"Gnosticism and Gnostic Tendencies in Heresies from the First Centuries to the Present Day". Gnosticism as the most influential variety of religious and philosophical thought Gnostic teachings

Gnosticism- the eclectic philosophy of the first centuries of Christianity, which built its systems from pagan, Jewish and Christian elements and gave mythological forms to its ideas. The term itself was originally borrowed from the word gnosis, i.e., knowledge, which ap. Paul uses in the sense of deep insight into the ways of God in the work of redemption (1 Cor. 13:21). Irenaeus testifies, speaking of the whole sect, that the Carpocratians - one of the oldest sects - called themselves "gnostics". This fact, as well as the early development of Christian philosophy in Alexandria, lead us to the conclusion that the word was used in this city very early. Gnosis was used in opposition not to pistis, that is, to faith, but also to pagan philosophy.

Gnosticism stands on the boundary between the Christian system and paganism. It was the result of two processes arising from different directions - from the contact of the church, on the one hand, with pagan thought, and from the attempt of philosophy, on the other hand, to harmonize Christian revelation with its systems. He abandoned the monotheism of the Bible, limited the canon, and partly or completely turned into allegories great events from the activity and personal life of the Savior Christ. Gnost. mainly took from the Greek systems of Plato and the Stoics; but that which is most characteristic in it has been borrowed from the religions of the East. He embodied a bold oriental dualism; while Greek philosophy, for the most part, tends toward a pantheistic view of the universe. He usually conceived of individual life as the result of a process of emanations from the original essence; while Greek speculation taught the process of development through evolution in an ascending ladder from chaos. In contrast to the Greek systems, the thought of the Gnostics was not methodical, but poetic, and replete with oriental imagery and fantasies. The Gnostics also showed a preference for Eastern mythologies in the names of angels. Parseism with its fully developed idea of ​​God as light, Chaldean astrology (among Vardesan and Saturninus) and Buddhism with its ascetic tendency - all this, together with Syrian and Phoenician mythologies, gave gnost. its oriental imprint. The first task that the Gnost set himself was the task of leading man, by means of speculative knowledge, to salvation. The main questions presented to him for resolution were how the human spirit was imprisoned in matter and how it is possible to free it. The first question is almost identical with the question about the origin of evil, which Tertullian, along with other polemical writers, considered the main subject of gnostic thought. In the latter, namely in the question of the purification and liberation of the soul, gnost. contributed to the development of one of the deepest ideas of Christianity. Under the influence of the Greek philosophy, the Gnostics subordinated the will to knowledge and presented experimental Christianity as knowledge rather than faith, and made knowledge the measure of the moral state. They changed the sequence of Christ's words: Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God Matt. 5, 8, per position: those who see God are pure in heart. They were influenced by the aristocratic feeling of the Greek philosopher, who considered himself superior to religious beliefs and the humiliating practices of the crowd. This crowd remained at the lowest level of knowledge, characterized by faith. At the believer who kept the latter, they looked with contempt. Faith thus became for gnost. the principle of separation; while Christianity makes it a bond of unity and brotherhood among all people. The Gnostics divided mankind into three classes - spiritual (πνλιχοἱ ), spiritual and carnal ( ὑλιχοἱ, σαρχιχοἱ ). The latter act under the influence of passions and instincts. Matter is the source of chaotic motion and sinful lusts: God and spiritual nature (πνεἁμα ) are not subject to the influence of instinct and passion. Spiritual beings in the course of time become aware of their kinship with God and subsequently achieve complete freedom. This is the source of moral duty and the law of life for the spiritual class of people. Its members should strive to rise to the spiritual realm, and thus increase the seed contained in them. Different writers have tried to deduce the various phases of Gnosticism from some single main principle. Baur finds it in the idea of ​​absolute religion, derived from the combination of paganism and Judaism, Lipsius believes it in the difference between knowledge and faith. Without denying this antithesis, Neander and Gilgenfeld are the point of departure for gnost. they consider the personality of the Creator of the World, which in Valentine (following Plato) is called Dimiurgis; among Basilides - by the Archon, among the Ophite sects - by Jaldabaoth, i.e., the son of Chaos. This, in any case, is the most distinctive image in the Gnostic systems, and concentrates in itself its most important ideas. The introduction of this being between God and visible nature arises from the opposition between God and matter. This speculative dualism leads to a religious dualism that places the God of the New Testament in sharp conflict with the God of the Old Testament. The dimiurge is almost constantly depicted as having a very subordinate activity in comparison with God (and Justin alone attributes to him a spiritual or pneumatic nature). Spirits that originate from God stand above him. He belongs to the world and marks the boundary between the world and God. The description of his creative work, for the most part, is borrowed from the first chapters of the book of Genesis. He is the God of the Jews. But his kingdom is destroyed by the kingdom of Satan and the kingdom of spiritual or pneumatic life. The classification of Gnostic sects presents many difficulties. Since the discovery of Hippolytus, the difficulty has become even stronger due to the additional systems he puts up. He also made it likely that not only the dualistic but also the pantheistic conception was common among the Gnostics. Giseler divides them into Alexandrian, influenced by Plato, and Syrian, among which dualism was stronger. But, in his own mind, the system of the Syrian Marcion does not agree with this division. The classification based on religious influence, according to which Gaza divides Gnostics into Oriental, Greek, Christian, and Jewish, is not precise. Lipsius distinguishes among them three stages: 1) early Gnost., in which elements of Sirian mythologies are mixed with Judeo-Christian ideas; 2) Greek Gnost., beginning with the supposed migration of Basilides to Alexandria; 3) transitional, to which Marcion belongs. The alleged transition from Syrian to Greek Gnosticism, in Basilides, is not supported by facts; both of these forms developed simultaneously. Gnost in Alexandria. was strong already in the middle of the II century. Cerinthus began his activities there, and, if we follow the testimony of Hippolytus, Basilides also belonged there. Baur arranges these systems as follows: 1) the Gnostics, who combine Christianity with Judaism and paganism (Basilides, Valentin and the Ophites); 2) the Gnostics, who oppose Christianity to the latter two (Marcion); 3) the Gnostics, who, identifying Judaism and Christianity, contrast them with paganism (Clementine Conversations). The best grouping belongs to Neander, who distinguishes between two main classes - Judaizing and anti-Judaizing. We prefer a classification based on historical development and distinguish: 1) a period of sporadic Gnosticism at the end of the first century; 2) the period of the greatest fruitfulness of speculation until the middle of the third century; 3) a period of decline, in which little original thought is already noticed (after the 5th century, not a single new system has appeared); 4) the revival of Gnostic ideas around the 7th century in the Kafar sect. We confine ourselves to considering only the first two classes.

Gnosticism had a powerful effect on the church. When the church was in danger of being subjected to dead letter-speak and formalism, the idealistic speculation of the Gnostics prompted her to think and to a more detailed discussion of the doctrine. The consequence was that those points in which Christianity differed from Judaism and Paganism were subjected to more scrutiny. The Alexandrian school of theologians, which far surpassed the Gnostics in depth of speculative thought, gave the tone to the new life. Not completely free from the error according to which the essence of Christianity was posited in knowledge, it was Christian in tone both in teaching and in morality. She borrowed much from the rich speculations of Greek philosophy, but keeping aloof from Eastern theosophy. The influence of gnost. was not only useful as an occasion for the church to define more clearly the main points of its doctrine, but it also gave an incentive to interpretive works. Basilides and Heraklion were the first interpreters of the entire Gospel. The Gnostics were also the foremost exponents of religious poetry. Learning much from the Gnostics, the Church, on the other hand, gathered more closely around her bishops and more strongly brought forward the distinctive points of her teaching, her rites, and her apostolic origin. Gnost. was the rationalism of the ancient church. It was an effort of speculative thought to unite Christian revelation with reason. He put forward the distinctive principles of Hellenic philosophy, Eastern Theosophy, and Jewish religion, and compared with them the great ideas of Christianity. Christianity has often taken on the most fantastic outward appearances, but it has always declared itself to be superior to that which preceded it. But the Gnosticism of the ancient Church differed from the rationalism of our time in that it was limited only by the speculations of scientists; latest glitch. penetrated into the masses. This difference can be explained, perhaps, by the fact that the people then saw more clearly the influence of non-Christian thought and life on the world and better understood the superiority and power of Christianity over all the systems that preceded it.

