Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Apokatastasis in Coptic Gnostic Texts

Apokatastasis in Coptic Gnostic Texts

Journal of Coptic Studies 14 (2012) 33–45 doi: 10.2143/JCS.14.0.2184686

APOKATASTASIS IN COPTIC FROM NAG HAMMADI AND CLEMENT’S AND ’S APOKATASTASIS: TOWARD AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF UNIVERSAL

BY ILARIA L.E. RAMELLI

The present essay sets out to analyse the notion of apokatastasis or res- toration/reintegration in Coptic Gnostic texts from the such as the treatise On the Origin of the World, the Exegesis of the Soul, the Valentinian Treatise on the Resurrection, a didactic letter addressed to a pupil, the , and the of Philip. I shall draw a comparison with the notion of apokatastasis that is found in of (the restoration of the soul to virtue, spiritual health, and spiritual life) and with the Christian doctrine of apokatastasis as universal restoration of rational creatures to that is attested in , Origen, and of in a time that is close to that of our Coptic texts. Profound similarities will emerge between the Coptic Nag Hammadi texts and especially Philo and Clement (both close to Middle ), but also remarkable differences, in particular between these Coptic Gnostic texts and Origen — and Clement, too, in various respects. Such an inves- tigation will help shed welcome and needed light on the complex history of the Christian doctrine of apokatastasis,1 and principally on its genesis. In the assessment of this question, philosophical (Stoic and Platonic) ele- ments and Scriptural elements must be taken into account as well. When speaking of , one should always be aware of the variety of tendencies that underlie this umbrella-term.2 Now, the

1 On this doctrine and its development from the to John the Scot Eriugena a monograph is forthcoming, to which I refer readers. See also Ramelli, “Origen, Bardaisan, and the Origin of Universal ”,135-168. 2 The often puzzling complexity of this category is underlined by King, What Is Gnosti- cism?, with my review in InvLuc 25 (2003), 331-334; Ramelli, “Gnosticismo”, 2364-2380; Plese, “Gnostic Literature”, 163-198, who objects to a total deconstruction of the Gnostic

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 3333 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 34 ILARIA L.E. RAMELLI

understanding(s) of apokatastasis in “Gnosticisms” seem to substantially differ from Origen’s and his followers’ notion of apokatastasis. For the “Valentinians” — who never designated themselves with this heresio- logical term, but rather called themselves “Christians”, as testifies in Dial. cum Tr. 35 —,3 the use of âpokatástasiv is attested, and this not only in Greek heresiological sources, but also (in transliteration) in the Coptic texts from Nag Hammadi, which represent an invaluable term of comparison and means of verification of the heresiologists’ lore. But, differently from what happens in Origen and Gregory Nyssen, and even in Bardaisan of Edessa and Clement of Alexandria beforehand,4 the concept of apokatastasis, such as it emerges in the Coptic Gnostic texts available to us, does not coincide with that of universal salvation. Indeed, the ülikoí, those belonging to the “material” nature, and a part of the cuxikoí were excluded from salvation, so that the latter cannot possibly be universal — as it is in Bardaisan’s, Origen’s, and Gregory’s view.

