26. For, by endeavouring to obliterate the truth of these things through the pleasures which we derive from sacrifices, we deceive ourselves, but cannot deceive divi- nity. Of those animals, therefore, which are of an ignoble nature, which do not impart to our life any supe- rior utility, and which do not afford us any pleasure, we do not sacrifice. any one to the Gods. For who. ever sacrificed serpents, scorpions, and apes, or any one of such like animals? But we do not abstain from any one of those animals which afford a certain utility to our life, or which have something in them that contributes to out enjoyments; since we, in reality, cut their throats, and excoriate them, under the patronage of divinity’. For we sacrifice to the Gods oxen and sheep, and besides these; stags and birds, and fat hogs, though they do not at all participate of purity, but afford us delight. And of these animals, indeed, some, by co-operating with our labours, afford assistance to our life, but others supply us with food, or administer to our other wants. But those which effect neither of these, yet, through the enjoyment which is derived from them, are slain by men in saerifices similarly with these who afford us utility. We do not, however, sacrifice asses or elephants, or any other of those animals that co-operate with us in our labours, but are not subservient to our pleasure; though, sacrificmg ‘being excepted, we do not abstain from such like animals, but we cut their throats on account of the delight with which the deglutition of them is attended; and of those which are fit to be sacrificed, we do not sacrifice such j..2. Under the pretext of being patronized by divinity in 90-doing. ὁ as are acceptable to the Gods, but such as in a greater degree gratify the desires of men; thus testifying against ourselves, that we persist in sacrificing to the Gods, for the sake of our own pleasure, and not for the sake of gra- tifying the Gods.
26. But of the Syrians, the Jews indeed, through the sacrifice which they first made, even now, says Theo- phrastus, sacrifice animals, and if we were persuaded by © them to sacrifice ia the same way that they do, we should abstain from the deed. For they do not feast on the flesh of the sacrificed animals, but having thrown the whole of the victims into the fire, and poured much honey and wine on them dunng the night, they swiftly consume the sacrifice, in order that the all-seeing sun may not become a spectator of it. And they do this, fasting duriag all the intermediate days, and through the whole of this time, as belonging to the class of philosophers, and also discourse with each other about the divinity™. But in the night, they apply themselves to the theory of the stars, surveying them, and through prayers invoking God. For these make offerings both of other ammals and themselves, domg this from necessity, and not from their own will. The truth of this, however, may be dearnt by any one who directs his attention to the Egyp- tians, the most learned of all men; who are so far froxe slaying other animals, that they make the mages of these ᾿ to be imitations of the Gods; so adapted and allied do they conceive these to be both te Gods and men.
27. For at first, indeed, sacrifices of fruits were made to the Gods; but, in the course of time, men becoming negligent of sanctity, in consequence of fruits being scarce, and, through the want of legitimate nutriment, being impelled to eat each other; then supplicating divinity with many prayers, they first began to make oblations of themselves to the Gods, not only conse- ™ Porphyry, in what he here says of the Jews, alludes to that sect of them called Esszans; concerning whom, see the 4th book of this work, 64 ON ABSTINENCE FROM.
crating to the divinities whatever among their possessions was most beautiful, but, proceeding beyond this, they sacrificed those of their own species. Hence, even to the present time, not only in Arcadia, in the Lupercal festi- vals, and in Carthage, men are sacrificed in. common to Saturn, but periodically, also, for the sake of remem- bering the legal institute, they sprinkle the altars of those of the same tribe with blood, although the rites of their sacrifices exclude, by the voice of the crier, him from engaging in them who is accused of human slaughter. Proceeding therefore from hence, they made the bodies of other animals supply the place of their own in sacri- fices, and again, through a satiety of legitimate ‘nutri- . ment, becoming oblivious of piety, they were induced by voracity to leave nothing untasted, nothing undevoured. And this is what now happens to all men with respect to the aliment from fruits. For when, by the assumption of them, they have alleviated their necessary indigence, then searching for a superfluity of satiety, they labour to procure many things for food which are placed beyond the limits of temperance. Hence, as if they had made no ignoble sacrifices to the Gods, they proceeded also to taste the animals which they immolated; and from this, as a principle of the deed, the eating of animals became an addition to men to the nutriment derived from fruits. As, therefore, antiquity offered the'first produce of fruits _ to the Gods, and gladly, after their pious sacrifice, tasted what they offered, thus also, when they sacrificed the firstlings of animals to the divinities, they thought that the same thing ought to be done by them, though ancient piety did not ordain these particulars after this manner, but venerated each of the Gods from fruits. For with such oblations, both nature, and every sense of the humgn soul, are delighted. © No altar ther was wet with blood of bulls Irrationally slain; but this was thought To be of every impious deed thé worst, Limbs to devour of brutes deprived of life.
ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 69 28. The truth of this may also be perceived from the altar which is even now preserved about Delos, which, because no animal is brought to, or is sacrificed upon it, is called the altar of the pious. So that the inhabitants not only abstain from sacrificing animals, but they like- wise conceive, that those who established, are similarly pious with those who use the altar. Hence, the Pytha- goreans having adopted this mode of sacrifice, abstained from animal food through the whole of life. But when they distributed to the Gods a certain animal instead of themselves, they merely tasted of it, living in reality without touching other animals. We, however, do not act after this manner; but being filled with animal diet, we have arrived at this manifold illegality in our life by slaughtering animals, and using them for food. For neither is it proper that the altars of the Gods should be defiled with murder, nor that food of this kind should be touched by men, as neither is it fit that men should S eat one another; but the precept which is still preserved at Athens, should be obeyed through the whole of life. _ 29. For formerly, as we have before observed, when men sacrificed to the Gods fruits and not animals, and did not assume the latter for food, it is said, that a common sacrifice being celebrated at Athens, one Diomus, or ᾿ Sopater, who was ‘not a native, but cultivated some land in Attica, seizing a sharp axe which was near to him, and being excessively indignant, struck with it an ox, who, coming from his labour, approached to a table, on which were openly placed cakes and other offerings which were to be burnt as a sacrifice to the Gods, and ate some, but trampled on the rest of the offerings. The ox, therefore, being killed, Diomus, whose anger was now appeased, at the same time perceived what kind of deed he had perpe- trated. And the ox, indeed, he buried. But embracing a. voluntary banishment, as if he had been accused of impiety, he fled to Crete. A great dryness, however, taking place in the Attic land from vehement heat, and a dreadful sterility of fruit, and the Pythian deity being in δ. ON ABSTINENCE FROM.
consequence of it consulted by the general consent, the God answered, that the Cretan exile must expiate the crime; and that, if the murderer was punished, and the statue of the slain ox was erected in the place in which it . fell, this would be beneficial both to those.who had and those who had not tasted its flesh. An inquiry thereforé being made into the affair, and Sopater, together with the deed, having been discovered, he, thinking that he should be liberated from the difficulty in which he was now involved, through the accusation of impiety, if the same thing was done,by all men in common, said te those who came to-him, that it was necessary an ox should be slain by the city. But, on their being dubious who should strike the ox, he said that he would under take to do it, if they would make him a citizen, and would be partakers with him of the slaughter. This, therefore, being granted, they returned to the city, and ‘ordered the deed to be accomplished in such a way as it is performed by them at present, [and which was as follows:] 30. They selected virgins who were drawers of water; but these brought water for the purpose of sharpening an axe and a knife. And these being sharpened, one person gave the axe, another struck with it ‘the ox, and a third person cut the throat of the ox. But after this, havin excofiated the animal, all that were present ate of its flesh. These things therefore being performed, they sewed up the hide of the ox, and having stuffed it with straw, raised it upright in the same form which it had when alive, and yoked it to a plough, as if it was about to work with it. Instituting also a judicial. process, respecting the slaughter of the ox, they cited ‘all those who were partakers of the deed, to defend their conduct. But as the drawers of watef accused those who sharpened the axe and the knife, ‘as more culpable than themselves, and ‘those who sharpened these instruments accused him ‘who gave the axe, and he accused him who cut the throat ofthe ox, and this last person accused the knife, — hence, ANIMAL -FOOD.—BOOE HI. 6? as the κα΄ could ndt speak, they condemned it as the cuuse of the slaughter. From that time also, even till now, during the festival sacred to Jupiter, in the Acro- polis, at Athens, the sacrifice of an ox is performed after the same manner. For, placing cakes on a brazen table, they drive oxen round it, and the ox that tastes of the cakes that are distributed on the table, is: slain. The race likewise of those who perform this, still remains. And all those, indeed, who derive their origin from Sopater are called boutupoi [i. e. slayers of oxen); but those who are descended from him that drove the ox round the table, are called kentriadai, [or.stimulators.] And those who originate from him that cut the throat of the ox, are denominated daitroi, [or dividers,] on ac- count of the banquet which takes ‘place from the distri- bution of flesh. ‘ But when they have filled the hide, and the judicial process is ended, they throw the knife into the sea.
