Podcast episode
April 24, 2024
Episode 186: The Esoteric Proclus, Part I: The Life and Thought of an Esoteric Sage
Works Cited in this Episode:
Primary:
[Abbreviations: PT = Platonic Theology. ET = Elements of Theology. VP = Marinus’ Life of Proclus]
Apuleius on Pythagorean sea-bathing: Metamorphoses 11.1.
Iamblichus knows which road to go down: Eunapius VS 459 Wright. Levitation: 458 Wright. Eros and Anteros: 459 Wright.
Marinus:
- Proclus as initiate: into the mysteries of Platonist philosophy: VP 13. Into the vision of the higher realities: VP 22.
- Omens to do with Proclus: Spring of Socrates and anecdote about the doorman: VP 10. Proclus has a glowing ‘halo’ while speaking: VP § 23. Eclipses before and after his death: VP 37.
- Epiphaneiai: Telesphoros appears and heals Proclus: VP 7. Goddess in dream exhorts him the Athens and the philosophic life: VP 9 and 10. Fasted on certain days known through revelation: VP 19. Prophetic dream of Plutarch: VP § 26. Syrianus appears in a dream and forbids an Orphic commentary: VP 27. Fiery apparitions of Hekatē: VP 28. Lydian god appears to him in the sanctuary at Adratta: VP 32. Athena appears to him, bidding him prepare her a dwelling with him: VP 30.
- The rain-miracle: VP 28 [for lore on an earlier rain-miracle, which will have ‘set the stage’ for Proclus’ achievement, see Garth Fowden. Pagan Versions of the Rain Miracle of AD 172. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, 36(1):8395, 1987].
- Proclus’ horoscope: VP 35. For an attempt at rectification of this chart, see O. Neugebauer and H. B. van Hoesen. Greek Horoscopes. American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, PA, 1959, pp. 35-6. See discussion in Saffrey-Segonds-Luna, in an appendix devoted to the horoscope.
Plato on the Limit/Unlimited pair: Phlb, esp. 16c-d and 26e–31b.
Plotinus finds the stolen necklace: Porph. Plot. 11.
Proclus, various:
- Belonged to the Chain of Hermes: VP 28.
- Physics as theology: In Tim. I 217.18–27.
- Theurgic ascent results in immortalisation: In R. I.152.10.
- The best Greek MS of the Parmenides commentary is available online from Gallica.
Proclus, Metaphysics/Physics (this is meant as a handy list for further reading: not every entity listed below is discussed in the episode):
- monē-prooödos-epistrophē: e.g. ET § 35.
- The One: the One transcends all attributes, causal nexus, and multiplicity: we quote PT III 8, 31.12-18 in the translation of Chlup 2012, p. 55; cf. PT II 12, 72.19-73·23; In Parm. II 96.22-31.
- On the Demiurge: see especially In Tim. I, 99-319, on Timæus 28c.
- On the iunx-gods: Comm. in Eucl. 91.3: τῶν ἰυγγικῶν θεῶν; cf. In R. 213.1 Kroll; In Crat. p. 333.15 Pasquali [iunges and teletarchs mentioned].
- On Soul: ET §§ 184-211.
- On the Ochēma: See especially ET §§ 205-10. It makes the soul enkosmios: in Tim. 311 C. It allows souls to recognise each other postmortem: In R. II, p. 17. ‘Garments’: ET § 209; cf. In Tim. 3.237.21-31. Planetary vices and virtues, and the ochēma: In Tim. 3.355.7-19. The periblēma is the seat of divine visions: In R. I.39, 8–10 Kroll … καὶ γὰρ τοῖς ὁρῶσιν αὐτοῖς ὁρᾶται τοῖς αὐγοειδέσι τῶν ψυχῶν περιβλήμασιν. Cf. Comm. in Eucl. Prologue Part Two, 52-52, where its rôle in sense-perception is laid out.
Secondary:
Beierwaltes: see Recommended Reading.
John Dillon in G.R. Morrow and J.M. Dillon, editors. Proclus’ Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1987., we quote pp. xxxii and xvi.
Antoine Faivre. Introduction. In Antoine Faivre and eds. Jacob Needleman, editors, Modern Esoteric Spirituality, pages xix-xii. SCM Press, New York, NY, 1992; we quote p. xv.
Rosán: see Recommended Reading.
David T. Runia and Michael Share, editors. Proclus: Commentary on Plato’s Timæus,Volume II. Book 2: Proclus on the Causes of the Comsos and its Creation. The University Press, Cambridge, 2008.
Recommended Reading:
Episode 186 Recommended Reading
Themes
Apophatic Writing, Arithmology, Astrology, Cosmic Ascent, Divinisation, Epiphany, Esoteric Hermeneutics, Esoteric Tradition, Georg Hegel, Henads, Iamblichus, Imagination, Iunx, Marinus, Nicholas of Cusa, Pico, Polytheism, Proclus, Subtle Body, Syrianus, Theurgy, Western Esotericism
Stephen Rego
April 25, 2024
Thanks Earl for a well put-together first part to what is by no-means an easy task – I don’t envy you at all and you are doing a fine job!
