Religious Syncretism in Antiquity: Essays in Conversation with Geo Widengren

Citation preview

RELIGIOUS SYNCRETISM IN ANTIQUITY ESSAYS IN CONVERSATION WITH GEO WIDENGREN

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF RELIGION and

THE INSTITUTE OF RELIGIOUS STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA BARBARA SERIES ON FORMATIVE CONTEMPORARY THINKERS Edited by Walter H. Capps

and Charles H. Long

Number 1

RELIGIOUS SYNCRETISM IN ANTIQUITY ESSAYS IN CONVERSATION WITH GEO WIDENGREN Edited by Birger A. Pearson

SCHOLARS PRESS

Mi ss oula, Montana

) -RELIGIOUS SYNCRETISM IN ANTIQUITY ESSAYS IN CONVERSATION WITH GEO WIDENGREN

Edi ted by Bi rger A. Pearson

Published by SCHOLARS PRESS for The American Academy of Religion and The Institute of Religious Studies University of California, Santa Barbara

Distributed by SCHOLARS PRESS University of Montana Missoula, Montana 59801 RELIGIOUS SYNCRETISM IN ANTIQUITY ESSAYS IN CONVERSATION WITH GEO WIDENGREN Edited by Birger A. Pearson Department of Religious Studies The University of Californi a Santa Barbara, California 93106 Library of Congress Cata l oging in Publication Data Religious syncretism in antiquity. (Symposium series - American Academy of Rel i gi on and Institute of Religious Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara ; no . 1) Based on a symposium held in Santa Barbara, Calif., on April 21 - 22, 1972, sponsored by the Institute of Religious Studies of the University of California, Santa Barbara. Includes bibliographi cal references. 1. Religion - -Congres s es. I. Widengren, Ge o, 1907II. Pearson, Birger Albert. III. California. University, Santa Barbara. Institute of Religious Studies. IV. Series: American Academy of Religion. Symposium serie s - American Academy of Religion and Institute of Religious Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara ; no . 1. BL21.R45 291 75-29421 ISBN 0-89130 - 037 - 6 Copyright ©

1975

by The Amer ican Academy of Reli gi on Printed in the United States of Americ a 123456 Print i ng Department University of Montana Mi s s oula, Montana 59801

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abbreviations ............•...............•.... .... ...•..... v11 Introduction ...................................•.•.....•.. ix I.

II.

GEO WIDENGREN Culture Contact, Cultural Influence, Cultural Continuity, and Syncretism. Some Views Based on my Previous Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . .

1

WALTER H. CAPPS Uppsala Methodology and the Problem of Religious Syncretism: An Afterword on Prolegomena .......... 21

III.

RAIMUNDO PANIKKAR Some Notes on Syncretism and Eclecticism Related to the Growth'of Human Consciousness ........... .. . 47

IV.

STANISLAV SEGERT Some Remarks Concerning Syncretism .............. . . 63

V.

G.W. ALHSTROM Heaven on Earth - At Hazor and Arad ............... 67

VI.

GEO WIDENGREN Iran and Israel in Parthian Times with Special Regard to the Ethiopic Book of Enoch . .• ... .... .... 85

VII.

JONATHAN Z. SMITH Wisdom and Apocalyptic ........................... 131

VIII.

DAVID WINSTON Philo' s Theory of Cosmogony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . 1 S7

IX.

DOUGLAS M. PARROTT Evidence of Religious Syncretism in Gnostic Texts from Nag Hammadi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 3

V

X.

ERIC SEGELBERG Syncretism at Work: On the Origin of Some Coptic Manichaean Psalms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . 191

XI.

BIRGER A. PEARSON Jewish Haggadic Traditions in The Testimony of Truth from Nag Hammadi (CG IX, 3) ................ .. 205

vi

ABBREVIATIONS The following abbreviations have been used in this book. ADAIK AirWb

ANEP ASTi AB BASOR Bhdn BiOr BWANT CG CIS DAWBIO ERE ET GBS GCS

HdbdOR HdbZAT RN

HUCA ICC IEJ JA JAC JBL JEA JNES NedTT NHS

Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archiologischen Instituts Kairo AZtiranisches Worterbuch {ed. Bartholomae) The Ancient Near East in Pictures {ed. Pritchard) AnnuaZ of the S~edish TheoZogicaZ Institute BibZicaZ ArchaeoZogist BuZZetin of the American SchooZs of OrientaZ Research Bundahism BibZiotheca OrientaZis Beitrige zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Codex Cairensis Gnosticus Corpus inscriptionum Semiticarum Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Institut fUr Orientforschung EncycZopedia of Religion and Ethics Ezpository Times Greek (Roman) and Byzantine Studies Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte Handbuch der Orientalistik Handbuch zum Alten Testament Badozt Nask Hebre~ Union College Annual The International Critical Commentary Israel Ezploration Journal Journal Asiatique Jahrbuch fur Antike und Christentum Journal of BibZical Literature Journal of Egyptian Archaeology Journal of Near Eastern Studies Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift Nag Hammadi Studies vii

NT NTS OLZ RB REJ RHPhR RHR SGV STK SVF

~T ThR TPS TU

uuj Vd VigChr VT ZRGG ZDPV ZThK

Novum Teatamentum Ne~ Testament Studies Orientalische Literaturzeitung Revue biblique internationale Revue des Etudes juives Revue d'histoire et de philosophie religieuses Revue de l'histoire des religions Skand-Gumanik Vicar Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta Supplements, Vetus Testamentum Theologische Rundschau Transactions of the Philological Society Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur Uppaala universitets 8rsskrift Videvdat Vigiliae Christianae Vetus Testamentum Zeitschrift fur Religions - und Geisteageschichte Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palaestina - Vereins Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche

.

viii

INTRODUCTION Birger A. Pearson This volume of essays has grown out of a symposium held at the Old Mission in Santa Barbara, California, on April 21-22, 1972. Professor Geo Widengren of Uppsala University was a Guest Professor in the Department of Religious Studies of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and a Visiting Research.Scholar in the Institute of Religious Studies of the University. The symposium was sponsored by the Institute of Religious Studies, and was one of a series of symposia conceived by the Institute's Director, Walter H. Capps, featuring the work of seminal figures in the study of religion.I A highlight of this symposium was a banquet at which Profesor Eric Segelberg (an old friend and former student of Widengren's at Uppsala), currently of Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, presented Widengren with a Festschrift on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday (April 24, 1972).Z In organizing this symposium, the committee (consisting of Capps, Raimundo Panikkar, and the editor of this volume) wanted to elicit a statement from Widengren which would be somewhat "autobiographical" in nature, to present papers on areas of interest to Widengren, and to provide for ample and free discussion on ·the part of all participants. The title and focus of the sym-

r-Trevious symposia, and previous volumes of essays growing therefrom, have revolved around the work of Georges Dumezil and Erik Erikson. Cf. Gerald Larson, ed., Myth in Indo-European Antiquity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974), and Donald Capps, M. Gerald Bradford, and Walter H. Capps, eds., Encounter with Erikson (in preparation). 2 See C.J. Bleeker, S.G.F. Brandon, M. Simon (honorary editors), J. Bergman, K. Drynjeff, and H. Ringgren (editors), E~ Orbe Retigionum. Studia Geo Widengren, 2 vols. (Numen Suppl. 21, 22; Leiden, 1972). ix

posium would be a matter of some importance, and yet was not at all self-evident to the planners. The reason for this is that Widengren's work has ranged far and wide, involving not only theoretical but very concrete historical and philological studies, the latter covering many geographical and linguistic bases in the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean. Thus any number of possi bilities presented themselves: a symposium on Iranology, on Islam, on the Old Testament, on ancient Mesopotamian religion, on Syrian Christianity, on Gnosticism, on the Phenomenology of Religion, etc., could with equal justification be suggested. But in order to cover as wide an area as possible, while at the same time eliciting some comments from Widengren himself on a subject matter with which he has not dealt in a gene~az way (but which he has dealt with in very concrete specific studies, e.g . on Manichaeism),l viz. "syncretism," it was decided that we would entitle our symposium, "Religious Syncretism in Antiquity." It goes without saying that the essays in this volume represent a number of perspectives and points of view. It is, after all, in the nature of "conversation" that all the conversants do not say the same thing. Therefore some introductory comment on the various essays will be in order, and the rationale for the ordering of them in this volume will also thereby become clear. Naturally, the first chapter consists of Professor Widengren's "autobiographical" address: "Culture Contact, Cultural Influence, Cultural Continuity, and Syncretism. Some Views Based on My Previous Work." It is not only a partial summary of his scholarly production over the years, but also a statement on the subject of "syncretism." Widengren does not, characteristi cally, speak in general terms about syncretism, but distinguishes between "inherited" mythical-religious ideas and "acquired" ideas (this in his discussion of Syrian Christianity). He also shrinks from speaking generally about the "influence" of one religion upon another unless one can pin down, historically, concrete cultural f

~ - W. Capps' remarks on this in his essay, Chapter Two in this volume. X

contact. "Conscious syncretism" Widengren finds to be a rare phenomenon, but observable in the case of Manichaeism and the Islamic sect of the "Pure Brethren." It might be useful to point out here that in the discussion that followed Widengren's address during the symposium, the example of the Graeco-Egyptian cult of Sarapis was also mentioned as a case of "conscious syncretism."l The second chapter, "Uppsala Methodology and the Problem of Religious Syncretism: An Afterword on Prolegomena," by Walter H. Capps, is a fascinating discussion of Widengren's scholarly approach against the background of the history of philosophy in Scandinavia, especially at Uppsala . Capps finds in the Swedish rejection of Hegelian idealism, as espoused by Christopher Jacob BostrHm in the nineteenth century, and the concomitant victory of "positivism," an anlogv to the way in which scholarship in the history of religion has been carried out at Uppsala, especially by Widengren. With the third chapter, "Some Notes on Syncretism and Eclecticism Related to the Growth of Human Consciousness," by Raimundo Panikkar, we move away from "positivism" in the direction of a more general and philosophical analysis of syncretism. Panikkar distinguishes between "syncretism" and "eclecticism," and proposes that "growth" would be a better term to use in describing what actually happens in the encounter of religions and cultures. In the fourth chapter, "Some Remarks Concerning Syncretism," Stanislav Segert discusses the etymology of the word "syncretism" and the broad way in which the term is used (usually without definition) by historians of religion. He proposes that concepts taken from the field of linguistics might be useful to historians of religion in dealing with religious phenomena more broadly labelled as "syncretistic."

r-'Mie Serapis cult has not, of course, escaped the notice of Geo Widengren. See his discussion of "Synkretistische Religionen" in B. Spuler, ed., Religionsgeschichte des OPients in deP Zeit deP WeltPeligionen (Handbuch der Orientalistik 8; Leiden, 1961), especially pp. 66ff. Widengren does not, however, use the expression, "conscious syncretism," of the Sarapis cult. xi

With Chapter Five, "Heaven on Earth--at Hazor and Arad." by G. W, AhlstrHm, we move back to the concrete particulars of history, in this case ancient Canaan and Israel. Ahlstrom discusses the temples excavated at Hazor and Arad, and comes up with a fascinating explanation for certain of the cultic paraphernalia found in these temples. His conclusion is that Israelite religion was far more "syncretistic" than is usually thought. In his symposium address Professor Widengren referred 1 to an article he had published in 1966 entitled, "Iran and Israel in Parthian Times with Special Regard to the Ethiopic Book of Enoch." This article is reprinted here as Chapter Six. It is a very fine example of how Widengren deals with specific cases of religiocultural contact. In this essay he discusses the important (and controversial) problem of the influence of Iranian conceptions upon Judaism in the pre-Christian centuries, 2 especially upon Jewish apocalyptic literature. "Apocalypticism" is the subject of Chapter Seven by Jonathan Z. Smith: "Wisdom and Apocalyptic." In this interesting essay Smith takes a position against the view that apocalypticism arises as a syncretism with foreign influences. Using examples taken from Mesopotamia and Egypt, Smith argue s that apocalyp ticism. widely distributed throughout the Mediterranean world, should be understood as part of the continuous history of the tradition within which it occurs, and specifically as a learned phenomenon which develops out of scribal wisdom traditions as "wisdom lacking a royal court and patron. 113 Philo of Alexandria is paradigmatic of a first-century Jew who, though faithful to his ancestral laws, was thoroughl y at

rsee

p. 7 2 For a good review of scholarly discussions on this subject by a contributor to this volume s ee D. Winston, "The Iranian Component in the Bible, Apocrypha, and Qumran: A Review of the Evi dence," History of Religions S (1966) 183-216. 3 For a succinct statement of Widengren's understanding of apocalypticism, for comparison and contrast wi th Smith's views, see his ReZigionsphllnomenoZogie (Berlin, 1969), ch. 16 (pp . 456 - 479); xii

home in the philosophical environment of Hellenistic cultural syncreticism. His philosophy• and more specifically "Philo' s Theory of Cosmogony." is the subject of the essay by David Winston that constitutes Chapter Eight in this volume. Winston's analysis is exceedingly acute, and concludes with the convincing (but perhaps also surprising) observation that Philo, like Plato. taught the doctrine of the eternal creation or generation of the world. Gnosticism has often been cited as the example. par ezceiience, of "syncreticism" carried to its farthest limits.I Thus it is fitting that a number of contributions on the phenomenon of ancient Gnosticism be included in this volume. Chapters Nine through Eleven do, in fact, comprise contributions on this subject. In Chapter Nine, "Evidence of Religious Syncretism in Gnostic Texts from Mag Hammadi." Douglas Parrott traces in versions of the gnostic myth found in certain of the Coptic documents from Nag Hammadi the line of development in the history of the gnostic religion from a pre-Christian stage to a fully "Christianized" stage. In Chapter Ten, "Syncreticism at Work: On the Origin of Some Coptic Manichaean Psalms,'' Eric Segelberg discusses five of the psalms in the Coptic Manichaean Psalm Book, showing that these psalms have probably originated in pre-Manichaean Christian gnostic circles, and have been subsequently edited with specifically Manichaean features upon their incorporation into the Manichaean corpus of pslams. In Chapter Eleven, "Jewish Haggadic Traditions in The Testimony of Truth from Nag Hammadi (CG IX,~,)," the editor of this volume discusses a passage in one of the Christian gnostic tractates

ch. 15 in the Swedish edition. 1 The classic treatment of Gnosticism against the background of Hellenistic syncretism is that of Hans Jonas, Gnosis und sp8tantiker Geist, 2 vols. (Gottingen, 19643 and 19662); see also The Gnostic Religion (Boston, 19632). xiii

from Nag Hammadi which he takes to be a pre-Christian gnostic source taken into the larger tractate, and uses it as a paradigm for the argument that Gnosticism originated within syncretistic Jewish circles in the eastern Mediterranean in pre-Christian times. The editor had hoped to obtain from Professor Widengren an additional article which would contain his latest reflections on the problem of Gnosticism. The press of many commitments made it impossible for him to supply such an article for this volume. Nevertheless Widengren's views on Gnosticism are well known, and the chapter on Gnosticism from his epock- making book on the phenomenology of religion is now available in English in the form of a small monograph.I It is earnestly to be hoped that the entire book will make its appearance in English dress before too long, and that Professor Widengren's "Brage-Promise" might thereby be fulfilled. 2 As Editor of this volume I should like to register here my sincere thanks to those who helped in its formation. I am indebted to Mr. Ernst F. Tonsing, my student and former assistant to the Director of the Institute of Religious Studies (now on the faculty of California Lutheran College), for much help in the editing process. Christina Keene, Eva Tamminga and Deborah Sills of the Institute staff did the typing for this volume, for which I thank them most heartily. Ms. Ruth Beane, another student of mine, assisted me in the proofreading, for which I thank her also. And, of course, to those whose essays appear between these covers, my sincere thanks, especially to him in whose honor this volume came into being, and to whom it is dedicated, Geo Widengren. Birger A. Pearson Santa Barbara, California

1 Geo Widengren, The Gnoatia Attitude, translated from the Swedish and edited by Birger A. Pearson (Santa Barbara: Institute of Religious Studies, University of California, 1973). 2 Cf. his remarks p.19. xiv

About the Contributors to this volume: GEO WIDENGREN, born in Sweden in 1907, received his higher education in the universities of Stockholm, Copenhagen, and Uppsala, and his doctorate at Uppsala in 1936. In 1940 he became Professor of the History and Psychology of Religion at Uppsala, a post he held until his recent retirement. He is now Professor Emeritus. He has also served as the Dean of the Theological Faculty at Uppsala. He has held visiting professorships and lectureships in many universities, including Leeds, Aarhus, Munster, King's College, the University of London, and the University of California, Santa Barbara. He holds honorary doctorates from the universities of Amsterdam, Strasbourg, Wales, Rostock, and Uppsala. A past president of the International Association for the History of Religions (1960-1970), he holds memberships in numerous other societies and academies, including the Royal Academy of Letters, History and Antiquities in Stockholm, The Royal Society of Sciences in Uppsala, the Norwegian Academy of Sciences in Oslo, and the Rheinisch-Westfalische Adademie in ollsseldorf. In addition to his academic achievements, he is an expert horseman, and was a company commander in the Finnish Army, as well as a Captain in the Swedish army. He holds the Finnish Memorial Medal, and the Lapland Cross, and is a Knight Commander in the Order of Stella Polaris. His major books are too numerous to enumerate here, but include the following titles: The Accadian and Hebre~ Psalms of Lamentation as Religious Documents, Hochgottglauben im alten Iran, a series of monographs under the general title "King and Saviour," Religionens varld (German ed.: Religionsphanomenologie), Iranische Geisteswelt von den Anf~ngen bis aum Islam, Mani and Manichaeism, Die Religionen Trans, Feudalismus im alten Iran, Sakrales x8nigtum im AT und im Judentum, Muhammad the Apostle of God, and Iran und Islam. GtlSTA W. AHLSTRtlM, a native of Sweden, received his doctorate at Uppsala in 1959. He is currently Associate Professor of Old Testament at the University of Chicago . He has participated in arxv

cheological excavations at Gezer, .Jerusalem, Cesarea Maritima, and Tell Jemme, as an Annual Professor at the American School of Oriental Research in Jerusalem. His books include Psalm 89: Eine Liturgie aus dem Ritua l des lei de nden Koni gs , AspP.c ts o f Syncretism in Isra e lit e RRligion, and J oe l and thP. T•mpZe r ult of Jerusalem. He is also a con tributor to Encyclopedia Br itannica and Theol ogisches Worterbuch zum alten Testament.

WALTER H. CAPPS, a native of Nebraska, received his doctorate at Yale University in 1965. He is currently Professor of Religious Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and Director of the Institute of Religious Studies of the University of California. He has been a visiting scholar at the Warburg Insti tute of the University of London. He has also been recognized for effective undergraduate teaching by the Society for Religion in Higher Education. His books include The Future of Hope (ed. and co-author), The Religious Personality (with Donald Capps), Ways of Looking at Religion, and Time Invades the Cathedral. RAIMUNDO PANIKKAR, born in Barcelona in 1918, of an Indian father and a Spanish mother, received doctorates in the natural sc iences (Madrid, 1958), philosophy (Madrid, 1951), and theology (Lateran University, Rome, 1961). He was ordained a priest in 1946. His academic career spans three continents; at one point in his life (1964-71) he was regularly commuting between Varanasi, Rome, and Harvard University. He is currently Professor of Religious Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. His books, too numerous to enumerate, include Ontonomia de la Ciencia, The Unknown Christ of Hinduism, Kultmysterium im Hinduismus und Christentum, El Silencio del Dios, The Trinity and Wo rld Religions , and Wors hip and Secular Man.

