The Delphic Maxim ΓΝΩΘΙ ΣΑΥΤΟΝ in Hermetic Interpretation

Author(s): Hans Dieter Betz

Source: The Harvard Theological Review , Oct., 1970, Vol. 63, No. 4 (Oct., 1970), pp. 465-
484
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Harvard Divinity School

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509168

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

and Cambridge University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Harvard Theological Review

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
VOLUME 63 OCTOBER 1970 NUMBER 4

THE DELPHIC MAXIM

IN HERMETIC INTERPRETATION

HANS DIETER BETZ

SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY
CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA 917 11

As early as 1906 R. Reitzenstein 1 suggested in his study on

"Poimandres" that the "holy word" spoken by the god in ? 18
of that tractate comes from an older source. "Es sind Worte einer

iilteren heiligen Schrift; das zeigen die weiteren Zitate..."

But Reitzenstein was unable to say anything more about this
older source of "holy scripture" which he was suggesting. W.
Scott firmly believed that the first line of the "holy word" came
into the hands of the Hermetist from the Book of Genesis, but
he was certain only about the first, and not about the second part
of the quotation, where he thought the author "had in mind"
God's covenant with man in Gen. 9: i Iff. or the speech of God
in Plato, Tim. 42a. Scott took the quotations in "Poimandres"
? 21 also as insertions,2 but made no real effort to inquire about
their origin.

J. Kroll 3 pointed out that in Hermetic thought "yv&or'&" is

usually "yvi0o-, eoo," but that "Poimandres" takes exception to
that general understanding. He then referred to the sayings in ? ?
18, 19, 21, explaining that the knowledge of man is only "ein
Nebenzweig der Gnosis" intended to clarify the relationship be-
tween man and God.4 Kroll furthermore referred to parallel
doctrines of the Naassenes,5 in the "Pistis Sophia" 6 and in other

1 R. REITZENSTEIN, Poimandres (Leipzig, 1906), 51, note i; cf. id., Die Hellen-
istischen Mysterienreligionen nach ihren Grundgedanken und Wirkungen, 3rd ed.
(Leipzig, 1927), 291.
SW. ScoTT, Hermetica, II (Oxford, 1925), 52-54.
'J. KROLL, Die Lehren des Hermes Trismegistos, 2nd ed. (Miinster, 1928), 372ff.
'lb., 3 72.
S b.; already REITZENSTEIN, Mysterienreligionen, Ist ed. (Leipzig, I9Io), 118
(= 3rd ed., 291) had noted this.
6Ib., Poimandres, 373f.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 466 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

gnostic texts, as well as in Philo.7 He follow

seeing a relationship between the Hermetic conc
edge and the catalog of questions which Nor
gated.8 But he did not offer a suggestion as to
sayings in "Poimandres." ' This state of thin
the edition of A. D. Nock and A. J. Festugie
sayings are treated as quotations without sugges
origin.10
It is the thesis of this paper that the nature of the sayings can
be clarified in a more precise way and that a solution to the prob-
lem of their source can be proposed. First we shall examine the
sayings themselves in their context, and then inquire about their
possible origin.

In the development of the cosmogonic drama which is revealed

in the tractate "Poimandres," ? I8 marks a decisive turning
point. The first cosmic period is fulfilled, and the divine "Will"
decides to dissolve the "bonds of the universe." The reason why
such a decision is made is left in the dark; undoubtedly it is
another of the divine necessities which characterize the progress
of the cosmogonic drama. However, the result of the divine de-
cision is clear: the sexes of the animals as well as of men - which
up to this moment were all androgynous - are now separated,
so that all beings now appear as male or female. Having ac-
complished this, the god issues his "holy word" of two commands.
The first command, addressed to all creatures, human and
animal, but not to the planetary forces, is to procreate and mul-

tiply: AvheaHeO-OE E amVon-Eth KaC'L iTXr)'VE Oi E 7TXrOEL rr bevC cr

K~orattaja KaCL 7,LLLtovpy)JamC.
In the Hermetist's mind this order is surely a terrible curse
lIb., 374, where he lists De somn. I, 53-60, De fuga 46, De migr. Abr. 13; 184ff.
81b., 374f., where he mentions Exc. ex Theod. 78; cf. E. NORDEN, Agnostos
Theos, 4th ed. (Darmstadt, 1956), Io2ff.
'Ib., 375; he suggests POSIDONIUS as the one who propagated the questions
which ultimately go back to the orphic mysteries.
10Hermes Trismegiste, I (Paris, 1945), ad loc., notes 47 and 54. Cf. A. D.
Nocx in a postscript to FESTUGIERE'S edition of the fragments, IV (Paris, 1954),
148f. Quotations of Hermetica are according to this edition.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DELPHIC MAXIM 467

under which, from that moment on,

cording to W. Scott "there can be n
mand came to the author from the B
ing to Scott, the author has altered t
Ev avi&o-Et and E'v r'XjE . . . This fo
but the Hebrew idiom of which it is
in the command 'increase and mult
must therefore suppose that the writ
was not Genesis itself, but some d
original in which the words of Gen
panded." This suggestion has gai
some Gnostic texts from Nag Hamma
known Hermetic tractates, do in f
phrases and expansions of the Gen
possible, of course, that the blessin
had parallels in older creation myths
Genesis share the same kind of older
decision is possible. In any case we
divine blessing of the creation in Gen
perishability in "Poimandres." 13
The second command is a call and
only, that is, to those human beings
Anthropos a portion of the substance

avayvmopLtcarm (0') vvovV Sa 7v Ova ac va

Kat TV a tov o701) aavarov pona, Ka ?civ
"Let the one who has the 'Nous' recogni
love as the cause of death, and all the th

The first line is still part of the co

appeal to those who have the "Nous
from the preceding curse. On the oth
pears to be an addition, not an origin
though the "Jvayvwopi'Ev" is now
n ScoTT, Hermetica, II, 53; similarly C. H
(London, I935), I64f.
" Cf. K. RUDOLPH's recent survey of the pre
ismus, ein Forschungsbericht, ThR 34 (I969), 1
13 Cf. E. HAENCHEN, Aufbau und Theologie
149-91, esp. 177.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
468 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

line also, it does not really fit, and the connection

ra 6vra" is somewhat obscure.
Moreover the parallels in ? 21 make it obvious that the divine
word in ? 18 is a composition out of different elements. As in the
previous section, in ? 21 we have again an explicit reference to the
"word of God" as the source of two sayings which are similar but
not identical.
In the case of the first of these sayings, the god Poimandres asks
the initiate to interpret the following saying:

0 voqo'as- avrov ts aarvov Xwpd.

