The 'Demiurge', 'The Craftsman' or 'Creator', in some
belief systems, is the
deity responsible for the creation of the
physical universe.
Originally, the demiurge was described as a divine entity in the works of Plato circa 360BC, but later in
Gnosticism the term refers to the evil creator god of the material world.
The demiurge appears in a number of different religious and philosophical systems, most notably
Platonism and later
Gnosticism.
Plato uses the term to mean the omni-benevolent
creation. For Plato, the demiurge is a creator (of the laws or the heaven) or the creator (of the World) in
''Timaeus''.
The neoplatonist
Plotinus identified the demiurge as ''
nous'' (divine reason), the first emanation of "
the One" (see
monad).
Neoplatonists personified the demiurge as
Zeus.
In
Gnosticism, the material universe is seen as
evil, and the demiurge is the evil creator of the physical world.
Alternative Gnostic names for the Demiurge, include 'Yaldabaoth', '
Yao or
Iao', 'Ialdabaoth' and several other variants.
The Gnostics identified the Demiurge with the Hebrew God
Yahweh (see the
Sethians and
Ophites). He is known as 'Ptahil' in
Mandaeanism.
The word ''demiurge'' is derived from the ancient
Greek (''dēmiourgós'', Latinized ''demiurgus''). In Classical Greek, the word means “artisan” or “craftsman” (literally "worker in the service of the people":
(''dēmios'') “the people”(deriv. of dêmos the people) + (''ergon'') “ worker”).
Platonism and Neoplatonism
Plato has the speaker Timaeus refer to the Demiurge frequently in the
Socratic dialogue ''
Timaeus'' circa
360 BC. The title character refers to the demiurge as the entity who “fashioned and shaped” the material world. Timaeus describes the Demiurge as unreservedly benevolent and hence desirous of a world as good as possible. The world remains allegedly imperfect, however, because the Demiurge had to work on pre-existing
chaotic matter.
Plato's Demiurge is a fleshing out of
Hesiod's cosmology from Hesiod's work
Theogeny, within the realm of dialectical discourse between Timaeus and the other guests at the gathering in the dialog of Timaeus (also see
Symposium). The concept of artist or creator and even the Platonist conflict between the poet and philosopher (see Plato's
Republic) has a link in Plato's expression of the demiurge in his works.
For Neoplatonist writers like
Plotinus, however, the demiurge represents a second creator or cause (see
Dyad). The first and highest God is the One, the source or the
Monad. The Monad
emanated the
Nous, which Plotinus referred to figuratively as the demiurge. In this he claimed to reveal Plato's true meaning, a doctrine he learned from Platonistic tradition that did not appear outside the academy or in Plato's text.
Plotinus also elucidates the equation of matter with nothing or non-being in his
Enneads.
[1] Some writers have seen this as an alternate expression of Biblical doctrine.
[2]
Their idea of clarification of Plato's teachings continued through the Middle Platonists such as
Numenius to the
Neoplatonists such as
Plotinus.
The Demiurge is not the supreme deity of Plato or Neoplatonism. As
Nous, the demiurge is part of the three ordering principles:
#
arche - the source of all things,
#
logos - the underlying order that is hidden beneath appearances,
#
harmonia - numerical
ratios in
mathematics.
Plato in
Timaeus states that it is "''blasphemy to state that the universe was not created in the image of perfection or heaven''". The Demiurge creates the Cosmos in the image of the eternal and transcendent Living Thing in the world of
Forms.
Before
Numenius of Apamea and Plotinus'
Enneads, no Platonic works ontologically clarified the Demiurge from the allegory in Plato's
Timaeus. The idea of Demiurge was however addressed before Plotinus in the works of Christian writer
Justin Martyr who built his understanding of the demiurge on the works of Numenius.
[3]
In relation to the Gods familiar from mythology the Demiurge is identified as
Zeus within Plotinus' works.
[4]
Gnosticism
A lion-faced deity found on a Gnostic gem in
Bernard de Montfaucon’s ''L’antiquité expliquée et représentée en figures'' may be a depiction of the Demiurge.
Like Plato, Gnosticism also presents a distinction between the highest, unknowable “alien God” and the demiurgic “creator” of the material. However, in contrast to Plato, several systems of Gnostic thought present the Demiurge as antagonistic to the will of the Supreme Being: his act of creation occurs in unconscious imitation of the divine model, and thus is fundamentally flawed, or else is formed with the malevolent intention of entrapping aspects of the divine ''in'' materiality. Thus, in such systems, the Demiurge acts as a solution to the
problem of evil. In the ''
Apocryphon of John'' circa 200AD (several versions of which are found in the
Nag Hammadi library), the Demiurge has the name “Yaltabaoth,” and proclaims himself as God:
:''“Now the
archon (ruler) who is weak has three names. The first name is Yaltabaoth, the second is
Saklas (“fool”), and the third is
Samael. And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, ‘I am God and there is no other God beside me,’ for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come.”''
[5]
Yaldabaoth
“Yaldabaoth” literally means “Child, come here” in a
Semitic language. For example, the
Hebrew word for “young girl” is “yalda,” and for “come” is “bo.” Thus, most probably “yaldabaoth” is a declension of “young girl” and “come,” together meaning “young girl, come hither” (the language’s identification as Hebrew itself is doubtful).
Gnostic myth recounts that
Sophia (Greek, literally meaning “wisdom”), the Demiurge’s mother and a partial aspect of the divine
Pleroma or “Fullness,” desired to create something apart from the divine totality, and without the receipt of divine assent. In this abortive act of separate creation, she gave birth to the monstrous Demiurge and, being ashamed of her deed, she wrapped him in a cloud and created a throne for him within it. The Demiurge, isolated, did not behold his mother, nor anyone else, and thus concluded that only he himself existed, being ignorant of the superior levels of reality that were his birth-place.
The Gnostic myths describing these events are full of intricate nuances portraying the declination of aspects of the divine into human form; this process occurs through the agency of the Demiurge who, having stolen a portion of power from his mother, sets about a work of creation in unconscious imitation of the superior Pleromatic realm. Thus Sophia’s power becomes enclosed within the material forms of humanity, themselves entrapped within the material universe: the goal of Gnostic movements was typically the awakening of this spark, which permitted a return by the subject to the superior, non-material realities which were its primal source. (See
Sethian Gnosticism.)
Under the name of 'Nebro', Yaldabaoth is called an
angel in the
apocryphal ''
Gospel of Judas''. He is first mentioned in “The Cosmos, Chaos, and the Underworld” as one of the twelve angels to come “into being [to] rule over chaos and the [underworld].” He comes from
heaven, his “face flashed with fire and whose appearance was defiled with blood.” Nebro’s name means rebel. Nebro creates six angels in addition to the angel
Saklas to be his assistants. These six in turn create another twelve angels “with each one receiving a portion in the heavens.”
Samael
“
Samael” literally means “Blind God” or “God of the Blind” in
Aramaic (
Syriac ''sæmʕa-ʔel''). But this being is considered not only blind, or ignorant of its own origins, but may in addition be evil; its name is also found in
Judaica as the
Angel of Death and in Christian
demonology. This leads to a further comparison with
Satan.
Another alternative title for the Demiurge, “Saklas,” is Aramaic for “fool” (Syriac ''sækla'' “the foolish one”).
Samael can also mean "Poison of God." (the el is "of God"). Sm or Sama is the word for poison or venom.
[6] This is from Jewish folklore.
Yahweh
Some Gnostic philosophers (notably
Marcion of Sinope and the
Sethians) identify the Demiurge with
Yahweh, the
God of the
Old Testament, in opposition and contrast to the God of the
New Testament. Still others equated the being with
Satan.
Catharism apparently inherited their idea of Satan as the creator of the evil world directly or indirectly from Gnosticism. Or, they may well have gotten the idea directly from the New Testament, which refers to Satan as “The God [‘ho theos’] of this age” in Second Corinthians 4:4. Also, the New Testament asserts that the “whole world lies in the power of the evil one” in 1 John 5:19. Though nowhere in the New Testament is the creator of the world or the universe identified as Satan, although Yahweh declares in Isaiah 45:7 that He “makes light and creates darkness [Hebrew "choshekh"]. Nor in the Old (see the
Septuagint) or New Testament is nature or earth created by the creator referred to as evil.
For some Satan is in character being the Father of the original lie, as the creator of the physical world as we know it; having coerced the first sin representing human kind missing of the mark. This distinguishes the God of the Old Testament from the God of the New; the God of the New possessing a single purpose unblemished by the uncertainty that duality implies.
Neoplatonism and Gnosticism
It appears that Gnosticism attributed falsehood, fallen or evil to the concept of a creator in at least the Judeo-Christian and
Hellenic paganism traditions. Though sometimes the creator is from a fallen, ignorant or lesser rather than evil perspective in some Gnosticism traditions (see
Valentinian). The Neoplatonic philosopher Plotinus addressed within his works what he saw as un-Hellenic and blasphemous to the demiurge of Plato. An example of vilifying the Judeo-Christian creator would be to attribute the term “Kosmokrator” (found in the New Testament) to the Old Testament creator as the fallen Gnostic demiurge (see
Marcion and the
Cathars). Though this would be at one point also to diverge from
Philo and
Plato as well as the New Testament. If one sees the attribute of Creatorship as inherent in the concept of “God,” then the title “The God of this Age” applied to Satan becomes a powerful indicator that Satan is indeed the creator. Other modern-day Cathars see a further indication of this in the epithet “Kosmokrator”
Koine Greek, kosmokratoras, which literally means cosmos-sovereign, or even cosmos-might, which is applied to Satan in Ephesians 6:12, as a possible further indication of the creatorship of Satan and his identity with the Demiurge.
However, “Kosmokrator”—with cosmos (Greek κόσμο) and κράτορας ("kratia"), as in
dēmokratikós, or "
democratic" does not mean to create but to rule, direct or influence. Koine Greek κοσμοκράτορας, which literally means "world-ruler" and is applied to Satan in
Ephesians 6:12, ("against the world-rulers (κοσμοκράτορας/Δείτε επίσης) the darkness of age") would, by this Gnostic interpretation, lead to an indication of the power of Satan and his identity with the Demiurge. This usage would according to some vilify the
logos[7] as it was used by
Heraclitus, meaning the ruling or guiding principle of the universe. This would also be a different understanding of St Paul's passage which was referring to ''men'' of power falling under the influence of evil as in the world-rulers (since the word Kosmokrators in Ephesians is ''plural'' meaning many rulers not one ruler) of the darkness of the age this then meaning many evil rulers not just one.
Neoplatonic Criticism
Gnosticism's conception of the Demiurge was criticised by the Neoplatonist philosopher
Plotinus. Plotinus is noted as the founder of
Neoplatonism, a movement noted as being
orthodox (Neo)Platonism. His criticism is contained in the ninth tractate of the second of the
Enneads. Therein, Plotinus criticizes his opponents for their appropriation of ideas from Plato:
:From Plato come their punishments, their rivers of the underworld and the changing from body to body; as for the plurality they assert in the Intellectual Realm—the Authentic Existent, the Intellectual-Principle, ''the Second Creator and the Soul''—all this is taken over from the Timaeus. (Ennead 2.9.vi; emphasis added from
A. H. Armstrong's introduction to Ennead 2.9)
Of note here is the remark concerning the second Creator and Soul. Plotinus criticizes his opponents for “all the novelties through which they seek to establish a philosophy of their own” which, he declares, “have been picked up outside of the truth”; they attempt to conceal rather than admit their indebtedness to ancient philosophy, which they have corrupted by their extraneous and misguided embellishments. Thus their understanding of the Demiurge is similarly flawed in comparison to Plato’s original intentions. Where as Plato's demiurge is good wishing good on his creation,
gnosticism contends that the demiurge is not only the originator of evil but is evil as well. Hence the title of
Plotinus' refutation "
Enneads" The Second Ennead, Ninth Tractate - Against Those That Affirm the Creator of the Kosmos and the Kosmos Itself to be Evil: [Generally Quoted as "Against the Gnostics"]. Plotinus marks his arguments also with the disconnect or great barrier that is created between the nous or mind's
noumenon (see
Heraclitus) and the material world (
phenomenon) by believing the material world is evil.
This symptom of alienation or
somnolence was also later expressed by
Eric Voegelin in his critique of Gnosticism.
[8]
The majority view tends to understand Plotinus’ opponents as being a Gnostic sect—certainly, (specifically
Sethian) several such groups were present in
Alexandria and elsewhere about the
Mediterranean during Plotinus’ lifetime, and several of his criticisms bear specific similarity to Gnostic doctrine (Plotinus pointing to the gnostic doctrine of Sophia and her emission of the Demiurge is most notable amongst these similarities). The Body and the cosmos as a prison or evil. Scholars of note who have held this view include
A.H. Armstrong, who published a highly influential translation of the ''Enneads'' in
1966, through the
Harvard University Press. As well as modern scholar
John D Turner and scholar
John M. Dillon.
However, other scholars such as
Christos Evangeliou have contended that Plotinus’ opponents might be better described as simply “Christian Gnostics,” for the reason that several of Plotinus’ criticisms are as applicable to orthodox Christian doctrine as they are to Gnosticism. Also, considering the evidence from the time, Evangeliou felt the definition of the term “Gnostics” was unclear. Thus, though the former understanding certainly enjoys the greatest popularity, the identification of Plotinus’ opponents as Gnostic is not without some contention. Currently in the case of Christos Evangeliou it is yet to be seen if he still holds this view. One since Plotinus' teacher and founder of Neoplatonism
Ammonius Saccas was a noted Christian and Plotinus never mentions Christianity in any of his works where as Plotinus' pupil
Porphyry names Christians by name in Porphyrys' Against the Christians. Also later
A. H. Armstrong identified the “Gnostics” that Plotinus was attacking as Jewish and Pagan in his introduction to the tract in his translation of the
Enneads. Armstrong eluding to Gnosticism being a sort of
Hellenic philosophy heresy of sorts, who later engaged Christianity (see
Neoplatonism and Gnosticism) and Neoplatonism. Armstrong did this by using Michelle Puerch’s study of the Sethian library found at
Nag Hammadi as the basis that all Gnostic groups shared a “common” core or library of text from which they drew common or core beliefs. These core beliefs are defined in works like the
Apocalypse of Adam.
John D. Turner professor of religious studies at University of Nebraska and famed translator and editor of the Nag Hammadi library stated that the text Plotinus and his students read was Sethian gnosticism which predates Christianity, see
Neoplatonism and Gnosticism. It appears that Plotinus attempted to clarify how the philosophers of the academy had not arrived at the same erroneous conclusions (such as
Dystheism or
misotheism for the creator God as an answer to the
problem of evil) as the targets of his criticism.
Comparisons
Cerinthus
According to the
heresy of
Cerinthus (who shows
Ebionite influence), the ancient Hebrew term
Elohim, the “uni-plural name,” often used for God throughout
Genesis 1, can be interpreted as indicating that a hierarchy of ancient spirits (“
angels or gods”) were co-creators with a Supreme Being, and were partially responsible for creation within the context of a “master plan” exemplified theologically by the Greek word
Logos.
Psalm 82.1 describes a plurality of gods (''ʔelōhim''), which an older version in the
Septuagint calls the “assembly of the gods”; however, it does not indicate that these gods were co-actors in creation. (Unless one translates Genesis 1:1 literally as “in the beginning the gods [elohim] created the heaven and the earth.”) Also according to this theory, an abstract similarity can be found between the Logos (as applied to Jesus in the
Gospel according to St John) and Plato’s Demiurge. However, in John 1:1, which reads: “in the beginning was the
Word (''Logos''), and the Word was with God and the Word was God,” the Logos is clearly one single being, not an assembly or group. Further, typical Christian theology identifies Jesus as the second person in the holy and undivided
Trinity, thus rejecting the notion that the world was created by an ignorant or even malevolent demiurge (“uni-plural” or not) in co-action with a separate, higher and unknowable god.
Iamblichus
The figure of the Demiurge also emerges in the theoretic of
Iamblichus (a
Neoplatonist), in which it acts as a conjunction between the transcendent, incommunicable “One” that resides at the summit of his system, and the material realm. Through the Neoplatonic theurgy of Iamblichus one unites with the demiurge and therefore the monad the end result of return is called henosis (see
Theurgy, Iamblichus and henosis).
The initial dyad that Iamblichus describes consists of the One, a
monad whose first principle is intellect (“''nous''”); between this monad and “the many” that follow it. Iamblichus posited a second, superexistent “One” that is the producer of intellect or soul (“''psyche''”), completing the dyad mentioned above. The former and superior “One” is further distinguished by Iamblichus as the spheres of the intelligible and the intellective; the latter sphere is the domain of thought, while the former comprises the objects of thought. Thus, a is formed of the intelligible ''nous'', the intellective ''nous'', and the ''psyche''.
Of this intellectual triad Iamblichus assigned the third rank to the Demiurge. The figure is thus identified with the perfected ''nous'', the intellectual triad being increased to a ''
hebdomad''. As in the theoretic of Plotinus, ''nous'' produces nature by the mediation of the intellect, so here the intelligible gods are followed by a triad of psychic gods.
Non-Western traditions
Hinduism Vedic
Within the vast
Hindu Vedic tradition, there are many different stories associated with the creation of the material world. These are traditionally explained away within the cyclic notion of time with the idea that different entities might be responsible for the creations of different iterations of the material universe, and so there is no fundamental inconsistency in having different stories for creation.
In relation to Neoplatonism, the figure in which most closely appears to resemble the Demiurge is
Isvara inasmuch as the Demiurge is a personal, creator God. In comparison with
Brahman which equates with the transcendent and ineffable One.
Brahma, a member of the
Trimurti, is sometimes considered to be the creator of the universe.
In the
Matsya Purana, the actual act of creating the current material universe is performed by the human
Manu after its last version is destroyed in
pralaya while he is rescued by
Vishnu.
Manu then sings/chants the universe into existence and creates the various gods along the way.
Siberian Shamanism
In the
shamanic religion of the ancient
Turks and other
Siberian nomads,
Bai-Ulgan was the force behind creation. Inasmuch as Siberian shamanism may be said to parallel Gnostic cosmological beliefs, Bai-Ulgan has been compared to the Demiurge.
Pirahã Cosmology
The term ''demiurge'' may be applied to a figure that ''re''creates the world after a catastrophe, even if the world existed in a previous form. Among the
Pirahã of
Amazonas,
Brazil, the demiurge
Igagai recreated the world after its destruction in a cataclysm that came about when the moon was destroyed. In the cataclysm, all the animals died and all light disappeared from the world, and the higher levels of the cosmos almost fell on top of the earth. Igagai restored the structure of the cosmos, and created the animals that the Pirahã know today.
[9]
References in popular culture
★ In the
Philip K. Dick novel,
Valis.
★ In
Jack Womack's novel
Elvissey, an
alternate history Elvis Presley is abducted by the machiavellean DryCo so that he can become a
messiah figure for a
21st Century religion that views the original popular entertainer as an avatar of the divine. Unfortunately for DryCo and the alternate Elvis,
Valentinian gnosticism is the dominant theological framework in its Southern United States, not
evangelical Christianity. Resultantly, this Elvis regards DryCo's intended role as a
messianic impersonator for him as equating him with the flawed demiurge creator of the material world.
★ In the 1996
LucasArts game ''
Afterlife'', the player is referred to as the Demiurge. The goal of the game is to build and manage both a Heaven and a Hell to provide rewards and punishments for the inhabitants of the local planet.
★ In the animated series ''
Æon Flux'', the Demiurge is a god-like entity that Aeon Flux and the Monican resistance want to release into space in order to free the planet from its influence while Trevor Goodchild hopes to use the Demiurge to bring "peace" to the world in his own image. All the while, the Demiurge is using supernatural delusion to pit the two sides against each other.
★
Michael Demiurgos is a principal character in the DC/Vertigo comic book series ''
Lucifer''. In this depiction, Michael was created by Yahweh with the demiurgic power to enable the physical creation of the universe. Michael was eventually taken outside of creation by Lucifer, where he released his demiurgic power, allowing Lucifer to create a second universe. Later, Michael's daughter
Elaine Belloc became the demiurge.
★ Demiurg (Демиург in Russian) is one of the primary characters of
"Overburdened with Evil" (Отягощенные злом, 1988), a novel by
Arkady and Boris Strugatsky. The origin of the name is referred to a
Gnostic belief system, in which Demiurge is an entity that produces matter which is inherently overburdened with evil.
★ Demiurge is a central concept in the role-playing game
Nine Worlds. Players portray Archons, mortals with special powers whose actions as a group represent the will of the Demiurge.
★ In the
role-playing game Kult, the Demiurge is an evil being who imprisoned humanity in a world of illusions in order to keep them ignorant of their true nature and power, so that he might rule over them. At the time where the game takes place, the Demiurge has vanished and as a result the illusion-prison is crumbling.
★
Marvel Comics has an entity known as the Demiurge that was responsible for creating the life on Earth. Mating with
Gaea during a demon crisis, Demiurge fathered
Atum, who in turn destroyed or defeated many evil primordial gods such as
Set and
Chthon.
★
Games Workshop Warhammer 40,000 universe has an alien race known as the
Demiurg who are great miners and builders.
★
Ialdabaoth is the name of a Shura God (''Kishin'', literally meaning "Machine God") in
Super Robot Wars Compact 3 and
Super Robot Wars Original Generations.
References
1. Plotinus "Matter is therefore a non-existent" Ennead 2, Tractate 4 Section 16
2. Numenius of Apamea was reported to have asked “What else is Plato than Moses speaking Greek?” Fr. 8 Des Places
3. "Plato is just the Greeks Moses Numenius", Frag. 8 (Des Places) The Neoplatonic Writings of Numenius Translated by Kenneth Guthrie Selene Books
ISDN 0-933601-03-4
4.
In Fourth Tractate 'Problems of the Soul' The Demiurge is identified as Zeus.10."When under the name of Zeus we are considering the Demiurge we must leave out all notions of stage and progress, and recognize one unchanging and timeless life."
5. The Nag Hammadi Library (see Nag Hammadi)
6. ''Ben-Yehuda's Pocket Dictionary'', Pocket Books 1961, 1964.
7. Irenaeus ''Against Heresies'' 3.11.8)
8. Voegelin used Nous or Demiurge to mean intellect that is a divinely creative substance. It is a point of contact between the human and the divine.
Eric Voegelin The Restoration of Order by Micheal P. Federici pg 227
9. Gonçalves, Marco Antonio. 2001. O mundo inacabado. Ação e criação em uma cosmologia
amazônica: Etnografia Pirahã. Rio de Janeiro: Editora da UFRJ. [pp. 39-41]
See also
External Links
★
Dark Mirrors of Heaven: Gnostic Cosmogony
العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
Español