category. Dundenberg, Beyond Gnosticism, builds upon Williams’ and King’s arguments and regards the term “Gnostic” as misleading in particular for , on which he focuses. He sees the school of , like those of and Justin, as a philosophical school. Likewise, Tite, Valentinian Ethics and Paraenetic Discourse, denies the accuracy of umbrella-terms such as “Gnosticism” and even “Valentinianism”. On the other hand, Weiß, Frühes Christentum und studies the reception of the New Testa- ment in “Gnosticism”, accepts this category, and regards Gnosticism as a religion of its own (510), consistent in itself, and opposed to as a different religion; it used the New Testament only in order to confirm its own, non-Christian, ideas (434, 456 and passim). An opposite view is held by Aland, Was ist Gnosis?, who thinks that Gnosticism (“Gnosis” in her terminology) is a Christian phenomenon, relatively unitary, and unthink- able outside Christianity. See also Grabbe, An Introduction to Second Judaism, esp. 109-127, in which Gnosticism is described as a kind of inverted Judaism. Brakke, The Gnostics, besides providing a useful history of scholarship on “Gnosticism”, adopts a middle position between the rejection of this category altogether and its uncritical use; this category “must be either abandoned or reformed” (19), but used it taking the designation gnwstikoí from the Sethians, who, Brakke argues, first applied it to themselves. Edwards, Catholicity and in the Early Church, 11-34, too, considers the term “Gnostic” not heresiological, but used by some Gnostics whom exponents of the deemed “falsely so called.” 3 Within Valentinianism itself, different trends can be noticed, as well as common features. See only Markschies, Valentinus Gnosticus?; idem, “Valentinian Gnosticism”, 401-438; Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, who rightly remarks on the term “Valentinian” as heresiological (4); Dundenberg, “The School of Valentinus”, 64-99; idem, Beyond Gnosticism. On the distinction of a Western and an Eastern Valentinianism (Hippolytus Ref. 6,35; Carn. 15) see Kaestli, “Valentinisme italien et valentinisme oriental”, 391-403; Dundenberg, Beyond Gnosticism, 1-31; now Kalvesmaki, “Italian versus Eastern Valentinianism?”, 79-89, and Ramelli, Bardaisan of Edessa, 62-70. In the last monograph it is also argued that Bardaisan himself was not a Valentinian or a “Gnostic”, but was closer to and to Origen’s positions. 4 A detailed discussion of the doctrine of apokatastasis in Bardaisan, Clement, Origen, and Gregory Nyssen will be found in Ramelli, Apokatastasis.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 3434 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 APOKATASTASIS IN COPTIC GNOSTIC TEXTS FROM NAG HAMMADI 35

Apokatastasis in Valentinianism rather coincides with the restoration of the pneumatikoí, those belonging to the “spiritual” nature, to their original abode.5 The treatise On the Origin of the World (NHC II 5; XIII 2), perhaps stemming from Alexandria between the end of the third and the beginning of the fourth century, in its final section shows very well that the “Gnostic” apokatastasis is the restoration of each category of humans to its own original nature, which is not the same for all human beings (or for all rational creatures, as Origen maintained precisely against the “Valentinians”): “Each one must return to the place from which it came. Indeed, everyone will make one’s own nature known through one’s actions and knowledge” (127,14-17). Another element that sharply differentiates the notion of apokatastasis that is found in the Coptic Gnostic texts from Nag Hammadi and that which is found in Clement, Origen, and the latter’s followers, is that apokatastasis in our Coptic texts is the restoration of the soul, and does not include the resurrection of the body as well. This non-holistic concept of apokatastsis is shown very well in the Exegesis of the Soul (NHC II 6, 134,7-12), in which the resurrection from the dead is said to consist in the apokatastasis of the soul, which returns to its original abode, whereas the resurrection of the body is excluded: It is appropriate that the soul be regenerated and return to be as it was at the beginning […] restored to the place in which it had originally been. This is the resurrection from the dead.

The resurrection of the body is ruled out precisely because the incarnation of the soul is considered to be a damage for the latter, whose restoration cannot but imply a separation from the body. This is evident from ibidem 137,5-10: “When the soul leaves her6 perfect bridegroom because of the seductive arts of Aphrodite, who exists here in the act of generation, then she will be damaged. But if she weans and repents, she will be restored to her home.” This notion of the apokatastasis of the soul is not too dif- ferent from Philo’s concept of apokatastasis (which entails the restoration of the soul to virtue, knowledge, spiritual health, and life, as opposed to the death of the soul in which sin has become ingrained). In the exclusion

5 The very expression “saved by nature” (fúsei) is attested for Valentinianism by Clement, Exc. Theod. 56,3: tòn pneumatikòn fúsei swhÉmenon. Markschies, however, commenting on Strom. 2,20,115,1 doubts that Valentinus ever used the phrase “saved by nature” (Valentinus Gnosticus, 58; 81-82). 6 I usually employ the neuter for the soul, but here I use the feminine because of the imagery of the soul as a bride used in this passage.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 3535 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 36 ILARIA L.E. RAMELLI

