1. Χαῖρε, θεῶν μῆτερ, πολυώνυμε, καλλιγένεθλε·
   Hail, O mother of the gods, many-named, blessed with beautiful offspring,
   
   
2. χαῖρ’, Ἑκάτη προθύραιε, μεγασθενές. ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὸς
   Hail, O Hekate before the door, of great strength. But also he:
   
   
3. χαῖρ’, Ἴανε προπάτορ, Ζεῦ ἄφθιτε· χαῖρ’, ὕπατε Ζεῦ.
   Hail, O forefather Janus, imperishable Zeus. Hail, O most exalted Zeus.
   
   
4. τεύχετε δ’ αἰγλήεσσαν ἐμοῦ βιότοιο πορείην
   Make radiant the course of my life
   
   
5. βριθομένην ἀγαθοῖσι, κακὰς δ’ ἀπελαύνετε νούσους
   laden with good things, but drive away evil illnesses
   
   
6. ἐκ ῥεθέων, ψυχὴν δὲ περὶ χθονὶ μαργαίνουσαν
   from (my) limbs, and (my) soul, furiously raging around the earth
   
   
7. ἕλκετ’ ἐγερσινόοισι καθηραμένην τελετῇσι.
   attract (it), after it has been purified by intellect-stirring rites.
   
   
8. ναί, λίτομαι, δότε χεῖρα, θεοφραδέας τε κελεύθους
   Truly, I beg, give a hand, and the roads revealed by the gods
   
   
9. δείξατέ μοι χατέοντι. φάος δ’ ἐρίτιμον ἀθρήσω,
   show to me, the one in need. And the precious light I will observe,
   
   
10. κυανέης ὅθεν ἔστι φυγεῖν κακότητα γενέθλης.
    from which comes (the opportunity) to flee the misery of dark birth.
    
    
11. ναί, λίτομαι, δότε χεῖρα, καὶ ὑμετέροισιν ἀήταις
    Truly, I beg, give a hand, and with your winds
    
    
12. ὅρμον ἐς εὐσεβίης με πελάσσατε κεκμηῶτα.
    bring me, exhausted, to the harbor of piety.
    
    
13. χαῖρε, θεῶν μῆτερ, πολυώνυμε, καλλιγένεθλε·
    Hail, O mother of the gods, many-named, blessed with beautiful offspring,
    
    
14. χαῖρ’, Ἑκάτη προθύραιε, μεγασθενές. ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὸς
    Hail, O Hekate before the door, of great strength. But also he:
    
    
15. χαῖρ’, Ἴανε προπάτορ, Ζεῦ ἄφθιτε· χαῖρ’, ὕπατε Ζεῦ.
    Hail, O forefather Janus, imperishable Zeus. Hail, O most exalted Zeus.

There is still time to get in on the pre-orders for my new book, Interlinear Magic: An Anthology of the Greco-Egyptian Magical Papyri (PGM). The Kickstarter is doing incredibly well, and everyone who has pledged at the book letter or higher gains access to all the unlocked stretch goals. Thanks for checking it out, and please help spread the word if you have friends who might be interested. Thanks!

The lunar invocation is useful for many purposes: as a standalone rite, as a daily (or nightly) devotion to attune oneself with the progress of the moon’s power throughout the lunar month, or paired with other rituals to enhance their effect. During the waxing or full moon, rituals intended to produce a positive effect can be augmented, while the waning moon can be leveraged to produce lessening effects, ancient examples of which include the reduction of fever, the expulsion of daemons, or even the calming of a storm while at sea.

In the Hermetic and Neoplatonic worldview of cosmic sympathy, the moon is associated with the activity or energy (ἐνέργεια) of increase (αὐξητική) and decrease (μειωτική), as well as the divine gifts of silence (σιγή), sleep (ὕπνος), and memory (μνήμη). The lunar sphere also offers control over fear (φόβος) and daemons (δαίμονες). Many goddesses are associated with the sphere of the moon, including Hekate (Ἑκάτη), Artemis (Ἄρτεμις), and Isis (Ἶσις). As the sphere associated with the threshold between the circular (divine) motions of the heavens and the rectilinear (mortal) motions of the material world, the moon presides over ever-changing nature (φύσις) as the domain of Isis. Physis, the Greek word often translated as “nature,” is etymologically related to the verb φύειν (to grow) and the noun φυτά (plants).

PGM VII.756-794:

Prayer:

“I invoke you who have all forms and many names, double-horned goddess, Mēnē, whose form no one knows except him who made the entire cosmos, IAŌ, the one who shaped you into the twenty-eight figures (σχήματα) of the cosmos so that you might complete every form (ἰδέα) and distribute breath (πνεῦμα) to every animal and plant, that it might flourish, you who wax from obscurity into light and wane from light into darkness.

“And the first companion of your name is silence (σιγή),
the second is a popping sound (ποππυσμός),
the third a sighing (στεναγμός),
the fourth a hissing (συριγμός),
the fifth a cry of joy (ὀλολυγμός),
the sixth a moaning (μυγμός),
the seventh a barking (ὑλαγμός),
the eighth a bellowing (μυκηθμός),
the ninth a neighing/thundering (χρεμετισμός),
the tenth a voice harmonious (φθόγγος ἐναρμόνιος),
the eleventh a breath endowed with speech (πνεῦμα φωνᾶεν),
the twelfth a wind-creating wail (ἦχος [ἀ]νεμοποιός),
the thirteenth a coercive voice (φθόγγος ἀναγκαστικός),
the fourteenth an irresistible effluence of perfection (τελειότητος ἀναγκαστικὴ ἀπόρροια).

