Uzdavinys on Theurgy

THE GREEK TERM "THEOURGIA"

We should wonder if the Greek term theourgia is not simply a rendering of some now forgotten Egyptian, Akkadian, or Aramaic term related to the complicated vocabulary of temple rites, festivals, and hermeneutical performances that follow the paradigms of cosmogony and serve as a vehicle of ascent conducted by the divine powers (sekhemu, bau) themselves. Accordingly, it would be incorrect to think that the Chaldean Platonists of Roman Syria, those who allegedly created and promoted this term theourgia, also invented the thing itself, that is, the tradition of hieratic arts and of their secret, theurgical understanding. Assuming the latter case, it would follow that this tradition, somewhat related to the solar metaphysics, royal cult, and reascension of the soul through the seven Babylonian planetary spheres (or through the branches and fruits of the Assyrian Sacred Tree) to the noetic Fire, is a dubious creation of those Chaldean philosophers who ‘forged’ (as modern positivists regard it) the so-called Chaldean Oracles, thereby forcing us to believe that the gods themselves, along with the luminous ghost of Plato, suddenly decided to reveal the final version of the Stoicized Middle Platonist metaphysics in the form of seductive ‘manifestos of irrationalism’.

This is the ideological dogma established by E.R. Dodds and his countless predecessors. All of them feel an incredible pleasure in ridiculing the Ephesian theurgist Maximus and in mocking those who, instead of talking about the distant transcendent gods, allegedly ‘create’ them, following ‘the superstitions of the time’.

This almost scandalous ‘creation of gods’ through the methods provided
by certain telestic science (he telestike episteme) is often deliberately
misunderstood. For E.R. Dodds, it is an ‘animation of magic statues
in order to obtain oracles from them’. That sounds like a reinterpretation (employing ‘magic’ in a derogatory sense) of Proclus, who says that the telestic art, by the use of certain symbols (dia tinon sumbolon), establishes on earth places fitted for oracles and statues of the gods (kai chresteria kai agalmata theon hidrusthai epi ges: In Tim. iii.155.18).

Telestike (the term derived from the verb telein, to consecrate, to initiate, to make perfect) is not a kind of rustic sorcery (goeteia). Rather it is a means to share or participate in the creative energies of the gods by constructing and consecrating their material receptacles, their cultic vehicles, which then function as anagogic tokens, as sumbola and sunthemata.

However, one should be careful not to fall into the trap of an improper one-sidedness when approaching the realm of ancient metaphysical concepts and related terms. The word ‘theurgy’ is not the term most frequently used by the ancient Neoplatonists when they discuss cosmological, soteriological or liturgical issues. As A. Louth openly states:

"In Iamblichus, theourgia refers to the religious rituals—prayers, sacrifices, divinations—performed by the theurgist: it is one of a number of words—theourgia, mustagogia, hiera hagisteia, threskeia, hieratike techne, theosophia, he theia episteme—which have all more or less the same meaning and which are frequently simply translated theurgie by E. des Places. ... "

Damascius often prefers the terms hiera hagisteia, hierourgia (hierurgy, holy work, cultic operation) instead, or speaks of ‘theosophy which comes from the gods’ and of the ancient traditions (ta archaia nomina) which contain the rules of divine worship. The Greek terms hieratike and hieratike techne (hieratic art, sacred method) are also rendered simply as ‘theurgy’ by the modern scholars.

For Damascius, hieratike is ‘the worship of the gods’ (theon therapeia) which ‘ties the ropes of heavenbound salvation’, that is, raises the soul to the noetic cosmos by means of the ropes of worship, as in the Vedic and ancient Egyptian hieratic rites or the anagogic recitations of the Qur’an. This hieratike techne is designated as the ‘Egyptian philosophy’ which deals with certain spiritual alchemy consisting in gnostic paideia as well as in transformation, elevation, and immortalization of the soul (the winged ba of the true philosopher or the initiate).

The return of our souls to God presupposes either a fusion with the divine (theokrasia), or a perfect union (henosis panteles). This hieratic method of spiritual ‘homecoming’ is praised as the higher wisdom, namely, the Orphic and Chaldean lore which transcends philosophical common sense (ten orphiken te kai chaldaiken ten hupseloteran sophian).

