Near the end of the ancient era, in contrast to the skepticism that was widespread then, a powerful philosophical trend arose that stubbornly insisted on the possibility of knowledge of the supersensible and focused on the development of the doctrine of the deity and its relationship to the world and man. The thinkers of this direction took as a basis the philosophy of Plato. In convincing the truth of the bizarre constructions of the brilliant Platonic fantasy, they built on them a new, original religious and philosophical system - Neoplatonism. Neoplatonism was based on theoretical and practical thoughts akin to Plato's doctrine of ideas, but absorbed the influences of other theories of that time. The Neoplatonists constituted a system that captivated the imagination with a wealth of mystical views and symbols. It became the spiritual atmosphere that engulfed the entire mental life of that age. In the profound ancient myths about Apollo the purifier, healer, intercessor and about Hercules, a man who became a god, under the cover of allegories, Neoplatonism sought teachings about the essence of the soul, about the relationship of the divine spirit to the human, in the old Eastern mysteries and symbols - great truths about the eternal, constantly renewing life of the human soul. In the Chaldean divinations, in the theogonic poems, and in the hymns of Orpheus, to which popular credulity gave deep antiquity, the secret teachings of Greek and Eastern wisdom were found; they took for divine revelation fantastic books attributed to the Egyptian god or demigod, Hermes the Thrice Greatest (Trismegistus), the father of all religious wisdom, all sciences and arts. These books, translated into Greek in Alexandrian times or simply composed by Greek mystifiers, expounded religious and philosophical ideas in the taste of the Alexandrian age, mystical teachings about God, the universe and the soul, astrological and magical fantasies.
Thus, Neoplatonism built a system of religious and philosophical syncretism that combined the basic Eastern and Greek fantastic ideas into a chaotic whole. It was something like an ideal pantheon; deities, myths and symbols of all peoples merged in this system, their meaning was interpreted by allegorical explanations in the spirit of Plato's doctrine of ideas. The strict, stoic doctrine of virtue and temperance was exaggerated by the Neoplatonists in the taste of Eastern asceticism. Belief in spirits and miracles, the germs of which are found in Plutarch, is already very developed in Apuleius, and it soon reached the extreme fantastic. People of that age felt voluptuous admiration, plunging into mysticism. The former popular religion, which Neoplatonism ardently defended against Christianity, which was beginning to overcome it, received a spiritual character through the allegorical interpretation of its myths and dogmas. The Neoplatonic trend was manifested in its main ideas by the deification of gifted people who were considered the founders of a holy life, a mixture of all forms of worship, an attraction to a mystical merger with a deity, achieved through asceticism and fantastic rites, contempt for practical life, which has become more or less impure.
Founder of Neoplatonism - Ammonius Saccas
The syncretic philosophy of the Neoplatonists arose in Alexandria, where Greek systems and Eastern religious speculations, Judaism and Christianity, touched and partly mixed. Neoplatonists considered the founder of their doctrine Ammonia Saccasa(or Sacca, Zacca, d. c. 248). He was a native of Alexandria, the son of Christian parents, brought up in Christianity. After acquiring mental independence, he became a follower of pagan philosophy and made himself an eclectic system from a combination of the teachings of Plato, the Pythagoreans, Aristotle with Eastern religious and philosophical ideas. Having thus united heterogeneous pagan views into one fantastic theosophy, Ammonius Sakkas expounded it orally to a small circle of inquisitive and gifted students. For a long time it remained a secret teaching, which was communicated only to the elect. Ammonius did not set it down in writing: there are no writings left of him. But his great disciple Plotinus (205-270), a native of the Egyptian city of Lycopolis, became for the founder of Neoplatonism what Plato was for Socrates. Plotinus promulgated his doctrine; but it has changed greatly, passing through the rich imagination of the interpreter.
Neoplatonism Plotinus
In 244 Plotinus moved to Rome and became one of the famous lecturers there. Thanks to the 26-year activity of Plotinus in the capital of the empire, many people became enthusiastic followers of Neoplatonism and its ascetic morality, renounced worldly fuss, indulged in asceticism. Combining strict asceticism with the Greek bright mood of the soul, Plotinus led a temperate life, avoided sensual pleasures, and did not eat meat. Neoplatonism spread even in court circles. His zealous followers were Emperor Gallienus and his wife, noble nobles and aristocrats. After the death of Plotinus, his closest student became the distributor of Neoplatonism Porfiry(233-305), a Syrian from Tire (real name - Malchus). Porfiry wrote a biography of his mentor and put in order his writings, which Plotinus, who had a poor command of the Hellenic language, did not give careful processing.
The greatest philosopher of Neoplatonism Plotinus with his students
The writings of Plotinus make up six "nine books" (enneads). They clearly show the influence of the Jewish religious philosophy of Philo and Egyptian mythological symbolism. The system of Plotinus is imbued with romantic mysticism. He believes in the appearance of gods and spirits to people, accurately describes different categories of spirits, believes in divination, promotes mysteries and witchcraft, which, in his opinion, is based on sympathy, connecting all objects in the world. The Neoplatonism of Plotinus calls for raising the soul, purified by asceticism from sensuality, to such a height where it acquires the ability to “contemplate the deity”, mysteriously unite with God in rapturous love. Through the mouth of Plotinus, Neoplatonism asserts that the thinking spirit of man is only the outflow of God, that the universe has a living soul, which, like the human individual, longs to return to God.
Head of a statue from the Roman harbor of Ostia. Presumably - a portrait of the Neoplatonist Plotinus
Truth (identical to good) in Plotinus is not a postulate of thinking, as in Plato, but the source of everything that exists, accepted by faith that does not allow any doubts. Neoplatonism tried to bring contemplation to such an exaltation in which a person feels the divine nature in himself. In this way, the Neoplatonists opened a path for human thinking, which it had not entered before him among the Western peoples, becoming the forerunners of Christian philosophers. He posed the question that became the supreme question of their thinking. In Neoplatonic theology, all the threads of ancient Greek philosophy were connected: the mind (“nous”) of Anaxagoras, the single unchanging being of Parmenides, the eternal primitive unit of the Pythagoreans, the ideas of goodness of Socrates and Plato, the motionless, moving mind of Aristotle, the divine nature of the Stoics. In Plotinus, all these beginnings are moments and active forces in the divine triad.
Iamblichus - basic ideas
Plotinus' idea of a spiritual triad was developed by his students Amelius and Theodore. The system of Neoplatonism became from this even more mystical than before. Porfiry's disciple went even further Iamblichus(c. 245 - 325), a native of the Celesirian city of Chalkis, the true founder of philosophical syncretism. Plotinus and Porfiry considered the contemplation of God through ecstasy, the mystical union of the soul of the sage, purified by self-deepening and asceticism, with God in blissful moments of delight to be the highest triumph, the goal of philosophical striving. Iamblichus, a student of Porphyry, combines the sensual ideas of Eastern mysticism and the demonology of contemporary superstition with Platonic idealism and Pythagorean mystical number theory, and developed from this mixture the Neoplatonic doctrine of the continuous intervention of spirits in human life. The basis of his ideas was fantasy, similar to witchcraft and based on theurgic symbolism. Iamblichus distributed the gods, angels, various spirits into classes, taught the means to call them and force them to serve the will of the caster. These means were symbols, prayers, spells, consecrations, and various other rites of sorcery. Part of Iamblichus's treatise "On the Pythagorean Life" has come down to us, and the treatise "On the Egyptian Mysteries" has come down, attributed to him, but perhaps not belonging to him. Numerous students, the most important of which were Sopater of Apamepe, Aedesius of Cappadocia, Prisk of Thesprotia, supported and disseminated the main ideas of Iamblichus, sometimes being persecuted by Christian emperors. Julian the Apostate warmly patronized this theurgy. After the death of this last pagan emperor, her followers, exhausted from the grief of disappointment, were crushed by persecution. A contemporary of Julian, Eunapius, described in pompous style the life of the "divine" Iamblichus, with complete faith in all his fantastic thoughts and in his miracles.
Longinus
Of the students of Ammonius Sakkas, the most famous after Plotinus is Longinus (born c. 213 - d. 273), who earned great fame for his learning, courageous character and nobility of soul. He was a man of bright mind, a zealous researcher of truth, and therefore could not long remain an adherent of a vague Neoplatonism. But, having rejected Neoplatonism, he did not join any other of the then dominant philosophical schools. Longinus strengthened his mind by studying Plato and other great thinkers, expanded his concepts by travels, lived for some time in Athens as a teacher, after which he devoted himself to political activity, but did not leave scholarly studies. He wrote many essays. Before us, only one treatise by Longinus - "On the Sublime". The language of this treatise is pure, the exposition is lively, and in content it is such a wonderful work that one must regret the death of Longinus' other writings. Subsequently, he became an adviser Palmyra queen Zenobia, was executed Emperor Aurelian for devotion to her and accepted death with the courage and calmness of a hero and sage.
Neoplatonist Proclus
The last phase of the development of Neoplatonism is the activity Proclus(412-485). This thinker, who lived in Athens in the 5th century, was the last support of the falling paganism, the rites of which he could perform at home only in secret. For loyalty to the ancient religion, Proclus was subjected to slander and persecution. He was a very educated person. His comments on Plato's dialogues show that Proclus had many-sided knowledge; he had a poetic talent. And yet, a person with such qualities, who, moreover, lived in Athens, in the center of the classical world, in the spirit of all Neoplatonists, engages in fantastic constructions, clings to ancient myths and rituals in order to quench the thirst of his soul, believes in the empty talk of charlatans who covered up their absurd inventions with the names of famous philosophers. This pitiful sight testifies to the mental impotence of decrepit paganism. Reading Proclus, we do not know whether to respect his spiritual attachment to ancient legends and national deities, or to laugh at the stupidity of fantasy with which this educated man of a noble soul, an impeccable life, hasslefully builds from rotten materials the building of Neoplatonic theosophy on the basis of Eastern demonology and other mystical nonsense, builds a pantheon of pagan dogmas and philosophies on sand and marsh mud.
The disciples of Proclus, Isidore of Damascus and Simplicius, were the last preachers of pagan philosophy. Justinian ordered to close their auditoriums. These Neoplatonists retired to Persia, hoping to find there the promised land of their fantasies. But, deceived in expectations, they returned to their homeland and lived out their life there in obscurity, not disturbed by anyone, but with shattered hopes, with doubt in their souls. Neoplatonism is gone. However, some of his ideas had a profound effect on the development of theosophy that survived him.
NEOPLATONISM- the final period in the history of ancient Platonism. The teaching of Plotinus (204-269) is considered the beginning of Neoplatonic philosophy.
The characteristic features of Neoplatonism are the doctrine of a hierarchically arranged world, generated from the ultimate principle, special attention to the theme of the "ascension" of the soul to its source, the development of practical ways of uniting with the deity (theurgy) based on pagan cults, in connection with this, a steady interest in mysticism , Pythagorean symbolism of numbers.
Ancient Neoplatonism existed as a school philosophy and was focused on commenting on Plato's dialogues and the systematic development of his teachings. Amelius and Porphyry belonged to the school of Plotinus in Rome.
Already in this early period, the basic concepts of the Neoplatonic system were developed: United above being and thinking, it can be known in the supramental transcendence of discourse (ecstasy); in an excess of its power, the One generates by emanation, i.e. as if radiating the rest of reality, which is a successive series of steps of the descent of the one. The unity is followed by three hypostases: being-mind, which contains all ideas, living in time and facing the mind, the world soul, and the visible cosmos generated and organized by it. At the bottom of the world hierarchy is formless and qualityless matter, provoking any higher level to the generation of its less perfect likeness. The system of Plotinus was expounded by him in a series of treatises published after the death of Plotinus by Porphyry under the title Ennead. Fixed in Ennead the anti-Aristotelian position of Plotinus in the further development of Neoplatonism is replaced by the recognition of the role of Aristotle as a follower of Plato, the philosophy of Aristotle, in particular his logic, is understood as an introduction to the philosophy of Plato. Beginning with Porphyry, neoplatonism begins a systematic interpretation of the writings of Plato and Aristotle.