The first period of gnost. belongs to the end of the 1st century. The earliest signs of gnost. can be seen in Simon Magus. This was one of the many magicians or sorcerers of the East, who attributed to themselves the power to perform miracles. Ancestors of the Jewish gnost. were the same false teachers against whom the Apostle rises. Paul in his letter to the Colossians. Without denying the messianic ministry of Christ, they seem to have had a widely developed doctrine of angels, who may have been looked upon as participants in creation. Gnost indication. also found in the Epistles to Timothy. The First Epistle of John is directed against Docetism. At the end of the apostolic age, Kerinth acted in that part of Asia Minor where St. John. He retained some points of the teachings of the Old Testament, but in place of God he put the creator of the world, the God of the Jews, who was also the head of the lower angels, Jesus was the son of Joseph and Mary. The Redeemer descended on Him at the time of His baptism and left Him before His suffering. Golden period gnost. ended about half of the 3rd century. After the first decades of the 2nd century, gnost. speculation was so prolific with systems that in this respect it has nothing like it in history and philosophy, either ancient or modern. Originating in Egypt and Syria, Gnosticism spread to the remotest parts of Christendom, from Edessa to Lyon. We now turn to a description of the Gnostic systems separately.

I. Jewish Gnostics. Basilides and Valentin. Two conflicting accounts of the Basilides system have come down to us. Irenaeus and Epiphanius say that his system embodies a bold dualism and borrows much from parsism. Hippolytus and Clement of Alexandria, on the other hand, present it as monistic, strongly influenced by Greek philosophy, especially the Stoics. The latter is obviously the more correct representation. St. Irenaeus did not have sufficient information and does not even mention Isidore; son and student of Basilides. Clement and Hippolyte, on the other hand, appear to have been familiar with the writings of both. On the Basilides system, see below. "Basilides". As for Valentine, our information about him is limited to the fact that he arrived in Rome under Bishop Hyginus (c. 138), enjoyed the highest influence under Pius (c. 155) and taught before the accession to the papal throne of Aniceta ( about 166). There is no doubt that he came from the East. But Tertullian's testimony that he broke with the church and was repeatedly excommunicated is doubtful. Valentine was gifted with rich powers of mind. His system is the most artistic of all Gnostic systems. It is an epic account of creation, fall, and redemption in two realms, in heaven and on earth. See about him under the next. "Valentine and the Valentinians". About Vardesan also see under his own. named "Vardesan".

II. Anti-Jewish Gnostics. The main and representatives of them were: 1) Saturninus or Saturnilus from Syrian Antioch. Lived and acted in the first half of the II century. He taught about the sharp antagonism between the unknown God and matter, over which Satan rules. Judaism and paganism are hostile to Christianity, and Christ was sent to destroy the God of the Jews and bring liberation to spiritual beings. 2) Marcion was the son of the Bishop of Sinope. He was a man of a serious mood and retained a lot of moral Christian strength. Tertullian reports that he was excommunicated several times. It is probable that the reason for his leaving Syria and going to Rome was that he hoped to find Christianity there in greater purity. He was familiar with St. Polycarp. He looked at Christianity as standing immeasurably higher than Judaism and paganism. But the apologists of the church strongly opposed him, and St. Polycarp, meeting with him in Rome, treated him as the firstborn of Satan. There was a tradition that later, before his death, he sought the opportunity to re-enter the bosom of the church. The main ideas in Marcion's system are as follows. There is a supreme God who is love; then follows the Demiurge, whom he identifies with the God of the Old Testament and presents him as merciless, and finally Or, i.e., matter controlled by Satan. The dimiurge first combines with Or to create the world and man, but, deceiving her, appropriates the man for himself. In vengeance for this, Or fills the earth with polytheism and idolatry. The Demiurge continues to dominate Judaism; but neither the history of Judaism nor of paganism has anything to do with the highest God. Taking pity on man, God sends Christ. The Demiurge seeks His crucifixion. Christ descends into hell and preaches redemption to the Jews condemned by the Demiurge and to the pagan idolaters Or. He condemns the Demiurge himself to hell and chooses Peter as his apostle; He alone gives him the pure gospel. Marcion accepted only 10 Pauline Epistles and a distorted Gospel of Luke into his canon. The most capable followers of him were: Apelles, Prepon and Lucan. The Marcionites were divided into many sects, and at the time of Epiphanius, according to his testimony, they were scattered over a vast area from Persia to Rome. For docets that belonged here, see under the word docetism.

III. Pagan Gnostics, whose representatives were: 1) Carpocratians. Carpocrates was an Alexandrian, and taught in the first decades of the 2nd century. His system was monistic: All life, through an ever-expanding process, comes from the monad. On the borders of divine development is matter, in which spirits live, who have finally fallen away from God. His son Epifan, who wrote the essay "On Justice", followed exactly the system of his father. The antinomianism of the Carpocratians gave occasion to the pagan world to bring accusations against the Christians, with whom the latter identified them. 2) Simon Magus (Acts 8, 9, 10) already in the 2nd century was declared by the church as an archieretic and founder of Gnosticism. Although he pretended to be a believer (Acts 8:13), he presented himself as the great power of God. In the 2nd century, a sect descended from him, which considered his power equal to that of the apostles. There was a legend that in Tire he bought himself a harlot. He allowed his followers to idolize her as his first thought (Ennia), which created the angels. Angels create the world; but she seduces them with her charms, so that they indulge in lust, which is indicated in the poems of Homer. Simon apparently frees Ennia, and like her, all Gnostics will be freed. Clement of Alexandria mentions several sects belonging to this category. What they all had in common was pantheism. The anti-tacts hoped to achieve salvation by ignoring every moral law, thereby thinking of hitting the Demiurge. So did the followers of Prodicus, who proudly applied the name Gnostics to themselves. - The Nicolaitans derived their descent from the deacon Nicholas (Acts 6:5) and likewise preached the freedom of the flesh. They had nothing to do with the sect of the same name mentioned in the apocalypse.

IV. Ophites. This kind of Gnostics, called by Hippolytus ophites, by Clement of Alexandria ophians, assign a prominent place in their systems to the serpent, a demon who is the representative of either evil or good. In this respect, they obviously fell into the tone of the mythology of ancient Babylon (in which the seven-headed serpent fights against the forces of light), Persia and Egypt. The apocryphal literature of the Jews also often mentions the snake. The Ophites also borrowed a lot from Greek philosophy. The sharp contrast in which they place Judaism and Christianity, as well as the predominance of a pagan element in them, eliminates the theory that they were of Jewish origin. - The third Gnostic of this trend - 3) Justin, whose system is expounded by Hippolytus, was much more influenced by Old Testament ideas than any other of the Ophites. From the originally good male being came a female being - Eden, which in its upper part was a man, and in its lower part a serpent. The dimiurg (called Elohim), descended from God, enters into connection with Eden and gives birth to two kinds of beings, corresponding to its dual nature. Eden left by him fills the earth with evil. Elohim tries to lead people upwards, loves the Jews and opens himself through Baruch, one of the angels, to Moses and the prophets. The latter, however, are seduced by Eden. Then Elohim turns to the prophets of the pagan world. They suffer the same fate. Finally, Baruch finds in Jesus, the son of Mary and Joseph, a firm opponent of Eden. He counteracts all the temptations of the serpent, and the latter brings Him to crucifixion. This opens the way for the complete separation of earthly and heavenly; moreover, the spirit of Christ departed to Elohim, and the body to Eden. The Ophites of Irenaeus put Christianity in sharper antagonism to Dimiurgis. Dualism is clearly recognized: on the one hand, Bethos (the abyss), a divine being; on the other hand, matter, a joyless ocean composed of water, darkness, chaos and abyss. From the mixing of light with matter comes Jaldabaoth, the son of chaos. He is the creator of the world. Treating Or with gloomy hatred, he produces his diabolical image of an Ophiomorph or “wriggling serpent” (Is. 27), and all evil, sorrow and death come from him. He rules over Cain and the Gentiles; Jaldabaoth is over the Jews and inspires Moses and other prophets. But he crucifies Jesus, on whom the heavenly Christ descended, and does not participate in the kingdom of light. But Christ brings salvation to all spiritual beings.

