Section 11 (Page lxvii)
GNOSTICISM.
Ixvii 'ATTcxpdacts, Now I say to you that I say, and write that I write.
The scheme is this.
There are 'two offsets from the Perfect aldoves having neither beginning nor end, from one root, which is the Invisible, Incomprehensible Power Silence; of which one is manifested from above, the great Power, Mind of the Universe, that administers All Things, the Male Principle ; and the other, from beneath, vast Thought, generative of All Things, the Female princi ple ; whence in mutual apposition they combine in con sort, and exhibit the mean space as an immense atmo sphere, having neither beginning nor end.
But within it is the Father that upholds and sustains all things that
have beginning and end.
He is the Past, the Present, the Future, Bisexual Power, the reflex of the pre-existent Infinite Power, still subsisting in oneness, which hath neither beginning nor end; for from Him, Thought, sub sisting in Oneness, emanating, made Two.
Yet He was One ; for having Her within Himself, he was alone ; not in truth First, howbeit Pre-existent, but Himself manifested from Himself became the Second.
But neither was He called Father, before His Thought so named Him.
As therefore evolving Himself from Himself, He revealed iipavipuxrev {avr<$ rip> Iblav 'Ext'oiay, $a> dXX^jXois irruTToixoOrrcs, av}vylav (paveiffa 'Ejrivoia o6k ttrotfxovffi, Kal tA pJaov Stiarq/ia ip<palvovovtus Kal i) •t\acv [/. ow a4pa &.KHTi\T)TTToy, fi^re ipxh" prff* iirol-qacv dXXws, dXX' lSov<ra] dXXd l5ouo~a airbv tv^Kpv^e rbv xartpa I. xipas txorra.
*Ey 5^ Tovrip varijp
hf tavTjj, rouriori rty divafuv, Kal icriv Paordfow xdyra, Kal Tpi<pwv ra dpxty dppevb$rj\vs Siva/its Kal 'Exlvoia, S$ev koI Wpas txovra.
Ovtos iarlv
'E<rdXXi)Xois avrio-roixovaiv' oiSiv yap SiaTws-ffTas-<m)ff6fievos, &v apff€v6$7j\vs (pipet Sivapis ixivotai, tv tvrtt.
'E*t p.tv vafus Kara t}jv irpovTdpxouffCW 56vapuv rCiv avoj evplffKcrat bfoa/JM, iK hi rGsv Kara ixtvoia.
*E<xrw otv ovtus Kal rh dutpavrov, ifrtt otr ipxh" olrre r4pas (Xet> 1* ftovorTjri otiaav dwb yap ratinjs <paviv djr' airwv tv ov, bio eiptffKeadai, rpoeKdovca ^ (v fiovbrirri 'E^roia, tytdpaevbByjkvs txw tV 0i)Xeiac Iv (avr$. eft, txw y&P rjv vcro bio.
EdKavo? i» iavrip dirty, ijv pMvot, oi nivroi xpurros, Ovrbs iari NoOj (v 'Exivola, ixiipurra ix' dXXijXwv tv 6vrct, bio ebploKovrai.
Hipp. Ph. VI.
18.
Kalrep xpovirdpxw, jewels 5£ airrds dxb iavrov, tytvero bcirepos.
'AW oibi Cf. the old Persian theory, p. xii. tot^p iK\-fi9i), rplv avrrjv airbv ivopdaai
xaripa [Mill, airij bvopdcei^ '(It in which the first Dyad emanated from ..
. otiv airbt iavrbv fori tavrod xpoayayiiv an antecedent principle of unity. e2
lxviii
PRIMITIVE
Simon to Himself His own Thought, so also the revealed Thought Magus.
, „ acted not otherwise, but seeing Him she hid within herself the Father, which is the Power ; thus Thought also is a bisexual Power, so that in this way they mutually cor respond ; for Power differs in no respect from Thought, being One.
Power is found to be from above, Thought from beneath.
It is thus that the manifestation also ema nating from them being One, is found to be Two; the Bisexual that hath within Himself the Female.
He is Mind in Thought.
Being One inseparably from each other, they are virtually Two."
We may observe in this passage a very definite as
sertion of the Oriental emanative principle.
The Deity, One and Inscrutable, is described as putting forth a certain Power or quality, that was substantially reabsorbed, and identified with the Divine essence.
The dark saying of Heraclitus, p. xxxv, may have been indicative of this theory.
The Brahminical simile of the tortoise putting forth, and withdrawing its limbs from beneath the testudo, at the present day, exemplifies it.
But with greater subtle ty, the Samaritan Mage drew his illustration from that, which is at once the loftiest exponent of Power upon earth, the highly composite system of a most perfect Unity, the Mind of Man.
Another particular, that should be observed in the passage quoted, serves to illustrate the rationale of the Valentinian series of Mow, which is the meaning, pregnant with the co-ordinate, of each successive term that it contains : so vovs and eir'ivoia are present throughout as the theme; and the Past—Present —Future is embosomed in them; 1<pa)vt] also and ovotxa evolve the name of Father; and Xoyiofios and evOv/nrjaii complete the series, as the action and reaction of Mind in Thought, and Thought in Mind.
The Valentinian system, though numerically different, is determined by the same limits; y 1 Cf. the Rabbinical VpVD and the Hebrew synonym for the Deity, DC
GNOSTICISM.
Ixix the entirety forms the same Pleroma.
The avfyyla of Menander. vods and eirlvoia is partly Pythagorean, and partly an Ori ental mode of theosophising.
The arrhenothele combina tion is Pythagorean, the enthymeme Oriental.
Menander was the disciple and immediate follower of Simon.
He was the third of a Samaritan succession, reck oning as first, Dositheus, the predecessor of Simon, who pretended to be the promised Messiah ; and each of these impostors gave out that neither 'himself nor his followers should be subject to death.
If the PseudoClementine * writings may be trusted, these three teachers represent a 'Samaritan sect, that existed before the birth of Christ.
In all respects, however, the account given by Irenseus
with respect to Menander's notions, finds a counterpart in what Hippolytus has said concerning Simon.
The pupil added nothing original, so far as we have the means of judging.
Saturninus carried on the succession.
The Nicolaitans took their name, as it has been said, from p- »*■ Nicolas the proselyte of Antioch, who, after his ordination to the diaconate, apostatised and formed this sect.
*The
So Origen says of Dositheus, in view was to shake faith in our Lord's Tom. XIV. in Joh. iv.
25, &<j>ov Sevpo bodily resurrection, by the exhibition of liiXP1 tlalv ol AotrtBetwol, <pipovret Kill a similar power in his own person.
He pifiXovs roO AoaiBiov, nal p.6dom rivdts affirmed that the Body of Christ was repl alrrou Sirjyoifievoi, lis /ii} yewa/iivou not real ; his own too, as he pretended, Btwdrov, dXX' iv tQ {Hip iron Tvyxdvovros. was phantasmal.
See Recog.
Clem. II. xi.
But see note 3.
Cf. Eudox. ap. Phot.
Menander also laid claim to immunity Eibl.
230.
According to the Clementine from death, infr.
195, where see note 6.
Horn. II. 24, Dositheus died from cha11Clem. H.n. 13, 24; itec.11.8; Ep.76. grine, because Simon had superseded 3 Origen speaks of the Dositheans him.
Similarly Simon boasted of himself, and Simonians as branches of the same <rrri<rdftevov del, nal alrlav </>8opas, rb stock, and he says of the first, c.
Celt. awpM ireaeiv, oik txeui.
Clem. Horn. II.
VI.
11, 0!
Si AooiBcavol o68i irpbrepov 22, and Epit.
25.
The most probable tficimirav, vvv Si iron-eXus eVtXeXoijrairi, account of the impostor's death, percJore rbv S\ov airdv laroptiaBai dpiBpiiv, is that given by HipfoIjYTUS, o6k ttvat tv rois rpidKOvra.
He speaks also infra, p.
195, n. I.
Some unusual want of the Simonians elsewhere in Bimilar of dexterity, or possibly, the forgetfulterms, Nwl Si rods irdvras iv rg olxovness of his successor, Menander, caused ftivy oIik (trri XipMvicwovt evpcTv rbv his permanent occupation of the grave dpiBpiv otp.ai rptdKovra.
Tom. 1. p. 45. dug by his order.
No doubt the object 4 See Ign. Ep. Inierp. ad Trail. XI.
Ixx
PRIMITIVE
NicolaiNicolaitans taught the complete indifference of human tol"' actions in a moral point of view ; both bodily and spiritual iropve'ta was held by them to be allowable ; and in the Rev.u. & Apocalypse the Ephesian Church is praised for its abhor rence of these infamous principles.
Dr Burton has said Lect. xii. that "the evidence is externally slight which would convict Nicolas himself of any immoralities ;" still the p. 214, n. i. evidence is that of Ireneeus, who is also followed by Hipstrom. in. 4. polytus;
Clement of Alexandria, while he speaks of his personal morality, does so at the expense of a godly reve rence for the sacred institution of 1marriage ; and his expressions are conclusive upon the point, that, in the
writer's opinion, the Deacon gave existence as well as a name to the Nicolaitan sect.
Rev.u. i4, is.
Another hateful feature of this heresy was the assertion, that in times of persecution, principle might be ignored, and conformity rendered to mysteries however abominable, 5 Cainites of a later date and rites however impure.
The 2i4,i. are compared with this sect by Tertullian.
3 Matter also infers from the word Mi, n. 40, n. 5, that many of the dis tinctive features of Valentinianism were developed by this early sect; but nothing is less probable, and, as 4Eichhorn has shewn, the meaning of Irenseus must be limited to the statement, that these Nicolaitans had preceded Cerinthus, in assigning the creation of the world to certain koct/xoTrotol ayyeXot, and this was clearly the notion of the Sama ritan sect represented by 5 Simon Magus and Menander. a Apparently for their assertion of 1 Of his own wife it is said, that the moral indifference of actions.
Mat ter calls them Its dtfcnseurs les plus intrfpides de Vindtpendance de I'esprit yrjuai ti# povXopJvtp lirirpzil/tv, and his reason is assigned, Sri Trapaxp^ca<r8at rrj <rapid Set. Cl. Al. Strom, m. 4.
The de torn let actes du carps.
II. 153.
See incident is mentioned by Clement ra also Theodoret, Hcer. Fab. I.
15.
8 Matter, II. Cr.
11. 426.
* Repertorium f. bibl. it. morgenl.
Ziteratur, xiv. ther in terms of praise, as shewing per sonal iyupdrcia, though it is added that his followers perverted the deacon's meaning, and carried the same principle 5 As regards Simon, see pp. 193, 194, to a very wild excess.