"He who has recognized himself departs into him(self)."

The exegetical problem which the initiate is supposed to solve con-

cerns the relationship between ",avr4v" and "a'r6v" (scil. "rbv
W'6v"). In his interpretation the initiate shows that the two must
be identical. The Father-god consists of "life and light" (? 9), and
so does his son, the Anthropos (? 12) who is identical with the
"essential man" ("6 oro-t;87s ava0pros" in ? 15) of those who are
"gvvovq" (? I8). To "understand" this means to reverse the en-
tire cosmogony and to return to one's immortal self which is the
divine.
Although Poimandres accepts the answer as correct, he never-
theless reformulates it and supplements what the initiate has left
out in his correct but somewhat clumsy reply. Poimandres sets
forth the correct form of the definition of God and the Anthropos:
"Life and light is the God and Father, out of whom was born the
Anthropos." Then he adds another saying:

EaW ovv /La2ro a yrtv K Kat Cwr vra

Kat OTt EK TOVTOW TV-aYXVElft

Ets ttl7V TL\qXLV XwP?'7aEfts

"If you learn that he is out of life and light

and that you are constituted of the same substances,
you will return into life."

The phrase "6 voro-aq" in the preceding saying must then be in-
terpreted as a condition, for the return to the god does not occur
automatically, but only through "voEiv" and "pavOdvewE." Further-
more, "EL aIrbv X pEn" has a promissory meaning: the return

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DELPHIC MAXIM 469

does not come instantly, but is an eve

time (cf. ?? 22-24). There is still an
initiate has on his mind and which he asks Poimandres to solve for
him. It is the anxious question, "How shall I depart into life (scil.
eternal life)?" The god answers by quoting another saying from
the same source referred to before. This new saying is similar to
the "holy word" in ? 18 and of the same form-critical type:

0 EVVovT av ponrog avayVmpatocr EaVTOov.

"Let him who has the 'Nous' recognize himself."

The god addresses only those who possess an immortal and divine
"self," the "voDV." Form-critically we may call this saying an
"appeal" "4 to the "'vvovT" 15 to realize his own immortality by an
act of redemptive "gnosis." The term used here is "dCvayvwoplEtv,"
indicating the idea of remembrance. The appeal appears here
without the second and third element of ? I8. This raises the
question whether the saying in ? i8 or the sayings in ? 21 are
form-critically primary. A decision can be made in favor of those
in ? 21. We have already pointed to the secondary composition
of the "holy word" in ? I8; in addition we can state that the say-
ings in ? 18, 21 represent form-critical types of sayings of which
many examples are known from other literature.
If we accept this as the most probable solution, we are left
with three similar but not identical sayings, one in ? 18 and two in
? 21. It is then our conclusion that the author of the tractate
found all three sayings in his source material, since all of them are
explicitly marked as quotations from the "holy word of God." "
This phenomenon of a tradition of a saying in different versions
is a problem neither for us,'7 nor for the author of the tractate
14 Cf. the missionary sermon "Poimandres" 27-28, and H. JONAS, Gnosis und
spiitantiker Geist, I, 3rd ed. (GBttingen, 1964), 120-33; id., The Gnostic Religion,
2nd ed. (Boston, 1963), 74-86.
"6 Cf. REITZENSTEIN, Mysterienreligionen, 235, 328.
18 One should not, as SCOTT does, attempt to harmonize them (Hermetica, II,
54f.).
1 Another version is found in C. H. XIII, 22: voep&s y'ws Oeavr7b Kai 7 v
7racrpa Ten'Enn.
PLOTINUS, 7;LierepoP. NOCK-FESTUGkIRE.,
VI, 9, 9, 56ff., but a closerII,parallel
219, note
is 97, refer to theRef.
HIPPOLYTUS, parallel in
X, 34:

TrovrEoT
texts to E.rtG.r WIxmINs,
vwo^ t 0 eavrov,
"Know.ryvobs r v7E
Thyself" r0VK67Lra
in Greek 0e6uP.Literature
and Latin I am indebted for those
(Chicago,
I917), 77, 96. This dissertation is useful as a collection of material. Cf. REITZEN-

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 470 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

himself. He interprets them by reference to

drama, so that for him they mean basically the s
less of the formulation. On the other hand, the d
can illuminate different aspects of the same Her
this reason individual sayings in fact interpret e
sequence of the sayings in ? 21 shows.

II

The problem of the origin of the sayings in "Poimandres" ?? 18

and 21 is not as insoluble as it may seem at first sight. Our thesis
is that they represent interpretations and reformulations of the
famous Delphic maxim "yvOiL o0-avr6v." It must be said that, as
far as we know, the Hermetic writings never quote the maxim
as the Delphic maxim. We shall demonstrate, however, that there
was in fact a tradition of interpretation of the Delphic maxim
which explains the Hermetic sayings. That the Delphic maxim is
found a great number of interpreters in ancient history 19 can be no
surprise to anyone. Its origin is not known with any degree of
certainty; various traditions attribute it to the god Apollo or the
Seven Sages,20 among whom it was Thales or Chilon who is be-
lieved to have first uttered it, while Plutarch ascribes it to the
Amphictyons.21 Many witnesses testify that this maxim, along
with others, was inscribed at the entrance to the temple of Apollo
at Delphi, but it is altogether unknown at what time and exactly
where this was done.22 Equally diverse is its interpretation by the

