Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
38
which both allows the soul to descend into the body and
enables the theurgist to ascend () into the angelic and divine
realms.
39
Iamblichus describes the as (ethereal)
40
and specifcally notes that it is composed of (ether)
41
the Aris-
totelian element of the stars of which all superlunar bodies were
thought to be composed.
42
Proclus (412485 CE) too noted the ethe-
real nature of the , adding the adjective (astral).
43
Hierocles (ffth century CE) as well described the vehicle as both
astral and pneumatic.
44
With the rediscovery of Neoplatonism in the Renaissance, the
theory of the vehicle re-emerges. Marsilio Ficino (14331499) saw the
body as linked to the anima by means of spiritusthe regular Latin
translations of and .
45
For Ficino, spiritus formed the
36. John Finamore, Iamblichus and the Theory of the Vehicle of the Soul, American
Classical Studies, 14 (Chico: Scholars Press, 1985), 1; Robert Christian Kissling,
The - of the Neo-Platonists and the De Insomniis of Synesius of
Cyrene, The American Journal of Philology 43, no. 4 (1922): 31830, 322.
37. The Chaldean Oracles: Text, Translation, and Commentary, edited and translated
by Ruth Majercik, Studies in Greek and Roman Religion, 5 (Leiden: Brill, 1989), fr.
120.
38. Ibid., fr. 196.
39. Ibid., ffr. 119, 1223.
40. Iamblichus, On the Mysteries: Translated With Introduction and Notes, ed. and
trans. Emma C. Clarke, John M. Dillon and Jackson P. Hershbell, Writings from the
Greco-Roman World, 4 (Atlanta: Society for Biblical Literature, 2003), III.14.132,
V.26.239.
41. Iamblichus, In Timaeum, in Iamblichi Chalcidencis: In Platonis diologos commen-
tariorum fragmenta, 106205, edited and translated by John M. Dillon, Platonic Texts
and Translations, 1 (Wiltshire: The Prometheus Trust, 2009), fr. 84.14.
42. Friedrich Solmsen, The Vital Heat, The Inborn Pneuma and the Aether,
The Journal of Hellenic Studies 77, no. 1 (1957): 11923.
43. Proclus, vol. 3 of In Platonis Timaeum commentaria, 3 vols., edited by Ernst
Diehl (Leipzig: Teubner, 19036), 195, 308.
44. H.S. Schibli, Hierocles of Alexandria and the Vehicle of the Soul, Hermes
121 (1993): 1111.
45. Marsilio Ficino, Platonic Theology, 6 vols., ed. James Hankins, trans. Michael
J.B. Allen, The I Tatti Renaissance Library (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
20012006), VII.6.1; Anna Corrias, Imagination and Memory in Marsilio Ficinos
Theory of the Vehicles of the Soul, The International Journal of the Platonic Tradition, 6
(2012): 88, 901.
258 The Pomegranate 15.1 (2013)
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014
souls currus (chariot)
46
or vehiculum (vehicle),
47
and was described as
aetherius (ethereal).
48
It was this ethereal spirit bestowed vita (life) and
sensus (sense) upon the body.
49
Drawing on Ficino as well as the late
classical Neoplatonists, Henry Cornelius Agrippa (14861535) simi-
larly conceived of a universal spiritus mundi (world spirit) that acted
as a transmissive medium through which the anima mundi acted
upon the material world.
50
And, as did his predecessors, Agrippa
identifed spiritus with Aristotles quintam essentiam (ffth element),
or ether, which was the means through which each occulta proprie-
tas (occult property) was conveyed from the stars into the elements.
51
Paracelsus too conceived of spirit as a mean between soul and body,
which conveyed astral infuences into mans terrestrial form.
52
Fol-
lowing Neoplatonic precedent, this spiritual intermediary manifests
itself anthropologically as the gestirnt leib (astral body), which
along with the elementisch (elemental) body comprises ein massa
gwesen sind und ein limus (one slimy mass of mud) which is man.
