Mani
- founder of Manichaeaism
Intro
- to Manichaeanism
Beliefs
- Teachings & Practices
Texts
- Literary Remains
Timeline
- Chronology
Offshoots
- Branches & Hybrids
Enemies
- Anti-Mani writings
Ruins
- Temple Remains
Revival
- Restoration
Diet
- Veganism
Light Cross
- Ecology
Mythos
- Worldview
Naz site
- Site dedicated to Nazoreans
Forum-
Nazorean Forum
Order
of Nazorean
Essenes
|
Manichaean
Pantheon
Werner Sundermann
MANICHEAN PANTHEON, the
gods of the Manicheans considered collectively with regards to their names
and functions.
Sources. Accounts
of Manichean cosmogony are the most important sources for the understanding
of the Manichean pantheon. The best available version is undoubtedly Theodore
Bar Ko@nay's abstract in his Liber Scholiorum (ed. Addai Scher,
1960; French tr. Hespel and Draguet, 1982) not only because of its concise
and systematic rendering but also because it is composed in Syriac, an
Aramaic dialect very close to Mani's mother-tongue (for a comprehensive
survey of other Manichean and non-Manichean cosmogonical sources see COSMOGONY
and cosmology iii.).
Next in importance are
discourses on the deeds and merits of prominent gods. In the Eastern tradition
the "Sermon on the Light-Nous" (Manohmed ro@æn wifra@s; ed.
Sundermann, 1992a) and the "Sermon on the Soul" (Gya@n wifra@s,
i.e. on the Living Soul; ed. Sundermann, 1997) are of particular significance.
Several chapters of the Coptic Kephalaia also discuss various gods
in some detail (e.g. Keph. 21-22: Father of Greatness; Keph.
51, 53, 72, 74: First Man and his five sons; Keph. 32, 43, 54: Living
Spirit; Keph. 34-35, 46, 65, 66: Third Messenger and Sun; Keph.
95: Virgin of Light; Keph. 38, 103: Light Nous).
Valuable information can
also be gleaned from hymns in praise of divine beings, such as Mid. Pers.
and Parth. hymns to the Living Soul (Andreas-Henning, 1933, pp. 318-21;
Andreas-Henning, 1934, pp. 870-78), to the Third Messenger and Sun god
(Andreas-Henning, 1934, pp. 883-90), to Jesus (Andreas-Henning, 1933, pp.
312-18; Andreas-Henning, 1934, pp. 878-83), and also from various Coptic
Hymns (ed. Allberry, 1938, pp. 49-97, 120-26). Hymnic enumerations of gods
offer brief summaries of the pantheon (see examples in Waldschmidt-Lentz,
1933, pp. 545-62), as do word-lists of divine beings (Sundermann, 1994,
pp. 452-62; repr. Sundermann, 2001, pp. 833-43).
Divine categories and
their terminology. The Manicheans adopted the different Zoroastrian
terms designating gods, which were in common use in 3rd-century Iran, namely
Mid. Pers. bay and yazad and Parth. bag and yazad.
They developed in both of these languages a fixed terminological system
for designating individual gods, invariably saying Ohrmezd bay and
bay
Zurwa@n, but Mihr yazad and Narisah yazad. This use of
terminology has no basis in Mani's own Syriac tongue, however. It is otherwise
in Keph. 22 (Gardner, p. 68), which distinguishes between "gods"
(noute), "rich ones" (rmmao) and "[angels]" ([aggelos]).
Keph.
50 (Gardner, pp. 133-34) explains the difference between these terms: "gods"
are, according to its definition, those beings which were "evoked" by (see
below), or emanated from, the Father of Greatness himself, and in turn
they evoke the "rich ones" and what the "rich ones" evoke are called "angels,"
both in the eternal world of light of the Father and in the nether world
of the cosmos. But these terminological distinctions have remained without
any real consequence for Manichean theology, except for the differentiation
between gods and angels (cf. Allberry, ed., 1938 p. 213, l. 21: the redeemed
believers will be "added to the number of the angels") which is also well
known in Eastern Manichean texts (e.g. Parth. Mani. 137 I, recto, ll. 5-8:
"Full of mercy is this day of confession of the "gods" (yazda@n,
i.e. of the elect), of the assembly of gods (baga@n) and angels
(fre@ætaga@n)," (somewhat differently Henning, 1945, p. 485,
n. 7). The "rich ones" are evidently what Mandaic texts call the uthri
"riches" (cf. Rudolph, 1993, p. 357). They therefore must be a common Mandaic
and Manichean heritage, and they belong to Mani's own theological concepts.
It is possible that the
tripartite structure of the divine world is reflected in ˆahrasta@ni's
distinction between "angels, gods and awlia@÷" (Gimaret-Monnot,
1986, p. 658). Although translators render awlia@÷ as "saints,"
another possible meaning would be "lords, possessors, or owners" which
is closer to "rich one." Cf. also "(1) Light Gods, (2) Angels and Elements,
and (3) Powers (z÷wrkynd)," in the Sogd. Text M 178, ll.
5-7; Henning, 1948, pp. 307-308).
Manichean theology.
The
approximately forty Manichean gods and goddesses mentioned in doctrinal
and hymnic texts seem to bear witness to a markedly polytheistic theology.
This impression is contradicted, however, by certain classical descriptions,
which present the Manichean cosmogony and cosmology in philosophical terms
and concepts. The characteristic example is Alexander of Lycopolis (see
Van der Horst and Mansfeld, 1974; Villey, 1985) who calls the First Man
"Soul," the Spiritus Vivens "Demiurge," the Third Messenger "another power,"
and the demoness
AÚz "Matter" (Hyle@). Simplicius
describes the Manichean system and its actors in an even more abstract
way (Text in Adam, 1969, pp. 71-74).
Islamic sources, namely
Ebn al-Nadim's Fehrest (ed. Flügel, pp. 52-58, 86-90) and ˆahrasta@ni's
Keta@b
al-melal wa'l-neháal (tr. Gimaret and Monnot, 1986, pp. 658-59),
tend to avoid direct reference to some Manichean deities as gods, mentioning
them by their proper names only, perhaps in order to conceal from their
Islamic readers the polytheistic appearance of the Manichean doctrine.
Most of them are called "angels" (malak) rather than "gods" (ela@h).
