MANICHAEAN ESCHATOLOGY:

GNOSTIC-CHRISTIAN THINKING ABOUT THE LAST THINGS*

Abstract

The past decades saw the first publication of Manichaean texts such as the Greek Mani Codex and
new editions of pivotal eschatological texts such as the Coptic Sermon on the Great War and Mani’s
Šābuhragān. In combination with previously discovered Manichaean texts and polemics from the
Church Fathers, these sources enable us to construct a sketch of Manichaean eschatology. The
present chapter aims at presenting some new insights, while stressing the particular fact that
Manichaean eschatology—both according to Western and Eastern sources—assigns the central
position in the eschatological events to Jesus.

Introduction

New discoveries have revealed the true face of Manichaeism. Many scholars in the past hailed
Manichaeism as an offshoot of Iranian religious traditions, in particular because of its ‘dualism’ and
a number of eschatological concepts such as the Great War at the end of time and the
conflagration (ἐκπύρωσις) of the world through fire. Since the discovery of the Mani Codex,
however, we know for sure that the prophet Mani, the founding founding father of Manichaeism
who was born in 216 in present-day Iraq and died in 276 or 277,1 was raised in a Jewish-Christian
community of Elkesaites. This means that young Mani grew up in some sort of kibbutz among Jews
who claimed Jesus to be the Messiah and venerated a certain Elchasai as the final eschatological
prophet. Not Iranian, but Jewish and Christian ideas made up the basis of the gnostic religion of
the Manichaeans, a church (ἐκκλησία) which spread from Mesopotamia as far as Roman Africa
and Spain in the West and China in the East. Even recently, small communities have been
discovered near Quanzhou on the South China coast venerating Mani as the Buddha of Light.2
From the Greek Mani Codex we also learn that Mani was an eschatological prophet and
that his first disciples considered themselves to live in apocalyptic times.3 We find the same in

* Revised and updated paper read at a conference of the Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Vienna, Sept.
2015) and published as ‘Manichaean Eschatology: A Sketch of Gnostic-Christian thinking about the Last Things’,
JECH 7 (2017) 108-120.
1 According to Sayed Hasan Taqizadeh, the most likely date is 26.2.277; see Sayed Hasan Taqizadeh & Walter Bruno

Henning, ‘The Dates of Mani’s Life’, Asia Maior, New Series 6 (1957) 106-121 (107). Cf. the discussion in Alexander
Böhlig (unter Mitwirkung von Jes Peter Asmussen), Die Gnosis, Dritter Band, Der Manichäismus, Zürich-München:
Artemis Verlag 1980, 309-310; Böhlig, ‘Manichäismus’, Theologische Realenzyklopädie 22 (1992) 25-45 (30); Werner
Sundermann, ‘Studien zur kirchengeschichtlichen Literatur der iranischen Manichäer, III’ (1987), repr. in Christiane
Reck, Dieter Weber, Claudia Leurini, Antonio Panaino (eds.), Manichaica Iranica. Ausgewählte Schriften von Werner
Sundermann, I, Roma: Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente 2001, 357-423 (367-369).
2 For general introductions to Mani and Manichaeism, see Samuel N.C. Lieu, Manichaeism in the Later Roman Empire and

Medieval China, Tübingen: Mohr 19922; Iain Gardner & Samuel N.C. Lieu, Manichaean Texts from the Roman Empire,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2004; Johannes van Oort, ‘Mani’; ‘Manichaeism’, in: Wouter J. Hanegraaf (ed.),
Dictionary of Gnosis and Western Esotericism, Vol. I, Leiden–Boston: Brill 2005 (20062), 756-757; 757-765. On Quanzhou,
see esp. Lieu’s contributions to Samuel N.C. Lieu, Lance Eccles, Majella Franzmann, Iain Gardner and Ken Parry,
Medieval Christian and Manichaean Remains from Quanzhou (Zayton) (Corpus Fontium Manichaeorum, Series Archaeologica et
Iconographica 2), Turnhout: Brepols 2012.
3 Ludwig Koenen, ‘Manichaean Apocalypticism at the Crossroads of Iranian, Egyptian, Jewish and Christian Thought’,

in: Luigi Cirillo & Amneris Roselli (eds.), Codex Manichaicus Coloniensis. Atti del Simposio Internazionale (Rende–Amantea 3-7
Mani’s own writings, in particular his so-called Šābuhragān, the text once composed to win šāh-in-
šāh Šābuhr I.4 The selfsame impression we gain from a third writing, the Sermon on the Great War,
which has been transmitted in Coptic and was discovered in Egypt at the end of the 1920s.5 Each
of these writings may be characterized as strongly eschatological.