1. ox (Βοῦς)
2. vulture (γύψ)
3. bull (ταῦρος)
4. scarab beetle (κάνθαρος)
5. falcon (ἱέραξ)
6. crab (καρκίνος)
7. dog (κύων)

8. wolf (λύκος)
9. serpent (δράκων)
10. horse (ἵππος)
11. chimera (χίμαιρα)
12. asp (θέρμουθις)
13. she-goat (αἴξ)
14. he-goat (τράγος)

15. baboon (κυνοκέφαλος)
16. cat (αἴλουρος)
17. lion (λέων)
18. leopard (πάρδαλις)
19. field mouse (μυγαλός)
20. deer (ἔλαφος)
21. multiformed one (πολύμορφος)

22. virgin (παρθένος)
23. torch (λαμπάς)
24. lightning (ἀστραπή)
25. crown (στέλμα)
26. herald’s wand (κηρύκειον)
27. child (παῖς)
28. key (κλείς)

“I have spoken your signs (σημεῖα) and the symbols (σύμβολα) of your name, in order that you might hear me, because I pray to you, the mistress of the entire cosmos. Listen to me, steadfast one, mighty one: APHEIBOĒŌ MINTĒR OKHAŌ PIZEPHUDŌR KHANTHAR KHADĒROZO MOKHTHION EOTNEU PHĒRZON AINDĒS LAKHABOŌ PITTŌ RIPHTHAMER ZMOMOKHŌLEIE TIĒDRANTEIA OISOZOKHABĒDŌPHRA.” (add the usual)

***

NOTE: Some have suggested the 28 forms are relatable to the lunar mansions. Although I have no doubt the rite can be adapted for this use, the 28 forms in their original Greco-Egyptian context would have been the visible days of the waxing and waning moon, excluding the “invisible” new moon. This would allow the performer to adjust for the discrepancy between the 28-day idealized month (of four planetary weeks) and the roughly 29.5-day synodic month (the moon’s waxing and waning cycle). The lunar mansions, on the other hand, express the moon’s relationship to the “fixed” stars of the sidereal ecliptic, and not to the waxing and waning cycle of the synodic month. In other words, because the mansions do not sync with the phases, relating the 28 forms to the lunar mansions obscures the obvious connection between the increasing intensity of the sounds and the growing light of the moon over the 14 days of the waxing cycle.

Translation and commentary © Copyright 2020 PracticalTheurgy.com. Do not copy or distribute without written permission.

Porphyry preserves the following hymn (translated in Johnston Hekate Soteira p. 140):

I come, a virgin of varied forms, wandering through the heavens,
bull-faced, three-headed, ruthless, with golden arrows,
chaste Phoebe bringing light to mortals, Eileithyia;
bearing the three symbols of a triple nature.
In the aether I appear in fiery forms
and in the air I sit in a silver chariot;
Earth reins in my black brood of puppies.

ἥδ’ ἐγώ εἰμι κόρη πολυφάσματος, οὐρανόφοιτος,
ταυρῶπις, τρικάρηνος, ἀπηνής, χρυσοβέλεμνος,
Φοίβη ἀπειρολεχής, φαεσίμβροτος Εἰλείθυια,
τριστοίχου φύσεως συνθήματα τρισσὰ φέρουσα·
αἰθέρι μὲν πυρόεσσιν ἐειδομένη εἰδώλοις,
ἠέρα δ’ ἀργεννοῖσι τροχάσμασιν ἀμφικάθημαι·
γαῖα δ’ ἐμῶν σκυλάκων δνοφερὸν γένος ἡνιοχεύει.

The author of the third-century CE Refutation of All Heresies (4.35) preserves the following hymn:

Approach, you of the netherworld, of earth, of heaven, Bombō!
You by the wayside, at the crossroads, light-bearer, night-wanderer,
Enemy of light, friend and companion of night,
Rejoicing in the bark of pups and in bright red blood,
Lurking among the corpses and the tombs of the dead,
Lusting for blood, bringing terror to mortals,
Grim one, Ogress, Moon – you of many forms,
May you come gracious to our immolations!

Νερτερίη, χθονίη τε καὶ οὐρανίη μολὲ Βομβώ·
εἰνοδίη, τριοδῖτι, φαεσφόρε, νυκτεροφοῖτι,
ἐχθρὴ μὲν φωτός, νυκτὸς δὲ φίλη καὶ ἑταίρη,
χαίρουσα σκυλάκων ὑλακῇ τε καὶ αἵματι φοινῷ,
ἂν νέκυας στείχουσα κατ’ ἠρία τεθνηώτων,
αἵματος ἱμείρουσα, φόβον θνητοῖσι φέρουσα,
Γοργὼ καὶ Μορμὼ καὶ Μήνη καὶ Πολύμορφε·
ἔλθοις εὐάντητος ἐφ’ ἡμετέρῃσι θυηλαῖς.

The Orphic Hymn to Hecate, translated by Athanassakis and Wolkow:

Lovely Hekate of the roads and of the crossroads I invoke.
In heaven, on earth, then in the sea, saffron-cloaked,
tomb spirit reveling in the souls of the dead,
daughter of Perses, haunting deserted places, delighting in deer,
nocturnal, dog-loving, monstrous queen,
devouring wild beasts, ungirt and repulsive.
Herder of bulls, queen and mistress of the whole world,
leader, nymph, mountain-roaming nurturer of youths,
maiden, I beseech you to come to these holy rites,
ever with joyous heart, ever favoring the oxherd.