DOUGLAS M. PARROTT, a native of New York stat e , received hi s doctorate at the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, in 1970. A member of the Coptic Gnostic Project of the Institute for Antiq uity and Christianity, Claremont, since 1968, he i s a volume edxvi

itor and translator for the multi -volume edition of the Nag Hammadi codices, The Coptic Gnostic Library. He is currently Assistant Professor of Religious Studies at the University of California, Riverside. BIRGER A. PEARSON, a native of California, received his doctorate at Harvard University in 1968. A member of the Coptic Gnostic Project of the Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, Claremont, since 1968, he is a volume editor and translator for the multi-volume edition of the Nag Hammadi codices, The Coptic Gnostic Library. He is currently Associate Professor of Religious Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is author of a number of studies in Gnosticism and in Early Christianity. T. ERIC W. SEGELBERG, a native of Sweden, received his doctorate at Uppsala University in 1958. He is currently Professor of Classics at Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia. He is author of Ma~buta. Studies in the Ritual of the Mandaean Baptism, and of a number of smaller studies in the areas of liturgics, Gnosticism, and the Ancient Church. STANISLAV SEGERT, a native of Czechoslovakia, received his doctorate at the Charles University of Prague in 1947. He is currently Professor of Biblical Studies and Northwest Semitics at the University of California, Los Angeles. He is author of AltaramHische Grammatik, as well as a number of books and articles in the Czech language. JONATHAN ZITTEL SMITH, a native of New York, received his doctorate at Yale University in 1969. He is currently William Benton Associate Professor of Religion and the Human Sciences at the University of Chicago. He is co-editor of the journal, History of Religions. His published works, mainly in the area of Hellenistic religions, include a number of articles for the new edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. xvii

DAVID WINSTON, a native of New York, received his doctorate at Columbia University in 1956. He has done field work and research in Israel, and has been a Visiting Professor of Hellenistic and Judaic Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is currently Professor of Hellenistic and Judaic Studies at the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley. He has published a number of artic les on Judaica and is working on a commentary in the "Anchor Bible" series on the Wisdom of Solomon.

xviii

I.

CULTURE CONTACT, CULTURAL INFLUENCE, CULTURAL CONTINUITY, AND SYNCRETISM. SOME VIEWS BASED ON MY PREVIOUS WORK Geo Widengren

In September 1967 there was arranged a colloquium on Syncretism in the Swedish University of Abo, Finland. In June 1971 th e University of Strasburg also had a colloquium on Syncretism, to which I was invited but unfortunately prevented from coming be cause of my Jordan Lectures at the University of London. In Oct ob er the same year, however, I read a· paper at the symposium sponsored by the German Academy of Goettingen entitled "Synkretismus in der syrischen Christenheit." The theme of the whole symposium was "Synkretismus im syrischpersischen Kulturraum.'' And now finally I par · ticipate in this symposium arranged by the Institute of Religious Studies at Santa Barbara with the same subject, namely Syncretism. Had I been fortunate, or perhaps rather, unfortunate enough, I could have taken part in four colloquia devoted to the same subject, Syncretism, within a rather short span of time. It surely must be something in the air, but what it is I dare not say. Perhaps we will learn it here in the course of our symposium. At any rate, the Go e r tingen colloquium afforded me the opportunity of trying to bring out a small synthesis of 35 pages, based on various books and articles 01 mine, above all Mesopotamian Elements in Manichaeism, 1 Th e Kin g an d L, . c Tree of Life, 2 and a chapter in Muhammad. The Apostle of God, 3 as

r-;esopotamian Elements in Manichaeism. Studies in Manichae a n, Mandaean, and Syrian-gnostic Religion. Vol. II of King and Sa viour. Uppeala Univereitets Areskrift (Uppsala, 1946). 2 The King and The Tree of Life in Ancient Near Eastern Religion. Vol. IV of King and Saviour. Uppeala Universitets Areskrift (Uppsa la, 1951). 3 Muhammad. The Apostle of God and His Ascension. Vol. V of Kin g and Saviour. Uppsala Universitets Arsskrift (Uppsala, 1955). 1

2

well as some pages in my ReligionaphanomenoZogie. 1 Since I began the study of Syriac language, literature and religion more than 40 years ago, I have never given up my occupation with them. What I have written on these topics has been scattered in various publi cations. In the contribution to the Goettingen symposium I tried to bring out as clearly as possible three factors in Syrian Christianity. First, of course, we have the purely Christian foundations of doctrine and practice, to some extent already tinged by Greek philosophical speculation and early Gnostic ideas, above all such as those coming from Marcion and Bardaisan. Secondly, there are the inherited Mesopotamian mythical notions and ritual customs. These are centered around the myth of the Garden of Paradise, where the Tree of Life and the Water of Life are found, where Primordial Man is living as the Gardener (nukarribu in Accadian), provided with a garland as his crown and a branch as his scepter, both taken from the Tree of Life. These conceptions in Syrian Christianity have been transferred to Adam as Primordial Man and Primordial King. In addition there is the idea that the young male god, Tammuz, is identified with the Tree of Life, or else the Cross is said to be that tree. These ideas have found a highly representative expression in the hymns about Paradise written by the Syrian Church Father, Aphrem. The fruit of the Tree of Life which Adam was not allowed to eat in Paradise is given to Adam's children in the shape of the elements of the Christian Eucharist, the Lord's Supper. Bread and wine as the body and blood of Christ, put in the mouth of the believers, are said to be the fruit forbidden to Adam in Paradise. The Syriac term corresponding to pharmakon athanasias used by Ignatius, is aam hayye, which properly means "the (medicinal) plant of Life." As is well known, Gilgamesh in Paradise tried to acquire the sam baZati, the

~eligionsphanomenologie (Berlin, 1969). Translated from the Swed· ish, ReZigione ns var l d, 3rd edition (Uppsala, 1971).

3

plant of Life. This plant was able to rejuvenate man, and for that reason had the name s~bu i!!ahir ameiu, "when old, man is rejuvenated." It was a characteristic idea in early Christianity that the body and blood of Christ, as partaken of in the Lord's Supper, were able to rejuvenate man. This idea has found a clear expression inter aiia in the Easter homily of the Syrian ecclesiastical poet, Qurillona, for Easter was the great baptismal festival in the Syrian church. Having been baptized in the Water of Life, the Christian neophytes for the first time were allowed to partake of the communion of the Bread of Life, Christ's body. In ancient Mesopotamia, the marriage between the young god, Tammuz, and the Mother Goddess, called Ishtar, or in Sumerian usually Inanna, was one of the great events in the religious festival-calendar of the year. The marriage hut, where the hieros gamos was celebrated, is met with in Mesopotamia as an institution of the temple of Kharran as late as in the tenth century A.D., and in southern Iraq among the Mandaeans in modern times. In both these cases, as well as in the marriage hymn found in the Apocryphal Acts of Thomas, the construction is always of a special type. Its use can be traced back to Sumerian liturgies of the Isin period. It certainly calls for notice that in the Christian baptismal liturgies it is said that he who is to receive baptism enters the spiritual bride-chamber, the doors of which are opened to him. In this context it may be added that in Syrian Christianity, the Holy Spirit, ruha ae quasa, being of feminine gender, was conceived of as the Mother of Christ, a conception also found in the Gospei of Hebrews. Accordingly, the ancient Mesopotamian divine triad, Father, Mother and Son, was preserved in Syrian Christianity. The name of the marriage hut in Sumerian is ganun, in Accadian ganunu, and in Syriac g6 nona. This term too, has been preserved throughout the millennia. The name of the bride's attendants in Sumerian is iigirsi, corresponding to Accadian susabinu, which survives as a loanword in Syriac, sus 6 bina, found in the Hymn to Sophia. The sacral king in Mesopotamia was ritually slain, though not actually killed. Presumably, however, a divine figure was sacrificed in

4

an ol de r pe riod, as shown by cyl i nder seals. And we have in the Spi c of Cr eat i on the sacri f i c e of Kingu as a substitute, p~hu, for h i s brethren. In Christian liturgies in Syriac and Ethiopic (which presumably are translations from Syriac texts), it is said t hat in the Lord's Supper Christ is sacrificed as the fattened calf, s on of the holy young cow, king, and bridegroom. This threefold conc eption of t he slaughtered de i ty i s explained by a reference to !'-1c s opotamian ide as, according to which Tammuz is the descendant of th u r es pl e nde nt cow, king, and bridegroom. It is but natural that al so the des ignat i on of the altar in the Syrain church, pa t~ra, is th e Acc a di an loanword, pass ~ru, in icself a Sumerian word, bansur. The same proc e ss is to be observed in the case o f dap pa, another des i gnation of the sacrificial tab l e, from Accadian du pp u, from Sume rian dub . And the veil covering the element s cf the Holy Communion in Syriac i s call e d s us eppa, which comes from Accadian susuppu, a gain a Sumer i an word s us ub . I could also have added observations on exorc i sm in connection with baptismal rites and also on the stay of Tammuz in the nether world, but I think that enough has been said. Of course a bare skeleton of facts has been presented he re. I must refer to my rather comprehensive paper in Goettingen and above all to my published books and art i cles. I hope that these facts demonstrate the great influence exer cized in the Syrian church by inherited Mesopotamian mythical ideas and ritual customs. These two categories have their context within a certain type of religion, the so-called Tammuz religion. Theimportant fact is, that the cult in this type of religion was no ZocaZ cult only, but was a kind of national Mesopotamian religion, found in every part of Mesopotamia, and for that reason the type of religion with which the whole population was imbued for more than 3000 years. Syrian Christians were living within the borders of the Sasanian empire, and Syrian missionaries spread their religion to the eastern parts of Iran, and even further eastwards to China. Already in Parthian times there had been a mighty Iranian influence in Northern Mesopotamia and Syria. This influence is observable in language,

s literature, art, custom, dress, and also in religion. This Iranian influence spread also to the Jews, who in Achaemenian times already had been in cultural and political contact with Medes and Persians. But it is only in Parthian times that this influence made itself felt to a much greater extent in the field of religion. As far as Syrian Christianity is concerned, we may concentrate our attention on some central themes. It is a characteristic that these ideas, contrary to the Mesopotamian elements, are aaquired, not inherited, and that they are centered around eschatological and mythical ideas, but not around any ritual ceremonies, even in such cases where in their Iranian context they may have possessed a ritual background. To take eschatology first. In this connection I have only been able to study the writings of Aphrem, of whose poetical works I have edited and translated a small homily on the fate of the soul after death. 1 Here we meet with typical Iranian traits such as the fight between angels and demons, who try to seize the soul of the deceased during the three critical nights after death, according to Iranian conceptions. In the writings of Aphrem we also come across the notion of the bridge, gesra, on which the deceased must walk in order to attain to salvation, an adaptation of the famous Cinvat conception. More important is the mythical idea of the birth of the Saviour. It is attested in Christian sources that the Magians assembled every year at a certain time at the so-called Mount of Victories, Mons Victorialis. In silent prayer they waited here for the star of the Saviour to appear, announcing the birth of the Saviour. The Syriac Chronicle of Zuqnin gives a Christian adaptation of this story. The Magians one year saw a column of light, and on its top a star. This star went down into a cave, and when the Magians entered the cave they saw a newborn child, the Saviour-King. They presented to him their gifts, golden crowns, the usual tribute already in the Achaemenian empire. Then follows, as a ~ind of appendix, the rather illogically attached story of how these Magians went to Bethlehem to see the newborn Jesus and returning to their home spread the news of him. This is of course a Christian addition to the original birth-story, which must be compared with the myth of the birth of Mithra in the r"The Fate of the Soul after Death. From a Memra Attributed to Afrem.'' Orientalia Sueaana, XI (1960), pp. 102-6.

6

cave. It is essential to observe that the original Iranian custom of .presenting golden crowns as a tribute to the newborn Saviour obviously had received a fixed iconographic tradition in Iranian art, for we find in the Armenian Evangeliarion of Etzschmiadzin a picture showing the Virgin Mary with the child Jesus, approached by the three Magians in Iranian costume, who present their golden crowns as their tribute, only the golden crowns, in spite of the gospel tradition. These mythical Iranian ideas attained visible expression in a ritual which we may call the royal birth·drama. The king proceeded from a cave-sanctuary, like the Mithra·grotto, provided with a water basin for ablutions, dressed in his royal garb, pretending to· have descended from heaven. This motif was analyzed in some de · scriptions given of Iranian haeresiarchs in Islamic times, and I ~efer here to what I have written in my books, Iranisch-Semitische Kulturbegegnung in parthischer Zeit, 1 and Muhammad, the Apostle of God. 2 There is an Iranian idea that all human souls · - or rather human minds· · are parts of the great cosmic soul ·- or more exactly Mind, in Pahlavi Vahman vazurg, who is the mind of the Godhead. In the book, The Great Vohu Manah 3 where I discussed these conceptions, I aiso referred to corresponding Indian ideas. At the end of this monograph I traced in Syriac literature the corresponding· Syriac term hauna rabba, the Great Mind, as applied to Christ, in the same manner as Vahman va~urg in Manichaeism was a designation of the ever - recur· ring Saviour. It has only been possible to add one reference to what I found in 1945, but I am quite sure that a systematic investigation

1 Iranish-semitische Kulturbe gegnung in parthischer Zeit , Arbeits· gemeinschaft fUr Forschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Geistewiss (Koln, 1960). 2 Muhammad. The Apostle of God, op. cit. 3 The Great Vohu Manah and the Apostle of God. Studies in Iranian and Manichaean Religion. Vol. I of King and Saviour. Uppsala Universitets irsskrift (Uppsala, 1945).

7

would yield a richer harvest. As far as the Syrian Christian religion is concerned it was always a guiding principle in my research to base my demonstration of Iranian influence with reference to the many loanwords in AramaicSyriac coming from Iranian languages, and to distinguish between Parthian and Middle-Persian loanwords, in order to get a more fixed date of the loans. Next, I tried to show how art in Mesopotamia and Syria in Parthian times to a great extent exhibits Iranian iconographic motifs and Iranian characteristics in the field of dress and armour. As a typical detail I mention in this connection the fact that in the Synagogue paintings at Dura-Europos, the High-Priest Aaron is dressed not according to the prescriptions given in Exodus, but in the royal garb worn also by deities, as shown by the rockreliefs at Taq i Bostan. It appeared to me desirable to follow up this type of investigation by a thorough study of Iranian loanwords among the Jews. Unfortunately, I was able to do this only in a limited way in my article, "Quelques rapports entre Juifs et Iraniens a l'epoque des Parthes," 1 and in a fairly comprehensive article in Temenos, devoted to Iranian influence in the Ethiopic Book of Enoch.2 For the Achaemenian period, however, I think I have put together most of the relevant material of Iranian loanwords in Imperial Aramaic in my contribution to the volume, The PeopZes of the OZd Testament,3 where I have written on the Persians. This endeavour to demonstrate, if possible, the political, social and cultural context in which religious influence made itself felt, was due to the fact that when I was a student, the so-called "Religionsgeschichtliche Schule" was

1 "Quelques rapports entre Juifs et Iraniens a l'epoque des Parthes," Vetus Testamentum, Supplement 4, Volume du congres 2 (Strasbourg, 1956; Leiden, 1957), pp. 197-241. 2 "Iran and Israel in Parthian Time with Special Regard to the Ethiopic Book of Enoch," Temenos II (1966), pp. 139-77, and Chapter 6 in this volume. 3 "The Persians," in The PeopZes of the OZd Testament, ed. by Donald J. Wiseman (Oxford, 1973), pp. 312-57.

8

reproached by its theological critics for occupying itself with "lose herumflatternde Vorstellungen," as I think the expression runs. My teacher and distinguished predecessor, Tor Andrae, in his masterly Der Ursprung des Islam und das Christentum, 1 for that reason tried to show how Muhammad was influenced by Christian ideas by demonstrating the possible way in which these ideas found their contact with Muhammad. I think that this insistence on the concrete contact must have been of importance for my own development in spite of the fact that we never had a real discussion on this point. Next to Tor Andrae, I owe a debt of gratitude to r,· · ~c .'" ner in Semitic and Iranian languages, Professor Nyberg. I learned Hebrew in a collegium privatieeimum he gave to me in his study, and he inspired me with an interest in the philological and historical approach to the Old Testament. Full of irony and sarcastic remarks about "the exegetes in their incomprehensible wisdom," as he used to express himself, he handed over to me a healthy scepticism against most of what was produced in German exegetical circles. I must also mention the influence exercised on me at an early point in my life by Pedersen's book, Ierael. 2 Both Nyberg and Pedersen were representatives of a sound method in text criticism, and for that reason, of immense importance to a young scholar. Nevertheless I have not been able to share the somewhat unqualified estimation of the Masoretic text shown above all by Nyberg. Here the Dead Sea Scrolls have been illuminating. In 1935, I went to Copenhagen to s tudy Assyriology with Ravn, having started my studies in this field on my own because there was at Uppsala no teaching in this field. As a result of my Semitic, especially Hebrew and Assyriological studies, my doctor's dissertation was published in 1936 as a thesis in History of Religion. I

Gor Andrae, Der Ursprung dee Islam und dae Chrietentum (Uppsala and Stockholm, 1926). 2 Johannes Pedersen, Israel, Its Life and Culture , (Copenhagen, 1-11, 1926; III-IV, 1940).

9

was offered by Ravn to publish it as a specimen in Assyriology, but that would have meant that I could not have presented it as a thesis under the chairmanship of Tor Andrae. In this work, The Accadian and Hebrew Psalms of Lamentation.

A Comparative Study, 1

my chief aim was to establish a comparison between the Babylonian and the Hebrew Psalms of Lamentation, not to demon~trate the Babylonian influence, although this influence to some extent was shown to have existed. The answer given to the question of Babylonian in fluence was that there had been a very strong Mesopotamian influen :~ in Palestine before the immigration of the Hebrew tribes and tht>i_r settlement there, but that any direct influence on the Israelites could not be assumed. The influence from Babylonian cult - lyrics must have been indirect, via Syria. It was in those days that the decipherment of Ugaritic literature really started, but having attained a working knowledge of the language, I thought it wiser at that time not to include Ugaritic literature in my research. And, remarkable enough, up to this date no real psalms have been discovered in Ras Shamra. However, investigation has shown that to an astonishing extent, the older religious, and especially cultic, terminology in Israel was dependent upon the cult-lyrics of Canaan, as attested in Ugaritic literature, to some degree in West Semitic inscriptions too. In a contribution to the volume Myth, Ritual and Kingship, edited by S. H. Hooke with the assistance of H. H. Rowley, I tried to use the Ugaritic material extensively for the interpreta tion of Early Hebrew myths. 2 I had made the acquaintance of Rowley in 1948 and of Hooke in 1953, and was in very close touch with both of them, but especially with Rowley. About the supposed inspiration the so-called Uppsala School had got from "the Myth and Ritual School," I have made a statement in the article just mentioned. I was brought

Ghe Accadian and Hebrew Psalms of Lamentation as Religious Documents. A Comparative Study (Uppsala, 1936, 1937). 2 "Early Hebrew Myths and Their Interpretation," in Myth, Ritual and Kingship. Essays on the Theory and Practice o f Kingship in the Ancient Near East and in Israel, ed. by S. H. Hooke (Oxford, 1958, 1960), pp. 149- 203.

10

to the study of sacral kingship from my studies in the psalms, on the one hand, and my Assyriological and Iranian studies, on the other hand. My aim was not at all to demonstrate any influences, but in the first place to analyze the institutions and ideas connected with sacral kingship, and was accordingly much more of phenomenological than of historical orientation. My intention was to study kingship in Iran, Mesopotamia and Israel, each religion apart . At the same time, I wanted-· but in a separate series of mono· graphs -- to study the development of the conception of a sacral king into the idea of a divine saviour, or rather the interrelations between these two ideas. In January 1952, invited by my friend Professor Rengs torf, I gave the Franz Delitzsch-Vorlesungen at the University of Munster, called "Sakrales Knigtum im Alten Testament und im Judentum. 11 1 To a great extent these lectures were based on articles written in Swedish during, and shortly after, the war. In this book I tried to analyze sacral kingship in Israel and to show the continuity of ideas into Jewish-Hellenistic times . It was not my intention to prove cultural influences, though it was inevitable that the Ugar itic and Mesopotamian literatures were called upon to elucidate difficult passages in the Old Testament. How interested I was in the problem of cultural continuity is shown by the fact that, on the one hand, I traced a certain royal ritual in Bethel down into Samaritan texts-· which were shown to throw light on some directions given in Deuteronomy - - and, on the other hand, by the fact that I demonstrated that still in Jewi sh-Hellenistic times the petty Jewish princes played a most important role in Synagogue worship as readers of the Torah, carrying on a tradition from the days of King Josiah. Thus, I may say that my chief interest in my Old Testament studies has been to get a clearer idea of the historical development of I sraelite - Jewish religion .

r-Ba'kra Zes K~nigtum in AZten Te stament und im Judentum (Stuttgart, 1952, 1955) .

