Neoplatonism

Neoplatonism was the last of the great schools of Classical pagan

philosophy. A synthesis of Platonism, Aristotlism, Stoicism, and
Pythagoreanism, which provided an esoteric interpretation of
classical Greek Paganism, it incorporated philosophy, mysticism,
theosophy, and theurgy (higher occultism). For three centuries it
served as a last bastion of Pagan wisdom and Esoteric philosophy
in an increasingly hostile Christian dominated empire. Even after
the light of Classical Learning was extinguished, the Neoplatonic
current remained, undergoing new metamorphoses, in Christian
Mysticism, Islamic Philosophy, Ishraqi and Sufi Esotericism, and
Judaic Kabbalah. Now with the decline of materialistic scepticism
and religious intolerance, and the rise of diversity and multiplicity
in the new information-rich society, may the light of
Neoplatonism shine once more!
Neoplatonism was the last of the great schools of Greek
philosophy; and the most mystical. It's founder Plotinus and his
successors taught an elaborate emanationist cosmology.

The Neoplatonist Family Tree

This chart lists all of the important figures (and a few of the less
important ones) in the Neoplatonic schools. It does not list some
important individuals like Augustine of Hippo who were
influenced by the Neoplatonists but not actually associated with
them.

Ammonius Saccus
__________|__________
|
|
|
Origen
Plotinus
Longinus
__________|________________
|
|
|
Amelius
Porphyry
|
PORPHYRIAN SCHOOL |
______|
|
Iamblichus
SYRIAN SCHOOL
__________|____________________
|
|
|
Theodorus
Aedesius
|
PERGAMENE SCHOOL |
ALEXANDRIAN SCHOOL
|
Theon
|
Hypatia
Plutarch of Athens
ATHENIAN SCHOOL
________________________|___
|
|
Hierocles
Syranius
_________________|
____|_
|
_____________________|
|
Aeneas
|
|
(Christian)
Hermiasas
Proclus
GAZA SCHOOL
| ___________________________|____________
|__|
|
|
|
Marinus
Dionysius(Christian)
Ammonius
Isidorus
_____________|________________________ Zenodotus
|
|
|
|
John Philoponus Olympiodorus
Simplicius Damascius
(Christian)
|
(Aristotlean)
Elias (Christian)
|
David (Christian)
|
Stephanus (Christian)
|_____________________________
school falls
founds Imperial Academy
into Arab hands
(Constantinople)

The Roots of Neoplatonism

As the last great school of Greek philosophy and mysticism,
Neoplatonism borrowed from all preceding schools. The
influence of Aristotle himself can be found in the Neoplatonic
philosophical method and propositions of logic. In its scepticism
of empirical knowledge it draws from the Cynic and Pyrrhic line.
In its dualistic emanationist metaphysics and aspiring to the Good
in a transcendent spiritual sphere it is clearly a continuation of
the Platonic school. Its derivation of all realities from a
transcendent One is pure Neopythagoreanism. Its ethics have
been adopted from Stoicism. And its conception of the action of
the Divine in the world, and the essence and origin of matter, is
clearly derived from the dynamic pantheism of Stoicism. Indeed,
Neoplatonism could be seen as the culmination of Greek
metaphysical thought, not as a mere eclecticism but a true
synthesis.
Ammonius Saccus
Although Ammonius Saccus was reputedly the founder of the
Neoplatonic school in Alexandria, none of his writings, and very
little information about his life, has survived. In addition to
Plotinus, his pupils include a number of others.
Ammonius's students:

Erennius was, along with Plotinus and Origen, a member of

Ammonius' inner circle. Nothing else is known about him.

Longinus was considered by Plotinus a scholar but not a

philosopher. In contrast to conventional Platonism he located
the Forms at a level beneath the Nous. He was Porphyry's
teacher before the latter met Plotinus.

Origen has been confused with the great Christian theologian

of the same name. He rejected Plotinus' concept of the One
and regarded the Nous the highest principle

Plotinus - see below.

Plotinus (204-270 c.e.)

Plotinus is one of the giants of western spirituality - both mystic
and philosopher - who in his Enneads describes reality in terms of
a series of divine hierarchies or hypostases. He taught the
rejection of worldly things and purification of the soul as the
means for returning to the One.
Later Neoplatonists
Whilst Plotinus was the founder and dominant theorist of the
Neoplatonic movement, his successors developed a more
sophisticated cosmology and metaphysic within the general
framework he laid out. And here we find two tendencies.
First is the reduction in the number of hypostases postulated (for
example the identification of the One and the Nous), such as was
taught by the Plotinian and Porphyrian schools. Plotinus and his
immediate successors such as Porphyry and an anonymous
commentator tended to "telescope" the Hypostases, to reduce
them to a single pantheistic One1 analogous to the immanent
Absolute of Eastern Monism (Advaita Vedanta, Mahayana
Buddhism, etc). Here we see the "mystical" side of Neoplatonism.
In contrast to this is the tendency to increase the number of
hypostases, for example in th teachings of the
Syrian Iamblichus (died c.326) and the Athenian Proclus (412485). These later philosophers not only multiplied Plotinus' three
hypostases, formulating a large number of metaphysical
1

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.111f

principles, but also introduced greater systematisation and

complexity, and indeed also a strong element of rigidity, into
Neoplatonic metaphysics.
On this basis we can distinguish three periods of post-Plotinian
development:2
1. the teaching of Plotinus' immediate pupils such as Porphyry
and Amelius;
2. the Syrian and Pergamene schools deriving from the teachings
of Iamblichus; and
3. the fifth and sixth century schools of Athens and Alexandria
Porphyry and Amelius
Amelius Gentilianus was Plotinus' senior disciple. He emphasised
the unity between individual souls and the Nous, adopted
Numenius' idea of a triple division with of the Nous, considered
(unusually) the Forms to be infinite in number and (equally
unusually) postulated a Form of Evil. He put great value on the
prologue of the Gospel of John and wrote a forty-volume
refutation of a Gnostic text.3
Although Porphyry c.232-c.305) is best known for organizing
and editing Plotinus's writings and lectures, he also made several
original contributions regarding the nature of the hypostases,
tending to adopt a more "monistic" and pantheistic position than
Plotinus. His simplification of Plotinus' thought appealed to the

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.1.

Adolph Harnack and John Malcolm Mitchell, "Neoplatonism", in
Encyclopaedia Brittanica, vol XIX, p.376, (Eleventh Edition, 1911); R. T.
Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.94
3

practically-minded Romans, and influenced both pagans like

Macrobius and Christians like Augustine.4 [More on Porphyry]
Iamblichus and the Syrian School
Iamblichus was the chief representative of Syrian Neoplatonism.
He modified the basic Plotinian metaphysic through a greater
elaboration of the hypostases, a more systematic application of
Pythagorean number-symbolism, and, under the influence of
Oriental systems, less of an emphasis on the intellectual approach
and more the occult-magical and mythical. By this latter he
presented a philosophical interpretation of popular Hellenistic
religion. His influence extends even to the Theosophists of the
late 19th and early 20th century.
Aedesius was Iamblichus' chief student. He founded a school in
Pergamum (now Albania). the school seems to have placed some
emphasis on the Plotinian philoophical-mystical way of
purification, rather than solely the theurgic.
Theodorus of Asine was another student; he broke away from the
master and taught a synthesis of a number of different teachings,
combining elements from Numenius, Plotinus, Amelius,
Porphyry, and Iamblichus.5 He does not seem to have had any
long-term influence.
Iamblichus and his successors rejected the pure philosophical
speculation of early Neoplatonists and increasingly emphasised
theurgy,6 thus paralleling the greater emphasis on ritual magical
procedures in later, Tantric, forms of Hinduism and Buddhism.
There was also a tendency towards increasing scholasticism and
textual fundamentalist adherence to Classical sources, along with
an increasing metaphysical complexity; in contrast to the
4

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.96

Ibid, p.95
6
R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.93,
5

simplicity of Plotinus' hierarchy, the Iamblichus and the postIamblichean schools formulated a proliferation of Hypostases,
with
ever
more
rigid
divisions
between
them.7
[More on Iamblichus]

Proclus and the Athenian School

Until the beginning of the fifth century, Neoplatonic schools still
flourished in the major cities of the Empire. But the murder of the
female mathematician Hypatia by a mob of fanatical Christians
showed that the Church would no longer endure the presence of
"heathenism". Although the school in Alexandria maintained a
lingering existence until the middle of the sixth century, it was
elsewhere that Hellenistic philosophy found its last refuge. In
Athens, which was by now a mere provincial town, a Neoplatonic
centre still flourished.
In a time when classical civilisation was in decline, the Athenian
academy returned to a stricter philosophical method and
scholarship. It sought to interpret the entire Greek tradition,
undertook in the light of Plotinus, to a comprehensive and tightlyknit system. Hence the earlier mysticism and magic was replaced
by a drier and more intellectual approach; in other words
scholasticism. For these Athenian Neoplatonists, the works of
Plato, the Chaldean Oracles, the Orphic poems, and much more
which was assigned to a great antiquity, were inspired divine
writings, and formed the basic material, which was then
elaborated through dialectic hermeneutics.
The first head of the school was Plutarch of Athens (d.432 c.e.)
not to be confused with the great Roman biographer of the same
name. The school flourished under his disciple Syrianus (d. c.437)
an important commentator on Plato and Aristotle, and Proclus
7

Ibid, p.93, 123.