of the body from apokatastasis the “Gnostics” agreed not only with Philo, but also with , who famously thought that the resurrec- tion is not of the body, but from the body. Interestingly, Plotinus seems to have written much of his Enneads in dialogue with the “Gnostics”.7 On the other hand, Origen, followed by Methodius, Gregory Nyssen, Maximus the Confessor, and other Fathers, entertained a holistic concep- tion of resurrection-restoration, which encompassed both the resurrection of the body for all human beings and the restoration of all rational crea- tures to the Good. In perfect line with the non-holistic notion of apokatastasis in the Exegesis of the Soul, the Valentinian Treatise on the Resurrection, a didactic letter addressed to a pupil, Rheginos (NHC I 4), offers an inter- pretation of the resurrection, not as a resurrection of the flesh, but as a spiritual resurrection that can be experienced even in the present, accord- ing to a realised eschatology that is attested for Valentinianism in Tertul- lian and Irenaeus as well.8 This resurrection coincides with a restoration to the which is made possible by Christ qua Son of the Human Being and Son of God at the same time. In this way, he embraced both humanity and divinity; therefore, being Son of God, Christ could van- quish death, and being Son of the Human Being he rendered human beings’ restoration or apokatastasis to the Pleroma possible (44,23-33). This — and not the resurrection of the body — is the true resurrection, which is defined as “the of those who have risen” (48,4-5), “the revelation of what is” and a transformation into imperishability, light, and fullness, that is, the Pleroma, which will fill up all deficiencies (48,34–49,8). Consistently with this notion of a spiritual resurrection that excludes the resurrection of the body, the restoration at stake is described as the return from union with a body to separation from any body. The same is indi- cated in another Coptic text, the Gospel of Mary (P. Berolinensis 8502,1), originally written in Greek in the second century.9 In its first part, the

7 See now Narbonne, Plotinus in Dialogue with the Gnostics, who argues that Plotinus’s debate with the “Gnostics” was an ongoing one, which started early (at least with Trea- tise 6), continued with what is known as the Großschrift against the Gnostics (Treatises 27-39), and went on later, e.g. in Treatises 47-48 and 51. Cf. my review of Narbonne in BMCR 2011. 8 Tert. Praescr. 33,7; Resurr. 19,2-7; Iren. AH 2,31. 9 Tuckett, The Gospel of Mary, argues that the Gospel was written in Greek and the Coptic version is later than the extant Greek fragments, but it preserves readings that are more original. He also argues (42-54) that the Gospel of Mary is “Gnostic”, at least in the broad sense given to “Gnosticism” by Pearson and Markschies.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 3636 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 APOKATASTASIS IN COPTIC GNOSTIC TEXTS FROM NAG HAMMADI 37

risen Saviour explains to the disciples that everything will be restored to its original root: “all creatures […] will be resolved again into their own roots […] God came among you, to the substance of every nature, in order to restore it to its root” (p. 7,5-6;18-20). Restoration is universal here, but not uniform: every nature returns to its own origin, different from that of the others. Instead, Origen thought that all rational creatures, who are of one and the same nature, will be restored to the same state, namely, union with God. A form of apokatastasis is also detectable in the so-called Apocryphon of John (NHC II 1; III 1; IV 1), a Gnostic mythological treatise of the second half of the second century, but it does not entail universal salvation. Christ — it is explained there — came to save humanity, which was created in the image of by the evil Yadalbaoth, the son of . Christ saves humans by reminding them of their heavenly origin. Some, who have knowledge and practice asceticism, can be saved immediately; others must first go through until they too acquire saving knowledge; some others, however, never attain restoration: they are cast into the place where there is no repentance and will be punished with eternal punishment (26,24-27,30). Therefore, here restoration is not universal. The notion that some souls will never be restored to their original abode, not even after several reincarnations, but will endure punishment forever, is very close to ’s position (some souls, due to the gravity of their sins, become “incurable” and will never be restored to the contemplation of the Ideas, but will be punished in Tartarus forever10), which Origen wanted to correct by remarking that “no being is incurable for the One who created it.”11 The Valentinian understanding of apokatastasis is clarified by the (NHC II 2), probably from the third century. The very term (in its Coptic transliteration, which clearly renders Greek âpoka- tástasiv) refers to the mystery of the bridal chamber, which is related to the redemption and the revelation of truth.12 It is remarkable that here apokatastasis is again connected with a “resurrection”, but not the resur- rection of the body:

