Jacob of Serugh and His Times 9781607240495, 2010019270, 1607240491

Citation preview

-DFRERI6HUXJKDQG+LV7LPHV

*RUJLDV(DVWHUQ&KULVWLDQ6WXGLHV

 6HULHV(GLWRUV *HRUJH$QWRQ.LUD] ,VWY¾Q3HUF]HO /RUHQ]R3HUURQH 6DPXHO5XEHQVRQ

*RUJLDV(DVWHUQ&KULVWLDQ6WXGLHVEULQJVWRWKHVFKRODUO\ZRUOGWKH XQGHUUHSUHVHQWHGILHOGRI&KULVWLDQLW\DVLWGHYHORSHGLQWKH(DVWHUQ KHPLVSKHUH 7KLV VHULHV FRQVLVWV RI PRQRJUDSKV FROOHFWLRQV RI HVVD\V WH[WV DQG WUDQVODWLRQV RI WKH GRFXPHQWV RI (DVWHUQ &KULVWLDQLW\ DQG VWXGLHV RI WRSLFV UHOHYDQW WR WKH XQLTXH ZRUOG RI KLVWRULF2UWKRGR[\DQGHDUO\&KULVWLDQLW\

-DFRERI6HUXJKDQG+LV7LPHV

6WXGLHVLQ6L[WK&HQWXU\6\ULDF&KULVWLDQLW\

(GLWHGE\

*HRUJH$QWRQ.LUD]

 

*RUJLDV3UHVV//&5LYHU5RDG3LVFDWDZD\1-86$ ZZZJRUJLDVSUHVVFRP &RS\ULJKW†E\*RUJLDV3UHVV//& 

$OO ULJKWV UHVHUYHG XQGHU ,QWHUQDWLRQDO DQG 3DQ$PHULFDQ &RS\ULJKW &RQYHQWLRQV1RSDUWRIWKLVSXEOLFDWLRQPD\EHUHSURGXFHGVWRUHGLQD UHWULHYDO V\VWHP RU WUDQVPLWWHG LQ DQ\ IRUP RU E\ DQ\ PHDQV HOHFWURQLF PHFKDQLFDO SKRWRFRS\LQJ UHFRUGLQJ VFDQQLQJ RU RWKHUZLVH ZLWKRXW WKH SULRUZULWWHQSHUPLVVLRQRI*RUJLDV3UHVV//& 

‡

,6%1

,661

/LEUDU\RI&RQJUHVV&DWDORJLQJLQ3XEOLFDWLRQ'DWD -DFRERI6DUXJDQGKLVWLPHVVWXGLHVLQ VL[WKFHQWXU\6\ULDF&KULVWLDQLW\HGLWHGE\ *HRUJH.LUD] SFP*RUJLDV(DVWHUQ&KULVWLDQ VWXGLHV,661 3URFHHGLQJVRIDV\PSRVLXPKHOGLQDW 6W0DUN V6\ULDQ2UWKRGR[&DWKHGUDO7HDQHFN 1- ,QFOXGHVELEOLRJUDSKLFDOUHIHUHQFHV -DFRERI6HUXJ&RQJUHVVHV, .LUD]*HRUJH$QWRQ %5-- GF  3ULQWHGLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVRI$PHULFD

TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface......................................................................................................vii Symposium Welcome .............................................................................ix John Meno Repentance and Fasting from an Ascetical Prospective: A Comparative Reading of Jacob of Serugh and an Unpublished Shortened Version of a Collection of Homilies by Severus of Antioch ..............................................1 Iskandar Bcheiry A Prayer Song by St Jacob of Serugh Recovered..............................29 Sebastian Brock Jacob’s forgotten sughyotho.....................................................................39 Sebastian Brock Jacob of Serugh, the Man Behind the Mimre ....................................51 Khalid Dinno Mar Jacob of Serugh on Monks and Monasticism: Readings in his Metrical Homilies ‘On the Singles’ .................71 Sidney H. Griffith The Syriac Orthodox Celebration of the Eucharist in Light of Jacob of Serugh’s mimrō 95 .....................................91 Amir Harrak To Whom Did Jacob Preach? ............................................................115 Susan Ashbrook Harvey Jacob of Serugh, Homily on Good Friday and other Armenian Treasures: First Glances ..........................................133 Edward G. Mathews, Jr. Jacob of Serugh and His influence on John of Dara as Exemplified by the use of Two Verse-Homilies ...............163 Aho Shemunkasho v

vi

JACOB OF SERUGH’ SYMPOSIUM

Humanity’s Sin in Paradise Ephrem, Jacob of Serugh, and Narsai in Conversation .......................................................199 Lucas Van Rompay Jacob of Serugh: a Select Bibliographical Guide .............................219 Sebastian Brock A Reflection on the Occasion of the Blessing of an Icon of Mar Jacob of Serugh ..............................................................245 Mary Hansbury

PREFACE Jacob of Serugh (ca. 451–521) stands next to Ephrem the Syrian as a poet of the Syriac Church. He is accurately called ‘the Flute of the Holy Spirit and the Harp of the Church’. His metrical and prose homilies amount to thousands of pages, many of which still await the attention of scholars. On the occasion of its 50-year Anniversary, St. Mark’s Syrian Orthodox Cathedral, Teaneck, NJ, held a symposium on Jacob of Serugh’s and his time. An international team of scholars participated in the symposium. This volume presents the papers of the symposium. Many people helped in making this conference a success. Mor Cyril Ephrem Karim encouraged the meeting in many ways. Very Rev. Fr. John Meno, whose idea it was to hold the symposium, worked hard to make it a success. Mr. Jack Darakjy, Esq., acted as moderator. The President and Board of St. Mark’s, as well as its various organizations, helped in the day-to-day activities of the symposium. The Symposium and this publication were funded by the Athanasius Yeshue Samuel Fund. Piscataway, NJ April 23, 2010 George A. Kiraz

vii

SYMPOSIUM WELCOME JOHN MENO On behalf of St. Mark’s Syrian Orthodox Cathedral, I would like to warmly welcome you to our Golden Anniversary symposium on St. Jacob of Serugh and his times. During the summer of 2007, when we were preparing for the celebration of the 50th Anniversary of the establishment of our Cathedral, we thought of observing the occasion with a series of events that would engage the various elements of our parish family such as a choir and youth concert, a formal parish banquet and the issuance of a commemorative album. All of these undertakings were to be means of remembering and thanking that small group of twenty-five dedicated families who sacrificed so much, together with the late Archbishop Mor Athanasius Yeshue Samuel of blessed memory, in establishing St. Mark’s Cathedral, then in Hackensack, New Jersey, and opening its doors on Sunday, September 7, 1958. As part of our preparation and with the blessings and encouragement of His Eminence Mor Cyril Aphrem Karim, our beloved Archbishop, I met with Dr. George Kiraz to discuss the possibility of an academic event to celebrate our Golden Jubilee. Out of our discussions came the idea of hosting a symposium on our great Church Father St. Jacob of Serugh. With the approval and support of His Eminence, our Cathedral Board of Trustees and Golden Anniversary Committee, we began to undertake the project. In this regard, I wish to acknowledge the interest and tireless efforts of Dr. Kiraz and his dear wife Christine who have given so generously of their time and talents in helping to make this weekend’s symposium a reality. In selecting the subject of our symposium, we felt that the person of St. Jacob of Serugh was most worthy of our consideration as we believed that this outstanding figure of our Syriac patristic heritage and his remarkable body of writings were ix

x

JOHN MENO

indeed worthy of further research and study. We are very appreciative and thankful for the interest that has been shown in the symposium and for the group of outstanding scholars who graciously accepted our invitation to be with us and to present their contributions to this study. We are also very grateful to all who are present with us to listen and share in the discussions prompted by the various presentations made over these coming two days. In this regard, we are especially appreciative of all those individuals who have come from a great distance to be with us. It is our hope and prayer that this symposium will be a source of a deeper appreciation of St. Jacob of Serugh on the part of all who have an interest in our Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch and the traditions and patristic contributions of Syriac Christianity. It is our intention, God willing, to publish the papers presented during this symposium, as well as others still in preparation, together with introductory material and a detailed bibliography for further reading and study. Finally, I wish to take this opportunity to thank all who in any way have contributed toward the success of our symposium, including its organizers, participants and supporters. Special thanks are due to the members of our Cathedral Ladies Auxiliary who have so graciously agreed to provide the meals and refreshments for our two-day gathering. May God Almighty bless all concerned and may this symposium be a fitting way of both honoring the founders of our beloved St. Mark’s Cathedral and all who have been a part of the growth, life and character of our congregation over the past half century as well as an encouragement to our youth and the generations of faithful to come. Thank you and may the Lord bless you all.

Symposium Speakers Front: S. Brock, S. Harvey, S. Griffith, I. Bcheiry, A. Harrak, E. Papoutsakis, K. Dinno, G. Kiraz Middle: L. van Rompay, A. Shimunkasho With Mor Gregory John Mansour and Mor Cyril Ephrem Karim

REPENTANCE AND FASTING FROM AN ASCETICAL PERSPECTIVE: A COMPARATIVE READING OF JACOB OF SERUGH AND AN UNPUBLISHED SHORTENED VERSION OF A COLLECTION OF HOMILIES BY SEVERUS OF ANTIOCH ISKANDAR BCHEIRY INTRODUCTION For many religions, fasting, and repentance are an act which strengthens the faith. For this reason, our forefathers have dedicated many writings regarding these subjects, which have become our spiritual inheritance. My paper will focus on two patristic writings, which coincide on the very aspect of fasting and repentance. The first of the two writings is a well known poem or memrō, written by St. Jacob of Serugh, illustrating the story of Jonah and the repentance of the people of Nineveh. The second is a condensed, unpublished version of the original Homilies delivered by St. Severus of Antioch. As I mentioned earlier, we have many writings about fasting and repentance, but these specific documents were chosen because they share an interesting perspective, that is not commonly expressed in other writings, which is the ascetical view.

ST. JACOB OF SERUGH AND MEMRŌ 122 ON JONAH St. Jacob of Serugh was a Bishop of Baṭnān who lived in the 5th and 6th century, during the Christological conflict that divided the 1

2

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

Christian world. He is known as one of the foremost Syriac poettheologians, perhaps only second in stature to Ephrem the Syrian († 373) and equal to Narsai († 502). Where his predecessor Ephrem is known as the “Harp of the Spirit”, Jacob is the “Flute of the Spirit”. 1 He is best known for his impressive corpus of more than seven-hundred versed homilies, or memrē, of which only 225 were edited and published. 2 Memrō 122 on Jonah: A spiritual struggle As we take a look at his poem 122 on Jonah which is his longest memrō, published by P. Bedjan, in Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, vol. 4: 368–490, we notice a very interesting aspect of how he presents the repentance of the Ninevites. After Jonah arrived to the city of Nineveh and warned its inhabitants about the anger of God against them, the King and his court replied by ordering the whole city to be spiritually armed and fortified against the coming war. St. Jacob describes the spiritual equipment with following words: ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ... ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫̈ܗܝ ܘ ܪ ܐ ܢ‬ ̈ ‫ܓ ܬܘܪ‬ ‫̈ܬ‬ ‫̈ܕ ܕ‬ ‫ܘ ܚ‬ ̈‫ܕ‬ ̈ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܨܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܕܐ ܐܟ‬ ̈ ‫ܐ ̈ܢ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕܗ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܗܘܝ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫̈ ܬ ܕܐܬ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܕ ܕ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ̈ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܙ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ̈ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ ̈ ‫̈ ܘ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܢ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ̈ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܢ‬ ‫ܬ ܘ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܘ‬ Cf. Chesnut (1976), pp. 113–41; Hansbury (1998), p. 15–7; Honigmann (1951), pp. 3–18. 2 Cf. Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, ed. by Paul Bedjan with additional material by Sebastian Brock, in VI volumes (New Jersey: Gorgias press, 2006). 1

REPENTANCE AND FASTING ‫ܬ‬

3 ‫ܬ‬ ̈

‫ܢ ܗܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬

̈ ‫ܬ‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܚ‬

‫ܘܢ‬

‫ܪܘܢ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫̈ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܬܘܢ‬

“The King rose from his throne and took off his crown; he wore mourning clothes and prepared himself to repent (…). 3 He gathered his regiments and he put them in a row in order that they would supplicate. He extended the rows (of soldiers) to block the gaps (of the city wall) with prayers. He imposed fasting on men, women and children in order to fight according to the strength of each one of them against the anger (of God). The King was saying these words to his armies which were gathered in supplication: “Now a new uncommon war descends on us, let us wake ourselves for the victory in power. Leave the weapon and take the sackcloth instead of shields. Abandon the arrows and may the voice of supplication rise from us. Let the children and the elder stand against the anger, and let the men and women fight against the destruction. Even the one day old child should not be stopped from joining the battle, because the war is very hard, thus we should not show any sign of apathy. Let the nursing infants stand with us in the ranks, helping us to repel the evil far from us. In this war the children are stronger than the mighty ones and the battle is much easier for the infants than the men. A boy that has not committed a sin is able to defeat a thousand in this battle, thus let them come with us because through them the battle is gained”. 4

3 4

Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, p. 448, 16–7. Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, p. 449, 7–15; p. 450, 1–6.

4

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

Then, St. Jacob describes the city as a big dwelling place where everything turned into an ascetic living. To convince the angry God, and gain his mercy, the city prepared a banquet for Him, by decorating the dwelling place in a black cover, and cleansing the markets and streets with the tears of eyes. In this banquet the groom and bride showed up in an ascetic appearance. ‫ܿܗ ܕܪ‬ ‫ܘܬ ܗܘܬ ܕ ܬ‬ ܿ ‫ܬܘ ܿ ܘ‬ ‫ܕ ܠ ܬ‬ ̈ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܿܗ‬ ̈ ‫̈ ܿܗ‬ ‫̈ ܕ ܕܝ‬ ‫ܘܙ‬ ̈ ܿ ̈ ‫ܨ ܬ ܬ‬ ܿ ̈ ...‫ܬܗ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ܿ ... ܿ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̈ ̈ ̈ ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܝ‬ ̈ ̈ ‫̈ ܗܘܝ‬ ‫ܗܘܝ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̈‫ܗܘܝ‬ ‫ܐܬ‬ ‫̈ ܕܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̈ ‫ܪ‬ ̈ ‫ܘܢ‬ ‫ܗܘܝ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̈ ‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̈ ... ̈ ‫ܓ ܗܘܝ‬ ‫̈ܘ‬ ‫ܕܙܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ ̈ ‫ܕܬܨ‬ ‫ܘ ̈ܝ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̈ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕܙ‬ ‫ܘܕ‬ ...‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘܐܟ‬ ܿ ̈ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܨ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̈ ‫ܐܘ‬ ‫ܐܬܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘܐ‬ ‫̈ ܘܢ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘܐܬܬܨ ܬ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ ̈ ܙ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̈ ‫ܘܕ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̈ ‫̈ ܬ‬ ‫ܨ ܬ ܬ‬ “Nineveh made a banquet to her angry Lord so that He would come and rest at her table and be pleased by her. She dressed her house with the clothes of the free women and men and wet the markets with the tears which flowed from her eyes

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

5

(The city) decorated its doors with the sad sackcloth which show pain, and instead of incense she scattered the tears through the neighborhood (…). 5 The groom came out from his room wearing sackcloth, also the bride came out from her chamber and her head was bowed down (…). The brides threw their bright bridal dresses; they were crying and wearing the mourning clothes on their bodies. Instead of wool they wore the garments of mourning, and instead of incense sprinkled ashes on their heads. Instead of wine which was prepared for their weddings, they mingled tears with their banquets for their guests (…). The news of the fear frightened the virgins, thus they took off and threw down all the beauty of their jewelry. The young men hated all the brightness of luxury and they emaciated themselves like hermits (spending their life) in a wailing place (…). 6 The entire city came out in mourning clothes to pray and they made the day like night. The animals and the people wore the mourning garments. The country was darkened and there the color of the night was brought on by their gatherings. A dark cloud ascended from Nineveh in a clear sky. (The cloud) was full of darkness and was wearing mourning garments in great sorrow. The thunder rumbled by strong crying, and instead of rain the tears fell abundantly. There were mourning clothes, ashes, weeping, pain, crying, tears, and constant prayer with much pleading”. 7

Notes on the text: In these verses we see that the nation was in state of mourning, the city, the markets, the streets, the doors, all were covered in black. Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, p. 454, 11–6. Ibid., p. 455, 1–2, 5–10, 15–8. 7 Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, p. 456, 2–10. 5 6

6

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

Their occasion and feasts turned into mourning, and the light turned into dark. The place became a dwelling of sorrow and not of pleasure. The description of the fast and repentance which were ordered by the king of Nineveh expresses an ascetical and monastic tone. All the inhabitants of the city including the cattle are fasting and wearing black sackcloth, the monastic cloth which symbolizes the act of pronouncing that they are dead to the world and to its desires. The city was also covered by black covers like a monastery where the act of ascetic life is practiced by devoted people. In this place life turns to mourning and sorrow because of sin that occurred against the Lord. Black cloth makes them aware of their habit and reminds them of their call, and complete surrender to God. 8 Girding on sackcloth and rolling in the ashes is an act that symbolizes mourning, sorrow and repentance. Sprinkling ashes on one’s head signifies self-denial and contrite self-humiliation. The city becomes a big monastery covered with black garments, the king became like the head of this monastery, and the people were monks who offered their tears as a sacrifice, not a bloody one but a sacrifice of a broken heart. The city of Nineveh portrays a classic figure of a monk, who fasts and prays continually, wearing black sackcloth and spending its time in weeping and supplicating.

A SHORTENED VERSION OF A COLLECTION OF HOMILIES BY SEVERUS OF ANTIOCH The second writing that I would like to present regarding the same subject of fasting and repentance is the condensed, unpublished version of 4 homilies which were delivered by St. Severus of Antioch († 538). He is one of the most important authors of the Miaphysite churches in general and the Syriac-Orthodox Church in This ascetical aspect in this homily was also discussed by Robert A. Kitchen in his article “Jonah’s Oar, Christian Typology in Jacob of Serugh’s Mēmrā 122 on Jonah” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies [http://syrcom.cua. edu/syrcom/Hugoye] vol. 11, no. 1 (2008). 8

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

7

particular. Severus was elected patriarch of Antioch in 512. In 518 he was deposed, by the order of Emperor Justin (518–527). He escaped to Egypt from where he continued to defend his doctrine until his death in 538. Among Severus’s writings that survived we have his 125 Cathedral Homilies that he delivered during the six years of his patriarchate in Antioch (512–518), and were quickly translated into Syriac first by Paul of Callincum (?† 530) in 528, and later by Jacob of Edessa († 708) in the second half of the seventh century. 9 A Homily on the Great Lent There is a Syriac manuscript shelf marked TCD MS 1511, in Trinity College, Dublin, which is two independent manuscripts and one extra leaf from a third manuscript, bound together. Vellum, size: 233 x 163mm, consisting of iii, 87 leaves. The first part of this manuscript (1511/1 fols. 1r–31r) belongs to the seventh century? and contains a collection of St. Severus of Antioch’s homilies. The second part (1511/2 fols. 1r–51v), goes back to the ninth and tenth century and contains a collection of homilies of St. Cyril of Alexandria, Gregory of Nazianzus, and St. Severus of Antioch. The text is Esṭrāngelō, Single column, 32 lines per page, mediocre handwriting. 10 In fols. 2v–6v of the second part we have a homily on the ̈ ‫ܨܘ‬ ‫ܕ ܬ ܐܟ ܕ‬ Great Lent, entitled: Reminder of the recommendations regarding the Holy Great ‫ܕܐ‬ Lent. This homily is a shortened version as we mentioned above, of a collection of Cathedral homilies on Lent by St. Severus of Antioch n.15, 11 39, 12 66, 13 68, 14 which were delivered in Antioch around 513 and 514, and were published in Patrologia Orientalis with a French translation from a manuscript that goes back to the eight century. Cf. Youssef and Allen (2004). Cf. Bcheiry (2004). 11 Cf. Graffin (1976), t. 38, f. 2, pp. 418–34. 12 Cf. Graffin (1972), t. 36, f. 3, pp. 504–20. 13 Cf. Brière (1912), t. 8, f. 2, pp. 331–49. 14 Cf. Ibid., pp. 367–88. 9

10

8

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

Peculiar Shortened Version This short version is peculiar because it differs from the original in many aspects, such as structure, form, focus, interests, audience and context. First of all it is an abbreviated version of the original homilies, and also a restructured homily in which some parts of the original were selected and arranged to correspond to the context of the later editor’s interest. This version begins with the Genesis, when God created man and adorned him with spiritual and divine beauties in order to trace His indescribable and inexpressible power and to comprehend God’s wisdom. However, Satan envied man’s honor, and plotted to hunt him by his deception. Satan achieved his plan by mingling the evil of his deception in the mind of man, in this way darkness and suppression of the Grace of God operated, which with its vanishing, the unavoidable contraries entered: Instead of life death, instead of health sickness, instead of blessing curse, instead of joy anxiety, and instead of Paradise exile. However, God sent His Son for our salvation that became the head of the new creation. In an unchangeable way, He was incarnated in order to be baptized for our sake even though he was not in need of purification. He also accepted to fast. He came down to wrestle against the adversary, making our fight His own. The reason why Jesus accepted to wrestle against Satan in the desert was to weaken Satan for our sack, making him easy to be crushed by us. In this homily, fasting was presented as a struggle against the evil spirits, who fight against us concerning heavenly things. Also we fast to purify our selves, and die with Christ. So that we die with Him and with him we shall be glorified. Besides fasting as the main theme of this short version, many other subjects appear as instructions and recommendations which help Christians to arrive to the state of purity before God such as: repentance, humbleness, diligent prayer, abundant tears, charity, forgiveness, bringing back a sinner to the way of God, asking prayers from true priests, participating in the holy sacraments, receiving holy communion, and asking the priest of the church to pray upon the sick people. Some of these instructions were followed by examples from the Holy Scriptures such as: The repentance of the people of Nineveh, King David and Menasha,

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

9

Daniel, Jesus’ baptism by John, tax collectors and adulteresses who were declared righteous, the robber who qualified to enter paradise. Monastic and Ascetical Tone: In contradiction to the original homilies, which were addressed to ordinary parishioners, the short version remodeled the theme according to a monastic tone. This is shown through the special expressions that are found in the shortened version such as: ̈ ‫ܕ̈ ܕ‬ ، ̈ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ ܗܝ‬، ‫ܐܦ‬ ‫ܗ ܢ‬

‫ܐ‬ ‫ܐܬ‬ ̈ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܬ‬

، ‫ܬ‬ ، ‫ܨܘ‬

، ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܪ ܕ‬ ‫ ܘ‬، ̈

‫ܘܐ‬

، ܿ ̈

‫ܐܪ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬

“We cleanse ourselves from the dead deeds, mortifying our bodies on earth, by fasting, self-denial, and constant prayer; which is the fruit of fasting. Through (these deeds) the ancient saints were exalted, especially Moses, Elijah, and the children of the house of Hananya”. 15

‫ ܕ‬، ،

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘ‬

،

̈

‫ܕܐ‬

، ‫ܕ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܪܘܬ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܕܪ‬ ‫ܬ‬

‫ ܘ‬، ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܪ ܘ‬ ، ̈ . ‫ ܗܝ ܕ‬،

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ، ، ‫ܘܕ‬

‫ܢ ܐ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܘ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫̈ܬ‬ ‫ܬ‬

‫ܘ‬

“Therefore, it is important to have the help of God, through which we may be saved from the spirits of evil, and from the endless suffering. We find this (to be ready and prepared) through vigil and constant efforts in fasting, pure prayers, loving of the poor, visiting the sick, and by sanctifying the soul and the body which are gained through hard work”. 16

‫ ܘ‬،

‫ܦ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ ܕܐܢ‬،

15 16

See the appendix, paragraph 31. Appendix, paragraph 59.

‫ ܘ‬، ‫ܿܗ‬

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ ܕܬ‬،

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬

10

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY ܿ

‫ ܕ‬،

‫ܐܪ‬

‫ܕ‬

̈‫ܕ‬

‫ܡ‬

“Because of our transgressions, we were punished by being wearied and exhausted, and not to rejoice or have pleasures. The soul that loves God is not permitted to leisure its body. If it (the soul) doesn’t mortify the body every day on the earth, Christ won’t be able to live in”. 17

،

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬

،‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫ܐ ܘܗܝ‬

، ̈ ‫ܘܬ ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ، ‫ܪ‬ ، ‫ܬ‬ ، ‫ܘܬ‬ ، ‫ܪܘܬ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܬܘܒ ܐ‬ ‫ ܐܬܪ ܕ‬، ‫ܘ ܗ ܕ ܪ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬

‫ܐ‬ ̈

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ ܒ‬

“But they (apostles) plucked the brutality of weaknesses; by means of constant fasting, self-denial, vigil, lying on the ground, and many other works of virtues. They were exalting with joy: “we think about the high above and not about earthly things”, the place of Christ, who sits at the right of the Father”. 18

Ascetical Expressions In these mentioned paragraphs we notice an emphasis on the idea of mortifying the body every day on earth, through an ascetic way in self-denial; ‫ܬ ܐ‬ in of Christian life: ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ in constant fasting; ‫ܪ‬ constant prayer; ‫ܕ‬ ‫ ܘ‬through vigil and constant efforts; ‫ ܐܪ‬in lying on the ground; because as principle the soul that loves God is not permitted to leisure its body. If the soul doesn’t mortify the body every day on the earth, Christ won’t be able to live in. All of these expressions and terms we don’t find them in the originals one, and which present fasting and repentance as a way to mortify the body in order to liberate the spirit and clean the soul to reach the kingdom of God.

17 18

Appendix, paragraph 60. Ibid., paragraph 64.

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

11

CONCLUSION In closing, St. Jacob projects his monastic interest through the words and acts of Ninevites and their king. The whole nation became an example and model of repentance. Fasting and repentance are an act of spiritual struggle against the fruits of their own transgressions. Thus, through penitence they die with their former sins and they live by the grace of God’ forgiveness. This view coincides with the interest of the short version of a collection of homilies by Severus of Antioch, which remodels the theme of this collection into a monastic tone. This monastic remodeling developed from an ordinary Christian community into a monastic circle, when the monasticism was the element which strengthened and formed the basis of the Syriac orthodox church in the 6th, 7th and 8th century. The ascetics were a people who were dedicated to a style of life that was inspired by the picture of athletes presented by St. Paul’ letter to the Corinthians “You know that while all the runners in the stadium take part in the race, the award goes to one man. In that case, run so as to win! Athletes deny themselves all sorts of things. They do this to win a crown of leaves that withers, but we a crown that is imperishable. I do not run like a man who loses sight of the finish line. I do not fight as if I were shadowboxing. What I do is discipline my own body and master it, for fear that after having preached to others I myself should be rejected” (I Cor. 9:24–7).

APPENDIX Unpublished Shortened Version of a Collection of Homilies by Severus of Antioch. The Syriac text @μÉiga†@b“î‡Ô@bàìc@Þà@aóÕćïÑi†@…a@aòíä†üÉà(fol. 2v) .1 Z@ aòíÝïÝ·@ZbîćüÜaì@bïåyìg@ahÐí“i@ûóicì@Zb“ä5Ü@aüÜa@‡jÈ@‡Ø@óï“î‹i N2 @ìû@bÐ@üÜ@lüî@bvïuŠì@bîbÐ@a‹àíÈì@Zaòìòíïà@ý†@aòíjïi@Zaóïi@òíïÝ“i @æî†@æîüåà@Zbîy@aìüä@ûòćüïàò†@æà@æîüåà@Zbåîyóà@üÝØ@bäû@báÝȆì@Zkîdä@b®‡¾† Za‹à @aóÝà@æà@ÞÉ܆ì@båÝÝàóà@ý@üÝï¨@Zæîćyóà†@μÜû†@aòíiŠì@a‹Ðí’@‡ïi†@båÙîa@N3 Nˇä@biìüî†@ûóáÙ¨@ZæÝØóćà†@μÜû†@b8íi@æî†@‡ïi@ZkÕÉä

12

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY @æàì@ZbîüÜa@b®†@æà@ñûíïÕy‡ä@båÙîa†@‘‹Ðòaì@Zac‹ÕÝØa@û‹Õîbi@ây@Zaìû@båà@N4 NüÝÙä†@͖ͮ͠΍͵@bjïà@aìüä@båØû†@Zaìû@æ«@‰i†@aòŠóïà@aóØŠíi

@aóØŠíi†@þïy@7u@aìû@μ“È@ZŠíÉä†@aìû@adà@ý@a7Õi@ìa@óîbïÝu@a†û†@Þàì@N5 Nü“Ñä@ßíÕä@ñûćì‡îbi@ìû†@üÜ@ÚÝà@ZüÝî†@aóî7Ô@aòíä‡jÉà@æà@aóîüÜa @a‡ïya†@aóïiüÝ“Ü@‰ïÙȇä@aóïyíÑà@‡ïi†@”äa@adà@ý†@ñóàa@Za‡ïѾ†@aŠíå܆@bäØaì@N6 NaóïiüÝ“Ü@‰Ü@ÂáÉà@båØûì@Zbz“·@ÂÝy@bïà@óîbÉïäc@Züi @‹É@båØûì@Zb“ä‹i†@ûóïÈŠói@ûòíïÉ †@aòí“ïi@ÂÝy@ZþiíÕ܆†@ìûì@aòíà‡i@‰i@N7 ZæÝćÉä@þiíÕ܆†@μÜû†@bÕåäa@ZóïÐìa@‡Ø†@ñû@ZaóØŠíi†@ˆòíÙȇàì@båáÈ @Zaòòüi@bïû‹Ð@ÒÝy@Zaó íÜ@aóØŠíi@ÒÝy@Zaòìüî‹Ø@þïy@ÒÝy@Zaòíà@bćïy@ÒÝy@N8 ZbîŠíØa@bÐ@ÒÝy@ZbЊí @b8íi@ÒÝy@ZþáÈ@bzïä@ÒÝy @Zb“äa@âyŠì@bj @Ûa@ýa@Zb¾í“Ü@bà‡È@üÕy†@ýì@Zû†íjÈ@üåà@ðàûa@båØû@þÐaì@ã‹i@N9 Zûòćí«@ldÈì@l‹Ôòaì@ZñûíÝÈ@âyŠòaì@bàŠ†@ñüîy bïgìói@aüîhÙÜ@æà@bŠóà@ZbïÑyì@báïÙy@ (fol. 3r)@@bïa†@båÙîaì@N10@ @bïåïØ@bå¾íy@òíÜ@bäŒ@bäüiì@Züåà@ÖÐ@bäûgíØ@ç‡Éjćà†@æî†@aóÝÝćÉÜ@ZüÜ@μᨆ ZüÜ@aóïà Z@ ìû‹Øòa†@æÝîý†@Ûa@óîbä‹vÐ@æà@bŠóàì@Òîdî@Zçóć“Ñä†@bïåyìŠ@bïa@aüÜaì@båØû@N11 @æà†@bàìc@‡ÕÐì@ZbÑi†@ìû@a‹î솆@aóïà‡Ôì@aóáïÝy@ñû@ïÔ@òíÜ@æî†@þÉà @bä‡ÔíÐì@bïćjäì@bí¹@‡ïi@Zæ“ÑåÜ@‰Ü@†üÉà@bïà‡Ô@ìû@a‹Õîýì@ZaóïåÜćìû@μÜû@aóïgò ZçíïÝ−ìa† ý@ @çóÝà@‡Ø@Zaò‡y@aóî‹i†@b“îŠ@aìû†ì@Zbiaì@aüÜa†@aóÝàì@a‹i@ìû@bzï“à@çíu‡iì@N12 @bćïà@•‡Õä†@ýa@Zaìû@Öïå@ý@ìû@bïØì†@ÞÈ@‡Ø@‡áÈ@æ܆@båÙîa@Zb“ä‹i@aìû@óîbåÑÝyó“à Ncc‹ä@båïäò†@bć“î‹Üì @æÝî†@aŠ‡Üì@ZðàŠòa@aŠ‡ÝÉi@ÞjÔí܆@bäíuýì@Zóîbä‹i‡à@ÞjÔ@bàìdïÜì@båØû@N13 @bji‡ÝÉjÜì@Zûòí܆@ìû@bäíuý@æåÝ«òa†@æÜ@üÜ@ÚØ‹à@ã‡Ô@‡Ø @Zû‡jÈ@üÝî† Nû‡jÈ@í“jØó¾@Þï܆@Zaòíåï؆¾@ÖÈ@bå’óØóàì @æåu@òí܆@aóáïÙy@aòíä‹i‡àì@Zaòí弋à†@aòíiŠ@‰îóîa@bá؆@ðÜ@bÕiòaì@N14 @bióØ@‹àa@7u@båà@ZæÜ@ñíy†@aüÜa@óÝy††@b9ìŠì@ZaŠóïà@a‹i솆@bÐí ì@Zò‹Èóa Zac‹ÕÝØa@æà@bäóä†@Zb’†íÔ†@byìŠ@æà@‹i†òa@Ëí“î@æî‡îû@ZçíïÝ−ìa†@b“î‡Ô @ îbåÑÝyó“à@ý†@bic†@7u@ñüi@Zbá¨@bïåïic@bÔŠí†@aóćz’í¾@a†û@Óa@‡Ø@N15 ó @æåîŠóȆ@Šói@æà†@æÜ@׆Œ†@aí«@‡Ø@Z‹É@μÑÝy@aóćï“äa@æîüÝØ@a†üi@Zb“ä‹i@aìüä Za‹i†@båïic@æà@íÜì@byìŠ@æà@‹i†óäì@ZbïÝćÉà@bćïy@òíÜ@bå“ä†@Zbćïåi@óáï†@aòíjïi

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

13

@μÜû@Zæî‹i†óà@byì‹i†@7u@çíäû@Z‹àa@bćïàìû‹Ü@lóØ@‡Ø@‘íÜíÐ@Óa†@båÙîa@N16 @ñûìóîa@ñüi@Zb“î‡Ô@byìŠ@üÜ@ñûìóîa@bïìbi@aí’†@7u@ìû@ZaüÜa†@çìüîóîa@bïćåi @Zbia†@båïØ@‹iì aüÜa† (fol. 3v) óîbåÑÝà@Zò‹àa†@båÙîa@üi@ýa@ZbïÝćÉàì@båyìg@bćïy@ÞÈ@aìû@Öïå@ìû@båÙîa .17 @âÈ@l‹Õä†@׆Œ@båÙîa†@ÒÜbä@æåy†@Þà@ZæÜ@æćá¨ì@μzć“y†@μÜû@â’Š@óîbä‹i‡àì Zbć’ìóØói@aŠ‡ÝÉi ‘íØga@âÈ@ýa@Zbà†ì@a‹i@âÈ@ñûìóîa@ý@ZbîüÜa@bzïÝ’@‹àa†@Ûa@æi‹Ô†@Þà .18 ZbØí“y@bäû†@báÝÈ@ñ‡ïćya@âÈì@ZbćåïÝ’@âÈì@ μÜû@7u@Þà@Zaóćïåï9@μÜüi@Zçìûòí܆@æ’ìóØò@ñûìóîa@æî†@bå· .19 ZaòìŠóïà†@aóćÈì†@‡ïiì@bàìc@‡ïi@Ö¾@æåï’óØóà@æà@æåy†@Zæåî‹yóà@aóćïåï9@ 7u@aóïä5îóà@ý@Zμic@óîa7Ô@æÜ@çìó®†@μÜû†@çìü“îŠ@båì@æî†@ać†b’ .20 Zæîüåà@íÝÑä@çìüÝî†@bäûŠíØ@Þà†@μÝîa@Zæåy@båÕä@μćäû†@ñüÜ@Z‰Ü@μj“y@ aóå@ac‹ÕÝØa@û‹i†@æî‡îû@ZçíïÝ−ìa@‹àa†@Ê9@‡Ø@æÔì‹Ð@Þà@”äa@ý@ã‹i .21 @7u@a†û@Zìû@æà@aìû@‹i†óà@aòíïy@Ûa†@5ä@ZãŠ@k †@aŠíÜ@û‹i†@lìòì@Zaó“î‡Ô@ @ìû@æà@æà@æîhi†óàì@Zçìüi@a‹áȆì@þiíÕ܆@aòíä‡jÉà@íÝjÔ†ì@Zćüîóîa@μäíî†óà†@bć“äa† ZaŠ‹“i ý@æÜ@a‹Ñ’†@ñû@æà@5Ü@bå@æà@Zæåî‹i‡à@æÜ@æåy@æ“Ñä@æÜí“i†@æåy@7u@ça .22 Zßíjä@a†û†@bzï“à@æî†@aìû@‡îóÈ@båÙîa@Zæåïic@ý†@ñû@òíÜ@Zæåî‹i†óà@ 7u@æà@æåy@ZÞjÔ@μÜû@óîbåïic†ì@ZüÜ@aí«@aüÜa@aìû@‹i†óà†@ñû†@aóÝà@ýa .23 @æàò@æÜ@l‹Õà@båïäì@ã‡à@bzÐ@ça@æåïȇî@ý@Zæåïå“à@aò‹ya@aóØì‡Ü@aóØì†@æà@‡Ø@ Zbå aìû@‡îóȆ@μÝîa@ac‹ÕÝØa†@ñûíåïćäì@ñûíjć’íy@Êî‡î@ã‡Ô†@ZaüÜa@Ûa@æî†@bzï“à .24 @bÑåÙÜ@aìû@ÖÝì@Zaìû@bå“à@aó“î‡Ô@aóåî‡à@òíÜì@aìû@ߌa@biŠí¨ì@ZüÜ@l‹Õä†@ ZüÜ@l‹Õä@μᨆ@bćåïå܆@ZüÜ@aìû@߇“à@aóïØć솆@æîüåàì@ZþÙîû† ZÖÑä@ûòì‹ÕÐ@‰ÝÙ܆@Þà@Zlüî@ñûíihÕÜ@üÜ@ìû@óîbåïicì (fol. 4r) .25 Zaìüä@aòíØÜ@Öï“Ð@æÜì@ZÞ«óä@þï¢ì@ ߌa@‡Ø@Zçí“9@ìû@òíà‡i@båÔ@båï؆à@ý@þïy†@ZbäóÝïy@bå’óØóà@”äa†@båÙîaì .26 @ZbähÈíi@çìüi@‹àb¾†@Ûa@ÖÈà@‡Ø@ZaŠ†@ðÝÉćjÜ@âÝ“ä@üÜ@ìû@Zbćji‡ÝÉi†@aŠòý@ @ZóîbäóÝïy@ñûíÝÈ@μáï@‡Ø@æî‡îûì@Zíz“yòa@çìóïÉi†@Ûa@ZçíÙćî‡îbi@ñóîa@aû@ðäì‹iì† Zçí؆äì@çíäa@ÛíÐüä Zbå†@ñûíihÕÜ@üÜ@ìû@âÝ’a@Zߌa@æćᨆ@aóćïØì‡Ü@‡Ø@bzï“à@Óa@båØû .27 ZbjîóØ@‹i†òa†@Óa@bäüÝà@

14

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY Óa†@μÝîa@Zbć“ïåØ@çíäû@bć“y@‡ïi@üáÈ@l‹Ôa@‡Ø@ZñüïØŒ@abïv@þïy@æà@båØûì .28 @󼊆@ìüi@ZbÕî‹@b¢í’†@ìüi@Zb‹Ø@󼊆@ìüi@Zać†íya@çìüîóîa@bØ‹’†@μÜû†@ @Ûa@Za‹ióà@ð܆@Ûa@ñüî‹Ô@ãŠ@k †@aŠí @Óa†@ìüÜ@Naòhîóî@μÜû†@båïåÔ†ì@ZbÑØ Zaóć“ïi@æîüÝ؆@b“îŠì@bàý†

‡Ø@Zbz@ac‹ÕÝØa@l‹Ô@þć·@æîćüiì@‹àbä@”äa†@Ûa@bÐìc‹Ñi@üi@Zbåïä@æî†@bäû .29 @ìüÜ@aŠòa@ßóä†@båÙîa@Züåï؆@bí¹@Ûa@æÑÙä†@æćïàíî@μÉiŠa@Šói@æà@û‹vÑÜ@Öj’@ Züi@ðàŠa@bćïå“y@bćj’í¨@Zæi†@Ûa@aóïÈŠói@íÜì@Zbåà† þÙä@þÐa@Zkîó؆@Ûa@‡jÈ@ý@aóïy†@Zb“Üí @ÞÙÜ@aìû@ñûìóîa@båØŠ†óà@ý .30 @üÜ@aüÜaì@a‹¾†@Ûa@ýa@Zç슇Éä†@íÜ@ZíihÔ@bØþà@båïä@Šói†@ìüÜ@ZüàíÑi@|Øó’a@ ZÒÜa†ì@׋Іì@Zðäòa†ì@ñyòa†ì@Z|j“ä@æåy@Óa†@ìüÜ@Zçí“á“ä ZaòíîíåÉi@Zbàìdi@ZbÈŠa@ÞȆ@bćà†üÜ@æåîóï¿@‡Ø@Zaóćïà@a‡ćjÈ@æà@æ“Ñä@b؇äì .31 @Zbćïà‡Ô@bć“î‡Ô@Óa@íydäòa@7u@μÜüi@Zbàìc@æà†@aŠbÐ@‰îóîa†@ñû@Zaóåïàa@aòíÜdi@ Zbïååy@óïi†@çíäû@bïÝ ì@bïÜaì@b’íà@óîbÉî‡îì †ü†@båÙîa@Zììû@æćî‡jÈ@bàìc@çìüćïïy@çìüÝÙÜì@ZíÑÕäòa@bć“î‡Ô@bćzïÝ’@Óa@μÜüÜ .32 ZçìûóÝà@ï؋І@bióØ@ Zb“ug@b“¼@μÜû@‡ïi@æåïy@ý@‡Ø@Zb؆óä@ðćya@æåy@Óa@μÜüi (fol. 4v) .33 @Zaóïy†@bćåÝÉà@çìüîóîa†@μÜû@ZbÔíì@aóáÉ ì@aó“uì@aòyì@bä‹àa@aóÉá“·@ Naóïà@aòí¾†@aóuŠ@ÞØ@bïÝàó“à@çìćüî‡îbi† bïà‡Ô@ñûìóîa†@bäóií @bàíî@ìü܆@båÙîa@Zæåïºc@aóćåiŒ@bćåàò@çìüåà@‡zÝÙÜ@‡Ø .34 NbÔì‹Ð†@aózj“à@ûóáïÔ†@ìû@Zçììó“ä@bïåïàòì@ æć’óØóà†@Zaòí“ïi†@byìg@ÞjÔíÜ@ñûìóîa@bäíua†@Zbàìc†@ˆóÝÈ@æåÑÝî@æî‡à@aû .35 ZæÜ@bÉi@bzï“à@âÈ@òí¹ì@b؆óä†@Óa@lìòì@Zaóćïåï9@μÜû@Þà@æáÈ@ ‡Ø@Züå¨íÐ@aí®@óîbïÑy†@æÜ@׆Œ@ÞïÙàì@Z|ió“ä@üáȆì@üáÈ@òí¹†@båÙîa .36 Zbïä‹i@bzïä†@aòìïÝu@Þà@ZæåïÙi@ìa@æåî‹áØóà@ý@ ZæÜ@aìû@l‹Ôóà@bàìc@ìû@óîbïa@Zæîìû@æîóîa@aüîhØì@bïÝáć“à@ý@‡Ø@æà@âî‡Ô@æà .37 @bî‹Ô@Zñûìóîa@bïíy†@bàíî@ZbïÉïj’@by7i@aò‹Éi@ZbåØû@‹àaì@b’íà@7u@‡ÕÑà@ @båÕií’†ì@bïíy†@bàíî†@%@Þà@ZçíØóć“Ñä@íÙÙàì@ZçíÙÜ@aìüä@b“î‡Ôì ñûìóîa Zaìû@‹àbä@bäûŠíÙi@μÝïáȆ@çíäüÜ@bïa@Óa†@båÙîa@ZíÝjÔ@bàìc@æà†@bÙØí¾ .38 Zbå¾íy†@b䊆íÈ@Þà@aí؆@ìa@aŠu†@bibÙÜ@çì5ïä†@ ãìdä@óîbÝ“à†@Zμj’ćí¢@æåîòa@aóïÝá“à@aóïÈŠò@òí܆@Þà@æî†@b’û .39 Zbzï“à@æÔì‹Ðì@biŠ@çüÜa@æà@Zæåî‡ÕÐóà@

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

15

Z‘ì‹ÑÝØ@æà@æî†@|“àóà@ZÚ“îŠ@í“à@Zóäa@ãac†@ñóàa@æî†@óäa@Z‹àa@7u@båà .40 @aò‹ya@aóå¾@íÜ@Zbåȇîóà@ýa@aŠ†@ñûìóîa@bïä‹vÐ@í܆@Þà@ýa@ZdïÝy@aŒaŠ@òí܆@ìû@ Zb“Ñä†@ˆòíå“î‹Ü@æî†@íäû@Zb“î‹Ü@ça@ýa@Z|“á¾@‡ÕÐ@a‹vÐ@æà bz“·@퓹@ÞïØû@bäüÜ@Zü“î‹i@báïÙy†@ñûíåćïȆ@ZóÜûíÕÜ@7àa†@båÙîa .41 @ߌ‹Èóà@Z|“à@båØû†@ìû†@bå¢óć“à@ać‡jÉi@Zby슆@þć·@ZbîüÜa@ ìû@‰iüî@a†üÝà†@ZüÜ@bi‹Ôóà@aóÙïÙà@byì‹iì@bÕïz’@bjÝi†@a‡îa (fol. 5r) .42 æ@ à@Zb®ì@båÐóä†@ýa@ûòí·@bäa@bic@ý†@7u@‹àa@ZüÝî†@aóÝïju†@b䊆íÉÜ@Zb弋à@ Zíîí0@óîa@bć“î‡Ô@bćió؆@aòbćïv@aóćïØì† ZçìüïÝȆ@aüÜa†@båî†@Šu@æà@íiŒìó’aì@Zçìûòí“ïi@æà@bćîíåïä@íï؆òa@ÞïØû@a†üi .43 Zçìûóå@Þj®ì@ÛíÐüä†@ãu†@ Šói@æà@ZÖÐ@ü“Ñä@ÞÈ@ìû†@ìû@aòíà@æà@æà@ìû@ZíÔ‹Ðòa@b“åàì@‡îì†@Óa@‰i .44 Zûóïy@ðÐa@ÞÈ@bïjä@çóä@æà@Øòa†@ ‡jȆ@aòíÑå ì@bjîí@Þà@%ó’a@çìü܆@ZbïÝćji†@agíaì@bćïj’@æà@æî†@ìû .45 @båÜí’@æî†@bäüÜ@Zbïïjä@båØí’@Óa@üÜ@ò‹ä@æà@ìüÜì@ZaüÜý@uŠaì@âÝ’Šìbi@ ZaòíÙÝà† aóćj †@a5ì@ZaóáïÔ†@aŒaŠ@óîa‹îüä@aìû@ðÝuòa@Þï؇È@ý†@ìû@båii@μÜûì .46 @ðaì@Z‹ji@bzï“à@ðÝuòa@æî†@‡Ø@Zaìû@ayóà@óîbîŠíÈŒì@agíÈÜ@Zæî‡îóȆ@båÈgíÐì@ Za‹vІì@b“Ñä†@bå¾íy@æÙ’ì@Zçòćí«@ldÈ@ZæćïibØ ZbÑÜ@ñìó’a†@bï¡@ZíÔ††Œa†@aóćïäŒì@bćÙ·@Zaòíjîò@óydäòa@óîbiŠìŠ .47 @aòìŒì‹Øì@aòízïÝ“i@3ca†@bÐ솋i@Zaò‡ÉÜ@aóaó’@âïòòa@aòíåºüi†@aŠíÑÙi@ ZçíïÝ−ìa† |ïÑä@bióØ@æà@æåïÑÝîì@Zaìûò†@׆Œ@aòíjîò@ñû@båÙîa†@ZbÉjä†@adïÜa@ÞïÙàì .48 @æÐaì@ÞïÑä†@ìüÜ@âïÔò†@ñû@bîdàì@Z‰Ü@óîa@abïv@þïy†@ñû@aò‹î‹’@aòíjîò†@Zbyì‹i@ @Zaòa@aó“ïi†@bÙ@òíÜ ‰ï‹Ñä@óîbïÝu†ì@Zaóïy†@aòíåïÝàì@bï܇È@æà@óïà‡Ô@Zaìûò†@ýì@båØû .49 @aóî†íáÉà@Zæåyíî@æà@ì‡áȆ@çíäû@ììû@æî‡jȆ@çíïÝ−ìbi@kîóØ@æî†@båØû@Z‰ïyjäì@ Zaìû@Œ‹Ùà†@ñû@aòíjîò† ÛóÈŠìa@%@ñćüy@ZþÔ†ì@aŠíu†@ñû@aóïy@Þà@ZaüÜa@òíÜ@‹àa@‡îì†ì@båØû .50 @ò5Èa@óäaì@ZñòíÝÙ@ÞÈ@b@a†ìa†@ò‹àa@ZÚåà@óïØ@ý@ðÝî†@aòćíïí¹@ýì@ @bÉ’ì‹Ü NðÝî†@aóïy† (fol.5v)

16

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

òíÙïÙà@æî†@μØŠói@ZñûćíÝà@ñŠí“i@x‹Õà@ü“ÑåÜ@bÕ†@Z‹àa@û‹i@çíáïÝ’ì .51 @ý@aüÜa@bÙïÙàì@bÕïz’@%@bjÜ@Zaó“ïi@üÝî†@byŠìa@æà@”äa@ÛíÐüä†ì@Zaòbïv@aóïÈŠò@ Zþà íÉuì@ZbáÔ@ÞÈ@íióîì@bÕ@bîćíåïä@í“jÜ@ZaóÙïÙà@byìŠì@bÕïz’@7u@bjÝi .52 @üÝî†@byŠìa@æà@‡zÝØ@íïåÐòa†@ZçìüÝî†@ać‡jÉÜ@ay@‡Ø†@ìû@Zóîbzïyóà@aüÜa@òíÜ@ ZçìüÜ@‡jɾ@ÞÝà†@ñû@aó“ïi@æà@ðÝØòa@Zû‡îbi†@ýíÈ@æàì@aó“ïi Z‡îì†@‹àa@ñó®aói@óîý@ZaüÜý@l‹Õä@aòbćïv@bćÉà†ì@aóćïÑy@aòćíÜc†@lìòì .53 @óîìû@xà@ñó“àì@ZóÉÜ@bá¨@Ûa@báÔì@ZðÝî†@b‹ÉÜ@þïÜ@ÞÙi@óÉicì@ NbćÉà‡i ñćûíÝu‹Ü@bćÉà‡i@óÉic@‡Ø@Zćûóïy@æà@óï؆òa@aóïy@ñû@aòóäa@Óa@μÜüi .54 Zbzï“à†@ ZÚÝî†@aćüy@Þà@aüÜa@æà@%@ðÉi@ZóîbÉïÑ’@aóÔ†Œ@ßóä†@Óa@ZμÜû@âÈì .55 @Z‹àa@báïÙy@”äaì@ZŠdä‡ØíjåÜ@Þîbïä†@bïjä@‹àa@Z×ì‹Ð@aóÔ†i@ÚïÜćíÈ@çìüÝÙÜì@ @Zaćüy@μÈóà@aóÔ†Œì@aòíåºüi† lìò@ZçíÙÜ@Öió“ä†@bÔì‹Ð@‹àa@íÔíj’@Zæi@μÝÙà†@μÜüÜ@×íj“ä†ì@æî†@a‡zØa .56 ü@ Ýî†@b“Ñä@b«@ZüyŠìa†@aòíïÉ @æà@bï¨@ÚÐüà†@%@ìû@ZaòíïÉ @æà@byý@ÚÐüä†ì@æî†@ Zñûìćüy†@abuí@bÈì@Zaòíà@æà %@ahÕä@Zbć“î‡Ô@aŒahi@æåïÐòìó“à@aìüä@óîbåïàa†ì@Za‹îh’@bćäü؆@aòćíÜc@ßb“ä†ì .57 @μÕió“à@üÜ@æî‡ïjÈ@aćüy@æÐa†ì@ZñûíÝÈ@çíÜdäì@üî‹Ø†@båîa@aò‡È†@bć“ï“ÕÜ@ @bćïy@çíÙÜ@óïÜ@Züà†@çìó’òì@b“äa†@û‹i†@û‹vÐ@çíÝØaò@ý@ça†@Z‹àa@ç‹àì@ZüÜ ZçíÙàíåÕi aòac@ÞØ@æà@bćÉà‡i@çóć“Ñä@×싹@ZæÜ@óîa@båiŒ@‡È@Zðćya@æåïȇî@μÜû@‡Ø .58 @μÜû@aóćàíïi@óîa‹îóîì@Zaóïy†@ ý†@Zæåïjïàì@æåî‡îóÈ@aìüäì@ZaòíjîóÜ@a‡îa@æÜ@μiüî†@Zbàìc†@bć“î‡Ô (fol.6r) Næä‡äíȆ@aóÉ’@ìa@bå@æî†@íäû@Zbjåu@aòa@ñóàa@æåïȇî@ æàì@Zaòí“ïi†@byìg@æà@adÐóä@üi†@ZaüÜa†@b䊆íÈ@æÜ@kä†@adïÜa@çíu‡iì .59 a@òćíÜdiì@bàìdi@Zabïv@þáÉiì@aŠü“i@ZbäüÜ@æî†@æåïzÙ“à@Zb¾í’@ý†@bÕïå’ò@ @þćáÈ@‡ïi†@ñû@Za‹vІì@b“Ñä†@aòí“î‡Õi@Zaüîh؆@aòìŠíÉi@ZbćåÙà@ó¼‹i@Zaóćï؆ ZbïåÔóà@aòíåå᫆ Zabuóäì@ÖåÐóä†@aìû@ýì@Zbä‡ÔíÐ@5È@Þà@æåïáï@Ó‹ óäì@7u@aþä† .60 @bćà†üÜ@ãíïÝØ@aóï¿@ý@ça†@ZbïÝ’@ý@ˆ‹vÐ@abuò†@ZaüÜý@bj«†@b“Ñä@bäüÝàì@ Zbîdà@ý@bzï“à@‰i@bybä†@ZbÈŠa@ÞȆ

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

17

ZˆóÝà@ì5ï@abćïv@bćädïÜìaì@Zóîa‹î‹’@üÜ@íÑÕäòaì@ñûíÑÝî†@çíäû@æî†üì .61 @ýì@abćïv@bćädïÜìbi†ì@Zæi@‹»@aòíä5ïà@bädïÜìa†@Zæîhàa@bîüÜa@bzïÝ’@âÈì@ NaüÜa†@ûòíÙݾ@Þɾ æàì@Z†d®@þjy@a‹i@æà@ZËŠŒ@‹ji†@æà†@ZaóćîüÜa†@bćáïÙy@Ûa@7u@ììû@μȇî .62 Z”åØ@âÝÉ܆@bćïy@byìŠ@æà@ZËŠŒ@ì‹i†@ ìû@Za‹i†@aóvïug†@bćuü܆@ahÉi@Zb“Ñä†@ˆòíå“î‹Ü@ììû@μÙ“«@ý@bØŠû@æàì .63 ‰@ Ü@Öj’@ýì@Zb“ÑåÜ@aìû@båäòì@bååÈ@òíà‡iì@ZhïÈòóà@aòbïv@aòíÉjì@bái@æà†@ N‰Ü@óîa@aüÜa@æà†@ñû@aòìŠb¨@ˆìó’òì@ZŠíyò@ÞÉ܆ bjÙ“·@ZaŠü“i@ZaòíîíåÉi@Zabïv@bàìdi@Zbć“y†@aòíî‹î‹ÉjÜ@ììû@μ“åÙà@‡Ø@ýa .64 í@ Üì@bÈŠóä@ÞÉ܆@Zììû@μÕÈà@aò쇢@ZaòìŠóïà†@bähya@lìò@þćáÉiì@ZbÈŠa@ÞȆ@ Zbia†@båïº@æà@lóî†@ñûìóîa@bzï“à†@Šòa@ZbÈŠbi†@μÜû óîbåïic†@ìû@bjïÜc@Zbzï“à†@û‡y@æåïåïÉ @‡Ø@Za†‹ä@æåy@Óa@μÜû†@aóćjÕÉi .65 @Z‹ji@μÑÝy@5ï@ ÞÈ@ÞïØò@‡Øì@Zbzï“à†@þïÑÔ@ìa@a‹uò@aìüä@æåà@”äa@ýì .66 ZhÉ†@aóïähya@aòhïÑ’@ÞÈ@ìa@aóÔ†Œ@ (fol. 6v)@ ÞȆ@b¼hi†@Zæî‡jÈ@abïćv†@ñû@Zb‹Ø†@aóćïåÙjÜóà@ý@aòćìbïäû@æà@‡yòóä .67 @æî†@aój @ÒÝy@Zμbà@aó“ïjÜ@aóji@íÜì@ZμåiŒ@óîbä‹vÐ@çíájä†@bćåÙà@ ZμÝÕ’@aó“ïi ‡Ø†@aìû@ýì@Zaóćj @‡jÈ@ÖåÐóà@‡Ø†@ZûòíÜ@óîa@biŠ@bàíà@Z‹É@a†û†@7u@ìû .68 @bäüÜ@Zaóïä‹à@þÔ@ò‹i@Ûa@üÜ@æàà@bîì@æà@ìü܆@ZaòìŠóïà@|ÝÐ@ü“Ñä@Ó‹àì@dïÜa@ Zbií @æî† ìû@æàìdi@bÉjä@ZbІ@b8íi@æà@æåÝÑä@aóÜíØbà@‡ïi†@æåïȇî@ÞïØû@‡Ø .69 ZæÜ@óÙÝàòa@ñûíÑÝy†@ñû@aòíÙÝà@æî†@çíÝà@æä‡iìa†@ã‡à@ Zb“î‡Ô@byìŠì@bia@âÈ@b¢í’@ü܆@Zç‹à@Ëí“î@bzï“·@Zaìó“ä†@aìüä@æÝØ@‰Ü† .70 @@@Nμàa@μáÝÈ@âÝÉÜì@æiÝÙiì@b’ûì@ The English translation: 1. (fol. 2v) Reminder in short form for the Holy Great Lent. 2. In the beginning God created man and adorned him with spiritual and divine beauties: with rationality, with free-will, with the grace of immortality. (God) granted him a beautiful and desirable dwelling-place, a paradise, which is planted toward the

18

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

East, and this entire visible world: parts of which he would be beholder at its wonders, and parts of which, he would be a ruler. 3. By means of the beauty and greatness of this visible (world) he would trace His (God) indescribable and inexpressible power. And by means of the pleasure of the understandable (parts), he would comprehend the wisdom of the Giver. 4. What happened? Satan envied his honor, and plotted as how to cast him away from the brightness of God and from the finest blessing, in which he was guarded; doing so he would become ripe for the hunt of his (Satan) deception. 5. And because he (Satan) was unable to act this (his plan) openly or by force, because the power of the divine grace is stronger than his powerful influence. He (Satan) deceived him (man) to kill himself by his own hands. 6. And just as the fire of the lamp, no one can extinguish the flame that is burning in it by blowing it out, but can deceitfully mingle water with oil, and thus he quenches (darkens) the flame. 7. In this metaphor, the adversary (Satan) mingled the evil of his deception in the mind of man, in this way the darkness and the suppression of the blessing operated, which with its vanishing (of the blessing), the unavoidable contraries entered: 8. Instead of life, death; instead of health, sickness; instead of blessing, curse; instead of boldness, shame; instead of ease, weariness; instead of joy, anxiety; and instead of Paradise, exile. 9. In spite of this, His creator didn’t neglect him and didn’t cast him away for ever. But, being good and loving man-kind, He saw him (man) fallen, but had mercy on him, He approached him and bandaged his wounds. 10. (fol.3r) And like a wise and diligent doctor who sustains sick men with nourishments that fit them, He cuts from him the causes that spread sickness, and in this way He brings him to natural healing. 11. In the same manner, God the spiritual doctor of our souls, takes care and sustains in a bodily way those who were sick, and He raises them to the former and healthy Catastasis of the living which was in Paradise. And He commanded to fast from material nourishments, reminding our souls of the former honor, through the law, prophets, and the commandments of the Gospel. 12. Therefore, Christ who is the Son and the Word of God, the Father, and who became the head of the new creation, when

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

19

for us, in an unchangeable way, He was incarnated in order to be baptized for our sake, even though he was not in need of purification, but to sanctify the water and to break the heads of the dragon. 13. In a dispensational way, He accepted to fast. He came down to wrestle against the adversary, making our fight his own. At the beginning He weakened him (Satan) for our sake, because we were weak in wrestling against him, as it was difficult to defeat the adversary and the fighter, making him easy to be crushed. 14. I realize how great the mercy and wise dispensation worked for our race, and the picture of this wise management and proof of the fear of God that he showed us, for what the Holy book of the Gospel said: “then Jesus was led by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by Satan”. 19 15. Even though this (previous quote) is understood according to the measurements of voluntary humbling, it’s because he intended to be man (without ceasing to be God) in an unchangeable way. Through which, he experienced all humankind’s aspects for us, showing us that after we will be enriched with the grace of adaptation, in order to head toward the exalted life, and to be led by Spirit and not by the will of flesh. 16. as Saint Paul wrote to the Romans saying “those who are led by the Spirit are sons of God”. 20 He (Jesus) is equal to the Holy Spirit’s essence, because (fol.3v) He is God, and from the same nature of the Father. 17. Why did He (Jesus) need the spiritual and sublime life? As I mentioned, He (Christ) pointed out in an instructional and manageable way, the things that serve and be-fit us, so that we learn how we have to fight with the adversary in battle. 18. Because our struggle as the divine apostle says “is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world”. 21 19. Why is our struggle against them (demons)? It’s for the things which are heavenly. For because these are seen as heavenly Mat 4:1. Rom 8:14. 21 Eph 6:12. 19 20

20

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

things, we struggle to ascend through fasting and the sweat of virtues. 20. While demons, and Satan, their chief, want by force to lower us. They can not stand that we gain them (the heavenly things), from which they fell because of their sickness. 21. However, nobody hearing what the Gospel says about our savior: “then Satan led Him to the Holy city”, also “he led Him to a very high mountain”, 22 will think that He (Christ) was like an animal, led by him (Satan). This thought is from people who are foolish, and accepted the action of the adversary, that dwelt within them. And truly they are led by him (Satan). 22. If we, by our authority conduct ourselves and we are not led by Satan to something that we don’t like or don’t want, than how is it possible that Christ would stand it. 23. However, the Word that was led (in the desert) was guided by God, and He (Christ) accepted this voluntarily (the temptation). We, who move from place to place don’t know if by any trap or temptation Satan would attack us. 24. But Christ, as God, previously knew the thoughts and temptations of Satan with which he shall fight Him. He (Christ) went into the wilderness and moved to the Holy city, and went up to the pinnacle of the temple. From these places he (Satan) was enticing Him (Christ) so that he was fighting against Him with the suitable temptations. 25. (fol.4r) And willingly He (Jesus) gave in to his (Satan’s) wars, so that He talks away all his ferocity, and weakens his (Satan’s) strength, so that victory becomes easy for us. 26. Like a strong wrestler who gained undefeated strength, in likeness, Samson went to the land of the enemies to surrender to the adversaries. He was shouting, mocking them “lead me I am in your hands, and do whatever you want”, so that when they shall arrest him strongly, he would strongly drive them back and defeat them. 23

22 23

Luk 4:5, 9. Jdg 15:12–5.

