■■■■■■■■ 4th Edition ■■■ ■■■

■■■
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookstep.com/download/ebook-36787176/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Comprehensive Gynecology, 8e (Aug 5,

2021)_(0323653995)_(Elsevier) 8th Edition Gershenson Md

https://ebookstep.com/product/comprehensive-
gynecology-8e-aug-5-2021_0323653995_elsevier-8th-edition-
gershenson-md/

Dealing With The Bad Boy Febriani Ad.

https://ebookstep.com/product/dealing-with-the-bad-boy-febriani-
ad/

Iulius Paulus Ad Neratium libri IV Gianni Santucci

https://ebookstep.com/product/iulius-paulus-ad-neratium-libri-iv-
gianni-santucci/

Nilai Nilai Akhlak dalam Surat Ad Dhuha Saadatus

Salamah

https://ebookstep.com/product/nilai-nilai-akhlak-dalam-surat-ad-
dhuha-saadatus-salamah/
Calculate with Confidence, 8e (Oct 26,
2021)_(0323696953)_(Elsevier) 8th Edition Morris Rn
Bsn Ma Lnc

https://ebookstep.com/product/calculate-with-
confidence-8e-oct-26-2021_0323696953_elsevier-8th-edition-morris-
rn-bsn-ma-lnc/

AD 2000 Regelwerk Taschenbuch 2016 Verband Der

Technischen Überwachungs Vereine

https://ebookstep.com/product/ad-2000-regelwerk-
taschenbuch-2016-verband-der-technischen-uberwachungs-vereine/

Cotton and Williams' Practical Gastrointestinal

Endoscopy - The Fundamentals, 8e (Apr 22,
2024)_(1119525209)_(Wiley-Blackwell) 8th Edition Walsh

https://ebookstep.com/product/cotton-and-williams-practical-
gastrointestinal-endoscopy-the-
fundamentals-8e-apr-22-2024_1119525209_wiley-blackwell-8th-
edition-walsh/

Imamah Uzhma Konsep Kepemimpinan dalam Islam Prof. Dr.

Abdullah Ad-Dumaiji

https://ebookstep.com/product/imamah-uzhma-konsep-kepemimpinan-
dalam-islam-prof-dr-abdullah-ad-dumaiji/

Crença e Islam 1st Edition Mawlana Diya’ Ad-Din Khalid

Al-Baghdadi

https://ebookstep.com/product/crenca-e-islam-1st-edition-mawlana-
diya-ad-din-khalid-al-baghdadi/
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
929. Orelli, Inscpt. Latinar. selectar. Turin, 1828, vol. I. pp. 406-412.

930. See Cumont, T. et M. II. p. 95, inscr. 15, p. 98, inscr. 23; p. 100
inscr. 40; p. 101, inscr. 41. The tomb of Vincentius in the
Catacomb of Praetextatus at Rome would show an instance
of the joint worship of Sabazius, the consort of the Great
Mother, and of Mithras, if we could trust Garrucci’s restoration,
for which see his Les Mystères du Syncrétisme Phrygien,
Paris, 1854. It has been quoted in this sense by Hatch, H.L. p.
290; but Cumont, T. et M. II. pp. 173 and 413, argues against
this construction. For the pictures themselves, see Maass,
Orpheus, München, 1895, pp. 221, 222.

931. Cumont, T. et M. II. p. 261, Fig. 99.

932. Kenyon, Gk. Papyri, p. 65.

933. This is the more likely because his second initiator bears the
name of Asinius, which, as he himself says (Apuleius,
Metamorph. Bk XI. c. 27), was not unconnected with his own
transformation into the shape of an ass. The Emperor
Commodus was initiated into both religions (Lampricius,
Commodus, c. IΧ.).

934. See n. 1, p. 259, supra.

935. Dill, Nero to Marcus Aurelius, p. 625, n. 3, quoting Gasquet,

Mithras, p. 137. See also Gibbon, vol. III. p. 498, Bury
(Appendix 15).

936. Justin Martyr, First Apology, c. LXVI.

937. Porphyry, de antro nymph. c. 15. Tertullian, de Praescpt. c.

40.

938. Porphyry, op. et loc. cit.

939. See Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 339, for authorities.

940. Augustine, In Johann. evang. tractatus, VII. or Cumont, T. et
M. II. p. 59. This last thinks it more probable that the passage
refers to Attis, as there is an allusion in it to redemption by
blood. But this would hardly apply to the self-mutilation of the
Galli, while it would to the blood-bath of the Taurobolium and
Criobolium which so many high initiates of Mithras boast of
undergoing.

