4 s aa Ralle
PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY | PISTIS, GNOSIS, C on its content. The conception of the secret, esoteric tradition prophecy of the Old Test of gnosis is the same both in Clement and in Gnosticism. distinguished men—name q prophets—to reach some
: pace e A every scholar of C 2. The esoteric knowledge of the highest divinity can be ree Almost 4 s aa Ralle . sophy he i vealed only by the Son. Just as in ethics the Logos acts both ag sophy an :
Sa tant fal : the Alexandrine theologi a metaphysical principle and as a historical person,' so also in J se pl F ans, are to gnosis he has the same dual role. 'God, being undemonstrated, ; God's plans, prepa ; '
Mics, Sq aes ' on our side, added that t is not the object of science, but the Son is wisdom, science, | : t Wecidentihe truth, and whatever is kindred with these things', says Clement sophy', must | ; "1
P ss Ty i with that gnosis which the in Strom. iv. 156. 1
(ii. 317. 21-3). That the knowledge of the ky t f le highest divinity can be attained only by means of the Logos, the 10: a.tewiselect is, i % i i cet | exact way of interpreting second hypostasis, is shown also by the following evidence: ee of ; st ,
After becominga histo Strom. i. 97. 2 (ii. 62. 17): 4 8€ edpeats [sc. dAnfeias] 5: viod. q the source ofgnosis. In the Strom. ii.
Oeparrevwv tov Tay dAwy Bedv did roo a strong emphasis Cleme 45 7 Pp dpxrepéws Adyou, 5? 08 Kafoparar ra Kar' ddjPeav Kad Kat tradition. Here we must Sixaca.
, of the 'Yrorumdaeis pres +e \.g ene \ ¥, ; E Strom. v. 12. 3 (ii. 334. 8): Sree' vind 6marip yrwpiferat.
Christ revealed gnosis to Strom. vii. 2. 2 soe f.) : wap' of expavOdvew Eorw ro éméKewva attiov, | surrection: *LaxdBo 7@ S TOV TATEPA TWVY OAWYV. i) eo n \ Strom. vii. 13. 2 (iii, 10, 7-8): mpooopurety 7H Oe@ Sid Td peyddov
| ne arapediaicey is dpviepdees, =e '
(vol. iii. 199. 21 ff.). For Strom. vii. 16. 6 (iii. 12. 20-2) : obros 6 7G dvze povoyers . .
. evarro= | teacher who has come do odpaylopevos TO yrworK® Th redrelav Bewplav.
| selected persons to the h them to the perfect ddev This function of the Logos in gnosis explains why Clement some- ~ trines based on the allego times calls him 'teacher' and describes his activity in gnosis as is what Clement means a 'teaching': particularly important in this respect are the pasredeemer of the whole of sages Strom. iv. 162. 5 (ii. 320. 19-20), v. 1. 3 (ii. 326. 10-11), replaced, in Clement's ph v. 1. 4 (ii. 326. 13), vi. 122.
(ii. 493. 6-7), vi. 123.
(ii. 493. a of gnosis.6 The wood of t } 30-1).
A dispensable transmitter o Considered as the source of gnosis the Logos is also the wéyas yOow jpiv adixra, Strom dpxvepevs: like the High Priest,? the Logos also possesses the The doctrine of the met full knowledge of the first principle. Clement sometimes applies ledge of the highest divi , > the term péyas dpxtepeds to the Logos.3 a ' See chapter I, p. 16 above.
| How can the Logos be the transmitter of gnosis when he is © * See chapter I, footnote 1, p. a a still only a metaphysical principle? We have already pointed out, Se PE BeRe AON, : hie fi } ali Cl
Strom. iv. 136. 5 (ii. 308. 30). in the first chapter, that, according to Clement, he, as mvedpa that if gnosis and cwrnpia were or Adyos omeppatixds, is the source both of philosophy and of the choose gnosis, ° T completely agree, on thi ' See chapter II, pp. 113ff. above.
2 See pp. 173ff. below.
303-8. Courdaveaux hints also a 3 Strom. ii. 45. 7, ii. 134. 2, vi. 153. 4, Vii. 9. 2, Vii. 13. 2. j {P291) without, however, exam .
PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY i PISTIS, GNOSIS, COS if by his identification of the metaphysical Logos with the wisdom
Son who is in the womb of of God,! is led to consider the former as the source of any human 18). The heretical gnostics wisdom and of the higher, esoteric knowledge:
} keeping with their own view De F Ta Gy (HL ee Bo seta Budden Wy best support for their theor (4 uga @ nv. il.