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

21

27. In this manner also, Christ when he went to suitable places, he submitted himself to the wars of Satan. Because of that, it is written “he was led”. 28. Thus, He defeated him with a strong power, when he (Satan) attacked Him (Christ) with a collection of tainted thoughts, which are represented by the following: gluttony, false glory, greediness and possessing riches. As I think, the very high mountain that was mentioned represents the mother and head of all evil. 29. This temptation in person, as someone who speaks with these same words, the adversary attacked Christ, who allowed His body to become hungry for forty days in accordance with His (human) nature, in order to give chance to the tempter. This did not happen figuratively, as in us, by means of throwing tainted thoughts. 30. He (Christ) is infallible unapproachable by any blemishing as it’s written: “Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth” 24. He is the one (Christ) whom the angels approached after the temptation, not for help but to serve Him, as Lord and God. To whom we also give glory, who was seen, tempted, saved and taught. 31. And we cleanse ourselves from the dead deeds, mortifying our bodies on earth, by fasting, self-denial, and constant prayer; which is the fruit of fasting. Through this the ancient saints were exalted, especially Moses, Elijah, and the children of the house of Hananya. 32. Also the holy apostles followed these (virtues), fasting all their lives, as the book of Acts of Apostles testifies for them. 33. (fol.4v) O my brothers, through these (virtues) let us be purified, not committing sin through these five senses: I mean, hearing, sight, touch, taste, and smell. These are the entrance to sin, and through which every desire that leads to death is fulfilled. 34. Thus, we fast eight times on behalf of each one of them, in a way that they are equal to the blessed day which is the first and the eighth, which is the day of the glorified resurrection of the savior. 24

1 Pet 2:22.

22

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

35. Now we learned the reason of fasting which is the struggle against the evil spirits, who fight against us concerning heavenly things. Also that we purify our selves, and die with Christ, this is what He wants from us. 36. So that we die with Him and with him we shall be glorified. Thus, we have to show in an active way His work, without being sad or crying because of the abstinence of physical rest. 37. Before, when we were immature and sick, the fast was presented to us as medicine. For Moses commanded and said this “the tenth day of the seventh month is the Day of Atonement. Hold a sacred assembly and humble yourselves, because it is the Day of Atonement and forgiveness”. 25 38. They (the people) accept humbleness through fasting, like the doctor when he asks those troubled with sickness, to bear the pain of cutting or cauterizing, for the help of healing. 39. And now because we reached the maturity, we fast by authoritative order of our Great God and Savior Christ. 40. What did He say? “When you fast, anoint your head”, 26 of course it will be anointed, which is reserved for a mystery. And being that the battle is not bodily, but spiritual, He (Christ) did not command to anoint any part of the body other than the head, because it is the head of the soul, 41. as it was said in Ecclesiastes “The wise man’s eyes are in his head” 27 thus, we anoint with the divine oil, with the words of the Spirit, and with the glorified deeds. The person that shall be anointed shall be engaged […] 28 42. (fol. 5r) which is presented to him in a broken heart and in a humble spirit, and for this, the merciful one gave it to the help of his creature; He (God) said “I am not pleased in his (man) death but that he turn back and live”. 29 We can show this from many places in the Holy Scriptures. Lev 23:26–8. Mat 6:17. 27 Ecc 2:14. 28 The text is cut here. 29 Eze 18:23. 25 26

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

23

43. Through this the people of Nineveh were purified from their evil deeds and were saved from the judgment of God against them, who determined to destroy their city. 44. Through this, also David and Manasseh were saved, the former from the same death that he judged himself, after he was reproached by the prophet Nathan on the account of his sin. 45. The latter (Manasseh) was saved from the Babylonian captives and exiles to whom he was given, on account of the profane and defiled deeds that he deed in Jerusalem, offending God. For the former the prophetic gift was preserved to him, and the latter the authority of kingdom. 46. These occurred in the time when the Mystery of the Resurrection was not yet revealed clearly, and the hope of the future blessings and rewards were seen by children in an unclear way. When Christ appeared in flesh, healing our sicknesses, mending our wounds, and offering healing of soul and body, 47. repentance was greatly exalted through the tax collectors and adulteresses who were declared righteous, through the robber who was qualified for the paradise, through the unbeliever who was appointed foundation to the Church, through the persecutor that prospered in the apostleship and preaching the Gospel. 48. Thus, it is necessary to ask, how should repentance be? We learn from the Bible which is inspired by the Spirit, that true repentance possesses a great power and is able to raise the one who has fallen, even thought he arrived to the utmost of sin. 49. Thus it should be: first, if one recognizes its (sin) shame and rejects sin and exposes and disgraces it. This is what is written in the Gospel: “those who were baptized by John, were doing the baptism of repentance that he was preaching”. 30 50. The same thing David said to God, concerning the sin of adultery and killing, “I acknowledge my sin unto You, and my iniquity have I not hid. I said. I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and You forgive the iniquity (fol. 5v) of my sin”. 31

30 31

Mar 1:4. Psa 32:5.

24

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

51. And Solomon his son said “The righteous man accuses himself at the beginning of his speech” 32, then (showing) “a great humble conscience”, and “the man shall turn back from his evil way,” “for a broken and contrite heart, God will not despise. 33 52. In a broken and contrite heart the people of Nineveh wore sackcloth and sat on ashes. And they called God intensely, who upon seeing their deeds, and how every one of them returned back from his evil way and iniquity, withheld the harm that He had decided against them. 53. Again through diligent prayers and abundant tears to be presented to God. David said “I wetted my bed every night.” 34 “And I ate ashes like bread and I mingled my drink with weeping”. 35 54. In this way also, the sinner woman was purified from her sins, when she washed the feet of Christ with her tears. 55. With this also we have to give charity abundantly, “thus ask from God (mercy) for your sins and break away from your iniquities by doing righteous deeds”. 36 This is what the prophet Daniel said to Nebuchadnezzar, and one philosopher said “through faith and charity the sin will be canceled. 56. Equally, we should forgive those who trespass against us, Our Savior said “forgive and be forgiven” also to bring back a brother from deception. “The one, who brings back a sinner from the deception of his way, enlivens his soul from death and cancels most of his sins”. 57. Also, to ask prayers from true priests and always participate in the holy sacraments and the sick should ask the priests of the church in order to pray over him. And even though he had committed sins, they will be forgiven”. 37 Our Lord said

Pro 18:17. Psa 51:17. 34 Psa 6:6. 35 Psa 102:9. 36 Dan 4:27. 37 Jam 5:14–5. 32 33

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

25

“unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves”. 38 58. O my brothers, knowing all this, we still have time, to clear our souls with tears from all the spots of sin, particularly in these (fol. 6r) holy days of fasting. They (the days of fasting) give us help for repenting, and to be ready and prepared, because we don’t know when the thief comes, who is Satan, or the time of our death. 59. Therefore, it is important to have the help of God, through which we would be saved from the spirits of evil, and from the endless suffering. We find this (to be ready and prepared) through vigil and constant efforts in fasting, pure prayers, loving of the poor, visiting the sick, and by sanctifying the soul and the body which are gained through hard work. 60. Because of the transgression, we were punished by being wearied and exhausted, and not to rejoice or have pleasures. The soul that loves God is not permitted to leisure its body. If it (the soul) doesn’t mortify the body every day on the earth, Christ won’t be able to live in it. 61. Those who truly learned and followed it testify, and they endured many difficulties because of it. With the divine apostle they say that hardship strengthens patience within us. 39 “It is through much tribulation that we must enter the Kingdom of God”. 40 62. They knew as divine wise-men that “the one who sows in flesh will reap corruption from the flesh, but the one who sows in spirit will gain eternal life from the spirit”. 41 63. Thus, they (apostles) didn’t darken the dignity of the soul with evaporated incense of desires of the body, from which it lusts many gluten pleasures, which would become like cloud and smoke to the soul, not allowing her to look high and to know the freedom which was granted from God. 64. But they (apostles) plucked the brutality of weaknesses; by means of constant fasting, self-denial, vigil, lying on the ground, John 6:53. 2 Cor 4:17. 40 Acts 14:22. 41 Gal 6:8. 38 39

26

ISKANDAR BCHEIRY

and many other works of virtues. They were exalting with joy: “we think about the high above and not about earthly things”, the place of Christ, who sits at the right of the Father. 65. We also have to pursue their steps, holding the mercy of Christ, the cross which He willingly endured in His body on our behalf. 66. No one of us shall be a merchant or head (responsible) for Christ, at the same time relying on (fol. 6v) the charities or other good deeds that he does. 67. Let him restrain himself from uncontrolled desires of the stomach, as many do. They indulge their body, while they offer charity for the poor. They should not remedy the bad habit with the good one. They buy evil for good. 68. He who does this has great shame, when one pleasures himself and gives charity. He should act righteously as he restrains and drains himself. For concerning the former, he invites wow, in accordance with the Lord’s saying, while to later, invites blessing. 69. Now, knowing that through food we fall from the pleasure of the paradise, we ask through our fasting, the thing that we lost, the kingdom that we inherited by Him. 70. To it may all of us be worthy. Through Christ Jesus our lord, to whom we glorify, with the father, and the holy spirit, in this time and every time, for ever and ever. Amen

BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen and Hayward (2004) = Allen, Pauline, and C.T.R. Hayward. Severus of Antioch. London/New York: Rutledge, 2004. Bcheiry (2004) = Bcheiry, Iskandar. Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in Trinity College, Dublin. Lebanon: Kaslik, 2004. Brooks (1904) = Brooks, E.W. The Sixth Book of the Select Letters of Severus, Patriarch of Antioch: In the Syriac Version of Athanasius of Nisibis. Published by Williams & Norgate, 1904. Chesnut (1976) = Chesnut, Roberta C. Three monophysite christologies: Severus of Antioch, Philoxenus of Mabbug and Jacob of Serugh. Oxford: Oxford University press, 1976. Graffin (1972) = Brière, M., F. Graffin, et C.J.A. Lash. Les Homiliae cathédrales de Sévère d'Antioche. Homélies 32–39, syriaque et français. PO, 36.3.169. Turnhout: Brepols, 1972.

REPENTANCE AND FASTING

27

Graffin (1976) = Brière, M., F. Graffin, C.J.A. Lash et J.M. Sauget. Les Homiliae cathédrales de Sévère d'Antioche. Homélies 1–17, copte, syriaque et français. PO, 38.2.175. Turnhout: Brepols, 1976. Hansbury (1998) = On the Mother of God by Jacob of Serugh, transl. by Mary Hansbury. New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1998. Homilies (2006) = Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, ed. by Paul Bedjan, with additional Material by Sebastian Brock, VI vols. New Jersey: Gorgias press, 2006. Honigmann (1951) = Honigmann, Ernest. Évêques et évêchés monophysites. CSCO, 127; Subs. 2. Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1951. Kitchen (2008) = Kitchen, Robert A. “Jonah’s Oar, Christian Typology in Jacob of Serugh’s Mēmrā 122 on Jonah.” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies [http:// syrcom.cua.edu/syrcom/ Hugoye] 11.1 (2008). Torrance (1988) = Torrance, Lain R. Christology after Chalcedon: Severus of Antioch and Sergius the Monophysite. Canterbury Press, 1988. Wimbush (1990) = Wimbush, Vincent L. Ascetic Behavior in GrecoRoman Antiquity: A Sourcebook. Continuum International Publishing Group, 1990. Youssef and Allen (2004) = Youssef, Youhanna Nessim, and Pauline Allen. The Arabic Life of Severus of Antioch Attributed to Athanasius of Antioch. Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum Contributor. Brepols, 2004.

A PRAYER SONG BY ST JACOB OF SERUGH RECOVERED SEBASTIAN BROCK In the Night Office (Lilyo) for Friday in the Fifth Week of Lent, as given in the Mosul (Syrian Catholic) edition of the Fanqitho, 1 there are the first eight stanzas of a beautiful poem whose opening words are ‘O Soul, depiction of the Kingdom’. The poem in question is an alphabetical madrosho, and is attributed to St Ephrem. The fact that the stanzas given run from olaph to heth implies that the poem once contained 22 stanzas, continuing the acrostic to the end of the alphabet. If one turns to the three-volume edition of the Fanqitho published by Fr. Abraham Konat at Pampakuda, the same poem, but with a different selection of stanzas, is to be found allocated to Lilyo on Wednesday in the Week before Palm Sunday (Hosha‘na). 2 In this source one has the alternate stanzas (olaph, gomal, he,...) as far as kaph, and then it changes to just the even-numbered stanzas (lomadh, nun, ‘e,...). As is so often the case in these two printed editions of the Fanqitho, the madroshe and sughyotho are only rarely given in their full form, but instead are abbreviated in one way or another. In the Pampakuda edition it quite frequently happens that only every Vol. IV, 658–9. Mosul, 1891. This text was soon afterwards reproduced, and accompanied by a Latin translation, by T. Lamy in vol. IV of his Sancti Ephraem Syri Hymni et Sermones, Malines, 1902, where it features among the Hymni dispersi (cols. 725–8). 2 Vol. II, 362–3. Pampakuda, 1963. 1

29

30

SEBASTIAN BROCK

other stanza is given. In the case of the dialogue sughyotho this has the unfortunate result that the verses of only one of the two speakers are given, thus completely spoiling the effect of the poem. 3 It is easy to see how this has come about: the source used for the printed text must have been a manuscript designed for just one of two choirs (gude) that sang antiphonally, each having its own half of the full text. In the Mosul edition of the Fanqitho the abbreviation has taken place in a more haphazard way. 4 This process of abbreviation had already begun in liturgical manuscripts of the Middle Ages, and in order to discover the full text of any madrosho or sughitho one usually needs to go back to the earliest surviving manuscripts. Fortunately, in the case of our particular alphabetical poem, ‘O Soul, depiction of the Kingdom’, the complete text is to be found in a very early manuscript in the British Library, ms Add. 14592, dated by William Wright in his Catalogue to the sixth or seventh century. The manuscript has the further advantage of being a literary, rather than liturgical, collection of texts, for it contains a large number of poems by three great early Syriac poets, Isaac of Antioch, Jacob of Serugh, and Ephrem. Within this collection, our present poem does not feature in the section containing poems by Ephrem (as the attribution in the Mosul Fanqitho would lead us to expect); instead, it is to be found as one of nine madroshe ‘On Repentance’, by Jacob of Serugh. Since the manuscript is so early—probably belonging within a century of Jacob's death—this attribution deserves to be taken much more seriously than that in the Mosul Fanqitho (where almost all madroshe are ascribed to Ephrem), and indeed there would seem to be no good reason for doubting its correctness. It is interesting that in all the sources mentioned so far the poem is described as a madrosho, even though it has some of the characteristics of that type of madrosho which is usually called a This applies to the dialogues between Mary and the Magi (I, pp. 185– 7, odd-numbered stanzas only); John the Baptist and Christ (I, pp. 276–8; even stanzas (2–28), and then odd (39–47); and the Church and Synagogue (II, pp. 408–10, even stanzas). 4 See my “The transmission of Ephrem’s madrashe in the Syriac Liturgical Tradition,” Studia Patristica 33 (1997): 490–505. 3

A PRAYER SONG BY ST JACOB OF SERUGH

31

sughitho, namely, the metre is simple and regular, and there is an alphabetic acrostic. Very possibly the reason for retaining the term madrosho lies in the fact that the stanzas have only three metrical lines (8+8+8 syllables), whereas the sughyotho always seem to have four (the most common being 7+7+7+7, or 8+8+8+8 syllables). On the other hand, one may observe that several later manuscripts containing parts of the poem designate it as a sughitho; this is already the case, for example in the liturgical collection in British Library ms Add.17141, dated to to the eighth or ninth century. Within the poem's three-line metre of 8+8+8 syllables, each line is always composed of 3+5 (or 5+3) and never 4+4 syllables. 5 The alphabetical poem falls into three parts: Stanzas 1–7 (olaph to zayin): the soul is reproved; stanzas 8–15 (heth to semkath): the soul replies; stanzas 16–22 (‘e to tau): the soul is comforted. The identity of the speaker in the first and third sections is left unspecified. Throughout the poem, the soul’s experience is related in terms of the Fall of Adam/humanity, and the characteristically Syriac theme of the Robe of Glory—lost at the Fall, and then made available again thanks to the Incarnation 6—is alluded to on several occasions. The qolo is given in Add.14592 as ‘Listen, my brethren, to the mocking of the Crucified One’, whereas in the two printed editions it is stated to be the opening words of the poem. 7 Add.14592 gives no ‘unitho, but in the Mosul edition this is ‘Praise to Him who has returned you to his Father’s house’ (taken from the last line of Breydy, M. Kult, Dichtung und Musik im Wochenbrevier der Syro-Maroniten, III, Rishaiqole, 139–40, Kobayath, 1979, gives it just as 3+5, but line 1 of stanza 7 in particular suggests that 5+3 is a recognized variation for this metre. Breydy mentions that the poem also features in the funeral service, but it has disappeared from the standard more recent printed texts of this. 6 See my “Clothing metaphors as a means of theological expression in Syriac tradition,” in my Studies in Syriac Christianity, ch. XI, Aldershot, 1992. 7 The qolo of this name is occasionally found elsewhere in the printed editions: in the Mosul edition, IV, p. 685; VI, pp. 406, 525; and in the Pampakuda edition, I, p. 338 and II, p. 352. In the Pampakuda edition of the Beth Gazo (1986) the qolo is listed on p. 152. 5

32

SEBASTIAN BROCK

stanza 22), while in the Pampakuda edition it is ‘Have pity on me, O Lover of humanity, forgive me my sins in Your grace’. The translation is based on the text in Add. 14592, though the main variations in the two printed editions of the Fanqitho are given in the notes (on a single occasion they have a better text). Words in brackets are supplied for the sense. Syriac text ‫ܬ‬

‫ܨܘܪܬ ܕ‬ ‫ܘܐܗܠ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܝ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܝ‬ ̈ ‫ܗܘ ܝ‬ ̈ ‫ܪ ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܝ‬

‫ܐ ܐܘ‬ ‫ܘܗ‬ ̈

‫ܕ‬

‫ܒ‬

‫ܘܐ‬ ‫ܬܪܗ ܘ‬ ‫ܝ‬

‫ܓ‬

‫ܬܗ‬ ‫ܕ ܕ‬

‫ܗܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܕ ܕܘ‬ ̇ ‫ܕܗܘ ܗܪ‬ ‫ܗܝ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ̈ ̈ ‫ܘ ܕ ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܕܘ‬ ‫ܙܗ‬ ‫ܘܬ‬ ‫ܝ ̈ ܬ‬ ‫ܝܘ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ ‫ܗܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̈

‫ܗܘ ܝ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܝ‬ ‫܀‬ ‫ܕ ܪ‬ ‫ܘ ܚ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫̄ܘ‬

̈

‫ܕ ܗܪ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܒ‬ ‫̈ ܝܘ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬

‫ܗ‬ ‫ܬ‬

‫ܪ‬

‫ܘ ܘܝ‬ ‫ܨ‬ ‫ܕܗ‬ ‫ܙ‬

‫ܙ‬

‫ܘ‬ [

]‫ܚ‬ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܛ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘܗ‬

‫‪A PRAYER SONG BY ST JACOB OF SERUGH‬‬

‫‪33‬‬ ‫ܝ‬ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܗܘ ܕܐ ܗ‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܗܝ‬ ‫ܬܗ ܘ‬ ‫̈‬ ‫ܚ‬ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܘܨ‬ ‫ܘܪ ܬ ܐ‬ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܨ‬ ‫ܕ ̇ܒ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܠ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘܗ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܠܕ ̈‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܙ‬

‫ܡ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܪܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܣ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܥ‬ ‫ܐܘ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬

‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܬܬ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫̇‬ ‫ܗܝ‬ ‫ܬܘ‬ ‫ܪ ܕܗܘ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܪܝ ̇‬ ‫̈‬ ‫ܝ‬

‫ܗܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܘ ܐ‬

‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ ̈‬

‫ܐ‬

‫̈‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ ܗܘ‬

‫ܦ ܚ ܘܐܬ‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܗܘ ܪ ܪ ̇‬ ‫ܗܝ ܘ‬ ‫ܐܘ‬ ‫ܨ ܨܕ‬ ‫ܘܪܨ ܪ‬ ‫ܩ‬

‫ܐ‬

‫̈‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܝ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ ܚ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ܕ̇ ܪ‬ ‫ܘܪܨ‬

‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܘܬ‬ ‫ܬ ܗܪ ܬܝ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ܪ ܪ ܬ ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܝ ܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܬܘܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬

34

SEBASTIAN BROCK ‫ܕ ܪ‬ ‫ܘ ̇ܪ‬ ̇ ‫܀‬

‫ܐ‬

̈ ‫ܪܘ‬

‫ܘ‬ ̇ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫̇ ܘ‬

‫ܫ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܬ ܬ‬

‫ܕܐ‬

Translation. [THE SOUL IS REBUKED] 1 [olaph] O Soul, depiction of the Kingdom, who has stripped you of your beauty and mocked you? For look how ugly you are with your many evil deeds. 2 [beth]

In Paradise (full) of blessings you were resplendent 8 as you reclined in glorious delights. Who is it who has cast you down into the land of the 000curses? (Gen. 3:17)

3 [gomal] The King chose you and brought you into His chamber 000 (Cant. 1:3); He revealed His wealth, and showed you His treasure, so why is it you have shown hate for Him who is rich? 9 000 (2 Cor. 8:9) 4 [dolath] It is a matter of astonishment that instead of living close to the glorious light of Paradise, of your own will you have loved darkness (instead). 5 [he]

The halleluiahs and cries of ‘holy’ of those above and the glorious ministry of spiritual beings you have abandoned—and gone after wild animals!

So the two printed editions; Add. 14592 has ‘abandoned’ or ‘left’ (shbiqo for shbiho). 9 ‘Luminous One’, Mosul Fanqitho; ‘Beauteous One’, Pampakuda Fanqitho. 8

A PRAYER SONG BY ST JACOB OF SERUGH 6 [waw]

35

Alas, O Soul, neighbour of the Luminous One, image of the Great One (Gen. 1:26), how far has your 000fallen state reached! For now thorns are mingled for you in your bread (Gen. 0003:18–9)

7 [zayin] You were clothed in rays of light, you were sealed 10 [10] with the King's own necklace; who is it who has given you leaves (to cover your) 000nakedness? (Gen. 3:7) (THE SOUL SPEAKS) 8 [heth] The Accursed One laid ambush and has mocked me; he stole my clothes, and (so) I stood naked. (Gen. 3:7) (Now), with the leaves he has clothed me in, I am 000scorned. 9 [teth]

I went astray because I listened to the Evil One: (Gen. 0003:13) in his guile he led me into captivity and now my feet are entangled in stumbling blocks.

10 [yudh] I should have kept the commandment (Gen. 2:16) but I did not keep it; for that reason I am thrown down in the place of thorns (Gen. 3:18), and my captor mocks 000me. 11 [kaph] He laid ambush and craftily set a snare, he made me suppose that he would give me greatness, but when I came close, he threw me into the pit.

‘You wore (lit. carried) the King’s own necklace’, Mosul and Pampakuda editions (t‘ina for tbi‘a). The precise sense of tbi‘a here is not clear: is it ‘imprinted’, i.e. with the seal stone on the King's necklace, or is it ‘immersed’ in the necklace? Though the reading of the printed texts is easier, it is unlikely to be original. 10

36

SEBASTIAN BROCK

12 [lomadh]

He enticed me on, (saying) he would raise me to 000heaven, whereas he dug for me a grave—into which I fell, and now I lie in Sheol, (the home of) the dead.

13 [mim]

I went wrong because of the beauty of the Tree 000 (Gen. 3:6); (its) beauty was borrowed, and I did not realize, but when I tried it, how I shook and felt ashamed!

14 [nun]

He made me a guardian for Paradise (Gen. 2:15), but I failed to guard it—and so I am despised, for I stole the very fruit which has (now) killed me.

15 [semkath] The Slayer of humanity has gone after me, jealous at my beauties which were many. Through his cunning he destroyed me—what can I 000 (now) do? THE SOUL IS COMFORTED 16 [‘e]

With you is the hope of all creation: O Soul, do not cut off (all) hope, for the Tree of Life is beside you.

17 [pe]

There has flown down and come from Eden of the 000luminous ones that Fruit, the Lover of humanity. Rise up and eat of it: revive, you who were dead!

18 [sodhe] He has caught and slain the serpent which mocked you, He has crushed its head (Ps. 74:14), seeing that it had 000deceived you. Return, O Soul, to Eden which is gazing out for you. 19 [quph] The serpent is slain, the Accursed One is crushed, broken is the sword of the guardian (cherub). 000 (Gen. 3:24) O Daughter of Light, come and enter into Paradise!

A PRAYER SONG BY ST JACOB OF SERUGH

37

20 [resh] Your greatness and your beauty which were lost —(all this) you have (now) found on the height of 000Golgotha. 11 Arise, clothe yourself and return to your inheritance. 21 [shin] Strip off your rags and the leaves (that cover) your nakedness; take and put on the glorious robe, enter into Eden which is opened up and awaits you. 22 [tau]

That garment which the serpent stole from you the King’s Son has brought and given to you. Praise be to Him who has returned you to your Father’s house. 12

‘of Paradise’, Pampakuda Fanqitho. The text of the poem has previously been published in Kolo Suryoyo 133 (2001): 226–30, and the translation in Sobornost / Eastern Churches Review 23 (2001): 40–4, and in The Harp 16 (2003): 349–54 (in the latter, which should have included the Syriac text, the text was inadvertently omitted by the printer). Text and translation thus appear together here for the first time. 11 12

JACOB’S FORGOTTEN SUGHYOTHO SEBASTIAN BROCK In the Chronicle attributed to Joshua the Stylite, composed in Jacob’s own lifetime, there is a passing reference to Jacob’s activities at the time of the Persian shah Kawad’s siege of Amid in 502/3: 1 (People) prepared to flee westwards, but the respected Jacob, the periodeutes, who composed mimre on sections of the Scriptures and sughyotho and songs (zmirotho) on the time of the locusts, did not neglect his duty at that time. He wrote letters of exhortation to all the cities, encouraging people to trust in divine salvation, and not to flee.

Sughyotho are also mentioned as being part of Jacob’s literary output in the biographical notice in British Library, Add. 12174. 2 What is to be noticed in these two sources/texts is the absence of any mention of madroshe, yet two of the earliest manuscripts (of the 6th/7th and 8th/9th century) which transmit stanzaic poems attributed to Jacob both describe these poems as madroshe, and not sughyotho. The situation is further confused by the fact that some of

Section 54 in the edition by W. Wright; English translation by J.W. Watt in Trombley, F.R., and J.W. Watt, The Chronicle of Pseudo-Joshua the Stylite, 63–4, Liverpool, 2000. 2 For a translation, see ‘Jacob of Serugh: a select bibliographical guide’, below. 1

39

40

SEBASTIAN BROCK

these madroshe are also to be found in later manuscripts, but there described as sughyotho. 3

WHAT IS A SUGHITHO? Clearly there is a problem of definition: what constitutes a sughitho, and what differentiates it from a madrosho? Both are stanzaic, but what characterizes a stanzaic poem as a sughitho? Quite a number of different definitions have been given in modern histories of Syriac literature, but all can be said to be based on one or more of the following criteria: — the nature of the content; — there is a dialogue in alternating verses; — the presence of an alphabetic acrostic; — the short length of the stanza; — the use of a particular syllabic metre. Thus, for example, Barsoum opts for three criteria: 4 dialogue form, with or without an alphabetic acrostic, and the use of the 7+7, 7+7 syllable metre. A similar set of criteria is likewise suggested by some Western scholars, such as Chabot, while others lay primary stress on the presence of an acrostic, or the 7+7, 7+7 metre. The Maronite scholar Michel Breydy, in his valuable Kult, Dichtung und Musik, 5 took issue with all these definitions, but without specifically providing one of his own; nevertheless, in the course of his classification of syllabic metres it emerges that it is only poems with stanzas consisting of 4+4, 4+4 syllables which he considers should properly be described as sughyotho. 6

Vööbus, A. Handschriftliche Überlieferung der Memre-Dichtung des Ja‘qob von Serugh, I, 22–4, CSCO Subsidia, 39, 1973, mentions briefly some of the manuscripts with madroshe and sughyotho. 4 Barsoum, I.A. The Scattered Pearls A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 29, tr. M. Moosa, revised edn. Piscataway NJ, 2003. For some further references, see my “Dialogue and other sughyotho.” In Chahwan, A., ed. Mélanges offerts au Prof. P. Louis Hage, 363–84. Kaslik, 2008. 5 Breydy, M. Kult, Dichtung und Musik bei den Syro-Maroniten, III, 240–5, Kobayath, 1979; also II.ii (1971), pp. x–xi. 6 III, 239–45. 3

JACOB’S FORGOTTEN SUGHYOTHO

41

In order to attempt to sort out this confused situation, it is important to examine the early manuscript tradition of the stanzaic poems transmitted under the name of Jacob. But before embarking on this exploration, it is worth turning briefly to some of the earliest references to sughyotho to be found in Syriac literature. Rather surprisingly, the term seems to be first attested in the Book of Steps, usually dated to the late fourth century. 7 The passage (VII.17) reads: 8 When God avenges every impure word that we speak with the [same] mouth that receives his Body and Blood, he said ‘You have loved the harlot and have done such and such things, which God hates’ (cf. Hos. 4:11); indeed, what answer can we give him? For that matter, what fruits do impure words and foul songs (sughyotho so’otho) and hateful ditties (zmirotho) and deceitful tales bring in for us? Indeed, do they produce wheat or clothes for us?—Only sins and pitfalls. Because of this, let us avoid all these things so that we shall not be condemned along with the world.

The passage points to two features which (from the author’s standpoint) characterize sughyotho: they are popular in character, and their content is inappropriate as far as Christians are concerned, and so they are to be avoided. Interestingly enough, very much the same negative connotations are to be found in one of Jacob’s mimre on the Spectacles of the Theatre. In the course of a list of the bad fruits of theatrical spectacles, he includes ‘lying sughyotho which the pagans (lit. ‘Greeks’) have fictitiously devised’. 9 Similar connotations are to be found if one turns to the rare occurrences of the verb. The Peshitta version of 1 Sam. 21:11(12) It is absent from the Peshitta, Aphrahat and Ephrem (the sughyotho under Ephrem’s name published by E. Beck in his Des heiligen Ephraem des Syrers Hymnen de Nativitate (Epiphania), CSCO Scr. Syri, 81–2, 1959, are not genuine Ephrem). 8 Kitchen, R.A., and M.F.G. Parmentier. The Book of Steps. The Syriac Liber Graduum, 76–7, Kalamazoo, 2004 (slightly adapted). 9 Moss, C., ed. “Jacob of Serugh’s Homilies on the Spectacles of the Theatre,” Le Muséon 48 (1935): 96. 7

42

SEBASTIAN BROCK

points to the popular character of the activity, and interestingly it identifies the ‘daughters of Israel’ (who are not specified in the Hebrew) as the singers of David’s praise: This is the man of whom the daughters of Israel were singing (msagyon (h)way), saying ‘Saul slew thousands, but David tens of thousands’.

The Hebrew verb employed here is ‘anah, ‘to respond’, which may suggest that the Syriac verb also implies responsorial singing. For the verb’s negative connotations, one need go no further than Jacob’s own works, for in Homily 101, On the Fall of Idols, he writes: 10 And the gentiles put together all kings of choirs (gude gude) to sing (la-msagoyu) to the idols’.

Once again there is a hint, provided by the reduplicated gude, that responsorial singing is involved. One further witness to the popular character of the sughitho can be called, this time Anton Rhetor, who probably belongs to the ninth century. After indicating that sughyotho are stanzaic and sung (and that they are not confined to Syriac), he gives a single example of one. 11 Fortunately this proves to be one that is known independently, for he cites the opening verses of the Dispute of the Months. 12 It would seem that what qualifies this poem as a sughitho is its popular character, rather than its dialogue form (which differs from that of the majority of dialogue poems, having the twelve months speaking in turn, instead of just two protagonists). The Dispute of the Months belongs to the venerable Mesopotamian literary genre of the Precedence Dispute, whose Ed. Bedjan, III, 800. Watt, J.W. The Fifth Book of the Rhetoric of Anton of Tagrit, 71, CSCO Scr. Syri, 203, 1986 (cf pp. 6–7, 38 for Anton’s general comments on sughyotho). 12 Edited in my “A Dispute of the Months and some related Syriac texts,” Journal of Semitic Studies 30 (1985): 181–211, repr. in From Ephrem to Romanos. Interactions between Syriac and Greek in Late Antiquity, chapter VIII, Aldershot, 1999. 10 11

JACOB’S FORGOTTEN SUGHYOTHO

43

roots can be taken back to Sumerian literature. 13 Syriac writers from Ephrem onwards took up the genre and developed it in their own way. To date, some fifty such poems are known in Syriac, and these are normally described in the manuscripts as sughyotho, and very frequently they employ the 7+7, 7+7 metre. 14 There are, however, some significant and important exceptions. Firstly, in the case of Ephrem, the earliest Syriac author to make use of the genre, his three precedence dispute poems, all between Death and Satan, are part of his cycle of madroshe on Nisibis (nos 52–4), and so are considered to be madroshe, not sughyotho, in the single early manuscript which transmits this cycle. Secondly, there is at least one case of a precedence dispute poem which is not stanzaic, being instead a mimro, written in couplets; it happens also to be attributed to Jacob. 15

THE EARLY MANUSCRIPTS: MADROSHE OR SUGHYOTHO? With these preliminaries, we can turn to the early manuscripts that transmit stanzaic poems attributed to Jacob. As mentioned before, two of the oldest manuscripts both describe these poems as madroshe, and not sughyotho: Add. 14,592, of the 6th or 7th century—and thus copied within a century or so of Jacob’s lifetime—contains eleven stanzaic poems attributed to Jacob, 16 while Add. 14520, of the 8th or 9th century, provides under his name a cycle of eighteen poems on the Virgin Mary, 17 and another cycle of twelve poems on a variety of different subjects. A further eleven poems, on the departed, are ascribed to See, for example, my “The Dispute Poem: from Sumer to Syriac,” Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 1 (2001): 3–20. 14 The majority of these are anonymous, though four are attributed to Jacob in some manuscripts; for these, see below. 15 Dispute of the Body and the Soul, in Harvard Syr. 85, published in my Sughyotho mgabyotho, St Ephrem Monastery, Glane, 1982, no. 21; German translation by H.J.W. Drijvers in Reinink, G.J., and H.L.J. Vanstiphout, Dispute Poems and Dialogues, 121–34, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 42, Leuven, 1991. 16 See Appendix, 1. 17 See Appendix, 2. 13

44

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Ephrem and Jacob, without further indication of which poem belongs to whom. In view of its early date, discussion here can be confined to the contents of Add. 14,592. Only five out of the eleven poems are to be found in other manuscripts, and four of these occur only in one manuscript, Add. 17,173, of the 7th century, where they are also ascribed to ‘Jacob the teacher, bishop of Batnan’); here they feature in a group of seven poems which are unhelpfully introduced simply as ‘stanzas (bote) of admonition’. Much more informative is the case of the single poem, ‘O Soul, depiction of the Kingdom’, in Add. 14,592 which is attested in quite a number of manuscripts, and also features in an abbreviated form in the two printed editions of the Fenqitho. 18 In tabulated form these witnesses provide the following information: Manuscript date Add. 14,592 6th/7th cent Add. 17,173 7th cent. Add. 17,141 8th/9th cent Add. 17,232 AD 1210 Sachau 323 ? Sachau 350 ? Sachau 356 14th/15th cent. Mosul Fenqitho Pampakuda Fenqitho

ascription Jacob Jacob no attribution no attribution no attribution no attribution no attribution Ephrem no attribution

genre madrosho ‘stanzas’ (bote) sughitho sughitho(?) sughitho sughitho sughitho madrosho } 5th Friday of madrosho } Lent

One further point in connection with this particular poem should be noted: its metre is 8+8, 8+8, 8+8, that is, with a tristich, rather than a distich (which is the norm for poems described as sughyotho).

The Mosul Fenqitho (IV, p. 658) provides only stanzas 1–8, while the Pampakuda Fenqitho (II, pp. 362–3) has alternate stanzas; the text in the Mosul Fenqitho was republished by Lamy, T.J. Sancti Ephraem Syri Hymni et Sermones IV, cols 725–8, Malines, 1902. The poem is republished in its complete form elsewhere in this volume (pp. 32–34); see also n. 27. The attribution to Ephrem in the Mosul Fenqitho (and followed by Lamy) need not be taken seriously, since almost all madroshe in the Mosul Fenqitho are attributed to him, many of which cannot possibly be by him. 18

JACOB’S FORGOTTEN SUGHYOTHO

45

What is one to make of this confusing state of affairs? The following general points can safely be made: —Almost all poems with a dialogue in alternating stanzas are described as sughyotho, but by no means all sughyotho are dialogue poems. —An alphabetic acrostic is not a distinguishing feature, since, on the one hand, it is absent from many poems described as sughyotho, while on the other hand, madroshe (and mimre) may also employ an alphabetic acrostic. In order to go further, and to explain the conflicting pieces of evidence of the kind that has been set out above, one needs to resort to a hypothesis of a chronological development in the ways in which the term sughitho has been employed. Accordingly, the following might be suggested. The earliest evidence strongly implies that the sughitho originated as a sung stanzaic poem of a popular character. Just as Ephrem sought to attract people away from the lure of Bardaisan’s poetry through his own poetry, it may well be that Jacob set his stanzaic poems to currently popular tunes, and so these poems came popularly to be known as sughyotho, as indicated by the passage on Jacob in the Chronicle attributed to Joshua the Stylite. In more staid ecclesiastical circles, however, the term sughitho, with its negative connotations, is avoided as being inappropriate for a poem of religious content; instead, the standard term for a stanzaic poem, madrosho, is retained. This will explain why madrosho is the term used in two of the early manuscripts containing Jacob’s stanzaic poems (Add. 14,592 and 14,520). By the eighth/ninth century, however, the negative connotations of the term sughitho have disappeared into the background, and so it became acceptable to employ the term sughitho in liturgical manuscripts for particular poems of a popular character. Then subsequently another development evidently took place: whereas at an early stage, sughitho could be used of a stanzaic poem consisting of a tristich (as in Jacob’s ‘O Soul, depiction of the Kingdom’), later on the term came to be restricted to poems whose stanzas consisted of

46

SEBASTIAN BROCK

distichs. 19 This stage is reflected in the terminology used in the printed editions of the Fenqitho, where Jacob’s poem, because it consists of verses with tristichs, is called a madrosho. One final development then occurs, differentiating the Maronite and Syrian Orthodox definitions of the term sughitho: for the Maronites, the true sughitho has the syllabic pattern of 8+8, 8+8, 20 while for the Syrian Orthodox it is 7+7.

DIALOGUE SUGHYOTHO ATTRIBUTED TO JACOB Now that a possible explanation for the variation in the designation of Jacob’s stanzaic poems has been found, it is time to turn to the poems themselves. First of all, since dialogue poems are normally described as sughyotho, it is worth noting those dialogue poems which are specifically attributed to Jacob, at least in some manuscripts. Since normally these dialogue sughyotho are transmitted without any attribution, the occasional specific mention of Jacob as author should probably not be rejected out of hand. Only four out of the fifty odd dialogue poems that come down to us have an attribution to Jacob; these are: The Sinful Woman and Satan (I), for which two of the oldest manuscripts ascribe the poem to Jacob (Add. 17,168 of 9th cent.) and 17,141 of 8th/9th cent.); 21 the later manuscripts leave the author as anonymous.

Perhaps this accounts for Bedjan’s description of many short extracts from Jacob’s mimre in his Mois de Marie as sughyotho: see Bedjan, P. ̈ Mois de Marie, 1–57, Paris/Leipzig, 1904, entitled ‫ܕ ܬܝ‬ ‫ܕ‬ . 20 In the Maronite weekday Office, the Shehimto, all the verse texts designated as sughyotho are in this metre; several of these are in fact of East Syriac origin, and in that liturgical tradition they are designated instead as teshbhatha; for these, see my “Some early witnesses to the East Syriac liturgical tradition,” Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies 18:1 (2004): 19–44. 21 Edited in Sughyotho mgabyotho, no. 11; critical edition, based on ten manuscripts, in my “The Sinful Woman and Satan: two Syriac Dialogue Poems,” Oriens Christianus 72 (1988): 23–54. 19

JACOB’S FORGOTTEN SUGHYOTHO

47

The Church and the Synagogue, 22 according to Add. 17,141; in other manuscripts, however, it is anonymous. The Church and Sion, 23 according to Add. 17,190, dated AD 893; in other manuscripts, however, it is anonymous. Joseph and Potiphar’s Wife (I), 24 according Add. 17,141; in other manuscripts, however, it is anonymous. A detailed discussion for each of these would be necessary in order to assess the plausibility, or otherwise, of these attributions, and this is not the place to undertake this. Here it will be sufficient to notice that, while Jacob treats the subject of the Sinful Woman (Luke 7) very differently in his mimro on the subject (Bedjan, II, pp.402–28; Hom. 51) 25, there are nevertheless some quite close parallels in phraseology, suggesting that there is some sort of literary relationship, with three main possibilities: (1) Jacob is author of both; (s) Jacob knew the sughitho; or (3) the author of the sughitho knew Jacob’s mimro. Once again, a detailed investigation will be necessary before any reliable decision between these three main possibilities can be made.

Edited in Sughyotho mgabyotho, no. 19. Also edited, with German translation, by B. Kirschner, in Oriens Christianus 6 (1906): 22–43. 23 Edited in Sughyotho mgabyotho, no. 18. Critical editions of nos. 18 and 19 are in preparation. 24 Edited in Sughyotho mgabyotho, no. 3; critical edition and translation in my ‘Joseph and Potiphar’s Wife: two anonymous dispute poems’, in van Bekkum, W.J., J.W. Drijvers and A.C. Klugkist, eds. Syriac Polemics. Studies in Honour of G.J. Reinink, 43–9, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 170, Leuven, 2007. 25 There is an English translation by S.F. Johnson in Sobornost/Eastern Churches Review 24 (2002): 56–88). 22

48

SEBASTIAN BROCK

OTHER PUBLISHED SUGHYOTHO BY JACOB 26 Mention has already been made of the poem on the Soul in connection with its manuscript tradition; an edition of the text, with a translation, appears elsewhere in this volume. 27 Another sughitho, which was published over 140 years ago, has the title ‘A sughitho by Mar Jacob the Teacher on Edessa when she sent to our Lord (inviting him) to come to her’. 28 In the course of this short but beautiful poem Edessa speaks in the first person, identifying herself as the harlot Daughter of the Gentiles, who sends (through Abgar the Black) a message to Christ, expressing her love for him in language taken from the Song of Songs. By way of conclusion, I take the intriguing case of a poem published by Lamy among his hymni dispersi (IV, cols 737–46). In his introductory note he states that he has taken the text from the Mosul Fenqitho (V, p.212) and Paris Syr. 161, where it is attributed to Balai; he also mentions that in the early liturgical manuscript, Add. 17,190 (dated AD 893) it is attributed instead to Jacob. Lamy himself prefers yet a third rival attribution, to Ephrem, which is found in the Mosul Fenqitho. Given that little confidence can be given to the standard attributions to Ephrem in the Mosul Fenqitho, the attribution to Jacob should not be rejected out of hand. The poem, which opens ‘I gazed on the Scriptures and I was filled with wonder at our Lord suffering’, Vööbus, Handschriftliche Überlieferung, I, 25 (with note 13) mentions a sughitha on Jesus and Mary, but this seems to be due to a misinterpretation of the term Cantus in the title of Bedjan’s Cantus seu Homiliae Mar Jacobi in Jesum et Mariam (Paris/Leipzig, 1902), the contents of which are all mimre (reproduced in vol. VI of the reprint of Jacob’s Homilies, Piscataway NJ, 2006). 27 See note 18. Translations have previously appeared in my “An acrostic poem on the Soul by Jacob of Serugh,” Sobornost/Eastern Churches Review 23 (2001): 40–4, and “A prayer song by St Jacob of Serugh recovered,” The Harp 16 (2003): 349–54; the Syriac text, which should have appeared also in this, was first published in my “Madrosho d-Mor Ya‘qub da-Srug d-‘al naphsho,” Qolo Suryoyo 133 (2001): 230–227 [sic]. 28 Edited, with English translation, by Cureton, W. Ancient Syriac Documents, - (text), 106–7 (tr.), London, 1864. Cureton took the text from Add. 17,158, f. 56a (8th cent.), which is the only manuscript to transmit it. 26

JACOB’S FORGOTTEN SUGHYOTHO

49

is of added interest in that it also features in the East Syriac Hudra, 29 allocated (as in the Mosul Fenqitho) to Good Friday. If this madrasha should prove to be indeed by Jacob, it would not be the first text by Jacob to have found its way into the East Syriac liturgical tradition, for part of Jacob’s turgomo on the Resurrection has also been incorporated into the Hudra. 30

APPENDIX 1. Madroshe attributed to Jacob in Add. 14592 (6th/7th cent.). f. 47a ‫ܐܘ‬ With alphabetic acrostic. f. 48a ‫ܨܐܕܝ‬ ‫ܕܪܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ f. 49b ‫ܘܐܕ ܘܬܪ‬ f. 50a ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐܘ‬ With alphabetic acrostic. f. 51a ‫ܕܬܘܒ ܬ‬ ‫ܐܘ ܕܐܬ ܘ‬ With alphabetic acrostic. ̇ f. 51b ‫ܕܕܐܪ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫̇ ܗܘ‬ Also in Add. 17,173, f. 141. f. 52a ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܝ‬ ‫ܕܘ‬ Also in Add. 17,173, f. 142b. f. 53a ‫ܦ‬ ‫ܪ ܨ‬ ̈ f. 53b ‫ܕ‬ Also in Add. 17,173, f. 144a. f. 54a ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܨܘܪܬ ܕ‬ ‫ܐܘ‬ Also in Add.17,173 and several other manuscripts (see above). f. 88b ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕܐܬܬܨ‬ ‫ܝ‬ The two further stanzaic poems attributed to Jacob and found ‫ܕ ܬ ܀ ܐܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܗܕ‬ only in Add. 17,173 are:

. ‫ܐ‬

An edition of these poems is in preparation.

Hudra (ed. Darmo), II, 501; Breviarium Chaldaicum (ed. Bedjan), II, 368. See my “An extract from Jacob of Serugh in the East Syrian Hudra,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 55 (1989): 339–43. For yet a further example of the use of Jacob in the East Syriac liturgical tradition, see the contribution by A. Harrak to this volume. 29 30

50

SEBASTIAN BROCK

2. Madroshe on the Virgin Mary attributed to Jacob in Add. 14,520, ff.16a–26b (8th/9th cent.) Several of these madroshe were published, but from other manuscripts and without attribution to Jacob, by Lamy (II, 519– 642) as part of a series of Hymni de Maria (English translation in my Bride of Light [Moran Etho 6, Kottayam, 1994]); in many cases the selection of stanzas is different. An edition of these 18 madroshe in Add. 14,520 is in preparation. Concordance Add. 14,520 1 } 2 } 3 } 4 } 5 6

Lamy, no. 2 2:8f. 9 9:5f. 1 –

7 8 9 10 11 } 12 } 13 14 15 16 31

4 13 – – 6 6:7f. – 3 8 –

17

–

18

7

Bride of Light, no. 7 7 ̈ 14 14 6 28 (tr. from Add. 14,520) 9 18 – – 11 ‫̈ܘ‬ 11 – 8 13 29 (tr. from Add. 14,520) 30 (tr. from Add. 14,520) 12

begins ‫ܗ‬ ‫̈ܘ‬

‫ܟ‬

‫ܐܙ‬ ‫ܬܬ‬

‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ̈

̇

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕܘ‬ ‫ܐܙ‬ ‫ܬ ܕܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܗܘܬ‬ ‫ܕܘܨ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܐܙ‬ ‫ܐܬ‬

‫ܐܬ‬ ̇

‫ܝ‬ ‫ܬ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܬܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܗܪ ܐܘ‬

‫ܬܗܪ‬ ‫ܬܘ‬

Some stanzas from this (which begins ‘Mary became a chariot of flesh’) are to be found in both the Mosul Fenqitho (VI, 526) and that of Pampakuda (I, 201; III, 142). 31

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE KHALID DINNO As we convene in this symposium to celebrate the heritage of this great church father, I have selected to speak of the man behind this immense heritage, a man whose learning and piety earned him esteem as the flute of the Holy Spirit and as harp of the Orthodox Church. In his flag publication in Arabic, the book entitled “Al Lulu alManthour” (The Scattered Pearls), Aphram Barsoum, himself a man of renowned eloquence, described Mor Jacob of Serugh in a manner that reflected deep admiration. In quoting from Barsoum some of Barsoum’s eloquence of expression will be lost in the translation from Arabic, even when the translation is made by an experienced and eloquent scholar such as Matti Moosa. All the same, it is worthwhile to quote briefly from Moosa’s translation: 1 ……Jacob’s poetry contains masterpieces and beauties which astound the mind and arrest the heart. It is also characterized by immaculate style and perspicuity, exquisite themes, masterful expression and firm and clear form. ……The more he penetrated his poetical theme the more he enriches it with eloquence and beauty, and the more he creates new forms, delicate expressions and brilliant techniques, which drive away boredom and alert the reader that he is opposite a mighty ocean full of literary pearls and Barsoum, Ignatius Aphram I. The Scattered Pearls, A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, transl. by Matti Moosa, 255, Gorgias Press, 2003. 1

51

52

KHALID DINNO uncommon objects… Thus his tongue was a spring of wisdom and he himself was one of the chosen of God and the most famous of the Saints of his time, the age of faith, heroism, and orthodox religious principles.

Mor Jacob epitomizes what we understand Syriac spirituality to characterize, namely the way of seeing and meditating upon God in a symbolic manner. This entails a kind of dual vision that sees simultaneously the visible physical world and the hidden realities of God concealed within it, which are conveyed through the Scriptures, Christ, the Church, the sacrament, by means of faith and the Holy Spirit. This way of seeing the Christian realities expressed itself best and most characteristically within the Syriac tradition of poetry. Mor Jacob’s mimre, therefore, earned him fame and continue to assist those who seek to find the classical Syriac mode of understanding the Bible. The testimonies of Barhebraes and Jacob of Edessa together speak of 763 such homilies. Although Mor Jacob’s greatest literary output was in the form of mimre, he also composed madrase, sogyatha and other genre of various compositions. By means of the mimro genre, Mor Jacob weaves exegetical comment, imaginative and dramatic dialogue in order to unfold an event. We must be mindful of the difference between the literary genre as utilized by Jacob of Serugh and other Syriac authors and between the styles of expression of Greek and Latin writers. In this respect I can do no better than quote Sebastian Brock, where in Baptismal Themes he says: 2 I should stress at the outset that it is essential to read Jacob on his own terms, and not approach him with our own Western European presuppositions, if we are to appreciate his true originality and profoundity. In other words we must make an effort of the imagination in order to recapture this suprahistorical way of thinking.

Brock, S.P. Baptismal Themes in the Writings of Jacob of Serugh, 325–6, OCA, 205, 1978. 2

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE

53

Hence the culture and taste for whom Mor Jacob wrote are important and must be given due consideration. One of the most significant themes that come through again and again in his mimre is the economy of salvation. This theme is centered on the mystery of the Son of God who became tangibly revealed in his Incarnation. Hence, the words and deeds of the incarnate Son of God are replete with hidden realities and powers. By a holistic vision of the entire Biblical history, Mor Jacob views the path of divine economy for the redemption of humanity. His mimre reflect a profound conviction on the central position of Christ through the Bible, often displayed through images and types. It is Christ who inspires and leads the prophets; all the prophecies are like lamps that illuminate the earth through the coming of Christ, the Sun. All the prophets and prophecies are like rivers flowing to the same ocean with their own parts of inspiration. As poet and pastor, Mor Jacob propounds the mystery of Christ through his symbolic-typological vision; one that steers him away from disputes and investigations, proclaiming that the Holy Spirit inspires the faithful with the knowledge of the Truth. Mor Jacob calls himself a “harp” on which the fingers of the Holy Spirit play on. His mimre reveal a man who felt he was duty bound to devote his entire creative energy to express and proclaim the majesty of God, the Omnipotent and Creator. There is an abundance of examples showing his genuine and frank nature, his spontaneity, honesty and readiness to admit failure. His mimre reflect various moods and emotions, often with more than one mood appearing in one mimro; feeling of inadequacy, self approach, self pity, and humility on the one hand, and self confidence, pride and assertiveness, on the other. In the one mimro you may see him show humility and compassion, but also readiness to admonish those who are not attentive to hear what he has to say. He opens up his heart to his listeners and readers, and is always ready to express his inner feelings without pretence or camouflage. His treatment of difficult subjects at times shows duality of thought even a touch of enigma. He often complains of inadequacy and frustration at not being able to find the right word or expression, beseeching the Lord for forgiveness and inspiration so that he may shed away laziness and march on towards the task to which he considered himself destined and ordained; the task of revealing and glorifying the Creator and Savior.

54

KHALID DINNO

SELECTED SAMPLES FROM JACOB’S MIMRE: 3 The following are selected samples from a number of mimre which show the the various facets that make up Mor Jacob’s creative personality.

On His Feeling of Inadequacy This is a feeling Mor Jacob often expresses in his mimre. In it he shares with his audience the challenge, even the agony of finding the words that would befit the subject he is addressing. Examples: 4

M 2:337 —

M 68:30 —

V1, p36, L4+5 ܶ: ‫ܰܗܘ ܳ ܰܘܐ ܰ ܶܬܗܘ‬ ܺ ‫ܰ ܳ ܰ ܺ ܰܘ‬ ܳ ܺ ܰ‫ܺ ܳ ܳ ܶ ܕ‬ ܽ ܶ ܳ ̱‫ܽ ܪ ܳ ܐ‬ ‫ܟ܀‬ The story is difficult and the mind weak, what is to be done? For if it wasn’t for the weakness of my mind, I would have, in fact, started to speak. V2, p861, L5+6 ܳ ܳ ܺ : ‫ܺ ܶܨ ܳ ܺ ܬ ܰܕ ܺ ܽ ܬ‬ ‫ܰ ܶܕ ܐ‬ ܳ ܰ ܶ ܳ ‫ܰܕ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܕܬ ܺ ܽ ܘܬ ܰ ܬ ܐܙ ܰ ܀‬ Would I have the Apostle’s skilful fingers to sing with the Disciplehood’s harp, about the end! V2, p861, L7+8 ܺ ܰ ܳܰ ܳ ܺ ܰ ‫ܺ ̱ ܰ ̱ܗܘ ܺܕܐ ܰ ܰ ܗܘ ܕ ܪ ܕ‬ ܳ ܽ ܶ‫ܰ ܳ ܣ ܺ ܬ‬ ‫ܘܗܘ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܰ ܺ ܳ ܬ ܀‬ I am too weak to speak about the coming great Judgment: let Paul teach us the truthful facts. :

M 68:31 —

V3, p631, L4+5 ܳ ܳ ܳ ܺ ܳܶ ‫ܐ‬ : ܳ ‫ܰ ܺ ܳ ܘ ܳ ܽܕܪܘ‬ ܳ ܳܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܰ ‫܀‬ ̱‫ܘ ܥ ܐ‬ Bedjan, P., ed. Homiliae Selectae Mar Jacobi Serughensis, Vols. I–V, Paris/Leipzig, 1905–10. Republished with additional material by Sebastian P. Brock by Gorgias Press, 2006. 4 The mimre are referenced here by mimro number and line. 3

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE

55

M 94:515 — I, the inadequate one, am neither wise nor learned and do not know how to investigate on the Son of God.

M 3:106 —

M 3:107 —

M 3:108 —

M 3:109 —

V1, p48, L8+9 ܰ ܰ ‫ܰܘܕ ܺ ܳ ܺܐ ܶܐܬ‬ ܽ ܶ ܺ ܶ ܰ : ‫ܕ‬ ܳ ܽ ܶ ‫ܳ ܝ ܬ ܡ ܰ ܶ ܙ ܽ ܳܪ ܰܕ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܀‬ As the story of Moses has been told only incompletely by me, Lord, don’t forget this idler’s menial effort. V1, p48, L10+11 ܺܳ ܺ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܺ ‫ܰ ܺ ܽ ܶܬܗ ܕ‬ ܶ : ܺ ܽ ܶ ܶ‫ܘ‬ ܰ ܽܳ ‫ܰ ܳܘܪܟ ܳ ܽ ܘ ܳ ܀‬ Accept with compassion the inadequacy of my mimro, and let my coin fall on your table with favor. V1, p48, L12+13 ܳ ܳ ܶ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܺ ܶ :‫ܬ‬ ‫ܺ ̱ܳ ܳ ܝ‬ ‫ܟ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ܺܳ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܰ ‫ܺ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ My Lord, I should not be blamed by the Justice for I never defined you, for who can speak of you sufficiently and limit you? V1, p48, L14+15 ܶܳ ܶ : ܳ ܶ ‫ܰ ܶ ܳܕ ܳ ܕ ̈ ܙ ܽ ܕ ܰ ܰ ܪ‬ ܶܳ ܳ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܺ ‫ܘܽ ܪ‬ ‫ܕ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܐܬ ܐ̱ ܳ ܀‬ ‫ܬܟ‬ Accept as gift the few tunes that my tongue has sent forth and preserve for me the treasure of mercies until I come to you. V1, p48, L16+17 ܺܳ ܺܰ ܳ ܳ ܶ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܳ ‫ܕܙ ܬ ܗܪ‬ ܺܳ ܺ ܰ ܶܺ ܽ ܰ ‫ܐ ܀‬ ‫ܺ ܪ ܽ ܢ ܰ ܰ ܘ ܘܢ ܐ‬ In exchange for what I have sung briefly and feebly here, may your mercies endure so that I may live through them to eternity. :

M 3:110 —

56

M 65:1 —

KHALID DINNO V2, p77, L1+2 ܺܳ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܰ ܰ ܳܶ ܺ ܶ : ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܝ ܘܙ‬ ‫ܐܬܬ‬ ܶܳ ܺ ܺ ‫ܰ ܳ ̈ ܰܕ ܶ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܳ ܐ ܀‬ Wake up my harp and recite outstanding praise for the Son with many tunes, full of glory.

The feeling of inadequacy is at times mixed with a feeling of self admonition, even reprimand:

M 35:9 —

M 35:10 —

M 35:11 —

V2, p77, L17+ V2,p78,L1 ܳ ܺ ܶ ܰ ܳ : ܰ ‫ܰ ܰ ܳ ܐ ̱ ܐܬܬ ܺ ܰ ܰ ܐܘ‬ ܺ ܰܶ ܽ ‫ܶ ܰ ܳ ܐܘܕ ܀‬ ‫ܶ ܶ ܡ ܶ ܰܙ ܳ ܐ‬ O, you idle one, while still alive, wake up and praise, for there is time for every thing and so profess (God) now. V2, p78, L2+3 ܽ ܶ ܶ ‫ܰ ܳ ܺ ܶܬ ܰ ܳܬ ܘ‬ ܳ ܶ ܳ : ‫ܪܘ‬ ܶ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܰ ̈ ܶ̈ ܶ ‫܀‬ ‫ܶ ܬ‬ ‫ܘܶ ܽ ܩ‬ Before death arrives to undo your body structure, breaking the strings that utter praise. V2, p78, L4+5 ܳ ܰ ܶ ܶ ܶ ܰ ܳ ܰ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܽ ‫ܕ ܬ‬ ‫ܪܟ‬ :‫ܠ‬ ܳ ̱ ܶ ܰ ‫ܘ ܶ ܽ ܢ ̈ܳ ܶ ܶ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܰܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܀‬ Before the silence of death reaches the mouth in Sheol to silence the mouth that utters praising hymns.

Elsewhere reverting to self pity and the feeling of inadequacy, seeking refuge in God’s mercy: V3, p826, L7+8 ܳ ܺ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܰ : ‫ܘܐ‬ ‫̈ܳ ܶ ܙ ܽ ܺܪ ܶ ܰ ܝ‬ ܰ ܺ ‫ܘ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܰܐܨܦ ܳܗ ܳ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܀‬ M 102:22 — The dressings are few, my word is despised and I am feeble, so now to which of my wounds do I tend?