GNOSTICISM.
lxxi The Cerinthians take their name from Cerinthus, who Cerinthus. is stated by Irenaeus, on the authority of his instructor il p. la Polyearp, to have come in contact with S. John at Ephesus.
He taught in Asia, though he was of Egyptian origin, and «n, n. 1. in religion, by proselytism possibly, a Jew.
The 1 Persian belief, adopted by the 2 Samaritan heresiarchs, that the Source of All was the Unknown and Inscrutable, and that the material world was formed by angelic beings of an inferior grade of emanation, was also taught by 3 Cerin thus.
This notion, like very much of early Gnostic opinion, may be traced back through Philo to * Zoroaster ; in Phi-
Ionic terms, the 5Deity as a Source of Light sent forth myriads of rays ; these were each and all of them Swd/xeis rod owtos, substantive entities and ministering Spirits ; but as radiating from the Eternal, these Suva/xeii were 6 dyevvr]toi, ai Trepi axiTov ovaai XanirporaTov (puis airaaTpdirrovat, and the names of 7 attributes whereby he describes them only serve to identify them more completely with the Gnostic JSons.
These organising powers of Philo were as the ideas of Plato, but they were creative essences as in the Persian system, though here they were of an inferior, because of a later, order of emanation.
The Koanoiroioi and compare Theod. liar. Fab. 1. 1. Menander also inherited the notion, p. 195, 4.
1 See p. xiii. deteriorated.
THEODORET
speaks of this power in the plural, Suvdfieis rtvas k exwpurpivas, Kal TravreXus avrbv dyvoovaas.
Hot.
Fab. II.
Ce ne sont jamais les opinions a See p. Ijcv. n. 3.
* p. til, where the Greek text is preserved by Hippolytus ; he repeats the statement X.
21, and says that the pures que Ton rencontre dans ces systemes; e'est toujours l'Orient concu et world was created Otto Svvdue&s twos reproduit par le genie de l'Occident.
Matter, //.
Or.
11. 262. dyyeXwrijs, to\6 Kexw/wyitMjj icol Sieor&Q"t)S rip virtp tA Ska ai/Ocyrtas, Kal 5 oi>to!
Si dv ipxlrviros avy^] uvplat d/cricas irfdWa.
Cherub.
28.
&yvoo6a7)S t6v inrtp irdvTa Qc6v.
So also Tert. Praascr.
48.
We may recognise 6 Qu. D. tit immut.
17.
oiVwy iTnaT^firjv GeoO Kal votplav again the Oriental idea, that this mate rial world could only have been created Kal <ppbvTjo-tv Kal SiKaioavvT]v Kal t&v dkkav iKaaTipi dperdv, ris av aKpaitpvTi by a power far removed from the Source of Light, and, in consequence, greatly S4(aa0ai SvvaiTO, Omp-ds iiv, k.t. X.
Ibid.
lxxii
PRIMITIVE
Cerinthus. 0775X01 therefore, common to so many of the Gnostic systems, agree more closely with Philo's oriental original, than with anything that he has adopted from Plato. p. m As Docetic opinions originated with 'Simon, so the Gnostic notion that the Mon Christ descended upon Jesus at his baptism, but left him again at the crucifixion, owed p. mi. its origin to 'Cerinthus.
The rationale of this tenet of Gnosticism may be traced back to the Platonic principle, whereby the eternally subsisting idea was separate from its predetermined but non-existent form, until this form was at length brought into being, and the necessary ne9e%is or adunation of pre-existent idea and material
form, then took place.
But the idea of Christ cannot be separated from the power of working miracles, and from the teaching of Divine Wisdom ; and these powers were in abeyance, until the descent of the Holy Spirit upon our Lord at baptism ; therefore the iieQe^is of the ideal Christ, that had eternally subsisted in the Divine Pleroma of Intelligence, only took place upon the formal initiation of our Lord to his ministry ; or Gnostice, the Mon Christ de scended upon the human being Jesus at his baptism.
Cerinthus thus referred the human nature of our Lord to a purely natural cause, and he affirmed that his supernatural power was the effect of his greater sanctity.
He learned at Alexandria to distinguish, as the later Jews, between the different degrees of inspiration that guided the sacred writers, and, according to him, different angels dictated severally the words of Moses and of the prophets ; an idea iheodor. that the Ophite inherited from him.
His notion that a H«r. Fab.
"•a sensual millennium should precede the restoration of all things, bespeaks plainly a Jewish source.
Irenaeus and some of the earlier Fathers also held a somewhat 'similar 1 Theod. Hot.
Fab.
1. tonism of Alexandria. s He may reasonably be supposed 8 The Apocalypse, upon which their to have been conversant with the Plabelief was built, is so highly figurative,
GNOSTICISM.
lxxiii opinion, but they interpreted it of a purely spiritual state.
Ebiomtes.
The Valentinian notion also of a spiritual marriage be tween the souls of the elect and the angels of the Pleroraa originated with Cerinthus, but it may be a matter of doubt whether Origen has not given a greater latitude of meanin i«k u. ing to his expressions than was intended.
Other sects of greater note took up his views, and the name of Cerinthus was soon lost to all but the learned.
It should be added, that, according to one definite tradition, it was the heresy of Cerinthus, that caused S. John to write his 1Gospel.
The Ebionite heresy, whether the name be deduced from jV382 poor, in allusion to the unworthy notions of
Christ entertained by this sect, or from some leader named 3Ebion, as Hippolytus also seems to imply in speaking of 'E/3/oji/os trxoX?;, is said by Epiphanius to have originated Ph. to. m. with those Christians, who escaped to Pella from the siege of Jerusalem.
The superstitious veneration with which they still clung to Jerusalem, as the domus Dei, certainly p S13agrees well with the supposition, that it was connected with all their most cherished traditions, and that the gathering of the eagles around the carcase had been an event of their own day.
The same cause led to their easy acquiescence in the Cerinthian notion of a millennium, and of a new Jerusalem.
The sect apparently took its of reproach, and accepted by the sect that, with the exception of the moral and matters of it, truths contained in as a badge of party, like the gutux of the Netherlands.
Schiller, Gesch. d. historical fact, impossible to iden is it as capable of Abfalls d. v. Nied. tify any portion of it, literal interpretation.
It Mujus successor Hebion fuit, Ce-
is mystery a ; rintho rum in omni parte consentient, and for the present the wisest course quod a Deo dicat mundtim, non ab anis, to look upon as a sealed book, it ffelis factum.
Tert. Pr. 48.
Cf. p. 112, so far as regards the futurity of which But the expression of Theodoret speaks.
Its accomplishment will it 3. shews that even Hippolytus may have finally ratify to the people of God the truth of every portion of the Divine understood 'Rfilwv to mean poor, rauryot 5i rrjs <pd\ayyos rjp^ev 'Efjiuv, t&v Word. rrrwxov fie ovtws 'Efipawi rrpoffayopco'HrEBON. in Joh.
A name therefore given as ovai.
Hot.
Fab. n. I. term ' a
Ixxiv
GNOSTICISM
OF THE Ebionites. rise in Palestine.
As regards the birth of Christ, it symbol ised with Cerinthus ; presenting a compound, of " 1imper fect Christianity and imperfect Judaism."
These Ebionites said, that Christ was a mere title of superior virtue, which was equally within the reach of any strict observer of the Law.
They kept 2 consecutively the Jewish Sabbath, and the Lord's day ; but in this they only continued the prac tice of the earliest Christians, and the custom was not entirely superseded, until the Church, by a definite canon, had condemned the practice as marking a 3Judaising spirit.
The rite of circumcision was retained by them, and the «3, 3creation of the world was ascribed by them to the
hot. Fab. n. Supreme Deity.
Theodoret says that Symmachus, who translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, was an TomMi.
Ebionite ; accordingly we find the word veavis in Is. vii. 14.
Of the New Testament the entire volume was rejected by the Ebionites ; the 4 Gospel of the Hebrews having been substituted for the Greek Gospel of S. Matthew
; S. Paul, as an apostate from the Law, was an object of bitter dis like to them, and his Epistles were altogether rejected.
Ha*, lx x.
The assertion of Epiphanius that S. John wrote his Gospel to meet Ebionite error, is only so far important, as shew ing the writer's belief that the heresy was antecedent to the Evangelist in point of time.
We are only concerned with the Gnostic sects, as they presented themselves to the notice of Irenaeus, and it will not be necessary to consider any subsequent divari cation of the Ebionite branch, of which he appears to have known nothing.
We may pass on therefore to the next sect in our chronological series.
1 Burton, Lect. XI. kvpioktjv irpoTip.Civras, etye Suvawro (ri to (rdftpaTOv (cori riv 'IovtaW liberi fueri/nt, sc.), o-xoXdfeiv (is Xpur- * TiiuZiat. vbfwv, rty Si Kvpianty Ka8icpov<ri Tiarof.
EZ Si tipeBeitv lovSatarai, t<TTUrapair\Ti<rl<as inxiv.
Theod.
Hcer.
Fab.
(ran &viBcp.a irapb. 'Xpurrif.
Cone.
Laod. ii. i.
Can. xxix. a.d. 371.
Vmd. Cath. 1. 471. and Vol. II. 45, Sti oi Set Xpioriavois lovSatfeir,
See p.
213,
4, 1, preserved in Syriac.
KaX b> rip aafifi&Tip crxo\dfeu> ttjv Si where a text is
SECOND CENTURY.
lxxv 1Carpocrates, an Alexandrian Jew of the Platonic Carpocrates. school, setting aside his hatred of the Jewish and every other law, agreed in many points with the Ebionite.
He taught the mere human origin of Jesus; and his misbelief upon this point accounts for his repetition of the Ebionite assertion, that a like degree of sanctity was within reach of any other man, since all human souls are from the same source, and share the same nature.
But his impiety P. aw. in this respect carried him to a more 2 fearful pitch of blasphemy than his predecessors.
Irenaeus states that he treated with equal reverence the likeness of Christ, and of the heathen philosophers, Pythagoras, Plato, and I Aristotle; if we take into account that his successor Pro-
dicus professed to have the Apocalypsis of 'Zoroaster as his text-book, we may collect that syncreticism in the widest sense was the true Carpocratian principle.
Even the heathen mysteries perhaps met with no disfavour from him.