11 In Scandinavia the problem of oral tradition and written literature was taken up for discussion by Nyberg, who presented some far-reaching theses, strongly advocating the dominant role of oral tradition among the Semites, and especially the Israelites. Coupled with this assertion was the idea that it is impossible to accept the results of the so-called higher criticism, the source-analysis as found in the Documentary Hypothesis as regards the Pentateuch. How ever, already as a student in Copenhagen, I had an uneasy feeling about these theses which were hailed with much enthusiasm and led to the publication of works by Birkeland and Engnell, where they tried in various ways to develop the words of the master. When going deeper into the material, I soon found that the thesis -- propogated by Nyberg and Birkeland -- of the purely oral tradition among the Arabs, as far as poetry and early prose tradition are concerned, could not possibly be correct. The texts spoke another language from that of the theories, and, as usual, the relevant passages in the texts had not been collected and analyzed. In the book, Literary and Psychological Aspects of the Hebrew Prophets from 1948,1 two chapters were devoted to an analysis of Arabic and Islamic conditions, and these results were used for a comparison with Hebrew material, because Arabic conditions had always been referred to as proving the dominant role played by oral tradition. I followed up these researches by publishing in 1959 a lengthy article devoted chiefly to an analysis of early Arabic prose narratives as found in the relations of the so-called ayyam al-'Arab, the had?th literature, the Sirah, and early historical works. 2 The results arrived at were that the prose narratives, as well as the poems, were taken into the pen at a very early date, and that principles of literary criticism had to be applied to these narratives, which moreover had to be dissolved r-;;iterary ang Psychological Aspects of t he Hebrew Prophe ts, UppsaZa Universitets Arsskrift(Uppsala, 1948).

2 ''Oral Tradition and Written Literature among the Hebrews in the Light of Arabic Evidence with Special Regard to Prose Narratives," Acta OrientaZia, XXIII (1959), pp. 201-62.

12 into single traditions, so that the artificially created chronological arrangement could be split up into its components. From here it was possible to advance to corresponding Hebrew phenomena, which I did in a lecture in Cambridge in 1953. I hope to be able to publish this lecture in an enlarged form, as well as a review article in which I strongly criticized the positions taken by Professor Gerhardsson in his interesting book, Memory and Manuscript. 1 These researches are of importance from a more general, phenomenological point of view, because they show how holy tradition was transmitted in various religi,ons. I remember that my colleague, Professor Wikander, who had, like myself, been studying Iranian Ian· guages with Nyberg -- actually like myself, his "Hauptschuler" - when assisting me in the proofreading of my Literary and PsychoZogicaZ Aspects, 2 wrote to me that he now saw clearly that there was a marked difference between Semitic and Indo- European peoples in the transmission of their holy traditions, and that he was going to develop this distinction in a forthcoming book. Most unfortunately, he never did publish that book. He was appointed professor of Sans· krit and Comparative Linguistics and more or less lost his interest in the History of Religion. He wrote an essay, however, but only in manuscript form. It is full of the mos t brilliant observations and ideas. In my ReZigionsphSnomenoZogi e , 3 I have referred to its main thesis. Wikander has clearly shown that Indo- European peoples, as long as they were dependent upon their own civilization, handed down their literary tradition only as oral traditions. This holds true of Indian, Iranian, Roman, Celtic, and Germanic-Scandinavian tradition. I shall try to show how important this distinction is when one tries to demonstrate culture contact and cultural influences in the Near East.

1

"Tradition and Literature in Early Judaism and the Early Church," Numen, X (1963), pp. 42-83. 2 Literary and PsychoZogicaZ Aspects, op . cit. 3 ReZigionsphllnomenoZogie, chapter 8.

13

As a kind of synthesis of my research in the field of Manichaeism my little book Nani und der Nanichaismusl (accessible in English since 19652), may be looked upon. In this case, perhaps the only one, I was really concerned with an unmistakeable syncretism. Lidzbarski had very aptly observed that "Mani war ein bewusster Synkretist." This was due to the fact that Mani was of the opinion that there existed a Divine Wisdom, found in previous religions, but now communicated to him, Mani, in the last period of human history. Thus Mani, as it were, summed up in a complete and perfect form the Divine Wisdom, which in more or less fragmentary form had been proclaimed by Buddha, Zoroaster and Jesus. They had not written books; only their disciples after them wrote down their words. Mani, on the other hand, had produced a canon of Holy Scriptures containing this Heavenly Wisdom. In these few words I have tried to emphasize the role played by the Divine Wisdom and its relation to written literature according to Mani's doctrine. This is a central idea with him, which has not received sufficient attention in my book on Mani. This line of research will, however, be developed in an article in the near future. It has to be demonstrated that this notion of wisdom is possessed of an Iranian background, combined of course with the Jewish-Hellenistic ideas of Sophia. On the other hand, the emphasis put by Mani on the ~ritten literature shows the importance of the notion of a Holy Book, received in Heaven or from Heaven. This idea was analyzed in a series of books, and I shall come back to this topic. In the Iranian field it was again Nyberg who was one of the first to discuss the problem of Ave sta as a Holy Scripture in Sasanian times. Other important contributions were given by Bailey and Wikander. In my book Die Religionen Irans 3 (accessible also in a

1 Mani und der Manich~ismus (Stuttgart, 1961). 2 Mani and Manichaeism, tr. from the German by Charles Kessler, revised by the author. History of Religion series, ed. by E.O. James (London, 1965). 3 Die Religionen Irans. Vol. XIV of Die Religionen der Menschheit (Stuttgart, 1965).

14 very good French translation 1 ), and in a contribution to the Man · chester colloquium on "Holy Book and Holy Tradition," published in 19682, I tried to sum up the discussion and to advance somewhat farther. The conclusion was that the original Sasanian Avesta contained a mass of Zervanite texts, but that these texts had been purged from the canon in the stage of its final redaction under Xosrau Anoshurvan in the middle of the sixth century A.O. This result inevitably led to the question: Can we find traces of these texts today, and provided this is the case, where? The answer was of course: We find them in Zoroastrian Pahlavi writings. And this answer naturally leads to the problem: How do we, out of this Pah· lavi text material, reconstruct the original Avestic Zervanite texts? This problem in its turn is coupled with the question of the influen~ exercised in the West by Iranian religion, which at that time should not be identified with Zoroastrian religion. This problem concerns above all, the Jewish and Christian religions. If you look up the relevant article in RGG, 3rd edition 3 , you will find it stated by the author•- who, by the way, is neither an Old Testament scholar nor possessed of any knowledge in Iranian languages -- that the Iranian religion could not have exercised any considerable influence on Judaism in the later post-exilic period, since the Pahlavi writings, where the most important doctrines are found, e.g., about Primordial Man (called Gayomart), \bout the bodily resurrection, and the whole eschatological complex found in apocalyptic texts, of which the Bahman Yasht is the most important specimen, are to be dated in the ninth century A.D. The same statement was repeated at the Mes· sina symposium on Gnosticism in 1966, and you can find it everywhere. The solution to this problem about the date of some important Iranian ~es religions de l'Iran, tr. by L. Jospin, Bibliotheque historique , Collection, "Les religions de l'humanite" (Paris, 1968). 2 "Holy Book and Holy Tradition in Iran," Holy Boo k and Tradition, ed. by F. F. Bruce and E. G. Rupp (Mancester, 1968), pp. 36-53. 3 Bo Reicke, IV. "Iranische Religion, Judentum und Urchristentum," in vol. III. of Die Religion im Geschichte und Gegenwart. Handw8rter,buch fllr Theologie und "ReZigionswissenschaft, ed. by Kurt Galling (Tubingen, 1959) , pp. 881 - 4.

15 ideas also is of a great interest for the understanding of Mani's religion. As I tried to demonstrate, the basic structure of the Manichaean system and its fundamental myths are pure Zervanism. Accordingly, several lines of research crystallized in this problem : To what extent are Pahlavi texts of a Zervanite character based on authentic Avestic texts? It has not been possible for me to publish more than four articles devoted to this problem. 1 Concentrating above all on the fact that West, the pioneer scholar in Pahlavi studies, had seen the problem already, I tried to analyze the Pahlavi texts from a syntactical point of view in all such cases where the text itself pretended to be a quotation from the Avesta. Such pas sages are introduced by the remark : "It is revealed in the Religion," hac den paitztk, or corresponding expressions, den, "the Religion," indicating the revealed Scripture, Avesta. This criterion must be combined with the observation of exegetical glosses and some special syntactic features, of which the most important is the place of the verb in the sentence. Pahlavi constructs the sentence in such a way that the verb comes at the end of the sentence. If what follows is said to be a revelation from the Religion, and is expressed in a sentence where the verb comes before the end of that sentence, then we may be fairly certain that this passage is a translation of a lost Avestic text. There are other stylistic and syntactical criteria too, but I need not enter into technical details.

r"Pahlavi and New Persian. Some Interrelations," Dr. J . M. Unvaiis Memorial- Vol-ume (Bombay, 1964), pp. 66 - 79. "Zervanitische Texte aus dem 'Avesta' in der Pahlavi-Uberlieferung: Eine Untersuchung zu Zatspram und Bundahishn," Festschrift tllr Wilhel-m Eil-ers (Wiesbaden, 1967), pp. 278-87. "Primordial Man and Pros titute: A Zervanite Motif in the Sassanid Avesta," Studies in Mysticism and Religion, presented to Ger schom G. Scholem, ed. by R. J. Zwi Werblowsky (Jerusalem, 1967), pp. 337-52. "Philological Remarks on some Pahlavi Texts Chiefly Concerned with Zervanite Religion," Sir J . J. Zarhosti Madressa Centenary Volume (Bombay, 1967), pp. 84 - 103. 11

16 Several years ago I pointed out that in the biography of Zoroaster in the Pahlavi book, Denkart, there are passages clearly Avestic in origin, and moreover, some of them exhibiting traces of a metrical structure. This idea is now further developed in Mole's posthumous edition,! and in Nyberg's Manual of PahZavi.Z By combining two recensions of the Pahlavi text, Bundahishn, I was able to present a more complete text than before in some passages of a Zervanite character. Moreover, this text was shown to possess certain epic traits. As to Bahman Yasht, I prepared an edition many years ago, but have not found time for a final redaction. However, \ in a German collection of translations called Iranische Geisteswe l t,· I published a translation of Bahman Yasht with introductions, where I drew attention to the fact that especially Book III of Bahman Yash t , because of the syntactic and stylistic criteria mentioned, reveals itself as based upon lost Avestic texts, thus confirming the statement given in the text itself where these Avestic texts are mentioned. In this way I have tried to open a way for a correct understand· ing and analysis of the Zervanite texts in Pahlavi tradition, to lay a foundation for the study of the Zervanite elements in Manichaeism and other Gnostic movements, and last but not least, to show that the talk of the impossibility of using Pahlavi texts for historical research regarding Iranian influence in Pre-Christian times is nonsense. It stands to reason that the correct dating of relevant texts i s the essential condition for all research concerning the factors constituting cultural influence, or even syncretism. Here, Manichaeism i s the most representative illustration. Researches in the field of sacral kingship already before the Second World War led me to the conclusion that the designation, "The Apostle of God," used above all in Christian Gnosticism, Mandaeism, r---,;rarijan Mole, La Legende de Zoroa s tre s eZon l es textes pehlevis (Paris, 1967). · Z _H~nrik S. Nyberg, A Manual of Pahlavi (Wiesbaden, 1964); 2nd ed1t1on of the Hilfsbuch des Pehlevih 2 vols., (Uppsala, 1928-31). 3 Iranische Geistes~elt v on de n Aufangen bis zum Islam (Baden-Baden 1961). '

17

Manichaeism, Syrian Christianity, and Islam, was possessed of a common background in the conception of the Saviour as having received the commission of God to convey a message from him to mankind. This message often was given to him in heaven in the shape of a book, the Holy Scripture, which the Apostle of God brought down from heaven. This Apostle of God was normally held to be of a divine nature himself. Another type of the same idea was that a Heavenly Being, identified as the higher Ego of the Apostle, had descended to him, bringing the revelation. In a series of books published with the common sub - title "King and Saviour" during the years 1945-1955, 1 I tried to follow this idea from Iran to Islam, devoting quite a lot of interest also to Christian phenomena. The investigation of the Islamic material was combined with an analysis of technical terminology in the Quran, among them Iranian loanwords of Parthian origin. In my Jordan Lectures, I took up for treatment the subject "Iran and Islam," but it goes without saying that I was not able to deal with more than some aspects of this vast problem. There I referred to Professor Corbin's pioneer researches in the field of syncretistic phenomena in Islamic mysticism on Iranian soil. In my lectures I was interested in the political and cultural relations between Arabs and Iranians, relations after the Muslim conquest of Iran producing such special forms of Islam as the movements started by Bihafarid and Babak, movements which we may well call syncretistic. But I also tried to demonstrate the strong Iranian influence in the dar~?sh orders as regards their social organization -- their dress and equipment, their manner of life, and their ideas -- trying to demonstrate that many of these phenomena are found already in preT"°The Great Vohu Manah and the ApostZe of Gcd , op . ait. Mesopotamian EZements in Maniahaeism, op. ait. The Asaension of the ApostZe and the HeavenZy Book. Vol. III of King and Saviour. UppsaZa Universitets 1rsskrift (Uppsala , 1950). The King and the Tree of Life, op. ait. Muhammad. The ApostZe of God, op . ait.

18

Islamic Iran. To some extent I could use here my monograph, "Har" lekintracht und Monchskutte," from the year 1953, 1 where a common trend behind certain phenomena in religion, social organization, dress, and popular drama were investigated. In this monograph, to a certain extent, I left the Orient and directed my interest to medieval Europe, especially the Franciscans. But only to a minor extent was this investigation devoted to phenomena that we may call syncretistic. Rather, here too, it was the question on the one hand of cultural continuity, on the other hand of cultural influence, above all as far as Islamic mysticism i s concerned. I brought to Santa Barbara my material for the research work in which I have been engaged for more than 25 years, but of which I have not yet been able to produce more than two papers, read at the congresses sponsored by "Union Europeenne des Arabisants et Islamisants." One article is to be expected in the near future, and I hope that the other will follow. Here again, as in the case of Manichaeism, we come across a conscious syncretism for "the Writ ings of the Pure Brethren," as the conventional name of this corpus runs, constituting a vast encyclopedia of a highly mixed character, which is, moreover, consciously syncretistic. In this collection of treatises my first attention was directed to the Gnos tic elements in the writings of the Brethren. The technical Gnostic language used by the writers is exactly that used in Christian Gnosticism, Mandaeism and Manichaeism and the Hermetic Gnosticism found in northern Mesopotamia in Kharran. Actually it was possible to demonstrate the connection with Gnostics of Kharran. When one is approaching the end of his academic career, as also of life itself, it is understandable that he looks backward to see what he has achieved of what he once hoped to achieve. This c olloquium has given me the opportunity, as that in Goettingen, though in a wider context, to check how my work will stand when looked

r-::"Harlekintracht

" " und Monchskutte, Clownhutt und Derwischmutze, Eine gesellschafts-, religions- und trachtgeschichtliche Studie," O~ienta l ia Sueeana, II (1 953), pp. 41 - 111.

19

upon from a very special point of view. It goes without saying that I did not start my research work in the firm conviction that it had to be concentrated on culture contact, cultural influence and cultural continuity. Therefore, it is but natural that most of what I have written does not fall under such headings. On the whole I have tried, even if I have not been successful, to be an all-round historian of religion, including also phenomenology and psychology of religion into the sphere of my interests. But is was inevitable that I was concentrating more on some things than on other things. When I was a comparatively young professor, I got a label attached to my person, and that label was: "Antievolutionism, High-Gods and Sacral Kingship." Well, I have struggled rather hard to get rid of that label. I do not think that I ever ran the risk of being classified as a specialist in syncretism, but it has been of great interest to me to see how far my work could.be said to be useful for the study of syncretism. On the other hand, I think that most of what I have written may be useful for the phenomenological synthesis of religious studies. Standing now at a cross-road of my life, and to some extent having to make a fresh start for the period that may be included in the inscrutable future, I think that as far as religious studies are concerned, I could do the same thing as the old Norse kings before setting out on a big enterprise: they drank from a bowl, and to the god, Brage, they made a promise called "Brage-promise." My promise would be to try to bring out an English edition of my phenomenological work which will comprise not only a chapter on syncretism--which is now lacking--but something more besides, trying to revise it and to make it as acceptable as possible.

II.

UPPSALA METHODOLOGY AND THE PROBLEM OF RELIGIOUS SYNCRETISM: AN AFTERWORD ON PROLEGOMENA Walter H. Capps "I do not think that I ever ran the risk of being classified as a specialist in syncretism, but it has been of great interest to me to see how far my work could be said to be useful to the study of syncretism." --Geo Widengren

Strictly speaking, I am not an historian of religion. Consequently, my contribution to the symposium, unlike most of the others, will not be based on textual studies, philological analysis, or even on recent archaeological findings. My interests are different. Trusting the truth of Thomas Kuhn's observations regarding the functions of paradigms in scientific research,! and Pierre Thevanez' contention that revolutions in thought come more from methodological than from substantive innovations,2 I am interested in Scandinavian approaches to religious studies, and particularly those that have been conducted and fostered within the Universities of Stockholm, Uppsala, and Lund. Aspiring to become something of an historian of the history of religion, I am suggesting that much can be learned by studying the traditions of scholarship by which the field has been formed. In addition, being of Swedish descent on my mother's side, my interest in Scandinavian religious self-consciousness, whether

r----irfiomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revoiutions (Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1970), 2 Pierre Thevenaz, What is Phenomeno iogy?, trans. James M. Edie, Charles Courtney, Paul Brockelman (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1962), p. 38.

21

22

tutored or not, is probably part of my own strategy for probing those questions of religious identity which continue to fascinate me.• Thus, in turning my attention to Scandinavian traditions of scholarship, I move as one who hopes to identify some of his own religious and cultural roots; and, in doing this in connection with a symposium on the thought and work of Professor Geo Widengren, I am giving tacit recognition to the assumption that Professor Widengren is a self-conscious practitioner of certain deep-seated Scandinavian dispositional factors. 1 I suspect that these factors regi s· ter as much in scholarly fields as they do in literature, the arts , certain branches of the social sciences, and even in religious en thusiasms. The assumption I want to test has to do with the presence of paradigms in the formation of scholarly approaches to a subject and in the cultivation of intellectual positions. To put the matter less exactly, there is a certain style that bec6mes evident when one surveys the approaches employed in religious s tudies in Scandin· avia -- for our purposes, particularly in Sweden. This style is implicit both in methodological stances and in the tenor of historical investigations. I do not pretend to be able to identify its source, but I believe one can go some distance toward identifying a few of the ingredients in its morphology. That it exhibits coherence - that it is, in fact, a style - - is indicated by its ability to operate effectively in several different but related fields. For example , I suspect that the way in which the Lundens ian theologian and philoso· pher, Anders Nygren, employs motif-res earch is methodologically congruent with the way in which some historians of religion at Uppsala r,:-he precedent on which this presumption is based is Professor Widengren's continuing attempt to recapitulate the best in Uppsala scholarship in his own research. His writings also give evidence of deep interest in interpreting Scandinavian scholarship to others throughout the world. See, for example, his essay "Theological Stud· ies and Research," in Ergo Inte rnationai (Uppsala: 1964), and the comprehensive essay "Die Religionswissenschaftliche Forschung in Scandinavien in den letzten zwanzig Jahren," in Zei tschri ft fllr ReZi· gions- und Geistesgeschichte. Vol. V (1953), pp . 193- 321 and 320· 334 .

