Isho'dad of Merw. Commentary on the Gospel of John (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, Volume 672 Scriptores Syri, Tomus 260) 9789042937802, 9789042937826, 9042937807

Citation preview

CORPUS SCRIPTORUM CHRISTIANORUM ORIENTALIUM EDITUM CONSILIO

UNIVERSITATIS CATHOLICAE AMERICAE ET UNIVERSITATIS CATHOLICAE LOVANIENSIS Vol. 672

SCRIPTORES SYRI TOMUS 260

ISHO‘DAD OF MERW. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN TRANSLATED BY

JOHAN D. HOFSTRA

LOVANII IN AEDIBUS PEETERS 2019

ISHO‘DAD OF MERW. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

CORPUS S C R I P T O R U M C H R I S T I A N O R U M O R I E N TA L I U M EDITUM CONSILIO

UNIVERSITATIS CATHOLICAE AMERICAE ET UNIVERSITATIS CATHOLICAE LOVANIENSIS Vol. 672

SCRIPTORES SYRI TOMUS 260

ISHO‘DAD OF MERW. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN TRANSLATED BY

JOHAN D. HOFSTRA

LOVANII IN AEDIBUS PEETERS 2019

A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

© 2019 by Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium Tous droits de reproduction, de traduction ou d’adaptation, y compris les microfilms, de ce volume ou d’un autre de cette collection, réservés pour tous pays. ISSN 0070-0452 ISBN 978-90-429-3780-2 eISBN 978-90-429-3782-6 D/2019/0602/59 Éditions Peeters, Bondgenotenlaan 153, B-3000 Louvain

ABBREVIATIONS 1. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ABBREVIATIONS BJRL BO C CSCO DTC FS GEDSH GOF HC JA JECS LSI LSII LM NCE OC OCA OLP PG PdO PO PS RB ROC SC ThSyr

BulletinofTheJohnRylandsUniversityLibraryofManchester Bibliotheca Orientalis Vosté,TheodoriMopsuesteniCommentariusinevangeliumIohannisApostoli Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium DictionnairedeThéologieCatholique Sachau,Fragmentasyriaca GorgiasEncyclopedicDictionaryoftheSyriacHeritage GöttingerOrientforschungen Tonneau-Devreesse, Les Homélies Catéchétiques de Théodore de Mopsuestia JournalAsiatique TheJournalofEasternChristianStudies Scher,TheodorusbarKoni,LiberScholiorumI Scher,TheodorusbarKoni,LiberScholiorumII LeMuséon The New Catholic Encyclopaedia OriensChristianus Orientalia Christiana Analecta OrientaliaLovaniensiaPeriodica Migne,PatrologiaeGraeca Paroledel’Orient Patrologia Orientalis Patrologia Syriaca RevueBiblique Revuedel’OrientChrétien Sources Chrétiennes Robert Payne Smith,ThesaurusSyriacus.

2. ABBREVIATIONS OF NAMES ES GN IbN IoM JC TbK TM

Ephrem Syrus Gregory of Nazianzus Isho‘ bar Nun Isho‘dad of Merw John Chrysostom Theodore bar Koni Theodore of Mopsuestia

VI

ABBREVIATIONS

3. ABBREVIATION OF WORDS c. cf. ch. cj. f. h. m. p.

column confer chapter conjecture folium, folia Homily Mêmrê page

4. INDICATIONS IN [….] (…..) ˹….1 ** *

THE

TRANSLATION

in margin reference to the page of the Syriac text text supplied by the author indicating the origin of the present passage literally identical almost literally identical

BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBELOOS, Jean B. and Thomas J. LAMY, GregoriiBarhebraeiChroniconEcclesiasticumIII, Louvain, 1877. ABRAMOWSKI, Luise. Untersuchungen zum Liber Heraclidis des Nestorius (CSCO 242, Subsidia 22), Louvain, 1963. ABRAMOWSKI, Luise and Albert VAN ROEY. ‘Das Florileg mit den Gregor-Scholien aus Vatic. Borg. Syr. 82’, OLP 1 (1970), p. 131-185. ABRAMOWSKI, Luise and Allen E. GOODMAN, ANestorianCollectionofChristologicalTexts, CambridgeUniversityLibraryMsOriental1319, vol. I. Syriac text, vol. II. Introduction,translation,indexes (University of Cambridge, Oriental Publications 18-19), Cambridge, 1972. ALTHEIM, Franz. GeschichtederHunnerIII, Berlin, 1961. AMANN, Émile and Eugène TISSERANT, ‘L’Église nestorienne, littérature’, in: DTC, 11,1, Paris, 1931, p. 271 -285. AMANN, Émile. ‘Théodore de Mopsueste’, in: DTC, 15,1, Paris, 1946, p. 235279. AMANN, Émile. ‘Theodore Bar-Koni’, in: DTC,15,1, Paris, 1946, p. 228-229. AMAR, Joseph P. ‘Ephrem, Life of’, in: GEDSH, p. 147. ASSEMANUS, Joseph S. Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana I, Roma, 1719; II, Roma, 1721; III,1/III,2, Roma, 1728. Repr. Piscataway, NJ, 20042. BAARDA, Tjitze.TheGospelQuotationsofAphrahatthePersianSage: Aphrahat’s TextoftheFourthGospel, Academisch Proefschrift Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Meppel, 1975. BAARDA, Tjitze, EarlyTransmissionofWordsofJesus: Thomas,Tatianandthe TextoftheNewTestament.ACollectionofStudies, Amsterdam, 1983. BAARDA, Tjitze. ‘Tatian’s Diatessaron and the Greek Text of the Gospels’, in: Ch.E. Hill and M.J. Kruger, TheEarlyTextoftheNewTestament,Oxford, 2012. BARDY, Gustave. ‘La littérature patristique des «Quaestiones et Responsiones» sur l’Écriture Sainte’, RB41 (1932), p. 210-236; 341-369; 515-537, and 42 (1933), p. 14-30; 211-229; 328-352. BAUM, Wilhelm and Dietmar W. WINKLER, DieapostolischeKirchedesOstens. GeschichtedersogenanntenNestorianer,Klagenfurt, 2000. BAUM, Wilhelm. ‘Zeitalter der Araber’ (650-1258)’, in: Baum and Winkler, Die apostolischeKirchedesOstens, p. 43-76. BAUMSTARK, Anton. ‘Die Bücher I-IX des Kataba Diskolion des Theodoros bar Koni’, OC 1 (1901), p. 173-178. BAUMSTARK, Anton. GeschichtedersyrischenLiteratur, Bonn, 1922. Repr. Berlin, 1968. BEASLEY-MURRAY, George R. WordBiblicalCommentary, Vol. 36. John, Waco (TX), 1987. BECK, Edmund.Des heiligenEphraemdesSyrers, HymnendeNativitate (CSCO 186, Script. Syri 82 [text]), Louvain, 1959.

VIII

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BECK, Edmund. DesheiligenEphraemdesSyrers,HymnendeFide (CSCO 212, Script. Syri 88 [text]), Louvain, 1961. BECK, Edmund. Des heiligen Ephraem des Syrers, Sermo de Domino Nostro (CSCO 270, Script. Syri 116 [text]), Louvain, 1966. BECK, Edmund.EphraemSyrus,SermonesinHebdomadamSanctam (CSCO 412, Script. Syri 181 [text] and 413, Script. Syri 182 [transl.]), Louvain, 1979. BECK, Edmund. Ephräms Trinitätslehre im Bild von Sonne/Feuer, Licht und Wärme (CSCO 425, Subsidia 62), Louvain, 1981. BECK, Edmund. Nachträge zu Ephraem Syrus (CSCO 363, Script. Syri 159), Louvain, 1975. BEDJAN, Paul. Nestorius:lelivred’HéraclidedeDamas, Paris, 1910. BEVAN, George A. ‘Nestorius’, in: GEDSH, p. 306-307. BEVAN, George A. TheNewJudas,theCaseofNestoriusinEcclesiasticalPolitics, 428-451CE (Late Antique History and Religion 13), Louvain, 2016. BIDAWID, Raphaël J. Les Lettres du Patriarche Nestorien Timothée I (Studi e Testi 187), Città del Vaticano, 1956. BIESEN, Kees den, BibliographyofEphremtheSyrian, Giove in Umbria, 2002. BIHLMEYER, Karl. DieApostolischenVäter, Neuarbeitung der Funkschen Ausgabe, Tübingen, 19562. BRADE, Lutz. ‘Untersuchungen zum Scholienbuch des Theodoros bar Konai’, in: GOF 1. (Reihe: Syriaca, Band 8), Wiesbaden, 1975. BRADE, Lutz. ‘Nestorianische Kommentare zu den Paulusbriefen an der Wende vom 8. bis 9. Jahrhundert’, OC66 (1982), p. 98-114. BRAUN, Oskar.TimotheiPatriarchaeI,EpistulaeI, (CSCO 74, Script. Syri 30 [text] and 75, Script. Syri 31 [transl.]), Louvain, 1914-1915. BRIÈRE, Maurice.‘La légende syriaque de Nestorius’, ROC15 (1910), p. 1- 25. BROCK, Sebastian P. ‘The Nestorian’ Church: A Lamentable Misnomer’, BJRL 78 (1996), p. 23-35. BROCK, Sebastian P. ‘A Brief Outline of Syriac Literature’ (Mōrān ’Eth’ō9), Kottayam, India, 1997. BROCK, Sebastian P. et al. GorgiasEncyclopedicDictionaryoftheSyriacHeritage, Piscataway, 2011. BROCK, Sebastian P. ‘Aphrahat’, in: GEDSH, p. 24-25. BROCK, Sebastian P. ‘Ephrem’, in: GEDSH, p. 145-147. BROCK, Sebastian P. ‘Gregory of Nazianzus’, in: GEDSH, p. 181-182. BROOKS, Ernest W. EliaeMetropolitaeNisibeniOpusChronologicumI(CSCO 62, Script. Syri 21 [text] and 63, Script. Syri 23[transl.], Paris, 1909-1910. BULTMANN, Rudolf. Die Exegese des Theodor von Mopsuestia, (posthum hrsg. von H. Feld und K.H. Schelke), Stuttgart, 1984. BUNDY, David D. ‘Isaiah 53 in East and West’, in: M. Schmidt, Typos,Symbol, AllegoriebeidenöstlichenVäternundihrenParallelenimMittelalter (Eichstätter Beiträge 4), Regensburg, 1982, p. 54-73. BUNDY, David D. ‘The Peshitta of Isaiah 53:9 and the Syrian Commentators’, OC 67 (1983), p. 32-45. BUNDY, David D. ‘The Questions and Answers on Isaiah by Iso‘ bar Nūn’, OLP16 (1985), p. 167-178. BUNDY, David, ‘Timotheos I’, in: GEDSH, p. 414-415.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

IX

BUTTS, Aaron M. ‘Ibn al-Ṭayyib’, in: GEDSH, p. 206-207. CASSINGENA-TRÉVEDY, François,ÉphremdeNisibe,HoméliesPascales (SC 502), Paris, 2006. CHABOT, Jean-Baptiste.JacobiEdesseniHexaemeronseuinopuscreationislibri septem, (CSCO 92, Script. Syri 44 [text]), Louvain, 1928. CHABOT, Jean-Baptiste. Littératuresyriaque,Paris, 1934. CHILDERS, Jeff W. StudiesintheSyriacversionsofSt.JohnChrysostom’shomilies ontheNewTestament,withspecialreferencetohomilies6,20,22,23,37, 62,83,and84onJohn, D.Phil. diss., University of Oxford, 1996. CHILDERS, Jeff W. ‘John Chrysostom’, in: GEDSH, p. 229-230. CHILDERS, Jeff W. The Syriac Version of John Chrysostom’s Commentary on John I, Mêmrê 1-43 (CSCO 651, Script. Syri 250 [text], and 652, Script. Syri 251[transl.]), Louvain, 2013. CLARKE, Ernest G. TheselectedQuestionsofIshōbarNūnonthePentateuch, editedandtranslatedfromMsCambridgeAdd.2017.Withastudyofthe relationshipofIshō‘dadhofMerv,TheodorebarKōnīandIshōbarNūnon Genesis, Leiden, 1962. COPLESTON, Frederick C. AHistoryof Philosophy, vol. I, part II, New York, 1962. COWLEY, R.W. ‘Scholia of Aḥob of Qatar on St. John’s Gospel and the Pauline Epistles’, LM 93 (1980), p. 338-339. DE HALLEUX, André. ‘Bibliographie’, LM 107 (1994), p. 207-208. DETIENNE, Claude. ‘Grégoire de Nazianze dans la tradition syriaque’, in: Studia Nazianzenica I, ed. B. Coulie (Corpus Christianorum: Series Graeca 41, Corpus Nazianzenum 8), Turnhout, 2000, p. 175-183. DEVREESSE Robert. EssaisurThéodoredeMopsueste(Studi e Testi 141), Città del Vaticano, 1948. DRAGUET, René. Commentaire du Livre d’Abba Isaïe par Dadišo Qaṭraya, (CSCO, 326, Script. Syri 144 [text] and 327, Script. Syri 145 [transl.]), Louvain, 1972. DUVAL, Rubens. Lexicon syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule, Paris, 18881901. DUVAL, Rubens. Anciennes littératures chrétiennes. La littérature syriaque, Paris, 1901-1907. EVETTS, Basil. HistoryofthePatriarchsoftheCopticchurchofAlexandriaII, (PeterItoBenjaminI),(PO 1, fasc. 4, no. 4), Paris, 1904, p. 383-401. FAULTLESS, Julian.TheProloguetoJohninIbnalṬayyib’sCommentaryonthe Gospels, DPhil thesis, University of Oxford, Oxford, 2001. FAULTLESS, Julian. ‘The Two Recensions of the Prologue to John in Ibn al Ṭayyib’s Commentary on the Gospels’, in: D.R. Thomas (ed.), ChristiansattheHeart ofIslamicRule:ChurchLifeandScholarshipin‘AbassidIraq(The History of Christian Muslim Relations 1), Leiden, 2003, p. 177-198. FIEY, Jean M. AssyriechrétienneI-II.Contributionàl’étudedel’histoireetdela géographieecclésiastiquesetmonastiquesdunorddel’Iraq, I (Recherches publiées sous la direction de l’Institut des lettres orientales de Beyrouth 23), Beyrouth, 1965. FOERSTER, Werner.Gnosis:Aselectionofgnostictexts, English trans. ed. by R. McL. Wilson, 2 vols., Oxford, 1972-1974, vol. 1, p. 100-120.

X

BIBLIOGRAPHY

GALLAY, Paul and Maurice JOURJON. GrégoiredeNazianze, LettresThéologiques (SC 208), Paris, 1974. GALLAY, Paul.GrégoiredeNazianze,Discours27-31 (DiscoursThéologiques), (SC 250), Paris, 1978. GEORR, Khalil.LesCatégoriesd’Aristotedansleursversionssyro-arabes, Beyrouth, 1948. GIBSON, Margaret D. TheCommentariesofIsho‘dadofMerv,BishopofḤadatta in Syriac and English (c. 850), vol. I. Translation (Horae Semiticae 5), Cambridge, 1911. GIBSON, Margaret D. TheCommentariesofIsho‘dadofMerv,BishopofḤadatta inSyriacandEnglish(c.850), vol. II. MatthewandMarkinSyriac (Horae Semiticae6), Cambridge, 1911. GIBSON, Margaret D. TheCommentariesofIsho‘dadofMerv,BishopofḤadatta in Syriac and English (c. 850), vol. III. Luke and John in Syriac (Horae Semiticae 7), Cambridge, 1911. GIBSON, Margaret D. TheCommentariesofIsho‘dadofMerv,BishopofḤadatta (c.850), vol. IV. ActsoftheApostlesandthreeCatholicEpistlesinSyriac (partI)andinEnglish(partII), (Horae Semiticae10), Cambridge, 1913. GIBSON, Margaret D. TheCommentariesofIsho‘dadofMerv,BishopofḤadatta (c.850),vol. V. TheEpistlesofPaultheApostleinSyriac(partI)andin English(PartII), (Horae Semiticae11), Cambridge, 1916. GIGNOUX, Philippe. HoméliesdeNarsaïsurlacréation (PO 34, fasc. 3-4, no. 161162), Turnhout, 1968. GISMONDI, Henricus. Maris,‘AmrietSlibaedePatriarchisNestorianorumCommentaria,I-IV, Rome, 1896-1899. GRAF, Georg. Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur, Band II. Die SchriftstellerbiszurMittedes15. Jahrhundert(Studi e Testi 133), Città del Vaticano, 1947. Repr. 1959-1960. GRAFFIN, François and Maurice BRIÈRE, Les Homiliae Cathédrales de Sévère d’Antioche.TraductionsyriaquedeJacquesd’Edesse,HoméliesXVIIIà XXV, (PO 37, fasc. 1, no. 171), Turnhout, 1975. HAELEWYCK, Jean-Claude. SanctiGregoriiNazianzeniOpera,versiosyriaca, IV: Orationes XXVIII, XXIX, XXX et XXXI, (Corpus Christianorum, Series Graeca 65. Corpus Nazianzenum 23), Turnhout, 2007. HEIMGARTNER, Martin. DieBriefe42-85desostsyrischenPatriarchenTimotheos I. (CSCO 644, Script. Syri 248 [text] and 645, Script. Syri 249 [transl.]), Louvain, 2012. HEIMGARTNER, Martin. DieBriefe30-39desostsyrischenPatriarchenTimotheos I. (CSCO 661, Script. Syri 256 [text] and 662, Script. Syri 257 [transl.]), Louvain 2016. HENNECKE, Edgar and Wilhelm SCHNEEMELCHER, NeutestamentlicheApokryphen, I.Band, Tübingen, 19684. HESPEL, Robert and René DRAGUET, ThéodorebarKoni,LivredesScolies(recension deSéert)I,MimreI-V (CSCO 431, Script. Syri 187 [transl.]), Louvain, 1981. HESPEL, Robert and René DRAGUET, ThéodorebarKoni,LivredesScolies(recension deSéert,II.MimreVI-XI (CSCO 432, Script. Syri 188 [transl.]), Louvain, 1982.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

XI

HESPEL, Robert. Théodore bar Koni, Livre des Scolies (recension d’Urmiah), (CSCO 447, Script. Syri 193 [text] and 448, Script. Syri 194 [transl.]), Louvain, 1983. HESPEL, Robert.ThéodorebarKoni,LivredesScolies(recensiond’Urmiah).Les CollectionsannexéesparSylvaindeQardu(CSCO 464, Script. Syri 197 [text] and 465, Script. Syri 198 [transl.]), Louvain, 1984. HEUSSI, Karl. KompendiumderKirchengeschichte. Tübingen, 196012. HOFSTRA, Johan D. Isho‘dadvanMerw,‘EnhetWoordisvleesgeworden’. De plaats van het commentaar van Isho‘dad van Merw op Johannes 1,1-18 binnendeSyrischeexegetischetraditie, Academisch Proefschrift Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Kampen, 1993. HOFSTRA, Johan D. ‘Isho‘ bar Nun’s “Questions and Answers” on the Gospel of St. John and their relation to the commentary of Isho‘dad of Merw and Theodore bar Koni’s Scholion’, JECS56 (2004), p. 69-93. HOFSTRA, Johan D. ‘Some remarkable passages in Isho‘dad of Merw’s commentary on the Gospel of St. John’, PdO 35 (2010), p. 303-335. HUNTER, Erica C.D., ‘The Church of the East in Central Asia’, BJRL 78 (1996), p. 131-132. HUNTER, Erica C.D. ‘Converting the Turkic Tribes’, SilkRoadStudiesVI,Wallsand Frontiers in Inner-Asian History. Proceedings from the Fourth Conference oftheAustralianSocietyforInnerAsianStudiesMacquarieUniversityNovember18-192000, Turnhout, 2002, p. 183-195. JANSMA, Taeke. InvestigationsintotheEarlySyrianFathers.AnApproachtothe ExegesisoftheNestorianChurchandtotheComparisonofNestorianand Jewish Exegesis, in: Oudtestamentische Studiën, Deel XII. Studies onthe BookofGenesis, Leiden, 1958, p. 69-181. JANSMA, Taeke. ‘Théodore de Mopsueste. Interprétation du Livre de la Genèse, fragments de la version syriaque, B.M. Add. 17,189, f. 17-21’, LM75 (1962), p. 63-92. JANSMA, Taeke. ‘Étude sur la pensée de Narsaï. L’Homélie No. XXXIV: essai d’interprétation’, L’OrientSyrien 11 (1966), p. 165-166. KIRAZ, George A. Comparative Edition of the Syriac Gospels. Aligning the Sinaiticus, Curetonianus, Peshîttâ and Harklean Versions. Vol. IV, John, Leiden, 1996. KMOSKO, M. ‘Analecta Syriaca e codicibus Musei Britannici excerpta I-III’, OC 2 (1902), 35f. KMOSKO, M. LiberGraduum (Patrologia Syriaca I,3), Paris, 1926. LAGARDE, Paul de. AnalectaSyriaca, London, 1858. LAMPE, Geoffrey W. H. APatristicGreekLexicon, Oxford, 1961. LANGE, Christian. The Portrayal of Christ in the Syriac Commentary on the Diatessaron(CSCO 616, Subsidia 118), Louvain, 2005. LELOIR, Louis.SaintÉphrem,Commentairedel’ÉvangileConcordant. Version arménienne (CSCO 137, Script. Arm. 1 [text] and 145, Script. Arm. 2 [transl.]), Louvain, 1953-1954. LELOIR, Louis. LeTémoignaged’ÉphremsurleDiatessaron (CSCO 227, Subsidia 19), Louvain, 1962.

XII

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LELOIR, Louis, Saint Éphrem, Commentaire de l’Évangile Concordant Texte syriaque (ManuscritChesterBeatty709), (Chester Beatty Monographs 8), Dublin, 1963. LELOIR, Louis, Saint Éphrem, Commentaire de l’Évangile Concordant Texte syriaque(ManuscritChesterBeatty709)FoliosAdditionnels, Louvain, 1990. LEONHARD, Clemens.IshodadofMerw’sExegesisofthePsalms119and139147,AStudyof hisInterpretationintheLightoftheSyriacTranslationof Theodore of Mopsuestia’s Commentary (CSCO 585, Subsidia 107), Louvain, 2001. LEONHARD, Clemens. ‘Cave of Treasures’, in: GEDSH, p. 90-91. LEVENE, Abraham.TheEarlySyrianFathersonGenesis: FromaSyriacMs.in theMinganaCollection, London, 1951. LOOFS, Friedrich.Nestoriana,DieFragmentedesNestorius, Halle, 1905. MALINGREY, Anne-Marie. Jean Chrysostome, Sur l’Égalité du Père et du Fils (SC 396), Lyon, 1994. MANQURIUS, Yusuf. Tafsiral-masriqi,‘KommentardesOrientalen,dasistdes PriestersAbu’lFarag,zudenvierEvangelien’, Bd. I. (Mt/Mk), Bd.II. (Lk/ Joh), Cairo, 1908-1910. METZGER, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, London – New York, 1964. MIGNE, Jacques-Paul, Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Graeca-Latina, Parisiis, 1844 ff. MOLENBERG, Corrie. The Interpreter interpreted, Išo` bar Nun’s selected QuestionsontheOldTestament, Academisch Proefschrift universiteit Groningen, Groningen, 1990. MORESCHINI, Claudio and Paul CALLAY, GrégoiredeNazianze,Discours38-41 (SC 358), Paris, 1990. NAU, François. Nestorius. Le livre d’Héraclide de Damas, Paris, 1910. Repr. Piscataway, 2010. NODET, Étienne.FlaviusJosèphe,LesAntiquitésJuives, LivresXetXI (Antiquitates Judaicae 5), Paris, 2010. ORTIZ DE URBINA, Ignatius. Patrologia Syriaca, Altera ed. emendata et aucta, Rome, 1965. PARISOT, Jean. ‘Aphraate (ou Pharhad)’, in: DTC, 1,2, Paris, 1924, p. 1457-1463. PARISOT, Jean. AphraatisSapientisPersaeDemonstrationes (Patrologia Syriaca I, 1-2), Paris, 1894-1907. Repr. 1980. PAYNE SMITH, Robert. ThesaurusSyriacusI-II, Oxford, 1879-1901; with Supplement by J. P. Margoliouth, Oxford, 1927. Repr. Hildesheim-New York, 1981. PIERRE, Marie-Joseph. Aphraate le Sage Persan, Les Exposés I. Exposés I-X (SC 349), Paris, 1988. PIERRE, Marie-Joseph. Aphraate le Sage Persan, Les Exposés II. Exposés XIXXIII (SC 359), Paris, 1989. PREUSCHEN, Erwin. Origenes Werke, Band IV. Der Johannes Kommentar (Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte 10), Leipzig, 1903. PUTMAN, Hans. L’Égliseetl’IslamsousTimothéeI(780-823). Étudesurl’Église nestorienne au temps des premiers ῾Abbasides avec nouvelle édition et

BIBLIOGRAPHY

XIII

traduction du dialogue entre Timothée et al-Mahdi (Recherches publiées sous la direction de l’Institut de Lettres Orientales. Nouvelle Série, B. Orient Chrétien 3), Beyrouth, 1975. QUISPEL, Gillis. M.MinuciiFelicisOctavius, uitgegeven en van commentaar voorzien. (Griekse en Latijnse schrijvers met aanteekeningen 61) Leiden, 1949. REININK, Gerrit J. StudienzurQuellen-undTraditionsgeschichtedesEvangelienkommentarsderGannatBussame (CSCO 414, Subsidia 57), Louvain, 1979. REININK, Gerrit J. GannatBussame,I.DieAdventssontage (CSCO 501, Script. Syri 212 [text] and 502, Script. Syri 213 [transl.]). Louvain, 1988. RENDEL HARRIS, James. Fragments of the Commentary of Ephrem Syrus upon theDiatessaron. London, 1895. RI, Su Min. LaCavernedesTrésors:Lesdeuxrecensionssyriaques (CSCO 486, Script. Syri 207 [text] and 487, Script. Syri 208 [transl.]), Louvain, 1987. SACHAU, Eduard. Theodori Mopsuesteni fragmenta syriaca e codicibus Musei BritanniciNitriacis,Leipzig, 1869. SCHÄUBLIN, Christoph.UntersuchungenzuMethodeundHerkunftderAntiochenischenExegese (Theophaneia: Beiträge zur Religions- und Kirchengeschichte des Altertums 23), Köln – Bonn, 1974. SCHER, Addai. Lacausedelafondationdesécoles,parBarḥadbĕšabba‘Arbaya, évêquedeHalwan (PO 4, fasc. 4, no. 18), Paris, 1907. SCHER, Addai. ‘Notice sur les manuscrits syriaques et arabes conservés à l’archevêché chaldéen de Diarbékir’,JA sér. 10, vol. X (1907), p. 339-340 and 348-349. SCHER, Addai. Histoirenestorienne(ChroniquedeSéert),Premièrepartie(II), (PO 5, fasc. 2, no. 22), Paris, 1910, p. 219-367. SCHER, Addai. Histoire nestorienne (Chronique de Séert), Seconde partie (I), (PO 7, fasc. 2, no. 32), Paris, 1911, p. 97-199. SCHER, Addai. TheodorusbarKoni,LiberScholiorumI(CSCO 55, Script. Syri 19 [text]), Louvain, 1960. SCHER, Addai. TheodorusbarKoni,LiberScholiorumII(CSCO 69, Script. Syri 26 [text]), Louvain, 1960. SMITH Lewis, Agnes and Margaret D. GIBSON, ThePalestinianSyriacLectionary oftheGospels, London, 1899. SOKOLOFF, Michael. ASyriacLexicon.ATranslationfromtheLatin,Correction, Expansion, and Update of C. Brockelmann’s Lexicon Syriacum, Winona Lake (IN) – Piscataway (NJ), 2009. SOURDEL, Dominique. ‘Bukhtīshū`’, in: TheEncyclopaediaofIslam, New Ed., vol. I, Leiden – London, 1960, s.v., p. 1298. SPULER, Bertold. ‘Die nestorianische Kirche’, in: Handbuch der Orientalistik, hg. von Bertold Spuler, 1. Abt.: DerNaheundderMittlereOsten; 8. Bd.: Religion; 2. Abschn.: ReligionsgeschichtedesOrientsinderZeitderWeltreligionen, Leiden – Köln, 1961, p. 120-169. SULLIVAN, Francis A. ‘Theodore of Mopsuestia’ in: NCE, bd. 14, 18-19, New York, 1967 ff. TAYLOR, David G.K. ‘Les Pères cappadociens dans la tradition syriaque’, in: A. Schmidt and D. Gonnet (dir.), LesPèresgrecsdanslatraditionsyriaque (Études Syriaques 4), Paris, 2007, p. 43-61.

XIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

TER HAAR ROMENY, R. B. (Bas), ‘Erotapokriseis’, in: A. Volgers and C. Zamagni (eds.), Early Christian Question-and-Answer Literature in Context. ProceedingsoftheUtrechtColloquium,13-14October2003 (Contributions to Biblical Exegesis & Theology 37), Leuven – Paris – Dudley (MA), 2004, p. 145-163. TER HAAR ROMENY, R.B (Bas), ‘Aḥob Qaṭraya’, in: GEDSH, p. 12-13. THOMSON, Robert W. AthanasianaSyriaca.I,1. De Incarnatione.2.Epistulaad Epictetum (CSCO 257 Script. Syri 114 [text] and 258 Script. Syri 115 [transl.]), Louvain, 1965. TONNEAU, Raymond M. and Robert DEVREESSE.LesHoméliesCatéchétiquesde Théodore de Mopsueste, reproduction phototypique du Ms. Mingana Syr. 561 (Studi e Testi 145), Città del Vaticano, 1949. TONNEAU, Raymond M. ‘Théodore de Mopsueste, Interprétation (du Livre) de la Genèse’, LM66 (1953), p. 45-64. VAN DEN EYNDE, Ceslas. Commentaire d’Išo’dad de Merv sur l’Ancien Testament,I.Genèse, (CSCO 156, Script. Syri 75 [transl.]), Louvain, 1955. VAN DEN EYNDE, Ceslas. Commentaire d’Išo’dad de Merv sur l’Ancien Testament, II. Exode-Deuteronome (CSCO 176 Script. Syri 80 [text] and 179, Script. Syri 81 [transl.]), Louvain, 1958. VAN DEN EYNDE, Ceslas. Commentaire d’Išo’dad de Merv sur l’Ancien Testament, III. Livre des Sessions (CSCO 229, Script. Syri 96 [text] and 230, Script. Syri 97 [transl.]), Louvain, 1962-1963. VAN DEN EYNDE, Ceslas. Commentaire d’Išo’dad de Merv sur l’Ancien Testament, IV. Isaïe et les Douze (CSCO 303, Script. Syri 128 [text] and 304, Script Syri 129 [transl.]), Louvain, 1969. VAN DEN EYNDE, Ceslas. Commentaire d’Išo’dad de Merv sur l’Ancien Testament, V.Jerémie,Ézéchiel,Daniel (CSCO 328, Script. Syri 146 [text] and 329, Script. Syri 147 [transl.]), Louvain, 1972. VAN DEN EYNDE, Ceslas. Commentaire d’Išo’dad de Merv sur l’Ancien Testament,VI.Psaumes (CSCO 433, Script. Syri 185 [text] and 434, Script. Syri 186 [transl.]), Louvain, 1981. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘A hitherto Unknown Nestorian Commentary on Genesis and Exodus 1-9,32 in the Syriac Manuscript (olim) Dijarbekr 22’, OLP 5 (1974), p. 53-78. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Išo‘ bar Nun and Išo‘dad of Merv: New Data for the Study of the Interdependence of their Exegetical Works’, OLP 8 (1977), p. 229-249. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ThéodoredeMopsueste,FragmentssyriaquesduCommentaire des Psaumes (Psaume 118 et Psaumes 138-148), (CSCO 435, Script. Syri 189 [text]), Louvain, 1982. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. Le commentaire sur Gènese-Exode 9,32 du manuscript (olim) Diyarbakir 22 (CSCO 483, Script. Syri 205 [text] and 484, Script. Syri 206 [transl.]), Louvain, 1986. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Quelques remarques sur la tradition syriaque de l’œuvre exégétique de Théodore de Mopsueste’, in: IVSymposiumSyriacum1984: LiteraryGenresinSyriacLiterature (Groningen–Oosterhesselen,10-12 September), ed. by H.J.W. Drijvers etal. (OCA 229), Rome, 1987, p. 33-42.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

XV

VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Gennadius of Constantinople as a Representative of Antiochene Exegesis’, in: StudiaPatristica,Vol. XIX. Paperspresentedtothe Tenth International Conference on Patristic Studies held in Oxford 1987, Louvain, 1989. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘The Christian Syriac Tradition of Interpretation’, in: M. Saebø (ed.), HebrewBible/OldTestament.TheHistoryofItsInterpretation, Vol.1. FromtheBeginningstotheMiddleAges(until1300), Part 1. Antiquity, Göttingen, 1996, p. 612-641. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Development of Biblical Interpretation in the Syrian Churches of the Middle Ages’, in: M. Saebø (ed.), Hebrew Bible / Old Testament.TheHistoryofItsInterpretation, Vol. 2. FromtheBeginnings totheMiddleAges(until1300), Part 2. TheMiddleAges, Göttingen, 2000, p. 559-577. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Daniel bar Maryam’, in: GEDSH, p. 113. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Ḥenanisho‘ I’, in: GEDSH, p. 194-195. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Isho‘ bar Nun’, in: GEDSH, p. 215. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Isho‘dad of Merv’, in: GEDSH, p. 216-217. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Theodore of Mopsuestia’, in: GEDSH,p. 401-402. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Theodoros bar Koni’, in: GEDSH, p. 405-406. VAN ROMPAY, Lucas. ‘Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban’, in: GEDSH, p. 441. VASCHALDE,Arthur A. BabaiMagniLiberdeUnione (CSCO 79, Script. Syri 34 [text]), Louvain, 1982. VON HARNACK, Adolf. Marcion, Das Evangelium vom fremden Gott, Leipzig, 19242. VOÖBUS, Arthur. History of the School of Nisibis (CSCO 266, Subsidia 26), Louvain, 1965. VOSTÉ, Jacobus-M. ‘La chronologie de l’activité littéraire de Théodore de Mopsueste’, RB34 (1925), p. 56-63. VOSTÉ, Jacobus-M. TheodoriMopsuesteniCommentariusinevangeliumIohannis Apostoli (CSCO 115, Script. Syri 62 [text] and 116, Script. Syri 63 [transl.]), Louvain, 1940. VOSTÉ, Jacobus-M. and Ceslas VAN DEN EYNDE. Commentaired’Išo’daddeMerv surl’AncienTestament, I. Genèse (CSCO 126, Script. Syri 67 [text]), Louvain, 1950. WRIGHT, William. AShortHistoryofSyriacLiterature, London, 1894. Repr. of the 2nd ed.: Amsterdam, 1966. WRIGHT, William and Norman MCLEAN, TheEcclesiasticalHistoryofEusebiusin Syriac: editedfromtheManuscripts,withacollationoftheancientArmenian Version by Dr. A. Merx, Cambridge, 1898. WRIGHT, William and S.A. COOK. A Catalogue of the Syriac Manuscripts PreservedintheLibraryof theUniversityof CambridgeI-II,Cambridge, 1901. YOUSIF, Pierre. ‘Symbolisme christologique dans la Bible et dans la nature chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe (De Virginitate VII-XI et les textes parallèles)’, PdO8(1977-1978), p. 5-66.

INTRODUCTION 1. ISHO‘DAD OF MERW 1.1 TheEastSyrianChurchintheEighthandNinthCentury In the eighth and ninth century the East Syrian Church1 experienced a new acme in its existence. The improved political and cultural situation in the Islamic world under the rule of the Abbasids constituted its breeding ground.2 Despite a number of discriminatory regulations and periods of persecution3, it was flourishing in many parts of Asia, as a result of its missionary activities.4 At the same time a rich scientific life developed in its midst. Many of its members played a leading role as personal physician and philosopher at the Court of the Caliphs or made a significant contribution to the scientific development of the Arabic world by translating ancient Greek writings.5 As far as ecclesiastical literature is concerned, this period is characterized by a desire to record and assemble the heritage of the fathers. Consequently most works from this time bear the character of a collection, where, however, the tradition is not merely followed, but constantly modified and adapted.6 In the field of exegesis, the great collective works of Isho‘ bar Nun, Theodore bar Koni and Isho‘dad of Merw bear witness to this tendency. The latter’s work is the most extensive. 1.2 Background,LifeandWorkofIsho‘dad In his catalogue ‘Abdisho‘ († 1318) mentions the following about Isho‘dad’s activity as a writer:7

1

This designation for the Church of the East is preferable to the term ‘Nestorian Church’, called ‘alamentablemisnomer’ by Brock (‘The Nestorian’ Church: A Lamentable Misnomer’, 23-35. 2 Spuler, ‘Die nestorianische Kirche’, 145 ff. 3 Spuler, ‘Die nestorianische Kirche’, 146; Bidawid, LesLettres,76; Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’, 56-57. 4 Baumstark, Geschichte, 216-217; Spuler, ‘Die nestorianische Kirche’, 153-155; Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’, 57-58; 61-63; 68-74. 5 Baumstark, Geschichte, 216-217; Spuler, ‘Die nestorianische Kirche’, 147-149; Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’, 57. 6 See: Molenberg, TheInterpreterinterpreted, 102. 7 Assemanus, BOIII,1, 210-212.

XVIII

INTRODUCTION

     

.ÀËÐxÁzÎæåé ? ¿ÂÎãĀÚÂxu{¿ÂĀÝ{   .  ‘Isho‘dad of the same place (as the aforementioned Solomon, Bishop of Ḥedatta) composed a commentary on the New (Testament) and also a book on the ‘Beth Mautbe’8 in concise sentences’.

This survey of ‘Abdisho‘ is as far as the New Testament is concerned correct9, but incomplete as to the rest. On the basis of manuscript tradition it has become clear that Isho‘dad not only commented upon the ten books of the ‘Beth Mautbe’, but also upon the remaining books of the Old Testament.10 Clemens Leonhard in his thorough study of Isho‘dad’s exegesis of the Psalms 119 and 139-147 supposes that ‘Abdisho‘ either did not possess as many parts of Isho‘dad’s work as they are extant today or did not look carefully enough at the headings in the manuscripts in his library’.11 In any case, together with the commentaries on the books of the New Testament, it may be considered an impressive oeuvre. Little is known about Isho‘dad’s life.12 The conceptions about the meaning of his name vary: ‘Jesus has given’13, ‘the gift of Jesus’14, ‘friend of the Saviour’15 and ‘Jesus is friend, has befriended16. According to the addition 8 Literally: ‘of the dwelling places’. This concerns a commentary on the books: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Proverbs of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Ruth and Job (see: Sokoloff, ASyriacLexicon,147 s.v.). 9 Editions: Gibson, TheCommentaries,[vol. I]: TranslationoftheGospels (Introduction by Rendel Harris); [vol II]: Matthew and Mark in Syriac; [vol. III]: Luke and John in Syriac; [vol IV]: ActsoftheApostlesandthreeCatholicEpistles; [vol. V]: EpistlesofPaul. 10 Editions and translations: Vosté and Van den Eynde, Commentaired’Išo‘daddeMerv, I. Genèse [text]; Van den Eynde, Commentaire d’Išo‘dad de Merv, I. Genèse [transl.]; II. Exode-Deuteronome; III.LivredesSessions;IV.IsaïeetlesDouze; V.Jerémie,Ezéchiel, Daniel; VI.Psaumes. 11 Leonhard, IshodadofMerw’sExegesis, 11. 12 See: Baumstark, Geschichte, 234; Chabot, Littératuresyriaque,112; Duval, Anciennes littératureschrétiennes, 73; Ortiz de Urbina, Patrologia,203;Wright, Ashorthistory,220221; Van Rompay, ‘Isho‘dad of Merv’, 216-217; Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’, 60. 13 For this opinion: Assemanus, BO III,1, 210 (‘Jesudadus, hoc est, Jesus dedit’). According to Payne Smith, ThSyrI, 824 s.v. ˆÎþÙxx this was also the interpretation of the lexicographer Bar ‘Ali († 1001). 14 This is the conception of Bar Bahlul (Duval, Lexicon syriacum, II, 534). Payne Smith assumes (ThSyrI, 1639, s.v. xËïÎþÙ) for the word-part xx, that he translates with ‘donum’, a Persian background. 15 Bar Hebraeus according to Assemanus (BOIII,1,214.) 16 Thus finally Rendel Harris in his ‘Introduction’ to Gibson’s edition (TheCommentariesI, XIII-XIV).

INTRODUCTION

XIX

to his name he was from Merw, one of the oldest cities of Central Asia, in the north of Khurāsān, in present-day Turkmenistan.17 It is situated on a river and known for its fortifications, which are listed by the Greek author Strabo, and, located on the Silk Road, it was a transit port for goods.18 It is not clear when exactly Christianity reached Merw.19 In any case the ‘Synodicon Orientale’, listing the synods held in Mesopotamia between 410 and 790, records that the city around 424 was a bishopric. Soon afterwards, in 544, it achieved even the status of an archbishopric.20 The city of Merw played a crucial role in Christianizing the Turkic tribes advancing to the West.21 In addition trade and culture flourished. Already long before the ninth century the city was a centre of science and translation work.22 Isho‘dad was, probably as successor to Abraham of Marga23, who in 837 was elected Catholicos, appointed Bishop of Ḥedatta24, a town situated not far from where the Tigris and the Great Zab flow together.25 After some vain attempts had been made, since the death of Catholicos Abraham II, to fill the vacant seat, finally Isho‘dad was nominated by Ibrahīm ibn Nūh of Anbar because of his erudition, wisdom and appearance.26 But by the intrigues of Boktisho‘ ibn Gibrā‘īl27, the influential physician of Caliph al-Mutawakkil (847-861), Isho‘dad was put aside. Subsequently Theodosius, Metropolitan of Gondisapor, was elected catholicos, whose enthronement took place in 853.

17 For the location of Merw: Putman, L’Égliseetl’Islam,(780-823), Tome III, map I. Le Califat ‘Abāsside sous Harūn al-Rašīd; Altheim, GeschichtederHunner,3, 129. 18 Hunter, ‘Converting the Turkic Tribes’, 189, n. 28. 19 Hunter, ‘Converting the Turkic Tribes’, 190. 20 Hunter, ‘Converting the Turkic Tribes’, 190 and eadem, ‘The Church of the East in Central Asia’, 131-132. 21 Hunter, ‘Converting the Turkic Tribes’, 190; eadem, ‘The Church of the East in Central Asia’, 132. 22 Altheim, GeschichtederHunner,3, 110. 23 See: Fiey, AC I, 112-113. 24 The name means ‘new city’ (Gibson, TheCommentariesI, Introd. XIV). 25 For the history of the city and the correct location, see: Fiey, ACI, 103-106. For a map, see: Putman, L’Égliseetl’Islam, map III, Assyrie Chrétienne. According to Assemanus’s specification it was locatad at a distance of 14 parasanges from Mosul (B.O.III,I, 209) and should not be confused with Ḥedatta, located on the Euphrates (B.O.III,I, 209; Fiey, ACI,104). 26 See: Gismondi, Maris,‘AmrietSlibae, 1, Maris(versio Latina) 69-70; 2, ‘Amriet Slibae (versio Latina) 42; Assemanus, BO III,1, 210-212; Baumstark, Geschichte, 234; Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’, 60. 27 For Boktisho‘: Sourdel, s.v. Bukhtīshū‘, 1298; Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’, 60.

XX

INTRODUCTION

Eventually his failure to obtain the highest position in his church did not work out badly for Isho‘dad, because hardly a month after his enthronement Theodosius was put in prison by the Caliph for more than three years. 2. THE SOURCES USED

BY ISHO‘DAD OF

MERW

2.1 Isho‘dadasaCompiler The commentaries of Isho‘dad of Merw on the Old and New Testament are compilations. When composing his commentaries Isho‘dad made use of already existing exegetical traditions. He drew in particular on the tradition to which he belonged. As a compiler Isho‘dad did not merely copy the material he borrowed from other authors, but rewrote and reshaped it into a new unity. In order to determine the sources Isho‘dad used in his commentary on the Gospel of John, first an inquiry will be made into the relationship of Isho‘dad’s work to the early sources of Syrian exegetical tradition, and next the position of Isho‘dad’s commentary within the narrower circle of East Syrian exegesis will be looked at28. 2.2 Isho‘dad’sCommentaryandtheSyrianExegeticalTradition To the older sources of Syrian exegetical tradition belong the works of both Syriac and Greek authors. In the Greek schools in Syria, at Antioch or elsewhere, the Greek and Syrian exegetical conceptions met and existed harmoniously side by side because of a great affinity in the matter of exegetical methods and premises.29 In the work of Isho‘dad these two streams of tradition are, in accordance with the East Syrian exegetical practice of his time, also present.

28 All sources, as far as possible, are included in the following survey. In three cases I desisted from recording in the list of sources, namely where IoM reports (1) that Abgar of Edessa wrote a letter to Jesus, which is to be found in the Ecclesiastical History of Bar Maryam (Syriac text: 101,13-14); (2) that Dionysius wrote a letter to Timothy and (3) that Peter Patriarch of Alexandria in a homily ‘About the Godhead’ testified about Jesus’s appearances to the disciples (Syriac text: 120,13-15), for these are only statements. For Bar Maryam: Van Rompay, ‘Daniel bar Maryam’, 113 and Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’, 66; Peter of Alexandria: Evetts, History of the Patriarchs, 383-401; the letter of Dionysius Areopagita to Timothy: Baumstark, Geschichte, 69. 29 Van Rompay, ‘Quelques remarques’, 33-34.

INTRODUCTION

XXI

2.2.1 Syriac Authors In his commentary on the Gospel of John Isho‘dad has made use of the following Syriac authors: A. Aphrahat Aphrahat, the so-called Persian Sage30, has to his name a collection of twenty-three treatises, known as ‘Demonstrations’31, which — written in 336 to 345 — have survived as one of the first literary products of the Syrian Church.32 Aphrahat occupied himself with the text of John in many places of his work.33 One of these places was used by Isho‘dad in his commentary, referring to him explicitly as ‘the Persian Sage’. The passage concerned applies to John 1,5.34 Isho‘dad quotes the words of Aphrahat very freely, concentrating particularly on his conception of ‘the light’ and ‘the darkness’. B. Ephrem The oeuvre of Ephrem Syrus († 373) consists of a number of works of various genres.35 Besides hymns, dogmatic treatises and saints’ lives, he wrote commentaries.36 So far the work of Ephrem has been considered as one of the main sources used by Isho‘dad for his commentaries on the Old and New Testament.37 Regarding his commentary on the Gospel of John Isho‘dad particularly used the commentary Ephrem wrote on the Diatessaron.38

30

Baumstark, Geschichte,30-31; Wright, AShortHistory, 32 et seq.; Ortiz de Urbina, Patrologia, 47-51; Parisot, ‘Aphraate (ou Pharhad)’, 1457-1463; Brock, ‘Aphrahat’, 24-25. 31 Edition: Parisot, AphraatisSapientisPersaeDemonstrationes; recent translations: Pierre, AphraateleSagePersan, LesExposésI,(I-X); LesExposésII,(XI-XXIII). 32 Concerning the chronology, see Baarda, TheGospelQuotations, 2; 6-7; Baumstark, Geschichte, 31. 33 See: Baarda, TheGospelQuotations, 55-281. 34 Syriac text: 11,3-5; Aphrahat: Parisot, Demonstrationes, PS I,1, 21,24 [text]. 35 Den Biesen, Bibliography; Baumstark, Geschichte, 31-52; Ortiz de Urbina, Patrologia, 52-77; Brock, ‘Ephrem’, 145-147; Amar, ‘Ephrem, Life of’, 147. 36 Cf. Ortiz de Urbina, Patrologia, 55-70. 37 In relation to the O.T.: see Van den Eynde’s prefaces to the various commentaries; concerning the N.T.: Rendel Harris’s ‘Introduction’ in: Gibson, The Commentaries I, XVII and idem, FragmentsoftheCommentary, 24-91. 38 Leloir, Commentairedel’ÉvangileConcordant and idem, Commentairedel’ÉvangileConcordant,FoliosAdditionnels.

XXII

INTRODUCTION

The following list gives a survey of the correspondencies between Isho‘dad and Ephrem39: Text IoM

Text Ephrem

1. Mar Ephrem

21,23-22,5

C. FA 20,20-26**

2. Mar Ephrem

24,23-24

C.

FA

38,17-18*

3.

25,1-5

C.

FA

38,3-5*

4.

33,1-3

C. 88,19; 90,1-2

5. Mar Ephrem

33,16-22

C. 92,13-20*

6.

34,4-11

C. 92,7-12*

7.

34,11-18

C. 92,23-94,5*

8.

38,21-39,1

C. 102,17-23

9. Mar Ephrem

45,20-21

C. 138,5-7*

10.

53,20-54,1

C. 184,21-186,2*

11.

56,21

C. 188,12-13. 17-18*

12.

58,18-19

C. 190,19

13.

60,1-2

C. 190,19

14.

63,19-21

C. 190,21-192,2*

15.

64,23-65,2

C. 192,9-12**

16.

65,2-6

C. 192,12-15*

17.

66,19-20

C. 196,10-11

18.

66,21-22

C. 198,23-24*

19.

67,17-19

C. 194,1-2**

20.

67,19-21

cf. C. 200,2-5

21.

67,21-68,5

C. 198,11-21**

22. Mar Ephrem

102,14-17

C.

23.

105,8-11

H. S. VII, 229

24.

110,19-24

cf. C. 228,16-21

25.

111,11-13

C. 228,12-14*

A

214,26-29**

39 C.=Leloir,Commentaire,textesyriaque; C.FA=Leloir,Commentaire,FoliosAdditionnels,textesyriaque;C.A= Leloir, Commentaire,Versionarménienne [transl.]; H.S.= Beck,SermonesinHebdomadamSanctam [text]. For all tables: ** = Literally identical. * = Almost literally identical. Without * = identical in content.

INTRODUCTION

XXIII

The survey shows us twenty-five coincidences. Five times (the numbers 1, 2, 5, 9 and 22) Isho‘dad indicates the source he used by mentioning the name of ‘Mar Ephrem’. In all the other cases he keeps silent about the name of his source. Twenty-four passages are derived from Ephrem’s commentary on the Diatessaron, one passage (number 23) is from another writing ascribed to Ephrem. In seventeen cases Isho‘dad associates himself closely to very closely with Ephrem’s text. In particular Isho‘dad has made use of Ephrem’s work when interpreting chapter 2, ‘Jesus changes water into wine’ (the numbers 2 and 3), and chapter 4, ‘Jesus talks to a Samaritan woman’ (the numbers 4, 5, 6 and 7) and especially when interpreting the text of chapter 11, ‘the death of Lazarus’ (the numbers 14 to 21). It is remarkable that Ephrem’s voice is completely absent in the so important Christological passage of John 1,1-18. I have previously pointed out that this is possibly connected with his Christological views, which no longer suited those of Isho‘dad’s on this point as discussed in his commentary.40 Number 8 of the survey — an explanation of John 5,17 (‘MyFatheris workingstill,andIamworking’) — is very interesting because of the fact that an explanation similar to that of Ephrem, is also to be found in Theodore of Mopsuestia and John Chrysostom.41 The numbers 13, 18 and 24 also have a parallel in the commentary of the Interpreter.42 In number 13 Theudas and Judas are called ‘thieves and deceivers’, who tried to break into the pen referred to in John 10,1. These two names are also to be found in the explanation of Theodore bar Koni and John Chrysostom.43 Overall, what strikes one most is that the extent of Ephrem’s contribution to Isho‘dad’s commentary on the Gospel of John is very limited. In the Syriac text this contribution consists of 97 lines out of a total of 2856 lines. This corresponds to 3.4 % of the commentary. This makes it clear that the designation of Ephrem’s work as ‘most important source’44 at least for Isho‘dad’s commentary on John is not appropriate. 40 Hofstra, Isho‘dad van Merw, 110. For Ephrem’s Christological views: Cf. Beck, EphrämsTrinitätslehre, 1,25-27; Yousif, ‘Symbolisme christologique’, 5-66; Lange, The PortrayalofChrist,118. 41 Theodore of Mopsuestia (TM): Vosté, Commentarius [text], 103,3-13; Johannes Chrysostomus (JC): Migne, PG 59, h. 38, c. 214,63-c. 215,4 (Gr. text); Childers, CommentaryonJohnI, Mêmrê 38,4, 273,28-274,6 (Syriac text). 42 No. 13: Vosté, Commentarius[text] 200,25; 27-29; no. 18: 227,24-28; no. 24: 349,1631. 43 Theodore bar Koni (TbK): LSII[text], 165,12-13; JC: PG59, h. 59, c. 325,9-11. 54-55. 44 Rendel Harris (Gibson, The Commentaries I, Introduction, XVI): ‘Next in importance to the Ephrem quotations, we should place those which are said to come from the

XXIV

INTRODUCTION

C. Nestorius On one occasion45 Isho‘dad cites words of Nestorius (c. 386 – c. 451) by name.46 The passage referring to John 20,17 deals with the Holy Trinity, more specifically with the interrelationship of the Son with the Father. A great deal of Nestorius’s work was destroyed because of his supposed heresy. What has, however, been preserved is the ‘LiberHeraclidis’,written towards the end of his life and discovered in 1895.47 It proved to be impossible to trace this quotation in this work. Perhaps it is derived from a letter of Nestorius, which has been lost. D. Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban The Chronicle of Séert makes mention of Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban († 566/567)48 as the author of a book of ‘Questions’.49 This remark is supported by the catalogue of ‘Abdisho‘, in which it is reported that it applied to questions about the Old and New Testament.50 The book itself has been lost. Isho‘dad refers in his commentary once by name to an opinion of Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban. In connection with John 4,5 he mentions that Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban said that Sychar — the place mentioned there — is the same as Shechem.51 It cannot be excluded that still more material of Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban has been inserted in Isho‘dad’s commentary.52 E. Aḥob of Qatar On the strength of data out of the commentary on John written by the East Syrian author Abu’l Faradj ‘Abd Allah Ibn al-Ṭayyib († 1043),53 it Mephaššekana or Interpreter…’; and (Introduction, XVII): ‘Of these writers, those quoted most frequently are Ephrem, Josephus and Theodore.’ 45 Syriac text: 112,9-13. 46 Baumstark, Geschichte, 117; the Syriac life of Nestorius is presented by Brière, ‘La légende syriaque de Nestorius’. See also: Bevan, ‘Nestorius’, 306-307 and idem, TheNewJudas. 47 Loofs, Nestoriana, Die Fragmente des Nestorius; Bedjan, Nestorius: le livre d’Héraclide de Damas; Nau, Nestorius. Le livre d‘Héraclide de Damas. Abramowski, UntersuchungenzumLiberHeraclidisdesNestorius. 48 As a teacher attached to ‘the School of Nisibis’ at the same time as his relative Abraham of beth Rabban was head of this school. (Baumstark, Geschichte, 115-116; Van Rompay, ‘Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban’, 441). 49 Baumstark, Geschichte, 115-116; Scher, Histoire nestorienne, t. 7, 116; Voöbus, History, 213-216. 50 Assemanus, BOIII,I, 72. 51 Syriac text: 32,22-33,1. 52 One could possibly think of the following passages (Syriac text): 21,6-17; 26,6-12; 49,22-50,12; 85,23-86,4 because of their question and answer scheme. 53 Cf. Amann and Tisserant, ‘L’Église nestorienne, littérature’, 271-272, 275-278; Graf, Geschichte,II, 160-177; Butts, ‘Ibn al-Ṭayyib’, 206-207; Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’,

INTRODUCTION

XXV

is to be assumed that one passage of Isho‘dad’s commentary on the first chapter of John must be ascribed to the Syrian author Aḥob of Qatar, known because of his biblical interpretation, and considered for election as catholicos in 581.54 The passage in question gives an explanation of the phrase ‘TheWordbecameflesh’(John 1,14).55 F. The ‘Tradition of the School’ For their knowledge Syriac exegetes drew not only on the commentaries of illustrious predecessors, but also on the so-called ‘Tradition of the School’, a collection of traditions, handed down originally ‘from mouth to ear’, afterwards put down in writing in the exegetical centres of the SyroAntiochene world.56 Also in Isho‘dad’s commentary two passages are with certainty to be ascribed to this source. The first passage deals with the order of the things that took place at the Paschal Supper and is introduced with the words ‘as the Teachers hand down’.57 The second passage gives a reaction by ‘the Teachers of the Schools’ to an explanation by Theodore of Mopsuestia on John 19,34-35, where it says ‘Oneofthesoldiersstruck HiminHissidewithaspearandbloodandwaterflowedoutimmediately. Hewhosawit,hasgiventestimonyandhistestimonyistrue’.58 Possibly 67-68. The commentary on John is part of a commentary on the Gospels, which Ibn alṬayyib completed in 1018. For the MSS and a description of this commentary: Graf, GeschichteII,167-169. It is edited by Manqurius, Tafsiral-masriqi, Bd.I (Mt/Mk), Bd.II (Lk/Jn). See also: Faultless, TheProloguetoJohn. Idem, ‘The Two Recensions’, 177-198. I had at my disposal MS (syr) arab. Chaldean Church Mardin no. 134, lent to me by the late J. C. J. Sanders. 54 For Aḥob of Qatar, see: Baumstark, Geschichte,131-132; Duval, Lexiconsyriacum, III, Proemium XIX; Cowley, ‘Scholia of Aḥob of Qatar’, 338-339; Ter Haar Romeny, ‘Aḥob Qaṭraya’, 12-13 55 Syriac text: 14,18-21; Ibn al-Tayyib: MS (syr) arab. Chaldean Church Mardin, no. 134, f 317r,18-20. The influence of IoM’s work on that of Ibn al-Tayyib’s is considerable, cf. Hofstra, lsho‘dadvanMerw, 190-193; 194, n. 24. 56 Barḥadbšabba gives a definition of this term, cf. Scher, Lacausedelafondationdes écoles, t. 4, fasc. 4, no. 18, 382-383. See also: Van Rompay, ‘Quelques remarques’,4142; idem, LecommentairesurGenèse-Exode9,32[transl.], Introd. XXXIII; Van Rompay states that Barḥadbšabba draws a clear distinction between ‘traditions’ (mašlmānwātā) and ‘commentaries’ (puššāqē). The ‘puššāqē’ refer to compositions written by individual authors, the ‘mašlmānwātā’ seems to have been transmitted orally and anonymously from generation to generation. He calls it ‘a dynamic reservoir of interpretations of various origins’ (‘The Christian Syriac Tradition of Interpretation’, 633). 57 Syriac text: 78,9-22. 58 Syriac text: 103,2-13. To this passage the remark made by Van Rompay applies: ‘When in later compilations the “tradition of the School” …. is quoted, the reference is often to questions provoked, or not satisfactorily settled, by Theodore’s commentaries, so that the Syrian teachers felt the need to make some adjustments to their Interpreter’s views’ (‘The Christian Syriac Tradition of Interpretation’, 637).

