cuarren 52 JEWISH ELEMENTS IN GNOSTICISM AND MAGIC 6. 7o~¢. ce 270 1 GNosricism WISH ELEMENTS IN ONOSTICHSH: THE PROBLABE DEPINED I sold be obsious eves from a cursory reading of Gnostic Htrture tat there age Jewish elemens in, Gnostic, These elemeets are of ent kinds and may be assed in many different ways, bat Je oot present porposes it will be sufScent to ditingaish to broad tsieyries~ bila and aon bible To the first eategoy belong he rns fe, of allan tthe OM Testament in the Gaorte text (or convenience we may inl here ls much Gnostic exegesis of the ‘O41 Testinent) Into the second extegory may be pa al those Gaon teas oi, literary genes, technical teams and formulae which have Fn punilad more or lest comsingingly ia pot-ibia Jovsh ite Inne. is inte to sealie thatthe signieanceof an elesnea wl vay ssveing the eaegony into which ells The Jewishness of elements in excyeny ome is nog, a the st analysis, open to question, We nay vite on how Old Testament matdls Sound thei way ino Gnoote on (uber through Chistian, pre-Christian Jewish Gnossesm, or In sli horrowing frm Juin), bo tha they Jewish ean hey be lspuis The Jevishness of elements in caegory two, onthe ote nad, litle problematic. We ae. dealing here in the feat instance, with Sunita, al dat creates a host of problems. We must establish tht the pansion we petsive weal and significa in sel no small nk, et we must ice the question of oxgas who has borsowed fn when? ‘There 6 a rendeney for seholats t assume that ln eas a [bile Goowican is indebted wo Judaism, This mayne be a the [pvt dl ahrays be lee pen tat Judit borrow fan Gin "reun fi ih cse we wl ave Cat element in Jada a Felon aot Grote dese de element frm cane ‘Ai iste nay cl thi in. ta Valentinian Gian Pe on) ane ate of the Deg Me crs ct teal pen te acy Ft Pons JAWISHE ELEMAWTS iN GNOSTICISM 1053 ‘he ase of the Hebrew Magow (‘Pace’) ata tile for God in Rabbisie ltentore. Assuming for the sake of agamment tht this sung vebal pansion is noe accidental we must be careil aot to jump tthe ‘ovelsion that we have idenied a Jewish element in Geos, ‘The ‘origin of the Rabbinic le Magoo is fa form cles is not bic, ‘though the Rabbis toed to Gad a biblical bss fort eg in Gen 2817 snd Exod. 33:20)? The pony cannot be ruled ut tat his expres. sion originated in Gnosticism, and pasted over into Rabbinic usage, oF ‘hat Gnostiiten and Rabbinic Judaim borrowed fs independendy om the same source (ay Alesana Tucism).” Sach non bible! pelle between Judaism andl Gnosticism’ are intresting and inpostaat. They shold ferie in any dscuation ofthe Jewish clemeess tn Gnontiass, ‘Buttheie ambivalent character mas be clea secognzed othe defcaes of euly Cristian orthodoxy the heety ofthe Gnostics ‘was «polymorphic yet. This image i worth bearing in mindy fori _zaphicalysmbolies the immense divenity of what we now eal Gros. ‘cho*Teis important to realize that Gnosticism, us 1 uned subject oF ‘tod, ia modern invention, which embraces ay efferent and contr sictory wosd-views. Th vem Gnosis ise though of Greck forma "oni not actly found inthe eal outees. The Pease heresiologts escbe diferent schools of Gost, but nowhere do they azine 1 ststct definition of Gann Te fat Eom cleat to What exe the GGaosies themselves would have acknowaged the ality of he Pate clasfcation, ot fle an afity with members of other schools “The probleins ease by the dversiy of Gnosticism ae wel lsat by de Nag Hammadi documents which constiute out primary source for Gnostic teichng. All the Nag Hammadi manosceps were found at A singe location and ae inthe sume language ~ Cope, Though waten by diferent hand, all were copied at roughly the same petod (our In Genk tc 9 to Gen. st xd mri ineHly One be pis ofhis wo bt swat oh’ “1391 nD Ss a * SP, Dv amu: and 8 ue naeire véns 1 epg She — God ‘ive epee ye of hi emsiag ann’ CECH Hm tse wit Sco fe, Hrs (Oar 9), ge. See Se Cope, oma te