31. Hence, neither did the ancients conceive it to be holy to slay animals that co-operated with us in works beneficial to our life, and we should avoid doing this even now. And as formerly it was not pious for men to injure these animals, so now it should be considered as unholy to slay them for the sake of food. If, however, this is to be done from motives of religious reverence of the Gods, yet every passion or affection which is essentially pro- duced from bodies is to be rejected, in order that we may not procure food from improper substances, and thus have an incentive to violence as the intimate associate of our life. “For by such a rejection we shall, at least, all of us derive great benefit in what pertains to our mutual security, if we do not in any thing else. For those whose sense is averse to the destruction of animals of a species different from their own, will evidently abstain from in-- juring those of their own kind. Hence it. would perhaps have been best, if men in after-times had immediately. abstained from slaughtering these animals; but since no- one ts free from error, it remains fon posterity. to take: 68 ON ABSTINENCE FROM away by purifications the crime of their ancestors, Te ᾿ specting nutriment. This, however, will be effected, if, placing before our eyes the dire nature of such conduct, we exclaim with Empedocles: υ Ah me, while yet exempt from such a crime, Why was I not destroyed by crael Time, Before these lips began the guilty deed, On the dire nutriment of flesh to feed?
For in those only the appropriate sense sympathetically grieves for errors that have been committed, who endee- - your to find a remedy for the evils with which they are afflicted; so that every one, by offering pure and holy sacrifices to divinity, may through sanctity obtain the greatest benefits from the Gods.
32. But the benefit derived from fruits is the first and the greatest of all others, and which, a8 soon as they are matured, should alone be offered to the Gods, and to Earth, by whom they are produced. For she is the - common Vesta of Gods and men; and it is requisite that all of us, reclining on her surface, as on the bosom of our mother and nurse, should celebrate her divinity, and love her with a parental affection, as the source of our exist- ence. For thus, when we exchange this life for another, we shall again be thought worthy of a residerice in the heavens, and of associating with all the celestial Gods, whom, now beholding*, we ought to venerate with those fruits of which they are the causes, sacrificing indeed to " In the original, οὖς νυν ogdvrac τιμᾶν τούτους, at, instead of which, _Reisk proposes to read, ove τὸν ovy ορωνγτας τιμαν δὲ, [vel Xn] roves, n7.A, But “the insertion of wy is most absurd: for the celestial are called the visible Gods. Thus Plato, in the Timeus, in the speech of the Demiurgus to the junior or mundane Gods, who consist of the celestial and sublunary deities, calls the celestial Gods those that visibly revolve, and the sublunary, those that become apparent when they please; Ewe: οὖν warric ὁσοι τὰ wipwohoves φανέρως, καὶ ores φαίνονται nad’ orev ay ἔϑελωσε" Seo, γενεσιν ἔσχον, x...Conformably, therefore, tu the above translation, Tread, eve wy ὁρωγτας τιμᾶν δὲι τουτοις, 8.7.4. To which may be added, that our author, in paragraph 37, expressly calls the stars visible Gods.
ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 69 ‘them from all these, when they have arrived at maturity, but ‘not conceiving all of us to be sufficiently worthy to sacrifice to the Gods. For as all things are not to be sacrificed to the Gods, so neither perhaps are the Gods gratified by the sacrifice of every one. This, therefore, is the substance of the arguments adduced by Theophrastus, to show that animals ought not to be sacrificed; exclusive of the interspersed fabulous narrations, and a few things which we have added to what he has said. © 33. I, however, shall not attempt to dissolve the legal ‘institutes which the several nations have established. For ‘iM is not my design at present to speak about a polity. But as the laws by which we are governed permit us to venerate divinity by things of the most simple, and of an inanimate nature, hence, selecting that which is the least costly, let us sacrifice according to the law of the city, and endeavour to offer an appropriate sacrifice, approach- ing with consummate purity to. the Gods. In short, if the oblation of first-fruits is of any value, and is an acknow- ledgment of thanks for the benefits which we receive, it -will be most irrational to abstain ourselves from animals, -and yet offer the first-fruits of these to the Gods. For neither are the Gods worse than we are, so as to be in want of those things of which we are not indigent, nor is ‘it holy to offer the first-fruits of that nutriment from which we ourselves abstain. For we find it is usual with -men, that, when they refrain from animal food, they do not make oblations of animals; but that they offer to the Gods the first-fruits of what they themselves eat. Hence also it is now fit, that he who abstains from animals -should offer the first-fruits of things which he touches '.[for the purpose of food]. 94, Let us therefore also sacrifice, but let us sacrrfice in sach a manner as is fit, offering different sacrifices to different powers°®; to the God indeed who is above all * In the original, Θυσόμον τοίνυν nas ὑμειζ ἀλλα Sucopsey, ὡς weeenss:, διαφόρους τὰς ϑυσίας, ὡς av διαφόροις δυναμῆσι προσαγοντες, This Valentinus erroneously translates as follows: “ Sacrificabimus igitur etiam et nos, 70 ON ABSTINENCE FROM things, as.a certain wise man said, neither sacrifeing with ‘incense, nor congecrating any thing sensible. Fox-thene is nothing material, which is not immediately impure to an immaterial nature. Hence, neither is vocal language, Ror internal speech, adapted to the highest God, when it is defiled by any passion of the soul; but we should venerate him in profound silence with a pure soul, and -with pure conceptions about him. It-is necessary, there- fore, that being conjoined with and assimilated to him, ‘we should offer to him, as a sacred sacrifice, the elevation -of our intellect, which offering will. be both ἃ bymn and. our salvation. In an impassive contemplation, therefore, of this divinity by the soul, the sacrifice to him is effected in perfection; but to his progeny, the intelligible Gods, hymns, orally enunciated, are to be offered. For to each of the divinities, a sacrifice is to be made of the first-fruits . of the things which he bestows, and through which he nourishes and preserves us. As, therefore, the husband- man offers handfuls of the fruits and berries which the season first produces; thus also we should offer to the divinities the first-fruits of our conceptions of their trans- cendent excellence, giving them thanks for the contem- plation which they impart to us, and for truly nourishing us through the vision of themselves, which they afford us, associating with, appearing to, and shining upon us, for our salvation. a 35. Now, however, many of those who apply them- selves to philosophy are unwilling to do this; and, pursuing renown rather than honouring divinity, they are busily employed about statues, neither considering whether they are to be reverenced or not, nor endeayour- ing to learn from those who are divinely wise, to what extent, and to what degree, it is requisite to proceed in this affair. We, however, shalf by no means contend with sed prout decet, victimas scilicet eximias potestatibus exjmiis addu- centes.” For διαφόρους and διαφόροις, in this passage, evidently mean different, and not excellent.
, ANIMAL FOQD.— BOOK II. 21 these, nor are we very desiraus of heing well instructed in a thing of this kind; but imitating holy and ancient men, we offer to the Gods, more than any thing else, the first-fruits of contemplation, which they have imparted to us, and by the use of which we become partakers of true salvation.
36. The Pythagoreans, therefore, diligently applying themselves to the study of numbers and lines, sacrificed for the most part from these to the Gods, denominating, indeed, a certain number Minerva, but another Diana, and another Apollo: and again, they called one number justice, but another temperance’. In diagrams also they adopted a similar mode. And thus, by offerings of this kind, they rendered the Gods propitious to them, so as to obtain of them the object of their wishes, by the things which they dedicated to, and the names -by which they invoked them. They likewise frequently employed their aid in divination, and if they were in want of a certain thing for the purpose of some investigation. In order, therefore, to effect this, they made use of the Gods within the heavens, both the erratic and non-erratic, of all of whom it is requisite to consider the sun as the leader; but to rank the moon in the second place; and we should conjoin with these fire, in the third place, from its alliance to them, as the theologist? says. He also says that no animal is to be sacrificed; but that first- fruits are to be offered from meal and honey, and the vegetable productions of the earth. He adds, that fire is not to be enkindled on a hearth defiled with gore; and agserts other things of the like kind. For what occasion is there to transcribe all that he says? for he who is 7 studious of piety knows, indeed, that to the Gods no > Concerning the appellations which the Pythagoreans gave to numbers, see my Theoretic Arithmetic, in which also the occul¢ meaning of these appellations is unfolded.
