ORIENTAL PHILOSOPHY. 
Afia or Egypt, Jina wee if the Egyptian, Cabbaliltic, 
salaaen and Ecleétic, ompared, there will be found 
among them a wonde rfal pein Sea ith t neral prin- 
ciples of that fyftem which we call the Goad Shisg hy. ; 
whence it feems a 2 admit the exiftence of this 
philofophy as a mo d to make _ of it as 
an univerfal key to unlock oe mytteries of the 
d nature, originated in C 
paffed through Syria, Afia Minor, and Egypt; pe mixing 
with other fyftems, formed many different feéts e 
feems alfo to be fufficient ground for referring the a- 
tion of the leading doctrines of this philofophy into a re- 
gular fyftem to Zoroafter, whofe name the followers of 
this doGrine p to fome of their fpurious books, 
h 
Afiatic philofophy, as well as of Oriental cece among: 
the later Platonifts, may be eafily accounted for from the 
intercourfe which fub itted betwee ‘he. Alexandrian and 
Afiatic age eee atter the fchools of Alexandria were 
eftablifhed. at time m r ics, who were ad- 
died to the fade ‘of philofophy, vifited Alexandria, and 
became acquainted with the celebrated doctrines of Plato 
and blending oa with their own, formed an heterogeneous 
mafs of opinio hich in its turn mixed with the fy {tems 
of the Alexandrian {chools. 
ain pro- 
of the Oriental philofophy, prior to dhe ries ce 
of the Chriftian herefies, borrowed from the Greeks the 
o paflages in St. Paul’s 
epiftles; in one o e ee ie Timothy again 
libres ts pevduvipuery “ the oppolition of co {cienee’’ 
(1 Tim. vi. 20.); and in the other (Coloff. ii. 8.) warns 
the Coloffians not to be impofed upon by a vain and. deceit- 
to human tradition and 
of original documents ee the Oriental iar at 
we can form no idea of its peculiar tenets, only b 
aring the ancient sea ries of the Eaft with that of ‘ick 
feds which {pring from this ftock. The Gnoftics were 
chiefly employed in fipporcne the fyftem of divine emana- 
tion, taught by Zoroafter and his followers. 
tained that all ae sea and material, are derived 
by a fucceffion of emanations from the infinite fountain of 
Deity. From this fecret and inexhaultible aby fs, they con- 
ceived fubftantial powers, or natures, of various orders tuo 
flow; till at the remote extremity cf the emanation, evil 
inane, or matter, with all the natural and morai evils 
neceffarily belonging to it, were produced. Brucker’s 
Phil. by Enfield, vol. i 
he firft principles af the Oriental philofophy, as Mu- 
fheim ftates them, feem perfeétly confiftent with the dictates 
of reafon ; for its firft founder muft undoubtedly have argued 
in the following manner: “ ‘There are many evils in this 
orld, and men feem imp pelled by a natural infliné to the 
paaie of thofe things oak reafon condemns; but that 
eternal Mind, from which all fpirits derive their exiftence, 
aut be inacceffible to all kinds of evil, and alfo of a mott 
perfe& and beneficent nature ; therefore the origin of thofe 
evils, with which the uriverfe abounds, mult be fou ght 
fomewhere elfe than in the Deity. It cannot refide in him 
g taken for granted thefe principles, 
they proceeded farther, and affirmed, that matter was eter- 
nal, and derived its prefent form, not from = pei of 
{upreme God, but from the creating power of fome 
inferior vies a to whom the world and its inhabitants 
owed their exitten As a proof of this aflertion, they 
alleged, that it was incredible, that the {up~eme 
atte Bek which is effentially malig- 
upon it, in any degree, the 
vided in their opinion, 
when they proceeded to argue from thefe principles. 
w 
roc ; the one pr ) 
over matter; and, by their perpetual confli€t, explained the 
mixture of go nd evil, that appears in the e 
Others maintained, t e being which prefided ove 
matter was not an eternal principle, but a fubordinate in- 
telliyence, one of th 0 e me God produced 
from himfelf. They fuppofed, ea ie being was moved, 
by a fudden impulfe, to reduce rude mafs of 
matter, which lay excluded from fie fiat hone of the Deity, 
and alfo to create the human race. A third fort fell upon 
a fyftem different from the two preceding, and formed to 
themfelves the notion of a triumvirate of beings, in which 
the fupreme Deity was diftinguifhed both from the material, 
evil principle, and the creator of this fublunary world. 
Thefe, then, were the three leading fe€&ts of the Oriental 
philofophy, which were fubdivided into various factions, by 
the difputes that arofe, when they came to explain more 
fully their refpeCtive opinions, and to purfue them into. all 
s 
the various fects of thefe philofo- 
d not iar their holding, in common, le 
the Dery, the univerfe, the hum 
They were unanimous in 
They main- - 
