Kakavelaki ntonia,* Doctor of Byzantine Philosophy (National and

Kapodistrian University of Athens, Department of Philosophy and History of

Science), e-mail: pahomios @hotmail.com

The notion of pneuma () in the work of John

Philoponus (490A.D-570A.D)*

Abstract:
The notion of pneuma was a central notion of two ancient traditions: the medical and
philosophical tradition of ancient Greece, and the Neo-platonic Philosophical one of
late antiquity. In this paper we shall examine the way in which a Byzantine
philosopher of the 6th century, John Philoponus, handled this notion from a Neo-
platonic point of view, and how he assimilated the Aristotelian, the medical and the
Neo-platonic theory of pneuma into a single conception.
Philoponus career can be divided in two periods: the one during which he
was studying under Ammonius, and the one during which he was writing in his own
name, expressing his Christian convictions as a Byzantine philosopher, and criticizing
Neo-platonic doctrines opposed to the Christian Dogma. We shall thus also present
the refutation he gives to the Neo-platonic theory of pneuma during the second period
of his career.

Key-words: John Philoponus , pneuma, Ancient Greek Medicine , Aristotelian theory

of pneuma.,Plotin, Porpyry, Jamblichus, Proclus, Theurgy, Neo-platonism, Byzantine
Philosophy.

John Philoponus was a student of Ammonius, the holder of the chair of

philosophy at the Neo-platonic school of Alexandria. 1 He was one of those

*
BSc (Political Science), BA (Theology), DEA (History and Civilization of Byzantium), PhD
(Byzantine Philosophy).
*
All the translations in this study are mine.
1
On the Neo-Platonic school of Alexandria see I. Hadot, Le problme du noplatonisme alexandrin.
Hirocls et Simplicius, Paris, 1978.

1
responsible for taking notes of his teachers classes. 2 But as the title of his

commentary On the Soul, which we shall now examine, mentions, he has incorporated

in his notes his personal opinions. 3 In this paper we shall present the notion of

pneuma, as presented by this work of John Philoponus. In this text Philoponus

combines the ancient Greek medical doctrine about the pneuma, the Aristotelian

pneuma theory, and that of the Neo-platonic philosophers.

For ancient Greek physicians the pneuma was the external air that was inhaled

into the living organism, and which was the medium by which most of its functions

operated.4 Aristotle inserted this medical notion in his work in order to explain the

bodily movements of living organisms, and to define it as the transmitting medium

from the sensory organs to the center of sensation of the organism, the heart. 5 He

considered it innate and identified it with the internal heat of the organism. Post-

Aristotelian physicians divided it into two kinds: the vital pneuma, which had its seat

into the heart, circulated in the body through the veins, and was responsible for the

2
On this scholar tradition see Richard M., Apo phones, Byzantion 20, 1950, . 191-222.
3
J. Philoponus, On the Soul, ed. M. Hayduck, CAG v. 15,p. 1:

.
4
For a thorough look upon the medical theory of pneuma, from the antiquity up to the medieval
Byzantine period, see our PHD: Kakavelaki Antonia,
, , Athens 2012, chapter I,.
5
For a thorough look upon the Aristotelian theory of pneuma see our article
, , vol. 30, issue 90, September 2013, A.
L. Peck, Aristotle, Generation of Animals, Appendix B, pp. 576-593, F. Solmsen, The vital heat, the
inborn pneuma and the aether, in Journal of Hellenic Studies, LXXVII (Part I), 1957, . 119-123,
idem, Greek Philosophy and the Discovery of the Nerves, MUSEUM HELVETICUM, vol. 18, 1961,
pp. 169-197., G. Verbeke, Doctrine du pneuma et entlchisme chez Aristote,: Aristotle on mind and
senses, Cambridge 1978, pp. 191-214 , Jaeger, Diokles von Karystos. Die griechische Medizin und die
Schule des Aristoteles, Berlin 1938, A. P. Boss, The soul and its instrumental body, Leiden Boston
2003, P. Moraux, (Quinta essentia), Realencyclopdie, vol. V, I, 1963, pp. 1171-1263.