STEIN, Mysterienreligionen, 29I, note i. J. M. ROBINSON calls my attention to the

new gnostic texts from Nag Hammadi, where several references to self-knowledge
are found: Codex II, tractate 7, p. 140; Codex XI, tractate 3 (cf. J. M. ROBINSON,
The Coptic Gnostic Library Today [NTS I4 (1968), 356-40oi], 392, 401); cf.
also Gospel of Thomas, Log. 67, ed. A. Guillaumont et al. (Leiden, I959); Epistula
Jacobi Apocrypha, ed. R. Kasser et al. (Ziirich, 1968), p. 12, 11. 20-23.
18 On the literary form of the "maxim" cf. M. KRUSE, Die Maxime in der
franzi'sischen Literatur (Hamburger Romanistische Studien, 44; Hamburg, I960),
chapter i, where the history of the form is surveyed.
19 Cf. PLATO, Protag. 343a-b; PLUTARCH, De E ap. Delph. 385d.
20 Cf. B. SNELL, Leben und Meinungen der Sieben Weisen, 3rd ed. (Miinchen,
1952), 6ff.
21PLUTARCH, De garrul. 5IIb.
'Cf. J. DEFRADAS, Les Themes de la Propagande Delphique (Paris, I954),
268ff.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DELPHIC MAXIM 471

various writers and philosophical scho

tions can be divided into two gene
"Know yourself" is an appeal to reali
other, to recognize one's essentially
Hermetic interpretation takes the m
is an appeal to realize one's divine
problems which this study must a
concept of the human "vooV" as a div
of where the Delphic maxim first
your divine 'Nous.' "
As early as 1930 W. Theiler 26 had e
Posidonius upon the Hermetic relig
Posidonius it had been contemplate
that man has a divine element in himself.27 Plato had made the
"voiv" the most eminent and divine part of the human soul.28 He
accepted Anaxagoras' view that the "Nous" reigns in man as in a
microcosm, while reigning as the cosmic ruler in the macrocosm.29
Thus the human "Nous" became intimately associated with the
"Nous" of the universe, an idea which in ever new forms became
a common property of ancient philosophy. Plato seems to have
been the first to interpret the Delphic maxim in the sense that
knowing oneself means knowing one's soul. In the Alcibiades
Maior Socrates distinguishes between the human soul and body.
Since the soul is declared the real self, the maxim must demand
23U. VON WILAMOWITZ-MOEILENDORFF, Erkenne dich selbst, Reden und Vor-
triige, II, 5th ed. (Berlin, 1967), 171-89. Cf. also A. ALTMANN, The Delphic Maxim
in Medieval Islam and Judaism, reprinted in his Studies in Religious Philosophy
and Mysticism (Ithaca, New York, 1969), 1-40.
" This interpretation is summed up in PLUTARCH, De E ap. Delph. 394c, ed. F. C.
Babbitt (The Loeb Classical Library): ... br6jP.nals 'rt rr O-fTr4 rs srept
airbri p 4iaeWS Ka doaOevelas.
2 WILKINs distinguishes between the following interpretations: "Know your
measure," "Know what you can and cannot do," "Know your place," "Know the
limits of your wisdom," "Know your own faults," "Know you are human and
mortal," "Know your soul."
1W. THEILER, Die Vorbereitung des Neuplatonismus (Berlin, 1930), esp. 125ff.;
cf. K. REINHARDT, PW, XXII/I, col. 819; and now H. J. KRAMER, Der Ursprung der
Geistmetaphysik (Amsterdam, 1964), esp. 223ff.
' Cf. J. HAUSSLEITER, Deus internus, RAC, III, 794-842; A. J. FESTUGIiRE, La
Revelation d'Hermis Trismegiste, IV (Paris, I954), 200ooff.
' Cf. G. JAGER, "Nus" in Platons Dialogen (Hypomnemata, 17; G6ttingen,
1967). The term "zv'ovs" in "Poimandres" 18 and 21 seems to come from PLATO,
Tim. 7Ie, where it occurs in a remark about divine inspiration.
* Cf. Phileb. 28c, and on this passage JAGER (see note 28), 115ff.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 472 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

knowledge of one's soul: frvXJ'v pa -rJLk KEXE

LM rdrrmov yvcvaL EavTvrv.30 The way in which
then outlined by Socrates: the only part of m
know itself is the soul, so that "the soul must lo
means at the virtue of the soul which is wisdom
soul is like the divine, so that anyone who loo
that is divine, God and thinking, and so also
sense knows himself." 32
After Plato this view becomes part of the Pl
and by the time of Posidonius God, whom he
a "rYVEv1.a voEPV Kat 7rvpa~s," is in fact identic
self; he is "deus in corpore humano hospitan
may have been the original source which is respon
lowing interpretations of the Delphic maxim.34
view the god Apollo does not order us to know
body and of mind," as Antiochus of Ascalon 3
rather for Posidonius, if he is the author of tha
yourself" means "Know your divine soul." Since t
different from Plato's Alcib. Maior, the passag
I, 52, whether or not it can be ascribed to Posido
in substance, when it declares the human body t
sel for the soul. Only because the command calls
immortal soul, could the Delphic maxim ever hav
to the god Apollo."6
, Alc. I, 30oe; cf. P. FRIEDLXNDER, Platon, II, 3rd ed. (Be
also Alc. I, 13Ia; 132C.
'31Cf. I30c: 160 "X7 o rby pvOpwirov ovpalve3awEv X v?('v.
82 133b: T( BOe dpa T700' 9OLKEV a67r^, Kal rts E l7070 roro X
yvo6s, Oe6v TE KaL /(JPOJltVP , O6TW KaL eavrToV a'P Volfl LuatXLora.
3 SENECA, ep. 31, Ii, ed. R. M. Gummere (Loeb). On POS
the self cf. I. HEINEMANN, Poseidonios' metaphysische Schri
55ff., 66ff.
SThe problem of Posidonius is still a matter of discussion. Cf. K. REINHARDT,
Poseidonios, PW, XXII/I (1953), cols. 558-826; M. POTRLENZ, Die Stoa, 2nd ed.,
I (G5ttingen, 1959), 2o8ff.; II (GUttingen, 1955), Io3ff.; HEINEMANN, Schriften,
I, 69ff., II (Breslau, 1928), 312ff.; K. REINHARDT, Kosmos und Sympathie (Miinch-
en, 1926), 276ff.
5 CICERO, De fin. V, 44, ed. Madvig: "Quod praeceptum quia maius erat, quam
ut ab homine videretur, idcirco assignatum est deo. lubet igitur nos Pythius Apollo
noscere nosmet ipsos; cognitio autem haec est una nostri, ut vim corporis animique
norimus sequamurque eam vitam, quae [rebus] iis perfruatur." On the attribution
to Antiochus see HEINEMANN, Schriften, I, 69; II, 313. Cf. also CICERO, De fin. V,
34; 41; IV, 25.
88 CICERO, Tusc. I, 52, ed. Pohlenz: "Cum igitur 'nosce te' dicit, hoc dicit: 'nosce

