Commentary On the First Three Delphic Maxims
Exploring the first three Delphic Maxims through Neoplatonic thought.
The Delphic maxims, brief yet thoughtful ethical principles attributed to the Oracle of Apollo, represent a foundation of ancient Greek moral and spiritual thought. There are 147 maxims in total. I would like to explore the first three, as I find their ordering interesting. Perhaps the first three tell us something crucial about the ancient Greeks that may interest us today. The commentary provided comes from Neoplatonic perspectives.
The first three maxims—Ἕπου θεῷ (“Follow God”), Νόμῳ πείθου (“Obey the law”), and Θεοὺς σέβου (“Respect the Gods”)—expressive a framework for living that intertwines individual behavior, societal responsibility, and spiritual alignment. When examined through the lens of Neoplatonic philosophy, these maxims reveal a dialogue between ethics, metaphysics, and the soul’s journey toward ultimate truth.
Ἕπου θεῷ – “Follow God”
The positioning of “Follow God” as the first maxim highlights the priority of divine alignment in human life. That is significant, considering the philosophy of Plotinus, the founder of Neoplatonism, who taught that the ultimate goal of life is union with the One, the source of all existence. He insisted that the soul must transcend material distractions and orient itself toward the divine through contemplation and self-purification. The maxim thus demands a metaphysical ascension, parallel to what Plotinus calls the "flight of the alone to the Alone."
In Neoplatonic terms, following God is not merely about obeying external commandments; it involves an inward transformation that aligns the soul with the divine. As Plotinus asserts, the One is ineffable, transcendent, and beyond human comprehension, yet it is also the source of all being and goodness. Therefore, following God reflects a journey toward realizing one’s true nature—a nature intrinsically tied to the divine. This alignment becomes the foundation for all ethical and spiritual practices.
Νόμῳ πείθου - “Obey the law”
The second maxim moves from the divine to the human, urging obedience to the law. In ancient Greek thought, law (nomos) was considered an extension of cosmic order, a principle echoed in Neoplatonic philosophy. Plotinus views the material and social realms as reflections of the divine hierarchy, suggesting that just laws are microcosmic expressions of the greater order established by the Logos. To obey the law is to participate in the harmony that governs the cosmos.
This relationship between divine and human law is emphasized in the teachings of Iamblichus, a later Neoplatonist who sees the law as a guide that harmonizes human life with the divine order. Iamblichus describes theurgy—ritual practices aimed at uniting the human and divine—as a process of aligning with the higher principles that laws are meant to embody. Thus, the maxim does not merely advocate compliance with societal norms; it calls for a deeper ethical engagement in which human behavior mirrors the divine structure of reality.
Θεοὺς σέβου - “Respect the Gods”
The third maxim, “Respect the Gods,” emphasizes reverence for divine beings and completes the triad with an emphasis on piety. In Neoplatonic thought, the Gods are seen as intermediaries between the One and humanity, embodying divine principles that sustain the cosmos. Plotinus and his followers understood that respect for the Gods was not merely about ritual observance but about cultivating an awareness of their role in maintaining both cosmic and moral order.
Iamblichus, in particular, highlights the transformative potential of revering the Gods through theurgical practices, which elevate the soul by fostering communion with the Gods. This reverence is not passive but participatory, enabling the individual to draw closer to the divine. The respect this maxim advocates thus transcends surface-level ritualism, inviting individuals to engage deeply with the spiritual forces that govern their lives.
Reflections
The order of the maxims—following God, obeying the law, and respecting the Gods—suggests a structured progression. The first maxim establishes the primacy of divine alignment, emphasizing that all ethical and spiritual endeavors must begin with a connection to the ultimate source of being. The second maxim bridges the divine and the human, advocating for a life lived following the laws that reflect cosmic harmony. The third maxim completes the framework by fostering piety, encouraging individuals to recognize and honor the intermediary powers that sustain the divine order.
This progression mirrors the stages of spiritual ascent described by Plotinus. Beginning with alignment to the One (Ἕπου θεῷ), the soul moves through ethical and intellectual discipline (Νόμῳ πείθου), culminating in a profound reverence for the divine (Θεοὺς σέβου). Together, these maxims offer a holistic vision of a well-ordered life that integrates individual, societal, and cosmic dimensions.
The works of Plotinus and later Neoplatonists enrich our understanding of these maxims. Plotinus’ emphasis on the soul’s return to the One aligns with the call to follow God as the ultimate guide. His view of laws as reflections of divine order provides a philosophical foundation for the second maxim. At the same time, his reverence for the Gods as embodiments of higher principles underscores the significance of the third.
Additionally, the Neoplatonic notion of hierarchy—where every level of reality participates in the divine—provides a unifying framework for these maxims. By following God, obeying the law, and respecting the Gods, individuals harmonize themselves with this hierarchy, achieving a virtuous life aligned with the ultimate truths of existence.
Put together, they form a framework that unites metaphysical, ethical, and theurgical dimensions that invite us to live not just as individuals or members of society but as participants in the cosmic order that transcends our ordinary perceptions.
Excellent post. Based on how you describe #2, would you say that unjust laws are not worth following? Obviously there is a certain degree of critical thought required to determine whether a law is just or not, but for would following an unjust law be just for the sake of social cohesion beyond individual disagreements, or should such laws be opposed if they are inharmonious with justice?