2
vital functions of the body, and the psychic pneuma, which had its seat in the brain,

circulated in the body through the nerves, and was responsible for the voluntary

movement and the sensitive and cognitive functions. This conception is seen in its

complete form from Galen on, and remained the dominant medical doctrine

throughout the medieval period.6

According to the Neoplatonic theory, pneuma was the first form of

incorporation of the soul as it descends from the heavens, the first form of body it

acquires before being finally introduced into the human body. This doctrine served as

a compromise between Platos conception of the soul as separable from its earthly

body, and Aristotles belief that the soul is the first actuality of a natural body that is

potentially alive.7 It is well known that the Neo-platonic movement, from Porphyry on,

aimed at all times at the harmonization of Platos and Aristotles thought.8

Although we have some hints in Plotinus work about the pneuma,9 it was his

student Porphyry that definitively introduced this doctrine into Neo-platonism.10 The

6
Some physicians accepted a third kind of pneuma too, the . See our PHD mentioned
above, chapter I.
7
Dodds, Proclus elements of Theology, Appendix II, pp. 316-317, Oxford 1963.
8
See I. Hadot, Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato,
Series: Studies in Platonism, Neoplatonism, and the Platonic Tradition, vol.18,, transl. M. Chase,
Leiden 2014.
9
The passages where Plotinus is considered to hint to the pneuma theory are the following : Enneade
III.6.5. 22-29, Enneade IV. 3. 15 and Enneade IV. 3. 24, See J. Finamore, Iamblichus and the Theory
of the Vehicle of the Soul, American classical studies 14, Chico 1985, p. 3, G. Verbeke, Lvolution de
la doctrine du Pneuma du stocisme St. Augustin, Paris-Louvain, 1945, E.R. Dodds, op.cit., p. 318,
M. Zambon, , Il significato filosofico della dottrina de l dell anima, Studi sull anima in
Plotino, Elenchos 43, Naples 2005, p. 307-335. S. Toulouse, Les thories du vhicule de lme. Gense
et volution dune doctrine de la mdiation entre lme et le corps dans le noplatonisme, ,
Paris 2001, p. 268-274. G. Verbeke,op.cit, p. 359, E.R. Dodds, op.cit. p. 318 and S. Toulouse, op.cit., p.
242-243 call also upon Enneade II, 2. 21, while A. H. Armstrong,in his proper edition of the Enneades
of Plotinus, Cambridge 1966, p. 46, note 2, and J. Finamore, op.cit, p. 8, note 9, consider more

3
main source from which it was derived was the Chaldean Oracles 11 (a text which

reflected oriental mystical religious doctrines, and contained a metaphysical doctrine

concerning the pneuma). One of the reasons that Porpyry introduced the pneuma

theory into Neoplatonism was his belief that Theurgy can facilitate the souls ascent,

especially for those not acquainted with philosophy,12 (Theurgy was the practice of

rituals, performed with the intention of invoking the action of gods, especially with

the goal of uniting with the divine, achieving henosis, and perfecting oneself). In sum,

Porphyry thought that through Theurgy mans pneumatic body is purified, becomes

lighter, and thus the soul can re-ascend into the heavens where it came from. Of

course Porhyry maintained that philosophy is superior to Theurgy, but is reserved

only to a few people.

plausible that this passage refers to Timaeus 79a5- e9 and to the discussion Plato opens there about the
respiration, and not to the pneuma.
10
On Porphyrys pneuma theory see J. Bidez, Vie de Porphyre, le philosophe noplatonicien, Gand-
Leipzig 1913, G. Verbeke, Lvolution de la doctrine du Pneuma du stocisme St. Augustin, Paris-
Louvain 1945, pp. 363-374, A. Smith, Porphyrys Place in the Neoplatonic Tradition, The Hague
1974, M. Di Pasquale Barbanti, Ochema-Pneuma e Phantasia nel Neoplatonismo, Aspetti psicologici e
prospettive religiose, Cantania 1998, pp. 107-130. M. Chase, Omne corpus fugiendum? Augustine and
Porphyry on the body and the post-mortem destiny of the Soul, Revue d Etudes Anciennes et
Mdivales, Bucharest-Paris, 2, 2004, pp. 37-58, S. Toulouse, (PHD- Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes)
Les thories du vhicule de lme. Gense et volution dune doctrine de la mdiation entre lme et le
corps dans le noplatonisme, , Paris 2001, pp. 268-274.
11
O the Chaldaean Oracles see H. Lewy, Chaldaean Oracles And Theurgy: Mysticism, Magic And
Platonism In The Later Roman Empire, Paris 1978, series: Etudes Augustiniennes.
12
See Porphyry, De regress animae, ed. J. Bidez in Vie de Porphyre, le philosophe noplatonicien,
Gand-Leipzig 1913, Appendix II, fr. 2: . 27*21-26: Nam et Porphyrius quondam quasi
purgationem animae per theurgian, cunctanter tamen et pudibunda quodammodo disputatione promittit,
reversionem vero ad Deum hanc artem praestrare cuiquam negat, ut videas eum inter vitium sacrilegae
curiositatis et philosophiae professionem sententiis alternantibus fluctuare, and fr. 2, p. 28* 10-13:
Ex quibus tamen theurgicis teletis fatetur intellectuali animae nihil purgationis accedere, quod eam
faciat idoneam ad videndum Deum suum et perspicienda ea quae vere sunt.

