"Rhetor Diodorus": who is hiding under this name? (review of three quotations from Diodorus of Tarsus in the First Collection of St. Isaac the Syrian based on Syrian sources). Part 3

This publication is a continuation of the ongoing research devoted to the identification of quotations given by St. Isaac the Syrian in his works, and interpolations of names in these quotes. In the previous article, taking into account the context and philological analysis, the “quotations” of Theodore of Mopsuestia, found in the First Collection of the East Syrian edition, were considered. As a result of the study, damage to the text and traces of interpolations introduced by Nestorian scribes were revealed. This time attention is paid to a review of quotations from Diodorus of Tarsus in the First Collection of St. Isaac the Syrian. The study establishes the true attribution of several quotes, and also shows that the replacement of names in certain places took place only in the East Syrian edition, without affecting manuscripts of other faiths. An attempt has been made by some scholars to challenge the identification of the quotation by Dionysius the Areopagite made by Marcellus Pirard in his critical edition. This publication provides additional facts and arguments in favor of the latter, which, in turn, criticizes the opinion of the researchers mentioned in the article. For the first time, a fragment from the Areopagite Corpus, borrowed by St. Petersburg, is published with translation into Russian. Isaac the Syrian. This text survives only in the Syriac version. Textual parallels are drawn with the translation of Sergius of Reshainsky. In this article we continue to consider the problem of identifying the names of those authors who were quoted by St. Isaac the Syrian in his works. This problem is related to the different interpretations of names found in Syriac manuscripts of different traditions - Eastern, Western and Melkite. In the scientific community, the East Syrian (Nestorian) edition is recognized as authentic. The uncritically published Syriac text of the First Collection of the Works of St. Paul Bejan. Isaac the Syrian was accepted by the scientific community without the slightest doubt, and numerous works and studies were built on this basis. However, in fact it turned out that the text published by Bejan does not accurately convey the original manuscript [Iσαάκ Σύρος, 2012. Σ. 57; Kessel, 2016. pp. 64−65]. The discrepancies in names found in different manuscripts, although in some places they were noted by the publisher, turned out to be nothing more than an interpolation introduced by the Nestorian scribe [Skarga, 2022 (a)]. Bejan accepted them as an authentic reading. Taking into account these identified flaws, we consider it necessary to further revise the East Syrian manuscript tradition. This time we will look at fragments of three quotes from Diodorus of Tarsus, found in the First Collection of St. Isaac in Syrian sources. Example 1. St. Basil/Diodorus In several examples we will show the replacement of the names of St. Basil and Dionysius in the name of Diodorus in Nestorian manuscripts. We will begin with a fragment that appears only in the East Syriac manuscripts, in order to show that Melkite or Monophysite scribes were not involved in this replacement. Name of St. Basil the Great can be found in manuscripts of the 11th century, an example of this is the London Brit manuscript. Add. #14633 In the 13th century manuscript, published by Bejan, instead of “Basily” there is already “Diodorus” (कक़ࣣ). Bejan in the interlinear apparatus noted that the name “Basily” is supported by three more manuscripts: from the Vatican, Alqosh and Mosul [Isaacus Ninivita, 1909. P. 242; Kessel, 2016. P. 78, approx. 361]. It must be said that A. Wensink adds the London manuscript to Bejan’s list and, like him, does not place this example in the interpolation section, but notes it as a fact of discrepancy [Isaac of Nineveh, 1923. P. 163]. In favor of an authentic reading of the name “Basily” is not only the above-mentioned manuscripts, but, mainly, the identification of the quote itself in the works of St. Basil the Great. Moreover, in the next question-answer of Rev. Isaac again refers to St. Basil, and, most notably, in the Brit manuscript. Add. 14633 two quotes from St. Vasily are on one sheet. Table 1. Quote identification Once the authorship of the quotation has been identified, it seems that no additional evidence is required to recognize that it was the Nestorian scribe in the 13th century. I deliberately introduced interpolation. Example 2. Dionysius/Diodorus In the following example