941. J. Maurice, “La Dynastie Solaire des Seconds Flaviens,” Rev.

Archeol. t. XVII. (1911), p. 397 and n. 1.

942. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 339, quoting Minucius Felix.

943. Op. cit. I. p. 65.

944. The remains of five Mithraea were found in Ostia alone.

945. Cumont, T. et M. II. p. 204, Fig. 30, and p. 493, Fig. 430; or
P.S.B.A. 1912, Pl. XIII. Figs. 1 and 2.

946. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 62.

947. The story quoted from Pseudo-Augustine (Cumont, op. cit. I.

p. 322) about the hands of the initiates being bound with
chickens’-guts which were afterwards severed by a sword
might account for the number of birds’ bones.

948. Cumont, op. cit. II. p. 21, gives the passage from Lampridius
mentioned in n. 1, p. 260, supra.

949. Op. cit. I. p. 322, quoting Zacharius rhetor.

950. See Chapter II, Vol. I. p. 62, supra.

951. Cumont, T. et M. II. p. 18, for the passage in St Jerome in

which these degrees are enumerated. They all appear in the
inscriptions given by Cumont, except that of Miles or Soldier.
An inscription by two “soldiers” of Mithras has, however, lately
been found at Patras and published by its discoverers, M.
 Charles Avezou and M. Charles Picard. See R.H.R. t. LXIV.
(1911), pp. 179-183.

952. Cumont, T. et M. I. pp. 315 sqq.

953. Tertullian, de Corona, c. 15.

954. Porphyry, de antro nymph. c. 15.

955. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 322. Gregory of Nazianza (A.D. 320-390)

is the first authority for these tortures (κολάσεις) in point of
time. Nonnus the Mythographer gives more details, but is
three centuries later.

956. Renan, Marc-Aurèle, p. 577.

957. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 73.

958. Op. cit. II. p. 294, Fig. 149; p. 298, Fig. 154; p. 300, Fig. 156;
p. 304, Fig. 161; p. 488, Fig. 421.

959. Op. cit. I. p. 175, Fig. 10.

960. Op. cit. I. p. 39, n. 6, quoting the Arda Viraf namak. A

quotation from Arnobius, adv. gentes, which follows, merely
says that the Magi boast of their ability to smooth the
believers’ passage to heaven.

961. See Chap. VIII, p. 74, n. 3, supra.

962. That those who had taken the degree of Pater were called
ἀετοί or eagles appears from Porphyry, de Abstinentia, Bk IV.
c. 16. Cumont doubts this; see T. et M. I. p. 314, n. 8. The idea
probably had its origin in the belief common to classical
antiquity that the eagle alone could fly to the sun, from which
the Mithraist thought that the souls of men came, and to which
those of perfect initiates would return. Cf. op. cit. I. p. 291.

963. Lafaye, L’Initiation Mithriaque, p. 106.

964. Cumont, T. et M. II. p. 56.

965. Porphyry, de Abstinentia, Bk IV. c. 16 says this was so.

966. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 318, n. 1, points out that an initiate might

become Pater Patrum immediately after being made Pater or
Pater sacrorum simply. This appears from the two monuments
both dated the same year of Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, op.
cit. II. p. 95.

967. See Ammianus Marcellinus Bk XXII. c. 7, for his life under

Julian. His career is well described by Dill, Roman Society in
the Last Century of the Western Empire, 1899, pp. 17, 18, 30,
154, 155.

968. Cumont, T. et M. II. p. 100, inscr. 35; p. 98, inscr. 24.

969. Op. cit. II. p. 130, inscr. 225; p. 132, inscr. 239; p. 134, inscr.
257. The two decurions may of course have been decurions
of the rite only, as to which see op. cit. I. p. 326.

970. Op. cit. I. p. 324: Tertullian, Praescpt. c. 40.

971. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 65. Thirty-five seems to be the greatest

number belonging to any one chapel.

972. Op. cit. I. p. 327.

973. Amm. Marcell. passim.

974. Neander, Ch. Hist. III. p. 136.

975. Marinus, vita Procli, pp. 67, 68; Neander, op. cit. III. p. 136.

976. Witness the reduction of Mitra, who plays such an important

part in the religion of the Vedas, to the far lower position of
chief of the Izeds or Yazatas in the Sassanian reform.

977. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 250, for authorities.

