Bible Study Library

MANDRAKE

Back to Bible Dictionary

דודאים, Gen. xxx, 14–16; Cant. vii, 13. Interpreters have
wasted much time and pains in endeavouring to ascertain what is intended
by the Hebrew word _dudaim_. Some translate it by violet,” others,
lilies,” jasmines,” truffle or mushroom,” and some think that the word
means flowers,” or fine flowers,” in general. Bochart, Calmet, and Sir
Thomas Browne, suppose the citron intended; Celsius is persuaded that it
is the fruit of the lote tree; Hiller, that cherries are spoken of; and
Ludolf maintains that it is the fruit which the Syrians call mauz,
resembling in figure and taste the Indian fig; but the generality of
interpreters and commentators understand by _dudaim_, mandrakes, a
species of melon; and it is so rendered in the Septuagint, and in both
the Targums, on Gen. xxx, 14. It appears from Scripture, that they were
in perfection about the time of wheat harvest, have an agreeable odour,
may be preserved, and are placed with pomegranates. Hasselquist, the
pupil and intimate friend of Linnæus, who travelled into the Holy Land
to make discoveries in natural history, imagines that the plant commonly
called mandrake, is intended. Speaking of Nazareth, in Galilee, he says,
“What I found most remarkable at this village was the great number of
mandrakes which grew in a vale below it. I had not the pleasure to see
this plant in blossom, the fruit now (May 5th, O. S.) hanging ripe on
the stem, which lay withered on the ground. From the season in which
this mandrake blossoms and ripens fruit, one may form a conjecture that
it was Rachel’s _dudaim_. These were brought her in the wheat harvest,
which in Galilee is in the month of May, about this time, and the
mandrake was now in fruit.”

MANICHÆANS, or MANICHEES, a denomination founded in the latter part of
the third century, by Mani, Manes, or Manichæus. Being a Persian or
Chaldean by birth, and educated among the magi, he attempted a coalition
of their doctrine with the Christian system, or rather, the explication
of the one by the other. Dr. Lardner, so far from taking Mani and his
followers for enthusiasts, as some have done, thinks they erred on the
other side, and were rather a sect of reasoners and philosophers, than
visionaries and enthusiasts. So Faustus, one of their leaders, says, the
doctrine of Mani taught him not to receive every thing recommended as
said by our Saviour, but first to examine and consider whether it be
true, sound, right, genuine; while the Catholics, he says, swallowed
every thing, and acted as if they despised the benefit of human reason,
and were afraid to examine and distinguish between truth and falsehood.
St. Augustine, it is well known, was for some time among this sect; but
they were not pretensions to inspiration, but specious and alluring
promises of rational discoveries, by which Augustine was deluded, as he
particularly states in his letter to his friend Honoratus. So Beausobre
remarks: These heretics were philosophers, who, having formed certain
systems, accommodated revelation to them, which was the servant of their
reason, not the mistress.”

Mani, according to Dr. Lardner, believed in an eternal self-existent
Being, completely happy and perfect in goodness, whom alone he called
God, in a strict and proper sense; but he believed, also, in an evil
principle or being, which he called _hyle_, or the devil, whom he
considered as the god of this world, blinding the eyes of them that
believe not, 2 Cor. iv, 4. God, the supreme and good, they considered as
the Author of the universe; and, according to St. Augustine, they
believed, also, in a consubstantial trinity, though they strangely
supposed the Father to dwell in light inaccessible, the Son to have his
residence in the solar orb, and the Holy Spirit to be diffused
throughout the atmosphere; on which account they paid a superstitious,
and perhaps an idolatrous, reverence to the sun and moon. Their belief
in the evil principle was, no doubt, adopted to solve the mysterious
question of the origin of evil, which, says Dr. Lardner, was the ruin of
these men, and of many others. As to the _hyle_, or the devil, though
they dared not to consider him as the creature of God, neither did they
believe in his eternity; for they contended, from the Greek text of John
viii, 44, that he had a father. But they admitted the eternity of
matter, which they called darkness; and supposed _hyle_ to be the result
of some wonderful and unaccountable commotion in the kingdom of
darkness, which idea seems to be borrowed from the Mosaic chaos. In this
commotion darkness became mingled with light, and thus they account for
good and evil being so mixed together in the world. Having thus brought
_hyle_, or Satan, into being, they next found an empire and employment
for him. Every thing, therefore, which they conceived unworthy of the
fountain of goodness, they attributed to the evil being; particularly
the material world, the Mosaic dispensation, and the Scriptures on which
it was founded. This accounts for their rejecting the Old Testament. Dr.
Lardner contends, however, that they received generally the books of the
New Testament, though they objected to particular passages as corrupted,
which they could not reconcile to their system. On Rom. vii, Mani
founded the doctrine of two souls in man, two active principles; one,
the source and cause of vicious passions, deriving its origin from
matter; the other, the cause of the ideas of just and right, and of
inclinations to follow those ideas, deriving its origin from God.
Considering all sensual enjoyments to be in some degree criminal, they
were enemies to marriage; though, at the same time, knowing that all men
cannot receive this saying, they allowed it to the second class of their
disciples, called auditors; but by no means to the perfect or confirmed
believers. Another absurd consequence of believing the moral evil of
matter was, that they denied the real existence of Christ’s human
nature, and supposed him to suffer and die in appearance only. According
to them, he took the form only of man; a notion that was afterward
adopted by Mohammed, and which necessarily excludes all faith in the
atonement. Construing too literally the assertion that flesh and blood
could not inherit the kingdom of God, they denied the doctrine of the
resurrection. Christ came, they said, to save the souls of men, and not
the bodies. No part of matter, according to them, could be worthy of
salvation. In many leading principles they thus evidently agreed with
the Gnostics, of whom, indeed, they may be considered a branch.
↑ Top