XXVI

INTRODUCTION

also two other passages can be counted as deriving from this source. The first passage59 applies to the interpretation of ‘some theoforoi’60 regarding Thomas’s words ‘Letusalsogo,thatwemaydiewithHim’ (John 11,16). In the second passage61 Isho‘dad mentions that one of the theoforoi has said that ‘in the time of our Lord there was nobody as evil as Judas, just as therewasnobodyasgoodasourLordetc.’ Although there is no direct reference to ‘the Teachers of the School’ the character of the passage and the assignment of this explanation to ‘one of the theoforoi’ make it plausible that it belongs to this source. 2.2.2 Greek Authors After presenting the survey of the early sources of Syrian exegetical tradition used by Isho‘dad in his commentary, we will now pay attention to the Greek sources. We will first look at the most important sources and then at the sources that only played a limited part in his commentary. A. Primary Sources 1. Theodore of Mopsuestia Within Syriac exegesis the work of Theodore of Mopsuestia (350-428) occupied a central position.62 Much of his work was translated into the Syriac language during the fifth century and incorporated into the heritage of the East Syrian church63, who conferred upon him the title of ‘The Interpreter’64. After the condemnation of Theodore at the fifth ecumenical council of Constantinople (553) most of his work was lost. Nevertheless, part of it has been preserved in Syriac translation, including the commentary on the Gospel of John.65 59

Syriac text: 65,15-22. According to Payne Smith, ThSyrII, 4366, s.v. †{Îò{sthe meaning is ‘Deum ? ferens, indutus’. It would be a synonym for ÀÍà¾ćàÛþÚÃà. Cf. for this last expression Rom 13,14. 61 Syriac text: 80,22-81,3. 62 Amann, ‘Théodore de Mopsueste’, 235-279; Baumstark, Geschichte, 102-104; Devreesse, EssaisurThéodoredeMopsueste; Scher, Histoirenestorienne,t. 5, 284-291; Ortiz de Urbina, Patrologia, 226; Sullivan, ‘Theodore of Mopsuestia’, 18-19; Van Rompay, ‘Theodore of Mopsuestia’, 401-402. 63 Cf. Amann, ‘Théodore de Mopsueste’, 238; Assemanus, BO III,1, 30-35.; Scher, Histoire nestorienne, t. 5, 289 et seq.; Vosté, ‘La chronologie de l’activité littéraire’, 56-63. 64 Cf. Ortiz De Urbina, Patrologia, 226: ‘Valuit apud Nestorianos tanquam ‘beatus Interpres’. 65 Edited by Vosté, Theodori Mopsuesteni Commentarius in evangelium Iohannis Apostoli. 60

INTRODUCTION

XXVII

In his introduction to Isho‘dad’s commentary on the Psalms Van Den Eynde concludes that Theodore’s commentary on the Psalms is unquestionably, both directly and indirectly, the principal source used by Isho‘dad in the compilation of his work. Further he speaks of “the dominating influence of the Exegete”.66 In a more recent study on Isho‘dad of Merw’s exegesis of the Psalms 119 and 139-146 Clemens Leonhard came to the conclusion that “30 % of Isho‘dad’s commentary could be literary parallels to Theodore’s commentary or can be read as direct reaction to the Interpreter’s text”.67 Gibson in her Preface to the translation of Isho‘dad’s commentary on the Gospels already presented a list of 221 coincidences between Isho‘dad and Theodore of Mopsuestia.68 My own investigation revealed that Gibson’s list is far from being complete. Her statements are not only often deficient, but she also overlooked many parallels. I myself come to a number of 371 coincidences between Isho‘dad and Theodore’s commentary on the Gospel of John. For these coincidences, see the following table69: Name

Text IoM

Text TM

1

3,2-3

C. 3,5**

2

3,3-4

C. 5,29-6,3*

3

3,5-6

C. 6,16-18**

4

3,6-7

C. 6,12-13*

5

3,8-14

C. 7,1-15*

6

3,15-17

C. 7,18-21*

7

3,17-19

C. 7,25-28*

8

3,19-20

C. 8,1-2*

9

3,20-4,6

C. 8,30-9,11*

10

4,6-9

C. 9,15-19*

11

4,22-5,1

C. 13,9-10; 14,1-2*

66

Cf. Van Den Eynde, CommentaireVI [transl.] Pref. XXIII. Leonhard, IshodadofMerw’sExegesis, 244. 68 Gibson, TheCommentariesI,Pref. XXXIII-XXXVI. 69 C: Vosté, Commentarius[text]; HC: Tonneau and Devreesse.LesHoméliesCatéchétiques. FS: Sachau, Fragmentasyriaca; DQ: Draguet, CommentaireduLivred’Abba Isaïe[text]. PG: Migne, Patrologia Graeca. 67

XXVIII

Name

INTRODUCTION

Text IoM

Text TM

12

5,1

C. 14,2-3*

13

5,2-6

C. 14,3-6*

14

5,7-9

C. 14,19-24

15

5,21-6,6

C. 21,15-23*

16

6,4-6

HC. f 18v.21-24

17

6,9-12

C. 22,6-13

18

6,15-18

C. 21,27-22,6; 22,15-18*

19

6,23

C. 14,19*

20 Interpreter

7,1-6

Letter to Kalastarton

21

7,15-19

C. 24,9-14; HC. f 19r.12-13

22

8,5-7

C. 24,19-21*

23

8,17-19

C. 24,5-14

24

9,4

C. 23,17-18*

25

9,8-11

C. 26,13-19*

26

9,11-14

C.28,17-21*

27

9,14-15

C. 28,26-28**

28

9,21-10,4

FS.f 20a,3-13

29

10,4-7

C. 28,28-29,1; 29,8-11

30

10,9-10

C.29,13-15*; 37,20-21*

31

10,21-23

C.29,21-24

32 Interpreter

11,7-8

Unidentified

33

11,19-22

D.Q.116,10-14**

34

12,10

FS. Îã, 19-21

35

12,11

FS. {, 24-25*

36

12,13

FS. Ïã, 4-5

37

12,15

FS. Îã, 11

38

12,16

FS. Ïã, 7-10

39

12,17

FS. Ïã, 1

40

12,21-22

FS. Îã, 2; Ïã, 16-17**

41

12,22-23

FS. Íã, 1**

42

12,24

FS. Îã, 7. 9-10. 22-23; Îã, 3. 25

INTRODUCTION

Name

Text IoM

Text TM

43

13,7

FS. Îã, 15-16

44

13,13-14

C.33,17-20

45

13,15-18

C.33,28-30**

46

13,19

PG. 66,725; 981; HC. f 47v.9-10

47

14,1-2

Cf. C. 34,1-2

48

14,4-5

Cf. HC. f 37r.5-6

49

14,14-17

C. 33,17-20*

50

14,3-5

C.33,22-23

51

14,9-10

FS. ~‹, 6-7

52

16,2-3

C. 33,23-24*

53

16,13-16

C. 19,21-24*

54

16,17-19

C. 21,15-21

55

17,3

C.73,14-16; HC. f 36r.13-15

56

17,21-18,1

C. 34,22-25*

57

18,9-11. 14-16 C.35,20-30

58

19,16-21

C.37,26-28; 38,1-5

59

19,21-22

C.38,5-7**

60

20,4-7

C.38,9-12. 19-20

61

20,14-18

C.39,5-13*

62

21,6-7. 9-10

C.40,13-16

63

21,12-13. 14

C.41,18-20

64

21,18-20

C.42,11-14**

65

21,21

C. 42,11-14**; 43,9-16

66

21,22

C. 42,1

67

22,6-8

C. 43,9-11*

68

22,11-15

C. 49,12-19

69

22,15-18

C. 52,1-4

70

22,19-20

C. 52,29-53,1

71

23,11-13

PG. 66; 734

72

23,20-21

C. 54,10-11. 29-30; 55, 2

73

23,22-24,3

C.55,25-30

XXIX

XXX

INTRODUCTION

Name

Text IoM

Text TM

74

24,4-6

C.56,13-15

75

24,7-8

C. 56,15

76

24,9-11

C. 56,15-17

77

24,11-14

C.56,20-24

78

24,20-24

C. 59,8-11. 12-15. 24; 60,5

79 Josephus

25,5-8

C.62,4-5. 8-12**

80

25,10

C. 62,4-5. 10-11

81

25,10-12

C. 64,13-14*. 23-24*

82

25,12-15

C.64,28-65,2**

83

25,15-17

C.64,18-21*

84

25,17

C.65,4

85

25,19-26,6

C. 67,6-7*; 67,22-68,3*

86

26,22-24

C.69,18-20

87 Interpreter

27,9-12

C.69,19-22

88

27,17-24

Cf. C. 68,29-69,6

89

27,24-28,2

C. 70,26-29

90

28,3-4

C. 70,30

91

30,7-14

C. 72,20-73,5*

92

30,16-17

C. 73,3-6

93

31,7-8

C. 73,15-19*

94

31,10-11

C.73,33-34*

95

31,11-13

C. 76,14-16. 19-21*

96

31,13-19

C. 76,24-30*

97

31,20-22

C.82,30-83,4

98

32,1

C.83,8

99

32,3-6

C. 83,15-19

100

32,18-19

C.85,17-18

101

32,19-20

C. 85,23-24

102

32,20-22

C.85,25-26

103

32,22

C.85,24-25

104

32,22-23

C. 86,4-6

INTRODUCTION

Name

Text IoM

Text TM

105

32,24-33,1

C. 86,9-10*

106

33,3-9

Cf. C. 85,24-86,4

107 Interpreter

33,10-16

C. 90,4-12*

108

33,22-24

C. 91,7-9*

109

34,1-2

C. 91,14-15*

110

34,2-4

C. 91,18-21*

111

34,18-19

C. 93,30-94,1

112

34,19-21

C. 94,10-11*. 16-17

113

34,21-24

C. 94,18-23*

114

34,24-35,1

C. 94,19-20*

115

35,1-5

C. 95,2-5*

116

35,5-9

C. 95,9*. 14-19*

117

35,10-11

C. 95,14-15*

118

35,11-15

C. 98,15-17*. 21-22

119

35,22-23

C. 98,17-18

120

36,11-12

C. 98,26-99,1

121

36,15-16

C. 99,12-15

122

36,19

C.99,6-7

123

36,20

C. 99,10-11

124 Interpreter

37,13-17

C.102,6-7. 15-16. 23-24

125

37,17-20

C.101,10-11

126

38,6-8

C.100,27-29

127

38,10

C.103,1-2

128

38,21-39,1

C. 103,3-13

129

39,4-6

C.108,29-109,1. 26-27

130

39,7-8

C.110,1-4*

131

39,10-11

C.109,28-110,1*

132

39,12

C.110,4

133

39,15-17

C.110,1

134

40,4

C.110,15-16*

135

40,5

C.110,16

XXXI

XXXII

INTRODUCTION

Name

Text IoM

Text TM

136

40,10-11

Cf. C.111,23-24

137

40,20-41,4

C.109,3-24*; 110,15-17. 28-29

138

41,6-7

C.111,23-24

139

41,8-9

C.111,20-24

140

41,14-15

C.112,15-18*

141

41,15-16

C. 113,5*

142

41,16-17

C.113,23-24*

143

41,17-19

C.114,13-15*

144

41,19-20

C.114,22-23*

145

41,20

C.113,28-29

146

41,21-42,7

Cf. C. 116,23-24; 165,23-28; 166,20-30; 167,2-8; 168,14-18

147

42,20-23

C. 124,17-19*; 125,6-8*

148

42,23-24

C.124,20-21*

149

42,24-43,1

C.125,8-9**. 11*

150

43,7-8

C.128,11-14*

151 Interpreter

43,8-11

C.138,23-25*. 27-29

152

43,12-23

C.140,11. 13-24**

153

43,23

C.148,20. 27-28

154

44,1. 3

C.148,26

155

44,11-14

C. 152,26-153,3*

156

44,22-45,1

C.153,1-7*

157

45,1-3

C.154,22-25

158

45,9-11

C.154,26-29

159

45,15-20

C.154,29-155,4

160

45,21-24

C.156,3-8

161

46,7-9

C.158,8-14

162

46,10-20

C.158,15-25

163

46,23-47,6

C.158,25-159,1

164

47,6-10

C.159,6-12*

165 Interpreter

48,12-17

Unidentified

INTRODUCTION

Name

Text IoM

Text TM

166

49,8-16

C.161,25-162,9**

167

49,17-20

C.162,9-14*

168

50,12-14

C.162,18-23

169

50,14-17

C.164,5-6

170

50,17-20

C.163,26-30*

171

50,20-23

C.164,15-20. 25*

172

50,24-51,1

C.164,27-28*

173

51,1-2

C.164,25-26*

174

51,2-8

C.164,21-22**; 164,30-165,3**

175

51,14-16

C.118,29-30; 119,4-5

176

51,20

C.165,17-18

177

52,12-14

C.169,4-6

178

52,17-18

C.169,8-9

179

52,18-24

C.165,8-10; 170,19-26*

180

52,24-53,1

C.171,27-29*

181

53,1-6

C.171,30; 172,8-12*

182

53,6-7

C.173,2

183

53,8-12

C.173,4-11*

184

53,13-15

C.173,4-8

185

53,17-20

C. 176,23-24*

186

54,12-13

C.180,8-9

187

54,15-18

C.180,11-14*

188

54,18-22

C.180,15-19*

189

54,23-55,1

C.180,22-24*

190

55,2-3

C.180,29-181,2. 9*

191

55,3-4

C.181,9-10*

192

55,5-8

C. 184,1-2*. 6-9*

193

55,8-13

C.184,24-28*

194

55,13-18

C.184,30-185,4*

195

55,18-19

C.185,11-12

196

55,19-56,2

C.186,12-20**

XXXIII

XXXIV

Name

INTRODUCTION

Text IoM

Text TM

197

56,2-5

C.186,27-30**

198

56,5-6

C.187,15-16**. 19**

199

56,6-8

C.187,25-26**

200

56,8-11

C.187,26-28**

201

56,11-12

C.188,2-5**

202

56,13

C.188,1

203

56,14

C.188,6**

204

56,14-18

C.188,12-18**

205

56,18-20

C. 188,21-22*

206

57,4-8

C. 194,28-29*

207

57,8-9

C. 194,29-195,1*

208

57,10-12

C. 195,1-4*

209

57,12-13

C. 195,7-9*

210

57,13-18

C. 195,9-14

211

57,18-20

C. 195,16-17*

212

57,21

C. 195,18-19

213

57,23-58,2

C. 195,19-27

214

58,4-8

C. 196,6-12*

215

58,9-10

C. 196,20-22

216

58,10

C. 197,12-13**

217

58,10-13

C. 197,15-17

218

58,15-16

C. 198,2-6*

219

59,11-12

C. 199,20-23

220

59,12-14

C. 199,24-27*

221

59,15-16

C. 199,27-29*

222

59,21-60,1

C. 200,6-15*

223

60,1-3

C. 200,25. 27-29**

224

60,3-6

C. 201,2-5*

225

60,6-7

Cf. C. 202,26-27

226

60,25-61,1

Cf. C. 203,16-18. 28

227

61,3-4

C. 204,8

INTRODUCTION

Name

Text IoM

Text TM

228

61,17-21

C. 201,27-28; 202,3-6*. 10-11

229

62,7-9

C. 204,26; 204,29-205,1

230

62,11-16

Cf. C. 211,4-13

231

62,16-17

C. 214,14-15

232

62,17-20

C. 214,18-21*

233

62,20-21

C. 214,22-24*

234

63,13-19

C. 220,21-29*

235

63,21-22

C. 221,4-5*

236

63,22-64,2

Cf. C. 223,1-2

237

64,2-8

C. 221,23-27*

238

64,9-20

C. 222,1-16*

239

65,6-7

C. 222,19-20*

240

65,11-13

C. 222,22-24

241

65,23

C. 223,27**

242

65,23-66,5

C. 224,28-225,5*

243

66,7-13

C. 226,6-11*

244

66,13-15

C. 227,19-23*

245

66,20-24

C. 227,24-28*

246

66,24-67,1

C. 227,29-30*

247

67,3-5

C. 227,30-228,3*

248

68,9-10

C. 229,23-27*

249

68,20-69,1

C. 230,17. 20-23. 27-29*

250

69,3-6

C. 231,18-24*

251

71,3-5

C. 236,22-25

252

71,5-11

C. 239,10-17**

253

71,13-14

C. 239,20-21*

254

71,14-22

C. 239,22-31*

255

71,22-72,2

C. 240,1-7*

256

72,4-17

C. 240,12-30*

257

73,3-4

C. 242,3-5

258

73,6-8

C. 242,9-11

XXXV

XXXVI

Name

INTRODUCTION

Text IoM

Text TM

259

73,9-12

C. 242,16-20

260

73,13-18

C. 242,25-243,1

261

73,21-74,1

C. 243,15-18

262

74,1-3

C. 243,21-24

263

74,4-8

C. 243,28-244,4

264

74,9

Cf. C. 244,16

265

74,13. 18-19

Cf. C. 244,12-13

266

74,21-22

C. 244,11-12*

267

72,22-73,1

C. 245,6-8

268

75,1-2

C. 244,25-26

269

75,5

C. 245,9

270

75,8-13

C. 245,10-18

271

75,16

C. 244,9-10

272

75,16-21

Cf. C. 248,7-10. 14-19

273

75,21-23

C. 248,30-249,3

274

75,24

C. 248,27-29; 249,3-4

275

76,1-4

C. 249,8-10. 14-17

276

76,4-8

C. 249,19-23

277

76,8-15

C. 250,6-14

278

76,15-20

C. 250,19-26

279

76,20-77,3

C. 251,11-20

280

77,3-5

C. 251,28-252,2

281

77,5-9

C. 255,14-17. 20-21

282

77,21-24

C. 256,25-26; 257,1-4

283

78,1-4

C. 257,7-8. 10-11

284

78,5-9

C. 258,16. 21-23*

285

79,1-3

C. 260,17-20**

286

79,3-5

C. 260,24-27**

287

79,8-13

Cf. C. 260,3-5

288

79,13-14

C. 39,5-13

289

79,21-22

Cf. C. 260,5.7

INTRODUCTION

Name

Text IoM

Text TM

290

80,13-15

C. 261,8-11*

291

81,3-6

C. 262,14-18**

292

81,6-7

C. 262,21-22*

293

81,7-10

C. 262,25-29**

294

81,10-12

C. 262,29-263,1**

295

81,12-15

C. 263,15-19**

296

81,17-19

C. 265,23-27*

297

82,4-7

C. 272,24-28

298

82,10-12

C. 272,3-9*

299

82,16-17

Cf. C. 273,18-19

300

84,3-9

C. 274,24-275,2*

301

84,10-17

C. 275,5. 8-9. 12-22**

302

84,17-85,5

C. 275,22-276,7**

303 Interpreter

85,6-7

C. 278,25-26; 278,29-279,1

304

86,22-87,4

C. 280,10-18**

305

87,6-8

C. 281,10-13*

306

87,8-18

C. 281,13-26*

307

87,18-88,1

C. 282,4-13*

308

90,12-20

C. 284,4-10*

309

90,23-91,5

C. 284,10-17*

310

91,10-12

C. 284,19-22**

311

91,12-92,3

C. 289,18-19*; 289,24-290,14*

312

92,14-23

C. 292,27-29; 293,1-11*

313

92,23-93,5

C. 293,1. 20-25*

314

93,5-7

C. 295,4-7. 10-11; 296,3*

315

93,8-12

C. 297,30-298,4*

316

93,12-13

C. 296,23-24. 29**

317

93,23-94,7

C. 301,5-20*

318

94,7-12

C. 301,22-25**

319

94,12-14

C. 302,1-3*

320

94,14-17

C. 302,5-8*

XXXVII

XXXVIII

Name

INTRODUCTION

Text IoM

Text TM

321

94,17-95,1

C. 302,14-15*. 18-20. 23-26

322

95,1-3

C. 307,29-308,2*

323

95,4-5

C. 307,26-27*

324

95,5-7

C. 307,22-24*

325

96,2-9

C. 310,3-4. 10-16**

326

97,12-14

C. 312,1. 7-9**

327

97,14-19

C. 312,9-15**

328

97,19-22

C. 316,8-9. 12-13*

329

97,23-24

C. 316,8-9*. 13-15*

330

98,2-4

C. 318,1-3

331

98,5-7

C. 318,4-6

332

98,8-12

C. 318,26-319,1

333

98,12-13

C. 319,9-11

334 Interpreter

98,14

C. 319,11-14

335

98,19-21

Cf. C. 319,1. 14

336

99,1-3

C. 319,22-23; 320,25

337

100,1-3

Cf. C. 324,2-14

338

100,6-11

C. 328,29-329,8

339

100,17-18

C. 329,26-30

340

100,21-23

Cf. C. 335,11-12. 15-17. 29-30

341

100,23-101,2

C. 329,24-26

342

101,4-8. 17-19 Cf. C. 336,3-8

343

101,21-22

C. 336,8

344

101,23-102,2

C. 336,24-27

345 Interpreter

102,17-103,1

C. 338,9-24**

346

104,3-16

Cf. 340,4-341,1; 342,7-344,1

347

104,16-18

C. 340,25-341,1*

348

106,4

Cf. C. 347,8-11

349

106,23-107,3

Cf. C. 346,21-24. 28

350

109,20-22

C. 347,28-348,1

351

110,1

C. 348,3

INTRODUCTION

Name

Text IoM

Text TM

352

110,2-3

C. 348,1-3

353

111,2-6

C. 348,21-29; 349,3-4. 8-16

354

111,8-10

C. 350,4-8

355

112,17-19

Cf. C. 353,3-5

356

112,23

Cf. C. 353,13-14. 18

357

114,1-7

C. 356,13-19**

358

114,8-10

C. 356,20-23**

359 Interpreter

114,10-12

C. 355,16. 21-23; 356,24-25**

360 Theologus

114,16-18

C. 358,12-14**

361

114,20-115,11 C. 356,25-357,16**

362

115,11-14

C. 358,4-6**

363 Interpreter

115,16-19

C. 358,7-11**

364 Theologus

116,22-24

C. 358,12-14**

365

116,24-117,6

C. 360,23-29**

366

117,7-118,5

C. 360,30-361,21**

367

118,7-10

C. 361,27-362,4**

368

118,11-17

C. 362,6-14**

369

118,17-119,3

C. 362,15-25

370

119,4-13

C. 363,14-18*

371 Interpreter

120,21-121,8

C. 364,1-6*

XXXIX

In 197 cases Isho‘dad associates himself closely to very closely with Theodore’s text. In the other 174 cases Isho‘dad cites Theodore in a freer manner. Only sixteen times does he mention the name of ‘Interpreter’ as an indication of his source.70 In three cases it concerns material from outside Theodore’s commentary on the Gospel of John. The first of them gives a quotation from a letter of Theodore’s to a certain Kalastarton71, the second Theodore’s view on the meaning of the word ‘darkness’ in John 1,572 and 70 Syriac text: 7,1; 11,7; 27,9; 33,10; 37,13; 43,9; 48,13; 48,16; 85,6; 98,14; 102,23; 103,3.4; 114,10; 115,16; 120,21. 71 Syriac text: 7,1-6. For Theodore’s letters, cf. Assemanus, BO III,1, 35 72 Syriac text: 11,7-8 (darkness) and 48,12-17 (on which feast Jesus entered Jerusalem). These quotations are not to be found in Theodore’s commentary. It may be assumed that they are derived from another work of Theodore’s.

XL

INTRODUCTION

the third quotation discusses a statement of Theodore’s concerning the feast during which Jesus entered Jerusalem. Beyond this there are three more passages connected with other writings of Theodore’s. The first of them73, dealing with the three categories of life, shows a relationship to a fragment from Theodore’s commentary on Genesis.74 The second passage, referring to the three ways in which the Scriptures say that we are born of God75, is to be found entirely in the commentary Dadisho‘ Qatraya (7th c.) wrote on the book of Abba Isaiah76, and regarding which Draguet spoke of “une formule familiaire à Théodore de Mopsueste”77. A third passage, finally, consisting of a list of the many ways in which things or persons ‘become’78, Isho‘dad derived from Theodore’s treatment of Gal 3,13 in his book ‘De Incarnatione’.79 In another way also the commentary of Isho‘dad has undergone the influence of Theodore of Mopsuestia. The range of thought is often that of the Interpreter as is illustrated by the parallels between the commentary of Isho‘dad and Theodore’s ‘Catechetical Homilies’, especially in chapter 1.80 The material extent of Theodore’s contribution to Isho‘dad’s commentary is enormous. In the Syriac text of the commentary this contribution consists of 1143 lines out of a total of 2856 lines. This means that over 40% of the commentary is derived from the Interpreter’s work. This makes it clear that the designation of Theodore’s work as “the principal source” also for Isho‘dad’s commentary on John is more than appropriate.81 It seems obvious that Isho‘dad had direct access to his source. 2. John Chrysostom On one occasion Isho‘dad attributes a passage to a certain ‘John’.82 Thus he refers to John Chrysostom (c. 345-407), who played an important part as an exegete, particularly in the West Syrian Church.83 Among 73

Syriac text: 9,21-10,4. Sachau, FS, f 20a,3-13. 75 Syriac text: 11,19-22. 76 Draguet, CommentaireduLivred‘AbbaIsaïe [text], 116,10-14. 77 Idem, CommentaireduLivred‘AbbaIsaïe [transl.], 89, n. 3. 78 Syriac text: 12,10-13,10. 79 Cf. Sachau, FS, Òã- Íã,4. 80 Tonneau and Devreesse, LesHoméliesCatéchétiques. For a survey, see the list in: Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 114-115. 81 See note 66. 82 Syriac text: 37,10-13. 83 Allen and Mayer, JohnChrysostom; Childers, ‘John Chrysostom’, 229-230; idem, StudiesintheSyriacversionsofSt.JohnChrysostom’shomilies. Idem, JohnChrysostom’s CommentaryonJohn,I.Mêmrê1-43. 74

INTRODUCTION

XLI

other things he wrote homilies on Matthew, John and the Pauline Letters. Already shortly after John Chrysostom’s death some of his work was translated into Syriac.84 For our investigation in particular the homilies on the Gospel of John are important. In the passage mentioned above, Isho‘dad records an exegetical discussion between John Chrysostom and Theodore of Mopsuestia concerning the paralytic, who in Bethesda on the Sabbath was healed by Jesus (John 5,1-18). John Chrysostom praises the paralytic, because he, after being healed, gratefully declared that it was Jesus who healed him.85 Theodore, however, writes that he was acting in this way owing to his wickedness, for although he saw how Jesus’s adversaries were raging with fury and eager for revenge, because of the transgression of the Sabbath, he none the less went to them to say that Jesus had cured him, and in this way he betrayed his healer.86 Both exegetes exhibit in their work knowledge of the opponent’s view and record this as such, but without mentioning each other’s name.87 Isho‘dad shares Theodore’s view and calls the cured paralytic a person of inferior origin, considering him as one of those who at last urged the murder of Jesus. For in Isho‘dad’s opinion this paralytic was the one who slapped Jesus on the face in the court-house (John 18,22). So it was to warn him that Jesus said after his healing: ‘Seeyouarewellagain.Stopsinningorsomethingworsemayhappentoyou’ (John 5,14). After he gave our Lord a slap, not only did the paralysis return, but also his hands shrivelled up, he became blind and suffered hellish pains, as a fulfilment of this warning.88 Besides this passage attributed to John Chrysostom, Isho‘dad uses his work on a large scale, without mentioning his name. As many as fifty-one other passages in his commentary can be ascribed to John Chrysostom’s work, as the following survey shows89:

84 Childers: ‘It is very likely that the translation was made sometime in the mid- to late 5th century’ (CommentaryonJohnI [text], Introduction XVI). 85 John Chrysostom (JC): (Gr. text: PG59, h. 37, c. 209,22-51; Syriac text: Childers, CommentaryonJohnI [text] m. 37,4; 263,2-3. 15-17; 264,6-7*); Malingrey,Surl’Égalité, 338,269-271; 342,323-324. 86 Vosté, Commentarius, 102,6-7. 15-16. 23-24. 87 TM: Vosté, Commentarius, 101,19-24; JC: Gr. text: PG59, h. 38, c. 212,48-51; Syriac text: Childers,CommentaryonJohnI [text] m. 38,2; 271,2-3; 38,3; 272,19-27. 88 Syriac text: 37,23-38,6. 89 PG: PG 59; ST: Syriac translation of Mêmrê 1-43 (Childers, John Chrysostom’s CommentaryonJohnI [text]. Mêmrê 30 is missing in the manuscripts.

XLII

INTRODUCTION

Text IoM

Text Joh. Chr.

1.

11,16. 18-19

PG. h. 10, c. 75,57-76,1; ST: m. 10,4; 87,6-9*

2.

18,9-11. 14-16

PG. h. 12, c. 82,3-8; ST: m. 12,2; 97,17-18*

3.

19,22-20,4

PG. h. 14, c. 94,40-95,3; ST: m. 14,4; 118,26-119,5

4.

21,9-14

Cf. PG. h. 16, c. 104,2-19; ST: m. 16,3; 134,22-27

5.

23,11-13

PG. h. 17, c. 107,45-49; ST: m. 17,1; 141,16-19*

6.

24,21-22

PG. h. 21, c. 130,24-34; ST: m. 21,4; 181,88-182,1*

7.

27,1-2

PG. h. 26, c. 154,45-52; ST: m. 26,3; 225,28-226,1*

8.

27,7-9

PG. h. 26, c. 155,15-18; ST: m. 26,4; 226,20-23**

9.

29,23-30,1

PG. h. 27, c. 158,36-38; ST: m. 27,2; 233,6-8*

10.

32,1

PG. h. 30, c. 173,45-48

11.

36,23-37,2

PG. h. 37, c. 208,28-38. 49-54; ST: m. 37,3; 261,2122; 262,2-4.13-14*

12. John 37,10-13

PG. h. 37, c. 209,22-51; ST: m. 37,4; 263,2-3. 15-17; 264,6-7 *

13.

37,13-19

PG. h. 38, c. 212,48-51; ST: m. 38,2; 271,2-3; 38,3; 272,19-27

14.

38,21-39,1

PG. h. 38, c. 214,63-215,4; ST: m. 38,4; 274,2-5; 38,5; 274,24-26*

15.

39,5

PG. h. 38, c. 216,18-20; ST: m. 38,6; 276,27-277,1

16.

39,7-9

PG. h. 38, c. 216,55-58. 62-63; ST: m. 38,7; 278,13. 5*

17.

41,4-6

PG. h. 38, c. 217,9-19; ST: m.38,7; 278,13-15

18.

41,8-9

PG. h. 38, c. 218,29-32; ST: m. 38,7; 279,13-14

19.

43,7-8

PG. h. 41, c. 236,13-15; m. 41,3; 310,7-8*

20.

49,8-16

PG. h. 51, c. 283,39-44. 50-62; 284,5-8*

21.

54,1-5

PG. h. 55, c. 302,43-48

22.

54,13-15

PG. h. 55, c. 303,57-304,6*

23.

56,21-24

PG. h. 59, c. 311,23-25*

24.

57,4-7

PG. h. 59, c. 323,13-20*

25.

58,17-59,2

PG. h. 59, c. 323,65-324,1-8. 15-19. 27-31*

26.

59,2-4

PG. h. 59, c. 324,31-34**

27.

59,4-9

PG. h. 59, c. 324,67-325,4**

28.

59,20-21

PG. h. 59, c. 324,60-65*

29.

60,7-8

PG. h. 59, c. 325,9-11. 54-55*

INTRODUCTION

Text IoM

Text Joh. Chr.

30.

60,8-9

PG. h. 59, c. 325,22-26. 30-35*

31.

60,11

PG. h. 59, c. 325,49-52*

32.

60,12-16

PG. h. 59, c. 325,54-60*

33.

60,23-24

PG. h. 59, c. 324,64-65**

34.

61,21-22

PG. h. 59, c. 325,63-65*

35.

63,9-11

PG. h. 61, c. 339,58-62**

36.

65,23

PG. h. 62, c. 344,53-54**

37.

67,2

PG. h. 63, c. 350,34-37

38.

68,6-9

PG. h. 64, c. 355,17-21*

39.

69,11-12. 14-18 PG. h. 65, c. 361,20-25*

40.

71,13-21

PG. h. 66, c. 367,42-48*

41.

72,19-23

PG. h. 67, c. 371,29-36*

42.

73,8

PG. h. 67, c. 371,50-53*

43.

73,15-16. 18-21 PG. h. 67, c. 372,12-15. 17-22*

44.

75,4-8

PG. h. 67, c. 373,18-23*

45.

75,16-20

PG. h. 68, c. 376,21-27*

46.

77,8-18

PG. h. 70, c. 383,26-31. 35-39. 43-44*

47.

85,7-8. 17-18; 85,20-22

PG. h. 75, c. 408,22-24

48.

106,15-20

Cf.PG. h. 85, c. 465,16-18

49.

106,23-107,3

Cf. PG. h. 85, c. 465,24-29

50.

109,1-4

Cf. PG. h. 86, c. 468,43-46

51.

109,18-19

Cf. PG. h. 86, c. 468,46-51

52.

112,23-113,1

PG. h.86,c. 470,38-41

XLIII

These passages refer to the following chapters of the Gospel of John: chapter 1: 5 passages90; chapter 2: 1 passage91; chapter 3: 4 passages92; chapter 5: 9 passages93; chapter 7: 1 passage94; chapter 8: 2 passages95; 90 91 92 93 94 95

No. 1-5 of the survey, concerning the explanation of John 1,13; 1,14; 1,16; 1,21, 1,28. No. 6: explanation of John 2,11. No. 7-10: explanation of John 3,8a; 3,8b; 3,13; 3,33. No. 11-19: explanation of John 5,8 (3 times); 5,17; 5,19a (3 times); 5,19c; 5,43. No. 20: explanation of John 7,38. No. 21-22: explanation of John 8,52 and 8,53.

XLIV

INTRODUCTION

chapter 9: 2 passages96; chapter 10: 11 passages97; chapter 11: 4 passages98; chapter 12: 6 passages99; chapter 13: 1 passage100; chapter 14: 1 passage101; chapter 20: 5 passages102. As can be deduced from this survey, Isho‘dad used the material of John Chrysostom in particular concerning John 5, the chapter about the paralytic and John 10, the passage about the Good Shepherd. In 36 passages Isho‘dad associates himself closely to very closely with John Chrysostom’s text of his homilies on the Gospel of John. In sixteen passages Isho‘dad cites his source in a freer manner. In fifteen cases the material Isho‘dad derived from Chrysostom also has parallels in the work of Theodore of Mopsuestia.103 This indicates that — in spite of all variety — there is a certain connection between the two great exegetes. In one passage they both derive their explanation from Ephrem’s work.104 Isho‘dad introduces the material he derived from John Chrysostom in several ways: ‘some say’105, ‘one of the theoforoi says’106, ‘some explain it as’107, ‘others say’108, ‘according to some’109, ‘according to one of the godly men’110, and ‘it is asked’111. In two cases topographical matters are at stake.112 It can be said that John Chrysostom’s contribution to Isho‘dad’s commentary on the Gospel of John is substantial. In the Syriac text of 96

No. 23-24: explanation of John 9,6 and 9,39. No. 25-35: explanation of John 10,1 (2 times); 10,4; 10,7; 10,8 (3 times); 10,11; 10,14b; 10,10b; 10,41b. 98 No. 36-39: explanation of John 11,18; 11,35; 11,41; 11,51. 99 No. 40-45: explanation of John 12,21; 12,27; 12,28; 12,29; 12,32; 12,41. 100 No. 46: explanation of John 13,6. 101 No. 47: explanation of John 14,28. 102 No. 48-52: explanation of John 20,6-7 (2 times); 20,14 (2 times); 20,19. 103 No. 5 (PG66/119, c. 734); no. 6 (Vosté, Commentarius(C), 59,8-11. 12-15; 60,5); no. 10 (C, 83,8 ); no. 12 (C, 102,4-7); no. 13 (C, 102,15-17. 22-25); no. 14 (C, 103,3-13); no. 16 (C, 110,1-4); no. 19 (C, 128,11-14); no. 20 (C, 161,25-162,9); no. 24 (cf. C, 194,28-195,1); no. 36 (C, 223,27); no. 40 (C, 229,22-31); no. 43 (C, 242,27-29); no. 45 (C, 248,7-10; 14-19); no. 49 (cf. C, 346,21-24. 28). 104 No. 14. See also note 41. 105 Syriac text: 49,8. 106 Syriac text: 58,17. 107 Syriac text: 61,21-22. 108 Syriac text: 69,11-12; 85,7; 109,18. 109 Syriac text: 75,7. 110 Syriac text: 77,9-10. 111 Syriac text: 77,13. 112 Syriac text: 23,11-13; 65,23. 97

INTRODUCTION

XLV

the commentary this contribution consists of 173 lines out of a total of 2856 lines. This means that almost 6 % of the commentary is derived from John Chrysostom’s work. In this respect it is remarkable that Isho‘dad only once mentions the name of his source and what is more, only to oppose a view of his. 3. Gregory of Nazianzus Claude Detienne in his introduction to the Studia Nazianzenica I states that among all the Greek Fathers there is no one who saw such a great part of his theological work being translated and studied in the Syriac World as Gregory of Nazianzus (330-390).113 Together with his friend Basilius the Great († c. 378) and his brother Gregorius of Nyssa († c. 395) he, as one of the three Cappadocians, exerted great influence on the Syriac Christians. They conferred upon him the title of ‘the Theologian’. Isho‘dad also used the work of Gregory of Nazianzus. He particularly incorporated material from his ‘Orationes’ and his ‘Epistula Theologica’. The following list gives us a survey of the correspondencies between Isho‘dad and Gregory. Text IoM

Text Gregory of Nazianzus

1. Gregory

11,5-7

Or. 39,2; 152,9-11114

2.

13,20-23

OLP 1,156; L.T. 101,62, no. 61115

3.

39,4-6

Or. 30,10; 248,1-4*; 250,5-6*(a); 249,1-5; 251,1(n)116

4.

39,6-7

Or. 30,11; 252,41-42*(a); 253,42-43(n)*.

5.

39,9

Or. 30,11; 254,3-4**(a); 255,3-4**(n)

6.

39,9-10

Or. 30,11; 254,7-8**(a); 255,7-8**(n)

7.

39,12-13

Or. 30,10; 250,14-17*(a); 251,15-17*(n)

8.

39,14-15

Or. 30,10; 250,21-23*(a); 251,22-25*(n)

9.

39,17-20

Or. 30,10; 252,35-40**(a); 253,36-42**(n)

113 Detienne, ‘Grégoire de Nazianze dans la tradition syriaque’, 175-183. See also: Taylor, ‘Les Pères cappadociens’. For Gregorius’s life and work: Brock, ‘Gregory of Nazianzus’, 181-182. 114 Greek text: Moreschini and Gallay, GrégoiredeNazianze,Discours38-41. 115 Syriac text: Abramowski and Van Roey, ‘Das Florileg mit den Gregor-Scholien’, 131-180; Greek text: Gallay and Jourjon, GrégoiredeNazianze,LettresThéologiques. 116 Syriac text, versio antiqua (a) and versio nova (n): Haelewyck, Sancti Gregorii NazianzeniOpera, versiosyriaca,IV: Orationes XXVIII, XXIX, XXX et XXXI.

XLVI

INTRODUCTION

Text IoM

Text Gregory of Nazianzus

10.

39,21-23

Or. 30,10; 250,11-14*(a); 251,11-15*(n)

11.

39,23-40,4

Or. 30,10; 250,6-11**(a); 251,5-11**( n)

12.

40,10-11

Or. 30,11; 254,9-10**(a); 255,8-10**(n)

13.

41,6

Or. 30,11; 256,20-21**(a); 257,20-21*(n)

14.

41,8

Or. 30,11; 256,28*(a); 257,29 *(n)

15.

47,17-20

Or. 41,4; 322,38-41117

16. Theologian 114,16-18; Unidentified 116,22-24

In passage 1 Isho‘dad mentions an opinion of Gregorius’s about the meaning of the words ‘light’ and ‘darkness’ in John 1,5. Isho‘dad incorporates this opinion in a collection of exegetical views on this text. He writes: ‘Gregorius, however, allegorically calls both the body in which the Word-God dwelt and the world ‘darkness’. This collection, which contains old material handed down by tradition, may have already existed in the exegetical centres of the Syrian Church and have been adopted as such by Isho‘dad in his commentary. As has already been indicated above concerning another quotation from this group of traditions, it is remarkable how freely Isho‘dad deals with Gregorius’s text.118 Passage number 2 proposes to interpret the words of John 1,14 ‘The Wordbecameflesh’ in the sense of ‘He took on the flesh’. This explanation of John 1,14, which is widespread within Syriac exegetical tradition119, Isho‘dad did not adopt directly from Gregorius’s work, but it came into his commentary via the work of another East Syrian exegete, Isho‘ bar Nun.120 The passages mentioned in the numbers 3 to 14 are related to the explanation of John 5,19 ‘TheSoncandonothingofHisownaccord,but only what He sees the Father doing’. The way in which Isho‘dad deals with his sources when interpreting these words is truly admirable. He reshapes them to the following new unity.121 117

See note 114. See Chapter 2.2.1 sub A. 119 For a survey, see: Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 73-75. 120 MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 87r.11-87v.2; Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 128-129. 121 After the various components I have mentioned the sources used by IoM. JC: Gr. text = PG59; Syr. text = Childers,CommentaryonJohnI. GN: Haelewyck, Sancti GregoriiNazianzeniOpera. TM: Vosté, Commentarius. TbK: Scher, LSII. 118

INTRODUCTION

XLVII

Introduction ‘These words ‘Hecandonothing’ are used in many ways’: (JC/GN/ TM/TbK)122 Thevariousmeanings: 1. ‘He cannot at all’. (GN)123 a. 2 Tim 2,13: ‘Hecannotdisownhimself’. (JC)124 b. Heb 6,18 ‘BytwothingsinwhichitisimpossibleforGodtolie’. (JC/TM/TbK)125 c. It is impossible for God to become evil; that 2 × 2 = 4 and also 14. (JC/GN)126 2. In the meaning of weakness. a. Heb 10,4 ‘Itisimpossibleforthebloodofbullstomakeatonement’. (TM/TbK)127 3. In the meaning of it not being proper. (GN)128 a. Mk 2,19 ‘Thewedding-guestscannotfast’. (GN/TbK)129 4. There is no desire. (GN). a. Mt 13,58 ‘Hecouldnotdomanymightyworksthere,becauseof theirunbelief  ’. (GN)130 b. Jer 18,23 ‘The Lord cannot again forgive them because of their transgressions’. (TM)131 5. It is impossible by nature, but it is possible with God, when He wishes. (GN) a. John 3,4 ‘Hehimselfcannotbebornasecondtime’. (GN) b. Mt 19,24 ‘Acamelcannotgothroughtheeyeofaneedle’. (GN)132

122 IoM: 39,4-6. JC: h. 38, c. 216,18-20 (Gr. text); m. 38,6; 276,27-277,1* (Syr. text). GN: Or. 30,10; 248,1-4*; 250,5-6*(a); 249,1-5; 251,1(n). TM: 109,26-27. TbK: 155,1416*. 123 IoM: 39,6-7. GN: Or. 30,11; 252,41-42*(a); 253,42-43(n)*. 124 IoM: 39,7. JC: h. 38, c. 216,56-58 (Gr. text); m. 38,7; 278,2-3* (Syr. text). 125 IoM: 39,7-8. JC: h. 38, c. 216,55-56* (Gr. text); m. 38,7; 278,1* (Syriac text). TM: 110,1-4*. TbK: 155,20-22*. 126 IoM: 39,9-10. First part: JC: h. 38, c. 216,62-63 (Gr. text); m. 38,7; 278,5* (Syr. text). Both parts: GN: Or. 30,11; 254,3-4(a)**; 255,3-4 (n)**; 254,7-8(a)**; 255,7-8(n)**. 127 IoM: 39,10-11. TM: 109,28-110,1*. TbK: 155,17-18*. 128 IoM: 39,12. TM: 110,4. TbK: 155,25. 129 IoM: 39,12-13. GN: Or. 30,10; 250,14-17*(a); 251,15-17(n)*. TbK: 155,20-25*; 156,1-2*. 130 IoM: 39,14-15. GN: Or. 30,10; 250,21-23(a)**; 251,22-25(n)**. 131 IoM: 39,15-17. TM: 110,1. 132 IoM: 39,17-20. GN: Or. 30,10; 252,35-40(a)**; 253,36-42(n)**.

XLVIII

INTRODUCTION

6. In the meaning of a large amount. (GN) a. Mt 5,4 ‘Acitybuiltonamountaincannotbehidden’. (GN) b. Perhaps it might be hidden if something bigger were put in front of it. (GN)133 7. A certain deficiency of strength at a particular moment. (GN) a. Like this: ‘A child is not able to fight’. (GN) b. And like this ‘a puppy is not able to see or fight against anybody’. In the future it (the puppy) will see or fight. (GN)134 ‘Itiswritteninthemeaningof‘entirelynot’ 1. 2. 3. 4.

Because of the equality with the Father. (TM/TbK) For He is inseparable from Him. (TM/TbK) Because of the natural connection with Him. (TM)135 In the same manner as: a. The sunbeams cannot shine by themselves, but need a heavenly body.136 b. The mind cannot do anything without the soul. c. Heat cannot exist without fire.

Conclusion: So the Son cannot do anything without the Father and vice versa. (GN/TM/TbK)137 Thesewordsmaynotbeunderstoodasarestriction 1. As the heretics do by saying that He confines this to Himself. But why — when men have the power to do something of their own accord — could only our Lord do nothing of His own accord? But: it is said about the natural unity of the Word with the Father. This appears from the addition:‘ButonlywhatHeseestheFatherdoing’ (John 5,19b). (TM/TbK)138 2. And not like sculptors and painters do this. (GN).139

133 134 135 136

IoM: 39,21-23. GN: Or. 30,10; 250,11-14(a)**; 251,11-15(n)**. IoM: 39,23-40,3. GN: Or. 30,10; 250,6-11(a)**; 251,5-11(n)**. IoM: 40,3-5. TM: 110,15-16; TbK: 156,4. So far I have not been able to trace the sources in the following lines: IoM 40,5-

9. 137 IoM: 40,10. GN: Or. 30,11; 254,9-10(a)**; 255,8-10(n)**. TM: 111,23-24. TbK: 156,5-6. 138 IoM: 40,14-41,4. TM: 109,3-24*; 110,15-17; 28-29; TbK: 156,6-25*. 139 IoM: 41,6. GN: Or. 30,11; 256,20-21(a)**; 257,20-21(n)*.

INTRODUCTION

XLIX

3. Or does the Father work one thing and does the Son imitate Him? (TM/TbK)140 4. But are there four worlds then? (GN)141 Conclusion: what the Father does, the Son also does in accordance with Him. Someunderstandthis‘Hecannot’about‘theTemplewhichisfromus’. They say: He cannot do anything at all. But this is a property of dumb animals which behave instinctively. But if we can do something of our own accord, how could He not, the temple of the Word? (Source?)142

Thus far this impressive compilation. The passage mentioned under number 15 refers to John 7,37 and speaks about the Jewish Feasts that have been adopted by the Christians and how the Church celebrates them. The last passage about ‘the receiving of the Spirit’ (John 20,22) Isho‘dad ascribes by name to ‘the Theologian’, this quotation could not be found in Gregorius’s work. However, it can be found literally in the commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia.143 Was Isho‘dad here perhaps mistaken? B. Secondary Sources The following Greek authors only played a limited part in Isho‘dad’s commentary: 1. Flavius Josephus Isho‘dad in his commentary in one instance refers by name to words of the Jewish author Flavius Josephus (37-c.100). This reference is related to the delay in building the Second Temple.144 Isho‘dad adopted this passage literally from Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentary on the Gospel of John, who however does not mention the name of Flavius Josephus.145

140

IoM: 41,6-7. TM. 111,23-24; TbK. 156,24-26*. IoM: 41,8. GN: Or. 30,11. 256,28(a)*; 257,29(n)*. 142 IoM: 41,9-14. 143 TM (Vosté, Commentarius, 358,12-14). 144 Text IoM: 25,5-8. 10. Text Flavius Josephus: Antiquitates Judaicae, Book 11 (Nodet, FlaviusJosèphe,LesAntiquitésJuives, vol. 5: Livres X et XI, 86-88). 145 Vosté, Commentarius, 62,4-5. 8-11**. 141

L

INTRODUCTION

2. Origen146 On one occasion in his commentary Isho‘dad cites the work of Origen (185-254) by name.147 This quotation relates to the number of fishes (153) in the description of ‘the miraculous catch of fish’ in John 21,1-11.148 The following words Isho‘dad ascribes to Origen: (About)this‘Ahundredand fifty-three’Origen(says)itsymbolizestheHolyTrinity’. So far I have not succeeded in recovering Isho‘dad’s reference in Origen’s work. 3. Eusebius of Caesarea With reference to the text ‘And thehouriscomingwhenanyonewho killsyouwillthink(heisoffering)aservice(toGod)’ (John 16,2), Isho‘dad in his commentary149 writes about a persecution that took place in Gaul under the reign of Emperor Verus (130-169)150. Gibson is of the opinion that Isho‘dad151 took this description from Irenaeus152. Although indeed this persecution in Gaul took place during the lifetime of Irenaeus, nevertheless the description derives from the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 265-339).153 In Eusebius’s extensive report the various elements of Isho‘dad’s text can be retraced: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) 146

the the the the the

Bible verse (John 16,2) cited statement that the persecution this time came from the Gentiles mentioning of place (Gaul) mentioning of time (under the reign of Verus) atrocities Christians were accused of.154

For Origen (185-254), see: Heussi, Kompendium, 67-68. Text IoM: 116,12-15. 148 The number of 153 fishes has occupied the commentators during the ages. For a survey of the history of interpretation, see: Beasly-Murray, WordBiblicalCommentary, vol. 36, John, 401-404. 149 Text IoM: 91,12-92,3. Ter Eusebius: Heussi, Kompendium, 68. 150 Lucius Aelius Verus (130-169) was the son of Lucius Aelius Caesar and co-Roman Emperor with Marcus Aurelius from 161 until his death in 169. 151 In margine (Gibson, TheCommentariesIII, 198) she mentions: ‘Irenaeus, (PG 8, c. 1235-6)’. 152 From 178, Bishop of Lyon. 153 Greek text: Eusebius of Caesarea, HistoriaEcclesiastica, Liber V, cap. 1 (PG 20, c. 415-416); Syriac text: Wright and McLean, TheEcclesiasticalHistory, Book V, 1-15, 247,11-253,5. 154 Wright, TheEcclesiasticalHistory, 253,4-5 (a); 249,15-16 (b), 248,19 and 249,7.10 (c); 247,17-18 (d); 252,18-19 (e). This last element (atrocities ascribed to Christians) is also present in Irenaeus’s passage cited by Gibson. These accusations were widespread in antiquity. See e.g. also: Quispel, M.MinuciiFelicisOctavius, IX,1-7. 147

INTRODUCTION

LI

For the rest, Isho‘dad does not cite Eusebius’s work directly here. He derives this passage almost literally from Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentary on the Gospel of John.155 4. Athanasius Isho‘dad ascribes in his commentary on John 1,14 the following exegetical view to Athanasius (295-373): ‘Athanasius says: ‘ThefleshimmediatelywasthefleshofGod.Immediatelysoul,immediatelysoulofGod’.156 The conception in question occurs in the work of various Syrian exegetes.157 In Athanasius’s work this quotation cannot be found. It has been adopted by Isho‘dad from one of the letters of Timothy I.158 2.3 Isho‘dad’sCommentaryandtheEastSyrianExegeticalTradition Inquiry into the place of Isho‘dad’s commentary within the narrower circle of East Syrian exegetical tradition shows that there is a close relationship between his work and that of a number of predecessors. 2.3.1 Ḥenanisho‘ Isho‘dad mentions once the name of Ḥenanisho‘ († 700), whose commentary on the Gospels has been lost except for a few fragments.159 Isho‘dad cites an opinion of Ḥenanišo, referring to John 9,6.160 However, it is remarkable that this passage is also literally to be found in the work of the Interpreter.161 2.3.2 Isho‘ bar Nun In his catalogue, among other writings ‘Abdisho‘ ascribes to Isho‘ bar Nun162 a work entitled: ‘Questions on the Entire Text of the Two Parts, 155 Vosté, Commentarius, 289,18-19*; 289,24-290,14*. It is notable that all MSS of IoM’s commentary read †ÎÙ¾Å(Gaius). TM, however, has †ÎçÚáÅ(Gaul). 156 Text IoM: 15,18-19. For Athanasius: Heussi, Kompendium, 97. 157 TbK: Scher, LS II, 80,8-10; Timothy I: Braun, Epistulae I [text], 158,25-28; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 16, 6-8. 158 Text of Timothy I: see note 157. De Halleux, in his review of my dissertation on the Prologue of St. John, considers this quotation ‘une citation ps.-athanasienne courante dans les florilèges monophysites’ (De Halleux, ‘Bibliographie’, 208). Unfortunately he did not provide references. 159 Reinink, Die Adventssontage [transl.], Einl., XXVII, note 105: ‘D.h. Katholikos Ḥenanišo I († 699/700), dessen Evangelienkommentaar bis auf wenige Fragmente untergegangen ist’. Baumstark, Geschichte, 209; Van Rompay, ‘Ḥenanisho‘ I’, 194-195. 160 IoM text: 56,8-11. 161 Vosté, Commentarius, 187,25-28. 162 Abbeloos and Lamy, ChroniconEcclesiasticumIII, 181-183; 187-188; Baumstark, Geschichte, 219-220; Van Rompay, ‘Isho‘ bar Nun’, 215; Brooks, Eliae Metropolitae

LII

INTRODUCTION

that is of the Old and New Testaments’.163 In the Cambridge MS Add. 2017 a large number of questions and answers from this work have been preserved164, probably a selection from the original work165. The author, from Beth Gabbārē on the Tigris, who had for a long time been a teacher at the so-called Great Convent on Mount Izla and, from 823 to 828, Patriarch of the East Syrian Church, wrote his book most probably in the second half of the eighth century.166 In his work he used the literary genre of ‘Questions and Answers’ which was very popular in antiquity and originated in the teaching of sophists and rhetoricians.167 Within the circle of EastSyrian exegetical literature, others like Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban, Michael and Daniel bar Tubhānitā, preceded him in this genre.168 The work of Isho‘ bar Nun was written as a handbook for theological students. The questions and their answers were generally related to obscure passages and words in the texts of the Old and New Testaments and were meant as a contemporary supplement to other commentaries that had to be studied besides the Bible. For a long time inquiry into Isho‘ bar Nun’s ‘Questions and Answers’ was confined to the questions and answers on the Old Testament.169 In studying these questions again and again it was asked, in view of mutual agreements, what kind of relationship there was between the work of Isho‘ bar Nun, the ‘Scholion’ of Theodore bar Koni and particularly the commentary of Isho‘dad of Merw. The thesis posed by Ernest G. Clarke that the three authors, in the compilation of their works, consulted independently a common older source, appeared very soon to be untenable.170 NisibeniOpusChronologicumI [text]; Clarke, TheSelectedQuestionsofIshobarNun; Gismondi, Maris, ‘Amri et Slibae. Pars prima, versio Latina, 66-67; Pars altera, versio Latina, 38-40; Ortiz de Urbina, Patrologia, 202. Molenberg, TheInterpreterinterpreted. 163 Assemanus, BOIII,1, 165-166. 164 A description of the manuscript in: Wright and Cook, Catalogue of the Syriac ManuscriptsI-II,555-560; Molenberg, The Interpreterinterpreted, 15-20. 165 Molenberg, TheInterpreterinterpreted, 20-25; 47-48; 328. 166 Molenberg, TheInterpreterinterpreted, 2; 561. 167 For the origin and development of this genre, see Bardy, ‘La littérature patristique des “Quaestiones et Responsiones”, 41 (1932), 210-236; 341-369; 515-537, and 42 (1933), 14-30; 211-229; 328-352; Ter Haar Romeny, ‘Erotapokriseis’, 145-154. 168 Scher, HistoirenestorienneII, t. 7, fasc. 2, 116; Assemanus, BOIII,1, 72; 147; 174. The genre of ‘Questions and Answers’ was very popular within the East Syrian tradition. This in contrast with the West Syrians (Ter Haar Romeny, ‘Erotapokriseis’, 154-163). 169 Clarke, The Selected Questions; Bundy, ‘The Questions and Answers on Isaiah’, 167-178; Molenberg, TheInterpreterinterpreted. 170 Clarke, TheSelectedQuestions, 165.

INTRODUCTION

LIII

Investigations based on the works of Lucas Van Rompay, David D. Bundy and Corrie Molenberg led to the conclusion that, where the mutual relation between Theodore bar Koni’s Scholion and the work of Isho‘dad remained obscure, Isho‘dad had used Isho‘ bar Nun’s questions and answers as one of his sources in composing his commentary.171 I gave an impulse to drawing into the inquiry also those questions related to the New Testament by editing and commenting on the questions and answers on the Gospel of John.172 Moreover the relation to the commentary of Isho‘dad and, where possible, to Theodore bar Koni’s Book of Scholion, was also subjected to more detailed investigation. The following survey shows that Isho‘dad in his commentary has seven passages in common with Isho‘ bar Nun’s work ‘Questions and Answers’.173 Text Isho‘dad

Text Isho‘ bar Nun

1. 4,22-5,1. 10-14

f 86v.6-8*; 86v.8- 87r. 2**

2. 13,12-14,15

f 87r.2-88r.9**

3. 23,11-14

f 81r.2-6**

4. 28,9-29,18

f 88r.9-90r.8*

5. 33,10-11 (TM); 33,16-22 (Ephrem)

f 90r.8-14*; 90r.14-90v.11*

6. 41,21-42,7

f 90v.11-91r.11**

7. 47,22-48,22

f 79v.10-81r.4*

In the first passage Isho‘dad discusses the words ‘In the beginning’ (John 1,1).174 The aim of this reasoning is to make clear that the expression ‘beginning’, as in Gen. 1,1, also indicates an absolute category, preceding everything. In his ‘Catechetical Homilies’ Theodore of Mopsuestia formulates this conception briefly as follows: ‘Now there is nothing prior to ‘beginning’175. The origin of this tradition is probably to be found in Theodore’s commentary on Genesis, which has been preserved only 171 Van Rompay, ‘Išo‘ bar Nun and Išo‘dad of Merv: New Data’, 229-249; Bundy, ‘The Questions and Answers on Isaiah’, 178; Molenberg, The Interpreter interpreted, 21-22; 333-334. 172 Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 125-134; Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 6993. 173 For a more detailed description of these texts: Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 69-93. 174 For a comparison of the texts: Ibidem, 72-74. 175 Tonneau and Devreesse, HC, f 19r. 4.

LIV

INTRODUCTION

fragmentarily and his commentary on John 1,1 may be an echo of it.176 Isho‘dad, in contrast with Isho‘ bar Nun, does not mention here the origin of this tradition.177 A comparison between the texts of Isho‘ bar Nun and Isho‘dad shows that Isho‘dad borrowed almost completely the material found in Isho‘ bar Nun. Even the ‘question and answer’ scheme has been maintained, albeit that Isho‘dad used different terminology (èçÙüãs{.......¿ÚðÂĀã).178 Some small differences between the two authors are to be ascribed to variations in expression and the choice of words. In passage 2 Isho‘dad occupies himself with the exegesis of John 1,14 ‘TheWordbecameflesh’. Four interpretations are given of these words179. As Isho‘dad states, they mean: 1. 2. 3. 4.

‘The taking on’ of a man by the ‘Word-God’. ‘Taking’ in the sense of ‘taking on’ sin and curse. ‘Staying’ (in a place) The becoming of ‘the flesh’.

All four interpretations Isho‘dad borrowed almost literally — except the fourth — from the work of Isho‘ bar Nun.180 Isho‘ bar Nun, for his part, derived his exegesis of John 1,14 in a great measure from Greek sources, particularly from Theodore of Mopsuestia (first and third explanation) and Gregory of Nazianzus (second explanation). It may be assumed that the fourth explanation originates from East Syrian sources.181 In the passage mentioned under 3 Isho‘dad discusses a problem in the biblical text of John 1,28: ‘ThesethingstookplaceinBethanybeyond Jordan’. Isho‘dad states that this is an error of the copyist, for Bethany is close by Jerusalem and not near the River Jordan. After this he proposes 176 Vosté, Commentarius, 13,9-10; 14,2-10. This conception of ÀĀÚý is also to be found in the Anonymous Commentary on Genesis-Exodus 9,32 (Van Rompay, Le commentaire sur Genèse-Exode 9,32 [text], 6,6-9); see also: Levene, The Early Syrian Fathers, 68,9. For TM’s commentary on Genesis: Sachau, Fragmentasyriaca; Tonneau, ‘Théodore de Mopsueste’, 45-64; Jansma, ‘Interprétation du Livre de la Genèse, Fragments de la version syriaque, B.M. Add. 17,189, f. 17-21, 63-92. 177 Elsewhere, however, IoM does also connect this tradition with ‘The Interpreter’ (Van den Eynde, CommentaireI [text], 11,22-27). 178 IoM text: 4,22-23. 179 For a more detailed description and comparison of the texts mentioned, see: Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 75-81. 180 Elsewhere IoM gives the same explanation of John 1,14 where he has embedded it in a more legendary tradition, see IoM text: 16,3-9. 181 Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’,80-81.

INTRODUCTION

LV

two solutions to solve the problem.182 He thinks it is possible to translate: ‘These things took place in Bethany and beyond the Jordan’, or to choose for the reading ‘Beth-abara’ and to translate: ‘These things took place in Beth-abara beyond the Jordan’.183 This topological subject is also to be found in the work of John Chrysostom and Theodore of Mopsuestia.184 In this they probably follow a conception of Origen’s. In his commentary on John the latter admits that in nearly all the copies βηθανιᾳ is found. But because of the fact that in his travels he was unable to locate a Bethany by the Jordan, he chose for the reading βηθαβαρᾳ, which he apparently found in a few copies current in his day.185 It is notable that whereas Origen still records that nearly all the copies read ‘ἐν Βηθανιᾳ’, John Chrysostom186 and Theodore of Mopsuestia187 speak of ‘more accurate (ἀκριβεστερον) manuscripts’ which have ‘ἐν Βηθαβαρᾳ’. This line is still continued by Isho‘ bar Nun188 and Isho‘dad189, who hold the opinion that in the rendering ‘ἐν Βηθανιᾳ’ we are dealing with a corrupt text. Most likely Isho‘ bar Nun and Isho‘dad rely on the Interpreter’s work. The fourth passage applies to John 3,13: ‘No man has ascended to heaven,butHewhodescendedfromheaven,theSonofman,whoisin heaven’. The last words of this verse ‘who is in heaven’ are left out by 182

IoM text: 23,11-19. In this case ‘Abara is an important place in the neighbourhood of Galilee and Gadara. In IoM’s opinion this conception is supported by Mk 3,8 and 5,1. Perhaps the fact that the Old Syriac Versions (Sys. c ) read ÁüÃï ĀÚ loco ¿Úçï ĀÚàalso played a part in this opinion (See: Kiraz, ComparativeEditionoftheSyriacGospels,vol. IV, 11). 184 TM: PG66/11, c. 733, vs. 28. JC: PG59, h. 17, c. 107,45-49 (Gr. text); Childers, CommentaryonJohnI, m. 17,1; 141,16-19 (Syriac text). 185 See: Preuschen, Origenes Werke, Band IV, Der Johannes Kommentar, Buch VI, 149-150, § 24 (40). In Origines’s choice also an etymological aspect played a role. Apart from that the spelling ‘Bethabara’ varies in the MSS of Origen’s commentary. Beside Βηθαβαρᾳ he writes Βηθαρᾷ, Βαθαρᾷ and Βηθαραβᾷ. Last-mentioned form is also to be found in ‫א‬b Syrhmg and is an orthographical variant of Βηθαβαρᾳ as a result of metathesis (Metzger, ATextualCommentary,200, note 6). 186 JC: PG59, h. 17, c. 107: Ταῦτα ὲγένετο ἐν Βηθανιᾳ. Ὅσα δὲ τῶν ἀντιγράφων ἀκριβεστερον ἒχει, Ἐν Βηθαβαρᾳ, φησιν. Ἡ γὰρ Βηθανια οὐχι πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, οὐδὲ ὲπὶ τῆς ἐρήμου ἦν, ἀλλ’ ἐγγύς που τῶν Ἰεροσολύμων. 187 TM: PG 66/11, c. 733: Ταῦτα δὲ ὲγένετο οὐκ ἐν Βηθανιᾳ, ἀλλ’ ἐν τῇ Βηθαρᾳ, ὡς τὰ ἀκριβῆ περιέχει τῶν ἀντιγράφων. ἡ γαρ Βηθανια οὐχι πέραν Ἰορδάνου, οὐδὲ ὲπὶ τῆς ἐρήμου ἦν, ἀλλ’ ἐγγύς που τῶν Ἰεροσολύμων. 188 IbN: MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 81r. 2-6: ? èæxÎÙx ÁüÃð ¿Úçï ĀÚàèÚàzx €z Ÿ ßÙs .ĀáÃЏs ¿Â{ĀÝ èã{ €{z œ Ÿ .èæxÎÚà¿ÃÙüù¿ćà{ .ÍÙĀÙsåáý{s¿ÃçÅâïjüÚÅ¿ÚçïĀÚ¿ÞÙs 189 Text IoM: 23,14-15. 183

LVI

INTRODUCTION

many textual witnesses of the New Testament, but are found in all Syriac Bible translations.190 These words lay greater emphasis on the problem which was present in this same text for East Syrian exegetes. For the text seems to say that the ‘Son of Man’ was in heaven and that he descended to earth. According to the view prevailing in the East Syrian church, however, it was the ‘Word-God’ that was in heaven, which had descended and become man. Isho‘dad tries to solve this problem by adopting some views Isho‘ bar Nun had developed.191 However, Isho‘ bar Nun’s explanation of this verse is exceptionally long-winded, showing less structure than is usual with him. So Isho‘dad has copied some points of Isho‘ bar Nun’s explanation almost literally, but also added other explanations. Here Isho‘dad shows he had more reservations about Isho‘ bar Nun’s work than in the preceding passages. In this way Isho‘dad clearly demonstrates intense editorial activity by approaching his predecessor’s work creatively and selecting those elements he could use and include in his own commentary. In passage 5 Isho‘dad occupies himself with the words Jesus said to the Samaritan woman: ‘Youhavehadfivehusbands,andthemanyounow haveisnotyourhusband’ (John 4,18). Here also Isho‘dad uses the work of his predecessor Isho‘ bar Nun as a basis for his own explanation. Isho‘ bar Nun draws for his exegesis on two sources, namely ‘the Interpreter’ and ‘Mar Ephrem’. From ‘the Interpreter’ he derives only one sentence originating from Theodore’s commentary on John, namely ‘that it was evident that this woman was not living a chaste life’192. Isho‘dad appeals — in imitation of Isho‘ bar Nun — to the exegetical view of Theodore of Mopsuestia, but he, in his turn, supplemented the tradition by citing ‘the Interpreter’ more extensively.193 From Ephrem’s text194 Isho‘ bar Nun borrows two elements: 1) the thought that the men feared to take this Samaritan woman as a wife and 2) the fact that widowhood was a disgrace in Samaria. Ephrem supports the first element mentioned with a reference to the history of Tamar, who by Judah was seen as a danger to his son Shelah (Gen. 38). Isho‘ bar Nun does not refer to that part of Scripture, but makes explicit what Ephrem intends to say by calling 190

For a survey: Kiraz, Comparative Edition of the Syriac Gospels, vol. IV, 21-24;

191

Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 82-86. Vosté, Commentarius, 90,4-5. Vosté, Commentarius, 90,5-11. Leloir, Commentaire, XII,19, 93,13-20

37. 192 193 194

INTRODUCTION

LVII

this woman a ‘man-killer.’ Isho‘dad, for his part, takes over the expression ‘man-killer’ in relation to the Samaritan woman, but then he includes in his commentary the reference to the history of Tamar from Ephrem’s work, joining the text of Ephrem closely. So it is evident that for his commentary on John 4,18 Isho‘dad takes Isho‘ bar Nun’s text as a starting-point, but then adds material borrowed from the original sources to this. The way he is citing them does suggest that he had these sources at hand.195 In passage 6 Isho‘dad deals with two statements by Jesus concerning the coming judgment that seem to contrast with each other. On the one hand, there are the statements in John 5,22 and 27 in which the execution of the judgment is ascribed to the Son. On the other hand, there are words of Jesus in John 8,15, in which he declares ‘to judge no one by himself’. Isho‘dad solves this problem by relating the statement in John 8,15 (‘I judgenoone’) to the divine hypostasis of Jesus. This divine hypostasis of Jesus is just like the Father and the Holy Spirit, invisible and not perceptible outwardly. Although the judgment rests indeed with the holy Trinity, the judgment will not be expressed and executed by the Father, God the Word and the Holy Spirit, because they cannot be seen as in the case of an earthly judge by those awaiting the judgment. This can rightly be done by the Son in his human hypostasis, for He is visible. The words of John 5,22 and 27 refer to this reality, indicating that the judgment is given to the Son. It is evident that Isho‘dad also in this case took the text of Isho‘ bar Nun as his starting point. He maintained the question and answer scheme, albeit in other terms. In the question, the biblical quotations are in reverse order. This is connected with the fact that Isho‘dad uses the material of Isho‘ bar Nun in his exegesis of John 5,22. The remainder of Isho‘ bar Nun’s text is only slightly adapted by Isho‘dad. Following on the text of Isho‘ bar Nun, Isho‘dad mentions a number of biblical verses, derived from the Old and New Testaments, which are related to the coming judgment.196 At the end he returns to the original answer of Isho‘ bar Nun, formulating it once again in another way.197 The way of putting this question and solving the problem goes back to the commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia on John 8,15, where one can find the same combination of biblical quotations (John 8,15 and John 5,22) and 195 196 197

Cf. Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 86-89. IoM text: 42,7-15. IoM text: 42,15-20.

LVIII

INTRODUCTION

the same development of thought.198 It is notable that whereas Isho‘dad elsewhere adds material from Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentary to the text of Isho‘ bar Nun, here he takes the work of the Exegete for granted. Substantially, he only adds a number of biblical quotations to the work of Isho‘ bar Nun. In the last passage Isho‘dad occupies himself with the question during which feast Jesus entered Jerusalem. For his explanation he uses the material Isho‘ bar Nun provides on this issue. Isho‘dad, however, shuffles this material into a new unity. The following survey elucidates this: Order of IbN

Order of IoM

v

(2) 47,22-23*

r

2. f 80 .13-15*

(4) 47,23-48,1

r

(3) 48,1-11**

v

4. f 80 .15-16

(1) 48,11-17*

r

(5) 48,18-21*

1. f 79 .10-80r.13* 3. f 80 .15-80v.11** 5. f 81 .1-6*

Partly Isho‘dad’s different order has something to do with the fact that he does not bring this problem up in connection with the entry of the Lord on the Feast of Unleavened Bread, but with the explanation of John 7,37: ‘Nowonthegreatday,whichwasthelastdayofthefeast...’. There the Feast of Tabernacles is meant. With regard to this feast there is a word written by ‘the Interpreter’ saying that our Lord entered Jerusalem on the Feast of Tabernacles, whereas it was really the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Isho‘ bar Nun states that this was changed by carelessness of the scribe and quotes another word of the same Interpreter that these things happened in the proximity of the Lord’s passion.199 Theodore bar Koni shows he is also aware of this problem.200 Isho‘ bar Nun’s contribution — as is represented above – to Isho‘dad’s commentary consists of 114 lines. This equates to almost 4 % of his commentary. But it is possible that more material in Isho‘dad’s commentary should be ascribed to Isho‘ bar Nun. There are a number of passages that 198 Vosté, Commentarius, 165,23-28; 166,20-30; 167,2-8; 168,14-18. Cf. Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 89-93. 199 IbN: Ms. Cambridge Add. 2017, f 79v.10-80r.8. 200 TbK: Scher, LSII, 118,25-119,4.

LIX

INTRODUCTION

have the form of the question and answer scheme.201 They cannot be traced back to the work of Isho‘ bar Nun as we have it now, but we should consider this work to be ‘a selection’ of his original questions and answers. 2.3.3 Theodore bar Koni In his ‘Scholion’202, completed in 792, Theodore bar Koni203 dedicated ten scholia to the Gospel of John.204 In Isho‘dad’s commentary there are many corresponding passages to be found between both authors, namely eighty-four in total. Of them the following fifty-eight coincidences go back to the work of Theodore of Mopsuestia: Text Isho‘dad

Text Theodore bar Koni

Text Theodore of Mopsuestia

1. 4,22-5,1

I, 13,23-14,3*; II, 154,9-13* C. 13,9-10; 14,1-2*. 5-6*

2. 5,21-22; 6,2-4

II,29,1-17

C. 21,15-23*

3. 8,6-7

II,154,20-155,1*

C. 24,19-21*

4. 12,11

I, 20,4-10*; 23,10-11; 41,20-23**

FS. {, 24-25*

5. 13,19-14,2

II,32,19-25; 220,4-16*

PG. 66/II, c. 725; HC. f 47v. 9-10

6. 15,3-4

II,160,1-4*

C. 33,22-23

7. 16,2-3

II,159,24-25; 160,7-8**

C. 33,23-24*

8. 16,17-19

II,29,13-17

C. 21,15-21

9. 20,13-17

I, 58,2-12*

C. 39,6-13*

10. 24,9-10

II,163,6-9

C. 56,15-17

11. 24,20-24

II,163,9-11**

C. 59,8-11. 12-15. 24; 60,5

12. 25,10-12

II,163,11-14*

C. 64,13-14*. 23-24*

201

For example IoM text: 21,6-17; 26,6-12; 49,22-50,12; 51,8-14; 57,7-8; 85,23-

86,4. 202 Editions and translations: Scher, Liber Scholiorum I [text]. Idem, Liber Scholiorum II [text]. Hespel and Draguet, LivredesScoliesI, MimreI-V [transl.]; idem, Livredes Scolies(recensiondeSéert)II.MimreVI-XI [transl. Hespel, LivredesScolies(recension d’Urmiah); idem, LivredesScolies(recensiond’Urmiah).LesCollectionsannexéespar SylvaindeQardu. 203 Amann, ‘Theodore Bar-Koni’, 228-229; Baumstark, Geschichte, 218-219; idem, ‘Die Bucher I-IX des Kataba Diskolion’, 173-178; Van Rompay, ‘Theodoros bar Koni’, 405-406; Brade, ‘Untersuchungen zum Scholienbuch’; idem, ‘Nestorianische Kommentare zu den Paulusbriefen’, 98-114. 204 Scher, LSII, 154-169.

LX

INTRODUCTION

Text Isho‘dad

Text Theodore bar Koni

Text Theodore of Mopsuestia

13. 26,22-24

II, 158,18-20*

C. 69,18-20

14. 27,9-15

II, 158,19-25*

C. 69,19-22

15. 27,24-28,2

II, 163,14-15*

C. 70,26-29

16. 28,3-4

II, 163,15-16*

C. 70,30

17. 30,7-13

Cf. I, 167,10-24

C. 72,20-73,5*

18. 30,17; 31,3

II,163,16-18*(Interpr.)