978. Gibbon, Decline and Fall (Bury’s ed.), I. p. 260 n. 106.

979. Reville, Religion sous les Sevères, p. 102.

980. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 347.

981. Dill, Last Century, etc. p. 29, n. 2.

982. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 347.

983. Op. cit. I. pp. 329, 330; Dill, Nero to Marcus Aurelius, p. 624.

984. Cumont, “L’aigle funéraire des Syriens et l’apothéose des

empereurs.” R.H.R., 1910, pt ii. pp. 159 sqq.
985. Cf. the “solitary eagle” of the Magic Papyrus quoted on p. 265
supra.

986. Maury, La Magie et L’Astrologie, passim. The Zend Avesta

also denounces magic as did the later Manichaeism. See p.
342 infra.

987. As in Shakespeare’s Macbeth.

988. So Cumont, T. et M. I. pp. 45, 349, 350. He seems to rely,

however, entirely on the passage in the Acta Archelai (as to
which see n. 1, p. 280 infra), wherein the supposed bishop
Archelaus addresses the equally imaginary Manes as
“Savage priest and accomplice of Mithras!”—possibly a mere
term of abuse. See Hegemonius, Acta Archelai, ed. Beeson,
Leipzig, 1906, c. XL. p. 59.

989. Cumont, T. et M. I. p. 41. He sees in the scenes which border

the Tauroctony references or parallels to the fig-leaves of
Genesis, the striking of the rock by Moses, and the ascension
of Elijah. In the so-called Mithraic Ritual of the Magic Papyrus
of Paris, there are certain Hebrew words introduced, such as
πιπι (a well-known perversion of the Tetragrammaton),
σανχερωβ and σεμες ιλαμ (The “Eternal Sun”).

990. See the story which Josephus, Antiq. XX. cc. 2, 3, 4, tells
about Izates, king of Adiabene, who wanted to turn Jew and
thereby so offended his people that they called in against him
Vologeses or Valkash, the first reforming Zoroastrian king and
collector of the books of the Zend Avesta. Cf. Darmesteter,
The Zend Avesta (Sacred Books of the East), Oxford, 1895,
p. xl. Cf. Ém. de Stoop La Diffusion du Manichéisme dans
l’Empire romain, Gand, 1909, p. 10.

991. Circa 296, A.D. See Neander, Ch. Hist. II. p. 195, where the
authenticity of the decree is defended. For the provocation
given to the Empire by the anti-militarism of Manes see de
Stoop, op. cit. pp. 36, 37.
992. Al-Bîrûnî, Chronology of Ancient Nations, p. 190. The date he
gives is twelve years before the accession of Ardeshîr. E.
Rochat, Essai sur Mani et sa Doctrine, Genève, 1897, p. 81,
examines all the different accounts and makes the date from
214 to 218 A.D.

993. Epiphanius, Haer. LXVI. c. 1, p. 399, Oehler; Socrates, Hist.

Eccl. Bk I. c. 22; Hegemonius, Acta Archelai, c. LXIV.

994. Muhammed ben Ishak, commonly called En-Nadîm, in the

book known as the Fihrist, translated by Flügel, Mani, seine
Lehre und seine Schriften, Leipzig, 1862, pp. 83, 116, 118,
119. Cf. Rochat, op. cit. p. 75.

995. Al-Bîrûnî, Chronology, p. 190.

996. Flügel, op. cit. p. 84; Rochat, op. cit. p. 83.

997. Hegemonius, Acta Arch. c. XL., p. 59, Beeson. Rochat, op. cit.
pp. 9-49, discusses the authenticity of the Acta chapter by
chapter. He thinks the pretended discussion between
Archelaus and Manes unhistorical, and the account of it
possibly modelled on that between St Augustine and Faustus
the Manichaean. The remainder of the Acta he considers
fairly trustworthy as an account of Manes’ own tenets. This
may well be, as Epiphanius, Haer. LXVI. cc. 6-7, 25-31,
transcribes the epistle to Marcellus, its answer, and the
exposition of Turbo, and could scarcely have heard, as early
as 375 A.D., about which time he wrote, of St Augustine’s
discussion. The Acta owe much to the care of the American
scholar, Mr Beeson of Chicago, who has given us the careful
edition of them mentioned in n. 1, p. 277 supra. It is a pity that
he did not see his way to keep the old numeration of the
chapters.

998. Beausobre, Hist. du Manichéisme, Paris, 1734, Pt I. Bk II. cc.

1-4. Cf. Stokes in Dict. Christian Biog. s.v. Manes; Rochat, op.
cit. p. 83.
999. Rochat, op. cit. p. 89.