10 Phaed. 113E2; Gorg. 525C2; Resp. 615E3. 11 Nihil enim omnipotenti impossibile est, nec insanabile est aliquid Factori suo (Princ. 3,6,5). 12 On the “bridal chamber” and its relation to redemption in “Valentinianism” see most recently Thomassen, “ among the Valentinians”, 895-915, praes. 899 and 905-908.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 3737 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 38 ILARIA L.E. RAMELLI

Truth did not come to the world naked, but in figures and images. For the world would not have received it in any other way. There is a rebirth and an image of rebirth; it is certainly necessary to be born again through the image. Which? Resurrection. The image must be resurrected through the image. The bridal chamber and the image must enter truth through the image: this is the apokatastasis. (67,9-19)

Heresiological accounts of Valentinian doctrine also testify to the notion of the apokatastasis of Sophia, that is, her restoration after her fall (which is the work of the Saviour, through the Cross). In particular, Irenaeus AH 1,2,4 attests that the Valentinians “maintain that thanks to this limit [sc. the Cross] Sophia has been purified [kekaqártai] and strengthened, and will be restored [âpokatastaq±nai] to her syzygy.” The very notion of a purification that must precede one’s apokatastasis was abundantly developed by Clement and Origen, and subsequently Gregory of Nyssa and most supporters of the Christian doctrine of apokatastasis. In AH 1,14,2 Irenaeus is speaking of “other” heretics, who seem to be again Gnostics, but no specification is given. I shall argue in a moment that they probably were “Valentinians.” These claimed that the name assumed by for the sake of redemption is “the name of the apokatas- tasis”, and they proclaimed it during their initiation rites.13 The expression eîv lútrwsin âggelikßn corresponds exactly to the Coptic “redemption of ” in the Tripartite Tractate (NHC I 5), which is usually regarded as a document of a revised form of Valentinianism — in which the role of Sophia is played by a double — and dated to the first half of the third century. It is especially momentous, in that it is the only Valentinian systematic treatise that is preserved wholly and directly, in a Coptic ver- sion.14 The process of restoration is there explained at 123,3ff. and is presented as the return of the perfect human being to the place from which it came, and the restoration of its members into the Pleroma, when they have been manifested as the whole body. At 125,19-20 the Son, who makes restoration possible, is called “the redemption of the angels of the

13 ‰Alloi dè pálin t®n lútrwsin êpilégousin oÀtwv· Tò ∫noma tò âpokekrum- ménon âpò pásjv qeótjtov, kaì kuriótjtov, kaì âljqeíav, Ω ênedúsato ˆIjsoÕv ö Naharjnòv ên ta⁄v hwa⁄v toÕ fwtòv toÕ XristoÕ, XristoÕ h¬ntov dià Pneúmatov ägíou eîv lútrwsin âggelikßn. ‰Onoma tò t±v âpokatastásewv· Messía oûfarèg namemcaimàn xaldaían mosomjdaéa âkfranaì caoúa, ˆIjsoÕ Naharía. Kaì toútwn dè ërmjneía êsti toiaútj· Oû diair¬ tò pneÕma, t®n kardían, kaì t®n üperourá- nion dúnamin, t®n oîktírmona· ônaímjn toÕ ônómatóv sou, Swt®r âljqeíav. Kaì taÕta mèn êpilégousin oï aûtoì teloÕntev. 14 See the analysis of Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, 166-187.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 3838 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 APOKATASTASIS IN COPTIC GNOSTIC TEXTS FROM NAG HAMMADI 39

Father.” The correspondence with Irenaeus’s passage is striking. The very terminology of apokatastasis is repeatedly employed in the whole passage (123,3ff.): When the redemption was proclaimed, the perfect man received knowledge immediately, so as to return in haste to his unitary state, to the place from which he came, to return there joyfully, to the place from which he came, to the place from which he flowed forth. His members, however, needed a place of instruction […] until all the members of the body of the church are in a single place and receive the restoration (apokatastasis) at one time, when they have been manifested as the whole body, namely the restoration (apokatastasis) into the Pleroma. […] The restoration is at the end, after the totality reveals what it is, the Son, who is the Redemption, that is, the path toward the incomprehensible Father, that is, the return to the pre-existent.15

