Закончил свой доклад для конференции "Hidden God, Hidden Histories." Доклад получился большой - 36 страниц. В основном он посвящён космогонии и антропогонии 2-го Еноха и их связям с гностическими и герметическими традициями.
Andrei A. Orlov
Adoil Outside the Cosmos: God Before and After Creation in the Enochic Tradition
The Upper Foundation
The Slavonic apocalypse underlines the portentous nature of the primordial cosmogonic account by stressing that this special knowledge has never been previously revealed to any other creatures, including the angels.
This supra-angelic disclosure, given to the visionary after his celestial metamorphosis, can be seen as the pinnacle of the esoteric instruction the seventh antediluvian hero acquired in the upper realm. An extensive description of this revelation is provided by both the shorter and the longer recensions of the Slavonic text. The shorter recension of 2 Enoch 25 offers the following account:
And I commanded the lowest things: “Let one of the invisible things come out visibly!” And Adail descended, extremely large. And I looked at him, and, behold, in his belly he had a great age. And I said to him, “Disintegrate yourself, Adail, and let what is disintegrated from you become visible.” And he disintegrated himself, and there came out from him the great age. And thus it carried all the creation which I had wished to create. And I saw how good it was. And I placed for myself a throne, and I sat down on it. To the light I spoke: “You go up higher and be solidified and become the foundation for the highest things.” And there is nothing higher than the light, except nothing itself. And I spoke, I straightened myself upward from my throne.
The central character of the story is the aeon Adoil (“Adail” in the shorter recension) who is envisioned in the text as the chief cosmogonic agent responsible for the “revelation” of the visible creation. This enigmatic entity is depicted as both the mother and the midwife of creation, someone that conceives and then releases the whole creation from its cosmic belly. The text emphasizes the enormous size of Adoil, defining him as “extremely large.” He is portrayed as “pregnant” with creation by containing a great aeon in his stomach. According to the text, Adoil’s disintegration provides the beginning for all visible reality and serves as the foundation on which God is able to establish the first visible manifestation of the created order: his Throne. It is noteworthy that in both recensions the Deity commands Adoil to become the foundation of the highest things. This terminological identification of Adoil with the concept of foundation is important for our study.
Another significant feature relevant to our subsequent discussion is the portrayal of Adoil in the longer recension as the “revealer.” Adoil’s disintegration is identified in the text as the revelation of the created order: “And the great age came out, and it revealed all the creation which I had thought up to create.”
Finally, another notable detail in the depiction of Adoil is the repeated references to his luminous nature. The emphasis on the luminosity of the primordial aeon is even more apparent in the longer recension, which emphasizes not only the outer shining nature of the protological agent but also his internal luminous state, depicted there as a pregnancy with great light.
 The longer recension, while preserving the general narrative structure of the shorter one, supplies some additional details. The longer recension of 2 Enoch 25 reads: “And I commanded the lowest things: ‘Let one of the invisible things descend visibly!’ And Adoil descended, extremely large. And I looked at him, and, behold, in his belly he had a great light. And I said to him, ‘Disintegrate yourself, Adoil, and let what is born from you become visible.’ And he disintegrated himself, and there came out a very great light. And I was in the midst of the [great] light. And light out of light is carried thus. And the great age came out, and it revealed all the creation which I had thought up to create. And I saw how good it was. And I placed for myself a throne, and I sat down on it. And then to the light I spoke: ‘You go up higher (than the throne), and be solidified [much higher than the throne], and become the foundation of the higher things.’ And there is nothing higher than the light, except nothing itself. And again I bowed (?) myself and looked upward from my throne.” F. Andersen, “2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch”, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2 vols. ed. J.H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1985 ), 1.144. Hereafter cited as OTP.
 OTP 1.145.