However, I just wanted to point out that at around the 51.40 (and later repeated at 52.00), after having introduced the noeric (or “intellective” or “intellectual) hedomad, you seem to say that its seven-fold structure comprises of “the first noetic-noeric triad, then the second, then the third.. and the first noeric triad, the second, the third.. and then the Demiurge”. Thus it seems you are taking each of the enumerated six triads as singular Gods as such , *plus* the Demiurge, to make up the noeric (or, intellective) hedbomad – thus making it span the noetic-noeric (intelligible-intellective) and noeric levels.
But this isn’t right.
The seven noeric (intellective) Gods that make-up the hebdomad exist solely at the noeric level; and the noeric (intellective) hebdomad is comprised of two triads and a “separating” monad. These are
1. The paternal triad of noeric (intellective) Gods consisting of (the following being derived from an exegesis of the 𝘖𝘳𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘤 𝘙𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘴𝘰𝘥𝘪𝘦𝘴):
• Kronos (pure Intellect)
• Rhea – equated with the Mixing Bowl in the Proclean exegesis of the 𝘛𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘦𝘶𝘴 creation myth
• Zeus (intellective Intellect) – equated with the Demiurge of the same myth;
2. The “immaculate” triad of noeric Gods – interpreted as the Kouretes that protect the infant Zeus in the Orphic myths and whose three monads have a one-to-one correspondence with the three monads (Gods) of the paternal triad;
3. A “separating”monad – this is symbolically represented through the exegesis of Orphic myth as the act of Zeus castrating his own father Kronos – its function is to separate (or “cut”) the intellective realm from the hypercosmic and lower orders; in the Proclean exegesis of the 𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘖𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘴 it is represented by the “girdling membrane” of Hekate.
Above this is the intelligible-intellective (noetic-noeric) level which is made up of three triads: intelligible-intellective Being, intelligible-intellective Life, and intelligble-intellective Intellect, and above this level is the highest, the intelligible (noetic), and this are is comprised of (the) three noetic triads or intelligible Being (this, the first intelligible triad, is primordial Being), intelligible Life, and intelligible Intellect (this, the third intelligible triad, is represented by the Paradigm in the Proclean exegesis of the 𝘛𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘦𝘶𝘴, and Phanes in his exegesis of Orphic myth).
Earl Fontainelle
April 25, 2024
Stephen,
Thank you very much indeed for the hebdomadic clarification (if ‘clarification’ is a term which can be applied to Proclean metaphysics!). So wrong was my take on the hebdomad, that I have gone back and re-recorded that bit. I’ll keep these comments here, however, as the citaitons you make may be useful to people, so they’re good to have around.
Stephen Rego
April 25, 2024
To summarise what I am saying – the hierarchy is
▪︎ BEING – 3 noetic (intelligible) triads (i.e. an *enneadic* structure)
▪︎ LIFE – 3 noetic-noeric (intelligible-intellective) triads (enneadic, as above)
▪︎ INTELLECT- the noeric hebdomad (made-up of 2 triads and the “separating” monad)
Stephen Rego
April 25, 2024
“The Curetes belong to the implacable and immaculate triad, which is instituted by Cronus and cooperates with each of the intellectual monads [sc. Kronos, Rhea, and Zeus] according to their respective powers. The first Curetic monad thus remains with Cronus and is associated with sameness, the second protects Rhea and the procession of Being and the third ensures that Zeus may both fabricate the cosmos and remain undefiled by it. These six deities along with a seventh Separative monad, which divides the demiurgic and cosmic sphere from the intellectual [sc. noeric/intellective], make up the Cronian hebdomad.”
(Duvick, Proclus, ‘Commentary on Plato’s 𝘊𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘶𝘴’ (2014), note 299, p.156.)
James Lomas
April 30, 2024
This is the hardest episode yet. Wow.
I’m trying to deal with the notion of plurality in ultimate oneness. I get that there can be multiple levels of oneness (eg in thought, in being, etc) and a transcendent oneness beyond thought and being etc.
But the side by side onenesses that separately emanate? I don’t get it. Also, how are the henads different from “wholenesses” that exist in the nous? For instance, a sphere is a wholeness in the nous ; sure there are lots of almost spheres in the nous too, but spheres are more basic someone. The nous is a bit like information, where there are infinite forms, but there is a lot of natural, mathematical structure. It isn’t entirely arbitrary. The wholes in the nous seem to provide some structure — Platonic solids and the like are further examples. How are these wholes (onenesses) different from Hanson’s?
What seems different about the henads: not only are they wholes (onenesses) but they also emanate. Spheres might be wholenesses, but do they emanate? (Well, maybe matter participates in sphereness? Eg like a star. Is that the emanation of sphereness into matter— and/or does matter participate in sphereness? Is there a reciprocal relation between participation and emanation??)
Oh jeez. I wonder if the complexity of Proclus helps explain why Christianity looked so appealing…
Thank you for doing this!!!
Earl Fontainelle
April 30, 2024
The henads differ from the wholenesses in the nous in that they DON’T EXIST (as thoughthat clarifies matters!).
It is seriously trippy material.
Vis à vis Christianity’s appeal in the face of this insane complexity: perhaps, but then, as we are about to see, a ridiculous amount of esoteric Christianity will be sort of cribbed from Proclus via the Pseudo-Dionysius. The story gets even weirder, that’s the amazing thing about Proclus!