™pes Li cnosis by means of a divine | Belov, Bs anglas dork ary , the eastern branch of the Va De Fuga et Inv. 137
(iii. 139. 4):... Adyov Betov, ad' ob macar the one one he Bei maSetar al copia peovow dévvaor.? q begotten Son as t he Being w De Somn. i. 191
(iii. 246. 7-12): 6 fepds Adyos... TONG Kal Toy | to reveal himself to all othe appirav dvadépe dy obdéva r&v dredéarwy emaxodoar Oéus. ij source of the gnosis of the Like Cl Phil < lls the L .
A) OAnoev yrwabivat roisAi » > € lement, ilo sometimes calls the Logos weyas dpxvepeus.<iaie nvebpa yrdioews ovons év yr But it is especially in Gnosticism that the idea of the onlyody Kat 6 dd yrdboews
. begotten Son, the second hypostasis, and of the historical person 3 ylod 6 marhp eyvdiabn", ofJesus as sources and transmitters of gnosis assumes a particular 7
The same conception unde relevance: it represents actually, together with the tendency to | ticism gives ofthe activity of stress the esotericism of gnosis, one of its characteristic features. to the earth in order to te Already in the New Testament it had been said 'nobody knows
P know: q of the unknown Father. In the a pespi the ti peels ee= oebiel to ; being about to descend int reveal him' (Matt. 11: 27, cf.
Luke 10: 22) and 'the only-begotten navra & dvoléw, popdds S€ V sg re Y 6800, yrOow Kadéoas, mapad ee p. 209 below.
2 This passage should be compared with De Plant. 121 (see p. 64 above) and | | 103. 19-104. 3); the Valen De Somn. ii. 221 (see p. 20 above). The three passages contain similar images; the been born from Mary whe Logos is compared either to a source (De Fuga et Inv. 137, De Plant. 121) or to iy) mysteries had come, dzdre od a stream (De Somn. ii. 221). It must also not be forgotten that Philo compares
, , philosophy to a shower (see pp. 19-20 above). yw daa i POOTA MAS PELVATO 3 See, for instance, De Migr. Abr. 102, De Fuga et Inv. 108, De Somn. i. 215,
} Hippolytus, Ref. vi. 35. 3
_ * It must be remembered that in the Valentinian system the only-begotten Son 7) Gospel of Philip says that Je is not identical with Jesus: the only-begotten Son is the first emanation of the Léanash Father, i.e. the second hypostasis which is formed by the couple vods/ dAjea way ne §nosts, 119. 7-9 (P (Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. i, 1. 1, vol. i. 9. 7-93 i. 1. 2, vol. i, 10, 10-11; Exc. ex Theod. following passages are parti 6. 3 and 7. 1), whereas Jesus (who is called also 'Saviour' and 'Paraclete') is the Being which the Acons send out of the pleroma in order to help Sophia, the fallen p.
16. 32-4:... the grace Acon: see Exc. 23. 1, 23. 2, 43. 2, and Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. i. 4. 4 (i. 38. 8-11) him through the power o (the parallelism between the two last passages has been pointed out byoO.Dibelius, q p. 18. 12-21: The Gospel.
ZNW g (1908), 231). It is he who frees Sophia from passions, gives origin to i cianle matter and to the sensible things (Exc. 45-6, cf. Iren. Adv. Haer. i. 4. 5, vole nanks to the clemency o i, pp. 39-40), and comes down to the earth (Exc. 59-60). The distinction between the only-begotten Son and Jesus is pointed out in Exc. 7. 3, 0 8¢ évradba
''R. M. Grant, Gnosticism and bdbels odxére "povoyerts" ddd' "cis povoyers'. The following sentences of Exc.
'It stands on the 7. 3-4, stressing the identity between the Being which has come down on the 7) thought.' earth and the Being which remains in the heavenly world, must be understood as i * Stahlin, app. crit., vol. iii, 108 Clement's own remarks, as F. Sagnard, Extraits de Théodote, footnote 4, pp. 67-71,
4, and I', Sagnard, Extraits de Th rightly points out. On this distinction between the only-begotten Son and the i r 7a7)p éyvda8y into connection Saviour it is also worth looking at the figures in Sagnard's book La Gnose valentinienne
"uke 10: 22, and John 1: 18.
+ +09 1455 3175 318, and 339 (see also p. 561, 'Mais ce Fits n'est pas descendu luitis, In the Valentinian system the ' méme').
"| 'ng with thepleroma of the Acons: y 5267061 i :
PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY | PISTIS, GNOSIS, acs 'hris Te i "ne i icate .