we find the name of Dionysius the Areopagite replaced by the name Diodorus. It should immediately be noted that Marcellus Pirard noted this interpolation in a critical edition [Iσαάκ Σύρος, 2012. Σ. 44] and the quotation of Dionysius is clearly identified [Iσαάκ Σύρος, 2012. Σ. 414–415]. Despite this, some researchers are trying to challenge this obvious fact [Fiori, 2014. pp. 288−307; Makarov, 2021. pp. 182–187]. So, for example, Emiliano Fiori says in a note: “In the Russian translation, as in the Greek version, the name of Diodorus is replaced by Dionysius, bishop. Athens" [Fiori, 2014. P. 292, note. 11] 2. E. Fiori, mentioning the Sinaitic manuscript, speaks of only one quotation from Dionysius. Nevertheless, this scientist puts forward the thesis that this quote, as well as the entire acquaintance of St. Isaac with the corpus of Dionysius the Areopagite, was "fragmentary" by means of florilegies. However, when comparing this quote with the florilegium found in the same Sinaitic manuscript (this fact is most significant, since the copyist could easily verify the quote), one can notice that the quotes are not identical, there are discrepancies in the texts, cf.: (Sin. syr. 24, fol. 135r; fol. 9r–9v). Based on this, E. Fiori’s thesis can be considered just an assumption, which is not confirmed by the textual criticism of the manuscripts. The second thesis put forward by E. Fiori 3 looks even more contradictory than the first: the researcher suggested that the fragment dedicated to the nine-order classification of angels, referring directly to the corpus of Dionysius the Areopagite, was originally written down by some copyist in the margins of the manuscript and then ended up in the main text [Fiori, 2014. pp. 295–296]. According to the handwritten heritage of St. Isaac, starting with the oldest surviving manuscript of Sin. syr. 24 (VIII century), one can see that these fragments are an organic part of the text itself, as evidenced by the entire textual picture of the known surviving manuscripts of the First Collection. For this reason, it can be considered that the hypotheses of Emiliano Fiori, in isolation from the handwritten heritage of St. Isaac are nothing more than speculation. It is strange that such a serious scientist, before voicing his hypotheses, did not consider it necessary to verify them with textual studies. Another researcher, Alexey Makarov, citing the work of E. Fiori, attempted to challenge the identification presented in the critical edition of M. Pirard. He put forward the thesis that St. Isaac in the angelological fragment refers not to Dionysius the Areopagite, Bishop of Athens, but to Diodorus of Tarsus. A. Makarov presented the text of the latter in the program of Joseph Hazzayi as the original quote [Makarov, 2021. P. 188]. When comparing fragments, you can notice that there is no lexical match [Makarov, 2021. P. 188] 4 . When reading the presented passages, one can indeed notice some parallels, which, however, upon closer examination turn out to be untenable. The reason for this is as follows. Robert Boehle noted that Rev. Isaac, in the hierarchical classification of angels, “opposes the entire Syrian tradition, which puts the cherubim in first place” [Böle, 2021. P. 219]. Following Dionysius, St. Isaac puts the seraphim in first place, in this order of ranks St. Isaac clearly follows both the Greek version of the Areopagite Corpus and its Syriac translation by Sergius of Reshain, as is clearly shown in the table below. Although this fact was known to A. Makarov, he still tries to convince the reader that St. Isaac refers to a fragment of Diodorus of Tarsus, in which the latter puts the cherubim in first place: “Therefore, blessed Diodorus called the rank of cherubim the head and elder of God’s creation...” [Makarov, 2021. P. 188]. Obviously there is a contradiction in this! Moreover, Joseph Hazzaia, quoting Diodorus and following his classification of angels, polemically opposes St. Isaac (without naming his name) is that he puts the seraphim in first place: “Some say that the seraphim are the first to accept knowledge, but this is far from the truth” [Böle, 2020. P. 219] 5. Here, obviously, there is a clash of two traditions: the East Syrian, the exponent of which was Diodorus of Tarsus and the subsequent Joseph Hazzaia, and the Greek, possibly also Melkite, the exponent of which was St. Isaac the Syrian, who adopted the classification of angels from the Areopagitik [Böle, 2021. P. 218; Isaac of Nineveh, 1923. P. LIII]. The identification of the quote from Diodorus of Tarsus proposed by A. Makarov turned out to be, in our opinion, an