23 University have approached "divine-kingship ideology," and that both of these resonate very well with the dominant current manner 1 The interest in of doing philosophy in the two institutions. descriptive accounts, in motifs, modes, and studies of themes, has become increasingly characteristic of twentieth-century Swedish approaches in religious studies. Thus, whether one looks at philosophy of religion, history of religion, certain examples of systematic theology, or even at philosophical analyses, he can detect some common methodological features. 2 It is in this sense that I speak of a distinctive style of reflection. ½nders Nygren, Re Zigi;st Apriori (Lund: Gleerupska, 1921); "Det Religionsfilosofiska Grundproblemet," in Bibelfo rskaz-en. Vol. XXVI (1919), pp. 290- 313; Fi Zosofi och,.Motivforskning (Stockholm: 1940); "Dogmatikens Vetenskapliga Grundlaggning," in Lunds Universitets Xrsskrift. Vol. XVII, No. 8 (1921); and Agape and Eros, trans. Philip S. Watson (London: SPCK, 1957). 2 In addition to some of the references already cited, the following essays provide helpful background material on developments within the academic fields cited in Scandinavian centers of learning: Robert T. Sandin, "The Founding of the Uppsala School," in Journal of the History of Ideas. Vol. XXIII, No. 4 (1962), pp. 496-512; Erik Ryding, Den svenska fil osofins historia (Stockholm: Natur och Kultur, 1959); "Scandinavian Philosophy" in The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (New York: Macmillan, 1967), Vol. VII, pp . 294-302, prepared by Justus Hartnack; and Widengren's two-part article, "Die Re ligionswissenschaftliche Forschung in Skandinavien in den letzten zwanzig Jahren," already cited. Significantly, the standard Scandinavian textbooks on the history of philosophy look very much like standard European textbooks on the history of philosophy: not enough attention is given to developments within Scandinavian schools. Anders Wedberg's Pilo sofins Historia (Stockholm: Bonnier, 1966) incorporates Scandinavian tendencies in the evaluation of schools and trends which originate elsewhere, although it also gives large place to positivistic and analytical phil osophical trends including Scandinavian investments in these traditions. Certain background factors can also be detected in Thor Hall, A Frame~ork for Faith. Lundensian Theological Methodology in the Thought of Ragnar Bring (Leiden : E.J. Brill, 1970), especially pp. 13-33, although Hall concentrates on developments in theology and philosophy of religion. Nygren himself goes into these matters in some detail in his new book, Meaning and Method. Pro legomena to a Scientific Philosophy o f Religion and a Scientific The o logy, trans. Philip S. Watson (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972).

24

But, before pursuing that topic directly, I find it necessary to supply some information about the genesis of the symposium in honor of Professor Widengren for which occasion the majority of the papers in this collection was inspired. Such information will be useful, I believe, in helping to establish the framework within which symposium discussion occurred, as well as the "program strategy" which the planners inserted into its format. It is also germane to my subject. According to the intentions of its sponsor, the Institute of Religious Studies of the University of California, Santa Barbara, the symposium was the third in a series of conferences on eminent living scholars who have made a distinctive contribution to the arts, sciences, and humanities and have been particularly influential in giving shape and direction to the scholarly study of religion. From its beginnings in 1967, the Institute has shown particular interest in "breakthrough models" of interdisciplinary research in religion. Thus, a symposium series on the work of persons who have broken new methodological ground became a natural product of an ongoing attempt to trace the genesis of "breakthrough" in man's expanding comprehension of the role assigned to religious factors in the composition of selected cultures. Informally, the Institute has been referring to these symposia by the rubric "catalytic figures." With such phraseology it means to emphasize that the persons whose work is being studied, discussed, and assessed have made a contribution to the field of religious comprehension that far transcends the mere accumulation of new or otherwise extensive hard data. In every case, the "catalytic figure'' in question generated a lively interest within the field by prompting a new pattern of arrangement. Georges Dumezil's tripartite approach to Indo-European mythology is a significant example of this, Nygren's successor at Lund, Gustaf Wingren, has prepared two useful survey - discussions of the recent development of theological trends in Sweden: "The Main Lines of Development in Systematic Theology and Biblical Interpretation in Scandinavia," published by the Library, Union Theological Seminary, Richmond, Virginia, 1964, and "Swedish Theology Since 1900," in Saottish Journal. of Theol.ogy. Vol. IX, No. 2 (1956), pp. 113-134.

25 1 and gave the series its inaugural meeting. Erik Erikson's work with the human life cycle, his concentration on relationships between the ego and society, and the implication of the advent of psycho-history for the study of religion, provided another eminent instance which the Institute was privileged to treat. 2 The same combination of achievements was implicit in the work of Geo Widen gren, whose studies in a wide variety of subjects are recognized as being landmarks within several branches of the history of religions. And yet, the designers of the third symposium encountered certain difficulties because of Professor Widengren's resistance to being identified with the labels and banners of typical schools. He has been persistent in pointing out, for example, that he really is not an unqualified "divine kingship" advocate, whatever that turns out to be. Similarly, he is something more than an "anti-evolutionist'' in the comprehension and interpretation of man's religious history. Moreover, his work cannot be reduced to a scholar's personal compulsion to trace down every example of "belief in high gods," even when the scope of that inquiry is restricted to the ancient Neareastern world. His contribution to the field of religious studies is not automatically classifiable. As I have described his career in another place: Trained under Professor Tor Andrae (whom he has succeeded at Uppsala) in the history of religion, and thoroughly trained in philological skills, Widengren has conducted extensive and painstaking research in a wide range of areas. His dissertation in 1936 dealt with Babylonian and ~he proceedings from this symposium have now been published in a book entitled Myth in Inda-Euro pean Antiquity (The Proceedings of the Dumezil Symposium), edited by Gerald J . Larson, University of California Press, 1974. 2 The proceedings of this symposium are being prepared for publication by Professors Donald Capps of the University of Chicago, M. Gerald Bradford of Brigham Young University, and Walter H. Capps of the University of California, Santa Barbara, under the title Encounter ~ith Erikson.

26

Israelite religions as self-contained entities. He has also done significant work in Iranian religions, Islam, the Old Testament, and Gnostic studies. Widengren has championed sacral kingship theory, influencing Ivan Engnell, the author of Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient NeaP East. Because of the times in which he has lived, Widengren has also inherited an interest in the evolution of religion, and, more particularly, the theory of the "high God" as advocated by Wilhelm Schmidt. Against Schmidt he rejects the notion of a primitive monotheism, but with Pettazzoni (whose theories he has embellished) Widengren attributes particular power to the sky-god. As an heir to the evolutionist traditions from the days of Frazer, Widengren is also a very severe critic . . . . From another side, he also registers as a phenomenologist of religion (witness his book Religionsph8nomenologie). How ever, if he were asked to typify his approach, Widengren might reply that he identifies most readily with those who approach religion through sound and thorough philological studies of primary textual materials, regardless of the area or the subject under scrutiny.I

And yet, this description tends to beg the question. Geo Widengren has been far more than a diligent, painstaking, persistent, and meticulous worker on "inside problems" within the field of the history of religions. He has also been a very conscious designer and articulator of the field's visible contours and schematic con figurations. What he has achieved is not exhausted by the impressive array of materials he has amassed, classified, cross-referenced, and interpreted. These achievements, by themselves, are more than sufficient to justify the almost incomparable reputation Widengren now enjoys among historians of religions. But he has done far more. And that something more, we recognize, has much to do with his catalytic influence upon the shape of the field of study. But the planners of the symposium didn't have the mechanism to coerce access to Widengren's larger contribution. To be sure, they had hints and suggestions about potential symposium programs through which the distinguishing sine qua non might emerge, recognizing all the while that the emergence of a sine qua non cannot be programmed.

r=Walter

H. Capps, Ways of UndePstanding Religion (New York: Macmi 11an , 19 7 2) , p. 119 .

27

They recognized too that symposia are never very predictable, especially when the planners aren't clear about what they want to make obvious. Thus, the distinguishing principle in Widengren's thought was not identified, named, or articulated prior to the symposium despite the assurances the planners extended to each other that Widengren would be honored for his formative work. As it turned out, we were correct in not pressing the question further. But before realizing this, our dilemma led us to wonder if a formative principle had ever been grasped by those who have writ ten about Geo Widengren. His work had been widely reviewed and appreciated, but always in pieces, and usually on the basis of this or that contention about a very specific subject. Consequently, its controlling principles have been able to resist articulation. Previous assessments always left remainders: there were large ranges of discourse that were left untended. Given these precedents we recognized that we could probably not expect success in hoping to do more than treat Widengren's contribution to the various areas of scholarship with which he has concerned himself -- Islamic and Iran ian religions, Gnosticism, Old Testament studies, and the like. But we wanted to point the discussion toward an assessment of overall methodological a.nd interpretive principles. So, acting boldly and with these large hopes, we proposed that the symposium concern itself with the problem of religious syncretism. And we requested that Professor Widengren's own contribution to the symposium be self-consciously autobiographical. In terms of symposium strategy, such devices provided focus a s well as intrigue. In addition, the topi c was an aid in urging the symposium participants to talk to each other no matter how varied their individual specialties and competences . As noted, Widen gren's contributions to scholarship extend over such a wide range of important subjects that successor-specialists are prompted to concentrate on smaller portions of it without ever feeling qualified or constrained to tackle the whole lot. At most times and in most instances, particular concentrations enhance both scholarship and insight; but, in terms of the mechanics of symposia, they cannot be

28

counted upon to prompt overall evaluation. Thus, in choosing "religious syncretism" as the symposium's theme, we wanted to make sure that the symposium would be a symposium. We assumed that "religious syncretism" could not be addressed unless attention was paid to ways in which religious phenomena -- not to mention special topics - - are interlaced with each other. Neither can the theme be approached unless consideration is given to the interaction and overlappings that characterize traditions and cultures. But our compelling interest was in comprehensive review and assessment: it was thought that "religious syncretism" might help the symposium identify some of the controlling, typifying features of a distinguished scholar's life-long work. Whether the device worked or not must be left for the thirty symposium participants to decide. From some vantage points, there is no question but that the symposium was successful. The contributions were of high quality. Professor Widengren's paper was, we can say, monumental. And the discussion was lively throughout. Furthermore, the participants were persons of solid accomplishment in their respective fields and of manifestly high interest in Widen gren's work. Given these ingredients, there was no way in which the conference could have failed. And yet, the program strategy brought ambiguous results. There were provocative insights on syncretism, t o be sure. There were provocative statements on Widengren. There were provocative statements by Widengren on syncreti sm, as well as provocative statements by Widengren on Widengren. And yet it seemed that the two topics could be talked about separately. In fact, some observers noted that Widengren couldn't satisfy some of the participants on the subject of "religious syncretism" without violating his own orienta tion. Others, sensing this, considered it programmatically impolite that Widengren should be asked to make the attempt. Several persons left the symposium dissatisfied with its results because it failed to produce obvious marks of culmination. Clearly, instead of disclosing an identifiable comprehensive principle, "religious syncretism" only seemed able to certify an impasse, a divergence of prolegomenous op inion that s eemed to grow wider as di s cus s ion continued on .

29 Partially sharing that attitude, somewhat disturbed by it, and suspecting that it was premature, I reread some of the sympo sium papers and listened to the tape recordings of the discussion. Then I realized that the topic was more successful than we had projected, in ways we had not expected, because of Professor Wid· engren's suspicions in approaching it. "Religious syncretism" i s a theme which Widengren 1 s outlook has some difficulty reaching, but the difficulty is self-conscious. He can get to the topic, although only after doing the necessary preliminary work on the semantics and logic of it. But when he does this, he does so with a certain apology, almost as though he had accepted an assignment which is not altogether of his own choosing. 1 But this, I would argue, tells us something significant about Widengren's approach and perhaps more than we would care to know about were he simply advocating or opposing the concept. But to appreciate this, we must know something more about the intellectual background within which Geo Widengren works, for then it becomes possible to detect some of the formative morphological ingredients of that which we have been referring to as the "Uppsala style." That style was implicit even as early as 1893 when Swedish scholars were invited to attend the World Parliament of Religions in Chicago. They found it impossible to attend the Conference because of its "distinctly syncretistic" bias, and, instead, arranged -rwe do not want to give the impression, however, that Widengren resists treatment of "syncretism." As his paper in this volume indicates, he has spoken and written on the topic several times before, recently and throughout his life . See, for example, the following s tudies : Mes opotamian Elements in Man i chaeism. Studie s in Manichean, Mandean, and Syrian-Gnostic Religion (King and Saviour II). (Uppsala: Upps ala Universi tets Xrsskrift, 3 , 1946); Mani und dez, Manich8i smus (Stuttgart, Urban BUcher, 57, 1961); "Synkretistische Religionen," in Handbuch dez, Orientalis t ik, edited by B. Spuler, Vol. VIII, No. 2 (Leiden, 1961), pp. 43-82; and '"Synkretismus' in der Syrischen Christenheit?" in Proceedings of the Symposium 11Synkretismus im syPisch-persischen kulturraum," October Z97l, forth coming under the auspices of . the Goettingen Academy. These articles, together with a long list of others, simply reinforce the fact that Professor Widengren works thematically rather than syncretistically.

30

for their own international conferences-· the ReligionsvetenskapZiga Kongreesen -- in Stockholm in 1897. 1 The stress during the Stockholm conference was on Religionewieeenschaft, a topic selected to give emphasis to the scientific character of the discipline as it was practiced in Scandinavia as distinct from the preoccupations of the Chicago conference. 2 Looked at from one vantage point, the intent of the ·conference was to purge the history of religion from all "Chicago elements." From the time that Nathan S~derblom became Professor in Theological Encyclopedia and Prenotions, and even before, there was distrust of "religious syncretism" in Uppsala, es especially when this implied any sort of meta-historical, "spirit ualistic" modulation of historical traditions. The distrust was inspired in part by orthodox Christian theological encounters with Swedenborgianism in Scandinavia. 3 It was fostered too by an in terest in strictly textual and historical studies. And finally, it was reinforced by the dominant climate of thought in Sweden, a climate to which Uppsala had made a significantly large contribution. With Vienna and Cambridge, Uppsala owns the distinction of being the locale in which positivistic philosophy originated. Working independently of likeminded thinkers in Austria and Great Britain, the philosophers of the "new Uppsala school" came to similar conclusions about the epistemological inaccessibility of so-called metaphysical realities. For the bulk of the nineteenth century, because of the prominence and influence of Christopher Jacob Bostrom, (1797·1866), the dominant philosophical tendency in Sweden was idealism, not out-and-out Hegelianism, but an idealism that had been influenced by both Hegel and Schelling. Bostrom's philosophy, £re1This fact is documented in Bengt Sundkler's hiography of the late Archbishop Nathan Soderblom, Nathan S~derblom. His Life and Work (London: Lutterworth Press, 1968), pp. SO ff . 2 The proceedings of the Stockholm conference were edited by S. A. Fries for the volume Religionsvetenekapliga Kongreasen i Stockholm Z89 7.

3 Many persons were ·worried about "spiritualism," not only churchmen, theologians, and historians of religion . See, for example, Axel H~gerstrom's "Lectures on So-Called Spiritual Religion," translated by C. D. Broad, in Theoria. XIV (1948), pp. 28 - 67.

31 quently described as a kind of neo-Platonism, was metaphysically 1 oriented, and tended to conceive reality in spiritual terms. Reality itself was spiritual, for Bostrom; determinations of reality occur in consciousness primarily; and the entities of the world are ideas. Consistent with idealist contentions, Bostr~m argued that everything that is is a determinative mode of self-consciousness. Being itself i s a system of ideas. And, as Justus Hartnack has summarized, "Bostromianism was for Swedish intellectual life almost what Hegelianism was for the intellectual life of Europe. It domin ated Swedish metaphysics, ethics, philosophy of law, and philosophy of religion, and until the beginning of the twentieth century it had no rival." 2 It's rival wa s shaped by the philosophical inquiries of Axel Hagerstrom (1868-1939) 3 and/or Adolf Phalen (1884-1931); 4 the con 1 Readers restricted to English sources can become familiar with Bostrom's thought best by reading the translation of Skrifter av Christopher Jacob Bostr3m, H. Edfette and G. J. Keijser, eds., 3 vols. (Uppsala: 1883-1906), which is entitled Philosophy of Religion, trans. Victor E. Beck and Robert N. Be ck (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963). An able description of Bostromianism is included in Erik Ryding, Den svenska filosofins historia (Stockholm: Natur och Kultur, 1959). Axel Lundenberg summarizes Bostrom's philosophy in his Sweden's Contribution to Philosophy (LaSalle, Illinois: Open Court Publishing, 1927), pp. 410-4 23 . Consult Beck's "Selected Bibliography" for additi ona l works. 2 Hartnack, op. cit., p. 295. 3 Hagerstrom's philosophy is becoming more widely known among American and English philosophers because of recent translation. For example, see his Philosophy and Religion, trans. Robert T, Sandin (New York: Humanities Press, 1964); his Inquiries into the Nature of Law and MoPa l s, trans. C. D. Broad (Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell, 1953); and his "Lectures on So-Called Spiritual Religion," op. cit., trans. C. D. Broad . Furthermore, there ~s an English summary appended to Jarl Hemberg's comparison of Hagerstrom's and Nygren's philosophies of religion, entitled Religion och Metafysik (Stockholm: Diakonistyrelsens Bokforlag, 1966). Then, in addition, Ernst Cassirer, a philo sopher generally well known in American and EnRlish philosophical circles, has wriF, ten a ~erceptive account of Hagers trom's position entitled, Axel Hdgerstrdm. Eine Studie zur Schwedischen Philosophie der Gegenwart (Goteborg: Goteborgs Hogskolas Arsskrift, 1939). Other good secondary materials include two in Swedish: Gotthard Nygren's

32 troversy continues as to which of the two men arrived at the point of critical insight first. The initial challenge was on epistemological rather than metaphysical grounds. Then, when the epistemological challenge proved potent, the metaphysical contentions of Bostromian idealism also began steadily to give way. There were intermediate figures, of course. Pontus Wikner (1837-1888), 1 who gave himself to uncovering contradictions in 2 subjectivist epistemology, and Vitalis Norstrom (1856 - 1916), who criticized Bostr~mian metaphysics on grounds that thoroughgoing separations of spirit and matter forced some necessary ideas

Re!~~i Studier i Ax el nlgerstroms Religionsfilosofi - ,, c n och Sanning. ,, ~ec Sa rs< ild Ha~syr. till Hans Kritik a ✓ J~gma t iken (Abo: Acta Acade · miae Aboensis, 1968); and Konrad Marc-Wogau's Studie~ till Axel HaJerstroms Filosofi (Uppsala: Foreningen Verdandi, 1968). Hagerstrom's Philosophy of Religion, entitled ReligionsfiZosofi, was edited by Martin Fries (Stockholm: Natur och Kultur, 1949). A volume published only, recently may have some significance for our study, i.e. Hagerstrom's Jesus. En Karakt aranaZys (Stockholm: ~atur och Kultur, 1968). HagerstrSm•s chief works are FiZosofi och Vetenska~, ed. Martin Fries (Stockholm: Ehlins, 1957); Kants Ethik im Verhd ltnis au seinem erkenntnistheoretischen Grundgedkanen (Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell, 1908); De Socialistiska Indeernas Bistoria, ed. Martin Fries (Stock· holm: ~atur och Kultur, 19.t6); S -:Jaial teleo l og i i Marxis men 'Uppsala : Akademiska Boktryckeriet, E. Berling, 1909); and Stat och Ratt (Up· psala: Almqvist and Wiksell, 1904). ~

4

A sample of Adolf Phalen's writings would include the following: Beitrag zur XlHrung des Begriffs der inneren Erfahrung (Uppsala, 1913); Dae Erkenntnisproblem in Hege Zs PhiZosophie. Die Erkenntnis~riti~ a: s ~ e taphys ik (Uppsala: 1912); Die Philosophie der Gegenwart i n SeZ!Jstdarstellung (Leipzig: 1924); "Kritik av subjectivismen i olika former," in Festskrift tiZZ!J.gnad E.O. Burman (Uppsala: 1910); "Our corru:ion notions and their dialectic movements in the history of philcisophy," in Proceedinas of the 7th Inter na tional Congress q,f Phii· csa;hy (Oxford: 1931), ~v~ Provf3reZasningar (Uppsala: 1916); Uber die ~ela tivitat der Raum- und Zeitbestimmungen ( Uppsala: Leipzig, 1922); and Zu r Besti~mung des Begriffe des Psychischen (Uppsala: Humanistiska Vetenskapssamfundet, 1890). The latter two volumes bes peak interests familiar to those who have worked with the thought of Edmund Husserl. 1 Carl Pontus Wikner's works have been assembled under the title S~ri:ter a~ Pontus Wikner, 12 Vols., edited by Adolf Ahlberg and Theodor Hj elmqvist (Stockholm: A. Bonnier, 1922-1927).