Εἰνοδίαν Ἑκάτην κλήιζω, τριοδῖτιν, ἐραννήν,
οὐρανίαν χθονίαν τε καὶ εἰναλίαν, κροκόπεπλον,
τυμβιδίαν, ψυχαῖς νεκύων μέτα βακχεύουσαν,
Περσείαν, φιλέρημον, ἀγαλλομένην ἐλάφοισι,
νυκτερίαν, σκυλακῖτιν, ἀμαιμάκετον βασίλειαν,
θηρόβρομον, ἄζωστον, ἀπρόσμαχον εἶδος ἔχουσαν,
ταυροπόλον, παντὸς κόσμου κληιδοῦχον ἄνασσαν,
ἡγεμόνην, νύμφην, κουροτρόφον, οὐρεσιφοῖτιν,
λισσόμενος κούρην τελεταῖς ὁσίαισι παρεῖναι
βουκόλωι εὐμενέουσαν ἀεὶ κεχαρηότι θυμῶι.

Participation (μέθεξις, μετέχειν, μεταλαμβάνειν, μετουσία, μετοχή) in Platonic philosophy characterizes how particular things relate to universals. Aristotle (Metaphysics 987b) writes that Plato adapted the idea of participation from the Pythagoreans: “The Pythagoreans say that things exist by imitation (μίμησις) of numbers, and Plato says they exist by participation (μέθεξις) [in Forms].” The multitude of sensible things having the same name as their Form exist by participating in that Form. For example, in Plato’s Phaedo 100c, Socrates characterizes beautiful things as participating in the Form of Beauty: “If there is anything beautiful besides the Beautiful itself, it is beautiful for no other reason than that it participates (μετέχειν) in that Beautiful.” Plato’s Parmenides 132d also states that instances participate (μετέχειν) in their Forms (τὰ εἴδη) or paradigms (παραδείγματα). This participation is characterized by particulars that “resemble” (ἐοικέναι) and are “likenesses” (ὁμοιώματα) of their universals.

For the theurgic Neoplatonists, participation is the relationship by which lower entities receive causes from higher entities in a continuous ontological hierarchy, and is closely related to Reversion, which is one of three moments in a continuous ontological process: Remaining (μονή), Procession (πρόοδος), and Reversion (ἐπιστροφή).

Iamblichus states that the gods “contain everything within themselves; and earthly things, possessing their being in the totalities (πληρώμασι) of the gods, whenever they come to be adapted (ἐπιτήδεια) for participation (μετοχή) in the divine, straight away find the gods preexisting in it prior to their own proper essence” (DM 1.8.28.13-29.3). Theurgy provides the means to produce this fitness/adaptation (ἐπιτηδειότης: 1000) for participation in the divine, through the use of proper ritual tokens/signatures (σύμβολα, συνθήματα). Additional terms coming soon…

One of the best introductions to theurgy is Gregory Shaw’s book, Theurgy and the Soul: The Neoplatonism of Iamblichus.

You may also want to read this Introduction to the De Mysteriis of Iamblichus.

The practice consisted of assigning the seven classical planets to the 24 hours of the day in descending “Chaldean” or Ptolemaic order. Although there were multiple competing orders of the planets in the Hellenistic period (Plato, for example, used a different order, sometimes confusingly called the “Egyptian” order), the Ptolemaic order (devised around the second century BCE) became dominant in the wake of Claudius Ptolemy (c. 100-170 CE). It seems to be the case that the Ptolemaic order was based on the orbital periods of the planets, as follows:

Saturn: 29.46 years
Jupiter: 11.86 years
Mars: 686.98 days
Sun: 365.26 days
Venus: 224.70 days
Mercury: 87.97 days
Moon: 29.53 days

(In the case of Mercury and Venus, which appear to wander “along with” the sun, the orbital periods were calculated based on the occurrence of the apparent retrograde motion of the planets.)

The division of the day and night into twelve hours each was developed by the ancient Egyptians, long before there was any evidence of a seven-day week. Dividing the night into twelve equal divisions is quite prominent, for example, in the New Kingdom (16th-11th centuries BCE) underworld books, such as The Amduat, The Book of Gates, The Spell of the Twelve Caves, and so on.

During the Hellenistic period, probably in Alexandria, the practice was devised of assigning each hour of the day and night to one planetary deity in descending “Chaldean” order. The planet assigned to an hour was called a “chronocrator” (χρονοκράτωρ) or “time-ruler.” The planetary days were then assigned based on the rulership of the first hour of each day (i.e., the first hour after sunrise).

By the numbers: The 7 planets are assigned to the 24 hours of each day, requiring 168 hours (7 days) to complete the cycle (7 x 24 = 168, the smallest number divisible by both 7 and 24). From the limited perspective of each day, a descending sequence of 7 planets is assigned 3 times (7 x 3 = 21 hours), with a remainder of 3 hours. It is this “remainder” that produces the counter-intuitive order of the days of the week. In other words, the order of the planetary week is based on a permutation of 7 planets over a repeating pattern of 24 hours. This can be grasped most easily using a full chart of the planetary hours for an entire week:

Stay tuned for Part 2 of this article, coming soon…

Prayer of Kronos (Saturn)

“O Eternal God, irresistible power, who dispenses everything for our salvation, give us grace, that I may subject the such-and-such planet to my will (θέλημα). I adjure you, planet Kronos, by your path and by your air, by your property (κληρονομία) and by your heaven, by your radiance and by your activity (ἐνέργεια), and by these, your names: Gasial, Agounsael, Atasser, Beltoliel, Mentzatzia, so that you will give me grace, capability, and actuality in the hour in which you rule.”

