The Shadow of God - Dr. Wesley Muhammad

The dark blue robe (“it is almost black,” QE 2.123) signifies a „dimmer‟ and therefore more senseperceptible
„soul-body.‟ 209 This lower soul-body is „aereal,‟ composed of the blue-black air of the sub-lunar
heavens. 210 This intermediate „body,‟ between the pneumatic/ethereal and the earthly, is associated with the
man of Gen. 1:26-7 made after the Image (Logos). 211 This man born on the sixth day of creation is thus
presented by Philo as aereal/psychic and associated with the blue robe of the high priest. Finally, as noted,
the earthly body made of dust, here the „ash-sprinkled,‟ was symbolized by the hem of the blue robe lined
with cloth pomegranates and flowers signifying the elements from which the earthly body was made. 212
Thus, the „bodies‟ of the three Adams are represented in Philo‟s exegesis on Jacob‟s dream by the white
tunic (1:3), the blue robe (1:26-27), and the hem (2:7). 213 Based on the above observations, and at the risk
of being overly systematic, we get the following associations:
Pure White = White Tunic = Light/Pneumatic Body = Gen. 1:3
Speckled = Blue Robe = Aereal/ Psychic Body = Gen. 1:26-27
Ash-Sprinkled = Hem = Earthly Body = Gen. 2:7
3.2.1. God’s Schattenbild
This areal/psychic body signified by the blue robe is in some way related to Philo‟s designation of the
demiurgic Logos as both God‟s Image and „Shadow‟ (Leg. III.96). Philo identifies the Logos with the chief
craftsman of the Tabernacle Bezalel. 214 The „tabernacle‟ that Bezalel constructs, says Philo, is the “soul”
(Leg. III. 95-96). As noted, Philo identified the soul with the man of Gen 1:26-7 215 ; this makes
Bezalel/Logos demiurge of the psychic man/body, a notion found in Gnostic sources as well. 216 This
„Adam-as-Tabernacle‟ motif recalls P. What is important here is that this psychic Adam made after the
Image, whom Philo associates with the blue robe of the high priest, is also called a „shadow‟ (Plant.27;
Somn. I.206). This association of “shadow” with “image” and with the (psychic) man/body of Gen. 1:26
parallels some Gnostic texts. In the Apocraphon of John (NHC II 15. 1-14), whose anthropogony is but a
(characteristically gnostic) midrash on Genesis 1 (particularly 1:26f. and 2:7), 217 as well as in the
Hypostasis of the Archons (89.26), “shadow” is a designation for the bodies of Adam and Eve made
according to the “image” of the Light-Man. 218 We might understand by this that, while the Logos is the
209
Ebr. 85-6; Mut. 45.
210
On the sub-lunar air as home of lower souls v. Plant. 14; Conf. 174; Somn. I. 134-5, 144-46. On the blue-black sub-lunar air as
signified by the blue robe v. Spec. I.85. On areal souls in Philo v. also A. Lemonnyer, “L‟air comme séjour d‟anges, d‟après Philon
d‟Alexandrie,” Revue des sciences philosophiqes et theologiques 1 (1907): 305-311.
211
Mut. 30 (Adam of Gen. 1:26 as „soul of intermediate stage‟); Somn. I.219; Spec. I.94 (robe as „intervening/intermediate‟); Ebr. 85-
6; Mut. 43-46 (robe as lower soul). Now Philo has interpreted the Man after the Image (Gen. 1.26) as both the rational soul (Plant. 18-
20; Spec. I. 81; Det. 83-87; Her. 230-1) and the lower, irrational soul (Mut. 30; Leg. III.95-6). This discrepancy can be resolved
however. According to Philo, the first person plural used here („Let Us make Adam‟) indicates that both God and lower powers (viz.
the Logos and other angels) participated in the creation of this man: God provided the immortal soul and the lower powers provided
the mortal soul (Fug. 66-70; Opif. 72-75; Conf. 179-182). That is to say, Gen. 1:26-27 actually alludes to the creation of both souls.
See also Fossum, “Gen. 1,26 and 2,7,” 203-208.
212
Somn. I:216-17; Spec. I.263-6.
213
Opif. 134-36.
214
The craftsman Bezalel would represent the Logos in the lower of the latter‟s two demiurgic functions. As Runia (Philo of
Alexandria and the Timaeus of Plato, 166) has pointed out regarding Philo‟s “building-of-a-city” metaphor used in Opif. 17-18, the
demiurgic process involves three functions and functionaries: the king, who calls for the city‟s establishment; the architect, who
designs the city; and the craftsman, who actually executes the creative activity. For Philo, the Logos functions as both the architect and
craftsman.
215
Spec. I.81, 171.
216
I.e. that the psychic body of Adam was the work of a lower demiurge. See above n. 203. On Gnostic and Philonic exegesis of Gen.
1:26-27 v. also Fossum, “Gen. 1,26 and 27,” 202-239.
217
On the Apocraphon of John and Gen. 1:26f and 2:7 v. Birger A. Pearson, “Biblical Exegesis in Gnostic Literature,” in idem
Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 29-38. See also Gerard P. Luttikhuizen, “The Critical Rewriting of Genesis in the
Gnostic Apocryphon of John,” in Florentino García Martínez and Gerard P. Luttikhuizen (edd.), Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome:
Studies in Ancient Cultural Interaction in Honour of A. Hilhorst (Leiden: Brill, 2003) 187-200; Søren Giversen, “The Apocraphon
of John and Genesis,” Studia Theologica 17 (1963): 60-76; Schenke, Der Gott „Mensch‟, 120ff.
218
On HypArch see Bently Layton, “Critical Prolegomena to an Edition of the Coptic „Hypostasis of the Archons‟ (CG II, 14),” in M.
Krause (ed.), Essays on the Nag Hammadi Texts in honour of Pahor Labib (Leiden: Brill, 1975) 98-99; idem, “The Hypostasis of
the Archons or the Reality of the Rulers,” HTR 69 (1976): 57; U. Bianchi, “Docetism: A Peculiar Theory about the Ambivalence of