Iamblichus, the founder of the Syrian school, studied with Porphyry Neoplatonism . Iamblichus is known as the developer of the system of studying and commenting on Plato (the so-called canon of Iamblichus from 12 dialogues of Plato), as a fan of theurgy - the mystical practice of communicating with gods and spirits through ritual magic. The final stage in the study of philosophy under Iamblichus was the interpretation of Orphic texts and Chaldean oracles, and religious worship became an obligatory element of school life closed from external interest. The disciples of Iamblichus were: his successor Sopater of Apamea, Dexippus, Theodore of Asin and others.
One of the students of Iamblichus, Aedesius, founded the Pergamon School of Neoplatonism, which continued the traditions of the Syrian. Its representatives were Chrysanthius, Sallust, the author of the work About the gods and the world, Eunapius, author of a valuable description of the philosophy of the Pergamon school Lives of Philosophers and Sophists, Emperor Julian (Apostate). The circumstances of the latter's life fully reflected the characteristic of the 4th century. confrontation in the intellectual life of the empire of Christianity and paganism.
The two main schools of late Neoplatonism were the Athenian and the Alexandrian. The Athenian school was founded under Plutarch of Athens as a continuation of the Platonic Academy, its most prominent figures were Sirian, Proclus, the last head of the Damascus Academy. The Athenian school continued to develop the systematic description of the non-material levels of the world (classification of gods, spirits, ideal entities) carried out by Iamblichus, while resorting to detailed and refined logical constructions. From 437 the Academy was headed by Proclus, who summed up the development of Platonism within the framework of pagan polytheism, compiled many commentaries on Plato's dialogues and wrote a number of fundamental works, some of which have survived (for example, Theology of Plato). The Alexandrian school became a continuation of the Athenian school. Hierocles, Hermias, Ammonius, Olympiodorus, Simplicius, John Philopon belonged to it. This school is primarily known for its commentary activities, and the writings of Aristotle became the main object of attention in it. The Alexandrians showed great interest in mathematics and natural science, many of them converted to Christianity (Philoponus). The last representatives of the school (Aelius, David) are known as compilers of educational comments on the logic of Aristotle.
Neoplatonism had a huge impact on the development of medieval philosophy and theology. The conceptual apparatus developed at the school, the doctrine of striving for the imperishable and the eternal, were rethought and entered the context of Christian theology, both in the East (Cappadocians) and in the West (Augustine).
Maria Solopova
IAMBLICH
IAMBLICH
(Iamwlichus) (no later than 280, probably in 245 - c. 325) - antique. , the founder of the Syrian school of Neoplatonists, a student of the Pythagorean Anatoly, a student, and then an opponent of Porfiry. He was under the strong influence of Pythagoreanism and the Chaldean oracles, connected philosophy. development of the problems of Platonism with theurgy intensively developed by him. The Y. school in Alamey, in which the pagan religious, understood as a necessary part of school life, was systematically sent, for the first time in late Platonism was established as a closed self-sufficient, consciously opposed to Christianity and closed to it. For school use, Ya. compiled a compiling “Code of Pythagorean teachings in 10 books” (five have come down to us: “The Life of Pythagoras”, “Exhortation to Philosophy (Protreptik)”, “On General Mathematical Science”, “Commentary on the Introduction of Nicomachus”, “ Theologians of arithmetic"), comments on Plato, from whose works 12 canonical works were selected, and Aristotle (fragments of comments on Phaedrus, Timaeus and Parmenides have been preserved, separate remarks from the commentary on Alcibiades 1, Phaedo , "Phileb", "Sophist"; there is evidence of Ya.'s comments on "Categories", "Analyst I", "On Interpretation" and on the treatise "On Heaven"); as well as op. “On the Gods”, “On the speech of Zeus in Timaeus”, “Chaldean”, “Platonic Theology”, “On Symbols”, fragments of the treatise “On the Soul”, etc. Ya. also belongs to Op. “On the Egyptian Mysteries” (in 10 books), in which Ya., in response to the “Letter of Anebon”, Porfiry defends theurgy, wearing the mask of the Egyptian priest Abammon.
I. carried out the school development of the Neoplatonic doctrine. In a single Plotinus, I. distinguishes, completely ineffable, and simply one, or "", which, through the opposites of the limit and the infinite, is connected with the one-existing. In the sphere of the mind (nousa), I. firmly distinguishes between the triad of being-life-mind, outlined by Plotinus and developed by Porfiry, i.e. conceivable (being), thinking (mind) of both - which in the triad is placed between the poles of "non-thinking" being and "non-existent" thinking. Thus, along with the "intelligible cosmos" I. introduces "thinking", uniting them in the sphere of the mind. The soul participates in the mind to the extent of its rationality and is placed above all intracosmic souls as . I strictly distinguished the souls of people, eternally connected by intelligible nature, from the souls of animals and did not allow their mutual transition. I divided the gods into supracosmic, relating them to the spheres of existence, the mind and soul, and intracosmic, dividing the latter into creating, animating, combining and preserving. In the doctrine of time and eternity I. believes that there is an intelligible world, and - real, arising from the mind (whereas there are innate bodies).
I. carried out a reform of the Neoplatonic commentary, its essence is to find the only “goal” of the dialogue with which everything is consistent, as well as to establish a hierarchy of types of interpretation, which begins with the physical and ethical interpretation, goes back to the mathematical and ends with the metaphysical. Under the influence of Y., the Pergamon and Athenian schools of Neoplatonism were formed. Y. was extremely great right up to the Florentine Academy in Italy in the 15th century.
Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Gardariki. Edited by A.A. Ivina. 2004 .
IAMBLICH
from Chalkis (Syria) (no later than 280, probably at 245,- OK. 330) , antique Neoplatonist philosopher, student and later opponent of Porfiry. He was under the strong influence of Pythagoreanism and the Chaldean oracles, connected with theurgy intensively developed by him. According to J. Dillon, op. Ya can be divided into 3 groups: Pythagorean-hermetic [compilative "Code of Pythagorean teachings in 10 books." (we got five), written for school use], Porphyrian-Platonic (comm. to Plato and Aristotle) and op., who made up the original contribution of Ya. to the Neoplatonic. philosophy and written after the death of Porphyry: “On the Gods”, “On the speech of Zeus in the Timaeus”, “Chaldean Theology”, “Platonic Theology”, “On Symbols” and others Probably ya belongs op."On the Egyptian Mysteries".
I. carried out the school development of Neoplatonic. doctrine. In the one, Plotina Y. distinguishes the one, completely ineffable, and simply the one, or “good,” which, through the opposites of the limit and the infinite, is connected with the one-existing. In the realm of the mind (nusa) I. firmly distinguishes between the triad of being-life-mind, outlined by Plotinus and developed by Porfiry, i.e. conceivable (being) thinking (mind) and the identity of both is life, which in the triad is placed between the poles of "non-thinking" being and "non-existing" thinking. T. about., along with the "intelligible cosmos" I. introduces the "thinking cosmos", uniting them in the sphere of the mind. The soul participates in the mind to the extent of its rationality and is placed above all vnutrikosmich. souls as a monad. I strictly distinguished the souls of people, eternally connected by intelligible nature, from the souls of animals and did not allow their mutual transition. I divided the gods into supracosmic, relating them to the spheres of existence, the mind and soul, and intracosmic, dividing the latter into creating, animating, combining and preserving. I. holds the doctrine of time and eternity, believing that eternity is the measure of the intelligible world, and time is a real entity that flows from the mind (whereas space is only an innate property of bodies).
I. carried out a reform of the Neoplatonic. commentary, its essence is in finding the only "goal" of the dialogue, with which the entire interpretation is consistent, as well as in establishing a hierarchy of types of interpretation, which begins with the physical. and ethical interpretation, goes back to the mathematical and ends with the metaphysical. Under the influence of Y., the Pergamon and Athenian schools of Neoplatonism were formed, the authority of Y. was extremely great right up to the Florentine Academy in Italy 15 in.
Do vita pythagorica liber, ed. A. Naurk, Petropoli, 1884; ditto, ed. L. Deubner, Lpz., 1937; Protrepticus, ed. H. Pistelli, Lpz., 1888; De communi mathematica seientia liber, ed. N. Festa. Lpz., 1891; In Nicoraachi arithmeticam mtroduetianem liber, ed. H. Pistelli, Lpz., 18L4; Theologounieria aritlinietirae, ed. V. de Falco, Lpu., 1922 (these five treatises are l,2,."i,4 p 7th book."Code of Pythagorean Teachings"); De rnysteriis liber, ed. (i. Par they, B., 18??7; lamblichi C. halcidensis in Platonis dialogos commentariorum fragmenta, ed. with traust, and cuinm. by J. M. Dillon, Leiden 1973.
Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983 .
IAMBLICH
(Jamblichos)
from X alkida, in Syria (c. 330) - an ancient philosopher; pupil of Porfiry. Founded the so-called. the Syrian school of Neoplatonism, of which he was the most prominent representative; borrowed the Platonic doctrine of emanation, put Eastern theology above the Greek. philosophy and, although he himself fought against Christ. his Eastern way of thinking had a decisive influence on Christ., theology. In his teachings, there are numerous analyzes of concepts: the division of the primordial essence into two, nous - into hypostases of the intelligible and intellectual, the trinity of the soul, and other triads; therefore Hegel regarded him as the first representative of the "dialectical method".
Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .
IAMBLICH
(Ἰάμβλιχος) (b. c. 280 - d. c. 330) - antique. philosopher, founder of the Syrian school of Neoplatonism, a student of Porfiry, who continued the line of development of Neoplatonism, leading from Plotinus, to the field of mysticism and theurgy. Ya. belongs to a large "Code of Pythagorean teachings", from which five treatises have come down to us. In the theoretical Philosophy Ya. continued DOS. the tendency of Neoplatonism to multiply and terminology, to consolidate the various aspects of Plotinus's three hypostases. I divided the “One” of Plotinus – quite in the spirit of Plotinus – into two principles: the “One”, which is above all knowledge and being and above any name, and the “One”, which is the beginning of everything that follows and therefore deserves the name as "single" and "good". Ya. divided the "mind" into thinkable (νοηρός) and thinking (νοερός), indicating thus. to the presence of a subject and an object. Both of these minds are divided in Y. triadically. The conceivable "mind" contains 1) the "father", or ""; 2) "potency" and 3) "potencies" (Damasc. I 108, 17-24 Ru.); the thinking one is 1) mind, 2) life and 3) demiurge. Each of this thinking triad is also triadic. All thinking minds, according to Ya., are ideas, and thinkable minds are prototypes (Procl. in Tim. I 230, 5-8 321, 24-30 Diehl; Damasc. De princ. II 149, 25 fl.). I also represented the “soul” triadically (Procl. II 105, 15–18, II 240, 4–12), interpreting the first soul in the spirit of Plotinus as transcendental and absolute, and the other two as emanating from it and as intracosmic (Procl in Tim. I 308, 15-310, 2).
In the philosophy of mythology, Y. introduces a large number of gods of various levels: the gods of the superworld (pure minds and souls), the gods of heaven, or "leaders", who lead the 12 world spheres (earth, water, air, fire, seven planets and ether), then the heavenly gods and, finally, "guardian" gods and demons for individuals and nations (Procl. in Tim. I 145, 5-12). In the spirit of Neoplatonism, the division of the gods is triadic in Ya. According to Ya. (Procl. in Tim. II 313, ff. 15), there is 1) that in which he participates (or imitates), i.e. participation, 2) the participant itself, and 3) the average that unites them. I also understood each of these three moments triadically. In this developed system of categories Ya tried to cover all the main deities of ancient mythology. On the whole, these views of I. represent the efforts of a dying language clothed in philosophical forms. polytheism to defend its own for life in the face of victorious Christianity with its monotheism.
In practical philosophy Ya. also restored the ancient religion with its rituals, miracles, prophecies, omens, prayers, and in general with all its cult. He considered the main thing in man to be faith in the gods and with them, in comparison with all other virtues - moral, political. and even purely internal ones are inferior. Ya. wanted to understand the essence of theurgy, mantika, sacrifice and prayer and give a classification of the main. phenomena in each of these religions. areas (treatise "On the Egyptian mysteries").