Προσευχὴ τοῦ Κρόνου. Ὁ θεὸς ὁ αἰώνιος, τὸ ἄσχετον κράτος, ὁ πάντα οἰκονομῶν ἐπὶ τὰ τῆς ἡμῶν σωτηρίας, δὸς ἡμῖν χάριν, ἵνα ὑποτάξω τὸν δεῖνα πλανήτην εἰς τὸ ἐμὸν θέλημα. ὁρκίζω σε, πλανῆτα Κρόνε, εἰς τὴν ὁδόν σου καὶ εἰς τὸν ἀέραν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν κληρονομίαν σου καὶ εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν λάμψιν καὶ ἐνέργειάν σου καὶ εἰς τὰ ὀνόματά σου ταῦτα· Γασιάλ, Ἀγουνσαέλ, Ἀτασσέρ, Βελτολιέλ, Μεντζατζιά, ἵνα μοι δώσεις χάριν καὶ ἐνέργειαν καὶ δύναμιν εἰς τὴν ὥραν, ἐν ᾗ κυριεύεις.

Prayer of Zeus (Jupiter)

“O Lord and God, All-Powerful Father, creator (δημιουργός) of the visible and the invisible, king of kings and lord of lords, give freely to us the power of grace, that [the planet] Zeus will be subject to us, because for you, Lord, all things are possible. I adjure you, Zeus, by your wisdom and by your knowledge, by your healing force and by your heavenly course in which you orbit, and by these, your names: Anōph, Orsita, Atnox, Onigeui, Atziniel, Ankanitei, Tuneos, Genier, Kaniptza, so that you will surrender your grace to me in this operation that I undertake.”

Προσευχὴ τοῦ Διός. Κύριε καὶ θεέ, πάτερ παντοκράτωρ, ὁ δημιουργὸς ὁρατῶν καὶ ἀοράτων, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν βασιλευόντων καὶ κύριος τῶν κυριευόντων, ἐπίδος ἡμῖν δύναμιν χάριτος, ἵνα ὁ Ζεὺς ὑποταγῇ ἡμῖν, ὅτι πάντα δύνατά σοι, κύριε. ὁρκίζω σε, Ζεῦ, εἰς τὴν σοφίαν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν γνῶσίν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν ἰαματικήν σου ἐνέργειαν καὶ εἰς τὴν οὐράνιον πορείαν, ἐν ᾗ περιπατεῖς, καὶ εἰς τὰ ὀνόματα ταῦτα· Ἀνώφ, Ὀρσιτά, Ἀτνόξ, Ὀνιγευί, Ἀτζινιέλ, Ἀνκανιτεῖ, Τυνεός, Γενιέρ, Κανιπτζά, ἵνα ὑποκλίνῃς ἐν ἐμοὶ τὴν χάριν σου εἰς τὴν δουλείαν ταύτην, ἐν ᾗ ποιῶ.

Prayer of Ares (Mars)

“Dreadful God, indescribable God, invisible God, whom no one among human beings has seen or can see, whom [even] the Depths (ἄβυσσοι) saw and shuddered, and the living were destroyed. Bestow grace upon us, that we may be able to subdue the planet Ares. I adjure you, fiery Ares, by the god who created the intellective beings (νοερὰς οὐσίας) and every fiery host. I adjure you by your activities (ἐνεργείας) and by your course, by your radiance and by these names: Outat Nouēt, Khorēzē, Tiniaē, Dakhli, Ampira, Noliem, Siat, Adikhaēl, Tzanas, Plēsum, so that you will give me your grace on account of this operation.”

Προσευχὴ τοῦ Ἄρεως. Ὁ θεὸς ὁ φοβερός, ὁ θεὸς ὁ ἀδιήγητος, ὁ θεὸς ὁ ἀθεώρητος, ὃν εἶδεν οὐδεὶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων οὐδὲ ἰδεῖν δύναται, ὃν οἱ ἄβυσσοι ἰδόντες ἔφριξαν καὶ οἱ ζῶντες ἀπενεκρώθησαν. Χαρίτωσον ἡμᾶς, ἵνα δυνηθῶμεν ὑποτάξαι τὸν Ἄρεα τὸν πλανήτην. Ὁρκίζω σε, Ἄρη πυρινέ, εἰς τὸν θεὸν τὸν κτίσαντα τὰς νοερὰς οὐσίας καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν πυρινὴν στρατιάν· ὁρκίζω σε εἰς τὰς ἐνεργείας σου καὶ εἰς τὴν ὁδοιπορίαν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν λάμψιν σου καὶ εἰς τὰ ὀνόματα ταῦτα· Οὐτάτ, Νουήτ, Χορηζή, Τινιαή, Δαχλί, Ἀμπιρά, Νολιέμ, Σιάτ, Ἀδιχαήλ, Τζανάς, Πλησύμ, ἵνα μοι δώσῃς τὴν χάριν σου διὰ ταύτην τὴν δουλείαν.

Prayer of Hēlios (Sun)

“King of Kings and Lord of Lords, sourceless nature, everlasting power, inconceivable light, limitless light, unique provider of wealth, dispenser of mercy, look upon us in the midst of your grace and kindness, so that we may be able to subdue the planet Hēlios, now present, and to restrain his activity. I adjure you, untouched, unconquered, and daily shining Helios, by your temporal cycle and by your four seasons, by your course and by your rays, by your wings and by your activities (ἐνεργείας), and by these, your names: Glibiōd, Antikon, Lithetioud, Akhripal, Elbioul, Autiour, Notiōliosēm, Oōgēn, Gōdasōr, Touldōraph, Ēnōan. By these names I abjure you, lest you disobey me; but by your grace, assist me in this operation.”