But even the Manichean myth itself makes it clear that there is, strictly
speaking, only one eternal and all-embracing god, limited only by the Evil,
namely the Father of Greatness. All the other deities, whether they are
specified as gods or merely called angels, are no more than his "evocations."
(Text T. II K. 2a, A. von Le Coq, ed., 1911 [1912], p. 22, calls the Father
of Greatness the elder brother and sister of all the other gods.)
To describe their origin
Mani avoided the actual term for the concept of procreation replacing it
by Syr. qra@ (Bar Ko@nay, Liber Scholiorum,
ed. Scher, 1960,
p. 313, l. 27), lit. "call," meaning "to evoke by creative word." The creative
word sets in motion an emanation, which results in a hypostasis. It is
not a creatio ex nihilo. The First Man, for instance, is ultimately
regarded as his father's own Self and Soul (ibid., p. 313, l. 26:
÷l÷
bnpæy ÷zln÷ "But I shall go myself," lit. "in my
self/soul").
In the same way as the
multiplicity of the pantheon took shape at the beginning of cosmic history,
it will, after the fulfillment of its tasks, return to and into the First
God (Keph. 39, also M 5750, Mid. Pers.; cf. Sundermann, 1992b, pp.
305-18; repr. Sundermann, 2001, pp. 667-81). This does not only follow
from the events of cosmic history, Mani has described it himself in an
important passage of his Treasury of the Living quoted by Biruni
in his India (Keta@b taháqiq ma@ le'l-hend): "The
resplendent hosts will be called young women and virgins, fathers and mothers,
sons, brothers and sisters, because such is the custom in the books of
the prophets. In the country of joy there is neither male nor female and
there are no limbs to be covered. They all bear living bodies. They do
not differ from each other in weakness and force, in length and shortness,
in figure and looks; they are like similar lamps which are lighted by the
same lamp and nourished by the same material. The reason for such naming
is the struggle of the two realms" (ed. and tr. Sachau, I, pp. 19, ll.
2-9, 39; Taqizadeh and Afæa@r ˆira@zi, 1956, pp. 211, l. 16-212,
l. 1; Adam, 1969, pp. 4-5). In the light of this explanation it would be
more correct to regard the Manichean pantheon as a manifold, complex manifestation
of the Manichean original divinity, and Manichean theology as a kind of
polymorph monotheism. This has been recognized clearly and emphasized by
Henning (1947, p. 39).
Not only were the Manichean
gods of a temporary nature, some of them could also change their appearance
whenever or however it was desirable. This was the case with the First
Man (Baur, 1831; repr. 1973, pp. 55, 63), the Third Messenger, the Virgin
of Light, the twelve Virgins of Light, and also the Living Spirit (Sundermann,
1991, pp. 339-42; repr. Sundermann, 2001, pp. 827-31), when they seduced
the demons in female and male forms. A change of appearance is also attributed
to Jesus the Splendor on his way down to Adam on earth, and when he "clothed"
himself in Eve (Sundermann, 1994, pp. 317-27; repr. Sundermann, 2001, pp.
877-88). Certain other deities are described sometimes as persons, sometimes
as objects or abstract concepts, such as the Light Elements, which can
be also the sons of the First Man, his garments, or his armor. The five
sons of the Living Spirit can be five heroic warriors or five ethical concepts.
The Twelve Virgins of Light also personify twelve virtues, and the Perfect
Man is likewise the Column of Glory.
Manichean theology was
claimed unreservedly to be a form of monotheism in the Christian milieu
of North Africa towards the end of the fourth century CE. Felix, in his
dispute with St. Augustine, did not hesitate to say, concerning the pantheon
of his creed, hoc unum sunt omnes ("that one (being) are are all
(gods)" ) (Decret, 1991, p. 61, n. 7). The defenders of Manicheism stressed
the uniqueness of god, less against polytheism than the Christian accusation
of dyotheism (cf. Decret, 1970, pp. 197-201; idem, 1978, p. 295). This
was because the Manicheans were accused of having made the Prince of Darkness
into an original, self-existing principle, independent of the good God,
and thus endowed with the qualities of a deity per definitionem.
What the Manicheans themselves did not accept was the Christian and Jewish
(and philosophical) type of consequent monotheism, which logically resulted
in confessing God as the lord over good and evil (cf. Keph. 112,
120; Allberry, ed., 1938, p. 57, ll. 3-12; Decret, op. cit.).
The functional structure
of the Manichean pantheon. It was the task of the Manichean pantheon
to overcome the attack of the powers of darkness and to render those powers
harmless forever. This was achieved by three successions of gods, which
correspond to the three acts of the Manichean cosmogony, cosmology and
eschatology respectively: 1) the redemption of the World of Light from
the attack of Darkness; 2) the creation of the cosmos as a prison for the
demons and an instrument for the liberation of the Living Soul; and 3)
the process of the liberation of the particles of the Living Soul from
their imprisonment in demonic matter.
This has led to the evocation
of the following essentially triadic groups of gods. First group: i. Father
of Greatness (Syr. ÷b÷ drbwt÷, Mid. Pers. pyd
¿y wzrgyhò, by zrw÷n, Parth. pydr wzrgyftò,
Sogd. ÷zrw÷ £©yy etc.; cf. Sundermann,
1979, sub 2/1, 3/1, 4/1; Coptic names: Lindt, 1992, pp. 12-13; Chinese
names: Bryder, 1985, pp. 121-22; further names: Polotsky, 1933, p. 66;
Vermes-Lieu, 2001, p. 45, n. 32). The Father of Greatness is, strictly
speaking, the uncreated member of the first sequence (on his role, see
below, and Van Tongerloo, 1994, pp. 329-42). ii. Mother of Life/of the
Living (Syr. ÷m÷ dháy÷, Mid. Pers. m÷dr
¿y zyndg÷n, Parth. ÷rd÷w÷n m÷d,
Sogd. ÷r’÷w÷n m÷tò etc.,
also called Great Spirit, Parth. w÷d wzrg; cf. Sundermann,
1979, sub 2/2, 4/2; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 42; Chin. names: Bryder,
1985, p. 121; further names: Polotsky, 1933, p. 66; Vermes-Lieu, 2001,
p. 46, n. 33). The Mother of Life is the immediate origin of the First
Man and supports the Living Spirit in his work. (On the Mother of Life,
see further Tongerloo, 1997, pp. 361-64.) iii. First Man (Syr. ÷næ÷
qdmy÷, Mid. Pers. ÷whrmyzd by, Parth. mrd(whm)
hsyng, mrdwhm nxwyn, ÷whrmyzdbg, Sogd. Xwrmztò÷£©,
÷÷’£©; cf. Sundermann, 1979, sections 2/3,
3/3, 4/3; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 53; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, p.