53
Paracelsus identifes this astral body as the jnner Gestirne (inner
stars),
54
the sidus (star) of the innern himels (inner heaven), and
the siderisch geist (sidereal spirit)which wei was im gestirn
(knows what is in the stars), and imbues man with this knowledge.
55
Thomas Vaughan (16211666), drawing upon both Agrippa and
Paracelsus, serves as a fnal example of Renaissance Neoplatonic
views of the relationship between soul and spirit. Like his pre-
decessors, he conceived of a spiritus mundi that was the medium
46. Ficino, Platonic Theology, IX.5.2.
47. Ibid., XIX.4.3.
48. Ibid., V.13.14.
49. Ibid., XVIII.10.11.
50. William Newman, Thomas Vaughan as an Interpreter of Agrippa von Net-
tesheim, Ambix 29, no. 3 (1982): 12540, 128; Henry Cornelius Agrippa, De occulta
philosophia libri tres, edited by V. Perrone Compagni, Studies in the History of Chris-
tian Thought (Leiden: Brill, 1992), I.11, I.14.
51. Agrippa, De occulta philosophia, X.14.
52. F.R. Jevons, Paracelsus Two-Way Astrology: I. What Paracelsus Meant by
Stars, The British Journal for the History of Science 2, no. 2 (1964): 1401.
53. Paracelsus, Astronomia Magna, oder die ganze Philosophia Sagax der groen und
kleinen Welt, in vol. 12 of Smtliche Werke, 1406, 14 vols., edited by Karl Sudhoff
(Munich and Berlin: R. Oldenbourg, 192933), 58.
54. Paracelsus, Paragranum, in Paracelsus (Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohen-
heim, 14931541): Essential Theoretical Writings, 61296, ed. and trans. Andrew Weeks,
Aries Book Series: Texts and Studies in Western Esotericism, 5 (Leiden: Brill, 2008),
H.2.47.
55. Paracelsus, Astronomia Magna, 301.
Plaisance The Transvaluation of Soul and Spirit 259
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014
through which the soul of nature was diffused and moved its
body.
56
Similarly, he saw spirit as a mere enclosure or vestment
of the soul,
57
and as the celestial, ethereal part of manwhereby
we do move, see, feel, taste and smell, and have a commerce with
all material objects whatsoever.
58
Vaughan further identifes this
spirit with that part of man which Paracelsus calls the sidereal
man (homo sidereus),
59
as the (vehi-
cle and ethereal body) of the Platonists,
60
and as the thin aerial
substance which is the vestment wherein the Soul wraps her-
self when she descends and applies to generation.
61
liphas Lvi
too follows suit with his predecessors, theorizing that there exists
a lumire astrale (astral light) which is identifed as the envel-
oppe de lme (envelope of the soul) and the thr ou le fantme
sidral (ethereal or sidereal phantom).
62
The function of this corps
sidral (sidereal body) is to act as lintermdiaire entre lme et le
corps matriel (the intermediary between the soul and the mate-
rial body).
63
He further clarifes that this corps astral (astral body)
is that qui fait communiquer notre me avec nos organes (which
connects our soul with our bodies).
64
Thus do we see throughout the Neoplatonists of late antiquity, the
Renaissance, and early modernity a consistent and coherent doctrine
in which spirit functions as a transmissive intermediary substance
between soul and body. The spirit is identifed with the ether, and
owing to the fact that the stars are themselves ethereal bodies, the
spiritual portion of man is designated as star-like. While Blavatsky
56. Arlene Miller Guinsburg, Henry More, Thomas Vaughan and the Late
Renaissance Magical Tradition, Ambix 27, no. 1 (1980): 3658.
57. Thomas Vaughan, Anthroposophia Theomagica: Or a Discourse on the Nature of
Man and His State After Death, in The Works of Thomas Vaughan: Mystic and Alchemist
(Eugenius Philalethes), 162, ed. Arthur Edward Waite (New Hyde Park: University
Books, 1986), 17.
