|
|
PSCO Minutes
PSCO Minutes
March 10, 1988
Powers, Watchers, and Archangels: The Paradox of Manichaean Magic
David A. Utz
In the ninth section of the Old Turkish Xwastwanift, or
Confession of Sins, for the auditores, or Manichaean lay community, the
confessor asks forgiveness for any transgression of the on
caxsapat or ten-fold Siksapada, the Ten Commandments of the
Manichaeans. Although these are not enumerated by the
Xwastwanift, the Fihrist Ibn an-Nadim has preserved an
itemized listing. Among them are tarku ta`limil-`ilal
was-sihr, "abstinence from teaching excuses and magic,"
especially enchantments and illusions. Moreover, as-Sahristani, in his
Kitabul-Milal wan-Nihal, was reiterated that Mani
made incumbent upon his "companions" to abstain from sihr,
"magic." In the sixth section of the Xwastwanift, in an
enumeration of the "ten kinds of sins" [on türlüg
suy], the confessor asks forgiveness "if we should somehow have
practiced magic" [näcä yilwii yilwilädimiz
ärsär]. It should be pointed out in passing that these ten
do not correspond to the on caxsapat enumerated by Ibn an-Nadim
and as-Sahristani. And, finally, the Fihrist also stipulates as a
precondition for entry into the Religion that one must abstain from
sihr, "magic" [tarkus-sihr]. From this
evidence it should be clear that the practice of magic, especially magic
which makes what is false or unreal appear true or real, was proscribed
for the Manichaeans.
Nevertheless, it is clear from the existence of two Manichaean
magical texts, one in Middle Persian, and the other in Parthian, that
the Manichaeans sanctioned the use of magical invocations of angels and
other "powers" for protection against a wide range of malevolencies.
Both texts are written in the special Manichaean script, and not in one
of the Middle Iranian vernacular scripts derived from Achaemenian
chancellery Aramaic. The issue of language and, especially, script is
important, and we will return to it a little later. That the use of
protective magic among the Manichaeans extended beyond the Turfan
community is born out by the famous Greek Mani-Codex, which was designed
to serve as an amulet.
The first text [A in the handout] consists of an exorcism of a
tab [tb] or "fever" called idra [`ydr], which
is said to have three forms and wings like a griffin [paskuz].
The exorcism consists in the invocation of a number of "powers"
including four peculiarly Manichaean ones, (1) Lord Jesus the Friend
[xwdwwn yysw` rymn], (2) His father the
Highest [`ys pydr bwrzyst], i.e., the Father of greatness, (3)
the Holy Spirit [wxs ywjdhr], and (4) the First Thought
[hndysysn nxwstyn], i.e., the First man, as well as three
archangels, Michael [myxyl], Raphael [rwfyl],
and Gabriel [gbryl]. In lines 21ff. The fragmentary text
should perhaps be emended to read: pad nam i mumin i erizend mixael
ud rufael ud gabrael [pd nm `y mwmyyn `y `yrycynd
myxyl wd rwfyl wd gbryl], "in the name
of the exorcism(s) which Michael, Raphael, and Gabriel bind," in and
effort to get a sense from the text, since Mumin, the son of
Eric doesnt make much sense here. The second part of this
text contains an invocation for protection from the malevolencies in a
house.
The second text is a zawar, "power," or amulet with a
saxwan or (magical) text. Once again various "powers" are invoked
to provide the wearer of the zawar with protection from a wide
range of malevolencies. These protectors include three explicitly
Manichaean ones, (1) Lord Jesus the Messiah [xwdy yysw
msyh], (2) Mar Mani, the Savior, the Apostle of the gods
[mrymny njywg yxdn frystg], and (3)
Your Holy, Praised, Blessed Spirit [twn wd wjydg
`stwdg frydg], as well as the four archangels
Michael [myhyl], Istrael (Sarael)
[sryl], Raphael [rwfyl], and Gabriel
[gbryl]. The saxwan or amulet text also includes a
Manichaean Yaksa catalogue, each hour is ruled by a Yaksa, who occupies
a certain country and has so-many thousand sons who each such-and-such
food. Yaksa catalogues are common to Mahayana Buddhism, such as those
contained in the Mahamayuri and Candragarbhasutra. The
Mahamayuri is one of the five formulae of the Pancaraksa
or "Quintuple Protection." This five-fold Manichaean Yaksa catalogue
does not correspond to any in Buddhist literature, which are not so
extensive in a number of categories. For instance, in the
Mahamayuri, the catalogue has only the categories Yaksa and
country. None of the Buddhist catalogues have "food" as a category.