Xifiane used the "Paraphrase of Seth", whence comes their name. According to their teaching, matter is an ocean, stormy, chaotic, gloomy. Light excites the serpentine soul in matter, which becomes the Demiurge. The Logos descends from the light, deceives the Dimiurge, taking the form of a serpent, and elevates the soul to the realm of light.

Naaseni(serpent worshipers) lived in Phrygia. They taught that the serpent comes from God and is the soul of the world. Christ does not redeem people by His death, but by His gnosis and teaching.

Perates, as their name means, looked at themselves as belonging to another world and being in this world only in a state of transition. They taught about 150 because they are mentioned by Clement of Alexandria. According to their teaching, the archon of matter is the Ilic demon, and his associates are the poisonous snakes of the desert. The serpent, as the apostle of wisdom, frees Eve from the slavery of the archon. To him belong Cain, Nimrod, and even Moses lifting up the serpent in the wilderness. Like the Cainites, they considered Judas to be the true apostle. Thus, the entire gospel history was completely distorted by them, and the serpent was recognized as a symbol of reason, which was the first to give true knowledge to our forefathers, and the true traitor of Christ was declared by the highest apostle.

Other various Gnostic sects, described by Epiphanius as the Fibionites, Stratioki, etc., were distinguished by extreme moral depravity, surpassing all probability. On the one hand, theology and apologetics showed the tremendous superiority of Christianity over Gnostics; on the other hand, the Gnostic sects, once animated by the noblest aims, have degenerated to such an extent that there is not the slightest doubt that their time has passed.

Summarizing the teachings of Gnosticism, it must be said that its theology is the exact opposite of true Christianity. As for the question of redemption, they had in common the teaching that the goal of any world formation is to separate the two initially separated principles - good and evil, again from one another, to free parts of the pleroma from captivity in this visible world, to untie or redeem; the thought of redemption comes from the highest God; this requires a special aeon, which they call either the Savior, or Jesus, or Christ, although they called it differently, and which among all sects was one of the highest aeons; none of these sects conceived the redeeming aeon as a real man. But at the same time, disagreements between them also appeared. The Alexandrians, in whom matter was conceived as the lowest dead line for divine life development, saw in the Savior a dual being, namely a man who was formed from matter, and on whom the aeon later descended. The latter only at baptism in the Jordan, sent by the highest God, united with a person (why they already had the feast of Theophany in the 2nd century - Clement Alex., Strom. 1, 22), from that time performed extraordinary deeds in Him and again left Him during suffering. The Syrian gnosis, which recognized unconditional evil in matter, did not recognize in the Redeemer a real body consisting of evil matter, but simply an apparent body (whence such Gnostics were called docets), almost in the same way that popular belief now imagines a ghost that appears to people with a visible and however, not a real body. The real or apparent sufferings of the Savior are presented as the work of the Dimiurge, who, either through his narrowness or out of malice, wanted in this way to destroy the work of deliverance. The whole task of redemption was to enlighten "spiritual" beings, i.e., Gnostics, as to their own superiority and heavenly origin; whoever believed this, he was such; spiritual natures (that is, Orthodox) could still have some hope, if only they recognized gnosis; for "material" natures there was no deliverance, since they lacked the susceptibility for this. Of the resurrection of the Savior, as Christianity teaches about it, naturally there could be no question; since the Savior was not resurrected, the rest of the people could not expect the resurrection of the body. This was not at all reconciled with the whole system, since it is impossible for matter, as the source of all evil, to enter the pleroma, where only the good and the divine exist. The goal and end of the world current, therefore, is the return of all the components of the pleroma to the latter, after which matter, deprived of everything higher, will return to its former death or its nothingness. The kingdom of darkness will be completely limited by itself. This state they called "the restoration of all things," which plays a significant role in their system. Sacraments, in the Christian sense, were out of the question in this system, since, with its contempt for matter, it could never recognize it as a means of communicating grace. Yes, they lacked the very concept of grace, since, having an excellent nature, they did not need any grace. Such a chain of delusions could not but remain without influence on the moral teaching of their adherents. But even in this respect there is a strong difference between the Alexandrian and the Syrian gnosis. The Alexandrian Gnostics, by their very principles, since they recognized in the Dimiurge the organ of the supreme God, who, according to His ideas, created nature and gave the ancient law, had to observe a certain moderation in relation to the body and to the world, and also obey the law; they especially observed the dignity of marriage, partly because in Alexandria, which was heavily populated by Jews, that high view of marriage, which was the peculiarity of Judaism, was always preserved; partly because in Alexandria the Valentinian system was very widespread, which inhabited the pleroma with pure couples of aeons and in their combinations saw the heavenly prototype of marriage. The Syrian gnosis looked differently, which from the creator of the world and the legislator made a being completely hostile to the highest God and His world government; out of this gnosis came an extremely fantastic, gloomy hostility to the world. This enmity was revealed in two ways: among the noblest and most prudent people in the form of an extremely strict lifestyle, which timidly avoided any contact with the world; among the unclean, prone to licentiousness, it was expressed in impudent disregard for all moral laws. The first were named encratites(abstinent), and the last - anti-tacts or antinomian sects (see the articles Anti-tacts and Antinomism). The first prescribed obligatory celibacy and disdainfully treated marriage as something unclean, completely criminal; the latter justified any satisfaction of shameful passions, on the grounds that everything sensual, external, is completely indifferent, and that a true Gnostic, through the neglect of all restrictive laws, precisely through the transgression of the commandments of the Decalogue emanating from the Dimiurge, which have as their goal the enslavement and oppression of the higher human spirit, should treat them with opposition and contempt. After all this, it is not surprising that the Gnostics did not want to know anything about martyrdom for Christ and His teachings. The Savior remained what He was without their confession; they absolutely did not honor Him as God, while the main essence of the matter consisted precisely in the confession before the Jews and Gentiles of the divinity of Jesus Christ. According to the Gnostics, it was enough to believe, not to confess.

The question involuntarily arises of how the Gnostics could pass off such strange, monstrous fantasies as Christian truth. This is due to the fact that they borrowed their teaching from various sources. Some of them referred to a secret tradition, which the apostles allegedly left to their most trusted persons, and which spread to them in silence, as the secret teaching of a chosen circle of believers. Others referred to the Holy Scriptures, and yet looked at the Old Testament as the work of the Demiurge, and therefore either completely rejected it, or did not attach any significant importance to it. In the Scriptures of the New Testament, in the critical treatment of which they allowed unlimited arbitrariness, they distinguished that the heavenly eon spoke on behalf of the Savior and that the earthly man, arguing that the apostles misunderstood a lot and adapted themselves to the concepts of their time, and not without wit turned into favor of his system some of what after that remained as the pure teaching of Christ. The parables of the Lord were especially useful to them, because here there was the most room for arbitrary interpretation. With a certain arbitrariness, of course, it was possible with the help of them to prove anything, and whoever willingly believes, it is easy for him to prove it. Many, however, willingly joined Gnosticism because it was convenient to keep the old popular religion in it, and also because this system greatly pandered to the inborn pride and (at least in one direction of the Syrian Gnostics) sensuality - these two old passions of heretical Judaism. In addition, in Eastern philosophy and the closely related popular religions of the East, Egyptian, Phoenician, Parsi and Buddhist, and in Alexandrian Judaism itself, insofar as it was formed under the influence of Platonic philosophy, especially thanks to Philo, it was possible to find some points of contact in Christianity itself. for gnostic ideas. The hostile position of the then world towards the Christian Church and the deep sensual decline of most of mankind, together with the teaching of Christianity that there are two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of evil, between which there is an unremitting struggle; that Christ is a citizen of the higher world; that the "prince of this world" must be conquered, etc. - all this, in some well-meaning, but not particularly enlightened Christians, could give access to gnostic ideas.

