Disputation and the Manichaean Kerygma

Disputation was central to Manichaean religious identity from the inception of the movement. More by means of radical reinterpretation than direct negation, Mani's kerygma brought into question the very legitimacy of the religious self-understanding of Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, and Buddhists.^[4] Manichaeans could not convey the cogency and compelling nature of their message without undercutting the fundamental religious claims of others.^[5]

According to the so-called Cologne Mani-Codex ,^[6] which contains the Manichaean work "Concerning the Birth of His Own Body," an agonistic exchange of words marked the beginning of the rift between Mani and the other Jewish-Christian baptists in Babylonia. The narrative presents a dichotomy between speech (public disputing) and silence (lack of pub-

[4] See F. C. Andreas and W. B. Henning, "Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan II," SPAW , Phil.-hist. Klasse 5 (1933): T.2.D126.IR, 295.

[5] H.J. Drijvers, "Conflict and Alliance in Manichaeism," in H. G. Kippenberg, ed., Struggles of the Gods (Berlin/New York/Amsterdam, 1984), 99-124; see esp. 105, on the imagery of war.

[6] Codex Manichaicus Coloniensis (hereafter CMC ), in A. Henrichs and L. Koenen, eds., "Der Kölner Mani-Codex (P. Colon. inv. nr. 4780) P EPI THSG ENNHS TOY SW -MATOS AYTOY, Edition der Seiten," ZPE 19 (1975): 1-85; 32 (1978): 87-199; 44 (1981): 201-318; 48 (1982): 1-59. Critical edition by L. Koenen and C. Römer, eds., Der Kölner Mani-Kodex: Über das Werden seines Leibes , Papyrologica Coloniensia 14 (Wiesbaden, 1989). The early dating of the text to the fourth and fifth centuries has recently been challenged on paleographical grounds; see B. L. Fonkic and F. B. Poljakov, "Paläographische Grundlagen der Datierung des Kölner Mani-Kodex," BZ 83 (1990): 22-29.

lic disputing) that is fraught with significance. The hagiographic text emphasizes that young Mani initially refrained from disputing with his fellow sectarians even while receiving revelations of errors in the baptists' religious practices and beliefs.^[7] At twenty-four or twenty-five years of age, he finally began to make public his doubts: he openly disputed the two central pillars of the sects self-understanding, the tradition of Elchasaius and the value of ablution, by putting forth questions in a public setting. This act understandably failed to endear Mani to the other members of the sect, who are described as becoming especially furious because they were incapable of responding to his questions, and thus were made to look foolish.

In the Mani-Codex , this lopsided debate very nearly ended in mob violence. The shamed and enraged baptists proceeded to threaten Mani with physical harm, an outcome averted thanks to the timely intervention of Patticius, Mani's father and spiritual patron. Afterward, an assembly was convoked to discuss the situation, and the baptists decided to expel Mani. Here we see that, in a sect with no graduated scheme of discipline, expulsion was the only means of dealing with a member who defied the group's central ethos.

After his expulsion, Mani commenced his missionary career by traveling as far east as India.^[8] In broken lines of Greek, the Mani-Codex discloses the only attested formal public debate involving the charismatic figure. Mani was already far advanced in his public career, having been favorably received at the royal court in Ctesiphon by Shapur shahanshah by the time he arrived at a local village to preach his customary message. His unsolicited attempt to proclaim his kerygma before an assembled religious congregation publicly challenged the authority of local leaders. Accordingly, the leader of the religious sect in question invited Mani to a public debate: "He [the leader of the religious sect] conducted a debate

[7] CMC 5:7-11. Such claims made ex post facto can of course constitute a veiled apologetical attempt to show that Mani's break with the baptists had long been prepared for and was no accident. See A. Henrichs, "Mani and the Babylonian Baptists: A Historical Confrontation," HSCP 77 (1973): 23-59, esp. 43-59; J. J. Buckley, "Mani's Opposition to the Elchasaites: A Question of Ritual," in P. Slater, D. Wiebe, M. Boutin, and H. Coward, eds., Traditions in Contact and Change (Waterloo, 1983), 323-36; idem, "Tools and Tasks: Elchasaite and Manichaean Purification Rituals," Journal of Religion 66 (1986): 399-411.

[8] The Middle Persian account of Mani's encounter with an Indian wise man named Gwndyš seems to describe a private discussion rather than a public debate. See text and German translation in W. Sundermann, ed., Mitteliranische manichäische Texte kirchenge-schichtlichen Inhalts , Berliner Turfantexte 11 (Berlin, 1981), 4b. 1 :M6040, 4b.2:M6041 (pp. 86-89). Mani eventually asked Gwndyš whether he could explain the origins of the world and the latter was not able to respond: "Er ko[nnte] ihm keine Antwort geben. Under handelte wie ein Unwissender, der nichts begreift" (4b.2:M6041, R18[1377]-V5[1395]; pp. 88-89).

() with me before men of his faith ().^[9] On all points he was worsted and incurred laughter with the result that he was filled with both envy and malice."^[10]

The vanquished leader tried to avenge his public disgrace and temporary exclusion from his social group by uttering incantations () against the stranger. The fragmentary nature of the Mani-Codex does not allow us to learn more about the nature of the incantations and their intended purpose, though they may be construed as a maledictory curse to inflict harm on Mani or as attempts to constrain his ability to speak in public. In either case, the efforts of the debater-turned-magus were in vain; Mani's guardian spirit or suzugos deflected the spells and he suffered no harm.^[11] Here we see, as we will elsewhere, that formal public debate was only one of several possible forms of social and religious conflict. The threat of physical violence and the use of illocutionary acts such as the casting of spells dearly retained their viability within the broader spectrum of such contests.^[12]

Mani proclaimed his kerygma openly, emulating his favorite apostle, Paul, but I know of no extant evidence that Mani resorted to public debate as a modus operandi . The noun dialogos and the verb dialegomai are used in the Mani-Codex mainly to describe the act of preaching, not the act of debating.^[13] Proclamation of the kerygma and the performance of miracles characterized Mani's missionary activities as well as those. of his disciples.^[14] In this respect, a document such as the Doctrina Addai , which may after all contain Christian anti-Manichaean polemic, can help

[9] This word reflects the standard terminology used to describe religious sectarian groups in the Codex; see, e.g., CMC 102.12.

