The Pure Human Soul in Iamblichus: Divine or Angelic?! Julio Cesar Moreira Pontificia Universidade Catélica de Sao Paulo, Brasil The problem raised here comes from a seeming discrepancy of doctrines at Iamblichus’ De Mysteriis. In 11.2.69, after distinguishing heroes from daemons, Iamblichus brings human souls into play: they receive some characteristics from the daemons and heroes and unfold some from themselves, and then he adds that the soul .--Selects principles akin both to things really existent and to those coming into being, joining itself to the gods (Beoic te ovvantovea éavtiv) by harmonies of essences and of potentialities different from those by which daemons and heroes are linked to them. (De Mysteriis, 11.2.69.1-5) With a median role and an intermediary position between two realms the human soul unites itself with the gods in a singular manner, which is repeatedly stressed throughout the work as the ultimate aim of theurgic téyyn: ...it [Theurgy] has the power to purify the soul...; afterwards, it prepares the mind for the participation in and vision of the Good and for a release from everything which opposes it; and, at the last, for a union with the gods who are the givers of all things good. (neta 5& tadta mpd tods tHv ayabdv Sotijpas bEodcs Evwow; De Mysteriis, X.5.291,10-292,2) Here, right before the closing remarks of the work, it is explicitly presented then that Theurgy purifies the human soul for the unification with the gods. A similar statement is presented in this other significant passage that appears in Book V: But come now, you say, is it not the highest purpose of the hieratic art to ascend to the One, which is supreme master of the whole multiplicity (obyi 16 dypdtatov tig iepatryfic éx’ adtd td yopidtatov tod GAov mArPous Ev avatpézer), and in concert with "| wish to thank Prof. J. Finamore for his review and critical remarks on this paper. This is a reviewed version of the presentation made at the International Society of Neoplatonic Studies Conference 2015. Buenos Aires, Argentina.176 Platonic Inquiries that, at the same time, to pay court to all the other essences and principles? Indeed it is, | would reply; but that does not come about except at a very late stage and to very few individuals, and one must be satisfied if it occurs even in the twilight of one’s life. (De Mysteriis, V.22.230,12 -231,2) In fact, as said, these remarks are emphatically repeated throughout the work. But back to II.2.69, right in the next sentence from the one quoted above, we face an apparently differing doctrine. Here the philosopher seems to establish a top rank for the pure human souls within the angelic realm. And though the soul has to a lesser degree the eternity of unchanging life and full actuality, by means of the gods’ good will and the illumination bestowed by their light, it often goes higher and is elevated to a greater rank, even to that of the angelic order (éni peiCova te tééw Thy avery avayopévn). When it no longer abides in the confines of the soul, this totality is perfected in an angelic soul and an immaculate life. (De Mysteriis, I1.2.69, 9-12) And this is restated a little further on chapter 6 when dealing with the epiphanies of pure human souls: Furthermore, the appearance of [human] souls, if immaculate and established in the order of angels (@éa t@v pév dypavtwv Kai év ayyéiov téEe1), is elevating and salutary to the soul. (De Mysteriis, 11.6.83, 2-4)” One cannot disregard this apparent limitation presented to the pure souls within the angelic realm. So if Theurgy purifies the human soul for unification with the gods and ascension to the One, while still living a mortal life (cf. 1.12.41, 4-II), why then it is also said in those two passages that these pure souls settle themselves not in the realm of the gods but within a lesser realm, the angelic? No great attention has been given to discern this apparent ambiguity. Prof. Finamore approached the theme in his book Iamblichus and the Theory of the Vehicle of the Soul 3, nevertheless he sustains the ambiguity, or does not seem to identify it. When dealing with the doctrine of the souls at the angelic realm his conclusion is that: “As a 7 All quotations and translations from this work are from Iamblichus, De mysteriis (On the Mysteries), E.C. Clarke, J.M. Dillon and J.P. Hershbell (2003) edition, my own slight emendations are inside brackets. ? J, Finamore (1985) 154-155.Pure Human Soul in lamblichus 177 teward for its pure life, it is granted to the purified soul to dwell with the angels after its death (i.e., at the end of its corporeal existence on earth)”*. But a few pages further, at the closing of his great study, his general conclusion is that The elevated human soul, its vehicle attached to its god’s vehicle and its soul attached to the god's soul, can follow in this retinue and can also be united to the higher entities. In this divine union, the rational soul is once again capable of the separate existence appropriate to it. The separated rational soul can climb upward to the One itself. After such a person's death his soul ascends immediately without judgment or ‘Punishment to the heavenly circulation and remains there until it is time for its next necessary descent, which it will accomplish purely.> So he concludes, i in different sections, that the pure soul after its death ascends both to the angelic and the godly realms. But the question to which extent pure human souls unite with the gods, or else they are settled within the angelic realm, is kept unanswered. In order to clarify this issue a brief research will be needed on Iamblichus’ view of pure souls, focusing mainly on Iamblichus’ surviving texts of De Mysteriis and De Anima, and on the surviving fragments of his other works. Such an undertaking will forcibly lead us to the dispute raised by Prof. van den Berg in his paper Proclus and the Myth of the Charioteer®, who questioned fundamental aspects to the understanding of the pure soul in Jamblichus’ thought. Besides Finamore’s reply to it (in his paper The Rational Soul in Iamblichus’ Philosophy)’, many aspects of van den Berg’s criticisms were kept open since there was no systematic evaluation of the arguments presented. Here we will revisit these critical and crucial aspects analyzing them systematically point by point. With that, we shall be able to establish the ground to advance and show a new light on this perplexity of the ascension and union with angels and gods. At De Mysteriis Book II, when dealing with the divine epiphanies, Iamblichus distinguishes souls and their manifestations in two groups, “Ibid. 154. * Thid. 168. ° RM. van den Berg (1997) 149-162. 7 J, Finamore (1997) 163-176