(412-85). the last great thinker of Greek thought, and the best
known and most important of the later Neoplatonists.
Thenceforth under Marinus, Isidorus, Hegias and Zenodotus a
period of decline set in. Under the talented Damascius there was a
revival of Platonism, and it could be speculated that this
encouraged the emperor Justinian to close the school.8 [More on
Proclus]
The Alexandrian School
The school of Alexandria is not the same as the vibrant academy
under Ammonius. It seems to date back to the late fourth and
early fifth centuries, represented by the mathematician Theon and
his daughter Hypatia, who was martyred by a Christian mob
under the instigation of the infamous church leader Cyril.
Persecution seems to have been common. Hierocles was flogged
by the authorities in Constantinople, despite the fact that his
teachings were more monotheistic than those of other pagan
Neoplatonists. (Ironically, the school of Alexandria also included
among its members a number of Christian philosophers, such as
Aeneas and John Philoponus.)
It was only with Heimonius and his son Ammonius that a definite
succession can be traced at Alexandria. Olympiodorus the
Platonic commentator was the last pagan head of the school, after
his death it passed into Christian hands under the Aristotlean
commentators Elias and David. The school's last head, Stephanus,
moved to and became head of an academy in Constantinople in
610. In 641 the Alexandrian school was captured by the Arabs. It
thus played an important part in the transmission of Neoplatonic
thought to both the Byzantine and the Islamic civilisations.

Ibid, p.138

Whereas the Athenian school was strongly influenced by

Iamblichus, and shared his enthusiasm for metaphysics, ritual,
and paganism, the Alexandrian school concentrated instead on
pure scholarship. But despite rivalry between them, the
relationships between the two schools were close and
intermarriage between their members common; and most
representatives taught or studied in both cities before settling
down in one.9
The End of Neoplatonism
Proclus' works exerted a great influence on the next thousand
years. They not only formed one of the bridges by which
medieval thinkers rediscovered Plato and Aristotle, but also
determined scientific method up until the sixteenth century, and
through "Pseudo"-Dionysius gave rise to and nurtured the
Christian mysticism of the middle ages.
In 529, Justinian closed the school of Athens. Damascius, the
Aristotlean commentator Simplicius, and five other Neoplatonists
set out for Persia, hoping they would be able to teach and
continue there under Chosroes I. But conditions were
unfavourable, and they were allowed to return to Athens.
Neoplatonism was the last of the great Hellenistic systems of
thought to fall. Yet quite a lot of it did survive in Christian and
Islamic form. In the West, Christian neoplatonism exerted a
strong influence on philosophy and theology at least until the rise
of scientific materialism in the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries. Neoplatonism had a profound effect on mediaeval
Christian and Islamic mystical thought and on Jewish Kabbalah,
Renaissance Hermeticism, the Cambridge Platonism of the 18th
century, and 19th century Theosophy. In the more philosophical
Islamic circles it is still going strong, appearing in the works of
9

Ibid, pp.139-140

modern Islamic philosophers such as Fritjof Schuon and Sayyed

Hossien Nasr.
And through Theosophy its traces can be seen in the modern day
"New Age" movements, and through Islam and Sufism (e.g.,
modern day writers like Fritjof Schuon) it made its way into the
"New Paradigm" and transpersonal psychology arena.
Yet for all its influence, it is surprising how little it is in evidence
on the electronic frontier of the Net itself (a few entries in on-line
philosophy and theology encyclopaedias, and a digital version of
Plotinus' Enneads.. It is hoped this small project will go some
small way to rectifying that shortcoming.

Plotinus
Plotinus (204/5-270 c.e.) was an Egyptian by birth but Greek (or
Hellenistic) by upbringing. He studied philosophy in Alexandria
under Ammonius Saccus, before joining a military campaign
against Persia, where he encountered Indian ideas. He went to
Rome c 244, where he taught until about 268. His lectures were
only committed to writing later in life. As the central figure of
Neoplatonism, Plotinus was the representative of a spiritualphilosophical tradition that begins with Plato or before, and
passes through the stages of early post-Platonism and Middle
Platonism.
Plotinus' metaphysics
Emanation
Central to Plotinus' metaphysics is the process of ceaseless
emanation and outflowing from the One. Plotinus gives
metaphors such as the radiation of heat from fire or cold from
snow, fragrance from a flower or light from the sun.10
This basic theme reappears in the scholastic maxim that "good
diffuses itself" (bonum diffusivum sui); entities that have
achieved perfection of their own being do not keep that perfection
to themselves, but spread it out by generating an external image
of their internal activity.11
This then leads to the idea that Arthur Lovejoy, in his book The
Great Chain of Being, calls "the principle of plenitude". What this
means is that emanation from the One cannot terminate until
10
11

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.61

Ibid, p.61

everything that has possibly come into existence has done so.
Creation cannot stop at the world of the Gods, but must continue
downwards through all possible levels of being and imperfection.
Things cannot all be good, and indeed, as Plotinus says, the
universe would be less perfect if they were, just as it may be
necessary for a beautiful work of art that not all its parts are
beautiful in isolation.12
In contrast to the monotheistic idea of a God who creates through
a deliberate act of will, Plotinus sees the activity of the Divine
Hypostases is more like the spontaneous operation of nature than
the laborious deliberations of a human craftsman.13
Emanation: Further Clarification

The Emanation of Worlds in Lurianic Kabbalah

The word "Emanation" comes from the Latin e-manare, "to flow
forth". The cosmos and finite beings are all seen as having
emerged out of the Absolute Reality through a sort of "out12
13

Ennead III. 2. 11; & R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.65

(Ennead IV. 3. 10; IV. 4. 11), R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.63, 65.

flowing". Metaphors are with the ocean (the Absolute) and the
waves (the Universe); the Sun (the Absolute) and the Light that
shines from it (the Universe); a fountain (the Absolute) which
overflows (the universe); and so on.
According to Emanationism, Creation occurs by
a process of emanation - "out-flowing". The
entire cosmos, and even all the Gods and
Godheads beyond the Cosmos, has come about
through emanation. Just as the ocean forms its
surface into waves, so the Absolute forms upon
and as Itself successive manifestations,
successive entities. And these in turn create - or
rather, emanate - further entities, and so on, with
all these entities combining and interacting in
Jaina diagram of the extraordinary network of existence.
progressively
denser bands of Each of the levels of reality in the Emanationist
matter projecting Cosmology could be termed a "World". Here,
into the Universe "World" is a general term meaning any self-

contained realm or universe of existence. One

could equally well say "Universe", "Cosmos", "Sphere", "Realm",
"Plane", "horizon", "reality", "state of existence", "state of
consciousness", etc. The term "World" has been chosen simply
because it is a useful general term.
One could think of the relationship between each of these levels
as being like "body and soul", "spirit and matter", or "Creator and
creature", in that each higher level is the Soul, Spirit, and Creator
of the level immediately below it; and the Body, Matter, and
Creature (created being) of the level immediately above it.

diagram of the relationship between spirit and

matter, according to the
emanationist paradigm

The Emanationist position then, is based, not a single CreatorCreated Dichotomy, but rather on a series or "hierarchy" of
realities or "Worlds", arranged "vertically" (inverted commas are
used because these terms are simply metaphoric, and should not
be taken literally). Each higher world "generates" the one below it
through a process of emanation, and each therefore stands in the
position of "God" or "Creator" to the level or grade below it.
Thus, Creation is not Creation out of nothing, but creation out of
the being of the higher hypostasis.
Each of the levels or stages in this "spectrum" or "great chain of
being" has its own specific characteristics. So you could speak of
the psychic world (or "astral plane"), the angelic world, the
archangelic world, the Divine world, and so on; hierarchy upon
hierarchy, world upon world, a kind of epiphany or manifestation
of the Divine; all looking downwards to matter, and also looking
upwards to the godhead.
Such a Cosmology has to be lived. It cannot be a mere theoretical
thing. It must be an actual Vision of Reality. The Vision of
Worlds beyond Worlds, of hierarchies of Angels or Gods
arranged in order upon order, Light above Light, is a truly
magnificent and awe-inspiring one. It is not abstract speculation.
It is contemplative reality.