For the late Neoplatonists, theurgy (including all traditional liturgies, rites, and sacrifices which are ordained, revealed, and, in fact, performed by the gods themselves) is essential if the initiate priest is to attain the divine through the ineffable acts which transcend all intellection (he ton ergon ton arrheton kai huper pasan noesin: Iamblichus De mysteriis). Thus, a theurgic union with the gods is the accomplishment (telesiourgia) of the gods themselves acting through their sacramental tokens, ta sunthemata. The awakened divine symbols by themselves perform their holy work, thereby elevating the initiate to the gods whose ineffable power (dunamis) recognizes by itself its own images (eikones).

Dionysius the Areopagite borrows the term theourgia from Iamblichus and Proclus, but uses it not in the sense of religious rituals which have the purificatory, elevating, and unifying divine force. Now this term designates certain divine works or actions, such as the divine activity of Jesus Christ (andrikes tou Iesou theourgias). Dionysius the Areopagite also speaks of one’s deification and koinonia (communion, participation) with God or an assimilation to God effected through participation in the sacraments. That means henosis (union) accomplished by partaking the most sacred symbols of the thearchic communion and of ‘divine birth’ achieved through the hermeneutical anagoge (ascent) and epistrophe (return to the Cause of All). However, as P.E. Rorem remarks,

"The uplifting does not occur by virtue of rites and symbols by themselves but rather by their interpretation, in the upward movement through the perceptible to the intelligible. ... "

Source: Algis Uzdavinys, "Philosophy and Theurgy in Late Antiquity" (first published in 2010), Chapter 2.

Photograph of Lithuanian philosopher Algis Uždavinys (1962–2010); he unfortunately died of a heart attack, on 25 July 2010, at the relatively young age of 48:

Proclus on magical signs

"Two passages of Proclus complementary to each other deal with a second group of magical signs. According to this author, the Chaldaeans believed that the "sign" (χαραχτήρ) "set in the heart" of the human soul consisted of a combination of semicircles and of the character X, and that the gods themselves had communicated the psychic signs of several Greek heroes and of Plato as well as their 'mystic names' which bring about their apparition.....While the apparition of Hecate was represented as that of a speaking flame, the philosopher's soul. became visible as a geometrical luminous figure. The belief that the apparition of the soul consists of semi-circles and of the charact derives from Plato's Timaeus, upon which Chaldeean metaphysics are based. For according to this work the Cosmic Soul consists of 2 axes having the shape of the letter X which are bent so as to form semicircles and joined together. We may accordingly surmise that the individual souls, regarded as the offshoots of the Cosmic Soul, were represented by the Chaldeans as being, as it were, her miniature copies. This transmutation of Platonic doctrines into magical diagrams is in entire conformity with the "hermeneutic method" used by the author of the Chaldean Oracles. " - H. Lewy, Chaldean Oracles and Theurgy, 254

Proclus on Matter

"All beings are the progeny of the Gods, and are produced by them without intermediary, and are established in them. For the procession of things is not brought to perfection solely by continuity … but subsists immediately from the Gods, from whence all things are generated, however distant they may be said to be from the Gods, and this is no less true of matter itself. For a divine nature is not absent from anything, but is equally present to all things. Thus, take even the last of things, in these also you will find divinity present," (Proclus, IT 1.209.13-21).

Burns on gnosis/esotericism/mysticism distinction+terminology debates

"Yet is there moreto be gained from careful attention to this language than ground in scholarly turf-wars? Yes: Precise surveys of terminology are not a matter of philological arcana.For instance, Wouter J. Hanegraaf has argued that the Hermetica assign a spe-cial status to the term “gnosis” as a kind of superior knowledge derived from visionary states, crowning a hierarchy of epistemological initiations