[11] CMC 139.11-13.

[12] See P. L. Ravenhil, "Religious Utterances and the Theory of Speech Acts," in W. J. Samarin, ed., Languages in Religious Practice (Rowley, Mass., 1976), 26-39; see esp. 28-31 on spells and "magical" speech as illocutionary acts.

[14] On Manichaean missionary activities and the working of miracles, see the excellent comprehensive account in Lieu, History of Manichaeism , e.g., 54-90. On the Manichaeans and public preaching, see Middle Persian fragment M219, in Andreas and Henning, "Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan II," 311-12.

us comprehend the historical milieu and expectations governing the interactions between charismatic missionaries and local communities in late antiquity.^[15]

For the advancement of his missionary career, Mani possessed the double gift of special revelation and the aid of a suzugos . His disciples and followers, however, required assistance to ensure the success of their own missionary efforts. The reputed success of the early Manichaeans in public debates may be attributed to the fact that they were equipped with writings specifically intended for use in situations of controversy. When Mani sent his disciples abroad to spread his kerygma, he instructed them to carry his own writings and to study them with care.^[16]

Addas, a disciple who ventured as far as Alexandria, is traditionally thought to have brought with him three of Mani's writings, including the Living Gospel . In a city in which various religious and philosophical groups competed with each other on a constant basis, Addas could expect to become involved in public debates,^[17] and he needed to be prepared to respond to criticisms.^[18] Many would wish to subject a novel message to public testing, the more so since its bearer was a stranger without recognized credentials.^[19]

A hagiographic Middle Persian source describes Addas as emerging triumphant from these early encounters, thanks to his use of Mani's writings.^[20] It further asserts that Addas' fundamental imperative was to

[15] See H. J. Drijvers, "Addai und Mani: Christentum und Manichäismus im dritten Jahrhundert in Syrien," OCA 221 (1983): 173-85.

[16] On Manichaean scriptures, see P. Alfaric, Les écritures manichéennes , vols. 1, 2 (Paris, 1918-19).

[17] See M2 RI 1-37 in Andreas and Henning, "Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan II," 301. Addas is said to have "opposed the 'dogmas' with these [writings], [and] in everything he acquitted himself well. He subdued and enchained the 'dogmas,'" English translation from J. P. Asmussen, Manichaean Literature: Representative Texts Chiefly from Middle Persian and Parthian Writings , Persian Heritage Series 22 (Delmar, N.Y., 1975), 21. The text does not specify whether these events took place in Alexandria or while Addas was on his way there. See also L. J. R. Ort, Mani: A Religio-historical Description of His Personality (Leiden, 1967), 63.

[18] Thus the importance of Stoic dialectic to Christians like Clement of Alexandria, who invited pagans to embrace Christianity. See J. Pépin, "La vraie dialectique selon Clement d'Alexandrie," in Epektasis: Mélanges offerts à Jean Daniélou (Paris, 1972), 375-83.

[19] See J. Pitt-Rivers, "The Stranger, the Guest and the Hostile Host: Introduction to the Study of the Laws of Hospitality," in J.-G. Peristiany, ed., Contributions to Mediterranean Sociology: Mediterranean Rural Communities and Social Change (Paris, 1968), 13-30.

[20] See M1750, in Sundermann, ed., Mitteliranische manichäische Texte kirchengeschichtlichen Inhalts , 183-85:2.5, p. 26; Andreas and Henning, "Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan II," M216c V9-11. See M. Tardieu, "Gnose et manichéisme," in Annuaire: École Pratique des Hautes Étdes , Section de Sciences Religieuses 96 (1987-88): 296-301, esp. 299.

establish communities of the faithful; there was no hint that he deliberately debated in public to gain adherents. Addas did debate with others, according to the source, but because he had to, not because he wanted to. We may surmise that debating in public was an unavoidable aspect of his missionary career rather than his means of carrying out his mandate.

Arising from a biblical tradition, the Manichaeans cherished a specific body of authoritative writings, some of which were at least readily adaptable to, and perhaps specifically designed for, the task of addressing religious controversy. In geographical areas where Christian communities abounded, particularly on the Roman Empire's extensive eastern frontier, Manichaean missionaries quickly discovered that many whom they encountered were especially interested in the status of the Hebrew bible as divine revelation. By initially focusing on this issue, Manichaeans positioned themselves to preach their own distinctive message of the principles of light and darkness to their engrossed listeners.

To exploit this opening, the Manichaeans (like most other religious groups) were not averse to using texts from other traditions. In particular, the Antitheses of Marcion of Sinope (mid-second century), whose teachings were very popular in eastern Syria, were quickly seized upon because they refuted the claim that the Hebrew bible was the work of a benign deity.^[21] Such documents were sometimes reworked and incorporated into the Manichaean tradition, as was the case with Modios (meaning "small basket" or "dry-measure"), which adapted arguments from the Antitheses and was attributed to the disciple Addas. In an effort to make their writings widely available in local languages, the Manichaeans later translated the Modios into Latin. Considering the cost and labor involved in copying texts, let alone translating them, we may surmise that the arguments contained in the Modios were useful in disputing with Latin Christians.^[22]