Great historical-philosophical. had a method of commenting on Plato's dialogues in Y., to which all the later Neoplatonic. comments. Interpreting Plato with t. sp. developed Neoplatonism with its doctrine of the hierarchy of being and the mutual reflection of all of it, I. accordingly interpreted any Plato in all possible aspects - ethical, logical, cosmological, physical, etc. I survived this method for a long time, reaching the Platonic Academy in Florence and finding an admirer in the person of Pico della Mirandola, not to mention his influence on the entire world literature of occultism.
Texts.: Iamblichi... de vita Pythagorica liber, ed. M. T. Kiessling, I–IIa, IIb, Lipsiae, 1815–16; Iamblichi de vita Pythagorica liber, rec. A. Nauck, Petropoli, 1884; Iamblichi Protrepticus, ed. H. Pistelli & Lipsiae, 1888; Iamblichi in Nicomachi anthmeticam introductionem liber, ed. H. Pistelli, Lipsiae, 1894; Περί τῆς κοινῆς μαϑηματικῆς ἐπιστήμης, ed. N. Festa and Lipsiae, 1891; Theologumena arithmeticae, ed. v. de Falco, Lipsiae, 1922; Jamblichi de mysterus liber rec. G. Parthey, Berolini, 1857.
Lit.: History of Philosophy, vol. 1, M., 1940, p. 372–75, Bidez J., Le philosophe Jamblique et son école, "Revue des études grecques", 1921, t. 32, an. 1919, p. 29–40.
A. Losev. Moscow.
Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M .: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970 .
IAMBLICH
IAMBLICH (Ίάμβλιχος - transcription of the Syrian or Aramaic yanıiku “he is a king”) from Chalkis (Syria) (not later than 280, probably in 245, - c. 325) - an ancient Neoplatonist philosopher, a student of the Pythagorean Anatoly, a student, and then an opponent of Porfiry. He was under the strong influence of Pythagoreanism and the Chaldean oracles, combined the philosophical development of the problems of Platonism with theurgy, which he intensively developed. The school of Iamblichus in Apamea, in which a pagan religious cult was systematically practiced, understood as a necessary part of school life, was first established in late Platonism as a closed self-sufficient organism, consciously opposed to Christianity and closed to it. For school use, Iamblichus compiled a compilation “Code of Pythagorean teachings in 10 books.” (five have come down to us: “The Life of Pythagoras”, “Exhortation to Philosophy (Protreptic)”, “On General Mathematical Science”, “Commentary on the Introduction of Nicomachus”, “Theologians of Arithmetic”), comments on Plato, from whose works 12 were selected canonical (see the Athenian school), and Aristotle (fragments of commentaries on “Phaedrus”, “Timaeus” and “Parmenides”, separate remarks from comments on “Alcibiades I”, “Phaedo”, “Philebus”, “Sophist” have been preserved; there are evidence of comments by Iamblichus on the “Categories”, “Analyst I”, “On the Interpretation” and on the treatise “On the Sky”), as well as the works “On the Gods”, “On the Speech of Zeus in the Timaeus”, “Chaldean Theology”, “Plato’s Theology”, “On Symbols”, fragments of the treatise “On the Soul”, etc. Iamblichus also owns the essay “On the Egyptian Mysteries” (in 10 books), in which, in response to “Letter to Anebon” by Porphyry, he defends theurgy, putting on mask of the Egyptian priest Abammon.
Iamblichus carried out the school development of the Neoplatonic doctrine. In the One of Plotinus, he distinguishes a single, completely ineffable and simply one, or “good”, which, through the opposites of the limit and the infinite, is connected with the one-existing. In the sphere of the mind (nous), Iamblichus firmly distinguishes between the triad of being-life-mind, outlined by Plotinus and developed by Porphyry, that is, the thinkable (being), thinking (mind) and the identity of both - life, which in the triad is placed between the poles of the “unthinking ” being and “non-existent” thinking. Thus, along with the “intelligible cosmos”, Iamblichus introduces the “thinking cosmos”, uniting them in the sphere of the mind. The soul participates in the mind to the extent of its rationality and is placed above all intracosmic souls as a monad. Iamblichus strictly distinguished the souls of people, eternally connected by intelligible nature, from the souls of animals and did not allow their mutual transition. Iamblichus divided the gods into supracosmic, relating them to the spheres of being, mind and soul, and intracosmic, dividing the latter into creating, animating, combining and preserving. Iamblichus develops the doctrine of time and eternity, believing that eternity is the measure of the intelligible world, and time is a real entity emanating from the mind (whereas space is only an innate property of bodies).
Iamblichus carried out a reform of the Neoplatonic commentary, supposing it in finding a single “goal” (σκοπός) of dialogue, with which all interpretation is consistent, as well as in establishing a hierarchy of types of interpretation, which begins with the physical and ethical interpretation, goes back to the mathematical and ends with the metaphysical. Under the influence of Iamblichus, the Pergamon and Athenian schools of Neoplatonism were formed, his authority was extremely great right up to the Florentine Academy in Italy in the 15th century.
Cit.: De vita pythagorica, ed. L. Deubner. Lipsiae, 1937 (cur. U. Mein. Stuttg., 1975); lamblichus. On the Pythagorean Vtey of Life, text, transi., and notes by J. Dillon and J. Hershbell. Atlanta, 1991, trad. franc, par L. Brisson et A. P. Segonds. P., 1996; Protrepticus, ed. H. Pistelli. Lipsiae, 1888, Stuttg., 1967 (index); De communi mathematica scientia liber, ed. N. Pesta. Lipsiae, 1891 (cur. U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975); In Nicomachi arithmeticam introductionem liber, ed. H. Pistelli. Lipsiae, 1894 (cur. U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975); Theologumena arithmeticae, ed. V. de Falco. Lipsiae, 1922 (cur. U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975) (these five treatises are books 1,2,3,4 and 7, respectively, of the Code of Pythagorean Teachings); Les mystères d "Egypte, texte et. et trad. par E. des Places. P., 1966; In Platonis dialogos commentariorum fragmenta, ed. with transi, and comm. by J. Dillon. Leiden, 1973; De anima, trad. par A. J. Festugière, in: La Révélation d "Hermès Tristmégiste, t. III: Les doctrines de l "âme, p. 177-264 (extensive notes). Russian translation: The Life of Pythagoras, translation and introduction by R. V. Svetlov. St. Petersburg, 1997; trans. V. B Chernyshevsky, M., 1997; On the Egyptian Mysteries, translated and introductory article by L. Yu. .: Knowledge beyond science, compiled by I. T. Kasavin, Moscow, 1996.
Lit .: Losev A.F. History of ancient aesthetics. Last centuries, book. 1. M., 1988, p. 122-301; Dalsgaard Larsen B. Jamblique de Chalcis. Exegète et philosophe, vol. 1-2. Aarhus, 1972 (Appendice Testimonia et fragmenta exegetica); Larsen B. D. La place de Jamblique dans la philosophie antique tardive. Places E. des. La religion de Jamblique.- De Jamblique a Proclus, Neuf Exposés suivis de Discussions, prép. par H. Dorrie, àndoeuvres-Gen., 1975 (Entretiens sur l "Antiquité classique XXI), p. 1-26, 69-102; SfeelC. The changing Self. A study on the Soul in later Neoplatonism: lamblichus, Damascius, and Priscianus Brux., 1978; Dillon J. lamblichus of Chalcis. - ANRW II, 36.2, 1987, p. 862-909; O "Meara D. Pythagoras revived. Oxf-, 1989; Nasemann S. Theurgie und Philosophie in Jamblichs “De mysteriis”. Stuttg., 1991.
Yu. A. Shichalin
New Philosophical Encyclopedia: In 4 vols. M.: Thought. Edited by V. S. Stepin. 2001 .
See what "YAMVLICH" is in other dictionaries:
IAMBLICH- IAMBLICH (Ίάμβλίχος) from Chalkis in Syria (c. 245/250 c. 326 AD), Neoplatonist philosopher, founder of the Syrian School of Neoplatonism; gave the Neoplatonic tradition a new direction of development, oriented towards greater religiosity; ... ... ancient philosophy
(Iamwlichus) (no later than 280, probably in 245 - c. 325) - antique. philosopher, founder of the Syrian school of Neoplatonists, student of the Pythagorean Anatoly, student and then opponent of Porfiry.
(Iamwlichus) (no later than 280, probably in 245 - c. 325) - antique. philosopher, founder of the Syrian school of Neoplatonists, student of the Pythagorean Anatoly, student and then opponent of Porfiry. He was under the strong influence of Pythagoreanism and the Chaldean oracles, connected philosophy. development of the problems of Platonism with theurgy intensively developed by him. The Y. school in Alamea, in which a pagan religious cult was systematically practiced, understood as a necessary part of school life, was first established in late Platonism as a closed self-sufficient organism, consciously opposed to Christianity and closed to it. For school use, Ya. compiled a compiling “Code of Pythagorean teachings in 10 books” (five have come down to us: “The Life of Pythagoras”, “Exhortation to Philosophy (Protreptik)”, “On General Mathematical Science”, “Commentary on the Introduction of Nicomachus”, “ Theologians of arithmetic"), comments on Plato, from whose works 12 canonical works were selected, and Aristotle (fragments of comments on Phaedrus, Timaeus and Parmenides have been preserved, separate remarks from the commentary on Alcibiades 1, Phaedo , "Phileb", "Sophist"; there is evidence of Ya.'s comments on "Categories", "Analyst I", "On Interpretation" and on the treatise "On Heaven"); as well as op. “On the Gods”, “On the speech of Zeus in the Timaeus”, “Chaldean Theology”, “Platonic Theology”, “On Symbols”, fragments of the treatise “On the Soul”, etc. Ya. also belongs to Op. “On the Egyptian Mysteries” (in 10 books), in which Ya., in response to the “Letter of Anebon”, Porfiry defends theurgy, wearing the mask of the Egyptian priest Abammon.
I. carried out the school development of the Neoplatonic doctrine. In the one, Plotina Ya distinguishes between the one, completely ineffable, and simply the one, or "good", which, through the opposites of the limit and the infinite, is connected with the one-existing. In the sphere of the mind (nousa), I. firmly distinguishes between the triad of being-life-mind, outlined by Plotinus and developed by Porfiry, i.e. thinkable (being), thinking (mind) and the identity of both - life, which in the triad is placed between the poles of "non-thinking" being and "non-existent" thinking. Thus, along with the "intelligible cosmos" I. introduces the "thinking cosmos", uniting them in the sphere of the mind. The soul participates in the mind to the extent of its rationality and is placed above all intracosmic souls as a monad. I strictly distinguished the souls of people, eternally connected by intelligible nature, from the souls of animals and did not allow their mutual transition. I divided the gods into supracosmic, relating them to the spheres of existence, the mind and soul, and intracosmic, dividing the latter into creating, animating, combining and preserving. In the doctrine of time and eternity, I. believes that eternity is the measure of the intelligible world, and time is a real entity emanating from the mind (whereas space is an innate property of bodies).
Ya. carried out a reform of the Neoplatonic commentary, its essence is to find the only “goal” of the dialogue with which all interpretation is consistent, as well as to establish a hierarchy of types of interpretation, which begins with the physical and ethical interpretation, goes back to the mathematical and ends with the metaphysical. Under the influence of Y., the Pergamon and Athenian schools of Neoplatonism were formed, and Y.'s authority was extremely great right up to the Florentine Academy in Italy in the 15th century.
Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Gardariki. Edited by A.A. Ivina. 2004 .
