بين مخطوطات الأقصر ومخطوطات نجع حمادى
وقال الامين العام للمجلس الأعلى للا ثار
المصرية الدكتور زاهى حواس فى تعليقه على هذا الاكتشاف بانه يعد ثانى اكبر كشف قبطى
فى مصر بعد مخطوطات نجع حمادى و تعتبر منطقة الكشف من اقدم الماطق التى هرع اليها
النساك و الرهبان المسيحيين هربا من آلا ضطهاد أن اكتشاف ثلاث مخطوطات من البردي
مكتوبة باللغة القبطية مخبأة فى اطلال دير قبطى قديم بمنطقة القرنة غرب مدينة
الاقصر التا ريخية فى صعيد مصر اثناء قيام بعثة االاثار البولندية باعمال التنقيب
امام احدى مقابر الدولة الوسطى(مقبرة رقم 1152)
لقد أحب القباط المسيح فهو قد بارك أرضهم فصار منهم وهم له , ومن اجل هذا عانى
الأقباط من الاضطهاد ومن ناحية أخرى قدمت مصر اسهاماتها فى انشاء نظام
الرهبنه الفردية و رهبنة الاديرة هربا بالعقيدة و حماية للتراث القبطى
وأشتهرت الاقصر وما حولها بالتغيير وإعتناق المسيحية فحول الاقباط معظم المعابد و المقابر الى اديرة و كنائس لجأ اليها النساك و الرهبان و شهدت المنطقة تجمعات لجماعات مسيحية هجرت الحياة الى الصحراء و كهوفها و واتخذوا المقابر الفرعونية مركز لاعتكافهم ينعمون بعلاقة وصله بينهم وبين إلههم فصارت هذه المنطقة مخزنا لتراث الأقباط الفكرى والانسانى .
الدكتور زاهى حواس فى تعليقه على هذا الاكتشاف بأنه يعد ثاني اكبر كشف قبطي فى مصر
بعد مخطوطات نجع حمادي
مخطوطات نجع حمادى
مخطو طات نجع حمادى اسرار العقيدة المسيحية و كان قد اكتشفها بالصدفة فلاح من
قرية حمره دوم فى مركز نجع حمادى بمحافظة قنا فى صعيد مصر يدعى محمد علتى السمان
اثناء بحثه عن السباخ لزراعاته بالقرب من جبل الطارف على بعد عشرة كيلو مترات شمال
شرقى نجع حمادى حيث عثر على اناء فخارى باحدى الكهوف و اعتقد السمان انه وجد كنز ا
من الذهب وعندما كسر الاناء بفأ سة اصيب بخيبة امل عندما وجد لفافات من البردى لم
يقدر قيمتها و حملها على جمله مع اخيه خليفه لتوفر وقودا لفرن امه
و عندما هرب السمان و شقيقه من قريتهم خوفا من الشرطة لخلافات ثارية اودع اللفافات
لدى زوجة قس القرية و بالصدفة ايضا شاهد هذه اللفافات شقيق زوجة القس المدرس بمدرسة
القرية و تيقن انها كتابات قبطية فحملها الى صديقة جورج صبحى الذى نقل واحده منها
الى المتحف المصرى و عرضها على مديره وقتها ايفان برايتون الذى اشتراها لحساب
المتحف بمبلغ 250جنية
العرفين بالرب ألإله
وشاعت اهيمة هذه المخطوطات القبطية وسارع العلماء
بشراء اجزاء منها من تجار الاثار والمهربين حتي
تمكنت سلطات الاثار من استعادتها وقتها الي المتحف القبطي وكان جزء منها اهدي الي
عالم النفس جوستاف يونج زميل سيجموند فرويد واحتوت مخطوطات نجع حمادي على مكتبة
كاملة تحتوي 53 نص في 1153 صفحة جمعت في 13 مجلد بعضها مكتوب باللغة القبطية وتبين
ان المخطوطات تحتوي علي أفكار مسيحية لبعض الجماعات التي ظهرت منذ القرن الميلادي
الاول وكانت تعرف بجماعة العرافين التي
ويقول العارفون بازدواجية الوجود ، الجسد ، والروح 00العدم ، والوجود ، وهي في حالة
صراع دائم .