58. Ibid., 40.
59. Ibid., 55.
60. Thomas Vaughan, The Fraternity of the Rosy Cross, and a Short Declaration of
Their Physical Work, in The Works of Thomas Vaughan, ed. Arthur Edward Waite (New
Hyde Park: University Books, 1986), 370.
61. Thomas Vaughan, Anima Magica Abscondita: Or a Discourse of the Universal
Spirit of Nature, in The Works of Thomas Vaughan, ed. Arthur Edward Waite (New
Hyde Park: University Books, 1986), 79.
62. liphas Lvi, vol. 1 of Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, 2 vols. (Paris: Germer
Baillire, 1861), 208.
63. Ibid., 278.
64. Lvi, Dogme et Rituel, 2:109.
260 The Pomegranate 15.1 (2013)
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014
does make the same connection between the ether and the astral body/
light,
65
it is the soul, not the spirit, which is identifed as astral and
ethereal throughout Isis Unveiled.
66
This position that soul, then, is
the astral intermediary existing as the mean between spirit and body
is a complete terminological reversal of the entire history of Neo-
platonic usage. As the terms Blavatsky uses to describe the soul
astral, sidereal, etc.are Platonic in origin, her transvaluation
of soul and spirit is confusing, and necessitates that we inquire
as to whether there are historical precedents for this usage and if so,
why she overtly appeals to Platonic sources while covertly relying on
wholly different philosophies.
Stoic and Biblical Infuences
Outside of Neoplatonism, there are two schools of thought which
value as identical with God, the Stoic and the Biblical tradi-
tions. The Stoic position regarding the metaphysical dominance of
spirit has its roots in the Presocratic philosopher Anaximenes (585
528 BCE) who used and (air) as synonyms,
67
and held
that aer deum statuit (air is God).
68
Zeno of Citium (ca. 334ca.
262 BCE), the Stoic progenitor, identifed the Aristotelian ether with
God,
69
noting that God is both ardorem (fery) and is aether nomi-
netur (called ether).
70
Zenos successor, Cleanthes (ca. 330ca. 230
BCE) clearly maintained the aforementioned notion of unity between
and , specifcally identifying God with spiritus.
71
Thus,
while the early Stoics certainly did follow precedent and employed
the term to mean wind, they were certainly part of a tradi-
tion which said that God was .
72
Could the Stoic identifca-
tion of God with fery spirit be an unattributed source of Blavatskys
transvaluation? She does mention the Stoic conception of God as the
65. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 2:59, 185, 234.
66. Ibid., 588, 592.
67. Burton, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh, 74.
68. Cicero, De natura deorum, in De natura deorum, Academica, 2383, ed. and trans.
H. Rackham, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1968), I.10.26.
69. Ibid., I.14.26, Cicero, Academica, in De natura deorum, Academica, 410659, ed.
and trans. H. Rackham, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1968),
II.41.126.
70. Cicero, De natura deorum, I.14.37.
71. Tertullian, Apology, in Apology, De spectaculis, 2229, ed. and trans. T.R.
Glover, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann 1928), XXI.10.
72. Burton, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh, 112.
Plaisance The Transvaluation of Soul and Spirit 261
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014
Divine Soul (Spirit), but not in direct connection with her own
theology.
73
The identifcation of God with the spirit certainly does comport to
Blavatskys usage, but the Stoic insistence on the synonymy of spirit
and ether wholly runs counter to her use of ethereal strictly as an
appellation of the soul. The Stoic notion of fre, too, does not coincide
with Blavatsky, who makes mention of an astral fre
74
and notes
that the ether is both pure and impure fre,
75
both of which link fre
to the soul rather than spirit. Additionallyalthough not a Stoic per
sein the Hellenised Judaic philosophy of Philo of Alexandria (20
BCE50 CE), the logos, or nous, is equated on occasion also with the
Stoic pneuma.