Emanationism: Even More Clarification

In contrast to the familiar Judaeo-Christian monotheistic view, according to which the whole universe
just appears ready- made through Divine Fiat (or
command), and the materialistic view which simply
ignores first principles, Emanationism explains creation as a
gradual process of emanation and descent from a transcendental
Absolute to mundane reality. Thus there is no Creator
God standing apart from, even if intimately connected with, the
universe as in monotheism; but rather a series of stages of downgrading of Consciousness-Being, by means of which the Absolute
principle actually becomes the multiplicity of entities and objects
It has been suggested (by Professor Huston Smith, in his
book Forgotten Truth) that the basic cosmology, arrived at
independently by many different philosophies and spiritual
traditions, shows Reality to be divided into a very minimum
of four levels or planes of reality: the Infinite or Absolute (the
topic of Monism), the Celestial or Divine, the Intermediate or
Psychic (with which occultism deals), and the Terrestrial or
Physical (the level considered by Materialism). Each of these can
in turn be sub-divided
Thus, applying this in an emanationist perspective, the process of
creation, in the emanationist cosmogony and cosmology,
proceeds through a number of distinct stages. First the Absolute
produces the Spiritual reality (or "God"). The Spiritual reality in
turn produces the Psychic reality. And finally, the Psychic reality
produces the Physical reality; the material world. Each reality
constitutes a specific stage of manifestation
Emanationism understands the more subtle and spiritual realities
as preceding and generating the grosser and more material ones,
and not vice-versa as materialism assumes; and that moreover

those grosser realities are the result of an out-flowing from the

subtle, rather than being created ex nihilo - out of nothing - as
the Theistic religions claim
Emanationism also avoids the Monist's dilemma of how to
reconcile Unity (the Absolute) and Multiplicity (the World) by
recognising that both the universe and the Absolute are "equally"
real and valid, but they simply have a different position or status
in the spectrum of being.

Plotinus' Mysticism
For Plotinus, and other Greek mystics, such as Plotinus'
predecessors Plato and Pythagoras, Spirituality means the ascent
from the lower sense-reality to the higher spiritual reality. Like
twentieth century scientists such as Albert Einstein, these ancient
Greek mystics derived meaning and purpose from the
contemplation of nature. But instead of contemplating the wonder
of visible physical reality, they contemplated the wonder of the
invisible spiritual reality which they saw as the cause and ultimate
meaning behind the physical reality.
Plotinus believed that man should reject material things and
should purify his soul and to lift it up to a communion with the
One.
The Hypostases
Also central in Plotinus' cosmology is the a chain of hypostases.
...With regard to the existence that is supremely perfect [i.e.
"The One"], we must say it only produces the very greatest
of the things that are found below it. But that which after it
is the most perfect, the second principle, is Intelligence
(Nous). Intelligence contemplates the One and needs

nothing but it. But the One has no need of Intelligence [i.e.
being the Absolute Principle, it is totally self-sufficient].
The One which is superior to Intelligence produces
Intelligence which is the best ex-istence after the One, since
it is superior to all other beings. The (World-)Soul is the
Word (Logos) and a phase of the activity of Intelligence
just as Intelligence is the logos and a phase of the activity
of the One. But the logos of the Soul is obscure being only
an image of Intelligence. The Soul therefore directs herself
to Intelligence, just as the latter, to be Intelligence, must
contemplate the One....Every begotten being longs for the
being that begot it and loves it... 14
The Hypostases in Neoplatonist Metaphysics
The word hupostasis means "underlying state", or underlying
substance. In other words, that fundamental realitry that supports
all else. Neoplatonist worldview teaches that behind the surface
phenomena that presents themselves to the senses are three
such higher spiritual principles or hypostases: each one more
sublime thna the preceeding. These are: the One or Absolute,
the Nous or Divine Mind, and the Psuche or World-Soul. Each
higher principle emanates the next, as its image. The One is
the transcendent, ineffable Source of all. From this arises the
Nous, the eternal, blissful, Divine Consciousness. The Nous in
turn generates the World-Soul, the creative consciousness which
exists in time. From and through the World-Soul is fashioned the
material cosmos. The Philosopher through contemplating the
spiritual realities returns back to the Source, thus completing the
cycle of precession (emanation) and return.
So much for philosophy and mysticism, but Neoplatonic thinkers
also equated the hypostases with deities of the Greek pantheon.
14

Ennead V:i:6; translated by Joseph Katz, The Philosophy of Plotinus,

pp.15-6 (Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc, New York, 1950)

The hypostases of Neoplatonism constitute a well defined

example of an emanationist representation of Reality - the idea
that Reality begins with an original transcendent ineffable infinite
Godhead or Absolute, and that this goes through various stages of
diminuation or deprivation, the gradation from spirit to matter.
The Neoplatonic hypostases in relation to other esoteric systems
of thought:

Plotinus (Neoplatonism)

Mahayana
Buddhism

Kashmir
Shaivism

Ibn Arabi
(Sufism)

Kabbalah

hypostasis

trikaya

kala

hadrath

olam
(World)

Paramashiva
One

Dharmakaya

En Sof
Shiva tattwa

Divine Mind (Nous)

Pure tattwas

Atzilut

Pure-Impure

Beriah

Sambhogakaya

World Soul

Nirmanakaya

Impure

Yetzirah

hyle (sense -world)

(subtle and gross

bodies)

Earth

Asiyah

The Logos
As the relationship between a Hypostasis and its products, the
Logos denotes the plan or formative principle from which the

lower realities evolve and by which their development is

governed.15
Plotinus uses the term not to indicate a separate hypostasis
(contra Philo, Christianity, etc), but to express the relationship
between a Hypostasis and its source or its products or both.16
For Plotinus therefore, the relation between the grades of being,
or hypostases, is a two-fold process. There is a downward process
of Emanation or "outflowing", and a corresponding upward
process of return through Contemplation. This can be represented
diagrammatically as follows:
THE ONE
The Absolute and Source
|
emanation contemplation
|
NOUS
The "Divine Mind";
Eternal and Transcendent.
|
emanation contemplation
|
PSYCHE
"Soul"; the dynamic, creative temporal
power, both cosmic ("World-Soul") and
individual (e.g. human consciousness).
The world of the senses

15
16

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.68

Ibid, p.68

Procession and Reversion

Plotinus distinguishes two stages of emanation. The first,
prohodros or Procession is the formless, infinite stream of life that
flows forth from the One. But it is impossible for beings to
receive any shape as long as the descent into multiplicity
continues unchecked; they must turn back upon themselves and
imitate the perfection of their Origin to the best of their ability.
Hence in the second stage, epistrophe, Reversion, being turns
back, contemplates the One, and so receives form and order. In
the subdivision of the second hypostasis into Being, Intelligence,
and Life, Life the Second Hypostasis in its unformed stage
(Procession), and Intelligence to the second stage, Reversion,
when it has received form and limit.17
This theme has been more recently taken up in
the Theosophical idea of "Life-waves" or "monadic essence" that
have emanated from the Absolute, but are still on the involutionary or descending arc, and hence still formless.
The Three Hypostases
The One
Plotinus taught that Reality is an ontological gradation; that is, a
gradation of levels of being. The highest reality, or First Principle
which Plotinus called The One (to hen) is the most perfect and
creative of all.
That [The One] which is eternally perfect is eternally
productive. That which it produces [the Nous] is eternal
too, though inferior to the generating principle...
In Plotinus' view, multiplicity is a fragmentation of the original
Unity. Hence each stage of emanation is a descent into greater
17