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE

57

V3, p844, L19+20 ܳ ܺ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܺ ܰ ‫ܟ‬ ‫ܕ ܕ‬ ̱ ‫ܘܐ‬ ‫ܰܘ ܶ ܽ ܳ ܘ ܰ ܺ ܺ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܽ ̈ܘ ܶ ܀‬ M 103:27 — Silence, o wretched one, for your word is despised, you are feeble, the wound is incurable and the pain is a challenge to the healer. ܰ : ̱‫ܐ‬

ܳܰ

V5, p855, L11+12 ܰ ܰܳ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܺ ‫ܳ ܳ ܶ ܶܘ‬ : ̱ ‫ܰ ܬܝ ܕܕ ܐ‬ ܺ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܳܰ ܰ ܺ ‫܀‬ ‫ܰܘ ܳ ܰ ܺܕ‬ M 192:202 — May your compassion be the defender of my weakness when you rise (for Judgment) and may it approach you on my behalf. V5, p855, L13+14 ܺ ܳ ܽ ܰ ܳ ܶ ܰ ܽ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ܳ ܰ ܳܳ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܳ ܶ ‫܀‬ ‫ܬܟ ܬ‬ ‫ܕ‬ M 192:203 — Let it speak to you loudly about my misery so that with your Grace you may bring life to this undeserving weakling. ܽ ܶ

:‫ܰ ܽ ܬܝ‬

V5, p855, L15+16 ܰ ܺ :‫ܘܗܝ ܳܗ ܳ ܺ ܳ ܘ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܰ ̱ܗܝ‬ ̱ ‫ܳ ܳ ܐ‬ ܺ ܶ ܰܶ ܳ ‫ܶܨ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܕܬܐ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܀‬ ‫ܬܬ‬ M192:204 — Who is this inadequate one? And what are his defects? Do not descend toward this weakling to judge him. V5, p855, L17+18 ܶ ‫ܳ ܳ ܙ ܽ ܳܪ ܺܕ ܳ ܰܪ ܳ ܳ ܰܬܘ‬ ܳ ܶ ܳ ‫ܰ ܳ ܬ ܰ ܟ ܶܨ ܳ ܽ ܕ ܰܗ ܶ ܳ ܀‬ M192:205 — Do not waste your great Judgment on this insignificant one, cast your vengeance upon the infidels who did not believe in you. : ܶ

V5, p855, L19+20 ܶ ܳ ‫ܺ ܽ ܳܬ ̱ܗܝ ܳ ܶܐܢ ܰ ܳܗ‬ :‫ܺ ܳ ܬ ܽ ܠ‬ ̈ ܳ ܳ ‫ܕ ܳ ܽܗܘ ܶ ܶ ܡ ܳܐ‬ ‫ܘܗܝ ܰ ܺ ܶ ܶ ܡ܀‬ ̱ ܰ

58

KHALID DINNO

M 192:206 — It is an insult to you if you were to enter into judgment with this who is worthless and whose sins are trivial. V5, p856, L1+2 ܰ ܶ ̈ܰ ܶ ܽ ܰ ܳ ܺ :‫ܘܗܝ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܘܗܝ‬ ̱ ‫ܕܐ‬ ̱ ‫ܶ ܶܘ ܺܕܐ‬ ܶܽ ܰ ܶ ‫ܳ ܰ ̱ܗܘ ܳܗ ܳ ܘ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܰ ̱ܗܝ ܬܬ ܐ ܢ܀‬ M 192:207 — Let us assume that he is all sins, who is he and what can be his sins to merit your revenge? ܰ

V5, p856, L3+4 ܽ ܶ ܳ ܰ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܶ ܶ̈ ܶ ܳ ܳ :‫ܝ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ܶ ܽ ܰ ܳ ܺ ‫ܕܬܬ ܰ ܰ ܚ‬ ܶ ‫ܺܘܐ‬ ‫ܰ ܳ ܽ ܬܟ܀‬ M 192:208 — Let your mercy utter these words to you on my behalf so that I may live in grace, and your mercy will shine in me.

On Assertiveness and Confidence

M 12:28 —

M 12:29 —

V1, p270, L11+12 ܶ ܶ : ܳ ̱‫ܺ ܰ ܺ ܰ ܺ ܽ ܳ ܐܢ ܳ ܶ ܫ ܐ‬ ܶ ܺܰ‫ܕ‬ ܰ ܽ ܶ ‫ܶܨ ܳ ܶܘܐ‬ ‫ܰܳ ܽ ܀‬ ‫ܘܐܙܘܥ‬ For me, who is free, the praise is beautiful, if I distinctly understand that my will is directed to cease or else live for praise. V1, p270, L13+14 ܶ ܳ : ‫ܶܘܐܢ ܳ ܐ̱ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܐ̱ ܳ ܺ ܶ ܺ ܽ ܬ‬ ܺ ܳ ܶ ‫ܕ ܰ ̈ ܰ ܺ ܬ ܳ ܰ ܽ ܢ ܳ ܽܘ ܳ ܀‬ If I stopped, I would be punished by the Justice, for it requires the free men to praise with distinction.

Yet he goes on in the next stanza to express profound reverence towards the Creator saying: : ܳ ̱‫ܐ‬ ‫ܳ ܶ ܐ̱ ܳ ܀‬

V1, p270, L15+16 ܶ ܰ ܽ ܶ ‫ܳ ܳ ܐ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܝ ܰ ܳܙܐܥ‬ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܶܳ ܳ ‫ܚ ܐ̱ ܘ‬ ‫ܐ̱ ܘܗ‬ ‫ܕ‬

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE M 12:30 —

59

Therefore, O Lord, I praise you with fear, for, although I am undeserving, I still dare and am incapable.

V4, p87, L12+13 ܶ ܽ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܳܶ : ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘܗܪ‬ ‫ܰܠ‬ ܶ ܳ̈ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܽ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܳ ܳ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕܐ ܐ̱ ܀‬ M 109:273 — There is the shadow and there is the tangible (aspect) of every reality, and all that of which I say is clear for those who understand. ܳ

ܽ

V4, p87, L14+15 ܰ ‫ܐܪܙ ܶܕ ܳ ܳ ܶ ܰ ܝ‬ ܳ ܳ ̱ ܰ̈ ܺ ܳ ‫ܰ ܽ ̈ܘ ܶ ܰܕ ܰ ܺ ܳ ̇ ܰ ܺ ܳ ܐ ܀‬ M 109:274 — My word, despite its clarity, requires the sons of sacrament and scholars to accept it clearly. ܳ :‫ܽ ܬ‬

ܰ

V4, p135, L22 (bottom line)+p136, L1 ܳ ܶ ‫ܰ ܳ ܰܕܨ ܳ ܶܐܕ‬ : ܳ ̱‫ܽ ܳ ܶ ܐ ܰ ܐ‬ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܶ ܳܺ ܰ ܽ ܶ ܳ ‫ܽ ܪܳ ܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̱ ̱‫ܐ‬ M 112:31 — I talk with love to whoever listens; and with others I adhere to silence for a purpose. V4, p136, L2+3 ܳ ܳ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܶ ̇ ܶ ܽ ܳ ‫ܶ ܳ ܰܪ‬ ‫ܝ ܐܘ ܕ‬ : ܰ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܺ ܳ ܰ ܺ ܽ ܰ ܳ ‫ܕ ܐ ܀‬ ‫ܬܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ M 112:32 — You who do not have love, count my word as great silence and do not ever carry burden of what is told to you. V4, p136, L4+5 ܺ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܺ ܰ ܳܺ ܺ : ‫ܐ ܽ ̱ܗܘ ܐ̱ ܘ‬ ܶ ܳ ‫ܘ ܶ ܐ ܰ ܐ̱ ܳ ܰܘ ܐ̱ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܐ̱ ܳ ܀‬ M 112:33 — The one who is anxious to speak with love, to him I speak; but for you I will keep quiet, whilst still loving (you). V4, p136, L10+11 ܺܳ ܺ ܰ ܶ ܳܳ ܽ : ܶ ‫ܳ ܶܪܕ ܽ ܘܪ‬ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܳ ‫ܶܘܐ ܳ ܰܐ ܶ ܗ ܐ‬ ‫ܨܐܕܘܗܝ܀‬ ̱ ܰܶ ̱

60

KHALID DINNO

M 112:36 — Teaching goes on along its way with humility, and it would not reside with him, he who does not aspire to grasp it.

On Supplication Almost invariably the opening lines of his mimre are supplications for illumination, to help him find the path to the truth he wants to express to his audience: ܳܰ :ܳ

M 4:1 —

M 4:2 —

ܰ

ܰ

V1, p49, L1+2 ܽ ܰ ‫ܰ ܳ ܕܐ̱ ܳ ܰܙ ܐ ܘ‬ ܺ ܺ ‫ܐܬܕ ܶ ܶ ܳ ܽ ̈ ܶ ܰܕ‬ ܰ ܶ ܳ ܺ

‫ܺ ܀‬ O, Son of God, your mimre took me down to the deep seas of your mysteries, but with you I was rescued from the waves that surround me.

V1, p49, L3+4 ܽ ܰ ܰ ̈ ܽ ܰ ܺ ‫ܰ ̈ ܶ ܕ ܰ ܰ ܰܐ‬ :‫ܬ ܘ ܘ ܢ‬ ܳ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܰ ‫ܰܐ‬ ‫ܰ ܺ ܳ ܕ ܰ ܺ ܳܬ ܀‬ ̱ The waves of your discourses beleaguered me greatly; you are the sailor, take me to the port of truth. V2, p77, L1+2 ܺܳ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܰ ܰ ܳܶ ܺ ܶ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܝ ܘܙ‬ ‫ܐܬܬ‬ ܺ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܳ̈ ܳ ܰ ‫ܐ ܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ Wake up, my harp, and praise the Son with distinction, with many tunes full of love. :

M 35:1 —

M 35:5 —

V2, p77, L9+10 ܶ ܳ ܰ : ܰ ܰ ܳ ܶ ܶܳܳ ܰ ܶ ܽ ܽ ܶ ܶ ܳ ܳ ‫ܰܘ ܰ ܳ ܬܘܒ ܘ‬ ‫ܳ ܰ ܰ ܀‬ Praise externally with the five senses of the body, and praise in secret with the five senses of the spirit. V2, p77, L11+12 ܰ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܳ ‫ܰ ܳ ܘ‬ : ‫ܘ ܳ ܘ ܶ ܳ ܐܦ ܰ ܳ ܬ‬ ܺܳܳ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܶ ܽ ܰ ܳ ̈ ܰ ‫܀‬ ‫ܘܢ‬

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE M 35:6 —

M 35:7 —

M 109:3 —

M 109:4 —

M 109:5 —

M 154:1 —

61

With smell, touch, taste, hearing and sight-with these five sense, praise with your body. V2, p77, L13+14 ܳ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܺ ܽ ܰ ܳ ܳ : ‫ܰܘ ܽ ܳ ܘ ܪ‬ ‫ܘܬܘܒ‬ ܰܶ ܳ ܰ ܳ̈ ܰ ܰ ̇ ܶ ܶ ܳ ܰ ‫ܘܗܘ ܳ ܘ‬ ‫ܐܘܕ ܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ And then praise with the hidden senses of the soul: knowledge, understanding, awareness, mind and thought. V4, p61, L6+5 from the bottom ܰ : ܳ ܰ ܶ ܶ ‫ܳܕܘ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܳܗ ܶ ܰ ܒ‬ ܳ ̱ ‫ܰܐ ܰܐ ܳ ܳܗܡ ܰܕ ܰ ܰ ܚ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܕ ܶ ܶ ܰ ܳ ܀‬ Here is my miserable tongue longing to tell your story, as Abraham longed to see your day. V4, p61, L4+3 from the bottom ܳ ̱ ‫ܶܘܐܢ ܰ ܺܙܕ ܳ ܳ ܟ‬ : ܳ ‫ܗܘ ܶ ܳ ܰܘ ܺ ܝ ܽܗܘ‬ ܶ ܳ ܺ ܳ ܺ ܳܶ ܶ ܺ ܰ ܶ ܰ ‫܀‬ ‫ܘܐܬ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܐ‬ And if the Virtuous One had seen you in the lamb and rejoiced in you, I the inadequate one, see you in the mimro and rejoice in you. V4, p61, bottom two lines ܶ ܰ ̱ ܺ ‫ܺ ܝ ܰܐ ܳ ܳܗܡ ܶ ܳ ܕܐ̱ ܳ ܰܙ ܺܕܨ‬ : ‫ܗܘܘ‬ ܺ ‫ܰ ܳ ܳܐܦ‬ ‫ܺ ܳ ܕܽ ܰ ܶ ܰܶ ܶ ܀‬ Abraham was glad with the lamb that signified your mysteries, bring me joy, with a mimro that shows your beauty. V5, p117, L1+2 ܳ ܽ ܺ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܶ ܰ ܳ̈ ܶ ܰ :‫ܬܟ‬ ‫ܬܝ ܕܐ ܙ ܬܪ ܕ‬ ‫ܚ ܳ ܝ‬ ܳ ܳ ܶ ܰ ‫ܘܐܪܕ ܶ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܽ ܳ ܰܕ ܽ ܘܬܟ܀‬ O Lord, open my lips to herald your abundant sweetness, and pass through my tongue the mimro of your glorious divinity. V5, p117, L3+4 ܳ ܳ ܶ ܶ ܺ ܺ ܳ ‫ܕܐܗܘ‬ ‫ܰܗܒ‬ : ‫ܶ ܟ ܰ ܺ ܳܐ‬ ܺ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܰ̈ ܰ ܳ ܶ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܳ ‫ܐ ܀‬ ‫ܪܗ ܕ‬ ‫ܘ ̇ ܐ‬

62 M 154:2 —

KHALID DINNO Help me to be the diligent agent of your word so that through it I may end with virtue the journey of my life. V5, p117, L11+12 ܽ ܳ ܶ ܺ ܺ ‫ܳܗ‬ ܶ ܶ ܰ ܰ ‫ܘܬ ܽ ܠ ܶ ܳ ܟ ܬ‬

ܶܳ : ̈ ܳܶ ܳ ܰ ܳ ܰ ܶ ‫ܳܶ܀‬ M 154:6 —

My mouth is given to you, let it be the harp for the tunes of your tidings, so let your word enter to speak through it, even though it does not deserve. V5, p117, L13+14 ܳ ܳ ܶ ܶ ܶܳ ܽ ܳ ܶ ‫ܽ ܢ‬ ‫ܬܟ‬ ‫ܕ‬ : ܳܶ ܶ ܺ ܺ ܶ̈ܺ ܰ ܽ ܳ ‫ܐ ܢ܀‬ ‫ܐ ܰ ܰ ܕܐܦ‬ How does a soiled mouth deserve to reach out to you, if not through your mercies that are endowed even upon the wicked? ܳ ܰ

M 154:7 —

On faith and salvation This is the core theme in many of Mor Jacob’s Mimre. Like St. Ephrem before him, Mor Jacob abhorred the notion of analyzing the Father and the Son and derided those who were engaged in it. He found refuge in faith, away from the pitfalls of philosophical discourses:

M 94:57 —

M 94:58 —

: ܳ ̱‫ܶ ܐ‬ ‫ܐ̱ ܳ ܀‬ Our lord, grant me that I kneel before you and not when I meditate it.

V3, p587, L7+8 ܰ ‫ܐܬܕ‬ ܰ ܶ ‫ܰܗܒ ܺ ܳ ܰ ܢ‬ ܶ ܳ ܰ ‫ܘ ܳ ܐܶ ܰ ܶ ܶ ܽ ܰ ܳ ܟ‬ may express awe and investigate your birth, ܳ

ܰ

ܳ

V3, p587, L9+10 ܶ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܺ :‫ܰ ܳ ܟ ܘ ܰ ܳ ܳ ̈ ܐ ܰ ܟ‬ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܰ ‫ܶܘܐ ܶ ܬ‬ ‫ܰ ܳ ܽ ܬ ܶܘܐ ܰ ܟ ܺ ܀‬ I wandered, scrutinizing you, and could not find you among the limiting definitions, so I took refuge in faith and I found you.

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE

M 94:59 —

M 94:60 —

M 94:61 —

63

V3, p587, L11+12 ܰ ܶ ܶ̈ܺܰ ܰ ܶ ܶ ܶ ܶ ܶ ܺ ‫ܘܐܬܬ‬ ‫ܐ‬ : ܳ ̈ ܽ ܳ ‫ܰܘ ܺ ܰܗ ܶ ܰ ܶܗܕ ܽ ̈ ܶ ܕ‬ ‫ܬܘ ܳ ܀‬ I set out to search for you amongst the wise and I stumbled, then I walked with the simple, without stumbling. V3, p587, L13+14 ܳ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܶ ܶ ܶ ̈ ܽ ܶ̈ ܳ ܰ ܶ ‫ܨ ܕ‬ :‫ܗ ܬ‬ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܶ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܰ ܳ ܽܬ ܶ ܰ ܳ܀‬ I learned faith from the fishermen; the wisdom of the world is not needed for faith. V3, p587, L15+16 ܶ̈ ܺ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܶ ‫ܕܗܕ‬ ܶܳ ̇ܳ ܶ : ܳܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܶ ܶ ܳ ܺ ‫ܕ ܰ ܳܕܪ‬ ‫ܪܘ ܀‬ Through the wisdom of the world many fell, and whilst scrutinizing about the Son of God they fell before his majesty.

V3, p630, L20+p631, L1 ܳ ̱‫ܐܶ ܳ ܶ ܽ ܘܡ ܽ ܰܕ ܳ ܰ ̱ܗܘ ܳ ܰ ܥ ܐ‬ ܳܰ ܰ ܳܳ ܳ ܰ ‫ܰ ̱ܗܘ ܰ ܰ ܐ̱ ܳ ܶ ܀‬ ‫ܘܕ ܬ ܕ‬ M 94:513 — I know he is ever God, and I believe without a search that he is the Son of God. : ܶ

V3, p631, L2+3 ܺ ܽ : ܶ ‫ܐ ܽ ̱ܗܘ ܳ ܶ ܺܘܐ ܰ ܺ ̈ ܶ ܺܘܐ ܳܕ ܘ‬ ܳ ‫ܺܘܐ ܰ ̈ ܳ ܶ ܺܘܐ ܰܕ ܺ ܺ ܰ ܺ ܰ ܀‬ M 94:514 — There are the teachers, there are the wise, and the inquisitors and the Greeks, and there are those who rely on scholarship. V3, p631, L4+5 ܳ ܳ ܳ ܺ ܳܶ : ܳ ‫ܰ ܺ ܳ ܘ ܳ ܽܕܪܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ܳ ܳܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܰ ‫܀‬ ̱‫ܘ ܥ ܐ‬ M 94:515 — I, the inadequate one, am neither a wise man nor a learned one, and I do not know how to scrutinize about the Son of God.

64

KHALID DINNO

V3, p631, L6+7 ܰ ܰ ܺ ‫ܺ ܰ ܳ ܰ ̱ܗܘ ܺܕ‬ ܶ ܳ ܳ ‫ܐܦ ܰ ܳ ܡ ܰ ܳ ܰ ̈ܶ ܰܕܙ ܺ ܽ ܬ ܀‬ M 94:516 — For me, He is God, born in the flesh, from the house of David, even as He suffered on the Cross. : ‫ܰ ܺܕܘ‬

ܶ

ܶ

V3, p631, L8+9 ܳ ܶ ܰ ܺ ܺ ܶ̈ܺܰ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܳ : ̱‫ܒ ܐ‬ ‫ܘ ܕ‬ ܳ ܶ ܺ ܳ ܶ ܺ ‫ܕܗܕ ܽ ܐ̱ ܳ ܰܘ ܰ ܺ ̈ ܶ ܀‬ M 94:517 — When the wise discuss his news I do not go near to them, for what is it to me, the ignorant one, to be with the wise? V3, p631, L10+11 ܶ ܶ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܳ ܺ ܰ ‫ܘ ܳ ܰܕ‬ : ‫ܐ‬ ܳ ܽ ܺܰ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܶ ‫ܬ܀‬ ‫ܘܬ ܘ‬ ‫ܰܕ ܰ ܰ ܝ ܐ̱ ܰ ̱ܗܘ‬ M 94:518 — When the learned discuss his news, I know how to remain quiet, for I am a stranger to scholarship and wisdom. ܶ ܶ

V3, p631, L12+13 ܳ ܶܳ ̈ܽܰ ܶ ܺ ܳ ܳ : ܳ ̱‫ܳ ܰ ܐ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ ܕܕܪ‬ ܳ ܳ ܰܺ ܰ ܳ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܶ ‫܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̱‫ܺ ܐ‬ M 94:519 — When the scholars argue about him, I do not listen, for I do not rely on the scholarship that examines the Son. V3, p631, L14+15 : ܳ ܳ ܺ ܺ ‫ܰܘܐ ܳ ܕ ܳ ܶ ܰܕ ܰ ܽ ܳ ܝ‬ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܶ ‫ܳ ܰ ܥ ܐ̱ ܳ ܀‬ ‫̱ ܰ ̱ܗܘ ܰ ܺ ܘ‬ M 94:520 — And whenever they want to dissect the Only begotten One, I become very stupid and fail to understand what they say. V3, p631, L16+17 ܺ ‫ܰܘܐ ܳ ܕ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܶܬܗ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ : ܳ ‫ܺ ܽܕܘ‬ ܳ ܶ ܺ ‫ܺ ܐܕ ܳ ܕ ܳ ܳ ܽ ̈ ܳ ܰ ܽ ܘܢ܀‬ ‫ܶ ܐ‬

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE

65

M 94:521 — And whenever they deny His Incarnation I become deaf and will have no ears to hear their explanations. V3, p631, L18+19 ܶ ܳܳ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܺ ܰ : ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܰ ܘ ܶܕ ܳܕܐ ܰ ܕ‬ ܶ ܶ ܶ ܶ ܺ ܳܳ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܶ ܰ ‫܀‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ M 94:522 — I never learnt to speak the language of those who say, God was not on the Cross. V3, p631, L20+21 ܶ ܰ ܺ ܳ ܰ ‫ܰܘܐ ܳ ܕ ܳ ܰ ܰܕ‬ ܳ ܽ ܶ ‫ܶܕܐ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܥ ܐ̱ ܳ ܀‬ ‫ܺ ܽ ܳ ܰ ̱ܗܘ‬ M 94:523 — And whoever thinks he has known the Son precisely he is a stranger to me, for I know not. :ܳ ܰ

V3, p632, L1+2 ܶ ܽ ܶ ‫ܰ ܘ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܺܕ‬ ܽ ܶ ܰ ܳ : ‫̱ܗܘ‬ ܳ ܳ ܳ̈ ܰ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܽ ܰ ܶ ܺ ‫ܕ ܬ܀‬ ‫ܕܗ‬ M 94:524 — He speaks in the language that each one learnt in his own dialect, as in the time of Babylon. V3, p632, L3+4 ܳ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܶ ܰ ܳܳ ܰ ܰ : ‫ܕܗ ܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ܳ ‫ܰ ܶ ܐ̱ ܳ ܶ ܘ ܳ ܰ ܥ ܐ̱ ܳ ܐ̱ ܺ ܳ ܶ ܶ ܡ܀‬ M 94:525 — I speak about the Son of God with the language of faith and I know nothing else. V3, p632, L5+6 ܳ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܶ ܺ ܶ ̈ ܰ : ‫ܐܦ‬ ‫ܺܕܐ ܽ ̱ܗܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ܶ ܰ ‫ܰܘ ܰ ̈ ܳ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܽ ܳ ܐ ܺ ܰ ܗ܀‬ M 94:526 — There are no teachers, wise men or interpreters; everyone speaks according to his knowledge. V3, p632, L7+8 ܳ ܰܺ ܰ ܶ ܳ ܳܰ ܳ ܰ ܳ ‫ܕܪ‬ ‫ܺܕ‬ : ܳ ܶ ܳܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܶ ܰ ܰ ‫ܕܬܕܪܟ‬ ‫ܳ܀‬ ‫ܬܕܥ ܕ‬ M 94:527 — My knowledge advanced to this extent: it is to know that the Son of God cannot be described.

66

KHALID DINNO

V3, p632, L9+10 ܳ ܰ ܶ ܳ ̱‫ܰܘܕܪ ܳ ܐ̱ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܶ ܐ‬ ܽ : ܳ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܶ ܺ ܶ ܶ ‫ܶ ܰ ܐ̱ ܳ ܀‬ ‫ܕܐܢ‬ ̱‫ܐ‬ M 94:528 — I do not want to rise another step for I have known that even if I wanted to, I could not. V3, p632, L11+12 ܳ ܳ ܳ ̈ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܽܶ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܳ ‫ܪܗܛ ܐ̱ ܐܨܘܕ ܪܘ‬ : ܳ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܺ ܰ ܽ ܶ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܰ ܶܪܟ ܐ̱ ܳ ܀‬ ‫ܕܐܢ ܪܗܛ ̱ܐ‬ M 94:529 — I do not run to catch the wind in steps, for I have come to know that even if I did I could not. V3, p632, L13+14 ܳ ܺ ‫ܳ ܰ ܰ ܚ ܐ ܳ ܰܐ‬ ܶ ܶ ܳ ‫ܰ ܳ ܘܐ‬ :̇ ̱ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܰ‫ܽ ܶ ܕ‬ ܶ ܳ ̱‫ܳ ܰ ܥ ܐ‬ ‫ܳ ܽ ܀‬ M 94:530 — I dare not fathom the sea and count its sand, for I know by whose hand it was measured. V3, p632, L15+16 ܳ ܺ ‫ܳ ܳ ܶ ܐܳ ܪ‬ ܶ ܶ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܰ ‫ܬܗܘ‬ : ̱ ܰ ܳ ܰ ܳ ‫ܳ ܺ ܰܕ ܰ ܰ ܐ̱ ܰ ̱ܗܘ ܰ ܐ ܺ ̈ ܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ M 94:531 — I do not aspire to touch the fire and the flame, for I have a body that greatly fears the fire. V3, p633, L4+5 ܳ ܽ ܳ ܰ ‫ܰܘܐ ܰ ܰܗ ܳ ܕ‬ ܺ ‫ܗܪ ܰ ܒ‬ ̱ ܶ ܳ ܶ ‫ܕ ܶ ܶ ܰܐܕܥ ܕ ܳ ܰ ܥ ܐ̱ ܳ ܳ ܬܗ ܰܕ ܳ ܀‬ M 94:536 — O Lord gave me a gift full of light, to know that I do not know how to test the Son. :‫ܳ ܰ ܢ‬

V3, p633, L6+7 ܰ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܰܳ ܳ ܳ ܰ :‫ܥ‬ ‫ܐ ܕܐܦ ܗܘ‬ ‫ܐ ܽ ̱ܗܝ ܥ‬ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܰܳ ܳ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܰ ܰ ܶ ‫܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ ܥ‬ M 94:537 — His father knows him just as He knows his Father, glory be to the Father who knows the Son, who is beyond examination.

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE

67

On the Virtues of Silence V2, p155, L17+18 ܰ ܳ ܽ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܳ ‫ܘ ܕ‬ : ‫ܬ‬ ܳ ܺ ܶ ܳ ‫ܰܐ ܳ ܕ‬ ‫ܽ ̱ܗܘ ܰܘ ܺ ܶ ܺ ܽ ܬ ܀‬ M 37:187 — Whoever refrains from speaking the truth in the right place is despised and rejected by the Justice. : ܶ ܰ ‫ܰܕ‬ ܶ ‫ܳ ܀‬ M 37:188 — If he spoke where he must losses to himself.

V2, p155, L19+20 ܳ ̱‫ܽܘܕܘ ܳ ܕ ܳ ܳ ܕ ܶ ܶ ܳ ̇ ܐ‬ ܳܶ ܶ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܶ ̈ ܽ ܶ ܽ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬܘ‬ be silent, he will bring ܳ

On being Open and Transparent with his Audience V5, p749, L1+2 ܳ ܰ ܳ ܶ ܺ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܺ ܺ : ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܝܕ‬ ‫ܰ ܶܓ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ܶ ܶ ܰ ܰ ‫ܺ ܳ ܐܶ ܶ ܳ ܶܐܬ‬ ‫ܰ ܬ ܺ ܗ܀‬ M 181:14 — My feeble mind urges me to write a mimro on St. George; in you I seek strength to narrate the story. V5, p749, L3+4 ܳ ̈ ܽ ܺ ܽ ܰ ܳ ܺ ܰ ‫ܳܗ‬ ܽ :‫ܘܢ‬ ‫ܺ ܶܬܪ‬ ܶ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܰ ܺ ܽ ‫ܘ ܦ ܀‬ ‫ܘ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܘܢ‬ M 181:15 — Here are two ideas that urge me to write; each attracts me to it, forcibly. V5, p749, L5+6 ܶ ܳ ܺ ܶ ܽܰ ܶ ܺ ܽ ܺ ܰ :‫ܐ ܘܩ‬ ‫ܕ ܪ ܬܗ ܕ‬ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܺ ܶ ܳ ܰ ܰ ܰ ‫ܘ ܬܬ ܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘ ܪ‬ M 181:16 — One frightens me, and on account of the magnitude of the mimro I run away, and the other signaled to me: tell His story and do not be afraid! V5, p749, L7+8 ܺ ܰ ‫ܶ ܶ ܺܕ ܳ ܰ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܰܗܘ‬ : ܰ ‫ܕܐܙ‬ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܶ ‫ܰܘ ܺ ܕ‬ ‫ܽ ܳ ܶ ܘ ܽ ܬܳ ܶ ܀‬ M 181:17 — I questioned the idea that frightened me, and found its advice defective and of no benefits.

68

KHALID DINNO

V5, p749, L9+10 ܶ ܽ ܳ ܺ ܺ ܳ ܶ : ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܶ ܗ ܳ ܳ ܕ ܰ ܰ ܕܐ ܘܒ‬ ܳ ܺ ܰ ‫ܺ ܶ ܽ ܳܬܪ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܕ ܰ ܰ ܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘ‬ M 181:18 — I followed the one that encouraged me to approach the amazing mimro, and found the counsel that it gave me not without merit.

When he Likens himself to a Child In several mimre Mor Jacob likens himself to a child muttering his confused words with love, but his Father listens with immense affection and understanding.

M 99:11 —

M 99:12 —

V3, p725, L3+4 ܳ ܳ̈ܺ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܰ ܶ ܰ : ܳ̈ܺ ܰ ‫ܢ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ܽ ܳ ܶ ܶ ܶ ܳ ܽ ܰ ܰ ‫̱ܗܘ܀‬ ‫ܕܘ‬ ‫ܕܕ‬ ‫ܶܘܐ ܽ ܘ ܕ ܶ ܘܩ‬ The child speaks, and even if his words are unintelligible they are very much loved; and if he remained silent, one would be afraid that he might be dumb. V3, p725, L5+6 : ܶ ܺ ܺ ‫ܳ ܶ ܐ̱ ܳ ܰ ̈ ̱ܗܝ ܳ ܰܕ ܰ ܶ ܰܘ‬ ܳ ܽ ܶ ܰ ‫ܰ ܺ ܰܨ ܶ ܗ ܰܘ ܳ ܺ ܶ ܀‬ ‫ܘ‬ His folk are happy even when he stammers; they accept his defect, viewing it with favor, as though it was glory.

V4, p118, L13+14 ܳ: ܺ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܰ ‫ܰܕ ܳ ܕ ܰ ܶܪܟ‬ ‫ܰ ܶ ܰ ܰܕ ܰ ܶ ܀‬ M 111:19 — One can never be faulted for speaking of love about the Beautiful one, for however far his speaking goes, he would never give you justice. V4, p118, L15+16 ܺܳ ܺ ܰ ܶ ܽܳ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܶ ܰ ‫ܡ ܕܗ‬ : ܺ ܰ ܶ ‫ܳܘܨܐܬ ܐ ܽ ̱ܗܝ ܽ ܳܕܐ ܰ ܶ ܰܪ ܳ ܳ ܀‬ M 111:20 — A child speaks to his father with love, while his father listens with love to whatever he says.

JACOB OF SERUGH, THE MAN BEHIND THE MIMRE

69

V4, p118, L17+18 ܰ ܶ ܳ ܳ̈ܺ ܰ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܰ ܳ ܰ‫ܘ‬ : ‫ܢ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ ܳܳ ܺܰ ܰ ܳ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܰ ‫ܬ܀‬ ‫̱ܗܝ ܐ ܗܘ ܕܐ‬ M 111:21 — And as he hears him speak through images, he accepts them as though by someone speaking serious facts. V4, p118, L19+20 ܳ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܰ ܶ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܰ ܳ ܶ : ‫ܫ ܡ ܕܐ‬ ܳ ܰ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܶ ܺ ܳ ̈ ܰ ܽ ܶ ܳ‫ܘ‬ ‫܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ M 111:22 — Even when he stammers a lot without making sense, the father is happier with his speech than with that of philosophers. V4, p118, L21+22 ܰ ܰ ܶ :‫ܳ ܶ ܐ ܳ ܐ ܰ ܽ ܳܕ ܽ ܕ ܰ ܐ ܽ ̱ܗܝ‬ ܳܰ ‫ܳܗ ܰ ܶ ܐ̱ ܳ ܳ ܡ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܰܪ ܳ ܀‬ M 111:23 — Hence I am like a child before his father, Behold, I speak before God with great love.

CONCLUDING REMARKS So here is our poet, an inspiration to read; a teacher who fathomed his subject, the entire Bible, and appreciated its deep mysteries. He expressed these mysteries in a language full of eloquence, yet one we could understand. He was an illuminator who shed new light on the Biblical narratives and clothed them in robes that we could recognize, using his unique brand of artistry of images and symbols. But while he negotiates his way through all this, he also comes across as a man who is genuinely ready to share with his audience his inner feelings of anxiety, inadequacy and self reproach; he was never aloof. Last but not least, what distinctly comes across is a man who is passionately devoted to one single vocation in life, namely that of revealing the wonders of Creation, and ihidoyutho (the Oneness) of the Son with the Father.

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM: READINGS IN HIS METRICAL HOMILIES ‘ON THE SINGLES’ SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH I. MAR JACOB THE TEACHER Mar Jacob of Serugh (c. 451–521) lived in theologically exciting times. Just at the beginning of his life, the fateful Council of Chalcedon had met and approved a Christological formula, articulated in Greek philosophical terms, that was destined to become one of the most church-dividing decisions ever to be taken by an ecclesiastical assembly in Late Antique times. Mar Jacob died some seventy years after the council, just at the beginning of the era when the Roman imperial government in Constantinople was prepared to enforce the adoption of the Christology of Chalcedon empire-wide, adopting a policy that required all bishops to accept its orthodoxy. 1 Meanwhile, in Edessa, where Mar Jacob had himself been a student, Syriac-speaking theologians during his lifetime were engaged in controversies with one another, engendered by their espousal of rival theologies based on texts newly translated into Syriac from their original Greek. The parties were divided by their theological allegiances and perhaps also by their political loyalties. On the one hand there were the partisans of See now Menze, Volker R. Justinian and the Making of the Syrian Orthodox Church, Oxford Early Christian Studies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 1

71

72

SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH

the theology of St. Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444), and on the other hand there were the devotees of the works and teachings of Theodore of Mopsuestia (c. 350–428). Differing political sympathies seem also to have been in play in Edessa in those years, with some Edessans being called ‘Persians’, presumably because of their political preference for Persia, or simply because they came originally from those parts of the Syriac-speaking milieu under Persian government; others remained reconciled to Roman suzerainty. In due course, theological discord in Edessa came to the point that in the year 489 the so-called ‘School of the Persians’ in the city was closed on imperial orders and its scholars fled to Nisibis in Persian territory, where under the sponsorship Bishop Bar Sawmâ of Nisibis (c. 420 – c. 490, bp. 457) 2 the devotees of the scriptural exegesis and the teachings of Theodore of Mopsuestia, led by the well-known, Syriac teacher and writer, Mar Narsai (c. 399–503), founded the institution that in due course would become the famed School of Nisibis. 3 Against the background of these developments, during the years between 470, when he was still in Edessa, and the year 502/3, when he was appointed Kôrepîskûpô in Ḥawrā, and the year 519 when he was named bishop of Baṭnan, Mar Jacob of Serugh seems to have spent some thirty years as a scholarly cleric in Ḥawrā, writing the hundreds of mêmrê (said by Jacob of Edessa to have been as many as 763) and the letters that have made him one of the best known and most prolific of the early Syriac writers. His style, his themes and his religious discourse, albeit in a simpler register, easily evoke the memory of the works of St. Ephraem the Syrian. The commemorative mêmrê written about Mar Jacob by later Syriac writers stress his role as a teacher (mallpōnô) and as a man filled with the Holy Spirit, indeed as the very ‘flute of the Holy

See Gero, Stephen. Barsauma of Nisibis and Persian Christianity in the Fifth Century, CSCO, 426, Louvain: Peeters, 1981. 3 See now Becker, Adam H. Fear of God and the Beginning of Wisdom: The School of Nisibis and the Development of Scholastic Culture in Late Antique Mesopotamia, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006. 2

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM

73

Spirit’. 4 These qualities again evoke the memory of St. Ephraem. And Mar Jacob himself celebrated the memory of his ancestor in faith and culture, the ‘Harp of the Holy Spirit’, in his well known mêmrâ, ‘On Mar Ephraem, the Teacher’. 5 And just as it is easy to suppose that Mar Ephraem was in his lifetime an îḥîdōyô, and a socalled ‘son of the covenant’, 6 so those who have written of Mar Jacob have not hesitated to speak of him as “having lived as a monk, in an ascetic life-style characteristic of Syriac monasticism,” as Wolfgang Hage has put it. 7 Patriarch Ignatius Aphram I Barsoum even said of Mar Jacob, “He became a monk and an ascetic. ... He was well received, loved and trusted by hundreds, nay, thousands of monks for his piety, honesty and knowledge.” 8 So far, not even half of the more than seven hundred mêmrê attributed to Mar Jacob of Serugh have been published, 9 and most of them are on biblical and liturgical themes. 10 On the basis of the See the mêmrê published by Krüger, Paul. “Ein bislang unbekannter sermo über Leben und Werk des Jakob von Serugh,” & “Ein zweiter anonymer memra über Jakob von Serugh,” Oriens Christianus 56 (1972): 80–111 & 112–49. 5 See Amar, Joseph P., ed. & trans. A Metrical Holily on Holy Mar Ephrem by Jacob of Serugh: Critical Edition of the Syriac Text, Translation and Introduction, Patrologia Orientalis, 47.1.209, Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 1995. 6 See Griffith, Sidney H. “Images of Ephraem: The Syrian Holy Man and his Church,” Traditio 45 (1989–90): 7–33. 7 Hage, Wolfgang. “Jakob von Serugh,” In Balz, Horst Robert, et al., eds. Theologische Realenzyklopädie, vol. XVI, 471. Berlin: DeGruyter, 1977–. 8 Barsoum, Patriarch Ignatius Aphram I. Berûlê Bdîrê: The History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 86–7, trans. Matti Moosa. Pueblo, CO: Passeggiata Press, 2000. 9 See Alwan, P. Khalil. “Bibliographie général raisonnée de Jacques de Saroug (+521),” Parole de l’Orient 13 (1986) : 313–84. The largest published collection of the mêmrê is Bedjan, Paul. Homilie Selectae Mar-Jacobi Serughensis, 5 vols., Paris/Leipzig: Via Dicta & Otto Harrassowitz, 1905– 1910. 10 See especially the studies of Kollamparampil, Thomas. Jacob of Serugh: Select Festal Homilies, Rome/Bangalore: Centre for Indian and Inter4

74

SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH

available mêmrê and Mar Jacob’s published letters, 11 scholars have studied his theology very carefully, 12 especially his Christology, 13 in an effort to determine more exactly his position on the controversial topics that during and soon after his time would become seriously church-dividing issues. Nevertheless, although in both his mêmrê and in his letters, Mar Jacob showed a great sensitivity to contemplative themes and to the exigencies of monastic life, hardly any scholarly attention has been paid to his two mêmrê, ‘On the Singles’, or to the advice he offers monks in his letters. It is the purpose of the present essay to discuss the structure and themes of the two mêmrê ‘On the Singles’ and then briefly to assess the significance of his thought in the light of the evolving history of monastic theory and practice in the Syriacspeaking milieu at the turn of the sixth century.

II. MAR JACOB AND THE ‘SINGLES’ IN GOD’S SERVICE Mar Jacob’s two mêmrê “On the Singles” (‘al îḥîdōyê) have long been published, one after the other in Bedjan’s edition of selected mêmrê attributed to the famous author. 14 Like the others in the collection, these two are presented in Mar Jacob’s signature meter of twelve syllables per half-line of verse. The verses follow one another sequentially, with no further textual division in evidence, save the editor’s paragraph indentations. It seems evident in the forms of religious Studies & Dharmaram Publications, 1997; idem, Salvation in Christ according to Jacob of Serugh: An Exegetico-Theological Study on the Homilies of Jacob of Serugh (451–521 AD) on the Feast of Our Lord, Bangalore: Dharmaram Publications, 2001. 11 Olinder, G., ed. Iacobi Serughensis Epistulae Quotquot Supersunt, CSCO, 110, Paris: E Typographeo Reipublicae, 1932. 12 See especially Bou Mansour, Tanios. La théologie de Jacques de Saroug, 2 vols., Bibliothèque de l’Université Saint-Esprit, 16 & 40, Kaslik, Lebanon: L’Université Saint-Esprit, 1993 & 2000. 13 See Bou Mansour, Tanios. “Die Christologie des Jakob von Serugh,” In Grillmeier, Alois. Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche, vol. 2/3, Die Kirchen fon Jerusalem und Antiochien nach 451 bis 600, 449–99, ed. Theresia Hainthaler, Freiburg: Herder, 2002. 14 Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 818–71, nos. 137 & 138.

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM

75

address he employs, that Mar Jacob’s audience was a congregation of îḥîdōyê; he addresses them in the second persons, both singular and plural, and in the imperative, sometimes adding an epithet such as ‘O mortals’, ‘O disciples’, ‘Brothers’ or ‘O discerning one’. Otherwise, there are no more definite indications of who the îḥîdōyê might have been. In all likelihood, they, like Mar Jacob himself, lived in the environs of Ḥawrā, and perhaps they were monks of the monastery of Mar Bassus, to whom Mar Jacob addressed several of his important letters; perhaps they were îḥîdōyê living independently or in small groups throughout the community. Mar Jacob also wrote letters to a number of monks and solitaries, as we shall see whose whereabouts are now unknown, so nothing very definite can be said about the addressees of the mêmrê; perhaps Mar Jacob presented them on a number of occasions. We may the most usefully study them one by one. But first a reflection on the meaning of the term îḥîdōyô is in order. It is the only one of the Syriac ‘monastic’ terms that Mar Jacob uses in the two mêmrê under discussion, no where in them do we find other terms like bar qyōmô, dayrōyô or abîlô. For Mar Jacob, îḥîdōyô means ‘single one’ or ‘solitary’. In mêmrô 138 he reflects on the term at some length; he says: See that the one who is îḥîdōyô is alone; he manages himself as he wills, in whatever he wills. For he has no one to subjugate and manage him; whatever he wills, he does without hindrance. Whoever is in ‘ûmrô, is under subjugation and coercion; he does not do what he wills among many [other people]. The work of one who subjects himself to his brothers is one thing; another is that of one who manages himself in everything he wills. It befits the one who is îḥîdōyô, O prudent man (pōrûshô), to look to see how many vexations of the world he is far from. Let him consider the circumstances he is in, like a wise man, and let him take heart and rejoice in the labor of his own way. Instead of the pain and the sorrow of heart that would afflict him,

76

SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH it behooves him to rejoice and to come to the end of his way in perfection (bagmîrûtô). Let him put the Lord ever before him as a mirror, and he will not tremble, either from pain or sorrow. 15

Here we see that Mar Jacob is speaking of îḥîdōyô as one who is not only ‘single’, in the sense that he is not married, but he is also ‘solitary’, in that he does not live in a communal dwelling (‘ûmrô), nor is he subject to many ‘brothers’. He keeps his Lord before him as a mirror, the îḥîdōyô of the Father, as the traditional language of Syrian ascetical life has it. 16 His use of the term îḥîdōyô, as we find it in the two mêmrê ‘On the Singles’, does not on the face of it, as we shall see, necessarily exclude any reference to a community of îḥîdōyê, but it does seem that he is not addressing a community of cenobites, as later monastic terminology would describe a group of brothers living in common. Rather, the îḥîdōyê to whom Mar Jacob addressed his two mêmrê seem literally to have lived by themselves as ‘singles’ in God’s service; they were hermits. A—Mêmrô 137: ‘On the Singles’— Two themes dominate Mar Jacob’s first mêmrô: a prolonged reflection on the deleterious role of ‘anxiousness’ or ‘anxiety’ (septô) about the things of this world in the lives of the îḥîdōyê, and an exhortation to the ‘solitaries’ to take a lesson from the fate of Lot’s wife, who, as she was leaving Sodom on the brink of destruction, according to the scripture narrative, she could not keep herself from turning back for a last look at her vanishing world (Genesis 19:26). On the face of it, the mêmrô exhorts the îḥîdōyê to avoid undue attachment to this world and to its wealth. From the insistent tone of the language and the constant admonition to resist being anxious about it, the reader gets the distinct impression that anxiety about the goods of this world was a major obstacle to Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 861–2, ll. 255–72. See in this connection Griffith, Sidney H. “Asceticism in the Church of Syria: The Hermeneutics of Early Syrian Monasticism,” in Wimbush, V., and R. Valantasis, eds. Asceticism, 220–45, New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. 15 16

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM

77

spiritual growth and development among the îḥîdōyê of Mar Jacob’s time. He develops his extended admonition in two very effective ways: Mar Jacob very adroitly applies the lesson to be learned from his selected passages from the Holy Gospel to the concrete situation of the lives of the îḥîdōyê; and he encourages them in a literary style that is concrete, uplifting and striking in its beauty of expression. Due to the limitations of time and space we may here give just one example of this literary grace, at the same time concrete and beautifully expressed. Having made the point that for the îḥîdōyô, life, and he means eternal life as well as life here on earth, is hidden in God, Mar Jacob compares the situation to that of the fish in the sea. In a beautifully crafted passage he writes: For you, life is hidden and preserved in God; enter in to bring forth for yourself from Him life without end. A breath of water keeps the fish alive, but if he comes out, onto the dry land, he crosses the boundary of what gives him life. The life-giving spirit is to be found in the Son of God; he suffices for the human race, for whomever issues from it. Swim in him spiritually, as in the great sea; if you pass beyond him, there is woeful death. Breathe him in and live; only in him will you come alive. let him be your water and in him you be the fish that takes in life. The spirit of this world exhales death into one who breathes it in, for it rouses the desire that pants bodily. 17

In addition to the extended metaphor, one notices the focus on the Son of God, the single one, who suffices for the human race, the very one whose title the îḥîdōyô bears. And as Mar Jacob develops his homily, it is this same Lord, Mar Jacob points out, who gave his disciples the commandment, “Do not be anxious.” (Matthew 6:25):

17

Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 819–20, ll. 15–21.

78

SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH Our Lord trod the Way beyond death for his apostles, and this is what he says, “Do not be anxious,” lest you drown. 18

From this point in his mêmrô, Mar Jacob carries on for almost fifty verses with a meditative reading of the whole passage in Matthew 6: 25–34, weaving into his verses the very words in which our Lord speaks of the lilies of the field, how they neither toil nor spin, yet not even Solomon in all his glory, nor any other earthly king, is arrayed like one of these. Then he states very clearly the main point of his homily to the îḥîdōyê: Poverty is the whole beauty of the îḥîdōyô, if he gets rich, he is diminished and his beauty is no more. 19

For Mar Jacob, an ‘empty purse’, as he puts it, is the sign of the one with whom the Messiah lodges. He states his advice bluntly to the îḥîdōyê who are anxious for tomorrow, what they will eat, what they will wear: He buys or he sells; with a cord whip our Lord will drive him out of the number of the îḥîdōyê. 20

The love of this world and its goods and beauties is the root of the problem, Mar Jacob says: The love of this world blinds men and they cannot see those hidden beauties that are in the new world. 21

The ‘hidden beauty’ as Mar Jacob conceives of it is the very ‘being’ (îtûtô), the ‘to be’, the to einai of God. He says: If the soul is buffeted by anxiety, its understanding is darkened; so it grows dim and it does not see the light that is above. The soul looks up; it is opened wide to receive great wealth from the being that is never disturbed. Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 821, l. 30. Ibid., 825, l. 75. 20 Ibid., l. 79. 21 Ibid., 827, l. 95. 18 19

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM

79

It lifts up its gaze from this world; the waves briskly snatch at it. It takes in the shining splendor of the Father in all His spiritual beauty. As the mind is not gazing on this world and what belongs to it, it takes its rest up above, where the Trinity abides. ... When the soul is gazing on God, it is full of light; if turns to look back on this world, darkness encompasses it. 22

Taking his cue from the possibility that the soul would give in to the temptation to turn back to the world, in the last part of his first mêmrô to the îḥîdōyê Mar Jacob presents a long meditation on our Lord’s admonition to his disciples regarding the end of the age, to “Remember Lot’s wife.” (Lk 17:32) As Mar Jacob puts it, When she left, her heart remained with her home in Sodom; On that account she too stayed there to become a parable. 23 ... She became a parable for the îḥîdōyê, the sons of the kingdom, so that they might be mindful of her and not be caught up in created things. 24

According to the biblical story, when he fled from Sodom, Lot asked God if he might not escape to the nearby small town of Zo’ar and God granted him his request. (Genesis 19:20–3) Mar Jacob makes use of this part of the story too, and he says to the îḥîdōyê: May Zo’ar be a quiet abode for you; flee to it as from a fire, from the evils of an evil world. Sodom was great, and Zo’ar was very small, but life was to be found in Zo’ar, the righteous. The world is large and the abode (‛ûmrô) of the îḥîdōyê is small, but life for the soul is to be found in it for the one who loves it. 25 Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 827 & 829, ll. 92–100, 113. Ibid., 829, l. 118. 24 Ibid., 831, l. 138. 22 23

80

SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH

Against the background of this biblical typology, Mar Jacob goes on to say to the ‘singles,’ You, O disciple, who have gone out after new life, choose a place for yourself, and live spiritually like Lot. If it becomes a place that is beautiful and full of death, abandon it like Lot did Sodom when he fled. If a hollow cave becomes available to you, and it can sustain you alive, flee to it; you will come to love its silent abode. 26

As for what the îḥîdōyê would be doing all day in their ‘silent abode’, Mar Jacob gives the following description: The prophets, who spoke about hidden things are the subjects of your study, The apostles, who proclaimed the revelation, are your common companions. All day you are delighted with the Psalms of the Spirit, with David’s sweet lyre, which will give you increase. Your life is woven onto the divine doctrines, and your soul will browse in the spiritual paradise of life. 27

The two most prominent themes in this first mêmrô ‘On the Singles’, Mar Jacob’s encouragement to the solitary to avoid anxiety about money and his warning about the dangers of looking back to the world from which the solitary had fled, suggest that during the last years of the fifth century and the first decades of the sixth, the ascetic lifestyle had become so common a feature of church life in Syria that the temptations of worldly ambition could readily affect those pursuing it. As we shall see below, it was indeed a time when the interests of both the church and the empire had become much intertwined and monks and monasteries would play a major role in the tumultuous controversies that already in Mar Jacob’s lifetime were beginning to produce permanent divisions in the SyriacBedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 832, ll. 145–7. Ibid., 833, ll. 156–8. 27 Ibid., 834, ll. 165–7; ‘spiritual paradise’ < pardîsô mlîlô, more literally, a paradise of well and truly spoken mysteries, i.e., the true doctrines. 25 26

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM

81

speaking churches. It was also a cosmopolitan time, when, as we shall discuss further below, Syriac translations were being made of Palestinian and Egyptian monastic texts that were originally written in Greek. Their influence is readily evident in the long, second mêmrô that Mar Jacob wrote ‘On the Singles’. B—Mêmrô 138 ‘On the Singles’— Mar Jacob’s second mêmrô, complete in three hundred and eighty one lines of homiletic verse, is just over twice as long as the first mêmrô. And while it retains the hortatory tones of the homily, it is in fact virtually a manual of ascetical and mystical theology for the îḥîdōyê, written in what is unmistakably an Evagrian tenor, with multiple echoes of the teaching in Evagrius of Pontus’ (346–399) popular treatise, De Oratione. Mar Jacob begins by evoking the scenario of the constant battle that Satan wages with the îḥîdōyê in their quiet, desert solitude (shelyô wṣedyô) and he says of the Evil One, At all hours he rouses all kinds of thoughts (ḥushōbê) in the îḥīdōyô; he does battle with him within his heart and cuts him apart. 28

Mar Jacob says that the Evil One constantly bedevils the îḥîdōyô with “visions of images (ḥezwōnê ddemwōn demwōn).” Mar Jacob cites in particular ‘lassitude’ (ma’înûô) and ‘depression’ (karyût lebbô) as the besetting ‘passions’ (ḥashshê) with which Satan encumbers the îḥîdōyê. He says, The Evil One perpetually casts lassitude upon the îḥîdōyê and they are weakened by it in their struggles. And when depression enters into the mind, it begins to suffer without knowing why it suffers. 29

In addition to the ‘lassitude’ and ‘depression’ with which Satan troubles the ‘singles’, and to which Mar Jacob gives a lot of attention, he also mentions the carnal passions (rgîgōtô kyōnōtô) that 28 29

Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 836, l. 3. Ibid., 837, ll. 11–2.

82

SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH

afflict them. The bulk of the mêmrô is devoted to reflections on the pervasive struggle with these passions and the recommendation of effective methods to counter them. We may best get a sense of how Mar Jacob deals with these matters by pausing at several of the more powerful passages in which he addresses them. They are on the order of set-pieces within the long accompanying text that provides their immediate frame of reference. Mar Jacob proposes that thinking about one’s own death might serve as an effective weapon against depression and lassitude. He says: Look always to the day of your demise, and you will be delivered from the thought of depression and lassitude. Always mark out before you your own death and you will overcome pain, grief, listlessness and depression. O prudent man, with these weapons and struggles fight lassitude and you will overcome. For there is nothing that brings this passion to nought, like always thinking of your own death in every season.30

Always adept at finding scriptural images to inspire the advice he gives to monks and solitaries, particularly from the Psalms, uniquely the monk’s prayer book, Mar Jacob likens the tempting ‘thoughts’ of the passions to the daughter of Babylon’s ‘babies’, who, according to Psalm 137:8–9, were to be bashed against a rock. Mar Jacob wrote: All thoughts will stir in your heart at all seasons; dash everyone of them instantly against the rock, so there will come true for you, “Blessed is he who would lay hold of your infants and dash them against the rock.” (Ps. 137:9) For the infants are the thoughts that are within your heart, and what will dash them is human freedom; it will trample them. 30

Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 842–3, ll. 66–9.

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM

83

At the beginning of its way the infant is small and its strength is small; so too the thought, at its beginning it is weak and easily crushed. Even a thorn, at the start of its growth is easy to root out, but if it grows up, it will hurt everyone who comes near. So too thoughts, when they are first aroused; they are easily trampled, but if they continue, they gain power. 31

Echoing an old monastic theme, Mar Jacob likened the life of the solitary in the Christian church to that of the angels, a way of life that in the human estate required steadfast renunciation (sûrōqô) to maintain, an exercise that Mar Jacob encouraged, recalling his constant admonition to the monk to abandon the world. He wrote: The solitary (îḥîdōyô) is like an angel, albeit he is bodily; his company is with God day and night. By means of renunciation his spiritual practice is united with that of the spiritual beings, if the fact is that he is not possessed of anything of the world, to which he would be bound. 32

The advice that Mar Jacob gives the solitary for the extirpation of vices echoes that of the ancient fathers of the Egyptian desert. For example, Evagrius Ponticus, seemingly borrowing the image from Aristotle, offered the homely advice that one might use a nail to remove a nail, meaning that one might use one vice to remove another vice. Evagrius gives the example of cultivating the demon of vain glory as a means of opposing the demon of fornication on the grounds that the two are incompatible with one another. 33 Mar Jacob replaced the nail with the thorn and puts his advice this way: Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 845, ll. 90–4. Ibid., 849–50, ll. 138–9. 33 See Guillaumont, Antoine, and Claire Guillaumont, eds. and trans. Évagre le Pontique: traité pratique ou le moine, 2 vols., Sources Chrétiennes, 170 & 171, Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 1971, no. 171, vol. II, 637–9, no. 58. 31 32

84

SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH With a thorn, one draws out a thorn from his body; so too O prudent man overcome one passion with its counterpart. 34

By its counterpart, Mar Jacob means that one extirpates one vice by the dangerous practice of cultivating another one, antithetical to it, just as Evagrius had proposed. In one example among the several options he provides, Mar Jacob says, When the passions of depression are roused in you, to sully you, think of how your stature is high above many and take heart. 35

Throughout this long mêmrô, Mar Jacob speaks constantly of the ‘thoughts’ (ḥushōbê), the passions of anxiety (ṣeptô), depression (‘ōqtô), sadness (karyût lebbô), and listlessness (ma’înûtô) as besetting vices for the solitaries, once again evoking the memory of Evagrius of Pontus’ concerns about the demon of sadness, and especially the demon of listlessness (akēdia). 36 Here is what Mar Jacob says about how such listlessness affects the solitary’s reading; he may even have the scriptures in mind. He says, When the solitary takes up a book (ktōbô) to read, he brings on listlessness and sleep and brings it to nought. The minute depression comes over his mind, he stops reading and begins to count all the pages. He sees the many pages that are in the book and he is irked; he begins to count, to see when he will finish with them. Straight away he begins to yawn because of his depression; it brings sleep upon him, coming at its command. The Evil One brings on dreamy sleep, suspended just above the eyes; they grow heavy with it and bring heavy sleep down on him. Listlessness binds a man in chains; he removes them with the labor of righteousness. 37

Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 853, l. 170. Ibid., l. 173. 36 See Guillaumont, Évagre le Pontique: traité pratique, vol. II, 520–7. 37 Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 854–5, ll. 187–92. 34 35

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM

85

Passing on from this masterful portrayal of the Evagrian logismos of akêdia, ma’înûtô, ‘listlessness’, Mar Jacob points out that the solitary must wrestle with all the passions constantly, as they really are. And he advises him to set before his mind’s eye the image of those who had achieved perfection before him “in the work of the solitaries,” the biblical figures, Elijah and John the Baptist in particular. It is almost as if Mar Jacob had a physical icon of these saints in mind. Echoing a favorite image of his spiritual forefather Saint Ephraem, 38 Jacob calls up the image of the imagemaker. He says, The painter always sets up a fair likeness before him; he paints from it and with its colors makes a likeness of his own. He never brings a defective image to set up before him; he would look at and make a likeness of a fair one, not a poor one. You too, O prudent man, look to and consider those higher than you, and strive to emulate them as much as you can. Take as a likeness, my brothers, the prophets inscribed in the Apostle, their endurance of adversity; emulate them. Do not look at those who have fallen and are sunk in this evil world, but those who have overcome by means of their exercises. 39

Mar Jacob commends the standard spiritual exercises to the solitaries; he speaks of fasting, of the importance of seeking a ‘word’ from one’s spiritual father, especially from Jesus himself in the Gospel, and most especially the admonition, “Do not be anxious ...” (Mt. 6:25–31). The solitary is called to carry on his See Griffith, Sidney H. “The Image of the Image Maker in the Poetry of St. Ephraem the Syrian,” Studia Patristica 25 (1993): 258–69. For the Evagrian connection, see Darling Young, Robin. “Evagrius the Iconographer: Monastic Pedagogy in the Gnostikos,” The Journal of Early Christian Studies 9 (2001): 53–71. 39 Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 855–6, ll. 200–4. 38

86

SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH

exercises in quiet tranquility, to “rejoice happily within your own mind,” 40 “in tranquility of soul and converse with God.” 41 The goal of the solitary’s life is to hear the word of his Lord, “Well done, good and faithful servant; ... enter into the joy of your master.” (Mt. 25:21) Mar Jacob puts it this way: Look forward to hearing this phrase from the King’s son, “Enter and rejoice, good servant, into the bridal chamber of light.” 42

Here and in the other places toward the end of the mêmrô, where he speaks of the ‘bridal chamber of life’, as in the phrases, “The just will enter in to rejoice in the bridal chamber of life,” 43 and “Your heritage is the kingdom on high, the bridal chamber of life,” 44 Mar Jacob is once again echoing the thought of his spiritual ancestor, Saint Ephraem, who, especially in his madrōshê ‘On Paradise’, 45 had depicted the consummate happiness of the just in the garden of Paradise in the symbol of marital bliss in the ‘bridal chamber’, a theme that subsequently came to permeate the Syriac liturgical tradition as the best metaphor for the Kingdom of Heaven. 46 At several points in the course of the mêmrô, again echoing a concern of St. Ephraem, Mar Jacob had emphasized the point that the spiritual exercises of the solitary are actions of his free will: “The will is the one that overcomes or goes down in defeat.” 47 At the end, he warns the solitary,

Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 864, l. 298. Ibid., 865, l. 309. 42 Ibid., 868, l. 341. 43 Ibid., 867, l. 326. 44 Ibid., 869, l. 347. 45 See esp. Beck, Edmund. Des heiligen Ephraem des Syrers Hymnen de Paradiso und contra Julianum, CSCO, 174 & 175, Louvain: Secrétariat du CSCO, 1957, VII:15 & 24; XIII:10. 46 See Brock, Sebastian. “The Bridal Chamber of Light: A Distinctive Feature of the Syriac Liturgical Tradition,” The Harp 18 (2005): 179–91. 47 Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 856, l. 209. 40 41

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM

87

Do not ever let yourself be moved by visions of fantasy; for the power of the Evil One is naught before freedom. He cannot force or drive it by constraint, But only by adulation does he do battle, and flattery. 48

III. MAR JACOB AND SYRIAN MONASTICISM Jacob of Serugh lived at a time when members of the burgeoning, Syriac-speaking monastic movement were importing the classics of Egyptian monasticism and the ideas and works of other influential spiritual writers in Greek, such as Gregory of Nyssa (c. 330 – c. 395), into their own traditional discourse concerning those who occupied a special station in the ascetical and mystical life of the church, the so-called ‘sons’ or ‘daughters of the covenant’, the ‘single ones’ in God’s service, the monks (dayrōroyê). 49 A number of Syriac texts from the period stretching between the late fourth century and the beginning of the seventh century reflect the efflorescence of a distinctively Syrian style of monastic life. 50 Many of the texts interweave the traditional vocabulary of the ‘Sons of the Covenant’ with the anachoretic experience of those who followed the way of Abraham Qîdûnōyô or of Julian Saba and their disciples. 51 These are texts variously attributed in the manuscripts Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae, vol. IV, 869, ll. 351–2. See Griffith, Sidney H. “Monks, ‘Singles’, and the ‘Sons of the Covenant’: Reflections on Syriac Ascetic Terminology,” in Carr, E., et al., eds. Eulogēma: Studies in Honor of RobertTaft, S.J., 141–60, Studia Anselmiana, 110, Roma: Pontificio Ateneo S. Anselmo, 1993. 50 See Escolan, Philippe. Monachisme et église: Le monachisme syrien du Ive au VIIe siècle; un ministère charismatique, Théologie Historique, 109, Paris: Beauchesne, 1999. 51 See Griffith, Sidney H. “Julian Saba, ‘Father of the Monks’ of Syria,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 2 (1994): 185–216; idem, “Abraham Qîdûnāyâ, St. Ephraem the Syrian and Early Monasticism in the SyriacSpeaking World,” in Bielawski, Maciej, and Daniel Hombergen, eds. Il Monachesimo tra Eredità e Aperture: Atti del Simposio “Testi e Temi nella Tradizione del Monachesimo Cristiano” per il 50. Anniversario dell’Istituto Monastico di Sant Anselmo, Roma, 28 maggio – 1 giugno 2002, 239–64, Studia Anselmiana, 140, Roma: Pontificio Ateneo S. Anselmo, 2004. 48 49

88

SIDNEY H. GRIFFITH

to St. Ephraem and to Isaac of Antioch (d.c. 460). They go under such evocative titles as “Letter to the Mountaineers,” “Mêmrê on anchorites, mourners, and hermits,” or simply “On the îḥîdāyê.” 52 By the early sixth century, a number of significant texts from the Egyptian monastic experience were circulating in Syriac translation, including the Vita Antonii, 53 St. Antony’s first letter, 54 and a body of other material containing works of Evagrius of Pontus, the letters of Antony’s disciple Ammonas, and texts attributed to Macarius the Great, as well as Syriac translations of Palladius’ Lausiac History.. This is the very era in which Philoxenus of Mabbug (c. 440–523) and other Syrian Orthodox scholars were actively engaged in the effort to infuse the classical Greek monastic texts into the Syrian experience. 55 Perhaps the high-water mark of this monastic translation movement in Syriac was achieved in the seventh century, with the publication of the Paradise of the Fathers, a compilation of the classics of Egyptian desert spirituality in Syriac translation by the Church of the East monk, ‘Enānîshô‛ (fl.c. 630– 670) of the monastery of Mount Izla, near Nisibis.. It included, among others, translations of the Vita Antonii, Palladius’ Lausiac History, the rule of Pachomius, i.e., the Asketikon, Jerome’s Historia

These texts were much discussed and wrongly attributed to Saint Ephraem by Vööbus, Arthur. History of Asceticism in the Syrian Orient, CSCO, 184, Louvain: Peeters, 1958. See now Mathews, E. “‘On Solitaries’: Ephraem or Isaac?” Le Muséon 103 (1990): 91–110. See also idem, “A Bibliographical Clavis to the Corpus of Works attributed to Isaac of Antioch,” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 5, no. 1, (January, 2002). 53 See Draguet, R. La vie primitive de s. Antoine conserve en syriaque, CSCO, 417 & 418, Louvain: Peeters, 1980. 54 See Rubenson, Samuel. The Letters of St. Antony: Origenist Theology, Monastic Tradition and the Making of a Saint, Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1995. 55 See Darling Young, Robin. “The Influence of Evagrius of Pontus on the Monastic Writings of Philoxenos of Mabbug,” in Young, R.D., and M.J. Blanchard, eds. To Train His Spirit with Books”: Studies in Syrian Asceticism, Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, to appear. 52

MAR JACOB OF SERUGH ON MONKS AND MONASTICISM

89

Monachorum, and the Apopthegmata Patrum. 56 Meanwhile, under the impetus of these translated texts, a long and wondrous tradition of east Syrian ascetical and mystical writing got underway. 57 Our brief reading of Mar Jacob of Serugh’s mêmrê ‘On the Singles’, assuming their authenticity, with their marked Evagrian thought and language, reveals his familiarity with themes dear to his contemporary, Philoxenus of Mabbug (c. 440–523), another Syrian Orthodox writer whose monastic texts are suffused with Evagrius’ thought. Indeed, Philoxenus had a major role to play in the initial transmission of Evagrius’ works in Syriac translation. 58 Perhaps then we may see in Mar Jacob’s mêmrê not only the echo of earlier Syriac monastic lore, as has previously been assumed, 59 but an expression, in the ordinary monastic milieu in Syria, of the early enthusiasm for the mystical thought that would come to full flower not long after his time in the classic texts of Syrian asceticism and mysticism.

