Dmthmar, CHRisriAir, a monk b Ae iW«y^ Corbey in the ninth centniy, was bora ia '*??[j and afterwards taught in the monastcnefl d?^ and Malmedy, in the diocese of L^ Hekft>(» mentaiy on St. Matthew (Stra8bnrg,]M4,' ^H"^ 1530, fol.). "It contains some opiniow i«P<*^ transubstantiation decidedly opposed to tlioM ^ J^ em Romanism, though they were regarded a* «J' dox at the time of his writing. He wmat^\ commentary on St Luke and St Johi, wind ^ ^ not Uve to finish. For St Mark he refers te p^
DRYANDER
903
DUALISM
a commentary of Bede/' His commentary on St ke and St. John was printed at Hagnenau in 1630, the Bibliotheca Patrum (t xv, p. 86). The edition Elaguenau was edited by Johann Secer, a Lutheran, 1 Wetzer und Welte {Kirchm-Lexihony iii, 821) say it he i>erverted and garbled the text so as to make oppose transubstantiation. His text runs: *'Hoc . corpus memn, i. e. in sacramento . . . transferens rituaUter corpus in panem, in vinum sanguinem." I the other hand, Sixtns of Siena asserts that he ind a MSS. in the Franciscan monastery at Lyons, which the words run : Hoc est corpus meum, hoc t, vers in sacrcanento ntbnsteiu .... trat^ferens inem in eorpu$ et vinum in sanffmnem. See Wetzer Welte, Kirchen-Lexikon, 1. c. ; Dupin, Eccksiastical ^riters, cent, ix ; Mosheim,^. nisUm/, cent ix, chap, n. 46 ; CeilUer, Autewrs EccUtiasiiques, Paris, 1862, i,419sq. ; Herzog^ HeaUEnqflehp, 'ii, 6Si,
Dryander. See Emzikas, Francisco db.
Drysdale, John, D.D., an eminent divine of the hurch of Scotland, was bom in 1718; entered the Diversity of Edinburgh in 1732; became minbter of ukliston in 1748; appointed minister of the Iron lurch, and also king's chaplain, in 1765; and died in 188. He was one of the loaders of the moderate par- r in the Church of Scotland, and was supposed to be iclined to Arminianism. See his Sermons^ tcith lAft y Dalzd (Edinb. 1798, 2 vols. 8vo).
Dualism, in philosophy, is that system which ex- lains the phenomena of thtf universe by assuming wo primcU principles instead of one (Monism). In [leology, Dualism explains evil by assuming two orig- lal principles or beings, one good, the other evil, lie doctrine of two primal causes, one good and the ther evil, constantly waning with each other, lay at he foundation of the system of Zoroaster (q. v.). It ros also developed later in Manicheism (q. v.) ; and mong the Sclavonians, who, during the interval be- ween their undisturbed faith in their national mythol- ogy and their conversion to Christianity, added to the rorship of the good being that of a supremely evil tne, viz. Czemebog (the Black God) (Lcndon Beview^ Vpril, 1855, p. 11). It was in this Sclavonic soil that he Oriental dualism found a congenial home, and Vom it seems to have originated the dualism of the uathari and other sects during the Middle Ages. See
uATHARI.
Its root is always found in imperfect speculation on the relation of God to the world, and on the origin of svU. It is apt to spring up, also, in the practical sphere, From the sense of personal sin, which seeks relief in a transfer of guilt f^om the real self— the man — to some- thing outside of him, e. g. to the physical side of his own nature, or to the general laws of nature.
1. Oriental DuaUtm. — ^The Chinese, at a very early period, adopted a dualistic philosophy and theology. The ordinary speech of their philosophers was dual- istic, implying two primal essences, '* one a power or cause, the other a more passive something on which that power or cause could operate. The former may be styled the ultimate immaterial principle of the uni- verse (Le) ; the second, consisting of ethereal matter, 18 the ulthnate material principle {Ke). The latter, again, is dual (i/ang and ^), viz. the paternal and ma- ternal principles in nature. Man is the product of the marriage of the male and female principles in na^ ture. Yang and ym, coexisting as the material ground in which the ultimate principle (Ke) takes effect, enter into the composition of rational as well as of irrational helngs. In moral speculation, however, this dualism passed into a sort of panthebm" (Hard wick, CArist and other Moitersy pt. iii, chap. i).
The PertioH Dualism. The Persian system, wheth- er originated by Zoroaster, or, what b more likely, modified by him from older doctrines, taught that there u ^*a supreme Being, all powerful and eternal, from
whom have eternally proceeded, by his creative word {jBonoftr), two principles, OrmuKd n.n^- Ahriman ; Or- muzd (jOivmatdes) being pure and infinite Light, Wis- dom, and Perfection, the Creator' of every good thing ; Ahriman the principle of darkness and evil, opposed to Ormuzd, either originally or in consequence of his &11. To this belief are attached fables respecting the conflicting efforts and creations of these two powers ; on the universal dominion ultimately reserved for the good principle, and the return of Ahriman daring four periods, each of which is to last three thousand years ; on the good and the evil spfarits (Amshaapandsy Izedtty FerferSy and Dives)y and their differences of sex and rank ; on the souls of men {Ferfersy, which, created by Ormuzd before theur union with the body, have their habitation in the heavens ; and which ultimate- ly, according as in this world they have served Or- muzd or Ahriman, pass after death into the dwellings of the blessed, or are precipitated into obscurity: finally, respectmg the future resurrection of the bodies of the wicked after the victory of Ormuzd and the res- toration of all things" (Tennemann, Manual Hist, qf PkUosophgy § 71 ; see also Hardwick, Christ and other Mastersy pt. iii, ch. iii). The Oriental Dualism first sets the Hyle (uX^, matter) as an original principle over against the divinity. The Eastern philosophers soon found it necessary to run into PantheiBm ; for, the ne- cessity of unity pressing on them, they found no other way of escape except to make God the soul of the world. But, the gulf between matter and divinity still remain- ing, they had to fall upon two principles, the material and spiritual ; and, not willing to identify the original spiritual principle with matter, darkness, and evil, they fbll upon the idea of two antagonistic beings or gods, a good and an evil one, the god of light and the god of darkness, the god of matter and the god of spir- it—Ahriman the evil principle, and Ormuzd the good.