76
In one instance, Philo specifcally identifes
(the divine spirit) as (rational and
intelligent).
77
This identity between and is further deep-
ened by Seneca (ca. 4 BCE65 CE), who tells us that ratio (reason)
is nothing more than the divini spiritus (divine spirit).
78
This
Philonic and Stoic unity comports well to Blavatskys contention of
synonymy between the two terms.
79
However, as Blavatsky does not
directly acknowledge the Stoa or Philo as sources for this idea, this
exegesis must retain a degree of uncertainty.
The Stoic identifcation between God and spirit having shown
itself to be inconclusive, we are left with the possibility of a bibli-
cal origin for Blavatskys transvaluation. As mentioned previously,
Blavatsky does follow precedent in identifying spirit and soul
with the Hebrew and .
80
Additionally, she twice identifes her
spirit with the of Paul of Tarsus (ca. 567 CE).
81
To under-
stand the connection between the biblical view of spirit with Bla-
vatskys, a brief examination of the former is required. Similar to the
Greek , originally bore the meaning of wind, and was
73. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1:317.
74. Ibid., 137.
75. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 2:12.
76. John M. Dillon, The Middle Platonists: 80 B.C. to A.D. 220, rev. ed. (Ithaca: Cor-
nell University Press, 1996), 159.
77. Philo of Alexandria, Questions and Answers on Genesis, ed. and trans. Ralph
Marcus, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1953), II.59.
78. Seneca, Epistles, 3 vols., ed. and trans. Richard M. Gummere, Loeb Classical
Library (London: William Heinemann, 191725), II.66.12.
79. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1:xli, 401; Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 2:112, 282, 284,
496.
80. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1: 181; Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled,2:362.
81. Ibid., 2812.
262 The Pomegranate 15.1 (2013)
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014
later extended to cover those of breath and spirit.
82
And, simi-
lar to the Greek , was used to designate the soul, that entity
which, residing in a living being, makes it alive,
83
which distin-
guishes a living being from inanimate objects.
84
However, distinct
from early Greek concepts of , the Hebrew understanding of
quickly took on a religious dimension, resulting in a composite
usage characterised as physical-religious-psychical as contrasted
with the psychical-vital use of .
85
And, while the early uses of
all four terms display a great degree of parallelism,
86
the Greek trans-
lators of the Septuagint subsumed the extra-Hellenic notion of the
spirit of God present in Old Testament uses of into ,
87
which resulted in the emergence of the Greek expression of an essen-
tially Hebrew idea in the designation , or holy spirit.
88
Still, it is not in the Greek translations of Old Testament literature
where we see the stark valuation of as something above and
beyond ; for this we look to Paul. As Troels Engberg-Pederson
notes, the importance of pneuma in Pauls thought can hardly be
overstated.
89
While Pauls use of is plainly kindred with
the Old Testament usage of , he almost never uses it to refer to
wind or breath. but rather continually and consistently uses it
in reference to the Spirit of God.
90
Neither is Pauls usage strictly
derived from Jewish sources. As is evidenced by his use of Stoic
terminology, his echoing of Stoic phrases, his bringing to expression
conceptions that would have been at home within Stoicism, his use
of Stoic topoi, metaphors, fgures and forms, [and] his use of Stoic
natural theology, Paul was clearly acquainted with Stoic philoso-
phy and seems to have drawn on it rather heavily in the develop-
ment of his own views.
91
Although it is clear that Pauls encounter
82. William Ross Schoemaker, The Use of in the Old Testement and of in
the New Testament (PhD diss., University of Chicago, 1904), 134; Burton, Spirit, Soul,
and Flesh, 55.
83. Burton, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh, 62.
84. Ibid., 65.
85. Ibid., 712.
86. Ibid., 73.
87. Schoemaker, The Use of , 36.
88. Burton, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh, 170.
89. Troels Engberg-Pedersen, The Material Spirit: Cosmology and Ethics in
Paul, New Testament Studies 55, no. 2 (2009): 179197 (179).