 Much scholarship has been devoted to clarifying the etymology of the enigmatic name of the great aeon. Many scholars consider the name to provide an important clue for understanding the origins of the text. Robert Henry Charles suggests that Adoil might be derived from the Hebrew l) dy, translated as the “hand of God” (APOT 2.445). Marc Philonenko supports this etymology, pointing to some Egyptian parallels in which “les premières créatures naissent du liquide séminal que le démiurge solitaire avait fait jaillir au moyen de sa main.” M. Philonenko, “La cosmogonie du ‘livre des secrets d’Hénoch,’” in Religions en Egypte: Hellénistique et romaine (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1969), 109–116 at 114. L. Cry suggests understanding Adoil as stemming from l) rw), “the light of God.” In his opinion, some letters in the Hebrew word rw), “light,” were altered. Resh was read as daleth; waw was transposed. These alterations produced Adoil. See L. Cry, “Quelques noms d’anges ou d’êtres mysterieux en II Hénoch,” RB 49 (1940), 201. André Vaillant suggests that the name might be derived from the Hebrew word d( with a suffix, “his eternity, his aeon.” A. Vaillant, Le Livre des secrets d’Hénoch: Texte slave et traduction française, Textes publiés par l’Institut d’Études slaves 4 (Paris: L’Institut d’Études slaves, 1976), xi. Gershom Scholem criticizes this rendering, arguing that the Hebrew word d( cannot carry a pronominal suffix; see his Origins of the Kabbalah (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987), 73. According to Scholem’s own interpretation, Adoil derives from Sadoqil; see “Die Lehre vom ‘Gerechten’ in der jüdischen Mystik,” Eranos–Jahrbuch 27 (1958), 252. Józef Milik considers the name Adoil “a Greek and Semitic hybrid: Hades + El”; see his The Books of Enoch. Aramaic Fragments of Qumrân Cave 4 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976), 113. Gilles Quispel derives it from Adonai-el, where the first element is the circumlocution for the Tetragrammaton. See J. Fossum, The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord: Samaritan and Jewish Mediation Concepts and the Origin of Gnosticism (WUNT, 36; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1985), 288. I have previously proposed that the name Adoil might be connected with “El Gadol” (the Great God) – a designation for the primordial upper foundation in the creational narrative of the Book of Zohar (Zohar I.17b). In this respect it is intriguing that in 2 Enoch Adoil is called “the large one” or “the great one.” See A. Orlov, The Enoch-Metatron Tradition, TSAJ 107 (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2005), 199.
 M.I. Sokolov, “Materialy i zametki po starinnoj slavjanskoj literature. Vypusk tretij. VII. Slavjanskaja Kniga Enoha Pravednogo. Teksty, latinskij perevod i izsledovanie. Posmertnyj trud avtora prigotovil k izdaniju M. Speranskij,” Chtenija v Obshchestve Istorii i Drevnostej Rossijskih 4 (1910), 1.25.
 Both recensions stress that Adoil’s disintegration provides an important foundation on which the divine Throne is established. The seat of the Deity thus serves here as the portentous locale from which God supervises the unfolding creation. The Throne plays an important role in the process of creation, being envisioned as the center of the created world.
 His revelations, however, encompass not verbal but rather “ontological” disclosure, conveyed through the act of changing his nature. This mode of revelation is very important for our subsequent analysis of Enoch’s role as the revealer and his “ontological” participation in the disclosure of the eschatological aeon.
 “And Adoil descended, extremely large. And I looked at him, and, behold, in his belly he had a great light … there came out a very great light. And I was in the midst of the [great] light. And light out of light is carried thus” (OTP 1.144).
The Cosmogony of 2 Enoch: Light inside of Light
Scholars have previously noted several parallels between the creational narrative found in the Slavonic apocalypse and some hermetic and gnostic cosmogonies. Further, the researchers often envisioned 2 Enoch’s account as an important early testimony to the Jewish matrix of these later cosmogonic speculations. In light of these similarities, scholars speculated that Adoil’s imagery may be connected with the myth of the Celestial Man. This imagery becomes prominent in the later hermetic and gnostic texts and collections,  including the Corpus Hermeticum where the Anthropos inherits the luminosity of the Father  and becomes the blueprint for the created order and humankind by disintegrating himself into the physical realm. This motif is conveyed in the Poimandres  through the erotic metaphor of Anthropos falling in love with Nature. In commenting on the features of the Celestial Man myth in the story of Adoil, Jarl Fossum draws attention to the peculiar symbolism of light conveyed in the longer recension of the Slavonic pseudepigraphon through the expression “light out of light.” He proposes that this imagery of light—possibly rendered in the Greek Vorlage of 2 Enoch through the term fos, as in many other accounts that contain the Celestial Man ideology—might have an anthropomorphic significance. It is well known that the heavenly Anthropos traditions often play on the ambiguity of the fwv terminology that can designate either fos “a man” or fos “light,” both pointing to the luminous and anthropomorphic nature of the Celestial Human. In view of these conceptual developments, Adoil can be understood in the Slavonic apocalypse as an anthropomorphic entity that is predestined to serve not only as the pattern of the visible creation but also as the blueprint of humanity. The possible “human” form of Adoil seems also reaffirmed in both recensions through references to his belly.