C. 73,6

19. 31,7-8

II,163,19-20*

C. 73,15-19*

20. 31,10-11

II,163,22-24*

C. 73,33-34*

21. 31,20-22

II,158,4-9

C. 82,30-83,4

22. 39,5-6

II, 155,14-16*

C. 108,29-109,1. 26-27

23. 39,7-8

II,155,20-22**

C. 110,1-4**

24. 39,10-11

II,155,17-18*

C. 109,28-110,1*

25. 40,4

II, 156,4*

C. 110,15-16*

26. 40,10

Cf.II, 156,5-6

C. 111,23-24

27. 40,14-41,4

II, 156,6-25**

C. 109,3-24*. 110,15-17;

28. 41,6-7

II, 156,24-26*

C. 111,23-24

29. 41,21-42,7

II, 162,1-16*

C. 116,23-24; 165,23-28;

30. 43,7-8

II,164,9-10*

C. 128,11-14*

31. 43,8-11

II,158,1-4**. 17

C. 138,23-25*; 138,27-29

32. 44,9-12

II, 164,18-21

C. 152,26-153,3*

33. 55,8-10

II,165,4-6*

C. 184,30-185,4*

34. 58,12

II,165,7-8*

C. 197,15-17

35. 61,1-4

II,165,15-16

C. 204,8

36. 62,7-8

II,165,18-19*

C. 204,26; 204,29-205,1

37. 62,17-20

II,166,7-11**

C. 214,18-21*

38. 75,16-20

I, 263,10-16*

Cf. C. 248,7-10. 14-19

39. 76,4-6

II, 166,22-23*

C. 249,19-23

40. 76,16-21

II, 166,24-167,1**

C. 250,19-26

41. 77,3-4

II, 167,3-5**

C. 251,28-252,2

42. 81,12-15

II,167,7-9*

C. 263,15-19**

43. 81,17-19

II, 167,9-10*

C. 265,23-27*

44. 82,11

II, 167,17-19*

C. 272,3-9*

LXI

INTRODUCTION

Text Isho‘dad

Text Theodore bar Koni

Text Theodore of Mopsuestia

45. 82,16-17

Cf.II, 167,21-23

Cf. C. 273,18-19

46. 85,6-7

II, 167,27-28**

C. 278,25-26;278,29-279,1

47. 87,6-8

II, 168,1-4

C. 281,10-13*

48. 93,12-13

II,168,5-9

C. 296,23-24. 29**

49. 93,23-24; 94,3-7 II,168,9-14*

C. 301,5-20*

50. 94,12-14

C. 302,1-3*

II,168,14-15**

51. 95,4-5

II, 168,17-19**

C. 307,26-27*

52. 95,5-7

II, 168,15-17**

C. 307,22-24*

53. 97,12-14

II, 168,23-25**

C. 312,1. 7-9**

54. 98,2-4

II, 168,25-169,2**

C. 318,1-3

55. 100,21-23

II, 93, 21-25**

Cf. 335,11-12. 15-17. 29-30

56. 104,16-18

II,94,16-20*

C. 340,25-341,1*

57. 111,2-5

Cf. II,119,18-20

C. 348,21-29; 349,3-4. 8-16

58. 120,21-121,1

II, 169,3-9*

C. 364,1-6*

In addition there are twenty-six corresponding passages, for which no parallels can be found in the work of ‘the Interpreter’. This concerns the following passages in the work of Theodore bar Koni and Isho‘dad of Merw. Text IoM

Text TbK

1. 10,13-14

II,133,6*

2. 15,12-18

II, 80,10-19

3. 15,18-19

II, 80,8-10*

4. 16,5-6

II, 160,1-2

5. 16,19-20

II,29,14-16*

6. 17,6-8

II,160,2-4*

7. 22,8-10

II,163,1-6**

8. 27,12-15

II,158,21-25**

9. 27,21-23

II,158,25-28*

10. 32,8-12

II,155,6. 10-13**

11. 39,12-13

II, 155,20**; 156,1-2**

LXII

INTRODUCTION

Text IoM

Text TbK

12. 47,22

Cf.II,118,10-11

13. 48,12-13

II,118,25-26**

14. 58,18-19

II,165,12-13*

15. 70,10-71,3

II,91,23-92,17 **

16. 72,2-4

II,166,15-16 **

17. 73,15-17

II,166,17-18

18. 76,1-2

II, 166,19-21**

19. 76,8-9

II, 166,22-24*

20. 100,4-6

II,93,14-17**

21. 100,11-14

II,92,26-29**

22. 100,14-16

II, 92,18-22*

23. 103,17-19

II,96,25-27 (negatively)205

24. 104,3-19

II,93,29-94,20**

25. 104,19-20

II, 94,28-95,1**

26. 104,20. 23; 105,2

II,154,2-3*

Now the question arises: what is the mutual relation of these corresponding passages? Van den Eynde, regarding Isho‘dad’s commentary on Genesis, has developed the opinion that Isho‘dad did not know the work of his predecessor and that Isho‘dad, writing his commentary, had at his disposal various commentaries, including the commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia.206 Moreover he supposed that Theodore bar Koni and Isho‘dad of Merw made use of a common older source, also containing in addition to exegesis a great many etymologies.207 The question of the relation between the work of Theodore bar Koni and Isho‘dad of Merw is also discussed by Lucas Van Rompay in his edition of the Anonymous Commentary, as found in manuscript (olim) Diyarbakir 22.208 Within the group of manuscripts handing down the Anonymous Commentary209, manuscript (olim) Diyabakir 22 has a special 205

See ‘Translation’, p. 100,12-15. Van Den Eynde, CommentaireI[transl.], Préf. XX. 207 Ibidem. 208 Van Rompay, LecommentairesurGenèse-Exode9,32dumanuscrit(olim)Diyarbakir22. 209 The text of the AC has been preserved in 9 manuscripts (Jansma, ‘Investigations into the Early Syrian Fathers’, 71-74 and Van Rompay, ‘A Hitherto Unknown Nestorian Commentary’,55). 206

INTRODUCTION

LXIII

place, because at the beginning of this manuscript the original text which is apparently lost, is replaced by the text of an older and more extensive commentary.210 This commentary on Gen-Exod 9,32 is to a large extent based on Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentaries and interpretations, to which the opinions of a number of other Greek writers and Syrian exegetes have been added.211 These Syrian exegetes also include Theodore bar Koni and Isho‘dad of Merw. Van Rompay in his investigation concludes that Theodore bar Koni, Isho‘dad of Merw and the Anonymous Commentary have a number of passages in common, which raises the question about the mutual relationship. With regard to Isho‘dad he is of the opinion that, besides various other sources, he also used the work of the author of the Anonymous Commentary.212 Concerning the other passages which the Anonymous Commentary has in common with Theodore bar Koni and Isho‘dad of Merw he supposes that the three authors have — independently of each other – made use of a common source containing all the passages they have together.213 In my study regarding Isho‘dad of Merw’s explanation of the Prologue of the Gospel of John, I shared this opinion of a common older source used by Theodore bar Koni and Isho‘dad, although I had some reservation.214 This objection arose not only from the fact that there was too little material to make a thorough decision, but also because in some passages the texts of Isho‘dad and Theodore bar Koni more closely agree with each other in the choice of words than with the work of Theodore of Mopsuestia. Now, after studying the entire commentary of Isho‘dad and collecting all the corresponding passages, it is time to adjust my opinion. It is evident from Theodore bar Koni’s and Isho‘dad’s work that both authors had at their disposal Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentary on the Gospel of John, resulting in 58 corresponding passages originating in the work of the Interpreter. In addition to this it is striking that in many cases 210 In 1907 Scher published a list with 159 Syriac and Arabic manuscripts collected by Souleiman Sabbagh, Archbishop of Diyarbakir. In this list the manuscript in question had the number 22 (Scher, ‘Notices sur les manuscrits syriaques de Diarbékir’, 339-340). After World War I the manuscript was temporarily in Mosul, where it was catalogued as Diyarbekr-Mossoul 13 (Vosté, ‘Notices sur les manuscrits syriaques de Diarbékir’, 348-349). In 1981 it was transferred to Bagdad. 211 Van Rompay, ‘Development of Biblical Interpretation’, 568. 212 Idem, LecommentairesurGenèse-Exode9,32 [transl.], Intr. XLVII-L. 213 Ibidem, Intr. XLV-XLVII. 214 Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 136. See also: idem, ‘Questions and Answers’, 7275.

LXIV

INTRODUCTION

Isho‘dad’s text is much closer associated to Theodore bar Koni’s text than to the text of Theodore of Mopsuestia.215 One of these cases216 I will discuss here as an example. The text in question goes back to a somewhat long-winded section in Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentary on John 5,19 ‘TheSoncandonothingbyHimself  ’.217 Theodore bar Koni218 and Isho‘dad219 summarize the text of the Interpreter. Isho‘dad’s text is almost literally identical to that of Theodore bar Koni. In addition to this the switch in the sequence of the examples used by Theodore of Mopsuestia in his commentary is notable. The Interpreter mentions as his first example Judas and subsequently Peter.220 Theodore bar Koni mentions first Peter and then Judas and Isho‘dad does likewise.221 Now in theory there are three possible explanations for these correspondencies: 1. Theodore bar Koni and Isho‘dad independently came to almost the same recapitulation of the material found in Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentary on John 5,19, including the switch in the sequence of the examples above-mentioned. 2. Theodore bar Koni and Isho‘dad independently drew on a common older source, containing inter alia recapitulations of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentary. Then it has to be supposed that both have adopted almost literally the recapitulation of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s explanation of John 5,19 from the common older source, including the switch in the sequence of the examples. 3. Isho‘dad adopted almost literally the recapitulation of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s explanation of John 5,19, including the switch in the sequence of the examples, from Theodore bar Koni. The explanation mentioned under 1 is most unlikely and therefore drops out. Regarding explanation 2: the supposition that Theodore bar Koni copied this common older source almost literally would be totally at odds 215

See e.g. no. 4, 7, 11, 14, 15, 27, 37, 40, 41, 46, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55. No. 27. 217 Vosté, Commentarius,108,28-110,4; 110,13-17; 28-29 and 111,20-24. For the text of IoM’s commentary, cf. Introd. Ch. 2.2.2, sub A.3. 218 Scher, LSII, 156,6-25. 219 IoM text: 40,14-41,4. 220 Vosté, Commentarius, 111,6-9. 221 TbK: Scher, LSII, 156,13-15; IoM: 40,18-19. 216

LXV

INTRODUCTION

with the character of Theodore bar Koni’s work as qualified inter alia by Clarke.222 On the contrary, the supposition (explanation 3) that Isho‘dad used the work of Theodore bar Koni on this point, perfectly fits the picture we have acquired of Isho‘dad as a compiler who copies various sources and knows how to insert them into his commentary. Regarding the twenty-six passages common to both authors which have no parallel in the work of Theodore of Mopsuestia: in five cases it is a matter of non-literal correspondencies223, but in twenty-one cases Isho‘dad’s text is closely to very closely associated with Theodore’s text. One example of these corresponding passages related to the passion of Christ will be discussed here, namely: John 18,13 and 27224. Text TbK

Text IoM

¿ÔêáÆæ{sèçÐÎÙx .Áxz‰sèÙxˆxÎþæ .......................èçÐÎÙx .............. :ˆËæxŒx|{ ûóæË݆{üÔòüóÝxüãsèçÐĀÚ ûóæË݆{üÔòüóÝxüãsèçÐĀÚ œ €z{ăÎé¾Â¿óÚùĀÚÃàƒ|¾æx…üã €z{ăÎé¾Â¿óÚùĀÚÃàƒ|¾æx…üã ................. ¿ÞÂ{xÍïs{…Îðäþ ..... üÐ{ .zĀðýü¿ÞÂ{ ........... …ÎðäþÂåàüÐ{ Translation: We also make this known that John the evangelist mentions the house of Annas (as the place) where Peter denied, when our Lord came out to go to the house of Caiaphas in his chains. ‘And He looked at Simon and he remembered and he wept’.

And we ought to know that John mentions the house of Annas (as the place) where Peter denied, when our lord came out to go to the house of Caiaphas in his chains. ‘And He looked at Simon ‘and at that very moment he wept.’

Isho‘dad discusses the discrepancy between John and the other evangelists about the place of Peter’s denial: in the house of Caiaphas (Mt 26,57; Mk 14,53; Lk 22,54), or in the house of Annas (John 18,13). Both authors offer the solution that it happened at the very moment Jesus left the 222 Clarke, TheselectedQuestions, 176: ‘the general conclusion is that this author has shown a remarkable independence from his predecessor in the matter of biblical exegesis’ and 177: ‘It is clear that Theodore bar Koni’s editorial attitude requires a high level of alertness and acumen’. 223 The numbers 12 and 13 have their parallel also in the work of IbN and apply to a problem raised by an inaccurate statement of TM concerning the question during which feast Jesus entered Jerusalem. Although IoM here, as we saw above, follows the work of IbN, it is important to note that this problem is not absent in TbK’s work. 224 Text TbK: Scher, LSII, 93,14-17; IoM: 100,4-6.

LXVI

INTRODUCTION

house of Annas going on his way to the house of Caiaphas. In their opinion, with this the discrepancy is solved. Besides the similarity of these passages with respect to content the literal similarity is also notable. Only in a few small parts does Isho‘dad differ from Theodore bar Koni’s text. These small differences have something to do with the way Isho‘dad inserts this text into his commentary.225 Conclusion Isho‘dad, when composing his commentary on the Gospel of John, used and incorporated various sources in his work. These sources contained a great deal of the traditional exegesis of the East Syrian Church, to a large extent based on Theodore’s of Mopsuestia commentaries and exegesis, and enlarged with the work of a number of Syrian exegetes. Isho‘dad relied not only on these older sources but also on the work of his direct predecessors, as in the case of Isho‘ bar Nun. In my opinion the corresponding passages in Theodore bar Koni’s ‘Scholion’ and Isho‘dad’s commentary can also best be explained by assuming that Isho‘dad knew the work of his predecessor Theodore bar Koni and used it in his commentary. 2.3.4 Timothy I Isho‘dad also made use of the writings of Timothy I, who for more than forty-three years (780-823) as Catholicos gave guidance to the East Syrian church.226 Once Isho‘dad quotes Timothy by name.227 This quotation cannot be traced back to the writings of Timothy that have been preserved. Isho‘dad will have adopted it from a Christological passage derived from one of Timothy’s letters that have been lost228 or from his 225 IoM uses the words ‘we ought to know’ many times when inserting a source, see e.g.: 5,17; 11,19-20; 16,13; 23,23; 49,17; 65,8; 82,23; 99,12; 100,4 (Syriac text). IoM omits the words ‘also’ and ‘the evangelist’, because he does not need them in his commentary. At the end both authors cite Lk 22,61. However, IoM’s text (‘at that very moment’) is influenced by John 18,27. 226 See: Baumstark, Geschichte,217-218; Bidawid, LesLettres,1-4; Putman, L’Église etl’Islam,t. III, 13-23; Gismondi, Maris,‘AmrietSlibae,1 (versio Latina), 63-66; 2 (versio Latina), 37-39; Tisserant, ‘Timothée I’, 1121-1139; Abbeloos, ChroniconEcclesiasticumIII, 165-172; 179-182; Bundy, ‘Timotheos I’, 414-415; Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’, 57-60. 227 Syriac text IoM: 18,24-19,4. 228 ‘Abdisho‘ speaks of a collection of 200 letters in two parts (Assemanus, BO III,1, 163). Editions and translations: Bidawid, LesLettres; Braun,EpistulaeI; Heimgartner, Die Briefe42-85 and idem, DieBriefe30-39.

INTRODUCTION

LXVII

book with ‘Questions’229. Moreover he has frequently made use of Timothy’s work without mentioning his name. There are twenty-three coincidences to be noted between Isho‘dad and Timothy. Most of these coincidences (1-21) relate to the first chapter of St. John, as is shown in the following survey.230 Text IoM

Text Timothy

1.

5,22

{,19-20 (BL)

2.

6,4

{,4-5 (BL)

3.

6,6

},28* (BL)

4.

7,6-8

207,20-24 (BE); 82,13-83,2 (MH)

5.

8,7-9

181,12-15 (BE); 46,16-18 (MH)

6.

8,16-17

230,23-24 (BE); 113,23-114,1 (MH)

7.

11,17-18

175,10-11 (BE); 38,12.17-18 (MH)*

8.

13,19-23

174,8-17 (BE); 37,8-16 (MH)

9.

14,1-2

€,24-25 (BL)

10.

14,13-14

Õà,14-15 (BL)

11.

14,15-17

¿Ù,9-10; ¿ćã,5-7 (BL)

12.

15,5-7

253,1-4; 7-9 (BE); 144,12-145,2 (MH)*

13.

15,9-10

‚, 23-24 (BL)

14.

15,12-18

159,1-13* (BE); 16,12-17,1* (MH)

15.

15,18-19

158,25-28 (BE); 16,6-8 (MH);¿Ù,22-26 (BL)**

16.

17,3-4

¿ćà,17-18; Çã,18-21(BL)

17.

18,23

Õà,18 (BL)*

18. Timothy 18,24-19,4 Unidentified 19.

19,4-6

242,4-5; 249,8-9 (BE); 130,1-3; 139,19-20 (MH)

20.

19,16-20

231,17;175,24 (BE); 115,5-6; 39,8-10 (MH)

21.

19,20-21

170,9-14 (BE); 31,20-32,1 (MH); €,15-20 (BL)

22

28,17-18

211,11-13 (BE)*; 88,4-6 (MH)*

23

42,7-19

260,1-9 (BE)*;153,22-154,3 (MH)*

229 In this work, which has been lost, various questions in the field of religion are thought to be dealt with (Assemanus, BO III,1, 163). Perhaps it could be identified with the ‘Collection of discussions’ held by Timothy with Patriarch Georgius van Bĕ‘eltan. (Abbeloos, ChroniconEcclesiasticumIII,181-182, note 1). 230 The abbreviations in parentheses indicate: Bidawid, LesLettres (BL);Braun, EpistulaeI (BE); Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39(MH).

LXVIII

INTRODUCTION

The corresponding passages are partly of an exegetical character, concerning the interpretation of John 1,14 (numbers 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19) and John 1,16 (numbers 20 and 21), and partly they include Christological statements (numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 16 and 17). All these passages cited by Isho‘dad are derived from the letters Timothy wrote, dealing with Christology. 2.3.5 ‘Tradition Source’ Isho‘dad proves himself a devoted follower of Theodore of Mopsuestia and the historical-grammatical method of the School of Antioch231. Nevertheless, there are also eight passages in his commentary that absolutely do not fit into this framework. I will give a description of each passage in short.232 Indication 1. ¿ćäàĀþã

Text IvM 4,9-15

Tradition A miracle attending the writing of the Gospel.

2. èÚäáþã

16,3-9

John 1,14: Two traditions about Qiyoré.

3. èÚäáþã 

23,2-11

John 1,49: Tradition about Nathanael under the fig-tree.

4. èÚäáþã 

68,19-20

John 11: Tradition about Lazarus being a bishop.

5. èÚäáþã 

69,23-68,10

John 11,54: Tradition about Ephraim.

6. ¿ćäàĀþã 102,10-14

John 19,23: Tradition about Jesus’s undergarment.

7. èÚäáþã

107,12-108,7

John 20,12: Tradition about the angels in the tomb.

8. èÚäáþã

108,14-21

John 20,12: Tradition about the odour of angels and demons.

In the first passage Isho‘dad reports about a miracle that attended the realization of the Gospel of John. When John was actually writing his 231 For the exegetical methods of the School of Antioch: Schäublin, Untersuchungenzu MethodeundHerkunft. For the exegetical methods of Theodore of Mopsuestia: Bultmann, DieExegesedesTheodorvonMopsuestia; Devreesse, ‘La Méthode exégétique’, 207-241; Devreesse, EssaisurThéodoredeMopsueste. In IoM’s commentary on John these exegetical methods find their expression among other things in (a) a coherent explanation of the text, (b) the explanation of difficult words and notions, (c) attention to the customs of the Scriptures, (d) attention to metaphorical speech usage, (e) attention to typology and (f) usage of literary stylistic device and profane science. See: Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 217-227. 232 For a more detailed description of the passages 1 to 5: Hofstra, ‘Some remarkable passages’, 303-335.

INTRODUCTION

LXIX

gospel, at a certain moment his work was in imminent danger of perishing due to a shower of rain. The angel of the air — called by John to account for that — took drastic measures by arranging for the rain to leave off and never to return to that place till the present day. Isho‘dad explicitly states that in this passage we are concerned with a certain tradition by the introductory words ‘it is handed down’.233 And besides, he says in so many words from which source this tradition originates, namely from the ‘theoforoi’. By this means it is said that the tradition mentioned is not just any tradition, but a tradition of great importance, because it has been handed down by devout men, inspired by God. Passage 2 reproduces two traditions about a certain monk, named Qiyoré.234 Emphatically, twice over, Isho‘dad here uses the term ‘they hand down’. This monk Qiyoré is described as ‘someone who has clothed himself with God’, a description which in the Syriac language is considered to be a synonym for the designation ‘theoforoi’ that we came across in the preceding passage.235 The tradition in question is related to the explanation of John 1,14. In this explanation it is proposed to connect the word ‘became’ with ‘flesh’ and ‘the Word’ with ‘dwelled’. The fact that he received this explanation by means of a vision gives the whole case a heavenly character, thereby conferring authority on it. Next Isho‘dad brings out another tradition, circulating about this ‘blessed man’, namely that once, when he was consecrating on the altar oil flowed out of the host. The explanation of John 1,14 mentioned is also to be found in Theodore bar Koni.236 However, in his rendering Theodore bar Koni confines himself only to the exegetical contents of this tradition. The name of Qiyoré is missing, as is the notion of a revelation. In the third passage a tradition with regard to the calling of Nathanael is the centre of interest. His being called is surrounded by remarkable details originating in the words of Jesus: ‘BeforePhilipcalledyouIsaw youwhileyouwerestillsittingunderthefigtree’ (John 1,49). By mentioning the fig-tree, Jesus gives proof of a knowledge surpassing human knowledge, knowledge of hidden matters. All kinds of thoughts have been 233

Syriac text: 4,9 (¿ćäàĀþã). In this person ‘Qiyoré’ one should probably think of one of the executives of the theological school of Nisibis. He was the predecessor of Narsaï, whose appointment is generally dated 437. For a description of the person of Qiyoré: Scher, La cause de la fondationdesécoles,382-383. 235 ? Syriac text: 16,3 (ÀÍàsÛþÚÃàè ãÿæs). œ 236 Scher, LSII, 160,1-2. 234

LXX

INTRODUCTION

developed concerning the fig-tree. All those thoughts have originated from the question: why is a fig-tree spoken of in this case? In Isho‘dad’s interpretation the fig-tree becomes an implicit reference to a crime Nathanael is thought to have committed in his youth, a crime known only to himself, because he had buried the body of the murdered person at the foot of a figtree. According to Isho‘dad’s vision Jesus in a subtle way lets Nathanael know that He is well informed about what had happened. Isho‘dad ascribes his knowledge of all this to a tradition, introduced with the words ‘they hand down’. The tradition Isho‘dad mentions here forms part of a series of traditions about Nathanael and the fig-tree.237 The tradition in passage 4 relates that Lazarus lived on for a long time after his first death and even held the position of a bishop. With this quotation, introduced like the three preceding passages with the wording ‘they hand down’, Isho‘dad finishes his explanation of the eleventh chapter of the Gospel of John. The tradition mentioned is concerned with the further adventures of Lazarus, after being raised from the dead by the Lord. We meet here with a tradition that has grown in the course of centuries and is easily traceable in the different stages of its development.238 The fifth passage deals with Ephraim, the name of a city that figures in the New Testament only in John 11, verse 54. To this city Jesus withdraws, when the conflict with the religious leaders has been aggravated further. Of this city Isho‘dad gives a topographical description. To these topographical data Isho‘dad links a local tradition. According to that tradition no kind of harmful reptile could ever have a chance to live in the Ephraim area, because when He came, the Lord sealed up this place.239 The sixth tradition is related to John 19,23b, where mention is made of Jesus’s undergarment that ‘wasseamless,woveninonepiecefromtop tobottom’. In the tradition mentioned by Isho‘dad and introduced with the words ‘it is handed down’, supernatural power is ascribed to it. When there is lack of rain, if it is taken outside and lifted up towards heaven, rain will come down in abundance. This tradition is also literally to be found in the ‘Cave of Treasures’.240 237

Hofstra, ‘Some remarkable passages’, 314-321. For this passage, see: Ibidem, 317-326. 239 Ibidem, 326-332. 240 A collection of legendary, biblical traditions, addressed to an unknown Nemesius (Brock, ‘A Brief Outline’, 47 (39); Leonhard, ‘Cave of Treasures’, 90-91. It is generally thought that the text reached its present form in about the 6th century. Text: See: Ri, La CavernedesTrésors [text], § L,8-11; 416,8-10. 238

INTRODUCTION

LXXI

Passage 7 contains a tradition about the two angels Mary Magdalene saw seated in the tomb ‘oneattheheadandoneatthefeet’ (John 20:12). In this tradition these two angels are identified as Gabriel, messenger and minister of the New Covenant, and Michael, minister of the Old Covenant. About them ‘they hand down’ that they entered the tomb with the Lord and remained there after His resurrection to honour the place and to announce His resurrection. These leaders of the angels had also carried the Lord solemnly to the tomb with many thousands of angels. This tradition does not stand on its own. Also in the work of (pseudo) Ephrem the involvement of Gabriel and many angels is spoken of.241 In the last passage a tradition is preserved relating to ‘the white garments’ of the angels at the tomb. In that tradition the manifestation of angels is connected with tranquillity, gladness, peace of heart and brightness with a sweet and delicate odour. But with the vision of demons are, since their fall from heaven, connected: cursing, trepidation, perturbation and disturbance of the heart, together with black and shady colours and figures with putrid odour. What the eight passages mentioned above have in common is that Isho‘dad cites them with the term ‘they hand down’ (passage 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8) or ‘it is handed down’ (passage 1, 6). The emphatic and consistent way in which Isho‘dad uses this indication leads us to suppose that these passages belong together. Therefore we wish to refer to them as ‘Tradition Source’ according to the words with which they are introduced.242 It may be concluded that the passages which belong to this ‘Tradition Source’ are characterized by interest in miraculous and legendary events, which in the course of time get attached to a holy event (the writing of the fourth Gospel), an important Christological text (‘and the Word became flesh’), a mysterious fig-tree (Nathanael), a person who was raised from the dead (Lazarus), a holy place (Ephraim), Jesus’s undergarment and the angels at the tomb. In these passages Isho‘dad provides some insight into legendary traditions about biblical texts, which in the course of centuries came into being in the East Syrian Church.

241 Beck, Sermones in Hebdomadam Sanctam [text], Sermo VII, 70, no. 81-93; 72, no. 149-169; Idem,SermonesinHebdomadamSanctam [transl.], Sermo VII, 122, no. 8193; 125, no. 149-169. 242 This ‘Tradition Source’ needs to be distinguished from ‘The tradition of the School’ (see Ch. 2.2.1 sub F), in which we meet an exegetical source. See: Hofstra, ‘Some remarkable passages’, 333-334.

LXXII

INTRODUCTION

This all leads to the conclusion that Isho‘dad by inserting into his commentary this material evidently broke new ground compared with his predecessors. For example whereas Isho‘ bar Nun in his ‘spiritual exegesis’243 still started with the concrete biblical text, which he tried to understand more deeply at a spiritual level, in this kind of tradition the biblical text slips more into the background and gives rise to delivering legendary traditions concerning holy matters and persons. It is clear that embodying traditions of this kind is at odds with the premises of the historicalgrammatical method professed by him in imitation of Theodore of Mopsuestia. The insertion of this legendary material once again emphasizes the fact that Isho‘dad’s commentary is a combination of different genres. Here lie its significance and strength, as is once again apparent, for most of the traditions figuring in our passages would never have been known were it not for Isho‘dad’s commentary.

243

Molenberg, TheInterpreterinterpreted,364.

COMMENTARIES ON THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT STRENUOUSLY COLLECTED FROM THE WRITINGS OF THE INTERPRETERS AND TEACHERS OF THE HOLY CHURCH by Mar Isho‘dad of Maru, Bishop of Ḥedatta in Assyria

Commentary on John the Evangelist

PROLOGUE

5

10

15

20

25

* Again in the same divine power I write the commentary on John, the evangelist. May his prayer be a bulwark to us. Amen. ˹First: the Prologue1. ˹After our Lord ascended to heaven the Apostles then went out to preach in all regions of Judea and other places.2 ˹And the three books of the Gospel — Matthew, Mark and Luke — were preached everywhere.3 ˹The blessed John also came and stayed in Ephesus, the city of Asia and he also visited all Asia and the surroundings.4 ˹Because the brothers in Asia were convinced that the witness of John — as one who lived from the very beginning with our Lord — was more trustworthy than anyone else’s, they brought him those three books of the Gospels to learn from him what opinion he held about them. He now praised the trustworthiness of the writers highly, saying that they (these Gospels) had been written by the grace of the Spirit. However, that they had omitted (a few of) the miracles our Lord did and much of the teaching about his Godhead.5 ˹So on account of this the request came to him from all the brothers to write down accurately those things that were necessarily needed and that had been omitted by the others.6 ˹He then, assenting to them and to the Spirit, began rightly at the teaching about the Godhead and then he came to the life of our Lord in the flesh.7 ˹And he also filled in the things that had been omitted by the others.8 ˹In short: one does not go astray in calling the Gospel of John the completion, because he wrote down for himself all the things that were necessarily needed and that had been omitted by the others and (he wrote them) in the way they would have said the things that they had omitted and had not recorded in their books.9 * ˹And so, for this reason, he also paid special attention to the place and the order of the things that happened, which none of these evangelists had concerned 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Derived from Theodore of Mopsuestia, see: Vosté, Commentarius[text]3,5**. TM (C. 5,29-6,3*). TM (C. 6,16-18**). TM (C. 6,12-13*). TM (C. 7,1-15*). TM (C. 7,18-21*). TM (C. 7,25-28*). TM (C. 8,1-2*). TM (C. 8,30-9,5*).

[3]

[4]

4

PROLOGUE

themselves with to do. ˹But many things that had been done first they had written down after the things that had been done later, and many things that were later, had been spoken and done before the things that were (written down) first.10 ˹Now John did not do so, but he took care to place the first things first and after them the things that came next. However, 5 in the middle he left many things out, those that had been told by those others.11 ˹Now it is handed down by Theoforoi12 that on one of the days he was writing the Gospel, clouds began to sprinkle rain. Then he rebuked the angel, ruler of the air, saying: ‘Should not you really fear and tremble? 10 Don’t you at least know the Gospel of your Lord is being written? And immediately upon his word no more rain fell on the earth. And from that hour and till this day neither rain nor dew has fallen in the courtyard in which John wrote the Gospel of Life.13 The blessed John now was banished by Domitian Caesar, son of Ves- 15 pasian, to the island named Patmos. And after the death of this (emperor) he returned to Asia. Now John lived after the ascension of our Lord for seventy-three years14 and then died in peace at Ephesus, the great city. The Prologue is ended.

10

TM (C. 9,5-11*). TM (C. 9,15-19**). 12 According to Payne Smith (ThSyr II, c. 4366, s.v. †{Îò{s) the meaning is ‘Deum ferens, indutus’ (God bearing, clothed with God). It is a synonym for ÛþÚÃà ÀÍà¾ćà(clothed with God). Compare for this last expression Rom 13,14. 13 Tradition-source. For a description of this passage and the Tradition-source: Hofstra, ‘Some remarkable passages’, 305-310; 332-335. See also: Introd. Ch. 2.3.5. 14 The year 106 A.D. 11

BOOK I [1,1] InthebeginningwastheWord. Now this term, namely this reading ‘berēshît’1 is Hebrew. In Syriac it is ‘berēshîtā’. ˹And it is asked why did he2 not say ‘at first’3 or ‘first’4 was the Word? We say: because this 5 expression ‘beginning’ precedes ‘first’ and is a better description.5 * ˹Now ‘first’ is so named on account of ‘a second’.6 For on account of ‘the category of relation’7 there are ‘first’ and ‘second’. They come in with one another and with one another they go out. If there is ‘a first’, necessarily there is also ‘a second’. And if there is ‘a second’ there is also ‘a first’. 10 But not so with ‘the beginning’: ˹although it is ‘the beginning’ of something, yet it is possible to be ‘the beginning’ without that which is after it.8 ˹In what way then? In like manner as a man puts the foundation to a building; the first stone which he lays, is called ‘the beginning’. It is not called ‘the first’ until that time when he lays another stone or many (stones).9 15 ˹Also (the) Sunday is called ‘first day’. But its ‘beginning’ or its ‘origin’, in which the seven natures10 came into being, precedes every day. For there is nothing temporal without ‘the beginning’ preceding in it, even if it is ‘the first’. For even to a single hour there is a ‘beginning’, that is to say that ‘beginning’ of its being counted.11 In short: if there is a ‘first’, 1 The translators of the Peshitta used this wording as a rendering for the Hebrew ‫( בראשית‬Gen 1,1). See: Levene, TheEarlySyrianFathers, 123. 2 John, the evangelist. 3 ÀĀÚãËú (bĕqadmāytā). 4 ĀÙ¾ćãËù (qadmā` īt). 5 TM (C. 13,9-10; 14,1-2*); see also: Isho‘ bar Nun (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 86v.6-8*; 86v.8-87r.2**) and Theodore bar Koni (Scher, LSI,13,23-14,3*;idem, LSII, 154,9-13**). For a comparison of the passages: Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 72-73. Cf. Ch. 2.3.2 note 174. 6 TM (C. 14,5-6*). 7 A term originating from the philosophy of Aristotle (384-322 B.C.). The categories function there as first definitions of the way things ‘are’ (Copleston, AHistoryof Philosophy, vol. I, part II, 21-22). TbK names nine categories (LSII, 15,12-18): quantity (ÀÎÚäÝ), qualification (¿æ|), relation („ËãÎà), where (¿ÞÙs), when (€Āãs), being in a position (åÚì), to have/to be (ĀÙs), doing (ËÃï) and being affected (ÿÐ). 8 TbK (LSII,154,9-13**). 9 TM (C. 14,19-24). 10 In his commentary on Gen 1,1 Isho‘dad mentions the following seven natures: heaven, earth, angels, darkness, fire, water, air (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, Commentaire I [text], 12,29-13,2; see also: Van Rompay, LecommentairesurGenèse-Exode9,32[text], 7,9-11). 11 IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 86v. 9-12**). See: Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 73-74.

[5]

6

[6]

JOHN 1,1

there is also a ‘beginning’. But if there is a ‘beginning’, it does not follow that there is also a ‘first’. InthebeginningwastheWord. We ought to know that ‘Word’ is not a proper name, like ‘Jesus’ or ‘Christ’ or ‘Son’. Nor is it a name for a hypostasis12 or being, but for a kind of being. And it is an indication of the manner in which the Son is born from the Father, namely that he is not born as bodies are with us, in a place and at a time, and by cutting13 and in material14, ˹but like a word that is from the soul15, not at a time and by suffering and by cutting and by separation etc. And whenever there is a soul and it thinks, necessarily there is also a word with it. And whenever there is a word, * there is also a soul. And every soul is connected with the word and every word is connected with the soul. And although being one, it is separated, and being separated, it is united. With this exception: the word is from the soul, but the soul is not from the word. For the effect is from the cause, ˹but not the cause from the effect16. In that way — and supremely so — the Son is also born. And he is born from the Father, eternally17, ˹without suffering and cutting18 etc. ‘Word’ he calls him and not ‘Son’ or ‘the born’ — although he is this indeed — in order that you should not think anything corporal and suitable for birth (here) below, such as place, accident and change etc. ˹Now your own birth, is it not real? Still, it is rather shadow and type and (a kind of) materialization, namely of flesh. And from a time it begins 12 The hypostasis (¿ćãÎçù) of man consists of the constitutive elements of the individual, his properties. With regard to the Holy Trinity: ‘L’hypostase désigne le caractère propre de chacun des Trois au sein de la nature commune’ (Tonneau and Devreesse,Les HoméliesCatéchétiques (HC),Introd. IX). 13 This probably refers to the cutting of the navel string. 14 By mentioning the various categories like place, time, being affected etc. IoM wants to make clear that the birth of the Son exceeds all categories. 15 This comparison (the birth of the Son from the Father is comparable to the soul and the word that originates in it) occurs many times in IoM’s work. See e.g.: Vosté and Van Den Eynde, Commentaire I [text], 47,11-14. The passage in question in IoM is derived from TM (C. 21,15-23*). Also elsewhere in the work of TM this comparison is to be found (HC, f 19r,16-23; 19v,2-5). See also: TbK (LS II, 29,1-17*). These conceptions are also present in the work of Gregory of Nazianzus (Greek: Gallay, GrégoiredeNazianze,Discours 27-31, Oratio XXX, 20,1-7; 266; Syriac: Haelewyck, Sancti Gregorii Nazianzeni Opera, versio syriaca, IV, Oratio XXX, 20, 1-8; 288 (versio antiqua); Oratio XXX, 20, 1-9; 289 (versio nova). 16 Cf. Timothy I (Bidawid, LesLettres,{, 4-5). 17 TM (HC, f 18v,21-24). Cf. also IoM’s commentary on Ps 110 (Van Den Eynde, CommentaireVI [text], 159,22-24 ). 18 Bidawid, LesLettres,}, 28*.

5

10

15

20

JOHN 1,1

5

10

15

20

7

and it needs material, and (only) after a long time it is completed.19 And in it there is only just a man, but sometimes not even a man, but an untimely birth20 or something else. There, however, is not one of these things, but the only One from the only One21, whose birth is one and only, beyond all investigation and examination.22 ˹But if the Ariomanitae23 say that this (word) ‘born’ makes him into (somebody) who came after the Father, let them know that if they should have found the ‘commencement’ of the Father, of necessity he24 should be secondary because of this ‘he was born’.25 But now to the being and also to the being born — to both — is attached this ‘inthebeginning’. One ought to know that ‘the beginning’ of anything is from its own nature, but its ‘commencement’26 is not (so) by any means. Therefore: every ‘commencement’ (has) also a ‘beginning’, but not every ‘beginning’ (has) also a ‘commencement’, because the time of the genesis of anything is properly its ‘commencement’, like the day on which a house was built, ˹but its ‘beginning’ was its foundation.27 And ‘the beginning’ of the day is its first hour, which is also its ‘commencement’. Therefore * every ‘commencement’ (has) a ‘beginning’, but not every ‘beginning’ (has) a ‘commencement’. The Interpreter28 (writes) in his letter to Kalastarton29: ‘by saying ‘inthe beginning’ and then adding to it ‘was’, he brought to the fore ‘the beginning’ indefinitely, because he extended it with this (word) ‘was’. The 19 20

Cf. TM (C. 22,6-13). For ‘untimely born’, see 1 Cor 15,8. There the apostle Paul speaks of himself as

such. 21

Cf. Diodore of Tarsus (De Lagarde, AnalectaSyriaca, 94,18). Ephrem Syrus also expresses himself regularly in this sense concerning the divine birth of the Son (Beck, SermodeDominoNostro [text], 1,21-22 and 2,7-8). Jansma (‘Étude sur la Pensée de Narsai’, 165-166) calls this a characteristic theme in Ephrem’s reflections upon the holy Trinity. 23 Transcription of the Greek Άρειομανίτης, which has the meaning ‘one with the Arian madness’ (Lampe, APatristicGreekLexicon, 224b). In 318 A.D. Arius, Presbyter in Alexandria, came into conflict with his Bishop on account of his ideas about Christ, whom he saw as a creature and a work of the Father. However, according to the lexicographer Bar Bahlul, this word is constituted from the names of Arius and Mani and means ‘followers of the heresies of Arius and Mani’ (Duval, LexiconsyriacumII, 292, 14). 24 The Son. 25 TM (C. 21,27-22,6; 22,15-18*). 26 ¿ÙÎý (šūrāyā). 27 TM (C. 14,19*). 28 Here Theodore of Mopsuestia (350-428 A.D.) is meant, who by the East Syrians was considered as ‘the blessed Interpreter’ (Ortiz de Urbina, Patrologia, 226). 29 A collection of letters of TM had circulated (Baumstark, Geschichte, 104). Possibly this letter, addressed to a certain Kalastarton, formed part of it. 22

[7]

8

[8]

JOHN 1,1

‘beginning’ in itself is not definite. But that ‘inthebeginning’ of Moses, by connecting the creation with it, was indeed definite.30 And lest one should think that he (the evangelist) understood the Son in the Father as a force in a substance — in like manner as the word is in the soul; for philosophers call every force in a substance an accident31 — but (that he understood him as) a perfect hypostasis32 from a perfect hypostasis, he adds: Andhe,theWord,waswithGod (John 1,1b). Gradually the writer leads us, ignorant (readers), on in order that he — leaving on one side the external text — should enter into the sense. And if not so, why then is ‘the Word’ and why then is this ‘was’ masculine but not feminine? Who has ever heard that ‘word’ is masculine33? And why does he say: he(theWord)waswithGod? ˹For every word is spoken either in someone or of someone or from someone.34 This ‘with him’, however, indicates something of simultaneousness and connection and of not being without origin and of the Word not being from or by itself God, but from the Father and ‘with him’, like the effect with the cause.35 AndGodwashe,theWord (John 1,1c). Observe the order of theology. First: Inthebeginninghewas, second: withGodhewas. With the first he showed that he is eternal and from Another, for this is what the appellation ‘Word’ signifies; with the second, however, (he showed) whom and in whom he was, and here he brought out God from a metaphorical view, as it were * the sun from amongst the clouds. This one, whom I called ‘Word’ metaphorically — although it is impossible — he is in truth God. 30 See for this comparison between the ‘In the beginning’ of Genesis and that of John 1,1 also TbK (LSII, 154,13-20). 31 The term ¿ýËÅ (gēdshā) originates from the philosophy of Aristotle. It can be defined as: ‘that which is in something, without being a part of it, and whose subsistence cannot be without that in which it is’ (Hespel, Les Collections annexées par Sylvain de Qardu [text], 53,4-54,6 and Georr, LesCatégoriesd’Aristote, 164). For IoM’s opinion that the Son cannot be understood as a force in the Father, see also Timothy I (Braun, EpistulaeI [text], 207,20-24, Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 82,13-83,2). 32 Here the divine hypostasis of Christ is meant. The East Syrian Church acknowledges two complete hypostases in Christ, a divine and a human (See: LS II, 160,17-20; and: Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw,228-235). 33 IoM draws attention to the fact that in John 1,1 ‘the Word’ (ÀĀáã/mĕltā) and the corresponding verbal form ‘was’ (€z{ĀÙs/`ītawhy) are masculine, although ‘mĕltā’ is originally a feminine word. For the various opinions on this point, see: Hofstra, ‘Isho‘dad vanMerw’,58; Kmosko, ‘Analecta Syriaca’, 35f, note 4; Baarda, TheGospelQuotations, 55; 58-59. 34 This thought is also to be found in TM (HC, f 19r,12-13). 35 TM (C. 24,9-14).

5

10

15

20

JOHN 1,2-3

5

10

15

20

25

9

[1,2] And lest one should think that all the labour of his exposition (is intended) to bring us to one God — him whom also we knew formerly — he adds of necessity: ThiswasinthebeginningwithGod. ˹For ‘God’ is he and ‘with God is he’, being nothing else than he is with whom he is.36 ˹There is no difference at all in this ‘God’. But diversity in hypostases only.37 In substance, however, he is one. One, not as being by himself, but as coming with Another by a causal connection38. This then is what is intended by GodwaswithGod. This sentence is also a perfect summary of the things above, but it also has something more in comparison with the preceding sentences. For there he said: theWord(was)withGod, but here: God(was)withGod. The former as an indication with the truth, the latter as truth with the truth. ˹And rightly with three and one — the former in hypostases, the latter however in nature39 — he has defined the whole mystery of theology. [1,3] ˹Now after referring to his eternity in this Inthebeginningwas theWordand to his causation by the Father in this: he,theWord..etc.’40 and to his being one in nature with him in this: GodwastheWord, and (after) bringing together and defining these three in this that ‘he who was so, was eternally withGod the Father’, he adds about his creatorship: All things through41 him came to be. For in this (word) ‘all’ he leaves out nothing that is not enclosed and that is unlimited within it. The logical conclusion * is then that he includes all42, because there is nothing out- [9] side ‘all’. Now this throughhim is not (meant) as by a servant nor as by an instrument, according to the impious opinion of some43, but as by the Maker44 and Creator. Byhim45hemadetheworlds(Heb 1,2c) Paul says, 36

TM (C. 24,19-21*. Cf. HC, f 19v,12-15; f 22r,19-21); TbK (LSII, 154,20-155,1*). Timothy I (Braun, Epistulae I [text], 181,12-15; Heimgartner, Die Briefe 30-39 [text], 46,16-18; Bidawid, LesLettres,{, 10). 38 I.e. a connection which exists from the very beginning. 39 Both elements (diversity in hypostases and unity in nature) are also to be found in Timothy I (Braun, Epistula I [text], 230,23-24; Heimgartner, Die Briefe 30-39 [text], 113,23-114,1). For the unity of nature, see also the commentary of IoM on Psalm 110,3 (Van Den Eynde, CommentaireVI [text], 159,15-16). 40 TM (C. 24,5-14). 41 zËپ (b` īdēh); literally: by the hand of, by the agency of. 42 Compare IoM’s commentary on Gen 1,1 (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, Commentaire I [text], 12,17). 43 This is a reference to the Arians (Braun, EpistulaeI [text], 272,16-18; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 173,5-8). 44 For the indication ‘Maker’ (ÁxÎÃï/‘abōdā) in relation to the Son, compare TM (HC, f 25r,14-19 and f 25r,25-26). 45 Í (bēh): by him, in him. 37

10

JOHN 1,3-4

because this ‘throughhim’ and ‘byhim’ are similar and equal in strength46, as the same Paul testifies: All things were created through him and by him (Col 1,16b) showing at the same time the operation, the dominion and the providence. ˹Andwithouthimnothingcametobethatcametobe. That is to say: there is nothing of the things that came to be, that came to be without him, from the Father alone, while the Son was a stranger to its creation. For in this, that the Son is continually with the Father, he of necessity is partaker with him also in the creative activity.47 [1,4] ˹Inhimwaslife. He did not say ‘he was life’, for this can also apply to the animals and to all that lives. But he says that his strength brought forth life and created it.48 ˹For he did not seek to say what his nature is in this Inhimwaslife, as some say, but what his strength is.49 And because he said: Allthingsthroughhimcametobe (John 1,3a), this ‘all’ includes all that does not live like stones and wood etc. and all living nature such as herbs and plants, those that fall under the living beings, as ordinary people say, but below animated beings. Therefore they are not called ‘living beings’, but ‘living nature’.50 And then he adds this: Inhim waslife. ˹And again ‘life’ — because it is a homonym — is divided into (beings) of the first, second and third (category), that is to say:

[10]

5

10

15

20

(a) in life endowed with senses, but motionless, like sponges and shellfish etc. that are fixed in the ground and do not move from place to place (b) * in life that moves and removes, like animals and reptiles etc. Of both of these kinds51 it is said that ‘they live by their blood’. The 25 evangelist, wishing to distinguish that third (category of) life — that is to say, the rational from those two mentioned — adds: andthelifewas 46 That zËپ (b`īdēh) and Í (bēh) have the same meaning and thus are interchangeable, appears also to be evident where in TM’s commentary on John — when citing Heb 1,2 — in contrast with IoM a form of zËپ (b` īdēh) is used instead of Í (bēh) (C. 23,17-18*). Syc and Liber Graduum (Kmosko, LiberGraduum, 917,13) read Í (bēh) instead of zËپ (b`īdēh) in John 1,3. 47 TM (C. 26,13-19*). 48 TM (C. 28,17-21*). 49 TM (C. 28,26-28**). 50 For this classification of all created things, see also IoM’s commentary on Gen 1,26 (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, CommentaireI [text], 49,6-11). A great deal of this enumeration is already to be found in TM (Sachau, Fragmentasyriaca(FS),f 20a,3-13). 51 This term (¿ýxs/’ādšā) is derived from the logic of Aristotle (Hespel, LesCollectionsannexéesparSylvaindeQardu [text], 33,26 et seq. and 49,1-50,6).

JOHN 1,4-5

5

10

15

20

25

11

thelightofmen, i.e. he created not only life, but also rational life, discerning and intelligent, i.e. mixed with the light of discernment and reason.52 These he calls ‘light’, like this (word): Ifthelightthatisinyouisdarkness,howgreatisthatdarkness?(Mt 6,23b).53 [1,5] ˹Andthelightshinesinthedarknessandthedarknesshasnot comprehended it54, that is ‘will not comprehend it’.55 And who is this ‘light’? He, whom above he called ‘the Word’, he who created the light that is in us. He whom after a little while he calls ‘theonlybegottenGod’ (John 1,18). For one name he gave to God and to man, because of the likeness of image; ˹for every image is associated with the prototype because of identity56 by likeness of name, although it is not so by identity of definition. Wishing to bring into relationship the ‘inthebeginning’ of our existence (Gen 1,1) with the ‘inthebeginning’ of our renewal (John 1,3) it seemed good to him here also to proceed, speaking well and appropriately about the way in which he there provided love towards man, with which we were adorned when (we were) created. For there man is called ‘image’57, here however ‘light’, as God also is called ‘light’. And there, on the one hand, it pleased him that he should be, here on the other hand, that he should also be good. ˹That this light thus ― eternal and without likeness ― when ‘comingnow’ (John 1,9), should redeem and set free the enlightened of mind from the darkness of ignorance and error, in the midst of which they were,58 and should add brightness to their brightness, (which is) accidental to (what is) natural. He helped them on the one hand as much as possible, * but him, who is in no way annoyed by the darkness [11] of error, (he did) not (help) at all. For he is the destroyer, the adversary of the true light and not the receiver (of it). ˹Others — (e.g) the Persian Sage59 in Demonstration I — say that ‘thelight’ is the Christ, ‘the darkness’ the people of Israel, among whom he not only gave light, but who grew even 52

TM (C. 28,28-29,1 and 29,8-11). This line of thought and combination of John 1,4b with Mt. 6,23b is also to be found in the work of Barḥadbĕshabba ‘Arbaya (7th century). See: Scher, LacausedelaFondationdesécoles,340,10-12. 54 The aphel of the verb ‚x (derēk) has the meaning of ‘to seize, overtake, grasp’ as well as ‘perceive, comprehend’ (ThSyrI, c. 949-950 s.v.; see also Leloir, LeTémoignaged’Éphrem, 77). 55 TM (C. 29,13-15*; 37,20-21*). 56 TbK (LSII, 133,6*). 57 Allusion to Gen 1,26. 58 TM (C. 29,21-24). 59 This is a reference to Aphrahat (260-354 A.D.). Cf. Introd. Ch. 2.2.1 sub A. 53

12

JOHN 1,5-13

darker. And so he went out and enlightened the nations.60 ˹Gregory61, however, allegorically calls the body in which the Word-God dwelt and the world ‘darkness’. ˹But the Interpreter calls the world ‘darkness’, that is to say, him who holds the world of darkness.62 [1,12] This: HegavethempowertobecomesonsofGod. For although others were expressly called ‘sons’, yet they were really not so, because they were unfaithful to their sonship soon after and delivered themselves up to cattle and animals and became like them.63 [1,13] This: notofblood, i.e. seed64, butofGodtheywereborn, that is to say by the Spirit and by faith. By the former he bestows purification from error, by the latter he also attracts prophecy as a spiritual gift. And we shall demonstrate the same in relation to another nature by means of (the concept of) transformation. ˹In like manner the nature of fire with mud also gives gold; namely from a simultaneous conjunction by mixture with dust it changes into gold. How much more powerful is the Spirit than fire and it can make us, sons of the flesh, into Sons of God!65 ˹And one ought to know that the Scriptures say in three ways that we are born of God. (a) In baptism by means of type. (b) In purification by means of revelations. (c) In resurrection by means of deeds. And in these three (ways) ‘adoption as sons’ is spoken of.66 60 IoM here cites from Aphrahat’s work Demonstratio I, De Fide (Parisot, DemonstrationesI, c. 21,24 et seq.). For a comparison of both texts: Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 104-106. Cf. Introd. Ch. 2.2.1, sub A. 61 Gregory of Nazianzus (330-390 A.D.), one of the three Cappadocians, who bears the epithet ‘the Theologian’. The quotation mentioned is derived from one of his ‘Orationes’ (Moreschini and Gallay, Discours38-41, disc. 39,2; 152,9-11). See also: Hofstra, Isho‘dad vanMerw, 116 and Introd. Ch. 2.2.2, sub A. 3. 62 This quotation cannot be found in TM’s commentary on the Gospel of John. Possibly it is derived from another work. 63 Cf. IoM’s commentary on Gen 9,4 (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, Commentaire I [text], 123,15-16). 64 In the Syriac language area an exegetical tradition existed in which ‘the blood’ in John 1,13 was explained in the sense of ‘seed’. See: Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 6566. 65 Cf. for this passage Timothy I (Braun, EpistulaI [text], 175,10-11*; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 38,12.17-18*). The same comparison is to be found in JC (Gr. text: PG 59, h. 10, c.75,57-76,1; Syr. text: Childers, Commentary on John I [text], m. 10,4; 87,6-9*). 66 The passage above is almost literally to be found in the work of Dadisho‘ Qaṭraya (7th cent.); see: Draguet, Commentaire du Livre d’Abba Isaïe [text], 116,10-14.) Draguet calls this passage ‘une formule familière à Théodore de Mopsueste’ (Commentairedu Livred’AbbaIsaïe[transl.], 89, note 3). This remark is supported by two passages in HC: f 114r,1-2. 12-14).

5

10

15

20

JOHN 1,14a

13

[1,14a] And he adds: AndtheWordbecameflesh. This, he says, that the flesh is exalted to this that it might be ‘born of God’, and this that God humiliates himself * to be born of flesh, this is the reason that there [12] is likeness and equality in power, because what is of God, is with the flesh, 5 i.e. with regard to the flesh it will be with God. And if (it is possible for) nature there, the same is also possible here and sons of the flesh will become naturally ‘sons of God’. And if this is impossible, then it would be all the more impossible for God to become flesh. Therefore: they both (are there) by divine providence. 10 Beforehand he prepared his audience with these words: Amanwassent (John 1,6a) and with these words: themhegavepower(tobecome)sons etc. (John 1,12), to reprove the ignorance which wishes to confuse the acts of providence. ˹About (how things or persons) ‘become’ is spoken of in many ways.67 15

(1) (2)

˹Either from nothing68, ˹like those seven natures in silence and one in a voice.69 Or from something, in like manner as the bodies from the four elements.70

67 In the following passage IoM gives a survey of twenty ways in which things or persons ‘become’. Elsewhere also he mentions various ways of ‘becoming’ (Van Den Eynde, CommentaireV [text], 83,10-16). The enumeration here given by IoM concerning the explanation of the verb À{z (to be/ to become) in John 1,14 goes all the way back to TM, who in discussing Gal 3,13, mentions a great number of the various ways in which things or persons ‘become’ (FS, Íã -Òã). In the translation it has been attempted to retain as much as possible the original meaning (to become), even where it produces a somewhat artificial text in the English language. 68 It relates here to the ‘creatio ex nihilo’. This ‘creation out of nothing’ has been emphatically defended by various Syriac authors against among others the ideas of Bardaisan (154-223 A.D.). For Ephrem, see: Beck, HymnendeFide [text], 15, sermo II, 377 and for TbK: LSII, 28, 19-26. 69 For ‘the seven natures’: see p. 5, note 10. They were created in silence (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, CommentaireI [text], 42,5). This tradition is also known to the Anonymous Commentary, as found in MS (olim) Diyarbakir 22 (Van Rompay, Lecommentaire surGenèse-Exode9,32 [text], 7,10) and to TbK (LSI [text], 23,10-11 and 20,4-10). This author also formulated a question and answer concerning the one nature (the light) created by God’s voice (LSI [text], 41,20-23). Narsaï († 502) is of the opinion that the creation of heaven and earth took place in silence, because God could not address himself to anybody, but since the morning of the first day — with the creation of the light — God spoke before every act of creation, addressing himself to the angels (Gignoux, Homélies de Narsaïsurlacréation, h. III, 107-114). This tradition, about the seven natures created in silence and one by a voice, goes back to TM (FS,52-42 ,{*). 70 That is to say: fire, air, water and earth (Chabot, JacobiEdesseniHexaemeron [text], 64b,32-68a,25). IoM writes in his commentary on Genesis: ‘Of four elements they were

14 (3) (4) (5)

(6) (7) (8)

(9) (10) (11) (12) (13) [13]

(14)

JOHN 1,14a

˹In (the sense of) transformation71, like the wife of Lot72 and the Egyptian waters. In (the sense of) completion: And itbecameeveninganditbecame morning(Gen 1,5). In (the sense of) formation: Adam thefirstmanbecamealivingsoul (1 Cor 15,45). ˹Or: someonebecame(i.e.had)sonsanddaughters’ (Job 42,13).73 ˹In (the sense of) help74: TheLord became(i.e.was)withJosephetc. (Gen 39,2) ˹We (also) say it in (the sense of) obtaining (an office): Someone became for us a priest or king.75 In (the sense of) difference and (of) relationship: Hegavethem the power to be called sons of God (John 1,12b) and I will become theirGod(Jer 31,33). In (the sense of) goodwill: Hebecame(i.e.wasmade)inthelikenessofman (Phil 2,7). In (the sense of) a supposition: Hebecameacurseforus (Gal 3,13). ˹In (the sense of) suffering: Ibecamelikeamanwhodoesnothear (Ps 38,14).76 ˹In (the sense of) retrogression of the mind: I became foolish (2 Cor 12,11).77 In (the sense of) hostility: TheLordbecameanenemyandhedestroyed Israel’ (Lam 2,5) And: ‘Hebecamealion etc. (Ezek 19,3). ˹In (the sense of) occupation of a place78: * Mosesbecame(i.e.was) acaravansary(Ex 4,24) and Josephaprison (Gen 39,20), i.e. in a caravansary and in a prison.79

composed, those that (came) after’ (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, CommentaireI [text], 49,24-25). 71 Cf. TM (FS,Ïã, 4-5). 72 Gen 19,26. The combination ‘becoming’, ‘transformation’, connected with the example of Lot’s wife, is also to be found in the monophysite author Severus of Antioch († 538). See: Graffin and Brière,LesHomiliaeCathédrales,118,30-33. 73 TM (FS,Îã, 11). 74 TM (FS,Ïã, 7-10). 75 TM (FS,Ïã, 1). 76 TM (FS, Îã, 2; Ïã, 16-17**). 77 TM (FS, Íã, 1**; Îã, 7; 9-10. 22-23**). 78 TM (FS,Îã, 3,25**). 79 For a more detailed elaboration of this remarkable view, see below p. 16,16-22. In his Introduction to the explanation of the Gospels IoM counts this phenomenon of omitting a letter as ‘a Scriptural custom’ (Gibson, TheCommentaries II, 6,16-17).

5

10

15

20

25

JOHN 1,14a

15

(15) In (the sense of) change: Arise and be changed and become (cf. 1 Cor 15,51-52). (16) In (the sense of) likeness, like the word which is formed with ink and signs and becomes visible to the eyes. 5 (17) In (the sense of) inhabiting, like this: a certain person became (was) in that house for years’. (18) In (the sense of) conjunction, as when one is joined to Jews or thieves, and it is said: ‘he became a thief or a Jew’. (19) ˹And (in the sense of) from smallness (coming) to greatness and 10 honour80, like: webecomeimmortalandincorruptibleintheresurrection (cf. 1 Cor 15,53). (20) And (in the sense of) taking on (a certain) likeness, according to the Chalcedonians81 that when material takes on the likeness of a calf, it also becomes a calf. And although ‘becoming’ is spoken of in these twenty ways that are commonly known — if not in more than these — ˹here however it is said in one way82: in the sense of taking on a person83, i.e. God the Word humbled himself and took it upon himself to dwell in man and to reveal himself in man84 and to be called man by taking on the person of a man 20 in whom he providentially became man. For this (word) ‘flesh’ is put instead of the whole man according to scriptural custom85, like this: Let allfleshblesshisholyname (Ps 145,21) and: Totheeshallallfleshcome (Ps 65,2) and: LetmysouldiewiththePhilistines etc. (Judges 16,30), which are spoken of by using a part for the whole86. 15

80

Cf. TM (FS,Îã, 15-16). Chalcedonians: theologians who accept the definition given at the Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.) of how the divine and human relate in the person of Jesus Christ. 82 The following passage (about three ways in which the incarnation of the Word is spoken of), is almost literally derived from IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 87r.2-88r.9**). He, in his turn, borrowed one thing and another from TM. For a more detailed discussion of IbN’s text and that of IoM, see: Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 75-77 and Introd. Ch. 2.3.2. 83 ¿ò{‹üò (parṣōpā). Heimgartner (DieBriefe30-39 [transl.], Einleitung XXXV): ‘parṣōpā betont …… den im ‘Angesicht’ zum Ausdruck kommenden personalen Karakter des Individuums’. 84 Cf. TM (C.33,17-20). 85 Interest in ‘Scriptural custom’ formed an important part of the exegesis within the Antiochene School (Bultman, DieExegesedesTheodorvonMopsuestia,47-49; Van Rompay, ‘Gennadius of Constantinople’, 402. 86 This relates to the figure of speech of ‘pars pro toto’. IoM eagerly and frequently pays attention to this ‘Scriptural custom’. See e.g.: Vosté and Van Den Eynde, CommentaireI [text], 113,23-24. This passage is also derived from TM (C.33,28-30**). 81

16

[14]

JOHN 1,14a

In another way (it is put) instead of taking on (something) like this (word): He became a curse for us (Gal 3,13) and: And for your sake — it is said — hemadehimtobesin,sothatinhimwemightbecome righteousness (2 Cor 5,21).87 And in like manner his hypostasis was not turned into a curse or into a sin, but certainly he took them upon himself, like this (word): He took our infirmities and our sicknesses (Mt 8,17). And we on the other hand, our nature and hypostasis were not turned into righteousness, * but we have taken righteousness upon us. So also this ‘flesh’: it was not declared that he was changed into flesh, i.e. into man, but that he took on man to be revealed in his person. And he raised man to a person who is adored with him eternally88, without effacing man in the same way as he effaced curse and sin that he took upon (himself). Impious (is he) who speaks so impiously! But (he raised man in such way) that he will be honoured with him eternally, in like manner as an image whose prototype in reality is invisible. But in a third manner, it is understood instead of staying (in a place), i.e. theWordbecameintheflesh, that is to say ‘he stayed’89 (there), like Moses became the caravansary, that is to say in the caravansary, and Joseph the prison, that is to say in the prison. For even as Joseph did not become the building of the prison, nor did Moses become the caravansary, but stayed in the prison, thus also the Word did not become flesh naturally, but he stayed in the flesh as in a Temple90. And it is witnessed by this: hedweltinus (John 1,14b). 87 In the East Syrian Church the opinion that ‘the Word became flesh’ had to be explained as ‘He took on the flesh’ played an important role. This opinion goes back to TM (PG 66/II, c. 725; c. 981, fragment 3; HC, f 47v,9-10). Within this conception the references to Gal 3,13 and 2 Cor 5,21 figure prominently. See e.g. also Timothy I (Braun, EpistulaI [text], 174,8-17; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 37,8-16) and TbK (LSII,32,19-20. 23-25; 220,4-16). The connection of John 1,14 with the references mentioned is already to be found in Gregory of Nazianzus (Gr. text: Gallay and Jourjon, Lettres Théologiques, Lettre 101, no. 61; Syr. text: Abramowski and Van Roey, ‘Das Florileg mit den Gregor-Scholien’, 156) and in Athanasius (Thomson, AthanasianaSyriaca, Part I,2 Epistula ad Epictetum [text], 80, 21-28). 88 For this opinion, see also Babai Magnus (7th century) (Vaschalde, LiberdeUnione [text], 91,9) and TM (HC, f 37r,5-6). 89 The Incarnation of the Word is here interpreted as À{Îäï /‘āmurutā: inhabitation, indwelling, staying (in a place). The way in which the Word-God is present in ‘the flesh that is taken on’ (see note 87) is often represented with a form of the verb üäï (‘ĕmar/to dwell, to inhabit, to stay, sojourn). The ground for this conception is to be found in John 1,14b (‘anddwelledin/amongus’). Cf. for this usage IoM’s commentary on Gen 9,27 (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, CommentaireI [text], 130,10-11) and on Is 7,14 (Van Den Eynde, CommentaireIV [text], 13,1.3-4). 90 A favourite expression in the East Syriac literature as a description of ‘the indwelling (see note 89) in the flesh of the ‘Word-God’, borrowed from John 2,19 and 21. For the

5

10

15

20

JOHN 1,14a

5

10

15

20

17

˹But also in a fourth way it is said hebecameflesh, (namely) on account of the onlookers’ opinion91, ˹because he humbly took upon himself (human) existence, like a person who is of ‘flesh’. And so it was supposed by the onlookers, that he was a common man.92 ˹For this is a custom of Scripture that it names facts according to the supposition of others93, like this: Theheavensshallberolleduplikeascroll’ (Is 34,4), and: Jesuslooked athimandlovedhim (Mk 10,21), and: Herodwassad (Mt 14,9) etc.94 Further in a fifth way (it is said, namely) instead of his connection with the flesh. For that is a custom of Scripture to use creation or existence instead of connection, like this: Fromthedaythatyouwerecreated,you werewiththecherubwhoisanointedandwhoovershadows (Ezek 28,1314).95 He now speaks about the connection between Hiram * and David [15] (cf. 1 Kings 5,12)96. (And) like this: Withthefaithfulfromtheirmothers’ wombitwascreated, i.e. wisdom (Sir 1,14). For if God became flesh by nature and then ‘came’ and ‘dweltamongus’ (John 1,9; 1,14), ˹how then could ‘flesh’ dwell in ‘flesh’? Therefore the Word did not become flesh by nature. However, it was called so, because he dwelt in it.97 ˹For that is a custom of Scripture that by the name of the dwelling-place the dwellers are also called98, like this: Hearheavensandgiveearearth (Is 1,2), i.e. heavenly and earthly beings.99 And: HearhouseofDavid (Is 7,13) usage by IoM, see: Vosté and Van Den Eynde, CommentaireI [text], 130,10-11 and 155, 20-21; Van Den Eynde, CommentaireIV [text], 10,8-10. For the occurrence in IbN: MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 88r.14-15 and Timothy I: Bidawid, LesLettres, Õà, 14-15. 91 TM (C. 33,17-20*). 92 According to a passage in Timothy I, these words are directed against the followers of Paul of Samosata, Marcellus and Photinus, who considered the Saviour to be ‘an ordinary man’ (Braun, Epistulae I [text], 278,22-25; Heimgartner, Die Briefe 30-39 [text], 181,12-16). Cf. further for this passage: Bidawid, LesLettres, ¿Ù, 9-10; ¿ćã, 5-7. 93 This ‘Scriptural usage’ IoM regularly mentions in his commentaries. Generally he then uses the same Biblical examples (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, CommentaireI [text], 9,13-17; Gibson, TheCommentariesII, 7,4-6; 102,10-14 and 226,5-9). 94 This passage has been attributed by Ibn al-Țayyib († 1043 A.D.) to Aḥob of Qatar, see: Hofstra, ‘Isho‘dadvanMerw’, 193 and Introd. Ch. 2.2.1 sub E. 95 According to IoM’s explanation of this text (Van Den Eynde, CommentaireV [text], 83,1-10) David is meant by the ‘cherub’. 96 Although IoM in his explanation of Ezek 28,14 does not speak directly of a bond with Hiram, yet his exegesis leads to a reference to this king of Tyre (Van Den Eynde, CommentaireV [text], 83,29-84,2). 97 Cf. TM (C. 33,22-23) and TbK (LSII, 159,24-25). 98 Cf. TM on Ps 145 (Van Rompay, FragmentssyriaquesduCommentairedesPsaumes [text] 76,18-19). 99 Timothy I (Braun, EpistulaeI [text], 253,1-4. 7-9*; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 144,12-145,2*).

18

JOHN 1,14a

i.e. ‘sons of David’. And also the dwelling-places are called by the name of the dwellers, as in the case of Samaria and Shechem. ˹He now says ‘hebecame’ i.e. he took on ‘flesh’ and not ‘man’, although he took on a complete man.100 First: according to scriptural custom, which speaks ‘pars pro toto’ in accordance with what we have said so many times. Second: because ˹if he had said ‘man’ — and ‘man’ is composed of body and soul101; but the soul is not created in the male until after forty days102 — it would have been thought that there was no unity until the man was completed and the flesh appeared to be simply flesh for forty days and (still) deprived of the Godhead. But now he showed that in the hypostasis of the Word there was stability and movement103 of his personality immediately.104 ˹Athanasius says: ‘The flesh immediately was the flesh of God. Immediately soul, immediately soul of God’.105 Third: he speaks of the despised part in man, i.e. the flesh, so that ― starting with what is lowly ― he demonstrates how great indeed was the humiliation of the Word, that this entirely humbled himself so that he put on flesh and was supposed to be only this (i.e. flesh). At the same time he humbled himself for our elevation and for our glory.

100

IoM here combats, in the footsteps of TM (FS, ~‹, 6-7), the conceptions of Apollinaris of Laodicea († 390 A.D.), who denied that Christ was also a complete man. The East Syrian Church declared Christ to be complete God and complete man (Bidawid, Les Lettres, ‚, 23-24). 101 IoM has a dichotomous portrayal of man: man consists of body and soul. See e.g. his commentary on Gen 2,7, where he opposes Apollinaris’s trichotomous view (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, CommentaireI [text] 126, 56,12-16). 102 Spuler (‘Die nestorianische Kirche’, 150, s.v. Seele) mentions the view within the East Syrian Church of the soul being created by God immediately after conception and being united with the body 40 days after. Some correction here is necessary, as is evident from IoM’s explanation of the man’s soul being united with the body 40 days after conception, but the woman’s soul being united only after 80 days. Cf. IoM’s commentary on Ex 24,18 (Van Den Eynde, CommentaireII [text], 45,7-10) and TbK (LSI,159,12-16). This view of the soul causes problems — as is seen hereafter — with regard to the Incarnation of the Word. Cf.: Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 235. 103 ‘Stability’ and ‘movement’ were considered to be specifically part of the hypostasis (Abramowski and Goodman, ANestorianCollection,106, note 35). 104 Timothy I (Braun, Epistulae I [text], 159,1-13*; Heimgartner, Die Briefe 30-39 [text], 16,12-17,1*); TbK (LSII, 80,8-16*). 105 These words, attributed to Athanasius, IoM probably derived from Timothy I (Braun, EpistulaeI [text], 158,25-28**; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 16,6-8**; Bidawid, LesLettres, ¿Ù, 22-26**); TbK (LSII, 80,8-10*).