The Eschatological Cologne Mani Codex

The first important document in this context is the Mani Codex, discovered in Egypt shortly before
1970 and bought by the University of Cologne. 6 On each of its very small pages (4.5 to 3.5 cm) we
find about 23 lines written in Greek majuscels. The tiny parchment codex contains a biography of
the young Mani in the form of accounts by his earliest disciples. Mani grew up in a baptising sect
whose members hailed the Jewish-Christian prophet Elchasaios7 as their founder (ἀρχηγός).8
Reading the Codex, one gets the same impression as when reading Bultmann’s Theologie des
Neuen Testaments. 9 I may call to mind a few of its opening sentences: ‘Jetzt ist die Zeit gekommen!
Die Gottesherrschaft bricht herein! Das Ende is da!’. According to Bultmann and others, Jesus was
an eschatological prophet and he called on his hearers to make a decision (‘Der Ruf zur
Entscheidung’). The crucial sign of the eschaton was the appearance of the prophet Jesus and his call.
From the CMC we learn much the same. The Codex describes the life of Mani as part of
the history of salvation. Its title is Περὶ τῆς γέννης τοῦ σώµατος αὐτοῦ: ‘On the Genesis of His
Body’. ‘Body’ means Mani’s physical body and his church. The CMC is not the work of one author,

settembre 1984), Cosenza: Marra Editore 1986, 285-332. This article is still leading in much of the research on
Manichaean eschatology; the present overview draws on it as well.
4 Last and best edition of all the fragments, with English translation: David Neil MacKenzie, ‘Mani’s Šābuhragān’,

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 42 (1979) 500-534; 43 (1980) 288-310. But also see, for instance,
Manfred Hutter, Manis kosmogonische Šābuhragān-Texte. Edition, Kommentar und literaturgeschichtliche Einordnung der manichäisch-
mittelpersischen Handschriften M 98/99 I und M 7980-7984, Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz 1992 and German translations
of essential parts of the Middle Persian text in Böhlig, Der Manichäismus (n. 1), 234-239.
5 Leading new edition by Nils Arne Pedersen, Manichaean Homilies. With a Number of hitherto unpublished Fragments (Corpus

Fontium Manichaeorum, Series Coptica 2), Turnhout: Brepols 2006, 7-42. See also Pedersen’s doctoral dissertation Studies
in The Sermon on the Great War. Investigations of a Manichaean-Coptic Text from the Fourth Century, Aarhus: Aarhus
University Press 1996 and his ‘Der große Krieg—ein Hauptthema manichäischer Frömmigkeit’, Hallesche Beiträge zur
Orientwissenschaft 26 (1998) 59-72. The still often quoted editio princeps was provided by Hans Jakob Polotsky (mit einem
Beitrag von Hugo Ibscher), Manichäische Homilien, Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer 1934, 7-42. Partial English translation (by
Iain Gardner) with focus on the Sermon’s final passages in: Iain Gardner & Samuel N.C. Lieu, Manichaean Texts from the
Roman Empire, Cambridge: CUP 2004, 221-226; partial German translation in Böhlig, Der Manichäismus (n. 1), 234-239.
6 First preliminary edition: Albert Henrichs & Ludwig Koenen, ‘Ein griechischer Mani- Codex (P. Colon. inv. nr.

4780)’, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 5 (1970) 97-216 [= ‘Vorbericht’]; editio princeps of CMC 1–72,7 in ZPE 19
(1975) 1-85 (with extensive commentary); of CMC 72,8–99,9 in ZPE 32 (1978) 87-199 (with very extensive
commentary); of CMC 99,10–120 in ZPE 44 (1981) 201-318 (with very extensive commentary); of CMC 121–192 in
ZPE 48 (1982) 1-59. An ample commentary on the final section has been published by Cornelia E. Römer, Manis frühe
Missionsreisen nach der Kölner Manibiographie. Textkritischer Kommentar und Erläuterungen zu p. 121–p. 192 des Kölner Mani-
Kodex, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag 1994. A complete edition was published by Ludwig Koenen & Cornelia Römer,
Der Kölner Mani-Kodex: Über das Werden seines Leibes: Kritische Edition aufgrund der von A. Henrichs und L. Koenen besorgten
Erstedition, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag 1988. Moreover, a diplomatic text has been edited by Ludwig Koenen &
Cornelia Römer, Der Kölner Mani-Kodex: Abbildungen und diplomatischer Text, Bonn: Rudolf Habelt 1985.
7 For the main facts (with relevant literature) on Elchasaios (or Alchasai, Elkesai, Elxaios, Elxai), who is said to have

received the revelation written about in the Book of Elchasai in Mesopotamia in 116-117 CE, see my German entry
‘Elkesaiten’ in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 4. Auflage, Band 2 (Tübingen: Mohr 1999, repr. 2008) 1227-1228 (=
English ‘Elkesaites’, Religion Past & Present, vol. 4, Leiden-Boston: Brill 2008, 416).
8 CMC 94, 10-11 (= Koenen & Römer, Mani-Kodex [dipl. Text], 186).
9 Rudolf Bultmann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments. 7. durchg. Auflage hg. v. Otto Merk, Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck) 1977