Obviously, the importance of the number five in Manichaean schematics
has played a role here in the adaptation of this Buddhist invocational
genre. To the issue of why this particular genre has been incorporated
we will return later.
The extremely significant fact that these texts are written in
western Middle Iranian languages, in the calligraphic Manichaean script,
should not be ignored. The use of this special script shows that this
magical invocational genre had official sanction in spite of the
Manichaean proscription against magic, which we discussed previously.
Were these texts the product of popular religious sentiment, they would
be in one of the vernacular scripts which developed for writing Middle
Iranian languages. So, for instance, in Central Asia, Manichaean texts,
not only in Sogdian, but also in Middle Persian and Parthian, survive
written in the more cursive and informal varieties of the Sogdian
script. However, the fact that these texts are in western languages,
i.e., Parthian Middle Persian, in the Manichaean script indicates that
the originated outside of the eastern Manichaean community in Central
Asia. Especially in the case of the Parthian text, it is clear that it
originated at a time before Parthian became a virtually dead language in
a place where Parthian was spoken and where both Buddhist and
Manichaeans were contemporaneously prevalent. The most likely candidates
would be either Margiana or, perhaps, Bactria in the
3rd-6th centuries.
Here is an apparent paradox: on the one hand, a clear
proscription against the practice of magic, and, on the other hand, the
officially sanctioned usage of a genre of invocational lists of angels
and other "powers" for magical exorcism and protection. One explanation
may be that sihr, "magic," should be understood in the narrow
sense of "enchantment" or "illusion," i.e., specifically those
transformation which make what is false or unreal appear true or real.
This is the particular variety of magic at which the Thessalian witches,
who figure prominently in Apuleius Golden Ass, are adept.
Then the proscription against "magic" would not extend to exorcisms and
protections, which are something quite different. But what might be the
larger context of this Manichaean magical practice which might also help
to clarify this apparent paradox? In particular, what is its
relationship to the larger Manichaean historical context and to
Manichaean origins?
The clue to this is provided by the invocation in both these
magical texts of the archangels, in one case, Michael, Raphael, and
Gabriel, and, in the other case, Michael, Istrael, Raphael, and Gabriel.
These four angels figure prominently in the Manichaean canonical Book
of Giants, as the four angels who come to destroy the Watchers and
their giant progeny. In one surviving Sogdian fragment of the Book of
Giants [G.], this is described in graphic detail. The
importance of the four archangels as the pre-eminent "powers" in the
Book of Giants, and the importance, in turn, of the Book of
Giants, itself, within the Manichaean community for the formulation
of the myth of redemption can account for why these four would figure in
a magical invocation.
From the surviving Aramaic fragments of the (First) Book of
Enoch in the Qumran manuscript collection, it is clear that the
Book of Giants was taken over by Mani from this corpus in which
it formed a sequel and further elaboration upon the Book of
Watchers, the first 36 chapters of 1 Enoch. This, in turn,
was an elaboration of Genesis 6.1-4 which contains the very brief
account of the watchers or Fallen Angels, and the Gibborim and Nephilim,
their offspring by the daughters of men. In the Manichaean cosmogony the
Watchers became dews [dyw], or "demons," and Yaksas who
were imprisoned in the firmament when the world was constructed and who
were kept under the supervision of the Rex Honoris, one of the five sons
of the Living Spirit. They rebelled and were recaptured, although two
hundred escaped to earth and propagated the Giants, kaw
[kw], i.e., Gibborim, and Abortions or proto-animals, i.e.,
Nephilim.
The discovery that the Book of Giants formed an integral
part of the Enochic literature as constituted among the Qumran community
provides an important clue to understanding the functional existence of
Manichaean magical texts. Earlier David Frankfurter discussed the
functional liturgical importance of invocations of angels in the Qumran
community and argued that this is an integral part of a wider phenomenon
of "magical" lists of angels used in ritual activities generally
conceived. In these lists of "pronunciations" of angelic names, the
functions of liturgy, magical spell, and apocalypse become blurred and
are not distinguished by sectarians for whom these are important, be
they Qumran sectarians or Manichaeans. So, it is less surprising that
the Manichaeans would have put such lists to the entire range of usages
to which they were traditionally applicable and efficacious, including
magic. It would be difficult to make rigorous historical argument
connecting Manichaean magic with the Qumran community; however, a more
phenomenological argument can provide a powerful tool in understanding
the apparent paradox of Manichaean magic.