121; further names: Vermes-Lieu, 2001, p. 46, n. 34), also called the "First
Enthymesis" (Mid. Pers. hndyæyæn nxwystòyn, Chin.
xian
yi; Bryder, 1985, p. 123). The First Man is instrumental in diverting
the attack of the demons of darkness on the world of light. His rescue
of the world of light is described both as a sacrifice to protect its integrity
and as an heroic victory over the demons. In any case, the First Man is
not under the power of darkness.
The only divine beings
to remain under the sway of the demons are the five sons of the First Man,
who are the Five Light Gods (Syr. hámæ÷ ÷lh÷
zywn÷, Mid. Pers. (÷)mhr÷spnd÷n,
Parth. pnj rwæn, Sogd. mr’÷spndt etc.). They
are also called the First Man's five weapon, or garments, and form together
with their father the third part of the first group of gods. They are the
five Light Elements: ether, wind, light, water and fire. As the light substance
devoured by the demons, they are the Living Soul imprisoned and cut up
in the dark matter (Syr. npæ÷ háyt÷,
Mid. Pers. gryw zyndg, Parth. gryw jywndg, similarly Soghd.
Which also has jwndy ©ryw; cf. Sundermann, 1979, sub 2/4, 3/4,
4/4; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, pp. 62-63; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, pp.
121-22, 123; cf. also Polotsky, 1933, pp. 71-72; Vermes-Lieu, 2001, p.
46, n. 35). The five sons of the First Man are the object of salvation.
The god of the Answer (Syr.
¿ny÷,
Mid. Pers. ÷zdygr yzd, Parth.
pdw÷xtg, Sogd.
P’w÷xtòg,
cf. Sundermann, 1979, sub 2/5, 4/5; in Copt. also "hearing, obedience,"
cf. Lindt, 1992, p. 72; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, pp. 121, 122, 123) is
often classified as the sixth son of the First Man. (For his function,
see below concerning God of the Call in the second group.)
Second group. i)
Friend of Lights (Syr. hábyb nhyr÷, Mid. Pers.
rwæn÷n
xw÷ryst, Parth. fryhrwæn, Sogd. fryy rwæn
£©yy; cf. Sundermann, 1979, sub 2/6; Copt. names: Lindt,
1992, p. 76; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, pp. 122, 123; further names: Polotsky,
1933, pp. 66-67), a deity whose function is unclear apart from the task
of bringing forth the Great Architect within a triadic series of mainly
demiurgic gods. ii) Great Architect (Syr. bn rb÷, Mid. Pers.
r÷z
¿y wzrg, r÷z ¿yg rwæn, Parth.
b÷myzd,
Sogd. £÷m £©yy etc., cf. Sundermann, 1979,
sub 1/7, 2/7, 3/7, 4/7; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 79; Chin. names: Bryder,
1985, p. 122). The Great Architect, on the command of the Third Messenger,
builds the New Paradise, which is the goal of redeemed souls, and a prison
for the powers of darkness. iii) The Living Spirit (Syr. rwhá÷
háy÷, Mid. Pers.
myhryzd, Parth. w÷d
jywndg, Sogd. w÷d jywndg, w÷’ jywndyy etc.; cf.
Sundermann, 1979, sections 2/8, 3/8, 4/8; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p.
86, also termed Father of Life in Coptic; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, p.
122; further names: Vermes-Lieu, 2001, p. 48, n. 43). The Living Spirit
liberates the First Man from the demonic powers of darkness, and as the
demiurge he builds the cosmos from the bodies of slain demons and places
the remaining demons in the prison of this world.
As in the case of the First
Man, who is the third in the first triadic gods, the Living Spirit is accompanied
by five (or six) sons: the Keeper of Splendor, King of Honor, Adamant of
Light (see Van Lindt, 1993, pp. 95-105), King of Glory and the Porter,
also called Atlas (Syriac and Iranian names: Sundermann, 1979, sub 2/9,
3/9, 4/9; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 91; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, pp.
122, 123; further names: Vermes-Lieu, 2001, p. 49, n. 49). Their task is
to guard and maintain the building of the cosmos as a prison of the demons.
The god of the Call, or
Summons(so Gardner; Syr. qry÷, MP. xwndg,myzdgt÷c
[yzd], Parth. xrwætg, Sogd. xrwætg, cf. Sundermann,
1979, sections 2/10, 4/10; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 72; Chin. names:
Bryder, 1985, pp. 121, 123) is regarded as the sixth son of the Living
Spirit. He is the awakening call that was once sent to the defeated, unconscious
First Man. Once roused, the First Man answered the call, and both Call
and Answer (or Obedience) became united into one new god, the Enthymesis
of Life (Syr. [mháæbt÷ dháy÷],
Mid. Pers. hndyæyæn zyndg, Parth. ÷ndyæyæn
jywndg, Sogd. [jw(÷)ndc æm÷r÷], Copt.
sa±ne,
Chin. Si, Arabic [hamma@ma]; not in Sundermann, 1979, but
in Sundermann "God and his adversary in Manicheism...," forthcoming). The
Enthymesis of Life is explained by Henning (Andreas-Henning, 1943, p. 878,
n. 4) as the Soul's natural will for redemption.
The third group is divided
into two branches which, as H. J. Polotsky has recognized (1935, p. 253;
repr. in Widengren, 1977, p. 118), correspond to the two cosmic vehicles
of redemption, the Sun and the Moon.
a. The "sun-group":
i) Third Messenger (Syr. ÷yzgd÷ "the Messenger," Mid.
Pers. nryshyzd, Parth. hrdyg fryætg, nrysfyzd, myhr
(yzd), Sogd. ÷ætykw pr÷y-æt÷k,
nryænx £©y, myæyy £©yy etc., cf.