وهم ينشدون الوصول الي معرفة الإله الحقيقي والروح الالهية عن طريق معرفة الانسان
لنفسة ويعد العارفون اول من وضع اسس علم النفس مما أدى إلى أن عالم النفس جوستاف
يونج قرأ كتاباتهم
وكان العارفون بالإله يزهدون الدنيا ويتنازلون عن احلامهم واعمالهم ويخرجون الي البرية يعيشون حياه النسك ولا ياكلون غير الخبز والماء ومما يذكر أن الفيلسوف السكندري اليهودي فيلو في كتاباتة وسماهم (السرابيون) او اهل السراب وكانوا مشهورين بعلاج الامراض النفسية والامراض المستعصية باستعمال الاعشاب الطبية الصحراوية
واول ما ظهرت المسيحية في مصر كانت بين صفوف هؤلاء العارفين الذين شكلوا
كما يقول الاب بسيوس اول من كتب من تاريخ الكنيسة انهم كانوا يمثلون اول كنيسة
مصرية وتضم مكتبة العارفين التي عثر عليها بنجع حمادي واخيرا فى الاقصر الاشعار
والكتابات الفلسفية وعدد من الاناجيل التى لم تكن معروفة من قبل , من اهمها :
1 - انجيل توماس الذي يحتوي اقوال السيد المسيح بعضها موجود في الانجيل الرابع (يوحنا) وبعضها غير موجود ويعد تاريخ انجيل توماس اقدم بعشرين عام من تاريخ تدوين الاناجيل الاربعة المعروفة بعد عام 70 ميلادي ويعد اقدم الاناجيل المكتوبة ويقال ان توماس هو الترجمة اليونانية للاسم المصري القديم تحتمس ( الصورة المقابلة نهاية أنجيل توماس وبداية أنجيل فيلب ) .
2 - وضمت ايضا انجيل مريم المجيد
3 - وانجيل المصريين
4 - وانجيل فليب
وبالطبع هناك اختلافات بين اناجيل العهد الجديد وانجيل جماعة العارفين فمريم المجدلية ليست هي المخطئة التي تابت انما وكما يقول انجيل فيليب هي ريقة المخلص التي احبها يسوع وقد ذكرتهم القصة للكاتب الامريكي دان براون فولف اشهر رواه في العالم الامريكي شعرت دافينشي من مخطوطات نجع حمادي والاختلاف الاهم كان في قصة صلب المسيح بناء علي اوامر الحاكم الروماني موتيناس سيلاخس حيث نفت المخطوطات قصة صلب المسيح
وقام القديس باخوميوس أب الشركة سنة 320 ب.م بإنشاء العديد من الأديرة , وبعد حوالى نصف قرن أى حوالى 367 ب . م قام الرهبان المحليين بنقل 45 من مخطوطات دينية مختلفه عن عقيدتهم لدراستها وشملت كتاباتهم أنجيل توماس Gospels of Thomas, وأنجيل فيلب وتروث Philip and Truth وشملت 12 لفائف من الجلد بداخلها هذه المخطوطات ووضعت هذه المكتبة فى أوانى فخارية وأغلق عليها وبقيت محفوظة لأكثر من 1600 سنة ز
وقد فحصها فى البداية جاكوس وتشارلز وكوكس Jacques Schwarz & Charles Kuentz, Codex II سنة 1946 م فى متجر أثار قديمة , ومنذ سنة 1952 م حفظت فى متحف القبطى فى مصر القديمة , وقد صورت هذه المخطوطات التى رآها كوكس
ومؤلف أنجيل توماس كتب عن نفسه الرسول توماس أحد التلاميذ الأثنى عشر والأنجيل يحتوى على جمل قصيرة قالها المخلص أكثر من مائة جملة ليس بينها أى إرتباط أو أحداث تجمعها .