 However, even the casual reader of this volume willsee how relatively unimportant the term “gnosis” was to even the “Gnostics”themselves; rather, a wide range of epistemological lexemes were employed todiscuss matters of revelation and secret knowledge. Moreover, Christian Bull’sarticle in the volume carefully demonstrates that Hermetic mystery-language was ‘more concerned with the hidden forces residing within the cosmos than ith hypercosmic realities’ that are ‘directly accessible’ to a visionary (p.422).If we agree with both analyses, should we draw a systematic distinction betweenHermetic “gnosis” (visionary knowledge of the beyond) and Hermetic “mys-tery” (visionary knowledge of the cosmos)? Of course not, because the sources themselves imply no such grand distinction between “gnosis” and “mystery”.This volume’s attention to the language of mystery and secrecy in ancient religions shows how wary scholars ought to be of over-systematizing the very diverse vocabulary used by a diversity of ancients to discuss a range of discourses and practices. This is not to say that a more generalizing approach to the problem of secrecy and esotericism in ancient religion ought to be avoided in future scholarly  work. On the contrary, the facts that 1) few of the papers explain why we should find mystery-language a compelling subject in the history of religions,2)still fewer engage previous work on thesubject(i.e.,by engaging Simmel and Stroumsa), and 3) no paper engages scholarship on “Western Esotericism” per se should inspire further engagement between the contributors to this volume and readers of this journal. If “esotericism”(or“gnosis”,if the researcher prefers) qua absolute knowledge mediated within a discourse of secrecy and revelation is a modern scholarly construct we can use to understand neglected currentsin the history of Western thought, we should expect a diversity of terminology to have been used by past participants in these currents"

Review_of_Bull_Lied_and_Turner_ed._Mystery_and_Secrecy_in_the_Nag_Hammadi_Collection_and_Other_Ancient_Literature_Ideas_and_Practices._Studies_for_Einar_Thomassen_at_Sixty

Seth Misunderstood?

Seth – A Misrepresented God in the Ancient Egyptian Pantheon?
Philip John Turner.
ISBN 9781407310848. £25.00.
114 pages; 18 figures.

This study examines aspects of Seth which suggest that throughout Egyptian
history he was continually worshipped and indeed, at times, enjoyed some
prominence, notably in the Pre- and early-Dynastic periods, during the
Hyksos interlude of the Second Intermediate Period and during the Ramesside
era of the 19th and 20th Dynasties. Whilst previous authors have devoted
some scholarship to these various aspects of Seth there have been very few
attempts to bring all these together and to demonstrate that rather than
being something of an ‘outsider’ to the Egyptian pantheon, he actually had
an important role within it, and as such was continually worshipped
throughout ancient Egyptian history. In sum, the author examines the role of
Seth as he was perceived by the Ancient Egyptians at specific times
throughout their history. To achieve this aim a chronological approach is
taken beginning with Seth’s role in Predynastic Egyptian religion and then
progressing through the early Dynastic and Old Kingdom, the First
Intermediate period and the Middle Kingdom, the Second Intermediate Period,
the New Kingdom, the Third Intermediate Period, the Late Period, and
culminating with the Graeco-Roman Period up to the death of Cleopatra.

Philo on the Number Six

Among numbers by the laws of nature the most suitable to productivity is six...It is the first perfect number, being equal to the product of its factors, as well as made up of the sum of them...It is in its nature both male and female, and is the result of the distinctive power of either. For among things that are it is the odd that is male, and the even female.- Philo of Alexandria, De opificio mundi, ch. 13 (tr. LCL)

John Dillon on "Becoming like God"

The later Platonist ethical ideal of 'becoming like to God' has
generally been accepted without much demur as a reasonable ambition
for mortals, but it is in truth a rather problematic one. In what
respect are we to liken ourselves to God? In respect of immortality?
Or of omnipotence? Or of omniscience? Or, if none of the above, then
what? And yet Plotinus, in Enn. I 2,7, says that our aim is not to be
good men, but to be gods. I suggest, taking my cue from this tractate
of his, that the points of likeness with the gods towards which we are
being exhorted are rationality and impassivity, and that these are
quite reasonable aims -- which, if achieved,will lead, no doubt, in an
afterlife, to immortality, omnipotence and omniscience (though only in
union with the rest of the intellectual realm).

Gregory Shaw on Theurgy as "The Tantra of the West"

Scholarship on Iamblichean theurgy has changed profoundly in the last
30 years. No longer dismissed as a distortion of Greek philosophy,
theurgy is now recognized by most scholars as a complement—even
culmination—to the disciplines of rational reflection. Yet resistance
to recognizing the full implications of living in a theurgic cosmos
continues. Although the gods of theurgy penetrate the material realm
and theurgists embodied these gods in ritual and aesthetic experience,
we continue to imagine the goal of theurgy as escaping from matter and
ascending to the noetic fire. A residual and often unconscious dualism
influences our thinking. Theurgists were athletes of divine fire, but
this fire is here, on earth, and the gods are revealed, Iamblichus
says, “by our physical eyes.” Iamblichean theurgy represents a
radically non-dual orientation that incorporates the body into divine
experience. In this sense theurgy closely resembles the tantric
non-dualism of South Asian yoga traditions. Dr Shaw will explore the
consequences of living in a non-dual cosmos and will present Platonic
theurgy as the Tantra of the West.