The work has long circulated in the English translation of Wallis Budge, E.A. The Paradise, or Garden of the Holy Fathers, 2 vols., London: Chatto & Windus, 1907. 57 See esp. Beulay, Robert. La lumière sans forme: Introduction a l’étude de la mystique chrétienne syro-orientale, Chevtogne, Belgium: Éditions de Chevetogne, 1987. 58 See Guillaumont, Antoine. Les ‘Kephalaia Gnostica’ d’Évagre le Pontique et l’histoire de l’origénisme chez les grecs et chez les syriens, Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1962; Guillaumont, Antoine & Claire. “Evagre,” in Viller, M., et al, eds. Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, 20 vols., Paris: Beauchesne, 1937–95, vol. IV, cols. 1731–44; Watt, J.W. “Philoxenus and Evagrius,” Oriens Christianus 64 (1980): 65–81. 59 E.g., in Griffith, “Asceticism in the Church of Syria,” 238. 56

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION OF THE EUCHARIST IN LIGHT OF JACOB OF SERUGH’S MIMRŌ 95 AMIR HARRAK I. INTRODUCTION In his magnificent poetical way, the poet theologian Jacob of Serugh (452–521) discussed the Eucharist, not simply as a theological subject but as a ritual of prime importance in the Christian life. In his hymn entitled On the Partaking of the Holy Mysteries, mimrō 95 of his large metrical repertoire, 1 Jacob exhorts, entices, and teaches his readers to attend the Eucharist celebration, not to leave it because it is too long, but to benefit from its spiritual nourishments. In doing so, Jacob provides us with unique information on how the Eucharist was celebrated during his own time, which was slightly different from the current celebration of the same within the Syriac Orthodox Church. Before discussing his references to the Eucharistic celebration, let us survey expressions that highlight his concept of the Eucharist, so as to better understand why he devoted a whole mimrō to the topic.

Bedjan, Paulus, ed. Homiliae Selectae Mar-Jacobi Serughensis, vol. III, 646–63, Leipzig: William Drugulin, 1902; repr. Gorgias Press, 2006. See also Metrical Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh: Jacob of Serugh’s Homily on the Partaking of the Holy Mysteries, trans. and introd. by Amir Harrak, Texts from Christian Late Antiquity, 23.17, Gorgias Press, 2009. 1

91

92

AMIR HARRAK

II. NAMES OF THE EUCHARIST IN JACOB OF SERUGH Jacob calls the Eucharist by several names, all familiar in Syriac literature. The main name is pōtūrō “Table:” : ̈ ‫ܘܪ ܕ‬ ‫ܬܘ ܐܬ‬ ‫܀‬ ‫ܬܗ‬ ‫ܕ ܐ‬ Come and be fattened by the Table full of life, for its food cannot be spoiled for the one who deserves it (2). 2

The Table is often that “of the Church” (24), or a “Spiritual Table” (3),” Divine Table,” (160), and “Table of the Royal Groom” (6). The Eucharist is also hlūlō “wedding banquet”: ̇݁ ̄ ̈ :‫ܐܪܙܗ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫܀‬

‫ܕܬ‬

݁ ‫ܘܢ‬

‫ܘ‬

The bride of the King made a wedding feast for the children of her Mysteries and with them she begs that she may rejoice today tremendously (5).

‫܆‬

‫ܡܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫܀‬

‫ܢ‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܗ ܘܕ‬ ‫ܢ‬

‫ܕ‬

He has set at the wedding feast his body and blood before the reclining ones that they may eat of him and live with him without end (181).

Terms related to banqueting include smōkō, hšomītō, and šōrūtō, as subsequently illustrated: ‫܆‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܪܘ‬ ‫̈ ܗܝ ܐ‬

̈ ‫ܬܘ‬

‫ܢ‬

‫ܬܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬

Come, my dear ones, and recline in a spiritual smōkō-feast, for love calls you concerning its divine actions (3).

‫܆‬ ‫܀‬ 2

̈ ‫ܘ ̈ܘ ݁ܗ ܕܐܪ‬ ̈ ‫ܘ‬ ݁ ‫ܬܗ‬

‫ܬ‬

Digits between brackets refer to stanzas (not to lines) in mimrō 95.

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

93

At the heads of streets and in the corners of the earth (the Bride of the King) stood up, calling toward her assemblies and crowds for the ḥšomītōbanquet (8).

‫܆‬ ‫ܘܬ ܀‬

̈

‫ܕ ܬ‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܬ‬

Why are the Hours of the church considered idleness? Why is not the liturgical service considered a šōrūtō-meal? (59)

‫݁ ܀‬

‫ܘܬ ܆‬

‫ܬܬܪܗ ܢ‬ ‫ܬ‬

‫ܕ‬

Do not rush to take your leave from the šōrūtō-meal, which the Bride has made so that the entire world may take delight in it (93).

Sacrificial offering, qurbōnō, and oblation, debehtō, are also attested: ̄ ‫܆‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܟܕ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܐ ܝ‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܐܬ‬

‫ܕ‬

Say to the Father: Behold, your Son is an oblation that pleases you! Forgive me through him, for he died on my behalf that I may be forgiven through him (162).

‫܀‬

‫ܐ ̈ ܝ ܕܐ ܘܗܝ‬ ‫ܕܐ ܒ‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܕܗ‬

‫ܗ‬ ‫ܘܐܬܪ‬

Behold your sacrifice: Accept it from my hands for He comes from you! Be pleased by Him for this is what I have to offer you (163).

The familiar but charged term rōzē “mysteries” is also present: ̄ ‫̈ ܆‬ ‫ܐܙ ܕ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̈ ‫܀‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ When these rōzē-mysteries, full of life, are administered, He (=Satan) fabricates motives leading to all sorts of losses (121).

‫܆‬ ̄ ‫ܢ‬ ‫ܐܙ ܀‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܗ‬ ‫ܕ‬

̄ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܘ‬

On this account, Satan is concerned and is much anxious to drive people out of the church during the time of the rōzēmysteries (127).

94

AMIR HARRAK

Finally, the more general but usual term tešmeštō “service” is as popular as pōtūrō “table” encountered above: : ̄‫ܐ‬ ‫ܬܢ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܪ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܘ‬

When you pass by, do not, as usual, turn aside when you draw near to us, So that the call of the Service is ineffectual in bringing you here (36).

̄ ‫ܐܙ ܆‬ ‫ܗ ܕ ܢ܀‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܬ‬ ‫̈ ܕ‬

‫̈ ܢ‬

‫ܨܘ‬ ‫ܕܬܬ ܢ‬

Plant your lives in the Service full of mysteries, So that you may bear sweet fruits of glory for the Lord of Eden (76).

‫܆‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܐ‬ ‫ܬ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐ ܢ‬

‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ‬

̈ ̈

Life springs from the Service of the house of God. O lovers of life, abstain not from its benefits (77).

‫܆‬ ‫ܘܬ ܀‬

‫ܕ ܬ‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܬ‬

Why are the Hours of the church considered idleness? Why is not the liturgical service considered a šōrūtō-meal? (59)

III. STAGES OF THE LITURGY IN LIGHT OF JACOB’S MIMRŌ 95 Part of mimrō 95 reflects the various stages of the Syriac Orthodox liturgy of his time while the other parts comment, almost in a mystical way, on the value and worthiness of the Eucharist to the Christian. The mimrō can be divided as follows: 1–4: Call to the theme 5–9: The Church is a banquet 10–23: The Body of Christ is a source 24–26: The Church is the place of peace 27–56: Exhortations to attend the Church, the liturgy is a healing 57–64: Call to the repentant 65–95: Stages of the Liturgy 96–101: Concept of baptism 102–182: Stages of the Liturgy

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

95

Jacob refers to the various sections of the Eucharist celebration as part of his general discussion of the Partaking of the Holy Mysteries and does not treat them independently. That he refers to them successively is, however, clear from the fact that his relevant discussion corresponds in large part to the current celebration of the Eucharistic liturgy in the Syriac Orthodox Church. The Syriac Orthodox liturgy can be divided into two major parts: The Pre-Anaphoric Service, also called the Service of the Word, and the Anaphora proper, that is the Eucharistic Service proper. III.1. The Pre-Anaphoric Service The offerings are prepared and the incense is served in this service, attended by both the catechumens and the faithful. It is a preparatory service as its Syriac name, ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ ܪ‬ “Preparatory Service of the Eucharist,” suggests. Among the rituals performed in this service is the burning of the incense and the readings from the Holy Scriptures—subsequently Psalms and Prophets from the Old Testament, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Epistles of St. Paul, and the Gospels from the New Testament. This service used to take place on the bīmō, a platform in the middle of the church, though this architectural structure disappeared probably after the 14th century. 3 All these constituents of the Liturgy of the Word, in addition to madrōšē sang by virgins, are referred to by Jacob as follows:

The latest bīmō is attested in a Syriac Orthodox monastic church uncovered in the vicinity of Takrit. The latest date attested there is the first quarter of the 13th century; see Harrak, A. “Recent Archaeological Excavations in Takrit and the Discovery of Syriac Inscriptions,” Journal of the CSSS 1 (2001): 14, and plans 1, 2, and 3. An extremely well preserved bīmō, built with stones and mortar, has been recently unearthed by Iraqi archaeologists in Bazyan, near Sulaimaniyya, in Iraqi Kurdistan; see Ali, Narmen Muhammad Amen. “The ‘Monastic Church’ of Bāzyān, in Iraqi Kurdistan,” Journal of the CSSS 8 (2008): 74–84. 3

96

AMIR HARRAK Scriptures and madrōšē: ̈

‫ܕܙ ܬ ܆‬ ‫̈ ܕܘ ܀‬

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܨ‬

‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬

Be patient and listen to the tunes of the Psalms that the prophetic finger struck on the words of David (65).

‫܆‬ ‫܀‬

̈ ̈

̈

‫ܨܘܬ‬

‫ܐ ܢ‬

‫ܪ‬

‫ܕ‬

Pay heed to the madrōšē-hymns (sung) by the virgins with glorious voices that the wisdom of the Most High has given to the congregations (66).

‫܆‬

‫̈ ܘܢ܀‬

‫̈ ܕܕܗ‬

̈

‫ܕܐ‬ ̄‫ܕ ̈ ܕܐ‬

̈

Listen to the Prophets, who like pipes of pure gold Pour forth life from their mouths into the ears of man (67).

‫ܘܬ ܆‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܕ‬ ̈

‫ܕ‬

̈

‫ܕܐ‬

‫ܨܘܬ‬ ‫ܬܪ‬

Pay heed to the Apostles, who like running rivers force their way to water the royal Paradise with magnificent streams (68).

Bema ‫ܘܬ ܆‬

̈

‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ܬ ܀‬

‫ܐܕ‬

‫ܐܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬

Turn your ear toward the divine bīmō, And receive from it precious pearls (69).

Beneficial Scriptures ‫܀‬

̈

‫ܘܬ ܆‬ ‫̈ ܕ‬

‫ܐ‬

‫ܘܐ‬ ‫ܬ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܕ‬

Learn and believe that the Testaments are rivers. For in both of them you have life that has no end (70).

‫ܘ ܝܐ ܆‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܪ‬

‫ܘܨܘܬ‬ ‫̄ܗܘ‬

‫ܬ‬

Listen to the New and pay heed to the Old, and realize that in both one and same truth is spoken to you (71).

‫ܘܬ ܆‬ ‫ܕ ܢ܀‬

̄‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕܪܕ‬

‫ܗ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

97

Behold, you hear from the Old Testament that four rivers run from the blessed source of Eden (72),

̈ ‫ܪ‬

‫ܘܬ ܆‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫̈ ܐܪܘ ܐ ܀‬

‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܘܬܘܒ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬

and then in the New Testament (that) the Apostles like four rivers went out to the four corners (of the world), watering them (73):

: ‫ܘܬ‬ ‫ܘܐܪܘܙ ܐ ܀‬

‫ܪ‬

‫ܗܝ ܘ‬ ‫ܗܘܘ‬

‫ܢ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬

Eden is Golgotha, and the Evangelists are the rivers, the four went out to the four corners and made them rejoice (Ms B).

Dismissal of the Catechumens: :

‫ܫ‬

‫܀‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܬ ܩ‬

̄‫ܐ‬

‫ܕܬ‬

‫ܕ‬

Do not depart when the Sanctification begins in the Holy of Holies, for you are of the Household and not a stranger (who must) move out! (94)

‫ܙܠ܆‬

‫ܪܘ‬

‫ܐ ̄ ܕܐ‬ ‫ܬܐܙܠ ܕܪ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐ ̄ ܐܦ‬

‫܀‬

‫ܕ‬

̄‫ܐ‬

When you hear: “Let the one who did not receive the signing (rušmō) leave,” you ought not to leave since you are signed and are a family member (95).

‫ܐ̄ ܆‬ ̈

‫܀‬

‫ܪ‬ ̄‫ܐ‬

‫ܐ‬

‫ܘ‬

You are signed with the sign, you are marked with the mark, among the brothers you are written. Why do you leave with the unsigned, like a deficient one? (97)

Dismissal of the catechumens and hearers: ‫܆‬

‫ܙܠ܀‬

‫ܨܘ‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܐ̄ ܐ‬

‫ܗܪ‬ ‫ܕܪ‬

‫ܐ‬

‫ܟܘ‬ ‫ܪ‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬

They signed you with the oil, and your face is signed by the sign of the Cross of light,

98

AMIR HARRAK but the one who is not signed the way you are signed, they ask to leave (100).

‫܆‬

‫܀‬

̄‫ܐ‬

‫ܬ ܩ‬

̈ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܟ ܐ‬

‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܗܝ ܘ‬

The sign of life made you a brother to the Only-Begotten One and a son of his Father, and since you are in the household, do not leave! (101)

:‫ܐ ܢ‬ ‫ܕܬ‬

‫ܐ ܢ܀‬

‫ܘ ܝ ܐ‬ ‫̄ܗܘ‬

̄‫ܐ‬

‫ܬܪ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬

Remain inside the gate and call the Father: Our Father! Because you are a son, you are permitted to call: Our father! (102)

:‫ܫ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܗܝ‬ ‫ܐ ܢ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ‬

On account of this, they put out he who is not baptized once the Sanctification takes place, for he is not permitted to call the heavenly One “Our father” (103).

: ̈ ‫ܬ ̄ܗܝ܀‬

̈ ‫ܐ ܢܕ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘܐ‬ ‫ܘܐ ܘ ܕ‬

He who is not baptized, his lot is not among the sons, And if he calls the Father “Our Father” this would be a lie (104).

:‫ܙܠ‬

‫ܪܘ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫܀‬

‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ܬ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܗܝ ܐ‬ ‫ܬܬ‬

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬

On account of this they say: “Let the one who did not receive the signing (rušmō) leave,” That a lie may not be spoken among the true ones (105).

̈

:

‫ܐ ܢ܀‬

‫ܘܗܝ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܘܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬

He who leaves with the Listeners (šōmu‛ē), what would he do when they search for him in the House and he is not there to call “Our Father”? (117)

III.2. Anaphoric Service Sanctus : ‫܀‬

‫ܬܗ‬ ‫ܬܗܘ ܪ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

99

(Satan), in every way, by his craftiness, brings you outside (the church), so that you may be removed from the crowds that chants: Qaddīš-Sanctus! (122)

Epiclesis :

‫ܕ‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܪ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܗ‬

‫ܪ‬

Along with the priest, the entire congregation petitions the Father to send his Son to come down and settle on the oblation (qurbōnō) (113).

:

‫ܘ‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܕ ܕ‬ ‫ܘܕ‬

‫ܐܦ‬

‫ܫ‬

‫ܘܪܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬

The Holy Spirit makes his power descend on the bread and wine, sanctifying them and turning them into the Body and Blood (114).

‫܀‬

: ̄ ‫ܐܪܙ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܘܢ‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܘ ܘ‬ ‫ܘܗܘ‬

And through his hovering (rūhōfō) he mixes (hōlet) them in a holy way, and sacramentally (rōzōnō’īt), they become one with him, as is writte 4 (116).

: ‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܬ ܀‬

‫ܗ‬ ̈

‫ܕ‬

̄ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬

The one (who leaves) deprives himself of the hovering—no one else deprives him of it. What does he gain in the market in which he errs? (118)

Catholic Prayer : ̄ ‫ܢ‬ ‫ܐܙ ܀‬

4

John 17: 11, 21.

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܗ‬ ̄ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܘ‬

100

AMIR HARRAK On this account, Satan is concerned and is much anxious to drive people out of the church during the time of Mysteries (rōzē), (127)

: ̈

‫ܩ‬ ‫ܘ ܕܕܩ ܀‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܐܦ‬

‫ܘ‬

lest, when the entire congregation cries out: Forgive my faults (šbuq lī hawbay), the sinner also shows up to be acquitted (128).

Blessing and Peace : ‫ܗ܀‬

‫ܐ‬

‫ܠ‬

‫ܗ‬

‫ܪ‬

̈

‫ܕܐ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܘܐ‬ ‫ܐܦ‬

When the congregation begs for mercy from God, even the sinners that are in it enrich themselves with His grace (131).

: ‫܀‬

‫ܕ‬ ̈

‫ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬

When the congregation begs the Father for mercy, he does not withhold it, not even from the bad ones found therein (132).

Fraction and Signation :‫ܫ‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܠܐ‬

‫ܐܙܠ ܐ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܬ‬

̄‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܐܦ ܐ‬ ‫ܘ‬

You may say: I will go and work until the time of the sanctification, and when the gates are opened, I will go in and take (communion) (138).

: ‫ܬܗ܀‬

‫ܘܐ‬

‫ܘ‬

̈ ‫ܙܘ‬

‫ܘܕ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܗ‬ ‫ܘܐܪ‬

O intelligent one, chase away these considerations and get rid of them; let your soul take care of its wounds to treat them (139).

: ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܣ ܀‬

‫ܕܐ‬

‫ܬܪ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܒ‬

‫ܗ‬ ‫ܘ‬

Behold: this is the time when the gate of the Great Physician is opened;

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

101

he treats freely, so bring in your sore that he may take care of it (143).

Pater Noster :

‫ܘ‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܕ ܕ‬ ‫ܘܕ‬

‫ܐܦ‬

‫ܘܪܘ‬ ‫ܘ ܫ‬

The Holy Spirit makes his power descend on the bread and wine, sanctifying them and turning them into the Body and Blood (114).

:‫ܐ ܢ‬

‫̈ܬ ܀‬

‫ܬܙ‬

‫ܕܐ‬ ̈

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܘ‬

And everyone who is in the House, moved, will call: “Our Father!” And the new sons sanctify him and bless him (115).

Final Exhortation by Jacob of Serugh (162–170) ‫܆‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܟ ܕ‬ ‫ܐܬ‬

̄ ‫ܐ ܝ‬

‫ܗ‬ ‫ܕ‬

Say to the Father, behold, your son is an oblation that pleases you! Forgive me through him, for he died on my behalf so that I may be forgiven through him.

:

‫ܐ ̈ ܝ ܕܐ ܘܗܝ‬ ‫ܕܐ ܒ ܀‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܕܗ‬

‫ܗ‬ ‫ܘܐܬܪ‬

Behold your sacrifice: Accept it from my hands for He comes from you. Be pleased by Him for this is what I have to offer you!

:

̄ ‫ܐ‬

‫ܝ‬ ‫ܗ܀‬

‫ܗ ܕ‬ ‫ܘ‬

‫ܬܝ‬

Behold: His pure blood is poured on Golgotha for my sake, pleading for me, so accept my supplication for his sake.

: ̄‫ܐ‬

‫ܐܢ ܬ‬ ‫܀‬ ‫ܕܬ‬

̈ ‫ܥ ܐܦ‬

Many are my sins but greater is your mercy! If you weigh them, your mercy will prevail even over the mountains that you balance!

102

AMIR HARRAK :‫ܘܢ‬ ̈

‫܀‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܪ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܘܕ‬

̈

‫ܪ‬

‫̄ܗܝ‬

‫ܕܪ‬

Consider the sins and consider the sacrifice on account of them; The slaughtered sacrifice is much greater than the sins!

:

̈ ‫ܨܨ‬ ‫̈ ܗܝ ܕ‬

‫ܘܪ‬ ‫܀‬

‫ܘܢ ܐ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܕ‬

Because I sinned, your beloved one sustained the nails and the lance; His suffering is able to please you so that I may live.

:‫ܘܗܝ‬ ‫ܘ ܀‬

‫̈ ܬܝ‬

‫ܘܒ‬

‫ܐ ܪ‬ ‫ܕܐܬ‬ ‫ܐ ܪ ܐܦ ܐ ̄ ܘ‬

Though I have been redeemed, the Evil one has encircled me, shooting me with his arrows; O King and my Saviour, encircle me too and heal my wounds.

: ‫܀‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܪܝ‬ ‫ܕ‬

My enemy is pressing and has killed me with the spear-head of iniquity; pass judgment on the insolent one for me, for he is not finished with me.

:

‫ܬܗ ܪ‬ ‫̈ ܀‬

‫ܘܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫̄ܗܝ‬

‫ܙ ܪ‬ ‫ܕܪܒ ̄ܗܘ‬

The soul is small and its injury is not very great, the compassion that heals the stricken ones is greater than it.

IV. COMMENTS Mimrō 95 preserves several stages found in the traditional celebration of the Eucharist within the Syriac Orthodox Church (marked with X below), but not all of the stages are referred to, as the following chart indicates: 5 The division of the Syriac Orthodox liturgy of the Eucharist is based on the following references: Khouri-Sarkis, G. “Le ‘propre’ de la messe syrienne,” L’Orient Syrien 1/4 (1956): 445–60, esp. 449–60; 5

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

mimrō 95

Traditional Eucharistic Liturgy PREPARATORY SERVICE

‫ܬ‬

103

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ ܪ‬

Introduction = Vestment of Priest = Service of Aaron Offertory (before catechumens’ service) PRE-ANAPHORIC SERVICE (on the bema) Psalms Hymns Liturgy of the Catechumens Old Testament = Book of Acts Catholic Epistles Epistle = Gospel = ‫ܢ‬ ‫ܐܘ‬ Dismissal of the Catechumens ‫ܙܠ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬

X X X X X X ‫ܕ‬

‫ܐ‬

X

ANAPHORIC SERVICE Introit Prayer = ‫ܪ ܕ‬ Creed Prayer of Peace Imposition of hands Sanctus Anamnesis Epiclesis ‫ܪܘ‬ Great Intercessions ̈ ، ̈ ‫ܕ‬ Catholic Prayer ‫ܨ ܬ ܕ ܘ‬ Blessing and Peace ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܬ‬ Fraction and Signation ‫ܘܪ‬ Pater Noster ‫ܨ ܬ‬ Prayer ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬

X X X X X X X

104

AMIR HARRAK

Traditional Eucharistic Liturgy Procession of the Eucharist ̄ ̈ ‫ܕܐ ܙ‬ Communion Dismissal = ‫ܬ‬

mimrō 95 ‫ܙܘ‬

As can be seen, mimrō 95 covers most of the liturgy of the Eucharist despite the fact that its author never intended to turn his discourse into a commentary on the same. 6 Pre-Anaphoric Service This service, also called the Liturgy of the Word or the Liturgy of the Catechumens, was performed on the bema referred to by Jacob of Serugh in stanza 69. Jacob invites the readers to listen to the Psalms, which “the prophetic finger struck on the words of David.” Psalms were part of the pre-anaphoric service up to the beginning of the anaphora. The Anaphora of the Twelve Apostles, dated probably before the christological controversies of the fourth century and still used in the Maronite, Assyrian, and Chaldean Churches, contains several psalms or portions of psalms. These were assigned to Sundays and feasts and were sung alternatively by those in and those out of the sanctuary. 7 Ps 24:9–10 (Lift up your heads, O gates…) was also chanted when the priest and the deacons moved from the bema toward the altar at which point the gates of the Sanctuary were opened. Although this ancient liturgical move is no longer included in the Syriac Orthodox ritual, it is part of the Armenian canons of the mass to this day. 8 For such a commentary in Syriac see Labourt, Hieronymus, ed. Dionysius bar Salībī: Exposito Liturgiae, CSCO SS textus, series secunda, 93, Parisiis: E. Typographeo Reipublicae, 1903. 7 The Liturgy of the Holy Apostles Adai and Mari, 1 note 3, Urmi: Press of the Archbishop of Canterbury Mission, 1890; repr. Gorgias Press 2002. For a detailed study of the anaphora, and its edition and translation, see Gelston, A. The Eucharistic Prayer of Addai and Mari, Oxford: Clarendon, 1992. 8 Harrak, A. “The Liturgical Dimension of Syriac Epigraphy,” The Harp 32 (2008): 16–20. 6

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

105

The madrōšē-hymns, “(sung) by the virgins with glorious voices,” are also part of the ancient celebration of the Eucharist. According to stanza 66, many congregations had choirs made of such virgins. It is interesting to see the role of female singers so expressly highlighted by Jacob. He himself commented on Ephrem’s insistence in using virgins in his choir: “The blessed Ephrem saw that the women were silent from praise and in his wisdom he decided it was right that they should sing out!” 9 Perhaps these hymns were chanted while the celebrants moved in procession toward the altar during the introit. 10 The Service is also made of readings from the Bible: The Old Testament, more precisely the “Prophets” according to Jacob, Catholic Letters (gawōnōyōthō), including the Acts of the Apostles (praksīs), Letters of Paul (šlīhō), and finally the Gospels (ewangēlyūn). The liturgy includes verses from psalms or prayers sung by the choir immediately before each of these readings are done, called qdōm ‛attīqō “before the Old [Testament]), qdōm qeryōnō da-praksīs wad-Pawlōs “Before the Acts and Paul,” and qdōm ewangēlyūn “before the Gospel”. All these readings are referred to by Jacob, who confirms that they were done on the bema: “Turn your ear to the divine bīmō, receiving from it precious jewels.” 11 From the ‛attīqō, three readings were done, which were not lectio continua, 12 as is indeed the case even in the contemporary liturgy. If today these readings are not made on Sundays, they still are part and parcel of the Eucharistic service in major feasts.

For the translation and more on the choirs of virgins mentioned by Jacob of Serugh with regards to Ephrem the Syrian, see Brock, Sebastian. St. Ephrem the Syrian: Hymns on Paradise, 22–4, Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1990. 10 Khouri-Sarkis, “Le ‘propre’ de la messe syrienne,” 449. The author mentions that during this part of service, psalms were chanted in the Latin liturgy. 11 On such payers see The Bread Of Life: The Book of the Divine Liturgy According to the Rite of the Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch, 58, Tūr Lebnōn, 2002. 12 Khouri-Sarkis, “Le ‘propre’ de la messe syrienne,” 452. 9

106

AMIR HARRAK

The Liturgy of the Word was attended by the faithful and the catechumens alike and was followed by the homily to which there is no reference in mimrō 95. In the early centuries of Syriac Christianity, the catechumens 13 used to be dismissed from the church after the homily, a practice that had disappeared from the Syriac Orthodox liturgy already in the time of Jacob of Edessa (died in 708). 14 The liturgy of the Church of the East (Assyrian and Chaldean) preserves the words of the dismissal but does not perform it either. In fact the dismissal of the catechumens was a normal practice in Christianity in the earliest centuries, 15 and it is a major theme in mimrō 95 (stanzas 95 and 105). Let us compare the wording in these stanzas 95 and 105 to that which is still used in the Church of the East: ‫ܙܠ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ .‫ܙܠ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ 16 .‫ܙܠ‬ Does ‫ܪܘ‬, lit. “signing,” refer to the non baptized in general or to inadmissible Christians, such as publically known sinners? The term in the Church of the East seems to refer to two categories of people: the non-baptized, including the catechumen referred to in the expression ‫ܕ‬ ‫“ ܕ‬he who did not receive baptism,” and an individual “who did not receive the signing of life” ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬, an expression similar to Jacob’s ‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬. Sarhad Jammo (now Chaldean Bishop) has studied the East Syriac wording and convincingly argued that These were called ̈ ‫ܬܪܬ‬ but this term is not used by Jacob; on this term and its meaning see Dionysius bar Salībī: Exposito Liturgiae, 21, lines 21–5. 14 See his Letter in ibid., 6, lines 14–22. 15 On the practice in Eastern Churches see Madey, John, et al. The Eucharistic Liturgy in the Christian East, 210 (Assyrian and Chaldean Churches), 308 (Melkite Church), 335 (Armenian Church), Kottayam, Kerala, India: Prakasam Publications, 1982. 16 For the wording see for example Taksā d-kahnē d-‛edtā d-madhenhā [Office of the Priests of the Church of the East], 13, Mosul, 1928; Chicago repr., 2002. 13

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

107

‫ ܪܘ‬is the signing of the Christian penitent and not another expression denoting the non-baptized (if the latter were referred to, there would be redundancy in the dismissal formula). For Narsai (died in 502) and Timothy II (died in 1332) the “signing of life” meant a signing administered to heretics and schismatics in the liturgy of reconciliation with the Church. 17 Unlike the early East Syriac authors, Jacob of Serugh clearly means by ‫“ ܪܘ‬baptism,” and hence the expression ‫ܕ‬ ‫ ܪܘ‬signifies “the non-baptized one, the catechumen.” The signing and baptism equation is clear in the following stanza 99: ̄ ‫̄ܗܝ ܬ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬ ̄‫ܐ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫̄ܗܘ ܪܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ Baptism, the daughter of light, is the sign of the King Since you bear this great sign, why do you leave (the church)?

Moreover, the expression ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫“ ܪܘ‬signing of life” also refers to baptism as in stanzas 100 and 101: :

‫ܨܘ‬

‫ܙܠ܀‬

‫ܪ‬ ̄‫ܐ‬

‫ܐ‬

‫ܗܪ‬ ‫ܕܪ‬

: ‫܀‬

‫ܬ ܩ‬

̱‫ܐ‬

‫ܐ‬ ‫ܟ ܐ‬

‫ܟܘ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܗܝ ܘ‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬

They signed you with the oil and your face is signed with the sign of the cross of light, but the one who is not signed the way you are signed, they ask to leave (100). The sign of life made you a brother of the Only-Begotten-One, and a son of his Father; and since you are in the household, do not leave! (101)

̈‫ܕ‬ Jacob’s concept of baptism as ‫ ܪܘ‬and ‫ ܪܘ‬is 18 also found in the Acts of Thomas #150 and in Aphrahat’s

Hermiz Jammo, Sarhad Y. La Structure de la Messe Chaldéenne du début jusqu’à l’Anaphore: Etude Historique, 153–4, Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 207, Rome: Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1979. 18 Klein, Albertus F.J. The Acts of Thomas: Introduction, Texts, Commentary. Leiden: Brill, 1962. 17

108

AMIR HARRAK

Demonstration 23 #63, 19 sources that predate him. While he devotes several stanzas (stanzas 96–101) to the dismissal theme without giving the whole dismissal formula, he makes clear that the “nonbaptized” were put out of the church:

‫ܫ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ‬

“The priest puts out he who is not baptized when the Sanctification takes place (98a).”

‫ܫ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܗܝ‬

‫ܕ‬

“On account of this, they put out he who is not baptized once the Sanctification takes place (103a).”

̈

‫ܕ‬

‫ܘܐ‬

“he who is not baptized his lot is not among the sons (104a).”

Jacob considers the catechumens strangers to the Father’s House, while the baptized ones are part of the household of the Father’s House. He takes the former for “deficient” (stanza 97), and worthy of disassociation in the bloodless offering of Christ. Along with the non-baptized, the hearers (‫ܥܐ‬ ̈ ) had to leave the church before the anaphora. The mention of the “hearers” in mimrō 95 stanza 117 is casual, but the full formula in which it is found is preserved in the liturgy of the Church of the East: ‫̈ ܘ ܘܬ‬ ‫“ ܙ‬Go hearers and watch the doors.” According to Narsai’s 17th homily, they are the catechumens, and for (Bishop) Sarhad Jammo there is no reason not to believe that they were so, adding that they were responsible of watching the exterior doors of the church. 20 Although Jacob of Edessa leaves the impression that the “hearers” are the catechumens, 21 the earliest Christian sources offer different interpretations. In the Parisot, Jean. Patrologia syriaca, vol. II, 133, lines 3–7, Paris: FirminDidot, 1894. 20 Jammo, La Structure, 154–5. 21 Jacob of Edessa’s Letter to Thomas the Priest reported by Dionysius bar Salībī: Exposito Liturgiae, 6. In fact Jacob of Edessa does not equate the hearers with the catechumens, but he lists those who had to leave the church: 1) the hearers, 2) ̈ ‫ܬ‬ (energumens), and 3) the penitents. From this context, the hearers must the catechumens. 19

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

109

Didascalia Apostolorum 8, 6 for example, the akrowmenoi (hearers) are those who were allowed to attend the readings of the Scriptures without being catechumens, 22 and for Basil the Great and Gregory the Thaumaturge, they are a category of penitents. 23 Since Jacob of Serugh already referred to the catechumens, the hearers in his hymn must be either simple listeners as in the Didascalia or some kind of penitents. On a more practical note, Jacob is puzzled why some baptized people leave the (long) Eucharistic celebration to return only for partaking the communion, mingling themselves with the “stranger,” the non-baptized ones. Anaphoric Service Stanza 103 makes a clear reference to the time of the anaphora with the phrase ‫ܫ‬ ‫ܕ‬ when catechumens were asked to leave. The phrase is based on the term ‫ ܕ‬, which refers, with 24 ‫ ܪ‬, to the anaphora. The first part of this service until Sanctus, including the Creed and the prayer of peace, does not seem to be present in mimrō 95. The Introit Prayer, sedrō da-m‛altō, lit. “sedrō of entrance [into the sanctuary],” was quite long perhaps due to two processions that used to take place at this time. The first was made by the celebrant and his diaconal entourage, moving from the bema to the sanctuary, and the second, by a deacon bringing the gift offerings from the sacristy and before depositing them on the altar, he had to process them around the church while another deacon incensed before him. While these elements survived in the Armenian Church, in the Syriac Orthodox (and Catholic) Church only the incensing by the deacon (without offering) is performed today. No mention of the Creed is made and this is also the case with the Prayer of Peace. In his adulthood Jacob must have Funk, F.X. Didascalia et Constitutiones apostolorum, vol. I, 478–9, item 2, Paderbornae: In libraria Ferdinandi Schoeningh, 1905. 23 Hammond, C.E. Liturgies Eastern and Western: Being the Texts, Original or Translated of the Principal Liturgies of the Church, 524 (29–34), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. 24 For the terms see Payne Smith, Thesaurus Syriacus, col. 3503, 3725. 22

110

AMIR HARRAK

witnessed the insertion of the Creed in the Eucharistic liturgy by Peter the Fuller, patriarch of Antioch (died in 488), as documented by the Greek Church Historian Theodore Lector (early 6th century). 25 The Eucharistic Prayer that follows is made of three steps: Eucharistic dialogue between the celebrant and the people, preface, and Sanctus, qaddīš, said by Jacob to be “chanted by the crowds” (stanza 122). By the crowds he probably meant the people, as is clear in the commentary of the Eucharist by Bar Ṣalībī: “Now the people shout, saying: Holy, holy, holy, etc.” 26 Nowadays, qaddīš is chanted by the deacons, sometimes even by one of these. The anamnesis follows and it is made of three prayers: The Lord’s recommendation (puqōdō d-moryō), remembrance of the divine economy (‛uhdōn mdabrōnūthō allōhoytō), and thanksgiving. None of these seems to be referred to in mimrō 95. After the anamnesis is the epiclesis made of 1) the calling of the Holy Spirit to come down on the bread and wine to make them into the Body and Blood of Christ, and 2) “sacramentally” to mix the Body and Blood to become one with Christ. The final prayer by the priest asks for the holiness and healing of the participants by the Holy Mysteries. Jacob of Serugh refers to the Epiclesis, calling it the rūhōfō “hovering” of the Holy Spirit, momentous in the Eucharistic celebration, and dwells on its importance in the context of his exhortation not to leave the service. The wording of stanzas 113–114, 116, and 118 reflects the modern invocation of the Holy Spirit by the deacon to sanctify the bread and wine: “How awesome is this moment and how solemn is this time O my beloved ones, in which the Holy Spirit moves to descend from the high Heaven to hover (rōhef) and settles over this Eucharist that is placed, consecrating it.” Shortly after this diaconal prayer, the priest Migne, Patrologia Graeca, vol. 86a, 208–10. Seemingly, Jacob of Edessa was not aware of the role of Peter the Fuller, for this is what he says about the insertion of the Creed in the liturgy which took place according to him in the Council of Nicea: “After the Creed of the 318 (Fathers) was written down, it was also judged that it must be added to the rite of the Eucharist (qurōbō);” Dionysius bar Salībī: Exposito Liturgiae, 7:15–7. 26 Dionysius bar Salībī: Exposito Liturgiae, 53:25–6. 25

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

111

says the following two prayers: “In such a way that, when (the Holy Spirit) descends, he turns this bread into the life-granting body, redeeming body, the body of Christ our God;” “may he fulfill this mixture, mzōġō [Jacob uses the participle hōlet] that is in this chalice the blood of the new covenant, redeeming blood, the blood of Christ our Lord.” Interestingly, the epiclesis for Jacob was also the sending of Christ to descend and settle on the bread and wine (stanza 113). No clear mention is made of the Great Intercessions ( ̈ ‫ ܕ‬or ̈ ) although the Catholic Prayer following them perhaps hints at them. This prayer starts with the supplication ānīh w-hasō wa-šbuq lšūr‛ōtō dīlan w-dīlhūn… “Give rest, pardon, and forgive our faults and theirs…;” Jacob made clear in stanza 128 that this supplication was said by the entire congregation (nowadays it is diaconal), and this is also confirmed by Bar Salībī. 27 At any rate, the pronominal suffix third masculine plural of dīlhūn must refer to the persons mentioned in the Intercessions: The Fathers of the Church, the Believing Brothers, Believing Kings, Spiritual Fathers, Doctors, Ascetics, and the Dead Believers. Stanzas 131–132 speak of “begging mercy from God” by the congregation. It is not known if these stanzas reflect the prayer “we beg mercy from the Lord” that formerly the deacon used to say after the Great Intercessions and before the Catholic prayer. Bar Ṣalībī who refers to this diaconal prayer says that “(Church) doctors stopped it” because it was superfluous. 28 There is of course the priest’s prayer that also begs for mercy: “Let the mercies of the great God and of our redeemer Jesus Christ be with you forever.” The next stage in the modern liturgy is the Fraction ( ) and Signation ( ‫)ܪ‬, neither of which are specifically mentioned by Jacob of Serugh. At this point, the Royal Gate (nowadays a mere curtain) is closed in order to be reopened at the time of the recitation of the Lord Prayer. Jacob refers to this major prayer several times when he highlights the difference between the baptized ones who are entitled to call God “Our Father”, and the

27 28

Dionysius bar Salībī: Exposito Liturgiae, 73:11. Ibid., 76:8–10.

112

AMIR HARRAK

catechumens who have no right to do so. 29 He clearly refers to it in stanza 115, Our Father… chanted by the entire congregation as has always been the case up to the present time. The Lord’s Prayer is an invitation to the communion that follows. Jacob mentions the opening of the Gate for communion in the context of some of the faithful who leave the church early in the Eucharistic celebration to return to take communion at this late stage of the celebration (stanzas 138–139, 143). Bar Salībī situated the communion after the Fraction but did not specify after which prayer it began. In the devotional and sacrificial context after the Fraction, Jacob inserts a prayer that became part of the West Syriac Eucharistic celebration, near its end. The prayer is an exhortation for participants to beg God the Father to accept the bloodless sacrifice of Christ for the forgiveness of sins (162–170). By the time this beautiful exhortation was inserted in the Eucharistic liturgy of the Syriac Orthodox Church, as well as in the Maronite liturgy, a doxology not attested in mimrō 95 was added: Glory to the Father who delivered his Son for our salvation. Adoration to the Son who died on the Cross and gave us life. Thanks to the Spirit who began and fulfilled the mystery of our salvation. O most sublime Trinity have pity on all of us.

Interestingly, the Church of the East attributed Jacob of Serugh’s exhortation, along with the appended doxology attested in the Syriac Orthodox liturgy, to none other than Narsai, the famous 6th century poet and theologian. 30 While the whole prayer is not part of the East Syriac liturgy of the Eucharist, it is nonetheless found among several other turgāmē-anthems. In fact another prayer

Bar Salībī is of the same mind: “On account of this, we too as soon as we are baptized, we call Our Father who art in Heaven;” Dionysius bar Salībī: Exposito Liturgiae, 83:13–4. 30 Ktābā d-turgāmē [The Book of turgāmē], 211–2, Baghdad, 1968; repr. Chicago, 1997. 29

THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CELEBRATION

113

very familiar in the Syriac Orthodox Eucharist Service, ‫ܙ‬, is also attributed to Narsai. 31

‫ܗܘ ܕ‬

CONCLUSION All of the mimrē of Jacob of Serugh treat issues relevant to his role as Bishop, and thus they are essentially pastoral in nature. This explains why he was concerned that the faithful, not fully appreciating the Eucharist, forfeited its spiritual benefits by leaving early. He was not alone in his concern and admonition, since the Didascalia chapter XIII [ii. 59] is also an admonition to the faithful to be constant in assembling together. An instruction such as “Make not your worldly affairs of more account than the word of God; but on the Lord’s Day leave every thing and run eagerly to your Church…” is echoed throughout mimrō 95. Although mimrō 95 is not a commentary on the Eucharistic celebration, and despite the fact that its author did not refer to every stage in the course of this celebration, it nonetheless gives us an idea about how the Eucharistic celebration was conducted at the end of the 5th and early 6th centuries. The few but important stages in this celebration, such as the liturgy of the word and the “hovering” of the Holy Spirit, are part and parcel of today’s Syriac Orthodox liturgy, a fact which highlights the ancient character of this liturgy and its originality.

31

Ktābā d-turgāmē, 212.

TO WHOM DID JACOB PREACH? SUSAN ASHBROOK HARVEY Jacob of Serugh is known especially through the huge corpus of his mimre (verse homilies), several hundred of which survive to us. 1 Preached over a career of some decades amongst villages, towns, and monasteries in the district of Serugh, to the southwest of Edessa, these homilies cover a wide array of topics, biblical, monastic, theological, liturgical. Scholars have generally focused on these homilies as the work of a master poet and theologian. They have analyzed Jacob’s poetic craft, his theological acumen, and his See the index of first lines in Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh / Homiliae selectae Mar-Jacobi Serughensis, Paris/Leipzig, 11905; Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 22006 (ed. S.P. Brock), vol. 6, 372–99. In this article, I use the following abbreviations: Bedjan = Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh / Homiliae selectae Mar-Jacobi Serughensis, Paris/Leipzig, 11905; Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 22006 (ed. S.P. Brock), 6 vols. DR = Downside Review FH = Jacob of Serugh, Select Festal Homilies, intro. and trans. Thomas Kollamparampil, Rome: Centre for Indian and Inter-religious Studies, 1997. HTM = Holy Transfiguration Monastery MFC = Message of the Fathers of the Church OCA = Orientalia Christiana Analecta PO = Patrologia Orientalis SVTQ = St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly. I have occasionally altered the older translations used here, for clearer sense. 1

115

116

SUSAN ASHBROOK HARVEY

articulation of the varied strains of Syriac biblical, doctrinal, and liturgical traditions woven into the tapestry of his teachings. 2 But what do we know about the congregations who heard these sermons? Sometimes the content of Jacob’s homilies indicates a monastic audience; sometimes Jacob is clearly addressing an urban church, or perhaps the smaller civic setting of the scattered villages and towns that dotted the landscape of his region. At times, he preaches in terms that seem inclusive of both the monastic and the civic lives, as if trying to present a sermon that would speak to both locations, with their differing daily lives and demands. Most often, it is impossible to know where, or when, or to whom he was preaching. Many of his biblical sermons, for example, seem addressed to any and every Christian, no matter their profession, vocation, age, gender, or social status. It is precisely this timeless—or even, generic—quality that caused Jacob’s homilies to be cherished and chanted over many centuries, recited in vigil services or daily offices with little concern for their relevance to any immediate context. 3 Like the Bible itself, Jacob’s homilies could stand outside of time in the wisdom they offered. This same timelessness is often frustrating for historians, however, For example, Alwan, Khalil. Anthropologie de Jacques de Saroug: l’homme ‘microcosme’, avec une bibliographie générale raisonnée, Jounieh, Liban: Imprimerie Moderne “Kreim” / Rome: Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1988; Bou Mansour, P. Tanios. La théologie de Jacques de Saroug, Kaslik: Université Saint Esprit, 1993; Golitzin, Alexander. “The Image and Glory of God in Jacob of Serugh’s Homily ‘On that Chariot that Ezekel the Prophet saw’,” SVTQ 47:3/4 (2003): 323–64; Papoutsakis, Manolis. “Formulaic Language in the Metrical Homilies of Jacob of Serugh,” in Lavenant, René, ed. Symposium Syriacum VII, 445–51, OCA, 256, Rome: Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1998; Harvey, S.A. “Bride of Blood, Bride of Light: Biblical Women as Images of Church in Jacob of Serugh,” in Kiraz, George, ed. Malphono w-Rabo dMalphone: Festschrift for Sebastian P. Brock, 189–218, Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2008. 3 Barsoum, Patriarch Ignatius Aphram I. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, trans. and ed. Matti Moosa, 2nd rev. ed., 77, 92, Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias press, 2003. 2

TO WHOM DID JACOB PREACH?

117

who must strain to find any hint of historical setting, place, or event; any reference to the turbulence and tumult indelibly woven into the times in which Jacob lived. But Jacob did preach, to real people in real lives, in real places. Jacob’s audience was important, for without them these homilies would not have been written or delivered. How might the various congregations to whom Jacob preached be visible to us? Who were they? How did they affect his homilies? How were they present in his preaching? 4 And why should they matter to us now, so many centuries later, in our continuing appreciation for Jacob’s work? The answers to these questions may help us consider anew the legacy of Jacob’s homiletic wealth.

1. THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD Jacob of Serugh chanted his homilies during the late fifth and early sixth centuries, in the easternmost part of the Roman Empire. It was “the best of times, and the worst of times” for Christians in this region. 5 Christianity reigned triumphant as the state religion of the Roman Empire; liturgically and institutionally, the church was blossoming into its full glory. Monastic life was well-established, the canonical ranks of the clergy clarified, and the integration of church life with family and civic duties everywhere apparent. For Jacob, the fullness of God’s creation was only now apparent, with the ascendancy of Christianity over the other religions of the Empire’s realm:

Important discussion of related evidence for late antique congregations is well treated in Cunningham, Mary B., and Pauline Allen. Preacher and Audience: Studies in Early Christian and Byzantine Homiletics, Leiden: Brill 1998, esp. Mayer, Wendy. “John Chrysostom: Extraordinary Preacher, Ordinary Audience,” 105–38; Maxwell, Jaclyn. Christianization and Communication in Late Antiquity: John Chrysostom and his Congregation in Antioch, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006; Taft, Robert. Through Their Own Eyes: Liturgy as the Byzantines Saw It, Berkeley, CA; InterOrthodox Press, 2006. 5 Cf. the opening line of Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities. 4

118

SUSAN ASHBROOK HARVEY The diligent Son of God uprooted and cast down the temples of the demons, and lo, He planted churches at the ends of all the world. ... He built up creation with gold and precious stones, and brought forth hymns of praise from desolate lands. He made the world into a king’s palace full of lovely things, and set the Cross therein like a pearl column. He burned incense to sweeten the earth with a sweet fragrance From a root that Virgin Soil gave the world. … The air that was troubled by the fumes of sacrificial victims, which ascended through it to polluted demons, is become clear and pure and sweet. 6

Jacob could sing the glories of triumph with grand majesty. But what did the life of the church mean for people now, amidst Christian dominance? Alas, Jacob’s homilies are replete with the hazards of complacency. In the civic community, whether of village or city, Jacob encountered Christian devotion in competition with the demands of worldly life much more than with other religions. Work, business, family, household: all required much attention, all demanded great energy. Religious devotion was one more demand. The church now offered long and elaborate liturgies, in addition to daily services morning and night, as well as celebrations for the great feasts of the church: the feasts of the life of Christ (Annunciation, Nativity, Baptism, Presentation in the Temple), Lent, Palm Sunday and Passion Week, Easter, Ascension and Pentecost; as well as commemorations of the saints, including the Virgin Mary, whose Dormition was just coming to be celebrated. 7 Justly did Jacob exhort, “On the Parable of the Leaven, by Mar Jacob, Bishop of Serugh”, trans. HTM [Dana Miller], The True Vine 3 (1989): 45–57, at 47, ll. 28–42. 7 For the development of the Syriac liturgy and the daily offices in the context of eastern Christianity see, e.g., Mateos, Juan. Lelya-Sapra: Essai d’interpretation des matines chaldeennes, OCA, 156, Rome: Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1959; idem, La célébration de la parole 6

TO WHOM DID JACOB PREACH?

119

The Church in the world is a great harbour, full of peace; whoever toils, let him come in and rest at her table. Her doors are open, and her eye is good and her heart is wide. Her table is full, and sweet is her mingled (cup) to them that are worthy. You lovers of the world, come in from wandering in the evil world, and rest in the inn that is full of comfort to him that enters it. 8

But who had the time? Jacob laments at length on the liturgical laxity of civic life. People were too busy to come! Distracted by their business affairs, their work, the marketplace and its fashions, people passed the church by. Or, they came to liturgy and fidgeted. As the liturgy proceeded in its stately unfolding, they stood impatiently with their thoughts elsewhere. “Do not let your mind remain in the market at your business,” Jacob pleaded in one homily, Why is your thought gone forth and distracted after affairs, so that when you are here [in church] you are not here, but there? Out amid the markets your mind is wandering, (taken up) with reckonings and profits; go fetch it…Stand not with one half of you within and one half without, lest when you are divided

dans la liturgie Byzantine, OCA, 191, Rome, Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1971; Bradshaw, Paul. Daily Prayer in the Early Church, 72–110, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982; Taft, Robert. The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: the Origins of the Divine Office and its Meaning for Today, esp. 225–48, Collegeville, Minn: Liturgical Press, 1986; Talley, Thomas. The Origins of the Liturgical Year, New York: Pueblo Publishing Co., 1986. Useful bibliography in general may be found in Jones, C., G. Wainwright, E.J. Yarnold and P. Bradshaw. The Study of Liturgy, rev. ed. New York: Oxford University Press / London: SPCK, 1992, esp. Cobb, P. “The Liturgy of the Word in the Early Church”, pp. 219–29, and Yarnold, E.J. “The Liturgy of the Faithful in the Fourth and Early Fifth Century”, pp. 230–44. 8 “A Homily of Mar Jacob of Serugh On the Reception of the Holy Mysteries,” trans. Hugh Connolly, DR 27 (1908): 278–87, at 279.

120

SUSAN ASHBROOK HARVEY your prayer lose itself between the two parts. Stand at prayer a united and complete and true [person]. 9

In his homily “On the Reception of the Mysteries”, Jacob described and explained the liturgy in its elaborate parts. First there was the liturgy of the Word, with its invocational prayers, psalms, hymns, biblical readings from prophets, apostles, and gospels; the homily to explicate the scriptures; and the departure of the catechumens. Then began the Liturgy of the Faithful, with its litanies, the Lord’s Prayer, the consecration, epiclesis, anaphora, the giving and receiving of the Eucharist amidst prayers whispered by the faithful, intoned by priest and deacons, and sung by the choirs to finish at last in the prayers of dismissal. In providing this scenic tour through the divine liturgy, Jacob’s concern was not that people did not appreciate the beauty this ritual mosaic comprised (although that did dismay him). Rather, he was appalled because people were leaving early—with the dismissal of the catechumens, half-way through the service! without receiving communion!—so as to go to the marketplace. Or, they took the excuse of the church doors opening for the catechumens to leave in order to arrive late and sneak inside—in time for communion, but having missed the entire Liturgy of the Word, because they had been at other business. Interestingly, it was not the harried housewife that worried him, but the businessman who was hard at work making money and increasing his wealth, rather than attending to the health of his soul (and body—for Jacob waxed lyrical on the nourishment for health that peaceful time within the liturgy could provide). 10 People came late to liturgy; people left early. They were restless in their places. During long sermons, they grew visibly impatient. Jacob’s poetry could be admonitory: “Rebellious children, do not grow weary with lengthy [sermons]… Do not grow bored… pay attention to me, that I may address you “A Homily of Mar Jacob of Serugh On the Reception,” 279. For examples of similar behaviors in other late antique congregations, see Sheerin, Daniel. The Eucharist, esp. 236–392, MFC, 7, Wilmington, Del: Michael Glazier, 1986. On wild behavior: pp. 319–48. 9

10

TO WHOM DID JACOB PREACH?

121

pleasantly.” Preaching a homily on the life of St. Ephrem that had clearly gone on too long for some people’s tastes, Jacob upbraided his congregation: Chosen Ephrem did not grow bored when he taught; you should not be bored when you hear the story about him. He struggled patiently against heresies; therefore, you should patiently follow the discourse about him. … Pay uninterrupted attention to me as I speak at length of the athlete who diligently carried on the struggle. 11

Jacob fretted not only about the impatience of his parishioners, but also about their carelessness. For the memorial services for the dead, people were to bring bread and wine for the priest to offer in commemoration of their beloved departed and their families. Instead, they sent their offerings with their servants, rather than coming in person. Even the women, Jacob complained, seemed more inclined to mourn the dead in the cemeteries where they could weep unimpeded, than to attend the memorials on their behalf. Families “forgot” about the portion of inheritance the dead had bequeathed for such memorial services, instead dividing the money for their own purposes. A cavalier attitude prevailed. “Good customs are not practiced as they ought;/ but lo, the world is diligently careful over vanities….Such things as be needful are not performed wisely,/ and those that ought not, are done unjustly.” 12 How luminous the beauty, then, of the faithful parishioner. “A Metrical Homily on Holy Mar Ephrem by Mar Jacob of Serugh”, ed. and trans. Joseph P. Amar, PO 47 (1995): 1–76, at pp. 57, 63, 67, vv. 128, 145–7, 169. Ephrem the Syrian was clearly worried about sleepy parishioners during the night vigil on the eve of the Nativity feast. See Ephrem, Hymns on Nativity 1: 72, 77–81; 4: 51–2; 5: 6–7, 9; 21:2, 10. These are translated in McVey, Kathleen. Ephrem the Syrian: Hymns, 61– 217, New York: Paulist Press, 1989. 12 “On the Reposed, by Mar Jacob, Bishop of Serugh,” trans. HTM [Dana Miller], The True Vine 5 (1990): 41–53, at p. 46, ll. 121–6; also trans. Hugh Connolly, DR 29 (1910): 260–70. 11

122

SUSAN ASHBROOK HARVEY Blessed is the widow that bears her sacrifice [of bread] in her own hands, and the bereaved that carries it and glories in it. … Like a priest, she brings her vow into the Lord as with pain she commemorates her dead over her oblation. … The prosphora is in her hands, tears are in her eyes, and praise in her mouth, And the excellency of her faith, like her oblation, is great. 13

Elsewhere, one hears a certain weariness in Jacob’s voice when he spoke on fasting in Lent: “It is good to speak about fasting if there is a desire for fasting in the ears of the hearers, so that what is said with knowledge may be received with love…It is much more important and excellent that one should fast rather than to speak about fasting.” 14 Even if one fended off the cares of the business world or the stresses of the marketplace, then the city offered other insidious distractions in the form of the theater. In this regard, Jacob joins a huge chorus of late antique homilists who railed against the spectacles performed in the popular arenas, the entertainments by which the quality of civic life was often measured in the ancient Mediterranean. 15 Jacob’s list of the theater’s dangers is standard “On the Reposed”, at p. 53, ll. 283–94. FH 9 (On the 40 Days’ Fasting), p. 234, v. 1. 15 Relevant here are Maxwell, Christianization and Communication, 51–60, 133–6; and Leyerle, Blake. Theatrical Shows and Ascetic Lives: John Chrysostom’s Attack on Spiritual Marriage, 13–74, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001. For the significance of the larger culture, see Potter, D.S., and D.J. Mattingly. Life, Death and Entertainment in the Roman Empire, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999, esp. ch. 6, Dodge, Hazel. “Amusing the Masses: Buildings for Entertainment and Leisure in the Roman World,” pp. 205–55, 336–8; and ch. 7, Potter, David S. “Entertainers in the Roman Empire,” 256–325, 338–41. For the material evidence for the theater and its civic significance in late antique Syria, see Butcher, Kevin. Roman Syria and the Near East, 223–69, Los Angeles: Getty Publications / London: British Museum Press, 2003; and Ball, Warwick. 13 14

TO WHOM DID JACOB PREACH?

123

fare for the time: the lascivious appearance of the performers, seductive music, exotic dancing, heady perfumes and incense; comedies and tragedies based on traditional (“pagan”) mythology that churned the emotions, riled one’s behavior, and infected the mind with stories of gods and goddesses, sex, violence, greed, and horror. As Jacob complained, people were dismissive of his criticisms (—and with the same defense of television and movies often heard today!). He mimicked their self-justifications: It is a game (i.e., a spectacle), they say, not [religion]. What will you lose if I laugh?...The dancing gladdens me, and, while I confess God, I also take pleasure in the play…I am a baptized (Christian) even as you are, and I confess one Lord… I do not go that I may believe, but I go that I may laugh. 16

Against such competition, one can see that the pressure for good preaching, with rousing, vibrant stories of thrilling adventures and exotic deeds could have been very strong, indeed. (And one can see why, in his sermons on biblical stories, Jacob struggled mightily to explain exactly how to understand in the right way, the sex, violence, greed and horror of many biblical episodes. 17) But Jacob’s real worry about the theater seems to have been the attraction of the music. He fretted to his congregation about “responses (or chorus, chants) which are not true; troublesome and confused sounds; melodies which attract children; ordered and cherished songs; skilful chants, lying canticles…Your ear is captivated by song.” 18 The music of the theater told its stories in melodies and verses that lingered in the mind, hummed by children and adults alike. And thus Jacob fumed: We have better music here, in the church! Rome in the East: The Transformation of an Empire, 246–305, esp. 304–5, New York: Routledge, 2001. 16 “Jacob of Serugh’s Homilies On the Spectacles of the Theatre”, Hom. 5, trans. Cyril Moss, Le Muséon 48 (1935): 87–112, at pp. 108–9–3. 17 Consider, for example, Jacob’s homilies on Tamar (Gen. 38), and on Jephthah’s Daughter (Jud. 11). See the discussion in Harvey, “Bride of Blood, Bride of Light”. 18 “On the Spectacles”, Hom. 3, trans. Moss, Le Muséon 48 (1935): 105.