He in fact appears to have given a wider expansion to Gnosticism, and where his predecessors, in ascribing the creation of the world to certain creative angelic powers, imagined to themselves an efflux from the Good Principle, Carpocrates carried the Oriental principle out to its fullest extent; and, with a rooted dislike to his former religion, affirmed that these creator angels, by reason of the remoteness of their origin from the source paw. of all, were in fact 4 evil in their nature ; and that the great object of Christ's mission to the human race was, that he might redeem mankind from the power of these KocrfioTToiot ayyeXoi.
Similarly, his mode of describing the first Principle agreed with that of most other Gnostic teachers, and the Source of all, that in the Simonian theory was doparos, 1 Epiph. Hot. xxx.
Compare also Hippol. Ph. vn. 32.
* el Si ical KaSapwripay Tit <rxplv s Clem. Ah.
Strom. I. 357 ; PoBPH.
^"XV> vTtpfHiaeral <pri<ri nai tov TloO V. Plolini, c. 16. ttiv &£lay.
Theod. liar.
Fab.
1. v.
* Theodob. Hot. Fab. 1. v.
lxxvi
GNOSTICISM
OF THE CarpoaKctToX»j7rTo?, was in his, iraTrjp ayvwaTos, and axarovo- ! mqctos, though the former term had been already 'natural ised as connected with heathen worship.
Matter remarks, that there is a wide interval between the Carpocratian irartjp ayvaxrros, and the subordinate Creative Power, which has been lost to us, owing to a natural desire on the part of early writers to abridge their details of a system, that they could not look upon without horror.
For professing to be saved by faith and love alone, this sect proclaimed the P. «io. moral indifference of all human actions ; asserting a comn.a plete freedom from every moral restraint2.
Their analogy of the unfettered instincts of the brute creation was singu
larly unfortunate.
Community of goods, and the entire annihilation of the matrimonial tie, alone could satisfy them.
If the account of Epiphanes, the heresiarch's son, is not to be ol al str. treated as a fable, he died at the early age of seventeen, III. 2. and yet had written his book de Justitia, in which stands the precocious sneer against the seventh and tenth command ments 3found below.
It is not without reason that antiquity has represented the Carpocratian system as particularly odious and repulsive ; Irenseus through some defect in the text, 4 1. xx. 3, has been understood as expressing a chasessed considerable vitality, (cf. Orig.
1 L'idee d'un Dieu iyvwaros parait avoir <H6 tres-re'pandue en Occident aux de Or.) Iren^us may well have spoken of their enormities as patent to his con premiers temps du christianisme.
Mat ter, II. Cr. n.
266. temporaries.
Possibly the first words of * Theodok.
Hot. Fab. 1. v. the section should include the negative,
^EtvBzv cl>s yeXoTov ctpijKoros tov e.g. Kal el p.h [oi>] Trpdo-fferai Trap* avrois k.t.X., but cf. the note.
Iren.*X'S ex vofioGtrou, pTjfia tovto aKOvoriov, Ovk iiri6vp.T)<Tcis, irpdt to yeKoidrepov elneiv, pressly says, that the impious doctrines Ti3x ToifiirXrialov a&ros yip i T7jc iiriand profligate habits of these heretics dvplav 5oi>s, us avvkxovo'av tA tt)s yevicaused a stigma to be fixed by the hea then upon the name of Christian ; how (Tews, TaijTTjv atpaiptladai *cc\ct5«, p.ij5tv6t inconsistently then Matter considers him to have said, " Je ne puii mc conafrrty 6.<pe\£)v £ajoD" t6 fi£ rfjs tov ttXtj* fflov yuvaiKbs, IdtortjTa rty KOwuvlav avayK&$uiv, $ti yfXotortpbv clirfv.
Epiph. rainere qu'il se fatse chcz cux da eltoses de Just. ap. Clem. Al. Strom, m.
1. irrSligieusca, immorales, de]fendue>."
Cr. n. 277.
4 Bearing in mind that this Beet pos
SECOND CENTURY.
Ixxvii ritable doubt with respect to these tenets and practices; Carpobut the entire context is at variance with such a supposi- — tion, as Tertullian also seems to have felt ; and Hippolytus, p *» who often preserves silence rather than condemn, conti nues his extract from Irenasus, so as to ascribe to the Carpocratians the notion of a continuous metensomatosis of the soul, oaov TrdvTa to. afiapT^/xara TrXrjjjaiatvcriv.
For another distinctive tenet of this sect was the strange notion, that it was necessary that the soul should have experience of every p »». possible action ; and until the entire series had been run through, the terms of its mission were not satisfied ; so that renewed trials must be encountered, until its course of action was complete, and a state of rest earned.
Theo-
doret very justly contrasts the Pythagorean theory of »«• F»°- »• transmigration, that, like the Brahminical notion, was to lead to the purification of the spirit, with this idea of the Gnostic heresiarch, which could only result in deeper and more hopeless degradation.
Carpocrates, like Simon and Menander, laid claim to prseternatural powers, as might indeed have been expected in the teacher of a system, that pretended to lead its votaries on to a final victory over the evil principle, that had created the natural world, p »* In the last place, the followers of Carpocrates, self-branded as they were in a moral sense, made themselves more 210, 1. openly conspicuous by a cauterised mark upon the lobe of 1 Theodoret refers this heresy to the reign of Hadrian, probably about 120 a d. the left ear.
Much has been said with respect to Epiphanes the son of Carpocrates, whom Clement of Alexandria affirms to have Strom, in. 1. been the author of Monadic Gnosticism.
The subject is discussed at p. 102, n. 2.
Clement mistook, apparently, the qualifying term eirKpavys, applying to Colorbasus or some other teacher, for a name ; and upon this assumption 1 ' Aoptanov Si Kal ovtoi fHaaikeiwros t&s irocijpds alpiacn ixpaWwav.
Har.
Fab.
1. v.
Ixxviii
GNOSTICISM
OF THE Ophites, ne ha8 engrafted a strangely unsatisfactory account.
If it be considered improbable that so considerable a develop ment of Gnosticism as the Monadic theory, owed its origin to a youth who died at the early age of 1 seventeen, the probability will also follow, that Carpocrates was not the p. 103. first to style himself Gnostic, but that the Ophites, as Hippolytus states, first assumed the name.
And this is the next system that presents itself for consideration.
H«r. n.
The assertion of Philastrius that the Ophites formed a sect before the time of Christ, an idea adopted by 2 Mosheim, cannot for a moment hold its ground, in presence of the additional light that we now derive from the (piXocro-
(povfxeva of Hippolytus, 'who says that they made frequent reference to the words of Christ ; in fact their quotations 4 from Scripture, and especially from S. John, must refer them to the close of the first century, or the beginning of the second; in the early part of which they certainly existed as a distinct sect.
The name Ophite is the equiva lent of 5 Haeurativoi, derived from the word JJTQ , o<pK.
But that root, as a 8 verb, is the vox solennis whereby the exercise of magical imposture is designated; and it occurs in this sense in describing the addiction of Ma2 Kings Mi. nasses to forbidden arts, in apposition with D*Jlsn* , 6.
71/wffTas, wizards.
It is not improbable therefore, that the adherents of this sect were originally called Naassenes 1 How strangely it sounds to be of the Sower and the seed, &c.
&c. told of a mere boy, Epipliane ...s'elanca Note also, the Ophites asserted that our jUtts en avant dam la Gnose qu' aucun de Lord's human nature was of a threefold xs predfcesteurs.
H. Cr. II. 158. substance, <cal ravra irdVra, tA voepa * Eccl.
Hist.
Scsc. II. c. v.
19, and /col ri ^i^ikA koI tA x°'*& KexupifKirai Matter, H. Cr. I.
181. els riai'lrjaovv.
Ph. x. 9.
8 They professed to have received * Hipp.
Philos. ed. Mill, pp.
97, their notions traditionally from James 99, 100, 102, 104, &c.
S. John's Gosthe Brother of our Lord.
Hipp. Ph. v. pel being quoted at 106, 107,
109, III,
7, X. 9.
The Catholic traditional dieill, HI. turn, Eph. v.
14, was applied by them,
in/cKr/SeVres Noocro'Tji'oJ, rjj "Eib. v. 7, as were the Lord's words, Matt. fipatdi tpiovrj otfrws Civop-aaiiivoi' ydas Si xx.
12, 15; Joh. iv.
10, vi. 44; Matt. i ctyis iraXeiVai.
Ph. v. 6. vii.
13, 11, xxi. 31; also the parablo ' See Gesenius, &c.
SECOND CENTURY.
Ixxix with reference to their mystic tenets and Magian pracOphites, tices, the term having been derived from the form to act the sorcerer; afterwards certain analogies suggested the Greek equivalent "O0ts, and they were called by their opponents Ophites; much as the Barbeliotce were termed 1 Bopfioplavoi from fiopfiopos, mud; as also the Ophite term * Prunicos was interpreted from an unnecessarily excep tionable point of view.
Some few points in their system, formerly considered as being suggestive of the idea of o<pK, are greatly absurd.
Thus, according to Irenseus, these heretics imagined a Serpentiformis Nus; also that Sophia p838 appeared as the 'Serpent; and subsequently, as if this mode p. mij of identifying heresy with the reptile were not quite satis
factory, an anatomical analogy was added, and the abdo- ™<>minal viscera of the human body were declared to typify the tortuous yEon.
Irenaeus however was writing nearly three quarters of a century after the sect had passed into other forms ; and Hippolytus, perhaps a more critical reviewer of early opinions, indicates that their name was caused by their philosophy, which referred the origin of the physical world to water, whose 4 symbol was the ser pent ; water having been the first principle of Thales, and Hyde, r»i.
* V. Pert. VI. an object of veneration in the Mithratic code.
For this reason Hippolytus termed the heresy vSpa, the Hydra or s water serpent.
Hence their * hymn in praise of a principle that Pindar had similarly celebrated before.
He indicates that some similarity was imagined between the convolu tions of the brain, and the contortions of the serpent.
Of £5 p >*°- * Ph. p. 11J.
1 See p. til, i. aioi.
Ph. v. 9.
dXX' eVel ToXuWd>aX4s iariv i) » p. 225, 1.
3 So the author of the Libelliu af irXdn; (to! toXuitxiWjs lis dXi/#(2s lorofixed to Tebtullian's Pne8cr., serpenpovphij v5pa.
Ph. V.
11.
6 TeroKp.i)Kl>Tw rir atrtov t^s >rXd>T;s tem maipiifaant in tantvm,vi ilium etiam ycvbp.aiov 6<pw ipjitar Sid Tiywv i<fyr)vpTf ij ..•■/'Ch riito praferant.
§ 3.
4 that rbv 6tpu>\tyoveiv ovtol Typ lUnat tear airrov ivipyaav \irfuv.