90. Ibid., 187.
91. David A. DeSilva, Paul and the Stoa: A Comparison, Journal of the Evangeli-
cal Theological Society 38, no. 4 (1995): 54964 (563).
Plaisance The Transvaluation of Soul and Spirit 263
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014
with Christ and with Judaism shaped his theology to a great degree,
the parallelism between Paul and the Stoics cannot be ignored.
92
In Paul, we fnd a view of that is specifcally tied to
heaven and that it is a physical element (like heaven itself) that may
enter into and transform an earthly, physical bodya position
far more consistent with Stoicism than Judaism.
93
An illuminating
instance of this can be found in I Cor. 15:448 when Paul describes
Adam as a (living soul) with a (nat-
ural body),
94
and then portrays Christ as a
(life-giving spirit) with a (spiritual body). The
difference between the two is that Adam is (earthly) and
Christ is (heavenly).
95
A further example of this is seen
in I Cor. 2:145, where the (natural) man is described as
one who has not received (Gods spirit), and
is thus not himself (spiritual). This usage marks a
contrast between and [that] is wholly foreign to ordi-
nary Greek thoughtbeing the exact converse of the Platonic use,
which treats as inferior to .
96
As much as Paul seems to have drawn on the Stoa, the identity
is far from complete. For, although with the Stoa we do see
identifed with and God, we do not see the Pauline linkage of
and , or the treatment of the ensouled physical body as
the opposite of a heavenly, pneumatic one.
97
What we see in
Paul is at once complete transversal of the Platonic view as well
as a radical appropriation of the Stoa, in which is treated as
the incorporeal and divine faculty, while is the semi-corporal
and embodied faculty. For Pauls exaltation of the over
there is no observed previous parallel,
98
and it seems clear that this
must be the ultimate root of Blavatskys inversion. What is curious,
though, is that while she does refer to Pauls use of as par-
allel with her own twice,
99
uses that appear to comport themselves
92. Ibid., 564.
93. Engberg-Pedersen, The Material Spirit, 186.
94. While this phrase might be literally translated as body of the soul,
here carries more the connotation of natural or worldlyas distinguished from
the transcendent .
95. The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition, ed. Michael W. Holmes (Atlanta: Soci-
ety of Biblical Literature, 2010).
96. Burton, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh, 191.
97. Engberg-Pedersen, The Material Spirit, 190.
98. Burton, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh, 206.
99. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 2: 2812.
264 The Pomegranate 15.1 (2013)
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014
into a Neoplatonic context are legion. The fact, then, that her usage
is essentially Pauline, but is cloaked in a Neoplatonic facade seems
to be an unacknowledged consequence of her syncretic blending of
two terminological apparatuses which are not in agreement.
The Astral Soul and the Augoeides
We now come to the third point in this examination, Blavatskys
description of the soul as astral and sidereal while linking the
spirit with the Augoeides. Although Blavatsky uses the word as
a proper noun, in its original context was an adjective,
meaning luminous or light-like, and was commonly used in
combination with the now familiar descriptor , as well
as other adjectival compounds like (fery) and
(solar)all of which involve the suffx, meaning form or
type.
100
Among its earliest extant uses are those found in the
Chaldean Oracles, where the (luminous body)
is identifed with the pneumatic vehicle used by the theurgist to
engage in (theurgic ascent).
101
Galen, too, makes an early
explicit reference to the (lumi-
nous and ethereal body), demonstrating a further early second cen-
tury linkage between descriptions of the vehicle as pneumatic,
ethereal, and luminous.
102
Moving forward into the Neoplatonism of late antiquity, we
see the term intimately bound up with the theory of
the . Iamblichus describes the theurgists ability to receive
God as achieved by purifying the (lumi-
nous spirit),
103
notes the ethereal nature of this luminous spirit
104