Jesus, the Christ. He enlightened them and indicated a path for ¥ possible to reach some k them; and the path is the truth which he taught them. vealer, namely Jesus, w p. 38. 23-4: ... but he reveals himself through a Son. asouties and. athi nk p40. 30-3: he sent him in order that he might speak about the cn dlhunt 7 13 thi 8 way, place and about his place of repose from which he had come ps F strate this patter forth.
Diese Offenbarung und . al p. 41. 4ff.: He will speak about the place from which each one , Jesus, der vom Himmel has come and the region from which he has received his essential
{ ew pg s According to this Gospel, the Christ 'nailed to a cross ofwood...
Pee , sie mit deren schriftlicl became a fruit of the Gnosis of the Father'
(p. 18. 24-6). This } ic passage reminds us at once of what Clement says in Strom. v. 72. 3
1 the ethical about the symbolical meaning of the wood of the cross." means of drdbew. whicl The same conception of Jesus as revealer of gnosis appears also
| ethinal levels from the in the Apocryphon ofJohn, in the Wisdom ofJesus Christ, and apt Pe :
> > sists in the ideal of the c in the first Book ofJeu: iceh the c ut .
, which the yvworucds po Apocryphon of John 22. 2-9 (p. 85 Till): I have come down in of the intelligible world ° order to reveal to thee what happens, what happened, and what often in connection with f ae { will happen, that thou mayst know the invisible as well as the such terms as Oewpia, é visible realities, and in order to teach thee the perfect man.3 ible .
\ ; and th possible to produce is e Wisdom of Jesus Christ 87. 13-15 (p215 Till): I have come out sages of Strom. i.
15. 2 of the being which has no limit in order to teach you all things. ii 46 1 (ii. 1 i i oS Ibid, 102. 1-6 (p. 245): I am he who has come out.
. . in order to re) c_ 37. 415) teach you all this. rae ae "* (ii. 266. 5First Book of Jeu, chapter 1 (p. 257. 14-16 Schmidt): . . . in the (ii, 308. 26-7), iv. 152. doctrine .
. which Jesus, the living Being, taught to his apostles.
1 E, Baert, FZPhTh 12 (1965 The :
P views on the role of the Son in The idea, which we have met in Clement, that Jesus transmitted tinians, but the scanty eulen .
~ eo gnosis to a few disciples after his resurrection is also very common q 9 of the agreement betwee in Gnosticism: in such writings as the Letter of James, the 2 Ph Vielhauer, Beiheft Apocryphon of John, the Gospel of Mary,' the W isdom ofJesus what A. von Harnack a L Christ, and the Pistis-Sophia Jesus imparts his esoteric teaching as ue wesentlich ... der Le aftes his resurrection; ua oiithe, etspende .
. ee . a oiap eit, sich zu héher Both in Clement and in Gnosticism we notice, therefore, the haftet. Tritt hier schon a PiReo n '
: fia seared , die Ver same pattern: God, the supreme Being, is unknown, and it is spss ndieh init den -Valedtal der ganzen Fassung de: ra 'This correspondence between Clement and the Gospel of Truth has been mung des Formalprinai Zone rightly pointed out by Daniélou, TU 79 (Berlin, 1961), 52und index Uesung der Pasble
2 This gnostic work preserved in a Coptic version has been edited and trans193-207, though 'drawing:atte lated into German by W. Till, TU 6o (Berlin, 1955)» 195-295» especially pp. ae Ae ae c 3 Cf. codex IL, 2. 16-20, pp. 112-13 Krause-Labib.
Clement ana eae no + The extant parts of the Gospel of Mary have been edited and translated into i 3 See chapter II 109 -6 German by W. Till, op. cit, 63-79. On this gospel sce also Till's article EYATj
4 "Thlepastigeabiond the les TEAION KATA MAPIAM, LPP1 (1946), 260-5. aspect of'enasis, He Nese s gnosis: dd0eva and Ge PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY t PISTIS, GNOSIS, C 317. 10-14),! v. 1. 5 (ii. 326. 19-20), v. 66. 2 (ii. 370. 15-16)? t Strom. v. 67. 3 (ii. 371. iG (ii ie 5) wi Gis (ii, 462. 24), vi. 61. 3 (ii. 462. 31- ; divinity . .
. after deta 6 a a — i Gi ' 66. 24), vie 75.