The elements in this account that are similar to Origen’s and his followers’ notion of apokatastasis are many: for instance, the idea that apokatastasis will be the return to the rational creatures’ original condition; that it will be the telos or ultimate end and goal; that it will be a return to perfect unity; that it will have to be preceded by instruction; and the very notion of the body of the church as that which is restored in the end. But for Origen the eschatological church or body of Christ will be all humanity, not only one class or nature or kind within humanity. Moreover, while this “Valentinian” passage speaks of a restoration given at one and the same time to all those who will experience it, Origen and his followers, especially Gregory of Nyssa, will insist on the order with which the various rational creatures will attain the eventual restoration. This order will be based on their merits and degrees of spiritual advancement. Interesting traces of the doctrine of apokatastasis are also found, I think, in another Coptic text from Nag Hammadi that has been recently attached to a later (fourth-century) and revised form of Valentinianism: the Dia- logue of the Saviour.16 Indeed, Valentinianism in the fourth century seems to have been different from how it was in the second and the first half of the third. In the fourth, it tried to come to terms with the newly established “orthodoxy” and to soften those aspects which were most unacceptable to it, such as the tripartition of the human beings into predestined classes, the attribution of creation to Sophia or an inferior or even evil entity, and the system of the . This is clear from works such as the above- mentioned Dialogue of the Saviour, Treatise on the Resurrection (Letter

15 I used here the by Attridge and Müller, with minor modifications. 16 See Létourneau, “The Dialogue of the Savior as a Witness to the Late Valentinian Tradition”, 74-98.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 3939 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 40 ILARIA L.E. RAMELLI

to Rheginos) or Tripartite Tractate.17 In the Dialogue of the Saviour, although there is no focus on the term âpokatástasiv itself, never- theless some key characteristics of apokatastasis are present: the notion of restoration to the “bridal chamber” (121,5-9 and 18-24; 138,14-20), the concept that the final restoration will be characterised by a state of equality (136,17–137,1; cf. Clement Exc. ex Th. 63,2), and the idea that this restoration will be preceded by the diórqwsiv or rectification of all (125,2-3 and 18-22; cf. Hippolytus Ref. 6,31). The Pleroma is the arxß and the télov of the elect, which in this treatise, just as in other expressions of later Valentinianism, are not only the “” people, but also the “psychic” people. The fact that a doctrine of apokatastasis is found in some Gnostic works as well, such as the Tripartite Tractate from Nag Hammadi, which admits of it not only for the pneumatikoí, but also for the cuxikoí, very probably contributed to foment accusations of “Gnosticism” against Origen in the Origenistic controversy.18 It is worth noticing in this con- nection that the Tripartite Tractate offers one of the best and most explicit examples of the Valentinian division of humanity into three natures or kinds/races (génj, rendered into Coptic with genos), which Origen spent his life in contrasting.19 What is more, in this treatise it is evident that this tripartition has necessitarian soteriological implications for the “spiritual kind”, the “psychic kind”, and the “material kind” of persons (118,14-122,12), all implications that Origen could not endorse. The very same terminology is found in Irenaeus’s account of the Valentinian sys- tem in AH 1,1-8: the three “kinds” of human beings are the “spiritual”, who are saved, the “psychic”, who are the object of the saving mission of the Saviour, being endowed with free will,20 and the “material”, who will perish, since “matter is incapable of being saved.” That the spiritual kind is saved “by nature” is discussed in scholarship; at any rate, this is attested in Clement Exc. ex Theod. 56,3 (fúsei swçhómenon) and Irenaeus AH 1,6,2.21 In the Tripartite Tractate, it is clear that the eventual apokatastasis will include the spiritual people (“the Election”) and, as it