Προσευχὴ τοῦ Ἡλίου. Βασιλεῦ τῶν βασιλευόντων καὶ κύριε τῶν κυριευόντων, ἡ ὑπεράρχιος φύσις, δύναμις ἀέναε, φῶς ἀκατανόητον, φῶς ἄπειρον, ὁ μόνος πλουσιοπάροχος, ὁ χορηγὸς τοῦ ἐλέους, ἐπίσκεψαι ἡμᾶς διὰ τῆς σῆς χάριτος καὶ εὐεργεσίας, ὅπως τὸν παρόντα πλανήτην τὸν Ἥλιον, [ἵνα] δυνηθῶμεν ὑποτάξαι καὶ κατασχεῖν αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐνέργειαν· ὁρκίζω σε Ἥλιε ἄψαυστε, ἀκατέργαστε, ἡμεροφεγγής, εἰς τὸν χρονικόν σου κύκλον καὶ εἰς τοὺς τέσσαράς σου καιροὺς καὶ εἰς τὴν ὁδόν σου καὶ εἰς τὰς ἀκτῖνάς σου καὶ εἰς τὰς πτέρυγάς σου καὶ εἰς τὰς ἐνεργείας σου καὶ εἰς τὰ ὀνόματά σου ταῦτα· Γλιβιώδ, Ἀντικόν, Λιθετιούδ, Ἀχριπάλ, Ἐλβιούλ, Αὐτιούρ, Νοτιωλιοσήμ, Ὀωγήν, Γωδασώρ, Τουλδωράφ, Ἠνωάν· εἰς ταῦτα τὰ ὀνόματα ὁρκίζω σε μὴ παρακούσῃς μου, ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς χάριτος τῆς σῆς συνέργησον εἰς ταύτην τὴν δουλείαν.

Prayer of Aphrodite (Venus)

“God unique and benevolent, who protects from evil in your love of men, who possesses an infinite and inscrutable sea of goodness, from whom issues the affection of friendship, I prostrate myself before your love of men, so that you will give us power and grace, so that you will give me complete and effective force for this planet, that I may do these things. I adjure you, most beautiful (ὡραιοτάτη: most timely, ripest) and sweet Aphrodite, by your grace and by your course, by your activity and by your sweetness, and by these names: Ēreth, Labam, Suar, Satēr, Touid, Toutimar, Rhesphodōm, Sirōph, Kakem, Setiap. By these names I adjure you, lest you disobey me; but bestow your grace on me, that I may accomplish such-and-such.”

Προσευχὴ τῆς Ἀφροδίτης. Ὁ θεὸς ὁ μόνος ἀγαθός, ὁ ἀνεξίκακος ἐν φιλανθρωπίᾳ, ὁ ὑπεράπειρον ἔχων τῆς ἀγαθότητος τὸ ἀνεξιχνίαστον πέλαγος, παρ’ οὗ τῆς φιλίας ἡ εὐσπλαγχνία, προσπίπτω τῇ σῇ φιλανθρωπίᾳ, ἵνα δώσῃς ἡμῖν δύναμιν καὶ χάριν, ἵνα τὴν ἐνέργειαν χρηστὴν καὶ πεπληρωμένην δώσῃς εἰς ἐμὲ τὸν πλανήτην τοῦτον, διὰ νὰ ποιήσω τάδε· ὁρκίζω σε, ὡραιοτάτη καὶ γλυκεῖα Ἀφροδίτη εἰς τὴν χάριν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν ὁδόν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν ἐνέργειάν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν γλυκύτητά σου καὶ εἰς τὰ ὀνόματα ταῦτα· Ἡρέθ, Λαβάμ, Συάρ, Σατήρ, Τοῦιδ, Τουτιμάρ, Ῥεσφοδώμ, Σιρώφ, Κακέμ, Σετιάπ. εἰς ταῦτα δὲ ὁρκίζω σε, ἵνα μὴ παρακούσῃς μου, ἀλλὰ τὴν σὴν χάριν ἔμοιγε δώσῃς, ὅπως τὸ δεῖνα ποιήσω.

Prayer of Hermes (Mercury)

“All-Powerful Lord, the discoverer of wisdom and knowledge, the artificer of celestial and super-celestial things, O All-Seeing and Omnipotent One, give us your grace, which you provide residually to your planet Hermes, so that we are able to do such-and-such. I adjure you, most clever Hermes, most erudite and intelligent, most awakened and cohesive, by your wisdom and by your eloquence, by your sphere in which you orbit, and by these names: Nēphan, Piout, Nomēn, Selak, Merepōn, Stemēnos, Kazētok, Miōt, that you will surrender your grace and your activity to me for this operation I want to accomplish.”

Προσευχὴ τοῦ Ἑρμοῦ. Παντοκράτωρ κύριε, ὁ εὑρετὴς τῆς σοφίας καὶ τῆς γνώσεως, ὁ τῶν οὐρανίων καὶ ὑπερουρανίων τεχνίτης, παντεπόπτα καὶ παντοδύναμε, εὐεργέτησον ἡμῖν χάριν, οἵαν τοῦ σοῦ πλανήτου Ἑρμοῦ ἐγκατέλιπες, ἵνα δυνηθῶμεν πρᾶξαι τὸ δεῖνα· ὁρκίζω σε, Ἑρμῆς πάνσοφε, λογιώτατε καὶ συνετώτατε, εὐσύναπτε καὶ ἐγρηγορώτατε, εἰς τὴν σοφίαν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν λογιότητά σου καὶ εἰς τὴν ζώνην, ἐν ᾗ περιπατεῖς, καὶ εἰς τὰ ὀνόματα ταῦτα· Νηφᾶν, Πιοῦτ, Νομήν, Σελάκ, Μερεπῶν, Στεμηνός, Καζητόκ, Μιώτ, ἵνα μοι ὑποκλίνῃς τὴ χάριν σου καὶ τὴν ἐνέργειάν σου εἰς τὴν πρᾶξιν ταύτην, ἐν ᾗ βούλομαι ποιῆσαι.