5

10

15

20

JOHN 1,14b

19

[1,14b] Hedweltinusit is said and not solely in him, because * this [16] is our own beginning. For he put on106 the whole nature and by this he dwelt in all of us. So he did not endure existence and transformation, ˹but he dwelt and stayed.107 5 Now108, one of the God-clad men109, labouring in prayer to find the meaning of this ‘theWordbecameflesh’, heard by revelation, that it was being said to him: ‘Give to ‘flesh’ this ‘itbecame’, (give) to ‘theWord’ ‘itdwelt’ and you shall find the strength of the Word. This (man) was, as they testify and hand down Qiyoré110, the monk. They also hand down 10 about this blessed one that when he was consecrating (host and wine) upon the altar, oil flowed out of the host. For it is also a custom of Scripture to mix meanings: Theygavehimwatertodrinkandtwocakesofraisins (1 Sam 30,11a-12) and: Theysawvoicesandtorches (Rev 4,5), and: He putitonhershoulderandthechild (Gen 21,14)111, and: Thewicked(man) 15 gavehisgraveandtherich(man)onhisdeath (Is 53,9)112. And (there is) much like this, that resembles this ‘theWord…...fleshetc.’ 106 The verb used here (ÿÃà / lebēš = to clothe oneself with, to take on, assume) is used more often by IoM as a description of the Incarnation. See: Vosté and Van Den Eynde, Commentaire I [text], 173,12-13; 215,25-26; Van Den Eynde, Commentaire II [text], 77,5; idem, Commentaire VI [text], 69,18-19. This terminology is also regularly to be found in other Syriac authors. (For ES: Beck, HymnendeNativitate [text], 105, hymne XXI,5; 116, hymne XXII,39; idem, Nachträge zu Ephraem Syrus, 23, sermo I, 205; Leloir, Commentaire, I,8; 6,23-24; for TM: HC, f 15v,20. 25-26; f 37r,4). 107 The verb üäï (‘ĕmar/to dwell, to inhabit, to stay, sojourn; see p. 16, note 89) is here explicitly cited as an equivalent for the verb èÅs (`ăgēn, aphel of the verb èÅ = to abide, rest upon, overshadow) used in John 1,14. This conception goes back to TM (C. 33,23-24*). Cf. also TbK (LS II, 159,24-25; 160,7-8**). For a comparison of these texts: Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 80). It is remarkable that the Syriac Palestinian lectionary (SyPal) in John 1,14 has a form of the verb üäï (Smith Lewis and Gibson, The PalestinianSyriacLectionary, u, 14) and that this verb is also frequently used by IoM (Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 206). 108 The following passage belongs to the ‘Tradition-Source’. For a closer examination of this passage: Hofstra, ‘Some remarkable passages’, 310-314; idem: ‘Questions and Answers’, 80 and Introd. Ch. 2.3.5. 109 For the expression ‘clothed with God’ (ÀÍà¾ćàÛþÚÃà): see p. 4, note 12. 110 In this person ‘Qiyoré’ one should probably think of one of the executives of the theological school of Nisibis. He was the predecessor of Narsaï, whose appointment is generally dated 437 A.D. For a description of the person of Qiyoré: Scher, Lacausede laFondation,382-383. 111 This Scripture-text cited by IoM as an example of zeugma, is often cited as such in his work, cf. Vosté and Van Den Eynde, Commentaire I [text], 162,25-26; idem, CommentaireIII [text], 70, 20-24. 112 IoM here cites the Peshiṭta (Syp), which here rather deviates from the usual reading. Several Syriac exegetes dealt with the explanation of these cryptical words. See: Bundy, ‘The Peshitta of Isaiah 53,9’, 32-45 and: idem, ‘Isaiah 53 in East and West’, 54-73; Molenberg,

20

[17]

JOHN 1,14b

˹And we ought to know that not one of the Apostles, not even Paul, nor John himself, nor anyone else ever used this appellation ‘theWord’ as a demonstration of the eternal birth of the Son except here only once.113 Here (it is) also (used) because of his becoming man, ˹which is like the word in the soul: with the soul and outside it; and it is not (so) that when it is outside it, it is also inside it.114 ˹And it is visible and it is free and puts on ink115 and it goes round on paper and it goes far away and has many effects while the soul does not go away from its nature — also the Son descended from beside his Father, not removing from him, and putting on flesh he accomplished his (divine) ministry116 without changing from himself. And in like manner if a man tears (a sheet of) paper into pieces and wipes out the ink, this (the word) * remains in freedom and being visible it is invisible — the characters on the one hand are visible, but this (the word) is only known in thoughts. And there are many such things in relation to the word. ˹In this way God did not suffer either by participating in the sufferings of man that he took on.117 And in like manner as this ‘Word’ is written with a reason — although it is not a name peculiar to him — so it is also with this ‘hebecameflesh’. It is an indication of the quality of the fact. ˹And if he became flesh by nature, this (word) ‘dwelt’, which he added would be superfluous. Or could ‘flesh’ have dwelled in ‘flesh’? That is impossible!118 Again all flesh is mortal and all that is mortal is flesh. And that is the definition of ‘flesh’. And if the Word became flesh by nature, then he also became mortal by nature. Far from it! This therefore ‘hebecameflesh’ is TheInterpreterinterpreted,185-190. Elsewhere IoM also goes into this verse in more detail (Van Den Eynde, Commentaire IV [text], 53,1-12). In his opinion a ‘reversal of terms’ is involved here and this verse should be read as follows in SyP: ‘The rich man (i.e. Joseph of Arimathea) gave his grave and the wicked (man) (i.e. Pilate) gave (Jesus’s body to Joseph to bury it) on his death’. 113 TM (C. 19,21-24*). 114 For this comparison, see p. 6, note 15; for this passage: TM (C. 21,15-21); TbK (LS II, 29,13-17). 115 TbK (LSII, 29,14-16*). 116 Translation of the Syriac ÀÎæüÂËã (mĕdabrānūtā). This word inter alia refers to the divine economy (οὶκονομίά) and so also to the life of Christ on earth and the mystery of the Incarnation (Th.Syr. I, c. 817-818). 117 For this opinion, see also IoM’s commentary on Gen 22 (Vosté and Van Den Eynde, Commentaire I [text], 172,8-9) and TM (HC, f 36r,13-15; C. 73,14-16). As is evident from a number of comments in the letters of Timothy I here IoM engages in a controversy against the views of the Arians and Cyrillus. Against the Arians: Bidawid, LesLettres, ¿ćà, 17-18; against Cyrillus: Bidawid, LesLettres, Çã, 12-14. 18-12. 118 TbK (LSII, 160,2-4*).

5

10

15

20

JOHN 1,14b-14c

21

like this ‘hebecameinthelikenessofman’ (Phil 2,7). For ‘he became’ (is) not by change of substance, nor by strength of creation. There are many expressions of ‘becoming’ concerning our Lord: Hebecamefromawoman,becameundertheLaw (Gal 4,4). 5 Hebecameinthelikenessofman (Phil 2,7). Hebecameacurseforus(Gal 3,13). Hebecameapriest (Heb 6,20). Hebecamethechiefcornerstoneofthebuilding (Eph 2,20). Hehasbecomethefirst-fruitsofthemthatsleep(indeath) (1 Cor 15,20). 10 Hehasbecomethemediatorofthenewcovenant (Heb 9,15). Hehasbecomebeforeme(John 1,15). And: Hewillbecometomeason(Heb 1,5).

15

20

25

30

TheWordbecameflesh. The definition of ‘to become’ is ‘to become’: a transformation from that which was not to that which was. And if he had said ‘body’, it would have been supposed that it was a ‘body’ he had sent down from heaven119 which had then been transformed to flesh. Again: a body is not spoken of without members. [1,14c] ˹And lest this ‘he became flesh’, i.e. he became man, should hinder his greatness from being revealed, he said: Andwesawhisglory, thegloryasoftheOnly-begottenoftheFather,fullofgraceandtruth. * The assumption of human nature did not hinder his greatness from [18] being revealed.120 And the veil of the flesh was not able to conceal the splendour ‘of his glory’. And the alteration and transformation could not prevent the Only-begotten and he that is equal in glory from being recognized. But even although he had put on flesh, his glory shone as the glory of the Only-begotten. And by the victorious deeds of his glory he made known about himself who he was, now however by being begotten (from the Father). And he calls to mind here all the words, deeds and marvels which took place from the beginning of his conception until his ascension and how it became known from the works that he was the Only-begotten and equal to the Father etc. ˹These (words) now: And we saw his glory as of the Only-begotten, not as if there is another Only-begotten. For he is incomparable. But it is 119 In Vetus Syra (Syc) the Greek σάρξ in verse 14 is rendered into ÁüÆò (păgrā/ body). This Vetus Syra reading is also to be found in Aphrahat, Ephrem, the Acts of Thomas, Addai, Titus of Bosra and Philoxenus of Mabbug. In Syp this reading had to make way for the more adequate rendering Áüê (bēsrā/flesh). Cf.: Baarda, EarlyTransmission,28-29, particularly note 44; 33-34. 120 TM (C. 34,22-25*).

22

[19]

JOHN 1,14c

similar to this: Asthyname,ohGod,sothygrace (Ps 48,11), and to this: Hewasfoundinappearanceasaman (Phil 2,8), and to this: Theyshall runasheroesandtheyshallascendlikemenofwarthecitywall (Joel 2,7) and to this: Theyarelikethosewhorejoiceetc. (Is 9,2) and (words) like these, in which there is no comparison with others. Therefore he does not compare the Son to any other ‘Only-begotten one’ either.121 Others (say): We saw his glory, namely of the flesh which he had assumed by his indwelling, without detracting in any sense from the ‘Only-begotten’ which dwelt in it. For we have not seen the invisible but the visible, while he gleamed — because of his being born (from the Father) — with the nature that was not visible, but dwelled in him. The former122 we know by the ‘kenosis’, the latter123 however by the fullness (produced) by the ‘kenosis’. Therefore it is not said about the substance of the Word ‘wesaw’, but about ‘the becoming of the Word’, i.e. about the becoming of his Temple124 and ˹about the unity of his own glory and its inhabitant.125 ˹Timothy says126: This‘theWordbecameflesh’etc. * is a clear representation of the humiliation of the Word, but this ‘Wesawhisglory’ etc. is an informative figure of the deification of our nature. ‘The Word-God’ became flesh by humiliation and became man. But the flesh of the Word became the Word by exaltation and was deified. Andwesawhisglory of his flesh, thegloryasoftheOnly-begottenfromtheFather. For, he says, one and the same glory and splendour appeared to us both in ‘the flesh’ of ‘the Word’ by his unity and in ‘the Word’ naturally.127 121 For the preceding passage: TM (C. 35,20-30). Also elsewhere IoM brings up the way in which Scripture speaks by comparison. Then he uses the same Scriptural references (Van Den Eynde, CommentaireVI [text], 174,19-175,1). See for this line of thought also: JC (Gr. text: PG59, h. 11, c. 82,3-8; Syr. text: Childers, CommentaryonJohnI,m. 12,2; 97,17-18*). 122 Namely, that we have not seen the Invisible. For ‘kenosis’ (¿ùÎé/sūrāgā): Phil 2,7. 123 Namely, that he, the visible One, gleamed with the nature that was invisible. 124 Cf. p. 16, note 90. 125 Cf. Timothy I (Bidawid, LesLettres, Õà, 18). 126 The following quotation of Timothy I is not to be found in his writings that have survived. IoM might have derived it from a christological passage of one of Timothy’s lost letters or from his book with ‘Questions’; see: Hofstra, Isho‘dadvanMerw, 139-140. The passage surely breathes Timothy’s style and way of argumentation (cf. Braun, EpistulaeI [text], 10,18-28). 127 Two passages in Timothy’s letters demonstrate a strong affinity with this passage: Braun, EpistulaeI [text], 242,4-5; 249,8-9; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 130,1-3; 139,19-20.

5

10

15

20

JOHN 1,14c-17

5

10

15

20

25

23

And he (the evangelist) said it (very) well with the addition, that ‘dalat’, that he placed before, i.e. ‘of’ the Only-begotten. For to the glory of the greatness of the Word, but not to the hypostasis of the Word nor to its substance the flesh was exalted. If now, instead of it, he had spoken without addition, he would be teaching us one nature and hypostasis of ‘the Word’ and of his ‘flesh’. But now, speaking with the addition, he made clearly manifest that in whatever hypostasis and substance he was, there was nevertheless no unity in hypostasis and substance unless in a (certain) way and in a (certain) quality etc. For ‘glory’ he calls the sonship and the deification and the divine works. [1,16a] ˹Andfromhisfullness (i.e.) of him who was received and was united with ‘the Word-God’128 and who received from the womb all riches of the grace of the Spirit, from him we have received a portion. And from it ‘the adoption as sons’ has derived to us129: If(weare)sons, it is said, thenalsoheirs,heirsofGod etc. (Rom 8,17). He, on the one hand, being united in sonship by nature, we on the other hand are made partakers by grace.130 [1,16b] ˹And Graceforgrace. Even the Law he calls ‘grace’131, while not by works the recipients have received it, but by the grace of the Giver. For it should not have been so, that after the natural Law had been despised, * the scriptural Law was ordained; the former remaining neglected in its [20] keeping and despised. It was given, however, on account of the Caretaker of the community and on account of goodness, even if he — because of evil-doers and in order that they may be vigilant — is compelled to mingle reproof with mercy.132 [1,17] ˹For the Law was given through Moses, but truth and grace became(i.e.came)throughJesusChrist. For he shows that although the Law was given by grace, yet it was a shadow and a type.133 ˹Our Law then 128 For ‘united with the ‘Word-God’, cf. two passages from Timothy’s letters (Braun, EpistulaeI [text], 231,17; 175,24; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 115,5-6; 39,810). 129 TM (C. 37,26-28; 38,1-5). 130 Timothy I (Braun, Epistulae I [text], 170,9-14; Heimgartner, Die Briefe 30-39 [text], 31,20-32,1; Bidawid, LesLettres, Ù, 15-20). 131 TM (C. 38,5-7**). 132 These thoughts about the natural and written Law are grafted onto the conceptions of TM (Bultmann, DieExegese, 86). Accordingly God here is represented as a mild, fatherly educator. Compare also: JC (Gr. text: PG 59, h. 14, c. 94,40-95,3; Syr. text: Childers, CommentaryonJohnI, m. 14,4; 118,26-119,5*). 133 TM (C. 38,9-12). IoM quotes John 1,17 in accordance with SyP. The most remarkable element in the text of SyP is the inversion of the order of the words ‘grace’ (χάρις)

24

[21]

JOHN 1,17-18

is the true body134, archetype and prototype.135 Therefore the former was given by the servant Moses, the latter by means of the Only-begotten Son, the Giver of both. [1,18] ˹TheOnly-begottenGod,hewhoisinthebosomofhisFather, hehastold (about Him). ‘TheOnly-begotten’ he calls him, because he is the Only One from the Only One, born alone and in a unique way. God (he calls him) however, because of the equality in substance, in will and in power etc. The ‘bosom’ because of the eternal conjunction and because of inseparability. For Scripture is accustomed by means of this ‘bosom’ regarding us, to indicate that which is united to us, on the grounds of that something we hold in our bosom is near to us and united to us, like this: Pay back to our neighbours sevenfold into their bosom (Ps 79,12), i.e. see to it that their disgrace does not depart from them.136 And how did he say: NomanhaseverseenGod? And behold:Moses usedtospeakwithhimfacetoface (Ex 33,11). And Isaiah (says): Isaw the Lord sitting on the throne etc. (Is 6,1) and other (places). However, these are resemblances and not the true nature. And it is known from the inequality of the visible things. For it is impossible, that hewhodwells inanunapproachablelight,whomnomanhasseeninthisworld,* nor shall see in the world to come (1 Tim 6,16), should be compared with changeable bodies. For if the light in which he dwells is invisible and incomprehensible, how much more he who dwells in the light? Here, however, (he says) ‘theOnly-begotten’hastold(abouthim) in the flesh that he took as (in the shape of) an interpreter. For he says ‘he hastold(abouthim)’and not ‘he was seen’.

and ‘truth’ (ἀλήθεια). This rendering, also to be found in Ephrem’s commentary on the Diatessaron (Leloir, Commentaire (Fol. Add.), V,8 ; 42,11-12), is not supported by any other Syriac Bible translation. It probably came into being as a result of the fact that first a text circulated containing only one of the two words. This text then was afterwards supplemented with the missing word from another stream of tradition. This word did not have a fixed position in the sentence, but could be placed before or after the old word (Baarda, TheGospelQuotations, 68-69). 134 With ‘our Law’ the Law of the new Covenant is meant and finally Jesus Christ. For the old Covenant as ‘shadow’ and the New Covenant as ‘the true body’, cf. TbK (LSII, 5,14-17). 135 IoM uses the indication ‘archetype’ for Christ quite often (Gibson, TheCommentariesII, 46,20-21) and so agrees with the usage that is to be found also in Timothy I (Bidawid, Les Lettres, Õà, 16-17) and IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 11 v,1112r.1). 136 TM (C. 39,6-13* and HC, f 16v,14. 17-19). For the same opinion in TbK, see: LS I, 58,2-12*.

5

10

15

20

25

JOHN 1,21-29

5

10

15

20

25

30

25

[1,21] ˹And it is asked why John, although being Elijah — Elijah and at the same time also a prophet as our Lord testifies about him (saying): Behold,Elijahhascomeandtheydidnotaccepthim (Mt 17,12) and Verily, Isayuntoyou,morethanaprophet (Mt 11,9) — he, when he was asked, answered, saying: I am not. Not Elijah, nor a prophet (John 1,21.25).137 ˹And we say what Moses said: aprophettheLordwillraiseupforyoulike me etc. (Deut 18,15). Although it has been said about Joshua, the son of Nun and the rest of the line of prophets, nevertheless the Jews were expecting someone different from the rest of the prophets. And higher and exalted above them all he would be and would be about to come138, like they, who were filled by the abundance of bread which the Lord made, also said: Truly,thisistheprophetwhoistocomeintotheworld (John 6,14). And concerning this John answered them: ‘No, I am not!’ I am not that prophet whom you are expecting’.139 [1,29] ˹These (words): BeholdthelambofGodwhotakesawaythesin oftheworld. ‘Lamb’ he called him, by a name that indicates his passion, because by his death he brought sin to an end.140 Just as also Moses in the Passover. And Isaiah in his story of his passion ˹called him ‘alamb’ and ‘a sheep’ (Is 53,7).141 These (words): Hesawhimcomingtowardshim. ˹According to some (he came) to be baptized by him.142 According to others (he came) to be witnessed by him: BeholdthelambofGod. ˹Mar Ephrem, demonstrating that the type possesses much resemblance to reality, says: Eliezer * who acquired Rebekah as a bride, showed [22] her Isaac when he was coming in the field to meet them; and John, who acquired the church as a bride, showed her to the bridegroom, her spouse, who came to her. At the well Eliezer acquired Rebekah as a bride. And at the well Jacob acquired Rachel as his bride. And at the well Moses acquired Zipporah as his bride and at the river John acquired the church as a bride.143 ˹For it is evident that he said this Behold,thelambofGod, 137

TM (C. 40,13-16). TM (C.41,18-20). 139 Cf. JC (Gr. text: PG 59, h. 16, c. 104,2-19; Syr. text: Childers Commentary on JohnI, m. 16,3; 134,22-27). 140 TM (C. 42,11-14**). 141 TM (C. 42,12-13; 43,9-16). 142 TM (C. 42,1). 143 ES (Leloir, Commentaire (Fol. Add.), III,17; 20,20-26**; Hofstra, Isho‘dad van Merw, 108-110). 138

26

[23]

JOHN 1,29-48

because they were expecting him. And from the time that he came he pointed him out as with his finger to those who came near.144 [1,45] ˹These (words): HimaboutwhomMoseswroteintheLawand theProphets. It is not so that Moses composed the Prophets, but this is a phrase that is mixed and involved145, like that: yourarrowsaresharp etc. (Ps 45,6) and: heputitonhershoulderandthechild (Gen 21,14). [1,40] ˹And one of them, who heard from John and followed Jesus, wasAndrew. And it is asked: ‘Who was the other?’ It was John, the son of thunder. He, however, concealed his name, because he was modest and not proud, and because he was the writer of this.146 [1,46] ˹About this: CananythinggoodcomeoutofNazareth? (This is said) because it was reviled and despised among the people. And also because it was inhabited by the Gentiles;147 and also (some of) the Gentiles were mixed with the Jews that dwelled in it. [1,47] ˹Behold a son of Israel in whom (there) is no deceit, because he was without hypocrisy he reproved Philip and revealed to him what was in his heart.148 [1,46] These (words): Can anything good come out of Nazareth? More than human love he honoured the truth. But what some imagine that Nathanael was accused of impure descent and that in this respect our Lord was justifying him, (by saying) that he was genuine etc. is tasteless. [1,48] These (words): OurLordsaidtohim— * showing that nothing is hidden from him —beforePhilipcalledyou,whenyouwereunder thefigtree,Isawyou. ˹They hand down149 that Nathanael — that is to say Bar Tolmi150 — was very well versed in the Scriptures, as is evident from the sharp answer to Philip and to our Lord. Now this man in his youth had committed a murder by himself and had buried (the body) under a fig-tree, without anyone seeing him. And our Lord seeking to let him know that he knew it, revealed to him the act he had committed. Without, however, specifying what he had done. First: because for the wise a hint is sufficient; second: that he might not be put to shame; third: so that no charges 144

TM (C.43,9-11*). TbK (LSII, 163,1-6**). 146 TM (C.49,12-19). 147 TM (C. 52,1-4). 148 TM (C.52,29-53,1). 149 The following passage belongs to the ‘Tradition Source’. For a description of this passage, see: Hofstra, ‘Some remarkable passages’, 314-321. See also: Introd. Ch. 2.3.5. 150 For this identification of Nathanael with Bar Tolmi, see: Hofstra, ‘Some remarkable passages’, 320-321. 145

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 1,28-2,1

27

would be brought against him; fourth: so that not everyone who heard that he was able to reveal secrets should approach him and come to him and become a disciple of his. [1,28] ˹These (words): These things took place in Bethany beyond 5 Jordan. It does not exist, for Bethany is close by Jerusalem and not near the (River) Jordan.151 From Bethany to the Jordan it is twelve miles and more. Therefore it is an error of the copyist. But (the passage) is preserved by being read thus: ‘These things took place in Bethany and beyond the Jordan. Or (like this): ‘These things took place in Beth-abara beyond the 10 Jordan’, because ‘Abara is an important place in the neighbourhood of Galilee and Gadara, as is evident moreover even from the Gospel of Mark, (where it says): AndfromEdomand‘Abara of(river)Jordan (Mk 3,8)152. And also: Hecameto‘AbaraoftheseatothecountryoftheGadarenes (Mk 5,1).153 15 [1,51] ˹These (words): Theangelsascendinganddescendinguponthe SonofMan as they were seen after his victory in the desert, in the passion and his resurrection and in etc.154 BOOK II [2,1] ˹AndonthethirddaytherewasaweddingfeastinQatne155 etc. 20 And we ought to know that all these things that the evangelist told above and also those that took place in Qatne *, were done in Galilee. For imme- [24] diately after his baptism he went thither and remained (there). But the things that (took place) in the contest with Satan happened later and not at the same time as his baptism.156 Therefore it is evident that these things 25 (which were said to have happened) in Bethany, (as a matter of fact) took place in Beth-abara and that it is an error of the copyist. ˹Andthemother ofJesuswasthereetc. 151 TM (PG 66/11, c. 733*) and IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 81r,2-6*). See also: JC (Gr. text: PG 59, h. 17, c. 107,45-49; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohnI, m. 17,1; 141,16-19*). 152 IoM here interprets the word ÁüÃï(`ēbrā = beyond) as the name of a place. 153 Sys.c read ÁüÃï ĀÚ (bēt ‘abārā) loco ¿Úçï ĀÚà(bbēt ‘anyā). TM, JC, and after them IbN and IoM, follow here Origen’s view in his ‘Commentary on John’ (Preuschen,DerJohannesKommentar, 149-150). For a description of this passage: Introd. Ch. 2.3.2. 154 TM (C.54,10-11. 29-30; 55,2). 155 Syp.h read ‘Qatnē’ instead of ‘Cana’. 156 TM (C.55,25-30).

28

[25]

JOHN 2,4-20

[2,4] These (words): WhathaveItodowithyou,woman?Myhour hasnotyetcome. If he pronounced them as a repudiation it gives quite another meaning157 than when he intended to pronounce them as an affirmation. ˹If repudiating her: ‘Why’, he said, ‘do you provoke me and entreat me?’158 Great are the things that you desire! ˹You need not plea for signs. Do not suppose that there are for me special times of knowledge and deeds, like Moses and the Prophets, who received power to do something corresponding to the need of the recipients.159 ˹My power is always with me, so that I can act when I want and how I want, even if the need of the recipients does not call for it.160 Therefore whether asked for or not, the time has already come in which I will make manifest to the eyes of everyone the splendour of the light of the nature that inhabits me and that shows that I am the Creator. However, (if he means it) as an affirmation, he says: ‘The time has not yet come in which it is right for me to do signs and to reveal by means of them the glory of my Godhead. For you look at deeds in a human way, I however, in a divine way. ˹Now this that until now our Lord had done no sign (cf. John 2,11), whence did his mother know that he was able to do them? From the things that took place when she conceived (him)161 and from the testimony of John.162 ˹Mar Ephrem says that she had heard from him that he would do a sign.163 ˹Therefore, when * she tried to persuade him that there was a lack of wine, he replied to her: WhathaveItodowithyou,woman? It is not proper for me to intrude myself upon them, but they all will perceive that the wine has run out and they will ask for drink, so that in their eyes the gift of God may grow.164 ˹And if not, (then) my hour has not yet come, i.e. but my hour will come’, he says.165 [2,20] ˹These (words): It took forty-six years to build this temple. It was not so that building needed all that time, but because the Gentiles round about them caused them to cease (work) and resisted them166 as 157

TM (C.56,13-15). TM (C.56,15). 159 TM (C.56,15-17); TbK (LSII, 163,6-9). 160 TM (C.56,15-24). 161 TbK (LSII,163,9-11**); JC (Gr. text: PG59, h. 21, c. 130,24-34; Syr. text: Childers, CommentaryonJohnI, m. 21,4; 181,88-1182,1*). 162 TM (C. 59,8-11. 12-15. 24; 60,5). 163 ES (Leloir, Commentaire,Fol.Add., V,2; 38,18*). 164 ES (Ibidem, V,1; 38,3-5*). 165 ES (Ibidem, V,2; 38,17*). 166 TM (C.64,4-5; 8-12**). 158

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 2,20-3,5

5

10

15

20

25

30

29

Josephus testifies.167 But they themselves were also negligent in building it, as Haggai the prophet reproaches them.168 ˹For this reason the building of it lasted all that long time.169 [2,23] ˹These (words): Many believed in him. Actually they did not. Otherwise why does he add: he,Jesus,didnottrusthimselftothem (John 2,24)?170 ˹Because he possessed exact knowledge and was convinced of them who were true disciples and of them who were doubting in their minds and (also) of them who came to him for the sake of form171, ˹who then said that they believed in him. These, because of some miracle they saw, praised him as an amazing and great man172, ˹just like Nicodemus173, that lover of the night, and others who for fear of the Jews did not come openly to him. [3,5] ˹These (words): UnlessoneisbornofwaterandSpirithecannotenterthekingdomofGod, i.e. in the same way as at the natural birth the womb is the place where (the child) that is to be born is formed — the divine power now forms him there according to the precept of the beginning — so it is here also: the water is to be understood in place of the womb, the Spirit, however, (as) in the position of the Lord and Creator. But see: * baptism is also said to be a sign of death and resurrection. [26] And because of this it is also called ‘new birth’. Just as he, who rises again after having died, is supposed to be created anew, so is he who is born in baptism; so someone is said to be born anew, having died at first in the water and thus rising from thence by the power of the Spirit.174 And it is asked: if justice rewards according to works and there are (people) who by good deeds are acceptable in the sight of God, are they deprived of the kingdom, because they were not bornofwaterandSpirit? And we answer: These words everyonewhohasnotbeenborn(ofwater andSpirit) have many meanings. But if there is no kingdom for anyone who has not been born (of water and Spirit), so then there is one for everyone who has been born (ofwaterandSpirit). And how (then are to be understood) these words: Manyarecalled,butfewchosen (Mt 22,14), or these: Thekingdomofheavenislikeanetthatwascast. (Mt 13,47), 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174

Flavius Josephus (Nodet, FlaviusJosèphe,86-88). Cf. Hag 1,2-11. TM (C.64,4-5. 10-11). TM (C. 64,13-14*. 23-24*) ; TbK (LSII, 163,11-14**). TM (C.64,28-65,2**). TM (C.64,18-21*). TM (C.65,4). TM (C. 67,6-7*; 67,22-68,3*).

30

[27]

JOHN 3,5-8

and: They sorted the good (fish) into vessels, but threw away the bad (Mt 13,48)? Therefore these words are not (meant) in a restrictive way. For see, many have triumphed in suffering and slaughter, without having received baptism. Even the robber was not baptized, but received the kingdom. But the word was spoken in this way: first, because of him to whom the word was (addressed). Afterwards, however, also because of the grace of the Spirit, the Perfecter of the kingdom, who brings home those who are baptized according to the mystery of the adoption as sons. But he is a stranger to those who are not baptized. Also (it is spoken) as if to frighten those who — without great necessity — despise the spiritual birth. [3,8] ˹These (words): Thewindblowswhereitpleases. Some take it in the meaning of ‘the wind in the air’.175 They say that out of this common element he instructs * about this divine (element) that makes himself believed. ˹And this: It blows where it pleases, because the speed of its course is not hindered by anything.176 These (words): Youdonotknowwhereitcomesfromandwhereit isgoing, i.e. the place is not known from which it begins and where it gathers. If this wind of the air cannot be grasped by you, while being itself a body, and you receive the sensation of its breeze (only) by contact and hearing, how (then) can you trace out the operation of the Spirit of God? ˹Now, just as the wind is invisible — although it gives out a sound — thus also the birth of the Spirit is invisible to these bodily eyes.177 ˹The Interpreter, however, and others take it as referring to the Holy Spirit. They say: they do not understand that the air has no will — so that it blows wheresoever it wills — because it is moved by a rushing stream of blowings. And not even these (words):Youdonotknowwhere itcomesfromandwhereitisgoing(refer to the air),178 ˹because we are all persuaded of the air through its blowings. And sometimes we say that it blows from this direction and sometimes from another. But it is clear that it is said about the Holy Spirit179, for nobody knows or even understands 175

TM (C.69,18-20); TbK (LSII, 158,18-20*). JC (Gr. text: PG59, h. 26, c. 154,45-52; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohn I, m. 26,3; 225,28-226,1*). 177 JC (Gr. text: PG 59, h. 26, c. 155,15-18; Syr. text: Childers, Commentary on John I, m. 26,4; 226,20-23**). 178 TM (C.69,19-22); TbK (LSII, 158,19-22). 179 TbK (LSII, 158,21-25**). 176

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 3,8-13

5

10

15

20

25

30

31

where he comes from and whither he goes, because he is infinite, being also God. ˹For he does not come where he is not, because he is in all. And: (Youdo) not(know)whereitisgoing, because he is not changing, but he goes where he is and he comes where he is and he fills all.180 For it is said: He,theSpiritoftheLordfillstheearth (Wisdom 1,7). ˹However these words: Youhearitssound (John 3,8), he (Jesus) speaks about the sensation that those receive who are esteemed worthy to participate in it, as is said about what the Apostles received. Asound, it is said,likeaviolentwind (Acts 2,2)181. He calls the sensation a sound. [3,12] ˹IfIhavespokentoyouofwhatisonearthand* youdonot [28] believe,howifIspeaketc. ‘Whatisonearth’refers to the mystery of baptism and resurrection182 or the birth from a virgin. For in Isaiah he had spoken to them about this ‘whatisinheaven’: ˹(namely) about the eternal birth from the Father183, that he is born naturally beyond time. Immediately, however, giddiness seized the hearers and it was thought: Had he ascended to heaven and had he seen or heard these things? And had he then come down to teach? And if not: where has this (man) got these things from, that he even treats heavenly things presumptuously? Jesus, however, as if seeing reinsandhearts (Ps 7,9) rejects the thoughts of this (person), but builds up his own. [3,13] ˹Nomanhasascendedtoheaven,buthewhoascended etc.184 ‘I have told you these things’, he said, and in truth I said (these things), because I did not receive (them) from others. But I am master of their mystery and Lord of their knowledge, i.e. the mystery of these things and their Lord and the One who knows them. Nomanhasascendedtoheaven,buttheSonofMan,who…. And although this (word) ‘hasascended’ is said of that Temple by nature, because of removal from place, yet this (word) ‘hedescended’ (is said) of the Word, because of the humiliation without removal. However, these two things are said about both of them, ˹because of the unity that was (there) from the first movement of the reception of that holy matter in the 180

Cf. TM (C.68,29-69,6). TbK (LSII, 158,25-28*). 182 TM (C. 70,26-29); TbK (LSII, 163,14-15*). 183 TM (C. 70,30); TbK (LSII, 163,15-16*). 184 The following passage is in large part derived from IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 88r,9-90r,8*. For a comparison of both texts, see: Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 8186. See also: Introd. Ch. 2.3.2. 181

32

[29]

JOHN 3,13

womb.185 For that is the definition and the unity that the God-clad men call the connection of two things — separated in nature and hypostases — into one something. And they give names and deeds to each other, in the retention of the natures and the hypostases and in the preservation of the fixed qualities of each of them. In this section (of the Scriptures) now he is called ‘theSonofManthatdescendedfromheaven’, on account of the Word — who is in heaven and in all — who took him. And the Word is called earthly. And he ascended, * because of his earthly Temple which ascended as if by removal. Now this, that he added: the Son of Man who is in heaven186, this ‘Son of Man’ is common for ‘the Son of Man’ by nature, as well as for ‘the Word’ in the Incarnation. However, he is in heaven in his manhood because of his Godhead. About one Son and Lord and Person we must not say that half of him is in heaven and half of him is on earth. But just as now — while the Manhood of our Lord is completely in heaven — we say about him that he is on earth and in the Church because of his Godhead, so also when he was on earth in his Manhood, it was said that he was in heaven because of his Godhead. And according to this ‘theoria’187 the Apostle said: hethatdescendedisthesamealsothatascended (Eph 4,10a). God the Word therefore came down by the humiliation of the Incarnation and not by transition of substance, for he is infinite. But because of this unity it is also said ‘and the Son of Man that descended’, on account of

185 See for this opinion also Timothy I (Braun, EpistulaeI [text], 211,11-13*; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 88,4-6*). 186 The phrase ‘whoisinheaven’is much disputed. It is found in the majority of New Testament textual witnesses, but omitted in a few very early and important textual witnesses (Baarda, TheGospelQuotations, 88; and: Idem, ‘Tatian’s Diatessaron and the Greek Text of the Gospels’, 344, note 52). IoM’s text is in accordance with Syp.h (See for a survey, Kiraz, ComparativeEdition,vol. IV, 37). These words lay greater emphasis on the problem which was present in the same text for East Syrian exegetes. For the text seems to say that the ‘Son of Man’ was in heaven and that he descended to earth. According to the view prevailing in the East Syrian church, however, it was the ‘Word-God’ that was in heaven, which had descended and become man. IbN, and with him IoM, solves this problem by emphasizing the unity of the divine and human in the Son. 187 The idea of ‘theoria’ is often found in the ‘Questions and Answers’ of IbN. In her treatise on IbN’s Old Testament questions and answers Molenberg defines the notion of ‘theoria’ as follows: ‘Theoria is the knowledge of a reality beyond the historical reality, which from eternity has been established by God, and its economy, which knowledge can be obtained by spiritual discernment of the historical reality that is expressed in the biblical text. This reality beyond has one or more aspects in common with the historical reality, which facilitate this discernment’ (Molenberg, TheInterpreterinterpreted, 364).

5

10

15

20

JOHN 3,13-16

5

10

15

20

25

30

33

the One who took him. And how amazing! It is said that ‘the Son of Man who descended from heaven’, who is with the One who took him, is one Son eternally, whereas it is written too about the bread that is in the Church, that ‘it is sent down from our Saviour’. (It is said:) Iamthe bread,whichcamedownfromheaven.(John 6,41). In like manner also about this it is written: ‘a descent from heaven’. Others (say): He said this (word) ‘he ascended’ instead of ‘he will ascend’ according to Scriptural custom to speak about what was to come, as if it had already been. Like this: He brought us up and made us sit withhiminheaveninJesusChrist (Eph 2,6); and: Ourcitizenshipisin heaven (Phil 3,20), i.e. that which is after the resurrection. ˹Again: this is a custom of the Saviour. At times he speaks on the one hand from his Godhead, like this: IandtheFatherareone (John 10,30) and: Whohasseenme,* hasseentheFather(John 14,9). Then again, [30] on the other hand, (He speaks) from the person of his manhood188 like this: Beholdmyhandsandmyfeet,thatitisImyself (Lk 24,39); and: Howisitthatyouseektokillme,amanthattoldthetruthamongyou? (John 8,40). And then again (he speaks) from the person of the undivided sonship, like this:IascendtomyFatherandyourFatherandtomyGod andyourGod’(John 20,17); and like this:Nomanascended etc. While this ‘heascended’ and this ‘hedescended’ and this ‘SonofMan’ are said from the person of the unity. [3,14] ˹AndjustasMosesliftedupthesnakeinthedesert,sowillbe etc. Let not the cross terrify you at all, he says, nor make you doubt about the things that have been spoken. For just as that snake was made of bronze and not alive — for the power of God saved those who looked at it — so this One who lives forever will, although bearing the suffering of the cross, yet on account of that divine power that dwells in him, grant those who believe in him eternal life.189 And not only bodies does he heal from the wounds of fiery serpents, but he also cleanses souls and bodies together from the bitterness of all that death brings. [3,16] ˹These (words): Godsolovedtheworldthat(hegave)hisSon etc. What now, did the Godhead suffer? Far from it!190 And how is it said that the Only-begotten is delivered up on behalf of each (John 3,16)? 188 JC (Gr. text: PG 59, h. 27, c. 158,36-38; Syr. text: Childers, Commentary on John I, m. 27,2; 233,6-8*). 189 TM (C. 72,20-73,5*); cf. TbK (LSI, 167,10-24). 190 TM (C. 73,6); TbK (LSII, 163,16-18*). TbK ascribes this view to the Interpreter.

34

[31]

JOHN 3,16-25

Because the ‘Only-begotten’ is a general name of ‘the Word’. I also say ‘Temple’ in the same way (as I say) ‘Son’, ‘Lord’, ‘Saviour’ and ‘Lord of glory’. Thus also the name ‘Only-begotten’ is general because of the unity. Thus Christ is on the one hand in divinity the ‘Only-begotten’, on the other hand in manhood the ‘Only-begotten’ and ‘first-born’. The 5 ‘Only-begotten’ like the vestment of the Word as in the birth from the Virgin, for he was without brothers. * ‘First-born, however, as the last Adam and as the beginning and the first(-born) out of the dead. Another (one) in nature in this ‘Only-begotten’ and another (one in nature) in this ‘first-born’; yet the Same was one in person because of unity. The 10 Same, capable of suffering and incapable of suffering. Now, it is not proper to the Word to suffer, but to the Temple. Destroy, he said, this temple,andinthreedaysIwillraiseitup(John 2,19). Behold, what will be destroyed and behold, he who will raise up, are different. ˹Although it is proper to his manhood that he suffered, yet the whole affair is taken 15 as relating to God.191 This vestment, the humanity that suffered, was his own. And therefore he is able to give eternal life. ˹And it is like this: Iftheyhadknownit,theywouldnothavecrucifiedtheLordofglory (1 Cor 2,8).192

BOOK III

20

[3,25] ˹These (words): AnargumentdevelopedbetweenoneofJohn’s disciplesandacertainJewaboutpurification. ‘An argument’ he says, and not ‘strife’. ‘Purification’ he calls baptism.193 ˹While the Jew, on the one hand, was giving praise to the different kinds of baptism according to the Law, he was, however, exalting the baptism of his rabbi. And from 25 this investigation they came near to the baptism with which our Lord was baptizing. And because both of them agreed that this baptism by the disciples in the name of the Lord was not necessary, they came in their envy to John to tempt him194 (to jealousy), as if his own honour should dimin30 ish by the magnificence that was with our Saviour.

191 192 193 194

TM TM TM TM

(C. (C. (C. (C.

73,15-19*); TbK (LSII, 163,19-20*). 73,33-34*); TbK (LSII, 163,22-24*). 76,14-16. 19-21*). 76,24-30*).

JOHN 3,33-4,4

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

[3,33] Now these (words): He who has accepted his testimony, has certified that God is truthful, i.e. he who believes what was spoken by him, he knows that this agrees with the truth of God.195 Others (say): has certifiedthatGodistruthfulmeans that he in his time has manifested in the Messiah the promises and the prophecies that gave birth to the Messiah. Therefore: * ˹he who does not believe in Christ makes God a [32] liar196, in that he does not fulfil those things he promised, namely the testimonies about the Messiah in the Scriptures. [3,34] ˹These (words): ItisnotbymeasurethatGodgiveshisSpirit. John seeks to make manifest by this the greatness of Christ and his sublimity above all prophets. And those on the one hand received (the Spirit) partly to a small degree; the Christ, however, wholly and not in moderation like them.197 And it is also like this: In him the whole fullness of deitydwellsbodily(Col 2,9) and like this: Andfromhisfullnesswehave allreceived(John 1,16). [4,2] ˹These (words): Jesus himself did not baptize. What (kind of) baptism? Not one that gave the Spirit, for the Spirit had not yet been given, because Jesus had not yet been glorified.198 And not (a baptism) that (was) in the Father, the Son and the Spirit, because the sacrament was not yet known, but (it was a baptism) in the name of the Christ for the forgiveness of sins. ˹It was then said about someone that had been baptized: such person has been baptized for the forgiveness of sins.199 Others say: ‘In the name of God, who sent the Christ for the salvation of the world, we baptize you to the discipleship of Christ in whom we believe.’ Some say: ‘This baptism was not different from John’s. For in both of them the Christ was preached and they brought those who were baptized home to our Lord’. [4,4] ˹These (words): He was impelled to pass by Samaria. (This is remarkable:) ForJewsdonotassociatewithSamaritans (John 4,9b). He passed through on his way (to Jerusalem) in order to do (in Samaria) what had to be (done) there, and not because he readily made his journey thither. He was not out to give them (the Jews) cause to murmur.200

195 196 197 198 199 200

TM (C. 82,30-83,4); TbK (LSII, 158,4-9). TM (C. 83,8); JC (PG59, h. 30, c. 173,45-48). TM (C. 83,15-19). TbK (LSII, 155,6. 10-13**). TbK (LSII, 155,11-13*). TM (C. 85,17-18. 23-26).

36

[33]

JOHN 4,5-4,18

[4,5] ˹And he came to a city of Samaria, called Sychar201, ˹this is Shechem as Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban202 said. ˹Spring he calls the well, because it springs up * with much water that is in it.203 [4,8] ˹Now our Lord did not enter the city withthedisciples,forthey hadgone(intothecity)tobuyfood, because he was seeking to hunt for prey at the well, namely that woman204 ˹and not to give the Jews an argument to murmur because of contact with Gentiles, as he also had commanded: DonotenteranycityoftheSamaritans (Mt 10,5b). And that these might not be deprived of his mercy that sprinkles upon all, he wisely did those two things, namely by his teaching to the woman. For he did not go to them, but they went out to him, as to a traveller, and consequently the Jews were not able to accuse him.205 [4,18] ˹These (words): Youhavehadfivehusbandsetc.206 The Interpreter says: ‘it is evident that she was not living a chaste life’.207 ˹And it seemed that the man she had, had not been taken legally by her and because of this she said: I have no husband (John 4,17). And also the five who took her (to wife), it is likely that they had her not in succession and not in public. And this is evident from the fact that the woman was amazed, that he, being a stranger, proclaimed before every one, what had been concealed from all citizens.208 ˹Mar Ephrem says that these five husbands, whom she had taken, had died one after the other. And she was supposed to be a ‘man-killer’, as Tamar was supposed to have been by Judah who held back Shelah from intercourse with her. And because widowhood was a disgrace, she was very cunning and took one to whom she was an ornament, since he did not approach her, save only to be called her husband, ˹but only so that her disgrace would pass.209 201

TM (C. 86,4-5). Author († 566/567), as a teacher attached to ‘the School of Nisibis’, at the same time as his relative Abraham of beth Rabban, who was head of this school (Baumstark, Geschichte, 115-116; Van Rompay, ‘Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban’, 441). ‘The Chronicle of Séert’ mentions him as author of a book with ‘Questions’ (Scher, HistoireNestorienne,t. 7, 116). This remark is supported by ‘Abdisho’s catalogue, stating it was about questions regarding the Old and New Testament (Assemanus, BOIII,1, 72). Cf. Introd. Ch. 2.2.1 sub D. 203 TM (C. 86,9-10*). 204 ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XII,16; 88,19; 90,1-2). 205 Cf. TM (C. 85,24-86,4). 206 For a closer examination of the following passage and a comparison with the text of TM, IbN and ES: Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 86-89. See also: Introd. Ch. 2.3.2. 207 TM (C. 90,4-5*); IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 90r.8-14*). 208 TM (C. 90,5-12*). 209 ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XII,19, 92,13-20*); IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f. 90r,4-90v,11*). 202

5

10

15

20

25

JOHN 4,22-4,35

5

10

15

20

37

[4,22] ˹He did not say: Salvation is through the Jews, but from the Jews, because fromthemwastheChristintheflesh(Rom 9,5), the salvation and redemption of all210, like this: thatitisevident* thatourLord [34] descendedfromtheJews (Heb 7,14). [4,24] ˹These (words): Godnowisspiritandthosewhoworshiphim etc.211 This is as follows: he is incorporeal and infinite and not confined to a place, but everywhere and in every place it is fitting to worship him and pray to him.212 ˹So little by little he made himself known to the Samaritan woman. First as a thirsty man and then as a Jew, then as a prophet and then as the Christ. Escorting her step by step he placed her on the highest step. At first she saw him as a thirsty man and then as a Jew and then as a prophet and then as God. Also she was convinced that he was a thirsty man and as a Jew she loathed him and put her questions to him as one who knew and she was corrected as by a prophet and she worshipped him as the Christ.213 [4,42] ˹Now, when the Samaritans came out to him and saw the miracles and revelations greater than those of that woman, they eliminated for him and for them the cause for reproach on the part of the Jews, that they should say ‘the foundation of your faith was based upon the revelation of the adulteress’. And for this reason they said to her: Wedonotbelieve inhimbecauseofyourword,forwehaveheardforourselveshisteachingandwecametoknowandhaveseenhismightyacts,thatheisthe trueChrist. And therefore it is also right that our knowledge is the foundation of our faith.214

BOOK IV

25

[4,34] These (words): Andtoaccomplishhiswork, i.e. the conversion of man.215 [4,35] ˹These (words): Seehowthefieldsarealreadywhiteandready forharvest, indicate the procession of the Samaritans who came from the 30 city to him and their conversion.216 210 211 212 213 214 215 216

TM (C. 91,7-9*). TM (C. 91,14-15*). TM (C. 91,18-21*). ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XII,18; 92,7-12*). ES (Ibidem, XII,19, 92,23-94,5*). TM (C. 93,30-94,1). TM (C. 94,10-11*. 16-17).

38

[35]

JOHN 4,35-5,2

˹These (words): Sowerandreaper. He calls himself ‘sower’, because he began preaching and teaching. Reapers (he calls) the Apostles, who made a beginning because of him. And so in the likeness of fruits they brought men to God.217 [4,37] ˹These (words): Inthis* thesayingistruethatonesowsand another reaps218, ˹i.e. also in this the truth of grace — it is said — is revealed to a greater extent, inasmuch as by means of the seed sown by me, I have given you all this very power that you may be able from me to bring many (people) to faith and make them grow (in it).219 [4,38] ˹These (words): Othershavelaboured, those are the prophets, i.e. because the tillage is mine and also I have fittingly sent you to reap and to enjoy the labours of others; for they have laboured much that the seed of piety towards God might remain. And you, come and gather from these harvests men together to piety towards God.220 ˹For he made manifest by means of these things, that it was he himself who also then gave that beginning through the prophets.221 [5,2] ˹These (words): HecametoaplacecalledBethChesdaandinit there were five porticoes. This pool was not according to (Jewish) Law, but it was a kind of fountain in which sacrifices were washed clean of blood and filthiness and the remains of the inside of sheep etc.222 ‘Pool’, it was called because they plunged into it and were cleansed of sicknesses after the moving of the water. ‘Beth Chesda’ now it was called.223 First, because it received these sick and disabled people, it means ‘house of shame’, like this: ThereproachofthosewhoreproachYouhasfallen on me (Ps 69,9), i.e. the shame. Second: Beth Chesda, means ‘house of mercy’, like this (word) of Jeremiah: ThecompassionoftheLorddoesnot failandhasnoend (Lam 3,22), i.e. his mercy, on account of the mercy that was in that place for the sick people. ˹Fiveporticoes: four round about and one above the fountain.224 The angel who stirred up the water was Michael, the ruler of the nation. It 217

TM (C. 94,18-23*). TM (C. 94,19-20*). 219 TM (C. 95,2-5*). 220 TM (C. 95,9*. 14-19*). 221 TM (C. 95,14-15*). 222 TM (C. 98,15-17*. 21-22). 223 In the following section IoM points out that the Syriac word ÁËêÐ(ḥesdā) has two very different meanings, namely ‘reproach, disgrace’ (e.g. Ps 69,9; Lk 1,25; Rom 15,3) and ‘compassion, pity, mercy’ (e.g. Gen 39,21; Lam 3,22). 224 TM (C. 98,17-18). 218

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 5,2-8

5

10

15

20

25

30

39

was * God who provided healing by the water, in which sacrifices were washed. And it was at a place far away from the temple and the Holy of Holies, so that Gentiles when they saw this deed, that there was relief from the washing of the sacrifices alone, (should think) how much more from the sacrifices themselves? And how much more abundant in the temple and in the Holy of Holies? That from this place they also might be enlightened and believe how strong the power of God was and how concerned he was about these things. [5,4] Now these (words): Now and then. There was no known fixed time for the movement and disturbance of the water. For if a cure was always available, it would naturally have been supposed that it (the pool) possessed magical power and that the healing did not take place by means of divine providence. At the same time, however, ˹(there was no known fixed time) lest the easiness and thoughtlessness with which the healing (then) was given, might decrease and diminish the greatness of the miracle.225 But he whoever descended first was made whole, so that grace might be the more magnified and glorified and encourage and exhort them the more to be thankful for the gift also after the healing. [5,6] ˹Although he was certain that every sick person desires ardently to be delivered from pain, yet he asked him: Doyouwanttobehealed?226 First: that it would not be supposed that he did the miracle just to show off his ability. Second: in order to awaken the desire of the sick man, like a doctor does, and to incite ˹him — whose hope was cut off — to wait for healing.227 ˹For at once and by a word only, he heals the paralytic228 and others, so that he himself might be confessed as the Creator who by a word had established everything from ‘inthebeginning’. But now he puts straight by power and by a word the works (of the Creation) that had deteriorated in the long run. [5,8] ˹He now commanded him totakeuphisbed, that it might not be supposed that the deed was a fantasy, but was seen as true because of the work. * In the same way, when raising up a dead person, he commanded that he229 be given something to eat (Mk 5,43) and also, when multiplying 225

TM (C. 98,26-99,1). TM (C. 99,12-15). 227 TM (C. 99,6-7). 228 TM (C. 99,10-11). Ÿ 229 One would expect the reading Íà(to her), but all the MSS read Íà (to him) and so does the Syriac translation of JC (Syr. text: Childers, CommentaryonJohnI,m. 37,3; 262,14). Only Gibson reads the pron. fem. (Gibson, TheCommentariesIII, 138,7). 226

[36]

[37]

40

[38]

JOHN 5,8-15

the bread, the baskets with the remaining bread were carried by the disciples in one and the same number (as they were).230 So he also commanded the paralytic ‘to take up his bed’, for the confirmation of what happened and for the revelation of the sign and the effect of the sign. For, on the one hand, the paralysis of this man is the mystery of our whole nature and it represents its fall symbolically. On the other hand, this about ‘the bed’ is the mystery of the torture of our nature by sinful passions and it is agreeable to it to be torn away from them. [5,5] Thirty-eight years is the mystery of the long time and the long duration, in which he was lying in his sins and was polluted by them. Now that he was healed by a word is the mystery of the salvation and deliverance which he received through Christ. [5,15] ˹John231 now praised him, this paralytic, saying that he went out and because of the greatness of his faith made known: ‘itwasJesuswho healedme’, not wanting the miracle of his healing to remain concealed, as if he were ungrateful.232 ˹But the Interpreter says that he was acting in this way owing to his wickedness and hypocrisy and in order to try to please men and as if he were zealous for the Law that his healer had broken. For he saw the adversaries, who were raging with fury and eager for revenge, because of the transgression of the Sabbath. And what kind of necessity was there — seeing these things — to go and make clear to the haters that it was Jesus. He betrayed, however, his healer and became an accuser instead of a rewarder and did so without necessity.233 And he did not act like the man who was blind from his mother’s womb, who defended his healer and got into a heavy struggle and conflict for his sake. And he was reviled and cast out of the synagogue because of his goodwill and at last he believed in Jesus, that he was the Son of God. And he fell down and worshipped him. This paralytic, however, was of inferior origin (and) an inciter and instigator * to his murder more than anyone else. For it was he who gave him the 230 JC (Gr. text: PG59, h. 37, c. 208,28-38. 49-54; Syr. text: Childers,Commentary onJohnI, m. 37,3; 261,21-22; 262,2-4. 13-14*). 231 i.e. John Chrysostom. Cf. Introd. Ch. 2.2.2, sub A. 2. 232 JC (Gr. text : PG59, h. 37, c. 209,22-51; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohn I, m. 37,4; 263,2-3. 15-17; 264,6-7*); Malingrey, Sur l’Égalité, 338,269-271; 342,323324. 233 TM (C. 102,6-7. 15-16. 23-24). For that matter TM states JC’s opinion without mentioning his name (C. 101,19-24) and likewise JC the opinion of TM (Gr. text: PG59, h. 38, c. 212,48-51; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohnI, m. 38,2; 271,2-3; 38,3; 272,19-27).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 5,15-17

5

10

15

20

25

30

41

slap in the court-house.234 And therefore our Lord prophesied about him: Stop sinning (John 5,24). But what thing happened that was worse than that before?235 Now first, only his feet were paralysed; but after he gave our Lord a slap, his hands shrivelled up, his eyes became blind and he became paralysed in his feet. And henceforward he received the torture that had been kept for him in hell. [5,13] ˹These (words): OurLordconcealedhimselfinthemidstofthe multitude, lest they should think that he was a show-off and vainglorious, doing everything out of love for himself.236 Behold the cruelty of the Jews, for they did not reproach the pool of Siloach for working a sign on the Sabbath237, ˹but they accused Jesus as a transgressor of the Law.238 [5,17] And therefore our Lord said: MyFatherisworkingstilland alsoIamworking. I make my defence, he says, in the nearness of that (pool) which has broken the Sabbath and not from things that are far away. I have an advocate: the pool that is with you. This (pool) has broken the Sabbath before I did so. It did not cry by (means of) the angel: ‘Why do you desire from me a deed on the Sabbath? Why do you move me to a (deed) of healing that transgresses the Law? It was not me that healed the sick people on the Sabbath, but it (the pool) was obedient to the angel moving (it) and fulfilled God’s command. For the healing that took place by means of it came from the Father. Should he therefore be rebuked by you as a Sabbath-breaker? Or should I, who am blameless as he is? ˹For do I allow the sun to go round and the winds to blow, the flowing of the rivers, (and do I allow) the curbing of the seas, the descent of the rain, the bringing forth of fruits, the birth as well as the growth of men and the guidance of all living creatures in all? These things are accomplished by means * of the angels according to his will.239 And these [39] things happen on the feast days and on the Sabbath and perpetually. I also have unlimited power to work on the Sabbath like the Father. For the lawgiver has power to break the laws.

234

Cf. John 18,22. See for this passage: Introd. Ch. 2.2.2, sub A. 2. TM (C. 101,10-11). 236 TM (C. 100,27-29). 237 Cf. John 9,7. 238 TM (C. 103,1-2). 239 ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XIII,4; 102,17-23); TM (C. 103,3-13) and JC (Gr. text : PG59, h. 38, c. 214,63-215,4; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohnI, m. 38,4; 274,25; 38,5; 274,24-26*). 235

42

JOHN 5,19

BOOK V [5,19] ˹TheSoncandonothingofhisownaccord. This ‘He cannot...’ is used in many ways in the Scriptures as well as in the world.240 ˹First: in the meaning of ‘He cannot at all’241, ˹like: Hecannotdisown himself (2 Tim 2,13) and: By two unchangeable things in which it is impossibleforGodtolie (Heb 6,18)242 ˹or for God to become evil.243 ˹Or that twice two should be four as well as fourteen.244 ˹Second: in the meaning of weakness, like this: Itisimpossibleforthe bloodofbullsandgoatstomakeatonementetc. (Heb 10,4).245 ˹Third: in the meaning of it not being proper246, ˹like these words: Thewedding-guestscannotfastaslongasthebridegroomiswiththem (Mk 2,19).247 ˹Fourth: in the meaning that there is no desire, like this: He could notdomanymightyworksthere,becauseoftheirunbelief(Mt 13,58).248 ˹And Jeremiah says: TheLordcannotagainforgivethemallbecauseof theirtransgressions (Jer 18,23).249 ˹Fifth: in the meaning that it is impossible by nature, but that it is possible by God, when he wishes, like this: He himself cannot be born a secondtime(John 3,4) and: Acamelcannotgothroughtheeyeofaneedle (Mt 19,24).250 ˹Sixth: in the meaning of a large amount, like this: Acitybuiltona mountaincannotbehidden(Mt 5,14). Perhaps it might be hidden if something bigger were put in front of it.251 240 TM (C. 108,29-109,1; 109,26-27); TbK (LSII, 155,14-16*); Gregory of Nazianzus (GN), [Haelewyck, SanctiGregoriiNazianzeniOpera.VersioSyriacaIV:Oratio XXX,10, 248,1-4*; 250,5-6 (versio antiqua)*, 249,1-5*; 251,1 (versio nova)*]; JC (Gr. text: PG59, h. 38, c. 216,18-20; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohnI, m. 38,6; 276,27-277,1). Cf. for this passage: Introd. Ch. 2.2.2, sub A. 3. 241 GN (Oratio XXX,11, 252,41-42(a)*; 253,42-43(n)*. 242 TM (C. 110,1-4*); TbK (LSII, 155,20-22*) and JC (Gr. text: PG59, h. 38, c. 216,5558. 62-63; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohnI, m. 38,7; 278,1-3. 5*). 243 GN (Oratio XXX,11, 254,3-4(a)**; 255,3-4(n)**); JC (Gr. text: PG59, h. 38, c. 216,6263 ; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohnI, m. 38,7; 278,5). 244 GN (Oratio XXX,11, 254,7-8(a)**; 255,7-8(n)**). 245 TM (C. 109,28-110,1*); TbK (LSII, 155,17-18*). 246 TM (C. 110,4). 247 GN (Oratio XXX,10, 250,14-17(a)*; 251,15-17(n)*); TbK (LSII, 155,20**; 156,1-2**). 248 GN (Oratio XXX,10, 250,21-23(a)**; 251,22-25(n)**). 249 TM (C. 110,1). 250 GN (Oratio XXX,10, 252,35-40(a)**; 253,36-42(n)**). 251 GN (Oratio XXX,10, 250,11-14(a)**; 251,11-15(n)**).

5

10

15

20

JOHN 5,19

5

10

15

20

25

30

43

˹Seventh: in the meaning of a certain deficiency of strength, at a particular moment and in relation to something, like this: ‘A child is not able to fight’, * or ‘a puppy to see’ or ‘to fight against somebody’. In the future [40] it (the puppy) will fight. Sometime it will see and fight against somebody, even if it cannot (fight) against others.252 ˹However, this ‘theSoncannot’, is written in the meaning of ‘entirely not’, because of the equality with the Father. For he is inseparable from him253 ˹and in natural connection with him.254 And in the same manner if someone should say that the radiance of the perceptible sun cannot shine by itself. Not that it could not, but without the heavenly body it cannot shine. Also the mind cannot do anything without the soul, nor the soul without the mind or the heat without the fire. ˹Likewise the Son cannot do anything without the Father, nor the Father without the Son.255 For they are one and their natural activity is necessarily one and the same. And the same is also the essence256. And wherever identity of essence is, there is also necessarily identity of activity. ˹But here the heretics make trouble, saying that he confines this to himself, that theSoncandonothingofhisownaccord. And they ask: Can men do anything of their own accord or not? If they cannot, they are not evil and not good. Nor should Peter be praised, nor need Judas be blamed. But if it is impiety to think so, how is it — when men have the power to do something of their own accord — that only our Lord could do nothing of his own accord and could not even break the Sabbath by his (own) will? Then also Satan is not as he is of his own accord and our Lord would not be of good will towards his Father. But it is evident * that he said this about the natural [41] unity that the Word has with his Father. And this is known on account of what he added: ButonlywhatheseestheFatherdoing, and: Thesethings theFatherdoes,theSonalsodoes.257 ˹By this ‘hesees’ and ‘also’he clearly explains about the equality of nature, the equality of sight and of activity, power and will. And not like sculptors and painters.258 ˹Or does the Father 252

GN (Oratio XXX,10, 250,6-11(a)**; 251,5-11(n)**). TM (C. 110,15-16*); TbK (LSII, 156,4*). 254 TM (C. 110,16). 255 GN (Oratio XXX,11, 254,9-10(a)**; 255,8-10(n)**); TM (C. 111,23-24); cf. TbK (LSII, 156,5-6). 256 Here the Greek term ‘οὐσία’ is used. 257 TM (C. 108,28-110,4; 110,13-17. 28-29; 111,20-24); TbK (LSII, 156,6-25**). Cf. Introd. Ch. 2.2.2, sub A. 3. 258 GN (Oratio XXX,11, 256,20-21(a)**; 257,20-21(n)**). See also: JC (PG59, h. 38, c. 217,9-19; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohnI, m. 38,7; 278,13-15). 253

44

[42]

JOHN 5,19-22

work one thing and the Son another which he sees from him259 and does in like manner as he? ˹But are there four worlds then?260 ˹However, what the Father does, the Son also does with him and in accordance with him at the same time.261 And if this ‘Hecannot’ is understood about the Temple (of his body) which is (originated) from us (people) and in the meaning of ‘entirely not’, then this is a property of dumb animals which are led by force. Then we are also judged without reason on the right or on the left. And why will we be rebuked or be praised then? But if we can, how could he not, he, the Temple of the Word? [5,20] ˹FortheFatherlovestheSonandshowshimallthathehimself isdoing,thatyoumaymarvel.262 This is said about his humanity only.263 ˹This ‘heshows’, i.e. hewillgivehimgreaterworksthanthese264: ˹the general resurrection, the universal judgment, the great transformation of all this etc. which will be completed through this Son of Man.265 [5,21] ˹For just as the Father shall raise up the dead etc.266 ˹These things are said about the unity of the person of the sonship.267 [5,22] ˹And it is asked:268 How did our Lord say here: TheFather judgesnoone,buthasgivenalljudgmenttotheSon, and: Hehasalso givenhimpowertoexecutejudgment (John 5,27), but in another place: IjudgenooneandifIdojudge,myjudgmentistrue (John 8,15)? And we say, that this: ‘TheFather* judgesnoone’ and ‘Ijudgenoone’ relate to the hypostasis of his godhead, because neither he nor the Father and the Spirit judge perceptibly. And although there is one judgment of the holy 259

TM (C. 111,23-24); TbK (LSII, 156,24-26*). GN (Oratio XXX,11, 256,28(a)*; 257,29(n)*). In IoM’s text this remark has become incomprehensible. GN’s line of thought is: the Father created this World and will create the world to come. If the Son does the same as the Father — and consequently also creates a world like ours and a world to come — then four worlds would exist. 261 TM (C. 111,20-24); JC (Gr. text: PG59, h. 38, c. 218,29-32; Syr. text: Childers, CommentaryonJohnI, m. 38,7; 279,13-14). 262 TM (C. 112,15-18*). 263 TM (C. 113,5*). 264 TM (C. 113,23-24*). 265 TM (C. 114,13-15*). 266 TM (C. 114,22-23*). 267 TM (C. 113,28-29). 268 For the following passage: TM (C. 116,23-24; 165,23-28; 166,20-30; 167,2-8; 168,14-18); Timothy I (Braun, EpistulaeI [text], 260,109*; Heimgartner, DieBriefe30-39 [text], 153,22-154,3*); IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 90v.11-91r.11**); TbK (LSII, 162,1-16*). A closer examination of this passage and a comparison of the texts are to be found in: Hofstra, ‘Questions and Answers’, 89-93. See also: Introd. Ch. 2.3.2. 260

5

10

15

20

JOHN 5,22-43

5

10

15

20

25

30

45

Trinity and of its Temple, still the Father, the Word and the Spirit are not to be seen when judging. But this ‘HehasgivenalljudgmenttotheSon’ and ‘He has also given him power to execute judgment’ are about the hypostasis of the Temple. For it is he who is about to be revealed and will wake up the dead and will judge everyone, as also the Apostle said: Hehasfixedadayonwhichhewilljudgethewholeworldinrighteousness,byamanetc. (Acts 17,31) or: InthedaywhenGodshalljudgethe secrets of men according to my Gospel (Rom 2,16). And the prophet (says) about him: Heshallnotjudgebywhathiseyessee,norslayby whathisearshear.Heshalljudgethepoorinrighteousnessandslayin uprightnessthewickedoftheearth(Is 11,3-4). For about this, too, it is assumed that there will be a visible judgment for visible people. Therefore the judge is in truth a divine nature, infinite, incomprehensible and invisible in the triune hypostases, yet invisible to the created things that will be judged. And therefore he executes the judgment in his Temple and his visible image. [5,37] And that is why our Lord said, that he judges and does not judge etc., that is to say: ˹He, the Father, who sent me, testifies about me, he, whosevoiceyouhaveneverheardandwhoseappearance(youhavenever seen)etc., i.e. Behold — it is said — not having heard his voice, you are esteemed worthy to hear his voice calling about me from heaven:269 ˹ThisismySonwhomIlove,withhimIamwellpleased.Listentohim! (Mt 3,17).270 ˹Nor have you been reverent (enough) to believe his words [43] and to accept * his witness about me.271 [5,39] These (words): SearchtheScriptures forMosestestifiedabout meetc., because the study of the Law and also of the Prophets is the preinstruction — so to say mathematically272 — in relation to the spiritual philosophy of the Gospel. And they (the Law and Prophets) are like grammarians, but this (the spiritual philosophy) is like the most important philosopher. They, on the one hand, (are like) the image and the letter, he on the other hand (like) the perfect form and true body. [5,43] ˹And Ifsomeoneelsecomesinhisownname,youwillaccept him, now this is an allusion to the Anti-Christ.273 269

TM (C. 124,17-19*; 125,6-8*). TM (C. 124,20-21*). 271 TM (C. 125,8-9.11**). 272 i.e. measured in time 273 TM (C. 128,11-14*); TbK (LSII, 164,9-10*); JC (Gr. text: PG59, h. 41, c. 236,1315; Syr. text: Childers,CommentaryonJohnI, m. 41,3; 310,7-8*). 270

46

JOHN 6,27-62

BOOK VI

[44]

[6,27] ˹ForonhimGodhasplacedhissealofapproval. The Interpreter says: ‘He has indeed carefully appointed him to be also the cause of this spiritual food. To those who approach his sacraments in the prefiguration of his passion he gives eternal life’.274 Others say: ‘The Father has appointed him as our Lord over the world to come’. [6,31] ˹These (words): Our fathers ate the manna in the desert. By comparison with the manna now they sought to belittle his gift of bread which he supplied abundantly. They supposed that this (manna) rightly was reckoned by them as better than he (Christ) was, although this was seen to be the contrary. For when the manna was given to them in the desert, they did not refrain from speaking about God: Whenhestruckthe rock,watergushedoutandstreamsflowedabundantly.Butcanhealso (giveus)breadetc.? (Ps 78,20). And in like matter as this they asked for better bread. But now when the bread was given to them, i.e. that very thing which they could suppose to be better, they extolled the gift of the manna.275 [6,51] ˹These (words): Iamthelivingbreadthatcamedown. He does not wish to teach us that his body is from heaven276, but that the power of him who made him into bread, is the body from heaven. * For our Lord taught here about the bread ˹of the Eucharist277 and not about the body of his hypostasis, because also when we eat, we do not eat the body of his hypostasis, but that of the Eucharist, which he calls ‘the heavenly bread that came down from heaven’ and mingled with him.

BOOK VII

5

10

15

20

25

[6,62] These (words): IfyouseetheSonofManascendetc., we have explained in ‘Nomanascendedtoheavenetc.’(John 3,13). And (we have explained there) how he speaks from the person about the unity of his two natures and hypostases, and how he speaks about the things that shall be 30 as if they were already there. 274

TM (C. 138,23-25*. 27-28*); TbK (LSII, 158,1-4**. 17). TM (C. 140,11; 13-24**). 276 TM (C. 140,20; 27-28). 277 TM (C. 148,26). For this translation, see: Vosté, Commentarius [transl.], 106, note 1: ‘Syriace ‘raza’, quae vox hic et saepius ‘eucharistiam’ significat. 275

JOHN 6,63-7,4

5

10

15

20

25

30

47

[6,63] ˹These (words): It is the Spirit that gives life, the body profits nothing. Here he removes the confusion of what he said above, (i.e.) how the body both raises its eaters from the grave, and gives them life for ever. Not that the body — so he says — bestows these things by its nature, but the divine nature (bestows them).278 This (divine nature), which is not corporeal, is the Giver of life by means of the body (that he took on). And why now profits the body of our Lord nothing? And how is it not bold (to say so)? But, however, he was not without the gift that gives life. For although not by nature, he was also Creator. And when so indeed he gives life, it is because of the Spirit who is in him, the Only-begotten, (whom) I call ‘Word-God’. He, who was in him, he it was who gave the body the possibility to give life. He (also) confers honour on his Temple by making it equal in power and equal in activity. Now the body distributes life (in its capacity) as the Spirit, the Temple (in its capacity) as the Word, (and) the flesh (in its capacity) as the Only-begotten, whose work powerfully prevails. ˹Now (the idea) that thebodyaloneprofitsnothing, is evident from the fact that also the Eucharist takes place among us in the symbol of the body of our Lord by the descent of the Holy Spirit. We believe that this happens in order to make known * that the nature of the Son is equal to [45] that of the Spirit.279 [7,4] ˹These (words): His brothers said to Jesus: There is no man thatdoesanythinginsecret,whilewishingittobepublic.280 The interpretation is in the form of a contradiction. They say: just like he, who does something in secret, does not want it to be in public, so it is not right that he who wants something to be public should do it in secret. If you seek — they say — to teach a new doctrine, according to what is visible from your works, don’t go then to Nazareth or to Galilee, but to the capital Jerusalem, where your listeners will be many, especially now at the feast. ˹For they sought to lead (him) astray and incited him as much as possible because of human honour, so that when he should be glorified before all, by means of working miracles, they also would be praised on account of him.281 For they reckoned the signs in Galilee and Nazareth to be obscure and hidden, like those who were seeking what was left (of the

278 279 280 281

TM TM TM TM

(C. (C. (C. (C.