124

SUSAN ASHBROOK HARVEY

However, lest one think that only the life of the laity, with its burdens of family and work, income and the marketplace, provided temptation towards a certain devotional laxity, one should note that Jacob also preached against the complacency and temptations of the monastic life. In homilies clearly addressed to those in monastic vocations, Jacob intoned against boredom and lethargy. He sang the praises of poverty and fasting; called for focus, attention, and struggle. The Evil One was always near to distract the monk with anxious thoughts, desires, uncertainties. Like Lot and his wife, or the Wise and Foolish Virgins, the monk must choose to remain steadfast, or he could be defeated. 19 However, overall it is not often that one can clearly delineate Jacob’s homilies as addressing a specifically monastic audience, or a specifically civic one. In many of the homilies on biblical stories, the distinction is moot for his topic: the biblical story and its implications for the life of faith are applicable to all. On occasions such as the great feasts of the church, Jacob celebrates the presence of the entire ecclesial body in liturgical splendor: lay and religious, ordained and monastic, young and old, married and virgin. And in fact, it seems that in general, church congregations contained this spectrum even in ordinary services. Lay people often attended liturgies performed at monasteries, or at the columns of stylites, or at the cells of hermits. In turn, village, town, and city church services generally included monastics, even of rigorous solitary practice. Jacob himself indicates this in some of his homilies, but the situation is constantly attested in other historical sources of his time: in personal accounts, letters, church canons, chronicles, or saints’ lives. 20 One of the important characteristics of ancient Syriac Christianity (as now!) was the constant interaction of monastics, clergy, and laity, in the context of daily life, of devotional piety, and

Memre 137 and 138, Bedjan 4: 818–36, 836–71. Harvey, S.A. “Praying Bodies, Bodies at Prayer: Ritual Relations in Early Syriac Christianity,” in Allen, Pauline, Lawrence Cross, and Wendy Mayer, eds. Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church, vol. 4: the Spiritual Life, 149–67, Sydney: St. Paul’s Publications, 2006. 19 20

TO WHOM DID JACOB PREACH?

125

of liturgical service. 21 This intermingling of the different vocations of Christian life is crucial for understanding what Jacob means when he speaks of the Church in its gathered wholeness, or of worship properly performed: each person is a necessary part in order for the body to be whole. All are needed. Jacob does not in fact understand the devotional obligations to be different for laity, monastics, or clergy in their essential discipline. Love of God, compassion for the poor, sick, and needy; service of the church; distance from worldly ambitions, material excess, greed, envy, or self-serving desires: such self-discipline in Jacob’s view was required of every Christian, of every station in life, regardless of age or gender. Nonetheless, there is a kindness to the bridge Jacob sometimes draws in his homilies, to connect the two vocations of monastery and family. In his homily on the death of an ascetic woman (a Daughter of the Covenant, bart qyomo 22), he praises her steadfast ascetic devotion and offers assurance that in death she entered the wedding feast with her beloved Heavenly Bridegroom, to whom she had betrothed herself in life. 23 The imagery is commonplace in Syriac tradition. Yet Jacob dwells upon the vocabulary of wedding banquets and marriage celebrations at great length here, using marital imagery to express monastic content. Elsewhere, in his homily on Jephthah’s Daughter (Judges 11), he does the reverse: using monastic imagery to express marital grief. When he describes the Daughter’s sojourn in the mountains with her friends to mourn her untimely death as a virgin, he uses the imagery of monastic renunciation to explore her tragic and untimely leave-taking of marriage and children. 24 In One thinks of St. Mark’s Syriac Orthodox Cathedral in Teaneck, New Jersey, for example! Or in the Netherlands, at St. Ephrem’s monastery in Glane; or most famously, in Tur ‘Abdin at Mor Gabriel. 22 Hom. 191, “On the death of a bart qyomo”, Bedjan 5: 821–36. See also Kitchen, Robert. “The Pearl of Virginity: Death as the Reward of Asceticism in Memra 191 of Jacob of Serugh,” Hugoye 7.2 (July 2004). 23 Esp. at Bedjan 5: 824–6. 24 Hom. 159, Bedjan 5: 306–30. An English translation see Harvey, Susan, and Ophir Münz-Manor, tr. and introd. Jacob of Sarug’s Homily on Jephthah’s Daughter, Texts from Christian Late Antiquity, 22, Gorgias Press, 21

126

SUSAN ASHBROOK HARVEY

both instances, one can well imagine that the homily was moving for all in the congregation, whether lay or monastic, whether parents or avowed ascetics.

2. THE SINGING CONGREGATION But Jacob had more to say to and about his congregations than frustrated criticisms. His parishioners could and did conduct themselves in exemplary style on occasion, and never more so than when they came to church and took up their assigned task of singing hymns. Jacob’s poetry shines incandescent when he calls his congregation to song. On the feast of the Nativity, for instance, he calls out, “Be awakened, O Church, with your beautiful chants,/ and offer to the Son gifts of praise on the day of his birth.” 25 To Jacob, the singing of praise to God’s glory is the real reason anything existed. In his homily on the first day of creation, Jacob describes how at the very moment “In the beginning”, God created “heaven and earth and hidden hosts of the heights”, establishing the ranks and orders of heavenly powers, seraphim, cherubim, angels and archangels, all with the purpose to sing. He established them, he ordered them, he set them in motion to bless, to sanctify, to chant “hallelujah”. He filled their mouths with hallelujahs and shouts of joy so that they would always be singing glory naturally. 26

Elsewhere, he speaks of nature and the whole of the created order as serving a continual liturgy of praise. Because creation sings “naturally”, Jacob explains, as it was made, it sings by free will and not as a programmed machine. In this way, nature provided the model for human response to God: of our own free will, we should all be singing, all the time! For example, by their stately movement 2010. The passage discussed here is at lines 386–405. See also the discussion in Harvey, “Bride of Blood,” 192. 25 FH 1 (Nativity 1), p. 88–9, ll. 1037–8. 26 “Jacob of Serugh, On the Establishment of Creation, Memra One, The First Day”, trans. Robin Darling Young, in Wilson Trigg, J., ed. Biblical Interpretation, 184–202, at p. 191, MFC, 9, Wilmington, Del: Michael Glazier, 1988.

TO WHOM DID JACOB PREACH?

127

in time, nature’s guards, Morning and Evening, instruct humankind in the wonders of God’s works, and incite the singing of praise as appropriate response. Like deacons reverend, vigilant and undefiled, The morning and the evening establish the ranks [of the faithful] in [their] devotions. As marshallers of two mellifluous choirs, Each of them arouses daily cause for doxologies. The morning goes forth as ambassador for the day, and gets the world up to give glory at the arrival of light. The evening enters, whereat all creation becomes tumultuous, as it removes its hands from labor to chant hymns of praise. The morning and the evening endure unchanging, like luminous signs, and from them, the world learns to give glory. 27

In his festal homilies, especially those for Nativity and Palm Sunday (the Sunday of Hosannas), Jacob delights to present the whole of God’s creation, heaven and earth, natural, supernatural, and human, joined together in shared song of celebration. With lyrical grace, he intones these occasions as moments when the biblical past interlaces the liturgical present, and different biblical characters provide the types for how and why the different segments of the human church community can all participate in the joyful singing of God’s glorious and saving works. Because a virgin conceived Christ, he exhorted, the choir of virgins can sing praise. Because Christ was born a baby to be cradled in the arms of his parents, babies in the arms of their parents are anointed and baptized in his name. Because Mary was chosen from human women to be his mother, mothers and husbands join in the festal songs. As Joseph, Mary, and the whole of creation sing because of the Christ child, so, too, all children, all pregnant mothers, all parents, all unmarried young virgins rejoice in song. Adam, Eve, and all the elderly rejoice; pastors and flocks, the Church, the “A Homily on the Giving of Praise for the Morning and Evening, by Mar Jacob, Bishop of Serugh”, trans. HTM [Dana Miller], The True Vine 26 (1998): 59–64, at p. 62, ll. 69–78. 27

128

SUSAN ASHBROOK HARVEY

gatherings of peoples and congregations all sing together. And not least, Jacob chants at the Nativity feast, “Let the speaker and the hearers too rejoice in you, my Lord/ because by your Nativity you have gladdened them, to you be glory.” 28 Here, for example, is an abbreviated version of such a description from his homily for the Sunday of Hosannas: O my Lord, the mouths of human beings praise you with their tongues, and the [mute] natures in their own ways sing your praise. … the whole of nature… …the heavens… and the earth… The redeemed gathering of the Church of the Peoples shouts joyfully to you, my Lord, … Behold, the young people praise you with the branches of the trees and the voice of praise of the aged is mixed with that of the children. Behold, the shepherds and their flocks adore you. (NB=bishops and churches) … Behold, the gatherings of the Peoples in all places bless you, … Behold, they call out to you, ‘Holy, Holy, Holy,’ in the assemblies … Behold, all voices from all mouths are singing your praise with all tongues, since you have stirred them up for your praise. Fiery Seraphs… Glorious Cherubs… Many thousands of heavenly beings sing your glory without ceasing from the praise of their sanctification. FH 3 (Nativity 3), pp. 112, 126–7, ll. 27–34, 342–70; cp. FH 4 (Nativity 4), p. 135–6, vv. 26–7. 28

TO WHOM DID JACOB PREACH?

129

… All are giving thanks to you because by your coming everything is renewed; you are blessed by all, to praise from all tongues. 29

In such passages, Jacob identifies every member of the gathered church as crucial to, and fully participant in, the activity of liturgical celebration. Naming each group by gender, age, ethnicity (‘the Peoples’/ the ‘Nations’), social location, ecclesiastical rank, Jacob effectively erases the lines between lay, monastic, and ordained as worship celebrants. Or, more accurately, the laity themselves become included as ritual participants whose role is as necessary to the fulfillment of liturgical prescription as those of ordained clergy and hierarchs. The Church becomes truly “a priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2). This is nowhere proclaimed with such visceral force as when Jacob portrays Christ the Good Physician welcoming Eve, healed and restored, into his renewed creation on the day of his Nativity. Because Christ healed and welcomed Eve, ‘the despised woman’, Jacob insists, all women are welcomed, even the most marginal. Jacob names them, one by one: the barren woman, the humiliated woman, the sorrowful woman, the lamenting woman, the enslaved woman, the possessed woman, the imprisoned woman. 30 Jacob’s insistence on the congregation’s all-inclusive constitution thus displays the congregation—female, male, rich, poor, young, old— as a mirror for the wholeness of humanity redeemed. In this role—themselves as living icons of salvific grace—the congregation are rendered not only the audience who receive Jacob’s preaching, but his co-workers in the declaration of divine mercy. From the sheer exuberance of Jacob’s praise for his congregation’s singing during festal liturgies, we can be sure that sometimes they did in fact behave as he would wish.

29 30

FH 10 (Sunday of Hosannas), pp. 259–60, ll. 275–304. FH 1 (Nativity 1), pp. 88–9, ll. 1039–56.

130

SUSAN ASHBROOK HARVEY

3. ORDINARY GRACE Jacob spent most of his career traveling throughout the district of Serugh preaching at vigils, serving daily offices and celebrating liturgies. In his homilies we glimpse his congregation amidst its every-day world; for in his exasperated criticism and his delighted praise, Jacob also shows us who they were by the lives they lived. The reverse to his complaints of their behavior looked like this: his parishioners were hardworking, beleaguered, and harried men and women struggling to provide for their families, seeking respite from the pressures of their burdens. They were newly weds longing for children, frightened of the dangers even as they craved the wonders of new life. They were the widowed and bereaved, worn, exhausted, and lonely. They were monks and nuns who struggled in all sincerity to work with unflagging commitment at the daily grind of self-sufficiency, while earnestly striving for illumination of the heart. They were ordinary villagers and townspeople who at the same time served their churches faithfully as deacons and deaconesses, chanters and readers, choir members, pastors, and teachers. And now and then, they all managed to sing together, in tune, in harmony, at the right time, and in the right place. Jacob’s work was not the glamorous thrill of establishing something new; nor the heady exultation of seeing a gamble succeed, triumphant and victorious. His was the work of keeping things going; not in the exciting rush of cosmopolitan cities, with their sophistication and turbulence, but rather in the often sleepy hinterland of the late antique eastern Mediterranean. It is the very ordinariness of Jacob’s work, preaching and teaching year in and year out throughout a sprawling countryside, that I often think of when I read his homilies. There is one passage to which I often return. In one of his homilies on the Nativity, Jacob describes the Virgin Mary after she has made her decision to accept God’s call and receive the conception of his divine Son. He pauses to imagine the interlude after her encounter with the archangel Gabriel and before her reception of the Holy Spirit, the moment in between these two miraculous encounters. In that moment, Jacob imagines Mary preparing herself for what will happen next. She is about to receive her Lord as a guest in her own body; she must present herself appropriately. So Jacob imagines Mary as a housekeeper preparing for royalty to visit. She cleans, dusts, tidies up and repairs

TO WHOM DID JACOB PREACH?

131

the house of her soul, sweeping away any unworthy thoughts, casting out any worthless sentiments, polishing up the shine of her virtues. She mends the damaged or worn parts, sets anything messy in order. She freshens, replenishes, and renews with sweet thoughts, good intentions, and reverence. She adorns and embellishes with piety, virtues, and prayer. As she works, she sings hymns of thanksgiving. When all is radiant and beautiful, she opens the door and invites her Lord to enter. 31 In this poignant depiction, Jacob presents the earnest effort of the village housewife. But here, too, was the quiet labor of the priest preparing his church and its sanctuary in the interlude before the people came for the service to begin—a service that would bring divine presence into their lives. I think, in fact, that here Jacob presents himself, attending to the work of preparing a place worthy for God’s arrival. That place was not only in the church buildings (large or small) in which he served liturgy. It was also in the hearts of his congregation, the ordinary people to whom he preached.

FH 1 (Nativity 1), pp. 59–60, 387–418. For discussion of this extraordinary passage, see Harvey, S.A. “Interior Decorating: Jacob of Serugh on Mary’s Preparation for the Incarnation,” Studia Patristica 41, ed. F. Young, M. Edwards and P. Parvis, 23–8, Leuven: Peeters, 2006. 31

JACOB OF SERUGH,

HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

AND OTHER ARMENIAN TREASURES: FIRST GLANCES

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR. Jacob of Serugh, “a natural poet of great genius,” dubbed by his contemporaries the “Flute of the Holy Spirit and Harp of the Believing Church,” is generally recognized as the greatest of the Syriac poets after Ephrem—his successor as ‘poet laureate’ as it were. 1 As is all too well known, the surviving works of Jacob of Serugh comprise just less than half of his known œuvre. While sources tell us that Jacob’s total production included as many as 763 mêmrê, 2 Sebastian Brock has been able to locate only 381. 3 And

Barsoum, Ignatius Aphram I. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 2nd revised edition, 255, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2003; Patriarch Barsoum actually goes one step further and calls Jacob a poet who is “unrivaled and unequalled”. Sebastian Brock also states unabashedly that “after Ephrem, it is undoubtedly Jacob of Serugh who shines out most brightly as a luminary of the Syriac poetic tradition,” foreword to Kollamparampil, Thomas. Jacob of Serugh, Select Festal Homilies, v. Rome: Centre for Indian and Inter-religious Studies, 1997. 2 An anonymous author of a Life of Jacob records that he wrote a total of 763 mêmrê; cited from Assemani, Joseph S. Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, 3 vols. I, 299, Rome: Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 1719. Bar Hebraeus reckons Jacob’s total output to be 760 mêmrê, Abbeloos, Jean-Baptiste, and Thomas J. Lamy, eds. 1

133

134

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

of these 381, more than a hundred remain unpublished. It should, therefore, be of immense interest to scholars to know that some of those of his works currently considered lost—even if only a few— have in fact survived. This particular ‘discovery’, as so many others, had a rather curious, but fortuitous history and, if the reader will indulge me a short personal reminiscence, I would like to share briefly what actually transpired. One evening during dinner at St. Nersess Armenian Seminary, one of our students came up to me with a large tome in hand that he had brought from chapel and he asked me if I could translate for him one of the non-biblical selections that he had found in it. This large tome is called a Jashots‘ Girk‘, the great Armenian Lectionary for the entire liturgical year, and the piece was a homily On Good Friday, attributed to a Yakob Srjets‘i, which is the Armenian rendering of Jacob of Serugh 4. I was a bit taken aback for two reasons. Firstly, while Armenian is well known for its having preserved a number of otherwise lost patristic texts, Greek and Syriac (Irenaeus and Ephrem, of course, come immediately to mind), Jacob of Serugh is, for all intents and purposes, completely absent from the lists of such translated

Gregorii Barhebraei Chronicon Ecclesiasticum (3 vols.; Paris and Louvain: Peeters, 1872), I.191. 3 Bedjan, Paulus, ed., with additional material by Sebastian P. Brock. Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, 6 vols., Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2006 [original publication Homiliae Selectae Mar-Jacobi Serughensis, 5 vols.; Paris/ Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1905–1910], VI, 372–99. Assemani, J.S. Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, I, 305–40, lists only 231 mêmrê. 4

Ճաշոց Գիրք Հայաստանեայց Առաքելական Սուրբ Եկեղեցւոյ

[The Lectionary Book of the Holy Armenian Apostolic Church], 229–34 [hereafter, Jashots‘ Girk‘], Jerusalem: St. James Printing Press, 1967. For the history of this fascinating collection, see Renoux, Athanase [Charles]. Le Codex Arménien Jérusalem 121, 2 vols., Patrologia Orientalis, XXXV.1 [163], XXXVI.2 [168]. Turnhout: Brepols, 1969, 1971; Renoux, Charles. Le lectionnaire de Jérusalem en Arménie, le Čašoc‘, 3 vols., Patrologia Orientalis, XLIV.4 [200], XLVIII.2 [214], XLIX.5 [221], Turnhout: Brepols, 1989, 1999, 2005.

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

135

authors. 5 Secondly, in a collection of nearly a thousand pages that includes only a handful of non-biblical readings, 6 it was more than

For example, Ter Petrosian, Levon. Ancient Armenian Translations, New York: St. Vartan’s Press, 1992, devoted specifically to this subject by one who is well-versed in Syriac literature, makes no mention of Jacob of Serugh whatsoever, nor does Sever Voicu in his catalogue of patristic works in Armenian; see di Berardino, Angelo, ed. Patrology: The Eastern Fathers from the Council of Chalcedon (451) to John of Damascus (†750), 571–88, Cambridge: James Clarke & Co., 2006. Such standard histories as Abeghyan, Manuk. History of Ancient Armenian Literature I: From the Beginning to the Tenth Century [in Armenian], Beirut: Sevan Press, 1955 [reprinted, Ant‘ilias: Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia Press, 2004], and Inglisian, Vahan. “Die armenische Literatur,” in idem. Armenisch und Kaukasische Sprachen, 157–250, Handbuch der Orientalistik, I.7, Leiden: Brill, 1963, also make no mention of Jacob. Hayrapetean, Srpuhi. The History of Ancient and Medieval Armenian Literature [in Armenian], 413, Ant‘ilias: Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia Press, 1988, mentions—only in passing and without citation—that some homilies and panegyrics of Jacob were translated into Armenian during the Cilician period; Kollamparampil, Jacob of Serugh, Select Festal Homilies, 15, notes that “other homilies [were] translated into Arabic, Armenian and Ethiopic” but he too provides no source information or itemization. Thomson, Robert W. A Bibliography of Classical Armenian Literature to 1500 AD, Corpus Christianorum, Turnhout: Brepols, 1995, does not even have an entry for Jacob, although in a later published supplement, idem. “Supplement to A Bibliography of Classical Armenian Literature to 1500 AD: Publications 1993–2005,” Le Muséon 120 (2007): 175, he does note an old collection (?) of Jacob’s Armenian works: “Homelies of Blessed Jacob of Serugh,” in Spiritual Writings and Homilies [in Armenian], Constantinople, 1722; unfortunately, I have been unable to locate any copy of this work. Only Zarp‘analean, Karekin. 5

Մատենադարան Հայկական Թարգմանութեանց Նախնեաց (Դար Դ– ԺԳ) [Catalogue of Ancient Armenian Translations (Fourth-Thirteenth Centuries)],

572–5, Venice: Mekhitarist Press, 1889, a work inaccessible to most nonArmenian specialists, but which was cited in Graffin, François. “Jacques de Saroug,” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, VIII, 57, Paris: Beauchesne, 1974, provides even the most rudimentary introduction to the works attributed to Jacob in Armenian (see further, below).

136

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

a little surprising that one of these few such works would claim to be a work of an author who is generally considered never to have been translated into Armenian. It was a very busy time of the semester, so I decided to take a “shortcut” and simply compare this Armenian text against the recent list of incipits compiled by Sebastian Brock. Once I located the original Syriac text in his list, I could then see if there did not already exist an English translation of that text to which I could refer my student. However, it clearly did not match up with any of the few extant homilies concerning Good Friday or the Crucifixion, and as I worked my way through the rest of Brock’s list, it also became clear to me that this Armenian text did not, in fact, match any of the extant Syriac homilies found in his list. Spurred on by the excitement of this ‘discovery,’ as soon as time permitted I began to pore through the available manuscript catalogues to see if any further copies of this text—or even any others!—might have survived in Armenian. Thus, this paper is the first fruit of a chance dinner conversation, and it has a very modest two-fold purpose: 1. to provide an initial description, including portions of a preliminary translation of this ‘new’ Homily on Good Friday by Jacob of Serugh, as found in the Armenian Jashots‘ Girk‘; and 2. to provide a brief listing of the other Armenian works attributed to Jacob of Serugh that I have so far been able to discover. 7

THE ARMENIAN HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY The full title of this homily, as given in the Armenian Jashots‘ Girk‘, is “On the Day of Great Friday, On the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ at the Ninth Hour, recited 8 by Blessed Saint James, Bishop For the entire year there are only two readings from John Chrysostom and one from Cyril of Jerusalem; from native Armenian tradition there are also one reading each from Ełišê, Nersēs Shnorhali, and Nersēs Lambronac‘i. 7 I am very happy here to offer my deepest thanks to all my colleagues and the students at St. Nersess for their support and encouragement. 8 This word, asats‘eal, the Armenian equivalent of the Syriac, d’amīrâ (lit., “which was said,” can also be rendered here as “dictated,” particularly 6

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

137

of Serugh”. 9 There is, so far as I can see, no reason to doubt the authenticity of this attribution of authorship. The language is very much that of Jacob. The homily follows a style and pattern of exposition that is well known from Jacob’s genuine Syriac works, and it treats a theme common to several works in Jacob’s corpus (see further, below). I have so far been able to find this Armenian Homily on Good Friday in nine manuscripts all of which appear, so far as can be discerned from the catalogue entries, to be complete. 10 I hope eventually to be able to publish a complete edition and translation of this homily, with a fuller study of the questions of genre, authenticity, etc. Interesting enough, however, we are given some rather precise information concerning the date of the translation of this Homily on Good Friday. Zarp‘analean, in his brief description of this work, records a colophon from a manuscript then kept in the Monastery as Bar Hebraeus tells us that Jacob had a team of seventy scribes working for him; Abbeloos, J.-B. ed. Gregorii Barhebraei Chronicon Ecclesiasticum, I, 191. 9

Երանելւոյ սրբոյն Յակովբայ Սրճոյ եպիսկոպոսի ասացեալ ի յաւր մեծի ուրբաթին չարչարանաց Տեառն մերոյ Յիսուսի Քրիստոսի յիններորդ ժամու. Jashots‘ Girk‘, 229a. Curiously, however, this work of

Jacob is found only in this Jerusalem edition; in the edition printed in Etchmiadzin there are only found some anonymous prayers, see Ճաշոց Գիրք Հայաստանեայց Եկեղեցւոյ [The Lectionary Book of the Armenian Church], 227–32, Vagharshapat: The Holy Catholicossate of Etchmiadzin Press, 1872. For other manuscript titles of this homily, see n. 37, below. 10 This total is very likely to increase as I have so far not had access to all the printed catalogues. To hinder matters further, the new catalogue of manuscripts in the Matenadaran, the National library and largest deposit of Armenian manuscripts, covers only mss. 1–1000 of nearly twenty thousand manuscripts. The two volume checklist, Eganyan, O., A. Zeyt‘unyan and P‘. Ant‘abyan, Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Mashtoc‘ Matenadaran [in Armenian], 2 vols., Erevan: Armenian Academic Press, 1965, 1970, is incomplete and is inadequate to determine the exact number of copies of this work. In addition, this catalogue often simply lists “a homily of Jacob of Serugh” with no other information.

138

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

of Sevan which reads: “This homily was translated from the Syriac [language] into our [Armenian language], at the command of Gregory, the Catholicos of the Armenians, by the hand of a certain priest whose name was Isaac, a Syrian by race, who is learned in our literature”. 11 This Catholicos Gregory is probably not Gregory Vkayasēr, the “Lover of Martyrs,” who was Catholicos from 1066– 1105, and is already well-known for his translation activity, especially from Syriac. This Gregory is more likely to have been Gregory III Pahlawuni, who was Catholicos from 1113–1166, as the same colophon continues by saying that “[Isaac (or the translation)] was approved by our great, holy and just Archbishop Nersēs, the orator and lover of wisdom,” who is no doubt Nersēs Shnorhali, the brother of Gregory Pahlawuni and his successor as Catholicos; Gregory Vkayasēr died while Nersēs was yet only five or six years old. 12 Mar Isaac, the translator, has made no attempt to maintain any poetic lines or reasonably consistent syllable count; in fact, it is often very difficult even to determine where the underlying Syriac line may have ended and the next begins. Thus, it cannot be clearly determined whether this homily was originally a turgāmâ or a mêmrâ, and so I will simply refer to this work as a homily so as not to prejudge the issue. Without the original Syriac, nothing can be said of the translation technique of this Homily On Good Friday, but we can Zarp‘analean, Catalogue of Ancient Armenian Translations, 573. I have not yet been able to identify this particular manuscript, but the very same colophon is found in Ms. Mat. 843b, f.98v, see Eganyan, O., P‘. Ant‘abyan, et al., Grand Catalogue of the Armenian Manuscripts in the Mashtoc‘ Matenadaran [in Armenian], 3 vols. to date. III, 952. Erevan: Magaghat Press, 2007, and in Ms. Armash 12, f.380v, which otherwise contains different material from Ms. Mat. 843b; see Topdjian, Hovhannēs. Catalogue des manuscrits d’Armache [in Armenian], 76. Venice: St. Lazare, 1962. This latter colophon was already noted in Tsovakan (Pogharean), Norayr. Վանատուր [Monastic Miscellanies], 193. Jerusalem: St. James Press, 1993. 12 Pogharean, Norayr. Հայ Գրողներ [Armenian Writers], 194–9, 226– 227, 233–39. Jerusalem: St. James Press, 1971. 11

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

139

provide a sample from another homily that was very likely translated around the same time, if not by the same translator (see below); from this comparison one can clearly see how the Armenian translator freely interpreted, even embellished, the Syriac text before him. Here are the first six lines of the original Syriac of the Mêmrâ In Praise of John the Baptist, along with the corresponding six lines of a printed Armenian text of the same homily: 13 ̈ ‫ܐ ܚ܆‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܥ ܗܪ ܕ‬ ‫܀‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܐ ܪ ܘܐ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫̈ ܆‬ ‫ܕܪܕܦ‬ ̇ ‫݂ ܀‬ ‫ܝ ܬܬ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫܆‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ ܘܢ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫܀‬ ‫ܗ ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕܐܨܘܪ ܨ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܪ‬ ‫ܨ‬ ‫ܨ‬ ‫ܗܒ‬

O Jesus the light, whose dawning gladdens the ends [of the world], Rise up in me that I may be light and speak of you with wisdom. O light of the nations who chased the darkness from the regions [of the earth], May your great splendor rouse my word to recount your story. O great image, by which all beauty is comprehended, Grant that I may paint an image of a mêmrâ about a certain beautiful one.

Յիսուս լոյս փառաց որ զամենայն տիեզերս պայծառացոյց ծագումն յայտնութեան քո. յայտնեա՛ առ իս ի նշուղից շնորհաց քոց, որպէս զի լուսաւորեալ քեւ, խաւսեցայց զքէն իմաստութեամբ: Քրիստոս լոյս հեթանոսաց՝ որ հալածեցեր զխաւարն անգիտութեան ի չորից կողմանց տիեզերաց, հալածեա՛ զծուլութիւն մտաց իմոց, եւ զարթո՛ զբանս իմ պատմել զանքննելի տնաւրէնութիւնդ քո: 13

For the relevant bibliographical information, see I.6, below.

140

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR. Անսկիզբն նկարագիր, անսկզբնականին Աստուծոյ, որ եւ ամենայն գեղեցիկ նկարագիրք արարածոց՝ քեւ կատարեցան, Շնորհեա՛ եւ ինձ նկարագրել բան միոյ գեղեցիկ պատկերի: O Jesus, light of glory, whose dawn of revelation has shone on this entire world, Make manifest to me by the rays of your grace so that enlightened by you, I might speak of you with wisdom. O Christ, light of the nations, who chased the darkness of ignorance from the four corners of the earth, Chase away the idleness from my mind and rouse my word to recount your inscrutable economy. O likeness without beginning, of the beginning-less God, in you are all the beautiful likenesses of creation perfected, Grant that I may paint a word [= mêmrâ] about one beautiful image.

Nothing, of course, can be stated categorically about the Homily on Good Friday based upon the technique of another homily, but it certainly does have the same feel of having been somewhat embellished. Only the discovery of the original Syriac will allow any definitive conclusions, but it would seem more likely that we are dealing with a somewhat interpretive, rather than a literal, translation. In the surviving corpus of Jacob of Serugh the passion of Christ is an oft-treated subject. Assemani lists a cycle of seven mêmrê “De crucifixione Domini”; 14 two of these were edited by Bedjan, 15 the other five remain unedited. There also survive another three works specifically to do with Good Friday. A twiceedited Festal Homily (turgāmâ), entitled On the Friday of the Passion, “surveys the events concerning the passion of Our Lord beginning from the house of Caiaphas and proceeding through the judgement 14 15

Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, I, 325. Bedjan, Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, I, 506–34, 554–79.

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

141

seat of Pilate to the crowning with thorns and the mockery of the soldiers.” 16 There also exists a cycle of mêmrê on Holy Week, all of which have been edited by Bedjan. In this collection are found two mêmrê concerned specifically with Good Friday; these are titled On the Eve of Friday and On the Day of Friday. 17 On the Eve of Friday speaks for itself; it pertains to the Last Supper, the agony in Gethsemane, the arrest, etc., that led up to the events discussed in the turgāmâ just mentioned above. The Mêmrâ on the Day of Friday, then continues recounting the events beginning from the presence of Jesus before Pilate to his carrying his cross up to Calvary: the crowd’s cry for Barabbas, the agitation of Pilate’s wife, the denial of Peter, the wailing of his female followers, and the raising of the cross. The events of this mêmrâ end with Jesus nailed to the cross with the title “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews” affixed to its top. The chronological sequence of these mêmrê now becomes an interesting point as this ‘newly discovered’ Armenian homily “takes place” entirely upon the cross. Apart from Jacob’s introductory invocation and his narrative description, the entire Homily on Good Friday is composed of two fairly short dialogues: the first between Mary, sitting at the foot of the cross, and the archangels, and the second between Jesus and the Good Thief. Thus, before we even begin to describe this new Homily, it seems that Jacob may have intended a cycle of homilies for Good Friday or—and this is probably more likely—highlighted different events of the passion so that the four works that have come down to us show an almost seamless progression from the Last Supper to the Crucifixion. Kollamparampil, Jacob of Serugh, Select Festal Homilies, 278. This work was edited by Brock, Sebastian P. Turgāmê da-simin l-qaddišâ Mar Ya‘qob da Sarûg Malpānâ, 36–46, Holland: Losser, 1984, and again by Rilliet, Frédéric. Jacques de Saroug, Six Homélies Festales en Prose, 610–28, Patrologia Orientalis, 43.4 [196], Turnhout: Brepols, 1986, with facing French translation. An English translation can be found in Kollamparampil, Jacob of Serugh, Select Festal Homilies, 279–91. 17 Bedjan, Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, II, 522–54, 554–79. English translations of these works are in preparation in the Gorgias Press Series, The Metrical Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh. 16

142

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

I have not been able to see it, but one cannot help but wonder if or how another still unedited mêmrâ, entitled On the Cherub and the Thief, 18 might also fit into this sequence. 19 Of course, although this progression can very clearly be discerned in these surviving homilies, this observation does not at all prove that Jacob actually delivered them in such a “chronological” order. The Armenian Homily on Good Friday, composed by Jacob of Serugh, can be divided into five basic sections: a. Invocation for Divine assistance b. Summary description of prior events c. Dialogue between Mary and archangels d. Plea of Good Thief and Jesus’ Response e. Conclusion/Epilogue The first section is a long invocation to God to overlook the failings of the author and to provide him with the necessary virtues to carry out the great task of writing about this great event, a task that is beyond even the ranks of angels. This manner of invocation, so typical of many of Jacob’s mêmrê, begins thus: O unknowable offspring from the bosom of Your Father, O Only-Begotten, rouse up my lyre, and enrich it to speak of Your great salvation. Let my weak tongue sing a sweet song about Your mysteries, that, with my words, I might suitably polish the image that it erects. This mêmrâ was already listed in Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, I, 325. Cf. Brock’s n. 262 in Bedjan, Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, VI, 390–1. I have checked the incipit of this mêmrâ against the entire text of the Homily on Good Friday; it does not seem to be a fragment of the Homily. 19 Although the title might suggest otherwise, the Mêmrâ on Mary and Golgatha, which Jacob left unfinished when he died, would not seem to belong here in such a “chronological” reconstruction. For the text and translation, see Mouterde, Paul, SJ. “Deux homélies inédites de Jacques de Saroug,” Mélanges de l’Université Saint Joseph 26 (1944–1946): 3–36, especially pp. 9–14 (translation), 23–28 (text). 18

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

143

By You[r help], O God, may my weak mind, crippled by lethargy, be roused that I may become a sober worker in the field of discoursing about You. Your splendor shone through the windows of Your scriptures and is desirable; the mind that has seen You is illumined by You to speak of what it received from You. . . . . . O day-star, great sun, spread forth Your rays into my dark heart, that I may be illumined to speak of You in a suitable manner. May my mind receive from You the grace to look upon Your mysteries, and having received it may I, with loud voice, sing the glory of Your marvelous works. . . . . . Your speeches are comely, Your beauty is wondrous, Your works are praiseworthy; Your mystery is awesome! Which shall I recount? Which figure shall I leave out? Upon Your first manifestation in the womb up to Your resurrection I gaze, but I am unable to recount Your marvelous deeds. By what cause might my tongue be moved to tell of You? Even a myriad of angels is unable [to tell of] You, for You are higher than all!

After this introductory invocation, Jacob goes on at some length resuming the events from Jesus’ birth up to the crucifixion. But rather than a simple resumption, it seems rather that Jacob is looking at Jesus on the cross saying “You should not be remembered this way. How then can I remember you? In your birth? In your Baptism? In your preaching? etc.” From the end of this second section, the remainder of the Homily consists almost entirely of two rather one-sided discourses: a lament from Mary, the mother of Jesus, to both archangels, Gabriel and Michael, to which one of them—it is not clear which one—responds briefly in order to give her comfort and encouragement. This dialogue is followed by a second, even more one-sided, between the Good

144

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

Thief and Jesus. The Good Thief pleads with Jesus, in a lengthy elaboration on the Lucan pericope, and Jesus offers a simple oneline response. This lament of Mary is also, it seems to me, of particular interest as it seems to constitute a unique interpretation of her presence at the cross. Mary, the Mother of Jesus, is usually portrayed as the sole person who resolutely follows her Son to the Cross, who knows his mission, and who encourages others to do the same, as she had already done at Cana (John 2:5). Jacob himself seems to suggest this cooperation when he says elsewhere: Your mother endured many sufferings for your sake; every grief encompassed her at your Crucifixion. How much sighing and sorrowful tears did her eyes shed, when they enshrouded you and brought you to rest within the tomb. She endured sufferings when she saw that you were hung on the cross, that with a spear they had pierced your side on Golgotha; and when the Jews had sealed the sepulcher in which had been placed your living body which gives life and remits debts. 20

This same sentiment is echoed in another, perhaps contemporary, hymn that Jacob himself might even have read: That virgin, surrounded with wonder, Shone out amid this hidden mystery, Aware who He was, and whose Son Was that blessed Fruit which she was bearing; In all things was she wise. 21

Jacob of Serugh, “On the Death and Burial of Mary,” in Bedjan, Paulus, ed. S. Martyrii, qui est Sahdona, quae supersunt omnia, 710, Paris/Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1902; English translation from Hansbury, Mary. Jacob of Serugh on the Mother of God, 90, Crestwood: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1998. See also the discussion in Puthuparampil, James. Mariological Thought of Mar Jacob of Serugh (451–521), 323–5, Mōrān ‘Eth’ō, 25, Kottayam: St. Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 2005). 20

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

145

In this next section, contrary to what was just said and to what is generally held about her, Mary does not simply make a lament here; she rather chides, in fact, she actually hurls accusations at the archangels for not defending her Son and for their standing idly by while he was being crucified, thus breaking all their promises to her. First, she briefly addresses Gabriel, but then turns and directs most of the bitterness of her denunciation at Michael. Because of the interesting nature of this accusation on the part of Mary, I provide here my preliminary translation of her entire lament: “O Gabriel, come and see the outcome of your ‘good news’, for my Only-Begotten sits not on the throne of David, as you promised; rather He, the innocent one, has been bound to a cross by his oppressors. And, you Michael, O fiery one, why do you stand there in silence, you whose sword once cut down a hundred eighty-five thousand. 22 Has your fierceness now grown too cold to seek revenge for your innocent Lord who stands condemned? The Apostles abandoned their teacher and fled in mortal fear, but you, incorporeal powers, why do you not stand up for Him who has been condemned by those slanderers? Creatures of the earth flee from swords and from clubs, but you, O spiritual creatures, why do you timidly hand your Lord over into the hands of the unworthy?

Brock, Sebastian. Bride of Light: Hymns on Mary from the Syriac Churches, 39, Mōrān ‘Eth’ō, 6, Kottayam: St. Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 1994. In his introduction (p. 13), Brock says that “the majority [of the anonymous works translated in this volume] will belong approximately to the fifth or early sixth century.” 22 Cf. II(IV) Kings 19:35, where only “the angel of the Lord” is mentioned, but whom Jacob here clearly interprets as Michael. 21

146

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR. Two of you condemned Sodom and, by the beating of your wings, brought down a fiery rain, and you burned down the city with its inhabitants. You did not hold back your innocent hands from vengeance when you wished, yet you now sit back and endure the outrages of my OnlyBegotten, your Lord! The son of Amram, 23 deprived of his nation, sought vengeance against the Egyptians, yet you are too lazy to become fellow soldiers of the sinless lamb, and you stand around like those who watch over dogs and cattle? They opened their mouths against Him in blasphemy, yet you heavenly beings remain silent. The King stood on the tribunal, bound unjustly, yet help from His fiery hosts remained far from Him. While the Lord of fire was stretched out upon the wood, their fire died down and the fiery angels stood in the heavens holding their peace, While the earthly creatures were gathering themselves together, the angels remained speechless, the ashes numbing their tongues, and the seraphim covered themselves with their wings and spewed forth spit. Stones were split yet traitorous hearts would not be mollified, statues cried out but the ear of the unjust would not be opened.”

The Mary that Jacob presents here is contrary to the Mary, mother of the Lord, whom we usually encounter in Christian literature. Another example of more ‘traditional’ Mariology can be found in another Marian poem that Sebastian Brock also thinks may be contemporary, or even prior, to Jacob and thus, may even have been known to him. Brock also points out that this poem, taken from the Syrian Catholic Phenqitho, likely represents the only 23

I.e., Moses; cf. Exodus 6:20, 26.

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

147

known Stabat Mater in Syriac literature. I have included here Brock’s translation of portions of this hymn as it provides, in the same scene as Jacob presents her, a Mary that is more in line with the cooperating partner found above and, thus providing further evidence for the uniqueness of the Mary described by Jacob. In this mêmrâ, Mary addresses a short lament to both Gabriel and Michael but in a context of offering comfort to her son and in a tone much less accusatory than pleading, almost paralleling Jesus’ own plea in the Garden of Gethsemane. Would that I were an eagle, my Son, That I might fly to the four quarters of the earth To invite and bring in all the nations To the great wedding feast of your death. Who is it who has been moved by envy against you, my sweet one? . . . . . Your tomb is like a marriage chamber And in it you, my son, are like the Bridegroom; The dead resemble the wedding guests Who are served in the presence of angels. Weep, all created things, At your Lord who hangs on the wood. O sun, draw in your rays So that the shame of your Lord may be hidden; Descend and shine out in the darkness Where your Creator has shone forth, That the dead of Sheol may see And say “He is the Lifegiver”. . . . . . Tremble, O earth, quake in fear, For the Son of your Lord is abused upon you: Open your mouth and avenge his shame, Punishing the wicked children of Sion. Where is your sword, Michael, Which devastated peoples and nations? Where is your zeal, Gabriel,

148

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR. Mighty with your flame? Your Lord lies stripped on the cross, Why are your courses silent? 24

As we return to Jacob’s Homily on Good Friday, following Mary’s accusations against Gabriel and Michael, the latter 25 then offers her his comfort and assures, or reminds, her that this act on the part of her son is the necessary result of his willing obedience to the will of his Father; love, not weakness, provoked him to carry out such an act. He continues by reminding her that should her son have so desired, he certainly had the power to bring it about otherwise: “Be not astonished, O immaculate dove, at the willing death of your Only-Begotten, for He is stretched out on the cross in obedience to His Father. His love compelled Him to dwell in your womb at the Incarnation, and His mercy bound Him to die and bring Adam to life by the death of his offspring. Death is defeated by a man; by his sufferings the bolts of hell are smashed and its bonds are loosed. By him the captivity of the house of Adam who had been dispersed is overturned, and he himself set them in the land of Eden whence they had gone out. If He had not willed it, the tree of shame would not have been able to hold Him. Could the One who raised the dead not have raised up Himself if He wished? He opened [the eyes of] the blind man; could He not have removed the nails from His hands?

Brock, Bride of Light: Hymns on Mary from the Syriac Churches, 109–10. The text actually says simply “the angel”, but Michael is presumably intended as he took “the brunt” of Mary’s accusations. 24 25

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

149

Could He who cleansed lepers, not have cleansed the spittle from His face? He silenced the sea; could He not have stopped up the voices of those rioters? He changed the water; could He not have sweetened the vinegar they gave Him? He made the earth shake; could He not have caused His judges to tremble? He darkened the sun; could He not have blinded the crucifiers? He shook the mountains; could He not have submerged those despicable ones? He split open stones; could He not have cut off those who hate Him?

After this exchange, the text then moves back to the cross, to the plea of the thief who is being crucified next to Jesus. Here Jacob simply has the thief elaborate on the biblical verse “Remember me, O Lord, when you come into your kingdom”; part of the thief’s plea reads: O Bread of Life, grant that I may be joyful at Your great table. O High Wall, grant that I may enter and post myself within You. O desert tower, take me into Your storehouses and guard me from robbers’ assaults. O Great Treasure-house, bestow on me some of Your treasure that is full of blessing, that by Your gift I may forget my oppressive poverty. O Master, who contracted me for one denarius with the hired workers at the first hour, procure for me the same grace as those who came to Your vineyard at the eleventh hour.

Jesus’ response is a one line clear echo of his response as found in Luke: “Amen I say to you, O man, believe, for on this day you will have joy in Paradise (Luke 23:43).” The Homily then moves to a brief description of two events: the offering of the wine-soaked sponge, and the lancing of his side by the soldier, with minimal theological elaboration. Then the text ends in an awfully abrupt manner; the last few lines read as follows:

150

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR. By the lance with which the First-Born was pierced, the fiery sword was voided, by the side that was torn open, that boundary partition was undone. just as in Adam you all died, likewise in Christ you have all been given life. O Christ, who made peace, and killed the enemy in Your flesh, give peace to the Church in the four corners of the earth, and to You be glory for ever. Amen.

Even if this Armenian translation has been embellished in part, the Homily On Good Friday is still almost certainly a genuine composition of Jacob of Serugh, and its restoration to the immense legacy of one of Syria’s finest poets, even if only in Armenian translation, makes it none the less important to scholars. But it is not the only work of Jacob of Serugh that has been preserved in Armenian translation.

JACOB OF SERUGH IN ARMENIAN As already noted above, modern scholars seem to be almost completely unaware that any work of Jacob has survived in Armenian. Over a century ago, though, Zarp‘analean had already identified eleven Armenian works of Jacob of Serugh, 26 who is remembered among the Armenians as one of the great orthodox fathers. 27 While the current state of manuscript catalogues remains far from ideal, they are certainly much better than they were in the nineteenth century. Having these catalogues available, I can now add a number of additional works to the list of Zarp‘analean. I have not been able to see every available catalogue and others, particularly that of the manuscripts in the Matenadaran, the largest collection of Armenian manuscripts, is only beginning to be redone; thus, this list must for now remain incomplete (see n. 9, Zarp‘analean, Catalogue of Ancient Armenian Translations, 572–5. See, for example, the list of orthodox teachers mentioned in the “Confession of Orthodox Christians,” as printed in Bogharian, N. Grand Catalogue of St. James Manuscripts [in Armenian], 11 vols., IV, 290, Jerusalem: St. James Press, 1969. 26 27

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

151

above), but there remains every hope that even more works of Jacob of Serugh will soon be discovered. To date, I have located a total of seventeen homilies, at least one turgāmâ and mostly mêmrê, including the Homily On Good Friday discussed above. Nearly all of these are found in manuscripts titled Jaṛĕntir, which are collections of homilies (literally, “selection of homilies”), usually assembled for liturgical purposes. 28 There are also a number of other works that are found attributed to the same Yakob Srjets‘i/Jacob of Serugh, but which are not sufficiently identified. I have included them in a separate section simply to present as complete a picture as the catalogues I have perused allow of what the Armenians received as having come from the pen of Jacob of Serugh. Of the seventeen turgāmê and mêmrê, I have divided them into two groups: those with surviving Syriac originals and those without. Of these seventeen there are seven, including the Homily On Good Friday, that have no counterpart in the surviving Syriac corpus of Jacob’s works. 29 Thus, from our gleanings to date, the following list of Jacob’s works surviving in Armenian can be set out. 30 I have used the following abbreviations (full bibliographical citation can be found in the notes above):

Mss. Mat. 993 and 7729, two of the larger and more famous Jar.ĕntir manuscripts, have been discussed and catalogued in van Esbroeck, Michel, and Ugo Zanetti. “Le manuscrit Érévan 999. Inventaire des pièces,” Revue des études arméniennes 12 (1977): 123–67; and van Esbroeck, Michel. “Description du repertoire de l’Homéliaire de Muš (Maténadaran 7729),” Revue des études arméniennes 18 (1984): 237–80. 29 This number was arrived at by a comparison of the incipits as provided by the Armenian manuscript catalogues with the list of incipits of the Syriac homilies compiled by Sebastian P. Brock and found in Bedjan, Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, VI, 372–99. I have not been able to see the manuscripts of any of these works. 30 I hope to be able, in the near future, to produce a complete list of all the surviving works of Jacob in Armenian, along with a detailed catalogue of all the manuscripts where they can be found. 28

152

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

A Assemani, J.S. Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, I B Bedjan, P., ed. Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, 6 vols. Br Brock, S.P. “Index of First Lines.” In Bedjan, P. ed. Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, VI, 372–99. Z Zarp‘analean, K. Catalogue of Ancient Armenian Translations, 572–5. 31 For the editions of the Syriac texts, one can consult the entry in Brock’s “Index.” I have also provided the bibliographical details for English translations of these Syriac mêmrê, where available; for the others, translations are in preparation in the Gorgias Press series, The Metrical Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, of which more than a dozen fascicules have already appeared. I. Texts with surviving Syriac originals (I include an English translation of the Armenian incipit only when it is fuller or differs significantly from the Syriac): 1. Turgāmâ On the Resurrection of Our Savior Syr. Inc. 32 ‫ܗ ܕ‬ ‫ܐܬ‬ Ass p. 305 33 Zarp 2 34

‫ܪ‬

‫ܘܬ‬

The numbers following the abbreviations A, Br, and Z refer to the entry number, not the page number (unless otherwise noted); the numbers following B refer to volume number and pages. 32 This work has been edited in Brock, Turgāmê da-simin l-qaddišâ Mar Ya‘qob da Sarûg Malpānâ, 47–55, and again by in Rilliet, Jacques de Saroug, Six Homélies Festales en Prose, 630–44, with facing French translation; an English translation can be found in Kollamparampil, Jacob of Serugh, Select Festal Homilies, 319–28. 33 van Esbroeck and Zanetti, “Le manuscrit Érévan 999. Inventaire des pièces,” 152, identify this homily with that found in Bedjan, Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, II. 624–35, but this is erroneous. 34 Zarp‘analean, Catalogue of Ancient Armenian Translations, 572, misidentifies this work with mêmrâ n. 175, in Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, I, 326. 31

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

153

Arm. Inc. Այսաւր ուրախութիւն մեծ՝ լի ընտրութեամբք զարհուրեցուցանէ զիս պատմել զբան մարգարէին 2. On the Raising of Lazarus

‫̈ ܬܝ‬

Syr. Inc. ‫ܟ‬

‫ܚ‬

Ass 134 Br 309 B III.564–81 Arm. Inc. Բաց զշրթունս իմ խաւսել վասն քո Որդի Աստուծոյ զի քեւ բարբառին ամենայն բանաւորք [Open my lips to speak about You, O Son of God for all intelligent creatures cry out to You]

3. On the Ascension Syr. Inc.

‫ܗ ܕ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܝ‬

‫ܐܬܬ‬

Ass 183 Br 55 B VI.196–220 Zarp 4 Arm. Inc. Զարթիր քնար իմ եւ երգեա աւրհնութիւնն Միածին մինչչեւ լռեցուցեալ [Rise up, my lyre, and sing out the blessing of the Only-Begotten until interrupted]

4. On the Symbols of Our Lord Syr. Inc. ‫ܘ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܐ‬

‫ܗ‬

‫ܕ ܐܙ‬

Br 206 Zarp 8 Arm. Inc. Ի ծով խորհրդոց քոց ահա իջանեմ ի վաճառ որդի Աստուծոյ [Arm. adds only “O Son of God”]

5. On the Star [indicating] the Coming [of the Lord] Syr. Inc. ‫ܙ ̈ ܗܝ‬

‫ܕ‬

Ass 14 Br 135 B I.84–153 Arm. Inc. Ծագումն մեծ որ լցեր զաշխարհս ամենայն ի ճառագայթից քոց

‫ܪ‬

‫ܕ‬

154

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

6. In Praise of John the Baptist Syr. Inc. ‫ܚ‬

‫ܐ‬

Ass 35 Br 183 Zarp Arm. Inc. Յիսուս լոյս փառաց պայծառացոյց

̈

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܗܪ‬

‫ܥ‬

7 35

որ

7. On New Sunday and the Apostle Thomas Syr. Inc. ‫ܪ‬

զամենայն

̈

տիեզերս

‫ܪ‬

Zarp 5 Ass 182 Br 189 B II.649–69 36 Arm. Inc. Յորժամ յարեաւ հովիւն ի մեռելոց մեծաւ զաւրութեամբ սքանչելի նշանաւք [Arm. adds “[and] with wondrous signs”]

8. On the Death of Mary, the Virgin Mother of God Syr. Inc. ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬

‫ܐܪ‬

‫ܕ‬

Br 109 B VI.97–107 Zarp 6 Arm. Inc. Որդի Աստուծոյ Աստուած ճշմարիտ որ սիրով քո խոնարհեցար եւ իջեր յերկիր [O Son of God, True God, who in Your love humbled Yourself and came down to earth]

9. On Thaddeus and Abgar, King of Armenia and Syria Syr. Inc. ‫̈ ܗܝ ܘܙܘܬܗ‬ ‫ܕ ܒ‬

‫ܐ‬

Ass 100 Br 99 Arm. Inc. Որդի Աստուծոյ, որ ետուր սրբոց առաքելոցն զբան քարոզութեան քո A printed version of the Armenian text of this work, based upon a single unidentified manuscript (presumably from the collection then at Etchmiadzin and now at the Matenadaran in Erevan), was anonymously published, with no introduction or notes, in Ararat 21 (1888): 271–83. 36 An English translation of the Syriac text of Bedjan can be found in Holy Transfiguration Monastery, “A Homily on New Sunday, and on Thomas the Apostle by Mar Jacob, Bishop of Serugh (†451),” True Vine 4 (1992): 49–66. 35

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY 10. On the Birth of Christ, our God Syr. Inc. ‫ܪ ܗܘ‬

‫ܘܙ‬

‫ܐ‬ ‫ܪ‬

‫ܟ‬ ‫ܪ‬

155

‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܬܗܪ‬

Ass 11 Br 366 37 Arm. Inc. Սքանչելի է ծնունդ Քրիստոսի Որդի Աստուծոյ II. Texts with no apparent surviving Syriac original: 1. On Good Friday 38 Arm. Inc. Անծանաւթ ծնունդ ծոցոյ քո Հաւր միածին զարթոյ զքնարս իմ եւ փարթամացոյ

Zarp 1

[O unknowable offspring from the bosom of Your Father, O Only-Begotten, rouse up my lyre, and enrich it]

2. On Antioch Zarp 10 Arm. Inc. Ասէ Պետրոս, աշակերտ նորա իցեմ: ասէ Պաւղոս, ամենայն աշակերտ զարուեստն

ի վարդապետէն ուսանի

[Peter said, “I will be His disciple”; Paul said, “Every disciple learns the art from a teacher.”] This text was first edited in Bedjan, S. Martyrii, qui est Sahdona, quae supersunt omnia, 720–74, and reprinted in idem. Cantus seu Homiliae MarJacobi in Jesum et Mariam, 108–62, Paris/Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1902, the text was also reproduced in the supplemental volume to the Gorgias reprint of Jacob’s works; see Bedjan, Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, VI, 108[720]–162[774]. An English translation can be found in Kollamparampil, Jacob of Serugh, Select Festal Homilies, 41–93. 38 The full title, as found in the Jashots‘ Girk‘, is given above, n. 9. Zarp‘analean, Catalogue of Ancient Armenian Translations, 572–3, notes two other manuscripts, then Etchmiadzin 914 and 922, that have the following titles: “An admirable discourse on the Thief on the right side [of Our Lord];” and “On the sufferings of Our Lord Jesus Christ at the ninth hour [and] On the Thief who was invited into Paradise, and on the Cherub who guarded the way.” The latter title I have also found in Ms. Mat. 641, f. 275v; see Eganyan, Ant‘abyan, et al., Grand Catalogue of the Armenian Manuscripts in the Mashtoc‘ Matenadaran, III, 171. 37

156

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

3. In Praise of the Holy Virgin Arm. Inc. Բազմութիւնք քրիստոսասէր ժողովոյս [A multitude of Christ-loving crowds]

4. On the Resurrection of the Lord Zarp 3 and on the Soldiers guarding the Tomb Arm. Inc. Յարութիւն քո Քրիստոս զարթուցանէ զիս ճառել զինքենէ, դու Տէր պարգեւեա ինձ ձայն որ գոչեա զզարթուցումն քո [Your resurrection, O Christ, rouses me to speak of You; You, O Lord, grant to me the voice to exclaim Your waking]

5. On the Ninevites Arm. Inc. Յիսուս լոյս իմաստութեան հաւր [Jesus, the Light of the Father of Wisdom]

Zarp 9 39 6. On the Conversion of the City of Antioch Arm. Inc. Լուսով բանիւ քո գամ առ քեզ Որդի Աստուծոյ առ ի տեսանել զճշմարիտ եւ զհրաշալի պայծառութիւնդ քո [By Your light and word I come to You, O Son of God, to see Your truth and Your wondrous brilliance]

7. On the Mystery of the Tabernacle Arm. Inc. Ով ամենակարող Տէր իմ Յիսուս Աստուած Իսրայեղի հնոյն ի նորոյս [O All-powerful Lord, my Jesus, God of Israel, both Old and New] Zarp‘analean, Catalogue of Ancient Armenian Translations, 574, refers to the description of such a homily in Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, I, 332; S. Brock also lists a work with this exact title, but the incipits are quite dissimilar; of course, here and elsewhere, one or the other could be merely a fragment, see n. 42 in Bedjan, Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, VI, 376. 39

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

157

III. Others 1. The Life of Daniel of Galash There also survives, in at least two Armenian manuscripts, a prose Life of Daniel of Galash “and on the miracles that he wrought from the account and the interpretation of Jacob, the Patriarch of Serugh.” The Syriac text is considered to be a genuine work of Jacob by Baumstark, 40 despite some minor reservations by Nau in his summary of the Life. 41 This Syriac text has yet to be edited, but the Armenian translation under discussion here, was published over a quarter century ago on the basis of one of the extant manuscripts. 42 This account of the life of Daniel (d. 439), is the only known account of his life and it also seems to be the earliest mention of the famous mandylion of Christ that was preserved in Edessa. 43

Baumstark, Anton. Geschichte der syrischen Literatur mit Ausschluss der christlich-palästinensischen Texte, 149, Bonn: A. Marcus und E. Weber Verlag, 1922; he lists only Ms. Par. Syr. 235, as containing this text. 41 Nau, François. “Hagiographie Syriaque,” Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 2ème Série V (1910): 60–2; he too, also notes only Ms. Par. Syr. 235. 42 Ter-Petrosyan, Levon H. “Jacob of Serugh’s ‘Life of Mar Daniel of Galash [in Armenian],” Ējmiadzin 36.3 (1979): 22–40; his Armenian text is printed from Ms. Mat. 2270. Another copy which shows some substantial differences, can be found in Ms. Jer. Arm. 3681; see Bogharian, Grand Catalogue of St. James Manuscripts, XI, 106. In his introduction (p. 22), TerPetrosyan notes four additional Syriac manuscripts that contain this Life: Mss. Syr. Mardin 259.3 and 273, Mss. Syr. Damascus 9/8 and 12/17. 43 Balicka-Witakowski, Ewa, Sebastian P. Brock, et al., The Hidden Pearl. The Syrian Orthodox Church and its Ancient Aramaic Heritage, II: The Heirs of the Ancient Aramaic Heritage, 122, Rome: Trans World Film Italia, 2001. On the history of the mandylion see, most recently, Brock, Sebastian. “Transformations of the Edessa Portrait of Christ,” Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies 18 (2004): 46–56. In neither of these works does Brock express any hesitation about the authorship of Jacob. 40

158

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

2. On the Capture of the Ark by the Philistines Zarp‘analean lists this work as n. 11, the last item in his list of Jacob’s Armenian works. 44 He gives no incipit and I have yet to find it in any of the manuscript catalogues that I have looked at. It is, perhaps, to be identified with an unedited mêmrâ, titled On the Philistines, 45 but this cannot yet be determined. 3. Assorted Works From our research to date, there remains only to mention a single manuscript, Ms. Nor Julfa 464, which is a K‘arozagirk‘, a collection of homilies. 46 These homilies, at least according to their attributions, are mostly translations of Syriac texts, and most of these from the pen of Jacob of Serugh. According to the catalogue, this manuscript contains one work each by Anania Shirakats‘i and Yovhannēs Ojnets‘i, three works from a Sargis Vardapet, four works from Ephrem, and twenty-three works attributed to Jacob of Serugh. Unfortunately, the catalogue provides no incipits for any of these works. All the titles—again, as the catalogue gives them—are subjects that Jacob wrote on, so there is a good chance that many, if not all, of them, are authentic, but until the manuscript itself can be looked at, no such determination can be made. I give here the titles, as found in the catalogue, of these twenty-three works of Jacob. I have also provided the entry numbers from Brock’s “Index”, below each corresponding title, for those works whose Syriac titles are close to the titles of the Armenian works found in this Ms. Nor Julfa 464. These numbers are provided only for interim interest; it is possible that they will have nothing to do with the actual Armenian texts.

Zarp‘analean, Catalogue of Ancient Armenian Translations, 575. See Brock’s n. 8, in Bedjan, Homilies of Mar Jacob of Serugh, VI, 373. 46 Tēr-Avetisean, Smbat. Ցուցակ Հայերէն Ձեռագրաց Նոր Ջուղայի Ամենափրկիչ Վանքի [Catalogue of the Armenian Manuscripts in the All-Saviour Monastery in New Julfa], 2 vols., I, 729–30, Vienna: Mekhitarist Printing Press, 1970. 44 45

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY a.

On John the Baptist Br 183, 249 b. On the Entry of Our Lord into Jerusalem Br 260 c. On the Meaning of Sunday Br 189 d. On the Transfiguration Br 154 e. On Palm Sunday Br 260 f. On Stealing g. On the Resurrection Br 69, 319, 320; see also II.4, above h. On Good Friday see II.1, above i. On the Conversion of Antioch Br 42; see also II.2, 6, above j. On the Star and the Magi Br 135 k. On the Ninevites see II.5, above l. On Easter and on the Resurrection Br 69, 319, 320; see also II.4, above m. On John, the Forerunner Br 183, 249 n. On Giving Alms to the Poor Br 265 o. On Prayer/Supplication Br 3 p. On Envy q. On Prayer r. Another on Prayer s. On Prayer t. On Almsgiving u. On Confession v. Another on Confession w. On Faith Br 19, 21, 52, 125, 274, 303, 347

159

160

EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR.

It appears that there is a good chance that many of these works may be genuine Jacob of Serugh, although some at the end of the list may actually turn out to be compositions of Ephrem. Nonetheless, there remains a good possibility that we will find additional ‘newly discovered’ homilies of Jacob.

CONCLUSION One can now see that counter to the evidence found in modern handbooks, histories, bibliographies, etc., there are indeed a number of works of Jacob of Serugh translated into Armenian. He was also well enough known in Armenia to have been considered one of the great orthodox teachers. Nearly all of the seventeen works enumerated above are found in at least eight manuscripts, another attestation of how highly regarded Jacob was and how widely he was read in Armenian. It is too early to detail the influence of Jacob’s writings on Armenian authors, but the manuscripts do provide further evidence of when Jacob was translated into Armenian. In addition to the colophon already noted above, we also have two short colophons, included among three works of Jacob that are found in Ms. Jer. Arm. 1365, that provide us further evidence that the works of Jacob were not translated into Armenian until at least the twelfth century. They read, respectively: “In the year 695 of the Armenians (=1246), this homily (On Thaddeus and Abgar, cf. I.9, above) was translated from Syriac by the hand of the Syrian priest, Simeon, at the command of Vardan Vardapet, (f. 131)” and “This homily (On the Symbols of Our Lord, cf. I.4, above) from the praiseworthy compositions of Mar Jacob, and other works by him, were translated by Vardan Vardapet (f. 157).” 47 This Vardan Vardapet, or Teacher, is no doubt to be identified with Vardan Arewelts‘i (c. 1200–1271), the great biblical commentator and theologian. It is already likely that Vardan himself might have been the translator of the Old Testament Commentaries attributed to

47

Bogharian, Grand Catalogue of St. James Manuscripts, IV, 643–51.