17 See Edwards, “The Epistle to Rheginus: Valentinianism in the Fourth Century”, 78. 18 This is rightly suggested by Prinzivalli, Magister, 76. 19 See Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, 50-52. 20 According to Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, 493 and passim (esp. Part One), a shift occurred rather early in Valentinian soteriology, when Western Valentinianism changed its soteriological focus from the “spiritual” people to the “psychic” people; a psychic body was assigned to the Saviour, for him to be able to redeem the “psychic” people, while the “spiritual” people were considered not even to be in need of redemption. 21 See the discussion in Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, 67-72.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 4040 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 APOKATASTASIS IN COPTIC GNOSTIC TEXTS FROM NAG HAMMADI 41

seems, at least a portion of the psychic people (“the Calling”), while the material people will be destroyed. Indeed, the spiritual people instantly recognise the Saviour, while the material people, who have proved unable to receive him, will be eliminated (118,14-119,20). Thus, they will be definitely excluded from salvation and restoration. Apokatastasis as unity with the Pleroma in the bridal chamber with the Saviour is certainly the fate of the spiritual people (122,12-129,34). As for the psychic people, who have been uncertain whether to accept the Saviour, the door is left open for their salvation, if they will finally choose the Saviour (118,37- 122,12). In the eventual apokatastasis they will attain unity with the Pleroma, as it seems, but this is uncertain, also due to the lacunary state of the text in this passage (129,34-136,24). What is entirely clear from 132,20-21 is that the eventual apokatastasis, albeit certainly not universal, will be characterised by perfect unity: “For the end will receive a unitary existence, just as the beginning is unitary.” Indeed, “the restoration / apokatastasis to that which used to be is a unity” (133,7). In Origen’s view also the eventual apokatastasis will be a perfect unity, but it will be fully universal and there will be no exclusion from there of “material people”, who remain unconverted; only in this way, for Origen, will that unity be perfect. It is interesting that the notion of the eventual apokatastasis as a return to unity — which will be so prominent a theme in the eschatology of supporters of the apokatastasis doctrine such as Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, Evagrius, and up to Eriugena22 — appears very clearly in a report by Irenaeus, which he ascribes to “Mark the Magician” (AH 1,14,1) and which Einar Thomassen, in his invaluable study on Valentinianism, included in the testimonia of Valentinian thought:23 Tóte dè kaì t®n âpokatástasin t¬n ºlwn ∂fj genésqai, ºtan tà pánta katelqónta eîv tò πn grámma mían kaì t®n aût®n êkfÉ- njsin ©xßsjÇ.24 Then — he said — the universal apokatastasis will also take place, when all beings return to the one letter and resound one and the same utterance.

22 See Ramelli, “Harmony between arkhe and telos in Patristic Platonism and the Imagery of Astronomical Harmony Applied to the Apokatastasis Theory”, forthcoming in the International Journal of the Platonic Tradition. 23 The Spiritual Seed, 241-247. 24 This is the context: ÊEkaston gàr aût¬n mérov ªn toÕ ºlou, tòn ÷dion ¥xon Üv tò p¢n ônomáhein, kaì m® paúsasqai ©xoÕnta, méxri ºtou êpì tò ∂sxaton grámma toÕ ëkástou [Hipp. êsxátou] stoixeíou monoglwssßsantov katast±sai [Hipp. mono- glwttßsanti katant±sai]. Tóte dè kaì t®n âpokatástasin t¬n ºlwn ∂fj genésqai, ºtan tà pánta katelqónta eîv tò πn grámma, mían kaì t®n aût®n êkfÉnjsin ©xßsjÇ.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 4141 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 42 ILARIA L.E. RAMELLI