Ph. vypiw oialav, KaOdirep Kal 9aX?js i M1X1}v. 6.
lxxx
GNOSTICISM
OF THE Ophites, the philological comparison of vdas and rao's a temple, nothing need be said.
Our two principal sources of information with respect ph.v.6. to the Ophite system are Irenaeus, I. xxviii., who repre sents the sect as in the highest degree cabbalistic ; and Hippolytus, who shews that they borrowed much of their system from the same Jewish source, though he terms it Chaldaean ; we learn from him that the Gnostic appellation was first assumed by the Ophites.
Fortunately he does not go over the ground already covered by his predecessor, but he adds much curious matter connecting the opinions of this sect, the most 1 eclectic of all the Gnostic branches,
with the 'arcana of the heathen mysteries.
The Ophites made 3 the triple division of Man's Being into body, soul, and spirit, and Hippolytus compares the several systems that recognised these component elements of Man's complex nature.
Thus he refers to the Chaldsean lore their notion of the prototypal Man, who was 4alone of earth earthy, and of whom, as yet unquickened by the soul of life, it was Ph.v. 7. said, Ktiadai 8e avrov dirvovv, aKivriTov, aaaXevrov, ws dvSpidvra, eiKova virap^ovra eiceli'ov tov avw tov v/j.vovucvou 'A$dnavros dv&pwirov.
And very possibly the Cabbalistic notion was derived from Babylon.
But man so formed was with1 The analogy traced by the Ophite vabt KaXeurScu.
Ph.V.g.
The Ophite then between the words vdas, and vabs, though accepted the term in the sense of serworthless in a philological point of view, pens, see p. xxix ; but he claimed an in still suggests a valuable inference with terest in every mystery and every temple respect to the diffuse eclecticism of this under heaven.
We are indebted to heresy.
It symbolised universality :
Hippolytus for shewing us how far this and whatever becomes of the verbal was the case, and for supplying the criticism, the idea conveyed was unmeans of tracing the earlier development doubtedly a true one.
Thus the Ophite of Gnosticism in this remarkable sect, declared, Ndas Si iarlv b 6<f>is, i(f> ov,
to.
Kpvirrb. Kal iir6ppi]Ta niirruni $V<ri, irdvras eTvai tovs V7rb Toy obpavbv bjjLov trwdyovres ovtoi fxvorbpia tG>v rpocrayopevouiyovs vaobs, awo tov vdav Idvuv, KaTaificvSbp.cvoiTOv'S.piaTov, k.t.\.
Kixebnf fibvtp rif vdas avaKeiaBai ttov Hipp. Ph. v. 7.
Upbv Kal iraffav TeXcrfy/, Kal Tray /nuori)- 8 HlPP. Ph. pp. 98, 107. piov Kal KaBbXov pv>)SiWofat Ttkcrty 4 XoXSaToi Si rbv 'ASb.fi, Kal rovrov evpedijvai faro rby obpavbv, b> rj vabs ovk etvai tpdoxovo-i Tbv HvBpumov Sv aytSwKey tart Kal b vdai iv avr<$, atf> off Aa^Se i) yij phvov. lb.
SECOND CENTURY.
lxxxi out a soul ; the 1 question then arose from whence comes Ophites, the soul ? and the Ophite obtained his answer from other cognate mysteries ; the ^v^nt that animates the human frame, and was thought also to pervade the heavenly bodies as a soul of life, having been an especial object of venera tion in the astronomical, but scarcely Zabian, mysteries of 1Assyria and 3 Egypt The Ophites affirmed that the souls of men were sent down to earth to animate the body of * their fourth efflux ; clay, and to serve the fiery Demiurge, they believed also that 'Christ as the reasonable Word dwelt in man, and that without 8 regeneration through Him there was no salvation.
This regeneration moreover
was connected with the rite of 7 baptism, so that in this strange medley of opinion, the Christian Sacraments and heathen mysteries were brought into juxta-position, though 8 the heathen element predominated; and even the fearful picture of unredeemed Paganism, as drawn by S. Paul, w>m.Li8was accepted by them as the outward expression of a 9deeper mystical meaning.
It is evident therefore that 1 Zip-own* ovv ahrol ird\u> tIs Ictiv from the false Gospel of the Egyptians, 4 ^"X*!
Ka' Toflev . . . vbrephv rore Ik tov p. 98, et/u i) xilXi; i) dXqftm}.
Ib. V. 8, rpoovrot lorlv,.
. .ix tov avrov yivovs, 9) p. Ill, of.
12 r.
It tov ixKexv/iivov xdovs.
Ib.
97, 98.
7 tyvu ydp <pr;<ri Hal 'Icptfilat tov 1 Hipp.
Ph. pp. 98, 99. rfXtiov avBpu-rov, tov dvayevvufievov i( 1 Ib. p.
10 1.
Metros ica!
TrvcifuiTOS, oi eapaxir.
Ib.
' Karevcxfa ">Qv wSe els ir\d<y/ia to p.
1 1SAgain, t) yip irayyeXla tou rfiXwov, tva SovKeiauai t<# toi/tiji rijs \ovrpov, ovk aWrj tIs (vti /tar' oiiroit, trio-can Sri/uovpy<ji, fpaXSalip Be$ miplvif, rj t6 elaayayeiv els tt/v i/idpavrov i)5ov)]v ipiSpuf rerdprip.
HlPP.
Ph.
7, p. toV \ovbp.evov tear' airrovs £wvti SSart, teat 104.
For the meaning of the term xptbf-cov a\d\u> xplaiuiTi.
Ib. p.
100.
■ipaKSaltp see 224, 5, but the same term This assertion of heretical regeneration being written ijo-aSoaZos, Ph.
26, p. by baptism, is of course a valuable proof bfjl in that the Church Catholic, whose Sacra151, suggests the Hebrew both places. ments were mimicked, knew of no other '0 Xpio-Tos iv ttSo-1 (foal rots yevr\source of regeneration but by Water and
i Tom, vlot ivBpiirov KexapaKTripiafiivos the Spirit.
The martyr's baptism iu tou d\apaKTt\piaTov \byos.
Ib. p.
Blood was the only exception.
104, cf. p.
Ib. p.
119.
1. s 1J oi dvvarat ovv auBijvai iv yap toi/tois ...
* Te\eios IlaDXo!
SXov ivOpuvos, lav fir) avayervrjO-g Sii. Tairrfs <j>afft avvexeoSon to Kpitpiov airrdv Kal tlaeXBiiv TTp TrvXrjs, reference having apprrrov tt)s fia/caplas p.vari\pu>v rfiovrp.
* i
been made to a text, taken possibly lb. p.
100.
VOL.
I. f
lxxxii
GNOSTICS OF THE
Ophites, to be lbarn again of water and of the spirit, was with them only another term for a first initiation in the mystic rites of the heathen temples, as the ixupd ^varijpia, to be succeeded by a deeper yvwais: and "none understood the hidden meaning of those rites but the perfect Gnostic, who however still called himself 3 Christian, and claimed participation in the 4 gift of Christ, though in an Eleusinian sense.
It is superfluous to ask what was the practice and moral bearing of a sect so closely connected with heathen ism in its most hateful forms, and which converted the most 5 Suffice it to say that holy things into elements of impurity. the Valentinian Mon qSovq had its origin in this system,
and that terms that might serve to describe the 6 hallowed principles of Christianity, interpreted from an Ophite point of view involved the wildest impiety.
It may be added that the Pleroma, that forms so conspicuous a fea ture in the Valentinian theory, meant in the Ophite termi 7 the complete divine conception of all created sub nology stance.
Also that the koohottoioi ayye\oi of Simon and his 8 peyeOri, whose successors were reproduced in the Ophite voices summoned the world into existence.
In the ancient cosmogonies, matter was very generally said to be reduced under the Creator's laws by certain subordinate Satnovta, it being imagined that the Supreme 1 Ib. pp.
106,
115, III.
/livot, els tv ouk elaeXeiffCTal (p-qaiv * oiSels to&twv TtSv jui/tmjpfui/ ixpoaixiBaprot oibels, oi ij/vxiKos ob ffapxucbt, tt)s yeyorev, el /d) /ibvoi ypujTiKol d\X4 ntptrrai rvevp-ariKoU pivoit, 116. tAc«k. lb. p.
113, cf.
116.
Yet, in Eleusinian language, who were
Kal iapiy i£ ardyrwy dvdpiirwtaw these irvevfiaTtKol ? and by what kind of TjfieU yLpurrtavol fioyoi iv t-q Tplry jriJXg initiation did they cease to be dxddaproi, dTraprl^oyret to jivariiptoy.
Ib.
121. iJ/vxikoI, and aapxucol ?
104, 116, oCtos, (A vl6s) <pr;<riv, 7 tovto iariv to kbX to yAXa ou tffriy & ro\viiyvpu>i p.vpibp.p.aTOS ixardyevffafUpovs rois reXelovs, dfiaaiKevrovs X17TTOS, ov jraaa tpfoit dWij re AXXw; yeviadat, Kal p.eTao-xe?v T°v vXtjpdjpxiTot. dptyerai.
Ib.
117.
Tovto <firi<Tu>IvtI ri wkfipttpa tC ov ir&vra 8 See Ixxxi.
7, 9. ywipeva ycvyra 4to toC iyam^rou yeyovi 4 What can be more harmonious to re Kal renKiipwTai. lb. p.
113.
Christian ears than the statement, ovrot 8 el yap {XaXeTro tptiai to. peyid-ii,
ofrcoi Qeov, tirou b iyadbs Qebs KarotKei Koapos cvveaTdvai owe tJSiWto. Ib. p. 107.
SECOND CENTURY.
lxxxiii Being could not possibly be brought into contact with the Ophites, grosser elements ; in the same way the Ophites, following the general outline of the Mosaic account of the creation, spoke of the Spirit that moved on the face of the waters, as an 1ethereal light welling from the Supreme ; but this light was evidently no other than the mundane soul, or vital principle of philosophy; it was embodied through p. contact with water, and became wholly implicated with matter, when the struggle of antagonisms commenced that was described in the Ophite hymn, and that sug-p.*u. gested to Valentinus the irdOrj of Achamoth.
But the soul of life was not confined to this lower world, the
superextension of its substance formed the 2heaven; and p «s. in proportion as its desire for reunion with the Source of Light was satisfied, it was set free from the trammels of matter.
Next, Christ emanating from the Father, Son, pp- «7, s». and Spirit, by his own power put forth a son from the element of water, and five others in successional progres sion, making with himself a Hebdomad, and with the Maternal Origin an Ogdoad.