-

1

.l '

into becoming mere representations rather than realities, as Bostrom would have wanted it, provided the earliest challenges. But these were like the first arrows that penetrate a line of stable defense. They are as important for the onslaught thev signal as for the particular damage they wreak. The crucial ch al lenge was spirited by HYgerstrom and Phalen, and both on the hasis of epistemological contentions. Steeped in Kantian thought, ilage rstrom wrestled with the problem of how knowledge of a distinct ob ject is possible. The problem is one that concerned both Wikner and Norstrom in each found difficulty with Bostrom's content ion that knowledge is self-consciousness, or, in the familiar formu lation, that to be is to be perceived. Phalen attacked the s ~~e con tention by showing that idealism's conceptual underp innings lead frequently to self-contradictions. Similarly, in hi s quest fo r accessibility to objects distinct from mind, H~gerstrom gave some credence to the kinds of mental distinctions that Kant focused upun when talking about the categories and about forms of i ntuition. But eventually even these sorts of distinctions couldn't give t!~g, ·: · strom the flexibility he needed in distinguishing objects of know ledge from subjective determinations. The final break with Bostr0mian subjectivist epistemology came for H~gerstr~m, as for rhalen, through the recognition that reality, which is not reducible to consciousness, is given in cognition. It was an epistemological innovation that bore e xten sive imp ! i · " ,, cations for metaphysics. Hagerstrom rejected completely the noti on of an undifferentiable, unspecifiable, indeterminate metaphysica J Ding an sich. With this rejection, the idealist conception of i i-absolute -- or, more precisely, the idealist understanding of absolute Being - - is also foreclosed. And implicit in that fo r e< ! ., sure is the disavowal of all religious and theologi cal pos~t i on~ which depend upon conventional metaphys i cal supports. H~gcrstr~r

-rProminent

" include Grunddrag en af Herbert Sp.:,: works by Norstrom E. Berling, 1889); Religion und Gedanke , tr un~lated into German by Ernst Alfred Meyer and Axel Lagerwall (with 31, Introduction by Elof Kkesson), (Lund: Borelium, 1932); and /.f v.i-i ' : · blll' en Modern Standpunk t i FiZosofien? (Goteborg: Gotebor gs Ho g. L,,las Arsskrift, BD. 4, 1895). Sedelfl.l'a (Uppsala:

0

34 concludes that every declaration that flows from "Geiateswiasenachaft -- whether it concerns the self, society, the state, morality, or religion -- is only an intellectual play with expressions of feeling, as if something real were designated thereby," Thus, " " worked too to demolis · h in hoping to destroy metaphysics, Hagerstrom the Bostr8mian idealist subjectivism which had all but been synony mous with Swedish philosophy for almost an entire century. BostrH mianism was gone forever, and with it the religious and theological conveniences implicit in subjective idealism. I must emphasize that I am not contending that Geo Widengren's religionswiseenechaftZiche programmatic was prompted or inspired by the positivistic philosophical critique of metaphysical idealism. Rather, I am calling attention to the fact that Hagerstrom's and Phalen's contentions were in the air, so to speak, and could not be prevented from influencing developments within a large number of academic fields, not least the history of religions. Remember that we are talking about the development of traditions of scholarship. This doesn't make Geo Widengren a Hagerstromian, a Phalenian, or even an anti-Bostromian thinker necessarily. On the contrary, if we were attempting a strict genetic account of the development of his thought we would pay clo se attention to the influence of his teachers in reZigionegeechichte and Semitic languages, Tor Andrae 1 and H. S. Nyr,:-or Andrae is noted for such works as Mohammed. The Nan and His Faith, trans. Theophil Menzel (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1936, also published as a Harper Torchbook); Die Frage der Religi8sen AnZage (Uppsala: Uppsala Universitets Krsskrift, 1932); vSrZdereligionerna (Stockholm:1944); Krietendomen den fullkomliga religionen? (Stockholm: Religionsvetenskapliga Skrifter, 6, 1922); and Det OsynZigas vlirld (Uppsala, 1933). In "Die Religionswissenschaftliche Forschung in Skandinavien in den letzten zwantig Jahren," op. cit., Widengren credits Andrae with great contributions to Islamic studies, valuable explorations in the psychology of religion, a significant and decisive break with "evolutionism" as a methodological category in the history of religions--cf. Widengren's "Evolutionism and the Problem of the Origin of Religion," in Ethnoe. Vol. X, Nos. 2-3, 194S, reprinted in part in Walter H. Capps, ed., Ways o f Understanding Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1972), pp. 119- 126- - and for overcoming the tension between religion- as-theology and religion-as-a humanistic-~iscipline in favor of the science of ReZigionswissenschaft.

35 1 berg, to name but two of the more obvious examples. And the genetic account would also refer to certain students with whom Widengren has worked in concert. Certainly Widengren did not calculate his methodology to invoke the sanction of the philosophical analysts; nor is there evidence that he paid very much atten:ion to them. 2 At the same time, the morphology of that intent in the history of religions is in fundamental agreement with the new direotion given philosophy through the "new Uppsala" influenoe. I am proposing that the way in which Uppsala-conceived history of religion (and, more specifically, the methodology of Geo Widengren) is construed is consistent with commitments which contemporary Scandinavian philosophers exercise under positivistic influence. The philosophers might sometimes contend with the historians of religion on fundamental philosophical questions regarding the validity of religious experience, but they can hardly fault them on the way in which they approach their craft and the methodological claims which they bring to it. For example, the disciplines that belong to Religious Studies in Uppsala are conspicuously devoid of ontological commitment, and refrain from providing commentary on topics like "the nature of religion" or "man's religious experience generally conceived." In fact, one of the chief marks which differentiates Swedish approaches to Religious Studies is the strict economy of its interpretations and claims. The Occamist contention that "what can

See Widengren's book Tor Andrae (Uppsala: Lundequistska Bokhandeln, 1947), and his commemorative pieces, "Gnostikern Stagnelius (Till Tor Andrae p£ 60-Arsdagen) ," in SamZaren. Vol. XXV (1944), pp. 115-178, and "Tor Andrae. In Memoriam," v8r Losen. Vol. XXXVIII, No. 3 (19 4 7) , pp. 8 7 - 9 3. 1 Henrik Samuel Nr,berg wrote I rans Forntida Religioner (Uppsala: Olaus-Petri-FHrelasningar, 1937) which was also published in German translation, Die Religionen des aZten Iran, trans. H. H. Schaeder (Leipzig, 1938). 2 In private conversation, Professor Widengren informed me that the philosopher at the University of Stockholm under whose training he was influenced most was Dr. Hellstrom who, presumably, would have been appointed successor to Phalen had he not died just prior to the tiwe of appointment. In his philosophical studies, Widengren confesses to being particularly interested in logic and the history of ideas.

36

1

be explained on fewer principles is explaineci neeciles s iy by more" is honored by the Uppsala historians of religion. The sopnisLication of their approach is expressed more in the multiplicity of linguistic and philological tools which they control than in the preponderance of conclusions they tend to propose. Very self-cons ciously, they avoid postulating unverifiable entities to account for what can be explained more simply and direct ly . And this, too, is a characteristic Hagerstromian, nominalistic, even positivistic approach. To recognize its expression in the writings of specific Swedish histori ans of religion is not to argue that all of them a r e nominalistic, positivistic or anything worse. Rather it is simp ly to note that this is a history of religions conceived along s imilar structural lines, with similar stresses and omissions, be,: a us e there are parallel methodological commitments. And, to bring ou r discussion to the point at which it began, one can expect this ,: ' i mate of thought to become more and more explicit when a spokes,:. ,n for the Uppsala approach is asked to apply his skills to an .: :.icl lys is of "religious syncretism." It is evident that the kind of intellectual background we h~ve been sketching will not prompt those committed to it to give f ull attention to syncretistic features, regardless of the subject fiel d in which they are working. This is not the theoretical mili " 1 that prompts or promotes the unification or synthesizing of ,l~•a. Neither does it regard the disclosure of coherence as the ~ i ~hest possible objective. This is not the methodological transti on of neo- Platonic ploys in which the premium is placed upon a : og nit i on of prior i ties in the hierarchy of knowledge, where the .d J 0es n't rest until priority is given to the One that is en i~J by the many . In s tead of being syncr~tistic , the Uppsala : lliam of Ockham , p l u ralitas non est ponenda sine n eaessitate • 1 . 1 1>liL i.t y ought not to L e posited without necessity'' ) and : .: :. : .-;• ;,I;o•,, 1 :,. o d /-' n te;;t· f?'.er,'. pe r pa:1 ' · i -:, l"a

ii

hv

d:.

• " , ,. ; n0 e 6.v6p~TUi>V. "This is the book of the generation (the plural is used in the MT) of men (Adam is used in the MT)." Next we learn that when God made Adam, he made him xa..• &t.K6va. 3E:o0 "in the image of God." Since Adam is a man (according to the introductory statement) then God also must be a man. But since God is divine, he is Immortai Man. The male-female characteristic is clear from the next sentence: ~o&v Ka.\ afiAu fnoCno&v a.6.o6c "Male and female he made them." Adam is then male-female. But if this is so of Adam, and he is made in the image of Immortal Man, then Immortal Man must be male - female also. Moreover, Adam' s son is begotten Ka.Ta. Tnv Cotav a.6.oO xa.1. TTl\l &(x6va. a.O.oO "according to his (Adam's) image and form," which can only mean that he is also male- female. But why should the female aspect be called Sophia? George MacRae in his recent article, "The Jewish background of the Gnostic Sophia Myth,"2 has demonstrated convincingly that the Sophia Myth

r-Aconnection between Sophia and Eve is made in AJ, CG II, 23.21-24, where the Gen. 3,20 description of Eve is applied to Sophia. 2 NT 12 (1970), 86-101.

179 that is found throughout Gnostic literature in fact comes from Jewish wisdom literature. Therefore it is reasonable to look there for an answer to our question. In Wis. 8.3 we read that t:C>ytvt:1.0.v 6oEdCu au~lwa1.v atou txouoa., Ko.1. t, ndv'tll>V ~an6'tn~ ftyd.ttvot:v o.0-mv. "She (Sophia) glorifies her noble birth, having a common Zife (the Greek term suggests the life of a wife with a husband) with God, and the Lord of all loved her." Therefore if Immortal Man--God--has a female aspect, who should it be except Sophia? And since Adam and his son are made in the malefemale image of Immortal Man, what should their female aspects be called except Sophia also?l One other problem remains: how the third emanation can be called the Savior. The Genesis text requires that this being be Seth. Nowhere in Eug do we find this name used. However, that Seth is meant here there can be little doubt because in the summary section of AJ he is explicitly mentioned as the son of Adam. One can only assume that the Gnostics who wrote Eug used code language that would have been understandable to the initiates. But why is Seth the Savior? One answer is suggested by the phrase that is in apposition of "savior": "The creator of all things." The term translated "all things" is somewhat ambiguous in Coptic-it is 1i terally, "the all of them." This could mean "all men" or, more likely, "all men of the race of Seth." The Sethi an Gnostics believed that it was this race that had preserved the pure light that had come from Sophia, and had been entrapped in the world. And it was this race that would be the means of returning it to the pZe~oma. Hence the one who founded such a race might aptly be styled "the savior." The Jewish pseudepigraphical Life of Adam and Eve, which is dated in the 1st century_ A.O., provides another way of understanding Seth's saviorhood. Seth finds his father, Adam, in the agony of his last illness, and sets out with his mother to find the oil of the tree of mercy

1 It may be that by this identification of Sophia with Eve the Gnostics arrived at the idea of the fallen Sophia. See George MacRae, "The Jewish Background .•. ", pp. 97-101.

180

in order to heal him. The angel Michael denies their request for the oil, but promises that it will be given him "in the last days" (42.1). Thus Seth in the last days will have the medicine to heal man's "sickness unto death." Could the Gnostics have been influenced by this Jewish tradition, as they were by others? At any rate, both of these ideas about Seth are found in the Gnostic Gsopel of the Egyptians (CG III, 2; CG IV, 2). He is described as the creator of his race (III, 55.16-56.22), and the one who comes to provide the way of salvation for this race (62.24-64.9). It is clear, then, that the Gnos tics could and did think of Seth as the Savior. Thus the primary pattern-- The Immortal Man, the Son of the Man, and the Son of the Son of the Man--comes from a close exegesis of Gen. 5,1-3 by a group who used the Greek Old Testament and were acquainted with Jewish wisdom literature that had been produced in Egypt (i . e., the Wisdom of Solomon) . Without doubt, they were related in some way to diaspora Judaism. Seth was cons idered by them to be the Savior. The first change in the basic pattern occurs in Eug of CG III. The difference is in the summary section. Here, as we have noted, the third emanation is missing, and his title as Savior is transferred to the second emanation, the Son of the Man. What does this mean? Schenke held that Christian influence was to be found in Eug of CG III, although he gave no evidence. Krause denied it.l Do we have here an indication of such influence? What does the replacement of the triple emanation scheme by a double emanation scheme mean? How is the attachment of the term Savior to the second emanation to be explained? We can best ap proach the problem by asking who the second emanation might new be. He could still be Adam, as in the primary pattern. But the fact that he is now called "S:tvior" suggests otherwise. He could still be Seth. But unless he follows one who is specifi cally called Adam, or unless he i s named (both of which are the case in AJ) he i s only identifiable as Seth when he is in the r-R'obinson, "The Coptic Gnostic Library ... ", p. 374.

181 position of the third emanation. The obvious alternative is Christ. All three of the terms--Son of Man (the Greek for "The Son of Man" in the Gospels is ut6c -roO 6;v8pwnou--"The Son of the Man"), the first-begotten one,l and the Savior, strongly suggest him. Thus there is a strong likelihood that here in Eug of CG I I I we see the first sign of Christian influence. It may well reflect a situation where a group of Gnostics first become convinced that Christ is the Savior rather than Seth. In editing one of their tractates for recopying they make a minor adjustment in one part of the document, but overlook the contradictory material in another part (the exposition). In SJC changes have been made both in the exposition and in the summary. A double emanation pattern has replaced the triple one in both cases. In the exposition the first emanation remains the Immortal Man. The second is still the Son of the Man who· is now identified explicitly as Christ. But the attributes of the third emanation are connected to the second. The Son of the Man now becomes also what the third emanation had been. This is done by in effect having the Son of the Man take on another aspect-I have included the point at which this takes place on the chart. The Son of the Man appears "in a great male- female light." He then becomes the Savior, thus reflecting the conception found in Philippians 2.S-11 and John 1 that Christ pre-existed with God, but that he took on a different form to come to earth as the Savior. This Gnostic solution to the problem of how to impose a distinctively Christian pattern on a Sethian one was not perfect, however. How could the Savior Christ also be Adam, the one who needs to be saved, or at least, the forerunner of those who do? Yet they are both "the Son of the Man!" It was perhaps in response to this problem that the summary of SJC was devised. Here there are two emanations, as in the exposition. But as we have noted earlier they are turned around. The Son of the Man, the Savior, is now in first position, while the Man is in second. But this is Man shorn of primacy and immor~

8.29; Col 1.15,18; Rev 1.5.

182

tality. It is Man in his nakedness. He is called Adam. Immortal Man and Adam, who has relinquished his sonship to the Savior, Christ, are thus identified, but at the level of Adam. The separation of Adam and the Savior, and the placing of the Savior in first position indicates that the problem of the exposition is resolved on the Christian side. But even more is happening. In this summary the original cosmological pattern is not just modified, as was the case in Eug of CG III - - it is destroyed. The question about the genesis of the original man is no longer in view. What is in view is man--mankind--everyman, in his condition of weakness, and his Savior. Accordingly we expect to find, and we in fact do find, in other parts of SJC, great emphasis on the work of the Savior, and very little on the question of his origin. This indicates a shift of interest away from cosmology to soteriology. This means a movement away from that which was distinctively Gnostic. When we turn to the exposition of AJ we find the same double emanation pattern that was in that of SJC: the First Man and his First-born Son. The First Man is male-female, as in SJC, but we note that the son is not. The First Man's consort is not called Sophia here but Barbelo. The description of him in CG II as Monogenes (the parallel in CG III has "only son") is different from SJC, where first-begotten is used exclusively. Although AJ in CG III does not seem to take this too seriously, in view of the further statement that he is the first-born Son of all those of the father, it is of interest that AJ of CG II omits anything that would challenge it. He is called Christ. The term Savior is not used of him, but this probably is not significant, since in other parts of AJ it is used and related to Christ. The giving up of the male-female characteristic of the Son of the First Man, together with the use of the term Monogenes, may be taken as moving in the direction of more orthodox Christian thought. The most striking thing about the AJ pattern is the summary. Here, as we noted earlier, there are four emanations, rather than three or two. Why? The reason is that they had to agree with

183

the number of the four great lights, which were produced by Christ, and which are the dwelling places of the four angels of the presence.l These lights replace the aeons in Eug and SJC. Thus we have in this summary two elements not found in the others: the third and fourth emanations.2 In the first and second we appear to have almost exactly the reverse situation from what we found in SJC. The Man, identified as Adam, is in the first position, while his son is in second position. A closer look will help us understand why. The Man here is not just Man--he is "the perfect true Man, the Holy one, the first who appeared." This certainly suggests the First Man of the exposition; the more so since the adjectives "perfect" and "true" correspond to terms used to describe the Immortal Man in Eug of CG V ("The creator Nous who completes himself," "the truth"), and since in other parts of AJ the expression "The First perfect Man" is used (II, 15.10-11). But the editor here has taken out the term "first" and added "Adam". And since the next emanation is Seth, it is clear that he wants us to think of the "perfect, true Man" as Adam. Why? The likely reason is that in AJ's reworking of the older system these four emanations come from Christ. Therefore the first one could not correspond to the First Man of the exposition, since that would have made Christ the begettor of his own father. So the Perfect, True Man had to become Adam. We note also that his son is not designated "Savior". This was now a term reserved for Christ. What we have before us is the evidence of a faith in the process of being metamorphized. It began, so far as we can see,

r-Tnese four are found also in the Hypostasis of the A~chons 93. 20-22, and can be traced back at least to I Enoch 9.1 and 40.1-10 . 2 While the third is an understandable addition to the list, even though "the seed of Seth" does not really seem to qualify as part of the heavenly hierarchy, the fourth is a quite obvious intrusion. If "the souls" mentioned there are part of the seed of Seth, why do they need a separate place? If they are not of that seed, why should they be mentioned at all in a tractate devoted to the salvation of that seed? It seems likely that this category was supplied in order to satisfy the four-lighted scheme.