Ibid, pp.65-66

multiplicity, which means greater restriction, more needs, and the

dispersion and weakening of the power of previous stages.
Hence the Supreme principle must constitute the Negation of
Duality, in other words, the One. And, in a manner that was very
controversial to the Greeks, with their abhorrence of infinity,
Plotinus describes the One as Formless, Unmeasured, and
Infinite.
Plotinus was thus an early advocate in the West of what later
came to be called Negative Theology, which says that words and
conceptions can only tell us what the Absolute is not, no what it
is. While to deny, for example, that the One is motion does not
mean that it is rest, but rather that it is on a level where the duality
of motion and rest does not apply.
In Indian mysticism Negative Theology goes back to the earliest
Upanishads (mystical treatises, the oldest dating from the 7th and
8th Century B.C.E.), where it is said that Brahman (the Absolute)
is neti neti - "not this, not this". In Buddhism too, especially the
schools of Madhyamika and Zen, the dialectic of Negative
Theology was and is of central importance.
Plotinus applies Plato's term the Good to the One's role as the
supreme object of aspiration for all lower realities, due to its utter
freedom from limitation and lack of want.
The One has no need for its products and would not care if it had
no products at all; the process of emanation leaves the One totally
unaffected and unconcerned
The Nous
The beginning of each hypostasis constitutes a particular
discontinuity in the ontological spectrum. So The One is
characterised by absolute Unity, perfection, eternity, and

creativity. The Nous is still eternal, creative, perfect blissful, and

totally spiritual, but it is no longer unitary. Rather, this is the
region of Plato's Spiritual Forms. This idea has its roots ultimately
in the Middle Platonic view of Forms as thoughts of God.
At the level of the Nous, the individual still has his own identity,
but his contemplation embraces the whole Intelligible world and
everything in it. And since on this level subject and object are
identical, each member of the Intelligible order is identifiable
with the whole of that order, and every other member thereof. So
Universal Intelligence is a sort of unity-in-plurality. This is an
idea advocated earlier by the Neopythagorean philosopher
Numenius, the "all is in all"
Intelligence (Nous) is the level of intuition, where discursive
thought is bypassed and the mind attains a direct and
instantaneous vision of truth. The distinction between Soul and
Intelligence corresponds to the difference between discursive and
intuitive thought. Discursive thought means reasoning from
premise to conclusion, or being aware of first one thing, then
another
The Soul
With the Soul there is the beginning of time, and therefore of
Creation (because Creation by its very nature requires sequence in
which to occur). Whereas the Nous embraces the whole of the
Noetic world in one timeless vision, the Soul's contemplation is
forced to change from one thing to another.
The Soul thus constitutes the Nous projected into Time. Although
still creative and spiritual, is no longer eternal, or perfect in its
consciousness. It cannot see things in a holistic and all-embracing
way, but only successively, imperfectly, moment by moment, in
terms of past and future. In keeping with Greek thought generally,
Plotinus refers to an original cosmic and therefore Divine World-

Soul, which is the creator of the visible cosmos, and the

individual, for example the human, soul.
The Stoics conceived of individual souls as parts of the WorldSoul. For Plotinus in contrast, the World-Soul is herself an
individual soul, albeit a very large one, whose body is the cosmos
which she forms and administers. But both the individual and the
World- souls are manifestations of the one Universal Soul. This is
essentially the same as the monistic Hindu philosopher Shankara's
statement that the individual soul or Jiva and Ishwara or God the
creator and ruler of the universe are both the result of superimposition or Maya over the one Absolute or Atman-Brahman.18
As well as this "horizontal" division there is also a "vertical" one.
Plotinus and his successors integrated the Platonic distinction
between the rational and irrational souls with the Aristotlean
distinction of vegetative, sentient (animal), and rational soullevels. They thus postulated a whole range of levels of psychic
consciousness.
Being an intuitive and inspirational rather than a systematic
thinker, Plotinus sometimes divides the Soul into higher/rational
and lower/irrational, and sometimes into three or even more
levels, the various classifications often being contradictory with
each other.19 Sometimes the rational soul as a whole is identified
with the "unfallen" soul. Plotinus went so far as to say that the
soul, as an "intelligible cosmos", contains not only all other soulprinciples (or Logoi) but also the levels of Intelligence and the
One, and is therefore able to attain any of those principles; an idea
close to the Vedantic and Buddhist concept of Enlightenment or
Liberation.
Plotinus' psychology is as follows:

18
19

Vivekachudamani, vv. 243-246

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.73-4

The summit of Soul is an unfallen level which does not

descend into this world; the Noetic Soul. It is in constant
transcendent contemplation of the eternal Nous.

The Rational Soul is the highest level of the ordinary human

psyche, which is able to approach the spiritual.

The Irrational or Animal Soul, which is limited to the bodily or

animal passions and desires; the equivalent perhaps of the
Catholic "seven deadly sins". This is the bodily or "vegetative"
soul (phytikon) responsible both for physical growth and
nutrition, and also for the bodily appetites and emotions.20

The soul is thus an "amphibian", belonging to both the physical

and the intelligible (noetic) worlds.
This concept of "vertical psychology" was later to figure
prominently in Kabbalah and Sufism, and is still with us (minus
the higher or spiritual/noetic element) in the Freudian
psychoanalytical distinction of Ego (= Rational Soul) and Id (=
Irrational Soul). In modern Theosophy and Occultism also, this
gradation appears as the distinction between the Mental and the
Astral (or Emotional or Desire) bodies.
Sometimes Plotinus adds a further hypostasis, phusis or Nature,
as the lowest projection of Soul and the dim consciousness within
plants, between Soul and the Sensible World. The Theosophical
version of this is the "etheric plane".
The Soul is the lowest hypostasis, the lowest irradiation of the
Divine. Deficient as it is, it still retains a trace of the original ontological authenticity or Spiritual-Being-ness of the higher
principles. Below the Soul there is only non-conscious matter hyle - which Plotinus equated with "non-being" and total
deprivation. Plotinus describes Matter as "non-being", in view of

20

Ibid, pp.73-4.

its formlessness and utter unsubstantiality, although he denies that

this means absolute non-existence.21

Plotinus's Influence - the Islamic Connection

Plotinus' teachings were to exert an influence not only on later
Neoplatonists and Gnostics, but on the Islamic world too. This
happened quite by accident. An Arabic translation of a section of
Plotinus, padded out with his student Porphyry's commentary,
appeared, titled the Theology of Aristotle. Since the medieval
Islamic thinkers thought very highly of Aristotle, this work
exerted a strong formative influence on Islamic philosophical
thought. Thus, whereas Neoplatonism is no longer respected in
the West, except as an intellectual curiosity or historical
movement, the same is most definitely not the case with the
intelligent and the mystic Moslem. An Islamicised neoplatonism
has retained its popularity among progressive philosophers down
to the present day. Indeed, anyone who reads the works of
Frithjof Schuon, the important contemporary Sufi-inspired
theologian and Traditionalist, will notice the strongly Plotinian
bent to his metaphysics.
The Neoplatonism of Plotinus by Nima Hazini. Page one
of Neoplatonism: Framework for a Bah' Metaphysics. A very
good synopsis of Plotinus' teachings as presented in The
Enneads.
The complete text of The Enneads of Plotinus is avaliable
from

21

Ibid, p.48.

The Six Enneads - translated by Stephen MacKenna and B. S.

Page
The Internet Classics Archive (uses frames - select Plotinus from
the list of authors) divided into chapters for easier viewing
The Enneads (Gopher) - this is the complete text, all in one go, so
be prepared for a lareg download.
Plotinus (205-270) : Library of Congress Citations

parallels
QBL and Neoplatonism - Meredith Humensky - similarities
between Plotinian metaphysics and Hermetic Qabalah
Neoplatonism: A Metaphysical Precedent for the Structural
Dialectics Paradigm by Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. Has some material
on Plotinus about half-way down the page. Most of the page is on
Bahai'ism.

Porphyry
Porphyry (c.232/4-c.305) or Porphyrios was born in Tyre [now
Lebanon] or Batanaea [now Syria], and studied in Athens, before
joining the Neoplatonic group of Plotinus in Rome. In 263-268 or
thereabouts, Porphyry studied philosophy in Rome under
Plotinus, who rescued him from a suicidal depression.
In 301 Porphyry completed The Enneads, a systematized and
edited collection of the works of Plotinus, including a short but
very informative biography. The name Enneads means "Nines",
so-called because they were sorted into chapters of nine sections
each. (This arrangement of course was purely Porphyry's idea).
The Enneads became a book of great significance and influence,
not only in the Hellenistic-Roman world, but later in the Islamic
and Renaissance Christian worlds as well.
Although not an original thinker in the league of his teacher
Plotinus, or his student Iamblichus, Porphyry nevertheless was
possessed of great learning, an interest in and great talent for
historical and philological criticism, and an earnest desire to
uproot false teachings in order to ennoble people and turn them to
the Good. He declared the salvation of the soul as the ultimate
purpose of philosophy.
Even more than Plotinus, Porphyry emphasised the mystic path of
"flight from the body" (although never in the context of the
Gnostics who considered the material world as "evil"). He also
played down the emanationist hierarchies of the Middle Platonists
and Plotinus, and seemed sometimes to combine One and
Intellect, a process of "telescoping the hypostases" taken even
further by an anonymous student and commentator on
Plato's Parmenides. Yet at the same time he represented the
beginnings of the later Neoplatonic tendency of organising reality
in both vertical and "horizontal" triads; this became a very

important element in later Neoplatonic metaphysics. For

Porphyry, Being, Life, and Intellect were phases in the eternal
self-determination of the ultimate reality. (compare the Kashmir
Shaivite "Pure Tattwas" and Sri Aurobindo's "Upper Hemisphere"
or "Supreme Nature" (Paraprakriti), regarding the manifestation
of the Absolute)
Among his many philosophical works were

Against the Christians, a work of 15 volumes directed not

against Christ or his teachings, but against the Christians of his
own day and their sacred books, which, he argued, were the
work of ignorant people and deceivers, and whose doctrines he
attacked on both philosophical and exegetical grounds.
Although as to be expected banned in 448 and ordered
destroyed, copious extracts remain in the writings of
Augustine and others.