وقد أستعار بعض قدماء المؤلفين المسيحيين بعض هذه العبارات مثلاً
الأقوال رقم 2 , 22 , 27 - 37 بواسطة كلمنت الأسكندرى Clement of Alexandria (circa 150-211 AD) in his Stromata (Patches)
— but without explicit attribution to Thomas. Then 100 years ago at
Oxyrhynchus in Egypt, there were discovered a few fragments of what we now
know to be a prior Greek version of Thomas, datable by paleography as follows:
PapOx 1 (Th 26-33 & 77), 200 AD; PapOx 654 (Th Prolog & 1-7), 250 AD [on display
in the John Ritblat Gallery of the new
British Library at St Pancras, London]; PapOx 655 (Th 36-39), 250 AD— see
Biblio.10. The more recent discovery of the Coptic version of Thomas has
finally made this Gospel available in its entirety. Yet further evidence, such
as the
asyndeton in Th 6, reveals an underlying Semitic source document (see
Guillamont,
Recent Scholarly Comments). As indicated in the
press release, almost all biblical scholars who have been studying this
document since its first publication have now concluded that Thomas should be
accepted as an authentic fifth Gospel, on an equal footing with the
canonical quartet of John and the Synoptics.
The Gospel of Philip— as can be inferred from its entries 51, 82, 84, 98,
101, 137 & 139— was composed at least in part after 70 AD by Philip called the
Evangelist (not the Apostle), who appears in the Book of Acts at 6:1-6,
8:4-40 & 21:8-14. There is no known previous citation of this complex scripture,
which is an elegant series of reflections on the Abrahamic tradition, on Israel
and the Messiah, whilst elaborating a metaphysic of Spiritual Idealism. (typeset
page from Philip)
The Gospel of Truth was composed in about 150 AD by Valentine, the famous
saint of Alexandria (born circa 100 AD). A continuous interwoven
meditation on the Logos, it was scarcely mentioned in antiquity— and until the
Nag Hammadi discovery not even a quote from this noble composition was known to
have survived. (For a preliminary version of another text from the Nag Hammadi
library which may also be by Valentine, see:
The Supremacy).
In the early years following the discovery of these documents, and
before they could be given sufficiently careful scrutiny by scholars, it was
commonplace for them collectively to be labeled ‘gnostic’ (see e.g. Grant &
Freedman [1960], in
Recent Scholarly Comments). This has always been a generic term for the
Mediterranean mixture of essentially anti-sensory religious movements of
the early centuries AD, and so was at first unfortunately considered a
convenient category in which to place all of the diverse Nag Hammadi writings.
Subsequent investigation has shown, however, that neither Thomas nor Philip nor
the Gospel of Truth can correctly be labeled gnostic, as they each explicitly
affirm the reality of our physical incarnations in their historic ambiance
(including, notably, the crucifixion): thus Th 28, 55; Ph 25, 77, 78, 114, 132;
and Tr 6, 8, 9, 21, 28, 29, 37 (see
Commentary 1). ‘Gnosticism’— whether Oriental, Platonic, Mystery-Religion or
Theosophical— by definition considers the perceptual universe (including our own
incarnate lives as well as all human history, Biblical or otherwise) to be
inherently illusory and hence malignant. The unequivocal Old Testament view,
on the other hand— which Christ in the canonical Gospels most certainly
accepted— was that the entire realm of the five senses is neither unreal nor
evil, but rather divinely created and good: so, among countless examples,
Gen 1:31 (‘everything that He had made ... was very good’) and Lk 24:39 (‘flesh
and bones as ... I have’). A careful reading of the three Coptic Gospels makes
it quite clear that they are unequivocally within this quite un-gnostic Biblical
tradition.
