UTRIA in the COPTIC MANICHAICA the Context for the Research Summarised in This Paper Is a Much Broa
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ARAM, 22 (2010) 87-96. doi: 10.2143/ARAM.22.0.2131033 SEARCHING FOR TRACES OF THE {UTRIA IN THE COPTIC MANICHAICA Prof. IAIN GARDNER (University of Sydney) The context for the research summarised in this paper is a much broader project on the religio-historical and textual connections between Mandaeism and Manichaeism. I do not intend to discuss all the ramifications of that here; but, rather, to narrow the focus to a specific set of questions applied to a particular source of data, the Coptic Manichaica. By this source I mean the texts found in the codices of the so-called Medinet Madi library, these texts being Coptic trans- lations drawn ultimately from Syriac / Aramaic originals, written either by Mani himself or derived from the first generations of the Manichaean community. These texts form a coherent, if not entirely uniform, source of data that evi- dences very early Manichaean tradition in its homeland. The point of all this being that this source, i.e. the ‘Coptic Manichaica’, provides a reasonably closed set of textual material by which to test any hypothesis of Mandaean-Manichaean interconnection in Mesopotamia during the second half of the third century1. The questions that I have here applied to this source are specifically these: – Does this Manichaean material evidence a class of divine beings analogous to the {utria of Mandaeism? – If this is so, are there any traces of the Mandaean saviour figures, (a sub- category of the {utria), in this Manichaean material? This paper will be entirely taken up with these questions. It is deliberately restricted in its purpose and elaborates no grand theory, though I expect that some of the relevance for broader issues will be apparent enough. I should stress that this paper is not a study of the {utria in Mandaeism. It is, precisely as the title says, concerned with ‘searching for (their) traces in the Coptic Manichaica’. There is in the Mandaean texts (and, of course, in religious practice) a class of divine beings called {utria or uthras2. These ‘rich ones’ are called into existence 1 Whilst I have tried to phrase this opening paragraph carefully, one remains aware of various possible qualifications. In particular, the Medinet Madi codices evidence various strata of textual development, and what I have stated above is perhaps not uniformly true of all the material. One needs also add to this source both related material (such as Kellis texts) and other that is equally early found such as within the Mani-Codex, an-Nadim’s Fihrist, the Parthian hymns, etc. 2 E.S. Drower, R. Macuch, A Mandaic Dictionary, Oxford: 1963, p. 347ab. 993793_Aram_22_05_Gardner.indd3793_Aram_22_05_Gardner.indd 8877 118/10/118/10/11 115:125:12 88 SEARCHING FOR TRACES OF THE {UTRIA IN THE COPTIC MANICHAICA and are secondary to the First Life or King of Light. The term is very widely used. It includes the saviour figures, with which this paper will be primarily concerned; that is, the three ‘brothers’ Hibil Ziwa, Sitil, and Anus {Utra, together with the pre-eminent Manda d-Hiia. It also applies to more ambivalent figures, including the creator Ptahil {Utra; and to those beings who are imprisoned in the toll-houses between the World of Light and earth. Then again, the term may be used in liturgical and priestly contexts. It should also be noted that there are other titles or epithets used in the texts, such as malkia (kings) and malakia (angels / devils, usually negative). In general, it may be supposed that all the {utria share the characteristic of being intermediaries between the eter- nality of the World of Light, from which they derive or in which nature they partake, and our own mortal existence, from where we perceive them3. Whilst one would wish to be more specific about the various classes of divine beings and their particular characteristics, there is such an accumulation of strata of tradition within the available texts that this is impossible within the confines of a paper such as this4. In any case, this paper is not concerned with the holy grail of establishing such a stratigraphy of Mandaean teachings. The question is restricted: Does the Manichaean material evidence a class of divine beings analogous to the {utria of Mandaeism? Now, it is already apparent that the functions of the {utria are varied and not particularly distinctive, indeed generalised enough to be common to a number of religious systems. But the term itself is notable; though obviously derived from the word for ‘wealth’, this usage is specific to Mandaic amongst Aramaic dialects5. In fact, the term and usage has a direct parallel in the Coptic of the Medinet Madi codices: rmmao, that is, ‘rich one’6. This point is well enough known7. E.S. Drower, in her personal copy of the Manichaean Psalm-Book, hand wrote {utria beside the initial occurrence of the Coptic word in the first Thom Psalm8; 3 J.J. Buckley, The Mandaeans, Oxford 2002: 8: “In varying ways, (the {utras) continue to uphold and look after the Lightworld and earth, and especially to keep contact with the Mandae- ans of earth. Laufa (connection) .. expresses this contact between the worlds”. 