At this point we can return to consider the issue of the
Manichaean Yaksa catalogue included in our Parthian amulet text: why
have the Manichaeans incorporated into a magical invocational list names
of "powers" this characteristic genre of Indian Buddhism? It should be
recalled that the Manichaeans especially in Iran, Central Asia, and the
Far East, followed the practice of adapting their doctrine and
literature to local religious and cultural environments. So, for
instance, in the Iranian redaction of the Book of Giants,
Ohya [why] and Ahya [Hahyah (hhyh)],
the giant sons of Samihazah [smyhzh], the chief of the
Watchers, have been given the names of the Iranian culture heroes Sam
[sm] and Nariman [nrymn]. In
Varahamihiras Brhatsamhita, the pre-eminent treatise of
Indian astronomy and astrology, the 27 naksatras or "lunar
mansions" are divided into nine triads, to each of which corresponds the
kingdoms of one ninth of Bharatavarsa. Through the conjunctions of these
naksatra triads with the planets, the courses of events in the
corresponding regions and countries transpire. So, for instance, a major
calamity such as the death of the king may occur as a direct result of a
conflict between the planets and the corresponding naksatra triad
of that kingdom. Although this scheme is different in detail from the
Buddhist or Manichaean ones we have been considering, it provides the
necessary clue to the puzzle of why a Manichaean amulet text would
contain a Yaksa catalogue. Among the ideas which figured in the
development of the characteristic apocalyptic literature of Second
Temple Judaism of which the First Book of Enoch is a definitive
example, is that of the angels of the nations: Each nation of the world
has its "guardian angel," and the interplay of these angels controls the
destinies of their respective nations. Although this idea is alluded to
in Daniels vision concerning Persia and Greece [Daniel 10.13;
10.20-21], it receives its most definitive statement perhaps in the
Book of Jubilees [15.31-32]:
And he sanctified them [i.e., Israel] and gathered them from all the
sons of man because (there are) many nations and many people, and they
all belong to him, but over all of them he caused spirits to rule so
that they might lead them astray from following him. But over Israel he
did not cause any angel or spirit to rule because he alone is their
ruler and he will protect them
It seems clear that Jubilees is closely related to 1
Enoch. Whatever the outcome of the current debate [J. C. VanderKam]
concerning which parts of Jubilees and 1Enoch may have
influenced each other, respectively, it seems reasonable to suppose that
Mani, through his Elchasaite background, had not only become familiar
with the Book of Giants and other Enochic literature but also
related materials such as Jubilees through which he would have
become familiar with the idea of the angels or "spirits" of the nations.
It is also not unreasonable to suppose that his understanding of angels
and "spirits" in this context would be as referring to the Watchers,
who, in turn, are referred to in the Iranian redaction of Giants
as dews and Yaksas. So, it would have been only natural for the
Manichaeans in eastern Iran to have adapted Buddhist Yaksa catalogues
for use in magical lists of the Watchers guardians of the
Nations.
The ambiguous position of the Watchers within the Manichaean
community, on the one hand as malevolencies or dews, on the other
hand as efficacious "powers" for invocation in magical lists, is echoed
by a non-Manichaean Aramaic incantation text [B in the handout]
found on a bowl from the vicinity of Nippur in Babylonia, Manis
native land. Furthermore, as James Montgomery has pointed out, the
script on the bowl is paleographically very close to the special
Manichaean script. Consequently, it would not be unreasonable to suppose
that the text of this bowl reflects the Late Antique milieu of the
Babylonian Baptists in which Mani grew up. In this incantation, the
malevolent powers are bound and their bonds are sealed in the name of
Samihiza, the Lord Bagdana [b-smhyz mry
bgdn]. In the name Samihiza it would not be unreasonable
to see the name Samihazah, the chief of the Watchers in 1 Enoch,
who, whatever his malevolent personality, is here invoked for magical
protection.
The handout for this presentation is not available.
See also the presentations by George Nickelsburg and
Elaine Pagels and the ensuing
Discussion with Nickelsburg, Pagels, and Utz
For related materials,
consult other PSCO presentations and discussions on the topic for
the 1987-1988 seminar,
"Principalities and Powers:
Demons and Angels in the World of Late Antiquity".
|