Chapter V.--Explanation of the System of the Naasseni Taken from One of Their Hymns.
The foregoing remarks, then, though few out of many, we have thought proper to bring forward. For innumerable are the silly and crazy attempts of folly. But since, to the best of our ability, we have explained the unknown Gnosis, it seemed expedient likewise to adduce the following point. This psalm of theirs has been composed, by which they seem to celebrate all the mysteries of the error (advanced by) them in a hymn, couched in the following terms:--
The world's producing law was Primal Mind, [452]
And next was First-born's outpoured Chaos;
And third, the soul received its law of toil:
Encircl'd, therefore, with an aqueous [453] form,
With care o'erpowered it succumbs to death.
Now holding sway, it eyes the light,
And now it weeps on misery flung;
Now it mourns, now it thrills with joy;
Now it wails, now it hears its doom;
Now it hears its doom, now it dies,
And now it leaves us, never to return.
It, hapless straying, treads the maze of ills.
But Jesus said, Father, behold,
A strife of ills across the earth
Wanders from thy breath (of wrath);
But bitter Chaos (man) seeks to shun,
And knows not how to pass it through.
On this account, O Father, send me;
Bearing seals, I shall descend;
Through ages whole I'll sweep,
All mysteries I'll unravel,
And forms of Gods I'll show;
And secrets of the saintly path,
Styled "Gnosis," I'll impart.
[452] The text of this hymn is very corrupt. The Abbe Cruice explains the connection of the hymn with the foregoing exposition, and considers it to have a reference to the Metempsychosis, which forms part of the system of the Naasseni. [Bunsen, i. 36.]
[453] Or, "nimble."
Chapter VI.--The Ophites the Grand Source of Heresy.
These doctrines, then, the Naasseni attempt to establish, calling themselves Gnostics. But since the error is many-headed and diversified, resembling, in truth, the hydra that we read of in history; when, at one blow, we have struck off the heads of this (delusion) by means of refutation, employing the wand of truth, we shall entirely exterminate the monster. For neither do the remaining heresies present much difference of aspect from this, having a mutual connection through (the same) spirit of error. But since, altering the words and the names of the serpent, they wish that there should be many heads of the serpent, neither thus shall we fail thoroughly to refute them as they desire.
Chapter VII.--The System of the Peratæ; Their Tritheism; Explanation of the Incarnation.
There is also unquestionably a certain other (head of the hydra, [454] namely, the heresy) of the Peratæ, [455] whose blasphemy against Christ has for many years escaped notice. And the present is a fitting opportunity for bringing to light the secret mysteries of such (heretics). These allege that the world is one, triply divided. And of the triple division with them, one portion is a certain single originating principle, just as it were a huge fountain, which can be divided mentally into infinite segments. Now the first segment, and that which, according to them, is (a segment) in preference (to others), [456] is a triad, and it is called a Perfect Good, (and) a Paternal Magnitude. And the second portion of the triad of these is, as it were, a certain infinite crowd of potentialities that are generated [457] from themselves, (while) the third is formal. [458] And the first, which is good, is unbegotten, and the second is a self-producing good, and the third is created; and hence it is that they expressly declare that there are three Gods, three Logoi, three Minds, three Men. For to each portion of the world, after the division has been made, they assign both Gods, and Logoi, and Minds, and Men, and the rest; but that from unorigination and the first segment [459] of the world, when afterwards the world had attained unto its completion, there came down from above, for causes that we shall afterwards declare, in the time of Herod a certain man called Christ, with a threefold nature, and a threefold body, and a threefold power, (and) having in himself all (species of) concretions and potentialities (derivable) from the three divisions of the world; and that this, says (the Peratic), is what is spoken: "It pleased him that in him should dwell all fulness bodily," [460] and in Him the entire Divinity resides of the triad as thus divided. For, he says, that from the two superjacent worlds--namely, from that (portion of the triad) which is unbegotten, and from that which is self-producing--there have been conveyed down into this world in which we are, seeds of all sorts of potentialities. What, however, the mode of the descent is, we shall afterwards declare.
(The Peratic) then says that Christ descended from above from unorigination, that by His descent all things triply divided might be saved. For some things, he says, being borne down from above, will ascend through Him, whereas whatever (beings) form plots against those which are carried down from above are cast off, [461] and being placed in a state of punishment, are renounced. This, he says, is what is spoken: "For the Son of man came not into the world to destroy the world, but that the world through Him might be saved." The world, he says, he denominates those two parts that are situated above, viz., both the unbegotten (portion of the triad), and the self-produced one. And when Scripture, he says, uses the words, "that we may not be condemned with the world," it alludes to the third portion of (the triad, that is) the formal world. For the third portion, which he styles the world (in which we are), must perish; but the two (remaining portions), which are situated above, must be rescued from corruption.
[454] Something is wanting after Peratike in the text. Miller supplies the deficiency, and his conjecture is adopted above. Literally, it should be rendered--"the Peratic heresy, the blasphemy of which (heretics)," etc.
[455] Most of what is mentioned by Hippolytus concerning this sect is new, as the chief writers on the early heresies are comparatively silent concerning the Peratæ; indeed, Irenæus, Tertullian, and Epiphanius completely so. Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom., vii.; (vol. ii. p. 555), mentions the Peratics, and Theodoret more fully than the rest speaks of them (Hæret. fabul., i. 17). Theodoret, however, as the Abbe Cruice thinks, has appropriated his remarks from Hippolytus.
[456] proechestera or prosechestera, contiguous. This is Miller's reading, but is devoid of sense. Proechestera, adopted by Schneidewin and Cruice, might bear the meaning of the expression par excellence.