Aids to the Study of the Intelligibles, a basic summary of

Neoplatonism.

Introduction
to
Categories is
a
commentary
on
Aristotle's Categories, describing how qualities attributed to
things may be classified. Perhaps Porphyry's most influential
contribution to philosophy, it incorporated Aristotle's logic
into Neoplatonism, in particular the doctrine of the categories
interepreted in terms of entities (in later philosophy,
"universal"). Boethius' Isagoge was a Latin translation of the
introduction, and became a standard medieval textbook, which
set the stage for medieval philosphical-theological
developments of logic and the problem of universals. In
medieval textbooks, the "Porphyrian Tree" illustrates his
logical classification of substance.

Letter to Marcella, his wife, a discourse on the spiritual path

On Abstinence, an argument in favour of vegetarianism.

and a number of other works, including many since lost.

Iamblichus
Iamblichus of Chalcis (d. c.326) was the pupil of Porphyry, and
after Plotinus the most important figure in Neoplatonism. He
ushered in a totally new phase of Neoplatonism, changing it from
a system of philosophy to one of theology and occultism.

Theurgy
Iamblichus denied that philosophy or thought alone (the mystical
philosophical contemplation of Plotinus) is unable to unite the
philosopher with the gods. There is need also of the appropriate
ritual magical actions; or Theurgy, the power conferred by divine
grace on the rituals and the symbolic objects they employ.22
The term theurgy means not only "divine work" but also perhaps
"god-making" or "making gods of men", and was intended as a
contrast to theology, which merely talks about the gods, and
theoria, the purely philosophical intuitive contemplation
advocated by Plotinus.23 It was actually a form of ritual magic,
with the aim of incarnating a divine force either in a material
object like a statue or, more plausibly in a human being,
producing a state of visionary trance.
The difference between Neoplatonic theurgy and the
contemporary Christian and Gnostic sacramentalism was that the
former saw itself as employing forces that were part of the natural
world-order, the latter forces that were the result of supernatural
divine intervention over and above that world-order.24 Of course,
22

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.121

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.107 & footnote
24
R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.108, 121
23

the forces in both case are the same; the difference lies in where
you draw the line between "natural" and "supernatural". What the
Christians and Gnostics - being of a dualistic persuasion (the
Divine as something over and above the cosmos) - considered
"supernatural", the Neoplatonists, being emanationist or monisticemanationist orientated, saw as "natural".
Iamblichus admitted the possibility of the soul being able to
ascend to a higher rank, but unlike Plotinus saw this as coming
about not through the soul's own powers or possession of Logoi,
but through association (by means of theurgy) with the soul's
transcendent causes, the gods. Here we see the substitution of
Magic for Mysticism. This does not mean that the gods are
constrained by the theurgist, for the lower cannot com-mand the
higher. But the rituals invoke the gods only through a voluntary
bestowal of divine power; "the god's good will and the
illumination imparted from them", as Iamblichus puts it. And so,
Iamblichus says, rather than the gods being drawn down into
material world, they purify their worshippers and so raise them
into the Intelligible or Divine world.25

Emanation and Triads

Plotinus distinguished two phases in the emanation process,
refering to the Self-Creation of Intelligence (Nous), and on a
lower degree Soul. These are Procession (prohodos), a formless
infinite stream of life flowing forth from the One; and Reversion
(epistrophe), whereby the emanated entity turns back,
contemplates the One, and so receives form and order.
Plotinus related this also in terms of Aristotle's theory of
cognition, with Procession corresponding say to the power of

25

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.120-1.

sight when it is still groping for vision, and Reversion to the same
power actualised by the contemplation of the object.
Plotinus' successors interpreted this somewhat more elaborately.
An anonymous commentator on Plato's Parmenides, who would
seem to belong to the School of Porphyry (although whether or
not he actually was Porphyry is more dubious, although still
possible), recognised in Plotinus' account of the emanation of the
Nous a phase of Rest prior to Procession and Reversion, during
which the Nous is identical with the Primal One.
Such a telescoping of the hypostases and identification of the
Nous with the One was unacceptable to later Neoplatonists.
However, both Iamblichus and Proclus still agreed with the
commentator in dividing emanation into three phases, those
of Abiding, or immanence in the Cause, Procession from that
Cause, and Reversion back upon it.
This triad was also no longer applied simply to the emanation of
one Hypostasis from another, but thanks to the principle of
correspondence became a universal law inherent in the structure
of everything that exists. It is equated with the Plotinian triad
(also adopted and modified by Gnosticism) of Being, Life and
Intelligence, the Chaldaean triad of Existence, Power and
Intelligence, the Aristotelian triad of Substance, Potentiality and
Actuality, Plato's Philebus' triad of Limit, Unlimited and the
Mixture of the two, and the mythological triad (as interpreted
through the Orphic poemms and the Chaldean Oracles) of Cronos,
Rhea and Zeus.

Iamblichus' Hierarchy of Spiritual Entities

The cosmology of the Iamblichean school is summarised by
Annie Besant as follows:

There is One, prior to all beings, immovable, abiding in the

solitude of His own unity. From That arises the Supreme
God, the Self-begotten, the Good, the Source of all things,
the Root, the God of Gods, the First Cause, unfolding
Himself into Light. From Him springs the Intelligible
World, or ideal [archetypal] universe, the Universal Mind
(or) Nous, and the incorporeal or intelligible Gods
belonging to this. From this the World-Soul, to which
belong the "divine intellectual forms which are present with
the visible bodies [i.e. the planets] of the Gods". Then come
the various hierar-chies of superhuman beings, Archangels,
Archons (Rulers) or Cosmocratores [Creators], Angels,
Daimons, etc... 26
We can distinguish here between the higher divine spiritual
hierarchies and the more intermdiate beings.
The Highest Spiritual Realities
These can be listed from higher to lower:27

The First One is the absolutely ineffable first principle

The Second One is the Absolute as the Creative Source or

First Principle, from which successive manifestation unfolds.

The Dyad of Limit and Unlimited, or Many and One

constitutes the first manifest of the Absolute, and naturally
evokes parallels with the Indian Tantric concept of Shiva and
Shakti

The One Existent or Noetic Monad represents the lowest entity

in the realm of the One. It is a transitional principle, which
partakes of the nature of both the Absolute and the eternal and
inconceivable noetic reality.

26

Annie Besant, Esoteric Christianity, pp.22-3

John M. Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), pp.29-39

27

The Paradigm, the first element of the Noetic triad, or Pure

Being. Here are located the monads of the Spiritual Forms or
Ideas, as opposed to the actual Idaes themselves.

From Being emanates the second element of the Noetic triad,

spiritual Life

Finally there emanates the Nous and its archetypes (Ideas)

The Psychic Monad is transitional between the Eternal Noetic

and the temporal Noeric realm; it is the transcendent source of
both the Soul of the Cosmos and of individual Souls.

Three categories of psychic Gods are postulated.28

The first of these is supramundane (supracosmic) and beyond

ordinary understanding.

The second category is comprehensible to the rational mind.

The third category, the mundane or intracosmic gods, includes

a great diversity of minor deities - gods, angels, demons, and
heros - of various position, function and rank.