Sundermann, 1979, sub 2/11, 3/11, 4/11; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 115;
Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, pp. 121, 122, 123; further names: Polotsky,
1933, p. 67), the redeemer of the Living Soul, mainly from its macrocosmic
bonds. He seduces the female and male archons, and sets the sun, the moon
and the cosmic wheel in motion, but, as the main deity in the sun-group,
he is also instrumental in redeeming human souls. ii) The Twelve Virgins
(Syr. trt¿sr÷ btwlt÷, Mid. Pers. qnyg÷n
rwæn÷n, Parth. qnyg÷n, Sogd. XII £©pwryæt;
cf. Sundermann, 1979, sub 2/12; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 173; Chin.
names: Bryder, 1985, pp. 122, 123). Their function is the same as that
of the Virgin of Light (see below, and also Van Tongerloo, 1997, pp. 366-67).
iii) The Column of Glory (Syr. ÷stwn æwbhá÷,
Parth. b÷mystwn; cf. Sundermann, 1979, sub 2/13.1; Copt.
names: Lindt, 1992, p. 179; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, pp. 121, 122, 123),
also called the Perfect Man (Syr. not preserved, Mid Pers. mrd ¿yg
¿spwr, srwæhr÷y, Parth. mrd ¿spwryg,
Sogd. srwærtò £©yy, etc., cf. Sundermann,
1979, sub 2/13.1, 3/13.1, 4/13.1; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 179; Chin.
names: Bryder, 1985, p. 122; further names: Polotsky, 1933, p. 67). He
collects the redeemed souls and light particles and leads them up to the
moon. An eschatological variant of this god is the (god of the) Final Statue
(Syr. not preserved, Parth. ¿stòwmynyzd; cf. Sundermann,
1979, section 2/13.2; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 183; Chin. names: Bryder,
1985, pp. 121, 122, 123).
b. The "moon-group":
i) Jesus the Splendor (Syr. yyæw¿ zywn÷, Mid.
Pers. yyæw¿ ¿spyxt÷n, m÷hò
(yzd), Parth. yyæw¿ zyw÷, m÷hò
(yzd), Sogd. yyæw¿, m÷x (£©yy), etc.,
cf. Sundermann, 1979, sub 1/14, 2/14, 3/14, 4/14; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992,
pp. 143-44; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, p. 121; Greek name: Polotsky, 1933,
pp. 67-68), who serves mainly, but not exclusively, as the redeemer of
the Living Soul from the microcosmic sphere of mankind. He arouses Adam,
emanates the Light Nous, and, through the Light Nous, he sends out all
the subsequent apostles of truth, including Mani. (On the manifold aspects
of the Jesus figure in Manicheism, see christ in manichaeism; see further,
Franzmann, 2000, pp. 220-246, esp. pp. 229-34; Richter, 2001, pp. 174-84).
ii) Virgin of Light (Syr. not preserved, Mid. Pers. knygrwæn,
Parth. knygrwæn, sdwys, Sogd. qnygrwæn, rwxæn÷
£©pwryc, etc., cf. Sundermann, 1979, section 2/15, 3/15,
4/15; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 173; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, p. 123;
further names: Polotsky, 1933, p. 68; Vermes-Lieu, 2001, p. 51, n. 58).
She is active mainly in the sky, where she fights against the demons of
thunderstorms (see further Van Tongerloo, 1997, pp. 364-71). iii) The Light
Nous (Syr.: not preserved, Mid. Pers. whmn (yzd), Parth. mnwhmyd
rwæn, Sogd. mnwhmyd rwæn, whmn rwæn, ’ynmztò÷yzn
£©yy, etc.; cf. Sundermann, 1979, section 2/16.1, 3/16.1,
4/16.1; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, p. 165; Chin. names: Bryder, 1985, p.
123; further names: Polotsky, 1933, pp. 68-70), who is also called Holy
Spirit and Living Spirit (Sundermann, 1979, sub 2/16.2; Chin. name: Bryder,
1985, p. 121), is the divine, redeeming force in the Manichean religion.
He brings the nature of the New Man to power in the redeemed man and subdues
the demonic spirit of matter. A whole volume of articles is devoted to
the different aspects of the figure of the Light Nous (A. Van Tongerloo
and J. Van Oort, eds., 1995), as well as the Parthian "Sermon on the light-Nous"
(Sundermann, 1992a) .
The group of deities redeeming
the Living Soul is rich in further emanations, which are attributed either
to Jesus the Splendor or to the Light Nous. They all play their role in
individual eschatology. It is worth mentioning the Great Judge, who will
sit in judgment over the souls of the deceased (Syr. not preserved, Parth.
d÷dbr
r÷ætygr, Sogd. rætòyy ÷xtòw;
Bactrian
rætyg
l÷d£r: Gershevitch, 1984, p. 275, cf. Sundermann, 1979,
sub 2/17; Copt. names: Lindt, 1992, pp. 193-94; Chin. names not attested),
and the Light Form, who is accompanied by three angels who will approach
the souls of the deceased and lead them on their way to paradise (Polotsky,
1933, p. 72; cf.
Keph.
7) as well as the "Counterpart" of the apostle,
that is Mani's twin spirit or Syzygos (Mid. Pers. nrjmyg, Parth.
ymg (rwæn), Sogd. ym÷krwæn; Sundermann,
1981, pp. 166, 176, 192; Polotsky, 1933, p. 72; cf. Keph. 7; also
forthcoming De Blois, "Manes' 'Twin',").
The structure of the third
group of gods is without doubt the most complicated one. Its arrangement
as described here (cf. Keph. 25) may be contradicted by models presented
in other Manichean texts. In Keph. 7, for instance, the following
sequence of emanations is postulated: Father of Greatness, Third Messenger,
Jesus the Splendor, Light Nous, Light Form and Three Angels (on this problem
in general, see Heuser, 1998, pp. 3-108, esp. pp. 90-103).
The name of the Third Messenger
(also rendered as Third Ambassador) is proof that the tripartite system
of the Manichean pantheon is not merely a construct of scholars, although
there is no god called the First or the Second Messenger (except in Chinse
nomenclature which does have the name dier shi "Second Messenger"
for the Friend of Lights; Bryder, 1985, p. 123). Apart from the already-mentioned
triadic grouping of Manichean deities, other numeric stylizations are also
evident, such as pentads (five sons of the First Man, five sons of the
Living Spirit) and the dodecadic group of the Twelve Virgins of Light.
