Hippolytus

Footnotes

^[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.

^[684] Or, “Metagogeus”(see Irenæus, i. 1, 2, iii. 1).

^[685] Bunsen corrects the passage, “So that she should not be inferior to any of the Æons, or unequal (in power) to any (of them).”

Chapter XXVII.—Valentinus’ Explanation of the Existence of Jesus; Power of Jesus Over Humanity.

^[686] ἐνότητος: Miller has νεότητος, i.e., youth. The former is the emendation of Bernays.

^[687] This is Bunsen’s text, ὑποστάτους. Duncker reads ὑποστατικὰς, hypostatic.

^[688] Some read οὐσίαν (see Theodoret, Hær., c. vii.).

^[689] ἐπιστροφὴν; or it may be rendered “solicitude.” Literally, it means a turning towards, as in this instance, for the purpose of prayer (see Irenæus, i. 5).

10 per page

Search Comments

This page has been visited 0196 times.

Contents