Prayer to Selēnē (Moon)

“Lord and Master, dominant over the living and the dead, who furnished man with wisdom, piety, and conscience, so that he might gain mastery over your creatures, cooperate with me, your servant, so that I may be able to receive your grace, to subdue the planet Selēnē, and to accomplish the work I have set out to do. I adjure you, Selēnē, most beautiful purple of heaven and encouragement of the night. I adjure you by your course and by your renewal, by the unfathomable degrees of your progress, and by these names: Sabaēl, Boaēl, Ōnitzēr, Sparou, Sōrtērkha, Gabēd, Outoupōn, Kaipolēs, Gōmedēn, Marēbat. By these names I abjure you, Selēnē, that you will surrender your grace and your activity to me for this operation I aim to accomplish.”

Προσευχὴ τῆς Σελήνης. Δέσποτα κύριε, ὁ δεσπόζων ζώντων τε καὶ νεκρῶν, ὁ ἐν σοφίᾳ κατασκευάσας τὸν ἄνθρωπον, ἵνα δεσπόζῃ τῶν ὑπὸ σοῦ γενομένων κτισμάτων ἐν ὁσιότητι καὶ συνέσει, συνέργησόν μοι, ἵνα δυνηθῶ ὁ δοῦλός σου χάριν λαβεῖν καὶ ὑποτάξαι τὸν πλανήτην τὴν Σελήνην καὶ τελειῶσαι τὸ ἔργον, ὃ ἐπεχειρίσθην· ὁρκίζω σε Σελήνην, τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ὡραιοτάτη πορφύρα καὶ τῆς νυκτὸς παραμυθία. ὁρκίζω σε εἰς τὴν ὁδόν σου καὶ εἰς τὴν ἀνακαίνισίν σου καὶ εἰς ἀναμετρήτους βαθμούς, ἐν οἷς κατέρχει, καὶ εἰς τὰ ὀνόματα τοῦτα· Σαβαήλ, Βοαήλ, Ὠνιτζήρ, Σπαροῦ, Σωρτήρχα, Γαβήδ, Οὐτουπών, Καιπολής, Γωμεδήν, Μαρηβάτ. εἰς ταῦτα σε ὁρκίζω, Σελήνη, ἵνα μοι ὑποκλίνῃς τὴν χάριν σου καὶ τὴν ἐνέργειάν σου εἰς τὴν δουλείαν ταύτην, ἐν ᾗ ἐπιχειρίζομαι.

If you appreciate this translation and want to see more like it, please consider becoming a patron.

The De mysteriis (hereafter DM) of the Neoplatonic philosopher Iamblichus (c. 240 – c. 325 CE) is one of the most important texts for the study of Late Antique philosophy. It represents a definitive break from the systems of his immediate forebears, Plotinus (204/5 – 270 CE), generally considered the founder of “Neoplatonism” (a term coined by scholars in the late eighteenth century), and his student Porphyry (234 – 305 CE). The latter is believed to have been one of the teachers of Iamblichus, and it is to Porphyry’s Letter to Anebo that DM is a response. The seeming rivalry between Iamblichus and his former teacher may be due in part to their closeness in age. Regardless, Iamblichus, writing under the guise of an Egyptian priest named Abamon, takes Porphyry severely to task for his misunderstanding of and attack on the “priestly art” (ἱερατική τέχνη) or “mystical system” (μυσταγωγία) of theurgy (θεουργία).

The break with earlier Platonism can be summarized in two statements: (1) Iamblichus was the first of the Neoplatonists to challenge the Plotinian doctrine of the undescended soul, and indeed all subsequent Neoplatonists would follow him in this. (2) Because the soul has completely descended into the body, simple contemplation (the famous Plotinian “inward turn”) is not enough to achieve ἕνωσις, or mystical union with the One. Rather, various ritual practices – the content of theurgy – become necessary. Iamblichus distinguishes theurgy (roughly, “god-work”) from theology (mere “god-talk”), the latter being insufficient to achieve the goal of Platonic philosophy as understood by Iamblichus: ὁμοίωσις θεῷ – being made like God. How this worked – the tools and techniques of theurgic practice – will be discussed below.

The revised doctrine of the soul and the corresponding emphasis on ritual would influence not only all subsequent Neoplatonic philosophy until the closing of the philosophical schools by Justinian in the sixth century, but would also be an important influence on the development of Renaissance thought, represented by thinkers such as Marsilio Ficino, who translated (or paraphrased) Iamblichus’s text into Latin in the fifteenth century. It was Ficino, in fact, who gave the text the title by which it is now most widely known, De mysteriis Aegyptiorum, Chaldaeorum, Assyriorum, a title only slightly less unwieldy than the original title of the work: The Reply of the Master Abamon to the Letter of Porphyry to Anebo, and the Solutions to the Questions it Contains. Notable among his more immediate successors were Proclus (c. 411 – 485 CE) and Damascius (c. 460 – 540 CE), both of whom became the head of the reconstituted Platonic Academy in Athens, and both were strong proponents of theurgic Neoplatonism. When the academy was closed in 529, Damascius and six of his colleagues would seek refuge in Persia, where Iamblichean Platonism would eventually pass into the hands of Arab philosophers, among whom it thrived until the tenth century. Also notable is the Christian theurgist Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (late fifth or early sixth century), whose written work has had a strong influence on the development of Christian mysticism.