1000.
Abulfarag in Kessler, Forschungen über die Manichäische
Religion, Berlin, 1889, Bd I. p. 335; Rochat, op. cit. p. 84;
Neander, Ch. Hist. II. p. 168.

1001.
Flügel, op. cit. p. 85. Cf. Al-Bîrûnî, India (ed. Sachau), p. 55,
where Manes quotes the opinion of Bardesanes’ “partizans.”
There are many words put into the mouth of Manes in the
work quoted which argue acquaintance with the Pistis Sophia.

1002.
Abulmaali in Kessler, op. cit. p. 371; Firdaûsi, ibid. p. 375;
Mirkhônd, ibid. p. 379. Cf. Rochat, op. cit. p. 81. He is said to
have painted his pictures in a cave in Turkestan (Stokes in
Dict. Christian Biog. s.v. Manes), which would agree well
enough with the late German discoveries at Turfan, for which
see A. von Le Coq in J.R.A.S. 1909, pp. 299 sqq.

1003.
Flügel, op. cit. p. 85.

1004.
Al-Jakûbi in Kessler, op. cit. pp. 328, 329; cf. Rochat, op. cit.
p. 88.

1005.
Al-Bîrûnî, Chronology, pp. 191, 192.

1006.
Rochat, op. cit. p. 89. Al-Bîrûnî, whom he quotes, however,
says merely that the Manichaeans increased under Ormuz,
and also that Ormuz “killed a number of them.” See last note.
1007.
Al-Jakûbi in Kessler, op. cit. p. 330. But Darmesteter (see
passage quoted in n. 2, p. 284 infra) puts this event as
happening after Ormuz’ death and under Shapur II.

1008.
Al-Bîrûnî, Chronology, p. 191. The town is called Djundi-sâbur
or Gundisabur.

1009.
Al-Jakûbi, ubi cit. supra; Eutychius quoted by Stokes, Dict.
Christian Biog. s.v. Manes.

1010.
Rochat, op. cit. p. 93, examines all the evidence for this and
comes to the conclusion given in the text.

1011. Malcolm, History of Persia, London, 1821, Vol. I. pp. 95, 96.

1012.
G. Rawlinson, The 6th Oriental Monarchy, 1873, p. 222;
Rochat, op. cit. p. 53.

1013.
See Chap. XII supra, p. 232.

1014.
See n. 1, p. 278 supra.

1015.
Al-Bîrûnî, Chron. p. 187, makes Manes the successor or
continuator of Bardesanes and Marcion. This was certainly
not so; but it was probably only from their followers that he
derived any acquaintance with Christianity. See n. 7, p. 280
supra. So Muhammad or Mahommed, four centuries later,
drew his ideas of the same faith from the heretics of his day.
1016.
Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, 1903, p. 318, says that after 300
A.D. Buddhism was everywhere in decay in India.

1017.
Rochat, op. cit. p. 58.

1018.
Darmesteter, Zend Avesta, pp. xl, xli.

1019.
Op. cit. pp. xlvii sqq.

1020.
Al-Bîrûnî, Chron. p. 192.

1021.
Elisaeus Vartabed in Langlois’ Collection des Hist. de
l’Arménie, Paris, 1868, t. II. p. 190. The story is repeated
almost word for word by Eznig of Goghp, ibid. p. 875. Cf.
Neander, Ch. Hist. II. p. 171.

1022.
Rochat, op. cit., following Kessler, shows, it seems,
conclusively, that this is another name for Manes’ father,
Fatak or Patecius.

1023.
She was a courtezan at Hypselis in the Thebaid according to
Epiphanius, Haer. LXVI. c. 11, p. 400, Oehler. As Baur, Die
Manichäische Religionssystem, Tübingen, 1831, p. 468 sqq.
has pointed out, this is probably an imitation of the story told
about Simon Magus and his Helena (see Chap. VI supra). It
seems to have arisen as an embroidery, quite in Epiphanius’
manner, upon the story in the Acta, that Scythianus married a
captive from the Upper Thebaid (Hegemonius, op. cit. c. LXII.
p. 90, Beeson).
1024.
Many guesses have been made as to the allusions concealed
under these names, as to which see Rochat, op. cit. pp. 64-
73. Neander (Ch. Hist. II. p. 16) quotes from Ritter the
suggestion that Terebinthus may come from an epithet of
Buddha, Tere-hintu “Lord of the Hindus.” One wonders
whether it might not have been as fitly given to a Jewish slave
sold at the Fair of the Terebinth with which Hadrian closed his
war of extermination.

