Introduction

1 The Religious Orientation of the Alexandrian Neoplatonists from Theon of Alexandria to the Contemporaries of Ammonius, Son of Hermias

Still very recently, P. Golitsis, in his book Les commentaires de Simplicius et de Jean Philopon à la Physique d’Aristote,1 expressed the following view: “As one can see from the commentaries emerging from one and the other school, the school of Athens was focused more on Plato, whereas the school of Alexandria had more interest in Aristotle. What is more, the school of Athens was a bastion of pagan culture and religion, which was probably not the case for the school of Alexandria (…) Let us mention by way of a guideline that essentially no activity concerning the Orphic Hymns or the Chaldaean Oracles is known to us on the part of the Alexandrians (…) Hierocles the Alexandrian, about whom Photius (cod. 214 of his Library) reports that he had devoted the fourth book of his trea- tise On Providence to Plato’s agreement with the Chaldaean Oracles, seems to represent an exceptional case in the history of philosophical exegesis in Alexan- dria; he himself specified that the doctrine of the harmonization of theological traditions was handed down to him by his teacher Plutarch of Athens”. Let us specify that in this same book, it is not only the Chaldaean Oracles that Hiero- cles wished to place in agreement with Plato’s doctrines, but also the “hieratic institutions” and theurgy,2 and in his commentary on verses 67–69 of the Car- men aureum, he declares that theurgy, the ἱερατικὴ ἀναγωγή, is an indispensable complement to philosophical theory. In the fifth book of his De providentia, Hierocles makes a connection between the philosophy of Plato, Orpheus, and Homer.3 Let us also mention, already at this stage in our argument, that the sixth book preaches the harmony of the philosophies of Aristotle and Plato. Let us pause for a moment over the question of the role played by theurgy for Hierocles. I discussed this subject in detail in a German article published in

1 Golitsis, P. 2008, p. 9, n. 9. 2 In the De mysteriis of Iamblichus, the hieratic or theurgical art refers both to the ritual of the Chaldaean Oracles and to that of the Hermetica, another collection of revelations integrated into Neoplatonism, which this time took their starting point from Hermes Trismegistus. 3 See I. Hadot 2004, Studies on the Neoplatonist Hierocles, the chapter on “Hierocles’ ideas on the history of Platonic philosophy”, pp. 5–14. This book basically takes up, in English translation, the chapters on Hierocles contained in I. Hadot 1978, and most of the themes of my controversy with N. Aujoulat (in reg 103 [1990] and 106 [1993]).

2002,4 as well as in the chapter on “Theurgy” of my Studies on the Neoplatonist Hierocles. My position on this subject is not different from that of H. Schibli,5 who elaborated it at the same time as I did. Here is a very brief summary: in chapters xxv, xxvi and xxvii of his commentary on the Carmen Aureum, which is intended for beginners, Hierocles describes the relation between philosophy and theurgy, without ever using the word “theurgy”, obviously because it is not present in the poem being commented upon. In the Carmen aureum, the terms that to him evoke theurgy are καθαρμοί (purifications) and λύσις ψυχῆς (deliverance of the soul), in verses 67–68. According to Hierocles, the return of the rational human soul to its fatherland is possible only on condition of a twofold purification: that of the rational soul itself, and that of its ethereal, pneumatic, or luminous vehicle, which was joined to the first soul by the demi- urge. Each of these two kinds of purification is in turn divided into two, as is indicated by the following text:6

The purifications required for the rational soul are the mathematical sciences, and the elevating deliverance (ἀναγωγὸς7 λύσις) is the dialectical vision of beings (ἡ διαλεκτικὴ τῶν ὄντων ἐποπτεία).8 This is why ‘deliverance’ has been stated [sc. in the Carmen aureum] in the singular: ‘in the soul’s deliverance’, because deliverance is completed in a single science, whereas mathematics contains a plurality of sciences. It is also neces- sary to ordain for the luminous body prescriptions analogous to those that are appropriately transmitted for the soul’s purification and deliverance. Telestic purifications (τελεστικοὶ καθαρμοί) must therefore come together with those of mathematical purifications (μαθηματικοὶ καθαρ- μοί), and hieratic elevation (ἱερατικὴ ἀναγωγή) must accompany dialectical deliverance (διαλεκτικὴ λύσις). For these things are particularly apt to purify the pneumatic vehicle of the rational soul and render it perfect, to separate it from matter’s lack of life, and to prepare it to be apt to have converse with the pure pneumas [sc. pure pneumatic bodies] …

4 I. Hadot 2002 a, “Die Stellung des Neuplatonikers Simplikios zum Verhältnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie”, Signatur des spätantiken Denkens, pp. 323–342. 5 H. Schibli 2002, Hierocles of Alexandria, pp. 115ff. 6 Hierocles, In Carm. aur., xxvi, 21–22, p. 116, 20–117, 10 Köhler. 7 I owe to M. Chase the correction of the reading ἀνάγωγος in Köhler’s edition to ἀναγωγὸς. 8 On the Platonic and Neoplatonic division of philosophy into ethics, physics, and dialectic (pars rationalis in Latin), or ethics, physics, and epoptics, cf. P. Hadot 1979, “Les divisions de la philosophie …”, p. 206 (131ff.) and 218–220 (145–148).