Iamblichus
from Chalkis (Syria) (no later than 280, probably in 245, - ca. 330), antique. Neoplatonist philosopher, student and later opponent of Porfiry. He was under the strong influence of Pythagoreanism and the Chaldean oracles, combined Neoplatonism with the theurgy that he intensively developed.
from Chalkis (Syria) (no later than 280, probably in 245, - ca. 330), antique. Neoplatonist philosopher, student and later opponent of Porfiry. He was under the strong influence of Pythagoreanism and the Chaldean oracles, combined Neoplatonism with the theurgy that he intensively developed. According to J. Dillon, Op. Ya can be divided into 3 groups: Pythagorean-hermetic [compilative "Code of Pythagorean teachings in 10 books." (five have come down to us), written for school use], Porphyrian-Platonic (comments on Plato and Aristotle) and works., which constituted the original contribution of Ya. to Neoplatonic. philosophy and written after the death of Porfiry: “On the Gods”, “On the speech of Zeus in the Timaeus”, “Chaldean Theology”, “Platonic Theology”, “On Symbols”, etc. Probably I. belongs to Op. "On the Egyptian Mysteries".
I. carried out the school development of Neoplatonic. doctrine. In a single Plotina I. distinguishes a single completely ineffable and simply one, or "good", which through the opposites of the limit and the infinite is connected with the one-existing. In the sphere of the mind (nusa), I. firmly distinguishes between the triad of being-life-mind, outlined by Plotinus and developed by Porfiry, that is, the thinkable (being), thinking (mind) and the identity of both - life, which in the triad is placed between poles of "unthinking" being and "non-existing" thinking. Thus, along with the "intelligible cosmos" I. introduces the "thinking cosmos", uniting them in the sphere of the mind. The soul participates in the mind to the extent of its rationality and is placed above all vnutrikosmich. souls as a monad. I strictly distinguished the souls of people, eternally connected by intelligible nature, from the souls of animals and did not allow their mutual transition. I divided the gods into supracosmic, relating them to the spheres of existence, the mind and soul, and intracosmic, dividing the latter into creating, animating, combining and preserving. I. holds the doctrine of time and eternity, believing that eternity is the measure of the intelligible world, and time is a real entity emanating from the mind (whereas space is only an innate property of bodies).
I. carried out a reform of the Neoplatonic. commentary, its essence is in finding the only "goal" of the dialogue, with which the entire interpretation is consistent, as well as in establishing a hierarchy of types of interpretation, which begins with the physical. and ethical interpretation, goes back to the mathematical and ends with the metaphysical. Under the influence of Y., the Pergamon and Athenian schools of Neoplatonism were formed, and Y.'s authority was extremely great right up to the Florentine Academy in Italy in the 15th century.
Do vita pythagorica liber, ed. A. Naurk, Petropoli, 1884; ditto, ed. L. Deubner, Lpz., 1937; Protrepticus, ed. H. Pistelli, Lpz., 1888; De communi mathematica seientia liber, ed. N. Festa. Lpz., 1891; In Nicoraachi arithmeticam mtroduetianem liber, ed. H. Pistelli, Lpz., 18L4; Theologounieria aritlinietirae, ed. V. de Falco, Lpu., 1922 (these five treatises are l,2,."i,4 p 7th book of the Code of Pythagorean Teachings); De rnysteriis liber, ed. (i. Par they, V. , 18??7, lamblichi C. halcidensis in Platonis dialogos commentariorum fragmenta, ed. with traust, and cuinm., by J. M. Dillon, Leiden 1973.
Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983 .
Iamblichus
(Jamblichos) from Xalqida, in Syria (d. c. 330) - an ancient philosopher; pupil of Porfiry. Founded the so-called. Syrian school of Neoplatonism, of which he himself was the most prominent representative
(Jamblichos)
from X alkida, in Syria (d. c. 330) - an ancient philosopher; pupil of Porfiry. Founded the so-called. the Syrian school of Neoplatonism, of which he himself was the most prominent representative; borrowed the Platonic doctrine of emanation, put Eastern theology above the Greek. philosophy and, although he himself fought against Christ. his Eastern way of thinking had a decisive influence on Christ., theology. Numerous analyzes of concepts take place in his teaching: the division of the primordial essence into two, the nous into the hypostases of the intelligible and the intellectual, the trinity of the soul, and other triads; therefore Hegel regarded him as the first representative of the "dialectical method".
Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .
Iamblichus
IAMBLICH (b. c. 280 - d. c. 330) - antique. philosopher, founder of the Syrian school of Neoplatonism, a student of Porfiry, who continued the line of development of Neoplatonism, leading from Plotinus, to the field of mysticism and theurgy.
IAMBLICH (b. c. 280 - d. c. 330) - antique. philosopher, founder of the Syrian school of Neoplatonism, a student of Porfiry, who continued the line of development of Neoplatonism, leading from Plotinus, to the field of mysticism and theurgy. Ya. belongs to a large "Code of Pythagorean teachings", from which five treatises have come down to us. In the theoretical Philosophy Ya. continued DOS. the tendency of Neoplatonism to multiply and terminology, to consolidate the various aspects of Plotinus's three hypostases. I divided the “One” of Plotinus – quite in the spirit of Plotinus – into two principles: the “One”, which is above all knowledge and being and above any name, and the “One”, which is the beginning of everything that follows and therefore deserves the name as "single" and "good". "Mind" I. dismembered into conceivable (??????) and thinking (??????), indicating thus. to the presence of a subject and an object. Both of these minds are divided in Y. triadically. The conceivable "mind" contains 1) the "father" or "being"; 2) "potency" and 3) "thinking of potency" (Damasc. I 108, 17-24 Ru.); the thinking one is 1) mind, 2) life and 3) demiurge. Each moment of this thinking triad is also triadic. All thinking minds, according to Ya., are ideas, and thinkable minds are prototypes (Procl. in Tim. I 230, 5-8 321, 24-30 Diehl; Damasc. De princ. II 149, 25 fl.). I also represented the “soul” triadically (Procl. II 105, 15–18, II 240, 4–12), interpreting the first soul in the spirit of Plotinus as transcendental and absolute, and the other two as emanating from it and as intracosmic (Procl in Tim. I 308, 15-310, 2).
In the philosophy of mythology, Y. introduces a large number of gods of various levels: the gods of the superworld (pure minds and souls), the gods of heaven, or "leaders", leading the 12 world spheres (earth, water, air, fire, seven planets and ether), then the gods celestial and, finally, "guardian" gods and demons for individuals and nations (Procl. in Tim. I 145, 5-12). In the spirit of Neoplatonism, the division of the gods is triadic in Ya. According to Ya. (Procl. in Tim. II 313, ff. 15), there is 1) something in which something participates (or what it imitates), i.e. the subject of participation, 2) the participant itself, and 3) the mean that unites them. I also understood each of these three moments triadically. In this developed system of categories Ya tried to cover all the main deities of ancient mythology. On the whole, these views of I. represent the efforts of a dying language clothed in philosophical forms. polytheism to defend its right to life in the face of victorious Christianity with its monotheism.
In practical philosophy Ya. also restored the ancient religion with its rituals, miracles, prophecies, omens, prayers, and in general with all its cult. He considered faith in the gods and communication with them to be the main thing in a person, in comparison with all other virtues - moral, political. and even purely internal ones are inferior. Ya. wanted to understand the essence of theurgy, mantika, sacrifice and prayer and give a classification of the main. phenomena in each of these religions. areas (treatise "On the Egyptian mysteries").
Great historical-philosophical. the method of commenting on Plato's dialogues in Y. was important, to which all the later Neoplatonic. comments. Interpreting Plato with t. sp. developed Neoplatonism with its doctrine of the hierarchy of being and the mutual reflection of all its spheres, I. accordingly interpreted any dialogue of Plato in all possible aspects - ethical, logical, cosmological, physical, etc. This method Y. long outlived antiquity, reaching the Florentine Platonic Academy and finding an admirer in the person of Pico della Mirandola, not to mention his influence on the entire world literature of the occult.
Texts.: Iamblichi... de vita Pythagorica liber, ed. M. ?. Kiessling, I–IIa, IIb, Lipsiae, 1815–16; Iamblichi de vita Pythagorica liber, rec. A. Nauck, Petropoli, 1884; Iamblichi Protrepticus, ed. H. Pistelli & Lipsiae, 1888; Iamblichi in Nicomachi anthmeticam introductionem liber, ed. H. Pistelli, Lipsiae, 1894; ???? ??? ?????? ?????????? ?????????, ed. ?. Festa and Lipsiae, 1891; Theologumena arithmeticae, ed. v. de Falco, Lipsiae, 1922; Jamblichi de mysterus liber rec. G. Parthey, Berolini, 1857.
Lit.: History of Philosophy, vol. 1, M., 1940, p. 372–75, Bidez J., Le philosophe Jamblique et son ecole, "Revue des etudes grecques", 1921, t. 32, an. 1919, p. 29–40.
A. Losev. Moscow.
Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M .: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970 .
Iamblichus
IAMBLICH (????????? - transcription of the Syrian or Aramaic yaniiku "he is a king") from Chalkis (Syria) (not later than 280, probably in 245, - c. 325) - an ancient Neoplatonist philosopher, a student of the Pythagorean Anatoly , student and then opponent of Porfiry.
IAMBLICH (????????? - transcription of the Syrian or Aramaic yaniiku "he is a king") from Chalkis (Syria) (not later than 280, probably in 245, - c. 325) - an ancient Neoplatonist philosopher, a student of the Pythagorean Anatoly , student and then opponent of Porfiry. He was under the strong influence of Pythagoreanism and the Chaldean oracles, combined the philosophical development of the problems of Platonism with theurgy, which he intensively developed. The school of Iamblichus in Apamea, in which a pagan religious cult was systematically practiced, understood as a necessary part of school life, was first established in late Platonism as a closed self-sufficient organism, consciously opposed to Christianity and closed to it. For school use, Iamblichus compiled a compilation "Code of Pythagorean teachings in 10 books." (five have come down to us: “The Life of Pythagoras”, “Exhortation to Philosophy (Protreptic)”, “On General Mathematical Science”, “Commentary on the Introduction of Nicomachus”, “Theologians of Arithmetic”), comments on Plato, from whose writings 12 were selected canonical (see the Athenian school), and Aristotle (fragments of comments on Phaedrus, Timaeus and Parmenides have been preserved, separate remarks from the comments on Alcibiades I, Phaedo, Philebus, Sophist; there are evidence of Iamblichus' comments on the "Categories", "Analyst I", "On the Interpretation" and on the treatise "On Heaven"), as well as the works "On the Gods", "On the speech of Zeus in the Timaeus", "Chaldean theology", “Plato’s Theology”, “On Symbols”, fragments of the treatise “On the Soul”, etc. Iamblichus also owns the essay “On the Egyptian Mysteries” (in 10 books), in which, in response to Porphyry’s “Letter to Anebon”, he defends theurgy, putting on mask of the Egyptian priest Abammon.
Iamblichus carried out the school development of the Neoplatonic doctrine. In the One of Plotinus, he distinguishes a single, completely ineffable and simply one, or "good", which, through the opposites of the limit and the infinite, is connected with the one-existing. In the sphere of the mind (nous), Iamblichus firmly distinguishes between the triad of being-life-mind, outlined by Plotinus and developed by Porphyry, that is, the thinkable (being), thinking (mind) and the identity of both - life, which in the triad is placed between the poles of the "unthinking "being and "non-existent" thinking. Thus, along with the “intelligible cosmos”, Iamblichus introduces the “thinking cosmos”, uniting them in the sphere of the mind. The soul participates in the mind to the extent of its rationality and is placed above all intracosmic souls as a monad. Iamblichus strictly distinguished the souls of people, eternally connected by intelligible nature, from the souls of animals and did not allow their mutual transition. Iamblichus divided the gods into supracosmic, relating them to the spheres of being, mind and soul, and intracosmic, dividing the latter into creating, animating, combining and preserving. Iamblichus develops the doctrine of time and eternity, believing that eternity is the measure of the intelligible world, and time is a real entity emanating from the mind (whereas space is only an innate property of bodies).
Iamblichus carried out a reform of the Neoplatonic commentary, supposing it in finding the only "goal" (??????) of the dialogue, with which all interpretation is consistent, as well as in establishing a hierarchy of types of interpretation, which begins with the physical and ethical interpretation, goes back to mathematical and ends with a metaphysical one. Under the influence of Iamblichus, the Pergamon and Athenian schools of Neoplatonism were formed, his authority was extremely great right up to the Florentine Academy in Italy in the 15th century.