Turner on the Platonic Contribution to Sethian Gnosticism

Finally, during the late first and throughout the second and third centuries, Neopythagorean and Platonic metaphysics made a strong impact on Sethianism. They served to structure its world of transcendent beings by means of ontological distinctions, and to explain how the plenitude of the divine world might emerge from a sole high deity by emanation, radiation, unfolding, and mental self-reflection. Neopythagorean arithmology helped to flesh out the various triadic, tetradic, pentadic, and ogdoadic groupings of the transcendental beings. Besides metaphysics, there was also at home in Platonism a by-now-traditional technique of self-performable contemplative mystical ascent toward and beyond the realm of pure being, which had its roots in Plato's Symposium (cf. 210A-212A). Interest in this technique shows itself in such figures as Philo, Numenius, the author(s) of the Chaldean Oracles, and in Plotinus. This technique not only supplemented earlier apocalyptic notions of ecstatic visionary ascent (perhaps associated with the spiritualized Sethian baptismal ritual as in Trimorphic Protennoia, Gospel of the Egyptians, Zostrianos, and perhaps in Marsanes), but it also created new forms apparently independent of such a baptismal context as in Allogenes and Three Steles of Seth. Most importantly, though, the older pattern of enlightenment through gnosis "knowledge," conferred by a descending redeemer figure, could be replaced by a self-performable act of enlightenment through contemplative or visionary ascent, whether for individuals (Allogenes and Marsanes) or for a community (Three Steles of Seth).

http://jdt.unl.edu/lithist.html#Heading8 

Syrianus on the Timaeus + Parmenides

Among the fragments, we may distinguish In Tim. fr. 3 as it discusses the particular function of grades of daemons and also shows the relationship between the grades, correcting his predecessors on the matter and In Tim. fr. 6, which discusses the place of the Demiurge in Syrianus’ structure of the cosmos, as well as how the placement of the Demiurge corresponds to his function. In Tim fr. 11 is also important, as it gives evidence of Syrianus’ explanation of Platonic arithmetic and geometry in terms of ontology. The connection between geometry and hierarchical metaphysics is also to be found in Syrianus’ In Met. 85.38-86.2, but his thought becomes clearer through Proclus’ elaboration, as Wear rightly points out. In Parm. fr. 5 is also of key importance, as it shows how Syrianus develops the system of Platonic principles, in which reality is the result of the conjunction of Limit (Monad in the In Metaphysica) and Unlimitedness (Dyad in the In Metaphysica).
http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/10.1163/187254712x621040;jsessionid=25abdgrqj8vgx.x-brill-live-01

Clement on "Gnostic" Prayer

"And his whole life is a holy festival. His sacrifices are prayers, and praises, and readings in the Scriptures before meals, and psalms and hymns during meals and before bed, and prayers also again during night. By these he unites himself to the divine choir, from continual recollection, engaged in contemplation which has everlasting remembrance.  "And what? Does he not also know the other kind of sacrifice, which consists in the giving both of doctrines and of money to those who need? Assuredly. But he does not use wordy prayer by his mouth; having learned to ask of the Lord what is requisite. In every place, therefore, but not ostensibly and visibly to the multitude, he will pray. But while engaged in walking, in conversation, while in silence, while engaged in reading and in works according to reason, he in every mood prays. If he but form the thought in the secret chamber of his soul, and call on the Father "with unspoken groanings," He is near, and is at his side, while yet speaking. Inasmuch as there are but three ends of all action, he does everything for its excellence and utility; but doing aught for the sake of pleasure, he leaves to those who pursue the common life." (Strom. 7.7)
stolen from http://borbor-chan.livejournal.com/