4 See the classic paper by M. Lidzbarski, {Uthra und Malakha’, Orientalische Studien Th. Nöldeke zum siebzigsten Geburtstag gewidmet, ed. C. Bezold, Gieszen 1906: 537-545. More recently, there is detailed discussion in D. Shapira, {Anus and {U/ra Revised: Notes on Aramaic- Iranian Linguistic Interaction and Mystical Traditions’, Kabbalah, 6, 2000: 151-182 (especially n. 5). 5 Though see the discussion of Samaritan usage (‘angelic armies’) by D. Shapira, op. cit., pp. 155-156. 6 rMmao, lit’ ‘great man’; also note mNtrMmao, ‘richness’ or ‘wealth’. 7 E.g. D. Shapira, op. cit., pp. 153-154 (though I do not agree with certain details of his dis- cussion, especially that the rMmaaï belong to the second evocation). 8 A Manichaean Psalm-Book II, ed. C.R.C. Allberry, Stuttgart: 1938, p. 203, 12 (E.S. Drower’s copy is in my own possession). 993793_Aram_22_05_Gardner.indd3793_Aram_22_05_Gardner.indd 8888 118/10/118/10/11 115:125:12 I. GARDNER 89 and indeed P. Nagel in his German translation of the same texts even used the Mandaean term to represent the Coptic9. These instances relate to this particu- lar group of psalms, where parallels to the Mandaean literature were famously made evident by T. Säve-Söderbergh in 194910. But the term and this usage (i.e. the rich ones as a class of divine beings) is found more broadly in the Coptic Manichaica; and, it should be stressed, has no proper antecedent in earlier so-called gnostic literature in Coptic11. The link goes directly from the Mandaean to the Coptic Manichaica. For instance, the Kephalaia represents the rapidly developing scholastic tra- dition of the community, and kephalaion fifty is entitled, ‘Concerning these names: God, Rich One, and Angel; who they are’12. The primary classification is that gods are summoned by the Father from himself; rich ones are then evoked by the ‘first rich gods’; and angels in turn from the rich ones. Thus, in this classification the rich ones belong to a level of emanation below that of the gods, a distinction that does not correspond to Mandaean usage where it appears that all divine beings secondary to the First Life may on occasion be termed {utria13. However, the study of other Manichaean texts will easily demonstrate that the taxonomy applied here is very much a product of the scholastic tradition, and its imperative to impose an ordering system14. Indeed, despite this drive for consistency in terminological usage, it is clear that even in the Kephalaia the great gods, those evoked first from the Father, may them- selves also be termed rich: The twelve hours of this (first) great day are the twelve great rich gods (p]mNtsnaus Nnaö Nrmmao Nnoute) of greatness. These, who are the first evocations ..15 9 P. Nagel, Die Thomaspsalmen des koptisch-manichäischen Psalmenbuches, Berlin: 1980; cf. p. 29 n. 7a. 10 T. Säve-Söderbergh, Studies in the Coptic Manichaean Psalm-Book. Prosody and Man- daean Parallels, Uppsala 1949. 11 Thus, Nag Hammadi and related texts. Of course, the language of ‘richness’ has general utility and belongs to the common store of imagery. Thus it is possible to find some similar seeming instances, e.g. in The Apocryphon of John the pronoia declares ‘I am the richness of the light’ (NHL II, 1, 30, 15). 12 Kephalaia, ed. H.-J. Polotsky, A. Böhlig, Stuttgart: 1940, pp. 125, 25 – 126, 29. 13 Note, however, E.S. Drower’s definition of the {utria in The Secret Adam, Oxford: 1960, p. 56, “They are not First Emanations, but they were created by them, although this is often apparently contradicted by what is said of them in the texts”. 14 An examination of usage throughout the kephalaic tradition seems to evidence the attempt to apply this classification (e.g. 24, 4.15.20; 66, 9), but inconsistencies remain. Especially inter- esting is 63, 32 where is found rich gods, angels and dwellings (maNjwpe, i.e. skinata?); compare PsBk2 203, 11-15, richnesses, angels, dwellings (tamie⁄on). Cf. perhaps (e.g.) hymn 374 in The Canonical Prayerbook of the Mandaeans, ed. E.S. Drower, Leiden: 1959, (of Yawar- Ziwa): ‘.. king of {uthras, great viceregent of skinata’. 15 Keph. 25, 15-17; similarly e.g. 126, 4-5 (see above). 993793_Aram_22_05_Gardner.indd3793_Aram_22_05_Gardner.indd 8899 118/10/118/10/11 115:125:12 90 SEARCHING FOR TRACES OF THE {UTRIA IN THE COPTIC MANICHAICA We should now compare the Manichaean Psalm-Book16 which, obviously, is a liturgical text without the same scholastic imperatives.