Minor deities and intermediate spiritual beings

These minor deities (are enumerated in various ways; for example
the twelve or thirty-six or three hundred and sixty heavenly gods;
which give rise to seventy-two other gods. In addition there are
twenty-one chiefs (hegemones) and forty-two nature-gods (theoi
genesiourgoi), as well as guardian deities of particular individuals
and nations. Indeed, according to the important Iamblichan
text De Mysteriis, not only are all things full of gods (panta plere
Theon, as the philosopher Thales put it), but each person had a
special deity - an idios daimon (what would later come to be
referred to in Christian thought as a "guardian angel") as his own
guard and companion. The Iamblichan cosmos was therefore a
28

William Ritchie Sorley, "Iamblichus", in Encyclopaedia Brittanica, vol

XIV, p.214, (Eleventh Edition, 1911)

magical one, populated by a great diversity of superhuman

spiritual beings, influencing natural events, communicating
spiritual and prophetic knowledge, and accessible to prayers and
offerings.
Daimons
According to Iamblichus, between the gods and the pure (or
purified) souls, and bridging the gap between the two, are two
intermediate classes, the heros and the daimons.29 The daimons
have nothing to do with the "demons" of medieval Christianity,
being more equivalent, like the "heros", to the Christian idea of
"angels".
The daimons "serve the will of the gods, make manifest their
hidden goodness, and give form to their superior formlessness."30
The gods have general and universal power in the universe,
whereas the daimons have only partial power.31 They are
produced "through the generative and demiurgic powers of the
gods in the furthest extremity of their procession and of their
ultimate divisions."32 In other words, at the lowest subplane of
the gods, where there is the greatest multiplicity, they emanate
and give rise to subordinate beings, the daimons. Although
Iamblichus describes the daimons as the active principles of the
gods, and the heros as concerned with saving souls and leading
them upwards, the two groups would seem to overlap
somewhat.33
Personal Daimons - a good essay on the subject of daimons
in Neoplatonic thought. By Patrick Harpur.
29

John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), p.49-52

John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), p.49.
31
John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), p.50
32
John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), pp.50-51
33
John Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, (E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1973), p.51
30

Heros
In Iamblichus' cosmology, the heros have very little to do with the
heros of classical mythology, being totally spiritual beings. Like
the daimons, they help bridge the gap between the gods and the
souls. But whereas the daimons represent the lowest extension of
the gods, one could say that the heros represent the highest degree
of souls.
Pure Souls
The lowst category of higher beings, the psuchai achrantoi or pure
souls, although possessing only partial powers relative to the
daimons and heros, are nevertheless able to associate with or
withdraw from whomever they please, and can join themselves to
the gods. "Through the goodwill of the gods they can ascend even
to the rank of angel"

The Unparticipated-Participated-Participant Triad

Iamblichus introduced the triad - taken up by later neoplatonists,
especially Proclus - of Transcendent Form, immanent universal,
and material particular, or Unparticipated, Participated, and
Participant (ametekhomenon-metekhomenon-metekhon, from the
Greek meteko, traditionally translated as "to participate"). This
complex term refers to the "informing" or radiating into the lower
principle (the Participant) by the higher (the Participated). So for
example a body is informed by its soul, and the soul by its
intelligence. There is also the distinction between the
transcendent, universal, Unparticipated Soul which is not related
to any particular body, and the individual souls in which bodies
(the Participants) participated. This same principle also applies as

regards the relationship between the Nous or Intelligence and the

Soul.34
L. J. Rosen suggests that instead of "participate" it would be more
philosophically accurate to say "possess", which gives the triad
Unpossessed-Possessed-Possessor.35 In any case the terminology
is con-fusing for it refers to the Cause in the passive voice and the
Effect in the active voice - e.g. Proclus statement that "Every
possessor (or participant) is inferior to its possessed (or
participated) characteristic."36 In view of this, Proclus sometimes
"uses the opposite arrangement and calls the possessed
characteristic "the giver" (khoregoun) since it gives itself to that
which possesses (or participates in) it, whereas the possessor (or
participant) is called "that to which the characteristic is given"
(khoregounenon)." Although this latter is preferable in explaining
in terms of cause and effect, it is the former that is more usually
used. Moreover, the translation of "possession" is doubly bad, at
least for modern readers, who would tend to associate it with the
more negative phenomenon of "spirit possession". "Participation"
is a more neutral term, and will therefore be used here.
Participated and Unparticipated Realities
In Proclus's cosmology, the Unparticipated Monads of each plane
is the "universal" aspect of that plane [Proclus, Elements of
Theology, prop.108]. They are "Unparticipated" because they do
not incarnate or manifest (participate) in any lower-hypostatic
reality; and "Monad" because they are the fundamental unity, the
Monad, from which all subsequent multiplicity on that plane
originates. Every multiplicity can be traced back to an original
unity, which is not the Absolute unity, but only the unity, the
Monad, of that particular plane [Elements of Theology, prop.21].
34

R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, p.126

Laurence Jay Rosen, The Philosophy of Proclus, (Cosmos, New York,
1949) p.81 n.54,
36
Laurence Jay Rosen, The Philosophy of Proclus, p.81 n.56
35

And from each Unparticipated Monad, the succession of

particular Participated members (which emanate and manifest in
lower orders of being) emerge. In addition, each of these
emanations are in touch with a corresponding Universal - what
Proclus calls henadic, i.e. "Unitary" - member. In this way, all the
manifest hypostases can be traced back to their origin.
So for example all individual souls are the joint result of the one
Unparticipated or Universal Soul and their own transcendent and
Participated Intelligence [Ibid, pp151-2]. So, by the law of effects
reverting upon their causes, the soul may make contact with either
of these higher principles to which it is connected [ET 108-9, Ibid
p.152]. Proclus makes the curious assertion that because the
members of the higher Hypostases, being closer to the One, must
be fewer in number, not all souls would have their own
transcendent Intelligence, and not all and Intelligences their own
divine Henad [ET 110-11]. From this there is the division of souls
into three classes:

Divine souls, which are the participants of Intelligences that in

turn participate in their own divine Henad;

Daimonic souls, which likewise participants in a transcendent

Intelligence, but that Intelligences does not participate in a
divine Henad; and

Human souls, which lack even a transcendent Intelligence.

[Elements of Theology 184-5, 202].

Because it is only through the intermediary of a superhuman soul

or some other transcendent force that the human soul can make
contact with the Intelligible world, let alone the Divine, the
importance of theurgy, rather than philosophy, which is limited
only to the soul-level, as a means of attaining illumination,
becomes evident [R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism, pp.152-3]. There is
an increasing distance between the individual consciousness and
the Absolute. Proclus even states that terms like "Henad",

"Intelligence", and "Soul" can be used to refer either to the selfsubsistent gods the Unparticipated and Participated monads,
which are complete in themselves; or to the "irradiations" or
"images" of the former, which being incomplete require a
substrate for their existence. Thus whereas some souls belong to
themselves, others are dependent on their bodies, and are mere
phantasms of souls [ET 64]. Similarly, some Intelligence exist
independently, but others exist only as an irradiation within a
Soul. A common objection against Proclus' theory is that beings
cannot directly interact with the One; they can only interact with
beings immediately above them on the hierarchy of reality.
The Knowable and the Unknowable Godhead
When dealing with the ineffable, we are never able to describe
that reality itself. But we can understand the dynamics of the
Godhead by analogy with the created realities, such as the Gods,
which are in a sense the first manifestations of the unmanifest.
This is what Proclus did. As R. T. Wallis explains:
The view of some Neoplatonists that the Supreme Principle
contains the causes of (the lower) realities...Proclus rejects
as inconsistent with the One's absolute unity...(So he makes
a) distinction between the One, which...must be wholly
unknowable, and the Henads, for although the latter are
unknowable in themselves, some conception can none the
less be formed of their nature from the beings that
participate [i.e. express or embody or "incarnate"] them
[ET 123]. As Dodds observes [p.266], Proclus is thereby
enabled to devote more than 400 pages of his Platonic
Theology to his "unknowable" gods... R. T. Wallis,
Neoplatonism, pp150-1
Like Iamblichus, Proclus understood supra-human reality to be
made up of Spiritual hierarchies, mediating between the Absolute
and the phenomenal. Regarding Plotinus' first two hypostases,

the One (or Absolute) and the Nous (or Divine Mind), Proclus
replaced the Nous with a triad Being-Life-Nous, and between
Being and the One inserted a further series of principles, the
Henads ("Unities") or Gods, to mediate between the One's
unknowable unity and lower realities. As the intermediate
principles between the Unmanifest Absolute and manifest
existence, the Henads can be compared to the Logos of Philo
and Ibn Arabi, the Gnostic Aeons, and even more strikingly to the
Worlds which emanate from the transcendent Adam Kadmon of
Lurianic Kabbalah. Regarding the latter, Rabbi Moses Luzzatto
writes:
...We cannot say anything whatsoever about the Primordial
Man, but can treat only of the branches that ramify him to
the outside. [General Principles of the Kabbalah, p.14]
In both cases we have reference to unknowable realities within
the Godhead itself, and the projection, or emanation, of those
realities into phenomenal existence, where they become
knowable. As Proclus explains:
every particular intelligence participates the first Henad
(i.e. the One, or Absolute) both through the universal
(Monadic) Intelligence and through the particular henad it
coresponds to"; [Elements of Theology, prop.109]).
Similarly, "every particular soul participates of the
universal (Monadic) Intelligence both through the
Universal Soul and its own particular intelligence; and
every corporeal nature participates the universal Soul both
through Universal Nature and through a particular soul. [R.
T. Wallis, Neoplatonism]
The two-fold causation
This led to a two-fold theory of causation, according to which
each individual principle derives its generic characteristics from
its own orders Unparticipated Monad, and its specific

characteristics from the Participated principle immediately above

it. To quote Wallis:
...the Henads are arranged in a hierarchical order
prefiguring the structure of the lower orders of the universe.
There are thus Noetic Henads (corresponding to
Unpartcipated [the original hypostasis of] Being), NoeticNoeric Henads (to Unparticipated Life [or Power]), Noeric
Henads (to Unparticipated Nous), Supercosmic Henads (to
Unparticipated Soul [Psyche]), and Intracosmic Henads (to
Divine Participated Souls and the bodies they animate)
[ET 162-5]. In each case the Henads in question are not
members of the order whose name they bear..., but the
transcendent source of that orders distinctive
characteristics... [p.151]
This is all rather complex, although it can be represented in
diagrammatic form, as follows:

The
One

Noetic Henads

Noetic-Noeric
Henads

Noeric Henads

Supracosmic Henads

Intracosmic
Henads

Unparticipated
Being

Noetic-Noeric
Participated Being

Noeric
Participated Being

Supracosmic
Participated Being

Intracosmic
Participated Being

Unparticipated Life

Participated Life

Supracosmic
Participated Life

Intracosmic
Participated Life

Unparticipated
Nous

Supracosmic
Participated Nous

Intracosmic
Participated Nous

Unparticipated
Divine Soul

Participated
Divine Soul
Divine Body

Note that the Henads form a decreasing sequence. Those which

are closest to the One (The Absolute) partake of the latter's nature,
while those which are further are consequently more ontologically
impoverished, although of course still incomparably superior to
the human grade.

Proclus's Life and Teachings

Proclus' life
Proclus Diadochus (410/412 - 485 c.e.) was the last of the great
Platonic teachers. Born in Constantinople into a well-off family,
he was sent to Alexandria for schooling and was taught
philosophy by the Aristotlean philosopher Olympiodorus the
Elder, and mathematics by Heron (not to be confused with a more
famous mathematician of the same name). It seemed he was not
satisfied there, for while still a teenager he moved to Athens
where he studied at Plato's Academy under the philosophers
Plutarch and Syrianus. He was soon teaching at the Academy, and
succeeded Syrianus as administrator of the Athenian School,
eventually becoming director, a position he held for the rest of his
life. The title Diadochus was given to him at this time, the
meaning of the word being successor. He refined and systematize
the teachings of Iamblichus, whose school stressed elaborate
metaphysical speculation.
As well as being a poet, philosopher, and scientist, Proclus was
also an exponent of religious universalism. He believed the true
philosopher should pay homage to the gods of all nations,
becoming "a priest of the entire universe." He was initiated into a
number of mystery schools, composed hymns to the gods, fasted
in honor of the Egyptian divinities, and practiced theurgy. Like
Prophyry and Iamblichus, Proclus opposed Christianity, with it's
expectation of the end of the world [see On the Eternity of the
World], and passionately defended paganism. He was
a vegetarian, never married, and was very highly regarded by his
contemporaries. His student and biographer Marinus of Samaria

stated that he was inspired, and that when philosophizing his

countenance shone with preternatural light.
Proclus was author not only of many Platonic commentaries but
also numerous astronomical, mathematical, and grammatical
works. Aside from his commentaries on the works of Plato, the
most important of Proclus's surviving works are Elements of
Theology, a systematic evaluation of Neoplatonic metaphysics,
and the Platonic Theology.

Proclus' Metaphysics
As with his predecessors, Proclus taught the existence of
an ultimate, indescribable reality, the One. The One is the
originator of all things and is equivalent to the Good. The highest
level of reality subsists in an objective mind of the One (compare
this with Indian Vedanta). From the One all other realities,
including gods, daimons, humanity and the material universe, are
produced by a process of emanation. The further removed from
the One something is, the less real it is.
Proclus took the complex metaphysics of Iamblichus to even
greater lengths. He replaced Iamblichus' distinction of Noetic and
Psychic worlds with a complex six-fold classification of OneBeing-Life-Nous-Soul-Body. These various principles are
described as the higher causes of the lower creation. According to
Proclus, the higher in the scale of being a principle is, the further
downwards its influence extends [Dodds, Iamblichus, p.236].
This can be represented diagrammatically as follows:

The One (Unity)

-------------------------

Being

-----------------------------

Life

------------------------

Nous

------------------

Soul (Reason)

---------

|
|
|

Animals

<----------------

Plants

<----------------------

Inanimate bodies

|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

<------------------

Hyle (Formless Matter)

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

<------------------

This idea of the lower principles as inverted reflection of the

higher appears elsewhere; for example in the cosmology of Sri
Aurobindo and (in non-inverted order) the sequence of planes and
principles in Theosophy.

Proclus' Theurgy
Proclus, like his teacher Syrianus, identifies the Demiurge (the
Creator God, the father and maker of the universe) with the divine
Nous. He used theurgical ritual, based on this sympatheia, to
attract intermediate beings known as leader-gods (hoi
hgemonikoi theoi). Whereas the Demiurge who contains the
causes in an unified manner, is characterized by sameness
(tauton), the leader-gods are characterized by likeness
(homoiots) which is a lesser degree of unity (i.e. similarity rather
than identity). These beings, as Proclus explains "fasten
themselves through likeness to their causes, which are contained
in the Demiurge, and lift up and unfold all things it in this
demiurgical unity," including "the blessed souls among us, who

are lifted up away from the wanderings in the world of becoming

towards their own source." Proclus used theurgical hymns and
ritual, based on sympatheia, (equivalent to what in
modern hermeticism is called the law of correspondence), to
attract the leader-gods in order to be elevated towards the Nous. It
is fascinating to note the similarities with the late 19th
century Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn occult-magickal
system, and in all subsequent Western hermetic occultism.
More on Poclus' Theurgy

Later Influence
Proclus was the last major Greek philosopher. More than anyone
else, he was influential in spreading Neoplatonic ideas throughout
the post-pagan Byzantine, Islamic, and Roman worlds.
In the Christian world his writings were adpted by PseudoDionysius the Areopagite, through whom they influenced
Christian mysticism and theology. In the Arab world Abu Ya'qub
al-Sijistani (fl. 971) Liber de Causis ("Book of Causes") was
thought to be a work of Aristotle, but was actually rearrangement
of a number of chapters of Proclus's Elements of Theology
In the 13th century, William of Moerbeke's Latin translation of
the Elements of Theology (as Institutio Theologica) became the
principal sources for medieval knowledge of Platonic philosophy,
and helped to lay the foundation for the Renaissance revival of
Neoplatonism.
The German-Jewish scholar Leo Baeck (1873-1956) makes
the controversial propsal that the Gnostic-Proto-Kabbalistic text
the Sefer Yetzirah "in its thought as well as in its terminology, is
dependent upon the teaching of Proclus, the last great
Neoplatonist. Furthermore, the decisive passages of the Sefer

Yetzirah are none other than the transference of this Greek

scholastic's system into Jewish thought and biblical language."
This means that not only Christian Mysticism and Renaissance
Platonism, but Kabbalah as well can in part be traced back to
Proclus. Both of these latter streams of thought in fact merge in
the synthesis that is Western Hermeticism.
Today and for the last several centuries Proclus has been
relegated to the status of mere systematizer rather than original
thinker. Slowly modern scholarship is coming around to a full
recognition of Proclus' genius. Along with Plotinus and
Iamblichus, he surely stands as one of the great figures of the late
classical wisdom tradition.

The Influence of Neoplatonism

Influence on Christian Mysticism
The influence of Neoplatonism upon the West and Middle East
cannot be exaggerated. Proclus' concept of Spiritual hierarchies
was adopted and modified by his Syrian Christian
student, "Pseudo"- Dionysius the Aerogatite (c. 500 C.E.), who
could practically be considered the Father of Christian Mysticism.
Indeed, the term "mysticism" itself in its present usage derives
from him. Through Dionysius, the idea of Angelic hierarchies
was established in Medieval and Renaissance Europe, and more
recently in the teachings of the early 20th century esoteric
philosopher and occultist, Rudolph Steiner.
But from the eleventh and twelfth centuries onwards it was
Aristotle, not Plato or Plotinus, who shaped the understanding of
Western man through religious philosophers such as the Jew
Maimonides, the Moslem Averroes, and the Christian Thomas
Aquinas.