Literature. Only one Gnostic work has survived to us: Pistis Sophia Valentina, published by Petermann in Berlin, 1851. The testimony about the Gnostics is found in Irenaeus, Adv. Haer., Libri V; Hippolytus in his "exposing of all heresies"; also Tertulian, Praescrip. adv. haer. and adv. Tarc.; Clem. of Alexandria: in his Stromata; Origen, Com. on gosp. of Iobn; at Eusebius in the Church. East; at Epiphanius in Panakrion; and Theodoret. See also Neander, Genet. Entw. d. Gnost., Tub., 1831; Mohler, Ursprung d. Gnost., Tub., 1831; Baur D. christl. Gnosis, Tub., 1835: Lipsius, D. Gnosticismus, Leip., 1860; Harnack, Zur Quellenkritik d. Gesch d Gnost., Leip., 1873, and others.

* Glagolev Sergey Sergeevich,
doctor of theology, professor
Moscow Theological Academy.

Text source: Orthodox theological encyclopedia. Volume 4, column. 417. Edition Petrograd. Appendix to the spiritual magazine "Wanderer" for 1903 Spelling modern.

Gnosticism (from the Greek γνωδτικόζ - knowing) (gnostics, gnosis, or gnosis), this is the name of the totality of religious and philosophical (theosophical) systems that appeared during the first two centuries of our era and in which the basic facts and teachings of Christianity, divorced from their historical soil, developed in the sense of pagan (both Eastern and Hellenic) wisdom.

Gnosticism differs from related phenomena of religious and philosophical syncretism, such as Neoplatonism, Hermeticism, by the recognition of Christian data, and from true Christianity by a pagan understanding and processing of these data and a negative attitude towards the historical roots of Christianity in the Jewish religion.

In this latter respect, Gnosticism stands in particularly sharp contrast to the Judaizing sects in Christianity, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, to the Kabbalah, which, from the point of view of the Gnostics, is a pagan processing of specific Jewish religious data.

Origins of Gnosticism

Gnosticism is a religious movement in the Roman Empire that flourished between the second and fourth centuries CE. e. Considered heretics from the point of view of Christians and Jews, the Gnostics taught that the world was not created by the true God, but by an inferior, inferior Demiurge. The demiurge was perceived as a tyrant. He controlled his creation, our world, with the help of forces subordinate to him, the Archons. The realm of the true God (Pleroma or "Fullness") was beyond the limits of imperfect creation, while the goal of the Gnostics was to break out of the trap of this world and return there.

The general conditions for the emergence of Gnosticism, as well as other related phenomena, were created by that cultural and political mixture of various national and religious elements of the ancient world, which was started by the Persian kings, continued by the Macedonians and completed by the Romans.

The source of Gnostic ideas in various pagan religions, on the one hand, and the teachings of Greek philosophers, on the other, was clearly recognized from the very beginning and has already been indicated in detail by the author Φιλοσοφου̃μενα (Hippolytus), although, in particular, not all of his convergences are equally thorough.

There is no doubt, in any case, that certain national-religious and philosophical factors participated in the formation of certain Gnostic systems to varying degrees, as well as what was added to various combinations of ideas that already existed, with greater or lesser force and originality, and personal mental work on the part of the founders and distributors of these systems and schools.

It is all the less possible to analyze all this in detail, since the writings of the Gnostics are known to us only from a few passages and from someone else's, moreover, a polemical exposition. This leaves a lot of room for hypotheses, of which one deserves mention.

In the 19th century some scholars (for example, the Orientalist I.I. Schmidt) put Gnosticism in a special connection with Buddhism. It is only reliable here: 1) that from the time of the campaigns of Alexander the Great, Asia Minor, and through it the entire Greco-Roman world, became accessible to influences from India, which ceased to be an unknown country for this world, and 2) that Buddhism was the last word of Eastern "wisdom ”and still remains the most tenacious and influential of the religions of the East.

But on the other hand, the historical and prehistoric roots of Buddhism itself are far from being revealed by science. Many scientists, not without reason, see here a religious reaction on the part of the dark-skinned pre-Aryan inhabitants, and the ethnological connection of these Indian tribes with the cultural races that have long inhabited the Nile Valley is more than likely.

The general background of religious aspirations and ideas had to correspond to the general tribal soil, on which in India, thanks to the influence of the Aryan genius, such a harmonious and strong system as Buddhism was formed, but which in other places turned out to be not fruitless.

Thus, what is attributed to the influence of the Indian Buddhists may refer to a closer influence of their African relatives, especially since the highest flowering of Gnosticism occurred in Egypt.

If the external historical connection of Gnosticism specifically with Buddhism is doubtful, then the content of these teachings undoubtedly shows their heterogeneity. In addition to various religious elements alien to Buddhism, Gnosticism absorbed the positive results of Greek philosophy and in this respect stands immeasurably higher than Buddhism.

It suffices to point out that Buddhism gives only a negative definition of Nirvana to absolute being, while in Gnosticism it is positively defined as fullness (pleroma).

An undoubted connection with Gnosticism has another, insignificant in its distribution compared with Buddhism, but in many respects very curious religion of the Mandaeans or Sabians (not to be confused with Sabaism in the sense of star worship), which still exists in Mesopotamia and has its sacred, ancient origin, although they have survived to us in a later edition of the book.

This religion arose shortly before the advent of Christianity and is in some obscure connection with the preaching of St. John the Baptist; but the dogmatic content of the Mandaean books, as far as it can be understood, makes us see in this religion the prototype of Gnosticism. The very word manda, from which it takes its name, means in Chaldean the same as the Greek γνω̃σιζ (knowledge).

Some writers, eg. Baur, they speak of "Jewish gnosis" (apart from cabal), but this is more in line with the a priori schemes of these writers than with historical reality.

Main Features of Gnosticism

According to the teachings of the Gnostics, people contained within themselves a spark of true divinity, which did not belong to this lower creation, but was forced to be reborn in this world until the moment of redemption by gnosis (the liberating knowledge of our true origin). People were divided into three types: spiritual (for them, salvation was predetermined), mental (they could achieve a certain salvation thanks to gnosis and various cleansing practices) and material (by virtue of their nature, forever attached to the material sphere). The Gnostic religion was thus characterized by total contempt for this world (the prison) and for the body (the prison cell). From ancient sources it is clear that this contempt in some groups reached complete asceticism, and in others - to the same complete licentiousness (even though moral laws were only part of the trap created by the Demiurge, some Gnostics taught that the spiritually free demonstrate their freedom , breaking as many of these laws as possible).

The Gnostics considered Jesus to be the messenger of the true God, sent from the Pleroma to bring the liberating teaching of gnosis. They rejected the orthodox doctrine that Jesus died to atone for human sins. According to the Gnostics, the evil in the world is not the result of human sin, but rather lies in the imperfect creation of the Demiurge: the world is evil because its creator is evil. While orthodox Christians included the Old Testament in their sacred texts, the Gnostics saw the God of the Old Testament as the image of the Demiurge. Only Jesus was sent by the "Father", that is, the true God.