152,26-153,3*); TbK (LSII, 164,18-21). 153,1-7*). 154,22-25). 154,26-29).

48

[46]

JOHN 7,4-22

bread). For Galilee was (the land) of the Gentiles. But public and exalted those things would be if they were to be done in Judea, amongst the people and all belonging to them. [7,5] ˹These (words): Even his brothers did not believe in him. He surely is not accusing them of unwillingness, but that till that moment they had not gained full knowledge about him in order to believe in him, that he was God who had come in a human body, who will be revealed to all, being confessed as God over all.282 ˹Mar Ephrem reproaches them, saying, that even his brothers were willing here to betray him.283 ˹However, through the delay in his going up to the feast and also regarding this ‘not in public’, he helped both sides, the adversaries and the friends; the former on the one hand by tempering and mitigating their fury; the latter on the other hand by rousing and inflaming more the fervor of their love.284 [7,11] * These (words): Theyweresaying:whereishe? For it is peculiar to haters that they abhor the name of those whom they hate and indicate them by means of other things, like Saul who many times calls David ‘SonofJesse’ (1 Sam 20,30). And when Absalom, David’s son, reproached Hushai, he said: Isthisyourloyaltytoyourfriend?Whydidyounotgo withyourfriend? (2 Sam 16,17). In like manner they who accompanied them said about the Lord: Whereishe? [7,22] ˹Therefore: Moses gave them circumcision. Not because it is fromhim,Moses,butfromthepatriarchs, andontheSabbathyoucircumciseaman.AndifontheSabbathamancanbecircumcisedetc.285 ˹Moses, so he says, gave (them) circumcision and the Sabbath. On the one hand, concerning the first (circumcision, he gave it) as an archivist — for it had already been given before. On the other hand, concerning the latter (Sabbath, he gave it) as a lawgiver in a new way. Now he had set a timelimit to circumcision. For he commanded that circumcision had to take place on the eighth day, and (also on) the Sabbath, if the number (of eight days) happened to coincide. All this supposes circumcision to be more valuable than the Sabbath. This is right, because this (circumcision) has broken it (the Sabbath). He demonstrated now by these things that the commandment about the Sabbath was not very necessary. But that is right

282 283 284 285

TM (C. 154,29-155,4). ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XIV,28; 138,5-7*). Cf. TM (C. 156,3-8). TM (C. 158,8-14).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 7,22-37

5

10

15

20

25

49

where this (Sabbath) is broken. And if now the Sabbath is broken because of circumcision and this deed is not considered to be blasphemy against the Law, (why) then do you murmur against that paralytic as against a lawbreaker on account of the fact that the man was healed?286 And then how foolish it is that this circumcision, which is only an external seal on a man, is partly honoured, while this, my having granted total healing — both to his body and his soul — to a man, is considered to be blasphemy? [7,24] And because of this as a reproach he adds: Do not judge by mere * appearances,but(withright)judgmentetc. For if it is a violation [47] of the Law when somebody is working on the Sabbath, then first of all Moses himself is to be accused, because it was he who allowed the Sabbath to be broken for the sake of circumcision. And if he is not found guilty of breaking the Law, how much better than circumcision is the total healing of a man? In view of all this and still much more I am above rebuke.287 [7,27] ˹These (words): Theysaid:whentheChristcomes,noonewill knowwhereheisfrom. They lied openly, with envy, because they knew on account of a prophecy that he would be born at Bethlehem and from the offspring of the house of David, as they also answered to Herod when he asked them about the birth of the Messiah. And they quoted the testimony from the prophets288: You also, Bethlehem of Judah, are not littleamongthekingsofJudah,foroutofyouwillcomeaking,whowill herd my people Israel. And his origin is from the beginning, from the daysetc.(Mic 5,1; Mt 2,6).But there they clearly spoke the truth, here, however, they were smitten by the arrow of envy and spoke falsely at the same time about the Scriptures and themselves.

BOOK VIII [7,37] Nowonthegreatday,whichwasthelastdayofthefeast. There 30 were three feasts mentioned by name: (the Feast) of Unleavened Bread, (the Feast) of Weeks, ˹and (the Feast) of Tabernacles. Israel, however, celebrated these (feasts) as a foreshadowing. The Church adopted them 286

TM (C. 158,15-25). TM (C. 158,25-159,1). See for this opinion also JC (PG59, h. 49, c. 277,11-44; c. 278,1-11). 288 TM (C. 159,6-12*). 287

50

[48]

JOHN 7,37

from her (Israel) in their essence and as a model. And behold, she celebrates them in a spiritual sense289: the Feast of Unleavened Bread in the Passover that brings salvation and (in) the passion, the Feast of Weeks in the descent of the Spirit and the Feast of Tabernacles she changed into Palm Sunday290 in springtime. ˹And some say that at the Feast of Tabernacles our Lord entered Jerusalem in a great solemn procession,291 ˹because this Feast of Tabernacles was providentially delayed in his time so that the entrance * of our Lord took place in it.292 ˹Others (say) that the Jews, because they were under Roman sovereignty and had no power to hold a feast without their consent — they even kept their seal upon the vestment of the priesthood — had been held back and obstructed in that year from keeping the ‘Feast of Tabernacles’ in the autumnal season, but they celebrated the (Feast of) Unleavened Bread and the (Feast of) Tabernacles together, that is to say: the (Feast of) Tabernacles for seven days and (the Feast of) Unleavened Bread another seven days. Again others say that the time of the Feast of Tabernacles had not been fixed. For although it had been ordered to be kept in the seventh month, i.e. in Tishrin293, yet they had the power to do this at any time, because they hereby remembered their sojourn in the desert, when they were dwelling in tents and the cloud was overshadowing them (from) above.294 ˹They came to these diverse opinions on account of one word written by the Interpreter, saying that our Lord entered (Jerusalem) on the Feast of Tabernacles295, while it was (really) the Feast of Unleavened Bread. By carelessness of the scribe it was changed into (the Feast of) Tabernacles. And it is evident that our Lord entered Jerusalem on the Feast of Unleavened Bread on account of the words of the same Interpreter that these things happened in the proximity of our Lord’s passion.296

289

Cf. GN: Moreschini and Gallay, Discours38-41, disc. 41,4; 322,38-41. Literally : in (the feast of) the Hosannas. 291 IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 80r.13-15*); cf. TbK (LSII, 118,10-11). For this and the following passages, see also: Introd. Ch. 2.3.2. 292 IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 80v.15-16). 293 The month of October. 294 IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 80r.15-80v.11**). 295 TbK (LSII, 118,25-119,1). 296 IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 79v.10-80r.8**); TbK (LSII, 118,25-26**). 290

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 7,37-38

5

10

15

20

25

30

51

Again: (it is obvious) from the Gospel itself which says that Jesus came to Bethany six days before the Passover. ˹So then it has been superfluously stated by the spokesman that in the (time of the) Passover our Lord entered Jerusalem. And the Feast of Unleavened Bread was changed by a scribe into the Feast of Tabernacles, in like manner as this ‘These things(weredone)inBeth-abara’ (John 1,28), was changed into ‘(were done)inBethany’297, and this: ‘SheansweredandsaidtohiminHebrew ‘Rabboli’(John 20,16)into this: ‘sheturned(andsaidtoHim)‘Rabboli’ etc.298Suchlike things are changed by careless scribes. Now the feast (spoken of) was * the Feast of Tabernacles, with which [49] (the Feast) of Atonement299 was connected. But it was called ‘Feast of Braying’, because in it they sounded the trumpets300 and invited them to the Feast of Tabernacles and of Atonement. And that (Feast) of Tabernacles was celebrated at the beginning of the seventh month and that (Feast) of Atonement on the tenth of the same month. And that is why it is called ‘(Feast) of the Tenth Day’301. Now our Lord wentuptothefeast (John 7,10), not to celebrate, but to teach. Now ‘great’ he calls this (day) being ‘thelastdayofthefeast’ (John 7,37) and on account of forgiveness. And he very appropriately gave testimony at the Feast of Atonement about the grace of atonement. [7,38] ˹And some say: Where is it written that streamsoflivingwater willflowfromwithinhim? They connect it to the word below, while one ought to attach it to the word above. However, because there are many prophecies in the Scriptures about the Messiah which exhort everyone to believe in him, like he has said somewhere: Search the Scriptures etc. (John 5,39), and: Moseswroteaboutme (John 5,46), here he says this, that everyone who follows the Scriptures and believesinme(John 7,38), shall be filled with grace like a river, which not only is never-failing, but also brings forth from itself what is sufficient for him and useful to many others, like also somewhere else he calls (it) a fountain instead of ‘streams’ as here.302 ˹And we ought to know that the Scripture denotes by the name of the Spirit sometimes his nature and his hypostasis and sometimes his grace 297 298 299 300 301 302

IbN (MS Cambridge Add. 2017, f 81r.1-4*). Cf. Book I [1,28]. Cf. Book XIX [20,16]. i.e. the Day of Atonement. Lev 23,24. Lev 23,27. JC (PG59, h. 51, c. 283,39-44. 50-62; 284,5-8*).

52

[50]

JOHN 7,38-51

and his activity as in this case. This (grace and activity) the Apostles were going to receive303 from the hypostasis of the Spirit. That hypostasis of the Spirit himself, however, cannot be received. He is infinite, incomprehensible and eternal. And it is asked: if the Spirit was not yet given, like the evangelist said, by whom did the disciples work miracles before the passion of our Lord. And we say: although they wrought * signs at that time from the power of the Spirit of our Lord, which he gave them, nevertheless they had no knowledge about the grace which had been given to them from the hypostasis of the Spirit, as from the Father and the Son. This knowledge, however, they received in the descent of the Spirit. Further: because this gift that was about to be given afterwards, was very much better than that before the passion. For that (gift) which was before the passion, was given occasionally to the righteous and ancient prophets as a gift of grace. This (gift), however, which was given at last to the Apostles was very much exalted above theirs and it was with them at all times to work mighty works and signs, and to give the adoption of sons to those who received it (the Spirit) and to call them to the kingdom of heaven and to immortality. [7,40-41] ˹These (words): Someofthemsaid:‘ThisistheProphet!’And others:‘HeistheMessiah!’ What they thought was foolish, because the Scripture speaks about the same person as the Messiah and the Prophet.304 [7,48] ˹These words: Theysaid: ‘HaveanyoftherulersorofthePhariseesbelievedinhim?’ They lied openly, because Nicodemus, who believed in him, was a magistrate and one of the Pharisees. And there were others like him.305 [7,51] ˹Does our Law condemn anyone? i.e. you are condemning him unjustly, because till now you have not heard those words of his. The attendants whom we sent, were amazed when they heard them.306 ˹For the Pharisees reviled the region of Galilee. In this matter they blamed Nicodemus and also from this time on they continually belittled the glory of the Saviour and disparaged his deeds and his words, like one who rejects the fear of the Lord.307 Our Lord reproves them for speaking falsely and ˹for (not understanding) that he chose that region of Galilee 303 304 305 306 307

TM TM TM TM TM

(C. (C. (C. (C. (C.

161,25-162,13**). 162,18-23). 164,5-6). 163,26-30*). 164,15-20. 25*).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 7,51-8,14

5

10

15

20

25

30

53

* in view of a prophecy.308 ˹For, behold, Isaiah prophesies, saying: Galilee [51] of the nations, the people sitting in darkness shall see a great light;309 ˹andthosedwellingindarknessandintheshadow etc. (Is 9,1.2; Mt 4,16). And because of this our Lord said to them: IamtheLightoftheworldand whoever follows me etc. (John 8,12) i.e. do you not remember, he said, what the prophet says, that the people of Galilee shall rejoice in a great light? Now, I am that light, I, who am sufficient not only for the people of Galilee, but for the whole world.310 [8,14] And it is asked: why did he say here: EvenifIbearwitnessof myself,mywitnessistrue, after he had spoken thus: IfIbearwitness aboutmyself,mywitnesswouldnotbetrue (John 5,31). And we say: there he took action against his accusers, who were supposing: your witness is not true. However, so far they did not dare to speak a word against the things he said about himself, that: ˹The things the Father does, the Sonalsodoeslikehim (John 5,19c), and: LiketheFatherraisesupthe dead,evensotheSonrestoreslifetowhomhewill (John 5,21)311, and: Heitis,hesays,whowillexecutejudgmentandbestowlifethatiseverlasting (cf. John 5,25.27). Such things troubled them and they had not yet come out, so therefore by what he said, he made known that also in his witness he was trustworthy. (And) that if he understood the deliberation of their thoughts, ˹this is a quality of God alone312 and not hindered by anything. Here, however, because they openly poured forth their vomit saying: ‘Yourwitnessisnottrue’, he in refutation accuses them of falsehood (saying):‘This, my witness is true, because I know where I came fromandwhereIamgoing. Butyoudon’tknowwhereIcomefrometc. * This means: I came from above and from (being) with the Father. And [52] I am going to participate with the Father in glory and be equal in honour. And the former — on the one hand — indicates the Incarnation of ‘God the Word’, the latter — on the other hand — (indicates) the deification of a man, one of us. Also to the Samaritan woman he testified about himself, saying: IamtheMessiah,Iwhospeaktoyou (John 4,26). And to the man who was blind from his mother’s womb, he said: He that speakstoyou,heistheSonofGod(John 9,37).

308 309 310 311 312

TM (C. 164,27-28*). TM (C. 164,25-26*). TM (C. 164,21-22**; 164,30-165,3**). Cf. TM (C. 118,29-30; 119,4-5). Cf. TM (C. 165,17-18).

54

[53]

JOHN 8,15-34

[8,15-18] This that he said: Ijudgenoone.YetifIdojudgeetc. By this he made manifest the duality of his natures and hypostases. A nature and hypostasis invisible and incomprehensible like his Father and the Holy Spirit. These three hypostases do not judge perceptibly and it is a perceptible hypostasis that judges visibly etc. which we made clear above.313 ˹So and by saying that thetestimonyoftwomenisvalid,(namelywiththese words:)It’sIwhotestifyformyselfandtheFatherwhosentmetestifies aboutme,314 he made manifest the duality of his hypostases, because I am the Word who testifies about the Temple, together with the Father and the Spirit. For testimony has been given by the Father and by himself. ˹Therefore, two — the Father and the Word — are here also testifying about the manhood315, related to us. [8,21-22] ˹Concerning what he said: WhereIgo,youcannotetc., however, they stupidly answered: Willhekillhimself etc..? For whither should he go after his death? If he received death in a human way, they also — as human beings — would necessarily go there, because they were expecting the limit set on all men. 316 [8,27] ˹These (words): They did not understand * that he spoke to themabouttheFather, i.e. they did not understand about what Father he had spoken.317 [8,28] ˹These (words): When you have lifted up the Son of Man, i.e.: when you have crucified him on the wood, at that time you shall know my power and that I have done nothing against the Father. How then you shall see the Creation shaking and mourning, my Father — he, who is even now with me — making known his divine punishment on account of the things that were done.318 [8,33-34] ˹These (words): (Wehave)neverbeenslavestoanyone etc. Whereas he was speaking to them about the slavery of sin, they understood this as physical (slavery), answering him falsely, for they had never been freed from the slavery of the Egyptians and Babylonians and now — at the time they were speaking — of the Romans. Our Lord, however, did not lower himself to slay them for this lie. But he said: Everyonewho sinsisaslavetosinetc..319 313 314 315 316 317 318 319

Cf. Book V [5,22]. Cf. TM (C. 169,4-6). Cf. TM (C. 169,8-9). Cf. TM (C. 165,8-10; 170,19-26*). TM (C. 171,27-29*). TM (C. 171,30; 172,8-12*). TM (C. 173,2. 4-11*).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 8,39-56

55

[8,39] ˹And why did he say above: I know you are descendants of Abraham (John 8,37), but here: IfyouweresonsofAbraham. He does not declare that they were not his offspring, but that they were not his sons.320 With the first now he was indicating the nature, which is also similar among 5 dumb animals, but the second (is only possible) among rational beings, also endowed with a will.

BOOK IX

10

15

20

25

30

[8,44] ˹Now he here calls Satan theirfather. These (words): Healso isthefatheroflies, i.e. he brought them forth and at first he made them fruitful with Eve.321 [8,48] ˹These (words): Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritanandhaveademon?They called him a Samaritan, because the Samaritans said about themselves as against the Jews: ‘We are the sons of Abraham’. And the Jews in turn said to them: ‘We are the sons of Abraham’. And when they heard from our Lord: IfyouweresonsofAbraham, youwoulddotheworksofAbraham (John 8,39), they thought that (he with) his word took the side * of the Samaritans, although he was in [54] appearance a Jew.322 [8,52-53] ˹When our Lord said here to the Jews: Everyonewhobelieves in me, will never taste death, what would have been more suitable for them than to say and answer him straight according to what the word postulated? For the postulation demanded that they should speak thus: ‘Are you greater than the God323 our father Abraham believed in and also the prophets? And they died, they of whom you are saying that whoever believesinme,willnotdie(cf. John 11,26). But they omitted to answer what was suitable for them and they said what was not suitable, i.e. Are you greater than our father Abraham etc. (John 8,53). With this word they showed how they were inclined to embitterment, that they made the Saviour less than Abraham and the prophets. Now this would have been suitable to say if he had said: ‘I shall not die!’ [8,56] ˹These (words): Abrahamyourfather,earnestlydesiredtosee etc.324 ‘Hisday’, ˹i.e. that of the cross, that (day) on which he took upon 320 321 322 323 324

TM (C. 173,4-8). TM (C. 176,23-24*). ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVI,26 ; 184,21-186,2*). Cf. JC (PG59, h. 55, c. 302,43-48). TM (C. 180,8-9).

56

[55]

JOHN 8,56-9,3

him death for the sake of the life of all. He (Abraham) now saw the comparison with me (Jesus) in the sacrifice (of Isaac) that was not offered.325 ˹And this (shows) that I am so much greater than Abraham, so that he earnestly longed for this time, in which I should be ready to restore the world by the suffering and death of the cross. And through this earnest desire he saw — to the extent that was possible — the foreshadowing and rejoiced.326 ˹At the time when he set Isaac apart for an offering and a ram was offered up in his place, then he became worthy of the revelation and was instructed about the appearance of the sacrament. Just as he delivered up his son for a sacrifice because he loved God, so also God was to give his Only-begotten for the sake of the redemption of all.327 Now ‘herejoiced’ (John 8,56), saying that he would make known that the passion was now by the will of the Father. [8,58] ˹These (words): BeforeAbrahamwas,Iam. Even this is still too little; for it was not up * to the mark, because he was before the ages328 as the Creator of the ages etc. [8,59] ˹Now these (words): Hepassedthroughthemidstofthemand went...329 i.e. their eyes were blinded by divine power330 ˹and quite completely lest they perceived when He was going away, in what manner or capacity it was.331 [9,3] ˹These (words): Neitherhe,norhisparents sinned. Not that he seeks to show that they — the blind man and his parents — were without sin, but to teach them that there were other, hidden, causes, which come upon us with God’s permission.332 ˹These (words): ButthattheworksofGodmightbeseeninhim. He did not put this as the cause. He did not become blind333 for the works to be seen in him, but it happened to that blind man naturally. The permission, however, which was there from God concerning this infirmity was of great help, because in it a miracle might be seen happening to him.334 Now, this is like this (word): Inorderthatyouareprovedright 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334

Cf. Gen 22. JC (PG59, h. 55, c. 303,57-304,6*). TM (C. 180,11-14*). TM (C. 180,15-19*). TM (C. 180,22-24*). John 8,59: IoM uses here, like Syp.h, a text based upon Lk 4,30. TM (C. 180,29-181,2.9*). TM (C. 181,9-10*). TM (C. 184,1-2*; 6-9*). TbK (LSII, 165,4-6**). TM (C. 184,24-28*).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 9,3-6

5

10

15

20

25

57

inyourwordandjustified (Ps 51,4). Not because of this those sinners had sinned, but when they have sinned, God visits them rightly in all this so that he shows himself to be righteous by reproving the sinners. According to the custom of the Hebrews this is written: But that the works of God mightbeseeninhim.335 [9,4] ˹These (words): Imustdotheworksforhimwhosentme,while it is day. Night is coming etc.336, ˹i.e. just as to men day and night are separated. And the day, on the one hand, is the time that is suitable for work; the night, on the other hand, is for rest, in which no man can work. Also there is a time for me to do miracles until my passion, (a time) in which I ought to do those things that are right and suitable to the will of the Father and that show who I am. But after the passion of the cross it is necessary * to give up these things, because I will leave behind my life on [56] earth and among men.337 ˹And because he allegorically calls the time of his coming ‘day’, (he calls) the time after his passion and death ‘night’. And in order to make this clear he openly says: AslongasIamintheworld, Iamthelightoftheworldetc. (John 9,5).338 [9,6] ˹Hespatonthegroundandmadesomemudofthespittleandhe anointedtheeyesofthatblindman.339 ˹Thus by the mud he made him see, because he had not received sight at his birth.340 ˹Ḥenanisho‘341 says that he besmeared the face ˹with that which he ought to have received (and) which the entire human nature in the beginning was constituted from. And so, by this he made known that he was the Creator of man342, ˹i.e. that he was equal to the Creator of man in the power of his creative activity. Not being near at the time he cured him, he acted according to the divine economy.343 First: ˹to show that there was no doubt about him who healed him.344 Second: ˹that the miracle might not be hidden from anyone.345 ˹Probably now also the whole crowd 335

TM (C. 184,30-185,4*; TbK (LSII, 165,6-7*). TM (C. 185,11-12). 337 TM (C. 186,12-20**). 338 TM (C. 186,27-30**). 339 TM (C. 187,15-16.19**). 340 TM (C. 187,25-26**). 341 Reinink, DieAdventssontage [transl.], Einl. XXVII, Ḥenanišo, note 105: ‘D.h. Katholikos Ḥenanišo I († 699/700), dessen Evangelienkommentar bis auf wenige Fragmente untergegangen ist’ (cf. Idem, Studien, 22, note 33); Baumstark, Geschichte, 209. 342 TM (C. 187,26-28**). 343 TM (C. 188,2-5**). 344 TM (C. 188,1). 345 TM (C. 188,6**). 336

58

[57]

JOHN 9,6-39

that was with our Lord left him at that moment and went after the blind man to see the miracle that was about to take place. And because the blind man went through the streets and crowds of the city and they after him, those who saw it necessarily asked for the reason of their commotion.346 ˹And they also went after him to see what would happen347 and 5 from where the miracle would arise. And by this the faith would increase ˹and others would wash away the blindness of their heart.348 ˹He made mud with his spittle and not with water, so that it might be revealed from where the healing came. He commanded then that also the soil should be washed away in order that the healing might not be attrib- 10 uted to the earth.349 [9,7] Siloach it is called in Hebrew, * because the waters jumped up above the spring, sometimes straight ahead. But not always do they pour forth equally. Just like the Nile, because once a year it is filled (with water). And when it floods again it is called Gihon350, because its waters 15 flood.

BOOK X [9,39] ˹These (words): ForthejudgmentofthisworldIhavecome,that those who do not see, may see etc. It is like the Apostle says: That the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, but Israel 20 whopursueditetc.(Rom 9,30).351 ˹And it is asked why it is that in another place our Lord says: GoddidnotsendhisSontocondemntheworld,but tosavetheworldthroughhisSon(John 3,17).352 The former, however, is not contrary to the latter, ˹but he spoke above about the aim of his coming. For this is the aim of his coming that all men should be saved. In this 25 place, however, he says what was the outcome of his deeds.353 ˹I have come, he says, in order that the trial of men may be seen.354

346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354

TM (C. 188,12-18**). TM (C. 188,21-22*). ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVI,29; 188,12-13; 17-18*). JC (PG59, h. 57, c. 311,23-25*). The name of one of the rivers in paradise (Gen 2,13). TM (C. 194,28-29*); JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 323,13-20*). TM (C. 194,29-195,1*). TM (C. 195,1-4*). TM (C. 195,7-9*).

JOHN 9,39-10,1

5

10

15

20

25

30

59

˹These (words): Sothatthosewhodonotsee,mayseeandthatthose whoseemaybecomeblind, i.e. that it will be known who are really blind and who see. For behold, he who was thought to be blind, doubly received eyes with which he might see, physical eyes and perception of the fear of God. The Scribes and the Pharisees, who thought that they saw with physical eyes355, ˹were apparently blind with regard to both, so that they did not accept the truth and did not believe the works they saw with their eyes356, as both parts are subjected to free will. [9,40] ˹But why (did) the Pharisees (ask): What?Areweblindtoo? Now our Lord said: Ifyouwereblindfrom seeing the miracles,youwould havenosin,when not believing.Butnow,having seen the miracles with your eyes,yoursinremains (cf. John 9,41). * While above calling them [58] ‘servants’, here he calls them ‘blind’, because they understood these words corporeally.357 They asked him: Arewealsoblind?Such was Jewish dullness. ˹Afterwards he begins to speak with them in parables and demonstrates to them that his level of teaching is appropriately higher than theirs. For, whereas the Scribes and the Teachers of the Law and the leaders of the people cast out that blind man, he, however, accepted him, demonstrating from these deeds that he had more capacity than they had.358 [10,1] ˹Hewhodoesnotenterthesheeppenbythegate,butclimbsin etc.359 The ‘pen’is the lawful doctrine.360 ˹But the ‘gate’, however, is the observance of the commandments. And the ‘sheep’ are the recipients of this, that is to say, of the lawful doctrine. Now the ‘watchman’ is Moses and the ‘shepherd’ is everyone who tends (the sheep) in accordance with the Law and who keeps the commandments by taking care of them.361 The ‘shepherd’is a man of words — words which bring union and order, i.e. spiritual knowledge and a good manner of expression. ˹Another place: (this is) to act contrary to the commandments and simply to neglect them and to discard the norm of teaching362, not correcting oneself first etc.

355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362

TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM

(C. (C. (C. (C. (C. (C. (C. (C.

195,9-14). 195,16-17*). 195,18-27). 196,6-12*). 196,20-22). 197,12-13**). 197,15-17); TbK (LSII, 165,7-8*) and JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 324,44-46*). 198,2-6*).

60

[59]

JOHN 10,1-7

One of the Theoforoi explained it in this way: ˹the ‘thief’ is a seducer and a liar like Theudas and Judas363 etc., ˹who do not enter by the gate, (so) not as the Scriptures teach. ‘Thesheeppen’ — so he says — are the Scriptures. They bring us to God and they open knowledge of him to us. They make us ‘sheep’.364 ˹And like a gate, strengthened by locks, they keep us from evil doctrines of the heretics. For he who is not familiar with the Scriptures, but climbs in at another place — * by another way, impassable and unregulated — makes a schism and divides. Now also he refers to the Scribes who falsely taught other things outside the Law.365 ˹Hewhoclimbsin he says and not ‘he who enters’. This (‘who climbs in’) refers to a thief who climbs over the fence and who does all things dangerously.366 [10,4] ˹These (words): When he has brought out his sheep, he goes beforethem. This is unusual for shepherds. For it is usual for those who graze (their flocks) to walk behind the flocks and drive them as watchmen and keepers. But he goes up in front of the flocks like a guide towards the truth and because he also sent some preachers of the Gospel into the midst of wolves (cf. Mt 10,16).367 [10,7] And after he had finished comparing himself with the Scribes, he showed also what manner of shepherding was exactly his own. Therefore he began to speak about himself. ˹And also these things (he spoke) allegorically, saying Iamthedoorofthesheep (John 10,7).368 ˹Although above he says that he is the one who enters by the door, here (he says) that he is the door. For he is both the door and the one who enters by the door.369 With regard to the latter as a shepherd, and with regard to the former as Lord and Mediator of God and of all. ˹Now while he spoke with the Pharisees, who were familiar with a certain degree of teaching 370, he said that he entered by the door as a sign that he was legally a shepherd and a teacher and not someone who blocks the pathway like thieves. And unlike the Scribes he did not impudently make 363 ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVI,33; 190,19; TM (C. 200,25); TbK (LSII, 165,1213*) and JC (PG 59, h. 59, c. 323,65-324,1-8. 15-19. 27-31*). For Theudas and Judas, see: Acts 5,36-37. 364 JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 324,5-7*). 365 JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 324,27-31*). 366 JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 324,31-34**). 367 JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 324,67-325,4**). 368 TM (C. 199,20-23). 369 TM (C. 199,24-27*). 370 TM (C. 199,27-29*).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 10,7-8

5

10

15

20

25

61

an assault on the regulated order without keeping the commandments. ˹But where he is speaking about himself, he says, that he is ‘the door’. ‘Thedoor’ as the One who brings us to the Father.371 ˹‘Thedoor’, because he was the first of all in his entrance to the truth. For also he drew up his teaching alone and he caused everyone to be called by him and to leave the Law, consisting of commandments, and he brought them to perfection by the spiritual instructions of the Gospel.372 [10,8] * ˹And when the Pharisees attempted to recall Theudas and [60] Judas etc. to show by comparison with them that his promise was false373, ˹he — as one who examines hearts — not only vitiates the answer that they were about to give, but also showed from his deeds the difference that there was between him and them, saying: Allwhocamearethieves androbbers374 ˹i.e. I am not an impostor and a thief or a liar.375 ˹Upon this they dwelled in thought, (upon people) like Theudas and others.376 ˹They promised devastation (of the enemy) and at the very moment they said it they fled and perished.377 And this is evident from the sheep not listening to them, but their being despised for it like the garment of a menstruating woman.378 ˹For he does not call Moses and the order of prophets ‘thieves and robbers’, like Marcion379 and Mani380 do in their stupidity.381 ˹Because, how then can he call Moses, as mentioned, ‘the door’? And how can he send disobedient people to the prophets, that they might obey, saying: You searchtheScriptures,becauseyouthinkthatinthem etc.(John 5,39). And how can he add these words: Thesheepdidnotlistentothem?(John 10,8b), for they did listen to the prophets and by means of them, those who believed in the Messiah, came to believe.382 For (the words): Allwhoever came (John 10,8a), are not meant as an all-inclusive definition. But it is like this: Allhavegoneastray,together (Ps 14,3) and: Allmenareliars etc.(Ps 116,11), because not everyone is unfaithful and a liar etc. 371

JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 324,60-65**). TM (C. 200,6-15*). 373 ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVI,33; 190,19); TM (C. 200,25. 27-29**). 374 TM (C. 201,2-5*). 375 Cf. TM (C. 202,26-27). 376 JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 325,9-11. 54-55*). 377 JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 325,22-26. 30-35*). 378 Cf. Is 64,6. 379 For Marcion (c. 85-c. 160 A.D.): Von Harnack, Marcion,21-30; Heussi, Kompendium, 51-52. 380 Mani (216 - 276/277 A.D.), see: Heussi, Kompendium, 85-86. 381 JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 325,49-52**). 382 JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 325,54-60*). 372

62

[61]

JOHN 10,11-10

[10,11] Iamthegoodshepherd. Above he is the One ‘whoentersby thedoor’ (John 10,2), shortly after he is ‘thedoor’, and here ‘theshepherd’. And he is good. For it ought to be known, that he is not only ‘the door’, ˹but also ‘theshepherd’. By the former he is like a watchman, by the latter, however, like a carer.383 [10,14] ˹These (words): IknowmyownandIamknownby* myown, justastheFatherknowsme, are not of equal weight.384 ˹For, on the one hand he knows (them) like a lord his possessions385, they, however, (know) him as God and Lord. And he persuades by the comparison: ˹Justasthe Fatherknowsmeetc.He, on the one hand (knows) me, the Son, and I, on the other hand, (know) him, the Father. This word is about (his) humanity386, about the fact that God the Word assumed the form of a servant (cf. Phil 2,7). In this way, he says, the Father has esteemed me worthy of sonship by means of the Word. For, I am the Son, he who is ‘the Word’. And (he is) the Father; on account of this I know God, the Father. The Son now is known by him. In the same way I am also known as ‘Shepherd’ and ‘Lord’ by them that are saved. I, in turn, (know) them as ‘sheep’ and ‘chosen possession’. If then also in his humanity he is called ‘Lord of the sheep’, then there is nothing amazing in it, because he also suffered, (and) because he also has saved the flock by his death. For there is unity with ‘the Word’, in order that he also in the substance of his body might be God and Lord and he made him to be honoured. For this reason it is said: Whomhasbeen appointedasheirofall (Heb 1,2a), and: Allauthorityin heavenandonearthhasbeengiventome(Mt 28,18). But he, the Son of Man, will also come at last for the second (time) as Lord from heaven. And with an eye to that he calls the sheep his own, and he says his own, because all is ‘his own’. [10,10] ˹These (words): Ihavecomethattheymayhavelife,and(life) whichisabundantforthem, i.e. not ordinary life, but everlasting life. That they not only shall come to lifefrom the resurrection of the dead, but that they may keep living eternally.387 ˹This ‘abundant’: some explain it as the kingdom of heaven, which is ‘something abundant’388, i.e. symbolically here, in perfection there. Others say that also Moses and the prophets 383 384 385 386 387 388

JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 324,64-65**). Cf. TM (C. 203,16-18.28). TbK (LSII, 165,16-18). TM (C. 204,8); TbK (LSII, 165,15-16). TM (C. 201,27-28; 202,3-6*. 10-11). JC (PG59, h. 59, c. 325,63-65*).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 10,10-38

5

10

15

20

25

30

63

came to give life. I came to give life, like the prophets did, but also * to [62] impart what is more complete and perfect than what the prophets imparted, namely the sound doctrine, which is in the royal Trinity. Again, ‘Life’ he calls knowledge of the Truth, as he explained, saying: This is eternal life, that they know you and the truth (John 17,3). That whichisabundant now is the grace of the Spirit that they, who were baptized in his name, would receive. And they are also esteemed worthy of the gift of his glory in the midst of his Church, which is on earth and those (gifts) in heaven: life and beatitudes without end. [10,16] ˹These (words): I have other sheep also he spoke about the nations that would be related to him.389 Others (say): he means the nine ranks of spiritual beings, those who are far from the human sheepfold in immortality etc. [10,22] ˹NowitwastheFeastoftheDedicationinJerusalemandit waswinter, i.e. (they observed) the dedication of the city and the temple after the devastation and destruction by Antiochus the Macedonian. Then, when the Maccabees had prevailed over the Macedonian kings and had conquered them and put the city and the temple in order again and renewed the altar, then they called that day of victory and reformation ‘the Feast of the Dedication’.390 [10,30] ˹These (words): IandtheFather,weareone. He spoke about the equality of nature of the Father and the Son.391 ˹These words ‘weare one’ are said in two ways. One concerning ‘unity’, the other concerning ‘similarity’. Concerning ‘unity’ on the one hand like this: Nowthecompanyofpeoplewasoneinsoulandmind (Acts 4,32).392 ˹Concerning ‘similarity’ on the other hand, it is like this: WewereallbaptizedbyoneSpirit intoonebody (1 Cor 12,13).393 But here he spoke through (his) equality of substance and the things (that are connected with) the substance: ‘Weare one’. However, above he said this: MyFatherwhohasgiven(them)tome is greater than all (John 10,29). And he spoke about the person of the Temple, he who by his unity (with the Father) received * the things of the [63] Godhead: that is to say power and will etc. [10,38] These (words): I am in my Father and my Father is in me. That is also like this: IandmyFather,weareone.Although you are not 389 390 391 392 393

TM (C. 204,26; 204,29-205,1); TbK (LSII, 165,18-19*). TM (C. 211,4-13). TM (C. 214,14-15). TM (C. 214,18-21*); TbK (LSII, 166,7-11**). TM (C. 214,22-24*).

64

JOHN 10,38-11,6

convinced of me — he said — consent to the deeds by which you will recognize my likeness to the Father. Because it is impossible to know one nature by means of another nature, or one power by another one from an activity that is similar. However, when they differ in nature, there is no equality. If then, on account of the works, it can be known 5 and at the same time believed that theFatherisinhimandheinthe Father, (then) it is evident that this is because of equality both of nature and of power. [10,41] ˹Johndidnotworkevenonesign. He (Jesus) however, (did) many (signs). And if they believed in him (John) — even without a single 10 sign — how much more in this One394, who convinces by signs and mighty works.

BOOK XI

[64]

[11,3] These (words): Histwosisterssent(word), it was because their parents had passed away. ˹And with these (words): Behold, the one you love is ill, he395 indicated the greatness of their faith. For they were so convinced of the immense greatness of our Lord’s power, even as sickness came near to him who was loved by him. [11,4] Therefore our Lord also answered: Thisillnesswillnotendin death. Do not think — he says — that he will really die of this illness.396 ˹These (words): ThattheSonofManmaybeglorifiedbecauseofit, are like what he said about the blind man: Neitherhenorhisparentssinned, but (it happened) in order that the deeds of God might be seen in him (John 9,3);397 ˹because this deed was suitable for his own glory together with that of the Father.398 [11,6] ˹Nowhestayedtwomoredaysafterheheardthathewasill, so that death might prevail over his friend. If now he had come when he was still alive, he would only * have healed a sick man. The miracle in it would have been small. After (his) death now he goes, in order that the miracle should be much greater.399 394 395 396 397 398 399

JC (PG59, h. 61, c. 339,58-62**). The evangelist. TM (C. 220,21-29*). ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVII,1; 190,21-192,2*). TM (C. 221,4-5*). TM (C. 223,1-2).

15

20

25

30

JOHN 11,8-11

5

10

15

20

25

30

65

[11,8] ˹These (words): AshortwhileagotheJewstriedtostoneyou etc. (They said so) because the disciples till that moment considered in a human way how to keep their master safe, so that the Jews should not stone him. And hence they cunningly tried to prevent him from going to Lazarus, although many times he had received a manifest demonstration that it was impossible for anything to happen to him without his will.400 [11,9] Wishing to heal this weak thought of theirs, ˹he said to them: Aretherenottwelvehoursinaday?Andifanyonewalksbydayhewill notstumble,becauseheseesthelightofthisworldetc., saying that just as the day is completed in twelve hours and that he that walks in the daytime trustfully goes his way, being guarded from stumbling-blocks — however for him who walks by night there is great fear that darkness confuses him on his way — so it is impossible for anything that I do not want to happen to me. For the light of knowledge is in me and therefore — like someone who knows all — nothing will happen to me that is not my will. Therefore, it is not even necessary for me to preserve my life, because I am exactly acquainted with all; and especially with your telling me to flee from the Jews and to preserve my life from enemies.401 And also: the night with its darkness is a demonstration that the disciples and others had no knowledge, by thinking about our Lord that he would be killed against his will. The day is a sign that he is the Light of the world and that the knowledge of all is his. ˹Some (say): by this allegory he wishes to teach the disciples * that the Jews would not be scandalised [65] into murdering him until the year of his Gospel — which is the mother of the months — had come to an end. By this (murder) darkness would take possession of Zion.402 ˹Others say: ‘Do you fear stoning, while I am with you? None of you will die with me or instead of me. But darkness will come upon you full of obscurity, distress and fear, when I am lifted up from you and leave you in order that you will know your weakness and receive the crown etc.403 [11,11] ˹‘Sleep’ he calls the death of Lazarus to let them know how easily he will raise him.404 And we ought to know that this reading or this use of ‘hehasfallenasleep’ (John 11,11) is spoken of in three ways, corresponding to the custom of a certain place, i.e. concerning sleep, sickness 400 401 402 403 404

TM (C. 221,23-27*). TM (C. 222,1-16*). ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVII,2; 192,9-12**). ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVII; 2, 192,12-15*). TM (C. 222,19-20*).

66

[66]

JOHN 11,11-33

and death. If not so, how did our Lord say: Our friend Lazarus has fallenasleep’, ˹while they replied twice: Ifhesleeps,hewillgetbetter (John 11,12), but not ‘he will awake’ etc.405 Therefore, this is either a linguistic custom of this place or a simple manner of speaking by the evangelist. [11,16] Thomas,whoiscalledthetwin,saidtohisfellow-disciples: ‘Letusalsogo,thatwemaydiewithhim’. Some of the Theoforoi have reduced the word of Thomas to two senses. First they say: ‘When our Teacher goes to Judea, he will be killed. For the Jews threatened to kill him. Therefore it is expedient also that we, his disciples, should not leave his side in his death, but also go with him and die with him’. Secondly they say: ‘Lazarusisdead’ (John 11,14) and our great Teacher will go and die and it is proper that we also should be companions of them both, that is to say of Lazarus and our Teacher’. Now in both senses ‘death’ is associated with our Saviour. [11,18] ˹Fifteenstadia, i.e. two miles.406 [11,22-24] ˹From this that: Marthasaid:‘EvennowIknowthatwhateveryouaskofGodetc.’ and that she, after * our Lord said to her your brotherwillriseagain answered: Iknowhewillriseagainintheresurrectionatthelastday, from this it is evident that although they believed in something because of the power of our Lord, on the other hand they still inclined towards doubt on account of the greatness of the act. Likewise also Martha was in fear, because she doubted the promise of our Lord.407 She was now in doubt about the resurrection because of its greatness. She ran in her mind towards a resurrection in the future and she did not lose her faith in our Lord’s promise. [11,27] ˹These (words) Martha said: Yes, I believe that you are the Messiah,theSonofGod,whowastocomeintotheworld. Although not possessing complete knowledge of him as we have now, yet she called him ‘Son of God, as an excellent and righteous man and surpassing all men, because also in the Scriptures elect and excellent men are called ‘Messiahs’ and ‘Sons of God’.408 [11,33] ˹These (words): Hewasdeeplymovedinhisspirit. This fervour now was a sign of his rage against the Jews, who did not even believe

405 406 407 408

TM TM TM TM

(C. (C. (C. (C.

222,22-24). 223,27**); JC (PG59, h. 62, c. 344,53-54**). 224,28-225,5*). 226,6-11*).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 11,33-43

5

10

15

20

25

67

this miracle that they saw409, but rather were planning to kill him and Lazarus also with him.410 This ‘in his spirit’ is about the activity of the Spirit which dwelt in him, by which he anticipated and knew the things that would happen. For this is like what is said about Judas: Hewasdeeplymovedandsaid:one ofyouwillbetrayme (John 13,21) and ˹(it is) like this: Howlongshall Ibewithyouandendureyou? (Mt 17,17).411 [11,34] ˹He asks: Where have you laid him? Not that he did not know, for how could he have been ignorant of this, he who made known about his death while he was still far away? But he restored order at the beginning of his action, that it might not be supposed that he performed the miracle just to show off.412 [11,35] ˹These (words): ThetearsofJesuscame. And behold, because * he intended to raise him, it was needless to weep. But413 (he did this) [67] first ˹for a proper confession of the human hypostasis which is from us.414 For God has no tears. Second ˹(he did this) to set a limit to lamentation415 about the dead, that we shall weep as far as the grave and that is enough. ˹And we should not be overwhelmed by excessive sadness.416 Further: he was weeping about the misery and feebleness of our nature; although in the beginning being created in such honour and sublime glory, it was brought down to such low estate and corruption by its will etc. Others say: the tears our Lord shed were not from sorrow, but instructive. And it is evident from this: OurfriendLazarushasfallenasleep, butIamgoingetc.(John 11,11). Which of us grieves for a friend who is sleeping, whom he expects to awaken soon after?

BOOK XII [11,43] Lazarus come out! And he, a dead man, came back to life. And he, who was girded around, was walking. Miraculous wonder! In bandagesthefeetwerebound (John 11,44), and they were not hindered 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416

TM (C. 227,19-23*). Cf. John 12,10. ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVII,6, 196,10-11). TM (C. 227,24-28*); cf. ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVII,10, 198,23-24). TM (C. 227,29-30*). JC (PG59, h. 63, c. 350,34-37). TM (C. 227,30-228,1*). TM (C. 228,1-3*).

68

[68]

JOHN 11,43-43

in moving. For he who gave him strength was greater than he who was obstructing him. And how should he weep who was ready to do these things? But everywhere he supports our weakness moderately and within limits, and (he wants) us to share each other’s sufferings. ˹He was glad when he heard that he was sick, and he wept when he came to bring him back to life. He declared that he was dead before he came and he asked: Wherehaveyoulaidhim? (John 11,34).417 [11,39] ˹These (words): Take away the stone! He commands that the stone they had laid, should be lifted up by their hands so that they could not reject the sign.418 ˹Now, he who gave life to the dead man and gave back the soul etc. could not he have opened the grave and rolled away the stone by a word? And he who had said to the disciples: Ifyouhavefaith asamustardseed,youwillremovemountains(Mt 17,20)? And he * who by his voice upon the cross rent rocks and graves etc.? But because he was Lazarus’s friend he said: Openthegrave! (John 11,44) so that the smell of putrefaction might strike their nostrils. And: Unfasten him! (John 11,39), you who had clothed him. That you may acknowledge the works of your hands. And that is the reason why he was not present there when he died, so that they could not say they had come to an agreement between them.419 [11,41] ˹He lifted up his eyes. For three reasons. First: to teach us humility, that we do not rely upon ourselves, but on God. Second: to make manifest that he had taken a body like ours. Third: to make known that he was not an adversary of God like the Jews thought he was.420 [11,43] ˹These (words): He called in a loud voice: ‘Lazarus, come out!’ Not for the dead man the voice was needed, but in order that those who were present there might know that the soul was far away from its body421 and not inside the grave with it. Also it forms an illustration of that sound of the last trumpet or rather of that voice of our Lord, saying: ‘You, who are dead, stand up, come out!’ Andinthetwinklingofaneyethedead will be raised and the living will be renewed. (1 Cor 15,52). Therefore: just as he affirmed the end of the world from the devastation of Jerusalem, so (he affirmed) the general resurrection from that of Lazarus, saying: The 417 418 419 420 421

ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVII,3; 194,1-2**). Cf. ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVII,10; 200,2-5). ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XVII,9-10; 198,11-21**). JC (PG59, h. 64, c. 355,17-21*). TM (C. 229,23-27*).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 11,43-51

5

10

15

20

25

30

69

timeiscomingatlastandisalsonow— by means of Lazarus — when thedeadwillhearthevoiceoftheSonofManetc. (John 5,25). ˹It has been handed down422 that Lazarus lived for a long time and afterwards became a bishop. [11,48] ˹These (words): Ifwelethimgoonlikethis,everyoneetc. and the Romans will come etc., i.e. if we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him because of the signs and he will assemble them with him, calling himself leader and chief etc. The Romans will suspect us as if we seek to revolt. And this will be found by them * to be a cause for [69] revenge on us.423 But what they feared came over them and they fell into that which they were frightened of, a little time later. ˹The priesthood of Caiaphas now was illegal, because the priests did not stand in the ancient succession but by buying and selling, as it pleased the Romans and from year to year the priesthood had changed.424 [11,51] This he prophesied: by the gift of the Holy Spirit (he said this), but (also) from the result of events and by his evil desire and out of human calculation. And indeed it turned out to be so. Not as from his own proposition, but because thus it would be profitable to the human race, that our Lord should receive death instead of them and not all would perish. ˹Others (say): He did not know what he was saying425, what it was and in what power (he was saying it). On the one hand he had spoken about death as judgment, which on the other hand was for redemption. Because — although he was unworthy — grace was working in him to say things higher than himself, as also in the case of Balaam426. ˹Therefore he spoke — his mind not knowing — for grace was using his mouth, although she was far from his heart.427 And therefore he said that theChristshoulddieonlyforthe(Jewish)nation(John 11,50), whereas he also suffered death for the world. See, however, that the leaders’ words theRomanswillcome,takingawaybothourplaceandournation’ (John 11,48b) came true more fully than Caiaphas’s. For behold, not for them the Christ died. But (his) death rejected them entirely from the divine relationship. 422

‘Tradition Source’ (Hofstra, ‘Some remarkable passages’, 322-326 and cf. Introd. Ch. 2.3.5). 423 TM (C. 230,17. 20-23. 27-29*). 424 TM (C. 231,18-24*). 425 JC (PG59, h. 65, c. 361,21-22**). 426 Cf. Num 24. 427 JC (PG59, h. 65, c. 361,20-25*).

70

[70]

[71]

JOHN 11,54-12,3

[11,54] ˹These (words):428 HewenttoafortifiedplacecalledEphraim andremainedthere. The desert of Ephraim * is still a big town now and a five days’ journey distant from Bethel to the east. And after our Lord departed, he also hid himself there, because his hour had not yet come. A great miracle took place there (and has lasted) till the present time: that no kind of harmful reptile is found there. And if a viper or snake or scorpion etc. presses hard to enter there, it becomes too weak and cannot do any harm at all, and at last it will die if it does not hasten to get out of the area of that city. And still the people of that place hand down (the story) that our Lord bestowed this sign in that town, sealing the place so that no harmful reptiles should remain in it. [12,1] ˹These (words): SixdaysbeforethePassoverJesusarrivedat Bethany. Matthew and Mark (say): Two days before the Passover he cametoBethany(cf. Mt 26,2; Mk 14,1). John, however, said sixdays before, — on the Sabbath day, that is the day before the Sunday of the Hosannas429 — hecametoBethany.There is no contradiction between both. Now our Lord ate the Passover on Thursday evening and came to Bethany on the Sabbath day. Now from the Sabbath day on which he came to Bethany till Thursday evening there are six days. So John gave this number, but Matthew and Mark mentioned another number, because for the magnificence of the feast they observed three days for themselves and three after it. Now they mentioned ‘two’, namely the first day of the week and the second day of the week, because the third day of the week was the beginning of those seven days of feast. So they used this number, which Matthew and Luke also did in the ascent of the Lord to Mount Tabor. Matthew mentions ‘six* days’ (Mt 17,1) and Luke says ‘abouteightdays’ (Lk 9,28). So also here: whereas John was counting the number of the days till the Passover, Matthew and Mark spoke about the Passover from the beginning of the week of the feast.430 [12,3] ˹This that Matthew says: Mary anointed his head (Mt 26,7), whereas John (says) ‘hisfeet’: it is evident that it was both of them etc.431 We have explained this in (our commentary on) Matthew.432

428

‘Tradition-Source’ (Hofstra, ‘Some remarkable passages’, 326-332; Introd. Ch. 2.3.5). Palm Sunday. 430 TbK (LSII, 91,23-92,17**). 431 TM (C. 236,22-25). 432 Gibson, The Commentaries II, 170,16-17 [text]; idem, The Commentaries I, 101 [transl.]. 429

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 12,20-24

71

[12,20] ˹These (words): There were some Gentiles among those who wentuptoworshipattheFeast. Because there were always many miracles happening in the name of God amongst the Jews, the temple in which God was worshipped was highly honoured. And many of the Gentiles 5 — although they did not entirely fulfil the Law — yet used to go up to Jerusalem to worship God as much as possible. They had no part in the rituals of the Passover433, because they were uncircumcised. But they came to see the magnificence of the Feast. [12,21] ˹They came to Philip, as people who desired to see our 10 Saviour.434 ˹Now because Philip had in mind to speak with him about people from the Gentiles — with whom by command of the Law it was not allowed for them to have fellowship and also remembering that a little time before our Lord, in order not to give them reason for false witness by slanderers, had considerately warned them: Youshallnotgointotheway 15 oftheGentiles(Mt 10,5) — he (Philip) confided this to Andrew, who was (called as a disciple) prior to him. And after that together they told Jesus: SomeGentileswouldliketoseeyou!435

BOOK XIII [12,23] ˹Now our Lord, wishing to tell them that not only the Gentiles would assent to the invitation (to see him), but that greater things than these regarding him would happen, said: * The hour has come for the [72] SonofMantobeglorified, i.e. the hour has come that I will be glorified by everyone, and I will be in great things far beyond my nature.436 ˹For he said this ‘tobeglorified’ about those miracles that (would happen) 25 by means of his death and resurrection, from which his glory became manifest.437 [12,24] ˹And because he promised a deed, great, new and amazing — whereas the opposite was seen, (namely) suffering that he was about to bear — he adds: Unlessagrainofwheatfallstothegroundanddies 30 etc. He said: Let not my death disturb you (John 14,1), because (it is) like a grain of wheat (that) is on its own before it falls into the ground, 20

433 434 435 436 437

TM (C. 239,10-17**). TM (C. 239,20-21*). TM (C. 239,22-31*); JC (PG59, h. 66, c. 367,42-48*). TM (C. 240,1-7*). TbK (LSII, 166,15-16**).

72

[73]

JOHN 12,24-28

but after it has fallen into the ground and perishes, it sprouts out in great glory and brings forth twice as much fruit. Do think in the same way about my death, that I am now on my own and without glory and also considered an ordinary man. But after I have taken upon me the suffering of the cross, I will rise again in great glory. At that time I shall bring forth much fruit and at that time all men shall recognize me as Lord; not only the Jews, but also the pagan nations. And this, even more amazing, (will happen): not even the spiritual powers shall abstain from worshipping me.438 So the cross became for me on the one hand a cause of glory, on the other hand (a cause of) salvation to all men. [12,27] ˹Now,seemysoulistroubledandwhatshallIsay?MyFather, deliver me from this hour? (These words he says) that they might not consider him to be impassible to suffering, whereas he encourages them to suffer. (So) he focussed on (his) nature and openly he demonstrated the weakness and fearfulness of this (nature).439 And all this: that he was troubled in his soul by the remembrance of what was awaited. So then (he gave) an example, sufficient to persuade. * Let these things of mine be in your mind: I have come in a body, capable of suffering and fear, which is in such a humble state that it is easily troubled simply by the expectation of suffering. But why do I not withdraw from death? Because it is good the way it is. ˹And I will not ask the Father to (let me) escape. For it would not be suitable.440 But I will endure this for the sake of the salvation of all: ForthisIcame. [12,28] ˹ButthisIsay:MyFather,glorifyyourname! He says: ‘This I am asking — which will be a cause of great glory to God441 — ˹Father, bring Me quickly nearer to the cross’ etc.442 ˹And when he said these things therecameavoicefromheaven:‘Ihaveglorified(myname)andIwill glorifyitagain’, i.e. I have made myself known by means of miracles, that happened by words and again I will make myself known by means of miracles that will happen after the crucifixion443, when with deeds of power and signs this also will be fulfilled: Go, make disciples of the nationsinthenameoftheFatherandoftheSonandofthe(Holy)Spirit (Mt 28,19). 438 439 440 441 442 443

TM (C. 240,12-30*). JC (PG59, h. 67, c. 371,29-36*). TM (C. 242,3-5). TM (C. 242,9-11). JC (PG59, h. 67, c. 371,50-53*). TM (C. 242,16-20).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 12,29-31

5

10

15

20

25

30

73

[12,29] ˹Now the crowd was divided by the voice that came (from heaven)andsomesaidthatithadthundered;butothers(said):‘Anangel hadspokentohim’, because it was not a loud and clear voice, but some swelling sound, that by its noise astonished the hearers.444 ˹The disciples now perceived by revelation what was spoken.445 [12,30] ˹Now this, what he said: It was not because of me that this voice came, but because of you, (he said this) to show them that they were wrong in daring (to say) that he was not (coming) from God. It is impossible, he says, that he who will be glorified by God, would be an opponent of God and should be considered (such).446 [12,31] ˹And seeking to make known to the disciples that it would not be useless for him to bear the passion, but that his passion would be the cause of very great benefits for the world, he says: Now is the time of judgmentofthisworld.Nowisthetimethattherulerofthisworldwill becast* out.447 For because the first man had got far away from God on [74] account of disobedience, he was since then condemned to death together with all men that came after him and he was subjected to Satan.448 ˹And so he (Satan) fortified the kingdom of death over them by means of the continuous increase of sin. And nobody was capable of fighting this tyrant. Therefore: for the sake of all people who have passed and are to be, I have come with the help of the nature which dwells in me. And through me the world together with Satan will be judged.449 ˹On that account he brought in the law-court, the adversary and the condemnation etc. (saying) that from these things there will be victory450 and defeat. Who is the ruler? The slanderer.451 And what is the world? The human race. And what is the judgment? The accusation against the enemy. But what is this ‘hewillbecastout’? (This means:) relegation, defeat of the slanderer and (his) condemnation. And who is the accuser? A nature that is swayed by force. In the beginning our progenitor made all nature culpable; now acquittal is also communal.

444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451

TbK (LSII, 166,17-18). TM (C. 242,25-243,1). JC (PG59, h. 67, c. 372,12-15). TM (C. 243,15-18). TM (C. 243,21-24). TM (C. 243,28-244,4). Cf. TM (C. 244,16). This refers to the devil.

74

[75]

JOHN 12,31-33

Why now does he say that this has happened for the sake of ‘the world’? Because all (human) nature has now been completely judged in me, but with it Satan too. For although I am similar in nature regarding the body, still in honour I am Lord and Judge in these things. ˹But although I am so, I will not abstain from death — and this although I have the power (to do so)452 — lest I be accused of fear. Or if it is supposed that I have the power, ˹let then this excellent action be imputed to me alone like men as Enoch and Isaiah.453 For, after I have suffered and died and risen, I will also prevail over the tyrant and will confer upon all (human) nature freedom from Satan, sin and death. [12,32] * ˹Iwilldrawthemalltome454 ˹and ally them to me, because it is right that those who share with me in (human) nature, will also share with me455 in the spiritual gift. For it is impossible that in one and the same nature there is mortal and immortal. All natural things are part of nature. ˹However, in a(nother) place it says thattheFatherwilldrawtohimself (John 6,44), but here that he(Jesus)willdraw(tohimself)’, to let us know that there is equality in power between him and the Father. Now he said ‘(I)willdraw’ those who, according to some, are driven onward, forced456 by the tyrant and who by no means can be redeemed by themselves.457 ˹But how does ‘hedraw’? Because he already gave to everyone the hope of resurrection, in which we really shall be partakers at the end. And because he gave to many even here knowledge of the Truth and redeemed many from ungodliness and various wicked deeds by means of his laws. But he redeemed all completely by the resurrection.458 [12,33] These (words): Thishesaid,signifyingbywhatdeathhewould die. He indicated with this: Thejudgmentoftheworldisnow, and: The ruleroftheworldwillbecastout (John 12,31) — i.e. in order that the world will be judged and the adversary will be condemned — ˹that he is about to die and undeservedly.459

452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459

Cf. TM (C. 244,12-13). TM (C. 244,11-12*). TM (C. 245,6-8). TM (C. 244,25-26). TM (C. 245,9). JC (PG59, h. 67, c. 373,18-23*). TM (C. 245,10-18). TM (C. 244,9-10).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 12,41-48

5

10

15

20

25

75

[12,41] ˹About this: ThesethingsIsaiahsaidwhenhesawhisglory etc. Now Isaiah puts it about the person of the Father460, the evangelist however about the person of the Son. But the Apostle, speaking with the Romans in the Roman Empire interprets it as referring to the person of the Spirit461 for a sign that there is only one glory and holiness of the three hypostases.462 [12,44] ˹Because there were some among them who believed in the Truth. But there were also those who did not believe despite having seen the miracles. And there were those who from the signs assented the Truth.463 However, because they were ambitious464 ˹and did not want to fall from their pedestal, they concealed their thoughts.465 * Therefore our [76] Lordcriesout:˹‘Hewhobelievesinme,believesnotinme,butinhim whosentme’, i.e. that faith in me exalts you to the Father466, ˹to whom — so he says — I exalt you. This is — so he said — the intention of my words. [12,45] Therefore: He who believes in me will through me recognize the Father.467 ˹And he who sees me has seen him that sent me. This is thought to be contrary to what was (said) before.468 ˹For the first shows the distinction, the latter, however, the true likeness. For this ‘through him he sees him (the Father)’: it is evident that through likeness one comes near to vision;469 ˹so the first he writes as about his humanity, the latter, however, as about his divinity.470 [12,47] ˹These (words): Whoever hears my words and does not keepthem,Iwillnotjudgehim.ForIcamenottojudgetheworld,but togivelifetotheworld.If anyone does not hear my words, he is not judged by me. For I came to give him life. And this is the intention of his coming. [12,48] And he adds: He who rejects me, and does not receive my words,hasonewhowilljudgehim.ThewordwhichIspokewilljudge 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470

Cf. Is 6,9-10. Cf. Acts 28,25. Cf. TM (C. 248,7-10. 14-19) ; TbK (LSI, 263,10-16); JC (PG59, h. 68, c. 376,21-27*). TM (C. 248,30-249,3). Cf. John 12,42-43. TM (C. 248,27-29; 249,3-4). TbK (LSII, 166,19-21**). TM (C. 249,8-10. 14-17). TbK (LSII, 166,20-23). TM (C. 249,19-23). TbK (LSII, 166,22-24*).

76

[77]

JOHN 12,48-13,6

him etc.471 ˹There are many words in the Scriptures that, if taken by themselves, seem to be contrary to one another.’ For this ‘I will not judge’ (John 12,47), is not contrary to this ‘He has given his Son the fulljudgment’? (John 5,22), and (to this) ‘Forthejudgmentofthisworld Icame’(John 9,39). And again: ‘ThewordwhichIspoke’, how can it be a judgment, when there is no (question of a) person!472 ˹But this is what he means to say: ‘The purpose of my coming is the redemption of all. But you, because you do not believe, are condemned.473 ˹And as far as it is against my purpose, it does not come from me, because I do not want this. For because of the wickedness of your thoughts, you are condemned by my words. For the things that are not allowed there is no excuse either for those who do not * believe. And these are the very words I have spoken many times, that I do not want anything contrary to the Father. And I do not seek to make a congregation from myself and for myself’.474 [12,49] ˹These (words): For I did not speak of my own accord, i.e. because he did not say this outside the will of the Father, who speaks.475 [13,3] ˹Now these (words): FromGodIhavecomeandtoGodIam going, i.e. he, knowing that he was assigned by God to all this greatness in which he was to be after his passion, was not proud, but showed (the greatness) in himself. O depth of humility!476 [13,6] ˹These (words): WhenhecametoSimonCephas.And from whom did he start then? According to one of the God-clad men477: ‘From Judas the betrayer’. For he washed this man’s feet first. And it is believed that he wanted to put him to shame in everything and to see to it that he had no excuse. And it is questioned: how does it come that nobody else of the disciples refused to be washed except Peter? I think that he came from the betrayer to Peter. And Judas was not ashamed and did not shrink from it, because he was audacious and impudent in all these things. And it meant little to him, either that he should be washed by our Lord, or that he should precede the chief of the Apostles, or that he should stretch out his hand in the dish together with our Lord.478 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478

TM (C. 250,6-14). TM (C. 250,19-26); TbK (LSII, 166,24-167,1**). TbK (LSII, 167,1-3). TM (C. 251,11-20). TM (C. 251,28-252,2); TbK (LSII, 167,3-5**). TM (C. 255,14-17. 20-21). Cf. p. 4, note 12. JC (PG59, h. 70, c. 383,26-31. 35-39. 43-44*).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 13,8-18

77

[13,8] But these others — although they were meek and stood in awe of the Lord — how is it that they did not refuse? And we say: when they heard what was answered to Simon — i.e. UnlessIwashyou,youhave nopartwithme — they observed silence. 5 [13,10] ˹These (words): Hewhohashadabathneedsonly(towash) hisfeet. This is not, he said, baptism as Simon supposed. For you have received this once and you do not need to receive it again;479 but it is a type that * youwillunderstandlater (John 13,7), namely when and by [78] whose hands. ˹They received baptism for the forgiveness of sins before 10 they were called (by Jesus), and (they received it) from John, because they were first made his disciples and (by him) they were made partakers in the baptism of cleansing together with all the people. But the descent of the Spirit into the upper room brought it to complete fulfilment.480

BOOK XIV [13,16] These (words): There is no servant greater than his master etc., we have expounded in (the commentary on) Matthew481. [13,18] ˹These (words): Hewhoeatsbreadwithme,haslifteduphis heelagainstme.482 This is in Syriac: He who eats my bread, in whom I trusted, has acted very deceitfully against me. ˹It was not because he was 20 spoken of in the Prophets, but it was from his actions that he became suitable as a betrayer.483 ˹Now the order of the things that took place at the Paschal Supper was, as the Teachers484 hand down, as follows. While he (himself) was not eating with his disciples, he recited the Passover and completed the legal rite. 25 Then he ate his own supper. And during the supper he rose and washed the disciples’ feet. And after washing he again reclined as has been said. And after he had showed them the deeper meaning of the washing of their feet and had taught about it as was proper, then he gave them the Sacrament. And it is likely, they say, that he entrusted the Sacrament to them 15

479

TM (C. 256,25-26; 257,1-4). TM (C. 257,7-8. 10-11). 481 See : Gibson, The Commentaries II, 80,12-17 [text]; The Commentaries I, 48 [transl.]. 482 Cf. Ps 41,9. 483 TM (C. 258,16. 21-23*). 484 The following passage is derived from the so-called ‘Tradition of the School’. Cf. Introd. Ch. 2.2.1, sub F. 480

78

[79]

JOHN 13,8 – 23-24

with great care and honour, that they might know how great and excellent it is. And after the gift of the Sacrament, then he spoke the teaching John mentions. And after he had finished his teaching, he sang praises and went out to the Mount of Olives. But as John tells, it is probable that the giving of that morsel of common bread that he dipped into some kind of vessel and gave to Judas, took place after receiving the Sacrament. [13,27] This the evangelist said: And after the bread at that moment Satanenteredintohim,he did not say it about the bread of the Sacrament, but about the common bread that was on the table. * ˹For that which Judas hoped to hide in his mind was revealed before the eyes of all disciples by the giving of the bread.485 ˹Therefore now because it was justified in his mind, after the admonition486 he at once resorted to his treachery, suitable to this, his evil intention. ‘Satan’ the evangelist calls him487, because he had also participated in his Sacrament. This, that he gave the bread, took place after administering the Sacrament. And at the moment that our Lord was occupied with the administration of the Sacrament, Judas went out to send for the Jews. [13,23-24] ˹These (words): There was one (of them) leaning on his bosom, (the one) whom Jesus loved. To him Simon Cephas motioned to asketc. These words now (theone)whomJesusloved, the evangelist said them cryptically, speaking about himself; for hewhomourLordloved was John the evangelist.488 ˹These (words): Onhisbosom (he says) by reason of connection and nearness, as we have also explained elsewhere, namely at the very beginning of John the evangelist and when expounding (the words): Heison thebosomofhisFather (John 1,18).489 For the order (at the table) led to this. For they were reclining round an ‘accubitum’, that is a round table. And the first at the table was our Lord. Now after him, on his right, (was) Simon and necessarily because of the round shape (of the table), John was the last that was reclining at the table, that is to say ‘onhisbosom’, i.e. beside his cushions and at his side. ˹Simon motioned to this one to ask him who it was he spoke about.490 Peter himself, however, did not ask him for two (reasons). First: he was (too) far from our Lord’s head, 485 486 487 488 489 490

TM (C. 260,17-20**). Cf. John 13,27b. TM (C. 260,24-27**). Cf. TM (C. 260,3-5). Cf. Book I [1,18]. Cf. TM (C. 260,5.7).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 13,23-24 – 33

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

79

for he was sitting beside his feet. * Second: because our Lord had called [80] him Satan at the moment that he — in his weakness — had said: My Lord, never will this happen to you, that you will suffer! For you are trulytheMessiahwholivesforever (Mt 16,22). And again he had said: ‘One of you is a Satan’. Simon feared and trembled to ask him, because he supposed that our Lord was speaking about him. Now John, in order that no one else might hear a word, did not whisper in his left ear that was near to him, but he turned his face aside (for he was situated at his breast) and he spoke to him in his right ear secretly, because he supposed that perhaps it was not right at that moment that what was wrong should be spread openly. [13,26] What now did our Lord reply to him? ItistheonetowhomI willgivethebreadwhenIhavedippedit.AndJesusdippedthebread andgaveittoJudas,thesonofSimonIscariot. Now John understood directly who this person was and perhaps he gave a sign to Simon. But from the others it was still hidden. ˹And that is testified by the fact that, when he said to him: Whatyouareabouttodo,doitquickly(John 13,27), they supposed that he was ordering him to prepare something for the feast.491 These (words): Hedippedthebread, after supper etc., (this) was because it was the custom. And also these days the inhabitants of Palestine and also the Romans do not clear the table after eating the bread, but leave it in front of them with bread and food still upon it. In accordance with this custom our Lord acted, when after the supper he ordained the holy Sacrament. And he gave it to them and afterwards the morsel of bread to Judas. And after Judas had gone, he began (His) teaching. ˹One of the Theoforoi says: In the time of our Lord there was nobody as evil as Judas, just as there was nobody as good as our Lord. And if there had been anyone more evil than he (Judas), he would have been chosen. And also to the Jews he was detestable. * Also our Lord — lest [81] there should be an excuse for him and his master Satan — made him with the disciples a partaker of these three things: the signs, the holy Sacrament and the washing of his feet.492 [13,33] ˹This, that he said that hewillbewiththem(only)alittletime, (this he says) about the time until his passion. Now for the Jews — after 491

TM (C. 261,8-11*). This passage may also be ascribed to the ‘Tradition of the School’ (see p. 77, note 484). 492

80

[82]

JOHN 13,33-14,15

he had said: You will look for me — he added: you will not find me (John 7,34), because they would not see him any more after his suffering. But to the disciples he only said Youwilllookforme493, ˹because they would find him after the resurrection494 and they would rejoice at his appearance (to them). ˹He speaks well in adding this ‘now’, in the words: whereIamgoingnow,youcannotcome, because till now they were not able to defy death as he did, since they all fled (from death).495 ˹On account of this (he says) ‘now’ to show (them) that afterwards they would be quite capable of scorning temptations and sufferings.496 [13,34] ˹Anewcommandment he calls ‘love’, although in the Law it was already commanded. For there it is commanded that you shall love your neighbour as yourself. The word of our Lord, however, wants us to love those who are of the household of faith’497 even more than ourselves.498 And this is truly a new commandment. [13,38] The story of the crowing of the cock and the denial by Peter we have explained in (our commentary of) Matthew and Mark.499 [14,2] ˹These (words): InmyFather’shousearemanydwellingplaces. ‘Dwelling places’ he calls the abundance and the eternal rest, on account of the fact that all rest and pleasures take place at home for us.500 [14,9] What he said to Philip: Anyonewhoseesme,hasseentheFather, is treated as a folly by ordinary people, i.e. (he explains) what is unknown by what is unknown, because he was not seen in his divinity, nor was his Father seen with the human eye. But they are only to be known or understood by (their) works and by faith. [14,15] Ifyouloveme,youwillobeymycommandments. Now, because it was our Lord’s will that the disciples should be perfect in all virtue, he incites (them) * and kindles his love in their hearts. Love, namely, or affection too, is a certain force established in the soul and invisible. It finds its expression by keeping the commandments, because everyone 493

TM (C. 262,14-18**). TM (C. 262,21-22*). 495 TM (C. 262,25-29**). 496 TM (C. 262,29-263,1**). 497 Cf. Gal 6,10. 498 TM (C. 263,15-19**); TbK (LSII, 167,7-9*). For this opinion, see also: Didache II,7, Barnabas XIX,5 (Bihlmeyer, Die Apostolischen Väter, 2 and 31); also Liber Graduum (Kmosko, LiberGraduum, 395). 499 Matthew: Gibson, CommentariesII [text], 182,20-184,10; CommentariesI[transl.], 109; Mark: CommentariesII[text], 231,11-12; CommentariesI[transl.], 141. 500 TM (C. 265,23-27*); TbK (LSII, 167,9-10*). 494

5

10

15

20

25

JOHN 14,15-17

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

81

who loves another keeps his commandments and everyone who keeps another’s commandments loves him. [14,16] ˹These (words): IwillaskmyFather. He spoke these words for form’s sake, instead of this: by means of me you shall receive ‘grace’. For what use is a prayer about a matter that was predicted and prepared before the foundation of the creation.501 A prayer now needs a form in order that it will be known that the gift was bestowed by its intervention. Again, also as a confirmation of words and deeds, because anything a man asks in prayer will necessarily be granted to him. ˹These (words): (He will give you) another Paraclete i.e. another Teacher and Comforter in the temptations that will come upon you through the agency of men, so that you will endure them easily.502 And he will bestow upon you consolation for my separation from you. He says ‘another Paraclete’, because our Lord himself is also called ‘paraclete’. It is written: WehaveaParacletewiththeFather,JesusChrist,theRighteousOne (1 John 2,1). ‘Paraclete’ now is explained as Comforter. [14,17] ˹Whomtheworldcannotreceive. Now the Greek reads ‘accept’ instead of ‘receive’.503 But the meaning of both is the same, i.e. the whole world does not understand or comprehend him in his hypostasis. But he is believed only by contemplation and from the abundant gifts to all the members of his household and friends, because he also dwells in you as in his temples, as the Apostle says: HistempleyouarebytheHolySpirit whodwellsinyou (1 Cor 3,17; 6,19). It is good to know that this name ‘spirit’ is a homonym and applies to many things. Sometimes, on the one hand, it refers to the air, as this: * Hemakesthewindsblowetc. (Ps 147,18b). Another time, on the other [83] hand, it refers to the soul; it is written: Hisspirit(breath)departsand hereturnstohisearth.(Ps 146,4). Sometimes it refers to angels, as this (verse): They are all ministering spirits (Heb 1,14). And sometimes it refers to demons, evilspiritsintheheavenlyrealms(Eph 6,12), it says. And sometimes it refers to divine providence, as is said: MySpiritshall notdwellinmanforever(Gen 6,3). And sometimes it also refers to the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit as this (verse): TheHolySpiritwillcome (Lk 1,35) and: BaptizetheminthenameoftheFather,oftheSonandof the Holy Spirit (Mt 28,19). Sometimes, however, it refers to the grace 501 502 503

TM (C. 272,24-28). TM (C. 272,3-9*); TbK (LSII, 167,17-19*). Cf. TM (C. 273,18-19); cf. TbK (LSII, 167,21-23).