tn) Ps 38-7 “ihe Civin aces sae, ll op he deny of Gana for iced pecs mir umd th te wy Canoe Pa oe Ir oe 0 ht ea arosa THE EARLY ROMAWS PERIOD cents cx). Presumably they represent the reese Scpmues of 4 Goose commniy that Ive in the Nag Hata pon of Upper erp (perhaps the sacent Chena) In ate agaty—in ech the sme way asthe Dead Sea Seals epeeat he Scipaet of he Quaan communi. These Gronics wad ad oot coppotes, pore of al the te inte ede Hoey Ye the tts apart belong ves ieess Gaon shoo test i we flow te pati ce cations, ado advo logilycontaiory systems, Pha th Gnosis of Chenoboskn dd aot pat high premitan om eye oes foe, But sch incoherence maker dies ~ an pears oon Principle — to elk our Gnowicom in peo If we cemnot diag Safco the Gnosis: of 0 wae compas sche Nag Hana ay, what chance have we of producing definition of « Gaon ‘whch embraces ll the Pais enon Micha a Manda 4 wel: Thre hae bees, of cous many tempts downer the oe, ‘aes of Gnostiien, but none aa bech vey suet” Te cla scene poste find ome Grout tne which omit a est oe ot the aleged busi paces, or which rat pane in metal excite ways The dstnity of Gaon» nowhere beer sera tat in ts ck of an agreed teminology. Even where two seams appet @ seice on the mbstance ofan en, they wl not ecely Puke en ‘tos inthe sume techni octal. ‘To avi the iis of gncraiing shout Gnosis and of cetng 20 all soto of dvese etry, ne iveigadon of Gor, se ofthe Old Tesxmen: wil focus on one spoulic txt =the Hyper {ot of the Archons (= HA) HA dies into foo lage sctone Te ‘it 6, 27-5218) sa myth of engine recounting he cece of ‘ork and the pina history down to the Flood. Tee second po 4) sn pocapse which els how the get ange Eee Cane does fom heaven and revealed to Notes, daughter of Eve, the ove nate the Arion, These evo diac soon tay go back to tw angel lndependent documents, Ia the preset toy However, they vt beet * Feces Cu (Ox) py 9 hn of Geol in etl (oyu clo eal eee Sas aba crc ee atch rns ri Com pi nn a ‘sin Caan pm Domne De aoe iia rset icarmen et rg Hews of he rn Bat 7B tayo,“ ype Desh eto be a ite rd any Crt sete is Cine nn dB pp stb its a JEWISH ELEMENTS aN oNOSTICISM ross ther eel joined fom reasonably coherent whole. The myth of rigie moves smoothly it the spoalpe of Nova by dag Elis cour wih Nos ote ene of te Fo The sh eng the my of ors (6,27 ~ 8745) appeat to be baed on tc oer ‘heagony inthe pocapeeof Nowa 3, $196 17). The author of a ith of orgns sem have know the scape of Nore Indeed, be say have been the Srl rector of HA sesh for ping he to secon ofthe woth together ‘HA ast now stands contains cat Cristian clement: eg. 8610-7 gots fom Gok sand Eph 6335 91,1 probaly alaes to Eph 4 (oot the we of the ttn réeton: 961-9735 amgely ae vp of a een of Johannine allsions Butte Chita cements he ew aad besten, and fom a tourer poat of view aly brchctd wut of the text This opens up the poy tha ILA a Chan towing an oxigialynon-Cstian, proba (a we sal sec) fd Goa text. The closeness with which HA adheres to the Old Tesameat i sausual Ara minbrof pois simply quotes the Bb ad males ile sffort wo impose a intereetaion oa (ee ep gy t1-). The pal tans inthe tease Or se Ogi of te Wael (NHC) ae mone thoroushly intersted more ily Gnostic. These unger gobs cof Bible may inden that HA stprecen a compantvely pms sage fn Goose ae of the en chapes of Genes ‘The reaonship between HAY yh of orgs and Genesis 1-6 may be Set outa fal Ha Geis 627-87,25. Theagooy Alias to ee 87133-8897 The ceadon of man fee Btoae The suming ofthe ls teas 31089,5 Adam in Peas Eee (6 93519) Ig ssye” The eran of five Bucy sae) 5 o-96,19 Thevempation nd fal ey Sh.19-9 18 The expaion om Pundse S16 44-3, ep Suirse. Cain and Abel bos Sh and Nove. po ‘The Pod Gets ta tno A's my of origins involves sume snd direct quotations from, ‘or allusions to, Gen. 1-6. Unllke tome other Gnostic tet iis aot ly a fantasia on afew themes derwa form these chapters Whet HA offer is in effect, «commentary, prevented ia the form of «reeling ‘the hia! eatatve. Typologialy the cooimentary belogs wit "he walled ‘owriten Bible texts —Jubilrs, Genes Apoeryphon, andr toss THE ante ROMAN Enzo "scudo-Philo, ber antigeanorhierm Te cre with which the Gai snhor follows the bibeal sequence of evens i aoteworthy. Whete he ‘pars from the biblical order (aia items 9 aed ¢ above), he probably Jus exegecl reasons for doing so. The reading ofthe Bible which HA Ipeuhes i indeed strange. 