The Chaldean Oracles: Text, Translation, and Commentary

Although there is an ongoing debate as to what types of rituals may have been practiced in the various Gnostic and Hermetic communities (and, indeed, to what extent such communities even existed)14, it is clear that the Chaldean system included a complex ascent ritual involving purifications, trance, phantasmagoria, sacred objects, magical instruments and formulas, prayers, hymns, and even a contemplative element, all of which was practiced (most likely) in the context of a “mystery community.”15 These and other issues are discussed in detail in the following outline.

I. THEOLOGY

A. First Principles

Chaldean theology largely reflects its Middle Platonic origins, with a stress in particular on the transcendence of the Highest God. In certain fragments, this transcendence approaches a via negativa original: "via negativa" — a theological approach that defines God by what He is not, with the Highest God described as “snatched away” (fr. 3) or “existing outside” his products (fr. 84). In other fragments, however, the Highest God is positively characterized as “Father” (frr. 7, 14), “First” or “Paternal Intellect” (frr. 7, 39, 49, 108, 109), “Monad” (frr. 11, 26, 27), “Source” (frr. 13, 30, 37), and, perhaps, even “One” (frr. 9, 9a). This vacillation between negating and affirming the Highest God is a common feature of Middle Platonism, a thoroughgoing transcendence in these matters achieved principally by Plotinus, whose “One” is not only beyond Intellect, but

14 On the role of cult and ritual in Hermeticism, see, now, J.-P. Mahé, Hermès en Haute-Égypte, I, (Quebec, 1978), pp. 54-59; L. Keizer, The Eighth Reveals the Ninth: A New Hermetic Initiation Disclosure (Seaside, CA, 1974), pp. 6-15; W. C. Grese, Corpus Hermeticum XIII and Early Christian Literature (Leiden, 1979), pp. 40-43; 201-202; G. Fowden, The Egyptian Hermes, (Cambridge, 1987), passim. Other scholars, however, have argued against a cultic and/or ritual Hermeticism, suggesting instead only the existence of a literary phenomenon, with the texts read, perhaps, in the context of a “school” setting. See, e.g., Festugière, Rév., I, p. 84; W. Scott, Hermetica, I (Oxford, 1936; rpt. 1968), pp. 1-8. It should be no surprise, then, that the current debate among scholars on the problem of “Sethian” Gnosticism echoes this same division. See, e.g., F. Wisse, “Stalking those Elusive Sethians,” Rediscovery, II, pp. 564-577, who favors the “literary phenomenon” approach, arguing that there was no Sethian community as such, but only “like-minded Gnostics” reading various texts for the purpose of individual edification. In contrast, H. M. Schenke, “The Phenomenon of Gnostic Sethianism,” Rediscovery, II, pp. 588-616, not only posits the existence of a Sethian community or sect, but argues that the group was organized around a relatively coherent system of doctrine and cultic/ritual practice. A middle position between these extremes is now suggested by G. Stroumsa, Another Seed: Studies in Gnostic Mythology, (Leiden, 1984), e.g., pp. 4-8; 172 and passim.
15 See Lewy, p. 177 ff.; Bidez, “Note sur les Mystères Néoplatoniciens,” RPhH, 7, 1928, pp. 1477-1481; La Vie Julien, pp. 73-81.