theurgy section in revised SEP article on Proclus

3.6 Theurgy

Relying on Plato, Theaetetus 176a-b late Platonists saw the assimilation to god (homoiôsis theôi) as the goal (telos) of philosophy. Proclus was faithful to this ideal, as is attested by his biographer Marinus (Life of Proclus § 25). There was a fundamental discussion in late Neoplatonism on how this assimilation to the divine was possible for humans. Damascius (In Phaed. I § 172 Westerink) distinguishes two tendencies: Plotinus and Porphyry preferred philosophy, which makes us understand the divine principles of reality through rational explication, while others like Iamblichus and his followers, Syrianus, and Proclus, gave priority to hieratic practice or theurgy (theourgia, hieratikê [sc. technê]). Their different evaluation of respectively theory and theurgy as means of salvation may be explained by their different views on the human soul and its possibilities of ascent to the divine realm. While Plotinus and Porphyry claimed that the superior part of the human soul always remains within the intelligible realm, in touch with the divine principles, and never completely descends into the body, Iamblichus, followed by Proclus, criticised such a view. The soul does indeed wholly descend into the body (Steel 1976, 34–51). Hence the importance of theurgic rites established by the gods themselves, to make it possible for the human soul to overcome the distance between the mortal and the divine, which cannot be done through increasing philosophical understanding. In Theol. Plat. I 25, Proclus expresses his great admiration for the power of theurgy, which surpasses all human knowledge.
Allegedly, Neoplatonic theurgy originated with Julian the theurgist, who lived in the time of emperor Marcus Aurelius. At first sight, theurgy seems to share many characteristics with magic (theory of cosmic sympathy, invocations, animation of statues of gods and demons), but it is, as far as we can judge from the extant sources, clearly different from it. In his De Mysteriis Iamblichus developed a theology of the hieratic rituals from Platonic principles, which clearly sets them apart from the vulgar magical practices. While magic assumes that the gods can be rendered subservient to the magicians, Platonic philosophers consider this impossible. According to Plato's principles of theology (Republic II and Laws X), the gods are immutable, unchangeable, and cannot be bribed by means of sacrifices. Proclus' views on theurgy (of which only some fragments belonging to his treatise On Hieratic Art [i.e., theurgy] survived) are fully in line with these fundamental Platonic axioms. But how, then, does theurgy work? The theurgists take up an old belief, shared also by many philosophers, namely the natural and cosmic ‘sympathy’ (sumpatheia) pervading all reality. As with an organism, all parts of reality are somehow linked together as one. Another way of expressing this idea is in the Neoplatonic principle, going back at least to Iamblichus, that everything is in everything (panta en pasin). According to Proclus, all reality, including its most inferior level, matter, is directed upwards towards the origin from which it proceeds. To say it in the words of Theodorus of Asine, whom Proclus quotes in his Commentary on the Timaeus (I 213.2–3): “All things pray except the First.”
As stated before (cf. 3.3), the human soul contains the principles (logoi) of all reality within itself. The soul carries, however, also sumbola or sunthêmata which correspond to the divine principles of reality. The same symbols also establish the secret correspondences between sensible things (stones, plants, and animals) and celestial and divine realities. Thanks to these symbols, things on different levels (stones, plants, animals, souls) are linked in a ‘chain’ (seira) to the divine principle on which they depend, as the chain of the sun and the many solar beings, or the chain of the moon. Of great importance in the rituals was also the evocation of the secret divine names. In his Commentary on the Cratylus, Proclus compares divine names to statues of the gods used in theurgy (In Crat. § 46), pointing to the fact that also language is an important means in the ascent to the divine.
Proclus evokes the Platonic background of his theurgical beliefs, namely his theory of love (erôs) as expressed in the Symposium and the Phaedrus, in his treatise On Hieratic Art:

Just as lovers move on from the beauty perceived by the senses until they reach the sole cause of all beautiful and intelligible beings, so too, the theurgists (hieratikoi), starting with the sympathy connecting visible things both to one another and to the invisible powers, and having understood that all things are to be found in all things, established the hieratic science. (trans. Ronan, modified)

In the wake of an article of Anne Sheppard (1982), scholars usually distinguish between three kinds of theurgy in Proclus. The first kind, as described in the above quoted treatise On Hieratic Art, was mainly concerned with animating statues (in order to obtain oracles or to evoke divine apparitions) or, in general, with activities related to physical phenomena or human affairs (influencing the weather, healing illnesses etc.) (see Life of Proclus § 28–29). As emerges from our sources, it is this kind of theurgy that involved much ritualistic practice, including hymns and prayers. The second kind of theurgy makes the soul capable of ascending up to the level of the hypercosmic gods and the divine intellect. This second kind too operates by means of prayers and invocations and it seems especially characteristic of Proclus' Hymns. And finally, the third kind of theurgy establishes unity with the first principles, that is the One itself. This third kind corresponds to the level of the highest virtues (i.e., ‘theurgic virtues’) in the scale of virtues. It is not clear whether some form of ritual is involved here at all. For this last stage of the Platonic homoiôsis theôi the following elements are of major importance: negative theology (culminating in the negation of the negation), mystic silence and the intriguing notion of faith (pistis), which thus enters with a non-Platonic meaning - though even for the latter notion Proclus will search for confirmation in the Platonic dialogues.