1025.
These four books may have been intended for the
Shapurakhan, the Treasure, the Gospel and the Capitularies,
which Al-Bîrûnî, Chron. p. 171, attributes to Mani. Cf.
Epiphanius, Haer. LXVI. c. 2, p. 402, Oehler, and the Scholia of
Théodore bar Khôni in Pognon, Inscriptions Mandaïtes des
Coupes de Khouabir, pp. 182, 183.

1026.
Epiphanius, op. cit. c. 1, p. 398, Oehler.

1027.
Colditz in Kessler, op. cit. pp. 15, 16. Cf. Rochat, op. cit. pp.
65, 66.

1028.
Morrison, Jews under Romans, p. 325 for authorities. Philo,
de Vit. Contempl. etc. c. III. says that similar communities
existed in his time near the Mareotic lake in Egypt. But the
date of the treatise and its attribution to Philo are alike
uncertain. The first mention of Buddha in Greek literature is
said to be that by Clem. Alex. Strom. Bk I. c. 15.

1029.
Harnack in Encyc. Britann. 9th edition, s.v. Manichaeans, p.
48, says “There is not a single point in Manichaeism which
demands for its explanation an appeal to Buddhism.” This
may be, but the discoveries at Turfan and Tun-huang have
 made a connection between the two more probable than
appeared at the time he wrote. See also Kessler as quoted by
Rochat, op. cit. pp. 192, 193.

1030.
This appears from the Chinese Treatise at Pekin mentioned
later. See p. 293, n. 2.

1031.
Rochat, op. cit. p. 194. So Socrates, Eccl. Hist. Bk I. c. 22,
calls Manichaeism “a sort of heathen (Ἑλληνίζων)
Christianity.”

1032.
Hegemonius, Acta, c. VII. p. 91, Beeson; Flügel, op. cit. p. 86.

1033.
Certainly none is recorded in the Christian accounts, where
Darkness is called Hyle or Matter. En Nadîm (Flügel, op. cit.
p. 86) makes Manes call the good God “the King of the
Paradise of Light” and (p. 90) the Spirit of Darkness,
Hummâma. Schahrastâni, as quoted in Flügel’s note (p. 240),
makes this word mean “mirk” or “smoke” (Qualm). It would be
curious if Hummâma had any connection with the Elamite
Khumbaba, the opponent of the Babylonian hero Gilgamesh,
because this personage already figures in Ctesias’ story
about Nannaros, which has been recognized as a myth
relating to the Moon-god.

1034.
τὸ τῆς ὕλης δημιούργημα Hegemonius, Acta, c. VIII. p. 9,
Beeson. Cf. Alexander of Lycopolis, adv. Manichaeos, c. II.

1035.
Epiph. Haer. LXVI. c. 6, p. 408, Oehler; Hegemonius, Acta, c. V.
pp. 5-7, Beeson. The authenticity of the letter is defended by
Kessler, op. cit. p. 166. Cf. Rochat, op. cit. p. 94 contra.
1036.
τῶν κακῶν ἐπὶ τὸν θεὸν ἀναφέρουσιν, ὧν τὸ τέλος κατάρας
ἐγγύς. It is evidently intended for a quotation from Heb. vi. 8,
which however puts it rather differently as ἐκφέρουσα δὲ
ἀκάνθας καὶ τριβόλους ἀδόκιμος καὶ κατάρας ἐγγύς, ἧς τὸ
τέλος εἰς καῦσιν. “But that which beareth thorns and briers is
to be rejected and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be
burned.” The Khuastuanîft or Manichaean confession
mentioned later repeats this phrase about God not being the
creator of evil as well as of good. See p. 335 infra.

1037.
Hegemonius, Acta, c. VII. p. 9, Beeson.

1038.
En Nadîm in Kessler, op. cit. pp. 386, sqq. Kessler’s
translation of En Nadîm, which is given in the first Appendix to
the work quoted, differs slightly from that of Flügel and
depends on a somewhat better text than the last-named. It is
therefore used when possible in the remaining notes to this
chapter. Flügel’s book, however, has the advantage of a
commentary of some 300 pages marked with great erudition,
and must still be consulted by anyone wishing to be
acquainted with its subject.