Thomassen translates katelqónta with “descend” (instead of my “return”), which of course is one of the meanings of the verb katérxomai. As a consequence, he takes tà pánta to mean the Pleroma which descends onto a letter that is lost, as an image of Sophia.25 But katérxomai also means “to return”, a meaning that is very well attested from Herodotus onward, especially for the return from an exile.26 The same is the case for káteimi, an exact parallel: it does not only mean “to descend”, but also “to return”, for instance from an exile.27 The verb katérxomai was therefore perfectly suited to expressing the return of all beings (tà pánta) that takes place with the eventual apokatastasis, all the more in that the return from an exile is precisely one of the examples that Origen used to illustrate the meaning of âpokatástasiv and âpokaqístjmi and to show that âpokatástasív êsti eîv tà oîke⁄a (Hom. in Ier. 14,18).28 This is why, rather than the descent of the Pleroma (as Thomassen inter- prets tà pánta) onto one letter that is lost, I would read in Irenaeus’s report a reference to the return of “all beings” (tà pánta) to unity, symbolised by the “one and the same letter” and the “one and the same sound” that all will utter in unison. And this is precisely described as “universal apokatastasis” or restoration of all beings: t®n âpokatásta- sin t¬n ºlwn. This is depicted as a symphony, as the return of all to the unity of one single sound. Origen and Gregory of Nyssa will insist on the notion of the eventual apokatastasis as a unity of will and a symphony or harmony (essentially in that the wills of all shall be oriented toward the same point, i.e. God the Good); their concept of apokatastasis, though, universal and holistic as it is, seems to differ from most “Gnostic” attes- tations of apokatastasis. However, in the genesis of the Christian doctrine of apokatastasis the contribution of the Coptic Nag Hammadi texts must be taken into account as an important factor, along with: 1) the New Testament (especially Acts 3:20-21, which introduces the notion of “the times of universal restoration,” xrónoi âpokatastá- sewv pántwn, and 1 Cor 15:28); 2) Philo and his idea of the (non-eschatological) apokatastasis of the soul;

25 Thomassen, The Spiritual Seed, 244 (translation) and 245 (interpretation). 26 See, for instance, Herodotus 4,4 and passim; Aeschylus Ag. 1647; Ch. 3; Eum. 462; Sophocles Ant. 200; Oed. Col. 601; Aristoph. Ran. 1165, 1167; Plato Apol. Socr. 21A; Thucydides 8,68. Cf. p. 925 Liddell s.v. katérxomai. 27 See, for instance, Homer Od. 13,267; 15,505; Herodotus 1,62; 3,45; 4,3 and passim; Aeschylus Ag. 1283; Thucydides 8,48. Cf. p. 923 Liddell s.v. káteimi. 28 Analysis of this passage in Ramelli, Apokatastasis.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 4242 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 APOKATASTASIS IN COPTIC GNOSTIC TEXTS FROM NAG HAMMADI 43

3) the philosophical (especially Stoic) notion of apokatastasis, which worked at a cosmological level with an infinite succession of identical aeons (but Origen criticised its necessitarianism and was keen on dis- tinguishing his own doctrine of apokatastasis from it), 4) and authors such as Pantaenus and Bardaisan, with whose doctrine of apokatastasis Clement and Origen were acquainted.29

Origen will construct his own doctrine of apokatastasis, universal, holis- tic, and non-deterministic, on the basis of a debate with both the Stoic and the “Gnostic” (Valentinian) apokatastasis doctrines. The result, the Christian doctrine of universal restoration in Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, Evagrius and other Patristic thinkers, will differ from the “Gnostic” con- cept of apokatastasis essentially in that it will be universal (not restricted to a class of rational beings) and holistic (involving the whole of the human being, not only its soul). But in the very process of formation of the Christian doctrine of apokatastasis the role played by the definition of apokatastasis in the Nag Hammadi texts and in Gnostic texts in general is pivotal and must be taken into full account, something that has never been done so far in scholarship. In particular, the core role of Christ in this restoration, the process of rectification that will precede it, and the state of equality and union that will obtain in the eventual apokatastasis are all aspects that will be taken over by non-“Gnostic” supporters of the doctrine of apokatastasis as well, such as Bardaisan, Clement, Origen, and Orige- nian thinkers like Gregory of Nyssa, Evagrius, and even Maximus the Confessor. I thus hope that the present investigation will contribute to casting light on the so far obscure genesis of the Christian doctrine of apokatastasis.

Bibliography

Aland, B. Was ist Gnosis? Tübingen, 2009. Brakke, D. The Gnostics: Myth, Ritual, and Diversity in Early Christianity. Cambridge, 2010.