[457] gegennemenon: Miller reads gegennemenon, agreeing with plethos. Bernays, in his Epistola Critica addressed to Bunsen, proposes the former reading.
[458] eidikou: some read idikou. This term, adopted from the Platonic philosophy, is translated specialis by logicians, and transcendentalis by metaphysicians. It expresses the pre-existent form in the divine mind, according to which material objects were fashioned. The term seems out of place as used by the Peratics to denominate a corruptible and perishing world. We should rather expect ulikou, i.e., material. (See Aristotle's masterly exposition of the subject of the eidos and hule in his Metaphysics book vi., and p. 64 of the analysis prefixed to the translation in Bohn's Library.)
[459] protes or pro tes, "antecedent to the segment."
[460] somatikos, i.e., substantially. See Col. i. 19; ii. 9.
[461] aphietai: some read aphiei, i.e., dismisses; some aphiei eike, i.e., heedlessly casts off. Hippolytus, in his Summary of the Peratic Heresy in book x., has aphietai eike, which Cruice translates temere absolvuntur. Schneidewin has in the same passage aphietai merely, and translates it abjiciuntur. In both places Bernays suggests ophioeide, i.e., those of the nature of the Serpent.
Chapter VIII.--The Peratæ Derive Their System from the Astrologers; This Proved by a Statement of the Astrological Theories of the Zodiac; Hence the Terminology of the Peratic Heretics.
Let us, then, in the first place, learn how (the Peratists), deriving this doctrine from astrologers, act despitefully towards Christ, working destruction for those who follow them in an error of this description. For the astrologers, alleging that there is one world, divide it into the twelve fixed portions of the zodiacal signs, and call the world of the fixed zodiacal signs one immoveable world; and the other they affirm to be a world of erratic (signs), both in power, and position, and number, and that it extends as far as the moon. [462] And (they lay down), that (one) world derives from (the other) world a certain power, and mutual participation (in that power), and that the subjacent obtain this participation from the superjacent (portions). In order, however, that what is (here) asserted may be perspicuous, I shall one by one employ those very expressions of the astrologers; (and in doing so) I shall only be reminding my readers of statements previously made in the department of the work where we have explained the entire art of the astrologers. What, then, the opinions are which those (speculators) entertain, are as follow:--
(Their doctrine is), that from an emanation of the stars the generations of the subjacent (parts) is consummated. For, as they wistfully gazed upward upon heaven, the Chaldeans asserted that (the seven stars) [463] contain a reason for the efficient causes of the occurrence of all the events that happen unto us, and that the parts of the fixed zodiacal signs co-operate (in this influence). Into twelve (parts they divide the zodiacal circle), and each zodiacal sign into thirty portions, and each portion into sixty diminutive parts; for so they denominate the very smallest parts, and those that are indivisible. And of the zodiacal signs, they term some male, but others feminine; and some with two bodies, but others not so; and some tropical, whereas others firm. The male signs, then, are either feminine, which possess a co-operative nature for the procreation of males, (or are themselves productive of females.) For Aries is a male zodiacal sign, but Taurus female; and the rest (are denominated) according to the same analogy, some male, but others female. And I suppose that the Pythagoreans, being swayed from such (considerations), style the Monad male, and the Duad female; and, again, the Triad male, and analogically the remainder of the even and odd numbers. Some, however, dividing each zodiacal sign into twelve parts, employ almost the same method. For example, in Aries, they style the first of the twelve parts both Aries and a male, but the second both Taurus and a female, and the third both Gemini and a male; and the same plan is pursued in the case of the rest of the parts. And they assert that there are signs with two bodies, viz., Gemini and the signs diametrically opposite, namely Sagittarius, and Virgo, and Pisces, and that the rest have not two bodies. And (they state) that some are likewise tropical, and when the sun stands in these, he causes great turnings [464] of the surrounding (sign). Aries is a sign of this description, and that which is diametrically opposite to it, just as Libra, and Capricorn, and Cancer. For in Aries is the vernal turning, and in Capricorn that of winter, and in Cancer that of summer, and in Libra that of autumn.
The details, however, concerning this system we have minutely explained in the book preceding this; and from it any one who wishes instruction (on the point), may learn how it is that the originators of this Peratic heresy, viz., Euphrates the Peratic, and Celbes the Carystian, [465] have, in the transference (into their own system of opinions from these sources), made alterations in name only, while in reality they have put forward similar tenets. (Nay more), they have, with immoderate zeal, themselves devoted (their attention) to the art (of the astrologers). For also the astrologers speak of the limits of the stars, in which they assert that the dominant stars have greater influence; as, for instance, on some they act injuriously, while on others they act well. And of these they denominate some malicious, and some beneficent. And (stars) are said to look upon one another, and to harmonize with each other, so that they appear according to (the shape of) a triangle or square. The stars, looking on one another, are figured according to (the shape of [466] ) a triangle, having an intervening distance of the extent of three zodiacal signs; whereas (those that have an interval of) two zodiacal signs are figured according to (the shape of) a square. And (their doctrine is), that as in the same way as in a man, the subjacent parts sympathize with the head, and the head likewise sympathizes with the subjacent parts, so all terrestrial (sympathize) with super-lunar [467] objects. But (the astrologers go further than this [468] ); for there exists (according to them) a certain difference and incompatibility [469] between these, so as that they do not involve one and the same union. This combination and divergence of the stars, which is a Chaldean (tenet), has been arrogated to themselves by those of whom we have previously spoken.