These six emanations were distinguished by Hebrew names for the Deity, that are pp. wo, tsi. partly Biblical, partly Cabbalistic; and 3a Titanic contest arose for the supremacy, as in the heathen mythology, p. «?. which resulted on the one hand in the evolution of the Serpentiform Nus from matter ; and afterwards from the entire
Hebdomad, of the prot-ideal substance of man, immensum n>.n. i latitudine et longitudine.
Eve, or *Life (Pljn = £a>j}) in a similar way was evolved by Jaldabaotfy, the first of this 3 Kara Tavaurla fib dXXi)Xois trpocirofw Uvai roit (tfaXout.
Timce. 36 D.
tIjv St avafiXvoOtioav toC tpwrbs Ufidoa, infra, p. 118.
The Ophite mun dane soul was named Prunicu*; see 11$, * So in the Peratio system ; ^ E3a I . A probable solution suggests itself in far)), avT-q Si <pr\aiv i) Eva ft^TVP TaVrwv tCjv $&vtuv, Kottn) tpfois, rovrttrri Qewv, the Chaldee term, Np*J^S, delicia, the Ophite rjdovri.
Targ. in Deut. xxviii.
&yy£\o>v, dda.v6.Twv, Ovtjtwv, i\6yuv, 56. ' avahvvtu St, Kal tic tou TrfpiKdfUuov
XoyiK&v. k.t. X.
Hipp. PA. v. 16.
Hence in the Valentinian theory the ^Eon ftiri) was to A670S, as Eve was to Adam.
Tiijuaros KaraaKevdaOai rbv ovpaviv.
Ixxxiv GNOSTICS OF TOE Ophites, series of six, and by the agency of the other five became mother of the angels ; a notion that the Cabbala had p. 233,3. already imported from Babylon.
The fall of our first parents is described as in the Bible, and their expulsion from Paradise ; which, however, as in the Cabbala, was situp. 23s, 1. ated not on earth, but in the fourth heaven
; and now for the first time humanity was invested with a material nature.
It may be added, that the Serpentiform Nns was also ejected from heaven by Jaldabaoth, and became the p. m chief of an inferior Hebdomad of mundial daemons, the enemies of man.
This inferior Hebdomad was a manifest TimB. adaptation of the 1 Platonic planetary system, each mem-
S' op.'sk her of which was animated with a reasonable soul.
The upper represented the seven subordinate Sephiroth of the iit.
Cabbala, that severally involved the idea of a Divine Attrip 237. bute.
The prophets, as their ministers, were variously distributed amongst these Powers. p.m,n.t.
Hippolytus informs us that the Ophite worship consisted of hymns in honour of Man, i. e. the Cabbalistic Adam Cadmon, and of the Son of Man, who was as the Persian Ormuzd, the Logos of Philo, or Jewish counterpart of the divine ideas, that in the Platonic system were coeternal with the Deity.
In their Christology the human being 2 Jesus was the recipient of an efflux from the Divine Nature; but mediately, for the Ophite Christ emanated conjointly from the Father, or Adam Cadmon, from the p S27 Son or Second Man, and from the Spirit or 'Mother of 41.3.
Creation.
The 4astronomical distinction of a dextral or spiri tual, and sinistral or material principle, was observed by 1 Cf.
Sanctam autem hebdomadam a»0pu>Tov 6fiov 'ItjctoDv t&v in Tijs Haplat septem stellas, quas dicunt planetas, esse yeyevnutron.
Hipp. Ph. v.
6, 8, 9. volunt, p. 236; and Plato, rty $ hrbs 3 The Spirit throughout these sys- (<f>optw)0x100.% ifaxS, irrb. xixXovs 4*1terns was thus described.
Philo also oovs (iirotrjocv).
Timet.
36 D.
SuiXe \jivuses the same term.
See liv. 11. 6.
Xos loaptS/MVs tois Aorpoii.
41 E.
Sane- * Quae est e regione orientis, dextra lam may have originated in Uanc am. dicitur esse pars mundi, quae vero e re- * Karextbpiioc /col KaTi)\$a> els tva gione occidentis, sinistra.
Philo, Qu. in
SECOND CENTURY.
Ixxxv them ; the former being the type of dawning light, the Ophites, latter of a world shrouded in darkness.
Christ, therefore, p. m. quasi dextrum, et in superiora allevatitium, emanated from a redundant overflow of the Divine Light, and in conjunc tion with the triple source of his subsistence formed the iw<i. prototypal Ecclesia of the Highest Heaven.
The mundane Sophia or Nus, finding no rest either in heaven or earth, invoked the help of the Maternal Spirit, and obtained from the First Man, or Incorruptible Mon, that Christ should be sent to her aid, and being united pms. with her, should by a combined descent upon Jesus at his baptism, form that Ecclesia on earth, which had an eternal
counterpart in the union of Christ with the Father, Son, and Spirit in heaven.
The avfyyla of Christ and Sophia thus united with Jesus, left him again upon his crucifixion, and the psychic Man alone suffered death and was buried ; Christ however raised Jesus again from the dead, in a body p. aa that was animal and spiritual, but not choic or earthy.
Finally, those " holy souls" that had been endued with the gift of Light were received by Christ seated at the right hand of Jaldabaoth, when released from the body ; while p. mo. the merely animal souls were sent back again into the world for further purification.
The false gospel of the Infancy of Christ may have been intended by the writer to meet the Ophite assertion that Jesus performed no miracle either before his Baptism or after his resurrection, that is, psw. while separate from the iEon Christ; although the draught of fishes recorded by S. John, c. xxi., was evidently regarded by the disciples as miraculous.
We may observe in this tissue of absurdity the distort ed outline of one or two important Christian doctrines.
O. i.
The course of the Nile was the derived from the East, whose claim it basis of observation, and shews that the was to be the face of the world.
Elsedextral notion attaching to the principle where, the Jew of Palestine facing the of Light originated in Egypt.
If at a East determined the South to be uplater period the right hand expressed to on the right.
Cf.
Lobeck, Agl. 916, the Egyptians the North, the idea was &c.
lxxxvi GNOSTICS OF THE Ophites.
It is evident that the Catholic faith suggested this Trinity of Father, Son, and Spirit.
Also, these heretics denied not the miraculous Conception of the Human Nature of Christ; and if they refused to allow that his Divine Nature was united in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mother, with the first rudimental germ of Humanity, upon the Annun ciation, still they evidently confessed the Godhead of Christ, as manifested outwardly in the miraculous events of his ministry.
They bore witness to the Power of the Godhead, but they denied that it existed in Jesus before the Baptism ; even as it existed before the worlds were made, eternal in substance, though unrevealed.
Further,
the union of Christ with his Church, for ever predestinate in the counsels of the Father, one constant theme of Apostolical preaching, was allegorised by these heretics ; and the union of the heavenly and earthly in the Man Jesus, and an elective regeneration of the Spiritual Seed, were set forth in the mysteries of their system.
From the above account then it appears that the Ophites were not the least remarkable sect of the Gnostic stock ; they drew from every quarter, from philosophy, from the heathen mystic rites, from Judaism, and from the Christian records, whatever elements it suited them to incorporate in their system.
Irenseus confines himself to the two latter sources ; Hippolytus therefore supplies that which his master had omitted, and gives an account, full of curious information, upon the strictly heathen notions exhibited in the Ophite or Naassene theosophy.
1Theodoret adds, that this sect also called themselves Sethians, from Seth, the name of a Divine Power ; also that they • sacrificed to the serpent, whose presence con1 Hctr.
Fab.
I. xiv. xal rbv in itk&tu rplipovtn, Kal rjj reXerp tGjv Btiav two. bfyapuv elyat (paal.
Aii Kal p.v<xapQy airriSv avarr/pltar toutof t-q 2))S«U'o! Tpo<rr)yopci6T)<rav.
Tpavtft) irpoaipipovjiV imf}drros Si aif3 Atd rot tovto Kal wpoffKvyovai rbv tov twv dpr&v, Cjs i}yiairpiivv>> (itra6<j>w Sv iirtfiSaU run KaTaO&tamcs, Xayxdvova. Theod. Ib.
SECOND CENTURY. lxxxvii secrated their mystic feast.
But upon the first point he Perate. seems to have been in error, for reasons stated below, 1 p. 226, n. 3 ; and as regards the latter point, it has been already shewn that the serpent was the * symbol of water, the material basis of creation in the Ophite system.
It represented therefore the world of organised, quickened, and intellectualised matter ; and as such it is apparently described by Irenseus.
Their serpent-worship therefore was nothing else than an idolatrous veneration of the Spirit of life.
Possibly Theodoret may have confused the theosophical Ophite with the snake-charmer of India.
; 3 connected with the Ophites were the Peratse, Closely
who supplied fresh elements from the astrology and fatal 4 Mosheim has stated that Euphrates ism of Chaldsea. founded the Ophite sect; Hippolytus enables us to place this name more accurately at the head of the Peratse, o\ ph.».is.
T»j5 YlepariKrji u'tpecreoos dp^tjyot, Ei)0petT^s o IIe|OaTt(cos Kal KeXfiqi o KapvvTioi : he repeats this in two other places; ph. iv.«. where the latter name is varied as 'Aneufi^, and 'Adepts, always however o Kapvanos, i. e.
Eubcean.
The term Peratic seems from Pliny to be a synonym for Mede, where he speaks of a certain gum as being the produce of h. n. «i. ».
Arabia, India, Media, and Babylon, and adds : Aliqui sPeraticum vocant ex Media advectum.
The description given of the tenets of the Peratse by Hippolytus altogether points to the birth-place of astrology; while the 6 fatalism of 1 And compare Hippol. v.
19. in this system, as a symbol principally * See xxxiii. and pp. 11S, 1 ; ng; of the independent action of the Deity.
141.
Compare also Lobkck, AglaophaThe rapid movements of the serpent, mu», I. 485, 490.
The Ophic principle though destitute of all visible means as derived from Egypt was identical, as of locomotion, was an unsolved problem Athenaoobas has shewn, Leg. pro Chr. even to king Solomon.
Prov. xxx.
19.
18, and it was symbolised by a dragon; * Cent. 11. P. 11. t. 19.
'OxAiyof Smtp yivtait mvrtirai Wrvurat, c Euphratean from BID Pherat, i. e. ifv yip SSwp ipx^l "ar' airrip rofs S\on, Euphrates; hence Peraticus. ifb Se rov tfSaros l\As Kariart), Ik SI * Ka\ov<ri Si airroit Ylepirai, fii/Sh ixaHpuv tyewl]Br\ fwov, Spdicuy, k.t.\. 18.