(latest ed. 2002 as UTB 630).

but comprises excerpts from the testimonies of Mani’s first disciples. Just as the evangelists gave
their account of Jesus’ deeds and words (cf. Acts 1:1), so these witnesses give their account of
Mani’s. Their names are, for instance, Salmaios the Ascetic; Baraies the Teacher; Timotheos;
Abjesous the Teacher; Innaios the brother of Zabed; Za[cheas?]; Kustaios, the Son of the Treasure
of Life. We will come across Kustaios again as the author of the Sermon on the Great War.
What is the CMC’s essence? It is the revelation of τὰ γενόµενα (‘what happened’) and τὰ
γενησόµενα (‘what will happen’).10 In other words, Mani’s revelation deals with the entire past,
which includes the termination of the original separate state of light and darkness, their ensuing
mixture, and the first wars: and it deals with the future, the real ἔσχατα including the Great War, the
Last Judgment, and the restoration of the original separate state of light and darkness. Evil will be
enclosed in the βῶλος or Lump. So, τὰ ἔσχατα ὡς τά πρῶτα: the end like the beginning? Nearly,
for as we will see there are important differences.
Let us first notice how Mani is depicted as an eschatological prophet. To the members of
the community of Jewish Baptists, he tells that their daily washings of food and body are of no
avail. Real purity is the purity through γνῶσις. I quote: ‘It is the separation of light from darkness,
death from life, living waters from turbid ones’ (84); ‘... you [should keep] the commands of the
Saviour (= Christ) [so that] he may redeem [your] soul from [destruction] and from (85) perdition’.
Mani then tells, in this same excerpt from Baraies the Teacher, that some member of the
community accepted his words (‘they treated me as prophet and teacher’, 86), but that the majority
rejected him. They said: ‘Is [this] he concerning whom our teachers prophesied when they said, “A
young man will [rise up from] our [midst] and will come [forward] as a new [teacher] (87) to call
into question our whole doctrine, just as our forefathers have spoken of the Rest of the garment”?’
The forefathers meant here are the Jewish prophets of old.
Because these Baptists regarded Elchasaios as their founder (ἀρχηγός, 94), we may explain
the rather enigmatic expression ‘the Rest of the Garment’ (ἡ ἀνάπαυσις τοῦ ἐνδύµατος) as
referring to the Elkesaite idea that the true prophet, having dressed himself in the ‘garments’ of the
body of the succesive incarnations, finally entered the Rest (ἀνάπαυσις). In other words, they
considered Elkesai as the final eschatological prophet. But some of them wondered whether Mani
could be part of this tradition: was he the final prophet? The majority of the Baptists denied this
and regarded him as one of the apocalyptic pseudo-prophets; they even tried to put Mani to
death.11
We see here that not only Mani’s opponents stood in the Jewish-Christian tradition of the
prophet Elxai, who received the apocalyptic revelation written in the Book of Elchasai in
Mesopotamia in the year 116 or 117,12 but also Mani’s disciples. The difference is that the latter
considered Mani to be the final prophet. It could be that they used the expression ‘seal of the
prophets’, although this title is transmitted only in medieval Muslim sources such as the writings of
al-Biruni and al-Sharastānī and thus may be an expression only typical to Muslim writers.13 Anyhow,
in the CMC, Mani and his importance is discussed in eschatological terms. After quoting a number

10 Cf. CMC 26, 1-2 (= Koenen & Römer, Mani-Kodex [dipl. Text], 52). According to the letter, one may also translate
(cf. e.g. Judith M. Lieu and Samuel N.C. Lieu in Gardner & Lieu, Manichaean Texts [n. 1], 51): ‘... those things which had
happened or were to happen ...’. Or, in rather archaic English: ‘that which will come to pass’.
11 See the further course of the controversy described in CMC 94-106 (= Koenen & Römer, Mani-Kodex [dipl. Text],

186-210). For a fine analysis of context and background, see John C. Reeves, ‘The “Elchasaite” Sanhedrin of the
Cologne Mani Codex in Light of Second Temple Jewish Sectarian Sources’, Journal of Jewish Studies 42 (1991) 68-91.
12 Cf. above, n. 7.
13 See e.g. Gedaliahu G. Stroumsa, ‘Seal of the Prophets: the Nature of a Manichaean Metaphor’, Jerusalem Studies in