1 (ii 469. 5-6), vi. 98. 3
Strom. vi. 86. 1 (ii. 474. 2 oes prehension, which le (ii, 481. 15-16), vi. 102, 1-2 (ii. 483. 6-12), vil. 10. 3 (iii. g.
| enfin 9-11), vii. 44Baile 3322-4), Naas (iil. 33. 26), Wi 46. 4 q Strom. vii. 27. 6 (iii, 20.
(iii. 34. 26-7), Vil. 49. 4 (iii. 37. 7), Vii. 61. 1 (iii. 44. 13), Vil.
83. 3 ii purified in advance . .
(iii. 59. 24-5), Vil. 102. 2 (iii. 72. 7-8). a those who are going to The only way to achieve this contemplation of the intelligible
' selves to some purificat world is, according to Clement, the separation from sensible i Strom. vii. 40. 1-2 (iii. 30 things and, first of all, from the body. Clement insists on the A | the earth by means of necessity, for the perfect Christian, of freeing the soul—or, more i with wings' by mean exactly, its rational part—from the bonds of the body, which if our best to haste towa is regarded as a prison. This process, by means of which the DI fleshly bond: for we k een is able to contemplate the transcendent ideas, is a H put into practice the Aerie Laie * 2s thought: f exactly as the Jews did 'purification'. That this must have been Clement's thought is i shown by the following passages:
P The intelligible realities Strom. iv.
313. 25-7): The natural affection for the i templated by anything c je " ee intelligible realities enables the gnostic man to detach himself ij plate them only by THEeANS | from sensible things: in keeping with the knowledge he possesses, q namely the vods. This idea ' é
Mi (ss he is able to choose the good between beautiful things.
| (i. 45. 17-18), v. 16, 1 ( Strom. iv. 152. 3 (ii. 316. 1-2) : By meansofhis absolute purification H Vv. 67. 3 (ii. 371. 4-5); Vv. he contemplates the holy God in a holy way.
; ( '| The identification of g Strom. iv. 155. 4 (ii. 317. 15-18): When the soul, after surpassing \ of the necessity of fleeing the material world, is alone and in close communion with the a | tendency to regard the vo ideas, the gnostic man, like the 'chief' of the Theaetelus, become enable him to contempla an angel and stays with Christ, ig shenthey tet arate: y elements which connect '
@ (ii, 295, 6-10): rus als maintains j F '
: a v. < m (ii. 335.6 ee ' = bac asiee Bethe pentane q life with the Platonic tra that only the soul which is alor é | already clear j wisdom which is superior to any human power, when love enables ae dy clear a Plato. it to fly from the earth towards heaven i Spay, DedoBar, and Gewpetv y ire a s * .
Strom. v. 19. 4 (ii. 339. 4-7): Plato also thought that he whois ' the transcendent ideas impure must not be allowed to touch pure things .
. the mysteries haedo 66d 7, 66 e 1-2, also are not revealed freely to chance persons, but only after some 211d 8-e1, 211e3-4, 2 urifications and previous instructions. f 247d 4, 247d 5-€ 2, 249 1 Clement has here in mind the beginning of the Sophist, where Socrates calls
A Vi. 517 b 4-5, Vii. 517 d 4 the stranger who is introduced to him Beds (see Sophist 216 a).
Tk i 7-8.3 Moreover, like Clem 2 Clement is here explaining what, according to him, is the meaning of 1 Cor.
1 ff. See also footnote 2, p. 147 above. f This passage reminds us of S 3 On Clement's use of the term @ewpia for the designation of gnosis see also i in Egypt is both for Clement Vélker, 316 ff.and 403 f. He has, however, quoted only some of Clement's passages.
H allegorical interpretation of thi The pages which E. Fascher has devoted to Clement's use of the term énonrela ; writers see the paper by U. Treu in his article 'Epoptie', Reallex. fiirAnt. und Christentum (see especially pp. 980-2), h 4 > On the importance of the seetales worth readings -ontemplation et vie contemplative s | il i .o | ) '
PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY i PISTIS, GNOSIS, the soul—or, in other words, the separation ofthe soul from the 2. 718d). Albinus maint sensible world and, first of all, from sensations and from the body the separation of the s —as the preliminary condition which makes contemplation itself when man turns his at possible and maintains that the function of contemplating the realities and of the trut ideas is peculiar to the vods. The Phaedo is the dialogue in which Kal wepiaywy? puyfs dd these ideas especially occur: see, for instance, Phaedo 65 a 1-2, kalta Kar' ddjGeav ovra, 65,c 8-9, 65 c 11-12,? 66.2 3-6,3 67 a 3-6, 67 b 2,4 67 c 5-d 2,8
| rodrov [sc. Tov PiAdcogor 65 ¢ 6-66 a 3,° 79 a 2-3 and also Phaedrus 24.7 c 6-87 and Rep. vi.
