Arhcive Notes
The following introductory comments are extracted from G.R.S. Mead,
Pistis Sophia: A Gnostic Gospel, pp. xxxix - l. It should be remember
that this introduction was written in 1921, decades before the discovery of
the Nag Hammadi Library, and at a time when the Pistis Sophia was
one of the most important and largest collections of Gnostic material
available to scholars. Note that the complete 1921 edition of
Pistis Sophia translated by G.R.S. Mead is now
available in our library.
An Excerpt from the Introduction to Pistis Sophia
by G.R.S. Mead
We have in the contents of the Askew, Bruce and Berlin Codices a rich
material which hands on to us valuable direct information concerning what I
have called 'The Gnosis according to its Friends,' in distinction from what
previously used to be our only sources, the polemical writings of the
heresiological Fathers, which set forth 'The Gnosis according to its Foes.'
We have thus at last a new standpoint from which to review the subject, and
therewith the opportunity of revising our impressions in a number of
respects; a considerably different angle of vision must needs change the
perspective of no little in the picture.
The chief business or interest of the orthodox Fathers was to select and
stress what appeared to them to be the most bizarre points and elements,
all that was most absurd in their judgment, in the many Gnostic systems,
and of course, and rightly, everything that could be thought to be
ethically reprehensible. Good, bad and indifferent were only too frequently
lumped together. It was of no interest to this polemic to mention
similarities in belief and practice between the heretics and their
opponents, to dwell on the lofty faith of numbers of these Gnostics in the
transcendent excellence and overmastering glory of the Savior or on many
signs of spiritual inwardness, and especially of high virtue, in which they
were at the least not less scrupulous than their critics. Doubtless there
were sects and groups whose tenets were absurd at any valuation, and some
whose laxity of ethics demanded severe reprobation. But the majority could
not be accused on the score of moral delinquency, indeed no few were
rigidly ascetic; and some of their speculations again have a sublimity of
their own, and in a number of cases anticipated Catholic dogma. If we turn
to our direct sources in Coptic translation, we find that the ethic is
admirable, even if we are averse from over-asceticism in the religious
life, and that their whole-souled devotion to and worship of the Saviour is
unbounded.
It is no part of the plan of this translation to attempt anything in the
nature of a commentary. That would mean a second volume, and would in any
case be an unsatisfactory performance; for much would still remain obscure,
even if every ray of light shed on this or that special point by those who
have most deeply studied the subject, were gathered together. One or two
very general remarks, however, may be ventured.
u In the P.S. Jesus is everywhere pre-eminent and central. He is here
revealed as Saviour and First Mystery, who knows all and unveils all,
infinite in compassion. As such he is pre-existent from eternity, and his
ministry is not only earthly, but cosmic and supercosmic; indeed, it is the
chief feature in the divine economy. Yet nowhere is he called the Christ.
If this is intentional, no reason seems to be assignable for such an
abstention. There is no sign of antagonism to Judaism or to the O.T. On the
contrary, the psalms and other utterances which are quoted, are validated
by the theory that it was the Power of the Saviour which 80 prophesied of
old through the mouth of a David, a Solomon, or an Isaiah.
The whole setting is post-resurrectional. In Div v. i.-iii Jesus has
already, for eleven years after the crucifixion, been instructing his
disciples, men and women, in the Gnosis. The scene now depicts the
disciples as gathered round the Saviour on the Mount of Olives on earth.
The range and scope of this prior teaching may be seen in Div. iv., where
the introductory words speak of it as taking place simply after the
crucifixion. In this stratum the scene is different. The sacramental rite
is solemnized on earth; it takes place, however, on the Mount of Galilee
and not on the Mount of Olives. But the scene is not confined to earth
only, for the disciples are also taken into some of the regions of the
invisible world, above and below, have vision there conferred upon them,
and are instructed on its meaning. Now in Div v. i.-iii. Jesus promises to
take the disciples into the spheres and heavens for the direct showing of
the nature and quality and inhabitants, but there is no fulfillment of this
promise in the excerpts we have from ' The Books of the savior.' It is not
to be supposed, however, that Div. iv. is part of the fulfillment of the
high promise made in the prior extracts; for in it we move in an earlier
phase of the instruction and in an atmosphere of lesser mysteries than
those indicated in the preceding part.
Div v. i.-iii. throughout proclaim the revelation of higher mysteries.