SfoaoBai. vo/il{orres rwv It yeviaei Ka&eir- * Cf. Hipp.
Ph. v. 17.
In fact the ttik&tw Statfivytai T^r iirb rfjt yeviaeas serpent played a more important part rot s yeyeinjfie'vots upiff/ibnp' fioTpay.
They
lxxxviii
SATURNINUS.
Samaritan, the Mahometan and of the Manichsean converge and meet p. vM. in this Gnostic sect.
They were as the Chaldsei of Juvenal, and appear to have been wholly unknown to Irenaeus, though minutely described by Hippolytus, to whose work the reader is accordingly referred; for these opinions throw no further light upon anything that has been advanced by the venerable bishop of Lyons.
The account of 1 Saturninus, found in the work of Hip polytus, is identical with that of Irenaeus, of which it is now the recovered text.
He was contemporary, 2 and apparently a fellow-pupil in the Samaritan school with Basilides ; but while this latter heretic gained an Alexan
drian celebrity as a philosopher, Saturninus taught a more purely oriental doctrine at Antioch in Syria; where he may be considered to have been the last known teacher of the Samaritan succession, that about this date, was super seded by a catholic 3exegetical school.
Thus in his scheme the TraTtjp ayvwaTos was the 4 airepavTos $vva/uus of Simon, and his 'Hebdomad of creative angels, the six emanative attributes of the Mage, that represented the mundane elements, over which a seventh, or Past—Present—Future, ruled supreme, and of whom the God of the Jews was one. professed to have the exclusive power exist in the Syriac MSS. of the Nitrian of casting nativities, and revealing the collection in the Brit.
Mus. fate of individuals; fibvoi hi (prjew, * p. lxv, also termed hy him ri il/uit ol tV drdfK-riP T775 ■yev4<r€asiyvufuucdpior
(kuvo h irdvri KCKpufifiiyor K&ret, koL tAj iSoit Si iSv el<r€\^\v6ci>
Surd/to, oix hepyelq..
Hipp. Ph. VL 17. dvBpuirot elt t6v nhcfiov duptfiuis SeSiSay11Compare the seven creator angels /lint tttkSeir, koX irepaoai ri\v tpBophv of the Ophite system, pp.
230, 431, pj>vot.Swd/i(6a.
Hipp.
16. which represented the seven lower Cab1 See pp. 196 — 198 ; Hipp. Ph. vn. balistic Sephiroth, and the six Persian 28; Tebt. de An.
23; Theod.
JIaer.
Amshaspands with Ormuzd, their oriFab. 1. 3, which are identical accounts, ginating cause.
It has been usual and Epiph. liar.
23, which is appato identify the 5vt>dp.eu of Saturninus rently independent, though imperfect. with the planetary spirits of the Chal- * Compare the words of Hippodee theosophy.
But here these worlds LYTCS, 196, n. 1, with the Latin Version were created by them ; the Simonian of Iren-EUS in the same page. attributes therefore are rather indicated ; * See Matter, i. p. 292.
Of this which however had their reflex in the school some highly valuable remains mundane elements, p. Ixvi.
SATURNINUS.
lxxxix Both he and Basilicles adopted from the Magian source Zoroastrian in theory. the notion that life aa a heavenly spark, in the strict sense of the word, was kindled in man from above, and that this light, when severed once more from matter, re turned
TTpOi to. 6n6(pv\a.
But Saturninus held the oriental notion, perceptible both in the Zoroastrian and Kabbinical scheme, that man's ideal nature, as a transcendental form of light, was first Hyde, Rel.
Vet.
P. 3110.
Epiph. Hvr. created (desursum... lucida imagine apparente), although, as we shall see in the case of the Basilidian v\6rrp, it was too spiritual for this lower system, and instantly recurred to the world of glory ; when the creator angels proposed
among themselves to form man upon the type thus revealed, 2faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem3 ; they then 4 formed man's body of matter, but it 6 lay in an abject state, until moral life and intelligence were kindled within by the illapse of heavenly light.
1 This separation was termed by SXuv iraTTip reus ^outoO Swdpeaw, ah to Brrrrbv j]pQiv rijs if/vx^s pipos tSuice SiaBasilides, ipvXoKplvnait, and Christ came to give it full efficacy.
Ph. vn.
27.
Tebtcllian says that this spark, post TcXdrrew, pipovpivais ri)i> airroO rix^O't ijn/co to Xoymbv hi $\pxv ip6p<pov SiKaiwv deeessum vita; ad matricem relatura sit, Tert. de Anima, 23, where matriccm inrb pii> iryepbvos to i/yepoveOov h> ^"OCS, rb dl vv^koov irpbs itrnKbuv Snpiovp. yuadai.
De Prof.
13; Mund.
Op. evidently means els tA bpb(j>vka: and l£ <5» eyhero, in Hippolytus, refers 243 Das Wort, unserm Bilde, in der to the soul and spiritual principle, Genesis, passte freUich nicht in seiner but not to the body.
So Pseudo-TebTCLL.
Sane scintUlam salvam esse, Erklarung.
Neandek, Gen.
Entw. p.
271.
Cf. Matter, E. Or.
1. p.
283, ccdera hominis perire . . . resurredionem as Epiphanius also remarked, Uar. ncarnis nulla modo fvturam esse.
Adv.
Hser.
Observing like Simon and Me- * Baur notices the agreement of the Manicluean account; that in this imitation of the revealed type, Stimmt nander the Kabbinico-Philonic distinc tion of Man, formed kot' ehciva, and MaD, formed KaS' bpolwaiv.
Philo Saiurnin mit der Manichdern iiberein. even, considered, as Plato in the TiChr.
Gnos.
209.
But he adds, that mceus, that the Supreme Creator called whereas the Saturninian angels were the divine principle of man into being, but that man's lower and animal nature good, the Manichsean were wholly evil.
Cf. also Beausobre, vi. lx, 5 p.
197.
Compare the Ophite no was the work of inferior intelligences ; for so he explains the words "Let us tion, 231, n.
4, Tertdllian, de An.
23, and Psecdo-Tebtuli,. Libell.
AtoXe7t7-oi piv otv b rdv
SATURNINUS.
His view that 1 marriage and the procreation of chil dren were simply Satanic, involved a belief in the evil nature of matter ; and the conflicting elements of good and evil caused so marked a discord in the human race, that, by a forestalment of the Manichsean theory, it was divided into the good, in whom the seed of heavenly light was indefectible; and the evil, or the slaves of gross material propensities.
This distinction moreover was ab original, *a good and a bad progenitor of the race of man having been created; with which Theodoret so far agrees as to say that the difference existed ev <pvaei.
Consistently with this view 'the prophets were inspired
partly by the good, partly by the evil principle; though the God of the Jews was in direct antagonism with this 4And as a sort of corollary, the heresiarch en latter. joined abstinence from animal food, as contributing to the debasement of the human race ; though, as Neander sug gests, it is not improbable that the priestly caste alone held themselves bound by these strict observances.
Christ, it was said, came as a minister of light to release mankind from the dominion of evil daemons; and at the same time to break the power of the God of the Jews, and to set his subject people free from their vassalage.
But he came in a spectral not a real body ; and very possibly Irenseus may have ascribed the same notion to Basilides in error, know ing the community of origin that gave a first starting point to both heretics.
Basilides a Syrian, as Epiphanius says, according to 1 Tatian, also a Syrian, adopted VI.
15, 16.
Possibly a chronological the same notion of matrimony.
* 56o yip irtTK&aBtu Air' ipxy* &*• separation of the prophets was made; the captivity being the cardinal point.
Ihbn.eus refers to Saturninns, ffpiiirovs (pd<rnei, tva iyadbv <coi tra <pav- \or.
Epiph. B. xxnr. i. the first origin of the Encratitte or 8 Simon, although a Samaritan, not Continenta, p.
119.
These ascetic unfrequently cited the prophet Isaiah.
He also received and theosophised the notions formed the main point of con tact between Mabcion and the Gnostic five books of Moses, p. lxvi.
See Ph. sects.
BASILIDES.
XCI origin.
Hippoly tus professed to have received his doctrine from 1S.
Of Syrian Matthias, which would refer him to the latter half of the 1 traditional com first century; but he may have meant by munication or by vision.
S. Jerome says that he lived in 3Hadrian; 4 though in another place he too the time of carries him back to the days of the Apostles.
Clement of Alexandria adopts the later date, and adds that he lived to the reign of 'Antoninus Pius.
This * chronology is alone admissible ; and mention of Basilides in an interpo lated portion of the Epistle of S. Ignatius to the Trallians,
Bp. Interpol must still convict the passage in which it stands of spuriousness.
It may be added, that Eusebius and 7Theodoret h. k.it. 7.
both place this heresiarch in the reign of Hadrian ; and the former says that he was answered by a Catholic writer named Agrippa Castor.
Hippolytus has added in a considerable degree to our means of defining his opinions.
The account of Irenseus 1 Speaking of Basilides and bis son tuus.) * Speaking of heresies that existed in the Apostolical times, he says, Tunc Isidore, he says that they professed dprjK^vai ^iarffiaw avroh \6yovs iiroKpO0OfS out rficovae irapa. tou "ZuiTTjpos Kar* Simon Magus, et Menander discipulus ejus, Dei te asseruere virlutes.
Tunc Ba ISLar StSaxBe^Ph. VII.
20.
MILLER alters the reading to Mardatoii, but silides eummum Dcum Abraxas cum Clemens Al. Strom, vn. 17, shews that trecentis sexaginta quinque editionibus commentatus est.
Tunc Nicolaus qui MarSLav must have been written : also it may be noted that at the end of the unus de septem Diaconis fuit.
Ac.
Dial. adv. Lucifer.
Joh. Damasc.
Parall. I.
12, relates of Basilides and same section the MS. has MarOiov. where again Miller substitutes MorS. John, the occurrence at the baths, that Iren.el'8 has connected with the ffalou.
Clemens further says that Basi lides claimed to have had as his master names of Foltcarp and Marcion. one Glaucias, riv tou Uerpou ipnyved.
Ib.
8 xal p^xpi ye ttji 'AytojvIpov tou a Having drawn largely, perhaps, wpcapirrtpov SUravay ^Aiirlas, icdSairep b Bao-iXe(57jj.
Strom. VH.
17.
6 Compare Firmilian, Sed et Vaupon the xapabbaeis of S.
Matthias, an apocryphal production cited by Cl.
Al. xal MotWos (v rail irapa.Si<re<ri lentini et Basilidis tempus manifestum est, quod et ipsi post Apottolos, et post irapaivwv, Qavuaaov tA irapbyra, (SaOfibv Tovrotf rpwrov rijs tviKtaa yvdaews Orolongam atatem, adversas Ecclcsiam . . .