4
 Regarding the pneumatic body he considered it as an ethereal substance that

originates from the stars,13that it is the seat of the irrational soul,14 and that it is not

eternal. When it becomes completely purified, it returns to the celestial spheres where

it is subject to decomposition along with the irrational soul. 15

16
Later on, modifications to this theory were introduced. Iamblichus

maintained that theurgy is absolutely essential for the souls purification, 17 that the

pneumatic body does not come from the stars but it is made by the Demiurge, 18 and

that this and the irrational soul established on it are immortal. 19 Proclus and his

13
Proclus referring to Porphyry says in the In Timaeus, ed. Diehl, I, p. 147, 12-13: < >
, , and furthermore in ibid, III, 234, 23-4
Proclus mentions that the constituents of the pneumatic body according to Porphyry are:
< .
14
The irratinal soul, according to the Neo-platonic theory comprised mainly the faculties of ,
and .
15
Proclus, op.cit, . 234. 18-21: , ,

16
On Iamblichuss pneuma theory see G. Verbeke, Lvolution de la doctrine du Pneuma du stocisme
St. Augustin, Paris-Louvain, 1945, J. F. Finamore, Iamblichus and the Theory of the Vehicle of the
Soul, American classical studies, 14, Chico 1985, M. Di Pasquale Barbanti, Ochema- Pneuma e
Phantasia nel Neoplatonismo, Aspetti psicologici e prospettive religiose, Cantania 1998, pp.131-154, S.
Toulouse, Les thories du vhicule de lme. Gense et volution dune doctrine de la mdiation entre
lme et le corps dans le noplatonisme, vol , Paris 2001, pp. 277-294.
17
J. F. Finamore, op.cit., p. 4.
18
Proclus, , ed. Diehl, , p. 267, 6- 11: ...
. ,

. The Demiourge here is identified with the
Demiourge that Plato mentions in the Timaeus.
19
Proclus, ibid, p. 234, 32 and suite:


, ,
,

5
teacher Syrianus introduced a second vehicle of the soul, the so called or

body.20 They considered this immortal - vehicle of the rational soul, and

the pneumatic one mortal - vehicle of the irrational soul.21

Let us now examine how Philoponus treats this notion in his commentary on

the Soul. From his account, which is lengthy, we shall present only the principal ideas.

Philoponus divides the soul into three parts: the rational soul, which is completely

separate from the body, the irrational soul, which is separate from the earthly body,

but is inseparable from the pneuma, and the vegetative soul which is inseparable

from the earthly body.22 The pneumatic body constitutes the seat of the irrational

soul.23 It is composed by the four elements, as is the terrestrial body, but is called

pneumatic because of the surplus of air in its composition.24 He gives as proof of its

existence the following argument: The fact that the soul comes at a certain time to

,
.
20
Proclus, In Timaeum., , p. 81, 21 ed. Diehl:
, ,
.
21
Proclus, op.cit, , p. 285, 12-16, ed. Diehl: , ,
, , ,
, .
22
J. Philoponus, On the Soul, ed. M. Hayduck, CAG v. 15, p. 10, 4-8 (Philoponus, while mentioning
the opinions of precedent philosophers, says): ,
. ,
, ,
, . , ....
23
J.Philoponus, op.cit, p. 12, 17-21: (In this passage Philoponus is undertaking the task to prove)
,
, ,
, ,
.
24
J. Philoponus, op. cit, p. 17, 20-23: < >
, , ,
.

