The Tripartite Tractate offers a deeply mystical yet theologically grounded vision of the Father as the source and totality of all existence. When interpreted in light of Theodotus Fragment 10, especially the assertion that not even the highest spiritual realities are formless or incorporeal, a corporeal understanding of the Father emerges that aligns with Valentinian metaphysics. While the Tripartite Tractate uses language that initially appears to distance the Father from form or figure, its deeper theology and metaphors, read alongside Theodotus, suggest otherwise.
Theodotus states:
"But not even the world of spirit and of intellect, nor the archangels and the First-Created, no, nor even he himself is shapeless and formless and without figure, and incorporeal; but he also has his own shape and body corresponding to his preeminence over all spiritual beings..."
In this light, the Father’s nature is not devoid of substance, but is understood to have a form, though not a material form like that of the lower world. His corporeality is of a sovereign, intelligible kind—his body corresponding to his unique preeminence and perfection.
The Tripartite Tractate begins:
"In order to be able to speak about exalted things, it is necessary that we begin with the Father, who is the root of the All and from whom we have obtained grace to speak about him. For he existed before anything else had come into being except him alone."
This origin point affirms the Father's primacy. But more than being a formless origin, Theodotus insists he has a body "exceedingly pure and sovereign and directly enjoys the power of the Father." The Father's corporeality is not mere abstraction; it is substantial in the highest possible way. Though the Tractate claims:
"Such is the nature of the unborn one. He does not get to work starting from something other than himself, nor does he have a partner—this would imply a limitation. But he has such an existence that he has neither figure nor form that can be perceived by the senses. This means that he is incomprehensible as well; and if he is incomprehensible, it follows that he is unknowable."
This does not conflict with Theodotus. The key lies in the clause: "neither figure nor form that can be perceived by the senses." Theodotus would agree—his shape is not sensory or material, but spiritual and intelligible. Just as the Son, who is the “Only-Begotten and inherently intellectual,” is seen not by the eye of the flesh but by “the eye of the mind,” so too is the Father’s form grasped in the noetic realm. His greatness is "incomprehensible in his greatness, inscrutable in his wisdom, invincible in his might, and unfathomable in his sweetness." But that which is incomprehensible in degree is not non-existent in form.
The Tripartite Tractate describes the Father as:
"singular while being many. For he is first and he is unique, though without being solitary. How else could he be a father? For from the word 'father' it follows that there is a 'son.'"
This statement implies internal relationality within the Father. The Father is not an abstract Monad but one who emanates. This emanation—like the trunk, branches, and fruit of a tree—is expressive of a structured, embodied being. Theodotus mirrors this when he affirms the Seven First-Created are "shown by the similarity of their state to have unity, equality and similarity." Their bodies are unified in likeness to the Only-Begotten and ultimately to the Father. Thus, the Father's own corporeality must be the archetype of this intelligible bodily structure.
"He is without beginning and without end... unchangeable in his eternal being, in that which he is, in that which makes him immutable and that which makes him great... For no one has made him what he is."
His immutability is not static emptiness but a fixed fullness. Theodotus writes:
"Those which are here [in the lower world] are male and female and differ from each other, but there he who is the Only-Begotten... has been provided with his own form and with his own nature..."
This suggests that differentiation of form and nature exists even in the highest realms, and the Father—being the origin of these—must possess a supreme form, not less than, but greater than all others.
The Tractate continues:
"Therefore, his manner, his form, and his greatness are such that nothing else exists beside him from the beginning... Rather, he himself, being good, lacking nothing, perfect, and complete, is everything."
Here, the form of the Father is explicitly affirmed. Although it is said no body may touch him and no mind may grasp him fully, this inaccessibility speaks to the exaltedness of his corporeality, not its absence. Theodotus clarifies:
"Yet that which sees and is seen cannot be formless or incorporeal. But they see not with an eye of sense, but with the eye of mind..."
Therefore, the Father’s form is not denied—it is simply beyond the reach of sense-perception, being apprehended only by the intellect transformed through grace. His body is pure intelligibility, not bound by space or materiality, yet still substantial and real.
Finally, Theodotus affirms that the First-Created were made "at the time of the first creation from God through the Son." Their bodily perfection is not accidental, but reflects the archetypal perfection of the Son and the Father. If the Son is the face of the Father, as both Theodotus and the Tractate imply, then:
"they 'always behold the face of the Father' and the face of the Father is the Son, through whom the Father is known."
This affirms that the Father’s form is intelligible through the Son, and thus the Father, though ineffable in his depth, is not formless or incorporeal.
In summary, the Tripartite Tractate, when read through the lens of Theodotus Fragment 10, reveals not a formless deity but a fully substantial, corporeal Father whose form is intelligible, sovereign, and perfect. He is not perceptible by the physical senses, but is nevertheless real, embodied, and the source of all form and substance, both in the spiritual and material realms.