TiOtfiam.
Str. II. 9.
Moratus est autem Basilides, a rebellavcrint.
Ep. ad Oypr.
7 ipjpw St (Basilid. sc. et Saturnin.) exl 'Atpiavou rov KaUrapos lyborro. quo Gnostici, in Alexandria, temporibus Hadriani. de Scr. E. (al. male, morIfcer. Fab. I. 2.
xcii
BASILIDES.
and of 1 Eusebius, that he inherited them from the succes sor of Simon, caused Neander to refer them to the Judaising Gnostics, and Matter and Beausobre to trace those opinions back to the Persian theosophy ; but Hippolytus identifies them clearly with Greek philosophy, and more especially with the Peripatetic doctrines.
He owed much also to later Platonic theories, and altogether he occupied the same position with relation to philosophic thought, that the Ophite exhibited with respect to pagan mysticism ; and professing to recur to ancient speculation, he brought under one peculiar theory whatever features it suited him to incorporate from all.
The coincident revival at
Alexandria of the Pythagorean philosophy, suggested to him, in all probability, the imposition of a *five years' silence, and of a graduated initiation into the mysteries of his system ; the endless genealogies of his angels must have taxed severely the memory of these classes.
Hippolytus commences then by reviewing certain peculi arities of the Peripatetic doctrine ; and the Basilidian First Cause to bv, agrees, as he seemed to think, with 3 material and the assertion of Aristotle, that ova'ia imports bodily substance ; an idea wholly inapplicable to the Deity.
But there was a deeper meaning in the Basilidian defini tion.
For as it is not impossible for man's finite intellect to express 4 negatively what the Deity is not, but wholly im1 If.
IV.
7, followed also by Theodor.
U. Fab. I. «.
* HvdayopiKwi re rots irpoffiovtnv 4 Compare the negative terms ap plied to the Deity in heathen systems, as <rit6ro5, p. xxiii.
3, <tk6tos dyvutrror, xxi.
2, iyvuaros Geis, Acts xvii.
23; avr$ TTcvTaerT} fftuirrjif TrapaKtXevcffdai.
Eus. H. E. IV.
Lobeck, Agl. I. 38.
* oiVtat Si p-dXiar' rival SSkov/ji tA the ctyi) also of Simon Magus was adopted in one shape or other by the au.-u.aTa.
De An. II.
Xiyu 5' oWas pjv ri Tt AtXS aiuara, ofoK Tup Kal other Gnostic sects ; although perhaps this latter term may have had an oriental origin, and express the Deity yijv, Kal Sua overotxa toutois, Kal Sua Ik tovtw.
Dt Colo, in.
Hence Hippolytus says,
pAvo-j Si 17 ovala KaKrirai rb yivos, riSos, trofiov, a\\a before the creative Word had been put forth.
Similarly it was said of the Heaven of Heavens, jrdrra yap ijy Kal v\n Kal etSos, Kal aripiiau.
Ph.
VII.
19.
<pv\a<r<T6na>airoKp6tp(f aiu-irq. Ph. VII.
'5-
BASILIDES.
xciii possible for it to declare in an absolute sense what it is ; Negative and as the term existence conveys a certain idea to the ^mgy^ mind, arising from our own individual experience,
1 it was rejected as inapplicable to a Being that is wholly 2 Incom prehensible ; and for this reason, relatively to all human modes of thought, the Deity was said by Basilides to be
* * a ' ouk cav Ueos.
4 If this was the meaning of the heresiarch, it explains the terms used by him in referring to the diarchic prin ciple, where it is said that light and darkness, having a definite and separate being, 5a(f> avrwv rjv, ovk ovra eXeyovTo.
He seems too to have held something of the same notion; for Epiphanius says that the 6germ of his heresy
1 The expression of Basilides re Ieen.kus, it does not once appear to minds us of a similar statement of Philo.
He however states that rb ov have been used by him.
Beausoeee however ascribes to him the use of the term, 11. 6, and Mabsdet, Dist. 61. imports the Deity absolutely, ofol tuh> rpbt rf but G«oi only relatively, as re 4 Compare the striking observations of Clem. Al. suggested by the words of Plato in Tim. rbv yip iraripa . . . eipeiv tc (pyov k. t. X., where he arrives at the gards things created, iiaavd irpbi n, De Mitt.
Norn.
583, ed. Mang.
There fore the term Btos would be inapplicable to the Deity antecedently to the work following conclusion, Kakovvrea i/toi {c, of Creation. if Ti.ya.6bv,
vovv, 17 airrb rb bp, if Tarlpa, rj 6e6v, fj Srjfuovpybv, rj Kvpiof, s Clement of Alex. Sir. v.
1 1, fin. rer3. says of Moses, t&v tva, lis otie (ti ovx &s Svopja airrov Trpo<pepbp.evoi X^yorif JSaaiXetSri tint, KarrfyyeXe
Qcbv, and pxv, vTrb Si iiroplas bvbfiaai jraXotf vpoaXpiip.e6a, k. t. X. ; for as he afterwards proceeds, oi repCKappivei tot<(> to iirepl- \ijvToy.
But for tok tva, f. leg. t&v adds, tray toIvvv b virb 6vopm rrlirrei, ytpptfrop Igtiv, tdv re fiofikovrai, lav re Svra, upon which term the preceding pit}.
Str. IV. It, 13.
Cf. the definitions of Simon Magus, p. lxvii. dXX' oiW varty lKkJ)0i), and Maimon.
108, n. 2.
5 Quidam (barbari) dixerunt, initia context turns.
* Hippolyttjs identifies this term with the Aristotelian refinement upon the notion of the Deity, that it is p&r/ott
. . . vo-riacws, Sirep fori iravrdirao'iv oOk omnium duo esse, quibus bona et mala St. Ph. vii. 19 ; again, ovk liv 6c4s, tv astociaverunt, ipsa dicentes esse ingenita, id est, in principiU lucem fuisse ac 'ApiaroriXris Kike? vb-qoiv votfaews, ovroi Si o&t trra. ib.
21.
If Aristotle's tenebras, qua ex temet iptis erant, non quae esse dicebantwr.
Basilid. ap. Act.
Archel. c. 55. derivation of aliiv from del uv, be cor rect, we may see the extreme impro bability that Basilides should have 8 (ff\e Si i) ipxh airijs Trjs kokw rrpoipicteuit rip alrtaii iirb tov fyreiv nal made use of this favourite term of the Valentinian.
And, in fact, judging \eyetv, rrb6ev to Kanbv; Epiph. ffar.
XXIV. 6. from the statements of Hippolytcs and
xciv
BASILIDES.
a is to be traced to the usual endeavour of accounting for the origin of evil; and the Acta Disp.
Archelai et Manetis clearly state that Basilides symbolised with the 'diarchic 2Seythianus.
The positive statements of antiquity upon this point cannot be superseded by the negative tes timony of Hippolytus, who advances nothing with respect to the Basilidian origination of evil; he merely states that the heresiarch 'carefully avoided all expressions that could charge the Creator with the origin of 4evil.
Hence cer tainly it might be argued, that if Basilides had believed in the eternal antagonism of a good and a bad principle, there would have been no such necessity for asserting
pointedly, that which must have stood forth as a funda mental principle in his Creed.
Still no inconsistency is involved, and modern writers, without doubt, have rightly classed him among those who adopted the Persian theory of two aboriginal principles, Good and Evil.
Thus 'Matter and Beausobre have identified that which Basilides said of the diarchic principle, with the heretic's own views.
3 tram' ipu> yiip fiaSXov, rj KaKbv to
Fuit pradicaior apud Pertat Trporoeuf epw.
Basilid.
Jbteg. ap. Cl.
Al. Sir. iv.
11.
4 The procosmic confusion of matter, etiam Basilides quidam anliquior, non longe pott nottrorum Apottolorum tem pera qui... dualitatem islam voluit affirmare qua etiam apud Seytfiianum erat. and without God, described in the Ti- . . . Basilides ail, Desine ah inani et maus, is to be traced in the original confusion of the soul in the Basilidian curiosa varietale, requiramus autem magit, qua de bonis et malts etiam barbari theory ; and so far as the soul partook of the material principle, its tendency was to evil, which was an appendage, in Basilidian phrase, upon the more divine inquisiverunt, et in quas opiniones de his omnibus pervenerunt; quidam enim horum dixerunt, (Sic., as in n. 5, p. xciii.) Kouth, Bel. Sacr. v.
196.
It should be principle.
Oi Si auipl rbv HacriXa'S^jobserved that this Basilides is said to Tpoffapr^nara tA na6i) KaXiir cHOaair have migrated to Babylon from Egypt, trvivpjara rlva ravra fear' ovaiar inrdpX«»", TpoanpTTififra 1-7? \oyUy ^vxq Kara rlva rapaxbv *ai otrfxyaut apxucip.
Cl. Al.
Strom.
11.
10.
The result of this ovyxwis was a considerable impor ib.
188.
* Hie ergo Scyihianus (Manichiei pnecursor) dualitatem istam introducit contrariam tibi, quod ipse a Pythagora euscepit, ticul et alii omnes hujus dogmatit tectatores qui omnet dualitatem detation of the soul of the brute into the soul of man.
5 Matter, H. Cr. du On. 11. p. 41 ; Beadsobbe, Ilitt. de Manich.
11. p. ai. fendunt, declinantet Scriptural viam directum.
Ib. p.
186.
DAS1LIDES.
xcv 1Neander was of the same opinion, though not always so His theory positively.
Baur also follows the same lead ; and there is ofereationno reason why 2 doubt should be thrown upon these mo dern deductions from ancient statements.
Only it should be borne in mind that all these heresies affected to revert to opinions and theories that were anterior to all contem porary systems of philosophy; and, as we have seen, the old Persian theory, like the Pythagorean, was Monadic, . but, like that system, exhibited a secondary development of contending principles; Basilides therefore may 3 very consistently have asserted his belief in one Supreme Prin ciple, by whatever negative name he might call it, and
yet have symbolised with the general teaching of the East as regards a co-ordinate antagonism of Good and Evil.
The latter, like the kvQvumavs of the Valentinian Pleroma, may have had its rise in this theory so soon as p. it. the evolution of divine attribute gave rise to the notion of relation.
The world when it was created was e£ ovk ovtwv, and in this term we need scarcely recognise the Platonic distinction of the nonentity of shifting variable matter, as compared with the eternal invariable Being of the Deity; because Plato extended the same definition to every product of matter; whereas the heretic nowhere describes the out ward world as ovk &v.