6
Hades, where it serves a sentence for all the aspects in which it did not live well. By

the punishments it receives, it undergoes pain. But if the soul were incorporeal how

could it be punished? This is why it disposes the pneumatic body which, by

immoderate freezing or heating, it either dilates or contracts asymmetrically according

to the law of homeopathy.25

Anger and desire (the main faculties of the irrational soul) are in this

pneumatic body as their substrate and they are inseparable from it.26 For if the soul

was released from both after it exits the earthly body, it would be also released from

the world of becoming and from the passions, and it would never go to the place of

judgment beneath the earth. 27 During the descent of the soul these passions were

given to it and it cant be delivered from the world of becoming if it does not first

purify itself.28 But since soul is self moving, and left the good voluntarily, in order to

re-ascend to the heavenly region again it has to be purified by itself. 29 For the places

of judgment beneath the earth can not by themselves lift it up, but only make it turn
25
J. Philoponus, op. cit, pp. 17, 26-18, 4: ;
, ,
,
. ,
. ,
, ,
; ,

26
J. Philoponus, op. cit , p. 18,8-10: ,
, .
27
J. Philoponus, op. cit, p. 18, 12-15: ,
,
.
28
J. Philoponus, op. cit, p.18, 15-17: ,

.
29
J. Philoponus, op. cit, p.18, 18-19: ,
, , .

7
towards itself and dismiss the things to which it became attached by sympathy.

When this takes place, the soul is delivered from anger and desire and from their

vehicle, the pneuma.30

Philoponus then mentions another opinion with which he seems to agree,

namely that another heavenly body exists, eternally joined to the rational soul, which

is called or . 31 In fact here he refers to the above mentioned

doctrine of Proclus and his master Syrianus. Philoponus explains the reason why this

kind of pneuma exists as follows: Because the soul belongs to the earthly beings it is

necessary for it as well to have a certain lot over which it rules, and through which it

may be part of the world. And since it is eternally moving and always acting, it must

also have eternally a body to vivify.32

Further on, Philoponus presents medical conceptions concerning the

pneuma. 33 He devotes a lengthy report to the optical pneuma 34 and the auditory

pneuma,35 and he also presents the way it functions in the case of the voice and the

30
J. Philoponus, op. cit., p.18, 19-26: ,
.
.
,

, .
31
J. Philoponus, op. cit, p. 18, 26 - 28:
, .
32
J. Philoponus, op. cit, p. 18, 28-31:
, ,
, .
33
On some of the medical conceptions of John Philoponus in his in de anima see R. B., Todd,
Philosophy and Medicine in John Philoponus commentary on Aristotles De Anima, Dubarton Oaks
Papers 38, 1984, . 103-110 and Philip J. Van der Eijk, On the soul 1.1-2, Ithaka N. Y., 2005, the
introduction.
34
J. Philoponus, op.cit. , p. 336, 16-20 and 33-37, pp. 337-9.
35
J. Philoponus, op. cit., p. 364, 15-32.

8
cough. 36 In these passages he appears to possess extended knowledge of medical

theories, as he presents a detailed anatomy of the human organs.37 What is important

to note here is that he does not present this part of his theory as separated from the

philosophical part, but actually unifies the two traditions into a single one. Then he

turns to Aristotelian theories about the pneuma. He locates its seat into the heart,38 and

considers that from there it is diffused throughout the body. 39 He identifies the

pneuma with the innate heat.40 Finally, he says that it is the appetitive pneuma that

moves the body and that it is found into the nerves.41 It thus becomes clear that he

combines the medical theory with the Aristotelian theory and with the Neo-platonism.