**Commentary on the Tripartite Tractate: A Corporeal Understanding of the Father**
The *Tripartite Tractate*, a key text in Valentinian tradition, opens with the affirmation that to speak of exalted things, one must begin with the Father. It states, **“In order to be able to speak about exalted things, it is necessary that we begin with the Father, who is the root of the All and from whom we have obtained grace to speak about him.”** This foundation not only centers divine knowledge in the Father but implies that this knowledge is relational, granted by grace. From a corporeal perspective, the Father is not an abstract void or pure metaphysical concept; he is the *root*—the generative, tangible Source from whom all substance and form emanate.
The Tractate affirms a profound unity and complexity in the Father: **“The Father is singular while being many.”** This is not to suggest a disembodied multiplicity, but rather that in his corporeality, he is like a body composed of many integrated parts. The Tractate supports this image: **“That singular one who is the only Father is in fact like a tree that has a trunk, branches, and fruit.”** This arboreal metaphor highlights a visible, organic unity—a living, structured being. The tree is not a symbol of formless spirit but of embodied growth and generative power. As a tree has form and mass, so too must the Father have a structured and expansive corporeal existence.
This corporeal interpretation is supported by the assertion that the Father is **“a true father, incomparable and immutable, because he is truly singular and God.”** He is *incomparable* because he is not modeled after anything, and he is *immutable* because no outside force can change him. Yet this immutability does not mean he is inert. Rather, he is *unchangeable* in a dynamic, self-sustaining way: **“He does not move himself away from what he is, nor can anyone else force him against his will to cease being what he is.”** Here, we do not encounter a metaphysical essence but a living, enduring form whose nature is stable yet overflowing with creative power.
The Tractate emphasizes this stability again: **“Therefore neither does he change himself, nor will another be able to move him from that in which he is, from what he is, from his way of being, or from his greatness—thus he cannot be moved, nor is it possible for another to change him into a different form.”** Change implies contingency or weakness; the Father, as corporeal Being, is not subjected to the forces of decay or transformation that characterize created matter. Instead, he is **“clothed in immutability,”** indicating not that he is invisible, but that his form is imperishable. His corporeality is eternal and of a different order than the material bodies of the fallen world.
This incorruptible nature is also evident in the line: **“He is incomprehensible in his greatness, inscrutable in his wisdom, invincible in his might, and unfathomable in his sweetness.”** While the Father’s totality exceeds created understanding, these are qualities of personhood and form—not abstractions. *Might*, *sweetness*, *greatness*—these all imply *presence* and *embodied experience*, not disembodied thought. The Father is unknowable in his *fullness*, but not nonexistent or incorporeal. His being exceeds comprehension not because it lacks form, but because it overflows with fullness.
The Tractate goes further in asserting his perfection and generosity: **“In the true sense he alone, the good, unborn, and perfect Father who lacks nothing, is complete—filled with everything he possesses, excellent and precious qualities of every kind.”** This language supports the corporeal view. The Father is *filled*, not void. He is *complete*, suggesting form, boundary, and wholeness. He *lacks nothing*, not because he is empty, but because he is overflowing—**“he has no envy, which means that all he owns he gives away, without being affected and suffering no loss by his gifts.”** Only a corporeal being can give in such a substantial way—emanating existence without diminishment.
This is further grounded in the description of his independence: **“Therefore, his manner, his form, and his greatness are such that nothing else exists beside him from the beginning—neither a place in which he dwells...nor a substance inside him...nor a collaborator with whom he collaborated.”** The Father does not dwell in something; he is the place, the form, the greatness. This statement defends the doctrine that the Father’s corporeality is *first*—he is not formed from preexistent substance or space. His body is the archetype, not derivative of anything outside himself.
Despite the text’s caution about human language, it concedes: **“There is no name that suits him among those that may be conceived, spoken, seen, or grasped...But the way he is in himself, his own manner of being—that no mind can conceive, no word express, no eye see, and no body touch.”** This passage affirms the mystery of the Father's being, but it does not negate corporeality. It merely notes that the *nature* of the Father's corporeality exceeds our bodily experience. His body is not limited as ours is by sensory constraints.
The final section warns: **“He does not get to work starting from something other than himself...he has neither figure nor form that can be perceived by the senses. This means that he is incomprehensible as well; and if he is incomprehensible, it follows that he is unknowable.”** This incomprehensibility must be read in harmony with earlier affirmations of form, fullness, and generation. The Father’s body is real, but not perceptible to fallen sensory limitations. His corporeality is supra-material—not made from matter, but constituting the pattern for matter.
Thus, the *Tripartite Tractate* affirms a corporeal Father—immovable, perfect, and eternal. Not body-less, but a Body of incomparable greatness, clothed in immutability and overflowing with form and life.
No comments:
Post a Comment