Most of what we know of the life of Iamblichus is from the biography (one might even call it a hagiography) by Eunapius in his Lives of the Philosophers and Sophists. Eunapius writes of an “illustrious birth,” while Damascius reports that Iamblichus came from a royal line of priest-kings of Emesa in western Syria. Iamblichus, however, was born in Chalcis, some dozens of miles north of Emesa. After studying briefly with Porphyry in Rome or Sicily, Iamblichus founded his own school of philosophy in Apamea in Syria, not far from Antioch. Apamea was a city known for famous philosophers, having previously been the home of the Stoic Posidonius and the Neopythagorean Numenius, and Plotinus’s pupil and successor Amelius retired there. It seems as though Iamblichus’s school did not survive him, but his voluminous written works, few of which survive, were revered by those who studied them, including the Roman emperor Julian, the so-called “apostate” and the last non-Christian emperor, whose rule ended in 363 CE. In the twenty short months of his imperium, Julian attempted to reverse the momentum of the quickly spreading Christian religion that had first been adopted and legalized by his uncle Constantine. Chief among his weapons was the work of “the divine Iamblichus,” in which Julian saw the perfect union of cultic ritual and philosophical rigor, and he attempted to reform the various non-Christian priesthoods along Iamblichean lines.

Outline of the Contents of De Mysteriis

DM was artificially divided during the Renaissance into ten books of quite uneven length, but the divisions have been retained by modern scholars, despite the fact that they somewhat obscure the intended structure of the work. Nevertheless, the divisions occur in natural breaks in Iamblichus’s prose, so each of the ten books will be briefly summarized here. Iamblichus begins by invoking Hermes (understood to be the Egyptian god Thoth) as his muse and patron of priestly knowledge and rational discourse. He then lays out the spectrum of divine entities, with the Good the greatest divine being and the soul as the least. In order for one to be able to know the other, then, an entire panoply of intermediate beings is necessary. He then begins to describe theurgy as the system of techniques that purify the soul and allow the theurgist to ascend incrementally toward the gods. The tools that enable this process he identifies as varieties of σύμβολα or συνθήματα, two words used interchangeably in DM (and in the second-century Chaldean Oracles, an important source for Iamblichus and subsequent Neoplatonists), which are often translated as “symbols” or “tokens.” (Shaw suggests “signatures,” which I also find useful, since they bear the mark of their creator.) But the general function of σύμβολα/συνθήματα is to join things together.

In Book II, Iamblichus explains the efficacy of σύμβολα/συνθήματα. They are an expression of divine power that are “sown” by the divine intellect (νοῦς) “throughout the cosmos” (Chaldean Oracles fragment 108), as well as into the human soul, at the moment of the world’s creation. They are both cosmogonic and anagogic; i.e. they are the means by which the world is created, as well as the means by which the soul is led back up to its divine origin. We will explore the nature of σύμβολα/συνθήματα below. For now, it is enough to stress that these symbols come from the divine; human ritual practitioners serve merely to enact them, with the goal of the purification and ultimately divinization of the soul. Book II also goes into detail on the hierarchy of intermediate beings, which include gods, archangels, angels, heroes, and δαίμονες. We see here a proliferation of Plotinian ontological levels, with many new classes of intermediaries to fulfill the ritual functions of the theurgist.

Book III, the most lengthy in the treatise, goes into great detail on the different types of divination (μαντική). He examines dream divination, varieties of divine possession, and divination by drawing down light (φωταγωγία). These good (i.e. theurgic) practices are distinguished from various dubious forms of divination, such as standing on magical characters (χαρακτῆρες), and also from inductive or intuitive abilities, such as a doctor’s prognosis of an illness and some animals’ instinctual sense for the imminence of earthquakes or rain.

Book IV deals with the sticky problem of the origin of evil, concluding that even in a universe that displays self-similarity (συμπάθεια) at multiple levels, the constraints of corporeality create (the illusion of) evil from the standpoint of the individual, whereas the same activity is salutary and good from the standpoint of the whole. Drawing on the two cosmic principles of Empedocles, Iamblichus writes that love (ἔρως or φιλία) and strife (νεῖκος) operate as complementary activities at the level of the whole cosmos, while becoming passions at the level of individual participants.

Books V and VI address sacrifice and prayer, and it is here that Iamblichus explains the functioning of various kinds of σύμβολα/συνθήματα (discussed below) in the greatest detail. Book VII looks at these using specific examples derived from the Egyptian symbols of “mud” (the primeval waters of Nun), the child-god Harpocrates sitting on a lotus, and the solar bark. It also examines the efficacy of divine names and the sacrality of language. Egyptian themes continue in Book VIII, where Hermetic astrology is discussed alongside Neoplatonic metaphysics dressed in Egyptian garb. Most notably, “Kmeph” (the Egyptian god Amun Kem-Atef, “he who has completed his moment”) – a serpent-god that appears also in the Greco-Egyptian “magical” papyri and is mentioned by Plutarch and Porphyry – is called the “intellect thinking itself” and “turning his thoughts toward himself,” and is envisioned as the primordial cosmic serpent swallowing its own tail (the οὐροβόρος of early Greek alchemical texts). Book IX briefly examines the personal δαίμων, the “genius” of Socrates and the being invoked in such elaborate theurgic rituals as PGM 13 or “The Eighth Book of Moses.” In Book X, Iamblichus reemphasizes that the only true good is mystical union with the gods (also called γνῶσις, experiential knowledge of the divine), and the only path to such union is theurgy.