Arabic and Islam 7 (1986) 61-74; Carsten Colpe, Das Siegel der Propheten. Historische Beziehungen zwischen Judentum,
Judenchristentum, Heidentum und frühem Islam, Berlin: Institut Kirche und Judentum 1989.
of (new, i.e., previously unknown) Jewish apocalypses,14 and also some passages from the apostle
Paul (2 Cor 12; Gal 1), the CMC states that Mani’s revelation is the final one and that his disciples
became ‘the seal of his apostleship’ (οἱ δὲ µαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἐγίγνοντο σφραγὶς αὐτοῦ τῆς
ἀποστολῆς, 72).15
In the Coptic Kephalaia, chapters on Manichaean doctrine that seem to have been directly
inspired by Mani’s own teachings, it is stated that Mani was sent to the last generation.16 He was not
only Jesus’ final prophet, but also the Paraclete.17 In Mani’s own words—such as transmitted by his
disciple Timotheos—his function was ‘to scatter the bread on my people’.18 Even Augustine
transmits that some of Mani’s disciples considered his name to be Mannichaios (with double N),
i.e., the shedder of manna.19 Jewish tradition has it that the miracle of manna (Ex. 16) would be
repeated at the end of the world.20
In sum: the CMC depicts Mani’s life within an eschatological setting. His deeds and words
herald the last days. His life initiates the final wars of light and darkness, good against evil. In all of
these features, he is heir of Jewish and Jewish-Christian eschatological expectations.

The Šābuhragān and the Sermon on the Great War

The same characteristics of Mani’s mission one discerns in the fragments of the Šābuhragān, the
Middle Persian text Mani once composed for Šābuhr I.21 The aim of this writing was to win the
Zoroastrian king and, for this reason, the Manichaean deities and other aspects of the worlds of
light and darkness bear Persian names. Several sections of the Šābuhragān are deeply influenced by
the Synoptic Apocalypse (Mk 13; Mt 24; Lk 21) and the eschatological twenty-fifth chapter of
Matthew.22
This essential feature of the Šābuhragān is also clearly reflected in the Coptic Sermon on the
Great War.23 The term ‘Great War’ seems to be Iranian,24 but much in the sermon is clearly inspired

14 See e.g. Ithamar Gruenwald, ‘Manichaeism and Judaism in Light of the Cologne Mani Codex’, ZPE 50 (1983) 29-45;

John C. Reeves, Heralds of that Good Realm: Syro-Mesopotamian Gnosis and Jewish Traditions, Leiden-New York-Boston: Brill
1996.
15 Thus the reading according to Koenen & Römer, Mani-Kodex [1988], 50. Their diplomatic edition (Koenen & Römer,

Mani-Kodex [dipl. Text], 142) reads σφραγεις. For the expression, one may compare the apostle Paul in 1 Cor 9:2.
16 Kephalaia 179, 16-17, ed. and transl. by Hans Jakob Polotsky & Alexander Böhlig, Kephalaia, Band I, Stuttgart:

Kohlhammer 1940, 179: ‘Ich dagegen bin jetzt in dieser letzten Generation (γενεά) gesandt worden’. Cf. the English
translation by Iain Gardner, The Kephalaia of the Teacher, Leiden-New York-Köln: E.J. Brill 1995 (= Leiden-Boston: Brill
2016), 189: ‘Furthermore, I myself was sent now, in this last generation’.
17 Cf. CMC 70, which speaks of ‘τοῦ παρακλήτου πνεύµατος τῆς ἀληθείας’ (Lieu & Lieu in Lieu & Gardner,

Manichaean Texts, 58: ‘... through the Paraclete, the spirit of truth’). On Mani as the Paraclete promised in Jn 14, see e.g.
Werner Sundermann, ‘Der Paraklet in der ostmanichäischen Überlieferung’ (1988), now in Manichaica Iranica (n. 1), 2,
813-824 (with Addenda et Corrigenda, 825); Johannes van Oort, ‘The Paraclete Mani as the Apostle of Jesus Christ and
the Origins of a New Christian Church’, in: Anthony Hilhorst (ed.), The Apostolic Age in Patristic Thought, Leiden-Boston:
Brill 2004, 139-157 [this collection, Ch. 6*].
18 CMC 107: ‘στάξαι δὲ τὸν σῖτον ἐπὶ τοῦ λαοῦ µου’.
19 Augustine, haer. 46, 1: ‘... Mannichaeum uocant, quasi manna fundentem’.
20 Cf. e.g. the annotations of Henrichs & Koenen to CMC 107 in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 44 (1981) 265 n.