JACOB OF SERUGH, HOMILY ON GOOD FRIDAY

161

Ephrem. 48 From the aggregate witness of these three colophons we can surmise that the bulk of the works of Jacob of Serugh were translated into Armenian between the mid-twelfth and the midthirteenth centuries, and not in the sixth or seventh shortly after his death. It is certain that the data above and, especially, the manuscripts themselves need further study, but it is equally certain that not only were there works of Jacob of Serugh that were translated into Armenian, but that his work was also held in great esteem by some of the greatest scholars of the medieval Armenian Church. Many important patristic texts were translated into Armenian at various times and in various places, but as is the case with such works as Irenaeus’ Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, Eusebius’ Chronicle, numerous Hymns of Ephrem, Timothy Aelurus’ Against the Council of Chalcedon, even some works of Philo, scholars and faithful alike owe the Armenian church a tremendous debt for the preservation of so many valuable patristic and theological works. Now we can add at least seven new works of Jacob of Serugh to our already immense debt to the dedication, the industry, and the great ecumenical spirit of the Armenian Church.

See Mathews, Edward G., Jr., tr. The Armenian Commentary on Genesis attributed to Ephrem the Syrian, L, CSCO, 573, Louvain: Peeters, 1998. Thus, these colophons now provide further evidence that Vardan may have been even more involved in translating Syrian works into Armenian then heretofore realized. 48

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE ON JOHN OF DARA AS EXEMPLIFIED BY THE USE OF TWO VERSE-HOMILIES AHO SHEMUNKASHO 1. INTRODUCTION From the late antiquity onwards, referring to the authors who were in the “orthodox” true faith, became a common method of proving the “truth” and right understanding of theological aspects which were being dealt with. Whereas, Syriac authors of early Syriac Christendom based their knowledge mainly on Holy Scripture, as well as on wisdom found in the created world, and on their social and common experiences in life. When they try to prove their theological arguments, they refer primarily to the Bible, but also to nature. Particularly Jacob of Serugh, as well as Ephrem, sees the revelation of God, next to the Incarnation in human body, in Scripture as well as in nature. Both, Holy Scripture and nature posses divine power that can be revealed to everyone everywhere. Jacob of Serugh’s homilies contain frequent allusions to, and citations from the Bible, but also provide references to nature. This however, changed with later writers. In addition to Holy Scripture and nature, later writers look at the texts of previous writers and present what they say. So too many of the later writers often refer to Jacob of Serugh who had a great influence on the Syriac writers following him, as well as on the whole of Syriac Christianity in general. A large number of selected couplets from Jacob’s versehomilies have been incorporated into the liturgical prayers and are chanted in Syriac churches up to today. Jacob has also been cited and referred to by John of Dara who died in 860 AD. 163

164

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

After introducing John of Dara and his work briefly this article, as exemplified, demonstrates only the use of two of Jacob’s verse-homilies in John of Dara’s treatises found in Codex 356 in Mardin. These are the Memro On whether Adam was created mortal or immortal and Memro On Adam’s Expulsion from Paradise. Both of Jacob’s memre have been edited and translated into French by Khalil Alwan [= Alwan] 1 in 1989. Since most of John of Dara’s work has neither been edited nor translated yet, the following manuscripts have been used: Codex 356 from Mardin [= A] that could be from the 9th–12th Century; Mingana 67 [= B] from 1911 and Damascus Patriarchate 4/4 [= C] from 1912. The last two manuscripts (B and C) are copied from the first one (A).

2. JOHN OF DARA AND HIS WORK Not very much is known about John of Dara 2, but he is supposed to be the West Syriac Metropolitan of Dara who appears in the context of Patriarch Dionysius of Tell-Mahre in the Chronicle of Michael the Great. 3 Patriarch Dionysius of Tell-Mahre ordained an Iwannis, a monk from the monastery of St. Hannanjo (Deir Za´faran) near Mardin, as a Metropolitan for Dara in 825 AD, who

Alwan, Khalil. Jacques de Saroug: Quatre Homélies Métriques sur la Création, CSCO, 508, S.Syr. 214, Lovanii, 1989, 18–77; CSCO, 509, S.Syr. 215, Lovanii, 1989, 17–86. 2 For John of Dara see Baumstark, Anton. Geschichte der Syrischen Literatur, 275–7, Bonn, 1922; Barsoum, Ignatius Aphram I. The Scattered Pearls. A History of Syriac Literature and sciences, transl. and ed. by Matti Moosa, 390–2, Piscataway, 2003. 3 The chronicle of Michael the Great survived in a unique manuscript from Edessa, dated 1599, that is now in Aleppo. A facsimile of it was produced by Gorgias Press in 2008. In 1899 a transcribed copy was prepared for Jean-Baptiste Chabot who published it with a French translation, annotations and indices in Paris 1905–1910: Chabot, J.-B. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, Patriarche Jacobite d’Antioche (1166–1199), I–IV, Paris, 1905–10. 1

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

165

was followed by Athanasius Hakim in 860 AD. 4 In his French translation of Michael the Great’s Chronicle Jean-Baptiste Chabot identifies this Iwannis with John of Dara, as he adds in the foot note: “Jean de Dara”. 5 John of Dara is considered to be a “proficient scholar and illustrious theologian” 6 and because of the importance of his treatises, he is often listed among the well known biblical and liturgical West Syriac commentators of late antiquity and early Middle Age. John of Dara’s treatises survived in various Manuscripts, but two of them contain most of his work. These are a manuscript in Mosul and one in Mardin. Other works have also been attributed to him, which may or may not be authentic. These are a treatise On the Soul, 7 a Book On Demons, 8 a Commentary on the Gospels, 9 and an Anaphora. 10 Michael the Great’s Chronicle, Manuscript Aleppo, fol. 382v [Chabot, Chronique de Michel le Syrien, IV, 756, fol. 378v], see number 64 in the list: “Patriarch John ordained Metropolitan Athanasius Hakim for Dara” ( ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܣ‬ ‫)ܐܬܐ‬. 5 Chabot, Chronique de Michel le Syrien, III, 43. For Patriarch Dionysius of Tell-Mahre see Abramowski, Rudolf. Dionysius von Tellmahre. Jakobitischer Patriarch von 818–845. Zur Geschichte der Kirche unter dem Islam, Abh. für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, XXV/2, Leipzig, 1940; Witakowski, Witold. The Syriac Chronicle of Pseudo Dionysius of Tel-Mahre. A Study in the History of Historiography, Diss., Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Sudia Semitica Upsaliensia, 9, Uppsala, 1987; Palmer, Andrew. The Seventh Century in the West-Syrian Chronicles, Translated Texts for Historians, 15, Liverpool, 1993. 6 Barsoum, The Scattered Pearls, 390. See also Edsman, Carl-Martin. “Death, Corruption and Eternal Life,” Bulletin of the Iranian Culture Foundation, 1 (1969): 85–104 [On John of Dara, On Resurrection, p. 89]. 7 The treatise On the Soul has been considered to belong rather to Moses bar Kepha. In 1928 Giuseppe Furlani published an article about John of Dara’s treatise On the Soul based on the text found in Vat. Library, Vat Syr. 147, fol. 133r–168v, from 1234. He also translated it into Italian. Vat Syr. 147, fol. 3r up to 91r, contains Moses bar Kepha’s treatise On the Soul. The oldest copy could be Vatican MS 100 from the 9th century. The Houghton Library at Harvard University contains an old copy of this 4

166

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

In the manuscript found in the library of the Syrian orthodox bishopric in Mosul, belonging to the 12th or 13th century, consisting of 323 pages, 11 we find altogether eleven treatises (memre) 12 and a treatise, MS 3973 (104 pages). In 1999, J. Reller wrote an article showing the relation of John of Dara’s texts and understanding of the soul towards Moses bar Kepha and Bar Hebraeus, see Reller, Jobst. “Iwannis von Dara, Mose bar Kepha und Barhebräus über die Seele, traditionsgeschichtlich untersucht,” in Reinink, G.J., and A.C. Klugkist, ed. After Bardaisan, Studies on Continuity and Change in Syriac Christianity in Honour of Professor Han J.W. Drijvers, 253–64, Leuven, 1999. However, it has been assumed that this text doesn’t belong to John of Dara, but to Moses bar Kepha. 8 We find the book On Demons” under the name of John of Dara in a codex which stems from the 16th or 17th century. The MS in Mardin 381 contains a corpus of theological works of Moses bar Kepha and includes the book On Demons in 23 kephalaia. 9 Bar Salibi speaks in his introduction to his Gospel’s Commentary of the previous commentaries he used for his composition. He mentions John of Dara explicitly when he says: . ̣ ‫ܘܐܬ‬ ‫ܬܘܒ ܕ‬ ̣‫ܕ‬ ‫ ܘ ܝ‬. ‫ ܘ ܝ ܐ‬. ‫ܝ ܐ‬ ‫ ܐ̇ ܐ ܕ‬. ‫ܢ ܕ ܘ ܗ‬ ‫ܕܐܘ‬ . ‫ܕܕܪ‬ ‫ ܘܐ‬. ‫ ܘ ܪ ܗ‬.‫ܪ ܣ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬. See Sedlacek, I., et I.-B. Chabot. Dionysii bar Salibi . ‫ܐ‬ Commentarii in Evangelia, 1, CSCO, 77; S.Syr., 33, Louvain, 1953. 10 According to I.A. Barsoum an Anaphora is also attributed to John of Dara, The Scattered Pearls, 392. 11 A copy of it can be found in the Mingana collection in Birmingham, MS 56. Mingana 56 is a copy of MS Mosul, but without pages 288–323 that are partly difficult to read and do not seem that all of them belong to John of Dara. They look like a collection of biblical verses and passages from various Church Fathers, such as from Severius (p. 321–3). Vat MS 100, transcribed before the year 932, is the oldest codex, but it does not contain all the twelve kephalaia found in Mosul codex. Vat MS 100 begins with the four memre on resurrection, followed by the memre on the celestial hierarchies and the priesthood. 12 Treatise 1 and 2 are commentaries on celestial and ecclesiastical hierarchy and 3 to 6 on priesthood in reference to Dionysius Areopagite. All 6 memre also survived in a manuscript from 1654 AD that is in Oxford Bodleian, Orient. 264, resp. Syr. 152; see Payne-Smith, R. Catalogues Codd. Syr. Bodleian, coll. 486–96, Oxonii, 1864.

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

167

collection of various texts at the end: two memre are on celestial and ecclesiastical hierarchy 13, four on priesthood and priests 14, another four on resurrection of human bodies 15, and one on the offering of the holy mysteries 16. The title of the final one is not identified. Barsoum, The Scatered Pearls, 392: “An eloquent treatise on the policy of the church and the settlement of peace in it, consisting of 39 pages. There is an anonymous copy of this treatise fixed at the end of his book on the theology in the former Mosul manuscript. This treatise is undoubtedly the work of this erudite metropolitan which he wrote in the days of the Patriarch John IV (around 850). We also have an accord copy of the treatise in nineteen pages, transcribed in 1603, which is most probably a reply to Basils II, Maphryono of the East (848–858).” See Strothmann, Werner. Das Sakrament der Myronweihe in der Schrift de Ecclesiastica Hiearchia des Pseudo Areopagita in syrischen Übersetzungen und Kommentaren, 49–57, Wiesbaden, 1978. 14 In some manuscripts the memre on the priesthood and priests have been attributed to John Maron. See Varghese, Baby. John of Dara Commentary on the Eucharist, Moran Etho, 12, Kerala, 1999; Sader, Jean. “Jean de Dara,” in Dictionnaire de Spiritualitè, VIII, 467–68, Paris, 1974; Breydy, Michel. La doctrine Syro-Antiochene sur le sacerdoce dans sa version maronite, Jounieh, 1977; P. Zingerle gives a summary of this work, Zingerle, P. “Aus dem Handschriftlichen syrischen Werk des Johannes von Dara über das Priestertum,” Theologische Quartalschrift 49 (1867): 183– 205; 50 (1868): 267–85. 15 Moses Bar Kepha has got exactly the same number of kephaleia on resurrection as John of Daras’ memro one, two and three on resurrection, namely all together 34 kaphalaia of resurrection. See Strothmann, W. Moses Bar Kepha, Myron-Weihe, I, 25, Reihe Syiaca, 7, Wiesbaden 1973. The first three memre on resurrection can be found in the following MSs: Vat Syr 100 and 582, Charfet 28, Mingana 56. In his article on “Death, Corruption and Eternal Life” C.-M. Edsman refers to memro two on resurrection that discusses the difference between the earthly body and the heavenly one. Quotations are found in Braun, O. “Beiträge zur Geschichte der Eschatologie in den syrischen Kirchen,” Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie, 16 (1892): 273–91. 16 This memro is a commentary on the liturgy which has been edited by Sader, J. Le De Oblatione de Jean de Dara, CSCO, 308; S.Syr., 132, Louvain, 1970, and translated into French, Le De Oblatione de Jean de 13

168

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

However, these treatises have not been considered for this article. The result of this work is based on the manuscript found in Mardin, MS 356. It is divided into seven memre that are written in fine Estrangelo script in 254 pages. The colophon is lost, missing the first three and half kephalaia of memro one. This parchment codex could be from 9th—12th Century. 17 This codex has been copied at least twice: 18 one copy is in Damascus, copied in Dayro d-Nutpho near Mardin, by Dayroyo Michael bar Jeshu` in 1911, except memro 6, which has been copied by Dayroyo Johannon; the other copy is in Birmingham (Mingana MS 67), produced by Deacon Mattai bar Paulus in Mosul in 1912. 19 Dara, CSCO, 309; S.Syr., 133, Louvain, 1970. In 1999, Baby Varghese translated it into English. See Varghese, Baby. West Syrian Liturgical Theology, 29–34. 17 See Vööbus, Anthon. “Important manuscript discoveries of Iwannis of Dara and his literary heritage,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 96 (1976): 576–8. On page 577 he writes: “This is a codex which has found its hiding place in the monastery of Mar Hannanya ...—unique and priceless records which have not survived elsewhere. The manuscript in question is MS Mardin Orth. 356, written on parchment. Because it has lost its colophon it does not instruct us more precisely about its age, but on palaeographical grounds it can be assigned to the 9th or 10th century. It is astounding to discover that all the works preserved in this collection are new.” 18 According to Vööbus also MS Vat. Syr. 581 is a copy from the same MS. See Vööbus, “Important manuscript,” 577. 19 In 1912 the Damascus manuscript was copied in Dayro d-Nutpho that is the monastery of Yoldath Aloho near Dayro d-Mor Hannanyo, Deir ̇ Za`faran in Mardin (see the note on page C 241: ‫ܨ‬ ̇ ̇ ݀ ݀ ̇ ‫܆‬ ‫܆ ܐܘ ̣ ܕ ܬ ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܥ܆‬ ‫ܕ ܛ ܕ‬ ̇ ). A year before, in 1911, the codex of Mardin was taken to ‫ ̄ܡ‬: ̄ ‫ܐܨ‬ Mosul by the Priest Aphram Barsoum (later Patriarch) and was copied by Deacon Mattai Bar Paulus. This copy is Mingana MS 67. (Also Mingana 56 was copied by the same deacon in 1912). He informs us about the condition of the codex that not all the text was legible and therefore he left gaps for the passages that he couldn’t read or were not available. And because Deacon Mattai Bar Paulus had to write it quickly (as he says “by night”) it could contain some mistakes according to him: ‫ܐܘ ܐ ̈ ܘ‬

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

169

The manuscript is divided into seven memre, which make up a unit: five kephalaia on Paradise, nineteen on creation, eight against heretics, thirty-three on resurrection (Easter), eleven on Pentecost 20, eleven on finding of the cross, and nineteen on the divine economy.

3. JOHN OF DARA’S REFERENCES TO JACOB OF SERUGH In the seven treatises found in the manuscript in Mardin, John of Dara mentions a great number of authors, and occasionally their works. John refers explicitly to nine of them more frequently. These are: John the Solitary (4 times), Basil of Alexandrian (6), Cyril of Alexandrian (6), John Crysostomos (7), Ephrem the Syrian (10), Severios of Antioch (14), Gregory of Nyssa (16), Philoxenos of Mabbug (17) and Jacob of Serugh (19). Indeed, John of Dara uses citations from Jacob of Serugh more than the others. So far seven verse-homilies of Jacob of Serugh have been identified in John’s work, manuscript Mardin 356. These are the memre: On whether Adam was created mortal or immortal, 21 On Adam`s Expulsion from Paradise, 22 On Crucifixion, 23 On Resurrecẗ ‫ܘ‬ ̈ ‫ܨ ܬ ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܢ‬ ‫ܐ‬ . ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܗ܆ ܘ‬ ‫ܟ‬ ‫ܩ ܘ‬ ‫ ܐ‬. ‫ܕ ܒ‬ ‫ܕܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̈ . ‫ܕ‬ . ̈ ‫̈ ܘܗܝ‬ ‫ ܘ‬.‫̈ ܘܗܝ ܘ ܨ ܘܗܝ‬ ‫ܝ‬ ̈ ‫ܐ ܀‬ ‫ܘܕ ܘܢ‬ ‫ܬ ܐ‬ ‫̱ܗܝ‬ ‫ ܘܕ‬. ̈ ‫ܕܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ (B 178v). For both writers it was indeed a great challenge to copy Mardin MS 356. For a critical edition, their interpretation could help us to read the passages better that have been further damaged since then. 20 See Vööbus, A. “Die Entdeckung von Überresten der altsyrischen Apostelgeschichte,” Oriens Christianus 64 (1980): 32–5. 21 A 46v, B 62r–62v, C 173–75. 22 A 13r, 21v, 34r, 35v; B 12r, 24v–25r, 43r, 45v; C 38, 72, 121, 129 . 23 Jacob of Serugh’s verse-homily On Crucifixion ( ‫ ܕ‬: ‫ܬ‬ ‫ )ܙ‬is structured according to the liturgy of the holy week and it is very long. It is edited under number 53 in Bedjan, Paul. Homiliae selecae Mar Jacobi Sarugensis, 2, 447–610. Paris, 1906. The citations found by John of Dara are equivalent to Bedjan’s text, pages 588 onwards that is the text For the Vigil of Holy Saturday ( ‫ܕ‬ ‫ )ܕ‬and For the Vigil of the Easter ‫ܗ‬

‫ܗ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܗ‬

170

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

ion, 24 On Ascension, 25 On Pentecost and the Distribution of Tongues 26 and On Adai and Abgar. 27 Referring to Jacob of Serugh, John of Dara does not use the name Serugh at all, instead he speaks of Jacob of Batnan ( ‫ܒ ܕ‬ ), or sometimes just of Jacob (‫ܒ‬ ). In addition John uses respectfully some titles for Jacob, as he calls him Mor (‫) ܝ‬, blessed one ( ), teacher ( ) and saint ( ). The following table contains the way John of Dara refers to Jacob of Serugh: Manuscripts A

B

C

13r

12r

38

John of Dara’s references to Jacob of Serugh ‫ܒ ܕ‬ [‫ܘ]ܐܦ‬ [‫]ܐܕܡ‬ ‫ܕ‬ Also Jacob of Batnan said in the memro On Adam’s Expulsion from Paradise … ‫ܗ ܕ‬

‫ܕ‬

Sunday ( ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫)ܕ‬. The references to Jacob of Serugh’s verse-homilies are given in square brackets, whereas the other references refer to John of Dara’s manuscripts: A 28r–28v, 35v, 64r–64v, 65r–65v, 66v–67r, 78r; B 35r, 45v, 86r, 87v, 90r, 105r; C 100, 129, 241, 243, 250, 292 [Bedjan II, 588, 592, 595, 600, 603–4]. 24 A 63, 68v, 71r, 80v; B 86r, 92r–92v, 95v, 109v; C 239, 256, 265, 304 [Bedjan II, 600 ff.] 25 A 35v–36r; B 46r; C 129. 26 A 93v; B 129r; C 357 [Bedjan II, 677]. 27 A 93v; B 129v; C 357. Jacob’s memro On Addai the Apostle and Abgar the King of Edessa ( ‫ܘܐ‬ ‫ܐܕܝ‬ ) came to us in Vatican’s manuscript 117 under memro Nr. 108, fol. 268r–270v. It seems that the end of it is missing. The text of folio 271r–271v gives the end of the ̇ memro On the Camel and needle’s eye ( ‫ܢ ܕܕ ̣ ܗܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̣ ‫ܗܝ ܕܐ‬ ̇ ). There is ̇ ‫ܬ ܕܐ‬ ‫ܐܘ‬ ‫ܘܪ ܕ‬ ‫ܕ ܠ‬ ܳܳ a translation of a part of it by Messo, Johny. “The Toponym ‘Aramea’ [‫]ܐܪܡ‬ in Two Early Syriac Writers (Part I),” Mardutho d-Suryoye 19:59 (Oct.-Dec. 2007): 25–7. John of Dara quotes only a few couplets from this memro:

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

Manuscripts A

B

C

21v

24v

72– 73

171

John of Dara’s references to Jacob of Serugh ‫ܗ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܒ ܕ‬ ‫ܕܐܕܡ‬ ̇ ‫̇ܗܝ ܕ‬ ̣ ‫ ܘܐ‬... .‫ܘܢ‬ Jacob of Batnan, however, said in the memro On Adam’s Expulsion from Paradise that Satan spoke through the Serpent. We agree with this. He said… And he said against them indeed ... ‫ ܕ‬. ̣‫ܐ‬ ̣‫ ܐ‬. ‫ܘ‬

‫ܕ‬

28r

35r

100

‫ܒ ܕ‬ ‫ܘܗܕ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܐ‬ . ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕܙ‬ ̣ This teaches Jacob of Batnan in the memro On Crucifixion. He said so indeed …

34r

43r

121

̇‫ܐ‬ And Jacob of Batnan says …

35v

45v

129

[‫ܘ ̇ ܕ]ܐ‬ ̇‫ܐ‬ And Jacob witnesses this in the memro On Crucifixion as he says …

35v

46r

129

‫̣ܗܘ ̇ܗܘ‬ ‫ܗܝ܆‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܘܐܢ‬ ̣ ‫ܕܐ ̣ ܬܘܒ‬ ‫܆ ܘܐ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘ‬ . ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕܙ‬ ‫ܒ‬ ̣ . ‫̇ܗܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̣ ̈ ̈ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ̣ ̇‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܒ‬ ‫ܘ‬ And if it is not like this, then the memro On the Cherub and Robber and what Jacob said again in the memro On Crucifixion is in vain. [Jacob] demonstrates that it was one of the cherubs who talked to the robber. It was one of the angelic hosts, said the [Holy] Scripture said truly. And Jacob says in the memro On Accession …

‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܕܙ‬

‫ܒ‬

‫ܒ ܕ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫̇ܕ‬

172

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

Manuscripts

John of Dara’s references to Jacob of Serugh

A

B

C

46v

62r

173

46v– 47r

62v

175

63v

86r

239

̣‫ܕ ܐ‬ . ‫ܗܪ ܕܕ‬ Jacob of Badnan, however, said that the shining light was seen by the [grave/tomb’s] keepers …

64r

87r

241

.... . ̇ ‫ܬ ܐ‬ ‫ܕܙ‬ ‫ܒ ܕ‬ Jacob, however, says in the memro On Crucifixion …

64v

87r

242

‫ܒ‬ ‫ܝ‬ ‫ ܐ‬... ̣ ‫ܕܐ‬ And we say, … as Mor Jacob said …

65r

87v

243

: ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕܙ‬ ‫ܒ ̄ ܪ‬ ‫ܕ‬ Jacob in the great memro On Crucifixion ….

66v

90r

250

: ‫ܗܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܒ ̄ ܕܙ‬ ‫ܕ‬ Jacob in the memro On Crucifixion, first part …

68v

92r

256

‫ܒ‬

‫̇ܗܝ ܕܐܢ‬ ‫̇ܗܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܒ ܕ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ ܐܬ ܝ ܐܕܡ ܐܘ‬ Jacob, however, [says] in the memro On whether Adam was created mortal or immortal … ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫̇ ܕ‬ ‫ܗ ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬ As the teachers witness these said above … ‫ܘܢ‬

‫܆ ܕܐܬ ܝ‬

‫ܒ ܕ‬

̇ ‫ܘܐ‬

̇‫ܐ‬

Jacob says indeed ... 71r

95v

265

̇‫ܐ‬ But Jacob of Batnan says …

78r

105r

292

‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕܙ‬ ‫ܒ ܬܘܒ‬ ‫ܘ‬ And Jacob demonstrates again in the memro On Crucifixion …

‫ܒ ܕ‬

‫ܡ‬

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

Manuscripts

173

John of Dara’s references to Jacob of Serugh

A

B

C

81r

109v

303

‫ܐ‬ ‫ܘܐ‬ As Gregorios of Nyssa and Mor Jacob and Ephrem …

93v

129r– 129v

357

‫̇ ܕ ܘ‬ ̈ ‫ ܘܬܘܒ‬... ̇ ‫ܐ‬ And the blessed Jacob witnesses these while he says in the memro On Distribution of Tongues … And again [he says] …

93v

129v

357

‫ܒ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܐܕܝ‬

‫ ܘ ܝ‬.

‫ܪ ܣ ܕ‬

‫ܒ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܒ‬

‫ܝ‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘܐ‬ ̣‫ ܐ‬. Mor Jacob demonstrates this in the memro On Abgar and Addai. He said indeed …

It is worth mentioning that before quoting from Jacob, John often uses the verb “to say”, which appears in both forms, as a perfect ( ̣ ‫ )ܐ‬and participle ( ̇ ‫)ܐ‬. Occasionally, Jacob does not use a verb at all, he just mentions the author Jacob before he cites the text. It becomes obvious from the context that John not just agree with Jacob, but rather he presents him as an authority who confirms his own theological thought. However, when he wants to highlight Jacob’s teaching, he uses the verbs “to demonstrate” ( ), “to witness” (‫ ) ̇ ܕ‬and “to teach” ( ̇ ). All three verbs appear as participles implying the continuous importance of Jacob’s teaching. Further, John distinguishes Jacob’s authority with the particles ‫ܕ‬, , ‫ܐܦ‬. When he quotes from Jacob in order to approve what he, have said or other authors he uses the particle ‫ܐܦ‬. In turn, when he wants to contradict other authors, John introduces Jacob with the particle ‫ܕ‬, sometimes follows as an indication that what Jacob teaches is at the same time of more value than some of the other authors. Generally, with the particle John emphasises Jacob’s authority and the importance of understanding the topics dealt with correctly.

174

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

3.1. Homily on whether Adam was created mortal or immortal The text of Jacob’s verse-homily On whether Adam was created mortal or immortal given below is based on manuscript Mardin 137, number 281, folio 239v–243r, and it is compared to Alwan’s edition. Using manuscript Mardin 137 [= E] and Sharfeh 312, Alwan edited this verse-homily in 1989. In addition he used also two other fragments 28 and an Arabic translation of it. 29 Vööbus already identified this verse-homily in these manuscripts and part of it in some fragments. 30 Jacob of Serugh’s verse-homily contains 308 lines. John of Dara quotes 33 lines 31 of them in memro three, chapter three that is entitled “[Objection] of [the followers of] Julian [of Halicarnassus] and their excess/intemperance” ( ‫ܘ‬ ‫)ܕ‬. 32 Julian of Halicarnassus, a contemporary of Severios of Antioch, taught that Christ’s body became incorruptible and immortal due to the union with the Word of God. 33 Memro three includes further heresies, like Simeonism, Manicheism, Nestorianism, and some theories on the Tree of Life. John of Dara rejects all theories that blame the Creator for the fall of man and which see evil in the nature of Alwan, 18–30; French translation, 17–32. In his introduction Alwan describes the manuscripts he used, see pages xviii–xlvii. As fragments Alwan used also MS British Library, Add 14532 and Add. 12155. 29 For the description of the Arabic translation Alwan, CSCO, 508; S.Syr., 214. Lovanii, 1989, ix–xviii. 30 A. Vööbus already identified this verse-homily in these manuscripts. See Vööbus, A. Handschriftliche Überlieferung der Memre-Dichtung des Ja`qob von Serug, II, 23. CSCO, 345; Subsidia, 40, Louvain, 1973; IV, 31, CSCO, 422; Subsidia, 61, Louvain, 1980. 31 Jacob of Serugh’s verse-homily On whether Adam was created mortal or ̄ ‫ܕ‬ immortal (‫ܬ ܐܬ ܝ ܐܕܡ‬ ‫ ܕܐܢ‬: ‫ܒ‬ ‫ܝ‬ ‫ ܕ‬: ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ )ܐܘ‬is found under Memro 281 in MS Mardin 137, folio 239v– 243r. John of Dara refers to this Memro in A 46v, B 62r–62v, C 173–75 [E 239v–243r]. 32 Chapter three: ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗ‬: ‫ܘܢ ܬ‬ . 33 See Grillmeier, Alois, and Theresia Hainthaler. Christ in Christian Tradition: From the Council of Chalcedon (451) to Gregory the Great (590–604), II, 25–6. 1995. 28

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

175

created beings, such as in the Tree of Life, in the Serpent or even in God’s commandment. According to John, Julian’s theory on the nature of the created human beings is that Adam’s body was created immortal as his soul. Thus, according to Julian the immortality of man was not a divine gift by mercy, but it was naturally real, and man would have remained “uncorrupted” ( ), passionless/without suffering ( ) and immortal ( ‫ܬ‬ ), if he had not trespassed against the divine ‫ ) ܬ ܕ‬is commandment ( ). 34 Death of the soul ( understood as separation of man from his Creator by sin, and bodily death ( ‫ ) ܬ ܕ‬is the separation of man from natural ̈ life ( ‫ܕ‬ ‫) ܪ‬. Rejecting Julian’s theory, John of Dara emphasises the mortality of the human physical nature according to its creation, and its immortality as a divine gift according to divine grace. If Adam was physically immortal he would have remained immortal even after he sinned, like Satan. The soul was immortal and remained immortal even after death, but the body was mortal and was kept immortal by grace only until Adam became disobedient. In this context, John refers briefly to Cyril of Alexandria, Dionysius Areopagita and Athanasius, but the long reference to Jacob’s memro “On whether Adam was created mortal or immortal” is noticeable. John writes: 35 ‫̇ܗܝ ܕܐܢ ̇ ܬ ܐܬ ܝ ܐܕܡ‬ ‫̇ܗܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܒܕ‬ ̇ : ‫̇ ܬ‬ ‫ܐܘ‬ 36 .‫̇ ܕܗ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܕ ܸܘ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ ܐܢ‬39– ̣ ܿ 37 ܿ ̇ ‫ܕ ܼ ܬ‬ . ̣‫ܘ ܐ‬ 40 ̣ ‫ܼܪ‬

See Memro three, the beginning of chapter three. The numbers of the right side refer to the lines of Jacob’s memro which are identical with Alwan’s edition. The footnotes contain the variations and differences found between John of Dara’s text (A, B, C), Jacob of Serugh text (E) and Alwan’s edition. A 46v, B 62r, C 173. See Alwan, memro two, 18ff. 36 ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܐܢ‬: BC missing. 37 ‫ܕ ܬ‬: Alwan ‫ܕ ܬܗ‬. 34 35

‫‪AHO SHEMUNKASHO‬‬ ‫ܘܐܢ ܿ ܼ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܐܢ ̇‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘܐܢ‬ ‫̇‬

‫–‪41‬‬ ‫‪42‬‬ ‫–‪43‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫–‪45‬‬ ‫‪46‬‬ ‫–‪ 47‬ܕܗ‬ ‫‪ 48‬ܘ‬ ‫–‪49‬‬ ‫̣‬ ‫‪ 50‬ܘ‬ ‫–‪55‬‬ ‫‪56‬‬ ‫–‪131‬‬ ‫‪132‬‬ ‫–‪141‬‬ ‫‪142‬‬ ‫–‪157‬‬ ‫‪158‬‬

‫‪43‬‬

‫ܵ‬ ‫ܵ ݀‪.‬‬ ‫ܝ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫‪39‬‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܵ‬ ‫ܿ‬ ‫ܘܙ ܝ ܼ ܬ‬ ‫ܬ ‪.‬‬ ‫̣‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܠ ̣ ܐ̣ ‪.‬‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܬ ̣‬ ‫ܗܘܬ ̇ܗܝ ܕܐܬ ܿ‬ ‫‪݀ ̣ 40‬‬ ‫̣ܘ ‪.‬‬ ‫̣‬ ‫ܼ‬ ‫‪41‬‬ ‫ܵ‬ ‫ܿ ܼ ܬܗ‬ ‫ܐܬ ܿ ܼ ݀‪.‬‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܠ ̣ ܐ̣ ‪.‬‬ ‫ܗܘ ܘ‬ ‫ܬ ̣‬ ‫‪42‬‬ ‫̇‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܬ ܘ‬ ‫ܬ ‪.‬‬ ‫ܼܿ ܸ ‪.‬‬ ‫ܘܡ ܿ ܼ‬ ‫ܸ‬ ‫ܿ‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕܬ‬ ‫ܘܪ‬ ‫ܡ‪.‬‬ ‫̣ ̣‬ ‫ܼ‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫ܘ ܐ ܐܕܡ ܘ ܗܕ‬ ‫̣‬ ‫‪38‬‬

‫ܵ‬ ‫̣‬

‫‪176‬‬

‫̣ܪ ‪.‬‬

‫̣ ܘ‪.‬‬

‫‪45‬‬

‫ܬ‬ ‫ܡ ܕܐ ̣ ܘܗܝ‬ ‫ܸ ܼܿ ܒ‬ ‫ܼܿ ܬ‬ ‫‪47‬‬ ‫̇‬ ‫̣ ܗ ܐܢ ܬܬ ܿ ܼ ܼܿ‬ ‫ܗܘ‪.‬‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫̣‬ ‫̇‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܗܘ ‪.‬‬ ‫ܬ ܐܬܪ‬ ‫ܬ ܘ‬ ‫ܕܐܦ‬ ‫̣‬ ‫‪48‬‬ ‫ܐܬ ܼܿ‬ ‫݀‬ ‫̣ ܹ ܪܘܬܗ‬ ‫̣ ‪.‬‬ ‫̈‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫ܐ ܨ‬ ‫ܬ ܘ‬ ‫̣‬ ‫ܕܗܘ ̣‬ ‫‪49‬‬ ‫ܿ‬ ‫ܗܘ‪.‬‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫̣‬ ‫ܕ ܼ ܬܗ ܕ ̣ ܕ ̣‬ ‫ܐ̣‬ ‫‪51‬‬ ‫‪50‬‬ ‫ܬܘܒ ܐܬܪ ܕ ̈‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬ ‫̇ܗܝ‪.‬‬ ‫̣‬ ‫̣‬ ‫̣‬ ‫ܘܐ ̣‬ ‫ܕ ܸ‬ ‫̣‬

‫ܘ‬ ‫̇‬

‫̇‬

‫‪46‬‬

‫‪.‬‬

‫‪: Alwan, E‬‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫‪.‬ܐܕܡ ‪B add‬‬ ‫‪40‬‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫‪: Alwan, E‬‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫ܬܗ ‪41‬‬ ‫ܬ ‪: Alwan‬‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫̇‬ ‫‪: Alwan, E‬ܕܗ ܵ‬ ‫ܬ ‪42‬‬ ‫̇ ܬ ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫‪ .‬ܬ ܗܘ‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪ ; Alwan, E .‬ܘ ‪: B‬ܘ‬ ‫ܘ ‪44‬‬ ‫‪ .‬ܘ ‪: Alwan‬‬ ‫‪45‬‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ ‪:E‬‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫‪. In the main text‬‬ ‫‪Alwan has got the same as John of Dara.‬‬ ‫̇‬ ‫‪46‬‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܒ‬ ‫‪: Alwan, E‬‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫‪ ̣.‬ܒ‬ ‫̣‬ ‫‪47‬‬ ‫‪: Alwan, E‬ܬܬ‬ ‫‪.‬ܬܬ‬ ‫ܐܦ ܪܘܬ ‪: Alwan, E‬ܐܬ ܼܿ‬ ‫݀‬ ‫ܪܘܬܗ ‪48‬‬ ‫‪.‬ܐܬ‬ ‫̣ ܹ‬ ‫ܬܗ ‪49‬‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܬ ‪: Alwan, E‬‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫‪50‬‬ ‫‪ ; Alwan, E‬ܘܐ ܗܘ ‪: A‬ܘܐ ܗܘ‬ ‫‪.‬ܘܐ ܗܘ‬ ‫‪ : Alwan, E ̈ .‬ܕ ̈‬ ‫‪51‬‬ ‫‪38‬‬ ‫‪39‬‬

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

177

‫̇ ܬ ܆‬ ‫ܗܘ ܘܨ ̣ ܕ ̣ ܘ‬ ̣ ̣‫ܐ ̣ ܙ‬ ܵ ܿ 52 ݀ ̣ ‫ܗܘܬ‬ ̣ ‫ܕ‬ ܼ ܿ 54 53 ܿ ܿ . ‫̣ ܬܗ ̣ ܥ ܨ ܼ ܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̣ ‫ܼܘܬ‬ ܼ ݀ ̣ ‫ܪܘܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ . ̣ ‫ ̣ ܐ‬55 ‫ܪ‬ ܵ ̄ ‫ܙܵ ܝ‬ ̇ ̇ . ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܿ ܼ ܬ‬ ̣ ‫ܬ‬ ̣ ̣ ‫ܘ ܕܐ‬ ܶ 57 56 ‫̇ ܸ ݀ ̈ ܘܪ ܿ ܼ ݀ ܿ ܼ ܬ ܆‬ ‫̣ ̈ܘܗܝ‬ ܵ .‫ܿ ܼ ܒ‬ ‫ܕܨ‬ ‫ܐܬܪ ܕ‬ ‫ܘ ̣ܒ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܗ‬ . ‫ܪ‬ ̣ ‫ܐ‬ ̣ 58 . ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܐ ̣ ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ‫ܕ‬ . ‫̈ ܬ‬ ‫̇ܬ ܐ‬ ‫ܬܘܒ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ̣ ̣ ‫ܝ‬ ̣ ‫ܘܐ‬ ̇‫ܕ‬ . ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫̇ ܢ ܪ ܗܘ‬ ̣ ̣ ̣ . ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ ܘ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ̣ ̣ ‫܀‬ ‫ܬܬ‬ ‫ܪܘܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ̣ ‫̣ܒ‬

159– 160 161

.̇

197– 198 279– 280 281– 282 283– 284 285– 286

“Jacob [says], however, in the memro that is

On whether Adam was created mortal or immortal: 59

If Adam was supposed to be made mortal by his Maker, then why did He put the cause of death in that tree?

39– 40

And if he was created immortal by nature first, then how did he die, and death defeat the immortal one.

41– 42

If he was going to die although he had not eaten from the tree, then it was too much, that he has been commanded by his Creator.

43– 44

‫ܕ‬: B ‫ܕ‬. ‫ܘܬ‬: Alwan, E ̣ ‫ܘܕ‬. 54 ‫ ܥ‬: Alwan, E ‫ ܥ‬. ̣ 55 ‫ ܥ‬: Alwan, E ‫ ܥ‬. ̣ 56 ‫ ܪ‬: Alwan, A ‫ ܪ‬. ܿ 57 ‫݀ ܿ ܬ‬ ܼ ‫ ܸ ݀ ̈ ܘܪ‬: E ‫ܬ‬ ܼ ‫ܕ ܬ‬ ‫̈ ܘ‬. 58 ‫ܕ‬ ; Alwan, E ‫ ̇ ܕ‬. ̣ ‫ܐ‬: A ‫ܕ‬ ̇ 59 A 46v, B 59–60, C 173: ‫ܗܝ ܕܐܢ‬ ̇ ̇ ̇ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ ܐܬ ܝ ܐܕܡ ܐܘ‬ . 52 53

‫ܘ‬

̈

‫̇ܗܘ ܕ‬

; Alwan

‫ܒ ܕ‬

178

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

And if the cause of death was not created in his nature, he would not die, even though he ate from the tree,

45– 46

For, behold, Satan is immortal and cannot die. And although he never keeps the commandment, he is alive and 00000misleads [people].

47– 48

Animals and creatures are an object to death every day, and they die, even though they never trespass the commandment as 00000Adam did.

49– 50

That what immortal is from beginning cannot be touched by death, and even so he sins.

55– 56

If you are comforted at 60 his [Adam’s]formation, you will learn, that he was formed mortal, as well as immortal.

131– 132

With his freedom a rational harbour was granted to him, to choose [between] death and life by his free will.

141– 142

Thus, the cause of his death was in him, since he is from dust, and likewise he had the option for life, for his soul is a spirit.

157– 158

If he had become victorious and chosen to become immortal, the soul would have pulled the body to live with it.

159– 160

The weak one lost and with his weakness he inclined to death.

161

And after [his] free choice picked the fruit from the tree, death defeated him, who would not die if he had kept [the 00000commandment].

197– 198

He [the Creator] put the reason/cause of life and the love of death 00000in his hand, and granted him the option to draw near towards what he wishes.

279– 280

If He had made him immortal at the beginning, he would be lost after having trespassed against the commandment.

281– 282

60

E

‫ܬܬ‬, inquire into.

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

179

And if somehow He had created him mortal, such as animals, what would he benefit from keeping the commandment?

283– 284

Therefore, it is beautiful/great that he became mortal and 00000immortal, and granted the power of free will upon both of them.”

285– 286

After the long opening speech (line 1–20), Jacob identifies the theme of the memro with the words: Grant me to speak on whether You created Adam mortal or truly immortal as the highests (line 21–22). He clarifies his topic pointing out that his approach is not prying into the divine nature of the Creator, but asking about the nature of the created Adam in his primordial state (23–38). The rest of the memro is basically the answer to the two causal questions (39–42) and the explanation of the following two causal sentences (43–46) expressed by Jacob that are found at the beginning of the citation identified by John of Dara. The questions refer to the relation of the divine commandments to the mortality and/or immortality of man. The citation by John also includes the next two couplets (47– 50) and lines 55–56, which provide an indirect answer to the questions. In line 47, Jacob begins with the acclamation “behold” ( ‫ )ܗ‬and refers in the following to creation, emphasising that the nature of created beings does not change. The angels, such as Gabriel, do not become mortal, even if they had trespassed against the commandments of the Lord. Satan, too, does not become mortal, even though he trespasses frequently against the Creator. In turn all sorts of animals die even though they do not have any commandment to disobey. In 57–76 Jacob explores this argument further, but John of Dara leaves it out. From line 77 onwards Jacob focuses on human nature, which differs from all other created beings, which are either mortal or immortal. John leaves out Jacob’s long introduction and dialogue with the audience, as he places the listeners in position of judges to decide about truth, in the same way as Jacob emphasises the role of man’s free will that has the power, as its Creator, to decide about its mortality and immortality. John focuses selectively on the important passages, and leaves out Jacob’s long explanations, metaphors and allusions to nature. From the couplets 131/2, 141/2, 157/8, 159/60 and line 161, which John quotes, it becomes clear that man was created mortal, as well as immortal: mortal

180

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

because of his bodily formation out of the earth, and immortal due to his spiritual soul. Either of them had the power to pull the other to its side. Man’s free will was there to make the decision. Next John quotes the couplet where Jacob explicitly expresses the decision taken by man’s free will with the fact that man’s mortality became victorious over his immortality (197/8). And finally, John quotes from the end four couplets where Jacob summarises his point (279–286) that Adam was created mortal ( ‫) ܬ‬, as well as immortal ( ‫ܬ‬ ). Mortality ( ‫ܘܬ‬ ) and everlasting life ( ‫ ) ܬ‬were part of the human being and were attributed to the free will of man ( ‫)ܨ‬. 61 Thus, Jacob compares the nature of created beings, such as the angles and animals, with the nature of human body to show that Adam was created both mortal as well as immortal. Both mortality as well as immortality were given as a choice to human free will. The reason given to the commandment is found in this previous intermediate state of Adam, which is described as a battle in which Adam would become victorious or would be defeated according to his free will. In the following, John cites from other authors and focuses on the immortality of the body by grace ( ‫ܬ‬ ), by deeds ( ‫ܬ‬ ), and by divine power ( ‫ܐ‬ ). At the end of chapter three, John quotes from Cyril of Alexandrian mentioning Plato and his philosophical theory on the immortality of sun, moon and stars that are supposed to possess a soul. Following Cyril, John rejects such teaching. 62 The text quoted by John illustrates mainly minor differences to Jacob text. John quoted carefully and selected systematically the stances he needed for his account. The differences found in the texts are not necessarily caused by John. They could be partly due to the text he used, or due to the copyists after him. Following table lists the variations:

61 62

MS Mardin 137 (= E), Memro 81, fol. 242v. A 48r, B 64r–64v, C 179–80.

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

Line Pa‘el—’apa‘el

282

Participle active— imperfect

56

Participle passive— imperfect

56

Sequence of words

55

John of Dara

Adverb

41

Vocabularies

50

‫̇ ܕ‬

‫ܒ‬

‫ܒ‬

‫ܬ‬

̈ ݀ ܸ ܿ ‫ܘܪ ܿ ܼ ݀ ܼ ܬ‬

‫ܘ‬

131

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܬ‬ (E) ‫ܬ‬ ‫( ܪ‬Alwan) ̈ ‫ܘ‬ ‫( ܬ‬E) ̈ ‫ܘ‬ ‫( ܕ ܬ‬Alwan) (Alwan)

‫ܘ‬ ‫ܬܬ‬

161

‫ܬܬ‬

‫ܥ‬

161

‫ܥ‬ ‫ܬ‬

197 Prepositions

Jacob of Serugh

‫ܐ ܕ‬ ̇

‫ܪ‬

279

181

‫ܕ‬ (Alwan)

‫ܪ‬

‫ܪ‬

141

‫ܐܦ‬

160 Suffix ending

Prefix

40

‫ܬ‬

‫ܬܗ‬

(Alwan)

45

‫ܬܗ‬

‫ܬ‬

(Alwan)

141

‫ܪܘܬܗ‬

157

‫ܬܗ‬

‫ܕ‬

‫ܬ‬ ̈‫ܕ‬

160 Position of ‫ܕ‬

‫ܪܘܬ‬

ܵ

47 ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܬ‬

̇

‫ܬ‬

‫ܕܗ‬ ̇

̈ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܗ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ‬

182

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

Line ‫—ܘ‬copula

50

Gender

44

John of Dara

Jacob of Serugh ‫ܘ‬

‫ܬ‬

While some of the varieties are due to orthographical variations, or differences in sequence of words, other differences occur in prepositions, vocabulary, prefixes or suffixes. It is also noticeable that four verbs appear in different forms and some nouns in different status. Despite these variations, John of Dara cites literarily from Jacob of Serugh. His citations are chosen very carefully. Therefore, John must have had a copy of this versehomily of Jacob. 3.2. Homily on Adam’s expulsion from Paradise Vööbus identified Jacob’s verse-homily On Adam`s Expulsion from Paradise in the manuscripts London British Library Add. 17215 and Add 12169, Sharfeh Patr. 312, Mardin Syrian-orth. Patr. 137 and Dair Za‘faran (A). 63 Except the first fragments, Alwan made use of all these manuscripts in his edition. 64 In comparison to Alwan’s edition, I followed MS Mardin 137 [E] 65. John of Dara refers to this verse-homily in his treatises. 66 Jacob’s verse-homily On Adam’s expulsion from Paradise deals with the cause of Adam’s departure from Paradise. This question Vööbus, A. Handschriftliche Überlieferung der Memre-Dichtung des Ja`qob von Serug, III, 72, 155–57, CSCO, 421; Subsidia, 60, Louvain, 1980; II, 23; IV, 33. 64 Alwan, Jacques de Saroug, xviii, 31–77; translation 33–86. 65 This verse-homily is memro 282 in MS Mardin 137 (= E), folio 243r– 256v. The incipit is: ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐܕܡ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ . Similar incipit can be found by Assemanus, J.S. Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, I, Rome, 1719, homily number 228 ( ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܢ ܐܕܡ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ ), p. 305–40; see Brock, S.P. “The published verse Homilies of Isaac of Antioch, Jacob of Serugh, and Narsai: Index of Incipits,” JSS 32,2 (Autumn 1987): 296. 66 John of Dara refers to this memro in A 13r, 21v, 34r; B 12r, 24v–25r, 43r; C 38, 72, 121 [E 245r, 255v–256r, 253v–254r]. 63

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

183

leads also to the cause of evil. Jacob dismisses the theory of relating fault to the Creator, or to the nature of the creation. He attributes the cause of expulsion to man’s free will. Neither the nature of spiritual beings, like those of the angel, nor the created nature of human beings is the reason for sin and evil. From the angel he refers to Satan, whose nature is the same as all the other angels; however, he sinned due to his free will. Concerning human beings, Jacob refers to Judas Iscariot who was one of the twelve disciples, but betrayed Jesus aching out of his free will. Therefore, neither the Creator nor the creation can be blamed. 67 In this context Jacob focuses on Adam’s nature. Jacob dismisses the idea that Adam was a child and not mature enough to know what he was doing. Adam was not a child 68, because he desired to become God and he was actively involved in achieving it. Giving names to the animals is one proof of Adam’s knowledge and maturity. 69 Thus, it was Adam’s fault, but he was influenced by Satan. Satan fell and caused Adam to fall with him. As Adam fell deeply, he was not able to get up by himself, except through divine mercy. God’s love created Adam, not to be expelled out of Paradise, but to inherit the heavenly kingdom by his victory. 70 Jacob emphasises the intermediate state of mortality and immortality, the possibility of sinning and not sinning. As the nature of Satan and Adam were not evil, neither the nature of the Serpent, nor of the trees in Paradise, including their fruits, were bad. Creation is not the reason and source of Adam’s spiritual and natural death. In his battle against humanity, however, Satan used the Serpent, as well as the Tree of Knowledge, as a tool to mislead mankind. 71

E 243v–244v. E 244v (stances 107–8): ‫ܐ ̈ ܆‬ ‫ܐܕܡ ܬ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬. ̣ ‫ܘܬܗ‬ 69 E 244v (stances 117–8): ‫ܗܘܬ ܐ‬ ̈ ̈‫ܕܐܬܝ ܨ ܘܗܝ‬ ̈ ‫̈ܬ‬ ‫ܬܘܒ܆ ̣ ܗܘ‬. 70 E 245r (stances 169–70): ‫ܗܘ ܕ ܩ‬ ‫ܕ ̣ ܠ ̣ ܘ ̇ ܬ ܐܦ‬ ‫܆ ܐ‬ ‫ ܕ‬. 71 E 246r–247v. 67 68

‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܐܢ‬ ‫ܗ‬

‫ܐܢ‬ ‫ܝ ܗܘ‬ ̣

184

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

Eve could have won the battle against Satan, but because she liked what she heard and desired to become divine, priest and superior to her husband, she did not question the Serpent and ate the fruit. For Jacob, Mary questioning the angel is evidence that women’s nature is not deprived of wisdom and victory. Eve could easily have become victorious over Satan, because he did not have anymore to say. 72 Then Jacob focuses on the clothing of man’s nakedness with fig leaves and with the garment they later put on. Losing their garment of glory, Adam and Eve felt ashamed and hid themselves. Jacob interprets the sound of God’s footsteps, His question to Adam and His question to Eve, as three opportunities for Adam to become penitent. 73 Presenting man’s free will as the cause of evil, Jacob explains at great length why the Serpent and the earth were cursed, since they did have not free will, and naturally they are good created beings. 74 John of Dara refers twice explicitly to this memro of Jacob of Serugh and quotes from it. In chapter seven of memro two that is On Creation, John cites 32 to 34 lines from this verse-homily, while he talks about the nature of the Serpent. John refuses the theory that God granted the gift of language and knowledge ( ‫ܘ‬ ) to the Serpent. John points out that Satan talked through the Serpent, using the following citation from Jacob: 75 ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗ ܕܐܕܡ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ܼܿ ‫ܒ ܕ ܕ‬ ܿ ̇ ‫ ̇ܗܝ ܕ‬. . ‫ܕ‬. ̣ ‫ܐ‬ ̣ ‫ܐ‬. ‫ܘ‬ ܼ ‫܆‬ .‫ܬܗ‬

ܵ ‫ܿܗ‬ ܼ

76

ܼܿ

77

̣

ܿ ܼܿ

ܼ

‫ܗܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ̣ ̣

̈

839– ‫ܕܗܘ‬ 840 ̣

E 247v–49v E 250v–253r. 74 E 253r–254r. 75 A 21v; B 24v–25r; C 72; [E 253v–254r, page 22–23 of the memro]. 76 : Alwan . 77 :A . 72 73

‫‪185‬‬ ‫–‪841‬‬ ‫‪842‬‬ ‫–‪843‬‬ ‫‪844‬‬

‫‪JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE‬‬ ‫‪78‬‬ ‫̣ ̇ ̇ܗܘ‬ ‫ܗ ܐܦ ܐܬܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫̣ܗܘ ܼܿ‬ ‫̇ܐ ܐ‬ ‫‪81‬‬ ‫ܸ ܛ ̣ܗܘ‬

‫ܘܐ ̣‬ ‫–‪845‬‬ ‫‪846‬‬

‫ܪ‬ ‫ܘ ̣ܬ‬

‫‪79‬‬

‫̣ ܨ‬

‫̄ܗܘ‬

‫ܿ‬ ‫ܼ‬

‫‪82‬‬

‫ܕ‬

‫܆‬ ‫ܬ ‪.‬‬ ‫̣ܗܘ ‪80‬܆‬ ‫܀‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܐ‬

‫ܘܢ‬ ‫̣‬ ‫ܪ‬

‫ܕ̣‬ ‫̣‬

‫ܕ‬ ‫̣‬

‫‪83‬‬

‫ܕ‬

‫‪ 84‬ܕܪ ‪ 85‬ܕܗܝ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܗ ܕ ̣‬

‫̇ܗ ܆‬

‫‪.‬‬

‫̇ܗܝ ܿ ܼ‬

‫‪[These two lines are‬‬ ‫‪missing by John‬‬ ‫]‪of Dara.‬‬

‫–‪ 847‬ܕܐ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫‪848‬‬ ‫̇‬ ‫̇‬ ‫‪[These two lines are‬‬ ‫–‪849‬‬ ‫̣ ܆‬ ‫ܕܗܕ ܕܐܬܬ‬ ‫ܕܗܝ ̇‬ ‫̇‬ ‫]‪missing by JD‬‬ ‫‪850‬‬ ‫ܗܘܬ‪.‬‬ ‫ܬ ̣ܕܙܪܥ ܬ ܕܐ‬ ‫̈‬ ‫ܐܕܡ܆‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ ‫–‪ 851‬ܐ ܕܐܬܬ‬ ‫̣‬ ‫̣ ‪.‬‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫‪̇ 852‬ܗ ܐܬܬ ̣‬ ‫ܪܘܬ ܆‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫̣ ܬ ܐ ̣ ̣ܗܘ‬ ‫–‪853‬‬ ‫̇ ܬ ‪.‬‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫̣ܗܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫‪ 854‬ܘ ܨ‬ ‫ܿ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܆‬ ‫‪̣ 87‬ܗܘ ܐ‬ ‫ܼܬ‬ ‫–‪ 855‬ܐܢ‬ ‫ܕܐܬܬ ̣‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܗܘܬ‬ ‫ܗܝ ܐ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ ‫‪856‬‬ ‫̇‬ ‫–‪857‬‬ ‫̣ܗܘ ܐ ̣ ܆‬ ‫ܐܕܡ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܐ ̣ ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ 858‬ܘ‬ ‫̣‬ ‫̣‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܬ‬

‫ܪ‬

‫‪86‬‬

‫‪.‬‬

‫ܕ܆‬

‫‪ .‬ܕ ‪: Alwan, E‬‬ ‫‪: ABC is missing.‬‬ ‫‪80‬‬ ‫‪: Alwan, E‬ܗܘ‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫‪81‬‬ ‫‪: Alwan, E .‬‬ ‫‪82‬‬ ‫‪ : Alwan, E‬ܕ‬ ‫‪ .‬ܐܦ‬ ‫‪83‬‬ ‫‪: Alwan‬ܕ‬ ‫‪.‬ܕ‬ ‫‪84‬‬ ‫‪ .‬ܐ ‪: Alwan, E‬ܕܐ‬ ‫‪85‬‬ ‫‪.‬ܕܪ ‪: Alwan‬ܕܪ‬ ‫‪86‬‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫‪: Alwan, E‬ܗ ܕ ̣‬ ‫‪87 B add‬‬ ‫‪: AE missing.‬ܗܘ‬ ‫‪78‬‬ ‫‪79‬‬

‫‪.‬ܕ‬

‫ܗ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܪ‬

186

AHO SHEMUNKASHO ܿ ܿ ܼ ‫ ܘ‬859– ܼ ‫ ܘ‬860 90 ̇ 861– ܸ‫ܐ‬ ܿ 92 ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܘ‬ 862 ܼ ܿ ܿ . ܼ ܼ ‫ ܬ‬863– . ‫ܪ ܼܿܕ‬ ‫ ܘ‬864 ܿ ‫ܗ‬ 865– ܼ 96 ̇ ‫ܬܘ‬ ‫ܘܗ‬ 866 ̣ ݀ ̣ ݀ ̣ ‫ܪ ܕܐܬ‬ ‫ ̣ ܗܘ‬. 867– ̇ . ‫ܕ ̣ ܗܘ‬ ‫ ܕ ̣ܘ‬868 ݀ ̇ ݀ ‫ܕܡ܆‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ̣ ‫ܕ‬ ̣ ‫ ܬ ̣ ܗ‬869– ̇ ̇‫ܐ‬ . ̣ ‫ܕܗ ܐܦ ܬ‬ ̣ ‫ ܕܬ ̣ ܬ‬870 97 ‫ܪ‬ ‫ ܐ ̣ ܗܘ ܐ‬871– ܼܿ ‫ܕ‬ ̈ . ‫ ܘ ܚ‬99 ‫ܕ‬ ‫ ܼܿܕ‬872 100 ‫̈ ]ܪ‬ [ ‫ܐ ܸ ܆‬ 873– ̇ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܕܗܘ ܕܪ‬ 874

.…………‫܆‬88 ̇ 91

‫ܕܡ܆‬ 93

. ̣

.‫ܬܒ‬ . ܼ

[These four lines are missing by JD.]

‫܆‬98

‫܆‬

̇ ܸ

̇ 101

.

‫ܐܪ‬ ܸ

‫ܕܐܕܡ ܐ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬: B ̇ ‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ ‫ܘ‬. ܿ ܿ ̇ ̄ ̇ .‫ܗܝ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ ܸ ܼ‫ ܘ‬. ܼ ‫ܘ‬: Alwan, E ̇ ̇ ̣‫ܐ‬ ̇ ‫ܬܘܒ‬ ‫܆ ܗ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ (John ̣ ‫ܕ‬ ̣ ‫ܕܐܕܡ ܐ‬ makes one line out of the couplet found by Jacob). 90 ̇ :E‫ ̇ܛ‬. 91 ̣ ‫ܐ‬: B ̣ ‫ ܐ‬. 92 ‫ܗ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬: A is very difficult to read, but it could be ‫ܗ‬ . Alwan has got ‫ܗ‬ too. 93 :E ‫ܗ‬ . ̣ ‫ܐܪ ܗ‬ ܸ ̣ 94 ‫ܕܗ‬ ‫ܕ‬: B ‫ ܕ ܕܗ‬. 95 ‫ܕ‬: B ‫ܕ‬. 96 ̇ ‫ܘܗ‬: E ̇ ‫ ; ܗ‬Alwan ̇ ‫ܬ‬. 97 ‫ ܪ‬: Alwan, E . ̇ : Alwan, E ̇ . 98 99 ‫ܕ‬ : Alwan, E ‫ ̣ ܪ‬. ̇ ܵ ܼܿ ̇ 100 ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܪ‬: Alwan, E ‫ܪ‬ ‫܆‬ ‫ܐ‬. 101 ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬: Alwan, E ‫ܬ ܘ‬ . 88 89

̇

ܿ

‫ܕܐܕܡ ܐ‬ 89 ‫ܗܝ܆‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܐܪ‬ ܸ ‫ܼ ܿܙ ܸ ܗ‬ ‫ܕ‬ 94 ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕܗ‬ ܸ ܸ 95 ‫ܕ‬ ̇ ܼܿ ‫ܕ‬

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE 102

‫܆‬

‫ܬ‬ ‫ܗ‬ ̣ ‫ܗ‬ 103 ‫܆‬ ܸ .105 ‫̣ܗܘ‬

.‫ܦ‬

ܿ ܼ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐܬܬ‬

ܼܿ

187 875– 876 877– 878 879– 880 881– 882 883– 884 885– 886

̇ 104

‫ܗ‬

݀ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܬ‬ . ‫ܐܙܕ‬ ‫ܕܐܪ ܘ‬ ‫ܕ ̣ ܗܘ ܕ‬ ̈ ‫ܿ ̈ ܝ‬ ̈ ̈ ̣ ‫ܗܘܝ܆‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ̣ ܼ ̣ ݀ ݀ ̣ ‫ܘܐܬ‬ . ̣ ‫ܨ‬ ‫̣ ܬܗ‬ ‫ܗܘܬ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ܿ ‫ܼܬܘܗܬ ܬ ̣ ܆‬ ‫ܕ ܪ‬ ‫̣ ܗܘ ܪ‬ ̇ ‫ܕ‬ . ‫ܪܗ‬ ̣ ̣

[These six lines are missing by JD.]

‫܆‬

‫܀‬

‫ܬ ܆‬ ̣‫ܪ ܕ‬

‫ܗܘ‬ ̣

‫̇ܗܘ ܕ‬ ‫ ܐܬܬ‬106 ‫ ܐ ̣ ܗܘ ܘ‬107

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘ‬

Jacob of Badnan, however, said in his verse-homily On Adam’s Expulsion from Paradise, that Satan talked through the Serpent. We agree with this. He said so: The Hebrews interpret this with objections, namely that the Serpent mislead Eve with his cunning;

839– 840

so that Satan did not betray her with his free will, and therefore he [Serpent] was cursed by justice.

841– 842

If there were a fellow-friend with him, while he mislead, the Righteous One would curse him with justice, as He did 00000to the Serpent.

843– 844

102

̇ . 103

‫ܐ‬. 104 105

‫ܬ‬ 106 107

ܸ

ܼܿ

‫ܬ‬ ‫ܐܬܬ‬

: Alwan, E . ‫ܗܘ‬ . ‫ܕ‬: Alwan, E ‫ܘ‬: Alwan, E .

: Alwan, E

‫̇ ܬ‬

‫ܗ‬: Alwan, E : Alwan, E .

̣ ‫ܐܬܬ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܘ‬ ̣ ‫ܗ‬

‫ܕܐ‬

188

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

And he [Jacob] said against them: So now let lie close the mouth of the one who 00000spoke false, and let truth come near to tell its opinion without 00000shame.

[Missing by John of Dara]

845– 846

He, who would think that that was Eve’s error only, is a common fellow of the evil one and his protector.

847– 848

From the fact that the Serpent was cursed, one 00000should learn, that the deception that he planted there belonged 00000to someone else.