This is only now made possible by the supremely joyous fact that in the
twelfth year of the inner-teaching-ministry a great, If not supreme, moment
in the life of the Saviour has been accomplished; his earthly ministry is
now achieved, and he is invested with the full radiance of his triple robe
of glory, which embraces the whole powers of the universe. He ascends into
heaven in dazzling light which blinds the disciples. After thirty hours he
returns again, and in compassion withdraws his blinding splendour, 60 as to
give his final teaching to his faithful in his familiar form. This means
that ' The Books of the Saviour' purport to contain not only a post-resurrectional
teaching, and therefore a Gnostic revelation supplementary to the public
preaching before the crucifixion, but also a still higher and more intimate
unveiling within the post-resurrectional instruction already current in the
tradition. If there had been apocalyptic elements and visions in the prior
literature, there were to be still more transcendental revelations now on
the completion of the ministry. Until the investiture, or rather
reinvestiture, had taken place according to the divine command, it had not
been possible for the Saviour to speak in utter openness face to face on
all things; now it is possible. Such is the convention.
In Div v. i.-iii. there is presupposed throughout a system of eons and
the rest, which is already highly complex and shows manifest signs of
consisting of stage once severally at the summit of earlier systems, but
now successively subordinated. It is clear then that, if still loftier
hierarchies are to be brought on to the stage, it can only be by again
reducing what had previously been regarded as 'the end of all ends ' to a
subordinate position. This is the method adopted, and we lose ourselves in
the recital of the designations and attributes of ever more transcendental
beings and spaces and mysteries.
In all of this, however, there is no sign of interest in metaphysical
speculation; there is no philosophizing.. It is then not any element of
Hellenic thought proper in the aeonology, which is said to have been so
strongly the case with the teaching of Valentinus himself, that has led so
many to conjecture a Valentinian derivation. It is rather the long episode
of the sorrowing Sophia which has influenced them. This episode reflects on
a lower level of the cosmic scale somewhat of the motif of the ' tragic
myth' of the world-soul the invention of which is generally ascribed to
Valentinus himself, though he may possibly have transformed or worked up
already existing materials or notions. It is this long Sophia episode and
its skillfully inverted mystical exegesis and allegorical interpretation,
following the method developed by Alexandrine contemplatives which has
produced the impression on many that it was of fundamental importance for
the system of the P.S.
It is certainly an indication of the deep interest of the circle in
repentance and the penitential psalms. But the interest is here ethical
rather than cosmological. Pistis Sophia would seem ~o be intended to
represent the type of the faithful repentant individual soul. Throughout,
the chief interest is in salvation and redemption. This i8 to be acquired
by repentance and by renunciation of the world, its lures and cares, but
above all by faith in the Saviour, the Divine Light, and his mysteries. The
first requisite is sincere repentance. The chief topic round which all the
ethical teaching naturally centres, is sin, its cause and its purification,
and the revelation of the mystery of the forgiveness of sins and of the
infinite compassion of the First Mystery. Though there i8 very much also
concerning the complex schematology of the invisible worlds and the
hierarchies of being, much concerning the soul and its origin, of how it
comes to birth and departs from earth-life, much of the light-power, the
spiritual element in man,-all is subordinated to the ethical interest in
the first place, and in the second to the efficacy of the high mysteries of
salvation.
The whole is set forth in terms of these mysteries, which are now
conceived in a far more vital way than was apparently the case in the
earlier literature. On the lower side the mysteries still in some respects
keep in touch with the tradition of words-of-power, authentic and
incorruptible names, and so forth, though there is little of this
specifically in Div v. i.-iii. But it is evidently intended that the higher
mysteries should now be conceived in the light of the fact that the Saviour
himself is in himself concretely the First Mystery and indeed the Last
Mystery, and that -the mysteries are not so much spiritual powers as
substantive beings of transcendent excellence The light-robe is a mystery
of mysteries, and they who have received of the high mysteries become
light-streams in passing from the body. The mysteries are closely
intertwined with the lore of the glory and its modes.
One of the main elements in the lower schematology isthe ancient astral
lore, those ground-conceptions of sidereal religion which dominated the
thought of the times and upheld their sway directly and indirectly for long
centuries after. But here again our Gnostic, while retaining the
schematology for certain purposes, placed it low in the scale. Moreover,
while not denying that previously there was truth even in the astrological
art, they reduced the chances of the horoscope-casters to zero, by
declaring that the Saviour in the accomplishment of his cosmic ministry had
now drastically changed the revolution of the spheres, so that henceforth
no calculations could be counted on; these were now of no more value than
the spinning of a coin.
Our Gnostics were also tranmigrationists ; transcorporation formed an
integral part of their system. They found no difficulty in fitting it into
their plan of salvation, which show no sign of the expectation of an
immediate end of all things -that prime article of faith of the earliest
days. So far from thinking that reincarnation is alien to gospel-teaching,
they elaborately interpret certain of the most striking sayings in this
sense, and give graphic details of how Jesus, as the First Mystery, brought
to rebirth the souls of John the Baptizer and of the disciples, and
supervised the economy of his own incarnation. In this respect the P.S.
offers richer material for those interested in this ancient and widespread
doctrine than can be found in any other old-world document in the West.