361 and the still leading study of Peder Borgen, Bread from Heaven. An Exegetical Study of the Conception of Manna in the
Gospel of John and the Writings of Philo, Leiden etc.: E.J. Brill 1965.
21 See for MacKenzie’s text edition and translation, n. 2 above.
22 This last aspect is specifically discussed in Manfred Hutter, ‘Mt 25:31-46 in der Deutung Manis’, Novum Testamentum

33 (1991) 276-282.
23 See for the editions of Pedersen and Polotsky, n. 4 above.
24 As repeatedly stressed by Geo Widengren; see already his Mani und der Manichäismus, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1961, 70

and 150 n. 3.
by Jewish and Christian traditions25 (including—perhaps—St John’s Apocalypse26). The Sermon or
Logos is said to be composed by Kustaios,27 one of Mani’s disciples whom we just met as one of the
authors of the CMC. Clearly the Sermon speaks of persecutions, in all probability those under
Bahrām II (277-293) and perhaps those under Hormizd II (303-310).28 The text was originally
written at the end of the third or the beginning of the fourth century, somewhere in Mesopotamia
and in all likelihood in East Aramaic.29
The Logos fully deals with Manichaean eschatology. It opens with apocalyptic predictions
about a time of disaster: robberies, wars, battles; death, hunger, and refugees.30 Then follows a
discussion of the wars of the saviours against Error (πλάνη): Zarathustra against the pre-
Zoroastrian religion; Jesus against the errant Jews; Mani against the Magi.31 As is the case in the
CMC, according to the Sermon the final cycle of history begins with Mani; his mission is painted as
ending in new disaster and error, and the coming of the Great War.32 Weeping is a strong
characteristic of eschatological feelings; one may compare Jesus, Enoch (in the Apocalypse of
Enoch33), Ezra (in 4 Ezra): all true prophets are full of tears.34 After the Great War follows the
peaceful rule of the Great King.35 This rule lasts from the end of the war until—within Mani’s own
generation—the Antichrist comes.36 During this peaceful time, the end is like the beginning and
even trees will speak.37 As is the case with the pseudo-prophets in the Šābuhragān,38 the Antichrist
will be defeated quickly.39 Then comes Jesus the Splendour (called Xradešahr in the Šābuhragān, i.e.,
the God of the World of Wisdom, or Nous40) and the Last Judgment.41 This Judgment is much like
in Mt 25: the sheep (i.e., the Manichaean Elect and the worthy Auditors) will be separated from the

25 See in particular the analysis of Pedersen in his dissertation Studies in The Sermon on the Great War (n. 5) and the
brief annotations in his text edition in Manichaean Homilies (n. 5), 7-42.
26 Cf. Pedersen, in particular the diagrams of biblical allusions and quotations in Studies, 53-64 (which are followed by

thorough analyses of the available material, 64-79). As regards Revelation, Pedersen concludes (75-79) that its use by the
Manichaeans is ‘possible’, although one should bear in mind (1) that an expression such as ‘the cup of wrath’ (Homilies
7,25) or ‘the second death’ (Kephalaia 104.106.150) could have been derived from other (Jewish) texts, and (2) that the
Manichaean New Testament seems to have consisted only of ‘the Gospel’ and ‘the Apostle’ (i.e., Paul) (cf. e.g. Michel
Tardieu, ‘Principes de l’exégèse manichéenne du Nouveau Testament’, in: idem (ed.)., Les règles de l’interprétation, Paris:
Cerf 1987, 123-146). For the ‘possible’ reminiscences of Revelation in the Sermon, see also the corresponding annotations
in Manichaean Homilies, 7 and 14.
27 See e.g. the page headings in Pedersen’s edition, 27; 31; 35 and 39 [the last two headings are missing in Polotsky’s

edition]; cf. Pedersen, Studies, 87-93.

28 Cf. e.g. Pedersen, Studies, 87.
29 E.g. Pedersen, Studies, 80-87; idem, ‘Der große Krieg’ (n. 5), 62.
30 Homilies 8,6-10,28. It is not easy to make a clear-cut division of the text. For convenience’s sake, I mainly follow

Koenen’s global division (Koenen, ‘Manichaean Apocalypticism’ [n. 3], 298-307). For Pedersen’s perhaps more
sophisticated summary of the Sermon’s sections, see his Studies, 170-171.
31 Homilies 10,28-11.
32 Homilies 12-21,27.
33 Cf. CMC 58 ff.
34 On weepings, see in particular Pedersen, Studies, 113-115 and 200-222. Pedersen considers the possibility that the

eschatological weepings of the Manichaeans are connected with their Bema-festival and that they possessed ‘books of
weepings’, one of which (The Weeping) circulated under Mani’s name.
35 Homilies 21,28-33. It is important to note that in the Elchasaite tradition (cf. e.g. Epiphanius, Panarion 19,3.4) the

Great King is Christ.