Those who hasten to be conjoined with the Good, do no longer need knowledge and activity, but need to be established and a stable state and quietness. What then is it which unites us to the Good? What is it which causes in us a cessation of activity and motion? What is it which establishes all divine natures in the first and ineffable unity of goodness? […] It is, in short, the faith (pistis) of the Gods, which ineffably unites all the classes of Gods, of daemons, and of blessed souls to the Good. For we should investigate the Good not through knowledge (gnôstikôs) and in an imperfect manner, but giving ourselves up to the divine light, and closing the eyes, to become thus established in the unknown and occult unity of beings. For such a kind of faith is more venerable than cognitive activity, not in us only, but with the Gods themselves. (Proclus, Platonic Theology, I 25, trans. Th. Taylor, modified).

<a href="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/proclus/">http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/proclus/</a>

Deleuze vs. Hegel on Spinoza

In Hegel’s reproach to Spinoza - that he ignored the negative and its power - lies the glory and innocence of Spinoza, his own discovery. In a world consumed by the negative, he has enough confidence in life, in the power of life, to challenge death, the murderous appetites of men, the rules of good and evil, of the just and unjust. Enough confidence in life to denounce all the phantoms of the negative….In Spinoza’s thought, life is not an idea, a matter of theory. It is a way of being. It is only from this perspective that his geometrical method is fully comprehensible. In the Ethics, it is opposition to everything that takes pleasure in the powerlessness and distress of men, everything that feeds on accusations, on malice, on belittlement, on low interpretations, everything that breaks men’s spirits. The geometrical method ceases to be a method of intellectual exposition but it is rather a mode of invention…Spinoza did not believe in hope or even in courage; he believed only in joy, and in vision. He let others live provided they let him live. He wanted only to inspire, to waken, to reveal.

Quotes from Church Fathers on Divinization

St. Irenaeus of Lyons stated that God "became what we are in order to make us what he is himself."
St. Clement of Alexandria says that "he who obeys the Lord and follows the prophecy given through him . . . becomes a god while still moving about in the flesh."
St. Athanasius wrote that "God became man so that men might become gods."
St. Cyril of Alexandria says that we "are called 'temples of God' and indeed 'gods', and so we are."
St. Basil the Great stated that "becoming a god" is the highest goal of all.
St. Gregory of Nazianzus implores us to "become gods for (God's) sake, since (God) became man for our sake."

thanks wikipedia!

Call for Papers - Reason and Myth in Platonism

The seventh annual Prometheus Trust Conference has been arranged for
June 29-July 1, 2012 - Warminster, Wiltshire, UK

Logos, Mythos, Sophos: Reason and Myth in the Search for Wisdom

The Platonic tradition has always embraced both reason and myth in its
cultivation of wisdom -- but what is their relationship? Are they in
opposition or complementary? How should we understand Socrates' views on
Homer and his fellow poets as stated in the second and third books of
the Republic, and Proclus' response in his Scholia on that dialogue? As
philosophers within our own time and culture, are we still able to
balance the two approaches and take from each the insights available to
those of ancient times? What kinds of reasoning and what kinds of myths
contribute to our own cultivation of wisdom? This conference invites
papers on these and other related questions. The Prometheus Trust'seeks
to build on previous conferences, in which contributors from diverse
backgrounds -- professional and amateur -- pooled their insights in
pursuit of wisdom.

The Trust is delighted that John F Finamore (who needs no introduction
here, I'm sure) has agreed to give the keynote address.