184

as something quite clear and consistent, and reasonably simple. But then an irresistible force--the force of early Christianity - - began to exert pressure upon it, and began to cause it to transform itself into something vastly different from what it had been: from three emanations to two; from Seth as the Savior, to Christ; from Adam, the great forefather, to Adam, representative of unsaved mankind. That the process is incomplete in the glimpse that these tractates give us the documents themselves testify in the differences between the expositions and the summaries. It is hard not to sense the sincere religious commitment of the writers to Christ . It is hard not to sympathize with their desire to keep as much as possible of the old structure of their faith. But from what we have seen here, the task seems to have been beyond them.

Appendix: PATTERN OF EMANATIONS IN EUGNOSTOS, SOPHIA OF JESUS CHRIST, AND APOCRYPHON OF JOHN* Summary

EX.E_OSition Eugnostos

[Immortal] Man (13.910)

1st

Immortal [male-female) aeon (6.4,15) 1st Creator Nous who completes himself (6.6-7) The Ennoia, the one of all the Sophias, The creatress of the Sophias (6.8-9) The truth (6.10) The Immortal Man (6.15) The Man of the depth (6.20) A father of himself (6.20-21)

2nd

[The first born male-female Soni (8.32-9.1) First-born [ I (9. 2-3) [The first)-born Sophia (9.4) [The mother of the all) (9. S) Love (9.6) Adam (9.23)

2nd

[The Son) of the Man (13.11) The first-born (13.12)

3rd

A great male-female light (10.7-8) The Savior, the creator of [all) things (10.9-10) [Pistis Sophia) (10.12-13)

3rd

The Son of the Son of the Man (13.13-14) The Savior (13.15)

in CG V

A

In order to conserve space, I have not followed the usual practice of showing Greek loan words in parentheses following their translation or transliteration.

.... 00

V,

..... Cl)

Summary_

EXE_OSition Eugnoatoa

in CG III

1st

Immortal male-female Man (76.23~24) The [Lord), the one who is complete (77.2) All-wise engenderer Sophia (77.3-4) The self-fathered one (77.14)

1st

Immortal Man (85.10)

2nd

(Much of description missing because of lost pages) First-begotten father (81.10) Adam, the one of the light (81.12) The Son of the Man (81.13)

2nd

The Son of the Man (85.11-12) The first-begotten one (85.13) The Savior (85.14)

3rd

A great male-[female) light (81.2482.1) The Savior, the creator of all things (82.5-6) All-engendering Sophia, Pistis (82.5-6) Pistis-Sophia (82.8)

Sophia of 1st Jesus Christ--BG

A great power (94.6) The first immortal male-female Man (94.9-10) The self-begotten father (95.4) The Man, the self-fathered one (95.9-10) The creator The self-[begottenJ Nous (98.17-99.1)

There is no third emanation in this summary.

1st

The Son of the Man (108.1-2) The first-begotten (108.4-5) The Savior, the one who came to appearance (108. 6- 7)

°'

Summar1_

Ex_p_osition 2nd

Sophia of Jesus Christ

His first begotten male-female son (99.4-5) The Son of God, Christ (99.8-9) First begotten Sophia, the mother of the all (99.10-12) Love (99.14) Adam, the eye of the light (100.14) The Son of the Man harmonized with Sophia, his consort. He appeared in a [great] male-[female light] (102.15-103.2) The Savior, the creator of everything (103.4) Sophia, the all-begetter (103.7-8) Pistis (103. 9) I am the great Savior (105.2-3)

1st

A great power (101.5) The Immortal male-female Man (101.7) The self-begotten father (101.19) The Man, the self-fathered one (102.1-2) The First Man (102.20) The creator, the Nous who is complete through himself (104.8-9)

2nd

His first-begotten male-female son (104.12-13) The Son of God (104.15-16) The first-begotten Sophia, the mother of the all (104.17-18) Christ (104.22) Adam, the eye of the light (105.12-13)

CG III

2nd

The Man (108.9) Adam, the eye of the light (108.10-11) There is no third emanation in this summary

The summary section is missing in CG III because of missing pages.

.... °" --.J

.... Summarx_

Ex.E_osition The Son of the Man harmonized with Sophia, his consort. He appeared in a great male-female light (106.15-19) The Savior, the creator of everything (106.20-21) Sophia, the all-begetter (106.22-23) Pis tis (106. 24) The great Savior (the speaker) (107.22) Apocryphon of John

1st

(Barbelon) became a first Man (7.23) The virginal Spirit (7.24) The [thrice male, the three-] [hymned one, [the three named one, the three]-powered one ... A male-[female one) (8.1-4)

1st

The perfect, true Man The holy one, The first who appeared Adamas (13.2-4) (He is placed over the first aeon with Christ and Harmozel) (13.4 - 8)

2nd

(Barbelon bears) Monogenes who appeared from the father, The pure light. The divine self- begotten one. The first-born Son of all those of the father (9.11-18) The Son of Barbelon (11.4 - 5) Christ (11.15)

2nd

His son Seth (13.17)

3rd

The seed of Seth (13.21)

CG III

00 00

Exposition

Apocl'yphon of John

1st

(Barbelon) becomes the First Man, the holy spirit, the thrice male, the three-powered one, the threepowered one, the three-named, male female one, the eternal aeon, the first to come (5.7-11)

2nd

(the highest God spiritually impregnates Barbelon and there appears) An only son of the Metropator (6.15) He appeared ... the self-[created] one (6.17-18) Christ, the divine self-begotten one (7.11)

CG II

Apocl'yphon of John BG is essentially the same as CG I I I.

the 1st emanation of the Summary.

Summary 4th

The souls of those who, knowing their pleroma, did not repent immediately, but persisted for a time and afterwards repented (14.3-6)

1st

The perfect man, the first appearing one, the truth ... The Gera-adaman (old Adam) (8.32-35) (He is placed over the first aeon with Christ and the first light, Armozel. (9.2-3)

2nd through 4th are the same as above.

It, however, has "Adam" in

.... '° 00

X.

SYNCRETISM AT WORK: ON THE ORIGIN OF SOME COPTIC MANICHAEAN PSALMS Eric Segelberg

The Coptic Manichaean Psalms have so far not been sufficently studied as to their background and as to their relation to the Nag Hammadi material. T. Save-Soderbergh in his Studies in the Coptic Manichaean Psalm Book (Uppsala, 1949) has proven that the group of psalms called "Psalms of Thomas" has a Semitic, and indeed Manaean, background. Their connexion with the masiqta hymns is obvious. However, one cannot say that the "Psalms of Thomas" are mere translations from a Mandaean source, at least not such as we know them today. It is hard to believe that a phrase such as "Salome built a tower upon the rock of truth and mercy" (Thomas XVI), Salome being unknown to the Mandaeans, or. "Jesus dug a river in the world" (Th. XII), are derived from Mandaean sources. No doubt the Mandaeans are dependent on rivers, especially the river called Jardna; further, they dig a special channel and pool for their religious ceremonies; but they would never say that Jesus dug that Ja~dna. If Thomas XII refers to a Mandaean reality, it is one earlier than that known from our sources. The problem to what extent the Manichaean Coptic Psalms are originally Manichaean seems hitherto unsolved. They may be genuinely Manichaean texts translated into Coptic; they may be Gnostic or Gnostic Christian texts translated from Greek or Syriac; they may also be Christian or Christian Gnostic texts known in Egypt, and, in accordance with a well known Manichaean missionary strategy, accepted with slight modifications. They may also in some cases be originally Manichaean, and written in Coptic. The intention in this paper is to point to the possible influence upon the psalms from earlier Gnostic or Gnostic-Christian poetry or literature. We want to observe a few cases where it seems that the Manichaeans had accepted and slightly adapted 191

192 Christian or Christian Gnostic psalms, namely four psalms of Heracleides and one of the Sarakoton,l I

In the collection called "psalms of the Lord Heracleides" (P. 187-202 ) there are texts of remarkably Christian or ChristianGnostic character. Heracleides No. l (Allberry, p. 187). This is a psalm where Mariam is the main character. She is the woman that come to the tomb on Easter morning (John 20:17 ) . She was sent by Jesus to the eleven with a crucial message. Alberry observes that this scene is also related in the Epistula Apostoloz,um ("The Discourse of Jesus with his Disciples after his Resurrection.")2 The eleven are gathered on the bank of the Jordan; Jesus describes himself in terms of their "brother", "master", "Lord", but not "Savior," If she is not successful she should say to Simon Peter: "Remember what I uttered between me and thee. Remember what I said between thee and me in the Mount of Olives: 'I have something to say, I have none to whom to say it.'" One should note the prominence given to Simon Peter here, not always obvious in Gnostic circles. Here is an obvious reference to the talk between Jesus and a disciple, often a woman, so important in many a Gnostic or Christian Gnostic writing, in order to authorize a peculiar Gnostic interpretation of the faith.3 The

r-Tne text and translation used is that of C.R.C. Allberry, A Manichaean Psalm-Book, vol. 2 (Stuttgart, 1938). 2 C. Schmidt, ed., Gespz,ache Jesu mit seinen Jungez,n nach der Auferstehung (TU 43; Leipzig, 1919), esp . pp. 38££. 3 Pistis Sophia is largely built on such discourses. On the Mount of Olives (p. 9) Maria (not the Mother of Jesus) has so much to say (p. 202-248) that Peter gets annoyed: "My Lord, may the woman stop asking that also we may ask." The apostles get to ask a few questions. On p. 253 Mary has a question again. Ed. used: C. Schmidt and W. Till: Kor,tisch- Gno stische Schriften. I. Die Piatia Sophia, Di e beiden Bucher des Jeu, Unbekanntes altgnostieahes Werk. (GCS 5; Berlin, 1962). Cf. the 'christianization' of the Eugnostos - letter in the Sophia Je su Christi effected by intro -

ducing, among other things, the scene from the Mount of Olives. (Cf. D. Parrott's contribution to this volume.-ed.

193 faithful singing this psalm decide with Mariam not to rest, not to sleep until "I have brought the sheep to the fold. Glory to Mariam, because she harkened to her master, she served his com· mandment in the joy of her whole heart." There is no special Mani· chaean feature in this Psalm except a final doxology, where a "Maria" (note the Greek form) is praised. We rather have to accept that we have found a text originating from a Christian or Christian Gnostic community (which label we choose depends on what amount of orthodoxy we expect from that community) when, in the second century(?), the text was written. With its Gnostic tendency it was fit for incorporation into the Manichaean Pslam-Book. Another example is the psalm beginning p. 189, 1.30: "Amen, the Father, Amen, the Son: let us answer to the Amen. Amen, Amen, Amen, the holy Spirit (that makes revelation), let us answer to the Amen." Here we find a kind of "trinitarian" theology, as is apparent from what has been quoted, and further evidenced by 190.25 ff." "The Father, the Son, the holy Spirit-·this is the perfect Church." The las t statement has no doubt a Manichaean flavour. The religious interpretation of the whole universe is, however, not incompatible with Christian unders tanding. "Thou art, thou art, thou art: the yea rs shall not fail" (190. 7) and the following line with the Trishagion, "Holy, holy, holy to thee, O Amen, King of the Aeons," also illus trate the kind of trinitarian thinking in the text, the Trishagion being a well - known formula in the Old Testament (Is. 6) and in the early Jewish and Christian liturgies . We observe the slightly different phrasing; nek- - "to you", a departure from the traditional Semitic nominal clause type, sometimes preserved in translation; "Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth." (p. 190.31) , "Let us go to the Mount of Olives being a place where the Risen Christ taught his apostles the secret doctrines.I The main christological section is 191 : 4 - 9:

~ - Pi s tis Sop hi a, p. 9 .

194 Amen, I was seized; Amen aga~n, I was not seized , Amen, I was judged; Amen again, I was not judged. Amen, I was crucified; Amen again, I was not crucified . Amen, I was pierced; Amen again, I was not pierced. Amen, I suffered; Amen again, I did not suffer. Amen, I am in my Father; Amen again, my Father is in me. Let us leave open the interpretation of this and the previous quotations. Let us just refer to two texts which shed light on some of them: 2 Cor . 1.19£.: "For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, .. . was not Yes and No; but in him it is always Yes. For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why we utter the Amen through him, to the glory of God."l Rev. 3.14: "The words of the Amen, the faithful and true writers, ... "l Undisputably Manichaean elements in this Psalm come in at 191.12: "Amen, Amen, Amen, Amen again, the four-faced God (pnoute nftouho)." Allberry refers to Migne, P. G. 1.1461: TE:Tpanpooca>nov na.tpa TOO 1,1e:ytaou~ "the four-faced father of greatness," said to be an invention of Mani. We observe that the teTlll, "Father of Greatness," resembles the common Mandaean "Lord of Greatness" (Right Ginza 2.14; 61.11, etc.) In the following lines we find further references to Christology , and a trinitarian approach: "Jesus, the Son of Amen," and the Holy Spirit that has taught us of Amen." Finally we find a phrase common to most Manichaean Psalms: "Peace be to the soul of the blessed Mary, Theona" (191.17). Even this fairly superficial analysis indicates that we have an example of religious syncretism at work. The victorious Manichaeism is flooding the "West." In Egypt, perhaps, or Syria a psalm is found which after some revision will make an acceptable Manichaean psalm, and being already known it will be a useful text in their missionary movement.

.~v

II Psalm of Heraa l eides (191.18-193.12).

~

translation.

195 This psalm seems to illustrate the same kind of development. Here we have, first, a part of a hymn based on the parable of the ten virgins, sung with the response: "There were ten virgins, watching for the bridegroom. There were five wise, there were five foolish." (191.18ff). The response is repeated nine times: 191.19, 20, 22, 24, 28; 192.11, 16, 22; 193.12. This parable cherished by the Gnostics, 1 can be used both by Christians and Gnostics without any trouble. A special interpretation is given at 191 . 30: "You received my name, but you did not do my works. Depart from me, your workers of iniquity." Here is influence from Matthew 7.23 (based on Ps. 6.8). A typically Gnostic sentence follows at 192.2f.: "The grey-haired old men, the little children instruct them. They that are six years old instruct them that are sixty years old". 2 The theme is well-known also from a Mandaean source, (Right Ginaa II, 1, 153), where Hibil Manda-d-Hayye appears as a boy of three years and one day, and teaches John about baptism.3 192.4-25 presents a text the origin of which cannot be put into doubt. A Christian Gnostic origin is obvious. Jesus, the twelve apostles (but only eleven are enumerated), and a few other bibli cal persons appear. A good deal of the material is drawn from the apocryphal acts or martyrdoms of the apostles, a good deal, although not identified, can be supposed to belong to a similar category. The list of the apostles is as follows: Peter, Andrew, John, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Simon the Canaanite, Thomas, Alphaeus, Judas, and Matthew. Finally Paul comes. This list is fairly clos e to the biblical lists. There are eleven names plus Paul. Matthias is missing. Alphaeus stands for James, son of Alphaeus (Matt. 10.3; Mark 3.18) to be

~ s t i s Sophi a, p. 206. 2 Cf. the Gospel of Thomas, saying 4. Cf. also the Apocry phon of John, CG II 2. lff. (Krause ed., p. 111). 3 As to aepearances of the Saviour a s a small boy see E. Segelberg, Ma~buta, (Uppsala, 1958), p. 141, n. 1.

196 compared with Levi ton tou Alphaiou (Mark 2.14). Judas is Iscariot, the lover of money, not the apostle, son of James (Lk. 6.16; John 14.22). Against other lists of the apostles this agrees with the one on page 194 in mentioning Simon Kananites and Judas Iscariot. Matthew is there called with his other name Levi, Alphaeus is called James, explained as the brother of the Lord. Paul is not mentioned, nor is Matthias; the number is thus eleven. We have consequently two related, but not identi cal, lists of apostles. They are both distinct, both fairly close to the New Testament lists, remarkably close if we take into consideration that Christian lists frequently depart even more from the canonical ones. The epithets given to the apostles are of certain interest . Peter is the "unshakable foundation," referring to Matthew 16. 18; Andrew is of a strong mind, and possibly regarded a twin; John is the Virgin, James died beneath a storm of stones (Cf. Psalms of Sarakoton 142.25 ff. sq.), against Acts 12.2, a piece of apocryphal information; Philip was in the land of the Anthropophagi; Bartholomew has amerimnia, ("freedom from care"), he does not take the bread of the day with him (Budge, Coptic Apocrypha p. 227); Thomas went to the land of India, according to the well-known Acts of Thomas; Alphaeus is an obedient disciple, Judas an accuser of God; Matthew is the taxgatherer (teZones). Most information is drawn from non-canonical sources of a type known from the apocryphal acts of the apostles and their martrdoms. There is little indication of heretical leanings. Next in line after the apostles come eleven women, beginning with Martha and Marihama (the form of their names is not derived from the Coptic Gospels, either Sahidic, Bohairic or Subachmimic ver sions.) The form "Marihama" may indicate Semitic background. Marihama now is "a netcaster for the eleven" (cf. 187.12 ff). As such she belongs to the area of Christian-Gnostic traditions where one or another Maria plays an active role. Salome, a biblical woman, and Arsinoe belong probably to the same sphere. Thecla,

197 a well-known heroine of the apocryphal Acts,1 appears also (192. 25; cf. also 143.4). In the group of women mentioned next Euboula appears both in the Aats of Paul and the Aats of Peter. Mygdonia is well known from the Aats of Thomas. 2 Up to 193.3 the text appears to be genuinely Christian (Gnostic). At 193.4 suddenly "our Lord Mani" is introduced, "a northwind blowing upon us, ... that we may sail to the Land of Light." 193.6 refers to the virgins of the beginning of this psalm: "Let us also, my brethren, put oil in our lamps . " 193.8-11 is a good Gnostic Christian parenesis, "Let us not slumber and sleep until our Lord takes us across, his garland upon his head ... and we go within the bride-chamber and reign with him .... " In summing up we find that thi s psalm has two main parts: the biblical, with the motif of the ten virgins which could be given a Christian Gnostic interpretation, and the Christian (-Gnostic) part on the apostles, biblical and apocryphal figures, with a final parenesis. There is no rea son to discuss here whether the two main parts belong together.3 We only observe that 193.6 ff. obviously regards them as a unity. The only distinctly Manichaean element is 193.4-5 where Mani suddenly is introduced without fitting very well into the context. The final line i s of a common type in these Manichaean texts. It seems quite clear, that the Manichaeans have accepted a Gnostic Christian psalm likely f rom Asia Minor-Syria, slightly

r-t'r. Aata Pauli et Thealae.

2 Possibly the eleven women are supposed to match the apostles, who are actually eleven plus Paul. Thecla certainly goes with Paul. That John the virgin is supposed to be without a female counterpart seems unlikely as encratism seems to be the generally heralded way of life. Possibly just by chance the list seems short of one woman. Or is Judas regarded as single? 3 Possibly 191.18-192.1 originally was a separate text sung with the responsum, "There were ten virgins," five times repeated in those few lines. Later the same response has been introduced also to the second part, although with less frequency, only four times. The text of the ten virgins seems to have been a useful text. It was exposed or used also in the Epistula ApostoZorum, ed. C. Schmidt, p. 135 onwards; Cf. The Falling Asleep of Mary, ed. Robin son, p. 107. In the Ps. Sarakoton 153.30 - 154.7 and 170.21-24 it also recurs.