Theurgy as Demiurgy

Gregory Shaw correctly characterizes the divinization and mystical union brought about by theurgy as ultimately demiurgic in nature. As intimated above, it comes down to a question of perspective, and for the most part this can be understood to be a perspective on matter and embodiment. For Iamblichus, matter (ὕλη, or in this context, its functional equivalents γένεσις, σῶμα, or φύσις) was ultimately the culmination of a long process(ion) (πρόοδος) of the “creative dispersion” of the One. Analogously, the body can be understood as the final “point of condensation” of ψυχή (which itself is a “condensation” of νοῦς, etc.). In other words, matter is “connatural” (συμφυής)with soul, mind, and the One. It is the final expression of the cosmic procession, and the key to the soul’s return. The material body is not an extrinsic addition, but rather the ultimate “moment” of an ongoing cycle of creation.

Plotinus, in his discussion of the descent of the soul (Ennead 4.8), sees an optimistic view of the soul’s embodiment in Plato’s Timaeus but a pessimistic view in dialogues such as the Phaedo and Phaedrus. His answer to this core problem of reconciling Platonic cosmology and psychology is to acknowledge, and even to emphasize, the negative view of embodiment while stressing that the soul never completely descends into the body. Iamblichus, on the other hand, fully acknowledges the soul’s descent, but solves this same problem through a shift in perspective. The first perspective – the pessimism concerning embodiment in the Phaedo and Phaedrus – involves a gradual purification of the soul from the body with the goal of achieving a proper relationship to the universe and its daimonic intermediaries. The second perspective is that of the Timaeus, in which each individual soul participates in the World Soul by identifying itself with the cosmic Demiurge and, by means of theurgy, takes part in the ongoing creation of the universe. Thus, embodiment is only a problem from the point of view of the individual who doesn’t understand her true nature. In fact, the cosmogonic law that caused the soul to “fall” into the body is simultaneously the means of salvation, in that the “signatures” (σύμβολα/συνθήματα) of this cosmogenesis are present throughout matter. For the accomplished theurgist, the cosmos becomes a temple, one in which the ritual procedures are established by the Creator (through his intermediaries) and sewn throughout the cosmos, as well as into the human soul. This reflects the general Platonic view of the microcosm mirroring the macrocosm.

The Tools of Theurgy: σύμβολα/συνθήματα

The σύμβολα/συνθήματα touched on in the chapter outline above constitute the primary ritual tools of the theurgist and consist of three primary types: (1) material, (2) intermediate, and (3) noetic. Material συνθήματα consist of such things as stones, plants, animals, and incense. A given material corresponds to a certain god, group of gods, or other divine entities. They may be explainable as a natural metaphor, such as a heliotropic plants corresponding to solar deities (Ἀπόλλων or Ἥλιος), or the association of iron with Ἄρης because of the common color of iron rust, the planet Mars, and blood. Indeed, catalogs of “astrological botany” and “mineralogy” assigning types of plants and stones to the planetary gods go back at least to around 200 BCE. Nevertheless, some συνθήματα have a hidden meaning known only to the gods, from whom their power derives. Intermediate συνθήματα are of two subtypes: visual verbal/vocal. Visual συνθήματα are statues or other images of the gods, as in the image of Harpocrates emerging from the lotus mentioned above. Verbal/vocal συνθήματα are divine names (ὀνόματα βάρβαρα) or strings of vowels that presumably represent hymns, the seven Greek vowels being correlated to the seven planetary deities. Again, sometimes the power (δύναμις) of these symbols are known, sometimes they are hidden or even unknowable, but their efficacy as ritual tools remains unimpaired. Shaw speculates that noetic συνθήματα consist primarily of mystical Pythagorean numerical constructs, but because no explicitly theurgic rituals are extant, this can be considered conjecture at best. Others have written of “ritualized inhalation of sunlight,” as seen in the so-called “Mithras Liturgy” (PGM IV. 475-829).

These συνθήματα function in three ways: (1) they have the power to purify not only the body but even more so the soul; (2) they prepare the human mind for participation (μετουσία) in and vision of the Good, and release the mind from any obstructions that prevent this; and (3) they enable mystical union (ἕνωσις) with the gods. Whether or not the three types of συνθήματα proposed above correspond directly to these three functions is unclear; there may be some overlap. What is important, however, is that the συνθήματα of various types derive their power from the gods, and thus Iamblichus stresses that theurgy is different from vulgar magic (γοητεία). These divine συνθήματα are properly the instruments of the gods themselves, the means through which the process of creation (πρόοδος) is enacted, and simultaneously the anagogic means of return (ἐπιστροφή, ἀποκατάστασις) for the soul of the practicing theurgist. There is no coercion of the gods (as magic is commonly understood) on the part of the theurgist. To classify theurgy as “special branch of magic,” as Dodds and others have done, is therefore misguided at best.

Relevance for the Study of Late Antique Religion

The modern scholarly reception of DM has been mixed. The general trend has gone from dismissing the text as a “manifesto of irrationalism” (Dodds, 1951) to praising it as a “manifesto of the miraculous” (Clarke, 2001). In the current author’s opinion, Iamblichus’s exposition of theurgy provides a hermeneutical framework with which to understand a broad range of ritual practices in Late Antiquity. DM has been used by scholars to shed light on ritual texts of the Gnostics, those belonging to Hermetic circles, and the so-called Greek Magical Papyri, many of which include rituals that Iamblichus certainly would have considered theurgic. This raises the bigger question of whether Iamblichus might also describe the practices of those he purports to describe, namely, the ancient Egyptians and Assyrians (or Chaldeans), as theurgic. One serious obstacle to this assertion is the presence of Neoplatonic metaphysics throughout the work of Iamblichus. However, at least in a Hellenized context, Iamblichus can be said to preserve authentic Egyptian priestly lore. His frequent appeal to Hermetic writings should be taken seriously, as Garth Fowden, David Frankfurter, and others have shown. Shaw reminds us that Egyptian cult appealed to Iamblichus precisely because it imitated cosmogenesis, one instance among many of the important theme of “theurgy as demiurgy.”