4“ Plotinus ni fallor, aut Plato, sed ille potius,” says Reisk; but every one who is at all conversant with Platonic writera, will imme- diately see that by the theologist, Porphyry means Orpheus.
72 ON ABSTINENCE FROM animal is to be sacrificed, but that a sacrifice of this kind pertains to demons, and other powers, whether they are beneficent, or depraved", He likewise knows who those ¥ Though Porphyry excelled in all philosophical knowledge, whence also he was called xa’ ἐξοχὴν, the philosopher, yet he was inferior to his auditor Iamblichus, in theological infermation. On this account, Tamblichus was called by all the Platonists posterior to him, the divine, and -the great priest. I shall present the reader, therefore, with -an extract from my translation of his treatise on the Mysteries, which appears to me to be an admirable supplement to what Porphyry has said in this book, about sacrificing animals, and a satisfactory answer to the question whether they are to be sacrificed or not.
In Chap. 14, therefore, of Sect. 5, he observes as follows: *’We . ‘shall begin the elucidation of this subject in the best possible manner, if we demonstrate that the sacred law of sacrifices is connected with the order of the Gods. In the first place, therefore, we say, that--of the Gods some are material, but others immaterial, And the material, indeed, are those that comprehend matter in themselves, and adorn it; but the immaterial are those that are perfectly exempt from, and transcend matter: but, according to the sacrific art, it is requisite to begin sacred operations from the material Gods; ‘for the ascent to the ‘immaterial Gods will not otherwise be effected. The material Gods, therefore, have a certain communication with matter, so far as they ' preside over it. Hence they have dominion over things which happen about matter, such as the division, percussion, repercussion, mutation, generation, and corruption of all material bodies. He, therefore, who wishes to worship these theurgically, in a manner adapted to them, and ‘to the dominion which they are allotted, should, as they are material, employ a material mode of worship. For thus we shall be wholly led to a familiarity with them, and worship them in an allied and appropriate manner. Dead bodies, therefore, and things deprived of life, the slaying of animals, and the consumption of victims, and, in ‘short, the mutation of the matter which is offered, pertain to these ‘Gods, not by themselves, but on account of the matter over which they preside. For though they are, in the most eminent degree, separate from it, yet, at the same time, they are present with it; and, though they comprehend matter in an immaterial power, yet they are co- existent with it. Things also that are governed, are not foreign from their governors; and things which are subservient as instruments, are not unadapted to those that use them. Hence it is foreign to the immaterial Gods, to offer matter to them through sacrifices, but this is most adapted to all the material Gods.”
In the following chapter, Iamblichus observes, “ that as there i is 4 ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 73 are that ought to sacrifice to these, and to what extent they ought -to proceed in the sacrifices which they make.
time when we become wholly soul, are out of the body, and sublimely sevolve on high, in conjunction with all the immaterial Gods; s0, like- ‘wise, there is a two-fold mode of worship, one of which is simple, incore ‘poreal, and pure from all generation; and this mode pertains to undefiled souls; but the other is replete with every thing of a material nature, and is adapted to’souls which are neither pure, nor liberated from all gene- , Fation.” He adds, “ we must admit, therefore, that there are two-fold — species of sacrifices; one kind, indeed, pertaining to men who are not ‘entirely purified, which, as Heraclitus says, rarely happens to one man, or to a certain easily-to-be-numbered few of mankind; but the other. kind being material, and consisting in mutation, is adapted to souls that are still detained by the body. Hence, to cities and people not yet liberated from sublunary fate, and the impending communion of bodies, if such a mode of sacrifice as this latter is not permitted, they will wander both from immaterial and material good. For they will not be able to receive the former, and to the latter they will not offer what is appropriate.”