1039.
Plutarch, de Is. et Os. c. XLV., says, however, that “evil must
have a principle of its own,” so that it cannot be the work of a
benevolent being. As he is generally supposed to have taken
his account of the Persian teaching from Theopompos of
Chios, who was at the Court of Ptolemy about 305 B.C., his
evidence is against those who, like M. Cumont, would make
the “Zervanist” opinion, which assumes a common principle
for good and evil, pre-Christian. Yet the point does not yet
seem capable of decision, as Plutarch may here be only
giving us his own opinion.
1040.
Casartelli, op. cit. p. 44.

1041.
This is really the crux of the whole question. If the idea could
be traced back to the philosophers of Ionia (e.g. Heraclitus of
Ephesus) and their theory of eternal strife and discord being
the cause of all mundane phenomena, it is difficult to say
whence the Ionians themselves derived it, save from Persia.
We can, of course, suppose, if we please, that the Persians
did not invent it de novo, but took it over from some of their
subjects. Among these, the Babylonians, for instance, from
the earliest times portrayed their demons as not only
attempting to invade the heaven of the gods, but as being in
perpetual warfare with one another. But the very little we know
of Babylonian philosophy would lead us to think that it inclined
towards pantheism of a materialistic kind rather than to
dualism.

1042.
En Nadîm, in Kessler, op. cit. p. 387; Flügel, op. cit. p. 86.

1043.
The likeness of this to the cosmogony of the Ophites and their
successor Valentinus is of course marked (cf. Chaps. VIII and
IX supra). Manes may have borrowed it directly from
Valentinus’ follower Bardesanes, whose doctrines were
powerful in Edessa and Mesopotamia in his time, or he may
have taken it at first-hand from Persian or Babylonian
tradition. That Manes was acquainted with Bardesanes’
doctrines, see n. 7, p. 280 supra.

1044.
En Nadîm in Kessler, op. cit. p. 387; Flügel, op. cit. p. 86.
Flügel’s text adds to these members other “souls” which he
names Love, Belief, Faith, Generosity, and Wisdom. Kessler
substitutes Courage for Generosity and seems to make these
“souls” the members’ derivatives.
1045.
See last note.

1046.
See Chapter XII, p. 251 supra. Here, again, the traditional and
monstrous figure of Satan may have been copied from the
sculptured representations of the composite demons of
Babylonia (e.g. Rogers, Religion of Babylonia and Assyria,
Frontispiece and Figs. 1 and 13). Yet if we take the Mithraic
lion, as M. Cumont would have us do, as the symbol of fire
and the serpent as that of the earth, we have in the five sorts
of animals the five στοιχεῖα or elements of Aristotle. Cf.
Aetius, de Placitis Philosophorum, ed. Didot, Bk I. c. iii. § 38
(Plutarch, Moralia, II.), p. 1069. Yet the nearest source from
which Manes could have borrowed the idea is certainly
Bardesanes, who, according to Bar Khôni and another Syriac
author, taught that the world was made from five substances,
i.e. fire, air, water, light and darkness. See Pognon, op. cit. p.
178; Cumont, La Cosmogonie Manichéenne d’après
Théodore bar Khôni, Bruxelles, 1908, p. 13, n. 2.

1047.
En Nadîm in Kessler, op. cit. p. 388; Flügel, op. cit. p. 87. As
the ancients were unacquainted with the properties of gases,
it is singular that they should have formed such a conception
as that of the compressibility and expansibility of spirits. Yet
the idea is a very old one, and the Arabian Nights story of the
Genius imprisoned in a brass bottle has its parallel in the
bowls with magical inscriptions left by the Jews on the site of
Babylon (Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, 1853, pp. 509 sqq.),
between pairs of which demons were thought to be
imprisoned. Cf. Pognon, op. cit. p. 3. Something of the kind
seems indicated in the “Little Point,” from which all material
powers spring, referred to by Hippolytus and the Bruce
Papyrus.
1048.
So in the Pistis Sophia, it is the “last Parastates” or assistant
world who breathes light into the Kerasmos, and thus sets on
foot the scheme of redemption. Cf. Chapter X, p. 146 supra.

1049.
Yet the Fundamental Epistle speaks of the twelve “members”
of God, which seem to convey the same idea See Aug. c. Ep.
Fund. c. 13.