849– 850

[Missing by John of Dara]

As the earth was cursed by mercy because of Adam, in the same way the Serpent was cursed in wrath because 00000of the evil one.

851– 852

Earth neither possessed ignorance nor freedom; likewise the Serpent did not have free will, nor deception.

853– 854

If it is because the Serpent has been cursed there, [one 00000would think] he [the Serpent] mislead, then it must had been the earth that ate from the tree.

855– 856

He [God] cursed the earth because Adam acted foolishly, and He cursed the Serpent because of the evil one who 00000deceived.

857– 858

And the curse of the earth is that of Adam, and the curse of the Serpent is that of the evil one. 108

859– 860

When the Lord cursed the earth, He made Adam suffer. And when He threatened the Serpent, He provoked anger 00000in the evil one.

861– 862

John of Dara makes out of one couplet one line. Alwan, E: While all curse of the earth belongs to Adam, so too the curse of the Serpent belongs to the evil one. 108

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

189

He crushed the flute that brings pain upon its player, and the guitar that throws lamentation upon its holder.

863– 864

He tied the horse that stupefied its horseman, and he turned over the ship that caused harm to its sailor.

865– 866

He cursed the furnace in which the deceitful word 00000was fabricated, to increase the pain of the craftsman who blew 00000into it.

867– 868

[Missing by John of Dara]

He broke the bow that bent and gave birth to 00000Adam’s death, to become feeble and fall from its holder, and 00000to make him feel sorry too.

869– 870

He is the one who caused life to [have pity on] the horse, in order to keep his rider alive to insult him.

871– 872

The mount [horse] getting wounded by the bowman, while he did not made mistake, so that he who is riding on will 00000fall in the battle.

873– 874

Although the horse is not liable to a blued feud against the warrior, he shoots against him, so that through his fall he will thrust down his owner.

875– 876

Likewise, when the Serpent was cursed, Satan was insulted through him [Serpent]. 109

877– 878

The [divine] justice shot warlike against the Serpent, for she was swift to the adversary as he became 00000victorious through her.

879– 880

The curses came out in the likeness of the arrows and pierced him [Serpent], and its swiftness fell lame because of his deceit. The mount [horse] was bitten so that perturbation falls upon his rider. He [God] cursed the Serpent to put in Satan alarums.

[Missing by John of Dara]

881– 882 883– 884

Also here John summarises the couplet in one line. Alwan, E: Like this the Serpent was cursed by God, as Satan was insulted by justice. 109

190

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

Cursing the Serpent [means] cursing the one who talked 00000through the Serpent there, and he [Satan] led astray through him [Serpent], and 00000received sentence [of punishment] through him.

885– 886

For Jacob, cursing the Serpent does not prove that Adam’s expulsion was the Serpent’s fault. With various references to natural metaphors and biblical allusions he clarifies this. Following the quotation John presents Jacob’s teaching representative for all church fathers, as he summarises: “In the same way all the blessed teachers of the church say, that Satan spoke through the Serpent”. 110 Thus, John summarises Jacob’s teaching as representative for all church fathers. Without quoting anymore from Jacob in this passage, John continues and emphasises jealousy ( ) as the main reason for Satan causing man to fall, for man was created out of dust in the image and likeness of God. While Satan fell and was expelled, Adam joined the angelic world in Paradise. This is the reasons given for Satan’s jealousy. Without explicitly mentioning this verse-homily, at the end of chapter eight of memro three that is On the Tree of Life, John makes further use of Jacob’s ideas. John paraphrases Jacob’s reasoning and alters it. Jacob’s concern is on the role of women, i.e. Eve who could have acted like Mary and questioned what she was told. The argument should have been between Eve and the Serpent. John transfers the same account and locates it between Adam and Eve, so that Adam should have been wise and questions Eve’s words and deeds. For instance, according to Jacob, Eve could have said to the Serpent: 111 ̇ 471– ‫ܕܐ ̇ ܐ‬ ‫ܐܢ ܗ ܗܝ ܐ‬ ̇ . ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܐ ܘܬ ܕܪ‬ 472 ‫ܐ̣ ܆‬ ‫̄ܡ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܢ‬ 473– ̣‫ܐ‬ .‫ܕܐ ܠ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘܗ‬ ‫ܘܗܘ ܐ‬ 474 ̣ A 21v; B25r; C 72: ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬ 111 E 249r; Alwan, 52. 110

‫ܕ ܬ ܆‬

̈

̈

‫ܘܢ‬

‫ܘ‬

.

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE 471– 472 473– 474

191

If it is so as you say, why has divinity, which you are aware of, not been granted to 00000you? Why have not you eaten from the tree first, and became God, and then reveal it to me 00000to eat too?

John writes that Adam could have said to Eve: 112 ̇ ‫ܙܕܩ‬ ̇ ‫ܕܗ ܐ ܝ ܐ ܝ ܘ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ ܘ‬. ‫ ܐ ܬ‬113 ‫ܗܘ ܝ‬ ̈ ̇ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܐ ܕ‬ . ‫ܕܐ‬ ̣ 115 ‫ܕܗܘ ܝ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ ܘ‬114 .‫ܬ ܕܐ ܝ‬ ̣ ‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ ܘ‬. ‫ܘ ܘ ܐ‬ ‫ܠ‬ ‫ ̣ܗܘ ܙܕܩ ̣ܗܘ ܕ‬. ‫ܐ ܬ‬ ‫̣ܗܘ ܝ‬ ‫ ܐ‬. 117 ‫ ܙܕܩ ̣ܗܘ ܕܬܬܐ ܬܝ‬116 ‫ܐ ܕܐ ܝ‬ . ‫ܐ‬ Behold, you have eaten and did not become God. I should not transgress God’s commandment, for especially I do not see any benefits for you who have already eaten, neither for the Serpent who told you that you will become God. [The Serpent] was supposed to eat first and become God, and then you who ate were supposed to become divine. However, you did not become God. Here one can see how John makes use of material found in Jacob’s verse-homilies. In this context John talks about nonphysical nature, irrational natures and the nature of human beings that all three of them utter praises to God in different ways. John develops Jacob’s theology, and speaks of different stages that human nature can achieve: it can be rational in the likeness of God and praise God by the motion of mind and knowledge, it can be in the likeness of animals and become irrational, but it can also become like the devils, falling into error and evil. According to John, at the beginning Adam was praising God with the words of a A 53r; B 72r; C 200. ̇ :C ‫ܗܘ ܝ‬ ‫ܕܗ ܐ ܝ ܐ ܝ ܘ‬ 114 ‫ܝ‬ ‫ ܬ ܕܐ‬: C ‫ ܬ ܕܐ‬. 115 ‫ ܕܗܘ ܝ‬: C ‫ ܕܗܘ‬. 116 ‫ܝ‬ ‫ ܕܐ‬: C ‫ ܕܐ‬. 117 ‫ܬܝ‬ ‫ ܕܬܬܐ‬: C ‫ ܕܐܬܐ ܬܝ‬. 112 113

‫ܗܘ‬

‫ܘ‬

‫ܐ‬

‫ܐ‬

̇ . ‫ܕܗ‬

192

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

pure mind ( ‫)ܗܘ ܕ‬, not with the words of the human tongue. However, while Satan was driven by jealousy to bring man to fall, man was driven by desire to become God. John concludes his chapter on the Tree of Life pointing out that man’s loss of Paradise is because Adam and Eve desired to become divine and “desired Divinity” ( ‫)ܪܓ ܐ ܘܬ‬. 118 After Jacob comments on Adam’s action and their punishment at great length, he reaches the end of Genesis 3, that is the biblical passage where God sent Adam and Eve forth from Paradise (Gen 3:20–24). Jacob found the title of his memro from this biblical passage, and ends with it. Referring to the skin garments that God made for man (Gen 3:21), Jacob points out that God’s action stems from compassion, mercy and love. This is in contrast to before, where God imposed punishment by justice (Gen 3:14–19). At the end of the memro, Jacob focuses explicitly on God’s intention and emphasises His merciful act. John agrees with such an interpretation and cites eleven lines in the second memro, chapter eleven that is entitled On the Garments of Skin that God made for Adam (Gen 3:21). 119

A 53r; B 72r; C 201. A 34r; B 43r–43v; C 121–122; [E 255v–257r, page 26–27 of the memro]. 118 119

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

‫ܘܢ‬

‫ܕ‬: ̇‫ܐ‬ ݀

‫ܕ‬

‫ܒܕ‬

193

‫ܘ‬

ܿ

.‫ܐ ܢ‬ ‫ ܘ‬996 ܼܿ ̣ ‫̣ܗܘ ܕ‬ ܼ 121 120 ̇ ̈ ‫ܙ‬ ] ‫ܕ‬ [ ‫ܡ܆‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܬ‬ 997– ̣ ̣ ̣ ݀ ‫ ܗ‬122 ‫ܘܬ‬ ‫ܬܬ‬ ‫ܬܗܘܢ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܢ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܘܐ‬ 998 ̣ ̣ ̣ ̈ 123 ‫ܕ ̣ܬ‬ ‫̣ ̇ܗ‬ 999– ̣ ̣ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ ܗܘ ܆‬1000

[These two lines are missing by JD.]

.

̈

.

̇

‫̇ ܨ‬

‫̇ܗܝ‬

124

‫ܐܦ ܗܕ‬ ̣

‫̇ ܘ‬ ̣ ‫ܕܐ‬

̣ ‫ ܪ‬1001– ‫ ܘ‬1002

݀ ̣ ‫ ܼ ܿ ܕܬܗ‬126 ‫̈ ܘܢ‬ ‫ܗܘܬ ̇ ܕܘܬ ܆‬ ܿ 127 .‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫ܙ ܿ ܼ ܬܗ ܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ̣ ‫̣ ܗܝ‬ ̣ ܼ 129 128 ‫܆‬ ̣ ‫ܘܢ‬

1003– ‫ ܘ‬1004

‫ܡ܆‬ ‫ܝ ̣ܗܘ‬ ̣

[Missing by JD.]

̣

125

‫ܕ‬ ̣

. ‫ܐ‬

[Missing partly by JD.]

‫ܿ ܼ ̈ ܗܘܢ‬ ܿ ‫ܼ ̣ ̄ ܗܘܘ‬

̣ ‫ܐ ܝ ܘܐ‬ ̈‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘ̣ ܘ ܐ ̈ ܆‬ ̣

.‫ܐ ܢ‬

‫ܕܗܘ‬ ̣ ‫ܗܘ‬ ̣

‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܗܘܘ‬

̣ ‫ ܪ‬1005– 1006 1007– ‫ܐܪ‬ ‫ ̇ ܕ ܆‬1009

ܿ ܼ ‫ܘܐ ̣ ܝ‬

130

̣

‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬

‫ܙ‬: E ‫ ܙ ̣ ̇ ܕ‬. ̈ ‫ ܬ‬: Alwan ̈‫ ܬ‬. 122 ‫ܬܬ‬: Alwan, BE ‫ܬܬ‬. ̈ ‫ܕ ܬ‬: Alwan ̈ ‫ܕ ܬ‬. 123 124 : Alwan . 125 ‫ܕܗܘ‬: Alwan, E ‫ܘܗܘ‬ ̣ . 126 ‫̈ ܘܢ‬ : AC ‫ܘܢ‬ . 127 . ̣ : Alwan, E 128 ‫ܪ‬: Alwan ̣ ‫ܪ‬. 129 :B . B read the first character as an ‫ ܦ‬because the ‫ܣ‬ in A is illegible. 130 : Alwan (mistake). 120 121

194

AHO SHEMUNKASHO 131

. ̈‫ܘ̣ ܘ ܐ‬

[These five lines are missing by JD.]

̈

̈ ‫ܬ‬

. 132

‫ܗ܆‬ .‫ܗܝ‬

ܼܿ

‫[ ܘ‬1007– 1009]

̇ ‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫ܗܘܘ ܕ‬ ̇ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̣ ̣ ̣ ‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫ܐܬ ܿ ܼ ̣ ܕ‬ ‫ܕ ܘ ܬ‬ ̣ ‫̣ ܗܘܘ‬ ̈ ݀ ̣ ‫ܘ ̣ ܬܗܘܢ‬ ‫ܕ‬

̣‫ܐ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܆‬

.‫ܘܢ‬

‫܆‬

‫ܐܪ‬

.‫ܡ‬

̣

̈ ܼܿ ̈

1010 1011– 1012 1013– 1014 133 ̇ 1015– ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ ܘܢ‬ ‫ܘܢ ܐ‬ ̣ ‫ ܘ‬1016

Jacob of Badnan says, when the Creator felt sorry for them: He did not grasp firmly to throw them out 00000[of Paradise] naked. He weaved garments out of nothing, and clothed them, so that their nakedness became 00000sheltered. [Although] it is written so: He made garments 00000of skin (Gen 3:21), [still] this is all a request by the listeners.

[Missing by John of Dara]

The Creator gave a sign for making clothes out of 00000nothing, and because it [clothes] felt thick, he called it skin. He prepared it on their bodies, and He did not weave it on another web and then they 00000put it on. The [divine] sign fabricated it swiftly upon their bodies. He weaved and stretched it out beautifully 00000upon their bodies.

[Missing by John of Dara]

996 997– 998 999– 1000 1001– 1002 1003– 1004 1005– 1006

̈ ‫ ܐ‬: AC ‫ ;ܐ‬Alwan ‫ܐ ܢ‬. John composed this line out the last three lines of Jacob of Serugh (1007–1009). 132 : Alwan . 133 ‫ܘܢ‬ ‫ ̇ ܕ‬: E ‫ܘܢ‬ ‫ ̇ ܕ ܗܘ‬. 131

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE They did not feel it while it was put on 00000them by Creator, since He did not bring it from another place 00000and put it on them.

[Partly missing by John of Dara.]

Until they touched the garments and saw them Without feeling/touching they put on the garments 00000and saw them. they did not know that they had clothes on 00000under the trees. Until they saw the bareness that was covered 00000 [before],

[Missing by John of Dara.]

195 1007– 1009

[1007– 1009] 1010– 1014

they did not realise that there were no leaves on their 00000bodies. The mercy of [God’s] act of creation touched the 00000naked people, and their nakedness put on garments out of nothing.

He was driving them out of His house like thieves, and putting [clothes] on them like children because of 00000His grace.

1015– 1016

Even God expelled Adam and Eve from Paradise as “thieves” ( ̈ ), as Jacob says, but He made garments of skin for them out of nothing to cover them mercifully as “children” ( ̈ ). One can see in the single line after the citation from Jacob, how much John values Jacob’s thoughts. John summarises what Jacob explored in his verse-homily in a single sentence and approves it: “With His love He put on them [clothes], and then drove them out [of Paradise]” (‫ܐ ̇ ܢ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܐ ̣ ܐ ̇ ܢ ܘܗ‬ ̣ ). 134 After that ‫ܐ ̇ܢ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܐ ̣ ܐ ̇ ܢ ܘܗ‬ ̣ : This sentence is not a literal citation, but a summary of what follows by Jacob of Serugh [1018–1026]: ‫ܐ ܗ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܪܕ‬ ‫ܗܘܘ܆‬ ̇‫ܙ‬ . ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܘܐ ܗ ܐ ܬ‬ ̣ ‫܆‬ ‫̇ ܪ ܕ ̣ ܕ ܘܕ ܐ ܢ ܐ ܕ ܘ‬ . ̣ ‫ܕ ̣ ܐ ܢܐ ܕ‬ ̣ ̣ ‫ܘ‬ ‫܆‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘܢ‬ ̣‫ܕ‬ ̣ 134

196

AHO SHEMUNKASHO

John finishes this chapter with a reference to Athanasius’ memro On Crucifixion. Mentioning Jacob’s name once more, John refers again explicitly to this verse-homily, whereby he paraphrases what Jacob says and does not cite it literally. The reference is very brief and appears at the end of the first memro, chapter five that demonstrates an Opinion on Paradise. 135 The passage in Jacob’s memro points out that the Creator and creation can not be blamed for Adam’s disobedience and his expulsion from Paradise. Adam was created to stay in Paradise and not to be thrown out. John, however, paraphrases Jacob’s text in the context, when he talks about marriage and mankind being fruitful and multiplying the earth (Gen 1:29). John writes: 136 ܿ . ̣ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗ ܕܐܕܡ‬ ‫̇ܒ ܕ‬ ‫ܘܐܦ‬ ܼ ‫ܕ‬ ܿ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕܡ ܼ ܕ ܩ‬ ‫ܝܗ‬ 137 . ‫ܬ ܕ‬ ‫ܘܸ ܘ‬ ‫ܐ ܕ‬ “And also Jacob of Batnan said in the memro On Adams expulsion from Paradise: Thus, the Lord created Adam, not to drive him out of Paradise, but to have dominion over it and become its heir.

4. CONCLUSION John of Dara’s rich references to previous authors witness the intellectual movements of the ninth century AD, a time when scientific knowledge of the ancient world was collected and .

‫ܘܢ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫܆‬ ‫ܪ ܕ̣ ܪ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ̇ .‫ܘܕ ܐ ܢ‬ ‫ܘܗ‬ ̣‫ܐ‬ ‫̣ ܬܗ܆‬ ‫ܗܘܬ‬ . ̣ ܼ ܿ ‫ܕܐܬ‬ ‫ܙ ̣ ܗܘ‬ ‫ܬ ܕ‬ ‫܆‬

[ AB] ‫ܕ‬ A 11r; B 8r; C 30. 136 A 13r; B 12r; C 38; [E 245]. 137 ‫ ܬ ܕ‬: A ‫ ܬܗ‬. E 245 [line 169–170] ‫܆‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܕ ܩ‬ . ‫ܬ ܐܦ‬ 135

‫ܘ‬

̇‫ܘ‬ ‫ܐ ܗ‬ ̣ ̣ ‫ܕܐ ̣ ܐ ܢ‬ ‫ܬܗ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬ ̣ ‫ܘܢ ܕ‬ ;

‫ܠ‬

‫ܝ ܗܘ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬

JACOB OF SERUGH AND HIS INFLUENCE

197

presented in a systematic order as a compendium. John of Dara’s theological themes, such as Paradise, Creator and creation, mortality and immortality, must have been of great relevance and a response to the intellectual questions of his time. In the Islamic Golden Age, John of Dara chooses his topics carefully, deals with the themes thoroughly, and presents his material systematically. Being concerned about the theology of creation and resurrection in the context of salvation—probably in its distinctive significance from non-Christian and agnostic teachings—John’s treatises present an anthropological Christian approach in accordance with the teaching of the church fathers. He tries to find a synthesis between the different teachings of the church fathers. Among them, Jacob of Serugh stands up as one of the most prominent authorities whom John of Dara often follows. John must have had access to Jacob’s verse-homilies. The citations quoted above demonstrate how John refers to Jacob of Serugh and how he presents Jacob’s theological teaching on subjects dealt with. Referring to Jacob, John often mentions the name and the sources he used. With this information it becomes easy to identify the cited passages. John’s citations of Jacob’s versehomilies proved very accurate, even though the references differ in style. Some of the citations are long as they present an important part of a verse-homily; other long passages are put together from a number of couplets that together present a central message. In such a case, John focuses on the main topic, leaving out the long explorations, allusions, metaphors and repetitions found by Jacob. At other times, John summarises Jacob’s teaching, either by focusing on a few couplets, or by putting the meaning in his own words as a synthesis. Furthermore, occasionally John makes use of Jacobs’s material without mentioning Jacob’s name, as he transfers and adopts the ideas, found by Jacob, into his own context. Further work on John of Dara’s work could identify more ideas and themes, which have been taken from Jacob without explicit reference to him. In comparison, identifying the texts and citations of the other authors, to whom John of Dara refers to, would provide better knowledge on both: on John of Dara, how he incorporates the work of previous writers in his treatises; and on Jacob of Serugh’s authority in comparison to the other authors.

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE EPHREM, JACOB OF SARUG, AND NARSAI IN CONVERSATION LUCAS VAN ROMPAY How easy would it have been for Adam and Eve not to sin! This is one of the main ideas underlying Ephrem’s interpretation of the story of Paradise, and it became a crucial idea in Jacob of Sarug’s understanding as well. All early Syriac Fathers invested much energy in exploring the story of Paradise, in an attempt to give meaning to God’s dealings with humanity as well as to the imperfections of their own world. In their world view, the story of Paradise was intrinsically linked to their own human experience. It is worthwhile, therefore, to try to understand their different approaches to the initial episode of human history. Each of the protagonists in that initial drama had a role to play: God, as Creator and Giver of the commandment; the first human couple: Adam and Eve in the order of their creation, but Eve and Adam in the order of their transgression; and last but not least Satan and his minion the serpent. Wasn’t creation meant to be perfect? How could it happen that the plan was drastically derailed so early on? My focus will be on Jacob of Sarug, but in order to understand his position more fully, I will also consider Ephrem, the fourth-century theologian and poet who is one of Jacob’s main sources of inspiration, as well as Jacob’s contemporary Narsai. 1 The audience at the Jacob of Sarug Symposium should be gratefully acknowledged for their attention as well as for their constructive 1

199

200

LUCAS VAN ROMPAY

EPHREM’S VIEW OF HUMAN POTENTIAL AND SIN According to Ephrem, when Adam was introduced to the perfect world of Paradise, he was potentially perfect himself. He was appointed owner and master of Paradise, and his power to give names to the animals is testimony to his elevated status. But Ephrem also explains that it was not enough for Adam to take control of creation physically; he also had to do it morally and intellectually. God gave Adam everything for free and without any merit on his side. Somehow Adam himself needed to take a step in order to take possession of all these free gifts and to claim ownership. Key to this process of taking possession was human freewill, on the one hand, and the divine commandment, on the other. In order for freewill to be activated, Ephrem reasons, God’s commandment needed somehow to be challenged, and this is why a tempter was required. Ephrem thus carefully dissects the successive moments of what he saw as the process by which Adam would be empowered to his full potential. This process, if completed successfully, would also have realized the “image” of God in man (cf. Gen. 1:26) to its full extent, and it would have provided human immortality. What we have in Ephrem’s description of the very beginning of human history is a blueprint for perfection, which only needed to be ratified by the first couple’s explicit commitment. Unfortunately, they made the wrong decision. Had they made the right decision and had they obeyed God’s commandment, they would have become the legitimate owners of Paradise, fully realizing the image of God and partaking in eternal life. As it was, they lost everything. In great detail and with much literary craftsmanship, Ephrem explains to his readers—both in his Commentary on Genesis and in many of his hymns 2—that God did everything possible to assist comments and questions. I also greatly benefited from the critical remarks of Maria Doerfler and Aaron Butts, who both read earlier drafts of this paper. 2 For an edition and Latin translation of Ephrem’s Commentary, see Tonneau, R.M. Sancti Ephraem Syri in Genesim et in Exodum Commentarii,

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE

201

man on his path toward perfection. The commandment was extremely light and easy: it was forbidden to man to eat from one tree only, while all the other trees were given to him. The restriction was very minimal indeed and could hardly be called even by that name. Moreover, the timing of the test was very advantageous, for Adam and Eve could not possibly have been hungry at that early moment. And finally, the instrument of temptation—a despicable snake!—was chosen for its complete lack of persuasive qualities. God could have allowed Satan to make use of one of the heavenly beings, or some human or divine appearance, or some noble and intimidating animal—which would have significantly increased the challenge for the human couple— but He did not do that, and He let him use a snake only, an animal that admittedly has some shrewdness (cf. Gen. 3:1), but is utterly despicable and repulsive. Nothing would have been easier for Adam and Eve—or for Eve and Adam—than making the right decision. And yet, they failed, one after the other. This is so incredible to Ephrem that he cries out: 3

CSCO, 152–153; Syr., 71–72, Louvain, 1955. For a full English translation, see Mathews, E.G., and J.P. Amar. St. Ephrem the Syrian. Selected Prose Works, 57–213, The Fathers of the Church, 91, Washington, 1994. An annotated translation of the main sections of the Commentary dealing with the story of Paradise is also found in Brock, S. Saint Ephrem. Hymns on Paradise, 197–227, Crestwood, NY, 1990. For an overview of Ephrem’s hymns, along with bibliographical references, see ibid., 228–33, and McVey, K.E. Ephrem the Syrian. Hymns, The Classics of Western Spirituality, New York, 1989. 3 Ed. Tonneau, p. 41,25–27. Jansma, T. “Beiträge zur Berichtigung einzelner Stellen in Ephraems Genesiskommentar,” Oriens Christianus 56 (1972): 63, proposes to read ḥw’ “Eve” instead of ḥwy’ “snake” (which is the reading of the sixth-century manuscript), and thus understands: “Who would ever have believed—had it not really happened—that Adam was going to listen to Eve and that Eve was going to give in to a serpent!”. He is followed by Mathews and Amar (St. Ephrem the Syrian. Selected Prose Works, 117). Even though Jansma’s reading is more faithful to the logic of the biblical narrative, it undercuts the literary power of the sentence.

202

LUCAS VAN ROMPAY .̇

‫ܕܗܘܬ‬

‫ ܐ‬. ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ ܐܘ ܕ‬. ‫ܗܘ‬ ̇

‫ܐܦ‬ ‫ܕܐܕܡ‬

.‫ܗܘܬ‬ “Who would ever have believed, had it not really happened, that Adam was going to listen to a snake or that Eve was going to be convinced by a reptile!”

The contrast between humanity’s high potential and deplorable performance could not be starker; the disappointment could not be greater. There can be no justification for the first couple’s sin, since so much was given to them and so little asked in return. Much of Ephrem’s insistence on God’s mercy in his dealing with humanity should be seen in the context of his opposition to the Marcionites. 4 For Marcion, the Paradise story was evidence of the Old Testament God’s harsh and somewhat irrational behavior toward man, which was dictated by his strict application of justice—in contrast to the God revealed in the New Testament, who acts according to his grace, not his justice. Ephrem obviously rejects Marcion’s distinction between the two images of God, and forcefully argues that the one God is just and merciful, and that in the story of Paradise the measure of his grace (ṭaybutho) reaches far beyond his justice (kinutho). In several of Ephrem’s works, the interplay between God’s grace and justice takes on an important role. 5 God’s mercy did not end after humanity’s first sin. For rather than abandoning humanity after their grave mistake, God continued deploying his mercy toward them, preparing the eventual return to their paradisiacal status.

For the broader context of Ephrem’s polemics against Marcion, the second-century thinker, and his followers, see Bundy, D. “Marcion and the Marcionites in Early Syriac Apologetics,” Le Muséon 101 (1988): 21– 32. 5 Cf. Martikainen, J. Gerechtigkeit und Güte Gottes. Studien zur Theologie von Ephraem dem Syrer und Philoxenos von Mabbug, Göttinger Orientforschungen, Syriaca, 20. Wiesbaden, 1981. 4

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE

203

JACOB OF SARUG IN EPHREM’S FOOTSTEPS Jacob of Sarug, even though anti-Marcionite polemics are much less prominent in his works, mainly adopts Ephrem’s reading of the Paradise story. 6 For most of the themes and concepts found in Ephrem, parallels exist in Jacob. Adam’s original condition is so exalted that Jacob calls him ’aloh besro “a god of flesh.” 7 Jacob agrees with Ephrem on the necessity of the commandment in order to perform the test—the commandment which would serve as a mentor (mrabbyono) for humanity 8 and disclose their discernment. And just like Ephrem, he argues that the commandment was indeed very light and that God by all means wanted the human couple to pass the test and to become victorious. As for the snake, an objective reader could point out that, in spite of its despicable nature, the snake had with Eve a substantial conversation (Gen. 3:1–5). Ephrem goes to great lengths to argue that Eve performed very poorly in that conversation: she was not only naïve, but also stupid in even considering the seriousness of the snake’s proposal—in addition to the fact that he suspects her of having wanted to use this opportunity to became the head of her husband. Ephrem points out to his reader that the snake—or Satan—deliberately misrepresented the commandment. Eve should have understood that right away, and Ephrem provides the counterarguments that she should have adduced in order to refute the snake. Jacob has a similar approach, but rather than explaining in great detail what Eve should have said, as Ephrem does, he provides a clear and convincing counterexample in the Virgin Mary, who—in contrast to Eve—knew how to respond to foreigners suddenly appearing on her doorstep. When the angel Gabriel announced that she The main sources for our knowledge of how Jacob understands the Paradise story are four mimrē edited and translated by Alwan, Kh. Jacques de Saroug. Quatre homélies métriques sur la Création, CSCO, 508; Syr., 214, Louvain, 1989. Alwan’s Hom. 4 is Hom. 72 in Bedjan, P. Homilies of Mar Jacob of Sarug, III, 152–75, reprint 2006. 7 Ed. Alwan, Hom. IV, p. 78,3 (= Hom. 72, ed. Bedjan, vol. III, p. 152,3); also in Hom. 71, ed. Bedjan, vol. III, p. 109,1. 8 Ed. Alwan, Hom. III, p. 39,197–8. 6

204

LUCAS VAN ROMPAY

would become pregnant and give birth to the Son of the Most High, she did not take the angel Gabriel’s words at face value, but asked him: “How will this happen what you say?” (cf. Luke 1:34). 9 This is exactly what Eve should have said and the conversation would have taken a completely different turn. Daughter Mary thus rebukes mother Eve! Ephrem and Jacob further agree in dismissing the possibility that Adam and Eve, when brought into Paradise, were inexperienced, immature, and somewhat childish. The biblical statement that Adam and Eve were naked without being ashamed of their nakedness (Gen. 2:25), just like little children, seems to lend support to this view. Ephrem strongly rejects it, however, and attributes it to barroyē, i.e., outsiders, non-Christians. 10 Adam’s ability to give names to the animals—thousands and thousands of them, without making any mistake, and properly remembering all these names—is sufficient proof that he had full intellectual capacity. The first couple’s lack of shame over their nakedness is due, in Ephrem’s view, to the šubhḥo, the “(robe of) glory,” which they wore in Paradise. 11 Much of Ephrem’s argumentation that Adam was endowed with full intellectual capacities is taken over by Jacob. 12

WAS ADAM CREATED MORTAL OR IMMORTAL? There is one question which Jacob singles out for discussion in a separate mimro: “Was Adam created mortal or immortal?” 13 Right from the beginning the two options are clearly presented, not only in the title, but also in the initial verses of the mimro, in which Jacob addresses God in quite direct language: “Allow me to say: Did you Ed. Alwan, Hom. III, p. 51,450. Ed. Tonneau, p. 32–3. Ephrem here deploys a masterfully elaborated contrastive comparison, similar to such comparisons found in rabbinic literature. 11 Cf. Van Rompay, L. “Memories of Paradise. The Greek ‘Life of Adam and Eve’ and Early Syriac Tradition,” Aram 5 (1993): 556–8 [= A Festschrift for Dr. Sebastian P. Brock] (with further references). 12 Ed. Alwan, Hom. III, p. 35,107–36,120. 13 Ed. Alwan, Hom. II, p. 18–30. 9

10

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE

205

create Adam mortal or rather immortal like the heavenly beings?” 14 Jacob has to apologize first, for he does not like to engage in investigating theological matters. But this question is urgent, he says, and “hateful silence” (šethqo sanyo) is not an option. For some time, Jacob goes back and forth between the two options, which are much debated “among the scholars” (beth ḥakkimē). He then argues that had it been the case that Adam was created mortal and was destined to leave Paradise, his disobedience would not have been the main reason for his expulsion; it would have been used as a pretext for something that was going to happen anyway. Even more importantly, the miserable situation in which humanity ended up after their expulsion would have been planned as such by God, and God would be to be blamed for it—which for Jacob is pure blasphemy: 15 ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܕܬ ̣ ܗܕ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܪ‬ ‫ܪܘ‬ ̈ ‫ܕ‬ . ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕܡ‬ ‫ܐ‬ : ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܗ ܕ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ̣ ̇ .‫̣ܗܘܬ ܨ ܐܕܡ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܕܐܬ ܪܬ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ “It is a great iniquity that it would occur to someone to believe that (God) expelled Adam from Paradise because of some pretexts. I consider it blasphemy for someone to think that things happened to Adam in just the way they had been decreed by the Maker.”

While the possibility of humanity’s original mortal condition is thus rejected, Jacob does not argue for humanity’s original immortality either. He rather maintains that the truth is different from either of the two options. In fact, Adam was fashioned both

Ed. Alwan, Hom. II, p. 19,21–22 : ‫ܕܐܢ ̇ ܬ‬ ‫ܕܐ‬ ‫ܗܒ‬ ̇ ‫ܬ ܐ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ ܐܘ‬:‫ܕܡ‬ ‫ܝ‬ ̣ . See also Alwān, Kh. “L’homme était-il mortel ou immortel avant le péché, pour Jacques de Saroug?” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 55 (1989): 5–31. The author responds to an unpublished study by Behnam M.P. Sony (1979) who had argued that Jacob defended humanity’s original immortality. 15 Ed. Alwan, Hom. II, p. 23,117–120. 14

̈

206

LUCAS VAN ROMPAY

mortal and immortal, 16 as he consisted of living nature (kyono ḥayyo) and dead clay (medhro mitho). 17 Through their freewill, humanity had the choice between life and death. Freewill was like a driver (henyukho), 18 holding the reins and steering the chariot towards life or death. It was freewill that picked the fruit from the tree, whereby “death overpowered the one who, had he obeyed, would not have died”. 19 From the one fruit that Adam and Eve picked, they understood its sweetness as well as its bitterness, and they became aware of what it meant to be mortal as well as what it meant to be immortal. 20

JACOB AND NARSAI: COMMUNALITIES AND SEPARATION As for the alternative view, the idea that humanity was created mortal, it is clear that Jacob does not simply present it in an abstract way. The personal tone indicates that Jacob had a specific opponent, or opponents, in view. Khalil Alwan, the editor and translator of this mimro, suggests that Jacob wrote against Narsai. 21 As is well known, Narsai was a student at the School of Edessa, and then for some time its director, around the middle of the fifth century, even though the exact chronology remains

Ed. Alwan, Hom. II, p. 23,132: ‫ܬ ܐܬܪ‬ ‫ܕܐܦ ̇ ܬ ܘ‬ ‫ ̣ܗܘ‬. 17 Ed. Alwan, Hom. II, p. 23,139. 18 Ed. Alwan, Hom. II, p. 24,145. 19 Ed. Alwan, Hom. II, p. 26,198: ‫̇ ܘ ܕܐ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܙ ܝ ܗܘ‬ . ‫ܬ ̣ܗܘ‬ . 20 The idea of humanity’s intermediate or undecided state prior to the first sin is first found in Philo of Alexandria. Among Christian authors, in addition to Ephrem and Jacob, it is found in Theophilus of Antioch, in Eusebius of Emesa, and in Nemesius of Emesa. See Runia, D.T. Philo in Early Christian Literature. A Survey, 263–4, Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum, III.3, Assen and Minneapolis, 1993; and Petit, F., L. Van Rompay, and J.J.S. Weitenberg, Eusèbe d’Émèse. Commentaire de la Genèse (Traditio Exegetica Graeca, forthcoming), Introduction. 21 Alwan, Jacques de Saroug, CSCO, 509, p. 23, note (ad 117–8). 16

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE

207

unclear. Jacob too studied at Edessa. 22 Narsai was several years older than Jacob. There is a slight chance that Jacob would have known Narsai in person at the School, but it is more likely that Jacob came to the School after Narsai left. Even in that case—if Jacob did not know Narsai personally in Edessa—he will have been aware of the direction that (at least some of) the teaching at the School had taken under Narsai’s leadership. This orientation— with which Jacob disagreed—was characterized by a strong adherence to the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia. Already during the lifetime of Theodore (d. 428), some of his writings were studied in the School of Edessa and translated into Syriac. Theodore’s theological and exegetical works obtained authoritative status in the School. Following the Council of Ephesus (431), the Christians of Edessa were divided between on the one hand those who in the wake of the Council supported Cyril of Alexandria and found their main spokesman in bishop Rabbula of Edessa (d. 436), who was among the first translators of Cyril into Syriac, and on the other hand those who opposed the Cyrillian influence and wanted to remain faithful to the legacy of the Antiochene theologians, in the first place to Theodore of Mopsuestia. The spokesman for the latter group was Hiba of Edessa, a well-known teacher at the School, one of the earliest Jacob’s connection to Edessa and his knowledge of the School are explicitly mentioned in one of his letters to the Monastery of Mar Bassus, datable to around 512; Olinder, G., ed. Iacobi Sarugensis Epistulae quotquot supersunt, 58–9 (Ep. 14), CSCO, 110; Syr., 57; Paris, 1937. For a detailed overview of Ep. 13–17, see Jansma, T. “Die Christologie Jakobs von Serugh und ihre Abhängigkeit von der alexandrinischen Theologie und der Frömmigkeit Ephraems des Syrers,” Le Muséon 78 (1965): 21–38. It is unclear, however, whether Jacob was a member of the School (which he, a non-Persian, calls “the School of the Persians”) or whether he was only loosely associated with it. See the remarks in Becker, A. Fear of God and the Beginning of Wisdom. The School of Nisibis and the Development of Scholastic Culture in Late Antique Mesopotamia, 52–3, Divinations: Rereading Late Ancient Religion, Philadelphia, 2006. Jacob’s Ep. 14 makes clear, however, that it was in those years in Edessa that he acquainted himself with the writings of the Antiochene theologians. 22

208

LUCAS VAN ROMPAY

translators of Theodore’s writings, and Rabbula’s successor as bishop of Edessa (436–448 and 451–457). 23 Since there is no evidence of problems in Edessa during the first twelve years of Hiba’s tenure, we may assume that the two opposing groups (the “Cyrillians” and the “Theodoreans”, as the polemical author Simeon of Bet Arsham calls them) lived in relative peace and that the power was evenly divided between them. It is only with the 448 Council of Ephesus (the so-called “Robber-Synod”) that problems resurfaced, leading to Hiba being deposed, then rehabilitated at the Council of Chalcedon (451), and to the last—relatively peaceful—six years of Hiba’s tenure as bishop (451–457). It is around this time—in the 450s or slightly later—that Narsai left Edessa and reestablished the School in Nisibis, in Persian territory. 24 After Narsai’s departure, the School continued to exist for a number of years, until it was formally closed in 489. We have very little information on the School of Edessa in the last decades of its existence. Bishop Nuna, Hiba’s successor, probably did not stand in the Antiochene dyophysite tradition. 25 Although the School was associated with the names of Theodore and even On Rabbula and Hiba, see Doran, R. Stewards of the Poor. The Man of God, Rabbula, and Hiba in Fifth-Century Edessa, Cistercian Studies Series, 208, Kalamazoo, Michigan, 2006, which includes English translations of several primary texts. On Hiba, see also Rammelt, C. Ibas von Edessa. Rekonstruktion einer Biographie und dogmatischen Position zwischen den Fronten, Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte, 106, Berlin, 2008. On Jacob of Sarug’s condemnation of Hiba, which followed after several requests from the abbot of the Monastery of Mar Bassus for proof of Jacob’s orthodoxy (Ep. 17, ed. Olinder, p. 85,24–26), see Rammelt, p. 246–8. 24 The chronology of Narsai’s life is highly uncertain. See Frishman, J. The Ways and Means of the Divine Economy. An Edition, Translation and Study of Six Biblical Homilies by Narsai, Part 3, p. 1–6. Ph.D. dissertation, Leiden, 1992. For a recent survey of Narsai’s homilies, see Brock, S.P. “A Guide to Narsai’s Homilies,” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 12.1 (2009). 25 He may have been either a “moderate Cyrillian” or a “strict Chalcedonian”. See de Halleux, A. Philoxène de Mabbog. Sa vie, ses écrits, sa théologie, 30–1, note 52, Louvain, 1963. 23

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE

209

Nestorius until its very end, there must have been room for the opponents as well, who must have become significantly more powerful after Narsai left. It was probably in the 460s that both Jacob of Sarug and Philoxenus of Mabbog came to study in Edessa. Both include in their works references to Antiochene dyophysite writings to which they were exposed, and Philoxenus himself admits that for some time in his early student years he was involved with them. 26 But in the same period, and probably at the same institution, both Jacob and Philoxenus must also have been studying different writings, including, of course, Ephrem’s works as well as the writings and the theology of Cyril of Alexandria, which subsequently decisively shaped their own theologies. 27 The fact that the School of Edessa, around the middle and in the third quarter of the fifth century, helped create and train three outstanding figures who subsequently would assume leading roles in the development of Syriac Christianity, one Dyophysite and two Miaphysites, may tell us a great deal not about the divisiveness and the polarization in the School, but rather about its inclusiveness. Returning now to humanity’s condition in Paradise, it is indeed the case that Narsai, in the footsteps of Theodore, regarded humanity as being mortal at its creation. 28 Humanity’s physical Cf. de Halleux, Philoxène, 28–30. For Jacob, see Jansma, T. “L’hexaméron de Jacques de Saroug,” L’Orient Syrien 4 (1959): 3–42, 129–62, and 253–84; and Idem, “Die Christologie Jakobs von Serugh” (see note 22). 28 Theodore’s view on this question is not entirely clear and may have been somewhat ambiguous. From his assertion that Adam became mortal as a result of the first sin, some scholars have concluded that according to Theodore Adam was created immortal; see e.g. Devreesse, R. Essai sur Théodore de Mopsueste, 98, Studi e Testi, 141, Vatican City, 1948. For a broader discussion, see Greer, R. Theodore of Mopsuestia. Exegete and Theologian, 20–7, Westminster, 1961. Narsai was among the first EastSyrian theologians to develop Theodore’s ideas into a clear affirmation of Adam’s original mortal nature, which subsequently became part of the traditional theology of the Church of the East. See Gignoux, Ph. Homélies de Narsaï sur la creation. Patrologia Orientalis, 34.3–4, Turnhout/Paris, 1968, in particular Hom. I, and Introduction, p. 488[70]–495[77]; Ma26 27

210

LUCAS VAN ROMPAY

constitution and the gender distinction are evidence, according to Narsai, that the first couple was created mortal and was meant to be mortal. While this view seems to be diametrically opposed to Jacob’s, there are a number of similarities between the two authors’ views on the technical necessity of God’s commandment and of the test. 29 For Narsai, human discernment (porušutho)—the foundation of freewill—needed to be put into effect. Prior to the sin discernment only existed in potential; it needed to be put into practice. This key-function of the human decision is very similar in Narsai’s and in Jacob’s (and one may add Ephrem’s) views. They also would agree that even though the first couple made the wrong decision—and the outcome thus was negative—this key-function was properly implemented. Human discernment was indeed put to work. Here, our two authors part ways. For Jacob, as we have seen, humanity should have made the right decision. They could have done so very easily; and there is no excuse for their not having done so. Due to their wrong decision, God’s initial plan was thwarted, and was replaced with an alternative plan, which consisted of preventing humanity from eating from the tree of life, expelling them from Paradise, and rescuing humanity, step by step, from its self-inflicted miserable condition. According to this view, as we already saw, the full burden of responsibility lies with humanity, which unduly failed their critical test. The high potential and the high stakes invested in the human decision allot a very crucial role to humanity in determining the course of God’s plan. Once human history is evolving, God’s role seems to be reduced to reacting and repairing. 30 comber, W. “The Theological Synthesis of Cyrus of Edessa, an East Syrian Theologian of the Mid Sixth Century,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 30 (1964): esp. 13–25; Van Rompay, L. Le Commentaire sur Genèse-Exode 9,32 du manuscrit (olim) Diyarbakır 22, 30 (text) and 40 (transl.). CSCO, 483–484; Syr., 205–206, Louvain, 1986. 29 For what follows, see Frishman, The Ways and Means, Part 3, esp. p. 18–22 and 54–65. 30 Human perfection as it existed prior to the sin for Jacob is more than a very distant memory of a condition that was lost forever. In

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE

211

In Narsai’s view, by contrast, it is God who steers his plan just as He intended. Humanity’s perfection is the final goal ultimately to be realized in the hereafter, not the starting point at the moment of creation. God intends to guide humanity through a process of education and learning. The first couple’s short stay in Paradise is part of this process, aimed at giving them a foretaste of perfect life. The decision they made with regard to God’s commandment and the eating of the fruit, by virtue of their freewill, was the wrong one, but it did not drastically change God’s plan. 31 Is there nothing negative to say, then, about humanity’s sin in Paradise? Yes, there is. Humanity’s wrong decision in Paradise disrupted the bond of love that existed in Creation, and it brought humanity closer to evil, to which they would increasingly attach themselves throughout history. There thus was not just one isolated event; but rather a pattern of sinfulness, of inclination towards sin, was initiated. Rightfully, therefore, when humanity sinned in Paradise, the whole creation was saddened and the angels immersed themselves in mourning, waiting to be comforted. 32 Comfort did come, first with Enoch, who “pleased God” and was taken by God (cf. Gen. 5:24), thus indicating that human beings eventually will be able to acquire immortal and incorruptible life. Both for Jacob and Narsai, therefore, the human decision in Paradise was the wrong one, and it is deplorable. And for both authors, in the wake of the human Hom. 189 (“On Children who die”), ed. Bedjan, V, p. 804–16, Jacob compares the innocence of children who die young to Adam’s perfection prior to the sin. According to Jacob, we are dealing here with “a great beauty that never needs any addition” (p. 808,7: ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܬܘ‬ ‫ܘܡ‬ ), which guarantees that these children, even without any merit in this world, go directly to Paradise—a view that Jacob defends with much passion against those who hold different opinions. This interpretation gives us a unique insight into the practical side of Jacob’s theology, and it may tell us a great deal about Jacob the man and the pastor, confronted with sorrow and mourning among his faithful. I am grateful to Maria Doerfler for reading and discussing this mimro with me. She intends to return to it in her future work. 31 Cf. Frishman, The Ways and Means, Part 3, p. 21–2. 32 Ibid., 43–5.

212

LUCAS VAN ROMPAY

sin and the expulsion from Paradise, God in his mercy embarks on a plan for human salvation, leading up to Christ and perfect life in the hereafter. But for Jacob the starting point was perfect; for Narsai it was not. For Jacob, therefore, the process is a restoration; for Narsai, the focus is on gradual perfection. Neither Jacob nor Narsai speculate much about what would have happened had the first couple made the right decision and had they not been disobedient. 33 While in Jacob’s view Adam and Eve surely would have remained in Paradise and lived forever, this is much less clear for Narsai. What we are witnessing in our earthly life now is God’s substitute plan according to Jacob of Sarug, while for Narsai it is the plan as God had stipulated and prepared it, even though it is more affected by human sinfulness now than it would have been had Adam and Eve not sinned. The figure of the righteous Enoch, briefly mentioned in Gen. 5:24, has an important role to play for both Jacob and Narsai, in that he transcends the bounds of human sin and mortality, thus showing to Adam and his offspring that they should not give up thinking about a better life. But interestingly, for Jacob Enoch points to the past, “reproving Adam that had he obeyed the commandment, he would not have died,” 34 while for Narsai he points to the future, becoming a sign of hope and a pledge of peace. 35 Jacob’s main objection to the view that Adam was created mortal and that everything happened as it was decreed by God in advance is that the expulsion from Paradise would then have been God, in his foreknowledge, knew the outcome of humanity’s free decision. While Jacob and Narsai (as well as Ephrem) would have agreed on this, human obedience to God’s commandment would have resulted in human immortality according to Jacob and Ephrem. 34 Alwan, Hom. II, p. 26,207–208: ‫ܗ‬ ( ̇ ‫ܐ‬ ‫) ܟ‬ ̇ ̇ ̇ ‫ܬ ܗܘ‬ ‫ܗܘ ܗܘ‬ ‫ ܕܐ‬:‫ ܕܡ‬. See also ibid., 209– ‫ܗܘ ܕܐ‬ ‫ ܕ‬.‫ܟ‬ ‫ܕܡ‬ 210: ̣ ‫ܬ ܐܬܬ‬ ‫̣ܗܘ‬ ‫“ ̇ ܬ‬A reproach was given to Adam through Enoch that he should not think that even if he would have pleased (God) he would have been mortal.” 35 Ed. Frishman, Hom. I (“On the translation of Enoch and Elijah”); cp. Part 3, p. 45–48. 33

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE

213

based on “pretexts” (b-ʿelloto). 36 If, indeed, Adam was created mortal, and if God had decided from the beginning that he would have to leave Paradise, is this still a real test? As we have seen, for all our three authors—Ephrem, Jacob, and Narsai—the test was needed in order to set the human discernment in motion, but while for Ephrem and Jacob the choice was deadly serious, perhaps it was less so for Narsai. For him, ʿelloto (“pretexts”) and pursē (“devices”) are part of God’s pedagogic program. Or, in Narsai’s own words: 37 ̈ ‫ܬܢ‬ ‫ܘ‬ ‫ܨ̣ ܕ‬ . ‫ܪܘܬ ܕ ܐܘܕܥ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘܐ‬ “The Creator wanted to instruct our rational nature by using certain pretexts, and as with young children, by using a threat, He revealed to us the freewill that is in us.”

Even though Narsai would not argue that Adam and Eve were somewhat childish—a position explicitly rejected by Ephrem—his idea of divine pedagogy implies that Adam needed to be instructed and educated from a less mature to a more mature status. 38 Presenting things in certain ways and issuing threats for the pure sake of education are part of that process. The concept of educational wisdom is not completely absent from either Jacob’s or Ephrem’s reading of the Paradise story, but Narsai, in the footsteps of Theodore, develops it more systematically and makes it into the guiding principle of his theology and anthropology.

PEDAGOGY, FREEWILL, AND HUMAN RESPONSIBILITY If one makes God into a dedicated schoolmaster, always intent on improving and encouraging his disciples’ emerging understanding, one puts some strain on the concept of freewill. The freewill of a beginning apprentice who just embarked on his training program— Ed. Alwan, Hom. II, p. 23,118. Ed. Gignoux, Hom. III, p. 604[186], 330–1. 38 Cf. Greer, Theodore of Mopsuestia, 25, who also highlights the connection between rationality and mutability. 36 37

214

LUCAS VAN ROMPAY

as Narsai presents it—is quite different from the freewill of a fully mature person of nearly divine status, enjoying the luxuries of Paradise, as Jacob and Ephrem see it. In the first scenario, is not the teacher somewhat responsible for the outcome of the process? As a matter of fact, this is one of Jacob’s objections against his opponents’ views, namely that God is blamed for humanity’s misstep. 39 Jacob’s own view, which he shares with Ephrem, puts the full burden of responsibility on the first couple and leaves humanity, once the sin is committed, severely wounded. 40 Tanios Bou Mansour, in his recent study of Jacob’s theology, expresses some amazement at the idea that for Jacob humanity was endowed with so much freedom that it was able to decide on its own life and death, holding in its hands the reins of humanity’s destiny. He then wonders whether Jacob doesn’t “exaggerate” in letting human freewill on its own assume full responsibility for evil in the world. 41 Obviously unhappy with this reading of Jacob, Bou Mansour then ̇ Ed. Alwan, Hom. II, p. 23,123–124: ‫ܗܕ‬ ‫ܐܘ‬ ̣ ‫ܕܐ‬ ̇ ‫ܠ ܗܕ ـ‬ ‫ܝ‬ : ‫“ ܐ‬Oh (you) miserable one, who have such thoughts about God, rebuke yourself! Let not God be blamed in such an ignorant way!” 40 Cf. Jacob’s Hom. 179 (“On the lame man who was healed by Simon ̈‫ܕ ܗ‬ and John”), ed. Bedjan, V, p. 716, 2–3: ‫ܪ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ̇ ‫̣ ܗܘ ܪܗ ـ ܕܙܕ ܬ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ : ‫“ ܘ‬When the head of the nations (i.e. Adam) strayed away from his duty, our nature became lame in its pursuit of righteousness.” Cf. Bou Mansour, T. La théologie de Jacques de Saroug, I, 95, Kaslik, 1993. 41 Bou Mansour, La théologie, 89: “Cette option pour la liberté, préférée à l’immortalité, a de quoi surprendre, surtout si l’on prend en considération l’anthropologie de Jacques et son ancrage dans le langage et la théologie bibliques, basés essentiellement sur les deux notions d’image et de poussière. […] Même si le docteur syriaque peut nous rassurer en affirmant qu’il y va de l’honneur de Dieu de créer un homme libre, tellement libre qu’il peut décider de sa vie et de sa mort […], on ne peut s’empêcher de s’interroger sur le bien-fondé d’une liberté qui semble tenir à elle seule les rênes du destin de l’humanité. Jacques n’exagère-t-il pas en faisant assumer à la seule liberté toute la responsabilité du mal dans le monde !” 39

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE

215

looks for passages that somehow qualify or temper his initial conclusions. He does find such passages: culled from a number of different mimrē, several passages seem to indicate that—in addition, or in contrast, to seeing evil as emerging from human freewill— Jacob also took into consideration an external cause of evil, i.e., Satan and his skillful temptation of the first couple. 42 I would be slightly reluctant to follow Bou Mansour in his otherwise recommendable effort to draw a more nuanced picture. Even while I admit that all the different passages collected by Bou Mansour provide a fuller overview of all Jacob’s statements on this topic, one has the impression that these new passages disrupt the logic of the few mimrē that explicitly deal with the Paradise story. It should also be remembered that Jacob’s understanding as found in these mimrē is quite consistent with Ephrem’s reading of the Paradise story. As we have just seen, Ephrem goes to great lengths to prove that Satan’s temptation was really not a big deal at all and could hardly be called by that name. An attempt to rescue Jacob from views that some modern readers may find problematic should, therefore, be extended to doing the same for Ephrem. As we have seen, Ephrem’s emphasis on God’s immense mercy toward humanity in Paradise should most likely be understood as Ephrem’s response to less positive depictions of the Old Testament God by Marcion and the Marcionites. Ephrem worked out his response into a coherent and powerful reading of the Paradise story, which a hundred years later was still powerful enough to capture the imagination of the young Jacob, perhaps while he was a student at Edessa. In those days—the sixties of the fifth century—Ephrem’s legacy had to compete with the works of a number of Greek Fathers that were studied and translated in Edessa, as diverse as Theodore of Mopsuestia on the one hand and Cyril of Alexandria on the other. Prior to Jacob’s arrival in Edessa, Narsai had already been deeply engaged in the study of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s theology and his interpretation of the first chapters Bou Mansour, La théologie, 101: “Ce second bilan se démarque sensiblement du premier, dans la mesure où il définit le mal comme une réalité provenant « de l’extérieur » et qui fait son entrée dans l’espèce humaine.” 42

216

LUCAS VAN ROMPAY

of Genesis. For Narsai, obviously, Theodore’s writings became so influential that they provided the new framework for his theological and exegetical explorations, whereby Ephrem’s appeal somewhat receded. This did not happen in the same way for Jacob, who was introduced to some works of the Antiochenes, but distanced himself from them. In his correspondence with the Monastery of Mar Bassus and its insistent abbot (to be dated around 512), Jacob looks back on his student years in Edessa, forty-five years earlier, i.e, in the mid-sixties. Consistent with his earlier rejection of the dyophysite works—so he tells his correspondent—he now again condemns and anathematizes these writings. 43 It is easy to see that the situation around 512 was widely different from the one in the 460s. In 512, around the time that Jacob wrote this letter, Severus became patriarch of Antioch and the fight against Dyophysitism (the two-nature doctrine) now targeted both Nestorianism and Chalcedonianism. At the same time, Antiochene Dyophysitism had established itself in the Church of Persia, as evidenced by the Synod of Seleucia-Ctesiphon of the year 486. While the immediate context of Jacob’s correspondence with the monastery of Mar Bassus was one of open conflict, this was not necessarily the case in the 460s.

THE SCHOOL OF EDESSA: A SHARED LEGACY Returning now to our reading of the Paradise story, it is obvious that Jacob and Narsai reflect widely different conceptualizations of this story. At the same time, these different conceptualizations are not independent from one another. We have seen that for one central theme Jacob directly responds to the argument of his opponents, either Narsai himself or the Theodorean tradition of the School of Edessa. But beyond this one obvious case of contact, there are a number of shared themes, parallel ideas and images that point to a common origin. Some of this may be explained through Ephrem, whose works most certainly were read by both Narsai and Jacob. In other cases, we have to consider direct interaction between the opposing parties in or around the School of Edessa. 43

Ep. 14, ed. Olinder, p. 58–59. See above, note 22.

HUMANITY’S SIN IN PARADISE

217

While we do have a great deal of evidence that there was conflict in Edessa between the “Theodoreans” and “Cyrillians”— such as around 435 under bishop Rabbula; in the time of the Council of Ephesus (448); and at the moment of the School’s closure—we should not necessarily connect all the dots and see the School of Edessa throughout the fifth century as “a hotbed in the propagation of Antiochian theology,” 44 as has often been done. Since two of the most influential Miaphysite theologians emerged from the School, Philoxenus and Jacob—one admittedly a committed polemicist, but the other a notorious peace-maker— there may be reason to nuance our view. Perhaps the School of Edessa was not always filled with strife and conflict. As a careful reading of Narsai and Jacob seems to suggest, in and around the School of Edessa there may have been, well into the fifth century, ample opportunity for fruitful encounter and interaction between important ideas and between creative minds. 45

Vööbus, A. History of the School of Nisibis, 40, CSCO, 266; Subs., 26. Louvain, 1965. 45 Contacts and common ground between Jacob and Narsai can be seen with regard to other topics as well. See, e.g., Butts, A.M. Jacob of Sarug’s Homily on the Tower of Babel, Texts from Christian Late Antiquity, 21, Gorgias Press, 2009, Introduction. 44

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE SEBASTIAN BROCK ABBREVIATIONS Assemani = Assemani, J.S. Bibliotheca Orientalis, I, 305–39. Rome, 1719; repr. Piscataway NJ, 2002 (numbered list of Jacob’s Mimre) Albert, Homélies = Albert, M. Homélies contres les juifs par Jacques de Saroug. Patrologia Orientalis, 38:1; 1976. Albert, Lettres = Albert, M. Les Lettres de Jacques de Saroug. Patrimoine syriaque, 3. Kaslik, 2004. Alwan = Alwan, Kh. Jacques de Saroug, Quatre homélies métriques sur la création. CSCO, 508, Scr. Syri, 214–5; 1989. B = Bedjan, P. Homiliae Selectae Mar-Jacobi Sarugensis, I–V. Paris/Leipzig, 1905–1910; repr. I–VI, Piscataway, 2006. Cited by volume, page and homily number; vol. VI of the reprint contains the eleven memre published by Bedjan at the end of his Martyrii qui et Sahdona quae supersunt, 603–85. 1 Paris/Leipzig, 1902, together with five further memre. BA = Bedjan, P. Acta Martyrum et Sanctorum I–VII. Paris/Leipzig, 1890–97. Bickell = Bickell, G. Ausgewählte Gedichte der Syrischen Kirchenväter. Kempten, 1872. The first nine of these were also published separately by Bedjan, P. Cantus seu Homiliae Mar-Jacobi in Jesum et Mariam, Paris/Leipzig, 1902; B VI retains both paginations. 1

219

220

SEBASTIAN BROCK

[Most of these translations also appear in Landersdorfer, and so are not mentioned further below]. ET = English translation. Frothingham = Frothingham, A.L. “L’Omelia di Giacomo di Sarug sul battesimo di Costantino imperatore.” Atti della R. Accademia dei Lincei (Anno CCLXXIX, 1881–2), ser. 3. Memorie della Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche 8 (1882): 167–242. FT = French translation. GT = German translation. Guidi = Guidi, I. “Testi orientali inediti sopra i sette dormienti di Efeso.” Reale Accademia dei Lincei (Anno CCLXXXII, 1884–85), Ser. 3. Memorie della Classe di Scienze morali, storiche et filologiche 12 (1884): 1–105 (esp. 18–19). (Anno CCLXXXII, 1884–85): 18–29. Hansbury = Hansbury, M. Jacob of Serug, On the Mother of God. Crestwood NY, 1998. Isabaert-Cauuet = Isabaert-Cauuet, I. Jacques de Saroug, Homélies sur la Fin du Monde. Paris, 2005. IT = Italian translation. Kollamparampil = Kollamparampil, T. Jacob of Serugh, Select Festal Homilies. Rome/Bangalore, 1997. Landersdorfer = Landersdorfer, S. Ausgewählte Schriften der Syrischen Dichter. Kempten, 1912. LT = Latin translation. MHMJS = The Metrical Homilies of Mar Jacob of Sarug. Piscataway, NJ, 2008–. Mouterde = Mouterde, P. “Deux homélies inédites de Jacques de Saroug.” Mélanges de l’Université Saint Joseph 26 (1944/6): 1–56. Overbeck = Overbeck, J.J. S. Ephraemi Syri, Rabbulae episcopi Balaei aliorumque opera selecta. Oxford, 1865. Reinink = Reinink, G.J. Das syrische Alexanderlied in drei Rezensionen. CSCO, 454–5; Scr. Syri, 195–6; 1983. SM = Brock, S.P., ed. Soghyatha mgabbyatha. Monastery of St Ephrem, Holland, 1982. Strothmann, Thomas = Jakob von Sarug: drei Gedichte über den Apostel Thomas. Göttinger Orientforschungen, Reihe Syriaca, 12; 1976.

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 221 Vona = Vona, C. Omilie Mariologiche di S. Giacomo di Sarug. Rome, 1953. Vööbus, Handschriftliche Überlieferung = Vööbus, A. Handschriftliche Überlieferung der Memre-Dichtung des Ja‘qob von Serug, I– IV. CSCO, 344–5, 421–2 = Sub. 39–40, 60–1; 1973, 1980.

INTRODUCTION The contents of all five volumes of Paul Bedjan’s edition of the Mimre/Homilies, together with those in the added volume VI of the reprint (Piscataway NJ, 2006), can readily be found in vol. VI, pp. xiii–xxi. Also in VI, pp. 372–99, a list of incipits is provided; this includes not only published mimre, but also unpublished ones, insofar as this information is available in catalogues. 2 The standard guide to the manuscripts is Vööbus, Handschriftliche Überlieferung, I– IV; a listing of those used by Bedjan is given in vol. VI, 407–9. Fuller bibliographies on Jacob are indicated in III.4, below.

I. JACOB’S WORKS, BY GENRE AND TOPIC I.1. Mimre It has been possible to derive the topics (and first lines) for a number of unpublished mimre from Assemani and from Mar Filoksinos Yohanna Dolabany, Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in Za‘faran Monastery (ed. Mar Gregorios Yohanna Ibrahim; Syriac Patrimony, 9; 1994), pp.45–58 (entry on the huge twelfth-century manuscript which is now Damascus, Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate ms 12/15).