82

[84]

JOHN 14,17

and the gift which is bestowed from the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit. Therefore our Saviour also distinguished the Holy Spirit, who is equal to the Father and the Son, from the rest of these spirits, by saying: ‘TheSpirit ofTruth,whomtheworldcannot(receive) etc.’ (John 14,17) and by calling the Spirit the ‘Paraclete’. By this (word) ‘Paraclete’ now he distinguished him from ‘the spirit of the Air’; for this is not a comforter. And by this ‘ofTruth’ (he distinguished him) from the evil spirits. He504isa liar, it is said, andeventhefatherofit505(John 8,44). And by these (words): Whom the world cannot receive’. He distinguished him (the Holy Spirit) from the angels and souls, because he is infinite, those, however, are finite. And the hypostasis of the Spirit is incomprehensible and invisible; he neither grows nor diminishes, and he neither goes nor comes. The grace, however, which is from him, grows by means of purification of men and is extinguished by impurity. It is said: ‘DonotquenchtheSpirit’ (1 Thess. 5,19). In short: he beseeches506, he pleads507, he gives security508 and he distributes509, he comes510 and he gives511; he begins, i.e. he makes a beginning512 and comes to an end513; he remains514 and he removes515 (from one place to another); he sets free516 and he joins517 and (does) other things. However, the hypostasis of the Spirit is also called by the name ‘Spirit’, just as the rays (are called) by the name of the sun and fruit by the name of its tree. And the reason for this is that this grace may not be considered as ordinary or as separated * from the Spirit. But because it is united with him for always and is in us, we believe that the Holy Spirit does everything of his own accord. Therefore: let the reader take care not to be deluded by the equality of names in the Scriptures.

504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517

i.e. Satan. i.e. ‘of lies’. Cf. Rom 8,26. Cf. Rom 8,26-27. Cf. 2 Cor 1,22; 5,5; Eph 1,14. Cf. 1 Cor 12,11. Cf. Lk 1,35, Acts 1,8. Cf. Acts 2,4. Cf. Gen 1,1. Cf. Rev 22,17. Cf. 1 Sam 16,13. Cf. 1 Sam 16,14. Cf. Lk 4,18-19. Cf. Acts 8,29.

5

10

15

20

25

JOHN 14,20-23

83

[14,20] ˹These (words): IaminMyFather,andyouareinmeandI aminyou. This ‘IaminMyFather’is by means of equality in nature in my Godhead and by means of the inseparable connection in my humanity. Now ‘youareinme’ by means of faith and love towards me, and also 5 by the gift of the Spirit that you have received, by which you are partakers of me. ‘AndIaminyou’, when you are born again by the life of the Spirit. And you are for me in the place of a body518 and I for you in the place of a head.519

BOOK XV 10

15

20

25

30

[14,21] ˹And because he had spoken these words to the disciples, in order that it might not be supposed that those who had not seen him would be destitute of gladness — he says: Anyonewhohasmycommandmentsand keepsthem,heistheonewholovesme.Hewholovesme,willbelovedby myFatherandIwilllovehim, i.e. that everyone also who loves me and keeps my commandments, will enjoy my love and my Father’s love. He will also be esteemed worthy of the sight (of me) that comes about by knowledge, not being harmed by the fact that he did not see me in the body, but he will be delighted when he sees me coming from heaven.520 [14,22] ˹Judas now, not knowing what was being spoken about, said to him: MyLord,whydoyouintendtomanifestyourselftousandnotto theworld? For he supposed from what had been spoken, that all people except them would reject the good things that were to come. [14,23] Our Lord, however, made his word clear, saying: He who loves me, will keep my word and my Father will love him and we will cometohimandmakeourhomewithhim, i.e. I have already said that I will not deprive of the reward for noble deeds any of those who seek for it. For this is in the power * of everyone who is willing to enjoy the good [85] things to come. Therefore, he who loves me and keeps all that I have commanded, will not only not be deprived of seeing my appearance, but will also enjoy our love, for we will come and make our home with him, I and my Father, being always with him. And by taking much care, we will show our dedication to him.521 518 519 520 521

Cf. 1 Cor 12,27 and Eph 4,15-16. TM (C. 274,24-275,2*). TM (C. 275,5. 8-9. 12-22**). TM (C. 275,22-276,7**).

84

[86]

JOHN 14,28-30

[14,28] ˹This (verse): My Father is greater than I. According to the Interpreter it refers to his humanity, because this bore the suffering.522 ˹Others say: (it refers) to his Godhead. For he (the Father) is only greater than he (the Son) in cause.523 Greatness and smallness now are always spoken of with regard to beings of the same nature and not with regard to beings which are foreign in nature. For — according to the wise — it is not said that a man is greater than an ass or a camel than a gnat. If the Father is greater than the Son, so then he who is greater would be limited by him who is smaller. But how then is it said: IaminmyFatherandmy Fatherinme (John 14,11)? And again: if he is greater than he, how could he say: IandmyFather,weareone (John 10,30)? And again this ‘greater’ would be either in power or in honour or in greatness, or in material or in cause. But in the Scriptures they testify that they are equal in power, honour and in the dimensions of (their) greatness and of (their) immeasurable quantity. Therefore, what remains is that in cause he is greater, as he says: MyFatherisgreaterthan.. .˹It is evident in this ‘Father’. Now this ‘Father’, what else does it mean than that he is the cause and beginning of him who is begotten of him? Now in short: substance is from substance. In this there is no mention of great and small, for substance is from substance. There is no difference in substance, but in who he is.524 And neither is he a hypostasis from a hypostasis. [14,30] Theruleroftheworldiscomingandinmethereisnothing for him. And it is asked whence it is that Satan is called ‘ruler of the world’. It is clear * that he is not so from nature, nor from the gift of the Lord of the world. Then it remains (that it is) from his rebellion and from the debility of the inhabitants of the world that he can hold sway over them. And it is like this (verse): Theirgodistheirbellyandtheirglory istheirshame (Phil 3,19). These words: Inmethereisnothingforhim, i.e. he finds nothing in me which he expects to find in a child of Adam, he who is at the same time the father of them who belong to this kind and (the father) of sin525. On the contrary, however, he finds things which break his heart and make bitter his palate, (namely) righteousness instead of sin etc. And although this is so, he does not back away nor does he flee. But by means of his

522 523 524 525

TM (C. 278,25-26; 278,29-279,1); TbK (LSII, 167,27-28**). JC (PG59, h. 75, c. 408,22-24). JC (PG59, h. 75, c. 408,22-24). Cf. John 8,44.

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 14,30-15,1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

85

sons, the Jews, he plans to murder me, i.e. for this is his goal with all people, to kill the soul and to take away from it the body. When in this death he does not succeed, he then turns upon the death of the body. In this way he dealt with Job and here with our Lord etc. Again: Theruleroftheworldiscoming to kill me, to repay destruction, seeing that his possession has been pillaged by me and will be pillaged even more. And I, having power, both from the greatness of my righteousness and also from my strength to cast him out with all his riches, have not done this. But that the world might know that I did not come to make known myself, but to proclaim in deeds my love towards my Father — (i.e.) by my death for his servants and my brothers — it seemed to be proper for him (God), that I willingly accept the death that the ruler of evil brings upon me by violence. [14,31] ˹And to encourage them, he said: Arise, let us go from this place. Therefore, he says, because these good things are to be through my suffering, so let us not be sad and fearful of death, but on the contrary * surrender our souls into the hands of the murderers with a will that is [87] prepared (for it). Now this he wishes to say and not that we should go from (one) place to another. And it is clear from this, that he used the words that came afterwards in consecutive order, without transition. And so he instructs them about love526 and union with him and with one another. From these natural things he shows the mind the way to the Spirit, in which he ought to live and also complete (his life). [15,1] ˹IamthetruevineandmyFatheristhevine-dresser, because after all the man who had been taken on, received all grace of the Spirit by means of the connection with God the Word.527 ˹Afterwards then the rest of the believers, when they have been born again by the power of the Spirit and have become the body of Christ, receive the connection with him. He used the example of the vine. He says that the vine, when planted in the ground, it becomes animated of its own accord. This it receives at a certain moment from the soil and then it puts forth branches, which bear fruit depending on how many (branches) there are. But if they have been pruned away, they cease from being animated and bearing fruit. In this way you also have to think about yourselves, that I am in the place of the vine and that I am for you the root, because I was first. All the grace of the Spirit I have received and you are for me in the place 526 527

TM (C. 280,10-18**). TM (C. 281,10-13*); TbK (LSII, 168,1-4).

86

[88]

JOHN 15,1

of the branches, because by spiritual birth you have received a connection with me.528 ˹And just as with a vine the vine-dresser examines the quality of the branches, and those that he sees to be good and suitable to give fruit he lets grow carefully and takes pains for them. But those that do not bear fruit he delivers to the fire. So the Father examines the will of everyone and those that he sees to be connected with me by their love, he takes pains for them and gives them a great opulence of spiritual gifts. But those who are * devoid of love, he delivers them at that very time to the judgment to come.529 Others say: he calls himself the vine as an indication of the assumption (of a man). For he was not the vine-dresser as (if he was) the cause, but the Father was the cause, both of the Word and of the flesh, namely by birth alone, beyond (all such questions as) where, when and how. (He is the cause) of this (Word), in order that he should be and that there should be a Son. And in a fine manner he speaks about the Father as the vine-dresser of the vine, his flesh, in order that we will understand that he (Jesus) receives these things from him. It is said: TheHolySpiritwill comeandthepoweroftheHighestetc. (Lk 1,35), i.e. by the resurrection the Christ made manifest his overwhelming power, as the Apostle says.530 So as the cause and the completion of the Incarnation, he calls the Father ‘vine-dresser’. And why does he not manifest himself as ‘vine-dresser’, as in the destruction of the temple? To show that he took upon him the passion apart from his Godhead, he demonstrates there that the flesh is perishable and not lasting. And although sometimes he calls himself ‘Shepherd’ and the believers ‘sheep’, by means of this demonstration he teaches here also the participation which they have naturally and by grace with him. And (he teaches) that thus they are able to call into being what they have received if they hold on to him tightly. He attributes (the notion) ‘cause’ to the Father, that the honour of the Father might not be denied and the human nature (of our Lord) might not come to division and fragmentation. Again: he calls the Father ‘thevine-dresser’ that it might not be thought that he has a will alien to the Father, as even in every place he attributes to the Father all that he says and does. He says: TheFatherhasgivenme 528 529 530

TM (C. 281,13-26*). TM (C. 282,4-13*). Cf. Eph 1,19-20.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

JOHN 15,1-5

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

87

(commandment)whattosay (John 12,49), and: MyFatherwhodwellsin me etc. (John 14,10). [15,5] Apartfrommeyoucandonothing. Now here many stumble by entirely taking away the freedom of will, which is a fixed quality of a rational nature. Behold, they say, he has decided and determined that apartfromme* youcandonothing. And we say that, if this ‘we can do [89] nothing’ is written instead of ‘entirely (not)’, then this is a quality of animals and of those that have not the faculty of speech, which naturally conduct themselves only instinctively and compulsively, without change from this to that etc. And therefore, if we are also judged just in this way without reason, on the right and on the left531, then for what are we blamed or praised? And why do we use laws and admonitions, do we fast and pray etc.? (Why perform) various virtuous actions? For this reason some add to this ‘can(not)do’ this (term) ‘good’, that is to say, they complete the Word of our Lord, which has no shortcomings. For in this way the verse is improved. But we ask: Can we not do anything good at all? Or even anything bad? And if (we cannot) do what is bad either, do not all evil people therefore do (their) evil things without him? And what then does he pay them back for? And if it is so, that we cannot do anything good, how then is it not absurd that they are able to do bad things in their freedom? Good things, however, they are not able to do unless they are helped by another power! So then it is confirmed here that others do wickedness, saying that sin is implanted by nature and therefore easy to commit. Extremely difficult (it is), however, (to do) the good things, because there is no power for them in nature. Well then: the word was appropriate to the disciples, but not to other people. Particularly it is confined to the works of preaching alone and not to other actions. And if not so, not even Judas would have been able to do what he did without him, because he was one of them to whom then the word was spoken. Therefore: this word was selected only for use with a view to preaching, * because it was not in their power or wisdom to bridle [90] the turbulent world with the laws belonging to Jesus and at the same time to make it serve (them) etc. Another explanation, however, says: (this word was selected) because as long as they were with the Master, they were simple disciples because of the exceptional position of the Master. However, after they had received 531

Cf. Mt 25,32 et seq.

88

[91]

JOHN 15,5-15

the Spirit everyone individually was glorious both in words and mighty acts etc. In order that they might not suppose the Spirit to be better than the Son, he suitably put forward this apartfromme,youcandonothing, instructing them to take account of the fact that the coming spiritual gifts are jointly from him and from the Spirit. And this testifies to it: Iwillbe withyoualwaystotheendoftheworld(Mt 28,20). For, if he was always in their company, it is evident that without him they could not have done what they did. [15,15] ˹These (words): Inolongercallyouservants,becauseaservant doesnotknowetc. What now if someone chances to observe these intrinsically contradictory words? For the things that are done by their lord are not hidden from the servants, because they sometimes also know most of the lord’s deeds, especially when he loves them. But our Lord did not tell them everything he knew, although he said: EverythingthatIheardfrom myFather,Ihavemadeknownandmanifesttoyou.532 And if this is not the case, how could what he said a little later be maintained: MuchIhave to say, but you cannot comprehend it all now, but when he comes, the Paraclete, he will make it known to you etc. (John 16,12-13). ˹But this he says: that servants do not share to the same extent in secrets as those who are free (people). * For although they, by order of their master, learn something at the right moment to serve (him), yet friends learn the secrets of their friends, because they share in the good things. Therefore you are not servants, but you ought rightly to be called ‘friends’, equal in glory as sons and inheritors of my blessings533, and this in order that by you the revelation of these things will be made manifest to others too, just as the Apostle in praise declares that by means of the church the wisdomofGodshouldbemadeknownetc.(Eph 3,10). Therefore: those who by the Spirit have received the position of sons and have understood the secrets of the hidden things are no longer called ‘servants’, as the Apostle also philosophises: You are not servants, but sons, also heirs, heirsofGodetc.(Gal 4,7)534. ˹These (words): EverythingthatIhaveheardfrommyFather,Ihave madeknowntoyou i.e. I have made you partakers in the good things that I have received. So by this word he refers to the facts.535

532 533 534 535

TM (C. 284,4-10*). TM (C. 284,10-17*). Cf. Rom 8,17. TM (C. 284,19-22**).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 16,2-15,26

89

[16,2] ˹Andthehouriscomingwhenanyonewhokillsyouwillthink (heisoffering)aservice(toGod)etc. Now these things were not only done cruelly by the Jews, but also by the Gentiles. For many of the sons of Simon the Sorcerer536 are accustomed to mingle with the Church and by 5 guile they supposed to be able to participate in the doctrine of truth. They also still do this to this day. So they are called by many ‘Borboriani’537, for they take their mothers (as wives) and eat their children, and another atrocity they commit in secret538. Sometimes many (of them) were arrested on account of this atrocity. And many outsiders supposed that the Church 10 also acted like this and that this was its law. And because of this the believers had to endure myriad wrongs from outsiders, because the latter supposed that by the (believer’s) death they brought about purification to the world, as one of the brethren * from the region of Gaul539 also wrote [92] to one of the bishops in Asia540, telling how much harm in the days of the 15 emperor Verus541 had befallen believers because of this supposition.542

BOOK XVI [15,26] And since he wished to tell (them) about the greatness of the gift of the Spirit and the equality of his nature with the Father and the Son, he gradually philosophises in a prudent way to the disciples, who were 20 (still) ignorant at that time, as he also did to the Samaritan woman, as we have expounded above. And first (he said): IwillasktheFatherandhe willgiveyouanotherParaclete’ (John 14,16). Afterwards he went further than this ‘IwillasktheFather’ and said: theFatherwillsend(him)inmy name (John 14,26) and after this (he said): IwillsendhimfromtheFather. 25 The last part of the phrase, however, reveals that the Spirit comes without 536

Cf. Acts 8,9-24. A gnostic faction. See: Foerster,GnosisI, 100-120. 538 These accusations against Christians are widespread in antiquity. See e.g. Ireneaus (PG 7, c. 1235-1236) and Minucius Felix (Quispel, M.MinuciiFelicisOctavius, IX,1-7). 539 All MSS read †ÎÙ¾Å(Gajus). TM’s commentary, from which IoM derives this passage, has †ÎçÚáÅ(Gaul). See: C. 290,11. 540 The Roman province of that name. 541 Lucius Aelius Verus (130-169 A.D.) was the son of Lucius Aelius Caesar and coRoman Emperor with Marcus Aurelius from 161 until his death in 169. For the persecution mentioned, see: Eusebius of Caesarea, HistoriaEcclesiastica, Liber V, cap. 1 (Gr. text: PG20, c. 415-416; Syr. text: Wright and McLean, EcclesiasticalHistory, Book V, 1-15, 247,11-253,5. Cfr. Introd. 2.2.2, Sub B 3. 542 TM (C. 289,18-19*; 289,24-290,14*). 537

90

[93]

JOHN 15,26-16,14

persuasion so to speak, and without instruction. But rather by his free will he convinces, condemns and judges. And he calls to mind what has been done and searches out what is hidden and he reveals, as God does, the future. [16,8-9] ˹And when he comes, he will convince the world of sin, of righteousnessandjudgment.Andhewillexplainaboutsin,becausethey donotbelieveinmeetc.So powerful is, he says, the descent of the Spirit, that when he rests upon men, the sins shall be revealed of those who acted deceitfully against me, who have in mind to kill him who was worthy of this greatness and honour. But also my righteousness will become known, about which I have spoken with much integrity in deeds and words directed at them, which I did in all sincerity. By the same things the divine providence of my passion will also be revealed, that it was not senseless and in vain, but for the condemnation of Satan.543 [16,11] ˹These (words): Therulerofthisworldnow(standscondemned). For when through the gift of the Spirit * in my name, by means of the disciples, miracles are performed which are contrary to the opinion of Satan and his attendants and the disciples henceforward gain much honour, then the guilt of Satan will be openly shown. And the manifestation of my honour will be gloriously revealed and then the sin of his adversaries will also be denounced.544 [16,13] ˹These (words): Hewillnotspeakfromhisownopinion. He did not speak about weakness, but about unity and equality with the Father and the Son, i.e. there is for him no opinion different from that of the Father and the Son.545 [16,14] ˹These (words): From what is mine he will take and make it manifesttoyou mean that with me is all the grace of the Spirit, because I am united with God the Word and have received the true sonship. From the grace now that is in me and with me, a small part will come upon you, so that you also shall be called children of God.546 ˹For he did not say: he will take ‘from me’, but ‘fromwhatismine’, because all grace is entirely his.547 Therefore also as a body that is perfect and without defect, he (the Spirit) appeared upon him at the Baptism. But upon the Apostles and the believers (he appeared) only partly, just as the tongue (is only a part) of 543 544 545 546 547

TM TM TM TM TM

(C. (C. (C. (C. (C.

292,27-29; 293,1-11*). 293,1. 20-25*). 295,4-7. 10-11; 296,3*). 297,30-298,1-4*). 296,23-24. 29**); TbK (LSII, 168,5-9).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 16,14-26

5

10

15

20

25

30

91

the whole body. And it is like this: Fromhisfullnesswehaveallreceived (John 1,16). But he calls the gift his own, because that (gift) is his, naturally in his Godhead, but also in his humanity because of his deification. This ‘hewilltake’not as something that is deficient in fullness, but as on a footing of equality. See, how these hypostases glorify one another and are glorified by one another, because of the equality of their nature. So it is written: Hewillglorifyme (John 16,14), (and:) Ihaveglorified you on the earth (John 17,4), (and:) I have glorified and again I will glorify (John 12,28) and: Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit willnotbeforgiven (Mk 3,29). [16,23] ˹These (words): In that day you will ask me nothing i.e. it is useless for you to pray. * For by the gift of the Spirit you will receive [94] participation in all good things. And lest they might think that they really do not need to ask, he adds: Verily,verily,whatsoeveryouwillaskmy Father in my name, he will give you. This is not contradictory to this: ‘Youwillnotask’, but it is spoken allegorically, (in the sense of): when you receive the grace of the Spirit, you will obtain the opulence of the spiritual gifts so abundantly that you will also have no need of prayer.548 [16,24] ˹Untilnowyouhavenotaskedforanythinginmyname. Now indeed in truth they had not supposed that they should pray to him. Ask andyouwillreceiveandyourjoywillbecomplete. Therefore, he says, you will not stop asking. For you will receive, that thus you will rejoice because of the things that are given to you.549 [16,25] ˹These (words): Atimeiscoming,whenIwillno(t)(longer) speaktoyouinparables. Now he spoke about the time of the descent of the Spirit.550 ˹For about this he had said: Iwilltellyouplainlyaboutthe Father, that they should know that the Father brought forth the Son from his essence, whom they did not know at that time until grace descended upon them.551 [16,26] ˹But these (words): IamnotsayingtoyouthatIwillaskthe Fatheronyourbehalf are not contrary to what he said above: Iwillask the Father (John 14,16), because for the man who was taken on, it is suitable that he should pray, although he did not really pray. But because he was the very cause of the gift, he mentions prayer as being proper to

548 549 550 551

TM (C. 301,5-20*; TbK (LSII, 168,9-14*). TM (C. 301,22-25**). TM (C. 302,1-3*); TbK (LSII, 168,14-15**). TM (C. 302,5-8*).

92

[95]

JOHN 16,26-17,4

him. Here, however, because he is speaking about the greatness of his Godhead, which they were about to know openly, he says: Iwillnotask (theFather), to make manifest that there was no need to pray in favour of them, because he himself could give in like manner * etc.552 [17,1] ˹These (words): Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you.He does not say this as a causal connection. For the Father did not glorify him for this reason that he might be glorified by him, but he says that it corresponds to it, as a Scriptural custom553, i.e. when I have become well known by means of the marvels (that took place) in my passion, ˹then you also will become manifest by me, that you are glorious and great.554 ˹He does not ask: ‘Give me glory!’, but (he asks) ‘make manifest what I have from you’.555 For he speaks about the man who was taken on. Now everywhere he calls the cross ‘glory’. It is said: Youmadehimfor alittlewhilelowerthantheangelsandyoucrownedhimwithgloryand honour (Ps 8,5; Heb 2,7). And the time has come that he shall be glorified etc. [17,4] These (words): The work you gave me to do, I have accomplished, and this: Apartfrommeyoucandonot(hing)etc. (John 15,5) (this is in order) to show that he perfected every act by his divine ministry in the flesh. The Apostles and teachers now were only there as mediators for the faith of men, therefore what was hidden and not yet revealed was made known by means of them. And this mystery was represented by the man who was blind from the womb556. Just as first the eyes were formed by spittle from his mouth and then he was commanded to wash them in the water of Siloach. This would have been of no use — even if he had washed himself many times in (the water of) Siloach — if they had not already been formed secretly. Neither would Naaman have been cleansed in the water of the Jordan from his leprosy, had not the power of God cleansed him by means of Elisha557. In like manner nor would the Apostles have been able to baptize the men whomGodfore-ordainedinthe likenessoftheimageofhisSon (Rom 8,29), if Christ, when he came, had not baptized them in the water from (his) side558. See, there ‘water’ of 552 553 554 555 556 557 558

TM (C. 302,14-15*. 18-20. 23-26). TM (C. 307,29-308,2*). TM (C. 307,26-27*); TbK (LSII, 168,17-19**). TM (C. 307,22-24*); TbK (LSII, 168,15-17**). Cf. John 9. Cf. 2 Kings 5,14. Cf. John 19,34; 1 John 5,6-8.

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 17,4-4

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

93

two kinds: hidden and revealed, i.e. of the spittle and of Siloach. * And [96] (see) here (water) of two kinds: of (his) side and of baptism. [17,5] ˹And he continues: MyFather,glorifymenowinyourpresence withthegloryIhadetc., i.e. reveal who I am, and make known to them that glory and that nature, which were there before the world was there (and make known to them) how I clearly showed your glory to all, while it was invisible. Thus also: Make me to be known, because men do not know me! For this was the greatness of the man who was taken on, that it should be known that God the Word dwells in him.559 Others say: GiveMethegloryIhadinyourpresenceetc. If he had this (glory), how, when and why was it taken away from him? But (by coming) as one of them, he persuaded (them) and took on a person from him who brought him forth and he gave back again to men what they had been deprived of. Again: he said it because of the body which he had put on. And if it was necessary to take it on and be perfected, why then had he not taken it and been perfected before he was seen in the body, when he was (still) with him who brought him forth? But from (the moment) that he came to that body, this was the cause of his lack (of glory). [17,4] These (words): The work you gave me to do I have accomplishedetc.,i.e. the debt, which was owed by all sons of Adam by breaking the commandment up till now, I have paid for all of them. Again he calls three amazing deeds ‘work’. These three compete with each other. The first (‘deed’ is): that he appeared in the flesh (born) of a virgin and endured all that the prophets had spoken of; and their voices that had cried out his coming were confirmed. And their lamp was put aside after the true Light had shone forth. The second (‘deed’ consists in): * the [97] signs and miracles in which he did whatnobodyeverdid, as he noted, if Ihadnotdonetheworks (John 15,24). The third (‘deed’ is): that he died as one condemned and that he rose without any corruption (of the flesh)560. And besides these things (there is) also his teaching that gives life and which he benignly poured out on all. And so then he says: ‘The debt has been paid; give (back) your glory to those who have been deprived of it’. And if he had needed glory, why would he not have taken it because of his need (of it)? He turned away and gave it to others, but he still remained in his former necessity.

559 560

TM (C. 310,3-4. 10-16**). Cf. Acts 2,27.31.

94

[98]

JOHN 17,22-16

[17,22] Theglory, he says,thatyougaveme,Ihavegiventhem. For this was how he took upon himself all the humiliations! Iwashungry, he said, andIwasthirstyandIwasinprison561, and the rest of the humiliations (we read about) in the Gospel. In this way he also carried upon himself the former glory, ‘which’, (so he said), ‘I took (upon me) and which I lost by the transgression of the commandment etc.’. [17,7] ˹These (words): NowIknowthateverythingyouhavegivenme, comes from you, are like this: Now you have made known that you fear God (Gen 22,12)562, ˹i.e. you have given a great example of your fear of me. In the same way he also wants to say here — in the order of the above-mentioned words — that it is (so he says) an example of the relationship, which they have with you. This relationship is there for those who believe in me and consent to these words563 and of these I have said that ‘Theyareyours’(John 17,9). For this is the very thing he said: The wordsyougaveme,Igavethem (John 17,8).564 [17,11] ˹These (words): Sothattheymaybeoneasweare, i.e. they are one by the new birth, by which they are esteemed worthy of the adoption as sons, and may by grace call God ‘Father’.565 Concerning (my) sonship: it is (a sonship) by nature with the Word. ˹This, that he says: In your name (John 17,11e) i.e. ‘of the Father’, him whom they also were about to invoke, after being esteemed worthy of the adoption as sons by the Spirit.566 *

5

10

15

20

BOOK XVII [17,12] Except the son of perdition, so that Scripture would be fulfilled, that is to say that the end of them will be perdition. He now speaks 25 about Judas. [17,16] ˹These (words): Theyarenotoftheworld: not by nature, but by the new birth. And they had become members of the Christ instead of children of Adam.567 Notice that he did not say: ‘they are not in the 561 562 563 564 565 566 567

Cf. Mt 25,35-36. TM (C. 312,1. 7-9**); TbK (LSII, 168,23-25**). Cf. John 17,8. TM (C. 312,9-15**). TM (C. 316,8-9. 12-13*). TM (C. 316,8-9*. 13-15*). TM (C. 318,1-3); TbK (LSII, 168,25-169,2**). Cf. 1 Cor 12,12 et seq.

JOHN 17,16-21

5

10

15

20

25

30

95

world’, but (‘theyarenot)oftheworld’, that is to say that, ˹although in their body they are in the world, yet in their spirit and in their citizenship they are above the world. But our citizenship is in heaven568, says the Apostle.569 [17,19] ˹These (words): FortheirsakeIhavesanctifiedmyself,that they too may be sanctified in truth, i.e. because of this I also offered myself to suffering, that when these things also fall to them, they will acquire through me the true holiness, i.e. the grace of the Spirit, so that they also will be able to preach the Truth.570 ˹Now all these things were prophecies of what was going to happen in relation to the disciples, and they are spoken in the form of a prayer.571 ˹The Interpreter says: ‘For it is also evident that these words were not a prayer’.572 And they are not necessary in relation to God the Father, (or) to that nature of our Lord’s humanity, whose will has authority over all that he wishes. Therefore: because that night was the completion of his (divine) ministry, it appeared to him that therefore this was the time to make these things known to them. ˹Among them there were instructions and prophecies of things to come. Among them there were also hope573 and encouragement for the whole human race, especially for the believers. And also exhortation and hope for the disciples. Among them there were also mysteries about future things, which will really be fulfilled in the world to come. As an instruction for them and the whole world he pointed (these things) out. And among them (he) also (spoke) about his greatness and his glory which he had with the Father and also about how we are guided [99] * to him etc. [17,21] ˹These (words) now: Thatallofthemmaybeone,justasyou, myFather,areinmeandIaminyou i.e. give to them all, so he says, that they receive the connection with us574 by means of the Spirit of the adoption as sons, just as the Word is united with God i.e. just as I am by the connection with God the Word. Father, you have one Son and for this reason I have a relationship with you. Just as I call you ‘my Father’, make that also the believers are together with the one body, the one 568 569 570 571 572 573 574

Phil 3,20. TM (C. 318,4-6). TM (C. 318,26-319,1). TM (C. 319,9-11). TM (C. 319,11-14). Cf. TM (C. 319,1. 14). TM (C. 319,22-23; 320,25).

96

[100]

JOHN 17,21-18,13

hypostasis and the one person. For the common person is able to bear humiliation and exaltation, but a hypostasis on his own cannot. Single hypostases now do not blend into a unity etc. With me being to them as a head, they shall be to me as members575 and they will share with me this name of sonship. And we ought to know that God the Word is the person of the Onlybegotten, who alone takes and holds the manhood of Christ. And we recognize one Son and we firmly believe this and we do so because of the inseparable connection between the natures, i.e. between (his) Manhood and (his) Godhead. But although we are partakers in the name of sonship and although there is a relationship with Christ, on account of immortality and incorruption (of the flesh), and the rest which is by means of him — as these (words) say: Sons of God you are and fellow-heirs with Jesus Christ (Rom 8,17) — yet we are not partakers in all other things that belong to Christ, i.e. Lordship, power, kingdom, judgment and Godhead over all. Now we only share with him in the name of sonship, through the abounding love which this good Lord showed with regard to our nature. He is a lantern, a lamp on whose head are three or four places for torches. [18,6] ˹This, * that he threw them twice backwardstotheground at that time576, made manifest that he delivered himself to them of his own will and not under compulsion, and that, had he so wished, he could have rooted them out and destroyed them.577

5

10

15

20

BOOK XVIII [18,13] ˹And we ought to know that John mentions thehouseofAnnas 25 (as the place) where Peter denied, when our Lord came out to go to the house of Caiaphas in his chains. AndhelookedatSimon, it is said, and atthatverymomenthebegantoweep (Lk 22,61).578 ˹But the other evangelists mention the house of Caiaphas (as the place) where he denied. Now because almost all of the disciples had fled, when our Lord was 30 taken, this was the cause of the insufficiency of their stories, so that

575 576 577 578

Cf. 1 Cor 12,12. Cf. John 18,6. Cf. TM (C. 324,2-14). TbK (LSII, 93,14-17**).

JOHN 18,13-19,19

5

10

15

20

25

97

they not only used different words, but also (spoke of different) places, although all of them related one and the same subject and one and the same denial.579 [18,28] ˹These (words): Theydidnotenterthepraetorium,sothatthey mightnotbedefiled,untiltheyshouldeatthePassover. He speaks not only aboutthe day of the Passover, but about the whole week, in which they were commanded to purify and sanctify themselves.580 ˹Some say because of this sentence and because (of the words) itwasjustbeforethe PassoverFeast (John 13,1) that he ate (the Passover) not on the Passoverday itself, but on the day before etc.581 We have expounded (this) in (the commentary on) Luke582. [18,32] ˹These (words): That the word of Jesus would be fulfilled (indicating)bywhatdeathhewastodie, i.e. thathewouldbedelivered bythemtotheGentiles (Lk 18,32).583 [19,13] Stonepavement he calls the somewhat heightened place. And this was a rock — stones actually — which sustained this place. A great part was carried by it, as a strengthening of the (whole) place. ˹Now inside the praetorium our Saviour carried his cross584, but when he came outside the city they met Simon from Cyrene and compelled him (to carry the cross).585 [18,31] ˹These (words): We have no right to execute anyone. They said them because of the Passover, like * a fox hiding under the form of [101] a lion or a hare that spoke feignedly. As if they did not kill him in delivering him over to death.586 They crucified him between two criminals587 and not aside from them, as if he were worse than they at the level of crime. [19,19] ˹These (words): He (Pilate) wrote a notice and put it above hishead. Now he wrote (this) in three languages, because in Judea there were Hebrews, Greeks and Romans. This now he had written: Thisisthe 579

TM (C. 328,29-329,8). TbK (LSII, 92,26-29**). 581 TbK (LSII, 92,18-22*). 582 See: Gibson, TheCommentariesIII, 76,5-78,5 [text]; TheCommentariesI, 195-196 [transl.]. 583 TM (C. 329,26-30). 584 Cf. John 19,17. 585 TbK (LSII, 93,21-25**); cf. TM (C. 335,11-12. 15-17. 29-30). For ‘Simon from Cyrene’: Lk 23,26. 586 TM (C. 329,24-26). 587 Cf. John 19,18. 580

98

JOHN 19,19-23

KingoftheJews. For two reasons. First: to revile them and to mock them588, that they entirely hated this, their king and benefactor, so deeply that they delivered him to the cross. Next: for fear of being accused before Caesar and being aware that he could be convicted, because he had crucified a righteous man, who had worked many miracles and mighty 5 deeds. Ultimately this is what happened and he came to his end in a nasty way589. Abgar, a native of Edessa590, wrote to him. What he wrote can be found in the Ecclesiastical History of Bar Maryam591. Although he had wickedly planned this ‘HeistheKingoftheJews’and had written it to excuse himself for this murder — for he took refuge in guile, because 10 he actually did not want to (crucify him) — yet he was (in this way) forced to proclaim the truth: ‘He is the King, the Christ’. [19,21] But the chief priests and the elders disallowed these words ‘HeistheKingoftheJews’ and desired (that he added to it) ‘Hesaid’, to avoid their being accused with him of rebelliousness. And again: to 15 avoid being accused of killing their kings, as their fathers too had killed the prophets. ˹They, however, were conscious of the fact that Pilate was scoffing at them.592 For Pilate wished that their disgrace should remain for ever.

BOOK XIX

[102]

20

[19,23] ˹These (words): His undergarment was seamless, woven in onepiecefromthetop, i.e. it was without a seam, * but it was woven in the same way as clothes whose sleeves are woven, just as textile fabrics are made at this present time.593 These (words): Theytookhisclothesanddividedthemintofourshares. 25 It was not because the value of his clothes was so very high that they were greedy to strip them off to sell them as merchandise, but probably 588

Cf. TM (C. 336,3-8). For the various traditions about the end of Pilate’s life: Hennecke and Schneemelcher, NeutestamentlicheApokryphenI.Band, 356-358. 590 Abgar V, King of Edessa (9-46 A.D.). For Abgar’s letter to Jesus: Eusebius, HistoriaEcclesiastica, Liber I, 13,6-10. 591 Daniel bar Maryam (c. 610 A.D.): Wright, A Short History, 180; Baumstark, Geschichte, 207; Van Rompay, ‘Daniel bar Maryam’, 113; Baum, ‘Zeitalter der Araber’, 66. 592 TM (C. 336,8). 593 TM (C. 336,24-27). 589

JOHN 19,23-35

5

10

15

20

25

30

99

because they had an incorrect opinion, i.e. some high supposition, of our Lord on account of the greatness of the miracles he had done, which they had heard and seen. And they wished to take them indeed as something to resort to. But with whatever reason they might have done this, nevertheless according to custom it brought forth great relief. ˹Now it is handed down about his garment that, wherever it is put and kept, when there is a lack of rain and it is taken outside, immediately when they lift it up towards heaven, rain comes down in abundance for the life and nourishment of men and animals.594 ˹Mar Ephrem says: ‘His garment which was not rent is a symbol of his Godhead, which is not rent or divided. And his stole which was divided into four parts is a symbol of the division of his body and a foreshadowing of his Gospel that (would go) to the four corners of the earth.595 [19,34] ˹These (words): Oneofthesoldiersstruckhiminhissidewith aspear i.e. he pierced his side, andbloodandwaterflowedoutimmediately. These are signs of the new birth. Now ‘blood’ is a manifestation of the sacraments.596 The spear was a broad lance. [19,35] ˹These (words): Hewhosawit,hasgiventestimonyandhis testimonyistrue, refer to himself. And from this it is evident, that John the evangelist was close at hand to these things.597 The Interpreter says: ‘The flowing out of blood and water was not revealed to everyone’s eyes, but was hidden from many’. ‘And this’, * he [103] says, ‘is evident from what he said, namely he who saw it, has given testimony. To him one could give credence in this, even if not everybody had seen it’.598 ˹But the Teachers of the Schools say about what the Interpreter said: ‘When the Interpreter said that John only saw (it), he meant this as it seems: that he alone saw blood and water separately, not mixed with one another, but water separately and blood separately. However, the rest of the people who were there saw all these things that happened, only they did not see the separation from one another, of the water from the blood, because they did not look at it carefully. But John looked at it

594 Tradition Source. This tradition is also literally to be found in the ‘Cave of Treasures’ (Ri, LaCavernedesTrésors [text], § L,8-11; 416,8-10). See also: Introd. Ch. 2.3.5. 595 ES: Leloir, Commentaire,Versionarménienne [transl.], XX,27, 214,26-29**; see also: Beck, SermonesinHebdomadamSanctam [text], Sermo VI,63-64; 1225-1241 and [transl.]; Sermo VI,111; 1225-1241. 596 TM (C. 338,9-13**). 597 TM (C. 338,14-18**). 598 TM (C. 338,18-24**).

100

[104]

JOHN 19,35-20,1

carefully, because of his love for our Lord and he saw something unusual. And if it were not so, how then could it be that there was something that revealed itself in this way, but that people could not see? And again: there was no reason for which it might have been of any use to keep it from the onlookers.599 [19,37] These (words): Theyshalllookontheonetheyhavepierced i.e. the time will come — after he rose from the dead and after their shameless will had been despised — that they, by means of this (Jesus) whom they transfixed and pierced with a spear, will stand in awe of (his) righteousness and through these things and by faith in him will become familiar with the worship of God and turn to the truth of his doctrine. [19,25] ˹These (words): Near the cross stood his mother and his mother’ssister,Mary,thewifeofJoseph,andthemotherofJames,Joses, SimonandJudah600. She was called the sister of the Blessed One, because of her great love for her.601 [19,31] These (words): ThatdaywasaspecialSabbath. This Sabbath, that is to say that Sabbath day, was special for three reasons. First: because the Sabbath day had been blessed and sanctified by God. Second: because on that day * the celebration of the Passover was to take place. Third: it was the conclusion of the (last) week of fifty years, in which possessions were to be returned and slaves set free etc.602 [20,1] ˹Julian603 and Porphyrus604, wicked men, here accuse the evangelists of disagreement with regard to the resurrection of our Lord, concerning both the times and the hours. Matthew says: Intheeveningofthe Sabbath, when the first day of the week was beginning to dawn, Mary (Magdalene)andtheotherMarywent (Mt 28,1). Now Marcus says: Inthe earlydawnofthefirstdayoftheweek,atsunrise,theywent (Mk 16,2). 599

Tradition of the School. For this passage cf. Introd. Ch. 2.2.1, sub F. IoM here gives a very remarkable variant reading. Thus for instance the qualifications mentioned along with Maria, the Lord’s mother’s sister, differ and also the name of Mary Magdalene is absent. For the names mentioned, see: Mt. 13,55; 27,56 and Mk 15,40.47. 601 TbK (LSII, 96,25-27) denies the existence of a certain Mary, who is said to have been the sister of Mary, Jesus’s mother, being married to Joseph and having Joses, Simon and Judah as her children. 602 So here a year of jubilee would be involved. Cf. Lev. 25,13 et seq. 603 Julian Apostata, Roman Emperor (361-363 A.D.) who wanted to make Neoplatonism the leading philosophical movement. 604 Porphyrus of Tyre (232 - 306 A.D.), Greek philosopher and a fervent adherent and advocate of Neoplatonism. He wrote inter alia a polemic pamphlet ‘Against the Christians’. 600

5

10

15

20

25

JOHN 20,1-4

5

10

15

20

25

30

101

Luke then says: On the first day of the week, while it was still dark, theywent (Lk 24,1). And John says: Onthefirstdayoftheweek,while itwasstilldark,(Mary)Magdalenewent. Three of them having one conception, Matthew having another conception, because all men do not think alike about the beginning of the day. But some consider the evening as the beginning, others the morning, as the Armenians hold. Well then: Matthew also held to the custom of the Armenians and because of this he says about the night of the first day of the week that it was the Sabbath. The other evangelists, however, reckoned it the first day of the week, as we count.605 ˹Again, if they had not all written equally about the resurrection, that it happened or (if they had written) about the day that it was not the same, or if they had not all said equally about the women that ‘they came to the sepulchre’, then perhaps one might have doubted. Further: it is a custom of Scripture to speak pars pro toto etc.606 as we have extensively explained in (the commentary on) Matthew607. These (words): Shesawthatthestonehadbeentakenawayfromthe tomb. The stone was not taken away in order that he might get out. For he did not need this. For behold, previously it was also like that. While he was mortal and material, ˹he came out through the virginal doors, without their being opened608. And he passed on between hands, while not being seized609. * And with firm steps he walked upon the fluid sub- [105] stance of the water610. ˹And after he was risen he entered through closed doors.611 But thestonehadbeenraised to indicate that he had risen. For if the grave had been guarded, being closed and sealed, it would not have been credible that he should rise. Nevertheless he rose at the cockcrowing, the grave being closed and sealed. And then for a sign that he had risen anangelcamedownfromheaven (Mt 28,2), as Matthew said, hisappearancewaslikelightningandhisclotheswere(white)assnow (Mt 28,3) and herolledawaythestonefromtheentranceandsatonit (Mt 28,2) and he announced the resurrection of our Lord to the women. [20,4] ˹These (words): Thosetwowererunning,butthatdisciple — who was John — outranSimon. Now he was the first for three reasons. First: 605 606 607 608 609 610 611

TbK (LSII, 93,29-94,20**). Cf. TM (C. 340,4-341,1; 342,7-344,1). TbK (LSII, 94,28-95,1**). Gibson, TheCommentariesII, 196,1-13 [text]; TheCommentariesI, 117 [transl.]. Allusion to the virgin birth of Christ. Cf. John 7,44. Cf. John 6,19. Cf. John 20,19; TbK (LSII, 154,2-3).

102

[106]

JOHN 20,4 – 6-7

because he was young in age and physical condition and because he lived a chaste life.612 Second: because he had so much confidence in our Lord that he had not abandoned him even at the time of his passion, when the rest of the disciples had fled. Third: because he was entirely filled with love for our Lord and longed to see him. Simon, however, slackened his pace. First: because he was an elderly man and weak. Second: because of grief about the crucifixion. Third: for he had also denied him, because he feared the crucifiers. Fourth: because of the pain in his heart on account of the threefold denial; because, when remembering and thinking upon this, his knees trembled very badly and it restrained his steps. And rightly, for there is nothing that injures confidence more than sin and there is nothing that strengthens the fervour of the heart more than purification. Nevertheless, although John reached the tomb first, hedidnotgoin. And this was to uphold the honour of him who was an elderly man and the head of the Apostles. [20,6-7] These (words): Hesawthelinenclothslying,butthesudary that* hadbeenaroundhishead(hesaw)notwiththelinencloths,but rolled up and laid aside etc. These things were left in the tomb. First: for a sign of the resurrection of all, which will necessarily take place and for the immortal men ˹who have no need of clothes and covering in the world to come.613 For there is no need of nourishment or any of the material things of this world, because (our) nature will be invested with splendour, honour and glory, which are more precious than all ornaments and (all) splendour of this world. Just as Elijah on account of this type, when he was taken away to paradise — a symbol of our transition from here — also left his cloak to Elisha, seeing that they do not need garments there. Second: that they might be witnesses to our Lord’s resurrection itself. That he had certainly not been stolen, as in the rumour the crucifiers had spread. For it was impossible that the body should have been stolen, whereas the garments were left behind, the very things which would be a reason for robbery. Neither could it be so, however, because the body had been damaged by nails and also by the spear, and blood and pus had come out (of the body) ˹and a hundred pounds of mixed spices614 together with a large quantity of incense had been spread out (over it) and the 612 ES: Beck, Sermones in Hebdomadam Sanctam [text], Sermo VII, 73, 229 and [transl.], Sermo VII, 127, 229. Cassingena-Trévedy, Homélies Pascales, 120, Sur les Azymes XIV,6 and 7. 613 Cf. TM (C. 347,8-11). 614 Cf. John 19,39.

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 20,6-7 – 12

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

103

linen cloths swathed the body and had adhered to it. And only with great difficulty might they be separated from one another without tearing and damage, because among medicines there is nothing so tough and sticky as myrrh and aloes, even more than things that originally adhere together.615 And just as it is said about poly-pods — that is to say many-footed animals — that when they place (their feet) on the stones, they by no means leave one another until they have taken over from one another; ˹thus it is also impossible that the linen cloths, the body and the myrrh could be removed from one another without damage and pieces of skin. For even that leaving behind * of the cloths did not happen simply and by chance, [107] because they were not scattered or thrown down carelessly, so that it would be supposed that it was a question of thieves and of people who were afraid; but rolled up and laid down here and there neatly, which is proper to someone who does this of his own free will and to someone who has taken off his clothes.616 But the garments and linen clothes (they gave) to Joseph, the counsellor. For it was right that they should be returned to him and be kept for him as owner of the grave and the one who had brought them to honour him. The sudary, however, Simon took and it remained with him to be a crown upon his head. And whensoever he made an ordination, he draped it upon his head, and much and frequent aid arose from it. In this way even now the leaders and the bishops of the Church are adorned with a cope on their heads and round their necks, in place of that sudary. [20,12] ˹These (words): Shesawtwoangelsinwhitegarments,seated oneathispillowsandoneatthefeet. They hand down that they entered the grave with our Lord and that they were there for two days and when our Lord rose and went out (of the grave), they remained there to honour the place where the body had lain and to announce his resurrection to his people. Now the one who was at the head was the angel Gabriel, messenger and minister of the New Covenant. He is, according to some Theoforoi, the head of all spiritual beings. The other, who was at the feet, was Michael, minister of the Old Covenant. He is, according to some, the head of the lowest rank, which properly is called (the order of) ‘angels’. These two assigned honour to (their) Leader, to him who gave these two Covenants. And now if these leaders had carried (him) solemnly to the grave, how 615 616

Cf. JC (PG59, h. 85, c. 465,16-18). Cf. TM (C. 346,21-24. 28) and JC (PG59, h. 85, c. 465,24-29).

104 [108]

[109]

JOHN 20,12

many more thousands and tens of thousands must have been * there!617 Although two (angels) only appeared to Mary, in accordance with the weakness of her (faith). As even now they encircle the altar of the Church in awe and fear, together with (their) praises and the (threefold) Sanctus, when the sacraments of our salvation are being consecrated. This is testified to by many God-clad men and Christ-lovers, who have been esteemed worthy of a vision in which these things have been revealed. But we, contemptible and corrupted, treat the altar, the adorable sacraments and holy things with disdain in this terrible time (in which we live).618 Now the angels appeared inwhite. First: for a sign of their joy and gladness about the resurrection. Not only because they were part of the universe, which had been renewed in the resurrection, but also because they received perfect knowledge and liberation from aberration etc. For if it is said that the angels in heaven rejoice at one sinner who repents619, how much more (will they rejoice) at all human nature which was renewed; after all it rose with him as members (of the body do) together with the head, as the Apostle philosophizes about many times620. Second: ˹in white, because — as those say who fight (the spiritual fight) — the fear of God is connected with the manifestation of angels (and so with) tranquillity, gladness, peace of heart and brightness with a sweet and delicate odour. But with the vision of demons are connected cursing, trepidation, perturbation and disturbance of the heart, together with black and shady colours and figures with putrid odour. They hand down that from the beginning of their fall from heaven this filthy smell clings to them.621 Third: they were inwhite. So they formed a type and earnest of those splendid robes that are in the new world. Then, it is said, shalltherighteousshineforthasthesuninthekingdomoftheirFather (Mt 13,43). Fourth: inwhite, indicating the splendour, the fineness * and purity of their nature. 617

(Pseudo) Ephrem also speaks about a participation of Gabriel and many angels, see: Beck, SermonesinHebdomadamSanctam [text], Sermo VII,70, 81-93; 72, 149-169 and [transl.], Sermo VII,122, 81-93; 125, 149-169. 618 Tradition Source. Cf. Introd. Ch. 2.3.5. 619 Cf. Lk 15,10. 620 Cf. Eph 1,22-23; 4,15-16; 5,23; Col 1,18. 621 Tradition Source. Cf. Introd. Ch. 2.3.5.

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 20,14

5

10

15

20

25

30

105

[20,14] ˹About these (words) Shesaidthisandturnedround many are in doubt. (They wonder) what a suitable connection is between her no longer paying attention to the beautiful sight of the angels and the conversation with them and her turning around.622 And some say: just as it is customary for those who have lost something to turn round hastily and in perturbation, looking hither and thither, to see if they can find what they have lost, in the same way Mary, because she fervently wished to see our Lord, was looking on all sides. Others say: ‘When she was standing before the angels, suddenly a shadow showed up from behind her to before her, (such a one) as is usually (and) especially to be seen in the early morning. Sheturnedto see the Maker of this’. Others (say): ‘She heard the sound of the steps of our Saviour and turnedround to see him’. And there was nothing in this to wonder at, (asking) how the sound of the feet, belonging to a body which was ethereal and purified of all that was superfluous, could be heard. For if it is said with regard to Adam that he heard the sound of the Lord walking in Paradise623, then it is not amazing at all that here it is also metaphorically used. It is not incredible to acknowledge that all these things could have happened. Others (say): ‘A powerful light suddenly shone forth inside the tomb’. ˹Others (again) say: ‘When the angels saw our Lord coming, they suddenly arose, in a hurry, and offered him worship and because of this she turned.624 ˹And there are some that say that her turning back took place by the grace of the Spirit625 and not by anything else (and) that on the basis of one of these (reasons) or of all — whatever it was — she then turned and sawJesusstanding (John 20,14), but not in a natural way. For it was impossible that the body which had been glorified and become equal with God, could be seen by mortal eyes, but he appeared metaphorically in the figure * of a gardener and this ˹in order that she might not [110] be shocked626 and be speechless, and become ill in her mind. Or rather that she should not return to her former illness627, ˹when he, whom she 622 623 624 625 626 627

Cf. JC (PG59, h. 86, c. 468,43-51). Cf. Gen 3,8. Cf. JC (PG59, h. 86, c. 468,48-50). TM (C. 347,28-348,1). TM (C. 348,3). Luke (8,2) and Mark (16,9) mention that Jesus had driven out from her seven demons.

106

[111]

JOHN 20,14-17

supposed to be dead, at that very moment suddenly and unexpectedly appeared to her.628 [20,15] And because it is a custom of gardeners to remove anything unpleasant from their garden — inasmuch as anything putrid hinders sweet scents, or rather causes illnesses and deaths to many — she said to him: ‘If you because of the unpleasant smell and to prevent the stench pervading your garden and your body have taken him far away from your garden, tellmethenwhereyouhavelaidhim,andIwillgoandgethim,for it is he who spreads a lovely fragrance for me and the whole world. [20,16] And afterwards our Saviour revealed himself to her by calling her name ‘Maria’. Immediately now the wandering sheep heard the voice of her Shepherd. In her joy she bleated and answered and cried out: Rabboli, ‘Light of my eyes’ and myriad things like this she spoke to him. But this: Sheturnedandsaid‘Rabboli. This answer is the same as Rabboni. (It does) not (say) as above that sheturnedtowards the angels, but that she (so it says) returned an answer to our Lord and called him Rabboni, according to the custom of the Jews of that time and until now. And by an inaccurate copyist these two readings have been changed, for instance by the copyist who wrote the edition from Greek into Syriac. [20,17] ˹These (words): Donottouchme,forIamnotyetascendedetc. And why did he, who is so merciful and gentle, keep the Magdalene’s fervent love from touching him, whereas he did not keep others from (doing) this? Theyheldhisfeet, so it is said, andworshippedhim (Mt 28,9). And he persuaded also Thomas and the Eleven to touch him.629 And some * bring forward many reasons for this. But we leave them all behind (us). And we say this, which is more trustworthy. ˹For it was a custom of the Saviour that, when different things happened, he acted in different ways. Just as he dealt with the woman that was bleeding and with the Canaanite woman and with the fig-tree, so he also dealt with the Magdalene taking account of the cause.630 First: to show that not only had he risen from the dead, but that he was also about to ascend to heaven. For if he had not openly said this, it would have seemed that he was a boaster and that he was out to be ostentatious. So therefore he spoke in connection with the cause.

628 629 630

TM (C. 348,1-3). Cf. TM (C. 349,16-31) and ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XXI,27; 228,16-21). TM (C. 348,21-29 ; 349,3-4. 8-10. 14-16); cf. TbK (LSII, 119,18-20).

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 20,17

5

10

15

20

25

107

Second: ˹to let it be known that he shared a glory, majesty and honour greater than before and that he should not inconsiderately be touched according to the previous custom and familiarity.631 Third: ˹just as before his passion he indicated about his passion and before his rising (from the dead) about his rising (from the dead) — as someone who knows all secret things and the things to come — thus also he wanted to let (them) know about his Ascension before his Ascension632 in order to eliminate sadness. And he added to them joy upon joy, that not only had he risen, but also ascended to heaven to inherit the throne of the Godhead. Fourth: because he was acquainted with the ardour of Mary’s affection, (knowing) that she would absolutely not desist from her desire, as she was not persuaded even by the witness of three angels633 about the resurrection. He admonished her that he was about to ascend to heaven and from that moment, after his time on earth, she would not pray to him according to her custom. IamascendingtomyFatherandyourFather,tomyGodandyourGod. This word is an Atlantic Ocean634 and elsewhere we have explained it635. But concisely: all this was a custom of our Saviour’s to speak sometimes from the person of his Godhead, like these words: IandmyFatherare oneetc. (John 10,30); and sometimes from the person of his Humanity, like this: Why* areyouseekingtokillme,amanwhohastoldyouthe [112] truth (John 8,40). Another time (he speaks) from the person that is One, like these words now. For he distinguishes the natures and persons in this myFatherandmyGod and brings them together in the unity of a person, by connecting the two names to one ‘Something’. For this is the definition of ‘unity’: the connection of two natures and hypostases in one person, which gave names and deeds to one another, preserving the natures and hypostases without mixture and confusion. See a definition of unity: God 631

TM (C. 350,4-8). ES (Leloir, Commentaire, XXI,27; 228,12-14). 633 It is remarkable that IoM here — while in the Gospel only two angels are spoken of — speaks of three angels. So far IoM constantly mentioned a number of two angels. In Ephrem there are also three angels involved (See: Cassingena-Trévedy,HoméliesPascales, Sur La Crucifixion IV,17, 224). An explanation can possibly be found in l.c., note 2: ‘Éphrem additionne librement l’ange de Mt. 28,2 et les deux anges de Lc. 24,4 et Jean 20,12, pour harmoniser le nombre des anges avec le ‘troisième jour’. 634 I.e. a sea of meanings, explanations. For this expression, see also: Reinink, Die Adventssontage [text], 3,11-12. 635 See Book II [3,13] p. 33,12-22. 632

108

JOHN 20,17-19

is not the God of the Word either by grace or in any other way. ˹Nestorius says: ‘He is God, at the same time ‘Father’ and ‘God’. ‘Father’, on the one hand to me by nature, to you on the other hand by grace. But ‘God’ on the one hand to me by grace, to you on the other hand by nature. But yet 5 one person, one Lord, one Christ and one Son in those two.636 [20,18] ThenMaryofMagdalawentoffandbroughtthedisciplesthe newsetc. Mary brought the news of the resurrection to the Apostles as a remuneration for Eve, who brought Adam the words of the crafty Serpent that he should eat of the fruit and die637.

BOOK XX

[113]

[20,19] ˹Nowwhenitwastheeveningofthatday,thefirstdayofthe week, i.e. the same day that he had risen. Behold, this was the evening of the second day of the week.638 Like that he ought to have said it, because a day was not reckoned by day-time and (then) night, but by night and (then) day-time. It says: Therewaseveningandtherewasmorningetc. (Gen 1,5). That same day he appeared to them, not waiting for another day. First: because of the love of mankind which he possessed towards the disciples and towards all (men). Second: ˹to confirm his resurrection639 and ˹to terminate distress, he then says: Peacebewithyou (John 20,19). Because he had said to them before the passion: * PeaceIleavetoyou, andmypeaceIshallgivetoyou (John 14,27).640 After his resurrection he bestows peace upon them three times in the same day, to show that it is he who had promised them peace then and as a faithful sign of the resurrection of his humanity. And it was also a sign of their concord in one faith, one hope and one love. Nowatonce,thedoorsbeingclosed,hestoodintheirmidst, to show that it was he who had risen and come out of the grave, the stones being guarded together with the seals. And because they saw a body that possessed three dimensions, namely height, depth and breadth, which, while the doors were closed, unexpectedly stood in their midst, and because 636 This quotation is derived from Nestorius (c. 386-c. 451 A.D.), Archbishop of Constantinople. See for Nestorius and this quotation: Introd. Ch. 2.2.1, sub C. 637 Cf. Gen 3,6. 638 Cf. TM (C. 353,3-5). 639 Cf. TM (C. 353,13-14. 18). 640 JC (PG59, h. 86, c. 470,38-41).

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 20,19-22

5

10

15

20

25

30

109

they supposed that they saw an apparition and an illusion, he showed them the places of the nails in his hands and his feet together with the wound in his side (made) by the spear. Not that these things were found in that body that had risen from Sheol and that had become ethereal and illumined and purified of all that was superfluous: of blood, gall, phlegm and perspiration, just as (it) also (will be with) all men, when they have risen from Sheol. Yet (here) still more: this body had become equal to God in his glory. However, for the reassurance of the disciples he showed these wounds at that moment, although they were not there before as such and neither did they come into being, nor were they there in it (the body). But for that very moment he urged the nature of the things (to this). He showed them these (wounds) for their assurance. And this subject we have illuminated at length (in our commentary) on Luke641. [20,21] These (words): AstheFatherhassentme,Iamalsosending you. The manner in which (they were sent) was not identical. For he, on the one hand, was sent on a footing of equality, namely as Son by the Father, they, on the other hand, as servants by a master. [20,22] ˹These (words): Hebreathedonthemandsaid:* Receivethe [114] HolySpirit, because he prepared them to be preachers. And preachers now have (to endure) many combats, struggles and temptations. In a sense they are crucified by the demons and evil men. He clothes them with a power which surpasses the natural withwhichtheycanextinguishallthe flamingarrowsoftheevilone etc. (Eph 6,16). By breathing (on them) he bestowed upon them a spiritual gift, so that he himself alone should be confessed as Creator. These (words) at that time (were): Hebreathed andmanbecamealivingbeing (Gen 2,7).642 But here: Hebreathedand hebecame,insteadofalivingbeing,alife-givingspirit (1 Cor 14,45). ˹If then at that time it (life) spread forth and went on for five thousand years and more, then, behold, this very (life) will necessarily flow and spread forth and last for ages and will extend interminably.643 ˹The Interpreter says: ReceivetheSpirit, he says instead of ‘You will receive (the Spirit)’. For he did not say ‘You have received (the Spirit)’, but ‘Receive (the Spirit)’, (namely) at the descent of the Spirit.644

641 See: Gibson, The Commentaries III, 96,20-97,4 [text]; The Commentaries I, 207 [transl.]. 642 TM (C. 356,13-19**). 643 TM (C. 356,20-23**). 644 TM (C. 355,16. 21-23; 356,24-25**).