1050.
Thus En Nadîm in Kessler, op. cit. pp. 388, 389; Flügel, op.
cit. p. 87. But here the Christian tradition gives more details
than the Mahommedan. Hegemonius, Acta, c. VII., p. 10,
Beeson, and Bar Khôni (Pognon, p. 185), are in accord that
the God of Light produced from himself a new Power called
the Μήτηρ τῆς Ζωῆς or Mother of Life, that this Mother of Life
projected the First Man, and that the First Man produced the
five elements called also his “sons,” to wit, wind, light, water,
fire and air, with which he clothed himself as with armour. See
Cumont, Cosmog. Manich. p. 16, n. 4, for the harmonizing of
the texts [N.B. the omission of πῦρ from his quotation from
the Acta is doubtless a clerical error]. The identification of the
Mother of Life with the “Spirit of the Right [Hand]” is accepted
by Bousset, Hauptprobleme, pp. 177, 178, and may be
accounted for by the crude figure by which the Egyptians
explained the coming-forth of the universe from a single male
power. See Budge, Hieratic Papyri in the Brit. Mus. p. 17.

1051.
These were also the “sons” of Darkness or Satan. See Bar
Khôni (Pognon, p. 186). The reason that led the God of Light
to send a champion into the lists was, according to Bar Khôni
(Pognon, p. 185), that the five worlds of his creation were
made for peace and tranquillity and could therefore not help
him directly in the matter. Cf. St Augustine, de Natura Boni, c.
XLII. But Manes doubtless found it necessary to work into his
 system the figure of the First Man which we have already
seen prominent in the Ophite system. Cumont, Cosmog.
Manich. p. 16, says few conceptions were more widely spread
throughout the East. It is fully examined by Bousset,
Hauptprobleme, in his IVth chapter, “Der Urmensch.” The First
Man is, in the Chinese treatise lately found at Tun-huang in
circumstances to be presently mentioned, identified with the
Persian Ormuzd and the five elements are there declared to
be his sons. See Chavannes and Pelliot, Un Traité Manichéen
retrouvé en Chine, pt 1, Journal Asiatique, série X., t. XVIII.
(1911), pp. 512, 513. The 12 elements which helped in his
formation seem to be mentioned by no other author than En
Nadîm. St Augustine, however, Contra Epistulam Fundamenti,
c. 13, speaks of the “12 members of light.” The Tun-huang
treatise also mentions “the 12 great kings of victorious form”
whom it seems to liken to the 12 hours of the day. As the
Pistis Sophia does the same with the “12 Aeons” who are
apparently the signs of the Zodiac, it is possible that we here
have a sort of super-celestial Zodiac belonging to the
Paradise of Light, of which that in our sky is a copy. It should
be remembered that in the Asiatic cosmogonies the fixed
stars belong to the realm of good as the representatives of
order, while the planets or “wanderers” are generally evil.

1052.
En Nadîm in Kessler, op. cit. p. 389; Flügel, op. cit. pp. 87, 88.
According to the Christian tradition, the Powers of Darkness
devoured only the soul of the First Man which was left below
when his body, as will presently be seen, returned to the
upper world. See Hegemonius, Acta, c. VII., p. 10, Beeson.

1053.
Both the Christian and the Mahommedan traditions agree as
to this result of the fight, which is paralleled not only by the
more or leas successful attempt of Jaldabaoth and his powers
to eat the light of Pistis Sophia, but also by a similar case in
orthodox Zoroastrianism. For all these see Cumont, Cosmog.
 Manich. p. 18, n. 4. Bar Khôni (Pognon, p. 186), goes further
and describes the surrender of the First Man as a tactical
effort on his part, “as a man who having an enemy puts
poison in a cake and gives it to him.” Alexander of Lycopolis
(adv. Manich. c. III.), on the other hand declares that God
could not avenge himself upon matter (as he calls Darkness)
as he wished, because he had no evil at hand to help him,
“since evil does not exist in the house and abode of God”; that
he therefore sent the soul into matter which will eventually
permeate it and be the death of it; but that in the meantime
the soul is changed for the worse and participates in the evil
of matter, “as in a dirty vessel the contents suffer change.”
These, however, are more likely to be the ideas of the
Christian accusers than the defences of the Manichaean
teachers.

1054.
En Nadîm in Kessler, op. cit. pp. 389, 390; Flügel, op. cit. p.
87. As Kessler points out, En Nadîm gives two accounts
doubtless taken from different Manichaean sources. In one,
he says simply that the King of the Paradise of Light followed
with other gods and delivered the First Man, the actual victor
over Darkness being called “the Friend” of the Lights (like
Mithras). He then goes on to say that Joy (i.e. the Mother of
Life) and the Spirit of Life went to the frontier, looked into the
abyss of hell and saw the First Man and his powers were held
enlaced by Satan, “the Presumptuous Oppressor and the Life
of Darkness”; then she called him in a loud and clear voice,
and he became a god, after which he returned and “cut the
roots of the Dark Powers.” For Bar Khôni’s amplification of
this story see p. 302, n. 1, and p. 324 infra. The whole of this,
together with the cutting of the roots, is strongly reminiscent of
the Pistis Sophia.

