MAGIC 1108 · Iamblichus Simulacrum and Theurgy — De Mysteriis as Founding Defence

Led by Iamblichus of Chalcis Simulacrum

1. Module 8 ○ Open

   Iamblichus Simulacrum and Theurgy — De Mysteriis as Founding Defence

   Led by Iamblichus of Chalcis Simulacrum

   The question

   Iamblichus of Chalcis (c. 245-c. 325 CE), Syrian-born Neoplatonist, founder of the Syrian school of Neoplatonism, author of the *De Mysteriis* — known in Greek as *On the Mysteries of the Egyptians, Chaldaeans and Assyrians* and originally circulated under the pseudonym "the Master Abammon" in response to Porphyry's *Letter to Anebo* — produced the foundational theoretical defence of theurgical practice as a philosophical discipline. Where Plotinus had given the metaphysical framework that licensed magical practice but had not himself worked it, where Porphyry had questioned whether ritual could be reconciled with philosophical austerity, Iamblichus argued that ritual practice was *necessary* for the philosophical ascent — that pure contemplation was insufficient, that the gods must be approached through the materials, signs, and operations they had themselves established as the ladder of return. The position would shape the next fifteen hundred years of Western magical theory. What does the *De Mysteriis* actually argue, and why does it matter?

   Outcome

   The student has read substantial portions of the *De Mysteriis* (Books 1-3 are the most accessible and contain the core philosophical argument; Clarke/Dillon/Hershbell translation), Shaw's *Theurgy and the Soul* introduction, and can produce a 700-word analytical essay.

   Begin the course → Mark module complete Print certificate of completion

   Practice scenarios

   Theurgy Defended

   Iamblichus Simulacrum walks you through *De Mysteriis* Book I (the foundational philosophical-theological framework) and the relevant portions of Book II that respond directly to Porphyry's specific questions on the mechanism of theurgical operation. Read both in full. Re-read Porphyry's *Letter to Anebo* alongside (the questions Iamblichus is answering). Then write a 700-word analytical essay: how does Iamblichus answer Porphyry's central philosophical question — how can ritual practice move impassible gods; what is the doctrine of *sumbola* and *synthēmata* and how does it work; where does Iamblichus depart from Plotinian metaphysics in order to make room for theurgy; and what is at stake philosophically in the move he makes (Porphyry would say Iamblichus has compromised the metaphysics; Iamblichus would say he has saved the practice without compromising it)?

   Your goals

   • Read *De Mysteriis* Books 1-2 in full and re-read the *Letter to Anebo* before drafting.
   • Render the doctrine of *sumbola/synthēmata* precisely.
   • Address the metaphysical-philosophical move Iamblichus makes — what does it modify in the inherited Plotinian framework, and what does it preserve?
   • Address the historical importance: this is the founding theoretical defence of magical practice as philosophical discipline; the rest of the Western magical tradition will draw on it.
   • 700 words ± 100, scholarly register.

   Practise this scenario →