Cit.: De vita pythagorica, ed. L. Deubner. Lipsiae, 1937 (cur. U. Mein. Stuttg., 1975); lamblichus. On the Pythagorean Vtey of Life, text, transi., and notes by J. Dillon and J. Hershbell. Atlanta, 1991, trad. franc, par L. Brisson et A. P. Segonds. P., 1996; Protrepticus, ed. H. Pistelli. Lipsiae, 1888, Stuttg., 1967 (index); De communi mathematica scientia liber, ed. N. Pesta. Lipsiae, 1891 (cur. U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975); In Nicomachi arithmeticam introductionem liber, ed. H. Pistelli. Lipsiae, 1894 (cur. U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975); Theologumena arithmeticae, ed. V. de Falco. Lipsiae, 1922 (cur. U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975) (these five treatises are books 1,2,3,4 and 7, respectively, of the Code of Pythagorean Teachings); Les mysteres d "Egypte, texte et. et trad. par E. des Places. P., 1966; In Platonis dialogos commentariorum fragmenta, ed. with transi, and comm. by J. Dillon. Leiden, 1973; De anima, trad. par A. J. Festugiere, in: La Revelation d "Hermes Tristmegiste, t. III: Les doctrines de l "ame, p. 177-264 (extensive notes). Russian translation: Life of Pythagoras, translation and introductory articles by R. V. Svetlov. St. Petersburg, 1997; trans. Chernyshevsky, M., 1997; On the Egyptian Mysteries, translated and introductory article by L. Yu. .: Knowledge beyond science, compiled by I. T. Kasavin, Moscow, 1996.
Lit .: Losev A.F. History of ancient aesthetics. Last centuries, book. 1. M., 1988, p. 122-301; Dalsgaard Larsen B. Jamblique de Chalcis. Exegete et philosophe, vol. 1-2. Aarhus, 1972 (Appendice Testimonia et fragmenta exegetica); Larsen B. D. La place de Jamblique dans la philosophie antique tardive. Places E. des. La religion de Jamblique.- De Jamblique a Proclus, Neuf Exposes suivis de Discussions, prep. par H. Dorrie, andoeuvres-Gen., 1975 (Entretiens sur l "Antiquite classique XXI), p. 1-26, 69-102; SfeelC. The changing Self. A study on the Soul in later Neoplatonism: lamblichus, Damascius, and Priscianus Brux., 1978; Dillon J. lamblichus of Chalcis. - ANRW II, 36.2, 1987, p. 862-909; O "Meara D. Pythagoras revived. Oxf-, 1989; Nasemann S. Theurgie und Philosophie in Jamblichs "De mysteriis". Stuttg., 1991.
Yu. A. Shichalin
New Philosophical Encyclopedia: In 4 vols. M.: Thought. Edited by V. S. Stepin. 2001 .
Iamblichus
IAMBLICH of Chalcis in Syria (c. 245/250 - c. 326 AD), Neoplatonist philosopher, founder of the Syrian School of Neoplatonism; gave the Neoplatonic tradition a new direction of development, oriented towards greater religiosity; was strongly influenced by Pythagoreanism and the "Chaldean Oracles".
IAMBLICH (?????????) from Chalcis in Syria (c. 245/250 - c. 326 AD), Neoplatonist philosopher, founder Syrian school neoplatonism; gave the Neoplatonic tradition a new direction of development, oriented towards greater religiosity; experienced a strong influence Pythagoreanism and "Chaldean Oracles".
A LIFE. I. came from a noble family, his ancestors were the ancestor of the kings of Emesa Sampsigeram, who lived in the middle. 1 in. BC e. (Strab. XVI2, 10), and Monim - supposedly the semi-legendary founder of Chalkis (Dillon 1987, b. 865), his family was among the richest and most prosperous in Plain Syria; the very name 4???????? is a transcription of the Syriac or Aramaic ya-mliku "he is a king".
Ya's first teacher was a Pythagorean Anatoly, comrade and fellow student porfiria by school Longina, then he studied with Porphyry himself in Rome. According to Eunapius (Eun. V. Soph. V, 1), in the school of Porfiry, Ya. very soon succeeded so much that there was “not a single subject left in which he would not surpass his teacher.” The only thing that Ya always lacked was Porfiry's inherent beauty and lightness of style. His writings were not only not conducive to reading, but rather "distracted the reader from themselves and tormented his ears" (V. Soph. V, 3). It is possible that at some point a gap occurred between the teacher and the student, so that already in the 90s Y. returned from Rome to Syria, where a philosophical circle began to form around him. After living for several years in Apamea, where the student of Plotinus Amelius moved an extensive library after the death of a teacher, he moved to Antioch and founded his own philosophical school in one of its suburbs, Daphne, where he taught until the end of his life (Jo. Malal. Chron. 312, 11).
The most important element of schooling Y. makes worship, the joint administration of pagan religious cults with students, which turns his school into a closed self-sufficient institution capable of resisting the growing strength of Christianity. Glory soon spreads about him as a divine man who enters into direct communication with gods and demons, he is credited with the gift of prophecy and the ability to perform miracles; they say that during prayer he rises into the air and spreads a bright radiance around him (Eun. V. Soph. V, 1, 7-9). Such a rumor attracts numerous disciples to Y., who hope, thanks to him, to join the ancient wisdom of the pagan mysteries. In the later Neoplatonic tradition, the epithet "divine" is steadily assigned to him. The most famous of his students were Sopater of Apamea, Edesius from Cappadocia (who transferred the school of Y. from Daphne to Pergamum and became the so-called founder Pergamon school), Theodore Asinsky and Deksippus.
WORKS. It is practically impossible to establish the exact number and chronological order of Y.'s works. An attempt made by J. Dillon to build a chronology of Y.'s work, based on the assumption of the growing influence of the "Chaldean Oracles" on him (Dillon 1973), did not receive recognition. Nevertheless, the thematic division of Y.'s work proposed by him into three periods - Pythagorean, Neoplatonic and Chaldean - is convenient to use in order to systematize both the surviving works of Y. (Dillon 1987, b. 875-878).
I. Compilative “Code of Pythagorean Teachings” belongs to the Pythagorean period (???????? ??? ??????????? ????????) in 10 books, of which only the first four have come down to us: 1) “On the Pythagorean Life”: an exposition of the semi-legendary biography of Pythagoras and the history of the Pythagorean union; 2) "Protreptik" (or "Exhortation to Philosophy"): a popular introduction to philosophy, accompanied by an interpretation of 39 Pythagorean sayings; 3) “On the General Mathematical Science”: a discourse on the nature of number and on the ability of numerical ratios to serve as a reflection of both the intelligible and the sensible world; 4) “Commentary on Nicomachus’ Introduction to Arithmetic”: a detailed paraphrase of the work, supplemented by excerpts from Pythagorean literature Nicomachus of Gerasa. In books 5 and 6 "On Arithmetic in Physics" and "On Arithmetic in Ethics", which are partially reconstructed from the fragments preserved by Michael Psellos (O "Meara D. Pythagoras revived, p. 53-76), outlined in previous books, the basic principles of Pythagorean arithmetic apply to nature and society. Book 7, "On Arithmetic in Theology," contains reflections on the mystical meaning of the numbers of the first ten; excerpts from it were included in the compendium Theologians of Arithmetic compiled by an unknown author, which was previously attributed to Ya himself. The last three books of the Code were devoted to Pythagorean geometry, music and astronomy. Thus, the entire work as a whole was a complete outline of the Pythagorean doctrine, designed to cover all the traditional parts of philosophy: ethics, physics and theology - and using the most general principles of mathematics as logic. The non-surviving commentary on Pythagoras' "Golden Verses" can also be attributed to the same period.
P. The Neoplatonic period includes: the treatise On the Soul, which is predominantly doxographic in nature (preserved in the form of excerpts in the Anthology by Stobeus and, possibly, in the commentary attributed to Simplicius to Aristotle's On the Soul); commentaries on Plato's dialogues: "Timaeus", "Alcibiades I", "Phaedo", "Phaedrus", "Sophist", "Philebus" and "Parmenides", extracts from which, scattered throughout the writings of the Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonists, were collected and published J. Dillon (Dillon 1973); commentaries on the Aristotelian "Categories", "On Interpretation", "Analyst I", "Metaphysics", "On Heaven" and "On the Soul" (almost completely lost); and letters to students devoted to various issues: “On fate”, “On dialectics”, “On music”, “On the upbringing of children”, “On virtue”, “On unanimity”, “On prudence”, “On courage”, “ On Justice”, “On the Benefits of Marriage” and others, also preserved by Stobey.
III. Of the Chaldean, or theological, works of Ya., only one has come down to us: “The answer of the teacher Abammon to Porfiry’s letter to Anebon and the resolution of the difficulties contained in it” in 10 books, better known as “On the Egyptian Mysteries” (De mysteriis), which was first attributed to this treatise by Marsilio Ficino in the Latin edition of 1497; this is one of the early works of Ya., written during the life of Porfiry. The treatise "On the Gods", which served as material for Sallust's book "On the Gods and the World" and for the 4th and 5th speeches of the imp. Julian, can be found in the form of passages in Stobeus. Works "On sculptures", "On symbols", "Plato's theology" and an extensive commentary in 28 books. on the "Chaldean Oracles" under the title "The Most Perfect Chaldean Theology" are almost completely lost.
PHILOSOPHY.
metaphysical principles. The basis of the philosophical doctrine of I. is determined by the classic for Neoplatonism scheme of three supersensible hypostases: One - Mind - Soul. Ya. belongs to a number of important innovations, which made it possible to significantly rework the original Neoplatonic idea of supersensible reality: 1) the doctrine of the “two” Ones, designed to clarify the concept of the beginning in Neoplatonic metaphysics; 2) the introduction of the terms "incommunal" (?????????), "communal" (???????????) and “participating” (?,??????), describing the relationship of consequences to the causes that give rise to them; 3) the doctrine of the "impenetrability" for each other of different levels of reality; 4) the law of the "middle term", which explains the transition from one hypostasis to another; and 5) the final formulation of the triadic scheme of Neoplatonism: stay - departure - return.
According to I., in order for the beginning to be able to generate everything, it should have nothing in common with the generated, and since both the existing and the non-existing come from the beginning, it cannot be compared with either one or the other. The beginning cannot be grasped either by affirmation or by negation, it is completely incomprehensible not only for the human, but also for the divine mind. Y. himself prefers to call him "completely inexpressible" (????? ???????) and "ineffable" (?????????). Such a beginning cannot have the divine Mind as its first product, as Plotinus and Porphyry believed. Since the Mind is the first plurality and the first number, its beginning must be something in all respects one and devoid of plurality. However, calling the beginning of the Mind “one” and opposing it to multiplicity, we thereby give it a certain definition and make it dependent on the consequences arising from it, which contradicts the absolute inexpressibility and incompatibility of the beginning with anything (Damasc. De princip. I, 86, 3-87, 24). Therefore, according to Y., beyond the limits of intelligible being, there are immediately two super-existing principles, which are called "two Ones" (see ZELLER III. 2, S. 688).
The concept of "initiation" (???????) first appears in Platonic philosophy to express the relationship between things and ideas: a thing acquires one or another property as a result of joining the corresponding idea, while the idea itself continues to exist separately from the thing, into which only a certain similarity and reflection of the ideal prototype falls. This reflection is sensuously perceived, arising and perishing, and, unlike the transcendent idea, belongs to the thing as its immanent form. Ya., apparently, was the first who extended the Platonic theory of communion to any causal relationship and proposed to describe the corresponding process in terms of: incommunal - communal - communal. According to Ya., each original thing, Tues. h. and each hypostasis, exists in two ways: first by itself, as something “incomprehensible”, and then as “participant” in that which is attached to it. At the same time, the second way of being is a reflection and reflection of the first, so that each lower level of reality turns out to be connected with the higher one by means of similarity, since it contains in an incomprehensible form that characteristic that exists at a higher level in an incomprehensible form. As a result, the number of basic levels of reality in the system of ego doubles: in addition to the world Soul, which is in the body of the cosmos and is “communal” for the cosmos, I. recognizes the existence of an absolutely incorporeal “incommunal” Soul, which not only does not belong to any body, but also does not has nothing to do with him (Procl. In Tim. II, 105, 15). In the same way, he divides the Mind into two independent hypostases: the mind that exists independently of the soul, and the mind that is immanent to the world soul and individual souls (In Tim. ?, 252, 21). It is possible that the teachings of Y. about the “two” Ones was the result of his consistent application of the theory of familiarization with the original.