(Concise synopses of the Manichean pantheon are given in Boyce, Reader,
pp. 9-10; and Tardieu, 1981, pp. 104-107.)
The pantheon was conceived
in order to fulfill specific pre-cosmic or cosmological tasks. But that
does not mean that, with the fulfillment of their designated work, the
gods become inactive or disappear from the cosmic scene. On the contrary,
a
deity of the First Evocation (I) supports the demiurgical work, and deities
of the First and Second Evocation (II) participate in the redemption of
the Living Soul, as it is currently under the effect of the deities of
the Third Evocation (III). The following examples may suffice to illustrate
this point: The Mother of Life (I) takes part in the creation of the world
out of the bodies of the demons killed by the Living Spirit (II). The Third
Messenger (III) commissions the Great Architect (II) to erect the New Paradise
and to build a prison for the enemies of the light. From the Call (II)
of the Spirit of Life and the Answer (I) of the First Man a new god comes
into being, the Enthymesis of Life, who becomes instrumental in the soul-redeeming
process.
It is not self-evident
why a misogynistic religion such as Manicheism admits the existence and
redeeming contribution of a number of female deities. Indeed, it is remarkable
that in the First and Third Evocations of the Manichean pantheon, the second
part in the triple sequence of gods is left to goddesses (Mother of Life
(I), Twelve Virgins (III), Virgin of Light (III)). A plausible explanation
is that in those cases there is still a trace of the older (Valentinian?)
idea of a "spiritual procreation," such that the father–mother–son pattern
can be presupposed. In the First Evocation, this pattern has the character
of a Trinity formula of the Gnostic type (cf. Leisegang, 1985, p. 345):
God the Father, Mother (= Holy Spirit), Son (= Christ).
The description of the
Manichean pantheon presented here is a simplified summary based on the
original sources at our disposal. It comes closest to the abstract of the
Manichean cosmogony presented by Theodore bar Ko@nay, which, however, is
defective in its final part.
The cosmic pantheon
and its model in the World of Light. Although the World of Light and
the nether world of the cosmos are totally different in nature and function,
a certain degree of comparability cannot be denied. This is also true for
the cosmic deities. Thus, the dodecadic circle of the divine aeons surrounding
the Father of Greatness reappears as the Twelve Virgins (!) of Light (III).
The five "dwellings" of the Father of Light are the same as the five members
of the soul and the five sons of the Living Spirit (II). Moreover, the
five sons of the First Man (I) reflect the "elements" of the World of Light
(the
mr’÷spndt of Sogd. M 178 /6/; see Henning, 1948, pp.
307-308). Since it is impossible to imagine anything more perfect than
the World of Light, the imitation of some of its structures in the cosmic
world can only underline the well-arranged perfection of the worldly pantheon
as well.
Sources of the Manichean
theological system. It is natural to compare the Manichean sequences
of gods deriving ultimately from the Father of Greatness with similar gnostic
speculations. The Valentinian doctrine of syzygies is particularly apt
for comparison (Rudolph, 1996; repr. Rudolph, 1965, pp. 647-48; Böhlig,
1988, pp. 326-28, 338). But a comparison also highlights the peculiarities
of Manichean theology (cf. Polotsky, 1935, p. 248; repr. Widengren, ed.,
1977, p. 111). There is hardly a trace left of the gnostic idea of a spiritual
procreation of sequences of deities, from the First Father and his consort
down to the last one, and until the origin of the world. This is because
the Manichean sequence of emanations does not imply a diminution of the
quality of the light of succeeding beings (Bianchi, 1993, pp. 25-26), and
also because it is not designed to separate the First God as much as possible
from the evil of this world, but rather to guarantee the successful application
of the necessary means of defense against worldly evil in due course. The
Manichean doctrine of the Enthymesis of Death and Life can be compared
with the Valentinian Enthymesis or "Lower Sophia," who, out of desire to
behold the Father God, became the origin of the material and psychic nature
of the world (see further Sundermann, "God and his adversary in Manichaeism..."
forthcoming).
The derivation of the files
of Manichean gods from a Zoroastrian pattern, such as the successive creation
of the divine pantheon as described in the Middle Persian Bundahiæn,
is less likely to be correct. A gnostic (most likely Valentinian) affiliation
is suggested by the use of a number of gnostic terms and names to denote
divine beings in the Manichean pantheon, such as the First Man, the Enthymesis
of Death, the Virgin of Light, and the five parts of the Soul, namely "Reason,
Mind, Intelligence, Thought, and Understanding." They are also attested,
as Rudolph and Tardieu have shown, in the Eugnostos Letter 73 and
in the Sophia of Jesus Christ 95 (Rudolph, 1996; repr. Rudolph,
1965, pp. 646-47; Tardieu, 1984, pp. 355-57, 366-70).
The role of the gods
in relation to the community and individual piety. Manichean hymns
and psalms, which are preserved in large numbers in both the Coptic and
the Iranian traditions, are mainly directed towards the deities and thus
constitute a rich source for the understanding of the role of the gods
in the religious practice of the community. In general, one can conclude
that those deities to whom complete hymns are dedicated are also the principal
ones, while gods of minor rank, receive, at the very most, a mere mention
in invocative lists. The quantity and length of hymns dedicated to a particular
deity may also be regarded as a measure of his or her reputation. On this
basis, one may conclude that the deities of the Third Evocation as well
as the Living Soul were the main object of Manichean devotion. It should
not come as a surprise that praise and prayer were not restricted to the
redeeming deities but addressed also to the suffering Living Soul, in view
of the fact that the latter played a major role as the object of redemption
in the ritual meal of the elect. Moreover, one means of setting free the
light particles of the Soul was the chanting of hymns. Among the gods of
the Third Evocation, it is primarily the Third Messenger and Jesus the
Splendor who are addressed. A subordinate role is played by the demiurgical
deities of the Second Evocation, and among the deities of the First Evocation,
it is the First Man who is given prominence.