110

[115]

JOHN 20,22-24

Others ask: If they, by (his) breathing (on them) received all the perfection, why will they be baptized with the Spirit? And we say: this breathing gave them an exceptional activity of the gifts of the Spirit. ˹The Theologian645 said: ‘The Spirit was given three times to the disciples: at the mission to the land of the nations, after the resurrection and at Pentecost’.646 [20,23] Immediately now after this he brought forward: Ifyouforgive anyone’ssins,theyareforgiven,andifyoumakeanyoneretain(hissins), theyareretained. ˹Therefore: this gift, (which was) by the breathing is related to this only: the power to bind and to loosen, so that it might be seen by them that this was the completion of those things relating to Peter (namely): ToyouIwillgivethekeysofthekingdomofheavenetc. (Mt 16,19). For it was right for him to begin with gifts like * these, so they might learn that the Spirit, whom he would give to them, was of the same nature and the same essence, (and) an abundant opulence of gifts! And in connection with this he said: Hewilltakefromwhatismineand willmakeitmanifesttoyou (John 16,14). But how far does this breathing go and does it have a limit? Ifyouforgiveanyone’ssinsandifyoumake (anyone)retain(them)etc. Oh, what a spiritual gift in truth! For he does not only give power to do signs and wonders, but also that they would be ‘gods’ at (God’s) calling. For what is particularly proper to God alone, is that he forgives sins or makes (someone) retain (them). This also the Jews represented to the Lord: Who can forgive sins but God alone? (Mk 2,7). This he generously grants to those who fear him.647 [20,28] ˹This (word) Thomas spoke ‘MyLordandmyGod’, he spoke them when seized with astonishment. And although he at first did not even believe that he had been raised from the dead, he now calls him ‘Lord and God’.648 [20,24] These (words): Thomas (the twin) he was called, at first because he may have been born a twin, and at last he was (also) called Thomas (twin). ˹The Interpreter says: ‘He (Thomas) did not call him (Jesus): ‘Lord and God’ — for it was not the sign of the resurrection that taught him 645

Used of Gregory of Nazianzus. Although IoM attributes this quotation to Gregory of Nazianzus, it is also literally found in TM (C. 358,12-14**). See also: Introd. Ch. 2.2.2, sub A. 3. It is remarkable that most of the MSS mention this quotation twice (cf. Book XX [21,14]). 647 TM (C. 356,25-357,16**). 648 TM (C. 358,4-6**). 646

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 20,24-21,14

5

10

15

20

25

30

111

that he who rose was also God — but on account of the miracle that had been performed he praised God, being speechless at the amazing things that he saw.649 [21,5] This, that he called them children. ‘Childhood’ is spoken of in three manners in the Scriptures. Either it is understood as relating to the early time (of human life), like these (words): Rememberthedays of my childhood (Ezek 16,22), i.e. the time in Egypt. Or (it is understood) as relating to a lack of knowledge, like these (words): Donotbe childreninyourminds (1 Cor 14,20). Or (it is understood) as relating to the nature of childhood, like these (words): ThechildSamuelwas ministering (1 Sam 2,18) * and: thechildJesus, it says, stayedbehind [116] etc. (Lk 2,43). So, contrary to this, in exactly the same way, ‘old age’ is also understood, either as diversity of times, or as fullness of knowledge, or as old in years. Now our Lord calls the disciples, old as they were, ‘children’, because they were still learning and fell short of perfect knowledge. And for this reason they had returned to their former craft after thousands of signs, which they had seen (done) by our Lord and which they also had done when they were sent out to preach in Judea. And also he was reminding them of the breathing of the Spirit, which — although they were not children — made them ‘children’. [21,6] These (words): Throw your net on the right side etc. (are) to show that the many fishes were gathered there not by accident, but by his power. [21,11] (About) this: A hundred and fifty-three. ˹Origen650 (says) it symbolizes the Holy Trinity. By the fifties and the three it symbolizes also the Psalms of David, a hundred and fifty in number; and by the three (it symbolizes) the three praises which they add to the Psalms from the Law and the Prophets.651 [21,14] This was the third time our Lord appeared to his disciples. Not only three times did he appear to them, but many times as is evident in the (book of) Acts, where it says: After his passion he also showed 649

TM (C. 358,7-11**). Origen (185-254 A.D.) the most important theologian and biblical scholar of the early Greek church, see: Heussi, Kompendium, 67-68. 651 The number of 153 fishes has occupied commentators throughout the ages. For a survey of the history of interpretation, see: Beasly-Murray, WordBiblicalCommentary, vol. 36, John. So far I have not succeeded in recovering Isho‘dad’s reference in Origen’s work. 650

112

[117]

[118]

JOHN 21,14-17

himselftothemalivebymanysignsduringfortydays (Acts 1,3).Three times, however, he appeared to the Eleven together until that moment when they were eating on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias, whereas afterwards he appeared to them many times until he ascended to heaven. ˹The Theologian said: ‘The grace of the Spirit was given three times to the disciples. At the mission to the land of the nations, after the resurrection and at Pentecost’.652 [21,15] ˹Our Lord said * to Simon: Feedmysheepforme. So he did not say to him: ‘Fast and watch’ etc., but this that is more valuable and better for the whole, namely the pastoral care of souls. But, so he said, I do not need (the fasting and watching). Feed my flock for me, and repay me the love with which I have loved you. And the grace you owe me, you shall repay with this. Because I will impute your care for them to myself653 and all that you show to them, I will confer upon my person. [21,17] ˹Simon, however, did not venture to answer him plainly ‘I love you’, but he said: You,whoknowall,youknowthatIloveyou. For he was thinking of the fact that he formerly not only had said ‘Neverwill Idenyyou’(Mt 26,35), but also that he would give his life on behalf of him.654 And that our Lord, showing him that his boasting was wrong, had said that he would deny him three times. And for this reason he answered him: ‘You know better than I do and my thoughts you know thoroughly’. Now, when he asked the third time like the first, Simon got sad and upset, supposing that perhaps our Lord was mocking at his declarations of love, whereas he had foreseen his last denial. Therefore he was immediately and sharply pricked by the sting of the threefold question and he justified our Lord regarding his knowledge of future things, (saying): Youknow thatIloveyou. For I do not strive to know anything about future things nor do I know them (now). You are the spring of wisdom. You are the acme of knowledge. Our Lord, being aware of his fear and exactly knowing of his love, first released him from his fear and confirmed his love by means of his testimony and affirmed his confession. And the medicine of the confession he applied to the abscess of the denial. For this reason now he had sought the confession up to three times, * in order to apply the threefold medicine of the confession to the threefold number of the abscess of the denial and to reveal the ardour of Peter’s love in the 652 653 654

TM (C. 358,12-14**). See also p. 110, note 646. TM (C. 360,23-29**). Cf. John 13,37.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

JOHN 21,17 – 21-22

5

10

15

20

25

30

113

presence of the disciples. At the same time, however, in order to show that his denial was (there) by divine providence and (did) not (originate) from the (human) will.655 Again: by asking the question three times, he gave him three ordinations of priesthood. And he received this reward because of his love. And although he had denied (him), love bound him and he did not leave and go anywhere else. [21,18] ˹These (words): Whenyouwereyoung,yougirdedyourloins yourselfandyouwentwhereyouwantedto.Butwhenyouareoldetc. you will stretch out (your hands) etc. Now, because our Lord saw that owing to the memory of his past he was hesitating656 ˹to confess all about his knowledge of our Lord, he gave (him) these (words). In order to teach him that a great change will happen to him between the past and the future, our Lord says to him: Do not fear the things to come. For in the same way I know that you are so steadfast in my love that you will be crucified for my sake. [21,19] And because what he said was not clear, the evangelist interprets it saying: He said this to indicate the kind of death by which he wouldglorifyGod.657 ˹For Simon endured the death of the cross upside down. For this is what he meant by saying: Someoneelsewillgirdyour loins, because those who died this death were fastened to that wood. Now when Nero had commanded that he should die by the cross, he persuaded the executioners to crucify him upside down, i.e. that his head should be fastened to the cross below and his feet above, lest he should get an equality of worship on the part of mad people, on account of the equality of suffering. Again: because he had taught men to adore the cross of our Lord, * (he feared) that it would be an opportunity for disparagers (by [119] saying): ‘in what does the cross of our Lord the Christ differ from that of Simon? Behold, both are fastened in like manner’. As for this his crucifixion now is different etc.658 [21,21-22] ˹After this Simon asks about John: Whatabouthim? that is to say: what kind of death will he receive for your sake? Our Lord says to him: IfIwanthimtoremainaliveuntilIreturn,whatisthattoyou? You, follow me! (This he says) because John after all lived for a long

655 656 657 658

TM TM TM TM

(C. (C. (C. (C.

360,30-361,21**). 361,27-362,4**). 362,6-14**). 362,15-25).

114

[120]

JOHN 21,21-22 – 25

time, i.e. seventy-three years after our Lord’s ascension until the time of Trajan; and after all the Apostles he died a natural death in peace. This he indicated by saying: ‘ifIwanthimtoremainalive even until my coming takes place, it is not for you to seek this out’. Therefore: It is your work to follow me and by that work you will make known your love for me.659 [21,25] TherearealsootherthingsJesusdid,which,iftheywerewrittendownonebyone,even(theworldcouldnotcontain)etc. Julian the Apostate660 and others now accuse John sharply here that by these words he utters an evident falsehood, (saying) that the world could write and tell not only all the things Jesus did in three years and a half, but also all stories from the beginning till now. And we say: sometimes on the one hand, John calls the whole creation ‘the world’, like this: Theworldwas madethroughhim (John 1,10), then on the other hand (he calls) the people (‘the world’), like this: Godsolovedtheworldthathegavehisonly Sonforitssake(John 3,16). Sometimes (he) also (calls) the people who fear God (‘the world’) like this: Iamthelightoftheworld (John 8,12). And sometimes (he calls) the evil people (‘the world’), like this: The world* shallrejoice,butyoushallgrieve (John 16,20) and like this: The rulerofthisworldwillbecastoutetc. (John 12,31) i.e. Satan, the chief of the evil people. In the same way here he calls the evil people ‘the world’ who cannotcontainthe books with the deeds of Jesus. And this is evident from the fact, that they did not even contain the books which they could have contained.661 For just as the Evangelists have omitted many deeds which, as is written, he performed in Korazin and Bethsaida662, so they also have omitted and have not mentioned other great deeds which he performed etc. For it is written in the Revelation of John and also the Book of Traditions testifies that there was a woman among the Greeks who was accused of adultery and when they brought her to our Lord, he said to them: Anyonewhohasaclearconscienceaboutthesedeeds,let himaccusethiswoman.Nowtheywereimmediatelyashamedandleft’ (John 7,53-8,11). And do know that also Dionysius663 wrote (a letter) to

659

TM (C. 363,14-18*). See p. 100, note 603. 661 IoM uses ‘contain(ed)’ here in the sense of ‘contain in their minds’, i.e. ‘grasp’ or ‘comprehend’. 662 Cf. Mt 11,21. 663 Dionysius Areopagita was a judge of the Areopagus who, as related in the Acts of the Apostles (17,34), was converted to Christianity by the preaching of the Apostle Paul. According to Dionysius of Corinth, quoted by Eusebius (HistoriaEcclesiasticaLiberIII,IV,11), 660

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOHN 21,25

5

10

15

20

25

115

Timothy and that also Peter, Patriarch of Alexandria664, testifies in his homily ‘About the Godhead’, that Jesus appeared on earth to the disciples after his Ascension, when they were gathered together. Likewise none of the evangelists wrote about those who rose from the dead at the time of our Lord’s passion665, (for example) how their end was; nor also about the five hundred of whom Paul spoke666, nor about the sign of the cross or about the order of the holy Eucharist or Baptism etc. Therefore: the word of the evangelist is true when saying that there are many things Jesus did that are not written down. ˹The Interpreter now (wrote) about this word and about that of theangel who, as is said, fromtimetotimestirredupthewaters (John 5,4) and about what is written at the end of the book of Job that he was (the same as) Jobab, the son of Zerah, the fifth from Abraham667. About these three passages * he says that they do not belong to the (original) text of Scrip- [121] ture, but that they were put above in the margin as a kind of explanation. And afterwards, so he says, they were inserted into the content (of Scripture) by some lovers of knowledge. (What is said) about Job, that we can confirm, because this passage is written neither in the Hebrew nor in the Syriac. But because they found in the genealogies of Esau a man named Jobab, they supposed and also wrote that this (man) was Job, the son of Zerah, the son of Reuel668, the son of Esau, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham.669 However, about this that fromtimetotimean angelwentdowntothepoolandstirredupthewaters (John 5,4) and this therearemanyotherthingsJesusdidetc.: not everyone assents to their not belonging to the text of Scripture, because they are also written in the Greek, in the Hebrew and in the Syriac within the contents of the text of Scripture. Therefore: let the reader judge and examine this word according to his own view.

this Dionysius then became the second Bishop of Athens. For his letter to Timothy, see : Baumstark, Geschichte, 69. 664 Peter, Patriarch of Alexandria († 311) was Archbishop, theologian and martyr. From his theological writings only fragments have survived. He wrote about the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, in formulations later on developed by Athanasius. See: Evetts, Historyofthe PatriarchsoftheCopticchurchofAlexandriaII, p. 383-401 and Baumstark, Geschichte, 263. 665 Cf. Mt 27,52. 666 Cf. 1 Cor 15,6. 667 Job 42,17b (LXX); Gen 36,33; 1 Chron 1,44. 668 Cf. 1 Chron 1,37.44; Gen 36,10. 669 TM (C. 364,1-6*); TbK (LSII, 169,3-9*).

116

JOHN 21,25

Some say about this ‘Eventheworldetc.’ that the Christ was God and Man and that all those things of his Godhead are incomprehensible to the mind and for narration, such as that he created (the universe), looked after it and governed it from the beginning until that time. And so they were not written down at all. And also the things of his Manhood (were) 5 not (written down), because the unity of the Word with his Humanity is incomprehensible. And we introduce yet another view, (namely) John speaks about ‘the signs’, that if they were written down the world would not have room for the words our Lord spoke about his Godhead, because ‘the signs’ exceed our hearing and the mind would not be adequate to 10 hear them, if they were written down. The commentary on John the evangelist is finished. And to God be the glory. Amen.

INDEXES References in the following indexes are based on the pages of the Introduction (Roman numerals) and of the Translation (Arabic numerals). The numbers in superscript (e.g. 3(n.3)) refer to the relevant footnote of the page in question. LXX means Septuagint.

1. INDEX OF BIBLICAL QUOTATIONS GENESIS 1,1 1,5 1,26 2,7 2,13 3,6 3,8 6,3 9,4 9,27 19,26 21,14 22 22,12 36,10 36,33 38 39,2 39,20 39,21

5(n.1,10); 9(n.42); 11,13-14; 82(n.512) 14,3-4; 108,15-16 10(n.50); 11(n.57) 18(n.101); 109,25-26 58(n.350) 108(n.637) 105(n.623) 81,31-32 12(n.63) 16(n.89) 14(n.72) 19,13-14; 26,6 20(n.117); 56(n.325) 94,8-9 115(n.668) 115(n.667) LVI 14,8-9 14,25 38(n.223)

EXODUS 4,24 33,11 24,18

14,24-25 24,14-15 18(n.102)

DEUTERONOMY 18,15 25,6-7 JUDGES 16,30

15,23

1 SAMUEL 2,18 16,13

111,10-11 82(n.514)

16,14 20,30 30,11a-12

82(n.515) 48,18 19,12-13

2 SAMUEL 16,17

48,19-20

1 KINGS 5,12

17,12-13

2 KINGS 5,14

92(n.557)

1 CHRONICLES 1,37 115(n.668) 1,44 115(n.667); 115(n.668) JOB 42,13 42,17 (LXX)

14,6-7 115(n.667)

PSALMS 7,9 8,5 14,3 38,14 41,9 45,6 48,11 51,4 65,2 69,9 78,20 79,12 110,3 116,11 145,21

31,20 92,13-15 61,27 14,18-19 77(n.482) 26,5-6 22,1 56,30-57,1 15,22-23 38,24-25; 38(n.223) 46,12-14 24,12 6(n.17) 61,27-28 15,21-22

118

INDEXES

146,4 147,18

81,27-28 81,26

ISAIAH 1,2 6,1 6,9-10 7,13 7,14 9,1-2 9,2 11,3-4 34,4 53,7 53,9 64,6

17,19 24,15-16 75(n.460) 17,20 16(n.89) 53,1-3 22,4 45,8-11 17,6 25,18-19 19,14-15 61(n.378)

JEREMIAH 18,23 31,33

XLVII; 42,15-16 14,13-14

LAMENTATIONS 2,5 14,22-23 3,22 38,26-27; 38(n.223) EZEKIEL 16,22 19,3 28,13-14

111,6-7 14,23 17,10-12; 17(n.96)

JOEL 2,7

22,2-3

MICAH 5,1

49,22-25

BOOK OF WISDOM 1,7 31,5 SIRACH 1,14

17,13-14

MATTHEW 2,6 4,16 5,4 5,14 6,23

49,22-25 53,1-3 XLVIII 42,21-22 11,3-4; 11(n.53)

8,17 10,5 10,16 11,9 11,21 13,43 13,47 13,48 13,58 14,9 16,19 16,22 17,1 17,12 17,17 17,20 19,24 22,14 25,32 25,35-36 26,2 26,7 26,35 26,57 27,52 28,1 28,2 28,2-3 28,9 28,18 28,19a 28,19b 28,20

16,6 36,8; 71,14-15 60,17-18 25,3-4 114(n.662) 104,29-30 29,32 30,1-2 XLVII; 42,13-14 17,7 110,12-13 79,2-4 70,26 25,3 67,6-7 68,12-13 XLVII 29,31 87(n.531) 94(n.561) 70,13-14 70,30 112,17-18 LXV 115(n.665) 100,24-26 107(n.633) 101,27-30 106,23 62,23-24 72,31-33 81,34-35 88,5-6

MARK 2,7 2,19 3,8 3,29 5,1 5,43 10,21 14,1 14,53 15,40 15,47 16,2

110,23 XLVII; 42,11-12 LV(n.183), 27,12 91,9-10 LV(n.183); 27,13-14 39,31-32 17,6-7 70,13-14 LXV 100(n.600) 100(n.600) 100,26-27

INDEXES

LUKE 1,25 1,35 2,43 4,18-19 4,30 9,28 15,10 18,32 22,54 22,61 23,26 24,1 24,39 JOHN 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,4 1,5 1,6 1,9 1,10 1,12 1,13 1,14

1,15 1,16 1,17 1,18 1,21 1,25 1,28 1,29 1,40 1,45 1,46 1,47 1,48

38(n.223) 81,33-34; 82(n.510); 86,17-18 111,11-12 82(n.516) 56(n.329) 70,26 104(n.619) 97,12-14 LXV LXVI(n.225); 96,27-28 97(n.585) 101,1-2 33,16

LIII-LIV; 5,2; 6,3; 8,12. 17-18; 8(n.30.33); 9,10. 15-17 9,3. 19 9,19-20; 10,4. 13 10,9. 12. 17-18; 10,28-11,1; 11(n.53) XX1; XXXIX; XLVI; 11,5-6 13,10 11,21; 17,15 114,12-13 12,5; 13,11; 14,12-13 XLIII(n.90); 12,9; 12(n.64) XXV; XLIII(90); XLVI; LI; LIV; LXVIII; LXIX; 13,1; 13(n.67); 16,23; 16(n.87.89); 17,1. 15; 19,1. 16; 19(n.107); 20,18-19. 24; 21,13. 18-20. 32; 22,7. 17-18. 21-22 21,11 XLIII(n.90); LXVIII; 23,11. 18; 35,14-15; 91,1-2 23,26-27; 23(n.133) 11,8-9; 78,23. 25-26 XLIII(n.90); 25,5 25,5 XLIII(n.90); LIV; 27,4-5; 51,5-7 25,15-16. 18-19. 20. 22. 30 26,7-8 26,3-4 26,11. 18 26,15 26,22-24

1,51 2,1 2,4 2,11 2,19 2,20 2,23 2,24 3,4 3,5 3,8 3,12 3,13 3,14 3,16 3,17 3,25 3,33 3,34 4,2 4,4 4,5 4,8 4,9 4,17 4,18 4,22 4,24 4,26 4,34 4,35 4,37 4,38 4,42 5,2 5,4 5,5 5,6 5,8 5,13 5,14 5,15 5,17 5,19

119 27,15-16 27,19. 26-27 28,1-2. 23 XLIII(n.91); 28,17 16(n.90); 34,12-13 28,28 29,4 29,5 XLVII; 42,18-19 29,13-14. 26-28 XLIII(n.92); 30,12. 15. 17-18. 2829; 31,3. 6 31,11-12. 14 XLIII(n.92); LV; 31,22. 27-29; 32,6. 10; 32(n.186); 33,7; 46,27 33,23-24 33,32-34; 114,14-15 58,22-23 34,21-22 XLIII(n.92); 35,1-2. 3-4 35,9 35,16 35,28 XXIV; 36,1 36,4-5 35,29 36,16 LVI-LVII; 36,13 37,1-2 37,5-6 53,31 37,26 37,28-29 38,5-6 38,10 37,20-23 38,17-18 39,9. 16; 115,10-11. 22-23 40,9 39,20 XLIII(n.93); 39,29 41,7-8 XLI 40,14-15 XXIII; XLIII(n.93) XLIII(n.93); XLVI; XLVIII; LXIV; 42,2; 43,6. 18. 27-28; 53,14-15

120 5,20 5,21 5,22 5,25 5,27 5,31 5,37 5,39 5,43 5,46 6,14 6,27 6,31 6,41 6,44 6,51 6,62 6,63 7,4 7,5 7,10 7,11 7,22 7,24 7,27 7,34 7,37 7,38 7,40-41 7,48 7,51 7,53-8,11 8,12 8,14 8,15 8,15-18 8,21-22 8,27 8,28 8,33-34 8,37 8,39 8,40 8,44 8,48 8,52

INDEXES

44,11-13 44,16; 53,15-16 LVII; 44,18-19. 22; 45,2; 76,3-4 53,17-18; 68,33-69,2 LVII; 44,19-20; 45,3; 53,17-18 53,10-11 45,18-20 45,25-26; 51,25-26; 61,21-22 XLIII(n.93); 45,32-33 51,26 25,12 46,2 46,7 33,4-5 74,16-17 46,18 46,26 47,1-2 47,22-23 48,4 51,17 48,15. 21 48,22-24 49,9-10 49,17-18 80,1-2 XLIX; LVIII; 49,29; 51,18 XLIII(n.94); 51,21-22; 51,27 52,20-21 52,23-24 52,27 114,29-31 53,4-5; 114,16 53,9-10 LVII; 44,21 54,1. 6-8 54,13-14 54,18-19 54,21 54,27; 54,32-33 55,1-2 55,2; 55,15-16 33,17-18; 107,22-23 55,8-9; 82,7-8; 84(n.525) 55,11-12 XLIII(n.95); 55,19-20

8,53 8,56 8,58 8,59 9,3 9,4 9,5 9,6 9,7 9,37 9,39 9,40 9,41 10,1 10,2 10,4 10,7 10,8 10,10 10,11 10,14 10,16 10,22 10,29 10,30 10,38 10,41 11,3 11,4 11,6 11,8 11,9 11,11 11,12 11,14 11,16 11,18 11,22-24 11,26 11,27 11,33 11,34 11,35 11,39

XLIII(n.95); 55,26-27 55,31-32; 56,11 56,14 56,17-18; 56(n.329) 56,21. 25; 57,4-5; 64,22-23 57,6-7 57,16-17 XLIV(n.96); LI; 57,18-19 41(n.237) ; 58,12 53,32-33 XLIII(n.96); 58,18-19; 59,1-2; 76,4-5 59,9. 14 59,10-12 XXIII; XLIII(n.97); 59,21-22.29; 60,1. 3. 10 62,1-2 XLIV(n.97); 60,13-14 XLIV(n.97); 60,22 XLIV(n.97); 61,12-13. 23. 25-26 XLIV(n.97); 62,28-29 XLIV(n.97); 62,1 XLIV(n.97); 62,6-7 63,10 63,14-15 63,29-30 33,13; 63,21. 34; 84,11; 107,20-21 63,33 XLIV(n.97); 64,9 64,14-16 64,19-21 64,26 65,1-2 65,8-9 65,31. 33; 66,1-2; 67,23-24 66,2 66,12 XXVI; 66,6-7 XLIV(n.98); 66,16 66,17-20 55,24-25 66,27-28 66,33 67,8; 68,7 XLIV(n.98); 67,13 68,8. 16

INDEXES

XLIV(n.98); 68,21 67,27; 68,25-26 67,28-29; 68,15 69,5-6. 29 69,26-27 XLIV(n.98); 69,15 LXVIII; LXX; 70,1-2 70,12-13. 14-16 70,30-31 71,1-2 XLIV(n.99); 71,9. 17 71,21-22 71,29-30 XLIV(n.99); 72,11-12 XLIV(n.99); 72,24. 27-28; 91,8-9 XLIV(n.99); 73,1-3 73,6-7 73,13-15; 74,27-28; 114,1819 12,32 XLIV(n.99); 74,11. 17 12,33 74,26-27 12,41 XLIV(n.99); 75,1-2 12,44 75,11-13. 16 12,45 75,17 12,47 75,23-25; 76,2-3 12,48 75,28-76,1; 76,6 12,49 76,16; 86,35-87,1 13,1 97,8-9 13,3 76,18-19 13,6 XLIV(n.100); 76,22 13,7 77,8 13,8 77,3-4 13,10 77,5-6 13,16 77,15-16 13,18 77,17-18 13,21 67,5-6 13,23-24 78,18-20 13,26 79,12-14. 20 13,27 78,7-8; 78(n.486); 79,17 13,33 79,34; 80,3. 5-6 13,34 80,10 13,37 112(n.654) 14,1 71,30 14,2 80,17 14,9 33,14; 80,20 14,10 87,1-2 14,11 84,9-10 11,41 11,43 11,44 11,48 11,50 11,51 11,54 12,1 12,3 12,20 12,21 12,23 12,24 12,27 12,28 12,29 12,30 12,31

14,15 14,16 14,17 14,20 14,21 14,22 14,23 14,26 14,27 14,28 14,30 14,31 15,1 15,5 15,15 15,24 15,26 16,2 16,8-9 16,11 16,12-13 16,13 16,14 16,20 16,23 16,24 16,25 16,26 17,1 17,3 17,4 17,5 17,7 17,8 17,9 17,11 17,12 17,16 17,19 17,21 17,22 18,6 18,13 18,22 18,27 18,28 18,31

121 80,25 81,3. 10; 89,21-22; 91,31-32 81,17; 82,3-4. 9 83,1-2 83,12-14 83,20-21 83,23-25 89,23-24 108,20-21 XLIV(n.101); 84,1 84,22-23. 29; 85,5 85,14-15 85,24 87,3. 6; 92,18 88,9-10. 14-15. 32-33 93,27-28 89,24 L; 89,1-2 90,5-7 90,15 88,16-18 90,22 90,26-27; 91,7; 110,16-17 114,17-18 91,11. 14-15 91,19-21 91,24-25. 26-27 91,30-31; 92,2-3 92,5-6 63,5 91,7-8; 92,17-18; 93,19-20 93,3-4. 10 94,7-8; 94,14-15 94,14 94,16. 20 94,24-25 94,27 95,5-6 95,26-27 94,1 96,20 LXV; 96,25 XLI LXV; LXVI(n.225) 97,4-5 97,21

122

INDEXES

18,32 19,13 19,17 19,18 19,19 19,21 19,23 19,25 19,31 19,34 19,35 19,37 19,39 20,1 20,4 20,6-7 20,12 20,14 20,15 20,16 20,17

97,12-14 97,15 97(n.584) 97(n.587) 97,27-28; 97,29-98,1 98,14 LXVIII; LXX; 98,21-22. 25 100,12-14 100,16 XXV; 92(n.558); 99,14-16 XXV; 99,18-19. 23-24 100,6 102(n.614) 101,2-3. 16-17 101,31-32 XLIV(n.102); 102,16-18 LXVIII; LXXI; 103,25-26 XLIV(n.102); 105,1. 27-28 106,8 106,11. 14 XXIV; 33,19-20; 106,20; 107,17 20,18 108,6-7 XLIV(n.102);101(n.611); 108,1120,19 12. 19. 26 20,21 109,14-15 20,22 XLIX; 109,18-19 20,23 110,7-8. 18-19 20,24 110,29 20,28 110,25 21,5 111,4 21,6 111,22 21,11 111,25 21,14 111,30 21,15 112,8 21,17 112,16. 26-27 21,18 113,8-10 21,19 113,18-19 21,21-22 113,31. 33-34; 114,3 21,25 114,6-7; 115,24 ACTS 1,3 2,2 2,27 2,31 4,32 17,31

111,32-112,1 31,8-9 93(n.560) 93(n.560) 63,24-25 45,6-7

ROMANS 2,16 8,17 8,29 9,5 9,30 13,14

45,7-8 23,14-15; 96,14 92,30-31 37,2 58,19-21 4(n.12)

1 CORINTHIANS 2,8 34,18 3,17 81,22-23 6,19 81,22-23 12,13 63,26-27 12,27 83(n.518) 14,20 111,8-9 14,45 109,26-27 15,20 21,9 15,45 14,5 15,51-52 15,1 15,52 68,30-31 15,53 15,10-11 2 CORINTHIANS 1,22 82(n.508) 5,5 82(n.508) 5,21 16,2-4 12,11 14,20 GALATIANS XL; 13(n.67); 14,17; 16,2; 16(n.87); 3,13 21,6 4,4 21,4 4,7 88,30-31 EPHESIANS 1,14 82(n.508) 2,6 33,9-10 2,20 21,8 3,10 88,26-27 4,10 32,19 4,15-16 83(n.518) 6,12 81,30 6,16 109,22-23 PHILIPPIANS 14,15-16; 21,1. 5; 22(n.122); 62,12 2,7 2,8 22,2 3,19 84,27-28 3,20 33,10-11; 95,3

123

INDEXES

COLOSSIANS 1,16 10,2-3 2,9 35,13-14 1 THESSALONIANS 5,19 82,15 1 TIMOTHY 6,16 24,18-20 2 TIMOTHY 2,13 42,4-5 HEBREWS 1,2 9,25; 62,23

1,5 1,14 2,7 6,18 6,20 7,14 9,15 10,4

21,12 81,29 92,13-15 42,5-6 21,7 37,3-4 21,10 42,8-9

1 JOHN 2,1

81,15-16

REVELATION 4,5 19,13

2. INDEX OF NAMES Abara: LV; LV(n.183.185); 27,9-14; 27(n.153); 51,5-6 Abbasids: XVII Abba Isaiah: XL ‘Abdisho‘: XVII; XVIII; LI; LXVI(n.228); 36(n.202) Abgar (King of Edessa): XX(n.28); 98,7; 98(n.590) Abraham (Patriarch): 55,23-31; 56,1-11. 14 – descendants/sons of Abraham: 55,1-2. 14-16 Abraham II (Catholicos): XIX Abraham of beth Rabban: XXIV(n.48); 36(n.202) Abraham of Marga: XIX Absalom: 48,18 Abu’l Faradj ‘Abd Allah Ibn al-Ṭayyib († 1043): XXIV; XXIV(n.53); XXV(n.53.55); 17(n.94) Acts of Thomas: 21(n.119) Adam: 14,5; 105,17; 108,8 – child/sons of Adam: 84,30; 93,20 – members of Christ instead of children of Adam: 94,28-29 Adam (the last): 34,7-8 Addai: 21(n.119) Aḥob of Qatar: 17(n.94) Alexandria: XX(n.28); 115,1; 115(n.664) Al-Mutawakkil (Caliph 847-861): XIX

Andrew (disciple of Jesus): 26,8; 71,15 Annas: LXV; LXVI; 96,25 Anonymous Commentary: LIV(n.176); LXII; LXIII; 13(n.69) Anti-Christ: 45,33 Antiochus: 63,16 Apollinaris of Laodicea: 18(n.100-101) Apostle (Paul): 7(n.20); 32,19; 45,5; 58,19; 75,3; 81,22; 86,19; 88,26. 30; 95,4; 104,18; 114(n.663) Apostles (the Twelve): 3,5; 20,1; 31,8; 38,2; 52,1. 16; 76,31; 90,33; 92,20. 29-30; 102,15; 108,7; 114,2 – head/chief of the apostles (Peter): 76,31; 102,15 Arians: 9(n.43); 20(n.117) Ariomanitae: 7,6 Arius: 7(n.23) Aristotle: 5(n.7); 8(n.31); 10(n.51) Armenians: 101, 6. 7 Asia: XVII; XIX; XIX(n.20-21); 3,8-10; 4,17; 89,14 Athanasius: LI; LI(n.156); 16(n.87); 18,13 ; 18(n.105) ; 115(n.664) Atlantic Ocean (a sea of meanings): 107,18 Babai Magnus: 16(n.88) Babylonians (slavery of): 54,30 Balaam: 69,24

124

INDEXES

Bar Bahlul: XVIII(n.14); 7(n.23) Barḥadbšabba: XXV(n.56) Bar Maryam (Ecclesiastical History of): XX(n.28); 98,8; 98(n.591) Bar Tolmi (i.e. Nathanael): 26,25; 26(n.149) Beth-abara (beyond the Jordan): LV(n.185); 27,9. 26; 51,6 Bethany: LIV; LV; 27,4-8. 25; 51,2. 7; 70,13-19 Beth Chesda (‘House of Contempt’/ ‘House of Mercy’): 38,17-28 Bethel: 70,3 Beth Gabbārē (on the Tigris): LII Bethlehem: 49,19-22 Bethsaida: 114,24 Boktisho‘ ibn Gibrā‘īl, physician: XIX; XIX(n.27) Borboriani: 89,6; 89(n.537) See also ‘Simon’ (the Sorcerer). Caesar: L(n. 150); 4,15; 89(n.541); 98,4 Caiaphas: LXV-LXVI; 69,12. 30; 96,27-29 Canaanite woman: 106,29 Cappadocians: XLV; 12(n.61) Cave of Treasures: LXX; LXX(n.240); 99(n.594) Cephas: 76,22; 78,19 See also ‘Peter’ and ‘Simon’. Chalcedonians: 15,13; 15(n.81) Cherub: 17,11; 17(n.95) Christ: LXV; 6,4; 7(n.23); 8(n.32); 11,28; 15(n.81); 18(n.100); 20(n.116); 23,27; 24(n.134-135); 33,10; 34,4; 35,6. 10-12. 20-26; 37,2. 10-15. 23; 40,12; 49,17; 69,27. 31; 81,15; 85,28; 86,19; 92,31; 94,28; 96,7.11-16; 98,12; 101(n.608); 108,5; 113,28; 115(n.664); 116,1 Chronicle of Séert: XXIV. 36(n.202) Constantinople: XXVI; 15(n.85); 108(n.636) Cyrene: 97,19; 97(n.585) Cyrillus: 20(n.117) Dadisho‘ Qatraya: XL; 12(n.66) Daniel bar Tubhānitā: LII David: 17,12. 20; 17(n.95); 18,1; 48,17-18; 49,20; 111,27 Diatessaron (commentary on): XXI; XXIII; 24(n.133)

Diodore of Tarsus: 7(n.21) Dionysius Areopagita: XX(n.28); 114,31; 114(n.663) Dionysius of Corinth: 114(n.663) Diyarbakir: LXII; LXII(n.208); LXIII(n.210); 13(n.69) Domitian: 4,15 Edom: 27,12 East Syrian Church: XVII; XXVI; LII; LVI; LXVI; LXXI; 8(n.32); 16(n.87); 18(n.100.102); 32(n.186) Egypt: 111,7 Egyptians (slavery of): 54,30 Egyptian (waters): 14,2 Eliezer: 25,24. 27 Elijah: 25,1-5; 102,24 Elisha: 92,29; 102,26 Enoch: 74,8 Ephesus: 3,8; 4,18 Ephrem (ES): XXI-XXIII; XXIII(n.40.44); XXIV(n.44); XLIV; LIII; LVI; LVII; LXXI; 7(n.22); 13(n.68); 19(n.106); 21(n.119); 24(n.133); 25,23; 25(n.143); 28,21; 28(n.163-165); 36,20; 36(n.204.206.209); 37(n.213-214); 41(n.239); 48,9; 48(n.283); 55(n.322); 58(n.348); 60(n.363); 61(n.373); 65(n.402-403); 67(n.411-412); 68(n.417-419); 99,10; 99(n.595); 102(n.612); 104(n.617); 106(n.629); 107(n.632) Ephraim (a fortified place in the desert): LXVIII; LXX; LXXI; 70,1-2 Esau: 115,19. 21 Eusebius of Caesarea: L; L(n.153); LI; 89(n.541); 98(n.590); 114(n.663) Eve: 108,8 See also ‘Mary (Magdalene)’. Evangelists: LXV; 3,28; 96,28-29; 100,2223; 101,9; 114,23; 115,4 Evangelist (John): 3,2-3; 5(n.2); 8,3; 10,26; 23,1; 27,20; 52,5; 64(n.395); 66,5; 75,2; 78,7. 13. 20-25; 99,20; 113,17; 115,8; 116,12 Feast of Atonement: 51,11-20 Feast of the Dedication: 63,14-20 Feast of Tabernacles: LVIII; 49,31; 50,427; 51,5. 10-15 Feast of the Tenth Day: 51,16

INDEXES

Feast of Unleavened Bread: LVIII; 49,30; 50,2-29; 51,4 Flavius Josephus: see ‘Josephus’ Gabriel: 103,30; 104(n.617) See also: Michael. Gadara: LV(n.183); 27,11 Gadarenes: 27,13 Galilee: LV(n.183); 27,11. 21; 47,28. 33; 48,1; 52,30. 34; 53,1-8 Gaul (persecution in): L; L(n.155); 89,13; 89(n.539) Gennadius of Constantinople: 15(n.85) Gihon: 58,15; 58(n.350) God the Word: 15,17; 32,20; 62,12; 90,28; 93,9; 95,30; 96,6 See also ‘Word-God’. Gospel (the Christian message/doctrine): 45,8. 28; 51,1; 60,17; 61,7; 65,24; 94,4; 99,13; 107(n.633) Gospels: XXVII; 3,12; 14(n.79) Gospel of John: XX; XXI; XXIII; XXV(n.53); XXVI; XXXIX; XLI; XLIII; XLIV; XLIX; LI; LIII; LIX; LXIII; LXVI; LXVIII; LXIX; LXX; LXXI; 3,23; 4,9. 11. 14; 12(n.62) Gospel of Mark: 27,11 Great Convent on Mount Izla: LII Great Zab: XIX Greek (authors/sources/writings/language): XVII; XIX; XX; XXVI; XLV; XLIX; LIV; LXIII; 7(n.23); 21(n.119); 43(n.256); 81,17; 97,29; 100(n.604); 106,19; 111(n.650); 114,27; 115,26 Gregory (of Nazianzus): XLV; XLV(n.113-115); XLVI; LIV; 6(n.5); 12,1; 12(n.61); 16(n.87); 42 (n.240-251); 43 (n.252.255.258); 44 (n.260); 110(n.645-646) See also ‘Theologian’. Haggai: 29,2 Hebrew (language): 5,3; 5(n.1); 51,7; 58,12; 115,18. 26 Hebrews: 57,4; 97,29 Ḥedatta: XVIII, XIX; XIX(n.25) Ḥenanisho‘: LI; LI(n.159); 57,21 Herod: 17,7; 49,20

125

Hiram: 17,12; 17(n.96) Holy Spirit (the): 30,25-31,10; 47,17-21; 54,3-10; 69,15; 72,32; 81,22. 33-82,26; 86,17; 91,9; 109,18-110,6 See also ‘Spirit (the)’. Hushai: 48,19 Ibrahīm ibn Nūh of Anbar: XIX Interpreter (Theodore of Mopsuestia): XXIII; XXIV(n.44); XXV(n.58); XXVIXXVIII; XXX-XXXII; XXXVII-XL; LI; LIV(n.177); LV-LVI; LVIII; LXI; LXIII; LXIV; 7,19; 7(n.28); 12,3; 30,25; 33(n.190); 36,13-14; 40,17; 46,2; 50,25. 29; 84,2; 95,11; 99,21-31; 109,31; 110,32; 115,10 Irenaeus: L; L(n.151.154) Isaac: 25,25 ; 56,2. 7 ; 115,21 Isaiah: 24,15; 25,18; 31,13; 53,1; 74,8; 75,1-2 Iscariot: 79,14 See also ‘Judas’. Isho‘ bar Nun: (patriarch of the East Syrian Church, 823-828 A.D.): XVII; XLVI; LI-LIX; LXVI; LXXII; 5(n.5.11); 15(n.82); 17(n.90); 24(n.135); 27(n.151.153); 31(n.184); 32 (n.186-187); 36 (n.206-207.209); 44 (n. 268); 50(n. 291-292.294.296); 51(n.297) Isho‘dad of Merw: XVII-XX; et passim Israel: 11,29; 14,23; 26,15; 49,24. 31; 58,20 Jacob (Patriarch): 25,28 James (Jesus’s cousin): 100,13 Jeremiah: 38,26; 42,15 Jerusalem: XXXIX(n.72); XL; LIV; LVIII; LXV; 27,5; 47,29; 50,6-7. 28; 51,4; 63,14; 68,32; 71,6 Jesse: 48,18 Jesus: XVIII; XVIII(n.13); XX(n.28); XXIII; XXXIX(n.72); XL- XLI; LVI-LVIII; LXV; LXV(n.223); LXVIII-LXX; 6,4; 15(n.81); 17,6; 20(n.112); 23,27; 24(n.134); 26,7; 27,27; 29,5; 31,6. 20; 33,10; 35,16. 18; 40,14. 22. 27; 41,11; 47,22; 51,1; 67,13; 70,12; 71,16; 78,19-20; 79,13; 81,15; 87,33; 96,14; 97,12; 98(n.590); 105,28; 105(n.627); 111,11; 114,6. 10. 21; 115,2. 9. 24; 115(n.664)

126

INDEXES

Jews: 15,7; 25,8; 26,14; 29,11; 35,29; 36,6. 12; 37,1-4. 18; 41,10; 50,10; 55,13-14. 18-19; 65,1-3. 18. 23; 66,9. 34; 68,24; 71,3; 72,7; 78,17; 79,30. 35; 85,1; 89,3; 98,1. 9. 14; 106,17; 110,22 Jewish: XLIX; 59,15 Job: XVIII; 85,4; 115,12. 17. 20 See also ‘Jobab’. Jobab: 115,13. 20 John (the Baptist: 25,1-30; 26,7; 28,20; 34,21. 29; 35,10. 25; 64,9; 77,10 John (the Evangelist): 3,2-4,1-18; 5(n.2); 20,2; 26,8; 70,14. 19. 27. 31; 78,3-4. 22. 25. 29; 79,6. 14; 96,25; 99,19. 26-31; 101,2. 32; 102,13; 113,31. 34; 114,8. 12. 26; 116,7. 12 John Chrysostom (JC): XXIII; XL; XL(n.83); XLI; XLI(n.85.89); XLIV-XLV; LV; 12(n.65); 22(n.121); 23(n.132); 25(n.139); 27(n.151.153); 28(n.161); 30(n.176-177); 33(n.188); 35(n.196); 39(n.229); 40,13; 40(n. 230-233); 41(n.239); 42(n.240.242-243); 43(n.258); 44(n.261); 45(n.273); 49(n.287); 51(n.302); 55(n.323); 56(n.325); 58(n.349.351); 59(n.361); 60(n.363-367); 61 (n.371.376-377); 62 (n.383.388); 64 (n.394); 66(n.406); 67(n.414); 68(n.420); 69(n.425.427); 71(n.435); 72(n.439.442); 73(n.446); 74(n.457); 75(n.462); 76(n.478); 84(n.523-524); 103(n.615-616); 105(n.622.624); 108(n.640) Joseph (Son of Jacob): 14,8. 25; 16,19 Joseph of Arimathea: 20(n.112); 103,16 Joseph (father of James, Joses, Simon and Judah): 100,13; 100(n.601) Joshua (Son of Nun): XVIII(n.8); 25,7 Jordan: LIV-LV; 27,4-12; 92,28 See also ‘John (the Baptist)’ and ‘Bethany’. Josephus (Flavius): XXIV(n.44); XXX; XLIX; XLIX(n.144); 29,1; 29(n.167) Joses (Jesus’s cousin): 100,13; 100(n.601) Judea (Region): 3,6; 48,2; 66,9; 97,28; 111,19 Judah (Tribe): 49,22-23 Judah (Patriarch): LXI; 36,23 Judah (Jesus’s cousin): 100,13; 100(n.601)

Judas (Iscariot, the betrayer): XXVI; LXIV; 43,20; 67,5; 76,22-32; 78,4-17; 79,12-33; 87,29; 94,26 Judas (the Galilean): XXIII; 60,2; 60(n.363); 61,9 Julian (the Apostate): 100,22; 100(n.603); 114,7-8 Kalastarton: XXVIII; XXXIX; 7,19; 7(n.29) Khurāsān: XIX Korazin: 114,24 Lazarus: XXIII; LXVIII; LXX-LXXI; 64,14-69,4 Liber Heraclidis: XXIV Liber Graduum: 10(n.46); 80(n.498) Lot (wife of): 14,1; 14(n.72) Luke: 3,7; 70,25-26; 97,11; 101,1; 105(n.627); 109,13 Maccabees: 63,17 See also ‘Feast of the Dedication’. Macedonian: 63,16-17 Magdalene: 100(n.600); 101,3; 106,21. 30 See also ‘Mary (Magdalene)’. Mani: 61,19; 61(n.380) Manna: 46,7-17 Maryam (Daniel bar): 98,8; 98(n.591) Marcellus: 17(n.92) Marcion: 61,19 ; 61(n.379) Marcus Aurelius: L(n.150) ; 89(n.541) Mark: 3,7; 27,11; 70,13. 20. 28; 80,16; 105(n.627) Martha (Lazarus’s sister): 66,17-32 Mary: see ‘mother of Jesus’. Mary(Lazarus’s sister): 70,30 Mary (Magdalene): LXXI; 100,25; 100(n.600); 104,2; 105,7; 107,11; 108,6-9 Mary (Sister of Jesus’s mother): 100,13; 100(n.601) Matthew: 3,7; 70,13-32; 77,16; 80,16; 100,24; 101,4. 7. 15. 27 Merw: XIX; XIX(n.17) Messiah: 35,5-8; 49,21; 51,24; 52,20-23; 53,31; 61,25; 66,28; 79,4 Michael (Archangel): LXX; 38,30; 103,32 See also ‘Gabriel’

INDEXES

127

Michael bar Tubhānitā: LXX Minucius Felix: 89(n.538) Moses: 8,1; 14,24; 16,16-23; 23,26; 24,2. 14; 25,6. 17. 28; 26,3-4; 28,7; 33,23; 45,25; 48,22-34; 49,12; 51,26; 59,24; 61,18-20; 62,33 Mother of Jesus (see also ‘Mary’): 27,2628,27; 100,12; 100(n.600-601) Mount of Olives: 78,4

Porphyrus (of Tyre): 100,22; 100(n.604) Priesthood: 50,12; 69,11-14; 113,5 Prophets (the): 25,7-12; 26,3-6; 28,7; 35,11; 38,10-16; 45,25-31; 49,22; 52,15; 55,24. 29; 61,18-25; 62,33-63,3; 77,20; 93,24; 98,17; 111,29

Naaman: 92,27 Narsaï: LXIX(n.234); 13(n.69); 19(n.110) Nathanael: LXVIII-LXXI; 26,15-27,3; 26(n.150) Nazareth: 26,11-14. 18; 47,28. 33 Neoplatonism: 100(n.603-604) Nero: 113,22 Nestorius (Archbishop of Constantinople): XXIV; XXIV(n.46-47); 108,1; 108(n.636) Nicodemus: 29,10; 52,24-26. 31 Nile: 58,14

Rabboni: 106,14-19 Rabboli: 51,7-9; 106,12-19 Rachel: 25,28 Rebekah: 25,23-27 Reuel: 115,21 Revelation (of John): 114,26 Roman (sovereignty/empire/province/ emperor): 50,10; 75,4; 89(n.540-541); 100(n.603) Romans: 54,31; 69,5-14. 29; 75,4; 79,22; 97,29 Ruler of the Air (Angel): 4,10

Origen: L; L(n.146); LV; LV(n.185); 111,25; 111(n.650-651)

Samuel: 111,10 Samaria: LVI; 18,2; 35,28-31; 36,1 See also ‘Sychar’ and ‘Shechem’ Samaritan(s): 35,29; 36,8; 37,16-29; 55,12-17 Samaritan Woman: XXIII; LVI-LVII; 36,4-37,24; 53,30-33; 89,20 Saul: 48,17 Saviour: XVIII; 17(n.92); 33,4. 12; 34,2. 30; 52,32; 55,28-29; 66,15; 71,10; 82,2; 97,18; 105,13; 106,10. 27; 107,19 Scribes (the): 59,5. 18; 60,8-9. 19. 30 Severus of Antioch: 14(n.72) Shechem: XXIV; 18,2; 36,2 See also ‘Samaria’. Shelah: 36,23 See also ‘Judah (patriarch)’. Sheol: 109,4. 7 Silk Road: XIX Siloach (the pool of): 41,9-11; 58,12-16; 92,22-93,2 Simon (from Cyrene): 97,18-20; 97(n.585) Simon (Iscariot): 79,13-14 See also ‘Iscariot’.

Palestine (inhabitants of): 79,21 Paraclete: 81,10-16; 82,5-7; 88,18; 89,22 Patmos: 4,16 Paul (apostle): XLI; 7(n.20); 9,25; 10,2; 20,1; 114(n.663); 115,6 See also ‘Apostle (Paul)’. Paul of Samosata: 17(n.92) Persian Sage (see also ‘Aphrahat’): XXI; 11,27-12,1 Peter (Patriarch of Alexandria): XX; 115,1; 115(n.664) Peter (see also ‘Simon’): LXIV-LXV; 43,20; 76,26-31; 78,32; 80,15; 96,26; 110,12; 112,35 Pharisees: 52,23-26. 30; 59,5. 9; 60,27; 61,8 Philip: LXIX; 26,15-17. 22-24; 71,9-17; 80,20 Philoxenus of Mabbug: 21(n.119) Photinus: 17(n.92) Pilate: 20(n.112); 97,27-98,19; 98(n.589)

Qatne (Cana): 27,19-21; 27(n.155) Qiyoré (monk): LXVIII-LXIX; LXIX(n.234); 19,9; 19(n.110)

128

INDEXES

Simon (Jesus’s cousin): 100,14; 100(n.601) Simon (Peter): LXV; 76,22-77,6; 78,1920. 28-32; 79,5-6. 14-15; 96,26-28; 101,31-32; 102,5-15; 103,19; 112,8-9; 112,15-113,3; 113,19-34 See also ‘Peter’. Simon (the Sorcerer): 89,3-5 See also ‘Borboriani’. Solomon (Bishop of Ḥedatta): XVIII Son of God: 40,28; 53,33; 66,27-32 Souleiman Sabbagh (Archbischop of Diyarbakir): LXIII Spirit (the): 3,15. 19; 12,10. 15; 23,13; 29,13-30,11; 30,17-31,10; 35,9-21; 44,24-45,2; 47,1-21; 50,4; 51,32-52,19; 54,9-10; 63,6. 26; 67,3; 75,5; 77,12-13; 82,1-5. 11-26; 83,1-8; 85,22-36; 88,1-8. 28; 89,18; 89,25-91,29; 94,22; 95,8. 28; 105,26; 109,31-110,6; 110,14; 111,20; 112,5-7 See also ‘Holy Spirit (the)’. Stone pavement (Litostrotos): 97,15 Strabo: XIX Sychar: XXIV; 36,1 See also‘Samaria’. Synodicon Orientale: XIX Syriac (language/exegesis/Christians): XX; XXI; XXV-XXVI; XLI; XLVXLVI; LVI; LXIX; 5,3; 12(n.64); 13(n.68); 16(n.90); 19(n. 106-107.112); 20(n.116); 24(n.133); 38(n.223); 39(n.229); 77,18; 106,19; 115,19. 26 Tabor: 70,25 Tamar: LVI-LVII; 36,22; Teachers of the Schools: XXV; 77,23; 99,25 Theoforoi: XXVI; XLIV; LXIX; 4,8; 60,1; 66,7; 79,27; 103,31 Theudas: XXIII; 60,2; 60(n.363); 61,8. 14 Theodore bar Koni (TbK): XVII; XXIII; LII-LIII; LVIII-LXV; LXV(n.222-223); LXVI; LXIX; 5(n.5.7.8); 6(n.15); 8(n.30); 9(n.36); 11(n.56); 13(n.68-69); 16(n.87); 17(n.97); 18(n.102.104-105); 19(n.107); 20(n.114-115.118); 24(n.134.136); 26(n.145); 28(n.159.161); 29(n.170); 30(n.175.178-179); 31(n.181-183); 33(n.189-190);

34(n.191-192); 35(n.195.198-199); 42(n.240.242.245.247); 43(n.253.255.257); 44(n.259.268); 45(n.273); 46(n.274); 47(n.278); 50(n.291.295-296); 56(n.333); 57(n.335); 59(n.361); 60(n.363); 62(n.385-386); 63(n.389.392); 70(n.430); 71(n.437); 73(n.444); 75(n.462.466.468.470); 76(n.472-473.475); 80(n.498.500); 81(n.502-503); 84(n.522); 85(n.527); 90(n.547); 91(n.548.550); 92 (n.554-555) ; 94 (n.562.567) ; 96 (n.578) ; 97(n.580-581.585); 100(n.601); 101(n.605-606.611); 106(n.630); 115(n.669) Theodore of Mopsuestia: XXIII; XXV; XXVI-XL; XLI; XLIV; XLIX; LI; LIII-LXV; LXVIII; LXVIII (n.231); LXXII; 3(n.1-9); 4(n.10-11); 5(n.5-6.9); 6(n.15-17); 7(n.19.25.27-29); 8(n.34-35); 9(n.36.40.44); 10(n.46-50); 11(n.52.55.58); 12(n.62.66); 13(n.67.69); 14(n.71.73-78); 15(n.80.82.84-86); 16(n.87-88); 17(n.91.97-98); 18(n.100); 19(n.106-107); 20(n.113-114.117); 21(n.120); 22(n.121); 23(n.129.131-133); 24(n.136); 25(n.137138.140-142) ; 26 (n.144.146-148); 27 (n.151.153154.156) ; 28(n.157-160.162.166); 29(n.169-174); 30(n.175-178); 31(n.180.182-183); 33(n.189-190); 34(n.191-194); 35(n.195-197.200); 36(n.201.203. 205-208) ; 37(n.210-212.215-216); 38(n.217-222.224); 39(n.225-228); 40(n.233); 41(n.235-236.238-239); 42 (n.240.242.245-246.249) ; 43 (n.253-255.257) ; 44(n.259.261-268); 45(n.269-271.273); 46(n.274-277); 47(n.278-281); 48(n.282.284-285); 49(n.286-288); 52 (n.303-307); 53 (n.308-312); 54 (n.314-319); 55 (n.320-321.324) ; 56 (n.326-328.330-332.334); 57 (n.335-340.342-345); 58 (n.346-347.351-354); 59(n.355-362); 60(n.363.368-370); 61(n.372-375); 62(n.384.386-387); 63(n.389-393); 64(n.396.398-399); 65(n.400-401.404); 66(n.405-408); 67(n.409.412413.415-416) ; 68(n.421); 69(n.423-424); 70(n.431); 71(n.433-436); 72(n.438.440-441.443); 73(n.445.447-450); 74(n.452-456.458-459); 75(n.462-463.465.467.469); 7 6 (n.471-472.474-476); 7 7 (n.479-480.483); 78(n.485.487-488.490); 79(n.491); 80(n.493-496. 498.500) ; 81(n.501-503); 83(n.519-521); 84(n.522); (n.526-527) ; 86(n.528-529); 88(n.532-533.535); 85 89 (n.539.542); 90(n. 543-547); 91 (n.548-551); 92 (n.552-555); 93 (n.559); 94 (n.562.564-567); 95(n.569-574); 96(n.577); 97(n.579.583.585-586); 98 (n.588.592-593); 99 (n.596-598); 101 (n.605); 102(n.613); 103(n.616); 105(n.625-626); 106(n.628630) ; 107(n.631); 108(n.638-639); 109(n.642-644);

INDEXES

110 (n.646-648); 111 (n.649); 112 (n.652-653); 113(n.655-658); 114(n.659);115(n.669) See also ‘Interpreter’. Theodosius (Metropolitan of Gondisapor): XIX; XX Theologian: XLV; XLVI; XLIX; 12(n.61); 110,4; 112,5 See also ‘Gregory of Nazianzus’. Thomas: XXVI; 21(n.119); 66,6-8; 106,24; 110,25-111,3 Tiberias: 112,3 Tigris: XIX; LII Timothy (Catholicos): LI; LXVI-LXVII; LXVII(n.229); LXVIII; 6(n.16); 8(n.31); 9(n.37.39); 12(n.65); 16(n.87); 17(n.90.92.99); 18(n.104-105); 20(n.117); 22,17; 22(n.125-127); 23(n.128.130); 32(n.185); 44(n.268) Timothy (Companion of Paul): XX(n.28); 115,1; 115(n.663) Titus of Bosra: 21(n.119)

129

Tradition of the School: XXV; XXV(n.58); LXXI; 77(n.484); 79(n.492); 100(n.599) Trajan: 114,2 Turkic tribes: XIX Turkmenistan: XIX Verus (Emperor (130-169): L; L(n.150); 89,15; 89(n.541) Vespasian: 4,15-16 Word-God: XLVI; LIV; LVI; 12,2; 16(n.89-90); 22,19; 23,12; 23(n.128); 32(n.186); 47,11 See also ‘God the Word’ Yoḥannan of Beth Rabban: XXIV; LII; 36,1-2; 36(n.202) Zion: 65,26 Zipporah: 25,28-29

3. INDEX OF SUBJECTS Accident (¿ýËÅ): 6,20; 8,5; 8(n.31); 11,24 Accubitum (round table) (…ÎÔÚÃùs): 78,27 ? Adoption as sons (¿ÚçÂĀäÚé): – through baptism (1), purification (2) and resurrection (3): 12,16-20 – by the grace of the Spirit: 23,11-14 – the mystery of the adoption as sons: 30,7-8 – by the new birth we are esteemed worthy of the adoption as sons: 94,1622; 95,26-30 Allegory/allegorically (À¾ćáò /ĀÙ¾æĀáò): 12,1-3; 57,14-15; 60,21-22; 65,22-25; 91,15-18 Aloes (€Îáï): – among the spices spread over Jesus’s body: 103,4 ? Angel(s) (¿Ý¾ćáã): – ascending and descending: 27,15 – make the sun go round, the winds blow etc., according to God’s will: 41,23-27

– messengers of the resurrection: 103,2829 – tradition about the two angels seated at the grave: 103,25-104,2 – angels encircle the altar of the Church: 104,3-5 – angels ‘in white’ (1) a sign of joy and gladness about the resurrection: 104,12-19 (2) manifestation of tranquillity, gladness and peace of heart: 104,20-27 (3) a type of the splendid robes in the new world: 104,28-30 (4) indication of the splendour, fineness and purity of their nature: 104,31-32 See also ‘Gabriel’ and ‘Michael’. ? Animals (ÀÎÚÐ): – conduct themselves only instinctively and compulsively: 44,5-7; 87,7-10 Ascend (to) (ûáé): – ‘has ascended’ is said of the Temple of ‘theWord’: 31,27-30

130

INDEXES

– ‘ the Word’ ascended, because of his earthly Temple: 32,8-9 – ‘the Son of Man ascending’ is spoken from the person about the unity of his two natures and hypostases: 46,27-30 – he ascends to heaven to inherit the throne of the Godhead: 107,8-10 Atonement: see ‘Feast of Atonement’. Baptize (to) (Ëäï): – Jesus came to John to be baptized by him: 25,20-22 Baptism (ÀĀÙxÎäðã): – time of Jesus’s baptism: 27,19-26 – the Spirit appeared upon him: 90,3233 – a sign of death and resurrection: 29,19 – also called ‘new birth’: 29,20-23 – the mystery of baptism: 31,12-13 – baptism called ‘purification’: 34,21-23 – different kinds of baptism: 34,23-25 – for the forgiveness of sins: 35,16-21; 77,9-12 Become (to) (À{z): – twenty ways in which things or persons ‘become’: 13,14-15,15 – other expressions of ‘becoming’: 21,3-12 – definition of ‘to become’: 21,13-14 Become (to) flesh (À{zÁüêÂ): œ – in the sense of taking on a Person: 15,16-24; 18,3-4 – instead of taking on something: 16,1-15 – instead of staying (in a place): 16,1623 – on account of the onlookers’ opinion: 17,1-7 – instead of connection with the flesh: 17,8-18,2 – not by change of substance, nor by strength of creation: 21,1-2 – a clear expression of the humiliation of ‘theWord’: 22,17-18 See also ‘Flesh’ and ‘Glory’. Beginning (in the) (ĀÚýüÂ) : refers to the eternity of ‘theWord’: 5,2-6,2; 9,15-16

Birth (ÁËàÎã): – untimely: 7,1-3 – baptism is called ‘new birth’: 29,1923 the water in place of the womb, the Spirit as Lord and Creator: 29,13-18 – birth of the Spirit is invisible to bodily eyes: 30,22-24 – by the new birth we are esteemed worthy of the adoption as sons: 94,1619 – blood and water signs of the new birth: 99,16-17 Blind (¿Úäé): – a blind man doubly (physically and spiritually) received eyes: 59,1-5 – blindness of heart: 58,6-7; 59,6-9 Blood (¿ćãx): – i.e. seed: 12,9; 12(n.64) – blood and water flowed out of Jesus’s side: 99,16-100,5 – blood as a manifestation of the sacraments: 99,16-17 Body (ÁüÆò): – the body in which the Word-God dwelt called ‘darkness’: 12,1-3 – God did not send down ‘a body’ from heaven: 21,13-16; 21(n.119) – ‘man’ is composed of body and soul: 18,7-8 – a body is not spoken of without members: 21,17 – our Law (the new Covenant/Jesus Christ) is the true body: 23,27-24,1; 24(n.134) – our Lord’s body is not from heaven, but the power of him that made him into (the Eucharistic) bread, is the body from heaven: 46,18-24 – the body raises its eaters from the grave and gives them life for ever. However, all this not by its nature, but by the divine nature: 47,1-16 – the Spirit gave the body the possibility to give life: 47,9-11 – the Word-God came in a body, capable of suffering and fear: 72,18-20

INDEXES

– as a body that is perfect and without defect, the Spirit appeared upon him at the Baptism: 90,32-34 – from (the moment) that he came to that body, this was the cause of his lack (of glory): 93,17-18 – his stole divided into four parts is a symbol of the division of his body and a foreshadowing of his Gospel that (would go) to the four corners of the earth: 99,11-13 – it was impossible that Jesus’s body should have been stolen: 102,29103,15 – after the resurrection Jesus’s body was ethereal and purified: 105,14-16; 109,3-7 – it had become equal to God in his glory: 109,7-8 ? Book of Traditions (¿ćáÂÎÙx ¿ÂĀÝ): 114,26-31 Born (to be) (ËÚáÙ): – the Son is born from the Father not as bodies are with us: 6,5-9; 6,187,5 – this ‘born’ does not mean that he came after the Father: 7,6-10; 31,14-15 – the flesh is exalted to be ‘born of God’: 13,1-5 – the Only-begotten God, i.e. born alone and in a unique way: 24,4-6 – men are born again by the Spirit and by faith: 12,9-11 – in three ways we are born of God: (1) in baptism, (2) in purification, (3) in resurrection: 12,16-20 See also ‘baptism’. Bosom (¿ÂÎï): – indicates unity, connection and nearness: 24,8-13; 78,23-26 – indicates the eternal conjunction and inseparability (between the Father and the Son): 24,4-9 Bread (¿ćäÑà): (a) Bread of the Sacrament: – the bread that is in the Church is ‘sent down from the Saviour’: 33,1-6

131

– Jesus the heavenly bread that came down: 46,18-24 See also ‘Eucharist’. (b) Common bread: – given by Jesus to Judas, after administering the Sacrament: 78,4-17 Breathing (on the disciples) (ÀĀÚÐÎóã): – to prepare them to be preachers: 109,18-19 – to bestow on them a spiritual gift: 109,23-24 – to give them an exceptional activity of the gifts of the Spirit: 110,1-3 – to give them the power to bind and loosen: 110,9-11 – to make them ‘children’: 111,19-21 Bride (to acquire as) (üÞã): – Eliezer acquired Rebekah, Jacob Rachel and Moses Zipporah as a bride: 25,23-29 – John acquired the Church as a bride and showed her to the bridegroom: 25,29-30 ? Brothers (ÛÐs): – Jesus’s brothers: 47,22-48,14 Category of relation (Îàx¿ÙÎÆӾŠ„Ëã): 5,6-8 Cause (ÀĀáï): – the Father is the cause and beginning of him who is begotten: 8,13-16; 84,16-18 – the Father was the cause, both of ‘the Word’ and of the flesh: 86,10-14 – the notion ‘cause’ attributed to the Father: 86,29-32 See also ‘Father’. Chaste (¿óÞæ/ ¿ćà{ĀÂ): – the Samaritan woman was not living a chaste life: 36,13-14 – John lived a chaste life: 102,1-2 Childhood (ÀÎÚáÓ): – spoken of in three manners: 111,4-21 Church (ÀËï): – the bride of Christ: 25,25-30 – the Lord is on earth and in the Church, because of his Godhead: 32,16-17

132

INDEXES

– the Church adopted the feasts of Israel: 49,32-50,5 – Sons of Simon the Sorcerer mingled with the Church: 89,1-15 – angels encircle the altar of the Church: 104,3-5 Circumcision (À{ÏÅ): – given by Moses: 48,22-27 – Moses had set a time-limit of eight days to it: 48,28-31 – it took place also on the Sabbath: 48,29-31 – circumcision more valuable than the Sabbath: 48,31-49,1 – only an external seal on a man: 49,4-6 ? Commandments (¿æËùÎò): – the ‘gate’ is the observance of the commandments: 59,22-23 – the ‘shepherd’ keeps the commandments by taking care of them: 59,25-31 – the love for Jesus finds its expression by keeping his commandments: 80,2581,2 – everyone who loves Jesus and keeps his commandments, will enjoy his love and his Father’s love: 83,12-15 Commencement (¿ÙÎý): – it is impossible to find the commencement of the Father: 7,6-9 – the beginning of anything is from its own nature, but its commencement is not so by any means:7,10-12 – every commencement has a beginning, but not every beginning has also a commencement: 7,12-18 Connection (ÀÎóÚúæ): – ‘withGod’ (John 1,1) indicates something of connection: 8,13-16 – there is a causal connection between the Father and ‘the Word’: 9,6-8 – ‘theWordbecameflesh’ is said instead of his connection with the flesh: 17,812 – the Son is inseparable from the Father and in natural connection with him: 43,7-8; 83,1-3 – the man who had been taken on, received all grace of the Spirit by

means of the connection with ‘Godthe Word: 85,24-26 – the believers receive the connection with God-the Word by spiritual birth: 85,26-29; 86,1-2; 95,26-30 – the inseparable connection between the natures, i.e. between (his) Manhood and (his) Godhead: 96,7-10 See also ‘unity’. Copyist (¿Â{ĀÝ): – an inaccurate copyist: 27,6-7. 24-26; 106,18-20 Covenant (¿ùĀÙx / ÀĀúÙĀï ¿ùĀÙx ÀËÐ): – the old Covenant as shadow: 24(n.134) – Michael the minister of the old covenant: 103,32-33 – Gabriel the minister of the new Covenant: 103,30-31 – Jesus as Giver of the two Covenants: 24,1-3 See also ‘Gabriel’ and ‘Michael’. Creation (ÀĀÙüÂ): – the creation of heaven and earth took place in silence: 13,15-16; 13(n.69) – shaking and mourning after the crucifixion: 54,23-26 – John calls the whole creation ‘the world’: 114,12 Creator (¿Ù{üÂ): – God the Word/Jesus as Creator: 9,1925; 28,10-13; 29,18; 39,25; 47,9; 57,23-25; 109,24-25 – he was before the ages as the Creator of the ages: 56,14-16 ? Cloth (¿æĀÝ): – Jesus’s linen cloths left in the tomb as a sign: 102,16-18 (1) of the resurrection of all and of the fact that the immortal men do not need clothes in the world to come: 102,18-26 (2) of our Lord’s resurrection itself: 102,27-103,9 (3) that he has taken off his clothes of his own free will: 103,9-15 – given to Joseph the counsellor: 103,1619

INDEXES

Cross (¿óÚù|): – Let not the cross terrify you: 33,2425 – his day, i.e. the day of his cross: 55,3156,1 – by his voice upon the cross rent rocks and graves: 68,13-14 – the cross a cause of glory and of salvation to all men: 72,9-10 – the cross called ‘glory’: 72,24-26; 92,13 – inside the praetorium the Saviour carried his cross, outside the city Simon from Cyrene: 97,18-20 – Simon endured the death of the cross upside down: 113,17-30 Curse (ÀĀÓÎà): – Jesus became a curse for us: 14,17; 16,1-13; 21,6 Custom (ÁËÚï): (a) of Scripture: – to name facts according to the supposition of others: 17,4-7 – to use creation or existence instead of connection: 17,9-10 – to call the dwellers by the name of the dwelling-place and the other way round:17,17-18,2 – to speak pars pro toto: 15,20-24; 18,5-6; 101,13-15 – to mix meanings: 19,11-16 – to speak about what is to come, as if it had already been: 33,7-11 (b) of the Saviour: – to speak at times from his Godhead, then again from the person of his manhood; another time from the Person that is one: 33,1222; 107,19-24 – to act in different ways in connection with the cause: 106,26-30 (c) of the Hebrews: – to say: ‘that the works of God mightbeseeninhim’ (John 9,3): 57,3-5 (d) of a certain place: – to use the word ‘asleep’ for sleep, sickness and death: 65,31-66,5

133

(e) of the inhabitants of Palestine and the Romans – to dip the bread after supper: 79,20-26 (f) of the Armenians – to consider the morning as the beginning of the day: 101,5-8 (g) of gardeners: – to remove anything unpleasant from their garden: 106,3-9 (h) of the Jews: – to call someone ‘Rabboni’: 106,1617 Darkness (¿ÝÎþÐ): – thetruelight (John 1,9) came to free from the darkness of ignorance and error:11,20-27 – thelight is the Christ, the darkness the people of Israel: 11,27-12,1 – Gregory calls the body in which the Word-God dwelt and the world darkness: 12,1-3 – the Interpreter calls the world darkness, i.e. him who holds the world of darkness: 12,3-4 – the night with its darkness is a demonstration that the disciples had no knowledge: 65,19-21 – by the murder (of Jesus) darkness took possession of Zion: 65,25-26 – darkness will come upon the disciples, when Jesus is lifted up from them: 65,26-30 Definition (¿ćãÎЏ/ †ÎäêٍÎÙËé{üò): – definition of ‘flesh’: all flesh is mortal, all that is mortal is flesh: 20,22-24 – definition of ‘to become’: a transformation from that which was not to that which was: 21,13-14 – definition of unity: the connection of two things into one something: 32,1-3 – the definition of ‘unity’: the connection of two natures and hypostases in one Person, which gave names and deeds to one another, preserving the natures and hypostases without mixture and confusion: 107,26-108,1

134

INDEXES

Deification (ÀÎæÍàsĀã): – ‘We saw his glory’(John 1,14c) is an informative figure of the deification of our nature: 22,17-19 – the deification of a man, one of us, participating with the Father in glory and equal in honour: 53,26-30 ? Demons (Áx¾ý): – the vision of demons is connected with cursing, trepidation, perturbation, disturbance, black colours and figures with putrid odour: 104,23-27 – Jesus had driven out seven demons from Mary Magdalene: 105(n.627) – preachers who endure many combats, struggles and temptations are in a sense crucified by the demons and evil men: 109,19-21 Denial (of Peter’s) (¿ÙÎóÝ): – the pain in Peter’s heart on account of the threefold denial: 112,15-31 – the threefold medicine of the confession to the threefold number of the abscess of the denial: 112,31-35 – was there by divine providence and did not originate from the human will: 113,1-3 See also ‘Peter’. Descend (to) (ĀÑæ): – the Son descended from beside his Father, without removing from him: 20,8-9 – ‘Hedescended’ (John 3,13) is said of ‘theWord’, because of the humiliation without removal: 31,29-30 – ‘the Son of Man who descended from heaven’, who is with the One who took him, is one Son eternally: 33,1-3 – ‘hedescended’ and this ‘Son of Man’ are said from the person of the unity: 33,20-21 – grace descended upon the disciples in the descent of the Spirit: 91,2629 ? Disciples (ÁËÚäà): – Before the Passion the disciples worked miracles without knowledge

about the grace which had been given to them: 52,5-11 – the disciples considered in a human way how to keep their master safe, in order that the Jews should not stone him: 65,1-6. 19-26 – Thomas summons the other disciples to go with Jesus and to die with him: 66,6-15 – the crowd was divided by the voice that came from heaven, but the disciples perceived by revelation what was spoken: 73,1-5 – nobody else of the disciples refused to be washed by the Lord except Peter: 76,26-77,4 – what Judas hoped to hide in his mind was revealed before the eyes of all disciples by the giving of the bread: 78,7-12 – our Lord, willing his disciples to be perfect in all virtue, incited (them) and kindled his love in their hearts: 80,2581,2 – individually glorious in words and mighty acts after receiving the Spirit: 87,35-88,2 – because almost all of the disciples had fled, when our Lord was taken, their stories were insufficient: 96,3097,3 – the Spirit was given three times to the disciples: 110,4-6; 112,5-7 – our Lord called the disciples, old as they were, ‘children’: 111,15-21 Divine (¿ÙÍàs/ÀĀÙÍàs ): – the sonship, the deification and the divine works are called ‘glory’: 23,9-10 – the divine power, that dwells in Jesus, grants those who believe in him eternal life: 33,28-29 – the divine nature is the Giver of life by means of the body (that he took on): 47,5-6 – rejected from the divine relationship: 69,31-32 See also ‘(divine) economy’, ‘(divine) ministry’ and ‘(divine) providence’.