] Svvarae mpoooiKeobv Kal 511 a1. Plato directly influenced Clement, who, in some of ; ovdaias; according to him the passages of the Stromateis quoted above, has his words still
| first ofall, at knowing t in his mind.' i év TH yrdoe Tis adnGelas In Middle Platonism, and in Neoplatonism also, the wisdom
| contemplative life has s which the philosopher possesses is one and the same thing with : sages of Clement, as can the contemplation of the intelligible world and depends on the i .
A ; lk Albinus, Did. 153. 18-20: separation of reason from sensible things. Justin tells us that i Bag he aim of the Platonism of his time was the contemplation of '
+-+78 giroodpp pndap the alm oO ie a ODE OF us as W aS rae i pre ; Dewplas admodelrecBar, G incorporeal ideas: Kai Be Tpet opddpa. 1 TWVY AOWLATWY VONOLS, ravrny tpéhew Kat avtew. kal q Oewpia tay dedv dverrrépov po ri dpovnow (Dial., Cc. 2, vol. t ss .
\ ii, 10. 1-2). Justin's words are confirmed by Plutarch, Albinus, ! y et . i and Maximus of Tyre. Plutarch regards the contemplation of intelligible things as the réAos of philosophy (Quaest. Conv. viii.
] 'On the Origin and Cycle of the philosophical Ideal of Life', Appendix IT of the 'fl ] English translation of his Aristoteles made by R. Robinson (Oxford, 1948), and ed.,
| 430-1, Vélker quotes only Rep. iv. 486 a (p. 318), Rep. vii.a1 andmigriticl 247 d || The same topics occur in (p. 403 n. 2). Aristotle also, following Plato, considered
Oewpia as the highest | anti rf i Sap form of life, and praisedit both in his early and in his later works: see, for instance, altendon to'such passage Protr. fc.
6 Walzer (on the eulogy of the contemplative life in the Protrepticus see i (126. 8 ff.),2 Or. xi. 60a especially W. Jaeger, Aristoteles, 81 ff. [pp. 8off. in the English translation], and i xi. 60 a (140. 11). his essay quoted above, p. 431); Met. 107224
(cf. Zeller ii/2. 615 footnote)5 ee Gs EN x. 117719-24 (cf. Zeller, p. 614:n. 1) and 1178%28-30 (cf. Zeller, p. 615 footi
In Neoplatonism Plot note). On the relationship between the Protrepticus and the tenth book of the the inferior virtues whic Nicomachean Ethics see Jaeger, op. cit. 74 and 79 (pp. 73 and 78 in the English task of which is to purify translation). ms: bv: Adywwev ate:
1 Cf. Festugi¢re, op. cit. 87 n. 7.
2 Cf. Festugiére, op. cit. 88 n. 3.
} . ia as UTGS 3 Cf Festugiére, op. cit. 72 n. 1 and 88 n. 15.
\ 1 yuyx7) ovpreduppévn T * Cf. Festugiére, op. cit. 72n.
Kal TdayrTa ovvdoédlovaa, 5 Cf. Festugiére, op. cit. 71 n. 2. ovv8oédtor OXAG: icdvn av © Cf. Festugiére, op. cit, 72 n. 1.
7 Cf. Festugiére, op. cit. 107 n. 3.
© yaaa ' Loma! : ME 8 Apart from Strom. iv. 155. 2-3 (see footnote 1, p. 164 above) Clement refers Cpo.orrabiis ein: rep eott directly to Plato in Strom. v. 14. 2 and v. 19. 4 (see p. 164above). In Strom. v. 14.2 j owparos drep éori avdpi Clement is probably thinking of Phaedrus 249 c, 56 83) Sixatws povy mrepobrat 7} t 70d diroaddov Sudvora; in Strom. v. 19. 4 he reproduces the sentence of Phaedo
\ * Cf. Phaedo 66 a, draddayel 67 b. As to the passage ofStrom. v. 67. 2, it is directly dependent on Phaedo 65 e-66 a Tovros.
(see Stahlin's apparatus), It goes without saying that both for Plato and for | * Cf. Phaedo 67 a, édv drt pdd Clement contemplation is closely connected with ¢pdvnacs, which for both of them is '
> Cf. Phaedo 65 ¢, prpre tiv d not only a practical but also a theoretical virtue (see chapter II, pp. 72 ff. above). aicbnow efédxwy pndenlav perd t i