36 Homilies 34.
37 Cf. CMC 10,1 ff. and 98,9 ff. for the speaking of trees (thus preventing the suffering of the divine Light). One may

compare Testament of Abraham 3,1-3 and the Genesis Apocryphon found in cave 1 of Qumran.
38 Šābuhragān 1-10, ed. & transl. MacKenzie, 504-505.
39 Cf. Homilies 28,4.
40 Cf. e.g. Šābuhragān 17, transl. MacKenzie, 505.
41 Homilies 35-38. Cf. Šābuhragān 42 ff., ed. and transl. MacKenzie, 504 ff.
goats.42 Under the rule of Jesus the Splendour, the gods, angels and Elect will live together in a new
golden age.43 Again, the trees will be green and talk; all evil will be removed from the world and
humankind will listen to the true religion.44 Then follows the dissolution and destruction of the
world. Through the Porter or Omophoros (Ὠµοφόρος),45 i.e., the Column of Glory or Milky Way,
identified with the cosmic Jesus), the sons of the Living Spirit will leave the world.46 Primal Man
will unveil his face and attract them to himself in Paradise.47 The whole earth will be subjected to
ἐκπύρωσις:48 fire sets free the last particles of Light. Darkness will be imprisoned in a βῶλος.49
Curiously, this βῶλος is situated in the middle of the New Aion, while both structures have
already been built at the time of the creation of the world. May we call this some sort of supra-
lapsarism?50 Or absolute determinism?51 Paradise as the outer sphere and the New Aion as the inner

42 On the (fairly complicated) question of the use of Mt 25 in Mani’s and Kustaios’ text repectively, see Pedersen,
Studies, 127 ff.
43 Homilies 39,1-18. Cf. Šābuhragān 130 ff., ed. and transl. MacKenzie, 508 ff.
44 An interesting feature in this context is that the believers, if they wish so, ‘will strip themselves of their body, and

receive the victory with him [i.e., Jesus], and find the road levelled from him up to the kingdom of life’ (Pedersen,
Homilies, 39, 15-18). Another feature is that, according Šābuhragān 130 ff. (MacKenzie, 509), ‘when god Xradešahr [i.e.,
Jesus] will care for the world, then will day, month and year come to an end ...’. The last characteristic is also stressed
in, for instance, 2 Henoch 17.
45 Mentioned only once in the Sermon as we have it (Polotsky, Homilien, 40,6; Pedersen, Homilies, 40,6), but several times

in the Kephalaia. As his name (‘one who bears on the shoulders’) indicates, this figure is also identified as Atlas, but in
this quality he seems to have another role. In an explanatory note to his translation of Keph. 25,23-25 (ed. Polotsky &
Böhlig [n. 5]), Böhlig, Der Manichäismus (n. 1), 328 n. 11 remarks: ‘Die Säule der Herrlichkeit ist nicht mit dem fünften
Sohn des Lebendigen Geistes zu identifizieren. Weil dieser, der Atlas bzw. Omophoros, den Kosmos trägt, heißt er so.
Weil die Säule der Herrlichkeit aber das Licht aus der Welt emporträgt, hat die den Beinamen «der große Omophoros»
bekommen. «Groß» dient hier zur Differenzierung’. Sarah Clackson a.o., Dictionary of Manichaean Texts, vol. 1, Texts from
the Roman Empire (Corpus Fontium Manichaeorum, Subsidia II), Turnhout: Brepols 1998, 88 s.v. ὠµοφόρος, list—apart
from the occurences in the Coptic Manichaica as ‘Omophorus, Atlas, Burden-bearer, Porter’—the texts in which it is
used in epithets of the Column of Glory, the Perfect Man and in epithets of the Sons of the Living Spirit.
46 Homilies 39,18-41,11. One may compare Šābuhragān 159 ff., ed. and transl. MacKenzie, 511 ff.
47 Koenen, ‘Manichaean Apocalypticism’ (n. 3), 304 compares the Sermon’s account that the appearance of First or

Original Man results in the destruction of the world with Apoc. 20:11: on the appearance of ‘the white throne and the
One sitting upon it’, ‘the earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them’.
48 Here I use (following Koenen, ‘Manichaean Apocalypticism’, 304) the general eschatological-apocalyptical term, with

the annotation that—as far as I am aware—the term is not used in Greek or (as a loan word) Coptic Manichaica.
49 Strictly speaking, the term βῶλος does not appear in the Sermon, but cf. Pedersen, Studies, 379 ff. Still the best study

on the Manichaean βῶλος is François Decret, ‘Le «globus horribilis» dans l’eschatologie manichéenne. D’après les
traités de saint Augustin’, in: Mélanges d’historie des religions offerts à Henri-Charles Puech, Paris: Presses Universitaires de
France 1974, 487-492 (repr. in idem, Essais sur l’Église manichéenne en Afrique du Nord et à Rome aut temps de saint Augustin.
Recueil d’études, Roma: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum 1995, 7-13). Apart from the βῶλος (for the incarceration
of the male demons and evil doers), several texts—probably including Kustaios’ Sermon; cf. Polotsky, Homilien, 41 n. to
line 6; Pedersen, Studies, 379; idem, Homilies, 41— also mention the τάφος (for the incarceration of the female ones).
50 The subject of supra- (and infra-) lapsarism has been much discussed in Calvinist dogmatics. See e.g. Karl Barth,

Kirchliche Dogmatik, II, 2: Die Offenbarung Gottes, Zollikon-Zürich: Evangelischer Verlag 1942, 136 ff. With regard to the
supra- and infralapsarianism discussion Gerrit Cornelis Berkouwer, Divine Election, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1960, 254,
asks ‘whether theology has not become a gnosis which can never become quite transparant to the Church and can never
really affect the Church’s belief’ (his italics).
51 As a rule, Greek and other Eastern church fathers laid (absolute) determinism as a charge against Mani and his

followers. See e.g. Wassilios W. Klein, Die Argumentation in den griechisch-christlichen Antimanichaica, Wiesbaden: Otto
Harrassowitz 1991, virtually passim, and the discussion (with ample references to texts and studies) in Nils Arne
Pedersen, Demonstrative Proof in Defence of God: A Study of Titus of Bostra’s Contra Manichaeos, Leiden-Boston: Brill 2004,
173 ff.
sphere encircle the βῶλος.52 In the New Aion, the Father of Light unveils his ‘image’ (εἰκῶν) to the
reedemed and all light will merge into Him.53
Kustaios’ Logos speaks of the New Paradise and the Eternal Paradise. The Eternal Paradise
appears to refer to the original kingdom of God the Father of Greatness and the New Paradise to
the New Aion of Primal Man or Christ. It is not entirely clear whether the New Aion will last
eternally like the Father’s eternal Paradise.54 If not, one may speak of some sort of Messianic
intermezzo,55 after which Christ ‘will hand over the Kingdom to God the Father’ (1 Cor. 15:24-28).
At the end of the Logos one finds a remark on the ἀνδριάς or (Last) Statue.56 Unfortunately
the passage is damaged. From other sources57 we know that this Statue forms itself from the last
particles of Light liberated by the ἐκπύρωσις: it becomes ‘the Perfect Man’. In all likelihood, this
term is reminiscent of Eph 4:13 and refers to (the cosmic) Jesus.58

Concluding Remarks

My overview is brief and could be supplemented with many details.59 What strikes me most is the
typical Judaeo-Christian substratum underlying many features of Manichaean eschatology. These
features are due to Mani’s orgins in a Jewish-Christian kibbutz of Elkesaites.
It would be possible to provide a fairly different description of Manichaean eschatology,60
and even to present an account featuring a dizzying number of names derived from Persian and

52 Graphically visualized, the βῶλος is also the lowest place.

53 In the words of Kustaios (Pedersen, Homilies, 41,14-16): ‘The veils will be rolled back and gathered, and he will unveil
his image for them. All the light will submerge into him’. Cf. Pedersen, Studies, 394-395 and—in particular for the
picture of the veil and the revelation of the Father—idem, ‘The Veil and the Revelation of the Father of Greatness’, in:
Jacob Albert van den Berg, Annemaré Kotzé, Tobias Nicklas & Madeleine Scopello (eds.), ‘In Search of Truth’: Augustine,
Manichaeism and other Gnosticism. Studies for Johannes van Oort at Sixty, Leiden-Boston: Brill 2011, 229-234 (with specific
reference to Rev. 20:4 and Mt 5:8 as its possible background c.q. parallels).
54 As stated above, it is—like the βῶλος—‘built’ at the time of the creation of the world. On this and other activities of

the ‘Great Builder’ or ‘Great/First Architect’, see e.g. Kephalaia 82, 8-12 and 118,8-12.
55 The term (in the sense that Christ’s incarnation and subsequent kingdom was God’s temporary ‘emergency measure’

in reaction to sin and the Fall) was coined and advocated in particular by the Utrecht theologian Arnold A. van Ruler in
his extensive dogmatic writings, to begin with in his Groningen dissertation De vervulling der wet: een dogmatische studie over
de verhouding van openbaring en existentie, Nijkerk: Callenbach 1947. The term was taken up by e.g. Jürgen Moltmann, but
mainly filled with a different meaning.
56 Cf Polotsky, Homilien, 41 l. 21, who translates ‘Ur[mensch]’ and in a note remarks: ‘Auch nach den Kephalaia soll der

Urmensch im Neuen Äon “der ἀρχηγός seiner Brüder” sein’; cf. Pedersen, Homilies 41 l. 21, with references to Kephalaia
28,34-29,4 and 54,19-24 for the eschatological role of the Last Statue.
57 E.g. the Kephalaia; see all places indicated in Gardner’s translation, The Kephalaia of the Teacher (n. 17), 300 s.v. ‘Last

Statue’; cf. Clackson a.o., Dictionary (n. 45), 61.

58 Cf. Stroumsa, ‘Aspects’ (n. 60, below), 173 who also refers to Psalm-Book 59,17: ‘Jésus est l’Homme parfait dans la

colonne (στύλος)’.
59 Such as, for instance, the curious teaching that the world fire will last for exactly 1468 years. Perhaps this idea is

borrowed from Egyptian thinking: a Sothis period of 1461 years plus an eschatological ‘year week’ of seven years. See
Charles J. Ogden, ‘The 1468 Years of the World-Conflagration in Manichaeism’, Dr. Modi Memorial Volume, Bombay:
The Fort Printing Press 1930, 102-105, who for the ‘apocalyptic “week” refers to 4 Ezra 7:43 in particular (105). His
opinion is endorsed by Stroumsa, ‘Aspects’ (n. 60, below), 167 n. 20; Koenen, ‘Manichaean Apocalypticism’ (n. 3),
316.321-326; Sundermann, ‘Manichean Eschatology’ (n. 60, below), 572a/63. But also see Hermann Stocks,
‘Manichäische Miszellen II: Eine neue Erklärung der 1468 Jahre des manichäischen Weltbrandes’, Zeitschrift für Religions-
und Geistesgeschichte 3 (1951) 258-261, who refers to the chronographic works of Julius Africanus and Hippolytus:
according to Africanus, Jesus’ resurrection happened in the year 5532, while the world will last for 7000 years. In this
way, the eschatological period after Jesus’ resurrection is 1468 years.
60 An original description of Manichaean eschatology, stressing both its Jewish-Christian and Gnostic (mainly Nag

Hammadi) affinities, has been provided by Gedaliahu Guy Stroumsa, ‘Aspects de l’eschatologie manichéenne’, Revue de
Chinese languages.61 These names of gods and other deities are found, however, in texts much
younger and much more syncretistic than the texts discussed above. In the Šābuhragān we hear
Mani’s ipsissima verba and—to a considerable degree—the same goes for the Logos and the CMC.
In essence, Manichaeism is not an offshoot of Iran, but a Gnostic-Christian religion.
Gnostic in the sense that its central message is that the Nous62 rescues the Psyche from the Hyle.
Christian, because in essence all Saviour figures in the Manichaean myth are representations of
Christ.63

l’Histoire des Religions 198 (1981) 163-181 (repr. in idem, Savoir et Salut: Traditions juives et tentations dualistes dans le christianisme
ancien, Paris: Cerf 1992, 259-273). Iain Gardner, ‘The Eschatology of Manichaeism as a Coherent Doctrine’, Journal of
Religious History 18 (1993) 257-273, offers a detailed account on the basis of Western (mainly the Kephalaia) and a
number of Eastern sources. More general accounts are provided by Werner Sundermann, ‘Manichean Eschatology’,
Encyclopedia Iranica 8 (1992) 569-575 (repr. in his Manichaica Iranica [n. 1], 1, 59-72 [with Bibliography and Addenda])
and in the less reliable (and mainly outdated) overview by A.V. Williams Jackson, ‘A Sketch of the Manichaean
Doctrine Concerning the Future Life’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 50 (1930) 177-198.
61 See e.g. Desmond Durkin Meisterernst (ed.), Dictionary of Manichaean Texts, vol. III,1: Texts from Central Asia and China

(Manichaean Texts in Middle Persian and Parthian) (Corpus Fontium Manichaeorum, Subsidia III, 1), Turnhout: Brepols 2004
and Gunner B. Mikkelsen, Dictionary of Manichaean Texts, vol. III,4: Texts from Central Asia and China (Manichaean Texts in
Chinese) (Corpus Fontium Manichaeorum, Subsidia III, 4), Turnhout: Brepols 2006.
62 I.e., in essence, the revealing Wisdom or Gnosis which comes from the spiritual and eternal world and liberates from

the temporal world of matter.

63 See above for (in any case!) the eschatological figures of Jesus the Splendour sive Xradešahr; the Omophoros; Primal

Man; and the Perfect Man. For more eschatological representations of Jesus, see Eugen Rose, Die manichäische
Christologie, Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz 1979, esp. 132-140 for his analysis of Mani’ Šābuhragān and Kustaios’ Logos.