He farther informs us, in Chap. 22, that though the summit of the sacrific art recurs to the most principal one of the whole multitude of Gods [i. ¢. to the ineffable cause of all,] and at one.and the same time worships the many essences and principles that are [rooted and concen- tred] in it; yet this happens at the latest period, and to a very few, and . that we must be satisfied, if it takes place, when the sun of life is setting. * But,” says he, “ our present discussion does not ordain laws for a man of this kind; for he is superior to all law; but it promulgates a law such as that of which we are now speaking, to those who are in want of a cer- tain divine legislation.” In the above passage, by “ a man of this kind,” Iamblichus most probably alludes to Plotinus, as both his works, and _ the life of him, written by Porphyry, show that he was a man capable -of recurring to, and becoining united with the highest God, and thus at ‘the same time worshipping all the divine powers that are rooted in him.
To what Iamblichus has thus excellently observed, may be added what the philosopher Sallust says in his golden treatise On the Gods and the World, viz. “ that since life primarily subsists in the Gods, and there ‘1s also a certain human life, but the latter desires to be united to ‘the former, a medium is required; for natures much distant from each other cannot be conjoined without a medium; and it is necessary that the medium should be similar to the connected natures. Life, ‘therefore, must necessarily be the medium of life. Hence, men of the _ ‘present day that are happy, and all the ancients, have sacrificed animals; and this, indeed, not rashly, but in a way accommodated to every God, 74 ' ΟΝ ABSTINENCE FROM Qther things, however, will be passed over by me jn silence. But what some Platonists have divulged, 1 shall lay before the reader, in order that the things proposed to be discussed, may become manifest to the intelligent. What they have unfolded, therefore, is as follows: 37. The first God being incorporeal, immoveable, and impartible, and neither subsisting im any thing, nor restrained in his energies, is not, as has been before observed, in want of any thing external to himself, as neither is the soul of the world; but this latter, contain- ing in itself the principle of that which is triply divisible, and being naturally self-motive, is adapted to be moved in a beautiful and orderly manner, and also to move the body of the world according to the most excellent reasons []. 6. productive principles or powers]. It is, however, connected with and comprehends body, though it is itself incorporeal, and liberated from the participation of any passion. To the remaining Gods, therefore, to the. world, to the inerratic and erratic stars, who are visible Gods, consisting of soul and body, thanks are to be returned after the above-mentioned manner, through sacrifices from inanimate natures. The multitude, there- fore, of those invisible beings remains for us, whom Plato indiscriminately calls deemons*; but of these, some being denominated by men, obtain from them honours, and other religious observances, similar to those which are paid to the Gods; but others, who for the most part are not explicitly denominated, receive an occult religious reverence and appellation from certain persong in villages and certain cities; and the remaining multitude is called in common by the name of demons. The with many ather ceremonies respecting the cultivation of divinity.” Let. the truly intellectual and pious man, however, never forget that prayer, as Proclus divinely observes, possesses of itself a supernatural perfection and power. | 5 For a more theological account of demops, I refer the reader to my translation of the before-mentioned admirable treatise of Jamblichus on the Mysteries.
ANIMAL FOOD.— BOOK II. 8 general persuagion, however, respecting all these invistbie beings, is this, that if they become angry through being neglected, and deprived of the religious reverence which ‘is due to them, they are noxious to those by whom they are thus neglected, and that they again become bene- ficent, if they are appeased by prayers, suppiications, and sacrifices, and other similar rites. _, $8. But the confused notioa which is formed of these beings, and which has proceeded to great crimination, ‘mecessarily requires that the nature of them should be distinguished according to reason. For perhaps it will be said, that it is requisite to show whence the error concerning them originated among men. The distinction, therefore, must be made after the following manner. ‘Such souls as are the progeny of the whole soul of the universe, and who govern the great. parts of the region under the moon, these, being incumbent on a pneumatic substance or spirit, and ruling over it conformably to reason, are to be considered as good damons, who are diligently employed in causing every thing to be bene- ficial to the subjects of their government, whether they preside over certain animals, or fruits, which are arranged ander their inspective care, or over things which subsist for the sake of these, such as showers of rain, maderate winds, serene weather, and other things which cooperate with these, such as the good temperament of the seasons of the year. They are also our leaders in the attainment