The
New Testament canons of the Western (Catholic/Protestant), Eastern Orthodox,
Coptic, Syrian/Nestorian, Armenian, and Ethiopian Churches all differ
significantly from one another— and even these were under dispute within the
various branches of Christianity until many centuries AD; previously there were
only widely diverse opinions recorded by various individuals well after the
Apostolic era, regarding not only today's commonly accepted works but also such
writings as the
Epistle of Barnabas, the
Shepherd of Hermas, the
Gospel of the Egyptians, the
Gospel of the Hebrews (in which Christ calls the Holy Spirit his Mother),
the
Traditions of Matthias, the
Apocalypse of Peter, the
Didakhê, and the
Acts of Paul. Thus the Codex Sinaiticus of the mid-4th century includes both
Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas, while the Codex Alexandrinus of the early
5th century contains I and II Clement as well as the Psalms of Solomon. There
was no church council regarding the NT canon until the Synod of Laodicea (363
AD), which indeed rejected John's Apocalypse or Book of Revelation. Twelve
centuries later (!), the Western Canon was finally settled by the
Council of Trent (1546 AD), which designated the present 27-book listing as
an article of Roman Catholic faith (although episcopal councils have never
claimed to be infallible; the vote at Trent was 24 to 15, with 16 abstentions)—
and which the various Protestant Churches subsequently accepted. The sundry
Eastern Churches have equally complicated records on establishing their
respective NT canons: thus, the Armenian canon includes a Pauline III
Corinthians; the Coptic NT contains I & II Clement; the Syrian/Nestorian
Peshitta excludes II & III John, Jude, and Rev/Ap; the Ethiopian Bible adds
books called the Sínodos, the Epistle of Peter to Clement, the Book of the
Covenant, and the Didascalia; and John's Rev/Ap is still not included in the
Greek Orthodox Bible! (see
Biblio.35)
Notably, however, the Gospels of Thomas, Philip and Truth were evidently
not known to any of those traditions at the time of their attempts at
establishing a NT canon, never being so much as mentioned in their protracted
deliberations— and hence were never even under consideration for inclusion in
their respective listings. But the concept of a canon was certainly never
intended to exclude the possible inspiration of any subsequent textual
discoveries or isolated agrapha (Lk 1:1 & Jn 21:25).
Precisely what transpired during the first 3½ centuries AD, prior to the
earliest ecclesiastical attempts at canonization, is notoriously obscure, as the
original Gospel Messianics were eventually supplanted by the Pauline
‘Christians’ (Ac 11:25-26). Thus the Epistle of Barnabas (late first century)
remains unacquainted with the historical Gospels, whereas Justin Martyr
(mid-second century) shows no awareness of Paul's writings— indicating an
ongoing schism between the Petrine and the Pauline traditions. Clement of
Alexandria and Irenaeus of Lyon, at the end of the second century, are the
first authors explicitly to quote from both the Gospels and from Paul. I have
attempted to analyze the basis of this rift in ‘The
Paul Paradox’. Essential reading on that formative period is Walter Bauer's
pioneering study,
Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity (Tübingen 1934,
Philadelphia 1971).
The translations of the texts themselves are both as literal and as
lyrical as I could make them. Any grammatical irregularities encountered (e.g.
the verb tenses in Th 109) are in the Coptic text itself. Plausible textual
reconstructions are in [brackets], while editorial additions are in
(parentheses). ‘[...]’ indicates places where it is not possible to interpolate
the deterioration of the papyrus manuscript. The Greek Oxyrhynchus variants to
Thomas are within {braces}. ‘You’ and its cognates are plural, ‘thou’ and its
cognates represent the singular (but generally with the modern verb-form). Notes
at the end of each logion are indicated by superscript¹, those at the end of the
current text with a circle°. Hyperlinks are underlined but not
color-coded. The scriptural cross-references listed are essential to an
understanding of the saying in its biblical context, and the reader is urged to
refer to them in every case; explicit parallels to Thomas in the Synoptics are
separately marked with an equal sign=, to spare the reader looking up what is
already well-known. In antiquity, of course, there were no lower-case letters,
and thus in order to represent the Hebrew, Greek and Coptic scripts I have not
here used their subsequent cursive letters but rather their classic forms, which
are easier for the non-scholar to read. In turn, in translating such ancient
texts to modern languages, it is virtually impossible to capitalize in a
consistent and adequate manner; I ask the reader's indulgence in this regard.
Thruout, ‘P…’ are links to paragraph numbers in Plumley's Grammar,
‘C…’ to page numbers in Crum's Dictionary (Biblio.4+5).