T. arr., I. - in contrast to Plotinus and Porfiry, who always emphasized the direct presence of different levels of reality in each other - emphasized the transcendence of the higher level in relation to the lower one. The mind, in his opinion, does not act directly in the soul, but through its reflection - the immanent or "attached" mind. Similarly, the Soul cannot dwell in the Mind and contemplate ideas directly: it sees only reflections of ideas in itself - logoi. The same impenetrable boundaries exist within each individual incarnation, for example, within the Soul between human, demonic and divine souls.
Such a closure of each thing within the boundaries of its own nature made the system of I. strictly hierarchical and at the same time deprived it of unity. In order for the transition from one completely separate hypostasis to another to be continuous, I. was forced to introduce intermediary entities, the need for which he substantiated with the help of the so-called. the law of the middle term, which, according to the assumption of some researchers, could get into the metaphysics of Y. through the neo-Pythagorean tradition (Shaw 1995, p. 66). According to this law, things that are dissimilar to each other in two respects must be connected with each other through some third thing (the “middle term”), which in one respect would be identical to one of them, and in another respect to the other. Such a thing both binds and separates the extreme members, forming a triad with them. In "Theologians of Arithmetic" (10, 10-11, 11) as an example of such a "middle" (?,????????) the number 2 is given, which is an intermediate step between the set, representable in the form of 3, and the unity, representable in the form of 1 (for more details, see Anatoly). Other examples of the mediation of extreme terms in Y. are given by Proclus and Simplicius: this is the transition from the inalienable Mind to the Soul through the mind, which is in the Soul and is one of the mental abilities (Procl. In Tim. II, 313, 15), or the transition from the incorporeal the inalienable Soul through the soul of the world to the body of the cosmos (II, 240, 2-15) or the transition from eternity through intelligible time to physical time (Simpl. In Cat. 355, 11-17).
System. The consistent application of the law of the middle term and the division of entities into incomprehensible and incomprehensible led not only to an increase in the total number of hypostases, but also to the complication of the structure of each of them. Instead of a single divine Mind, which included the thinking and conceivable aspects, as was the case with Plotinus, I. have two independent levels of reality - the intelligible and thinking cosmos, each of which breaks up into further sublevels.
Mind. intelligible space (?????? ??????) contains three members: being, life and mind, each of which in turn is also divided into three. Being (TO ael oV), as the first member and "head" of the intelligible triad as a whole, appears immediately after the One and represents the source of being of all things. Ya. also calls it "one-existing" (go b ov) and identifies with the "single" of the 2nd hypothesis of the Platonic "Parmenides" and the category of being in "Sophist". In itself, this being is not yet intelligible, but surpasses both the ideas and the higher kinds of beings, as close as possible to the simplicity and incomprehensibility of the original (Procl. In Tim. I, 230, 5-12). Perhaps the decision of I. to put being above the mind is explained by the following consideration: in Parmenides, Plato proves that the subject of thought must be ahead of thought and be independent of it, otherwise either the thought itself will turn out to be a thought about nothing, or being will consist of thoughts alone (Plat. Parm. 132bc). Nevertheless, perfect being cannot be deprived of either life or mind (Soph. 248e-249a), therefore, these two categories form the second and third members of the intelligible triad in the I system, and life corresponds to the process of being from itself, and the mind - his return to himself. The being that has returned to itself and contemplates itself is already alive and intelligible, therefore the mind, as the third member of the intelligible triad, turns out to be in Ya at the same time the world of ideas, that is, that Platonic “eternal living being that unites in itself all other living beings according to individuals and genera”, according to which the Demiurge creates the visible Universe (Tim. 29c, 37d). Wishing to show that the triad "being - life - mind" was known even to the ancient philosophers, I. puts it in line with various types of triads: Pythagorean (one - two - trinity), Platonic (limit - limitless - mixed), Aristotelian (essence - possibility - reality) and Chaldean (father - strength - mind).
thinking space (?????? ??????) also breaks up in Y. into three triads: the first of them is the mind turned to the intelligible and abiding in itself, the second corresponds to the principle of smart life, and the third - with the creative energy of the mind directed outward (Procl. In Tim. I, 308, 23 -309, 6), which I. identifies with the Platonic Demiurge of the sensual cosmos. According to some sources, I also subdivided the last triad into two triads and a monad, as a result of which the total number of entities belonging to the demiurgical level turned out to be seven, which easily allowed the philosopher to correlate them with the seven-part Demiurge of the Chaldean Oracles (Damsc. De princip I, 237, 11).
SOUL. Y. develops his concept of the soul in polemics with previous Neoplatonists. If for Plotinus and his students Porfiry and Amelius the human soul in its highest, rational part is identical to the Mind and never descends into the field of becoming, and there is no difference in essence between the souls of all creatures inhabiting the cosmos, then I. draws clear distinctions both in the sphere itself Soul, and between Soul and Mind.
According to Ya, the Soul is a self-sufficient (?????????) and a hypostasis completely different from the Mind, acting as an intermediary between corporeal and incorporeal, divisible and indivisible, eternal and transient kinds of being. It can be defined as life emanating from the Mind, which has received independent being, or as "the fullness of logoi", or as "the emanation of the genera of true being ... into being of a lower order" (Stob. 149, 32, 78-89). In the Soul itself, Ya distinguishes three levels. From a single “supra-worldly” or “incommunal” Soul, he produces two “communal” ones: the soul of the world and the one that unites the souls of individual living beings inhabiting the cosmos. In this case, the first acts in relation to the second and third as a generating monad. Not belonging to any body, the supra-mundane Soul is equally inherent in everything in the cosmos, equally animates everything, and is equally separated from everything. That is why, according to Ya., Plato in Timaeus describes it as being both in the middle of the world and outside it (Procl. In Tim. II, 105, 15; 240, 2-15).
In addition to the world soul, the souls of people and heavenly gods also belong to the intracosmic souls. The latter are considered by I. as a middle term between the perfect integrity of the world soul and the disparate multitude of individual human souls: like the soul of the world, the heavenly gods have the perfection of speculation and never lose their purity, but like the souls of people, they animate and set in motion each - one - the only celestial body (Iambl. De myst. V 2). Between divine and human souls there are two more classes of intermediary souls: demons and heroes. The necessity of their existence is dictated by the fact that the essence, force and action (????? - ??????? - ivkpyeia) heavenly gods are in everything opposed to the essence, strength and action of people. Ya. characterizes the existence of the gods as “higher, excellent and completely perfect”, and human souls as “lower, insufficient and imperfect”; the former have the power to do "everything at once, immediately and uniformly", while the power of the latter extends only to separate things at different points in time; the gods "beget all and govern all without any damage to themselves", and the souls of men "are inclined to obey and turn to what they have begotten and govern" (De myst. I 7). The relation of divine and human souls to the body is also different. If the gods are completely free from bodily restrictions and are not enclosed in separate parts of the world, so that they can be associated with certain bodies only to the extent that they exercise their will in them, then the souls of people are dependent on organic bodies inherent in them, since they embody a certain kind of life chosen by the soul even before its descent into the realm of becoming (De myst. I 8-9). Since demons and heroes are called upon to ensure the continuity of the transition from one limit of the spiritual hierarchy to another, Y. endows them with characteristics that combine the properties of gods and people. He describes demons as "multiplied in unity" and "purely mixed with everything", and heroes - as being even closer to division, plurality, confusion and movement, but still retaining unity, purity, stability and superiority over the rest (De myst .I 6). According to a more detailed scheme, between gods and demons there are two more classes of intermediary souls - archangels and angels, and between heroes and people - sublunar and material archons (De myst. II 3). Believing that the soul of one class cannot pass into another, I. denied the theory accepted in early Neoplatonism metempsychosis.
The class of divine souls itself was also divided into three. According to Proclus, I. singled out 12 orders of heavenly gods in it, corresponding to 12 zodiac constellations, 57 "planetary" or heavenly gods and 114 gods acting in the field of formation (???????????? oeoi), that is, below the sphere of the Moon (Procl. In Tim. III, 197, 8). Such an increase in the number of divine entities allowed Y. to easily include in its system all the gods of traditional pagan religions. An example of how he interpreted the image of the sun god in ancient Greek, Roman and Egyptian mythology can be found in the speech of imp. Juliana"To King Helios".
BODY AND MATTER. I. in many ways changed the attitude of the Neoplatonists to bodily nature. The body for him is a natural and necessary stage on the path of the origin of everything that exists from the beginning, and the space and time in which the life of the corporeal cosmos flows are the last manifestations of those divine laws that determine the structure of supersensible reality. Yes, space (?????), defined by Aristotle as the boundary of the embracing body, is for I. just a special case of a more general relationship of the embracing to the embracing, in which various supersensible hypostases are located to each other. Every hypostasis that is the cause of other hypostases embraces (????????) in itself its consequences, just as the whole embraces the parts, or, like space, bodies. In this sense, the Soul, as the immediate cause of the corporeal cosmos, is for it an enclosing boundary and space; the space of the Soul itself is the Mind, and the space of the Mind is God, whom I. also calls the space of all things in general (Simpl. In Cat. 363, 27-364, 1). Similarly, physical time, which is a successive change of moments of the past, present and future, arises because the categories “earlier” - “later” are already present in supersensible reality, where they describe the ontological priority of higher hypostases in relation to lower ones. This transition, which takes place in the sphere of the supersensible, from the ontologically earlier to the later self, he calls the “first” or “intelligible” time. Since such time is absolutely static, it is neither the life of the world Soul, as Plotinus thought, nor the measure and number of motion, as Aristotle believed, nor the rotation of the celestial sphere. Taken by itself, it is the principle of order, present in the form of an independent reality at the level of the Mind and extending its action to everything in the cosmos, including the chaotically moving stream of becoming, which, due to participation in the intelligible world, turns out to be ordered by number and measure. , i.e., it acquires the form of physical time (for more details on the theory of Iamblichus, see the corresponding section in Art. Time).
The very matter of the physical cosmos is for I. the last manifestation of the principle of uncertainty and multiplicity, penetrating all the floors of the cosmic building and originating directly from the “second” One. In De myst. VIII2, 11-13 Ya., describing its origin, writes that God produced matter simultaneously with being, as if highlighting the intelligible essence from the principle of materiality. In mathematical treatises Ya, matter symbolically appears in the form of a binary, since just as 2 in combination with 1 generates the entire set of natural numbers, so matter in combination with the defining and organizing power of the One generates the cosmos. As such, matter is not a source of evil, it is eternal and "life-giving" and is a necessary condition for the perfection of everything that exists. It becomes evil only in the eyes of individual souls, who, having descended into the realm of becoming and becoming excessively attached to the body, fall under the power of the laws that govern bodily nature, and, as a result, are subject to suffering and death. For them, who have forgotten that any partial being arises for the benefit of the Whole, bodily life seems to be a real punishment, since they can no longer adequately perceive the emanations of the gods pouring into the cosmos. So, they perceive the preserving and saving emanations of the god Kronos as inertness and cold, and the motive energies of Ares as excessive and unbearable heat. I. compares this situation with the situation of a sick person, for whom the life-giving warmth of the Sun is a source of constant suffering (De myst. I 18; IV 8).
Theurgy. I. sees the salvation of the individual soul not in flight from everything material, but in a change in the perspective of the gaze, allowing you to see your stay in the body as if from the point of view of the world soul - not as a punishment, but as a divine service, enabling the beauty of the divine Mind to spread its effect down to the last limits of the universe. For integral souls, such as the soul of the world and the souls of the heavenly gods, communication with matter is not detrimental, since the bodies they control do not serve as a source of passions for them and do not interfere with their thinking. The whole enjoys eternal bliss and does not tolerate evil, therefore the task of the human soul is to restore the separateness and isolation of its existence in the unity of world life. However, she cannot accomplish this task on her own. I am convinced that, since the individual soul descends completely into the sensual cosmos, it loses its direct connection with the divine reality and can no longer, simply turning inside itself, find God in the center of its being, as Plotinus believed. For its salvation, the soul needs influence from outside (??????), coming from the gods themselves, and this help from above is granted to her as a result of the performance of certain rites and rituals, united by Ya under the general name of "theurgy" (????????, from veoo?????, lit., "God's work").
