical framework. Plotinus argues that the human soul is directly connected with its higher self and that the higher soul doesn’t quite descend into the body but rather illuminates it or sees its reflection in the matter. So, in a way, the soul is confined in this lower world while also being beyond this world. The highest aspect of the soul participates in the same nature as the Intellect and the Forms. Yet, human beings are in a state of unawareness of their true nature and need to study philosophy and contemplation to ‘reascend’ to that higher state. Such endeavour is the product of personal contemplative and philosophical efforts.

Iamblichus has a very different view of the soul compared to Plotinus and he expresses that in his De Anima. In this book, he argues that the human soul is completely separate and inferior to other kinds of souls above it. For instance, divine souls, angelic souls, heroic souls and demonic souls. This inferiority also implies that the soul is detached from the Intellect.

The contrasting viewpoints between Plotinus and Iamblichus represented a turning point in Neoplatonism and opened the gates to the practice of magic, and more specifically Theurgy. Theurgy is the ritual act whereby the human soul is freed from its body and carried higher up to the Gods. Iamblichus uses THEUGIA in opposition to THEORIA, Theurgy in opposition to theory – or contemplation – the latter indicating the most important way of ascending to the divine for Plotinus. After all, if the human soul is always participating in the same nature of the Intellect – as Plotinus thought – then ascension to a higher state is the most desirable outcome for a human being seeking a connection with the One, or the “divine” source.

Conversely, if human souls’ and higher souls’ entities are separate and the former has an inferior nature, then working with entities that participate in a higher nature can allow human beings to participate in their divinity, too, both in being and in agency.

Now, Plotinus does talk about magic, and he elaborates on that in Enneads 4. 4.30-45. He starts by talking about astrology, which he accepts into his system, yet still framing it in service of contemplation. Plotinus adopts and adapts the Stoic conception of Universal Sympathy and cites Plato’s Timaeus by explaining that the universe is a single living being that contains all living beings within it and, as a living being, it is attuned to its parts in such a way that any activity in one of its parts can affect another, even at a distance. Since everything is ruled by this universal sympathy, we cannot say that the Celestial Gods hear our prayers but rather they respond through sympathy, as other parts of a whole do, almost as a mechanical response to a triggering action. Plotinus also adds that while the influence of celestial bodies in astrology occurs spontaneously from the universe, magic occurs through the agency of the magician, yet still according to the same cosmic principle of sympathy.

However, magic is ONLY effective against the lower aspect of the soul and CANNOT affect the soul’s rational higher aspect. Hence why contemplation is still of primary importance as it allows human beings to ascend to a higher state that remains unaffected by magic.

Iamblichus, as we know now, has a very different take on the matter. He discusses the workings of theurgic rituals in the De Mysteriis, a response to Porphyry’s arguments against the different tenets of those who believe in the power of sacred rites. In this text, Iamblichus agrees with Plotinus in his views that the celestial gods have bodies, yet they are unaffected by them as their connection to the Intellect and divine origin is unlimited. He disagrees with Plotinus when it comes to the interaction between human beings and the Gods as he sees the two as different classes of entities and believes that the Gods do care for us, respond to our prayers, and become involved with us through theurgical rituals. (Finamore, 1999)

Also, behind this magical technology are metaphysical principles and cosmological structures. The cosmic and hyper-cosmic are arranged in ‘series’ or taxeis so that, for example, a scorpion carved on an amulet belongs to a series that includes the earthly arachnids – both natural and artificial – but rises beyond them to a supercelestial divine Scorpion and many others in the grades of being in between, one of them being the Scorpio seen among the constellations. Knowing where the celestial and supercelestial Scorpions live, the magus will also know which things within reach are like them and which are not – things to call the gods down or fend them off: stones, plants, colours, odours, tastes, sounds, and everything that resonate sympathetically with the divine or drive it away by antipathy. (Copenhaver, 2015, pp.34–35)

So, to sum it up, the two main views on magic in Neoplatonism are endorsed by Plotinus and Iamblichus. Plotinus thought that since everything is one and our role in our material manifestation is to ascend to that Oneness – that is the divine source we’re all part of, magic is a distraction from the primary contemplative endeavour that will lead to that desired goal. He still believes that magic is real and works through the universal mechanism of sympathy and antipathy. However, magic can only affect the soul in its lower aspect and not in its higher one that we can ascend to through contemplation.

Iamblichus doesn’t agree that we are of the same nature of the Gods and higher souls, he thinks that we are different entities that can interact with each other to affect change and ascend through ritually-induced involvement with higher participants in the manifested universe.

So, this is it for today’s video!

Please, don’t forget to check out the other videos – part of this collaboration on Neoplatonism.

Filip Holme from Let’s talk Religion has made a video on Neoplatonism, Islam and Sufism.

Dr Justin Sledge from Esoterica tackled Neoplatonism and Gnosticism, Plotinus against the Gnostics.

Zevi from Seekers of Unity will address Neoplatonism and Kabbalah.

Dr Dan Attrell from The Modern Hermeticism is covering The Platonic Philosophers’ Creed by Thomas Taylor

And, finally, John Vervaeke made a video on Neoplatonism & 4E Cognitive Science.

You will find the links to all these videos in the Info Box. Don’t forget to check them out and say hi from me in the comments section.

Also, as you know, Angela’s Symposium is a symposium and as such, it is a crowd-funded educational project. So if you have the means and want to keep this project going I would really appreciate it if you’d consider supporting my work with a one-off PayPal donation, joining Memberships, or my Inner Symposium on Patreon. That’s an amazing, fantastic community that I’m really proud of. We have monthly lectures, one-to-one sessions with me, a Discord server, a book club and lots of other perks depending on your chosen tier. You can also SuperThank me using the SuperThank option. And other than that, you can also support my work by SMASHING the Like Button, if you liked this video – I wouldn’t want you to SMASH it if you didn’t but I am hoping that you did.

Also, Subscribe to the Channel and activate the Notification Bell because sometimes YouTube is naughty and will not notify you when I upload a new video and share this video around. Share it with your friends, with your family, with everyone, with the world. The world might be interested in knowing more about the academic study of all things esoteric – so why not? Please leave me a comment and let me know what you think about today’s conversation and what are you. Are you team Plotinus or team Iamblicus? Can you guess what team I am? So thank you all for being here and stay tuned for all the Academic Fun.

Bye for now.

PRIMARY SOURCES

Iamblichus on the Mysteries of the Egyptians, Chaldeans, and Assyrians https://amzn.to/3I7C0rh

Iamblichus de Anima https://amzn.to/3VtewQK

Plotinus: Complete Works https://amzn.to/3YOS8UR

REFERENCES

Armstrong, A.H. 1955. Was Plotinus a Magician ? Phronesis. 1(1), pp.73–79.

Copenhaver, B.P. 2015. Magic in Western Culture: From Antiquity to the Enlightenment. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Finamore, J.E. 1999. Plotinus and Iamblichus on Magic and Theurgy. Dionysius. 17, pp.83–94.

Helleman, W.E. 2010. Plotinus and Magic. The International Journal of the Platonic Tradition. 4(2), pp.114–146.

Merlan, P. 1953. Plotinus and Magic. Isis. 44(4), pp.341–348.

Sheppard, A. 1982. Proclus’ Attitude to Theurgy. The Classical Quarterly. 32(1), pp.212–224.

Wildberg, C. 2021. Neoplatonism In:

E. N. Zalta, ed. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [Online]. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. [Accessed 24 December 2022]. Available from: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/w….

Uploaded 29 Dec 2022