Islamic Neoplatonism
But if the Neoplatonic influence upon the Medieval West was
great, it was no less in the Islamic Middle East, mainly through
the pseudononymus Theology of Aristotle (derived from Plotinus
and Porphyry)

Islmic Neoplatonism by Nima Hazini. Page two

of Neoplatonism: Framework for a Bah' Metaphysics. A very
good synopsis

Contemporary Neoplatonic Influences

Finally, in the late nineteenth century occult West, Platonic and
Neoplatonic ideas figured strongly in the Theosophy of H.P.
Blavatsky.
Such influence however did not continue in later Theosophical
writers, and the pop-esoteric New Age metaphysics that appeared
in the 70's is pretty much a synthesis of the post-Blavatsky
Theosophy, Monistic Vedanta (brought to the West through the
various pop-spiritual Gurus), watered down Taoist elements
(especially the Yin-Yang theme), and a somewhat superficial
mysticising of quantum physics (Fritjof Capra's Tao of Physics
and it's innumerable spin-offs).
There was however something of a Neoplatonic influence in the
early New Paradigm movement of the late 70's and 80's, due to
the Islamic connection; specifically the writings of
the Traditionalist and neo-Sufi Frithjof Schuon and others who
have been influenced by him, such as the scholar of comparative
religions Huston Smith and the Transpersonal Psychologist Ken
Wilber, the latter still a foremost theorist in the New Paradigm
and serious alternative spirituality movement.

Dionysius the Areopagite (c. 500 C.E.)

M.Alan Kazlev and David Hildner

Dionysius "the Areopagite" was thought for many centuries to be

one of those converted to Christianity on the Areopagos hill in
Athens after the apostle Paul's speech there (see Book of Acts
17.34). With the rise of modern scholarship it was realised that he
was actually a 5th/6th century Syrian monk. His profound
mystical books contained large sections lifted without crediting
from the works of Proclus (412-85), the last of the great
Neoplatonists.
Dionysius can be considered the founder of Christian mysticism.
Indeed, the term "mysticism" itself in its present usage derives
from him.
His "De Celestia Hierarchia" translated the Neoplatonic hierarchy
of intermediate beings between man and the Godhead into the
Christian paradigm and established the idea of Angelic
hierarchies in Medieval and Renaissance Europe.
His treatise "On the Divine Names", which was just as important
(or sometimes even more important) in the history of religious
thought than the "De Celestia Hierarchia". It was fundamental in
the current of "apophantic" theology, that is, the doctrine that we
can say more about what God is NOT than about what He is.
In the early 20th century Dionysius's angelogy was revived
and given new interpretations by the esoteric philosopher and
occultist, Rudolph Steiner.

Rudolf Steiner's Angelology

detail of a drawing dated August 3,

1924 illustrating THE REALM OF
THE ANGELS "It is so, that from the relatively
singular realm of the angels a split
realm arises. One part tends
upward into the heavens, the other
down to Earth."

from Rudolph Steiner - blackboard

drawings

Just as, Steiner asserts, there is the sequence mineral-plantanimal-man, so there are nine more stages (three triads) of
evolution before Godhead, these being referred to as the
"Spiritual Hierarchies". The current Spiritual Hierarchies had
evolved to their present office through previous eras. These
Spiritual beings, the nomenclature for which Steiner takes from
the Christian Neoplatonist Dionysius, are the creative beings who
shaped the world and human consciousness.

GODHEAD

Father
Son
Holy Ghost

FIRST
HIERARCHY

Seraphim
Cherabim
Thrones or Spirits of Will

SECOND
HIERARCHY

Spirits of Motion
Spirits of Wisdom
Spirits of Form, Creators

THIRD
HIERARCHY

Spirits of the Age (Zietgeist)

Archangels (Spirits of Races)
Angels (Guiding spirits)
Man
Animals
Plants
Minerals

Of course, the idea of a succession of hierarchies of Divine beings

is an old and widespread idea; prominant in Buddhism,
Gnosticism, Neoplatonism (Iamblichus and Proclus), Suhrawardi,
Kabbalah, and Theosophy, to give just a few examples.
Steiner differed though in his evolutionary or ascending
emphasis. And here again we see his Theosophical, and
ultimately crypto-Darwinian, heritage. He considered that the
spiritual hierarchies were stages of evolution from the physical
(i.e. the next stage beyond the human is the "angel"), rather than
stages of emanation or descent, as all the other sources
unanimously assert. But if we ignore this eccentricity, we find
that his description of the actual spiritual hierarchies themselves
is pretty much in keeping with the consensus "perennial
philosophy". In fact, perhaps the most detailed and compre-

hensive account of the angelic or creative Demiurges available in

English at least is to be had from Steiner's teachings. Drawing
from the writings of the 5th/6th century Christian
Neoplatonist Dionysius the Aeropagite, Steiner spoke of three
hierarchies, each of which is divided into three sub-hierachies.
Sometimes he would add a fourth triad, which he called "the
Godhead", above these three, although this highest triad was not
given any part to play in the scheme of cosmic (or Solar
Systemic - for Steiner's cosmology rarely extended beyond this
solar system) evolution.
The following tables summarise Steiner's angelology.

Hierarchy

Objective
Consciousness

Subjective Consciousness

First

World-creation

Creation of Beings

Second

Self-creation

Simulation of Life

Third

Manifestation

Being filled with Spirit

Man

Perception

Inner Life

A few words of explanation from Steiner are necessary regarding

some of these categories:
When man directs his gaze outwards..., he lives with the
outer world...of nature. But when he diverts his gaze from
outside, he enters his own inner being and lives an independent inner [i.e. subjective] life.... (With) the beings
of the Third Hierarchy - instead of perception they have
manifest, and in this manifestation they reveal themselves.
Instead of inner life they have the experience of higher
spiritual worlds, that is to say, they are filled with Spirit.

What in the beings of the Third Hierarchy is manifestation of self,

is in [the beings of the Second Hierarchy] self-realisation, selfcreation, a stamping of impressions of their own being; and what
in the (former)...is being filled with spirit, is in them stimulation
of life, which consists in severance, in objectifying themselves....
The beings of the First Hierarchy can also objectify themselves,
they can also stamp their own being; it is separated from them as
in a sort of skin or shell.... (But) a higher degree of objectivity is
attained by them than by the Second Hierarchy. When the beings
of the Second Hierarchy create, if their creations are not to fall
into decay, they must remain connected with them....What they
create has independent objective existence; but only so long as
they remain linked with it. On the other hand that which is
detached from the beings of the First Hierarchy ... remain in
existence, self-acting, objective.
In the First Hierarchy...we have a form of creation in which the
part created is detached - we have not only self creation, but
world creation. That which proceeds from the beings of the First
Hierarchy is a detached world, such (as)...this (physical) worldphenomenon is....(T)he inner experience of the beings of the First
Hierarchy lies in creation, in forming independent beings...To
create...(and) live in other beings is the inner experience of
the...First Hierarchy. Creation of worlds is their external life creation of beings their inner life."
Rudolph Steiner, The Spiritual Beings in the Heavenly Bodies
and the Kingdoms of Nature - ten lectures, Helsinki, 3-14 April
1912 (Steiner Book Centre, N. Vancouver, 1981)
With Steiner's spiritual hierarchies in the celestial spheres we see
an obvious identify to Suhrawardis "Lords of Species" who
"move the heavens through love and guard all the creatures of the
Earth " And his cosmic Christ, as the composite of the six solar
Spirit of Form and central pivot in his cosmology, as well as
being the occult being behind the human Christ, is clearly no

different to the Master of Ishraqi's Gabriel, the archetype of

humanity, identified with the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of the
Prophet Muhammad, and thus also with the function of revelation
as such, being the supreme revealer of all knowledge. This
compatibility between these two spiritual teachers, who lived in
very different cultures and times, is made all the more remarkable
by the fact that Steiner had obviously never heard of Suhrawardi,
or of the Ishraqi tradition he founded.
Concerning the lowest member of the Spiritual Hierarchies,
the Angeloi, Steiner says that when people pray to God - god
help me with this or with that - they are really praying to their
personal Angel, who follows them through birth and death. As we
have seen, the idea of a higher or guardian daimon first became
prominant in the later Hellenistic period. Plotinus refers to it, and
so do Iamblichus and the other Neoplatonists. Steiner's
conception though is shallow and superficial, especially in
relation to the ayan thabitha of Ibn Arabi, or the Holy Guardian
Angel of Aleister Crowley.

MAN AS A PICTURE of the LIVING SPIRIT Rudolf Steiner - London, 2nd September, 1923
THE WORK OF THE ANGELS IN MAN'S
ASTRAL BODY - Rudolf Steiner - Zurich, 9th October, 1918