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DELPHIC MAXIM 473

This interpretation is carried a step f

70, where the Delphic precept is tak
("mens") should "know its own self a
divine mind, the source of the fullne
Although "mens" corresponds to the H
idea is Stoic, not Hermetic, as the f
shows. The meditation upon the power
kindles the zeal to imitate the divine
certainty whether this passage can b
the same is true for a reference in Cic
concept of "simulacrum," which is imp
is introduced. Again, explicit reference
As a matter of fact the whole section
a wisdom aretalogy and contains nu
tractate "Poimandres." It was "sapien
verbo philosophia nomen invenit") who
difficult of all things, "to know oursel
ogy consists of certain sentences which
come very close to the sayings in "P
knows himself will realize, in the first
element in himself, and will think of hi
of consecrated image of God .. ." 41
and thoroughly tested himself, he w
equipped by Nature he entered life, and

animum tuum.' Nam corpus quidem quasi vas es

ab animo tuo quidquid agitur, id agitur a te. Hun
non esset hoc acrioris cuiusdam animi praeceptum
Schriften, I, 69f.; II, 316; H. R. NEUENSCHWAN
Seneca und Poseidonios (Noctes Romanae, 3; Ber
I Ed. O. Heine: "Haec tractanti animo et noctes
Delphis praecepta cognitio, ut ipsa se mens agn
mente se sentiat, ex quo insatiabili gaudio conp
J. E. KING in the Loeb Library edition.
' One should note, at this point, the parallels
and "Poimandres" i.
3 Cf. HEINEMANN, Schriften, I, 70; II, 317.
4 I, 58, ed. C. W. Keyes: ". .. quod est difficillimum, docuit, ut nosmet ipsos
nosceremus; cuius praecepti tanta vis et tanta sententia est, ut ea non homini
cuipiam, sed Delphico deo tribueretur."
"59: "nam qui se ipse norit, primum aliquid se habere sentiet divinum in-
geniumque in se suum sicut simulacrum . . ." Cf. "Poimandres" 12 (the "zrarpbs
elKWdv" of the Anthropos); HEINEMANN, Schriften, II, 314f.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 474 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

possesses for the attainment and acquisition

can see from these instances how in the course
tion of the Delphic maxim the maxim is used a
in order to give expression to the meaning wh
finds in it.
Allusion is made to the Delphic maxim also
Scipionis," which Cicero has taken from som
corporated in his De re publica VI, 9-29. This
for the Hermetic sayings for two reasons. Th
place, the form-critical analogy of the Gattung
involved: "Scipio's Dream" is a narrative of
similar to "Poimandres"; in addition, its doc
teaches an anthropological dualism of a mortal
self which, after leaving the body, enters into
ient of the revelation is told: "Strive on indeed
it is not you that is mortal, but only your b
whom your outward form reveals is not yo
("mens") is the true self, not that physical f
pointed out by the finger. Know then that you
is that 44 which lives, feels, remembers, and f
rules, governs, and moves the body over which
supreme God above us rules this universe. And
God moves the universe, which is partly morta
spirit moves the frail body." 41
As much agreement as there is that "Scipio
from some source, its precise origin and natur

4lIb.: "cum se ipse perspexerit totumque temptarit, intel

a natura subornatus in vitam venerit quantaque instrume
dam adipiscendamque sapientiam . . ." The translation is
the Loeb edition.
a NEUENSCHWANDER, 90off., discusses the problem of the relationship between the
"Somnium Scipionis" and POSIDONIUS. Cf. also HEINEMANN, Schriften, II, 303ff.
" Cf. Poimandres 6 (and also 17): O rW yW^Ol ? 7 b E' a~L fPXI'7rov Kal dKoIov,
X6&yoS Kvpiov, 6 ~O 'i' 7irar'p Oe6S.
"4CICERO, De re publ. VI, 26, ed. K. Ziegler: "et ille: tu vero enitere et sic
habeto, non esse te mortalem, sed corpus hoc; nec enim tu is es quem forma ista
declarat, sed mens cuiusque is est quisque, non ea figura, quae digito demonstrari
potest. deum te igitur scito esse, siquidem est deus qui viget, qui sentit, qui
meminit, qui providet, qui tam regit et moderatur et movet id corpus cui praeposi-
tus est, quam hunc mundum ille princeps deus; et ut mundum et quadam parte
mortalem ipse deus aeternus, sic fragile corpus animus sempiternus movet." The
translation makes use of that of KEYES.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DELPHIC MAXIM 475

pute.46 I. Heinemann 47 maintains t

self with God may have come from P
likely the case, we can state that at th
tion the Delphic maxim means: "deum
The strong influence of Posidoniu
periods of Stoicism, especially in Sene
Seneca's Moral Epistles contain inte
Seneca develops the idea of the divi
residence in man,so so that "to know
to know our divine selves. What then
"Animus et ratio in animo perfecta."
into his well-known doctrine of self-observation.52 If one wishes
to know who a man really is, one must examine his soul.53 He in
whom a divine soul dwells is equal to the gods; he also remembers
his origin and strives to return to it: "illo tendit originis suae
memor." In the following passage Seneca describes the struggle
of the divine soul on its way up into heaven: "And if it makes use
of its powers and stretches upward into its proper region it is by
no alien path that it struggles toward the heights. It would be a
great task to journey heavenwards; the soul but returns thither." 54

" Cf. R. HARDER'S commentary Utber Ciceros Somnium Scipionis, reprinted in:
Kleine Schriften (Miinchen, I960), 354-95; furthermore, A. J. FESTUGIERE, La
Revelation d'Hermts Trismigiste, II (Paris, 1949), 441ff.; A. D. LEEMAN, De Aristo-
telis Protreptico Somnii Scipionis exemplo, Mnemosyne ii (1958), 139-51.
47 Schriften, II, 315f. HEINEMANN refers to Leg. I, 24; 60; 61 (where the Delphic
maxim is mentioned); De re publ. III, 40.
48 CICERO, De re publ. VI, 26.
" Cf. Ep. 31, 11; 41, I; 41, 5-7; 120, 14; 121, 14; 121, 23-24. Cf. HEINEMANN,
Schriften, II, 31 7ff.
5 See the famous passage Ep. 41, 1-2: "prope est a te deus, tecum est, intus est.
Ita dico, Lucili: sacer intra nos spiritus sedet, malorum bonorumque nostrorum
observator et custos." What this means, SENECA explains in ? 5: "sic animus magnus
ac sacer et in hoc demissus, ut propius divina nossemus, conservatur quidem nobis-
cum, sed haeret origini suae; illinc pendet, illuc spectat ac nititur, nostris tamquam
interest."
1 Ep. 41, 8.
52 Cf. Ep. 20, 3; 41, 1-2; 73, i6; 83, 1-2; 87, 21.
' Ep. 76, 32: "Atqui cum voles veram hominis aestimationem inire et scire,
qualis sit, nudum inspice; ponat patrimonium, ponat honores et alia fortunae men-
dacia, corpus ipsum exuat. Animum intuere, qualis quantusque sit, alieno an suo
magnus."
" Ep. 92, 30: "Et si utatur suis viribus ac se in spatium suum extendat, non
aliena via ad summa nititur. Magnus erat labor ire in caelum; redit." Cf. the
description in ? 31ff. On the divine mind and soul cf. J. N. SEVENSTER, Paul and

