Thrice-Greatest Hermes, Vol. I — G. R. S. Mead (1906)

As the whole matter is not only one of considerable interest for the student of our treatises, but also of the greatest importance for the student of the history of Gnosticism, I shall give a translation of Hippolytus' introductory and concluding sections, as well as of the intermediate section which specially concerns us, so that the reader may have a view of the whole medley as it comes to us from the hands of the he.resy-hunting bishop.

I shall, moreover, proceed a stage further in the analysis of the material of Hippolytus than Eeitzenstein has done, and hope, when the evidence has been laid before the reader, to win his assent to what appears to me to be the natural sifting out of the various elements, with resultant phenomena which are of the greatest importance for the history of Gnosticism, and, therefore, of the evolution of Christian dogmatics, and which lead to conclusions that are far too serious to be treated in the short space of a single chapter of our present

In the following analysis H. stands for Hippolytus ; C. for the Christian Gnostic final overwriter, the " Naassene " whose MS. lay before H. ; J. for the Naassene Jewish mystic who preceded C. and overworked the original ; S. for the original Heathen Hellenistic Source.

As H. and C. are of secondary importance for our immediate enquiry, though of themselves of the greatest value and interest, I shall print them in smaller type. J. I shall print in the same type as S., as nearer in contact with S. than C., and as being sometimes more difficult to detach from S. than from C.

The reader, to have the text of Hippolytus before him, must neglect all the critical indications and read straight on.

With these brief preliminary indications we will, then, present the reader with a translation of the first section, or introductory part,1 of Hippolytus' exposure or exposition of the Naassene doctrines, begging him to remember throughout that it is a portrait painted by the hand of one of their bitterest foes.

HIPPOLYTUS' INTRODUCTION

H. The priests and chiefs of [this] doctrine2 were first of all those who were called Naasseni — so named in Hebrew, [in which] " serpent " is called naas.3 But subsequently they called themselves Gnostics, pretending that they alone knew the Depths.

From these many separated themselves and [so] turned the school, which was originally a single one, into numerous sects, setting forth the same ideas in various doctrinal forms, as our argument will show as it advances.

These [Naassenes] honour as the Logos (Reason) of all universals * Man, and Son of Man. This Man is male-female, and is called by them Adamas.6 And they have many intricate 6 hymns in his honour. These hymns — to dispose of them briefly — run somewhat as follows :

J. '"From Thee '[is] Father, and ' Through Thee ' 7
Mother — the two Immortal Names,8 Parents of ^Eons,
0 Thou who hast the Heaven for Thy City, 0 Man of
Mighty Names." 9

1 S. 132, 1—134, 80 ; C. 139, 1—141, 2.

2 The worship of the serpent, according to H.

3 Cf. the strange logos, preserved in Matt. x. 16 alone : "Be ye therefore wise as serpents."

4 The reading can be slightly emended by H.'s epitome in x. 9 ; but the phrase irap& rbv wriav \6yov still remains an enigma.

6 The Celestial Adam, the Adam Kadmon of Kabalistic
tradition, or the Intelligible Cosmos of Hellenistic theology.
See Cruice, note in loc.

6 Or hymns of subtle meaning.

7 That is, Man as Cause and Substance of all things.

8 Sc. Powers.

9 That is, presumably, " names of power " (Egyptice) ; the Adam who gave their " names " to all the " animals."

H. And they divide him into three, like Geryones ; l for, they say, he has a mental, psychic, and choi'c [aspect] ; 2 and they think that the Qnosia of3 this [Man] is the beginning of the possibility of knowing God, saying :

J. The beginning of Perfection [is] the Gnosis of Man, but the Gnosis of God is perfected Perfection.*

H. All these, he says 6 — mental, psychic, and earthy — descended together into one man — Jeaus, born of Mary.

And these three Men, he says, spake each from their own special essences to their own special folk.