Plotinus and the Gnostics: the Tripartite Tractate?

Chapter 13 Plotinus and the Gnostics: the Tripartite Tractate?

John D. Turner

One of the novel developments in the transition from the rather static ontolo- gies typical of Middle Platonism to the dynamic emanationism of Plotinus and subsequent Neoplatonism is the doctrine of the unfolding of the world of true being and intellect from its source in a transcendent, only negatively- conceivable ultimate unitary principle which is itself beyond being. First, an initial identity of the product with its source, a sort of potential or prefigura- tive existence; second, an indefinite procession or spontaneous emission of the product from its source, and third, a contemplative visionary reversion of the product upon its own prefiguration within its source, in which the product becomes aware of its separate existence and thereby takes on its own distinc- tive form and definition.1 Although Plotinus has often been credited with being the first major phi- losopher to elaborate such a scheme clearly, it is clear that a similar model of dynamic emanation occurs in Gnostic sources, some of which chronologi- cally precede Plotinus. At present the clearest examples are the Platonizing Sethian treatises from Codices VII, VIII, X and XI, in particular two mentioned by Porphyry as having attracted Plotinus’ attention, namely Zostrianos (NHC VIII,1) and Allogenes (NHC XI,3). Of these, Zostrianos seems actually to have been cited in Plotinus’ critique of Gnostic thought in Enn. 2.9[33],2 while Allogenes expounds a technique of mystical ascent extremely close to Plotinus’ own,3 not to mention the ontogenetic metaphysics and the Being-Life-Mind

1 For example, Enn. 5.2[11].1.8–13: “It is because there is nothing in it that all things come from it: in order that Being may exist, the One is not being, but the generator of being. This, we may say, is the first act of generation: the One, perfect because it seeks nothing, has nothing, and needs nothing, overflows, as it were, and its superabundance makes something other than itself. This, when it has come into being, turns back upon the One and is filled, and becomes Intellect by looking towards it. Its halt and turning towards the One constitutes Being, its gaze upon the One, Intellect. Since it halts and turns towards the One that it may see, it becomes at once Intellect and Being.” All translations of Plotinus are from Armstrong, Plotinus. 2 Enn. 2.9[33].10.19–33 ≈ Zostrianos NHC VIII 9:16–10:20, as pointed out by Michel Tardieu, “Plotin citateur du Zostrien,” June 7, 2005 Collège de France colloquium, “Thèmes et prob- lèmes du traité 33 de Plotin contre les Gnostiques.” 3 Especially Allogenes NHC XI 60:1–61:22 ≈ Enn. 3.8[30].9.29–39 cited below p. 404 and note 58.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004414815_015 Plotinus and the Gnostics 305 triad these treatises share with Plotinus.4 Yet even in Sethian treatises that lack these specific commonalities, a similar ontogenetic process appears. Thus, in the Apocryphon of John, the supreme Invisible Spirit emanates an overflow of luminous water in which he sees a reflection of himself. This self-vision is the Spirit’s First Thought which constitutes the second, intellectual, principle, Barbelo. In turn, Barbelo contemplates the same luminous water from which she had originated in order to generate the third principle, the Self-generated Child.5

4 Of the four “Platonizing Sethian” treatises – Zostrianos, Allogenes, the Three Steles of Seth, and Marsanes – Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus 16 tells us that two of them – Allogenes and especially Zostrianos – were studied and critiqued at length by himself, Plotinus, and Amelius in Rome during the years 265–268 ce, which raises the question of the extent to which the doctrines he read in these Sethian texts may have made positive contributions to his own metaphysical philosophy. 5 Ap. John BG 8502,2 26:1–30:4: “For it is he (the Invisible Spirit or Monad) who contemplates (noein) himself in his own light that surrounds him, which is he himself, the source of living water…. The fountain of the Spirit flowed from the living luminous water and provided all aeons and [27] worlds. In every direction he contemplated his own image (eikōn), behold- ing it in the pure luminous water that surrounds him. And his Thought (ennoia) became actual and appeared and stood at rest before him in the brilliance of the light. She [is the Providence (pronoia) of the All] the likeness of the light, the image of the invisible One, the perfect power Barbelo…. [29] Barbelo gazed intently into the pure Light, [30] and she turned herself to it and gave rise to a spark of blessed light, though it was not equal to her in mag- nitude. This is the only-begotten (monogenēs) one, who appeared from the Father, the divine Self-generated One (autogenēs), the first-born Child of the entirety of the Spirit of pure light.” A similar process seems presupposed but is not narrated in the Trimorphic Protennoia. In the non-Sethian Eugnostos, the Blessed and its nearly identical but Christianized version, the Sophia of Jesus Christ, the divine Forefather sees himself “within himself as in a mirror,” and the resultant image is the second principle, the Self-Father: Eugnostos (NHC III,3) 74:21–75:12: “The Lord of the Universe is not rightly called ‘Father’ but ‘Forefather.’ For the Father is the beginning (or principle) of what is visible. For he (the Lord) is the beginningless Forefather. He sees himself within himself, like a mirror, having appeared in his likeness as Self-Father, that is, Self-Begetter, and as Confronter, since he confronted Unbegotten First Existent. He is indeed of equal age with the one who is before him, but he is not equal to him in power.” Also 72:10–11: “It looks to every side and sees itself from itself.” The Sophia of Jesus Christ (NHC III,4) 98:24–99:13: “The Lord of the Universe is not called ‘Father’ but ‘Forefather.’ For the Father is the beginning (or principle) of those that will appear, but he (the Lord) is the beginningless Forefather. Seeing himself within himself in a mirror, he appeared resem- bling himself, but his likeness appeared as Divine Self-Father and as Confronter ‘over the Confronted ones,’ First Existent Unbegotten Father. He is indeed of equal age with the Light that is before him, but he is not equal to him in power.” Also 95:6: “It looks to every side and sees itself from itself.” In Hippolytus of Rome’s account of Simonian doctrine (Ref. 6.13), the pre-existent first principle abides in absolute unity, but gives rise to an intellectual principle through self-manifestation: “manifesting himself to himself, the one who Stood became the second (φανεὶς γὰρ αὑτῷ ἀπὸ ἑαυτοῦ ἐγένετο δεύτερος).”