In place of the Greek form, Jesus (IHSOUS),
I have used the original Aramaic: Yeshua ((w#y,
meaning ‘Yahweh Savior’, i.e. ‘He-Is Savior’ (Ph 20a). ‘I-Am’ represents the
divine self-naming: Hebrew hyh) (ahyh),
Greek EGW EIMI,
Coptic anok pe (Th 13;
P306).
Lastly, I have appended five essays as commentary: (1) ‘Are
the Coptic Gospels Gnostic?’, a formal demonstration that they cannot be so
categorized; (2) ‘The
Maternal Spirit’, on the gender in the Semitic languages of
#dq-h xwr [ruakh ha-qodesh,
Spirit the-Holy]; (3) ‘Theogenesis’,
on the intimation in Philip that the original human transgression consisted in
claiming to produce children, rather than accepting them as begotten by God
alone; (4) ‘Angel
and Image’, regarding these two primary concepts as found in the new
scriptures, together with their underlying metaphysical framework of an apparent
Spiritual Idealism; and (5) ‘The
Paul Paradox’, a philosophical analysis of the evident discrepancies between
the Gospels and the theology of Saul of Tarsus.
In searching out the sense of these new writings, I have had the benefit
of extended conversations across the years with many friends and colleagues,
especially
Bob Schapiro,
Chris Wesson,
Crosby Brown,
Luz García and
Pedro Chamizo. My long-term thanks are also due to two of my undergraduate
instructors: the poet
Robert Frost, for his advice to partake only in what is worthy of one's
time; and Prof
William E. Kennick, for his example of the highest standards in
philosophical theology. To
Bertrand Russell, while I was studying in London and had the opportunity to
demonstrate with him in the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, I am indebted for
his fearless example in confronting the Establishment— whether political,
military or religious— for the sake of the truth. Much of the present edition
was prepared while I was a guest of numerous universities both state and
private, as well as seminaries and religious communities both Catholic and
Protestant, thruout Latin America; and also of the faculties of philosophy, of
orthodox theology and of informatics at the
University of Athens— for their fraternal hospitality I am profoundly
grateful. Internet technical advice has been kindly provided by Ioannis
Georgiadis of the Athens University Computer Center.
The canonical Gospels must be the paradigm in assessing any
newly-discovered ‘Gospel’. That is to say, our criteria for evaluating such a
text must be both its internal consistency with, and its external provenance
relative to, the four texts which provide the
ostensive definition of the very term ‘Gospel’ to begin with. So; are
Thomas, Philip and Valentine theologically harmonious with the Synoptics and
John? Do they all come from the same general historic context and archeological
ambiance in antiquity? Are the new texts, upon analysis, both conceptually and
empirically coherent with the four canonical Gospels? Do they, all in all, seem
to be of the same Logos? Sufficiently careful scrutiny, I have concluded, yields
an affirmative answer to all of these questions. The intent of this present
edition is to provide the reader with the resources to carry out a thorough
assessment of these extraordinary scriptures for him/herself.
It has often been suggested that these new writings are basically
concoctions produced by a series of unknown somebodies long after the events
they purport to concern. However, the simplest explanation here
(by William of Ockham's famous
Principle of Economy: ‘Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily’) is
not lengthy oral tradition followed by numerous written redactions; the simplest
explanation is that these three scriptures were composed by the Apostle Thomas,
Philip the Evangelist and Valentine of Alexandria, and come to us largely intact
and well translated into Coptic from the original Aramaic, Hebrew or Greek.
There is absolutely no reason to propose a more complex hypothesis here.
Thus, following the example of Aristotle's Metaphysics (thus afterward
titled by the Peripatetic Andronicus of Rhodes), I have called this collection
of new scriptures ‘Metalogos’— that is, ‘More Logos’.
In sum, these new Gospels are surely the most extraordinary discovery
imaginable
=================================================================
http://www.metalog.org/files/intro.html لمزيد من المعلومات عن مخطوطات نجع حمادى راجع هذا الموقع
===========================================================