1055.
En Nadîm in Kessler, op. cit. pp. 391, 392; Flügel, op. cit. p.
98. The Acta (Hegemonius, op. cit. c. VIII., p. 11, Beeson) say
that the “Living Spirit” before mentioned “created the Cosmos,
descended clothed with three other powers, drew forth the
rulers (οἱ ἄρχοντες) and crucified them in the firmament which
is their body the Sphere.” “Then he created the lights
(φωστῆρες) which are the remnants of the soul, caused the
firmament to encompass them, and again created the earth
[not the Cosmos] with its eight aspects.” The Latin version
after “earth” adds “they (sic!) are eight.” which if it refers to the
aspects would agree with En Nadîm. Alexander of Lycopolis
(adv. Manich. c. III.), who had been a follower of Manes and
was a Christian bishop some 25 years after Manes’ death,
says that “God sent forth another power which we call the
Demiurge or creator of all things; that this Demiurge in
creating the Cosmos separated from matter as much power
as was unstained, and from it made the Sun and Moon; and
that the slightly stained matter became the stars and the
expanse of heaven.” “The matter from which the Sun and
Moon were taken,” he goes on to say, “was cast out of the
Cosmos and resembles night” [Qy the Outer Darkness?],
while the rest of the “elements” consists of light and matter
unequally mingled. Bar Khôni (Pognon, op. cit. p. 188), as will
presently be seen, says that the Living Spirit with the Mother
of Life and two other powers called the Appellant and
Respondent [evidently the “three other powers” of the Acta]
descended to earth, caused the Rulers or Princes to be killed
and flayed, and that out of their skins the Mother of Life made
11 heavens, while their bodies were cast on to the earth of
darkness and made 8 earths. The Living Spirit then made the
Sun, the Moon, and “thousands of Lights” (i.e. Stars) out of
the light he took from the Rulers. That this last story is an
elaboration of the earlier ones seems likely, and the flaying of
the Rulers seems to be reminiscent of the Babylonian legend
of Bel and Tiamat, an echo of which is also to be found in the
later Avestic literature. See West, Pahlavi Texts (S.B.E.), pt iii.
p. 243. Cf. Cumont, Cosmog. Manich. p. 27, n. 2.
1056.
En Nadîm in Kessler, op. cit. p. 392; Flügel, op. cit. pp. 89-90.
This would agree perfectly with the system of the Pistis
Sophia, where it is said that the “receivers of the Sun and
Moon” give the particles of the light as it is won from matter to
Melchizedek, the purifier, who purifies it before taking it into
the Treasure-house (pp. 36, 37, Copt.). The idea that the
Sun’s rays had a purifying effect shows shrewd observation of
nature before his bactericidal power was discovered by
science. So does the association of the Moon with water,
which doubtless came from the phenomenon of the tides. Is
the Column of Glory the Milky Way?

1057.
The Ecpyrosis or final conflagration is always present in
orthodox Mazdeism, where it inspires its Apocalypses, and is
in effect the necessary conclusion to the drama which begins
with the assault on the world of light by Ahriman. For
references, see Söderblom, op. cit. chap. IV. From the
Persians it probably passed to the Stoics and thus reached
the Western world slightly in advance of Christianity. “The day
when the Great Dragon shall be judged” is continually on the
lips of the authors of the Pistis Sophia and the Μέρος τευχῶν
Σωτῆρος, and the conception may therefore have reached
Manes from two sources at once. The angels maintaining the
world as mentioned in the text are of course the
Splenditenens and Omophorus about to be described.

1058.
Hegemonius, Acta, c. VIII. p. 12, Beeson. St Augustine (contra
Faustum, Bk XX. c. 10) mentions the Wheel briefly and rather
obscurely. It seems to have fallen out of the account of Bar
Khôni. But see the Tun-huang treatise (Chavannes et Pelliot,
op. cit. 1ère partie, pp. 515, n. 2, 516, 517, n. 3). There can be
little doubt that it is to be referred to the Zodiac. The Aeons of
the Light seem to be the five worlds who here play the part of
the Parastatae in the Pistis Sophia.