A far more distressingly puzzling immixture is the element of magic. In
Div. iv. especially there are invocations and many names which resemble
those found in the Greek magical papyri and other scattered sources. But no
one has so far thrown any clear light on this most difficult subject of
research in general, much less on its relation to the P.S. It is evident
that the writers of Div. iv. and of the first treatise of the Bruce Codex
set a high value on such formula and on authentic names; nor are these
entirely absent from the excerpts from 'The Books of the Saviour' as
witness the five words written on the lightrobe. Our Gnostics
unquestionably believed in a high magic, and were not averse from finding
in what was presumably its most reputable tradition, material which they
considered to be germane to their purpose. In this tradition there must
have been a supreme personage possessing characteristics that could be
brought into close connection with their ideal of the Saviour, for they
equate a certain Aberamentho with him. The name occurs once or twice
elsewhere; but who or what it suggested, we do not know. In any case, as
they utilized and attempted to sublimate so much else which was considered
by many in those days to be most venerable, in order that they might the
more extend and exalt the glory of the Saviour and take up into it what
they considered the best of everything, so did they with what was
presumably the highest they could find in the hoary tradition of magical
power, which had enjoyed empery for so long in the antique world and still
continued to maintain itself even in religio-philosophical circles, where
we should, from the modern standpoint, least expect to find it.
As to the setting of the narrative,-if we had not such an abundance of
instances of pseudohistoric and pseudo-epigraphic scripture-writing, if
this were not, so to speak, the commonplace, not only of apocryphal and
apocalyptic literature, but also of no little that falls within the borders
of canonical sanction, we might be more surprised than we are at the form
in which the composers or compilers have framed their work. It is clear
that they loved and worshipped Jesus with an ecstasy of devotion and
exaltation; they do not fall short in this of the greatest of his lovers.
What sort of authority, then, could they have Supposed they had for
conceiving the setting of their narrative in the way they have ?
Objective physical history, in the rigid sense in which we understand it
to-day, was of secondary interest to them, to say the least; indeed, it was
apparently of little moment to the Gnostics of any school, and their
opponents were not infrequently rowing in the same boat. The Gnostics were,
however, less disingenuous; they strenuously declared their belief in
continued revelation, they delighted in apocalyptic and in psychic story.
The belief in a post-resurrectional teaching had doubtless existed for long
in many forms in Gnostic circles. It must have been widespread; for, as
shown by Schmidt quite recently (Bib. 59), a (Catholic writer in Asia Minor
found himself compelled to steal the fire of the Gnostics and adopt the
same convention in an orthodox document that was intended to be a polemic
against Gnostic ideas, somewhere in the 3rd quarter of the 2nd century.
However they arrived at their conviction, it seems highly probable that the
writers of the P.S. must have sincerely believed they had high authority
for their proceeding, and were in some way emboldened by ' inspiration ' to
carry out their task. As far as they were concerned, they do not by any
means seem conscious of belonging to a decadent movement or of
deterioration in the quality of the ideas they were attempting to set
forth, as so many modern critics would have it. On the contrary, they
thought they were depositories or recipients of profound mysteries never
hitherto revealed, and that by a knowledge of these mysteries they could
the more efficiently evangelize the world.
It is evident, however, that the P.S. was never intended to be
circulated as a public gospel. Certain things are to be preached or
proclaimed to the world, but only certain things. Certain mysteries, again,
the recipients were to bestow under certain conditions, but others were to
be reserved. The ' Books of the Saviour ' are, therefore, to be regarded as
apocrypha in the original sense of the word-that is, ' withdrawn ' or '
reserved ' writings. As such they fell within the proscriptions of
artificial secrecy common to all the initiatory institutions of the time
and of all time. And artificial secrecy can with difficulty, if ever, avoid
the moral and intellectual hazard of its innate obscurations. The P.S. was
intended for already initiated disciples, for chosen learners, though ~o
pledge of secrecy is mentioned. It was intended, above all, for would-be
apostles, for those who should go forth to proclaim what was for them the
best of good news; it is clearly the inner instruction of a zealously
propagandist sect.
If ' The Books of the Saviour ' in their full original form - for in the
extant P.S. we have but selections from them and the formula of the higher
mysteries are omitted,-and if what is given of the lower mysteries in Div.
iv. were held back from public perusal owing partly at least to the fear of
the unworthy making improper use of them, there is little danger to-day on
this score, for this part of the miscellany remains so far the most
securely incomprehensible. And indeed no little else remains obscure, even
when we are of those who have made a protracted study of the psychical
elements in mysticism and of the general psychology of religious
experience. But there is much also in our codex which has a charm of its
own. There are things of rare, if exotic, beauty, things of profound
ethical significance, things of delicate spiritual texture.
In any case, however all these very various elements and features in the
syncretism be judged and evaluated, the Pistis Sophia is unquestionably a
document of the first importance, not only for the history of Christianized
Gnosticism, but also for the history of the development of religion in the
West.