Given the complete contempt for the world on the part of Gnosticism, and also given the concomitant rejection of social norms, most scholars understand Gnosticism as a religion of radical rebellion. The Bogomils of Eastern Europe and the medieval Cathars of southern France are considered modern representatives of the Gnostic religion. A collection of ancient Gnostic books was discovered during excavations near the Egyptian city of Nag Hammadi in 1945.

On the one hand, Gnosticism is usually presented as a world-negative religion of rebellion: a religion adopted by outsiders and directed against social norms. It was believed that the Gnostics created a barrier separating them from the outside world and based on a mechanical overturning of the dominant social values. This notion of the Gnostics, who systematically denied everything that was sacred to society, arose from individual observations made by the Gnostics when reading the Hebrew Scriptures (they often looked at the story of the serpent in the Garden of Eden from a positive point of view, and Yahweh, perceived as the Demiurge, from a negative point of view). But these examples of Gnostic interpretation of scripture as a whole do not indicate the rebellious nature of the Gnostics in relation to society. Williams uses contemporary sociological models developed from the study of religious movements to argue that the opposite is often true: the people we call Gnostics actually interpreted Judeo-Christian ideas about divinity in harmony with pagan society, that is, the dominant society in which they lived.

Our usual notion of gnostic rebellion against society was forced upon us by heresiologists who, for obvious reasons, sought to portray the gnostics as rebels against orthodoxy. Our belief that the Gnostics were asocial elements is, therefore, an anachronism. With all our historical sophistication, we still use the late view of orthodoxy for the period when orthodoxy was not yet consolidated.

A careful reading of the sources reveals that a person is not "born" as a member of the Set race, but rather a status that can be earned or earned. The race of Set is a more spiritual entity than a biological "race" in the modern sense. So it is with the division into three types: the spiritual status of a person is connected with his behavior: you can lose this status by distorting the truth, so spiritual birth does not guarantee salvation. The notion that the ancient Gnostics were elitist and believed themselves to be (essentially) saved is false. Such Gnostic notions offered as much scope for other readings as more modern Protestant doctrines of the elect.

Classification of Gnostic teachings

This basic character of Gnosticism, according to the degree of its manifestation, can also serve as a guide for the natural classification of Gnostic systems. The incompleteness of sources and chronological data, on the one hand, and the significant role of personal fantasy in the speculation of the Gnostics, on the other, allow only large and approximate divisions. In the division I propose, the logical basis coincides with the ethnological one.

Simonians (Simonians) are followers of Simon Magus, a contemporary of the apostles and the founder of Gnosticism.
Docets
Cerinthian
Nicolaitans
Syro-Chaldean Gnosticism
Representatives of the Syrian direction learned the views of Eastern religions, and are more associated with Zoroastrianism.
Tatian
Marcionites
Carpocratians
Persian Gnosticism
At the beginning of the 3rd century, the Gnostic systems begin to lose their importance. They are being replaced by a new heretical doctrine, similar in principles to Gnosticism, but differing from it in that, in the complete absence of the ideas of Greek philosophy and the teachings of Judaism, it is a mixture of Christianity with the principles of the religion of Zoroaster.
Mandaean - The name comes from the Aramaic "knowledge". Founded in the 2nd century AD. e. Representatives of this movement considered themselves followers of John the Baptist. Until now, there are small groups of Mandaeans in southern Iraq (about 1 thousand people), as well as in the Iranian province of Khuzistan.
Manichaeism is a syncretic religious teaching of the Persian Mani (3rd century) composed of Babylonian-Chaldean, Jewish, Christian, Iranian (Zoroastrianism) Gnostic ideas.
Late Gnosticism
Ophites
borborites
Cainites
Sethian
Paulicians
Bogomils
Cathars

**************************************************

The school of Gnosticism was divided into two main parts, called the Alexandrian and the Syrian cults.

These schools were in agreement on common issues, but the Alexandrian leaned towards pantheism, while the Syrian towards dualism. The Syrian cult followed Simon, and the Alexandrian school developed the philosophical creativity of an intelligent Egyptian Christian named Basilides, who said that he took his main thoughts from the Apostle Matthew.

Like Simon, he was an emanationist with a Neoplatonist bent. In fact, the entire Gnostic Mystery is based on the hypothesis of emanation as a logical connection between incompatible opposites, Absolute Spirit and Absolute Substance, which, according to the Gnostics, coexisted in Eternity.

Some suggest that Basilides was the true founder of Gnosticism, but there is much evidence that this trend was still founded by Simon a century earlier.

A variety of religious philosophy of the first centuries of the new era was gnosticism. Its heyday falls on the middle of the II century. Initially, the Gnostics claimed to provide a philosophical and theological basis for the Christian doctrine that was being formed in this era. Some of them were directly involved in compiling the Epistles of the Apostle Paul and the Gospels.

The religious and philosophical current of Gnosticism originated in the east of the Roman Empire. It was only partly connected with Jewish religious thought, while most of its content was drawn from Iranian, Egyptian and other Middle Eastern religious and mythological ideas. Religious-mythological syncretism, which had been intensively developing since the beginning of the Hellenistic era, received its “theoretical” understanding in Gnosticism.

For the religious and philosophical development of late antiquity, the very name of this direction, which comes from the Greek word gnosis, i.e. knowledge. In religious circles, whose influence was growing, knowledge began to mean not the study of the real world and man through science and empirical evidence, but the interpretation of various systems and images of Middle Eastern religions and ancient mythological ideas.

The method of such understanding became among the Gnostics, as with, allegorical, symbolic interpretation of myths. Even more widely than Philo, the Gnostics resorted to the help of the concepts of Greek idealist philosophy, drawing them mainly from the Platonic-Pythagorean circle of ideas. Vulgarizing these ideas, the Gnostics in their teaching sought to combine them with positions and images (partly Greco-Roman) religious and mythological thought. They were convinced that the resulting systems represent "knowledge", far towering over the simple and naive faith of the overwhelming majority, which does not think about the content of religious and mythological beliefs and understands it literally. In reality, the gnostic systems were a fantastic conglomeration of individual idealistic concepts and provisions, taken out of the philosophical context of Platonism, Pythagoreanism or Stoicism and somehow adapted to religious mythological beliefs.

This feature of Gnosticism reflected the general ideological atmosphere that prevailed in the era under consideration and was characterized in the following words of Engels: “It was a time when even in Rome and Greece, and even more so in Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt, an absolutely uncritical mixture of the grossest superstitions of the most diverse peoples was unconditionally accepted on faith and supplemented by pious deceit and outright charlatanism; a time when miracles, ecstasies, visions, incantations of spirits, divination of the future, alchemy, Kabbalah and other mystical witchcraft nonsense played a paramount role". Among the superstitions listed by Engels, one should also add astrology, Babylonian in origin, which played approximately the same role in Gnostic constructions as physics played in the Aristotelian first philosophy (metaphysics).

One of the main features of Gnosticism is dualistic understanding of the world, especially social. Such a worldview goes back to Iranian Zoroastrianism and to some teachings of Greek religious and philosophical thought. According to Gnostic systems, the struggle between light and darkness, between good and evil, is a cosmic, natural phenomenon. It acts as a struggle between matter, which is the main bearer of the evil principle, and the spirit, embodying everything bright and good in the human and natural world. These religious-dualistic ideas substantiated the ascetic views and ascetic practices of the Gnostic communities. Like most of the religious and religious-philosophical trends of the era under consideration, the gnostics strove for the predominance of the spirit over the flesh, liberation of a person from sinful desires, substantiating such ascetic aspirations theoretically.