Theurgy includes both divine and human action, which meet each other in divination, sacrifice and prayer. Its main method is the use of various material objects - stones, metals, plants and animals - to attract the cleansing and uplifting energies of one or another god to the local world. According to Ya., these objects bear symbols (???????) and signs (?????????) the god who created them, which allows them, under certain conditions, to become perfect receptacles of the divine presence. I. believed that such objects consecrated by the divine presence can help the soul to enter into direct contact with the gods and, while still in a mortal body, achieve immortality and freedom from evil. At the same time, he considered the peak of the theurgical ascent not to dissolve (????????) the soul in the divine, as Numenius thought, and not its complete identification with him, as Plotinus taught, but such participation in “the energies, thoughts and creations of God the Demiurge” (De myst. X 6), in which the soul itself always remains a soul and does not cross the boundaries that define its essence. The action of material symbols is not realized by the soul, therefore, deifications (?????????) it achieves regardless of its intellectual efforts. From the point of view of I., what connects a person with the gods cannot be thinking, otherwise the connection with the heavenly world would fully depend on ourselves, and not on the gods, which is impossible (De myst. II 11). Such a position has usually been regarded by historical science as a tribute to popular superstition and a departure from the rationalistic principles of Greek philosophy and (Dodds 1970, p. 538). However, in a number of modern studies, there has been a tendency to consider the theurgical Platonism of Ya. as an attempt to resolve some purely philosophical problems that arose within the framework of Plotinus' system. According to G. Shaw and J. M. Lowry, I. sought to show that the rationalistic way of describing that Plotinus uses, speaking of the One, should not be taken either for the One itself, much less for union with Him, since this union transcends all understanding . Introducing the distinction between “theology” as a reasoning about the gods and “theurgy” as a real communion with them, Ya., perhaps, wanted to develop more systematically the mystical side of Plotinus’s philosophy and prevent the identification of theoretical philosophy with reality itself, which was outlined among his followers (Shaw 1995, p. .97).
Commentary reform. Ya. carried out a reform of the Neoplatonic commentary, the essence of which was the requirement for unity of interpretation, when all parts of the text, without exception, should be interpreted in accordance with its “purpose” or “subject” (??????). For example, if the dialogue "Timaeus" defined as physical (???????) and its subject - as a reasoning about nature, then the dramatic beginning of the dialogue, and the myth of Atlantis included in it, and the cosmological speech of Timaeus of Locrius himself had to be interpreted in a natural philosophical key (???????). Therefore, it was so important for the commentator to determine in advance the sole purpose of the essay, and it became customary to begin any commentary with its detailed clarification in the introduction. This exegetical rule was put forward by Ya. in contrast to the previously existing habit of separating the beginnings of Platonic dialogues from their main part and interpreting them either in an ethical key (Porfiry), or in a historical one (Origen), or to see them simply as a way to captivate the reader (Longinus). Nevertheless, if mathematical or metaphysical reasoning was encountered in a physical dialogue, I. advised not to neglect direct interpretation, while remembering that different types of interpretation, as well as their corresponding objects, are connected with each other by the principle of analogy. So, the direct mathematical meaning of the phrase can hide the physical and theological content, since the mathematical objects themselves (numbers and geometric figures) are, on the one hand, a reflection of divine ideas, and on the other hand, they are prototypes of physical reality. As a result, the task of the exegete is reduced to, moving from one method of interpretation to another, to consider the same phrase simultaneously from different points of view and to reveal its meaning at different levels of reality - natural, spiritual and divine. This practice makes it possible to discover many meanings at once in an authoritative text and to reconcile the seemingly opposing opinions of former commentators.
Wanting to make it as easy as possible for the commentator to move from ethical to physical and metaphysical interpretation, I. preferred to define the subject of the commented essay as broadly as possible. So, the subject "Phaedra", according to him, is the doctrine of "every kind of beauty" (???????????? ????? - Herrn. In Phaedr. 9, 10), by which one should understand not only sensual beauty, but also intelligible beauty. The same method I. extended to Aristotelian writings. According to Simplicius, he interpreted in a metaphysical spirit certain places from the "Categories", while widely using the method of analogy (Simpl. In Cat. 2, 9-15). Thanks to Ya., the interpretation of authoritative texts was extracted from the captivity of accidents and arbitrariness, in which it was among the middle Platonists and Porphyry. Giving him the rules and bringing into the system, I. told him the nature of the scientific method, which was subsequently accepted with little or no change by the Athenian neoplatonists: Syrian, Proclus, Hermias and Damascus, as well as some representatives of the Alexandrian school, such as Olympiodorus.
Ya. also developed the canon of basic Platonic texts (the so-called "canon of Iamblichus"), which later became mandatory for study in all philosophical schools of late Antiquity. This canon included 12 dialogues, which, in accordance with the traditional parts of philosophy, were divided into ethical, physical, logical and theological. He opened the cycle "Alcibiades I", in which the topic of self-knowledge as the beginning of philosophy was discussed; then came the ethical Gorgias and Phaedo, the logical Cratylus and Theaetetus, the physical Sophist and Politician, and the theological Feast and Phaedrus. At the next stage, the student moved on to more complex dialogues - "Timaeus" and "Parmenides", which I. considered the peaks of Plato's philosophy: "Timaeus" - the peak of its physical part, and "Parmenides" - theological. The training was completed by the dialogue “Phileb”, which dealt with the transcendent good of everything. It is possible that the reading of the Platonic dialogues was originally conceived by Ya. not only as an intellectual, but also as a spiritual exercise, each subsequent step of which had to include the previous one as its necessary condition (Hadot 1981, pp. 13-58). For example, in order to correctly understand Plato's reasoning in the Phaedrus about the uplifting role of erotic attraction, the student first needed to get acquainted with the ascetic motives of the Phaedo and realize the perniciousness of everything bodily for the soul. The result of this ascent was a gradual spiritual transformation of the student, and all Platonic dialogues, despite their obvious divergence on some points, turned out to be in agreement, or "symphony", with each other.
INFLUENCE. The authority of Y. was extremely great among all subsequent Neoplatonist philosophers, starting from the 4th century. and up to the Renaissance. Direct students J. called him the savior of the Greek world and the universal benefactor, and imp. Julian considered him equal to Plato (Jul. Or. IV, 146a) and said that he would rather receive one letter from Y. than become the owner of all the gold of Lydia. Neoplatonists 5th-6th centuries (Sirian, Proclus, Damascus) attached much more importance to the teachings of Y. than to the teachings of Plotinus and saw in him the founder of that direction of the Platonic tradition to which they themselves belonged. However, it is not possible to establish exactly which of the late Platonic concepts belong to Ya. due to lack of evidence. For a long time, the exegetical method developed by I. survived antiquity, finding admirers, in particular, in the person of the representatives of the Florentine Platonic Academy Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola.
Cit.: I. "Pythagorean period": 1) Iamblichus, De Vita Pythagorica liber. Ed. L. Deubner. Lipsiae, 1937 (ed. with additions and correlations by U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975); Iamblichi De Vita Pythagorica. Ed. A. Nauck. Amst, 1965; Iamblichus. On the Pythagorean Life. Transi, with notes and introduction by G. Clark. Liverpool, 1989; Iamblichus. On the Pythagorean Way of Life. Text, tr. and notes by J. M. Dillon and J. Hershbell. Atlanta, 1991 (trad, franc, par L. Brisson et A. P. Segonds. P., 1996); Iamblichus. Life of Pythagoras. Per., vst. Art. and comm. V. B. Chernigovsky. M., 1998; 2) Protrepticus. Ed. H. Pistelli. Lipsiae, 1888 (repr. Stuttg., 1967); Iamblichus. The Exhortation to Philosophy: Including the Letters of Iamblichus and Proclus Commentary on the Chaldean Oracles. Tr. by ansl. S. Neuville and T. Johnson. Grand Rapids (Mich.), 1988; 3) De communi mathematica scientia liber. Ed. N. Festa. Lipsiae, 1891 (ed. with additions and correlations by U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975); 4) In Nicomachi Arithmeticam Introductionem. Ed. H. Pistelli. Lipsiae, 1894 (ed. with additions and correlations by U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975); 5) Theologumena Arithmeticae. Ed. V. de Falco. Lipsiae, 1922; Iamblichus. The Theology of Arithmetic. Tr. by R. Waterfield. Grand Rapids (Mich.), 1988; Iamblichus. Theologians of arithmetic. Per. and approx. V. V. Bibikhina, - LOSEV, IAE. Last centuries. Book. 2. M., 2000, p. 480-508. I. "Neoplatonic period": 6) Iamblichus. DeAnima. Trad, par A. J. Festugiere, - La Revelation d "Hermes Trismegiste. T. III. Les doctrines de l" ame. P., 1953, p. 177-264, Iamblichus. DeAnima. Text, transi, and comm. by J. M. Dillon. Leiden, 2002. III. "Chaldean period": 7) Iambique. Les Mysteres d "Egypte. Texte et. et trad, par E. des Places. P., 1966; Iamblichus. On the Mysteries of the Egyptians, Chaldeans and Assyrians. Tr. by Th. Taylor. L., 18952; Index to "De Mysteriis liber". Ed. by G. Parthey. V., 1857, p. 294-328.; Iamblichus. De mysteriis. Text, tr. and notes by E. C Clark, J. M. Dillon et al. Atlanata, 2003; Iamblichus. On the Egyptian mysteries. Per. and vst. Art. L. Yu. Lukomsky. M., 1995; On the Egyptian mysteries. Per. and comm. I. Yu. Melnikova. M., 2004. 8) Iamblichus. Abammon's teacher's response to Porfiry's letter to Anebony. Per. I. I. Makhankova, - Knowledge beyond science. Comp. I. T. Kasavin. M., 1996; Fragments: Jamblique de Chalcis: Exegete et philosophe. Appendice: Testimona et Fragmenta exegetica. Coll. by W. D. Larsen. Arhus, 1972; lamblichi Chalcidensis. In Platonis Dialogos Commentariorum Fragmenta. Tr. and ed. by J. M. Dillon. Leiden, 1997; Iamblichus of Chalcis.
Iamblichus (Ἰάμβλιχος) (c. 280-330) - ancient philosopher, founder of the Syrian school of Neoplatonism; student porfiria, who continued the line of development of Neoplatonism, leading from Dam, into the realm of mysticism and theurgy.
Philosophical Dictionary / ed.-comp. S. Ya. Podoprigora, A. S. Podoprigora. - Ed. 2nd, sr. - Rostov n/a: Phoenix, 2013, p. 561.
Iamblichus (c. 280 - c. 330) - Greek Neoplatonist philosopher, founder of the Syrian school of Neoplatonism. In his treatises “The Code of Pythagorean Teachings”, “On the Egyptian Mysteries”, Iamblichus puts into philosophical forms pagan polytheism, which is receding into the past in the face of conquering Christianity, with its large number of gods of various levels (gods “heavenly”, “under heaven”, “protecting” people and nations, demons). Being the most important authority in the circles of the last pagans, he is trying to restore theurgy (ritual magic, which he is trying to justify philosophically). His method of commenting on Plato's dialogues in ethical, logical, cosmological and other aspects survived antiquity and found adherents in the Florentine Platonic Academy during the Renaissance.
Kirilenko G.G., Shevtsov E.V. Brief philosophical dictionary. M. 2010, p. 472.