198 adapting it for the use in their congregations. III

PaaZm of HeracZeidea, (193-197), This psalm is sung to the Savior of Spirits (paoter nmpneuma), "the Father who is in the Son, the Son who is in the Father." In 193.17-30 the Saviour is described in terms close to New Testament imagery. 194.1-3 refers to the incarnation, lines 4-6 introduces his calling the apostles. Odd is the statement, "He traversed Judea, looking for stones daily, He went to the shores of the sea, seeking pearls" (5-6). Stones and pearls stand for disciples or apostles. Z1ne, "stone", seems to be a parallel to "pearl," and not used as a play on the word "Petros." 194.7-17 presents a list of eleven apostles including Judas. This is somewhat closer to the canonical lists dealt with previ ously, but yet with the other list forming a distinct group closer to the canonical lists than many early lists from the church or Gnostic sects. Lines 19-23 refer to four females, Mariam, "Spirit of Wisdom," Martha, "breath of discretion," Salome, "grace of Peace," Arsinoe, upon whom he set the garland of truth. To these four is added the personified Jerusalem, whose pearls he took, probably referring to the destruction of the city. Three of the women are prominent in Coptic Gnostic Traditions. 1 Lines 23-29 tell what the Savior is doing (reviving dead; opening ears, etc.), actions generally acceptable even in Gnostic Christian circles. 194.30-195.23 tell what happened "when his cry went to the world," (line 29): "His sheepfold filled the corners of the world, the kings that heard put their crowns down," and the faith.i

1 Mariam occurs frequently in Piatia Sophia; cf. the GoapeZ of PhiZip, pp. 107 , 111, etc. Martha: Piatia Sophia, 38.17; 39.7; 105.17 etc. Salome: Pistis Sophia, 65.30; 66.19; 73.24.

199 ful were courageously suffering trouble and martyrdom (15-23). Then oddly (195.23) the Savior's own passion is introduced by the words: "Envy filled the scribes, they rose against the shepherd," and his martyrdom is described (19S.25-196.8), ending: "The sun withdrew his light." The New Testament influence is obvious; even the crucifixion at the sixth hour is mentioned following the Johannine tradition. The order of events is, however, not quite according to the canonical gospels (e.g. 19S.25 would fit in better after 196.5). 196.9 - 14 deals with the new situation after the resurrection in terms certainly surpassing what the New Testament can tell (e.g. "he fettered them of the sky by the fear of his light", line 10). More is told of the victory of the Savior after death, and how death was deceived, 196.22-28. The composition seems not always to comply to our demands of orderly presentation; after a reference to the sitting on the right hand of the Father and his bringing the faithful with him comes the final conclusion. 197.2 [I will} preach (?) thy words, making music in(?) thy glory. 3 (Have mercy on] my poverty, have compassion upon my sins. 4 Teach me the way of life that I may come to thee rejoicing. 5 [I will] dwell in they Aeons, thy bride-chambers of Light. 6 Hearken to my cry, hear my prayer. It seems obvious that we have here a virtually un-manichaeized Christian-Gnostic Psalm, probably of Syrian origin, perhaps from a bilingual Syriac-Greek environment. The term athaZia (Syriac, 196.8) and the name "Mariamme" speak in that direction. On the other hand there is the pun on words, Andreas-andrias, which indicates an original Greek text.I

~ 4 . 8: "Andrew (' Av6ptac), the first holy statue (Coptic touot obviously rendering Greek ~v5,:>Lac). Epiphanius Monachus of the 9th century states that there was "extant in his day in Sinope (i.e. in Egypt) a house of prayer with a marble statue of Andrew that had been made in his own lifetime." (Hennecke-Schneemelcher, New Testament Apoarypha II, p. SO). The psalm may refer to such

200 The only certainly Manichaean element here seems t o be the final verse recurring almost universally in these psalms: ''Victory and a garland be there given to the soul of Maria," (n.b. not Mariamme). IV P s a Zm ,

14 2 - 14 3

This psalm, actually beginning before p. 142 although in bad shape, belongs to the group called Sarakoton , a name that has not yet been explained. This is called a psalm of martyrdom and endurance, peaZmoe nhypomone (1 43.32). It begins by referring to some Old Testament figures, and states: "All the blessed that have been have endured these pains, down to the glorious one, the Beloved, Jesus, our Lord" (142.l0f.). Lines 12-16 refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Lines 142.17-143.3 refer to the sufferings of the apostles, informing about their end mainly from non-canonical sources. The four main apostles are mentioned in the traditiona l order (Peter, Andrew, James, John and James, the brother of the Lord) informing about their end mainly from non-canonical, but not necessarily heretical, sources. The four main apostles are mentioned to gether with James, Thomas and Paul. The choice of Thomas, to whom are devoted four lines, may indicate a Syrian connexion, the apostolic activity of Thomas and his "acts" having been carried out primarily in Syria and further East. The choice of Paul does not necessarily indicate anything. In connexion with Marcionite features it could be understood as an indication in the same direction. There follow Thecla, whose sufferings are told at length (143.4-10), Drusiane, Maximilla, and Aristobula, known from the apocryphal acts especially for their encratitic leanings. "All the godly [that) there have been, male, female, all have

atire. There may very well have been a statue in Sinope connected with the legend of Andrew. That it would go back to the apostle's own lifetime seems unlikely. One yet has to ask what is the primary feature, the statue at Sinope or a play on words.

201 suffered, down to the Glorious One, the Apostle Mani" (143.15 f.), but his sufferings are told in but three lines. Finally the sufferings of the faithful are interpreted in rather Christian terms: "We also, my brethren, have our part of suffering" (143. 20). There occurs also the New Testament image of the "seed that is sown, unless it dies, finds not the way to live" (143.25). At the end there is a parenesis; the faithful are encouraged to stand fast. There seems to be no reason to accept this psalm as an originally Manichaean text. Distinctly Manichaean material is sparse except the three lines referring to Mani's sufferings. But compare this to the six lines devoted to Jesus, four to Thomas, seven each to Paul and Thecla. The most sensible explanation of this text must be that it originates from those circles in Asia Minor-Syria where the Aats of Paul and TheaZa sprang forth or were widely read, a psalm composed in that community at a time of persecution and trouble. According to Schmidt (Acta Pauli et Theclae, p. 177) these Acts were written about 180 A.O. Other scholars date them somewhat later, e,i, W. Schneemelcher, about 185-195.l Presupposing that the material of the Acts was circulating before the actual composition of the work, one might assume that this hymn was written originally in the time of Marcus Aurelius when around 165 a persecution in Asia Minor took place, or in the time of Commodus when around 185 a persecution took place in the same area. The Manichaeans having similar experience from their superiors gladly accepted this psalm, added the lines about Mani and thus found a most helpful and missiologically correct hymn of endurance. We do know that a collection of apocryphal acts was circulating among the Manichaeans.2 One might think that the psalms here dealt with were written by Manichaeans who knew that particular material. If such were the case one would, however,

r7'1ennecke-Schneemelcher, New Testament Apoarypha II, p. 351. 2 R. Sch~ferdiek, in Hennecke-Schneemelcher II, p. 178 ff.

202

expect that the definite Manichaean material and Manichaean no tions were brought to more prominence. As has been indicated there is often a lack of balance between the "Christian" and the Manichaean elements. The most likely solution seems to be that we have here a number of originally Christian, or heretic-Christian, psalms which, like the Psalms of Thomas, have been adopted by Manichaean circles. Perhaps some of these encratitic Chris tian communities later embraced Manichaeism, and incorporated these psalms into their psalm-book. We would then really have syncretism at work.

203 Postscript Since this article was written excerpts of the Greek Manicodex (the Cologne Codex) have been made available.I Provided this Vita really can be regarded as a reliable source for the background and early life of Mani we are entitled to understand him, not from a Mandaean or related background, but from an Elkasaitic, i.e. a heretic Jewish Christian community that was characterized by the belief that Jesus was coming again several times to the earth, that Jesus and Jesus-Ziza were to be distinguished, etc.2 The Coptic Manichaean Psalms have to be examined afresh from this new starting point. It seems, however, that the psalms here dealt with represent texts · too close to "orthodox" Christianity to be regarded as Elkasaitic by origin, They rather are to be traced back to groups in Asia Minor such as the Montanists. But other texts such as the psalms of Jesus might have a different and perhaps Elkasaitic background or origin.

r""""K:" Henrichs and L. Koenen, "Ein griechischer Manicodex," Zeitschrift fllr Papyrologie und Epigraphik S, (1970), 97-216. Cf. R. N. Frye, "The Cologne Greek Codex about Mani" (in Ex Orbe Religionum I, p. 424-8). 2 A. Henrichs etc., op. cit. p. 158.

XI.

JEWISH HAGGAOIC TRADITIONS IN THE TESTIMONY OF TRUTH FROM NAG HAMMAD! (CG IX, 3)* Birger A. Pearson

The Jewish factor in the origins and development of Gnosticisml has gained considerable attention in recent scholarly discussion,2 especially as more and more of the Coptic documents discovered near Nag Hammadi, Egypt, have appeared in print.3 This article

~ i s article appeared originally in the Widengren Festschrift, Ez Orbe ReZigionum. Studia Geo Widengren, vol. 1 (Numen Suppl. 21; Leiden, 1972), 457-470, It is reprinted here, with some minor changes, with the kind permission of the publishers, E.J. Brill. 1 See the pioneer work of M. Friedlander, Der vorchristZiche judiache Gnosticismus (Gottingen, 1898). For recent articles on the problem of gnostic origins see e.g. B. Frid, "Diskussionen om gnosticismens upkomst," STK 43 (1967) 169-185; G. Widengren, "Les origines du gnosticisme et l'histoire des religions," in Le Origini deZZo Gnosticismo (Numen Suppl. 12, Leiden, 1967) 28-60; H. Drijvers, "The Origins of Gnosticism as a Religious and Historical Problem," NedTT 22 {1968) 321-351. 2 For some important recent treatments of the problem see especially O. Betz, "Was am Anfang geschah," in Abraham Unser Vater {Festschrift O. Michel, Leiden, 1963) 24-43; A. Bohlig, "Der jildische und judenchristliche Hintergrund in gnostischen Texten von Nag Hammadi," in Le Origini, 109-140; H. Jonas, "Delimitation of the Gnostic Phenomenon - -Typological and Historical," in Le Origini, 90-104; G. MacRae, "The Jewish Background of the Gnostic Sophia Myth," NT 12 (1970 86-101; K. Rudolph, "Randerscheinungen des Judentums und das Problem der Entstehung des Gnostizismus," Kairos 9 {1967) 105 - 122; H. Schenke, "Das Problem der Beziehung zwischen Judentum und Gnosis," Kairos 7 (196S) 124-133. on M. FriedlJnder's work in the light of new developments, see now B. Pearson, "Friedl!lnder Revisisted: Alexandrian Judaism and Gnostic Origins," Studia PhiZonica 2 {1973), 2339. 3 For recent progress reports on the publication of these texts see M. Krause, "Der Stand der Veroffentlichung der Nag Hammadi Texte," in Le Origini, 61-88; J.M. Robinson, "The Coptic Gnostic Library Today," NTS 14 (1968) 356-401; K. Rudolph, "Gnosis und Gnostizisnus, 205

206 is intended to provide some information on an as-yet-unpublished text, and at the same time to serve as a modest contribution to the ongoing discussion concerning the origins and essence of Gnosticism. The third tractate in the Nag Hammadi IX (CG IX, 3, 29.6-76, end of codex)l has been assigned the title, "The Testi mony of Truth. 112 It is an extremely interesting, but unfortunately fragmentary, document. Some entire pages are missing, and other pages are represented only by fragments. But judging from what has been preserved this tractate is clearly a most important document of "Christian" Gnosticism. 3 Formally, and as a whole, our document is a gnostic tract which holds up the ideal of ascetic continence and renunciation of the world. In it there are woven together as in a multi - colored garment arguments of a soteriological, hortatory, and "anti-heretical" character. Its opening passage indicates that it is addressed to "those who know how to hear not (merely) with the ears of the body but with

ein Forschungsbericht, ThR 34 (1969) 121 - 17S, 181-231, and 358361; J.M. Robinson. "The Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, NTS 16 (1970) 185-190; and most recently "The Coptic Gnostic Library," NT 12 (1970) 81-85. In the la s t-named publication a new monograph series i s announced, "Nag Hammadi Studies" (E. J. Brill, Leyden). This series will contain the international English language edition of the Nag Hammadi library, as well as other publications pertaining to Gnosticism. Vol. 1 in this series has now appeared, an invaluable research tool, Nag Hammadi BibZiogPaphy Z948Z969, by D. Scholer (Leyden, 1971). 1 The thirteen codices from Nag Hammadi now carry the designation "CG" (=CaiPensis Gnosticus); cf. "BG" (=BePoZinensis Gno sticus 8S02, ed. W. Till, TU 60, Berlin, 1955). See the first article by Robinson cited above, p. 4S7, n. 3. 2 Since the last two pages of the manuscript are lost it is not known what title, if any, the tractate originally carried. The assigne~ title has been supplied by the editor on the basis of key expressions occurring in the text of the tractate ( "truth," "the word of truth," "the true testimony," "witness," etc . ). 3 For oth~r literature on this tractate see S. Giversen, "Solomon und die Damonen," in M. Krause ed., Essays on the Nag Hammadi Texts in Hono uP of AZe:z:andeP B8hZig (NHS 3; Leiden, 1972), 133-143; and B. Pearson, "Anti - Heretical Warni ngs in Codex IX from Nag Hammadi," forthcoming in the Festschrift for Pahor Labib, ed. M. Krause.

207 the ears of the mind" (29.6-9). A polemical passage argues against those who have been gripped by error and by the authority of the Law. The ensuing material consists of alternate passages dealing with the redemptive work of "the Son of Man" (the usual title of the Redeemer in this tract, explicitly identified with Jesus Christ in a number of passages) and warning against the error of opponents, who are earily identifiable as catholic Christians. In the second half of the document the soteriological teaching is interspersed with extensive polemic against "heretics" who are clearly not catholic Christians but rather other gnostics! This section is fragmentary, but the names "Valentinus" (56.5, restored at 56.1,8) and "Isidore" (57.6) are preserved, and the names "Basilides" and "the Simonians" are very probably readings at 57.8 and 58.2. Other proper names occurred in the document, but are lost in lacunae . Most pertinent for the purposes of this paper are passages which contain haggadic discussions of texts and personae from the Old Testament . Indeed these passages appear clearly to be Fremdkorper, already-existing materials editorially inserted into our fractate and adapted by the author for his own purposes. The first and most important of these passages (45.23-49.28+) consists of a midrash on the serpent of Genesis 3. The second of these passages (72.5-30) is an excursus--in a very fragmentary section of the document--discussing King David's propensity to idol worship and King Solomon's use of the demons in building the Jerusalem tem~le. Both of these passages exhibit considerable contact with Jewish haggadic traditions. Both sections are editorially treated as containing "mysteries" (45.20; 72.30) which, presumably, can be probed only through gnostic hermeneutical insight. Limitations of space permit discussion of only the first of these passages in this paper.I

rsome parallels from Jewish haggada to the items mentioned from the second passage are here given, though incomplete: On David's idol worship, see Sanhedrin 107a. On the role of the demons in the building of the temple see Pesikta Rabbati 6.7; Ez. Rabbah 52.4; Nidr. Song of Songs 1.1.5; Num. Rabbah 11.3; Gittin 68ab; The Testament of Solomon (ed. Mccown); and cf. the Mandaean Ginaa R., Lindzbarski tr. p. 28 and p. 46 . See now also S. Giversen, "Solomon und die Damonen" (op. cit.).

208 The section preceding the passage in question deals with the virgin-birth of Christ, in contrast ot the natural birth of John the Baptist (45.6-18). This is followed by an exhortation: "Why then, do you (pl.) [ ..••...•. ] you not seek after these mysteries which were pre-figured for our sake?" (45.19-22). A horizontal line occurs in the left margin of the manuscript between lines 22 and 23, apparently indicating that the scribe saw at this point a clear dividing point in the text. A source critic would see at this point--even without the scribe's mark--a clearly defined "seam." We are encountering a literary source, previously existing and welldefined. Why the author-editor of the tractate put this source precisely here is a question for which I have no adequate answer, The passage reads as follows:l It is written in the Law concerning this, 2 when God gave [a command] to Adam, "From every (tree] you may eat, [but] from the tree which is in the midst of Paradise do not eat, for on the day that you eat from it you will surely die." But the serpent was wiser than all the animals that were in Paradise, and he persuaded Eve, saying, "On the day when you eat from the tree which is in the midst of Paradise the eyes of your heart will be opened." And Eve obeyed, and she stretched forth her hand; she took from the tree; she ate; she also gave to her husband with her. And immediately

lCGIX, 3 was transcribed and translated into Danish by S~ren Giversen; Giversen's Danish was rendered into English by C. J. de Catanzaro . The transcription and the English translation have been revised and edited by me on the basis of study of photographs of the ms. in the possession of the Institute for Antiquity and Christianitv in Claremont, California, and on the basis of examination of the original manuscript in the Coptic Museum in Old Cairo. As a result of work with the original manuscript it has been possible to establish a better Coptic text, and to improve the translation that was published in this article in the Widengren Festschrift. The pagination of the codex has also been firmly established, resulting in some changes from the pagination assumed before. Cf. e.g. Ez Orbe ReZigionum, p. 460, n. 1: The lost pages are now seen to be pp. 51-54. 2 It is not clear what "this" refers to; its antecedent is probably lost in a portion of the source which has been omitted by the author· editor of the larger tractate.