The most prominent representative of Gnosticism was Valentine(d. c. 161), who came from Egypt, but in the middle of the 2nd century. who lived in Rome and had success in the Christian community that arose there. The views of Valentinus are known to us from their exposition by one of the early Christian writers, Irenaeus of Lyon, who at the end of the same century wrote the work "Refutation and refutation [of the doctrine], falsely calling itself knowledge." According to this source, Valentine taught that the last basis of being is some mysterious and unknowable "fullness" (pleroma), devoid of any distinction and design. From it are born thirty aeons(Greek aion - “age”, then “age”, “generation”, “life”), which are creative world forces and at the same time abstract mythological creatures. According to Irenaeus, Valentinus and his followers taught that “in the invisible and unnameable heights, at first there existed some kind of perfect eon, which is called the original, first-father, deep ... here is the first and ancestral Pythagorean quaternary, which they call the root of everything: namely, deep and silence, then mind and truth”; “First, the first father united with his thought, and the only-begotten, that is, the mind, with the truth, the word with life, and the man with the church”.

In a similar way, Irenaeus draws us the views another prominent Gnostic of this age,Vasilis who originated from Syria and lived in Antioch, Alexandria, Iran. According to this source, Basilides taught that “first from the unborn father Nus was born, and from him the Logos was born, then from the Logos - Judgment, and from Judgment - Wisdom and Strength, and from Strength and Wisdom were born virtues, principles and angels, whom he calls the first, and by them the first heaven was created . Then from them, by emanation, others were formed, which created another sky, similar to the first.. Similarly, the third and fourth heavens arose, “then in the same way more and more principles and angels and 365 heavens were created; therefore the year also has such a number of days, according to the number of heavens ”.

The passages above help to determine main method of gnosticism, the essence of which is personification of abstract philosophical concepts identified with mythological creatures. Gnosticism is a reflection of the vulgarized idealistic concepts of late antiquity in religious and mythological ideas.

Despite all the fantastic nature of Gnostic philosophical and theological ideas, they have one feature that raises them above the Old Testament teaching about the creation of the world and man by God for several days. According to the views of Valentinus, Basilides and other Gnostics, "fullness", which is sometimes interpreted as a great world, or the Universe, exists from the beginning, has no beginning and gives rise to a whole series of aeons. Hence the hostility of the Gnostics to the Jewish Old Testament and the attempts of some of them (for example, Marcion, one of the likely authors of the Epistles of the Apostle Paul and the Gospels) to ignore this document when developing myths and dogmas of the Christian dogma.

As already noted, gnostic picture of the world and man was based on sharply dualistic ideas, according to which there are two mutually exclusive principles in the world. The first goes back to the purely spiritual, “pneumatic” aspirations of man, while the second goes back to his base, carnal aspirations. This duality of human aspirations reflects the duality in the higher world of the aeons. The spiritual principle is headed by the highest aeon identified with Christ who, being a witness and participant in the original origin of the world, then becomes the guardian and savior of the human race. The eon opposite to it, the bearer of the bodily and sinful beginning, is called by the Gnostics in Platonic terms the demiurge. It is this lower god who is the creator of the visible corporeal world, which he created through the use of matter, and, moreover, in such a way that the demiurge, as it were, does not know what he himself creates. It is significant that the aforementioned Marcion identified the demiurge with the Old Testament Yahweh, emphasizing the national narrowness, wickedness and limitations of this supreme Jewish god. It is clear that the world he created cannot be a perfect world. These ideas reflected the beginning process of separation between emerging Christianity as an international religion and Judaism, the religion of only one Jewish people.

The social essence of Gnosticism is not unambiguous. Some of the authors we meet with idea of ​​social equality, i.e. with one of the main ideas of Christianity as the ideology of the lower classes of society. However, the doctrine of the equality of all people before God was not a defining social teaching, characteristic of all Gnostics. Rather, it can be argued that both in the intellectual and social sense Gnosticism expressed the aristocratic tendencies of early Christianity. This is particularly evidenced by the classification of the human race, which we find in Valentinus. He taught that everything humanity is divided into three types. The first of these are "carnal" people(sarkikoi, hulikoi, somatikoi). These are pagans, tied to their passions and base motives, unable to rise above them and condemned to death. The second one consists of "spirited" people(psuhikoi, psyches) and includes the majority of Jews and Christians who have already embarked on the path of repentance dictated by conscience, and thus the path of salvation.

But even from them, those few chosen ones, whom Valentine calls "spiritual" people(pnevmatikoi, "pneumatics"). This is, in fact, Gnostics capable of direct communication and knowledge of the true god. Their faith is not as primitive as that of the "psychics", most Christians, and represents genuine knowledge, which is directly inspired by God. Therefore, the Gnostics considered only their theological systems to be the only correct ones, not subject to any control. Only pneumatics can really count on salvation. Some authors see in this Gnostic exaltation of "spiritual" people the first manifestation of the ideology of the clergy, which was formed in the depths of the early Christian communities, the clergy, already opposed to the overwhelming majority of their ordinary members.

As the above-cited book of Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon, shows, by By the end of the 2nd century, the emerging official church began to fight Gnosticism and rejected it. This happened primarily because Gnosticism was too complex a doctrine, little or even completely inaccessible to the vast majority of believers. What was presented in the Holy Scriptures of Christians as a fact that had to be understood literally, "without further ado", the Gnostics turned into an allegory and a symbol, thereby opening the way to heresy.

Completely unacceptable to the Christian Church the rejection of the Old Testament by many Gnostics in favor of a vague pseudo-philosophical. For all its incomprehensibility for philosophical consciousness, the creation of the world by the Old Testament god for several days gave ordinary believers the most accessible worldview. That is why the Old Testament, contrary to the wishes of many Gnostics, became the unshakable foundation of Christian religiosity, despite the anti-Jewish orientation of the New Testament. Gnosticism was not acceptable to the Christian Church, and because in the hierarchy of aeons she rightly saw relic of pagan, polytheistic mythology. Finally, the extreme dualism of Gnosticism, which consists in the complete independence of matter from God, limited divine omnipotence and thereby undermined the monotheistic idea.

However, Gnosticism by no means disappeared without a trace after its official defeat. Its influence on Christianity is evidenced not only by some passages from the Epistles of the Apostle Paul and the beginning of the Gospel of John cited above, but also by certain provisions of the dogmatics of Christianity.

References:

1. Sokolov VV Medieval philosophy: Proc. allowance for philosophy. fak. and departments of un-comrade. - M .: Higher. School, 1979. - 448 p.

Gnosticism

Gnosticism there is a combination, a mixture of pagan beliefs and ideas with Christian teaching. It represents a bold attempt to supplement Christianity with the values ​​of pagan culture - Eastern religious beliefs and Greek philosophy. As a result, everything Christian in Gnosticism was perverted, and the salvific essence of Christianity remained hidden for it. St. Irenaeus (I, 8, 1) depicts with such vivid colors this unnatural mixture of pagan and Christian concepts by the Gnostics “... as if someone, taking a royal image, beautifully made by an intelligent artist from precious stones, would destroy the presented form of a person, would present and bring these stones into another form and make of them the image of a dog or a fox, and about this worthless work would respond later and say: “This is the most beautiful royal image that a smart artist produced” ”.

Representatives of Gnosticismdivided into eastern, or Syrian, and western - Alexandrian. The former include the Ophites, Saturnil, Basilides, Kerdop and Marcion, the latter belong to Carpocrates and Valentin. In Eastern Gnosticism, the influence of Persian living dualism is more noticeable; and in the Western or Alexandrian, Platonism and, in part, neo-Pythagoreanism are clearly visible.

But the systems of Eastern and Western Gnostics have far more similarities than differences. Common features theirs are dualism, demiurgeism, docetism and trichotomy. The main feature is dualism, and the rest are derivatives.

Demiurge is needed as a being that saves the good God from direct contact with evil or "bearing" matter during the creation of the cosmos.

Docetism, or the doctrine of the illusory nature of the body and bodily life, especially of Jesus Christ, is a direct consequence of the view of matter as evil. It was impossible for a pneumatic being, such as Christ, to come into direct proximity to evil matter; if, apparently, it was so, then it is only so seemed(δοκησις, φαντασμα), but it was not so in reality.