But the Deity created the universe HiPP. ph. from things nonexistent ; 'ovtws ovk wv Geoy eirolijae kooiiov, ovk wv e% ovk ovrwv.
1 Er tragt die Lehre der Barbaren degenerating tendency of emanations, (Perser) vor, and machte dies hSchst that had become indefinitely remote vsahrtcheinlich zu der seinigen.
NEAlffrom the First Principle. deb, Qen.
Enlw.
31.
Seine Lehre mit 3 See Jacobi's excellent treatise, dem Persischen Dualismus in eine VerBatilidu Philotapki
Qnotlici Sentent. p. bindung gesetzt, die an der Verwand15.
Berlin, 1851. tchaft mit diesem nickt eweifeln lasst.
J fjv 0ijow, ire tJv oith, dXY oiSi Baur, Chr. Gnot. no.
Gieseleb, Theorb ovblv rjv n tS>v 6vtui», dXXi \j/t\ws log.
Stud. v. Kritii.
396, imagines that, xal avvirovorfTai Sixa rivrot cmpianarot in the Basilidian theory, matter, and ijr S\us oi&i tv.
Hipp. PA. vn. 20.
As therefore evil, was evolved through the regards the Beity, the heretic explains
xcvi
BASILIDES.
His theory In another point of view the definition that the world o creation.
,^ ^ qvtwv, was in direct antagonism with the Pla tonic theory of eternally pre-existent ideas, and chaotic matter: but it harmonised with the Aristotelian reasoning, whereby all substance having been divided into lgenus, species, and the individual, the aro/xoi or individual had precedence, and was termed »j irptirtf ovala, and t) vuroo-TaTij ovala, because neither genus nor species 2could subsist independently of the individual; these therefore were secondary substances or 3^evrepat ovcr'iai.
Thus primary substance indicated some actual subsisting thing; secondary substance a mere quality, which cannot exist apart from
that which it qualifies.
Hence before the creation of in dividual substance, so far as the world of matter was con cerned,
oXojs ovSev.
But the Deity is not to be defined, and is incomprehensible, and it was in this negative point of view, and not at all in the language of atheism, that Basilides set forth his idea of creation; ovk wv Geos . . .
108, 2. ai/otjTWi, avaia9ijTWt, dfiovXws, dirpoaiperws, airaQuis, dveiriOutxiiTws, Koa/iov rjOtXtjae iroiSjaai.
But he instantly checks this positive assertion, and gives it a symbolical meaning; To $6 tjOeXrjae Xeyu) o~t]fxa<rlas -^apiv, dOeXijTws, Kal di'otjTui^ Kal dvaiaOqTws, that is, as compared with human will, and his own meaning ; for, after saying that Xoty diraaiv viroKeiadai . . . KvpitirraTa oiltrial \iyovrai...fi^ ovawv oSv twv vp&the Ineffable had no existence, he shews that he so speaks, because no rela riav odaluv, dSvvaTov twv dWwv Tt elvai.
Caleg.
Compare Hipp. Ph. vn.
18. tive term can exist without that with which it stands in relation, Kal yip ri 8 Sevrepai Si ovaiai \iyovrai iv oh ovk <tfip\rov, ovk Sp'/nrrov 6rofid$trat, dWi fan, <f>i)alv,inrcpdvio rdmos ivbpuetSeatv al Trpilrrus ovaiai \ey6pxvai vvdpXovai' ravrd re Kal ra Turn elSwv tovtwv 70s dvofiafoufvov.
Ibid. yivTj' olov, 6 Tit dvdpuTros iv elSei uiv 1 As Hippolytus has represented inrdpxei Ttji dvOptavlvy yivoi Si tov etSovt iarl to t&ov Sevrepai odv avrai X^yoiftu the Aristotelian distinction, I6ip.e0a to ovaiai, olov S re dvdpwros Kal to fiS<w.
Ibid. yivos etvai ffiov, t6v Si dv&pojvov cTSos TUIV TToWwV £tph)V TjStJ KCXWpiafiivOV, 0-vyKexvp.tvov Si Sfius In, Kal fi^iru ue4 irpibry dpa Kal KvpiwriTr), Kal p.d- \io~Ta \eyofiivi} ovala 4k tovtuiv vwdpxti, p.op<piap.hov eU elSos ovaiai vvoaTaTTjs.
Ph. vii.
18. ovk Svriav Kara tov 'KpiaToriXrjv iaTtv.
Hipp. Ph. vu.
18. ifc a al irpwrai ovaiai, bia to rots fiX*
BASILIDES.
xcvii intellect, and sense.
The Deity therefore, that so far The world transcends every finite conception, willed, so to speak, the heap, creation of the world; the world, not lin extenso, but the seed of the world, hence called Travo-n-eptxia.
An idea again that was derived from Aristotle, whose species were deduced from zthe generic mass; and Hippolytus is very express in saying, 3that as regards the creation of the world out of nothing, Basilides was perfectly orthodox, though in the same degree he departed from the first principles of philosophy.
Further, the universe according to Aristotle, who fol lowed the teaching of his master 4 Plato, was divided into
three systems: the sublunary world, in a state of consider able disorder; the superlunary, but subcelestial world, in which every thing was in consummate order and discipline, reaching to the true heaven; the third system was this eirt(paveia tov ovpavov, which was supramundane5 (virepitoo-juios), and was also styled in the 6 Peripatetic termino logy, Tre/nrrr) ova la, or the fifth element, out of which the 1 oi rbv Kara irXdros Kal Siatpeffiv v\rjs bir60e<ris, ha Kbapov 9eij tpydo-qTai, yeyan\pivov.
. . 4XX4 Kal airtppa k6<x/iov. xaBdwep i dpd\vTis ri prjpip.ara, rj Bvrfrbs ib. 21.
The world destined to its own dvBpiavos xa^"> 1 t^-ov, if ti twv rrjs development, as the teeth of the newvXrjs /lepiov ipya£6pevos \apfidvci ;) dXXd, born babe ; the substance and intellect ETir{ <pri<nKal eyevero. k. t. \. Hipp. Ph. of man from the child, &c.
22.
Clem.
VII.
22. says that, with Philo, he called the uni4 i. e. if the Platonic Epistles be re verse the only begotten, povoyevi) re k6tained as genuine; in Ep. p. 312 B. the apiov, ius Qrtftn b BaoiXelSris.
Str. v. n. well-known passage occurs, vepl rbv s t6 8i yhos iarlv olovel awpbs Tts £k irdvrwv fiaaiKta irdvr' fori Kal ixelvov roWwv Kal 8ia<p6puv Karapxp.iyp.hos tveKa irdvra'
Kal iKtivo alriov dirdvTwv errtppdTwV i<p' oS yhovs, olovel tivos twv KaXwV bcirrepov Si irepl t4 Jei/re/ja, napoo, trirra t4 twv yeyov&roiv e£3ij bidKal jphor trepl t4 rplra.
These words, ««r<u.
Hipp. Ph. vn, 15.
Again, though never read by Aristotle, may tovt6 iari rb arippjx, 8 ?x« b iavrtf have supplied Basilides with an imaraaav tt/v travairtpplav, S <pi)<rtv'Apiorogined authority. tAijs y(vos elvai, «Is direipous Ttpv65 A term adopted also in the rods ptvov Ibtas, k.t.\.
Ib. 22. inrepK6<rpios of PtOTlNDB, Enn. in. v. 2; 3 lird Si Tjv dtropov elweiv irpofioK-hr V. i. 6, and cf. Pbool. in Tim. p. 267. tico too pA) Ivros GtoC ytyovbiai Ti obK 8 otoix&ov oUaav frcpov twv Terrdpwv, tv, {<p(6yet yap irdvv Kal WSotice t4i Kara iK-^parbv re Kal $eiov.
Abist. de Mundo, vpo§o\ijv twv ytyovbrav ovalas 6 Baai\elii. 6. cf. de Cosl. I. 2. 3.
But the notion bits'
Tolas yap TrpofioXijs xpe^ai ^ *olat was borrowed from Pythagoras. vol.
I. g
xcviii
BASILIDES.
Light the heavenly bodies were formed.
Similarly Basilides imagined created a triple distinction in the constitution of the universe. substance.
There was the lower world, of gross material principles; the upper world or virepKocxnia, corresponding with the irenirrr} ovala of Aristotle; and intermediately was the dKpwpelov, or fxeQopiov trvevixa, the spirit moving between the confines of both.
The first material principle in the Basilidian, as in the Mosaic theory, was light; but then, as in the Persian Cos mogony, it was the seed from whence every other material element was evolved; it was, as Ormuzd, the word of Light and Life1; and the addition of a text from S. John
completes the amalgam of notions borrowed from Greek philosophy and Zoroaster on the one hand, and from Moses and the Gospel on the other; for this material principle was the light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
We shall have occasion to observe in the sequel a further application of this Zoroastrian principle.
So far the system we have been tracing was not more remote from divine truth than many of the allegorical notions of Philo; but from this point a wilder note is sounded, and dogmata are advanced that the 2heresiarch himself appears to have referred to no higher inspiration than his own vain imagination.
The power of "'Son-hood (if 1 Tiyove, tynoh, i£ oix 6vtu>v to atriplidian system, according to Ieen^l'8, put TOO Kbviux), 6 \6yos i \exOels, Ten)p.
199, was NoDs, in most of these 0ifru <pws' xai toOto, (pnaiv, tori to Gnostic systems a synonym for vl6s.
\eyip.eyov b> rofs Eiayye\lois'
*Hi< to The ideas of FUiety, therefore, and In0wj to" i.\t)8ivov, 8 ciwr/fei ndirra dvffpoitellect coinciding, we may deduce from von Ipx^erov els toy ndcfioy.
Aa/ipivet the system now under consideration t&s dpxis Ato toC atckppjarm ixelnov xal another anticipation of the new PlaolwTfferoi.
ToDto i<rrt rd mripfta, S txei tonic theory.
It is not at all improbaiv (avTif Taaay Tty wavmrepiitav ic.t.X. ble that Basilides, as an Alexandrian Hipp. Ph. vn. «2. teacher, supplied to Alcinous hia notion 3 Sti &y \eya, <pt\<sh>,jierb. ravra yeof a mundane intellect, coexistent with a yovlvai, fii) itcilftrei v66ev.
Ib. mundane toul, ^ b> ^/vxy r6i)ais, but in 3 It should be borne in mind that the subordination to the Supreme Intellect ; first efflux from the Deity in the Basi- (Alcin. in Platan, doclr.
§ 10, and cf.