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
476 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

All of this can easily be identified as interpreta

maxim, and since Seneca relies heavily upon
probably from Posidonius, this cannot be a su
It is striking, however, that when he expressly
phic maxim, he presents the older interpretatio
A vessel that the slightest shaking, the slight
S. . However, this older interpretation seem
with the consolation literature and the cynic tr
The influence of Posidonius is also evident in E

doctrine of the "9oq EUo' 0v" is similar to Senec

fers to the Delphic maxim several times and give
pretations of it. In his diatribe "IlEp' KaLkKXXw7
question why the "Know yourself" was inscribed
temple of Apollo, because nobody takes it ser
professes to follow the example of Socrates in b
claim the truth.58 This is: "First learn who you
the light of that knowledge, adorn yourself."
being; 60 that is, a mortal animal gifted with
impressions rationally . . . What element of s
do you possess? The animal in you? No. Your
Your ability to use impressions? No. Your reason
superiority which you possess; adorn and beau

Seneca (Suppl. to Novum Testamentum, IV; Leiden, I96I),

805f.
' Consol. ad Marc. ii, 2-3, ed. F. Haase: "Hoc videlicet illa Pythicis oraculis
adscripta: NOSCE TE. Quid est homo? Quodlibet quassum vas et quolibet fragile
iactatu. ... quid est homo? Inbecillum corpus et fragile, nudum, suapte natura
inerme, alienae opis indigens . . ." A long description of human frailty follows.
' EPICTETUS, Diss. I, 14, ed. W. A. Oldfather: 6 Oebs evBov & 7' Kal 6 iiFrepoS
8altwv arrl~i. Cf. HEINEMANN, Schriften, II, 115, 283; THEILER, Vorbereitung, 99f.;
A. BONH6FFER, Epictet und die Stoa (Stuttgart, 1890), 76ff. See also Diss. II, 8,
ioff.; 14, 18-20; 14, 24-26; I, 3, Iff.
7 Diss. III, i, I8.
8 III, I, 19-24; it is a god who speaks through EPICTETUS (III, I, 36f.).
5 III, I, 25: yvOt 7r&rop 7TLS ei Ka(t OVTWS KoiLE OteavUTrv.
6" avOpwros el t roro 8'e'aT O' rb Y Pqov XP7rtKtJP alPV7aa'laLO XOytK&S. I take the
rhetorical question in I Cor. 3: 4 (o K &Ppw7-rol G-TE;) to be an allusion of Paul to
this interpretation of the Delphic maxim. As we can see from parallels, it has become
a polemic against the deification and self-glorification of man. Cf. the collection of
sayings in STOBAEUS, ecl. III, caput XXI, ed. Hense; PETRONIUS, Sat. 75; SENECA,
Apocol. 5, 4; 8, Iff.; PHILO, leg. 69; Acts Io: 26; 14, II. 15; cf. also 12: 22; Js.
5: 17. On the subject see F. TAEGER, Charisma, I (Stuttgart, 1957), 176; W. K. C.
GUTHRIE, The Greeks and Their Gods, 7th ed. (Boston, 1968), 113ff.
` Diss. III, 1, 26: To XoytK' X S e c blpe70V *700 ro7o K60TEL ia KaXXKaW'r ..e

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DELPHIC MAXIM 477

older meaning of "Know yourself"

definitely rejected in favor of "Know
Consequently, to look for the good
"Turn your thoughts upon yourselves
implications of this in a general adm
several maxims of basically identical c
over more carefully, know yourself
attempt nothing without the god."
obvious.64 Epictetus outlines vital que
among them these: "And what are we
Him, and for what purpose were we c
have some contact and relation with Him or none at all?" 65 If
man follows this interpretation of the Delphic maxim, he will not
only be elated,"66 he will be invincible.67
Although Epictetus stands in the tradition of Posidonius and
understands the Delphic maxim as an injunction to know one's
own inner divine self, it must be admitted that he presents other
interpretations also. The tradition of Posidonius is present also
in the thought of Marcus Aurelius, for whom the concept of
"voS")) is even more prominent than for Epictetus. When Marcus
states "6 EKaCO-'ov vor OE'o," this formulation sums up very well
the content of his philosophy.68
Most important for this study, however, is Philo's treatment of
the Delphic "Know yourself," because he lived in Egypt where
the Hermetic writings seem to have their origin. Philo is in-
fluenced by a variety of traditions, among them Posidonius, al-
though it is extremely difficult to identify with precision any
passages as derived from this source material.69 Philo comes very

62111, 22 (repl KVIPLO/IO), 39: rrt p P /are abTrol 1' Eavr s . . . Cf. 38: el y&p
70jXere, e6pere av albr6 (scil. 7 dtyaO6v) tv irp v I v . . . Cf. Fragm. I; 8.
3 Diss. III, 22, 53:BobiXeal Eil-ekX Porepov, yv-Ol o'avr6v, dnaKptvov 7 r aL6,VLOV,
8ixa eo oa, u? ertP~tnSas.
" Cf. F. SCHWEINGRUBER, Sokrates und Epiktet, Hermes 78 (i943), 52-79.
65 Cf. Diss. II, 14, 27: ,C/els 8 rrives 4res br'' Cbzro yey6'va)ev Kai p67s 71 9pyov;
&pa' y'9XouL6V T 7La '7rL7rXoKp Irpbs a6b vK KaaZ oXe'w oie4clav.
" Cf. Diss. I, 3, 2: ap 7yv^, i7L AL~S vIs ez, obK dCrapO'6n ; The question points
to the immediate context.
67 Diss. I, i8, 17-23. The command "Know yourself" (? 17) is really asking the
question: "Who, then, is the invincible man?" (Cf. ? 21 and 23).
8 MARCUs AUREL. XII, 26, ed. A. I. Trannoy; cf. II, 13, I; 17, 4; III, 12, I;
16, 1-3. See BONHSFFER, Epictet und die Stoa, 77; I20f.; NEUENSCHWANDER, 48ff.
6 Cf. K. REINHARDT's continuing skepticism, PW XXII/I, cols. 590o, 818.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
478 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