Trichotomy also fully corresponded to the indicated doctrine of the origin of the cosmos. The demiurge, as a creation, albeit a lower one, of the good God, forms a mediating world mixed from Spirit and matter; hence the tripartiteness of the entire universe is obtained - the good God, the mixed world and matter. This state of the world corresponds to a triple division among people - into pneumatics, psychics and giliks (υλη).

The theoretical views of the Gnostics revolved around four main subjects: God, matter, demiurge and Christ. Practical or ethical views have as their subject man, his origin and fate.

One can imagine Gnostic teaching in the following scheme:

At the head of everything, the Gnostics supply supreme being, called by various names, which wanted to express its absoluteness - a special sublimity, omnipotence, incomparability, uncertainty and self-conclusion.

But before the eyes of the Gnostic lay an unsettled, unhappy world. It was necessary to find out its origin. This world, for the gnostic, seemed to be in no way recognized as the creation of a higher God, because then one would have to look for the source of world evil, disorder, in it. No, only matter, which the Eastern, Syrian, Gnostics represented as an independent, living, evil being, while the Western ones gave only a kind of ghostly existence.

However, evil or inert matter could not by itself produce this world, where there are undoubtedly particles of the highest Deity. Finding out the origin of such a world was the most difficult problem of Gnosticism. When solving it, I had to invent theogony, to create an endless world of aeons, had to resort to an artificial view of the weakening of the Divine principle among those aeons or beings that are the most distant - in the order of creation - from the first beginning, and, finally, to a decidedly incorrect statement about the emergence of an impure, unnatural desire in the last aeon dive into matter. Such an immersion of a particle of the highest Deity in matter could not pass without a trace for the latter.

The first fruit of the union of the aeon with matter is demiurge. It is he who creates such a world mixed from spiritual principles with matter. But a being that has fallen away from the higher life and plunged into matter begins to be weary of its position, to repent of its impure desire, which has brought it down into matter, and desires to ascend and unite with the higher Divine life. But it is no longer alone, it has given a spark of life to many people who also yearn to unite with the first deity.

However, the aeon that has fallen away and human souls cannot rise to the deity on their own. They need salvation from the strongest, or powerful being. On the other hand, and from the point of view of a higher divine being, one cannot reconcile oneself with such an order of things in which a particle of higher life is enclosed in matter and suffers in it. And from this side there is a need for the salvation of the fallen aeon. For salvation, i.e. liberation of the spiritual spark from the bonds of dark matter and the soul from the labyrinth of evil, one of the highest eons descends to earth - Christ, also called the Savior, Jesus. This is beautifully and picturesquely expressed in one Ophite hymn. Christ takes on an espherical, apparent body, or, according to another idea, unites with the man Jesus, or the Jewish Messiah, at baptism and leaves him again during his sufferings. The Gnostics considered the birth of Christ, childhood and His earthly life to be invalid, seeming phenomena. For this, Tertullian especially strongly condemned Marcion. The main task of Christ was to communicate gnosis, to reveal "all mysteries"(μυστηρια) and "the secrets of the holy path" (τα κεκρυμενα της αγιας οδου) to the Small Circle of Initiates, thanks to which they could, with a clear consciousness, aspire to the Divine life, to the higher world, to the pleroma. Through this disorder of life, which has taken place in the world of aeons, is eliminated, and everything returns to its original harmony. Matter is destroyed by the fire within it.

Ethical views of the Gnostics were conditioned by the theological or dogmatic doctrine of the origin of man and his ultimate goal.

Gnostics looked at man as a microcosm, consisting of soul and body, it reflected the three principles of the universe - God, the demiurge and matter, but to varying degrees. Consequently they divided people into three classes:

Among confessors of human religions, pneumatics are found only among Christians, although not all Christians are pneumatics, most of their psyches.

Ethical Requirements or practical rules regarding the behavior of people among the Gnostics could only be addressed to psychics. For only they could get out of the uncertain situation and approach the pleroma; while pneumatics by their very nature were destined for salvation, somatics were doomed to certain death.

The central problem of Gnostic ethics is the question of the relation to matter, flesh and its inclinations. This question is solved in the opposite way: some in the ascetic sense, others in the sense of libertinism. Both decisions proceeded from a dualistic view of the world and the matter of the body as a source of evil or sin.

Such serious Gnostics as Saturnilus and Marcion, despising the body, forbade all pleasures and pleasures for it, especially in food, denied marriage life in order to avoid mixing with sinful matter.

Others, like the Nicolaitans, most of the Ophites, the Carpocratians, spoke of the feeling of the proud superiority of the spirit over matter - that sensuality must be conquered through the satisfaction of its sensual pleasures; there is nothing that can bind the spirit or defeat it. Hence the complete antinomianism.

Sometimes one extreme went to another. Thus, for example, the Nicolaitans at first thought of fulfilling their basic requirement that the flesh should be exhausted (δει καταχρησθαι τη σαρκι) by strict asceticism, and then considered it better to achieve the same goal with the help of extreme Libertinism.

Judeo- and linguistic-Christian distortion The teachings of Christ were not, in the proper sense, Christian heresies. They arose on the periphery of Christianity, so to speak, in its border areas, in contact with Judaism and paganism, and emerged from the misunderstood relationship of the new Christian religion to the Jewish religion and pagan religion and culture. The first heresy that arose within Christianity, on its soil, was Montanism.

A chapter from the book by Sergei Shestak "The Creed, the History of the Dogmas of the Christian Church".

Gnostics, their teachings

According to Jerome, Basilides (r. 125/130) is the founder of Gnosticism: "Basilides, from whom the Gnostics descended, lived in Alexandria in the time of Hadrian." According to Epiphanius, Deacon Nicholas is the founder of Gnosticism: "Even these Gnostics, people involved in various ways in Nicholas's deceit, grew in the world like the fruits of sorrow." They are wild beasts, scorpions, offspring of asps, empty snake eggs. The teachings of Nicholas caused Epiphanius anxiety, collapse. He felt a stench, a wound.

Who is the founder of Gnosticism, Basilides or Deacon Nicholas? The Athanasites explain the different opinions with different "Apostolic Traditions". In my opinion, Epiphanius lied, as did Rufinus and Theophanes with the baptism of Emperor Constantine.

“According to many well-known researchers (Hans Jonas, Gilles Kuispel, and others), Gnosticism is a separate world religion, comparable in historical significance to Christianity, Islam and Buddhism” (Afonasin).

The source of information about the Gnostics is the stories of the Athanasites. These stories are, to say the least, biased: the Gnostics were the ideological enemies of the Athanasites.

According to Irenaeus, the Gnostic Cerinthus taught that the God of the Jews, who created the universe, was some kind of lower being who knew nothing about God. A certain Christ descended on the man Jesus in the form of a dove and told people about the real God.

Irenaeus deliberately did not explain why Cerinthos came to this conclusion. The purpose of Irenaeus' writing is to make Cerinthos look stupid.

According to Cerinth, God must be omnipotent and omniscient. But the God of the Jews does not know everything and is mistaken. The proof of Cerinth is the Jewish book of Genesis.

The God of the Jews said, “Let there be light. And there was light. And God saw that the light was good, and God separated the light from the darkness” (Genesis 1:3-4). God came to the conclusion that the light is good. So He knew about the bad light. Therefore, the God of the Jews did not create good light the first time. Cerinth believed that God immediately does everything well: he is omnipotent.

God of the Jews, creating the universe, decided to rest. “By the seventh day God finished the work that He had done, and on the seventh day He rested from all the work that He had done” (Gen. 2:2). According to Cerinth, God will never get tired: he is omnipotent.

The God of the Jews did not immediately realize that Adam would need Eve. “It is not good for a man to be alone; Let us make him a helper” (Genesis 2:18). If the God of the Jews had been omniscient, He would have immediately realized that Adam would need Eve and would have created them at the same time.