36
J. Philoponus, op. cit., p. 379-380.
37
Ancient Arab writers attribute some medical works to Philoponus (See the catalogue published by M.
Steinschneider, Al-Farabi-Alpharabius- des arabischen Philosophen Leben und Schriften, Mmoire
de l Acadmie I,priale des Sciences de St. Petersbourg, 7, X 4, 1869, . 163-5.
Furthermore in an ancient compedium written in Syriac Philoponus is called Physician (This
compedium has been edited by A. Van Roey, Un trait cononite contre la doctrine de Jean Philopon
sur la rsurrection, Antidoron, homage Maurits Geerard, Wetteren 1984, fr. 33. Last, two greek
manuscripts entitled : (On fevers) and (On pulses) bear his name. In
spite of that M. Meyerhof hes the attribution of these works to Philoponus, (see his
works:Von Alexandrien nach Bagdad, Sitzungsberichte der preussischen Academie der
Wissenschaften, Philosophisch- historische Klasse, 1930, pp. 389-429, and Johannes Grammaticos
(Philoponos) von Alexandrien und die Arabische Medizin, Mitteilungen des deutschen Instituts fr
gyptische Altertumskunde in Kairo 2, 1932, p.p. 1-2). O. Temkin, on the other hand, adopts a more
moderate attitude (see O. Temkin, Byzantine medicine: tradition and empiricism, Dumbarton Oaks
Papers 16, 1962, . 105, . 58). On this theoretical discussion se R. Sorabji, Philoponus and
the the rejection of Aristotelian science, London 1987, p. 37.
38
J. Philoponus, op, cit., p. 588, 7-8: . Compare with Aristotle,
Movement of Animals 10, 703a 12.
39
J. Philoponus, op.cit., p. 588, 15-17: ,
, .
40
J. Philoponus, op.cit, , p. 588, 10-13:
, .
, .
41
J. Philoponus, op. cit., p. 591, 26-27:
.

9
 We also have the second period of his career when, writing as a Christian

Byzantine philosopher, he criticized theories incompatible with the Christian doctrine.

During this period he adopts a polemical attitude against Neo-platonic positions that

he had been defending in his previous works. In his work Against Proclus. On the

eternity of the world, Philoponus refutes Procluss theories within the framework of

the Neoplatonic philosophy, keeping biblical theology out of his polemic, although he

is evidently motivated by his Christian faith. So in this work he rejects, among others,

the existence of the eternal body.42 He begins his argumentation as follows: That it

is an unthinkable myth the hypothesis of the Greeks about the eternal body, which

they call , upon which first the rational faculties <of the soul> go aboard,

and towards which and through which the corruptible bodies move. And that it is

impossible the eternal body, resting at one place, to move the corruptible body by a

certain natural force like the magnet <moves> the iron.43

Then he refutes this doctrine on the basis of Aristotles theory of local motion

as this appears in the de Caelo. 44 Three kinds of movement exist in nature: the

rectilinear movement that characterizes the corruptible bodies, the circular movement

that characterizes the eternal bodies (he does not actually endorse this part of the

theory, but he uses it nevertheless in order to refute Proclus arguments), and the spiral

which is a mixed movement, but which, however, is not natural. With numerous

arguments he proves that the body eternally attached to the soul, as the Greeks claim,

42
J. Philoponus, Against Proclus. On the eternity of the world, ed. H. Rabe, Leipzig 1899, . 245,
22-246, 25.
43
J. Philoponus, Op.cit., p. 245, 22-26: .., .245, 22-26:
, ,
. ,
,
.
44
Aristotle, de Caelo, II, 268b 17-19.

10
can not be moved by either of the two kinds of natural movement because in that case

either the corruptible bodies would move in an eternal way, or the eternal body

itself would move in a rectilinear way, and that would mean that it would be

corruptible as well. He calls upon other arguments as well against the existence of the

eternal body, such as: the fact that a body cannot permeate a body, that if the eternal

body was to move in a circular way, its shape should be spherical too, but there is no

place in the body which is spherical, and that if the eternal body moves the perishable

bodies by means of natural power, while remaining still itself, that is, like the magnet

moves the iron, it would not impart movement at one time and not impart it at another,

it would always impart it but as we know, the perishable bodies do not move

constantly. 45 Concluding, he mentions that neither did Plato himself, in any of his

works, suggest the existence of bodies of that kind.46

The attitude held by Philoponus in the second period of his career can be

explained by the fact that the Neo-platonic pneuma doctrine presupposed the pre-

existence of the soul, doctrine rejected by the Christian Dogma. Thus, in this work we

also have one of the first philosophical arguments against this Neo-platonic doctrine,

held by a Christian byzantine philosopher.

45
J. Philoponus, Against Proclus. On the eternity of the world, ed. H. Rabe, pp. 272,27-293,22.
46
J. Philoponus, op.cit., p. 293, 14-15:
.

11