close to the Hermetic understanding of the D

De fuga 23ff. Philo presents an allegorical inter
27: 42-45, Jacob's flight from Esau to Laban
is taken to signify "bright" (")XEUK6"'), "Har
"cavities," a symbolic expression for the sens
in Haran" because during the period of mortal l
of the bodily senses.7 The advice "to make yo
for a few days" is nothing other than what the
mands: "Learn well the country of the senses; k
the parts, of which thou dost consist, what each
was made, and how it is meant to work . . ."
of oneself can be summed up as understanding t
body and the supreme role of "6 iv 0-cr voiJ." "7
Philo includes the same allegory of the flight t
panded form. The "Know yourself" is here iden
command "rrpOo-EXE 0-Eavr" in Exod. 34: I2.74
means to understand that one is king, ruling and
therefore one is a stranger in the land of the b
45, Philo points out that the words "depart o
12: I) must not be mistaken to imply the co
from the body because such a misunderstanding
scribe death to man." One must suggest at th
seems to polemicize against a radical dualism of
It is interesting that the author of "Poimandres
that the complete separation of the self from th

0 The allegorical meaning of Haran is apparently derive

a derivation which HEINEMANN thinks PHILo himself was u
he did not know Hebrew (Schriften, I, 133, note i). Cf
De somn. I, 41ff.; De Abrahamo 72. The term is rendered in
that is (De Abr. 72, ed. Cohn-Wendland): al r&Cv w^ pere'pwv
&rCrep o rcwv EKdc^LO) 8tLaKlj7rrtp 7'qKvKe pbSr 'jP rcv oKeLWP dPr
n De fuga 45: oIKE ' r7'j Xappiv, 7 '1eraXr7jeteo'd ~ el rp&T
alhrO6cewv - 6 'yp orte XopeOwv rru ^ Op7 fply Xpedos rW&v ala
7 De fuga 46 (the English translation is that of F. H. CO
TAKER in the Loeb edition): . . r~. rJv alOerewov xc'pav Ka7
Kat ra cTcvov /AE'p7, rI re eKaoPKi Ka irpbs rl' ye'yove Kai rc s g
"~De fuga 46f. On "vois" in PHILO cf. H. LEISEGANG, D
(Leipzig, 1919), 76ff.; FESTUGI#RE, La Revelation, II, 541ff
" De migr. Abr. 8.
S75b.: flaaLXeIs b &pXeLv dXX& i/7 'pX7cOaL 7rerale
y DvwCKe gea brv7
" De migr. ... 7.
Abr.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DELPHIC MAXIM 479

of the future," that is, probably

death" of the Hermetic believer. Late
Delphic maxim is cited again and now
who you are, in body, in soul, in sen
speech, in each single one, even th
divisions of your being." 78 How doe
comes to know himself? Briefly stat
the "vo~v" which knows itself; th
Vo7d" OaEopplara" and "drives out" t
involved in the realm of sense-perc
this are put into the mouth of Mose
De migr. Abr. 184-95, which comb
material from Greek philosophical tr
Very much as in "Poimandres," th
place as a "peraPCavELv" of the "No
"pLE8flaTo-v" proceeds in three steps.
from astrology, i.e., worship of the u
in this invective against astrology
topos against the natural scientist
examination of the body, including s
This investigation leads to the third
"Nous" in man."4 This in turn enc

" "Poimandres" 21ff.

78De migr. Abr. I137: . . . yplare avrobis Kai ofrtVs L re o-a5Fs eitra-re, Ka7Ta
rb o-La, Kard& 7Trp PX4IP, KaTa T ri arI'0erLP, Ka7T 76bP X yo, KaO' I9 7L K& 7b
P0paXrarov rt0vDie
I. HEINEMANN, el8wY. ThePhilos
Werke translation given is that
von Alexandria, ofVCOLSON
Part (Breslau,& 1929),
WHITTAKER.
ad loc.,
suggests PosIDONrus as the source; cf. also his Schriften, I, 70o.
79 De migr. Abr. 13: :reUvP yoOv 6 vo06 P0 ra yvwplret Eavt Kal 70or K VOla70o^ o
poLLXe&Yp Oewpizhaoztp, clra 7 b KXLt66/LEPO 7" VvX7 i rpbs 7r alo-rlbp- edos

Ib., 194: oTrW Kara' 8pax e7aalvetL' 6 vOV s e7r 7rbv e)oefpteiag Kai 6oL6Tl7770
d&L~eraL irarpa . .
SIb., 194; I84f.
" This has been shown by HEINEMANN, Die Werke Philos, Part V, p. 202, note
2; id., Schriften, I, 133. Closely parallel is De somn. I, 53f.; cf. XENOPHON, mem.
I, I, ii, and H. R. BREITENBACH, PW, 2nd series, IX/A, 2, cols. 1782f. In Jewish
literature cf. Jub. 8: 3-4; 12: 15ff.; Orac. Sibyll. 3: 227-30; Eth. Enoch 8: 3;
Apoc. Abr. 1-8; JOSEPHUS, Ant. I, 155-57; Mishn. Chag. 2, 1.
"De migr. Abr. 195 (cf. 185f.): wremr' etS 7- " rlrl'CK7jLy PXOcPw 7l a'rbs
cavr-ov, tLXo-OqO7'jTas 7rd KaT& 7 y ofo0 OtKOJ, TA 7repl OCdi 'roS, 7r& repi aGl'OjaeWs, r&
repZ X6yov . .
"81b., i86: XoytecarOe y&p 5Tr~, c2s &P s/ lar 0 VoS, Kal T r^ra rlc . . .