People began to sin. The God of the Jews repented that he had created humans. “And the Lord repented that he had made man on earth, and was grieved in his heart” (Genesis 6:6). The God of the Jews made a mistake in creating humans. Cerinth believed that God never makes mistakes.

The God of the Jews drowned the people. And then he realized that he had done wrong. “I will no longer curse the earth for man, because the thinking of the human heart is evil from his youth; and I will no longer strike every living thing, as I have done” (Genesis 8:21). The God of the Jews again made a mistake by drowning people. Besides, He did not immediately understand why people sin. They didn't need to be heated. They sin from their youth.

The God of the Jews did not correspond to the God that Cerinth represented Him. That is why Cerinthos decided that a certain Christ told the Jews about the real God through the mouth of the man Jesus, descending on him in the form of a dove.

In my opinion, the prophet Moses, the author of Genesis, told people that the knowledge and power of God is limited. Limited not on the same level as told in Genesis: the story in Genesis is an allegory. The limits of God's knowledge and power are the size of the Universe and the time of its existence, which have their limits.

“One should not think that there is no end to creatures (including the stars. - S. Sh.), as some people wish, because where there is no end, there is no knowledge, and no description is possible. If this were the case, then God, of course, could not contain or control creation, because the infinite is by nature unknowable. And Scripture says: “God created everything by measure and number” (Origen).

Origen expressed "an original ... strange thought about God as a Being self-limited in omnipotence and omniscience ... "If the power of God were unlimited, then it would necessarily not know Itself, because by nature the unlimited is unknowable" (Posnov ).

Epiphanius did not like the teachings of the Gnostics.

What should be done to punish these people? They need to be slandered. The pagans slandered the Christians of Lyon (supposedly they ate their children, lived with their parents, like husband and wife). And Epiphanius slandered the Gnostics (allegedly they had common wives, and they drank menstrual blood). He pointed to the secret Gnostics, who officially belonged to the Church. The Athanasites repressed about eighty people.

“...I reported the situation to the local bishops and helped to identify those (secret) members of this sect who officially belong to the Church. And those exposed were expelled from the city, numbering about eighty people ”(Epiphanius).

The source of information about the Gnostics is their enemies, the Athanasites. Having repressed the Gnostics, destroying their books, they told about the teachings, the moral behavior of the Gnostics in such a way that you immediately understand that the Gnostics are perverts, stupid, heretics.

“Heresiologists used the standard weapon with which any orthodoxy is affirmed – first to vulgarize, and then to trample, like crazy nonsense, what happened ... In view of all this, from the very beginning we have to tune in to what we will not find in the works of early Christian authors of an objective description of gnosis... The licentiousness of heretics, according to Epiphanius, has no limits. They have forgotten what normal sex is, they are addicted only to homosexuality, oral sex and masturbation (at the same time) ... But what about such heretics who are morally impeccable? For example, what can be reproached with Secundus and his followers, who do not even drink wine, or even more so with the follower of Valentine Ptolemy? His Epistle to Flora is quite ethically sustained and is a wonderful example of moral instruction. What can you blame them for?" (Afonasin).

According to Epiphanius, such heretics deceived people: they pretended to lead an abstinent lifestyle.

Who told Epiphanius that the Gnostics used sperm in their rituals, saying that it was the flesh of Christ?

“Gnostic texts, such as Pistis Sophia (147; 251, 14-19) condemn such a vulgar understanding of the meaning of "heavenly seed". Here, in the name of Jesus, those who "mix semen and menstrual blood and eat it" are condemned. Couldn't Epiphanius read this and wishful thinking? (Afonasin).

Some crazy people mixed and ate. Jesus condemned such people. “Thomas said: “We have heard that there are some (people) on earth who take male semen and the menstrual blood of a woman and add them to lentil stew and eat it, saying: “We believe in Esau and Jacob. Is it worthy or not?" Jesus ... said to Thomas: "Truly I say: this sin is worse than all sins and all crimes" (Pistis Sophia, 147). The author of these lines is a Gnostic. mix and eat!

Epiphanius did not hesitate to put himself on a par with the biblical Joseph, brother of Judas, who was the forefather of Jesus Christ.

God helped Joseph and Epiphanius. The brothers sold Joseph into slavery in Egypt. Epiphanius voluntarily came to Egypt. The wife of the dignitary Potiphar tried to seduce Joseph. Gnostic women - charming on the outside, ugly on the inside - tried to seduce Epiphanius. Joseph and Epiphanius were not offended. Result: God appointed Joseph as Pharaoh's helper. And Epiphanius - Bishop of Salamis (Cyprus).

The Athanasites could not destroy all the books of the Gnostics.

The book "Pistis Sophia" is written in the Coptic language, which was spoken by the indigenous people of Egypt before the conquest of this country by the Arabs. The British Museum bought this book from the London physician and bibliophile A. Askew in 1785. How the book came to Askew is unknown. Near the village of Nag Hammadi (Egypt), a Gnostic library was found in 1945. Now these books are stored in the Cairo Museum. Scientists suggest that the library was buried in 367 - after Athanasius the Great wrote an Easter message in which he condemned heretical books. Epiphanius, on the instructions of Athanasius, defeated the Gnostics in Egypt. And in the same year 367 he became bishop of Salamis - by the personal order of God, as the Athanasites assert.

There were many philosophical schools of the Gnostics. “The Gnostic schools, says Irenaeus, “spread like mushrooms”” (Afonasinus). The teachings of the Gnostics varied. The Athanasites destroyed the Gnostics before they could bring their teaching to general postulates, as the Athanasites did at the Ecumenical Councils.

According to one of the researchers of the Gnostic library, Frederic Wisse, "the only thing that unites the treatises from Nag Hammadi is ascetic ethics." Wisse suggested that the Gnostics were not the owners of this library. The owner of the library was a certain Athanasite scholar who, for some reason, was interested in gnosis. The ascetic ethics of the treatises points to the tastes of the owner, rather than proves that Epiphanius slandered the Gnostics.

Not all researchers agree with Wisse. “There are much more disagreements and disputes between modern researchers than among ancient ones. Moreover, the controversy is sometimes conducted in the spirit of the best pages of Epiphanius ”(Afonasin).

"About famous men", 21.

"Panarion", 26: 1. Chapter "On the so-called Gnostics, the sixth or twenty-sixth heresy." T. 1. S. 151.

“Someone Kerinth, taught in Egypt, taught that the world was not created by the first God, but by a power that is far removed from this supreme first beginning and does not know anything about the most high God” ... Christ, descending on the man Jesus, spoke about “ unknown Father” (“Against Heresies”, 1:26).

Translation of the New World. Synodal translation: “And on the seventh day God finished His works that He did, and rested on the seventh day from all His works that He did.”

"On the Beginnings", 2: 9, 1. S. 157.

Origen referred to the Wisdom of Solomon 11:21.

"Panarion", 26: 17. Translation by E. V. Afonasin. "Ancient Gnosticism. Fragments and testimonies. S. 47.

Translation of the Moscow Theological Academy: “...then he tried to point them out to the bishops of that place, to make known the names hidden in the church, to drive them out of the city of up to eighty names, and to cleanse the city of these weeds and thorns that had sprouted in it” (T. 1 pp. 175-176).

Translation by A. Mom. http://apokrif.fullweb.ru/nag_hammadi/

“In addition to these, many more Gnostics came from the aforementioned Simonians, who appeared like mushrooms from the earth” (Irenaeus, “Against Heresies”, 1: 29, 1).

Quote from E. V. Afonasin’s book “Ancient Gnosticism. Fragments and testimonies. S. 107.

E. V. Afonasin referred to the book Wisse F. The Nag Hammedi Librari and the Heresiologists. - Vigiliae Christianae 25 (1971). P. 205-223.