The anthropomorphic dimension of the fos symbolism was also evident in the hermetic and gnostic cosmologies that also often play on the ambiguity of this terminology in their depiction of the Heavenly Man. In this respect it is intriguing that some gnostic anthropogonies use expressions very similar to 2 Enoch by describing the Celestial Man “Adamas” as “a light which radiated from the light.”
 See, for example, G.W. MacRae, “The Jewish Background of the Gnostic Sophia Myth,” Novum Testamentum 12 (1970), 86-101 at 90.
 In his comments on the notion of the Celestial Man in the hermetic tractate Poimandres and the gnostic Apocryphon of John Roelef, Van der Broek notes that “ … both texts know the important notion of a heavenly Man — a notion that has to be explained through its Jewish background.” Roelof van den Broek, “Gnosticism and Hermetism in Antiquity: Two Roads to Salvation,” in: Gnosis and Hermeticism from Antiquity to Modern Times (eds. R. van der Broek and W.J. Hanegraaf; Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998), 1-20 at 15. Van der Broek traces the origins of this concept to Ezekiel 1:26 where the prophet saw the Glory of God in the shape of a man. He then suggests that Ezekiel 1:26 “and a specific interpretation of the creation of man in Genesis eventually led to the myth of the heavenly Man.” van den Broek, “Gnosticism and Hermetism,” 15.
 Poim. 12: “Mind, the father of all, who is life and light, gave birth to a man like himself whom he loved as his own child. The man was most fair: he had the father’s image; and god, who was really in love with his own form, bestowed on him all his craftworks.” B.P. Copenhaver, Hermetica. The Greek Corpus Hermeticum and the Latin Asclepius in a New English Translation, with Notes and Introduction (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 3.
 On the Gnostic variants of this myth, see G. Quispel “Der Gnostische Anthropos und die jüdische Tradition,” Eranos Jahrbuch 22 (1953), 211-215; I.S. Gilhus, The Nature of the Archons: A Study in the Soteriology of a Gnostic Treatise from Nag Hammadi (CGII, 4), SOR 12 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1985), 48ff.
 Poim. 16: “Poimandres said: ‘This is the mystery that has been kept hidden until this very day. When nature made love with the man, she bore a wonder most wondrous. In him he had the nature of the cosmic framework of the seven, who are made of fire and spirit, as I told you, and without delay nature at once gave birth to seven men, androgyne and exalted, whose natures were like these of the seven governors.’” Copenhaver, 4.
 Fossum observes that “Adoil is thus the prime cosmogonic agent. Since he is the primordial phos, or – rather – the archetypal phos, which means ‘man’ as well as ‘light.’” J. Fossum, The Name of God, 289-290.
 On the fwv traditions, see G. Quispel, “Ezekiel 1:26 in Jewish Mysticism and Gnosis,” VC 34 (1980), 1–13 at 6-7; J. Fossum, The Name of God, 280; idem, The Image of the Invisible God: Essays on the Influence of Jewish Mysticism on Early Christology, NTOA 30 (Fribourg: Universitätsverlag Freiburg Schweiz; Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1995), 16-17; Copenhaver, 109; S. N. Bunta, Moses, Adam and the Glory of the Lord in Ezekiel the Tragedian: On the Roots of a Merkabah Text (Ph.D. diss.; Marquette University, 2005) 92ff.
 “For this one, Adamas, is a light which radiated from the light; he is the eye of the light.” Gos. Egypt. IV 61.8-10. Nag Hammadi Codices III, 2 and IV, 2: The Gospel of the Egyptians (The Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit), NHS 4. Eds. A. Bohlig and F. Wisse (Leiden: Brill, 1975), 93. Cf. also On the Origin of the World 5: “… Now the eternal realm (aeon) of truth has no shadow outside it, for the limitless light is everywhere within it. But its exterior is shadow, which has been called by the name ‘darkness.’ From it, there appeared a force, presiding over the darkness. And the forces that came into being subsequent to them called the shadow ‘the limitless chaos.’” Nag Hammadi Codex II, 2-7 vol. 2, NHS 21, ed. B. Layton (Leiden: Brill, 1989), 31.