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
480 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

you opinion, the country of the Chaldeans," s5 an

way of the Father.8" The "way to the Father" be
curtailing of the senses 87 and is completed by t
ment of the mortal body.S8
Even closer to the Greek philosophical tradition
allegory of the migration to Haran in De som
again starts with a polemic against Chaldean
astrology, and then takes up, apparently from
vective against the physicists,89 closing with an
gate oneself."9 This includes the exploration of t
the body,91 and of the soul and the mind.92
against a heavenly journey, equally traditional,"9
by explicit references to the Delphic maxim
and to Socrates, whose sole philosophical them
have been. But Socrates was only a human being,
lical figure of Terah was "self-knowledge itself."
this self-exploration is clear: leaving behind th
perception and obtaining a knowledge of the o
is.95 A great example who demonstrates the fru
edge is Abraham. Philo concludes the section wit
proposition similar to one of the sayings in "P
"he who has thoroughly comprehended himsel
spairs of himself, having as a step to this ascert
ness in all respects of created being. And the
spaired of himself, is beginning to know Him tha
8 Ib., 187.
861b., 195: . . . dvaTecpC'v 686v T7p d5' avbrot KaL ... V... lraTepa TWAV
XWoJ Karavoqorat, LaO3W dKpLfBs P avTrbv E'ETraL T7dX L rov Kal Oe6V . .
87 Ib., 191.
S Ib., 192f.
"8It is of course very difficult to isolate any concrete source material in
PHILO. The polemic against the physicists is traditionally connected with Socrates;
contrary to PHILO'S intention this tradition has no remark about Chaldean astrology.
The "oiv" in the beginning of ? 55 could indicate the end of a source; cf. the
"o~v" in the beginning of De migr. Abr. 187.
9 De somn. I, 54: . . . oravrbv dKOXaKEbj7WS Epe6cVroov.
91 Ib., 55f.

9* lb.,
Cf. 56: 7Tv vaVrov'VXhVY
II Cor. 18EFV
I2: 1-4, and my KaL Eine
article T ,V Christus-Aretalogie
VO0V, 'c qY'yc apoveS.bei Paulus (II.

Kor. 12, 7-Io), ZThK 66 (1969), 288-305.

* De somn. I, 58: Oappa 8'a6rbs 6 X6-yos 6 rEp TOO yvwval TLa av6 . . .
Ib., 6o:Kai
lb.: tra7vKEV
O700 rpbs
OfTWsA ,tELav
XELv 65VTOS
XL'aV EIS dKpt, v ofl
Ka raaXaJV v Yj 9,XLX'V
EavUTbV XO. d4yVWKE 7pV

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DELPHIC MAXIM 481

This last theme, the realization o

treated in the allegorical interpre
sprinkling in De somn. I, 209ff. Ho
the "Know yourself" in that context
that in De somn. which we have
ash-sprinkling is taken to be a remin
ments out of which he consists, "f
purge out of himself high vauntin
evil things." 97 He who comes to kno
nothingness, "inferring from the elem
that he is nothing worth." 98 In t
parallel De spec. leg. I, 261-64 99 the
realisation of one's nothingness only,
of the "Nous." Abraham is again po
this time it is Abraham who says of
ashes.o00
The Hermetic doctrine as presented in the tractate "Poiman-
dres" is very similar to Philo's teaching in the allegory of the flight
to Haran. The similarity of these teachings and the dissimilarity
to the interpretations of the ritual of ash-sprinkling in De somn.
I, 209ff.; De spec. leg. I, 261ff. must have their reasons in differ-
ent source materials used by Philo. Thus, in the interpretation
of the Delphic maxim Philo and the Hermetist seem to share a
common tradition, most likely going back to Posidonius and Plato.
In this interpretation, knowledge of oneself results in the knowl-
edge of the indwelling "Nous" 101 and of the functioning of the

ep IraoaThe
5rJa. o700translations
yer)7ro7 ?aaww
ares poXapwJ ob68vetaJ,&6WHITTAKER.
that of COLSON 'diroJpobs eavrbT 'yf'the
Does PaL'KET rbT come
sentence

from a source? Very similar is De sacr. Abel. 55: gelArnlvog yos p rs li8ov rept
7rdivra ot~evelas
Schriften, leAl.ory
I, 70). Cf. Kal rl^ 70ro 21:
also "Poimandres" OeoO irepZ rirJra
6 vo~oras JavrbbreppoX^
lcs at5rbT(cf. HEINEMANN,
Xwpet. For
the theme of "oO,4veta" cf. De somn. I, ii9; 165; De Abr. 70; De mut. nom. 54; I55.
* De somn. I, 211: o05,ws -yp LeYyaXavXlaJ, vr KbaKW^v 6eoeoc Aw raTov EKlpavr'dv.
I lb., 212: ... . J'arbY tYJKe Kal Tiv d vGpWOpwriJv odbave'ai KarcLeXlckEe i, (
TvveKpl0K l 01rotXelw, rb T l~e~YEbsJ EZ'oaL TEKLrc XtopduLEJOs.
SDe spec. leg. I, 265 follows a sentence similar in structure to that in De somn.
I, 6o: rovTro yp lripobs r7J Erlp3ovXov ot7ar jt'Eo drocT rpaqC'ieraItt Kai Ka0eX&f, Trb
irdpavxov e dapcorj?'eT Oe Kal u.e7raroLrcaeLraL rs tXew 8vvJdl.ews a6crov (ToO) lcuro-'pros
d&acovelav. Cf. "Poimandres" 21, where the saying is also given a future meaning.
1" De somn. I, 214 (cf. Exod. 29:4) ; cf. De spec. leg. I, 44.
1o0 Cf. "Poimandres" 6.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
482 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

body."02 It leads to asceticism,'03 final abandonm

and ascension of the self 104 to the Father-go
ment made by Philo in De migr. Albr. 193 that
created the body, but is the workmanship of
therefore contained in the body as in a vessel" 10
ment with the Hermetist in "Poimandres." o6
similarities, however, the Hermetist and Philo a
ently and would have found themselves, if they
posite sides of the argument. The Hermetist wo
able to agree with Philo's rejection of astrolog
with his insistence on keeping the concrete l
religion.
As one might expect, the Delphic maxim became very important
for the Neoplatonist philosophers."?' It is significant for our study
to look at some of the texts, even if only superficially, because we
find numerous examples of reformulations of the Delphic maxim,
which are very similar to the Hermetic sayings. For Plotinus also,
Being is within man,1s0 man must separate himself from the
external, gather himself into his soul and return to his divine
origin.109 He states, in the form of philosophical propositions
which appear to be reformulations of the Delphic maxim, that to
know oneself means to know one's origin. "He who knows himself

'2a Cf. ib., 18-20.

2o Cf. ib., 22.
104 Cf. ib, 24-26.