Iamblichus (Ἰάμβλιχος) (c. 250, Chalkis, Syria - c. 330), ancient Greek philosopher, founder of the Syrian school neoplatonism, disciple of Porfiry . Continued the trend of Neoplatonism towards further differentiation of the basic concepts of Plotinus ("One", "Mind" -nus, "Soul"), whose teaching Iamblichus combined with Eastern mysticism. The author of a large "Code of Pythagorean teachings" (5 treatises have been preserved). In its highly developed system of gods of various levels (the gods of the superworld - pure minds and souls, the gods of heaven, leading the 12 world spheres - earth, water, air, fire, seven planets and ether, the heavenly gods and, finally, "protecting" god and demons of individuals and peoples) Iamblichus sought to defend the polytheism of ancient mythology in the face of victorious Christian monotheism. In the treatise "On the Egyptian Mysteries" he tried to give an interpretation and classification of the mantle, sacrifices, and other rites of the ancient religion. Of great historical and philosophical significance was the method of commenting on dialogues Plato Iamblichus (interpretation in all aspects - ethical, logical, cosmological, physical, etc.), which determined all later Neoplatonic comments up to the Platonic Academy of Florence ( Pico della Mirandola and etc.).
A.F. Losev.
Materials of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia are used. In 30 tons. Ch. ed. A.M. Prokhorov. Ed. 3rd. T. 30. Bookplate - Yaya (+ additions). - M., Soviet Encyclopedia. - 1978.
Iamblichus of Chalkis - a famous Neoplatonist philosopher of the late III - early IV centuries. from P. X., pagan, Syrian by nationality. Born in the city of Chalkis in Coele-Syria in the middle or third quarter of the 3rd century, he died about 325 in Antioch the Great. He comes from a rich and noble family. In the late 70s of the 3rd century, he was a student Anatolia, Bishop of Laodicea and famous philosopher of his time. Then, on the recommendation of his teacher, he continued his education in Rome, at the school of Porfiry, a student of the great philosopher Plotinus, and entered the inner circle of his friends. However, in the 90s. there was a break between teacher and student, and Iamblichus returned to Syria. He spent more than 10 years in Apomea, where, some time after the death of Plotinus, Amelius, another student of the great philosopher, moved there, moving a large philosophical library there. During the reign of Emperor Galerius in the East (305-312), Iamblichus went to Antioch and soon, with the money inherited from his family, he founded his own philosophical school in Daphne, a suburb of the Syrian capital, where he lived until his death. Iamblichus wrote for the most part in a chased and aphoristic manner, with the exception of works of an esoteric nature. Iamblichus' comments on Plato's writings became the basis for late Neoplatonism, and their influence can also be traced in Byzantine theological literature up to the works Michael Psellos in the 11th century. In them, Iamblichus developed the idea of a "symphony of dialogues" - the absolute consistency of Plato's works, which he considered "inspired". Unfortunately, these comments of Yavlikh have survived only in the form of quotations in the writings of his followers. In addition, a number of treatises by Iamblichus on Pythagoras and Pythagorean teachings that have survived to our time, an esoteric essay “On the Egyptian Mysteries”, as well as excerpts and extracts from his other works, are known. Most of the writings of Iamblichus are known today only by title.
Byzantine Dictionary: in 2 volumes / [ comp. Tot. Ed. K.A. Filatov]. St. Petersburg: Amphora. TID Amphora: RKhGA: Oleg Abyshko Publishing House, 2011, v. 2, p.537.
Iamblichus (Ίάμβλιχος) from Chalcis (Syria) (no later than 280, probably in 245 - about 330), an ancient Neoplatonist philosopher, student and then opponent of Porfiry. He was under the strong influence of Pythagoreanism and the Chaldean oracles, combined Neoplatonism with the theurgy that he intensively developed. According to J. Dillon, the works of Iamblichus can be divided into 3 groups: Pythagorean-Hermetic [compilative "Code of Pythagorean teachings in 10 books." (five have come down to us), written for school use], Porphyrian-Platonic (comments on Plato and Aristotle) and works that made up the original contribution of Iamblichus to Neoplatonic philosophy and written after the death of Porphyry: “On the Gods”, “On the speech of Zeus in " Timaeus", "Chaldean Theology", "Platonic Theology", "On Symbols", etc. Probably, Iamblichus wrote the essay "On the Egyptian Mysteries".
Iamblichus carried out the school development of the Neoplatonic doctrine. In the one Plotina, Iamblichus distinguishes the one, completely ineffable, and simply the one, or "good", which, through the opposites of the limit and the infinite, is connected with the one-existent. In the sphere of the mind (nusa), Iamblichus firmly distinguishes between the triad of being-life-mind, outlined by Plotinus and developed by Porphyry, that is, the thinkable (being), thinking (mind) and the identity of both - life, which in the triad is placed between the poles of the "unthinking "being and "non-existent" thinking. Thus, along with the "intelligible cosmos" Iamblichus introduces the "thinking cosmos", uniting them in the sphere of the mind. The soul participates in the mind to the extent of its rationality and is placed above all intracosmic souls as a monad. Iamblichus strictly distinguished the souls of people, eternally connected by intelligible nature, from the souls of animals and did not allow their mutual transition. Iamblichus divided the gods into supracosmic, referring them to the spheres of being, mind and soul, and intracosmic, dividing the latter into creating, animating, combining and preserving. Iamblichus teaches about time and eternity, believing that eternity is the measure of the intelligible world, and time is a real entity that flows from the mind (whereas space is only an innate property of bodies).
Iamblichus carried out a reform of the Neoplatonic commentary, its essence being in finding the only “goal” (σκοπός) of the dialogue with which the entire interpretation is consistent, as well as in establishing a hierarchy of types of interpretation, which begins with the physical and ethical interpretation, goes back to the mathematical and ends with the metaphysical. Under the influence of Iamblichus, the Pergamon and Athenian schools of Neoplatonism were formed, the authority of Iamblichus was extremely great right up to the Florentine Academy in Italy in the 15th century.
Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983.
Compositions: Do vita pythagorica liber, ed. A. Naurk, Petropoli, 1884; ditto, ed. L. Deubner, Lpz., 1937; Protrepticus, ed. H. Pistelli, Lpz., 1888; De communi mathematica seientia liber, ed. N. Festa. Lpz., 1891; In Nicoraachi arithmeticam mtroduetianem liber, ed. H. Pistelli, Lpz., 18L4; Theologounieria aritlinietirae, ed. V. de Falco, Lpu., 1922 (these five treatises are l,2,."i,4 p 7th book of the Code of Pythagorean Teachings); De rnysteriis liber, ed. (i. Par they, V. , 18Γι7, lamblichi C. halcidensis in Platonis dialogos commentariorum fragmenta, ed. with traust, and cuinm., by J. M. Dillon, Leiden 1973.
Iamblichus (Ἰάμβλιχος - transcription of the Syrian or Aramaic yamliku "he is a king") from Chalkis (Syria) (not later than 280, probably in 245, - c. 325) - an ancient Neoplatonist philosopher, a student of the Pythagorean Anatoly, a student, and then an opponent of Porfiry. He was under the strong influence of Pythagoreanism and the Chaldean oracles, combined the philosophical development of the problems of Platonism with theurgy, which he intensively developed. The school of Iamblichus in Apamea, in which a pagan religious cult was systematically practiced, understood as a necessary part of school life, was first established in late Platonism as a closed self-sufficient organism, consciously opposed to Christianity and closed to it. For school use, Iamblichus compiled a compilation "Code of Pythagorean teachings in 10 books." (five have come down to us: “The Life of Pythagoras”, “Exhortation to Philosophy (Protreptic)”, “On General Mathematical Science”, “Commentary on the Introduction of Nicomachus”, “Theologians of Arithmetic”), comments on Plato, from whose writings 12 were selected canonical (see the Athenian school), and Aristotle (fragments of comments on Phaedrus, Timaeus and Parmenides have been preserved, separate remarks from the comments on Alcibiades I, Phaedo, Philebus, Sophist; there are evidence of Iamblichus' comments on the "Categories", "Analyst 1", "On the Interpretation" and the treatise "On the Sky"), as well as the essays "On the Gods", "On the speech of Zeus in" Timaeus"", "Chaldean Theology", "Platonic Theology", "On Symbols", fragments of the treatise "On the Soul", etc. Iamblichus also owns the essay "On the Egyptian Mysteries" (in 10 books), in which, in response to "Letter to Anebony" by Porfiry, he defends theurgy by wearing the mask of the Egyptian priest Abammon. Iamblichus carried out the school development of the Neoplatonic doctrine. In the One of Plotinus, he distinguishes a single, completely ineffable and simply one, or "good", which, through the opposites of the limit and the infinite, is connected with the one-existing. In the sphere of the mind (nous), Iamblichus firmly distinguishes between the triad of being-life-mind, outlined by Plotinus and developed by Porphyry, that is, the thinkable (being), thinking (mind) and the identity of both - life, which in the triad is placed between the poles of the "unthinking "of being and "bearing" thinking. Thus, along with the “intelligible cosmos”, Iamblichus introduces the “thinking cosmos”, uniting them in the sphere of the mind. The soul participates in the mind to the extent of its rationality and is placed above all intracosmic souls as a monad. Iamblichus strictly distinguished the souls of people, eternally connected by intelligible nature, from the souls of animals and did not allow their mutual transition. Iamblichus divided the gods into supracosmic, relating them to the spheres of being, mind and soul, and intracosmic, dividing the latter into creating, animating, combining and preserving. Iamblichus develops the doctrine of time and eternity, believing that eternity is the measure of the intelligible world, and time is a real entity emanating from the mind (whereas space is only an innate property of bodies). Iamblichus carried out a reform of the Neoplatonic commentary, its essence is to find the only “goal” (...) of the dialogue with which all interpretation is consistent, as well as to establish a hierarchy of types of interpretation, which begins with the physical and ethical interpretation, goes back to the mathematical and ends with the metaphysical. Under the influence of Iamblichus, the Pergamon and Athenian schools of Neoplatonism were formed, his authority was extremely great right up to the Florentine Academy in Italy in the 15th century.
Theologumena arithmeticae, ed. V. de Falco. Lipsiae, 1922 (cur. U. Klein. Stuttg., 1975) (these five treatises are Books 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7, respectively, of the Code of Pythagorean Teachings); Les mysteres d "Egypte, texte et. et trad, par E. des Places. P., 1966;
In Platonis dialogos commentariorum fragmenta, ed. with transl. and comm. by J. Dillon. Leiden, 1973;
De anima, trad, par A. J. Festugiere, in: La Revelation d "Hermes Tristmegiste, t. Ill: Les doctrines de I" ame, p. 177-264 (extensive notes). Rus. trans.: Life of Pythagoras, trans. and intro. Art. R. V. Svetlova. SPb., 1997; per. V. B. Chernyshevsky. M., 1997;
On the Egyptian Mysteries, trans. and intro. Art. L. Yu. Lukomsky. M., 1995;
The answer of the teacher Abammon to the letter of Porfiry to Anebony, trans. I. I. Makhankova. - In the collection: Knowledge beyond science, comp. I. T. Kasavin. M., 1996.
Literature:
Losev A.F. History of ancient aesthetics. Last centuries, book. I. M., 1988, p. 122-301;
Dalsgaard Larsen B. Jamblique de Chalcis. Exegete et philosophe, vol. 1-2. Aarhus, 1972 (Appendice Testimonia et fragmenta exegetica);
Larsen B. D. La place de Jamblique dans la philosophie antique tardive. Places E. des, La religion de Jamblique.- De Jamblique a Proclus, Neuf Exposes suivis de Discussions, prep, par H. Dorrie, Vandoeuvres-Gen., 1975 (Entretiens sur I "Antiquite classique XXI), p. 1-26 , 69-102;
Steele. The changing Self. A study on the Soul in later Neoplatonism: lamblichus, Damascius, and Priscianus. Brux., 1978;
Dillon J. lamblichus of Chalcis. - ANRW II, 36.2, 1987, p. 862-909;
O Meara D. Pythagoras revived. Oxf., 1989;
Nasemann B. Theurgie und Philosophie in Jamblichs "De mysteriis". Stuttg., 1991.
History of Philosophy, vol. 1, M., 1940, p. 372 - 75;
Ueberweg F., Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, 12 Aufl., Bd 1 - Die Philosophie des Altertums, B., 1926 (lit.).