按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
Iamblichus and Proclus。
Whether or not Iamblichus wrote the famous work usually attributed to him； which describes itself as the letter of Abamnon the Teacher to Porphyry； he became the head of that school of Neoplatonists who fell back on theurgy and magic； and utterly swallowed up the more rational； though more hopeless； school of Porphyry。 Not that Porphyry； too； with all his dislike of magic and the vulgar superstitionsa dislike intimately connected with his loudly expressed dislike of the common herd； and therefore of Christianity； as a religion for the common herd did not believe a fact or two； which looks to us； nowadays； somewhat unphilosophical。 From him we learn that one Ammonius； trying to crush Plotinus by magic arts； had his weapons so completely turned against himself； that all his limbs were contracted。 From him we learn that Plotinus； having summoned in the temple of Isis his familiar spirit； a god； and not a mere daemon； appeared。 He writes sensibly enough however to one Anebos； an Egyptian priest； stating his doubts as to the popular notions of the Gods； as beings subject to human passions and vices； and of theurgy and magic； as material means of compelling them to appear； or alluring them to favour man。 The answer of Abamnon； Anebos； Iamblichus； or whoever the real author may have been； is worthy of perusal by every metaphysical student； as a curious phase of thought； not confined to that time； but rife； under some shape or other； in every age of the world's history； and in this as much as in any。 There are many passages full of eloquence； many more full of true and noble thought： but on the whole； it is the sewing of new cloth into an old garment； the attempt to suit the old superstition to the new one； by eclectically picking and choosing； and special pleading； on both sides； but the rent is only made worse。 There is no base superstition which Abamnon does not unconsciously justify。 And yet he is rapidly losing sight of the real eternal human germs of truth round which those superstitions clustered； and is really further from truth and reason than old Homer or Hesiod； because further from the simple； universal； everyday facts； and relations； and duties of man； which are； after all； among the most mysterious； and also among the most sacred objects which man can contemplate。
It was not wonderful； however； that Neoplatonism took the course it did。 Spirit； they felt rightly； was meant to rule matter； it was to be freed from matter only for that very purpose。 No one could well deny that。 The philosopher； as he rose and became； according to Plotinus； a god； or at least approached toward the gods； must partake of some mysterious and transcendental power。 No one could well deny that conclusion； granting the premiss。 But of what power？ What had he to show as the result of his intimate communion with an unseen Being？ The Christian Schools； who held that the spiritual is the moral； answered accordingly。 He must show righteousness； and love； and peace in a Holy Spirit。 That is the likeness of God。 In proportion as a man has them； he is partaker of a Divine nature。 He can rise no higher； and he needs no more。 Platonists had saidNo； that is only virtue； and virtue is the means； not the end。 We want proof of having something above that； something more than any man of the herd； any Christian slave； can perform； something above nature； portents and wonders。 So they set to work to perform wonders； and succeeded； I suppose； more or less。 For now one enters into a whole fairyland of those very phenomena which are puzzling us so nowadays ecstasy； clairvoyance； insensibility to pain； cures produced by the effect of what we now call mesmerism。 They are all there； these modern puzzles； in those old books of the long bygone seekers for wisdom。 It makes us love them； while it saddens us to see that their difficulties were the same as ours； and that there is nothing new under the sun。 Of course； a great deal of it all was 〃imagination。〃 But the question then； as now is； what is this wonder…working imagination？unless the word be used as a mere euphemism for lying； which really； in many cases； is hardly fair。 We cannot wonder at the old Neoplatonists for attributing these strange phenomena to spiritual influence； when we see some who ought to know better doing the same thing now； and others； who more wisely believe them to be strictly physical and nervous； so utterly unable to give reasons for them； that they feel it expedient to ignore them for awhile； till they know more about those physical phenomena which can be put under some sort of classification； and attributed to some sort of inductive law。
But again。 These ecstasies； cures； and so forth； brought them rapidly back to the old priestcrafts。 The Egyptian priests； the Babylonian and Jewish sorcerers； had practised all this as a trade for ages； and reduced it to an art。 It was by sleeping in the temples of the deities； after due mesmeric manipulations； that cures were even then effected。 Surely the old priests were the people to whom to go for information。 The old philosophers of Greece were venerable。 How much more those of the East； in comparison with whom the Greeks were children？ Besides； if these daemons and deities were so near them； might it not be possible to behold them？ They seemed to have given up caring much for the world and its course …
Effugerant adytis templisque relictis Di quibus imperium steterat。
The old priests used to make them appearperhaps they might do it again。 And if spirit could act directly and preternaturally on matter； in spite of the laws of matter； perhaps matter might act on spirit。 After all； were matter and spirit so absolutely different？ Was not spirit some sort of pervading essence； some subtle ethereal fluid； differing from matter principally in being less gross and dense？ This was the point to which they went down rapidly enough； the point to which all philosophies； I firmly believe； will descend； which do not keep in sight that the spiritual means the moral。 In trying to make it mean exclusively the intellectual； they will degrade it to mean the merely logical and abstract； and when that is found to be a barren and lifeless phantom； a mere projection of the human brain； attributing reality to mere conceptions and names； and confusing the subject with the object； as logicians say truly the Neoplatonists did； then in despair； the school will try to make the spiritual something real； or； at least； something conceivable； by reinvesting it with the properties of matter； and talking of it as if it were some manner of gas； or heat； or electricity； or force； pervading time and space； conditioned by the accidents of brute matter； and a part of that nature which is born to die。
The culmination of all this confusion we see in Proclus。 The unfortunate Hypatia； who is the most important personage between him and Iamblichus； has left no writings to our times； we can only judge of her doctrine by that of her instructors and her pupils。 Proclus was taught by the men who had heard her lecture； and the golden chain of the Platonic succession descended from her to him。 His throne； however； was at Athens； not at Alexandria。 After the murder of the maiden philosopher； Neoplatonism prudently retired to Greece。 But Proclus is so essentially the child of the Alexandrian school that we cannot pass him over。 Indeed； according to M。 Cousin； as I am credibly informed； he is the Greek philosopher； the flower and crown of all its schools； in whom； says the learned Frenchman； 〃are combined； and from whom shine forth； in no irregular or uncertain rays； Orpheus； Pythagoras； Plato； Aristotle； Zeno； Plotinus； Porphyry； and Iamblichus；〃 and who 〃had so comprehended all religions in his mind； and paid them such equal reverence； that he was； as it were； the priest of the whole universe！〃
I have not the honour of knowing much of M。 Cousin's works。 I never came across them but on one small matter of fact； and on that I found him copying at second hand an anachronism which one would have conceived palpable to any reader of the original authorities。 This is all I know of him； saving these his raptures over Proclus； of wh