209

they knew that they were naked, and they took some fig leaves (and) put on girdles. But [God) came at the time [evening) walking in the midst [of) Paradise. When Adam saw him he hid himself. And he said, "Adam, where are you?" He answered (and) said, "[II have come to the fig tree." And at that very moment God [knew) that he had eaten from the tree of which he had commanded him, "Do not eat of it." And he said to him, "Who is it who has instructed you?" And Adam answered, "The woman whom you have given me." And the woman said, "The serpent is the one who instructed me." And he cursed the serpent, and he called him "devil." And he said, "Behold, Adam has become like one of us, knowing evil and good." Then he said, "Let us cast him out of Paradise lest he take from the tree of life and eat and live forever." What sort is he, this God? First [he] envied Adam that he should eat from the tree of knowledge. And secondly he said, "Adam, where are you?" And God does not have foreknowledge, that is, since he did not know from the beginning. [And] afterwards he said, "Let us cast him [out) of this place, least he eat of the tree of life and live forever." Surely he has shown him• self to be a malicious envier! And what kind of a God is this? For great is the blindness of the commandments; and they did not know him. And he said, "I am the jealous God; I will bring the sins of the fathers upon the children until three (and) four gen· erations." And he said, "I will make their heart thick, and I will cause their mind to become blind, that they might now know nor comprehend the things that are said." But these things he has said to those who believe in him [and) serve him! And [in one] place Moses writes, ["He) made the devil a serpent for [those) whom he has in his generation." In the other book, which is called "Exodus," it i s written thus, "He contended against [magicians), when the place was full of [serpents) according to their [wickedness; and the rod) which was in the hand of Moses became a serpent, (and) it swallowed the serpents of the magicians." Again it is written, "He made a s erpent of bronze (and) hung it upon a pole ... 1

210 This passage can be called a "gnostic midrash. 11 In the style of Jewish expository midrash it takes its chief point of departure from Scripture, in this case from the Torah, and comments interpretively upon it. Much of it is also targumic i.e., paraphrasing the text of Scripture. The focal point of this midrash is the figure of the serpent of Genesis 3.1, but in interpreting the significance of the serpent recourse is had to other passages of the Torah--on the basis of the Stich~ort principle-which also deal with the "serpent" figure.2 It is, of course a gnostic midrash; the theological stance of the piece is at numer ous points diametrically opposed to the traditional assumptions of Jewish (and Christian) theology. It is thus a piece of "Protestexegesis."3 As to the specific branch of Gnosticism with which this piece is to be identified, the most likely assumptio:1 is that it derives from the "Ophite" branch, and probbaly from a very early (probably even pre-Christian) stage of its development.4

r-Tne midrash continues on p. 49, which unfortunately, is very fragmentary. The end of the midrash occurs probably at line 7 of p. 49, where the comments of the author-editor of our tractate begin, with the comment: "For this is Christ ••. " The comments on this page and the following are governed by the principle that the scriptures must be understood "spiritually" (nv£uuai:LKWC, 50.2), i.e. allegorically interpreted. 2 The use of the Stich~ort device in Jewish--especially rabbinic-exegesis of Scripture is too well known to require.further doc• umentation. Examples can be found on virtually every page of the Talmud and the Midrashim. For examples using the term "serpent" (~nJ) see Pirke R. Eiieser 53, comparing the serpent of Num. 21.9 with that of Gen. 3; cf. also Num. Rabbah 19.22 and Philo Leg. Ali. 2.79-81. See also Ez. Rabbah 3.21, comparing the serpent of Ex. 4.2 with that of Gen. 3; cf. also Philo Leg. AZZ. 2.88 where the serpent of Ex. 4.2 is interpreted as "pleasure" (1'6ov/t) and is thus equated with the serpent of Gen. 3 (ibid. 2. 7lff.). 3 The term is used by K. Rudolph, art. cit., p. 205, n. 2. 4 See below for further discussion.

a)

The Serpent

211

Although the thrust of our midrash is to interpret the serpent figure positively, consonant with Ophite gnosis,l there is nevertheless reflected in it the common Jewish (and Christian) identification, serpent•devil (61.6.aoA.o~, 47.6 and 48.16ff) ·. 2 It should be noticed, however, that the designation "devil" is given to the serpent by a hostile and envious God as an aspect of the curse inflicted upon him. It might also be inferred that the expression, ''Moses writes'' (48.16), is a signal that the truth is to be sought elsewhere than in the bare words of Moses.3 The serpent is introduced in our midrash as "wiser (Coptic: sabe) than all the animals that were in Paradise." The adjective "wise" is stronger than the word used in the biblical text of Gen. 3.1 (LXX q>pov1.W:,TaTo~, Aquila rtdvoupyo~, Heb, 01,y, Targ. Onkelos D'1Y),4 and is suggestive of the serpent's role--in the gnostic view--as revealer of wisdom and knowledge. The Targum Ps. Jonathan also used the word "wise" (c,:m), but adds the phrase "for evil" (ID":l"l). 5 The "wisdom" of the serpent is the subject of a saying attributed to R. Meir: "Because the wisdom of the serpent was so great, therefore

r-;t is, of course, true that some gnostic groups placed a negative valuation upon the serpent of Gen. 3. See e.g. the gnostics described by Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 1.30.5-7 (contrast 1 .30 .15, Sophia~ the serpent); the Severians described by Epiphanius, Pan. 45.1; the system of the book, Baruch, described by Hippolytus, Ref. 5 . . 26£., ("Naas"); The Gospe Z of Phi Zip (CG II, 3) "Saying" 42 (61 (= Till, Wilson 109.] 5ff.). 2 See e.g., Wis. Sol. 2.24; Apoc. Sedrach 4; 2 Enoch 31; Vita Adae 12 ff.; J Baruch 4.8; Rev. 12.9; etc. Of the many proper names attached to him, "Samael" is probab ly the most common in Jewish tradition. See e.g., Targum Ps.-Jonathan Gen. 3.6; 3 Baruch 4.8; Zohar 35b; Pirke R. EZiezer 13 and 21 (where, however, the serpent is the instrum~nt of Samael) . 3 Cf. the continuing refrain in The Aporcyphon of John. "not as Moses said" (BG 45.9; 58.17'. 59.17; 73.4; CG II (Krause ed.) 13.19; 22,22; 23.3; 29.6; etc. 4 The Bohairic version (ed. Lagarde) also uses the word sabe. 5 M. Ginsburger, ed., Thargum Jonathan ben Usiel zum Pentateuch (Berlin, 1903).

212 the penalty inflicted upon it proportionate to its wisdom."l The serpent's role as "teacher" is underscored in the interchange between God, Eve, and Adam (47.1-4), where it is stated that the woman "instructed" Adam, and the serpent had "instructed" the woman.2 Indeed the teaching role of both the serpent and Eve is the subject of considerable speculation in gnostic literature. The two most important of the gnostic documents that should be considered in this connection are The Nature of the Archons (CG II, 4) and On the Origin of the World (CG II, 5).3 In The Nature of the Archons, in a passage papaphrasing and interpreting the Paradise narrative of Gen. 2-3, the "Spiritual Woman" (=the heavenly Eve, Sophia)4 comes into the serpent, the "Instructor" (Coptic: preftamo), and gives instruction to the fleshly Adam and Eve.5 Similar speculations occur in On t he Origin of the

reccl. Rabbah 1.18, comparing Gen, 3.1 and 3.14.

The translation is that of A. Cohen in the Soncino edition of the Midrash Rabbah. It is, of course, true that the serpent is credited with "wisdom" or special intelligence not only in ancient Judaism and Gnosticism, but in many and diverse cultures. See on this T. Gaster Myth, Legend, and Custom in the OZd Testament (New York, 1969) 35f. 2 The Coptic word used is tsebo=, tsabo=literally "to make wise"; cf. the adjective sabe. 3 The former is now available as edited and translated by R. Bullard, The Hypostasis of the Archons (PTS 10, Berlin, 1970); the latter as edited and translated by A. Bohlig (with P. Labib), Die Koptisch-gnostisahe Sahrift ohne Titel aus Codex II von Nag Hammadi

(DAWBIO 58, Berlin, 1962). It should be noted that the title ~nd abbreviations of the Nag Hammadi tractates referred to in this article are those employed in the NT 12, article cited on p. 205, n. 3. It will also be observed that my citation of pages from CG II differs (by 48 pages) from the pagination employed by Bullard and Bohlig. The reason for that is that Bullard and Bohlig in their publications used the pagination of the volume of plates published by P. Labib, Coptic Gnostic Papyri in the Coptic Museum at Ol d Cairo (Cairo, 1961), rather than that of the Codex itself. 4 Cf. Iren. Adv. Hael'. 1.30.15 (Harvey ed. 1.28.8): "Quidam enim ipsam Sophiam se'l'penten factam dicunt"; Hipp. Q.ef. 5.16 (of the Peratic gnostics): 6 xa8oA~xoc o~~c, ~nolv, o~T6c toT~v ~ oo~c T~C EOac A6Yoc; cf. also The Apocalypse of Adam (CG V, 5) 64.12ff. On the gnostic Sophia as a heavenly projection of Eve see the important article by G. MacRae, al't. cit., above, p. 205, n. 2. S CG II, 89 (Bullard 137), 30ff. The term "instructor" is used of the serpent at 89.32 and again at 90.6. The same Coptic word (l'eftamo) is used with a femine article at 90.11 to refer to the

213 WorZd, also in passages dealing with the Paradise Story of Gen. Z-3. At 113 (BBhlig 161). Zlff., there is an involved discussion of the origin of the "Instructor" whose mother "the Hebrews" call "Eve-Zoe" "which is 'the Instructor of Life'" (113.33f.). As for the " Instructor" himself, he has another name given to him by the "Authorities": the "beast (ai,p1,ov), which also means the "instructor," "for they found him t o be wiser than them all" ( 114. 3f.; cf. Gen. 3 .1). Curiously, the term "serpent" does not appear in this text, but he is there under the names "instructor" and "beast." Subsequently in the text Eve comes as an "instructor" to Adam (115.33) to rouse him from his sleep (cf. Gen. 2.Zlff.). Anq later, when the archons command Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree of knowledge, "the one who is wiser than them all, who was called 'the beast' (ai,p1.ov)" (118 . 25 f.) comes and instructs Eve about the tree and about the envious nature of the Creator. Eve, confident of the good counsel of the "Inst ructor," eats of the tree and gives the fruit to her husband. Now all of these speculations involving the serpent and Eve and their teaching functions are based on word-plays that clearly derive 2 from Aramaic sources. 1 The Aramaic word for "serpent," tq.pr;i, tqHi, . is brought into word-play with the name "Eve," i1;1J, which already in the text of Genesis 3.20 is etymologically related to the word "live" (Heb. n;~, Aram. KiQ)· Both the serpent and Eve, in turn, are related via word-play to the Aramaic verb trin, "to show, tell" hence 'T-: "instruct." Only in Aramaic is this conjunction of words, ~ewy'11~awah-~awi, possible.3 Furthermore it is probable that this word-play arises on Jewish soil, our midrash (and the other texts cited) representing a gnostic interpretation of Jewish haggadah. Such haggadah occurs in Genesis Rabbah 20.11 in a comment on Gen. 3.20, "The man called his wife's name Hawwah: "She was given to him for an adviser (or "instructor,"

.

.

"Sp"Iritual Woman." 1 Cf . Bohlig's notes in his edition, p. 73f. 2 See Jastrow, Dictionary, 452. In Targum Onkelos (ed. Sperber) the word occurs in its full form, K'1'n at Gen. 3.1 et passim; in Targum Ps. - Jonathan (ed. Ginsburger) it occurs as K,1n. 3 The figure of the "beast" (ai'ip1.ov) in On.OrgWZd carries this wordplay even further. The term in Aramaic is K1'n (Jastrow, Diet. 452),

214 text:

nn,11,n), but she played the eavesdropper like the serpent (n,1,n)." Another comment immediately follows, clarifying the role of the serpent: ''He showed (n11,n) her how many generations she had destroyed. 11 1 A third comment, credited to R. A~a, reads (as though addressed to Eve): "The serpent was thy serpent, and thou art Adam's serpent" (01tn n,11n nK' ,,11n n,11n). 2 All of these comments are based on the same linguistic puns as those noted in the gnostic sources. It can hardly be doubted that the gnostic interpretations are derived from Jewish sources (whether precisely these or others of a similar nature); it is most improbable that the rabbis would base their interpretations upon gnostic sources. On the short and fragmentary passages in our midrash commenting upon the rod of Moses which became a serpent (Ed. 4.2-4; 7.8-12) and the bronze serpent in the wilderness (Num. 21.9) not much can be said. There are parallels in other gnostic sources,3 but nothing from Jewish haggada can be adduced which sheds further light on our text. 4 b)

The Tree

Our midrash is the only gnostic text that I know of which iden-

thus the possi bility for word - play involving the verb K1M presents itself. Cf. Bohlig, ibid. 1 Tr. H. Freedman, in the Soncino ed. ; text ed. Albeck (r.p. Jeru· salem, 196S). 2 Ibid., cf. also Gen. Rabbah 22.2. 3 On Moses' rod, see Hippolytus on the Peratae, Ref. 5.16 oO,oc, ~noCv, 6 6~LC ta.tv n 66vauLC ~ napaxoAou8~oaoa -~ Mwo&r, n M~6oc n OTP£~utvn Etc O~Lv. On the bronze serpent see Hippolytus, ibi d.; Epiphanius {on the Ophites) Pan. 37.7.1; etc. See below on the identification with Christ. 4 For an interesting, though late, account of the history of Moses' rod, see The Boo k of the Bee, ed. and tr. E. Budge (Oxford, 1886), ch. 30. It originated as a branch from the forbidden (fig-) tree in Paradise, and was handed down from Adam to Moses. It became a serpent in Egypt, and served as the standard for the bronze serpent, and finally became a part of the Lord's cross. On this pas · sage see G. Widengreu, The King and the Tree of Life in Ancient Near Eastern Re Zigion (UUA 19S1: 4, Uppsala, 1951) 38 ff. Cf. Num. Rabbah 18.23 (on Aaron's rod in Num. 17.21): this was originally the rod of Judah, later belonged to Moses, then Aaron; it served as the scepter

215 1 tifies the tree of knowledge in Genesis as a fig tree. That identification is clearly made at 46.18 ff,,: Adam hides, and in reply to God's query, 'Where are you?,' Adam says, 'I have come to the fig tree.• 2 Then God knows that he has eaten from the forbidden tree. In fact the identification of the tree of knowledge as a fig is a widespread tradition in early Jewish sources, apocryphal, 3 rabbinic, 4 and (derivatively) early patristic. 5 The identification made in our midrash between the tree under which Adam hid (cf. Gen. 3.8) and the fig tree~ tree of knowledge (deduced from Gen, 3.7) reflects a possible use of a haggada which appears (in variant forms) in the Apoaalypse of Moses and in a saying of J. Jose: Adam after his sin looked for a tree under which to hide, and none of the trees of Paradise would receive him except the tree whose fruit he had eaten in his sin against God. 6 Of course the gnostic version does not regard the eating of the forbidden fig tree 7 as a sin; in orevery kini until the Temple was destroyed, and in the end-time will be held in the hand of King Messiah. 1 Cf. the description of the two trees of Paradise in OnOrgWld, CG II, 110 (158).2 ff. The tree of life has leaves like those of the Cypress and fruit like clusters of grapes (reminiscent of "the tree of wisdom" in 1 Enoch 32); the tree of knowledge has leaves like those of the fig, and its fruit resembles dates. It gives power to those that eat of it to condemn the Authorities and their angels. 2 Cf. the following passage from the Ethiopic Book of Adam and Eve (tr. Malan, London, 1882), Bk. 1, ch. 36 " ... and the word of God came to Adam and Eve and said unto them, 'Adam, Adam, where art thou?' And Adam answered, 'O God, here am I. I hid myself among fig trees ... 111 3 E.g. Apoa. Mos. 20.4 f. 4 R. Jose, according to Gen. Rabbah 15.7; Eaal. Rabbah 5.10; Pes. R. Kah. 20; Pesikta Rabbati 42.1; and R. Nehemiah, according to Berakoth 40a and Sanhedrin 70b. 5 E.g. Tertullian, Adv. Mara. 2.2. 6 Apoa. Mos. 20.4 f., and Gen. Rabbah 15.7. This tradition may be reflected in Philo, Q. Gen. 1.44 (on Gen. 3.8): " ... whereas they ought to have fled far away from the tree whence came their transgression, in the very midst of this place he was caught ... " (tr. R. Marcus in the Loeb ed.). 7 In Jewish sources other identifications of the tree of knowledge are proposed (grapevine, ethrog, wheat, date) the most common of which is the grapevine. See e.g., Gen. Rabbah 15.7; Pes. R. Kah 20;

216 our midrash Adam is sinned against by God who envies him both knowledge and life. 1 The Creator-God We have in our midrash clear, though quite undeveloped, lineaments of the monstrous figure of the gnostic Demiurge, Ialdabaoth 2 Saclas-Samael. Though these names do not occur in our text his attributes are clearly present: blindness (typified especially in the name "Samael") ignorance (expressed in the name "Saclas"), and malicious envy (pro1Qinent in texts describing the monstrous "child of chaos," Ialdabaoth). 3 It is, moreover, evident that the figure c)

Pes. Rab. 42.1; Berakoth 40a; Sanhedrin 70ab; Lev. Rabbah 12.1; Num. Rabbah 10.2; Esther Rabbah 5.1; Apoc. Abraham 23; 3 (Gr.) Baruch 4.8 (where the vine is planted by the angel Samael~). Cf. the gnostic Severians described by Epiphanius, Pan. 45.1.5 ff.: the vine is the product of the wicked serpent-devil, and its fruit are like globules of poison. 1 There are many other more fully developed examples of gnostic interpretation of the tree(s) in Gen. 2-3. See especially ApocryJn, BG 56.3 ff.; OnOrgWld CG II, 21(69).21 ff.; 118(166).16 ff.; etc. See also the amulet published by E. Goodenough, "A Jewish-Gnostic Amulet of the Roman Period," GBS I (1958) 71-80. On one side of the amulet there is a figure of Adam and Eve on either side of a tree around which is coiled a serpent. Their stance - uncharacteristic of early Christian representation - is expressive of gnostic shamelessness (Goodenough, 73). Goodenough was unable to interpret the two Hebrew (square Aramaic) letters in the engraving, a heth beside Adam and "a resh or daleth beside Eve" (ibid). I offer the following solution: the two letters are heth and daleth, standing for O"'n, "life," and n)l'l, "knowledge," the two trees of Gen. 2.9 understood gnostically as a single tree portrayed on the amulet. 2 In TestTr, outside of our midrash, the name "Sabaoth" is used of the God of the Law and of error at 73.31. The figure of Sabaoth, a transparent reference to the God of the Old Testament, is sometimes differentiated from Ialdabaoth in gnostic texts, as e.g., in OnOrgWld 103 (151).32 ff.; where Sabaoth is the repentent son of Ialdabaoth. Contrast e.g., the Severians, Epiphanius Pan. 45.1.4, where Ialdabaoth and Sabaoth are explicitly equated. Cf. also Pan. 26.10.6, where Sabaoth is said by the ~nasties there described to have the form of an ass or a pig! 3 It is unusual for all three of these names of the Demiurge to occur in a single context, but that is the case in the ApocryJn, CG II, 11(59). 15 ff., and in the Trimorphic Protennoia, CG XII, 1, at 39. 21 ff.,: "the great demon (6a.Lu6vLov) who rules over the nether region of hell and chaos ... called Saklas, i.e., Samael Ialda baoth."

217 of the gnostic Demiurge derives in large measure from the Jewish devil and angel of death, usually called "Samael. 111 The name "Samael" is, in gnostic sources, defined as "the blind god" or "the god of the blind" 2 (Aramaic KDO, "blind" plus '7K, "god"). 3 This etymolo~y probably arises in pre-iz:nostic Jewish 4 tradition dealing with the figure of the devil. However, the most common understanding of the name "Samael" in Jewish sources involves a different etymology (00 or KDO "poison" plus '1K "god''). 5 In addition to his function as "devil" and "angel of death" Samael is also, in Jewish sources, the chief "accusing angel." 6 In our midrash "blindness" is only indirectly attributed to God; he is, however, described as bringing blindness to his people so as to prevent them from seeing the truth. The exclamation, "Great is the blindness of his commandments" (48.2 f.), coupled with a paraphrase of Isaiah 6.10 (48.8 ff.), accuses God of veiling

~Samael" is the only one of the three names that occur in Jewish (non-gnostic) sources, though all three are Semitic constructions. On Samael and Saklas see below. The etymology of "Ialdabaoth" (n,n:l K1'7") "child of chaos") proposed already by A. Hilgenfeld, Die Ketzergesahiahte des Urahristentums (Leipzig, 1884, r.p. Darmstadt, 1963) 238, is the usual one. For Coptic texts that strength en this etymology see OnOrWZd 103(151).24; SJC (BG) 119.9 f.; and the quotation from CG XIII, above p. 216, n. 3. But cf. G. Scholem, Jewish Gnostiaism, Merkabah Mystiaism, and TaZmudia Tradition (New York, 1965), p. 71~ n. 23. On the origin of the Demiurge figure see now also G. Quispe!, "The Origins of the Gnostic Demiurge," in P. Granfield and J. Jungmann, ed. Kyriakon (Festschrift Johannes Quasten; Mtlnster, 1972), vol. 1, 271-276. 2 See e.g., OnOrWZd 103 (B8hlig 151).18; NatArah 94(142).25 f.; 87 (13S). 3 f., ("the god of the blind'·). 3 Cf. Bohlig's note in his edition, p. 49. 4 It may be reflected in the N.T. in 2 Cor. 4.4; if so the designation would involve not the "blindness" of the "god of this world" himself, but his activity in bringing blindness upon the "unbeliev ers." Cf. on the other hand Aata Andreae et Matthiae 24: the devil cannot see Andrew, and Andrew says to him, tnLKtKAnoaL 'Aua~A (read Eaua~A); oux ~TL ,U~AOC er un ~Afnwv navTac TOUC aylouc; (Tischendorf ed). 5 Cf. JE, "Samael," and ' Adobah Zal'ah 20h; TeGt Abraham (e8ovoc in God's prohibition in Gen. 2.7. Philo, Q.Gen. 1.55, and Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 3.23.6, specifically deny any (l)86voc in God's resolve in Gen. 3.22, perhaps arguing against the gnostic interpretation . Cf. Plato's Demiurge : aya3oc ~v aya~ 6£ o06£LC n£P~ o65£voc o66tnoT£ tyylyv£TQL