Further details, including deadlines for submission of abstracts, fees,
etc, can be found on the Prometheus Trust website at

http://www.prometheustrust.co.uk/html/conference.html

Proclus Conference in Amsterdam this February

ACADEMY COLLOQUIUM

PROCLUS – EXPANDING THE CANON OF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY
Date 1-4 February 2012
Location Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
The Trippenhuis, Kloveniersburgwal 29, Amsterdam (routing)

This colloquium will bring together leading scholars and young researchers
from all over the globe in celebration of the 1600th anniversary of the Neoplatonist Proclus (412-485 A.D.). They will gather in
Amsterdam to establish an inventory of the status quo of Proclean
studies today and to discuss possible lines of future research on the
various aspects of Proclus’ thought. The colloquium will result in the publication of a comprehensive volume on Proclus’
philosophy, to be published with Oxford University Press.

The colloquium is sponsored and hosted by the Royal Netherlands Academy of
Arts and Sciences (KNAW) and is co-funded by the C.J. de Vogel Foundation, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific
Research (NWO), the De Wulf - Mansion Centre for Ancient, Medieval and
Renaissance Philosophy and the K.U.Leuven Research Fund.

Registration
Since places are limited, we recommend you to register at your earliest
convenience and in any case not later than 15 January, by filling in theregistration form.

Conference fee
For registration without conference dinner the fee is € 100, which gets
you all conference materials, lunches, coffee and tea, a reception on
Wednesday, and a visit with guided tour of the Allard Pierson Museum on
Friday. For registration including the conference
dinner on Friday the fee is € 150. If you wish to attend part of the
colloquium, please contact the organisers.

More information
* Program (pdf)
* List of participants (pdf)
* Colloquium's webpage
Or contact the organisers, Pieter d’Hoine (pieter.dhoine@hiw.kuleuven.be) or Marije Martijn (m.martijn@vu.nl) for information on the conference program.

C.J. de Vogel Foundation

Proclus on the soul

Proclus: The soul is constituded from intellective logoi [reason-principles] and from divine symbols [sumbolon], of which the former come from intellective forms, the latter from the divine henads; and we are images [eikones] of intellective essences but statues [agalmata] of nonconceptual tokens [agnoston sunthematon]. And just as every soul is the totality [pleroma] of all the forms, but subsists universally according to a single causality, likewise it participates of all the tokens through which it is connected to things divine, but the existence [huparxis] is defined in unity/in the One [en heni].
Philosophia Chaldaica
quoted in Edward Butler http://henadology.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/offering.pdf

Ficino on the Sight of the Beloved

Hence it always happens that lovers fear and worship in some way the sight of the beloved. Let me even say, although I fear that some of you will blush when you hear these things, that even brave and wise men, I say, have been accustomed to suffer in the presence of the beloved, however inferior. Certainly it is not anything human that frightens them, which breaks them, which seizes them. For a human power is always stronger in braver and wiser men. But that splendor of divinity, shining in the beautiful like a statue of God, compels lovers to marvel, to be afraid, and to worship.

-Marsilio Ficino, Commentary on Plato’s Symposium on Love
(found on Arturo Vasquez's excellent blog

Hymn-Singing from Plethon to Ficino (subjective to theurgic?)

“Gemisto Pletho recurs as an important but shadowy figure in the handing down of this tradition. He does not in his surviving works mention either Orpheus or the Orphic writings. But we know that hymn-singing played a large part in his reconstructed paganism, and that he devoted a chapter of his Nomoi to ‘Hymns to the Gods’ and another to ‘The Arrangement of the Hymns.’ We have evidence also that he copied out fourteen of the Orphic Hymns. It may be that it was Pletho's appearance at the Council of Florence in 1438 that awakened in the West an interest in this ritual practice. There are, however, significant differences in the motives underlying the hymn-singing of Pletho and that of Ficino. As Walker tells us Pletho saw the effect of the hymn-singing as subjective rather than objective. It did not actually reach the gods, but prepared or ‘moulded’ our imaginations. Ficino's motives are more direct and straightforward, and closer to the theurgic tradition of Iamblichus and Proclus. The singing of hymns can prepare man's spiritus to receive the influx of spiritus from a particular astral body. Music recovers its powers of magic, its ability to exploit and turn to advantage the forces of the phenomenal world. ‘Nothing is more effective in natural magic,’ says Pico, ‘than the hymns of Orpheus, if the proper music, mental concentration and other circumstances which the wise are aware of be applied.’ “
John Warden: from Orpheus, the Metamorphosis of a Myth, University of Toronto Press, 1985.

thanks to Lily Beard for dropping this excerpt on the Phoenix Rising Facebook forum

St Denis as Cephalophore

(St. Denis has been conflated with Pseudo-Dionysius)