In this context, the significance
of the position and function of the Manichean First God, the Father of
Greatness, needs to be highlighted. Not only is the Father of Greatness
the origin of all the other gods of the Manichean pantheon, and not only
does he manifest himself in the cosmic pantheon, but he remains at the
same time the god of the World of Light beyond the cosmos. He is a member
of the pentad of the World of Light, besides those 12 aeons who surround
him who are called his sons, and the innumerable aeons around the inner
circle of aeons, the Earth of Light and the Spirit of Life, which is the
life-giving air of the World of Light (cf. Gharib, 2000, pp. 258-69).
However, it is stressed
in Manicheism that it was the Father of Greatness himself who, of all the
beings in the World of Light, stood up against the attack of the powers
of Darkness (Keph. 63). He did so in the person of the First Man,
who is called his own Soul and Self according to Alexander of Lycopolis
(see above). He saved the World of Light at the cost of some of his own
light substance. After this achievement he remained unmolested by the powers
of Darkness, but that does not mean that he became a passive deus absconditus.
(Cf. Psalm-Book, ed. Allberry, 1938, p. 161, 31-32: "One is the
God that is hidden, that is revealed . . silent . . He it is that speaks
also," similarly ibid., p. 171, 27-28). On the contrary, he is a
deity who is often praised and invoked (see Boyce, 1960, p. 148, section
40.), and that can only mean that he constantly intervenes in the world
on behalf of the Living Soul.
The involvement of the
Father of Greatness in cosmic affairs finds a quasi-pantheistic expression
in the well-attested dogma of the fourfold god "God, Light, Power and Wisdom"
(where "God" can also be replaced by "Purity" or "Holiness"). Thus, in
the Chinese Hymn Scroll (vv. 146a and 151a; cf. Waldschmidt-Lentz,
1933, pp. 488 and 489), and in the Chinese stone inscription of Fujian
(Wushu, 1989, I, pp. 22-27; for a similar rock inscription beside the Manichean
temple near Quanzhou, see Bryder, 1988, p. 206), the aspect of "Light"
is represented by "Sun and Moon," "Power" by the cosmic achievement of
the Five Light Elements, and "Wisdom" by the redeeming gnosis of the Manichean
church (Merkelbach, 1986, pp. 39-50; on the pantheistic aspect of Manichean
theology, see also Baur, 1831 repr. Baur, 1973, pp. 41-45).
The hymns for the gods
contained praise of them, prayers for the salvation of souls, and lamentation
over the fate of the Living Soul in the prison of darkness, but hardly
any request for worldly goods, sound health, peace on earth, rich harvest,
property etc. An easing of earthly troubles could have been expected most
of all from the five Light Elements, as is explained in the "Sermon on
the Soul" (Sundermann, 1997, pp. 14-16). The religious poetry of the Manicheans,
their hymns and their psalms were large-scale compositions praising the
redeeming gods as well as complaining about the miserable fate of the Living
Soul. They reflect the essence of Manichean worship, namely to turn towards
the suffering and redeeming deity.
The Manichean elect
as gods. It was common to address high-ranking personalities in Sasanian
Iran as bay "god, lord." This was not alien to Manichean communities
(Mani is repeatedly addressed in Parth. bg ÷wd ÷njywg
"God/Lord and Savior"; see also Puech, 1979, pp. 356, 379). It exceeds
mere Zoroastrian parlance, however, when the Manichean elect are addressed
with the otherwise exclusively divine title of yazad (pl. yazda@n).
The reason for this remarkable practice is certainly some kind of deification
of the Manichean clergy. A Coptic Kephalaion confirms this assumption
(cf. Keph. 81, the fasting of the elect engenders angels; Keph.
88: "The elect are] gods as they stand firm in the image of the gods.").
This deification is, in my view, on account of the miraculous ability of
the Manichean elect to liberate the particles of the Living Soul from what
they eat during their sacramental meals, and thus to become redeemers of
the deity of the Living Soul.
However, the human frailty
of these "gods" could not have passed unnoticed. Thus, an Old Turkish hymn
ended with the entreaty: "Forgive the sin of the gods!" (Parth. yazda@n
a@sta@r hirza@ in an Uigur hymn; cf. Zieme, 1975, pp. 28, 29; cf. also
M 894 /V/3/ yzd÷n ÷stò÷r hyrz÷
, and (defective) M 870c /2/). The reason for the deification of the clergy
may therefore have been to give prominence to the high rank of the elect
above the lay people, rather than to raise the clergy onto equal standing
with the divine pantheon. Furthermore, it has an almost Buddhist ring to
it when a Coptic psalm makes Mani, as the Paraclete, an object of veneration
by the gods (Allberry, ed., 1938, pp. 36-38).
The Iranian names of
the Manichean gods. The Manicheans evidently had clear ideas about
what characterized their outstanding divine beings. They stated, for instance,
that the ideal personality should be mild like the First Man, severe like
the Living Spirit, beautiful like the sun god (the Third Messenger), wise
like the moon god (Jesus), and changeable like the goddess of lightning
(the Virgin of Light; Le Coq, I, pp. 24-25).
And yet, it is hardly imaginable
that the somewhat abstract and often complicated names of the Manichean
divinities could have been of much help in making those gods – except for
Jesus – into concrete objects of practical worship and belief (cf. Gardner,
1995, p. XXV). The simple believer was recommended to address his prayers
to the sun and the moon, the visible residences and symbols of divinity,
and of the Third Messenger and Jesus in particular (Puech, 1979, pp. 271-73;
Klimkeit, p. 261, l. 20).
Proper names of familiar
gods were given to the Manichean divinities in the East of Iran where the
Manichean gods were identified with Zoroastrian equivalents. The gods remained
Manichean throughout, and the Zoroastrian denominations were nothing more
than adaptable renamings (Schaeder, 1927, pp. 135, 146). And yet it is
likely that a god Mihr or Ohrmazd offered himself more readily
for worship than a Third Messenger or a First Man. The Iranian renaming
of the Manichean pantheon may well have strengthened the faith, and it
may have given Eastern Manicheism a more polytheistic appearance than it
originally had. North African Manicheism presented the radical counter-image,
where the idea of divine monotheism was emphatically stressed.
Alien gods in the Manichean
view. The gods of the Zoroastrian pantheon were neither rejected nor
negated, but instead they were accommodated by being identified with similar
Manichean deities. The rationale behind such treatment was the presupposition
that the Zoroastrians had misunderstood and misinterpreted the nature of
their own pantheon, and so it was up to the Manichean church to correct
their theology.
