Hippolytus

Footnotes

^[663] Miller’s text here yields a different but not very intelligible meaning.

^[664] Horace quotes this proverb (2 Serm., iii. 274) with a somewhat different meaning. Porphyry considers it a precept against irreverent language towards the Deity, the fire being a symbol—for instance, the vestal fire—of the everlasting nature of God. Σκάλευε in Hippolytus is also read, e.g., by Basil, ζαίνοντες, that is, cleaving. This alludes to some ancient game in which fire was struck at and severed.

^[665] Σάρον. This word also signifies “sweepings” or “refuse.” Some say it means a Chaldean or Babylonian measure. The meaning would then be: Neglect not giving good measure, i.e., practise fair dealing. This agrees with another form of the proverb, reading ζυγόν for σάρον—that is, overlook not the balance or scales.

^[666] Another meaning assigned to this proverb is, “Labour to no purpose.” The palm, it is alleged, when it grows of itself, produces fruit, but sterility ensues upon transplantation. The proverb is also said to mean: Avoid what may seem agreeable, but really is injurious. This alludes to the quality of the wine (see Xenophon’s Anab., ii.), which, pleasant in appearance, produced severe headache in those partaking of it.

^[667] “Eat not from a stool.” This proverb is also differently read and interpreted. Another form is, “Eat not from a chariot,” of which the import is variously given, as, Do not tamper with your health, because food swallowed in haste, as it must be when one is driving a team of horses, cannot be salutary or nutritive; or, Do not be careless, because one should attend to the business in hand; if that be guiding a chariot, one should not at the same time try to eat his meals.

^[668] The word “entire” Plutarch adds to this proverb. Its ancient form would seem to inculcate patience and courtesy, as if one should not, when at meals, snap at food before others. As read in Plutarch, it has been also interpreted as a precept to avoid creating dissension, the unbroken bread being a symbol of unity. It has likewise been explained as an injunction against greediness. The loaf was marked by two intersecting lines into four parts, and one was not to devour all of these. (See Horace, 1 Epist., xvii. 49.)

^[669] This is the generally received import of the proverb. Ancient writers, however, put forward other meanings, connected chiefly with certain effects of beans, e.g., disturbing the mind, and producing melancholy, which Pythagoras is said to have noticed. Horace had no such idea concerning beans (see 2 Serm, vi. 63), but evidently alludes to a belief of the magi that disembodied spirits resided in beans. (See Lucian, Micyll.; Plutarch, Περὶ Παίδ. ᾽Αγωγ. 17; Aulus Gellius, iv. 11; and Guigniaut’s Cruiser’s Symbolik, i. 160.) [See p. 12 supra, and compare vol. ii., this series, p. 383, and Elucidation III. p. 403.]

Chapter XXIII.—Pythagoras’ Astronomic System.

^[670] The text seems doubtful. Some would read, “The sun is (to be compared with) soul, and the moon with body.”

^[671] Or, “completes the great year of the world” (see book iv. chap. vii. of The Refutation).

Chapter XXIV.—Valentinus Convicted of Plagiarisms from the Platonic and Pythagoric Philosophy; The Valentinian Theory of Emanation by Duads.

^[672] Valentinus’ system, if purged of the glosses put upon it by his disciples, appears to have been constructed out of a grand conception of Deity, and evidences much power of abstraction. Between the essence of God, dwelling in the midst of isolation prior to an exercise of the creative energy, and the material worlds, Valentinus interposes an ideal world. Through the latter, the soul—of a kindred nature—is enabled to mount up to God. This is the import of the terms Bythus (depth) and Sige (silence, i.e., solitariness) afterwards used.

^[673] κυρία: instead of this has been suggested the reading καὶ ῥιζα, i.e., “which is both the root,” etc.

^[674] In all this Valentinus intends to delineate the progress from absolute to phenomenal being. There are three developments in this transition. Absolute being (Bythus and Sige) is the same as the eternal thought and consciousness of God’s own essence. Here we have the primary emanation, viz., Nous, i.e., Mind (called also Monogenes, only-begotten), and Aletheia, i.e., Truth. Next comes the ideal manifestation through the Logos, i.e., Word (obviously borrowed from the prologue to St. John’s Gospel), and Zoe, i.e., Life (taken from the same source). We have then the passage from the ideal to the actual in Anthropos, i.e., Man, and Ecclesia, i.e., Church. These last are the phenomenal manifestations of the divine mind.

^[675] τέλειος: Bunsen would read τέλος, which Cruice objects to on account of the word τελειότερος occurring in the next sentence.

Chapter XXV.—The Tenet of the Duad Made the Foundation of Valentinus’ System of the Emanation of Æons.

^[676] This follows the text as emended by Bernays.

^[677] The number properly should be thirty, as there were two tetrads: (1) Bythus, Sige, Nous, and Aletheia; (2) Logos, Zoe, Ecclesia, and Anthropos. Some, as we learn from Hippolytus, made up the number to thirty, by the addition of Christ and the Holy Ghost,—a fact which Bunsen thinks conclusively proves that the alleged generation of Æons was a subsequent addition to Valentinus’ system.

^[678] There is some confusion in Hippolytus’ text, which is, however, removeable by a reference to Irenæus (i. 1).

^[679] We subjoin the meanings of these names:—

Ten Æons from Nous and Aletheia, (or) Logos and Zoe, viz.:—

A. Bythus = Profundity.

B. Mixis = Mixture.

C. Ageratos = Ever-young.

D. Henosis = Unification.

E. Autophyes = Self-grown.

F. Hedone = Voluptuousness.

G. Acinetus = Motionless.

H. Syncrasis = Composition.

I. Monogenes = Only-begotten.

J. Macaria = Blessedness.

^[680] The following are the meanings of these names:—

Twelve Æons from Anthropos and Ecclesia, (or) Logos and Zoe:—

A. Paracletus = Comforter.

B. Pistis = Faith.

C. Patricus = Paternal.

D. Elpis = Hope.

E. Metricus = Temperate.

F. Agape = Love.

G. Æinous = Ever-thinking.

H. Synesis = Intelligence.

I. Ecclesiasticus = Ecclesiastical.

J. Makariotes = Felicity.

K. Theletus = Volition.

L. Sophia = Wisdom.

^[681] [Rev. ii. 24. It belongs to the “depths of Satan” to create mythologies that caricature the Divine mysteries. Cf. 2 Cor. ii. 11.]

^[682] This Sophia was, so to speak, the bridge which spanned the abyss between God and Reality. Under an aspect of this kind Solomon (Prov. viii.) views Wisdom; and Valentinus introduces it into his system, according to the old Judaistic interpretation of Sophia, as the instrument for God’s creative energy. But Sophia thought to pass beyond her function as the connecting link between limited and illimitable existence, by an attempt to evolve the infinite from herself. She fails, and an abortive image of the true Wisdom is procreated, while Sophia herself sinks into this nether world.

^[683] Miller’s text has, “a well-formed and properly-digested substance.” This reading is, however, obviously wrong, as is proved by a reference to what Epiphanius states (Hær., xxxi.) concerning Valentinus.

Chapter XXVI.—Valentinus’ Explanation of the Existence of Christ and the Spirit.

10 per page

Search Comments

This page has been visited 0196 times.

Contents