29 On the probable presence of the doctrine of apokatastasis in Pantaenus, Clement of Alexandria’s teacher, see Ramelli, Apokatastasis. I am grateful to Bas van Os, Nicola Denzey, and the participants in the Nag Hammadi and Gnosticism session at the SBL International Meeting, London, July 2011, for discussing an earlier draft of this essay. Special thanks to Karlheinz Schüssler for accepting my study in this Journal, which pro- foundly honoured me.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 4343 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 44 ILARIA L.E. RAMELLI

Dundenberg, I. “The School of Valentinus.” In: A Companion to Second-Century Christian “Heretics”, eds. A. Marjanen – P. Luomanen. Leiden 2005, 64-99. —. Beyond Gnosticism. New York 2008. Edwards, M.J. Catholicity and Heresy in the Early Church. Fanham-Burlington 2009. —. “The Epistle to Rheginus: Valentinianism in the Fourth Century.” NT 37 (1995). Grabbe, L.L. An Introduction to Second Temple Judaism. London-New York 2010. Kaestli, J.D. “Valentinisme italien et valentinisme oriental.” In: The Rediscovery of Gnosticism, ed. B. Layton. Vol. 1, Leiden 1980, 391-403. Kalvesmaki, J. “Italian versus Eastern Valentinianism?” VigChr 62,1 (2008), 79-89. King, K. What Is Gnosticism? Cambridge, MA, 2003. Létourneau, P. “The Dialogue of the Savior as a Witness to the Late Valentinian Tradition.” VigChr 65 (2011), 74-98. Markschies, Chr. Valentinus Gnosticus? Untersuchungen zur valentinianischen Gnosis mit einem Kommentar zu den Fragmenten Valentinus. Tübingen 1992. —. “Valentinian Gnosticism: Toward the Anatomy of a School.” In: The Nag Hammadi Library after Fifty Years, eds. J.D. Turner – A. McGuire. Lei- den 1997, 401-438. Narbonne, J.-M. Plotinus in Dialogue with the Gnostics. Leiden 2011. Plese, Z. “Gnostic Literature.” In: R. Hirsch-Luipold, H. Görgemanns, M. von Albrecht (eds.), Religiöse Philosophie und philosophische Religion der frühen Kaiserzeit. Tübingen 2009, 163-198. Ramelli, I. Review of K. King, What is Gnosticism? In: InvLuc 25 (2003), 331-334. —. “Galeno e i Cristiani: una messa a punto.” InvLuc 25 (2003), 276-297. —. “Gnosticismo.” In: A. Di Berardino (ed.), Nuovo Dizionario Patristico e di Antichità Cristiane. Vol. 2, Genoa 2007 (new English edition forthcom- ing in Chicago), 2364-2380. —. “Origen, Bardaisan, and the Origin of Universal Salvation.” HThR 102 (2009), 135-168. —. Bardaisan of Edessa: A Reassessment of the Evidence and a New Interpre- tation. Also in the Light of Origen and the Original Fragments from De . Eastern Christian Studies 22, Piscataway, NJ, 2009. —. Review of Narbonne, Plotinus in Dialogue with the Gnostics. BMCR 2011 (BMCR 2011.10.25). —. “Harmony between arkhe and telos in Patristic Platonism and the Imagery of Astronomical Harmony Applied to the Apokatastasis Theory.” Forth- coming in the International Journal of the Platonic Tradition. —. The Development of the Doctrine of Apokatastasis in Christianity: A Critical Assessment From the New Testament to Eriugena. Forthcoming. Thomassen, E. The Spiritual Seed. The Church of the Valentinians. Leiden 2008.

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 4444 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43 APOKATASTASIS IN COPTIC GNOSTIC TEXTS FROM NAG HAMMADI 45

—. “Baptism among the Valentinians.” In: Ablution, Initiation, and Baptism, ed. D. Hellholm et al., vol. 2, Berlin-New York 2011, 895-915. Tite, Ph.L. Valentinian Ethics and Paraenetic Discourse: Determining the Social Function of Moral Exhortation in Valentinian Christianity. Leiden 2009. Tuckett, Chr. The Gospel of Mary. Oxford, 2007. Weiß, H.F. Frühes Christentum und Gnosis: Eine rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studie. Tübingen 2008.

Ilaria L.E. Ramelli Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Largo A. Gemelli 1 I-20123 Milan Italy [email protected]

995694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd5694_JOCS_14_2012_03_Ramelli.indd 4545 119/12/129/12/12 11:4311:43

Top View