1o5 6 ~Lp y&p piTrepos P SoOV 06t e8ELto6pylYKe rb OaW^oCa, dXX' o-Ltr TLppyor erTpov ?
Wtb Ka l repteXEraL cs ' a dyye r y^ ow'LaTtL. The translation is that of CoLsoN.
Cf. De fuga 71.
106 Cf. "Poimandres" 12ff. It is the tendency of the Hermetist to remove the
creation of the human body as far away as possible from the work of the god
"Novs.
107 Cf. P. MERLAN, Monopsychism Mysticism Metaconsciousness (The Hague,
1963); W. BEIERWALTES, Plotin. Ober Ewigkeit und Zeit (Enneade III 7) (Frank-
furt, 1967), 75ff. For the references I am indebted to the collection made by E. G.
WILKINS, 7off.
108 rdcra eiaw (Enn. III, 8, 6, 40, ed. R. Harder; cf. VI, 9, 7, 17f.). PLOTINUS'
concept of the "inner man" (6 eo'e eavOpwros) is not different from that of the
Hermetist (6 9vovs WGpwros); cf. Enn. V, I, Io, io, and BEIERWALTES, 76, note
3, who refers to PLATO, Resp. 589a as the source; E. R. DODDS, Pagan and Christian
in an Age of Anxiety (Cambridge, 1965), 2off., 69ff.; W. THEILER, Antike und
christliche Riickkehr zu Gott, Forschungen zum Neuplatonismus (Berlin, 1966),
313-25.
1oo Esp. important is Enn. V, 3 in its entirety; cf. VI, 7, 41.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DELPHIC MAXIM 483

also knows his whence." 110 W. Beier

statement to Plato's Alcibiades Ma
7ff. Plotinus distinguishes between t
one by which we recognize the nature
and one by which we recognize ourse
becoming "Nous." In this latter sense
a human act at all, but it is the divin
itself through itself."'2 For if the
strictest sense can know itself, it can
eq 'LEI' y p fVXq EV'EL tLavr7jq OL cXXO
aLVTO9 KaZL OV'Lg KaL EK T79 EcavTOv oVTEOQ KL6 L El'TLTPE oWV Elv aL v iToV.i
Other Neoplatonic writers rephrase the Delphic maxim in a similar
way. The emperor Julian 114 should be considered in this category
when he states: "He who knows himself will know not only about
his soul, but his body also." 115 More precisely he means by this:
"For to know things divine through the divine part in us, and
mortal things too through the part of us that is mortal - this
the oracle declared to be the duty of the living organism that is
midway between these, namely man; because individually he is
mortal, but regarded as a whole he is immortal, and moreover,
singly and individually, is compounded of a mortal and an immor-
tal part." 116 Only the last part of the statement would be accept-
able to the Hermetist of "Poimandres." 117 Porphyry goes even
further by saying that the god of Delphi really addresses the
"Nous": " ELW av" ro"s which means: 06 vro Oadvarog yvo-Ofj

no Enn. VI, 9, 7, 35: 6 6 IcLOaOe javTrbv el65ieL KKa 6irr6OEv.

n Cf. BEIERWALTES, 78, note 16.
12. W TV JYLVj'WKOvaC eavrbvT rrbvLT dlvaL, rbvE L V 'YL&JWUKOvrarnC T7f avolaCs T7r
vx VLK^S 9CLV, rbv 6U repC~Ji rTOrTO, rbv 'yLVV'CKOvra waUbV KarT 7roV V10 VKEVOv

'ytv6pevov. KcdKe'V(J caTv voeliy av oa X o 5s vOpW70ov , r dXX& rravrXW &sXXov

'yev6OEvov Kai a vvaprriaav ra&Tv eIs 7T vw rvbrb vov e9XKovra rb rs4 T 7 vX s1
CA/evov,
edae. 8 Kal Jvarac L A6Vov rTepovoOacL rpbs v670LV, Iva 7~ s KEi 7rapaKaTaO^ro &
us Enn. V, 3, 6, 3-5 ; cf. 3, 9, Iff.
14 Orat. VI, 183aff., ed. W. C. WRIGHT, whose translation is also given.
115 lb., 183b: . . . 6 YLV(o'CKWOv aTrbV EvErraTL /V Irepl X1VS, ere7ra L Kai repL
no 184a; cf. ARISTOTELES, De anima III, 9, 432a 29ff.
", "Poimandres" 15.
18 In a fragment from his "IHep T70 yyvjO CravrT6V," preserved by STOBAEUS, ecl.
III, cap. XXI, ? 27, ed. Hense.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
484 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

avOpojirog Kal 0 "EKr' ElKOWLKO3 /1L-q ayvo1q, KaL

Such formulations come very close to the Her

"Poimandres." The examples given show that,
the interpretation of the Delphic maxim, it bec
reformulate it in such a way that it clearly
ticular philosophical interpretation which it wa
tain. The form of the maxim is thereby change
cal statement, or finally, to philosophical pr
development we can observe most clearly in Pro
Theology, where the proposition is first stated
by a commentary. Proposition 167 obviously res
maxim in its Neoplatonic understanding: "
VOEG." 120 Or, to give another example: aIIs vo
OEIv TL 'OE." 121 Or: "Ila voV ITrdva ta o." 122OE

III

We have seen that in its own way each of the Hermetic sayi
in "Poimandres" ?? 18 and 21 follows one of the traditiona
terpretations of the Delphic maxim "Know yourself." In
course of this history the maxim is not only interpreted but
reformulated in order to express directly the meaning intend
It changes its function from a "maxim" to a "kerygmatic
and an "appeal" to the potentially divine man to realize h
divinity. It finally changes function and formulation to that o
philosophical-theological "proposition." The history of th
transformations is, of course, simultaneously a reflection of t
history of Greek theology, from the simple wisdom of the Del
Apollo of the early period to the highly speculative systems a
esoteric wisdom of late antiquity.

111 lb., ? 28. W. THEILER, Die Vorbereitung des Neuplatonismus, 104 tra
saying in GALENUS (rps rav^pov 50, 21) back to POSIDONIUS: 6 yvob3 T.? GVeO
r'bv Oeby rapobTra KaL 6 dYvoPV TWL r^rav7aXov 7rapovrL r roTLrr.
10 The edition quoted is that of E. R. DODDS, Proclus: The Elements of T
ogy, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1963).
m Prop. 168.
122Prop. 170, cf. THEILER, Die Vorbereitung des Neuplatonismus, 58, wh
fers to MAXIMUS of Tyre.

This content downloaded from

81.215.218.164 on Wed, 13 Nov 2024 13:24:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms