I first became interested in Mithraism after reading J.M. Robertson’s ‘Pagan Christs’, 1966, and immediately after hearing a Loyola University Theology professor rail against it. He was outraged by the very idea that the narrative of Yeshua or Jesus could have just been wholesale copied - including the virgin birth - from a pagan religious entity. But the evidence was there, as Robertson (and others) have shown.
According to Plutarch, Mithraism first arrived in the Roman Empire through the Cilician pirates whom Pompey subdued, then brought back to Rome as slaves. (Many were actually believed to have been soldiers for whom Mithraism would have been the religion naturally embraced).
Mithraism was a mystery religion, so its
historical legends would have always been more accessible than its precepts,
rituals were held in strictest confidence – available only to the select few -
as a secret society would. (Much like today’s FreeMasons who maintain absolute
silence as regards their rituals.) As F. Zindler notes, no specific “works of
Mithraism are known since like other Mystery Cults, it centered around a secret
or body of secrets only known to those initiated into the rites. Most of our
knowledge of it is derived from the iconography of its temples”.
In the oldest extant version
of the legend of Mithras, found in the Izeds (28 in number) appearing in the
Zendavesta, Mithras was born on December 25th of the Virgin, Anahita. The
Zendavesta, literally "text and comment," is the doctrine of
Zoroaster (Zarathrustra), comprised in eight parts, written at different
periods, but of which the earliest have been assigned to the date of B.C.
1200-1000. In its present form it was collected by Ardeshir, the founder of the
Sassanian dynasty, from oral tradition, at the time when he re-established the
ancient religion of Persia.
Many critics on the Christian Right have somehow
confused themselves and the issues by too seriously taking certain babble
they’ve read such as Mithra being “born of a solid rock”. But like their own
biblical verses which they’re unable to parse (because they take them
literally) they gum the works up here too.
The notion of Mithra’s being "born of a solid
rock" can probably be traced to certain writings of early Church
Father Justin Martyr, who analogized Peter as the mystic "Rock" of
the Church ("Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my
Church") and to the emergence of Mithraism with Mithras. Researcher J.M.
Robertson ('The Origin Of Mithraic
Mysteries: Cosmology and Salvation in the Ancient World') speculates that Martyr's ruminations are
"in touch with the Graecized but probably Semitic myth of the Rock-born
Agdestis, son of Jupiter".
In other words, not peculiar to Mithraism proper,
but a subsequent syncretic addition which then became distorted into a
"rock birth" by early Christians. Not surprisingly, probably because
of the Agdestis- connection, Mithra is derived from the Latin "rock
born" and that concept has been perpetuated with the name.
A much older version, probably more accurate,
is cited in Robertson's 'Pagan Christs' (p. 119) wherein he
notes that according to a (Vendedadic) legend "Mithras shoots an arrow at
a rock, and water gushes forth where the arrow strikes". The passage is
believed by some scholars of pagan mystery religions to refer to either an
incident where Mithras saves his followers who are lost in the desert, or that
he uses his arrow to reveal an analog to the Judaeo-Christian Decalogue.
Aspects of Mithraism that later filtered into the
Graeco-Roman world (in the form of emergent Mithraic cults) undoubtedly came
from this text (the Izeds, wherein “Mithras” was chief and ruler) as well as
others likely destroyed with the burning of the library at Alexandria. (See,
e.g. J.M. Robertson’s ‘Pagan Christs’, 1966) . Many scholars believe the
greater details including Mithras’ disciples, the full recounting of his
miracles: including walking on water, raising the dead, changing water to wine
etc. were in those destroyed manuscripts.
A number of ancient authors
(e.g. Porphyry) bemoaned the catastrophic destruction of many of the original
works at the hands of the Christians. As we know from the example of Mikey,
they can’t tolerate other books sitting on shelves next to their own – they
either have to burn them or depict them in toilets.
Nonetheless, we do have enough in Ized 28 of the
Zendavesta to document much of Mithras' mythological basis. Perusing through it
there is no mention of battling a "bull" - which likely originated
from the Graeco-Roman version of the myth, which was probably distorted by
re-translations over centuries (much the same way the Christian New Testament
has been).
In the actual Izeds (#23-#28) there’s no record of
any “Bull”. There is a peripheral reference (by Porphyry) to Mithras as
"the Bull of Demiurgos and lord of generation". But again, no
"battle" with such. (so it's likely corrupted over time). Robertson
(p. 121) speculates Porphyry's reference is actually based on a conceptual
error mixing up the Mithraic seat at the equinoctial table (assigned to the
Ram, Aries) "which also bears the sword of the Ram." He adds (ibid.):
"The sword of the Ram is simply figured as a cross, since the sword IS a
cross".
Nor is there account of any "battle with the
Sun" (though Roman Mithraists, who worshipped in a Mithraeum, may well
have introduced this myth synthetically, as a kind of backhand way of vengeance
at the Roman Sun deity, Sol Invictus. After all the earliest Roman Mithraists
were Cilician slaves brought to Rome under duress.)
We only know that he emerged with the virgin
Anahita giving birth, then began his ministry which included numerous sermons,
miracles – especially curing lepers and the handicapped. As scholar J.M.
Robertson has pointed out: "The doctrine of the Logos - the Incarnate
Word- which Christianity absorbed via the Platonic Jews of Alexandria, was
already present in Mithraism" (See: 'Pagan Christs’, page 117)
Re: Mithras' birth date on Dec. 25th, one should
note that just as Jesus' date of Birth (putatively on the 25th December) was
ahistorical, most likely Mithras' was as well. The assignment of ancient
god-man births to this date is understandable given the ancients investment in
agriculture, and the Winter solstice marked the day of shortest daylight giving
way to increasing lengths of day through Spring. (Perfect for planting in the
northern hemisphere).
Some who complain about Mithraism in general
insist there's no evidence that Mithras was a great teacher. But this is belied
in Ized 28. (We were introduced to this in our Comparative Religion class at
Loyola, in 1966). In brief passages we see Mithras teaching the multitudes
about son-ship and stewardship and the Logos-Trinity. In many ways his message
echoes the ones seen in the Gnostic Gospels, and adhered to by the Gnostics. He
taught that there was one reality and all were part of it. Each man was a
divine “son” of the One God, as well as the doctrine of immortality of the soul.
He taught that people must see their brothers as they see themselves and treat
them the same. He also echoed the ancient ethical code from the time of
Hammurabi:
“Do unto others as you would have them do
unto you.”
Incredibly, this has found its way into Christian
lore and writings, and claimed to be an original statement of Christ.
Another complaint is the parallel between Mithras
and Christ breaks down because there's no mention of "12 disciples"
This is possible, but the truth is we may never know whether there were
actually 12 disciples of Mithras, or 24, 10 or 5 or none. As noted earlier,
most of the (Vendidad) and much older Mithraic manuscripts were destroyed when
the Christians burned the Library at Alexandria. In Carl Sagan’s COSMOS,
Episode 13, ‘Who speaks for Earth?’ he recounts the killing of Hypatia, one of
Alexandria’s foremost woman scientists and also the library’s burning. J.M.
Robertson ('The Origin Of Mithraic
Mysteries: Cosmology and Salvation in the Ancient World', Oxford Univ. Press, 1989) suggests than more
than 300 manuscripts documenting the role of Mithras’ disciples were likely
destroyed around the same time as Hypatia’s martyrdom.
Some other Christians have
complained Mithras underwent no bodily resurrection, but was "taken up in
a chariot." Again, false! Ized 28 is most exhaustive on this issue and is
confirmed in James Pullen’s (Origin of All Religious Myths- The New Testament
Exposed) . Mithras was condemned to death, crucified, buried and then rose in
an Ascension. No chariots carried him anywhere, so this is likely a derivation
from a later Greco-Roman myth (especially the latter, wherein chariots were
prominent and also symbolic).
Robertson observes (op. cit.)
"The celebration of the
Mithraic mysteries, of the burial and resurrection of the Lord, the Mediator
and Savior, the sacrament of bread and water...all these were in practice long
before the first Christian Gospel of a Lord who was buried in a rock tomb."
Another common canard is that Mithraists copied
from Christians to fabricate their god -Man not the other way around. This is
totally false, and can be ascertained from Tertullian’s writings combined with
just minimal reasoning ability. My class notes, e.g. from my Comparative
Theology class are fortunately still in one of my old file boxes with Exegesis
notes. The main theme, to summarize, is that the course was based on the
original writings of Church fathers, including Tertullian, Justin Martyr and
Julius Firmicus – all referencing Mithraic scriptures and references therein.
After describing the “Lord’s Supper’ for example,
Justin Martyr evinces outrage as he writes (from my notes):
“WHICH THE WICKED DEVILS HAVE IMITATED IN THE
MYSTERIES OF MITHRA, COMMANDING THE SAME THING TO BE DONE”
Tertullian also bears this out, scolding:
“The Devil, by the mysteries of
his idols, IMITATES EVEN THE MAIN PARTS OF THE DIVINE MYSTERIES. HE ALSO
BAPTIZES HIS FOLLOWERS IN WATER THAT PURIFIES THEM OF THEIR SINS”
As the notes indicate, a careless Christian reader
might jump to the conclusion that the Mithraists copied from the Christians,
but this simply isn’t so, on closer examination. The refutation of this notion
inheres in the language of the same trio of Christian Fathers. They all speak,
for example, of resemblance of Mithraic rites to Christian rites as being “the
imitation of devils”.
But why such an obscure use of language, when they
could simply have stated the Mithraists IMITATED their own works, and done? Why
the need to introduce devils? This presumes a supernatural influence over and
above ordinary human copying.
An answer becomes manifest when we examine more
closely the words of Justin Martyr, who expressly argued that "the demons
ANTICIPATED the Christian mysteries and prepared PARODIES of them
BEFOREHAND"! (Pagan Christs, p. 118)
As Justin further writes (cf. from Loyola Theology
notes):
"When I hear that Mithra was begotten of a virgin, I
understand that the deceiving serpent also counterfeited this!"
(Addendum in Comparative Theology notes: No
one pretends the Pagan virgin myth in general is LATER than Christianity.
Justin’s own words: "ANTICIPATED the Christian mysteries" can mean
only one thing: he KNEW the Mithraic version PRECEDED the Christian version.
What he said also underscored the arguments from Tertullian and Firmicus. He
was so incensed that the Mithraists trumped the Christians' Savior myth on the
timeline, that he attributed this to demonic work, aka the "imitation of
devils".)
Robertson (op. cit., p. 121) also cites other
common symbols that the Christians appropriated from Mithraic traditions,
including the Agnus Dei, or "Lamb of God". As he notes:
"The Christian assimilation of
Mithraism is still more clearly seen in the familiar Christian symbol in which
Christ is represented as a lamb, carrying by one forefoot a cross."
What about the way in which Christians have
consistently copied images of Mithras and used them for Jesus? Robertson again
(op. cit.) supplies an answer (p. 124):
"The Christian imitation,
took place, be it observed, because the features imitated were found by
experience to be religiously attractive."
It’s clear from this that the Mithras myth sticks
in the craw of many biblical literalists and even orthodox non-literalists,
since their dependency on the notion of one unique "Savior" exposes
their egocentric certainty that the Dalai Lama warned about (previous blog).
They simply can’t tolerate the idea that their God-man myths were prefigured in
earlier pagan God men. While Catholics more or less accept it and shrug it off,
since they make less of a big deal about salvation by “believing on the Lord
JC”, the evangelicals lose it, since it means losing their unique claim to a
pass into their heavenly reward.
What they ought to be doing is THANKING the
Mithraists for providing a ready to use template for Christian copyists and
re-translators (intent on using their good book in a PR campaign to lure
unsuspecting unbelievers) to build their "Savior" myth on, and have
everyone convinced he's unique. And......the sole, sure pass into the righteous
afterlife (with harps, clouds and all).
See Also:
How the early Pauline Christians invented “Jesus the Messiah”
And:
No comments:
Post a Comment