INDEXES

Door (the) (¿ï): – Jesus is both, the door and the Shepherd who enters by the door: 60,2226; 62,1-5 – Jesus entered by the door as a sign that he was legally a shepherd and teacher: 60,26-30 – Jesus is the door as the One who brings us to the Father: 61,2-4 – (in the resurrection) he came out through the virginal doors:101,18-20 – after he was risen he entered through closed doors: 101,22-23; 108,26-30 Dwell (to) (üäï/èÅs): – God the Word humbled himself and took it upon himself to dwell in man: 15,17-20 – how could ‘flesh’ dwell in ‘flesh’? That is impossible: 17,15-17; 20,1921 – the Word-God put on the whole (human) nature and by this he dwelt in all of us: 19,1-4 See also ‘glory’, ‘(to) become flesh’. ? ? Dwelling places (ÁüãÎï/¿ æ{s): – the dwelling-places are called by the name of the dwellers, as in the case of Samaria and Shechem: 18,1-2 – the abundance and eternal rest are called dwelling-places: 80,17-19 Earth (¿ïs): – ‘earth’ versus ‘heaven’: the first refers to the mystery of baptism, the resurrection and the birth from a virgin; the latter to the eternal birth from the Father: 31,11-15 – about one Son and Lord and Person we must not say that half of him is in heaven and half of him is on earth: 32,13-18 See also ‘heaven’. Economy (ÀÎæüÂËã): – divine: 20,8-11; 20(n.116); 57,25-26 Elevation (ÀÎã): – God the Word humbled himself for our elevation and for our glory: 18,1920

135

Eternity (ÀÎÚã{Āã): – ‘In the beginning was the Word’ (John 1,1) refers to his eternity: 9,1516 Equality (ÀÎÙÎý): – between the Son and the Father: 43,68; 90,22-25 – equality of nature, sight and activity, power and will: 13,1-5; 24,4-8; 43,2830; 63,21-22; 64,2-8; 74,16-18 – equality of substance and the things connected with the substance: 63,2729 Error (¿æÎðÓ): – scribal error: 27,6-7. 24-26 Essence (¿Úé{s): – the Father and the Son are of the same essence: 43,12-16 – the Father brought forth the Son from his essence: 91,26-29 – the Spirit is of the same nature and essence (as the Father and the Son): 110,13-15 See also ‘Substance’. Eucharist (À|ăs): – when we eat the bread of the Eucharist, we do not eat the body of his hypostasis, but that of the Eucharist: 46,18-24 – the Eucharist takes place in the symbol of the body of our Lord: 47,17-21 See also ‘Sacrament’. Fantasy (¿ÚêÔçò): – Jesus commanded ‘totakeuphisbed’ (John 5,8), that it might not be supposed that the deed was a fantasy: 39,29-31 Father (¿Âs): – what the Father does, the Son always does with him and in accordance with him: 44,2-4 – they did not understand about what Father he had spoken: 54,18-20 – the Father is only greater than the Son in cause: 84,1-21 – the Father brought forth the Son from his essence: 91,26-29 See also ‘Son’.

136

INDEXES

Fear (of God) (ÀÍàsĀáÐx): – connected with the manifestation of angels, together with tranquillity, gladness, peace and brightness with a sweet and delicate odour: 104,20-23 Feast (¿ÆÐ /ÁËïËï /Áx¾ï): (a) of Unleavened Bread: 49,29-50,5; 50,10-17.24-30; 51,1-5 (b) of Weeks: 49,29-50,5 (c) of Tabernacles: 50,1-30; 51,1-16 (d) of Atonement, also called ‘Feast of Braying’: 51,10-20 (e) of the Dedication: 63,14-20 – Israel’s feasts a foreshadowing, adopted by the Church as a model: 49,31-50,5 – the entrance of the Lord was on the Feast of Unleavened bread, not on the Feast of Tabernacles (Interpreter): 50,6-9. 24-30 Fig-tree (À): – Nathanael under the fig-tree: 26,2227,3 Fire (ÁÎæ): – one of the seven natures: 5(n.10) – the nature of fire with mud gives gold: 12,11-16 – the heat cannot do anything without the fire: 43,11-12 First-born (ÁüÝÎÂ): – Christ is in (his) manhood the ‘Onlybegotten’ and ‘first-born: 34,4-5 – Christ the ‘first-born’ as the last Adam and as the beginning and the first out of the dead: 34,7-10 Flesh (ÁüêÂ): – ‘theWordbecameflesh’, i.e. the flesh is exalted to being born of God and God humiliates himself to be born of flesh: 13,1-5 – the Word-God was not changed into flesh, i.e. into man, but he took on man to be revealed in his person: 16,8-10 – ‘flesh’ pars pro toto instead of the complete man: 18,3-6

– all flesh is mortal and all that is mortal is flesh: 20,22-23 – ‘the Word’ did not become flesh by nature. If ‘theWord’ became flesh by nature, then he also became mortal by nature: 20,23-24 – ‘hebecameflesh’ is like ‘hebecamein thelikenessofman’ (Phil 2,7): 20,2421,1 – the veil of the flesh was not able to conceal the splendour of his glory: 21,22-23 – although he put on flesh, his glory shone as the glory of the Only-begotten: 21,25-26 – the glory of the flesh which the WordGod had assumed by his indwelling: 22,7-9 – the Word-God became flesh by humiliation and became man, but the flesh of ‘the Word’ became ‘the Word’ by exaltation and was deified: 22,19-21 – the flesh was exalted to the glory of the greatness of ‘theWord’, but not to the hypostasis of ‘theWord’ nor to its substance: 23,1-4 Force (¿ćáÚÐ): – the Son is not in the Father as a force in a substance: 8,3-4 – philosophers call every force in a substance an accident: 8,5 Forgiveness (¿çúÂÎý): – baptism for forgiveness of sin: 35,1822; 77,9-13 See also ‘sin’. Foreshadowing (ĀÙ¾çáÓ/ ¿êòÎÓ): – Israel’s feasts: 49,29-32 – Abraham saw in the sacrifice (of Isaac) that was not offered the foreshadowing of the time in which Jesus would restore the world by the suffering and death of the cross: 56,1-13 – Jesus’s stole which was divided into four parts is a foreshadowing of his Gospel that (would go) to the four corners of the earth: 99,11-13

INDEXES

Friends (¿ćäÐă): – Jesus calls his disciples ‘friends’, because they are equal in glory as sons and inheritors of the blessings: 88,2024 Fruits (Áă¾ò): – in the likeness of fruits the Apostles brought men to God: 38,2-4 Fullness (¿Úáã/ÀÎÚáã): – by the fullness produced by the kenosis the visible One gleamed with the nature that was invisible: 22,9-16 – of him who was received and united with the Word-God we have received a portion of his fullness from him who was received: 23,11-17 Gardener (¿ççÅ): – Jesus appeared (metaphorically) in the figure of a gardener: 105,28-106,9 Garment (ÀĀðù{s/ ¿çُÎÝ/ ÀĀÑæ): (a) of a menstruating woman: 61,16-18 (b) of Jesus: – seamless: 98,21-24 – tradition about: 99,6-9 – unrent as a symbol of Jesus’s godhead: 99,10-11 – left behind after the resurrection: 102,29-31 – given to Joseph, the counsellor: 103,16-19 Gate (the) (¿ï): – the observance of the commandments: 59,21-23 ? Gentiles (¿ääï): – Nazareth inhabited by Gentiles: 26,1114; 48,1-3 – no contact with Gentiles: 36,4-8 – many of the Gentiles used to go up to Jerusalem to worship God: 71,16 – had no part in the rituals of the Passover: 71,7-8 – no fellowship with them allowed by command of the Law: 71,9-12 – desired to see Jesus: 71,9-20

137

– cruel acts done by the Gentiles against the believers: 89,1-3 Glory (¿ÑÂÎý): – the veil of the flesh was not able to conceal the splendour of his glory: 21,18-31 – the glory of the flesh which the WordGod had assumed by his indwelling gleamed by the quality of the nature which dwelled in it: 22,7-13 – about the becoming of ‘theWord’ it is said ‘wesawhisglory’: 22,13-16 – ‘wesawhisglory’: an expressive figure of the deification of our nature: 22,17-21 – one and the same glory and splendour appeared to us both in ‘the flesh’ of ‘the Word’ by his unity and in ‘the Word’ naturally: 22,21-25 – the Sonship is called glory: 23,9-10 – his glory became manifest by means of his death and resurrection: 71,2326 – the cross is called glory: 72,24-26; 92,11-13 – there is only one glory and holiness of the three hypostases: 75,1-6 – Jesus’s glory was there before the world: 93,3-9 – lack of glory by coming to the body which he had put on: 93,10-18 – Jesus forbade Mary Magdalene to touch him, to let it be known that he shared a glory, majesty and honour greater than before: 107,1-3 See also ‘Only-begotten (the)’. Glorified (to be) (ÒÂĀýs): – the Son of Man, by means of his death and resurrection: 71,23-26; 72,2430 – He, who will be glorified, cannot be an opponent of God: 73,6-10 – these hypostases glorify one another and are glorified by one another, because of the equality of their nature: 91,4-10

138

INDEXES

– the Father did not glorify Jesus for this reason that he might be glorified by him: 92,5-16 God (ÀÍàs): – Christ is called God, because of the equality in substance, in will and in power: 24,6-8 – invisible and incomprehensible: 24,2122; 54,1-4 – is Spirit, i.e. incorporeal, infinite and not confined to a place: 37,5-8 – he was God who had come in a human body, who will be revealed to all, being confessed as God over all: 48,4-8 – Jesus assigned by God to all the greatness after his passion: 76,18-21 Godhead (À{Íàs): – John paying attention to the Godhead of Christ more than the other evangelists: 3,16-22 – ‘theWord’ is in heaven in his manhood because of his Godhead: 32,10-18 – at times the Saviour speaks from his Godhead; then again from the person of his manhood; and then again from the undivided Sonship: 33,12-22; 107,19-26 – the Godhead did not suffer: 33,32-34 – the person of the Temple received the things of the Godhead by his unity with the Father: 63,29-32 – there is an inseparable connection between the two natures, i.e. between his Manhood and his Godhead: 96,710 – Mar Ephrem: ‘His garment which was not rent is a symbol of his Godhead, which is not rent or divided: 99,10-11 – all the things of his Godhead are incomprehensible to the mind and for narration:116,1-3 ? God-clad men (ÀÍàs ÛþÚÃà): 19,5; 32,1; 76,23-24; 104,5-7 See also ‘theoforoi’. Gospel of John (èçÐÎÙx…ÎÚáÆæ{s): – how it was written: 3,5-4,14 – called ‘the completion’: 3,22-23

Grace (ÎÃÚÓ/ ÀÎÃÚÓ): – the Gospels had been written by the grace of the Spirit: 3,13-15 – the Law is called ‘grace’, while the recipients have received it by the grace of the Giver: 23,18-25 – although the Law was given by grace, yet it was a shadow and a type: 23,2628 – everyone who follows the Scriptures and believes in Jesus shall be filled with grace like a river: 51,25-31 – the Apostles were going to receive grace and activity from the hypostasis of the Spirit: 51,32-52,2 – The disciples had no knowledge about the grace which had been given to them from the hypostasis of the Spirit: 52,5-11 – of the Spirit, received by those who were baptized in his name: 63,4-9 – grace was using the mouth of Caiaphas: 69,25-26 – the grace, however, which is from the Spirit, grows by means of purification of men and is extinguished by impurity: 82,13-15 – a small part of the grace that is in Jesus will come upon you, so that you also shall be called children of God: 90,28-30 – by grace we may call God ‘Father’: 94,16-19; 108,1-5 – gave the disciples the ability to preach: 95,5-9 – the grace of the Spirit was given three times to the disciples: 112,5-7 Harvest (ÁxøÐ): – the Samaritans that came to Jesus: 37,28-30 – men gathered together into piety towards God: 38,10-16 Heaven (¿Úäý): – although the Manhood of our Lord is completely in heaven, he is on earth and in the Church because of his Godhead. And when he was on earth in his

INDEXES

Manhood, he was in heaven because of his Godhead: 32,10-18 – the bread that is in the Church is called ‘a descent of heaven’: 33,1-6 – our Lord does not wish to teach us that his body is from heaven, but that the power of him who made him into bread, is the body from heaven: 46,1820 – Jesus’s garment lifted up to heaven: 99,6-9 – our Lord ascended to heaven to inherit the throne of the Godhead: 107,8-10 See also ‘earth’. Heal (to) (Ûés/ åáÐs): – not only bodies does he heal from the wounds of fiery serpents, but he also cleanses souls and bodies together from the bitterness of all that death brings: 33,29-31 – God provided healing by the water, in which sacrifices were washed: 39,1-18 – by a word only, he heals the paralytic and others, like the Creator who by a word had established everything from ‘inthebeginning’: 39,24-28 – the healing by a word is the mystery of the salvation and deliverance, received through Christ: 40,9-12 – healing of a blind man: 57,18-58,11 Heretics (¿LÓÎÚéăz): –their opinion aboutthe words‘theSon can do nothing of his own accord’ (John 5,19): 43,17-25 ? Holy of Holies (¿ýxÎùŽ{Ëù): 39,2-8 Hour (ÀĀðý): – there is a ‘beginning’ to a single hour, i.e. that ‘beginning’ of its being counted: 5,18-19 – Jesus’s hour had not yet come: 28,127; 70,1-4 – the hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified: 71,19-26 – Julian and Porphyrus accuse the Evangelists of disagreements: 100,22-24 Humanity (ÀÎþæs): – the vestment, i.e. the humanity that suffered, was his own: 34,14-17

139

– in his humanity the Son is called ‘Lord of the sheep’: 62,18-20 – the words ‘IaminMyFather’ are said by means of equality in nature in the Lord’s Godhead and by means of the inseparable connection in his humanity: 83,1-3 – the Interpreter says: his humanity bore the suffering: 84,1-2 – sometimes he spoke from the Person of his Humanity: 107,19-23 Humble (to) (ßÞã): – God the Word humbled himself and took it upon himself to dwell in man: 15,17-19 – God the Word entirely humbled himself so that he put on flesh; at the same time he humbled himself for our elevation and for our glory:18,1720 Humiliation (ÀÎæĀÑæĀã/ ¿ÞÝÎã): – the Word-God became flesh by humiliation and became man: 18,17-20; 22,17-20 – ‘hedescended’ is said of ‘theWord’, because of the humiliation without removal: 31,29-30 – God the Word came down by the humiliation of the Incarnation: 32,2021 Hypostasis (¿ćãÎçù): – ‘Word’ (John 1,1) is not a name for a hypostasis, but for a kind of being: 6,3-5 – the hypostasis of man consists of the constitutive elements of the individual, his properties; within the holy Trinity it indicates the properties of each one of the Trinity within the common nature of the holy Trinity: 6(n.12) – the Son is a perfect hypostasis from a perfect hypostasis: 8,3-7 – in the hypostasis of ‘the Word’ there was stability and movement of his personality immediately: 18,11-13 – the flesh was not exalted to the hypostasis of ‘theWord’: 23,3-4

140

INDEXES

– the hypostasis of the Temple will be revealed, will wake up the dead and judge everyone: 45,2-5 – the hypostasis of the Spirit is infinite, incomprehensible and eternal: 52,1-4; 82,9-12 – the nature and hypostasis (of ‘the Word’) are invisible and incomprehensible like his Father and the Holy Spirit: 54,1-4 – the three hypostases (of the holy Trinity) do not judge perceptibly and it is a perceptible hypostasis that judges visibly: 54,4-5 – only one glory and holiness of the three hypostases: 75,1-6 – the hypostasis of the Spirit is also called by the name ‘Spirit’: 82,2022 – single hypostases do not blend into a unity: 96,1-3 Illusion (¿ÚêÔçò): – the disciples supposed that they saw an apparition and an illusion: 109,1-3 Indwelling (ÀÎççÆã): – ‘theWordbecameflesh’ is understood as ‘indwelling’: 16,16-23; 16(n.89) See also ‘staying (in a place)’. Image (¿ćäà‹/ ÀÎçäà‹): – every image is associated with the prototype: 11,9-12 – in Genesis man is called ‘image’: 11,17-18 – God the Word raised man in such way that he will be honoured with him eternally, in like manner as an image whose prototype in reality is invisible: 16,13-15 – God executes the judgment in his Temple and his visible image: 45,1516 Impious (¿ðý{): 9,23-24; 16,10-13 Incarnation (ÀÎçþæüÂĀã): – five ways in which the incarnation of ‘theWord’ is spoken of: 15,15-18,2; 19(n.106)

– the name ‘Son of Man’ is common for ‘the Son of Man’ by nature, as well as for ‘the Word’ in the Incarnation: 32,10-12 – God the Word came down by the humiliation of the Incarnation: 32,2021 Interpreter (¿çäō): – the Only-begotten told about the Father in the flesh that he took as an interpreter: 24,23-25 Justice (ÀÎæ¾Ý): 29,24 Judgment (ÀÎçÙx) : – there is one judgment of the Holy Trinity and of its Temple; this judgment is executed in his Temple and his visible image: 44,18-45,16 Kenosis (¿ùÎé): 22,7-16; 22(n.122) Kingdom of God/heaven (/ ÀÍàsxzÎÞáã ¿ÚäýxÀÎÞáã): – for everyone who has been born of water and Spirit: 29,24-30 – the robber was not baptized, but also received the Kingdom and so did others: 30,3-5 – Kingdom of heaven: something abundant: 62,31-32 Knowledge (ÀĀïËÙ): – hidden knowledge: 29,4-12 – Jesus’s brothers had not gained full knowledge about Jesus: 48,4-8 – spiritual knowledge: 59,26-28 – the light of knowledge is in Jesus; nothing will happen to him against his will: 65,14-22 See also ‘darkness’. Labour (to) (€¾ćà): – the prophets: 38,10-13 Lamb of God (ÀÍàsxzüãs): – indication of the passion of Christ: 25,15-19 Law (¿éÎäæ): – the natural law, the scriptural law of Moses and Jesus: 23,18-24,3

INDEXES

– Jesus accused as a transgressor of the Law: 41,7-30 – study of the Law is the pre-instruction to the spiritual philosophy of the Gospel: 45,25-31 ? Life (¿ÚÐ): – ‘theWord’ brought forth life and created it: 10,9-18 – three categories of life: 10,19-11,4 – eternal life for those who believe in Jesus: 33,27-29 – abundant life, i.e. everlasting life: 62,28-31 – Jesus came to give life, i.e. the sound doctrine of the royal Trinity: 63,1-3 – life, i.e. knowledge of the Truth: 63,4 Light (ÁzÎæ): – ‘the Word’ created the light in us: 11,5-8 – the Persian Sage says the light is the Christ, the darkness the people of Israel: 11,27-12,1 – the splendour of the light of the nature that inhabits Jesus: 28,10-13 – Jesus, the light for the world: 53,4-8 Love (ÀĀäЍ/ ¿ÂÎÐ): – a new commandment: to love those who are of the household of faith even more than ourselves: 80,10-14 – love is a certain force established in the soul and invisible, expressed by keeping the commandments: 80,2581,2 – Jesus kept Magdalene’s fervent love from touching him: 106,20-23 – Simon’s declarations of love: 112,15113,7 Man (¿þæüÂ): – composed of body and soul: 18,7-8 Manhood (ÀÎþæs): – ‘the Word’ is in heaven in his manhood because of his Godhead, but although the Manhood of our Lord is completely in heaven, he is on earth and in the Church because of his Godhead. And when he was on earth in his

141

Manhood, he was in heaven because of his Godhead: 32,10-18 – at times he speaks from his Godhead, then again from the person of his manhood: 33,12-22 – it is proper to his manhood that he suffered: 34,14-19 – the Father and ‘the Word’ testify about the manhood related to us: 54,10-12 – an inseparable connection between the natures, i.e. between (his) Manhood and (his) Godhead: 96,6-10 Master (¿Â/Áüã) : – Jesus: 31,22-26; 65,1-3; 87,36-37 – Satan: 79,31 ? Members (¿ćãxz): – the believers members of Jesus’s household/body: 81,17-23; 94,27-29; 96,3-5; 104,17-19 Messiah (¿ÑÚþã): – the testimonies in the Scriptures: 35,3-8; 49,17-27; 51,23-25; 52,2022; 66,27-32 See also ‘Christ’. Metaphorical / metaphorically (/ ĀÙ¾æüÂËã ¿Ú揾ćáò/ ĀÙ¾ćáÙ¾ý): 8,20-24; 105,16-20. 28-32 Ministry (divine) (ÀÎæüÂËã): – Jesus perfected every act by his divine ministry: 20,8-11; 92,17-20 – Jesus’s last night the completion of his divine ministry: 95,15-17 Miracle (Àüãx/ ÀÎãx): – Mt, Mk and Lk had omitted (a few of) the miracles and much of the teaching about his Godhead: 3,13-16 – in Bethany: 64,26-30; 67,1.10-12 – in Ephraim: 70,1-11 – miracles before and after the crucifixion: 57,9-13; 71,21-26; 72,24-33; 93,26-28 – miracles performed by means of the disciples: 90,15-19 Myrrh (ÁÎã): see ‘aloes’. Mystery (À|s): – of theology: 9,8-14

142

INDEXES

– of the adoption as sons: 30,6-11 – of baptism, resurrection and the birth from a virgin: 31,11-13 – of our whole nature: 40,4-8 – of the long time and duration, in which the paralytic was lying in his sins and of the salvation and deliverance which he received: 40,9-12 ? Nations (¿ćääï): – related to Jesus: 63,10-11; 72,5-7; 110,4-6; 112,5-7 Nature (¿çÚÝ): (a) of Jesus – unity and equality in nature with the Father (and the Spirit): 9,1220; 9(n.39); 23,14-17; 43,28-30; 47,19-21; 63,21-22; 64,2-8; 83,13; 89,17-21; 91,4-6 – ‘the Word’ did not became flesh by nature: 17,14-17; 20,19-24 – the splendour of the light of the nature that inhabits Jesus: 21,2126; 22,7-16; 28,10-13 – Jesus’s nature and hypostasis invisible and incomprehensible: 45,12-15; 54,1-4 – the weakness and fearfulness of his (human) nature: 72,11-23 – the connection between the two natures in Christ: 96,6-10; 107,2429 (b) human nature – mystery of our whole nature and its torture: 40,4-8 – misery and feebleness of our nature: 67,18-21 – all nature culpable, but freed from Satan, sin and death: 73,28-74,10 – freedom of will is a fixed quality of a rational nature: 87,3-5 – our nature will be invested with splendour, honour and glory: 102,21-24 (c) nature (in general) – seven natures: 5,15-16; 5(n.10); 13,15-16; 13(n.69)

– ‘all’ (John 1,3a) includes all living nature: 10,13-18 – the nature of fire with mud gives gold: 12,11-16 Only-begotten (the) (¿ÙËÚÑÙ): – although he put on flesh, the glory of the Only-begotten was not hindered from being revealed: 21,18-26; 22,716 – it became known from the works that he was the Only-begotten and equal to the Father: 21,26-31 – there is not another Only-begotten, for he is incomparable: 21,32-22,6 – Only-begotten, i.e. he is the Only One from the Only One, born alone and in a unique way: 24,4-8 – Only-Begotten is a general name of ‘the Word’, because of the unity: 34,1-4 – Christ in divinity the ‘Only-begotten’, in manhood the ‘Only-begotten’ and ‘first-born’: 34,4-10 Only One (¿ÙxÎÑà): – because he (‘the Word’) is the Only One from the Only One, born alone and in a unique way, he is called Only-begotten: 7,3-5; 24,4-6 ? Parables (À¾ćáò): 59,16-17 Paraclete (ÀĀÚáùüò): – Teacher and Comforter: 81,10-13 – the Lord also called Paraclete: 81,1316 – the world does not understand or comprehend him in his hypostasis: 81,1723 Paralytic (¿Ùüþã): 39,19-41,6 ? /èÚò{Āþã Partakers (to be) (/¿òÎý èÚòÎþã): – in the resurrection: 74,21-22 – in the baptism of cleansing: 77,9-13 – of Jesus: 83,4-6; 96,11-18 Paschal Supper (¿ÐøòxÀĀÚäþÐ): – the order at the Paschal supper: 77,2279,26 See also ‘Passover’.

INDEXES

Passion (¿þÐ): – indicated by the word ‘Lamb’: 25,15-19 – by the will of the Father: 56,11-13 – the cause of very great benefits for the world: 73,11-15 – by divine providence, for the condemnation of Satan: 90,12-14 Passover (¿Ðøò): – Jesus came to Bethany six days before the Passover: 51,1-2 – eaten by Jesus on Thursday evening: 70,12-29 – the Gentiles had no part in its rituals: 71,4-8 – Jesus recited the Passover and completed the legal rite: 77,23-24 – indicates not only the day of the feast, but also the whole week before: 97,411 – its celebration was to take place on the Sabbath after Jesus’s Passion: 100,1619 Pars pro toto (¿ćáÝâïÀĀçãèã): see œ ‘custom of Scripture’. Peace (¿ćäáý): – Jesus bestows peace upon his disciples three times in the same day: 108,19-25 Pen (the) (ÁüÚÓ): – the pen: the lawful doctrine: 59,21-22 – the pen: the Scriptures, which bring us to God and keep us from heresy: 60,3-6 Permission (ÀÎçêóã): – causes, which come upon us with God’s permission: 56,21-30 Person (¿ò{‹üò): – taking on a person: 15,15-20; 15(n.83); 16,8-12; 17,1-3; 93,10-14 – unity of the person of the Sonship: 33,12-22; 34,8-10; 44,16-17 – the person of the Temple: 63,30-32 – the common person is able to bear humiliation and exaltation: 96,1-2 – ‘God-the Word’ is the person of the Only-begotten, who alone takes and holds the manhood of Christ: 96,6-7

143

– person of the Saviour’s Godhead/person of his humanity/person of his unity: 107,17-29 – one person, one Lord, one Christ and one Son: 108,1-5 Philosopher (¿òÎêáÚò): – philosophers call every force in a substance an accident: 8,3-5 – the spiritual philosophy of the Gospel is like the most important philosopher: 45,25-30 Poly-pods (many-footed animals) (…ÎÙxÎéÎàÎò): 103,5-7 Pool (ÀĀÙxÎäðã): – Beth Chesda: 38,17-39,18 – Siloach: 41,9-11; 58,12-16; 92,2293,2 Power (¿ćáÚÐ): (a) of Jesus – equality in power with God: 13,15; 24,3-8; 43,28-30; 47,12-16; 57,21-25; 64,7-8; 74,16-18 – always with him: 28,8-10 – to break the laws: 41,28-30 – to execute judgment: 44,18-45,16 (b) of God: 39,6-8 (c) of the Spirit: 29,22-23; 52,5-11; 85,26-28; 90,5-10 (d) of the disciples: – to bind and loosen: 110,7-13 Prayer (ÀÎà‹/ ÀÎðÂ): – needs a form: 81,3-9; 95,9-14 – no need of prayer: 91,11-23; 91,30-92,4 Priesthood (ÀÎæÍÝ): – of Caiaphas was illegal: 69,11-14 – three ordinations of priesthood given to Peter: 113,4-7 Prophecy (ÀÎÚÃæ): – prophecies in the Scriptures about the Messiah: 35,1-8; 49,17-27; 51,31 Prophet (¿ÚÃæ): – John the Baptist: 25,1-14 – the Jews were expecting someone different from the rest of the prophets: 25,6-14 – Haggai: 29,1-3 – Jesus: 37,5-15; 52,20-22

144

INDEXES

? Prophets (the) (¿ÚÃæ): – not composed by Moses: 26,3-6 – labourers: 38,10-16 – pre-instruction to the spiritual philosophy of the Gospel: 45,25-31 – those who believed in the Messiah, came to believe by means of the prophets: 61,18-28 – their lamp was put aside after the appearance of the true Light: 93,1926 Providence (ÀÎæüÂËã): – the exaltation of the flesh and the humiliation of God are by divine providence: 13,1-13 – the ignorance wishes to confuse the acts of providence: 13,13 – healing by means of divine providence: 39,9-18 – the divine providence of Jesus’s passion: 90,12-14 – Petrus’s denial was by divine providence: 113,1-3 Providentially (ĀÙ¾æüÂËã): – God the Word providentially became man: 15,15-20 – Feast of Tabernacles was providentially delayed: 50,6-9 Purification (ÀĀÚÝx/ ÀÎÚÝx): – purification from error: 12,9-11 – baptism called purification: 34,2123 – grace grows by means of purification of men: 82,13-14 – strengthens the fervour of the heart: 102,11-13 Put on (to) (ÿÃà): – ‘the Word’ put on the whole nature: 19,2-4 – although he had put on flesh, his glory shone as the glory of the Only-begotten: 21,25-26 – he said: ‘GiveMethegloryIhadin your presence’ (17,5), because of the body which he had put on: 93,1415 See also ‘flesh’.

? Reapers (Áx{øÐ): – the Apostles: 38,1-4 Redemption (¿çùÎò): – the purpose of Jesus’s coming: 37,1-4; 56,9-11; 76,6-8 Relationship (ÀÎÙĀÚÂ): – rejected from the divine relationship: 69,31-32 – for those who believe: 94,7-15 – between Jesus and the Father as an example for those who believe: 95,2696,5 Resurrection (ÀĀäÚù): – baptism is a sign of death and resurrection: 29,19-23; 31,11-13 – Martha doubted: 66,22-26 – of Lazarus: 67,27-69,2 – the hope of the resurrection: 74,21-25 – made manifest Jesus’s overwhelming power: 86,17-21 – disagreement with regard to the resurrection: 100,22-101,15 – Jesus’s linen cloths as sign of the resurrection: 102,16-31 – the angels in white as a sign of the joy and gladness about the resurrection: 104,11-19 – Mary brought the news of the resurrection as a remuneration for Eve: 108,6-9 – after his resurrection Jesus bestowed peace upon his disciples three times in the same day: 108,18-25 Revelation (¿çÚáÅ/ èçÐÎÙx¿æÎÚáÅ): – to Qiyoré: 19,5-11 – to the disciples: 73,1-5 – of John: 114,26-31 Reveal (to) (¿ćáÅ / ¿ćáÅĀæ): – God the Word revealed himself in man: 15,17-19; 16,8-10 – the greatness of ‘the Word’ revealed in the flesh: 21,18-23 – the Spirit reveals the future: 89,2590,14 – the Spirit reveals sin: 90,7-10 – Jesus’s honour will be gloriously revealed: 90,19-21

INDEXES

– the flowing out of the blood and water not revealed to everyone: 99,21-100,5 Riches (ÁÎï): – of the grace of the Spirit: 23,11-13; 91,16-18 Righteousness (ÀÎúÙx|): – our nature and hypostasis are not turned into righteousness, but we have taken righteousness upon us: 16,1-8 Ruler (¿æüÂËã/ ¿æÎݍs): (a) ruler of the air (angel): 4,8-14 (b) ruler of the nation (Michael): 38,30 (c) ruler of the world: 74,26-30; 84,2285,13 See also ‘Satan’. Sabbath (ÀĀÃý): – transgression of the Sabbath: 40,1721; 41,12-30; 48,22-49,16 – on a Sabbath day Jesus came to Bethany: 70,12-29 – the day after Jesus’s death: a special Sabbath: 100,16-21 See also ‘circumcision’ and ‘law’. Sacrament (À|s): – of baptism: 35,16-27 – of Eucharist: 77,22-78,17; 79,20-33; 99,16-17 Salvation (¿çùÎò): – Christ sent for the salvation of the world: 35,22-24; 72,9-10. 21-22 – from the Jews, because Christ descended from them: 37,1-4 See also ‘redemption’. Sanctus (¿ýxÎù): – threefold Sanctus, when the sacraments are being consecrated: 104,2-10 Satan (¿çÔé): – the father of lies: 55,8-10; 82,6-8 – destroyer, adversary of the true ‘light’: 11,24-27 – ruler of the world: 74,26-30; 84,2285,13 – tyrant: 73,11-24; 74,1-10.16-20 – slanderer and accuser: 73,25-30 – the ruler of evil: 85,9-13 – the crafty Serpent: 108,6-9

145

– the chief of the evil people: 114,18-20 – the judgement / the condemnation of Satan: 90,12-14 – Jesus will prevail over Satan: 74,8-10 – his goal is to kill the soul and to take away from it the body: 84,32-85,4 – the guilt of Satan will be openly shown: 90,15-19 – Judas called Satan: 78,13-14 – Peter called Satan: 79,1-6 Saviour (¿ù{üò): – the Eucharistic bread in the Church is ‘sent down from the Saviour’: 33,1-6 – a custom of the Saviour: 33,12-22; 106,26-30; 107,19-24 Scribe (¿Â{ĀÝ): – careless: 51,1-9 ? Scriptures (¿ÂĀÝ): – the Scriptures say in three ways that we are born of God: 12,16-20 – Nathanael was very well versed in the Scriptures: 26,24-26 – testimonies in the Scriptures about the Messiah: 35,3-8; 49,17-27; 51,23-25; 52,20-22; 66,27-32 – in the Scriptures elect and excellent men called ‘Messiahs’ and ‘Sons of God’: 66,27-32 – many words in the Scriptures seem to be contrary to one another: 76,1-2 – ‘Childhood’ is spoken of in three manners in the Scriptures: 111,4-12 See also ‘custom’. ? Secrets (ÀĀÚêÝ): – Jesus knows all secret things: 27,1-3; 107,4-10 ? Seven natures (¿çÚÝ¿ðÃý): – seven natures created in silence and one by a voice: 5,15-16; 5(n.10); 13,1516; 13(n.69) Shadow (ÀĀÚçáÓ): – our birth a shadow and type: 6,21 – the (scriptural) law was a shadow and a type: 23,26-28 Sheep (¿çï/ ¿Âüï/ ¿Úúæ): – the recipients of the lawful doctrine: 59,23-24

146

INDEXES

– other sheep, i.e. the nations related to Jesus: 63,10-13 – Mary as a wandering sheep: 106,1014 Shepherd (¿Úï): – qualities of a shepherd: 59,25-28 – Jesus as a shepherd goes in front of the flock: 60,13-18 – Jesus the good shepherd: 62,1-5 – Jesus is known as Shepherd and Lord by them that are saved: 62,1617 – Mary heard the voice of her shepherd: 106,10-14 See also ‘(the) door’. ? Sign (Às/ À{s): ˜ – a sign in Qatne: 28,1-27 – baptism a sign of death and resurrection: 29,19 – Jesus did many signs, John not even one: 64,9-12 – the day as a sign that Jesus is the Light of the world: 65,21-22 – Jesus’s fervour as a sign of his rage: 66,33-67,2 – a sign in Ephraim: 70,1-11 – water and blood are signs of the new birth: 99,14-17 – peace bestowed upon the disciples is a sign of the resurrection and their concord in one faith, hope and love: 108,21-25 – signs of Jesus exceed our hearing: 116,7-11 Sin (ÀĀÚÔÐ): – God made him (Jesus) to be sin: 16,115 – Jesus’s death brought sin to an end: 25,15-19 – the paralytic was lying in his sins and polluted by them: 40,9-12 – the blind man and the question about sin: 56,21-57,5 – the increase of sin: 73,15-19 – some say: sin is implanted by nature and therefore easy to commit: 87,2326

– power to forgive and to retain sin: 110,7-24 See also ‘slavery’. Slavery (À{ËÃï): 54,27-33 Snake (¿ÙÎÐ/ ëóés): – in the desert, made of bronze and not alive: 33,23-41 – no longer found in Ephraim: 70,111 Son (ÁüÂ): – the Son is born from the Father eternally, without suffering and cutting: 6,13-17 – the Son cannot be understood as a force in the Father, but as a perfect hypostasis from a perfect hypostasis: 8,3-7; 8(n.31) – the Son is continually with the Father and so also partaker with him in the creative activity: 10,4-8 – the Son cannot do anything without the Father, nor the Father without the Son: 42,2-44,10 – the Father and the Son are one in their natural activity and of the same essence: 43,12-26 – the nature of the Son is equal to that of the Spirit: 47,17-21 – equality of nature of the Father and the Son: 63,21-32 – the Father is greater than the Son only in cause: 84,1-21; 86,10-21 – there is one Son by the inseparable connection between the two natures: 96,6-10 ? Sons of Abraham („züÂsÛçÂ): – the Jews: 55,1-6. 11-18 Sonship (À{üÂ): – sonship is called ‘glory’: 23,9-10 – ‘the Word’ is united in sonship by nature; we are made partakers by grace: 23,11-16 – at times the Saviour speaks from the undivided sonship: 33,12-22 – the Father esteemed Jesus worthy of sonship by means of ‘the Word’: 62,13-15

INDEXES

– Jesus’s sonship is by nature with ‘the Word’: 94,16-19 Son of Man (¿þæsxzüÂ): – angels ascending and descending upon the Son of Man (John 1,51): 27,15-17 – the Son of Man ascended to heaven (John 3,13): 31,22-33,22; 46,26-30 – the Son of Man who is in heaven (John 3,13): 32,10-18; 32(n.186) – this name is common for ‘the Son of Man’ by nature, as well as for ‘theWord’ in the incarnation: 32,1012 – the Son of Man will complete the general resurrection, the universal resurrection, the great transformation: 44,11-15 – the Son of Man will come at last for the second time as Lord: 62,24-27 Soul (¿þóæ): – the Son is born from the Father like a word that is from the soul: 6,5-17; 6(n.15); 20,1-11 – ‘man’ composed of body and soul: 18,7-8; 18(n.101) – the soul is not created in the male until after forty days: 18,8-15; 18(n.102) – the mind cannot do anything without the soul and vice versa: 43,11-12 – Lazarus’s soul was far away from its body: 68,25-28 – Jesus’s soul was troubled: 72,11-23 – love is a certain force established in the soul: 80,25-28 – Satan’s goal is to kill the soul: 85,1-4 See also ‘Word’. Sower (¿ï{|): – Jesus by preaching and teaching: 38,1-2 Spices (ÀĀÔæÎÐ): – spread over Jesus’s body: 102,33 Spirit (Holy) (¿Ð{): – John assented to the Spirit to write his Gospel: 3,19-21 – to be born of God, i.e. by the Spirit and by faith: 12,9-16

147

– ‘unless one is born of the Spirit’ (John 3,5): 29,13-30 – the Spirit, the Perfecter of the Kingdom, brings home those who are baptized: 30,6-8 – the birth of the Spirit is invisible for our bodily eyes: 30,19-24 – ‘You do not know where it comes from’ (John 3,8) is said about the Holy Spirit: 30,25-31,10 – the prophets received the Spirit partly, Christ in full measure: 35,9-15 – the Spirit gives life: 47,1-21 – the name ‘Spirit’ denotes the nature and hypostasis as well as the grace and activity of the Holy Spirit: 51,32-52,4 – before the Passion the disciples wrought signs from the power of the Spirit of the Lord: 52,5-19 – ‘lifewhichisabundant’ (John 10,10) means: the grace of the Spirit for those who are baptized:63,4-9 – ‘inhisspirit’ (John 11,33) is about the activity of the Spirit which dwelt in Jesus: 67,3-7 – the word ‘spirit’ as a homonym refers to: the air, the soul, angels, demons, divine providence, the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit and the grace and the gift, bestowed from the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit: 81,24-82,8; 82,20-26 – twelve activities of the Holy Spirit: 82,9-19 – by the gift of the Spirit we are partakers of Christ: 83,1-8 – the man who had been taken on, received all grace of the Spirit by means of the connection with Godthe Word, and through him also the believers: 85,24-29 – the spiritual gifts are jointly from God the Word and from the Spirit: 87,3588,8 – the Spirit comes without intercession and without being sent; by his free will he convinces, condemns and judges: 89,17-90,2

148

INDEXES

– the Spirit calls to mind what has been done, searches for what is hidden and reveals the future: 90,3-4 – the Spirit has no opinion different from the Father’s and the Son’s: 90,22-25 – all the grace of the Spirit is with Jesus, because he is united with God the Word and has received the true Sonship: 90,26-91,3 – by the gift of the Spirit we will obtain the opulence of the spiritual gifts so abundantly that we will also have no need of prayer: 91,11-18 – the Spirit was given three times: 110,4-6; 112,5-7 – life-giving Spirit: a life that necessarily flows and spreads forth and lasts for ages, interminably extending: 109,26-30 See also ‘Temple’ and ‘Theologian’. Spiritual (¿ÚçÐ{/ ÀĀÚçÐ{): – the spiritual philosophy of the Gospel: 45,25-31 – the spiritual instructions of the Gospels: 61,6-7 – nine ranks of spiritual beings: 63,1013 – by spiritual birth we have received a connection with God-the Word: 85,36-86,2 Spiritual gift (¿çÝÎý/ÀĀÚçÐ{ÀĀÂÎã): – prophecy as a spiritual gift: 12,911 – we will share in the spiritual gift: 74,11-13 – a great opulence of spiritual gifts: 86,5-9 – the spiritual gifts are jointly from Jesus and from the Spirit: 87,35-88,8 Spring (¿çÚðã/ ¿ïÎÃã): – Jacob’s well at Sychar: 36,1-3 – Siloach: 58,12-16; 38,17-29 – Jesus: spring of wisdom: 112,28-29 ? Stadia (À{ËÔés): 66,16 Staying (in a place) (À{Îäï): – of the incarnation: 16,16-23; 16(n. 89)

Stole (¿ćáÔés): – Jesus’s stole divided into four parts as a symbol of the division of his body and a foreshadowing of his Gospel that would go to the four corners of the world: 99,10-13 Stone (¿ò¾Ý): – of Lazarus’s grave: 68,8-20 – of Jesus’s grave: taken away as an indication of the resurrection: 101,16-30 Substance (¿Úé{s): – equality in substance of the Father and the Word/the Son: 9,6; 24,4-8; 63,2729; 84,18-21 – ‘he became’ (John 1,14) is not by change of substance: 21,1-2 – there was no unity in hypostasis and substance between the Word and his flesh, unless in a (certain) way and in a (certain) quality: 23,1-10 – in God there is a diversity in hypostases; however in substance, he is one: 9,5-7 – God the Word came down by the humiliation of the Incarnation and not by transition of substance, for he is infinite: 32,20-21 See also ‘Essence’. Sudary (ÁxÎé): 102,16-18; 103,19-24 See also ‘Peter (Simon)’. Suffer (to) (ÿÐ): – God did not suffer: 33,3 – it is not proper to theWord to suffer, but to his manhood, his humanity: 34,4-19; 84,1-2 – Jesus will restore the world by the suffering and death on the cross: 56,3-5 – Jesus not to be considered impassible to suffering: 72,11-23 Sun (¿þäý): – the radiance of the perceptible sun cannot shine without the heavenly body: 43,6-16 Sunday (¿ÃþÂËÐ): – its ‘origin’, in which the seven natures came into being, precedes every day: 5,15-16

INDEXES

– in the church the Feast of Tabernacles is changed into Palm Sunday: 50,4-5 – the Sunday of the Hosannas: 70,15-16 Take on (to) (Äêæ): – ‘the Word became flesh’ to be explained as ‘He took on the flesh’: 16,1-15; 16(n.87); 19,1-4 – he took on ‘flesh’ and not ‘man’: 18,3-4 – for the man who was taken on, it is suitable that he should pray, although he did not really pray: 91,30-33 – the greatness of the man who was taken on was to make known that God the Word dwells in him: 93,7-9 See also ‘become’, ‘become flesh’ and ‘flesh’. ? Teachers (¿çóáã): – teachers were only there as mediators for the faith of men: 92,20-21 – of the school: 77,22-78,6; 99,25100,5 ? Tears (¿ðãx): – of Jesus: 67,13-25 Temple (¿ćáÞÙz): (a) temple in Jerusalem – built in 46 years: 28,28-29,3 – many miracles happened in the temple: 39,2-8; 71,1-8 – the ‘Dedication’ of the temple: 63,14-20 (b) Temple (of ‘theWord’): – ‘the Word’ did not become flesh naturally, but stayed in the flesh as in a Temple: 16,16-23; 16(n.90) – the becoming of ‘theWord’ is the becoming of his Temple: 22,14-16 – it is not proper to ‘the Word’ to suffer, but to the Temple: 34,11-19 – the Temple of his body which is from us: 44,5-10 – the judgment is executed in the Temple (of ‘the Word’) and his visible image: 44,18-45,16 – the Spirit confers honour on his Temple by making it equal in power and equal in activity: 47,1-16

149

(c) the (human) body as temple: – the Holy Spirit dwells in us as in his temples: 81,17-23 Theoforos (†{Îò{s): 4,8-14; 60,1-9; 66,6-15; 79,27-33; 103,30-35 See also ‘God-clad men’. Theology (¿ÚÅÎà{s): – the order of theology in John 1,1: 8,17-24 – the trinity the whole mystery of theology: 9,12-14 Theoria (¿Ù{s): 32,18-19; 32(n.187) Transformation (¿óáÐÎý): – the Spirit can make sons of the flesh into Sons of God by transformation: 12,9-16 – ‘to become’, in the sense of ‘transformation’: 14,1-2 – ‘to become’ i.e. a transformation from that which was not to that which was: 21,13-14 – the transformation could not prevent the Only-begotten and he that is equal in glory from being recognized: 21,23-25 Trinity (ÀÎÙĀÚà): – there is one judgement of the holy Trinity and of its temple: 44,24-45,2 – Jesus came to give life, i.e. the sound doctrine which is in the royal Trinity: 63,1-3 Truth (of God) (Áüý): – ‘truthandgracecamethroughJesus Christ’ (John 1,17): 23,26-24,3; 23(n.133) – Jesus’s words agree with the truth of God: 35,1-8 – the Scribes and the Pharisees did not accept the truth: 59,5-8 – ‘life’ (John 10,10): knowledge of the truth: 63,4 – ‘the Spirit of truth’ (John 14,17): 82,2-8 – the disciples will be able to preach the truth: 95,5-9 Type (¿êòÎÓ): – the (scriptural) law was a shadow and a type: 23,26-28

150

INDEXES

– the type possesses much resemblance to reality: 25,23-24 – the linen cloths left in the tomb and the angels ‘in white’ formed a type of the future world: 102,16-26; 104,2830 Tyrant (¿æ{üÓ): see ‘Satan’. Undergarment (ÀĀÚæÎÝ): – Jesus’s: 98,21-24 Unity (ÀÎÚæËÐ/ ÀÎÙËÐ): – diversity in hypostases and unity in nature: 9,10-14; 9(n.39) – ‘wesawhisglory’(John 1,14c) is said about the becoming of his temple and of the unity of his own glory and its inhabitant: 22,13-16 – there was no unity in hypostasis and substance between ‘the Word’ and ‘the flesh’ unless in a (certain) way and in a (certain) quality: 23,1-10 – there was a unity (between the Temple of his body and ‘the Word’) from the first movement of the reception: 31,27-32,1 – definition of ‘unity’: the connection of two things into one something in the retention of the natures and the hypostases and in the preservation of the fixed qualities of each of them: 32,1-9 – there is unity of Jesus’s humanity with ‘the Word’ in order that in the substance of his body he might be God and Lord: 62,20-27 – the definition of unity: the connection of two natures and hypostases in one Person, which gave names and deeds to one another, preserving the natures and hypostases without mixture and confusion: 107,24-108,5 Vestment (¿çُÎÝ): – the vestment, the humanity that suffered, was his own: 34,16-19 Vine (the) (ÀĀóÅ): – Jesus as: 85,24-86,9

– indication of the assumption (of a man): 86,10-11 Vine-dresser (¿Ñáò): – as the cause and the completion of the Incarnation the Father is called vinedresser: 86,11-24 – the Father called ‘the vine-dresser’ that it might not be thought that he has a will alien to the Father: 86,3387,2 Virginal (¿Úà{ĀÂ): – virginal doors: 101,18-20 Visible (¿çÙÏÐĀã): – there will be a visible judgment for visible people: 45,11-16; 54,1-4 Washing of the feet (¿ćáÅă ĀÚÆý): 76,22-77,13; 77,22-29; 79,30-33 ? Water (¿Úã): – born anew of water and Spirit: 29,1323 – streams of living water: 51,21-31 – Michael, the ruler of the nation, stirred up the water of Beth Chesda: 38,2930 – the water of Siloach: 41,9-11; 58,1216; 92,22-93,2 – water of two kinds (hidden and revealed): 92,29-93,2 – blood and water out of Jesus’s side as signs of the new birth: 99,14-100,5 Wedding feast (À{Āþã): – in Qatne: 27,19-28,27 Well (ÁüÂ): – at the well Eliezer acquired Rebekah as a bride, Jacob Rachel and Moses Zipporah: 25,23-30 – Jacob’s well at Sychar: 36,1-3 Will (¿çÚ‹): (a) of men: – denial of the truth and unbelief are subjected to free will: 59,58 – freedom of will: a fixed quality of a rational nature: 87,3-5 – Simon’s denial did not originate from the (human) will: 113,1-3

INDEXES

(b) of the Holy Spirit: – he convinces by his free will: 89,25-90,4 (c) of Jesus: – nothing will happen without or against his will: 65,1-30; 96,2023 Wind (¿Ð{): (a) the air – although it gives out a sound, it is invisible: 30,12-24 (b) the (Holy) Spirit – nobody knows where he comes from and whither he goes, being infinite: 30,25-31,10 Wine (ÁüäÐ): – lack of wine: 28,21-27 Witness (À{xÍé): – Jesus’s witness trustworthy: 53,9-33 Wood (¿êÚù): See ‘cross’. Word (the) (ÀĀáã): – not a proper name, but an indication of the manner in which the Son is born from the Father: 6,3-8 – the birth of the Son from the Father is comparable to the soul and the word that originates in it: 6,8-17; 20,1-21 – ‘the Word’ is masculine, not feminine; he is from the Father and ‘with him’, like the effect with the cause 8,7-16; 8(n.33); 9,6-7 – the appellation ‘Word’ used as a demonstration of the eternal birth of the Son: 8,17-20; 20,1-3 – ‘Godishe’ and ‘withGodishe’, being nothing else than he is with whom he is: 9,1-7 – ‘the Word became flesh’ (John 1,14) is said instead of: 1. taking on a person: 15,15-24; 16(n.87) 2. taking on something: 16,1-15 3. staying (in a place): 16,16-23; 16(n.89) 4. the onlookers’ opinion: 17,1-7 5. the connection with the flesh: 17,818,2

151

– ‘wesawhisglory’ (John 1,14c) is said about the becoming of ‘the Word’: 22,7-16 – ‘he ascended’ (John 3,13) is said, because of his earthly Temple and ‘He descended’ is said of ‘theWord’, because of the humiliation without removal: 31,27-30; 32,5-9 – the name ‘Son of Man’ is common for ‘the Son of Man’ by nature, as well as for ‘the Word’ in the Incarnation: 32,10-12 – God the Word came down by the humiliation of the Incarnation and not by transition of substance, for he is infinite: 32,18-21 – it is not proper to ‘theWord’ to suffer, but to the Temple: 34,11-19 – God the Word is the person of the Only-begotten, who alone takes and holds the manhood of Christ: 96,610 See also ‘humiliation’. ? ? Works (divine) (¿ćáÚÐ/ ÁËÃï): – three amazing deeds (the incarnation, mighty signs and miracles, his death and resurrection): 93,19-29 World (¿ćäáï): – Gregory and the Interpreter call ‘the world’ darkness: 12,1-4 – four worlds: 44,2; 44(n.260) – Jesus light of the world: 65,7-22 – the judgment of the world: 73,1174,10 – ‘Whom the world cannot receive’ (John 14,17) i.e. the whole world does not understand or comprehend him in his hypostasis: 81,17-19 – although in their body the disciples are in the world, yet in their spirit and in their citizenship they are above the world: 94,27-95,4 – the whole creation: 114,11-13 – the people:114,13-15 – the people who fear God: 114,15-16 – the evil people: 114,17-21 See also ‘darkness’ and ‘Satan’.

152

INDEXES

4. INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS Abbeloos, Jean B.: LI(n.62); LXVI(n.226); LXVIII(n.229) Abramowski, Luise: XXIV(n.47); XLV(n.115); 16(n.87); 18(n.103) Altheim, Franz: XIX(n.17.22) Amann, Émile: XXIV(n.53); XXVI(n.62-63); LIX(n.203) Amar, Joseph P.: XXI(n.35) Assemanus, Joseph S.: XVII (n.7) ; XVIII(n.13.15); XIX(n.25-26); XXIV(n.50); XXVI(n.63); XXXIX(n.71); LII(n.163.168); LXVI(n.228); LXVII(229); 36(n.202) Baarda, Tjitze: XXI(n.32-33); 8(n.33); 21(n.119); 24(n.133); 32(n.186) Bardy, Gustave: LII(n.167) Baum, Wilhelm: XVII(n.3-5); XVIII(n.12); XIX (n.26-27) ; XX (n.28) ; XXIV (n.53) ; LXVI(n.226); 98(n.591) Baumstark, Anton: XVII(n.4-5); XVIII(n.12); XIX (n.26) ; XX (n.28) ; XXI (n.30.32.35) ; XXIV(n.46.48.49); XXV(n.54); XXVI(n.62); LI(n.159.162); LIX(n.203); LXVI(n.226); 7(n.29); 36(n.202); 57(n.341); 98(n.591); 115(n.663-664) Beasly-Murray, George R.: L(n.148); 111(n.651) Beck, Edmund: XXII(n.39); XXIII(n.40); LXXI(n.241); 7(n.22); 13(n.68); 19(n.106); 99(n.595); 102(n.612); 104(n.617) Bedjan, Paul: XXIV(n.47) Bevan, George A.: XXIV(n.46) Bidawid, Raphaël J.: XVII (n.3) ; LXVI(n.226-228); LXVII(n.230); 6(n.16.18); 9(n.37); 17(n.90.92); 18(n.100.105); 20(n.117); 22(n.125); 23(130); 24(n.135) Biesen, Kees den: XXI(n.35) Bihlmeyer, Karl: 80(n.498) Brade, Lutz: LIX(n.203) Braun, Oskar: LI (n.157); LXVI (n.228); LXVII(n.230); 8(n.31); 9(n.37.39.43); 12(n.65); 16(n.87); 17(n.92.99); 18(n.104-105); 22(n.126-127); 23(n.128.130); 32(n.185); 44(n.268) Brière, Maurice: XXIV(n.46) ; 14(n.72) Brock, Sebastian P.: XVII(n.1); XXI(n.30.35); XLV(n.113); LXX(n.240) Brooks, Ernest W.: LI(n.162)

Bultmann, Rudolf: LXVIII(n.231); 23(n.132) Bundy, David D.: LII(n.169); LIII; LIII(n.171); LXVI(n.226); 19(n.112) Butts, Aaron M.: XXIV(n.53) Cassingena-Trévedy, François: 102(n.612); 107(n.633) Chabot, Jean Baptiste: XVIII(n.12); 13(n.70) Childers, Jeff W.: XXIII(n.41); XL(n.83); XLI(n.84-85.87.89); XLVI(n.121); LV(n.184); 12 (n.65); 22 (n.121); 23 (132); 25 (n.139); 27(n.151); 28(n.161); 30(n.176-177); 33(n.188); 39 (n.229) ; 40 (n.230.232-233) ; 41 (n.239) ; 42(n.240.242-243); 43(n.258); 44(n.261); 45(n.273) Clarke, Ernest G.: LII; LII(n.162.169-170); LXV; LXV(n.222) Cook, Stanley A.: LII(n.164) Copleston, Frederick: 5(n.7) Cowley, R. W.: XXV(n.54) De Halleux, André: LI(n.158) Detienne, Claude: XLV; XLV(n.113) Devreesse, Robert: XXVI(n.62); XXVII(n.69); XL(n.80) ; LIII(n.175) ; LXVIII(n.231); 6(n.12) Draguet, René: XXVII(n.69) ; XL; XL(n.76); LIX(n.202) ; 12(n.66) Duval, Rubens: XVII(n.12.14); XXV(n.54); 7(n.23) Evetts, Basil : XX(n.28); 115(n.664) Faultless, Julian: XXV(n.53) Fiey, Jean M.: XIX(n.23.25) Foerster, Werner: 89(n.537) Gallay, Paul: XLV(n.114-115); 6(n.15); 12(n.61); 16(n.87); 50(n.289) Georr, Khalil: 8(n.31) Gibson, Margaret D.: XVIII (n.9.16); XIX(n.24); XXI(n.37); XXIII(n.44); XXVII; XXVII (n.68); L; L (n.151.154); 14 (n.79); 17 (n.93); 19 (n.107); 24 (n.135); 39 (n.229); 70(n.432); 77(n.481); 80(n.499); 97(n.582); 101(n.607); 109(n.641) Gignoux, Philippe: 13(n.69)

INDEXES

Gismondi, Henricus: XIX(n.26); LII(n.162); LXVI(n.226) Goodman, Allan E.: 18(n.103) Graf, Georg: XXIV(n.53); XXV(n.53) Graffin, François: 14(n.72) Haelewyck, Jean-Claude: XLV (n.116); XLVI(n.121); 6(n.15); 42(n.240) Heimgartner, Martin: LXVI (n.228) ; LXVII(n.230); 8(n.31); 9(n.37.39.43); 12(n.65); 15(n.83); 16(n.87); 17(n.92.99); 18(n.104-105); 22(n.127); 23(n.128.130); 32(n.185); 44(n.268) Hennecke, Edgar: 98(n.589) Hespel, Robert: LIX(n.202); 8(n.31); 10(n.51) Heussi, Karl: L(n.146); LI(n.156); 61(n.379-380); 111(n.650) Hofstra, Johan D.: XXIII(n.40); XXV(n.55); XL(n.80); XLVI(n.119-120); LIII(n.172-174); LIV (n.179.181); LVI (n.191); LVII (n.195); LVIII(n.198); LXIII(n.214); LXVIII(n.231-232); LXX(n.237); LXXI(n.242); 4(n.13); 5(n.5.11); 8(n.32-33); 12(n.60-61.64); 15(n.82); 17(n.94); 18(n.102); 19(n.107-108); 22(n.126); 25(n.143); 26(n.149-150); 31(n.184); 36(n.206); 44(n.268); 69(n.422); 70(428) Hunter, Erica C.D.: XIX(n.18-21) Jansma, Taeke: LIV(n.176); LXII(n.209); 7(n.22) Jourjon, Maurice: XLV(n.115) ; 16(n.87) Kiraz, George A.: LV(n.183); LVI(n.190); 32(n.186) Kmosko, Michael: 8(n.33); 10(n.46); 80(n.498) Lamy, Thomas J. : LI(n.162) Lagarde, Paul de: 7(n.21) Lampe, Geoffrey: 7(n.23) Lange, Christian: XXIII(n.40) Leloir, Louis: XXI (n.38); XXII (n.39) ; LVI(n.194); 11(n.54); 19(n.106); 24(n.133); 25(n.143); 28(n.163); 36(n.204.209); 37(n.213-214); 41(n.239); 48(n.283); 55(n.322); 58(n.348); 60(n.363); 61(n.373); 64(n.397); 65(n.402-403); 67 (n.411-412) ; 68 (n.417-419) ; 99 (n.595) ; 106(n.629); 107(n.632) Leonhard, Clemens: XVIII ; XVIII(n.11) ; XXVII ; XXVII(n.67); LXX(n.240)

153

Levene, Abraham: LIV(n.176); 5(n.1) Loofs, Friedrich: XXIV(n.47) Malingrey, Anne-Marie: XLI(n.85); 40(n.232) Manqurius, Yusuf: XXV(n.53) McLean, Norman: L(n.153); 89(n.541) Metzger, Bruce M.: LV(n.185) Migne, Jacques-Paul: XXIII(n.41); XXVII(n.69) Molenberg, Corrie: XVII(n.6); LII(n.162.164166.169) ; 19(n.112); 32(n.187) Moreschini, Claudio: XLV(n.114) ; 12(n.61); 50(n.289) Nau, François: XXIV(n.47); Nodet, Étienne: XLIX(n.144); 29(n.167) Ortiz de Urbina, Ignatius: XVIII(n.12); XXI(n.30.35-36); XXVI(n.62.64); LII(n.162); 7(n.28) Parisot, Jean: XXI(n.30-31.34) ; 12(n.60) Payne Smith, Robert: XVIII (n.13-14); XXVI(n.60); 4(n.12) Pierre, Marie-Joseph: XXI(n.31) Preuschen, Erwin: LX(n.185); 27(n.153) Putman, Hans: XIX(n.17.25); LXVI(n.226) Quispel, Gillis: L(n.154); 89(n.538) Reinink, Gerrit J.: LI(n.159); 57(n.341); 107(n.634) Rendel Harris, James: XVIII (n.9.16); XXI(n.37); XXIII(n.44) Ri, Su Min: LXX n. (240); 99(n.594) Sachau, Eduard: XXVII(n.69); XL(n.74.79); LIV(n.176); 10(n.50) Schäublin, Christoph: LXVIII(n.231) Scher, Addai: XXIV (n.49); XXV (n.56); XXVI (n.62-63); XLVI (n.121); LI (n.157); LII (n.168); LVIII (n.200); LIX (n.202.204); LXIII(n.210); LXIV(n.218.221); LXV(n.224); LXIX(n.234); LXIX(n.236); 5(n.5); 11(n.53); 19(n.110); 36(n.202) Schneemelcher, Wilhelm: 98(n.589) Smith Lewis, Agnes: 19(n.107) Sokoloff, Michael: XVIII(n.8)

154

INDEXES

Sourdel, Dominique: XIX(n.27) Spuler, Bertold: XVII(n.2-5); 18(n.102) Sullivan, Francis: XXVI(n.62) Taylor, David G. K.: XLV(n.113) Ter Haar Romeny, R. B. (Bas): XXV(n.54); LII(n.167-168) Thomson, Robert W.: 16(n.87) Tonneau, Raymond M.: XXVII(n.69); XL(80); LIII(n.175); LIV(n.176); 6(n.12) Van Den Eynde, Ceslas: XVIII(n.10); XXI(n.37); XXVII; XXVII(n.66); LIV(n.177); LXII; LXII(n.206); 5(n.10); 6(n.15.17); 9(n.39.42); 10(n.50); 12(n.63); 13(n.67.69); 14(n.70); 15(n.86); 17 (n.90.93.95-96) ;18 (n.101-102) ; 16 (n.89) ; 19(n.106.111); 20(n.112.117); 22(n.121) Van Roey, Albert: XLV(n.115); 16(n.87) Van Rompay, Lucas: XVIII(n.12); XX(n.28-29); XXIV (n.48); XXV (n.56.58); XXVI (n.62);

LI(n.159.162); LIII; LIII(n.171); LIV(n.176); LIX(n.203); LXII; LXII(n.208-209); LXIII; LXIII(n.211-213); 5(n.10); 13(n.69); 15(n.85); 17(n.98); 36(n.202); 98(n.591) Vaschalde, Arthur A.: 16(n.88) Von Harnack, Adolf: 61(n.379) Voöbus, Arthur: XXIV(n.49) Vosté, Jacobus-M: XVIII(n.10); XXIII(n.41-42); XXVI(n.63.65); XXVII(n.69); XLI(n.86-87); XLIV(n.103); XLVI(n.121); XLIX(n.143.145); LI (n.155.161); LIV (n.176); LVI (n.192-193); LVIII(n.198); LXIII(n.210); LXIV(n.217.220); 3(n.1); 5(n.10); 6(n.15); 9(n.42); 10(n.50); 12(n.63); 13(n.69); 14(n.70); 15(n.86); 16(n.89); 17(n.90.93); 18(n.101); 19(n.106.111); 20(n.117); 46(n.277) Wright, William : XVIII(n.12); XXI(n.30); L(n.153-154); LII(n.164); 89(n.541); 98(n.591) Yousif, Pierre: XXIII(n.20)

TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . . 1. Bibliographical Abbreviations 2. Abbreviation of Names . . 3. Abbreviation of Words . . 4. Indications in the Translation

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

VII

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Isho‘dad of Merw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 The East Syrian Church in the Eighth and Ninth Century. 1.2 Isho‘dad of Merw: Background, Life and Work . . . . 2. The Sources Used by Isho‘dad . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Isho‘dad as a Compiler . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Isho‘dad’s Commentary and the Syrian Exegetical Tradition 2.2.1 Syriac Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Aphrahat, the Persian Sage . . . . . . . B. Ephrem . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Nestorius . . . . . . . . . . . . D. Yoḥanan of Beth Rabban . . . . . . . E. Aḥob of Qatar . . . . . . . . . . . F. The Tradition of the School . . . . . . 2.2.2 Greek Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Primary Sources . . . . . . . . . . 1. Theodore of Mopsuestia. . . . . . . 2. John Chrysostom . . . . . . . . . 3. Gregory of Nazianzus . . . . . . . B. Secondary sources . . . . . . . . . 1. Flavius Josephus . . . . . . . . . 2. Origen . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Eusebius of Caesarea . . . . . . . 4. Athanasius . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Isho‘dad’s Commentary and the East Syrian Exegetical Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 Ḥenanisho‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2 Isho‘ bar Nun . . . . . . . . . . . .

XVI

.

.

.

.

.

V V V VI VI

XVI XVI XVI XX XX XX XXI XXI XXI XXIV XXIV XXIV XXV XXVI XXVI XXVI XL XLV XLIX XLIX L L LI LI LI LI

156

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2.3.3 Theodore bar Koni . 2.3.4 Timothy I . . . 2.3.5 ‘Tradition Source’ . TRANSLATION . Prologue . . Book I . . Book II . . Book III . . Book IV . . Book V . . Book VI . . Book VII . Book VIII . Book IX . . Book X . . Book XI . . Book XII . Book XIII . Book XIV . Book XV . Book XVI . Book XVII . Book XVIII . Book XIX . Book XX . INDEXES . 1. Index of 2. Index of 3. Index of 4. Index of

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

LIX LXVI LXVIII

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . 27 . . . . . . . . . . 34 . . . . . . . . . . 37 . . . . . . . . . . 42 . . . . . . . . . . 46 . . . . . . . . . . 46 . . . . . . . . . . 49 . . . . . . . . . . 55 . . . . . . . . . . 58 . . . . . . . . . . 64 . . . . . . . . . . 67 . . . . . . . . . . 71 . . . . . . . . . . 77 . . . . . . . . . . 83 . . . . . . . . . . 89 . . . . . . . . . . 94 . . . . . . . . . . 96 . . . . . . . . . . 98 . . . . . . . . . . 108

. . . . . . . Biblical Quotations Names . . . . Subjects . . . . Modern Authors .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

117 117 123 129 152