It is also known that the
Manicheans interpreted some details of Ancient Greek mythology as confirmation
of their own worldview (cf. Baur, 1831; repr. Baur, 1973, pp. 81-82). But
there is no indication so far that they treated the gods and goddesses
of the Greaco-Roman world like the Iranian gods. What we do know is that
the Iranian example was repeated in Chinese Manicheism, where some Manichean
deities came to be identified with certain Buddhist Bodhisattvas and Buddhas
(Bryder, 1985, p. 122).
But even if such identification
was widespread in Eastern Manichean theology, it must not be generalized
universally. An obvious exception to the rule is the presentation of four
Hindu deities on the famous Manichean miniature MIK 4979a /R/, who were
identified by P. Banerjee as Brahma@, Visánáu, ›iva and Ganáes‚a.
Their suggested identification on a Manichean miniature with the Manichean
Fourfold God (God, Light, Power, Wisdom) is highly unlikely, mainly because
they are given a lowly position at the bottom of the picture, below all
the (human) clerics and warriors who are the actors in the scene. The repeatedly
expressed alternative explanation of these gods as the protective spirits
of the Manichean community in the Ùaha@r-Tu©ri-country
is preferable (cf. Gula‚csi, 2001, pp. 72-73). This would mean that the
Hindu deities were accepted as gods, but given a subordinate and subservient
function.
Bibliography: A. Adam,
Texte
zum Manichäismus, Berlin, 1969. C. R. C. Allberry, ed.,
A Manichaean
Psalm-Book II, Stuttgart, 1938. F. C. Andreas and W. Henning, "Mitteliranische
Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan II," SPAW, Phil.-hist. Kl.,
Berlin, 1933, pp. 294-363 (repr. Henning, 1977, pp. 191-260). F. C. Andreas
and W. Henning, "Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan III,"
SPAW,
Phil.-hist. Kl., Berlin, 1934, pp. 846-912 (repr. Henning, 1977, pp.
275-339). F. C. Baur, Das manichäische Religionssystem nach den
Quellen neu untersucht und entwikelt, Tübingen, 1831 (repr. Hildesheim/New
York, 1973). U. Bianchi, "Sur la the‚ologie et l'anthropologie de Mani,"
in P. Bilde et. al., eds., Apocryphon Severini presented to Søren
Giversen, Aarhus, 1993, pp. 19-28. F. de Blois, "Manes' 'Twin' in Iranian
and non-Iranian texts," forthcoming. A. Böhlig, "Zum Selbstverständnis
des Manichäismus," in W. Sundermann et al. eds., A Green Leaf.
Papers in Honour of Professor Jes P. Asmussen
(Acta Iranica 28), Leiden,
1988, pp. 317-338. M.Boyce, A Reader in Manichaean Middle Persia and
Parthian, Acta Iranica 9, Leiden et al., 1975. P. Bryder,
The
Chinese Transformation of Manichaeism. A Study of Chinese Manichaean Terminology,
n.p., 1985. Idem. " '...Where the faint traces of Manichaeism disappear',"
AoF 15/1, 1988, pp. 201-8. L. Cirillo and A. Van Tongerloo eds.,
Atti del Terzo Congresso Internationale di Studi "Manicheismo e Oriente
Cristiano Antico," ed. L. Cirillo and A. Van Tongerloo, Louvain/Naples,
1997. F. Decret, Aspects du maniche‚isme dans l'Afrique romaine,
Paris, 1970. Idem, L'Afrique maniche‚enne (IVe-Ve sieàcles)
I, Paris, 1978. Idem, "Le dogme maniche‚en fondamental des deux principes
selon Faustus de Milev," in A. Van Tongerloo and S. Giversen, eds., Manichaica
selecta. Studies presented to Professor Julien Ries on the occasion of
his seventieth birthday, Louvain, 1991, pp. 59-69. G. Flügel,
ed., Mani, seine Lehre und seine Schriften, Leipzig, 1862. M. Franzmann,
"Jesus in the Manichaean Writings – Work in Progress," in R. E. Emmerick
et al., eds., Studia Manichaica IV. Internationaler Kongreß zum
Manichäismus, Berlin, 14.–18. Juli 1997, Berlin, 2000, pp. 220-46.
I. Gershevitch, "The Bactrian fragment in Manichean script,"
From Hecateus
to al-Ówa@rarizm^, ed. J. Harmatta, Budapest, 1984, pp. 273-80.
I. Gardner, The Kephalaia of the Teacher. The Edited Coptic Manichaean
Texts in Translation with Commentary, Leiden, 1995. B. Gharib, "New
Light on Two Words in the Sogdian Version of the 'Light Paradise or the
Realm of Light'," in R. E. Emmerick et al., eds., Studia Manichaica.
IV. Internationaler Kongreß zum Manichäismus, Berlin, 14. -
18. Juli 1997, Berlin 2000, pp. 258-269. D. Gimaret and G. Monnot,
Shahrastani, Livre des religions et des sectes I, Leuven,
1986. Zs. Gula‚csi, Manichaean Art in Berlin Collections, Turnhout,
2001. W. B. Henning, "Sogdian Tales," BSOAS 11, 1945, pp. 465-87.
Idem, " Two Manichaean Magical Texts, with an Excursus on the Parthian
Ending -e@nde@h,"BSOAS 12, 1947, pp. 39-66. Idem, "A Sogdian
Fragment of the Manichaean Cosmogony," BSOAS 12, 1948, pp. 306-318.
Idem, Selected Papers I-II, (Acta Iranica 14-15),Leiden, 1977. M.
Heuser, "The Manichaean Myth According to the Coptic Sources," tr. M. Franzmann,
in M. Heuser and H-J. Klimkeit, Studies in Manichaean Literature and
Art, Leiden etc., 1998, pp. 3-108. Keph.:Kephalaia I, ed. H.