1 involves sot! reversa ofthe wales of ‘he biblical text at lest as wadionally understood: elements nomally evn s good (he Creto, the wod he crested the Garden of Eden the ‘nmandnest not to eat the fei) ae porsayed as bad by the Gnostic iil elenents traditionally taken a bad (le spent and mats eobe tone) ae portayed as good” The teason for ths reveal ste unple it ws citated bythe exepeical eandiat fom which the Gor, ie fad the txt, He came tothe text with the fandarenal eit at ‘he masta word is-€, the domain of malevolene power: mat’ oa lupe of slvaton les in escaping from i The Gnostic cxegete sed ie \doctine ats hetmeneasal Key fo unlock the ‘woe eotene meaning of Uh Bible. Given his assumptions, hs reading is lgial and conden, uke the other ‘ewsinen Bibl? texts HA does not make expt is "anit reasoning it presents a smoothly Rowing testament oF the abla marae in which the exegesis ix iasoled However, Sat ft [evappencra process of exegesis certtn, The undesying Faroning di Incomes clear when we Se A side by se with Rabie ein Wl cxamples should vuffce to iusate this point (0) The Gnostic exegere used the ple in Gen, 126 (God sid Let ‘rake man in ow image, after car kenese) to pty his ew hat oriy of beings ws involved inthe ereston of ram "The Archon ld ans an a: Come, Jt ut erste aman shat wl be tl rom ac ext (87, 25-6). C Gen xvi ¢ "RAB sid When the Holy One, bleed Teh, eame to erete Adam be sok counsel with the rinserng ange ying to thems "Let ws make man” (Gen. 136) Tn genenl, Rabbinic soles weee embarrassed by these plurals, and concerned lent they Ins be exploited ro impugn the unity of God (eee Gen R vt 6,1) le gt (3 99-66)), gn irs eee PG eal lige visite nd of ear hs ake pl eephaeiy olen nary hay soe owe ee er ny eI in age ht ¥ JeWISH ELEMENTS Iv GhOSTICISM os @ Jn Geo, 27 God commands Adam not 2 a of the ee of Inowiedge. In Gen. 5:3 Eve tells the sespen that ma ns been coun ‘tanded neither cat of the tee sr ach The Gnostic exept noted the lscrepany berwesn the evo versions of the divine prion ef 9% 2-9) and sed ic to good effect His account je a6 fellows, The ‘real commandment was issued by che Chief Archon (9 Sabot) the form, ‘Do not a” (se 9, 24-6; eB, 34-96 2, The other Archon, however, conveyed it to Adam inthe foun: ‘Do not et ote (8, 35 59). This soll unwanted change ed, eroagh divine providence, © ‘tans lsobedienc, and hence bit enightenmene “They Se Ares) bil not understand what they sid to him; eather, bythe Fathers wil ‘hey on this in such a way that he might Gi fal eat, and that Adam ight regard them a ould a maa of exchasbvely mates ate” GW, 33-85, 5). We have here a cate of the Gnostic motif tat the hone were tricked by dive providence, and thee eualevoleat us posts fastated Bot just how ther uniting change of the comm. ‘ment brought all his abou is aot expressed. Here, at othe pty ft HA, one fas the feling that there a fller form of the ulson to hich the Guostc texts merely alluding, Rabin midis ges a ‘ght into what that Faller form of dhe tation may have. God cxgnally commanded man aot to et of the tee oF kaswledge, bet -Acam, adding othe commande, coaveyed ito Eve in the fon ‘Do ‘ot ext or uc The serpent elven exploed the unauthoried adition, He showed Eve that he could foc the tre with impaniy. Thus he Soved dosbr in Eve's mind as ro God vrai, and peru bert et te frit (Gee Avot dRabbi Nata I (ed. Schecter pp. 4-4); Gea. ak 35 9Sanh 292). simile tation, wich the unual Gnosde inversion of ‘ales, probably lis behind HA's acount of tis cpaade 1) Tn HA’s version of the eestion story, a i many other Gnostic omogonies, Sophia plays a crucial role (eee #7, ¢~tt ek 9g a), Bes hind the Sgte of Sophia ies Prov where windom i Gesecbed the “achive oF ‘eraisman’ (ema) uh seed God in eeeaion (Deon 8:30), How di the Grow exponitor manage to inode Sophia ints Iisioerpctation of Gen. 1, ate pola in is expedition comctponding to Gea. ites? Pethaps thet no pest nystey se: he ply fl ak Ges. + and Prov. # could be harmonized on the grounds tat both ppasages are conccined with the rbject of creation Jewsh tadison, hhovever, sugests another possibly. According to « wel known Rab bine midkash the word rest (beginving) a Gen, lldes wo wssdor, which in Pror. 22 is called the it of God's way” (ee Gea 1 ‘This tin is elt inthe ernlation of Gen, 10 the Frage ‘ary "angun (MS Pai) “Wh wisdom 'WSONA) the Lord erated andio {wR EARLY ROMAN PBRLOD peice the heavens andthe cart eis of couse, posible thatthe muor ofthe myth of edn a HA knew hs eerpesion oF militia Gen. Bt sch pectin ot etl who vas i shows how closely HAA maybe bed on pre expos eres secon whee i appazeaty ent he bbe tox wih set eos “The impcaon of thee and ofthe many soar act that soa te brought ear Behind HA mph of organ hes gly ese cases of Gea. 1-6, abet fo aa usta ermencual anda ‘Thor ofthe myth of ong knew the opening capes of Genes critnely well and sje them to cael wpe T's wc wer ht he ambled by adeno he owt Bie na sae ‘pond waded. He ew aa caborte tion of Be cree ‘which proved emit as reading ofthe bbe text "The mney iting coespondcacss beeen his uneing exes tad Reco tna sugges that the exegeieal icon ehhh new ws fee hat Fthas dwn on Jewish sours comoborte by Cran fogs indeatons that ome of the wadcoes initrd stn ine ia Arana ha lng been recone! at Ha ete ‘ntl asses of Arama pron th nn Haw Eve)” hee sis tee ate follows () Bre aireacd the Puce oy tev "Mite. Ce the Arse fay ites (She ae nies a She who as gen ith athe posible wae of he Arn Ay) Bve becomes 3 the to ape trom the Archon, Svoumably the Tee of Lite (hae st bya) i mean The ek bry hewn Alam ad feapa was srl the Ge fa poningsome sof connection beeen Bre andthe se.) The "Peale Seal "rv oma iia ele, the Fete nace Pie tee tm) ete no the pene male pn espa one ‘kwmotannphosed ato the we Ths ine spent Becomes eis (Aric ohn.” A tube ofthese pus oer Ragmen of + ‘veasnn quoted st HA 86-17 A fue vestn of tinction Liv in Ot Org fe Wad (NHC 5) tages es pombe ct We fae hota nant ofthe Bag of 3 gro oF Arnie peng Gite Jw of couse were nee only Asn spesters to eet isltcnwan'in lc ang, br gen the cone of he aint oe as sly aa fo Conte dar he ment te te ‘ i ci brws Gt dP an ot iy ie Cov serine phe He gonCens e Mkt bau jun fate de Shr add ak shen a i ane Two ue sth hapa hae tn as Ware ice hsp Saheb" ne io re Ela perp tenet ie eee ee soar sire aguas Sie ce re ea ee Serre die Ri nto Serres eeverarnciae hee Pere mr ieee ioe Sealer eee ‘eprint eo Gee cma Suestacureigttescas rene EASE oe eer meee Sree re uni ace ht eee ni ee eh eee rien na omer pore ciety artless ere Fabcan te tect ant Scie ctr eb eae al ee eed Sree celia ie ‘The lege noi Jewish seen Gorm ae peas best Scanlin th cons 0h pose oft pan Sere Gos {cs and Metarah mt Th there esa pr be {sce he weg oth Gros ance eae he Joh Mrs ‘ys ofthe Taide and pot Tai en, arsed lng op. Gen Ww fe Theodor pt) pom “02 min eR SAA traacn “omn“Ti im he Saw Sy aot MANN EME Bie ohn a Pon wor WH NAD ATI NNT BD. ld om (Ge. 520 She ws ge hn pp Hn, at he nod See tet esr er ted dcope Be Abs va The tpt wn ou Ene) pene su a Adi pen’ On etl Sa gle ln of spe ee reales nes oe 11 och yee est, 0. On Sal 6 Sten, Kai (Now © Dg hea Sot Se Seen aint ese a ga “alice Fagin of he ose 2 Cac it eee as. Se Ag Pl rs Hag thle Cen noth na