(a) Old Testament Aaron: Hom. 5 (B I, 68–84). FT by M. Wurmbrand in L’Orient Syrien 6 (1961): 255–78. An earlier version of this, but also including mimre by Narsai and Isaac of Antioch, was published in my “The published verse homilies of Isaac of Antioch, Jacob of Serugh, and Narsai: index of incipits,” Journal of Semitic Studies 32 (1987): 279–313. 2

222

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Abraham and Isaac: unpublished. Abraham and his Types: Hom. 109 (B IV, 61–103). ET by R.E. McCarron, in Hugoye 1:1 (1998), and by E. Thelly, in The Harp 24 (2009): 179–88. Adam, Creation of, and Resurrection of the Dead: Hom. 72 (B III, 152–7), and Alwan IV (with FT). Adam, created mortal or immortal?: ed. with FT, Alwan II. Adam’s Expulsion from Paradise: ed. with FT, Alwan, III. Asa, king: unpublished. Azaza’el:—see Two Goats. Babel, Tower of: Hom. 33 (B II, 1–27). Text and ET by A.M. Butts, in MHMJS 15 (2009). Balaam and Balak: unpublished. Bronze Serpent: Hom. 4 (B I, 49–67). ET in The True Vine 6 (1990): 38–56. Cain and Abel (I): Hom. 147 (B V, 1–16). Cain and Abel (II): Hom. 148 (B V, 17–32). Cain and Abel (III): Hom. 149 (B V, 32–47). Cain, Abel and Seth: Hom. 150 (B V, 47–61). Creation, Six Days of: First Day: Hom. 71.1 (B III, 1–27). ET by R.D. Young in Trigg, J.W., ed. Message of the Fathers of the Church IX, 184–202. Wilmington, 1988. Second Day: Hom. 71.2 (B III, 27–43). Third Day: Hom. 71.2 (B III, 43–60). Fourth Day: Hom. 71.4 (B III, 60–79). Fifth Day: Hom. 71.5 (B III, 79–97). Sixth Day: Hom. 71.6 (B III, 97–129). FT by B. Sony, in Parole de l’Orient 11 (1983): 172–99. Seventh Day: Hom. 71.7 (B III, 129–51). Text and Arabic translation, with studies by Sony, B. L’Homélie de Jacques de Saroug sur l’Hexaméron, I–II. Rome, 2000. For a study, see T. Jansma, in L’Orient Syrien 4 (1959): 3–42, 129–62, 253– 284. Daniel (I) and Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream: Hom. 123 (B IV, 491– 516). (For the supplementation of part of a lacuna, see Parole de l’Orient 13 (1986): 84–5, 89–90). Daniel (III) and the Tree which Nebuchadnezzar saw: Hom. 124 (B IV, 517–43). ET by M. Henze, in his The Madness of King

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 223 Nebuchadnezzar. The Ancient Near Eastern Origins and Early History of Interpretation of Daniel 4, 251–69. Leiden, 1999. Daniel and Three Companions in the Furnace: Hom. 36 (B II, 94– 137). David and Goliath: Hom. 34 (B II, 28–76). On this mimro see C.E. Morrison, in Kiraz, G., ed. Malphono w-Rabo d-Malphone, 477–96. Piscataway, NJ, 2008. David and Uriah: Hom. 162 (B V, 367–93). On this mimro see A.G. Salvesen, in Kiraz, G., ed. Malphono w-Rabo d-Malphone, 568–72. Piscataway, NJ, 2008. David: unpublished. Elijah (I–V): Edition and ET by S.A. Kaufman, in MHMJS 9–13 (2009). Elijah (II), his Flight from Jezebel: Hom. 112 (B IV, 133–54). FT of Homs 112–15 by F. Graffin and others in Le Saint Prophète Elie d’après les Pères de l’Église, 484–604. Spiritualité Orientale, 53; 1992. Elijah (III) and Naboth: Hom. 113 (B IV, 154–207). Elijah (IV) and king Ahaziah: Hom. 114 (B IV, 207–26). Elijah (V), his Ascent to Heaven: Hom. 115 (B IV, 226–60). Elisha, (I): Hom. 116 (B IV, 261–81). FT of Homs 116–21 and 35 by F. Graffin and others in Le Saint Prophète Élisée d’après les Pères de l’Église, 249–363, 365–82. Spiritualité Orientale, 59; 1993. Edition and ET of Elisha I–VII by S.A. Kaufman, in MHMJS (forthcoming). Elisha (II) and the king of Moab: Hom. 117 (B IV, 282–96). ET in The True Vine 1 (1989): 51–67. Elisha (III) and the Shunamite Woman: Hom. 118 (B IV, 296– 317). Elisha (IV) and Naaman and Gehazi: Hom. 119 (B IV, 318–32). Elisha (V) and the Vision of the Saints: Hom. 120 (B IV, 333–49). Elisha (VI) and the Capture of Samaria: Hom. 121 (B IV, 349–67). Elisha’s bones which raised a dead person: Hom. 35 (B II, 77–94). Ezekiel’s Vision of the dry Bones: unpublished. Ezekiel’s Vision of the Chariot: Hom. 125 (B IV, 543–610). On this mimro see A. Golitzin, in St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 46:2–3 (2003): 323–64, repr. in Scrinium 3 (2003): 180–212. Ezekiel’s Vision of the Torrent: Hom. 164 (B V, 430–47). Flood: Hom. 108 (B IV, 1–61). Gen. 1:26 and Nativity: ed. with FT, Alwan I.

224

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Hosea: ed. + GT by Strothmann, W. Jakob von Sarug: der Prophet Hosea. Göttinger Orientforschungen, Reihe Syriaca, 5; 1973. Isaac’s Blessings on Jacob: Hom. 73 (B III, 175–91). Isaiah and king Uzziah: Hom. 163 (B V, 393–429). Isaiah 9:6: unpublished. Jacob, Rachel, Leah; Christ, the Church and the Synagogue: Hom. 75 (B III, 208–23). ET in The True Vine 4:4 (1993): 50–64. Jacob’s Revelation at Bethel: Hom. 74 (B III, 192–207). FT by F. Graffin in L’Orient Syrien 5 (1960): 227–46. GT in Landersdorfer, 332–43. On this mimro see C. Lange, in The Harp 20 (2006): 209–20. Jacob’s Rods: unpublished. Jephtha’s Daughter: Hom. 159 (B V, 306–30). ET by S.A. Harvey (forthcoming). Job: Hom. 157 (B V, 202–89). Jonah and Nineveh: Hom. 122 (B IV, 368–490). On this mimro see R. Kitchen, in Hugoye 11:1 (2008), and in Kiraz, G., ed. Malphono w-Rabo d-Malphone, 365–81. Piscataway, NJ, 2008. Joseph 1–10: unpublished. Joshua 1–2: unpublished. Lawgiver of Old and New Testament is the same: Hom. 136 (B IV, 803–17). Melkizedek: Hom. 155 (B V, 154–80). ET in The True Vine 2 (1989): 30–55. Melkizedek, ‘You are a priest for ever’: Hom. 41 (B II, 197–209). ET by J. Thekeparampil in The Harp 6 (1993): 53–64. On Melkizedek in Jacob, see Thekeparampil in Lavenant, R., ed. VI Symposium Syriacum, 121–33. Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 247; 1994. Moses and Amalek: unpublished. Moses, Burial of: unpublished. Moses and Burning Bush: unpublished. Moses and Exodus: unpublished. Moses’ Extended Hands: Hom. 158 (B V, 290–306). ___ : unpublished. Moses and Manna: unpublished. Moses and the Rock: unpublished. Moses’ Veil: Hom. 79 (B III, 283–305). Text and ET by S.P. Brock in MHMJS 1 (2009), and ET in Sobornost/Eastern Churches Review 3 (1981): 72–84, repr. in Studies in Syriac Spirituality, 177–

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 225 209. Bangalore, 2008. FT by P. Mouterde, in Dieu Vivant 12 (1948): 49–62, and by J. Babakhan, in La Vie Spirituelle 91 (1954): 142–56. Dutch tr. by Welkenhuysen, A. De Sluier van Mozes. Brugge, 1983; 3rd edn 1994. Moses and Water of Marah: unpublished. Moses’ Words ‘The Lord will raise up for you a prophet like me’: Hom. 110 (B IV, 104–16). Moses and Consecration of the Church: Hom. 3 (B I, 38–48). Moses : unpublished. Passover of the Law and Thursday of Mysteries:—see below. Philistines: unpublished. Phineas: unpublished. Psalm 148: Hom. 106 (B III, 892–906). Rebecca, Betrothal of: unpublished. Excerpts, and FT by F. Graffin, L’Orient Syrien 3 (1958): 324–36. Red Heifer: Hom. 77 (B III, 242–59). ET by D.J. Lane, in The Harp 15 (2002): 25–42. Study by P. Zingerle, in Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 11 (1887): 92–108. Samson (I): Hom. 160 (B V, 331–55). ET in The True Vine 11 (1992): 51–70. Samson (II): Hom. 161 (B V, 355–67). Sinai, Descent of the Most High on: Hom. 2 (B I, 3–38). FT by Babakan, Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 17 (1912), 411–26; 18 (1913), 42–52. Sodom (I): Hom 151 (B V, 61–77). Sodom (II): Hom. 152 (B V, 78–96). Sodom (III): Hom. 153 (B V, 96–116). Sodom (IV): Hom. 154 (B V, 117–53). Solomon’s Judgement: Hom. 111 (B IV, 116–32). Text and ET in S.A. Kaufman, MHMJS 4 (2008). Tamar and Judah: B VI, 255–69. ET by S.P. Brock, in Le Muséon 115 (2002): 293–302. Two Goats: Hom. 78 (B III, 259–83). ET by D.J. Lane, in The Harp 18 (2005): 365–91. Two Sparrows in the Law: Hom. 76 (B III, 224–42). FT by F. Graffin, in L’Orient Syrien 6 (1961): 54–66. Uzzah: unpublished. ‘Vanity of Vanities’: Hom. 104 (B III, 858–75). GT by Deppe, K. Kohelet in der syrischen Dichtung, 68–121. Göttinger Orientforschungen, Reihe Syriaca, 6; 1975.

226

SEBASTIAN BROCK

(b) New Testament Annunciation:—see (c). ‘Are you the one who comes?’: unpublished. ‘Behold, we have left everything’: Hom. 59 (B II, 689–704). Cherub and the Repentant Thief: Hom.177 (B V, 658–87). Christ’s Combat with Satan (I): Hom 82 (B III, 335–63). Christ’s Combat with Satan (II): Hom. 126 (B IV, 610–31). Christ portrayed as Food and Drink: Hom. 43 (B II, 228–244). Christ’s Thirty Years before Miracles: Hom. 81 (B III, 321–34). ET in The True Vine 4 (1990): 37–49. Christ walking on Water: unpublished. Christ as incomprehensible: unpublished. Christ’s body passible before the Resurrection: unpublished. Coin in the Fish: unpublished. Crucifixion: see (c). Emmanuel: Hom. 40 (B II, 184–96). Fig Tree cursed: Hom. 132 (B IV, 724–39). Galatians 6:14: unpublished. ‘In the Beginning was the Word’: Hom. 38 (B II, 158–69). Innocents, Slaughter of: unpublished. Lazarus, Resurrection of: Hom. 93 (B III, 564–81). Magi, Star of, and Slaughter of Innocents: Hom. 6 (B I, 84–152). Mary:—see (c) and (e). Miracles: Canaanite Woman healed: Hom. 17 (B I, 424–44). Centurion’s son healed: Hom. 45 (B II, 265–80). Deaf, Blind and Possessed, healing of: unpublished. Five Loaves and Two Fishes: Hom. 87 (B III, 425–62). Jairus’ Daughter healed: Hom, 91 (B III, 530–45). ___: unpublished. Lame Man healed by Peter and John: Hom. 179 (B V, 708–31). Leper healed: Hom. 44 (B II, 244–64). Man possessed by Legion healed: Hom. 130 (B IV, 683–700). Paralytic aged 38 healed: Hom. 131 (B IV, 701–24). Paralytic healed: unpublished. Three Dead Persons raised: Hom. 48 (B II, 334–47). Timaeus’ blindness healed: Hom. 88 (B III, 462–83). Wedding at Cana: Hom. 167 (B V, 480–94). GT by S. Grill in Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinischen Gesellschaft 8 (1959): 17–28.

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 227 Widow of Nain’s Son raised: Hom. 92 (B III, 546–63). ___: unpublished. Woman bent double, healing of: Hom. 169 (B V, 506–25). Woman with affliction, healing of: Hom. 170 (B V, 525–51). Only-Begotten Word: Hom 39 (B II, 169–84). Parables: Camel and the Rich Man: Hom. 128 (B IV, 649–66). Feast made by King for his Son: Hom. 171 (B V, 551–69). Five Talents: Hom. 173 (B V, 587–613). Good Samaritan: Hom. 47 (B II, 312–33). Kingdom of Heaven as Leaven: Hom. 86 (B III, 411–34). ET in The True Vine 3 (1989): 44–57. Kingdom of Heaven as a Mustard Seed: Hom. 127 (B IV, 632–49). Loaves and Fishes: Hom. 87 (B III, 425–62). Lost Coin and lost Sheep: unpublished. Pharisee and Tax Collector: Hom. 13 (B I, 299–319). ET in The True Vine 9 (1991), 19–34. Prodigal Son: Hom. 12 (B I, 267–99). ET in The True Vine 5:4 (1994), 11–37. ___: Hom. 90 (B III, 500–29). Rich Man and Lazarus: Hom. 16 (B I, 364–424). Ten Virgins: Hom. 50 (B II, 375–401). ET in The True Vine 4:1 (1992): 39–62. Treasure hidden in a field: Hom. 168 (B V, 494–506). Vineyard: Hom. 133 (B IV, 740–66). Wedding Garment: unpublished. Woman with Seven Husbands: Hom. 172 (B V, 569–87). Workers in the Vineyard: Hom. 14 (B I, 320–44). Repentant Thief: Hom. 52 (B II, 428–46). Samaritan Woman: Hom. 46 (B II, 281–312). Signs performed by Christ: Hom. 129 (B IV, 666–83). Simon Peter, Denial of: Hom. 21 (B I, 506–31). Sinful Woman: Hom. 51 (B II, 402–28). ET by S.F. Johnson, Sobornost/Eastern Churches Review 24 (2002): 56–88. Synagogue, adultery of: unpublished. Third Resurrection Appearance: Hom. 178 (B V, 687–707). ‘This one is appointed for Fall and Uprising of Many’: Hom. 166 (B V, 467–80). Two Thieves: unpublished.

228

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Types and Symbols of Christ: Hom. 80 (B III, 305–21). For this cento, see J. Konat, in Le Muséon 118 (2005): 71–86. Widow with Two Small Coins: Hom. 89 (B III, 483–500). Words of Christ: Beatitudes: Hom. 83 (B III, 363–74). ‘Do not swear at all’: Hom. 84 (B III, 375–95). ‘Foxes have holes’: Hom. 85 (B III, 411–24). ‘Get thee behind me, Satan’: Hom. 20 (B I, 482–506). Text with ET by A.C. McCollum, in MHMJS 22 (2009). ‘Our Father...’: Hom. 10 (B I, 212–48). ‘Seek what is above...’: Hom. 105 (B III, 876–92). ‘What will it profit a person...’: Hom. 30 (B I, 683–98). ‘Who do people say I am?: Hom.19 (B I, 460–82). GT in Landersdorfer, 316–32. Zacchaeus the Tax Collector: Hom. 15 (B I, 344–64). Zacharias:—see (c).

(c) Liturgical Year Zachariah, Annunciation to: Hom. 37 (B II, 137–58). Mary, Annunciation to: B VI, 27–49. ET in Hansbury, 43–64. IT in Vona, 135–50. ___: ed. with ET by A. Shemunkasho, in Kiraz, G., ed. Malphono wrabo d-Malphone. ___: unpublished. Visitation of Mary to Elizabeth: B VI, 49–73. ET in Hansbury, 65– 88. IT in Vona, 151–67. Nativity (I): B VI, 108–62. ET in Kollamparampil, 37–93. Nativity (II): B VI, 163–78. ET in Kollamparampil, 94–107. Nativity: B VI, 178–96. ET in Kollamparampil, 108–27. Nativity: unpublished. Epiphany (Baptism of Christ): Hom. 8 (B I, 167–93). ET in Kollamparampil, 159–86, and MHMJS 2 (2008). Presentation: Hom. 165 (B V, 447–66). ET in Kollamparampil, 138–58. Great Fast (I): Hom. 23 (B I, 551–70). Great Fast (II), Hom. 24 (B I, 571–87). Great Fast (III): Hom. 25 (B I, 588–606). Palm Sunday (Hosannas): Hom. 18 (B I, 445–59). ET in Kollamparampil, 246–60, and MHMJS 3 (2008). Monday of Hosannas: Hom. 174 (B V, 613–31).

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 229 Holy Week: 1. Monday: Hom. 53.1 (B II, 447–70). 2. Tuesday, Vigil: Hom. 53.2 (B II, 470–88). 3. Wednesday, Vigil: Hom. 53.3 (B II, 489–504). 4. Thursday, Vigil: Hom. 53.4 (B II, 505–21). 5. Friday, Vigil: Hom. 53.5 (B II, 522–54). 6. Friday of Passion: Hom. 53.6 (B II, 554–79). ET of excerpts by R.H. Connolly, The Downside Review 27 (1908): 285–7. 7. Saturday, Vigil: Hom. 53.6 (B II, 580–98). 8. Sunday, Vigil: Hom. 53.7 (B II, 598- 610). Thursday of the Mysteries: Hom. 175 (B V, 631–41). Friday of the Passion Penitent Thief: Hom. 52 (B II, 428–46). GT in Landersdorfer, 360–74. Two Thieves: unpublished. Cherub and Thief: Hom. 177 (B V, 658–87). GT of excerpts by Zingerle, Theologische Quartalschrift 53 (1871): 417–420. Descent to Sheol: unpublished. Death and Satan: Hom.176 (B V, 641–58). Burial of Christ: unpublished. Resurrection: Hom. 54 (B II, 611–23). ET in Kollamparampil, 292–305, and MHMJS 5 (2008). Resurrection: Hom. 55 (B II, 624–35). ET in Kollamparampil, 306–17, and Kollamparampil in MHMJS 5 (2008). New Sunday: Hom. 57 (B II, 649–69). ET in The True Vine 4:2 (1992), 49–66. Ascension: B VI, 196–220. ET in Kollamparampil, 329–52. Pentecost: Hom. 58 (B II, 670–89). ET in Kollamparampil, 353– 69. GT in Landersdorfer, 271–85. Transfiguration: Hom. 49 (B II, 347–75). ET in Kollamparampil, 201–30, and MHMJS 8 (2008). FT by E. Khoury, Parole de l’Orient 15 (1988/9), 65–90.

(d) Other liturgical Baptisms, the Three: Hom. 7 (B I, 153–67). See (f), under Three Baptisms. Burial of Strangers: ed. with FT, by P. Mouterde, in Mélanges de l’Université Saint Joseph 26 (1944/6): 15–22.

230

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Consecration of Church: Hom. 134 (B IV, 767–89). GT by Grill, S. Jakob von Sarug. Die Kirche und die Forschung. Heiligenkreuzer Studien, 13; 1963. Myron, consecration of (also attributed to George bp of the Arab tribes): 3 Ryssel, V., ed. Poemi siriaci di Giorgio, vescovo degli Arabi, 48–80. Atti, Accademia dei Lincei, Cl. Sc.Mor., Stor. et Filol., IV.9; 1892. GT by Ryssel, V. Georgs des Araberbischofs Gedichte und Briefe, 14–36. Leipzig, 1891. Mysteries, reception of: Hom. 95 (B III, 646–63). Text and ET by A. Harrak, in MHMJS 17 (2009). ET of excerpts by R.H. Connolly, in The Downside Review 27 (1908): 278–87. FT by J. van der Ploeg, in Studi e Testi 233 (1964): 401–18. Praise at Morning and Evening: Hom. 107 (B III, 907–12). ET in The True Vine 7:2 (1998): 59–64. Praise at Table, 1–8: Homs 139–46 (B IV, 872–914).

(e) Saints Abhai: unpublished. Addai: unpublished. Apostles: unpublished. Bacchus: BA VI, 650–61. Barsauma: unpublished. Behnam: unpublished. Confessors and Martyrs: Hom. 56 (B II, 636–49). Constantine, Baptism of: B VI, 297–323. IT in Frothingham, 33– 52. On this mimro see M. Kohlbacher, in Tamcke, M., ed. Syriaca, 29–76. Münster, 2002. Dimet: unpublished. Ephesus, Sleepers of: B VI, 324–30. ET by S.P. Brock, in Allen, P., and others, eds. Festschrift for Michael Lattke, 13–30. Early Christian Studies, 12. Strathfield, NSW, 2007. LT by Benedictus, P. Acta Sanctorum Julii VI, 387–8. Antwerp, 1729. Ed. and IT of expanded recension in I. Guidi, 29–32.

The mimro is attributed to Jacob in Damascus, Patr. 12/15 (no. 102) and in several other manuscripts. 3

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 231 Ephrem: BA III, 665–79; better edition by Amar, PO, 47:1; 1995, with ET. George: Hom. 181 (B V, 747–70). Gurya:—see under Shmona. Habbib: BA I, 160–72. ET by Cureton, W. Ancient Syriac Documents, 86–96. London, 1864, and by R. Doran in Valentasis, R. Religions in Late Antiquity, 413–23. Princeton, 2000. Helena: see Cross, finding of (in (f) below). John the Baptist, Praises of: Hom. 97 (B III, 687–710). FT of excerpts by J. Babakan, Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 19 (1914): 150–3. John the Baptist, Beheading of: Hom. 96 (B III, 664–87). Abbreviated FT by Babakan in Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 19 (1914): 67–8, 1434–8. John the Evangelist: Hom. 60 (B II, 705–16). Juliana Saba: unpublished. Laurentios: unpublished. Martyrs: Hom. 56 (B II, 636–49); also attributed to Narsai). Martyrs, Forty (of Sebaste): BA VI, 662–73. Mary: 4 B VI, 2–27. ET in True Vine 5:1 (1994), 2–28, and in Hansbury, 17–42. GT in Landersdorfer, 285–303. IT in Vona, 115–34. LT in Abbeloos, 202–53. Mary, her Virginity: B VI, 73–96. ET in Puthuparampil, J. The Mariological Thought of Mar Jacob of Serugh. Moran Etho, 25; 2005, Appendix, i–xxi. IT in Vona, 169–85. LT in Abbeloos, 256–301. Mary and Golgotha: ed. with FT, by P. Mouterde, in Mélanges de l’Université Saint Joseph 26 (1944/6): 9–14. Mary, her Death: B VI, 97–107. ET in Hansbury, 89–100, and by Shoemaker, S.J. Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary’s Dormition and Assumption, 408–14. Oxford, 2002; IT by Vona, 187–94. LT by A. Baumstark, Oriens Christianus 5 (1905): 91–99. Paul: Hom. 62 (B II, 747–69). ET in The True Vine 10 (1991): 57– 73. Paul, Conversion of: Hom. 61, (B II, 717–47) Many excerpts on Mary, drawn from Jacob’s mimre, are to be found in Bedjan, P. Mois de Marie, 1–57, Pairs/Leipzig, 1904. 4

232

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Paul, Peter and John at Antioch: B VI, 270–96. ET by Thomas, L.A.R. The Legend concerning Peter at Antioch in Syriac Tradition. BLitt. Diss. Oxford, 1978. Saint, any: unpublished. Sergius: BA VI, 650–61. Sharbel: Moesinger, Monumenta Syriaca II, 52–63. Innsbruck, 1878. Shmona: BA I, 131–43. ET by Cureton, W. Ancient Syriac Documents, 96–106. London, 1864; GT in Landersdorfer, 374–86. Shmoni and her 7 children (Maccabees): unpublished. Simeon the Stylite: BA IV, 650–65. ET by S.A. Harvey, in Wimbush, V.L., ed. Ascetic Behavior in Graeco-Roman Antiquity, 15–38. Minneapolis, 1990. FT (from GT) by Blersch, H.G. La colonne au carrefour du monde. Spiritualité Orientale, 77; 2001. GT in Landersdorfer, 387–405. IT by I. Pizzi, in Bessarione III.4 (Anno 12, 1908): 18–29. See also S.A. Harvey, in Aram 5 (1993): 219–41. Stephen: Hom. 98 (B III, 710–23). ET in The True Vine 7 (1990): 43–54. Theodore: unpublished. Thomas I: Hom. 99 (B III, 724–62). GT in Strothmann, Thomas, 27–163. Thomas II: ed. with GT in Strothmann, Thomas, 165–289. Thomas, Palace in air: Hom. 100 (B III, 763–94); GT of short recension by R. Schröter, in Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 25 (1871): 40–65, 321–77; cf 28 (1874): 584–626; ed. with GT of long recension in Strothmann, Thomas, 291–447.

(f) Other topics Abgar: see Addai in (e). Admonition: Hom. 1 (B I, 1–2). Admoition: Hom. 182 (B V, 771–84). Admonition: unpublished. Alexander the Great: ed. with GT, G.J. Reinink, CSCO, 454–5; Scr.Syri, 195–6; 1983, replacing older editions. Amid, sack of: unpublished. Assembly of Bishops: unpublished. Blasphemers, against: unpublished.

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 233 Body and Soul: SM 95–102. GT by H.J.W. Drijvers, in Reinink, G.J., and H.L.J. Vanstiphout, eds. Dispute Poems and Dialogues, 121–34. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 42; 1991. Chalcedon, Council of: B VI, 331–37. ET by S.P. Brock in Abp Methodios, ed., Texts and Studies (Athens) 8/10 (1989/91): 448–59; FT by G. Krüger in L’Orient Syrien 2 (1957): 125–36. Choice foods: unpublished. Consolation: BA VI, 674–89. Cross, finding of: unpublished. Day and Night, Work and Rest: unpublished. Departed bishops: unpublished. Departed priests: unpublished. Departed deacons: unpublished. Departed monks: unpublished. Departed strangers: unpublished. Departed bnat qyama: Hom. 191 (B V, 821–36). On this mimro see R.A. Kitchen, in Hugoye 7:2 (2004). Departed children: Hom. 189 (B V, 804–16). Departed, Commoration of: Hom. 22 (B I, 535–50 = BA V, 615– 627). ET by R.H. Connolly, in The Downside Review 29 (1910): 262–70, and Anon. in The True Vine 5 (1990): 41–53. GT in Landersdorfer, 304–15. Spanish tr. (< GT) in Textos eucaristicos primitivos II, 563–71. Madrid, 1954. Departed: Hom. 69 (B II, 873–77). Departed: Hom. 183 (B V, 781–4). Partial GT by Zingerle, Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 20 (1866): 521–6. IT by G. Rinaldi, Aevum 22 (1948): 88–90. Departed: unpublished. Disputers: unpublished. Edessa and Jerusalem: Hom. 180 (B V, 731–47). GT by P. Bruns, in Arnzen, R., and Thielmann, J., eds. Words, Texts and Concepts, 537–53. OLA 139; 2004. End: Homs 31–2 (B I, 698–713, 713–20). FT in Isabaert-Cauuet, 17–50. ___: Homs 67–8 (B II, 836–58, 858–72). FT in Isabaert-Cauuet, 51–103. ___: Homs 192–5 (B V, 836–99). FT in Isabaert-Cauuet, 105–96. FT of Hom. 194 by Babakan in Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 18 (1913): 358–74. ___: unpublished.

234

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Faith: Hom. 94 (B III, 581–646). GT of excerpts by G. Krüger, in Ostkirchliche Studien 23 (1974): 188–96. ___: unpublished. Fall of idols: Hom. 101 (B III, 795–823). FT by J.P.P. Martin, in Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 29 (1876): 107–47. GT in Landersdorfer, 406–31. Hour of Death: unpublished. Jews, against the: 7 homilies, ed. with FT, M. Albert. PO, 38; 1976. Kingdom and Gehenna: unpublished. Locusts, plague of: unpublished. Love: Hom. 26 (B I, 606–27). ET by Anon. in James of Serugh. A Song about Love. Aide Inter-Monastères, 1992. FT by E. Khalifé-Hachem, in Parole de l’Orient 1 (1970): 281–99. Love of Money: Hom. 103 (B III, 842–58). Abbreviated FT by Babakan in Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 19 (1914): 61–7. Love of the World: unpublished. Martyrion of St Stephen, Amid: unpublished. Monks:—see Solitaries. Nicaea, Council of: B VI, 231–54. Poor, Complaint of: unpublished. Priesthood: ed. with FT by M. Albert, in Parole de l’Orient 10 (1981/2): 54–65. Priests: unpublished. Repentance: Hom. 28–29 (B I, 646–66, 666–8). Repentance: unpublished. Rome, Conversion of by Peter: unpublished. Sacrifices: unpublished. Satan: unpublished. Solitaries: Homs 137–8 (B IV, 818–36, 836–71). Sophists: unpublished. Supplication: unpublished. Theatre (fragments): ed. with ET C. Moss, in Le Muséon 48 (1935), 87–112. Three Baptisms: Hom. 7 (B I, 153–67). Abbreviated ET by S.P. Brock, in Finn, T. Early Christian Baptism and the Catechumenate. West and East Syria, 189–97. Collegeville, 1992. I.2. Madroshe/Sughyotho On Edessa: ed. with ET by Cureton, W. Ancient Syriac Documents, 107*–108*, 106–7. London, 1864; repr. 1967.

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 235 On the Soul: ed. with ET by S.P. Brock (see 29–37 in this volume). Dialogue sughyotho attributed to Jacob: Sinful Woman and Satan; Church and Sion, Church and Synagogue; Joseph and Potiphar’s Wife. For these, and other sughyotho/madroshe attributed to Jacob, see S.P. Brock, ‘Jacob’s forgotten sughyotho’, 39–50 in this volume). I.3. Turgome (Six Prose Homilies). Editions: Brock, S.P. Shto turgome d-qadisho mor Ya‘qub da-Srug malfono. Monastery of St Ephrem, Holland, 1984. Rilliet, F. Jacques de Sarug. Six homélies festales en prose. Patrologia Orientalis, 43; 1986. Translations: Complete ET in Kollamparampil: I (Nativity) = pp. 128–36; II (Epiphany) = pp. 187–200; III (Great Fast) = pp. 231–45; IV (Palm Sunday) = pp. 261–77; V (Friday of the Passion) = pp. 278–91; VI (Resurrection) = pp. 318–28. Complete FT in Rilliet; and GT in Zingerle, P. Sechs Homilie des heiligen Jacobs von Sarug. Bonn/Aldenburg, 1887. Dutch tr. of I and II by K. den Biesen, in Het christelijk Oosten 48 (1996): 183–94, and 50 (1998): 167–83. 1.4. Lives of Saints (prose) Daniel of Galash: unpublished. Summary in A.N. Palmer, “Sisters, fiancées, wives and mothers of Syrian Holy Men.” In Lavenant, R., ed. V Symposium Syriacum 1988, 209–14. Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 236; 1990. Hannina: unpublished. Summary in Nau, F. “Hagiographie syriaque: Histoire de Mar Hannina.” Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 15 (1910): 62–4. I.5. Letters (Forty three) Edition: Olinder, G. Iacobi Sarugenseis Epistulae quotquot supersunt. CSCO, II.45; Scr. Syri, 57; 1937. Translation (French): Albert, M. Les Lettres de Jacques de Saroug. Patrimoine Syriaque, 3. Kaslik, 2004. Review by T. Bou Mansour, in Parole de l’Orient 34 (2009): 539–55.

236

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Studies: Albert, M. “A propos des citations scripturaires de la correspondence de Jacques de Saroug.” Studia Patristica 35 (2001): 345–52. Grill, S. “Der doppelte Stammbaum Christi nach Jacob von Sarug, Brief 23,6.” Texte und Untersuchungen 133 (1987): 203–9. Martin, J.-P.P. “Lettres de Jacques de Saroug aux moines du couvent de Mar Bassus.” Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 30 (1876) : 217–75. Krüger, P. “Le caractère monophysite de la troisième lettre de Jacques de Saroug.” L’Orient Syrien 6 (1961): 301–8. Olinder, G. The Letters of Jacob of Sarug. Comments on an Edition. Lunds Universitets Årsskrift, N.F. Avd. 1, Bd 34, Nr 8. Lund, 1939. Schröter, R. “Trostschreiben Jacob’s von Sarug an die himjaritischen Christen.” Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 31 (1877): 360–405. I.5. Liturgical Texts attributed to Jacob

(a) Anaphoras Editions and translations: Three Anaphoras, ed. with LT by H.W. Codrington, in Anaphorae Syriacae II.i, 1–83. Rome, 1951. Ed. with ET of First Anaphora in Samuel, A.Y. Anaphoras. The Book of Divine Liturgies, 347–82. Lodi, NJ, 1991.

(b) Baptismal rite Editions and translations: ed. with LT by Assemani, J.A. Codex Liturgicus II, 309–50; III,184–7. Rome, 1749–50. LT in Denzinger, H. Ritus Orientalium I, 334–50. Würzburg, 1863. Photographic edition of Vatican Syr. 313, Paris Syr. 116–119, with FT: Mouhanna, A. Les rites de l’initiation dans l’Église Maronite. Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 212; 1980. Study: Mouhanna, Les rites de l’initiation.

(c) Bo‘awotho Bo‘awotho in the twelve-syllable metre are regularly ascribed to Jacob, and many are in fact excerpted, or adapted, from his mimre.

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 237

II. BIOGRAPHIES ETC. OF JACOB There are a number of Lives (some in the form of panegyrics); details of manuscripts can be found in Vööbus, Handschriftliche Überlieferung I, pp. 1–16 (full title in III.2); these have been published as follows: II.1. Short biography, ed. with LT by Abbeloos, J.B. De vita et scriptis D. Jacobi..., 311–4. Louvain, 1867, taken from British Library, Add. 12174 of AD 1196/7. This reads: The father of this holy man was from Kurtam, on the Euphrates, His mother was barren, and her husband brought her to Mari of Barhadat, 5 and they prayed there. In accordance with God’s will, he slept with her and she gave birth to a miraculous son. When he was three years old his parents brought him to pray there, on the Commemoration of the small child Mar Moqim. With a large crowd standing around, and when the House of God full of all sorts of peoples who had come to pray in the holy shrine, and the sanctuary was filled with priests, at the time when the Holy Spirit stirred to descend (at the Epiclesis) to sanctify the Body of our Life-giver, our Lord and our God and our Saviour, Jesus Christ, (Jacob) pushed his way through the people standing in the House of God and went up to the holy sanctuary; he stopped in front of the Table of Life, with the eyes of everyone in the Martyrion fixed on him, and the angel of the Lord stirred and descended, giving him the gift of God. He stretched out his hands and drank three handfuls—like Ezekiel eating from the scroll. And from that moment the Spirit of the Lord alighted upon him and he began to utter discourse that was out of the norm. He grew up in the Hawra of Serugh, and became periodeutes there. He composed numerous mimre there, and the Spirit called him and made him Pastor in the church of Batnan of Serugh. He wrote compositions, turgome, and also narratives and sughyotho. His teaching was glorious and unerring. His Lord was pleased and delighted with him. We find that his teaching was the equivalent of fifty prophets: the mimre Abbeloos translates ‘to Mar Barhadath’, but the dolath before Barhadath makes that impossible. 5

238

SEBASTIAN BROCK

numbered 763. The last mimro that he composed, but did not complete, was on Mary and Golgotha. Mar Jacob lived in the time of Mar Severus, whom he went to visit and to receive a blessing from him, He went there in the company of many bishops from the entire Orient. Time is too short for us to recount his way of life, right up to the day of his death, his modesty, sanctity, his purity and asceticism, his vigils and labour, his toil and ministry, his tears and his groans, his love, his virtue and his prayers. May his prayer and supplication be for us a protective wall and refuge at all times, for eternal ages. II.2. Short notice, ed. with LT in Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis I, 206–9, taken from Vatican Syr. 37, dated 1626/7. This reads: The holy Mar Jacob the Teacher, the Flute of the Holy Spirit and the Lyre of the faithful Church, was from the village of Kurtam on the river Euphrates. He was the child of a vow by his faithful parents, who were barren. After he was born, when he was three years old, his mother was present at one of the Feasts of our Lord, and at the moment in the Anaphora of the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Mysteries, the holy child got down from his mother’s arms pushed his way through the people and went to the Holy Table where he partook of three drafts of the Holy Spirit. From then on he began to pour forth mimre and teachings. Once the bishops heard of him they came along to investigate him; they instructed him to utter a mimro on the Chariot which Ezekiel saw. He began to utter ‘O Exalted One who is seated upon the Chariot of the Heavenly Beings...’. They then told him to set down in writing his teaching in the Church, so he began to compose mimre and teachings in the Church when he was 22. Subsequently, when he was sixty seven and a half years old, he became bishop in the town of Serugh, this being 830 of the Greeks (= AD 518/9), in the 519th year after the coming of Christ. Having filled the Church with life-giving doctrine and having ... the entire world with his teaching and glorious , he departed to his Lord. He was buried with honour in his town of Serugh in the year 833, on the 29th November (= AD 521). The total years of his life were 70, 67 and a half of which were before he became bishop, and two and a half while he was bishop.

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 239 II.3. Biography in Mardin Orth. 256, dated 1665. This was described by Vööbus in “Eine unbekannte Biographie des Ja‘qob von Sarug,” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 23 (1974): 399– 405. This informative text certainly deserves to be published; according to Vööbus, it alone could be considered to be a proper biography. II.4. Panegyric, ed. with LT in Abbeloos, De vita et scriptis D. Jacobi..., 24–85, taken from Vatican Syr. 117 of 12th/13th cent. Assemani attributed it to George, a disciple of Jacob, but this cannot be correct; In other manuscripts it is attributed to a Habbib or to Patriarch bar Shushan. The text of a different manuscript (Paris Syr. 177) was edited (with GT) by Krüger, P. “Ein bislang unbekannter sermo über Leben und Werk des Jacob von Sarug.” Oriens Christianus 56 (1972): 80– 111. Vööbus, Handschriftliche Überlieferung, I, 8–13, lists a number of other witnesses to the text. II.5. Another long Panegyric, by Sa‘id bar Sabuni (d. 1095) was edited by Krüger (from Paris Syr. 177) in “Ein zweiter anonyme memra über Jacob von Sarug.” Oriens Christianus 56 (1972): 112–49. Vööbus, Handschriftliche Überlieferung, I, 13–16, lists several considerably earlier manuscripts, among which Chicago, Oriental Institute A. 12,008, of the 12th/13th century, is probably correct naming the author as Sa‘id bar Sabuni. II.6. The late Mar Philoxenos Yuhanon Dolabani (d. 1969) published a short biography of Jacob based on earlier Syriac sources, under the title Swodo mphaygono ‘al hayyaw wmalphonutheh d-qadisho Mar Ya‘qob Malphono. Mardin, 1952.

III. STUDIES (SELECT) III.1. General Introductions Abbeloos, J.B. De vita et scriptis D. Jacobi Batnarum Sarugi in Mesopotamia episcopi. Louvain, 1867. Assemani, J.S. Bibliotheca Orientalis I, 283–340. Rome, 1719, and reprints. Barsoum, I.A. The Scattered Pearls. A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 255–61. Piscataway, NJ, 22003.

240

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Baumstark, A. Geschichte der syrischen Literatur, 148–58. Bonn, 1922. Graffin, F. “Jacques de Saroug.” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 8 (1974): 56–60. Hage, W. “Jakob von Sarug.” Theologische Realenzyklopädie 16 (1987): 470–74. Lange, C. “Jakob von Sarug.” In Klein, W., ed. Syrische Kirchenväter, 217–27. Stuttgart, 2004. Ortiz de Urbina, I. Patrologia Syriaca, 104–9. Rome, 21965. Rilliet, F. “Jakob von Sarug.” Realenzyklopädie für Antike und Christentum 16 (1994): 1217–27. Tisserant, E. “Jacques de Saroug.” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique 8:1 (1924): 300–5. III.2. Monographs Alwan, Kh. Anthropologie de Jacques de Saroug: l’homme ‘microcosme’, avec une bibliographie générale raisonnée. Diss. Kaslik, 1988. [See also under 3, below]. Bou Mansour, T. La théologie de Jacques de Saroug. I, Création, anthropologie, ecclésiologie et sacrements. Kaslik, 1993; II, Christologie, Trinité, eschatologie, méthode exégétique et théologique. Kaslik, 2000. Kollamparampil, T. Salvation in Christ according to Jacob of Serugh: a Exegetico-Theological Study of the Homilies of Jacob of Serugh on the Feasts of our Lord. Bangalore/Rome, 2001. Puthuparampil, J. The Mariological Thought of Mar Jacob of Serugh (451– 521). Moran Etho, 25. Kottayam, 2005. Sony, B. La doctrine de Jacques de Saroug sur la création et l’anthropologie. Diss. Rome, 1989. [See also under 3, below]. Vööbus, A. Handschriftliche Überlieferung der Memre-Dichtung des Ja‘qob von Serug, I–IV. CSCO, 344–5, 421–2 = Subs. 39–40, 60–61; 1973, 1980. III.3. Articles on specific topics Albert, M. “Jacques de Saroug et le Magistère.” Parole de l’Orient 17 (1992): 61–71. Alwan, Kh. “L’Homme, le ‘microcosme’ chez Jacques de Saroug.” Parole de l’Orient 13 (1986): 51–77. ___. “Le remzo selon la pensée de Jacques de Saroug.” Parole de l’Orient 15 (1988/9): 91–106.

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 241 Alwan, Kh. “Était-il mortel our immortel, l’homme, avant le péché pour Jacques de Saroug?” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 55 (1989): 5–31. Black, M. “The Gospel text of Jacob of Serug.” Journal of Theological Studies NS 2 (1951): 57–63. Blum, J.G.“Zum Bau von Abschnitten in Memre von Jakob von Sarug.” In III Symposium Syriacum, 307–21. Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 221; 1983. Bou Mansour, T. “L’Eucharistie chez Jacques de Saroug.” Parole de l’Orient 17 (1992): 37–59. ___. “Die christologie des Jakob von Sarug.” In Grillmeier, A. (ed. Th. Hainthaler). Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche, II.3, 449–99. Freiburg, 2002. Brock, S.P. “Baptismal themes in the writings of Jacob of Serugh.” In II Symposium Syriacum, 325–47. Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 205; 1978. ___. “The Wedding Feast of Blood: an unusual aspect of John 19:34 in Syriac tradition.” The Harp 6:2 (1993): 121–34. ___. “An extract from Jacob of Serugh in the East Syrian Hudra.” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 55 (1989): 339–43. [Turgomo on Resurrection]. ___. “Dieu Amour et Amour de Dieu chez Jacques de Saroug.” In Dieu miséricorde, Dieu d’Amour, 173–83. Patrimoine Syriaque, Colloque VIII. Antelias, 2002. Carr, E. “L’Hodie nei sermoni ritmici di Giacobbe di Serug per le grande feste.” Ecclesia Orans 16 (1999): 17–28. Connolly, R.H. “Jacob of Serug and the Diatessaron.” Journal of Theological Studies 8 (1907): 581–90. Cramer, W. “Irrtum und Lüge. Zum Urteil des Jakob von Sarug über Reste paganer Religion und Kultur.” Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 23 (1980): 96–107. den Biesen, K. “Giacomo di Sarug predicatore.” In Vergani, E., and S. Chialà, eds. La tradizione cristiana Siro-occidentale (V– VII secolo), 109–27. Milan, 2007. Golitzin, A. “The image and glory of God in Jacob of Serugh’s homily ‘On that Chariot that Ezekiel the prophet saw.” St Vladimir’s Seminary Theological Quarterly 47:3/4 (2003): 323–64. Reprinted in Scrinium (St Petersburg) 3 (2007): 180–212. Graffin, F. “Le thème de la perle chez Jacques de Saroug.” L’Orient Syrien 12 (1967): 355–70.

242

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Guinan, M. “Where are the dead? Purgatory and immediate retribution in James of Serugh.” In Ortiz de Urbina, I., ed. [I] Symposium Syriacum, 541–50. Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 197; 1974. Harvey, S.A. “Interior decorating: Jacob of Serugh on Mary’s preparation for the Incarnation.” Studia Patristica 411 (2006): 23–28. ___. “Bride of Blood, Bride of Light: biblical women as images of the Church in Jacob of Serugh.” In Kiraz, G, ed. Malphono w-Rabo d-Malphone. Studies in Honor of Sebastian P. Brock, 177– 204. Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies, 3. Piscataway, NJ, 2008. Jansma, T. “The credo of Jacob of Serugh: a return to Nicaea and Constantinople.” Nederlandsch Archiev voor Kerkgeschiedenis 44 (1960): 18–36. ___. “Encore le credo de Jacques de Saroug.” L’Orient Syrien 10 (1965): 75–88, 193–236, 331–70, 475–510. ___. “Die Christologie Jakobs von Serugh und ihre Abhängigkeit Ephraems des Syrers.” Le Muséon 78 (1965): 5–46. Kollamparampil, T. “Adam-Christ complementarity and the economy of salvation in Jacob of Serugh.” The Harp 13 (2000): 147–70. Konat, J. “Christological insights in Jacob of Serugh’s typology as reflected in his memre.” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 77 (~2001): 46–72. ___. “Typological exegesis in the metrical homilies of Jacob of Serugh.” Parole de l’Orient 31 (2006): 109–21. Krüger, P. “Die kirchliche Zugehörigkeit Jacobs von Serugh im Lichte der handschriftliche Überlieferung seiner Vita unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Pariser Handschrift 177.” Ostkirchliche Studien 13 (1964): 15–32. ___. “Zwei Bemerkungen über die Privatbeichte bei Jakob von Serugh.” Ostkirchliche Studien 19 (1970): 44–5. ___. “Neues über die Frage der Konfessionszugehörigkeit Jakobs von Serugh.” In Wegzeichen. Festgabe ... H.M. Biedermann, 245– 253. Würzburg, 1971. Lane, D.J. “ ‘There is no need of turtle doves or young pigeons’ (Jacob of Sarug). Quotations and non-quotations of Leviticus in selected Syriac writers.” In ter Haar Romeny, R.B., ed. The

JACOB OF SERUGH: A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE 243 Peshitta. Its use in Literature and Liturgy. Third Peshitta Symposium, 143–58. Leiden, 2006. Martin, J.-P.P. “Un évêque poète au Ve et au VIe siècles, ou Jacques de Saroug: sa vie, son temps, ses oeuvres, ses croyances.” Revue des Sciences Ecclésiastiques IV.3 (1876): 309–52, 385–419. Menze, V. “Jacob of Serugh, John of Tella and Paul of Edessa: ecclesiastical politics in Osrhoene 519–522.” In Kiraz G., ed. Malphono w-Rabo d-Malphone. Studies in Honor of Sebastian P. Brock, 421–38. Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies, 3. Piscataway, NJ, 2008. Morrison, C. “David’s opening speech (I Sam 17:34–37a) according to Jacob of Serugh.” In Kiraz G., ed. Malphono w-Rabo dMalphone. Studies in Honor of Sebastian P. Brock, 477–96. Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies 3; Piscataway NJ, 2008. Palmer, A.N. “What Jacob actually wrote about Ephrem.” In Gerhards, A., and C. Leonhard, eds. Jewish and Christian Liturgy: New Insights, 145–65. Leiden, 2007. Papoutsakis, M. “Formulaic language in the metrical homilies of Jacob of Serugh.” In Lavenant, R., ed. Symposium Syriacum VII, 445–51. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 256; 1998. Peeters, P. “Jacques de Saroug appartient-il à la secte monophysite?” Analecta Bollandiana 66 (1948): 134–98. Rilliet, F. “Rhétorique et style à l’époque de Jacques de Saroug.” In Drijvers, H.J.W., and others, eds., IV Symposium Syriacum, 289– 95. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 229; 1987. ___. “La métaphore du chemin dans la sotériologie de Jacques de Saroug.” Studia Patristica 25 (1993): 324–31. ___. “Une victime du tournant des études syriaques à la fin du XIXe siècle: Retrospective sur Jacques de Saroug dans la science occidentale.” Aram 5 (1993): 465–80. ___. “Deux homéliaires sarougiens du VIe siècle à la Bibliothèque Vaticane.” in Miscellanea Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae (Studi et Testi 416; 2003), 293–337. Samir, Kh. “Un exemple des contacts culturels entre les Églises syriaques et arabes: Jacques de Saroug das la tradition arabe.” In Lavenant, R., ed. III Symposium Syriacum, 213–45. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 221; 1983. Scopello, M. “Jacques de Sarough et l’Exegèse de l’Âme.” Deuxième journée d’études coptes, 130–6. Cahiers de la Bibliothèque Copte, 3; 1986 [On Hom. VI against the Jews].

244

SEBASTIAN BROCK

Sony, B.M.B. “La méthode exégétique de Jacques de Saroug.” Parole de l’Orient 9 (1979/80): 67–103. ___. “L’Anthropologie de Jacques de Saroug.” Parole de l’Orient 12 (1984/5): 153–85. Sony, B.M.B. “La dette commune (Hawbat gawo)” [in Jacob]. In Patrimoine Syriaque, Colloque IV, 111–36. Antélias, 1997. Thekeparampil, J. “Simon chez Ephrem et Jacques de Saroug.” In Saint Ephrem, un poète pour notre temps, 109–23. Patrimoine Syriaque, Colloque XI. Antelias, 2007. ___. “St Peter in the homilies of Jacob of Serugh.” Parole de l’Orient 31 (2006): 123–32. Uhlig, S. “Dersan des Ya‘qob von Sarug.” Aethiopica 2 (1999): 7–52. Wurmbrand, M. “Dersana, une homélie éthiopienne attribuée à Jacques de Saroug.” L’Orient Syrien 8 (1963): 343–94. Zingerle, P. “Über Jakob von Sarug und seine Typologie.” Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 11 (1887): 92–108; FT by Forthomme, B. “La typologie de Jacques de Saroug.” In Splendeur du Carmel, 50–63. Beirut, 1996. III.4. For further bibliography A very full bibliography on Jacob was provided by Alwan, Kh. “Bibliographie générale raisonnée de Jacques de Saroug.” Parole de l’Orient 13 (1986): 313–83. Subsequent bibliography can be found in Brock, S.P. Syriac Studies: a classified bibliography (1960–1990). Kaslik, 1996, and the subsequent five-yearly updates published in Parole de l’Orient 23 (1998) for 1991–1995, 29 (2004) for 1996–2000, and 33 (2008) for 2001–2005.

A REFLECTION ON THE OCCASION OF THE BLESSING OF AN ICON OF MAR JACOB OF SERUG MARY HANSBURY There is a tendency to consider the Syriac tradition as aniconic. Yet the display presented at this conference by Amir Harrak of art from Mossul alone provides a wealth of visual imagery. It would be daunting for a present day iconographer to duplicate the color and detail of the “Entry of Jesus into Jerusalem,” from the Monastery of Mar Matta in Iraq. 1 Robert Murray finds already in St. Ephrem the roots of iconography. He refers to the Commentary on the Diatessaron 1.25 (The Birth of Jesus Foretold) where at the words of the angel: “… you shall call his name Jesus,” Ephrem says: “He was speaking about him who was to appear in the Body. He did not say to her, ‘That name which is called Jesus,’ but, You shall call his name. This shows that this name is of the economy which is through the Body, since Jesus in Hebrew means Saviour. For [the angel] said, You shall call his name Jesus, that is Saviour, for he shall save his people from their sins. This name therefore refers not to his nature but to his deeds.”

Murray sees this as assuring that God incarnate bears the personal name ‘Jesus’,” leading to “true access to the transcendent, incomprehensible and infinite Godhead itself,” which Murray May be found in Ettinghausen, R. La Peinture Arabe, 94, Geneva: Skira, 1962. 1

245

246

MARY HANSBURY

considers to be an early formulation of the doctrine of analogy. 2 He says in some respects it anticipates the symbolic theology of the Iconodule Fathers and classical Byzantine iconographical theory. 3 These comments by Murray come out of the larger context of the study of the role of human names in divine revelation as analyzed extensively by T. Koonammakkal. 4 Another perspective on Ephrem’s symbolism is offered by S.H. Griffith in his article, “The Image of the Image Maker.” 5 Griffith sees the image of the image maker as “Ephrem’s primary analogate for the whole business of divine communication with human beings, and for their attempts to give expression to their knowledge of God in turn.” Griffith then outlines four approaches to Ephrem’s use of the image maker’s craft and concludes with the following: Already in the Scriptures, of course, God along with His Son according to Ephraem, is the primordial image maker who made man in His own image and likeness (Gen. 1.26). So it is only a small step to picture God, or Christ, as the artist who in

Murray, R. “The Theory of Symbolism in St. Ephrem’s Theology,” Parole de l’Orient 6/7 (1975–76): 10. 3 Murray, R. Symbols of Church and Kingdom, 166, London; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1975. 4 Koonammakkal, T. The Theology of Divine Names in the Genuine Works of Ephrem, unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Oxford, 1991. In a cross-cultural context one notes with interest the tendency of Shantao (613–681), a Chinese Buddhist of the Pure Land school, to combine the verbal and the visual. He is thought to have been influenced by the Syriac presence in China and was a proponent of the recitation of the name of Buddha. He was also an accomplished iconographer. See my article “Calling on the Name: Roots and Influence,” in Kiraz, G., ed. Malphono wRabo d-Malphone. Studies in Honor of Sebastian P Brock, 171–6, Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2008. 5 Griffith, S.H. “The Image of the Image Maker,” Studia Patristica 25 (1993): 258–63. 2

A REFLECTION ON THE OCCASION OF THE BLESSING

247

the scriptures has painted pictures of the hole economy of salvation in the words and deeds of the prophets and apostles. 6

The following stanza is a wonderful example in Ephrem of God as the image maker: The scattered mysteries (râzê) from the Torah, You have gathered beside Your beauty; The figures (tapṉkê) which are in Your Gospel You have put forth. And forces (haïlê) and signs (rušm̄ê) from nature, You have mixed like pigments for Your image (ṣurtâ). 7

Griffith concludes by emphasizing again that “Ephraem does not simply compare figural art to eloquence in terms of its communicative potential,” rather “in Ephraem’s hymns and homilies the figural representation is the primary analogate, and eloquence, even in the Scriptures, is described in terms which belong to the wortfeld of the image maker’s craft, and not vice versa.” 8 Art theorists have been reflecting recently together with New Testament scholars on the significance of various aspects of the development of the New Testament canon, as to what manuscript traditions were not included, specifically the Aramaic and therefore any occurrence of Memra in John’s Gospel. Memra has different valences than does Logos, particularly visual ones, so that if Memra had been found in the Prologue, through the ages we might have been saying: “In the beginning was the Image.” This would have altered and perhaps enriched our appreciation of image in Scripture and in the life of faith. 9 Griffith, “Image,” 262–4. My translation, Hymn of Virginity 28.2. 8 Griffith, “Image,” 267–8. 9 See Rigg, M. “In the Beginning Was the Image…” Arts: the Arts in Religious and Theological Studies 31(1990): 18–19. The author extended her remarks in a telephonic conversation. For a survey of relevant Patristic evidence see Sr. Mary Charles Murray, “Art and the Tradition: Theology, Art, and Meaning,” Arts: the Arts in Religious and Theological Studies 53 (1993): 10–17. Ephrem comments on this aspect as well, see Commentary 6 7

248

MARY HANSBURY

There is a certain contextuality of the thinking of these art theorists with the tradition. St. John of Damascus also acknowledges the impact of the image on our ways of knowing: If, therefore, the Word of God, in providing for our every need, always presents to us what is intangible by clothing it with form, does it not accomplish this by making an image using what is common to nature and so brings within our reach that for which we long but are unable to see? A certain perception takes place in the brain, prompted by the bodily senses, which is then transmitted to the faculties of discernment, and adds to the treasury of knowledge something which was not there before. The eloquent Gregory (Nazianzen) says that the mind which is etermined to ignore corporeal things will find itself weakened and frustrated. Since the creation of the world the invisible things of God are clearly seen by means of images. We see images in the creation which, although they are only dim lights, still remind us of God. For instance, when we speak of the holy and eternal Trinity, we use the images of the sun, light, and burning rays; or a running fountain; or an overflowing river; or the mind, speech, and spirit within us; or a rose bush, a flower, and a sweet fragrance. 10

on the Diatessaron 1.2–3: Le Verbe, étant engendré, a une forme (ṣûrtâ), selon laquelle il est pronouncé. … Il n’est pas une simple voix, celui qui est la similitude (dmûtâ) de son Père; il n’est pas même la voix du Père, mais son image (ṣalmâ). For Syriac see MS Chester Beatty 709 in Chester Beatty Monographs No. 8, ed. and tr. Louis Leloir (Dublin: Hodges Figgis & Co. LTD, 1963); translation in Leloir, L. Commentaire de l’Évangile concordant ou Diatessaron, Sources Chrétiennes, 121, Paris, 1966. 10 See “St. John of Damascus, First Apology Against Those Who Attack Divine Images”, 11. Translation as found in Anderson, D. St.John of Damascus on the Divine Images, Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1980.

A REFLECTION ON THE OCCASION OF THE BLESSING

249

And certainly the last few lines of this quote bring us right back to Ephrem-like symbolism. 11 A contemporary witness to tradition, the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, recently had the following words to say about icons, particularly seeing the Word of God through icons: In affirming sacred images, the Seventh Ecumenical Council of Nicaea was not concerned with religious art; it was the continuation and confirmation of earlier definitions about the fullness of the humanity of God’s Word. Icons are a visible reminder of our heavenly vocation; they are reminders to rise above our trivial concerns and menial reductions of the world. They encourage us to seek the extraordinary in the very ordinary, to be filled with the same wonder that characterized the divine marvel in Genesis: “God saw everything that He made; and indeed, it was very good.” (Gn. 1.30–31) The Greek (Septuagint) word for “goodness” is kallos, which implies— etymologically and symbolically—a sense of “calling.” Icons underline the Church’s fundamental mission to recognize that all people and all things are created and called to be “good” and “beautiful.”

He continues in an Ephremic appreciation for all of creation: Indeed, icons remind us of another way of seeing things, another way of experiencing realities, another way of resolving conflicts. We are asked to assume what the hymnology of Easter Sunday calls “another way of living.” For we have behaved arrogantly and dismissively toward the natural creation. We have refused to behold God’s Word in the oceans of our planet, in the trees of our continents, and in the animals of our earth. We have denied our very own nature, which calls us to stoop low enough to hear God’s Word in creation if we One wonders what John of Damascus (c. 676–749), who was born Arab-Christian in Damascus and spent half of his life there, might have absorbed from Ephrem’s writings, even just from liturgical traditions and which may have influenced his thinking, at least on images, as suggested by R. Murray (see note #3). 11

250

MARY HANSBURY wish to “become participants of divine nature.” (2 Peter 1.4) How could we ignore the wider implications of the divine Word assuming flesh? Why do we fail to perceive created nature as the extended Body of Christ? 12

The Patriarch alludes here to contemporary environmental issues but relation to the created world has always been problematic. S.P. Brock suggests that the real issue in the Iconoclast controversy: “…has nothing at all to do with Christology, and very little (directly at least) with the legitimacy of images. It is, rather, a question of how far the divine is allowed to impinge on the human world.” The iconoclasts wanted to restrict the realm of divine influence whereas for the Iconodules: “…the divine was very much present in the world and was not subject to neat barriers. They are in fact heirs of the tradition of spirituality that saw the world as a sacrament, and that allows for the transformation of matter by means of the spirit.” 13 Another scholar of Syriac studies and also of iconology comments precisely on the materiality of icons: The things which serve for the sacraments, water, wine, bread, change nature through a choice of God, become means of divine operations; analogously the things which serve to execute a sacred image, material things and elements expressive of sensibility, art, culture, technique, once they have been truly subjugated by the obedience of faith, also these, in some way, change nature, becoming efficacious proclamation of the Christian mystery and at the same time means of communion of each baptized with this mystery and with all the persons involved in it, in heaven and on earth, in God and in

Address of the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholmew I of Constantinople to the Synod of Bishops gathered in Rome, October 2008. 13 Brock, S.P. “Iconoclasm and the Monophysites,” in Bryer, A., and J. Herrin, eds. Iconoclasm, 57, Birmingham, Eng.: Center for Byzantine Studies, University of Birmingham, 1977. 12

A REFLECTION ON THE OCCASION OF THE BLESSING

251

the created universe, in the present century and in the blessed eternity. 14

The material things involved in this particular icon come out of the Russian technique: the board is covered with cloth and 5 or 6 coats of gesso are applied. Bole (red earth) is then put on under two or three layers of gold. Six coats of paint, pigments ground from rocks, are used in a floating technique, as opposed to the dry technique of the Greek school. The finished icon has been covered with a mixture of oils which when dry protect the icon and with time, enhance the colours. 15 This particular image of Jacob of Serug was derived from a prototype found in St. Mark’s Church in Jerusalem. I simplified the original but retained both the appearance of the Holy Spirit and of the angel with the book, to signify Jacob as a child receiving “three ‘handfuls’ of the Holy Spirit from that time he began to utter homilies.” 16 The touches of nature are not meant to be simply ornamentation. While not as evident as in Ephrem who speaks of the two testaments, Scripture and Nature, Jacob does inherit from Ephrem a constant reference to nature. Any iconographer might take to heart these words of Jacob at the beginning of his homily on Mar Ephrem: How shall a wretch like me paint a picture of your beauty? The colours of my speech are too dull for your story. A plebian cannot raise up a statue for the king; nor can I be brought to speak of your history. On account of my own vices, my paints are too dirty, and your image requires colors which blaze away, and a finger ardent with flame to paint the portrait of your Gallo, M. Per una lettura cristiana dell’ immagine, 23–4, Rimini, Italy: Guaraldi Montetauro, 1992. The author bases her interpretation on a reading of St. John of Damascus’s treatises on the Divine Images. The italics are mine. 15 Technique as learned from the Prosopon school of iconography: Vladislav Andreyev and his sons Dmitri and Nikita, originally from St.Petersburg in Russia. 16 From the anonymous Syriac Life of Jacob of Serug, Assemani, J.S. Bibliotheca Orientalis, I, 286–9. 14

252

MARY HANSBURY exploits. The colours of my speech are spattered mud, due to my own personal blemishes. If I approach the panel of your history, it would be sullied. My paints are compounded of dirty water. If they were spattered over your story, it would become ugly. The dirty colours would be like dark shadows, and your history requires flames of fire to make its beauty shine. I believe, as I approach to paint a picture of your beauties, that cursed will be the one, whoever he is, who will have painted your portrait with paints of his own. 17

What Jacob writes concerning Ephrem underscores the unity of word and image and might easily be said about writing an icon of Jacob. In both of these saints we know God’s very Word, since according to St.Gregory of Palamas God and His saints share the same glory and splendour. 18 This icon of Mar Jacob was blessed at the Liturgy on the Sunday of the Remembrance of all the Faithful Departed by Mor Cyril Ephrem Karim. The icon was commissioned by Fr. John Meno and written by Mary Hansbury.

17 18

Translation as found in Griffith, “Image,” 269. As noted by the Patriarch in his address.