J. Polotsky and A. Böhlig, Stuttgart, 1940. H-J. Klimkeit,
Hymnen
und Gebete der Religion des Lichts. Iranische und türkische liturgische
Texte der Manichäer Zentralasiens, Abh. der Rheinisch-Westfalischen
Akad. der Wissenschaften., 79, 1989. A. v. Le Coq, Türkische Manichaica
aus Chotscho I, APAW, 1911; Berlin [1912]. H. Leisegang,
Die Gnosis,
Stuttgart, 1985. R. Merkelbach, Mani und sein Religionssystem, Opladen,
1986. H. J. Polotsky, "Manichäismus," Paulys-Wissowa, Suppl.
VI, Stuttgart, 1935, cols. 240-71; partly reprinted in Widengren, 1977,
pp. 101-144. Idem and C. Schmidt, "Ein Mani-Fund in Ägypten,"
SPAW,
Phil.-hist. Kl., Berlin, 1933, pp. 4-90; partly reprinted in Widengren
1977, pp. 67-97. H-Ch. Puech, "Liturgie et pratique rituelles," Sur
le Maniche‚isme et autres essais, Paris, 1979, pp. 235-394. S. G. Richter,
"Bemerkungen zu den verschiedenen 'Jesus-Figuren' im Manichäismus,"
in J. Van Oort, O. Wermelinger and G. Wurst, eds., Augustine and Manichaeism
in the Latin West. Proceedings of the Fribourg-Utrecht International Symposium
of the IAMS, Leiden, 2001, pp. 174–84. K. Rudolph, Gnosis, San
Francisco, 1993. Idem,
Gnosis und spätantike Religionsgeschichte.
Gesammelte Aufsätze, Leiden, 1996. E. Sachau, ed. and tr., Al-Beruni's
India I, London, 1888. H. H. Schaeder, Urform und Fortbildungen
des manichäischen Systems, Leipzig/Berlin, 1927. W. Sundermann,
"Namen von Göttern, Dämonen und Menschen in iranischen Versionen
des manichäischen Mythos," AoF 6, 1979, pp. 95-133. Idem, Mitteliranische
manichäische Texte kirchengeschichtlichen Inhalts, Berliner Turfantexte
XI, Berlin, 1981. Idem, "Der Lebendige Geist als Verführer der Dämonen,"
in A. Van Tongerloo and S. Giversen, eds., Manichaica selecta. Studies
presented to Professor Julien Ries on the occasion of his seventieth birthday,
Louvain, 1991, pp. 339-42 (repr. Sundermann, 2001, pp. 827-31). Idem, Der
Sermon vom Licht-Nous. Eine Lehrschrift des östlichen Manichäismus,
Berliner Turfantexte XVII, Berlin, 1992a. Idem, "Iranische Kephalaiatexte?"
in G. Wiessner and H-J. Klimkeit, eds., Studia Manichaica II, Wiesbaden,
1992b, pp. 305-318 (repr. Sundermann, 2001, pp. 667-81). Idem, "Eine Liste
manichäischer Götter in soghdischer Sprache," in C. Elsas et.
al., eds., Tradition und Translation. Festschrift für Carsten Colpe
zum 65. Geburtstag, Berlin/New York, 1994, pp. 452-62 (repr. Sundermann,
2001, pp. 833-45). Idem, "Eva illuminatrix," in H. Preissler et
al., eds., Gnosisforschung und Religionsgeschichte. Festschrift für
Kurt Rudolph zum 65. Geburtstag, Marburg, 1994, pp. 317-27 (repr. Sundermann,
2001, pp. 877-88). Idem, Der Sermon von der Seele. Eine Lehrschrift
des östlichen Manichäismus, Berliner Turfantexte XIX, Turnhout,
1997. Idem, Manichaica Iranica. Ausgewählte Schriften von Werner
Sundermann I-II, ed. Chr. Reck et al., Rome, 2001. Idem, "God and his
adversary in Manichaeism. The case of the 'Enthymesis of Death'
and the 'Enthymesis of Life'," forthcoming. S. H® Taqiza@da
and A. A. ˆira@zi, Ma@ni o din-e u (Mani and his religion),
Tehran, 1956. M. Tardieu, Le Maniche‚isme, Paris, 1981.Idem,
Écrites
gnostiques, Codex de Berlin, Paris, 1984. Theodore bar Ko@nay,Liber
Scholiorum, ed. Addai Scher,CSCO 69, Scriptores Syri 26, Louvain,
1960; tr. R. Hespel and R. Draguet as Livre des Scolies (recension de
Se‚ert) II, CSCO 432, Scriptores Syri 188, Louvain, 1982.P. W. Van
der Horst and J. Mansfeld, An Alexandrian Platonist against Dualism.
Alexander of Lycopolis' Treatise 'Critique of the Doctrines of Manichaeus',
Leiden, 1974. P. Van Lindt, The Names of Manichaean Mythological
Figures. A Comparative Study on Terminology in the Coptic Sources,
Wiesbaden, 1992. Idem, "Adamas, the Belligerent Hero," in P. Bilde et al.,
eds.,
Apocryphon Severini presented to Søren Giversen, Aarhus,
1993, pp. 95-105.A. Van Tongerloo, "The Father of Greatness," in H. Preissler
et al., eds., Gnosisforschung und Religionsgeschichte. Festschrift für
Kurt Rudolph zum 65. Geburtstag, Marburg, 1994, 329-42. A. Van Tongerloo
and J. Van Oort, eds., The Manichaean NOYS. Proceedings of the International
Symposium organized in Louvain from 31 July to 3 August 1991, Louvain,
1995. A. Van Tongerloo, "Manichaean female deities," in L. Cirillo and
A. Van Tongerloo eds., Atti del Terzo Congresso Internationale di Studi
"Manicheismo e Oriente Cristiano Antico," Louvain/Naples, 1997, pp.
361-74. Louvain, 2001. A. Villey, Alexandre de Lycopolis. Contre
la doctrine de Mani, Paris, 1985. E. Waldschmidt and W. Lentz, "Manichäische
Dogmatik aus chinesischen und iranischen Texten," SPAW, Phil.-Hist.
Kl., Berlin, 1933, pp. 478-607. G. Widengren, ed., Der Manichäismus,
Darmstadt, 1977. Lin Wushu, "A New Find of Manichaean Stone Carving in
Fujian, China," Manichaean Studies Newsletter 1, 1989, pp. 22-27.
P. Zieme, Manichäisch-türkische Texte, Berliner Turfantexte
V, Berlin, 1975.
(I thank Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst
and Chrinstiane Reck for valuable help and advice).
(Werner Sundermann)
|