unsuccessful “find”, since when comparing it with a fragment of the teaching of St. Isaac's identity is not revealed; on the contrary, the quotation from Diodorus comes into conflict and inconsistency with the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian. A. Makarov’s statement that “the principle according to which the completeness of knowledge is inversely proportional to the number of knowing angels 6 should be recognized as going back to him (i.e. Diodorus. – I.N.)” [Makarov, 2021. P. 189], demonstrates poor knowledge of the corpus of Dionysius the Areopagite. A similar thought runs like a red thread through the chapter “On the Heavenly Hierarchy,” which sets out the order of transmission of revelation from the highest ranks to the lowest, and reflects the principle of the hierarchical structure of the entire Areopagite corps, see: [Dionysius the Areopagite, 2003. Ch. 7.3, 11.1, 12.2, 15.1]. Below is a table containing the texts of the manuscripts of Sergei Reshainsky and St. Isaac the Syrian. In order not to repeat the literal identification of the quotation made by A. Wensink and M. Pirard, we will present another, almost verbatim quotation from Dionysius the Areopagite, which is usually kept silent in the scientific community. The quoted fragment was not included in the Greek translation, but is found in almost all the manuscripts of the East Syriac, Melkite and West Syriac editions. Table 2. Syrian sources The table clearly shows literal textual matches, which is the fact of quoting the chapter “On the Heavenly Hierarchy” by Dionysius the Areopagite, Bishop of Athens, as St. Isaac the Syrian. We fully agree with M. Pirard that in this case it is necessary to recognize that the authentic version of the fragment in question is presented in the Melkite and West Syrian editions and contains the name of Dionysius the Areopagite [Iσαάκ Σύρος, 2012. Σ. 44] 9. Finally, consider the last example related to the replacement of the name of Diodorus in the Nestorian manuscripts. In both the Melkite and West Syriac manuscripts, this fragment does not contain any name at all, there is only a reference To the previous quote from a certain philosopher: “and again he says the same” (ธଯࣣ ̣ ࡡપ) (Sin.syr.24,fol.54v). Indeed, the proximity to each other of two quotes, which have similar ascetic teachings about the fight against passions, may refer to one of the representatives of the Stoic philosophical school. At the end of this treatise, St. Isaac again cites as an example the statement of a certain philosopher (দংংপপপপপেডাযাারারাযাযারারারার), whom M. Pirard identified with Sextus and identified two of his quotes [Iσαάκ Σύρος, 2012.Σ. 507]. We found an almost verbatim matching statement in the maxims of Pythagoras [Pchela, 2013. p. 228] and close to the text in Menander [Arzhanov, 2011. p. 190]. It seems that Rev. In this treatise, Isaac, in order to further inspire his students in the fight against the passion of gluttony, decided to cite as an example philosophers who, even before the coming of Christ, distinguished themselves by ascetic skills. It is interesting to note that in the previous two maxims of Menander, the 20th and 21st, as they say in the same way as St. Isaac, about the fight against gluttony: “And there is no one who follows his lust or his belly and is not immediately subject to shame and contempt. It is good for a person who dominates his belly and resists his lust - this helps him at all times” [Arzhanov, 2011. P.190]. In the 18th maxim, Menander warns that “the abundance of the stomach” can turn “you into food for dogs” [Arzhanov, 2011.P.190], i.e. lead to a shameful death. In the Bible one can often find examples of such a shameful death, when the corpse of a guilty person was eaten by dogs, which meant God’s judgment for some grave sin 10 . This fragment may be consistent with the final maxim given by St. Isaac, where it is said that from laziness and bodily pleasure “a person falls under the judgment of God” [Isaac the Syrian, 1911. P. 376]. Thus, it can be assumed that the proximity of the 18th, 20th and 21st maxims of Menander, dedicated to the theme of the fight against gluttony, and the call of the 22nd maxim to fight sleep, for “sleep leads to Sheol” [Arzhanov, 2011.P.190], could serve as the material that St. Isaac, to paraphrase, placed in this treatise with reference to “one of the great philosophers” ( ͚ ͕ ͡ ͢ ͪ̈ ͒ ͢ ͐ ͕ ͦ ͝ ͠ ͘ ͣ̈ ͦ ͐ ) [Isaacus Ninivita, 1909. P. 290; Isaac the Syrian, 1911. P. 389]. It is also necessary to add that in one of the Nestorian manuscripts, instead of the name of Diodorus, the name of Theodore ( ͬ ͐ ͕ ͘ ͪ ͣ͘ ) (Berolin. or. oct. 1258, fol. 140r) is used. Perhaps, initially in this place there was the name of a philosopher, consonant with the name Theodore, for example, one of the names known from the florilegies: Theocritus, Thespis, etc. - and subsequently the Nestorian scribe corrected this name to a more familiar and authoritative one in the East Syrian tradition. Be that as it may, in this case we see an example of the fact that confusion and replacement of names is attested precisely in the Nestorian manuscripts. Summing up the research The review of quotations from Diodorus of Tarsus based on Syrian manuscripts allows us to draw the following conclusions. The “quotations” of Diodorus of Tarsus, found in the East Syrian (Nestorian) edition, have signs of artificial inclusion in the text. A clear example is the 1st and 3rd examples from this article, in which the replacement and variability of names occurs only in East Syrian manuscripts. In the 2nd example we see a case recorded in almost all manuscripts of literal citation of fragments of the Areopagite Corpus. Checking the sources in these examples leaves no doubt that the interpolation was introduced by the Nestorian scribes. It must be added that a comparison of some aspects of the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian and Diodorus of Tarsus shows a clear disagreement, for example, the presence of an allegorical method of interpretation in Abba Isaac, while this method was unacceptable for Diodorus [Nikiforov, 2007. P. 231], the method of contemplation (θεωρία) in St. Isaac is in isolation from history, which is also a violation of the exegetical method of Diodorus of Tarsus [Savrey, 2012. P. 162]. For Diodorus, it was impossible to admit that “conceived in the Virgin Mary and born of Her is also the Creator of the universe” [Nikiforov, 2007. P. 232], whereas for St. Isaac, there is no such Christological dualism: for him “the man Jesus is both God the Word and the Creator of the world” [Ilarion, 2011. P. 704] 11. Also Rev. Isaac in his teaching allowed for the mutual communication of properties (communicatio idiomatum) of human and divine nature [Muravyov, 2016. P. 217, note. 111], which, in turn, was not allowed by the Tarsian exegete [Zabolotny, 2020. P. 181]. And finally, “for Diodorus, the concepts “God the Word” and “the man Jesus” meant two specific individualized natures” [Zabolotny, 2020. P.181], and for St. Isaac, God the Word and the man Jesus are one and the same person, one subject [Ilarion, 2011. P. 704]. So, in the presence of such serious disagreements between the teachings of these two authors, we believe that those found in the manuscripts are not characteristic of St. Isaac's remarks such as - ͪ͒͐ ͕ͦͪͪ͗͛ͪ͐͢͢͡͠ ͕͕ͪͣ͘͘͘͝ "the great teacher and rhetorician Diodorus" (as well as in the case of the "quotations" of Theodore of Mopsuestia, see: [Skarga, 2022 (a)]), are the layer that made by later Nestorian scribes who wanted to adapt the texts of St. St. John by interpolation into their environment. Isaac the Syrian. Our research allows us to reconsider the opinions established in the scientific community relating to the “authentic” corpus of his works, found in the manuscripts of the East Syrian edition, and to recognize in them the presence of interpolations introduced by Nestorian scribes 12. At the same time, we can recognize as untenable and erroneous the thesis established in the scientific community that “in the field of dogmatics and exegesis, the main authorities for Isaac the Syrian were Theodore of Mopsuestia and Diodorus of Tarsus” [Ilarion, 2011. P. 700], and thereby awaken to life a new round of Orthodox studies of Isaac. Arzhanov Yu. N. Syriac Old Testament pseudepigrapha. Apocryphal Psalms of David, Apocalypse of Baruch, Sentences of Menander. St. Petersburg: Dimitry Bulanin LLC, 2011. Böle R. Formless Light: An Introduction to the Study of the East Syrian Christian Mystical Tradition. M.: Publishing house "Poznanie", 2021. Basil the Great, St. Creations. M.: Siberian Blagozvonnitsa, 2008 (PSTSO; vol. 3). Dionysius the Areopagite, smch. Essays. Interpretations of Maximus the Confessor. [Greek text] / Trans. G. M. Prokhorov. St. Petersburg: Aletheya, 2002. Zabolotny E.A. Syriac Christianity between Byzantium and Iran. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2020. Hilarion (Alfeev), Metropolitan. Isaac the Syrian // Orthodox Encyclopedia. 2011. T. XXVI. pp. 695–731. Isaac the Syrian, Rev. About Divine mysteries and spiritual life: newly discovered texts / Transl. with sire., note, preface. and after. Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeev). St. Petersburg: Oleg Abyshko Publishing House, 2013. Isaac the Syrian, St. Words of the Ascetic / [Trans., preface. S.I. Sobolevsky]. Sergiev Posad: Printing house St.-Tr. Sergius Lavra, 1911. Kessel G. M. Manuscript tradition of the first volume of the Syrian corpus of Isaac of Nineveh // Isaac the Syrian, Rev. (Mar Isaac of Nineveh). Book about the ascent of a monk: First collection (treatises I–VI) / General. ed. And lane from Syriac, Arabic, Greek A. V. Muravyova. M.: Publishing house "Yask", 2016. P.56–78. Makarov A.D. Distribution of the First Assembly of St. Isaac the Syrian outside the Church of the East. Part II: interpolation of names // Theological Bulletin. 2021. No. 2 (42). pp. 165–207. Muravyov A.V. The world of ideas of Mar Ishak. Sources and context // Isaac the Syrian, St. (Mar Ishaq of Nineveh). Book about the ascent of a monk: First collection (treatises I–VI) / General. ed. and lane from Syriac, Arabic, Greek A.V. Muravyova. M.: Publishing house "Yask", 2016. Nikiforov M.V. Diodorus bishop. Tarsian // Orthodox Encyclopedia. T. XV. 2007. pp. 228–234. Bee, or Instructive Chapters from Scripture, Holy Fathers and Wise Men / Intro. art., trans., afterword, comm. PC. Dobrotsvetova. M.: Orientir, 2013. Savrey V. Ya. Alexandrian school in the history of Christian thought. M.: Moscow University Publishing House, 2012. Skarga D.S. “Revelation of the Hidden”: a review of quotes from Theodore of Mopsuestia in the First Collection of St. Isaac the Syrian according to Syrian sources // Christian reading. 2022(a). No. 2. pp. 25–51. Skarga N. Review of the article: Makarov A.D. "Distribution of the First Collection of St. Isaac the Syrian outside the Church of the East. Part II: Interpolation of names" // Theological Bulletin. 2021. No. 2(41). P. 164–207. DOI: 10.31802/GB.2021.41.2.008 // Written monuments of the East. 2022(b). T. 19. No. 2 (49). pp. 120–128. Fiori E. Dionysius the Areopagite and Isaac the Syrian: an attempt to reassess // St. Isaac the Syrian and his spiritual heritage. Materials of the First International Patristic Conference of the All-Church Postgraduate and Doctoral Studies named after Saints Cyril and Methodius. M.: Church postgraduate and doctoral studies named after. St. Cyril and Methodius, 2014. pp. 288–307. Isaac of Nineveh. Mystic Treatises / Transl. A. J. Wensinck. Amsterdam: Uitgave der Koninklijke akademie van wetenschappen, 1923. Isaac the Syrian, st. Ascetical Homilies / [Transl. D. Miller]. Boston: Holy Transfiguration Monastery, 1984. Isaacus Ninivita. De perfection religiosa/Ed. P. Badjan. P., Lpz.: Otto Harrasso-witz, 1909. Ἰσαὰκ ὁ Σύρος, ὅσιος. Λόγοι ἀσκητικοί / Κριτ. ἔκδ. M. Πιράρ. ἍγιονὌρος: Ἱερὰ μονὴ Ἰβηρῶν, 2012. It was this fragment that was also well distributed in florilegia. See: [Bee, 2013.P.398]. We do not understand why E. Fiori is silent about the fact that the name of Dionysius is also found in an earlier Syriac source - in the Sinai manuscript Sin. syr. 24 (VIII century). This fact excludes the “replacement” of names by Greek scribes. It seems strange that E. Fiori is completely silent about the lengthy and almost verbatim quotation from the Areopagite Corpus, located at the end of the 25th treatise of St. Isaac, see quotation identification: [Isaac the Syrian, 1984. P. 131]. Referring to Wensink, Fiori points out another fragment [Fiori, 2014. P. 294]. Different terms: ͕ͥͬ͗͝ and ͣ̈͐͘͟͠͠' - are equally translated as “leading” in order to more clearly represent the coincidence of the text. A. Makarov tried to soften the motive of the accusation put forward by Joseph against St. Isaac, assuming that Joseph here is talking about a translator, i.e. Sergei Reshainsky, however, the context of this denunciation makes it clear that by “some” Joseph does not mean the translator (who is discussed below), but the one who followed this translation. As Böle showed, St. Isaac was the only one from the entire Syrian tradition who held this opinion [Böle, 2021.P.219]. In the quote from Diodorus given by A. Makarov, there is no mention of the number of angels. For more details about other errors, see: [Skarga, 2022 (b). pp. 120–127]. Translation by Hierodeacon Maxim (Sudakov). This fragment, preserved in the Syriac tradition, was borrowed almost unchanged from the Areopagite Corpus, see: [PG 3.208 BC)]. It should be added that two East Syrian manuscripts (Berоlin. or. oct. 1258; Berоlin or. quart. 1159) also give a reading of the name Dionysius. Wed. also: “the world mixed with God and creation and the Creator became one!” [Isaac the Syrian, 2013. P. 97]. We believe that the revision of the East Syrian edition should concern not only the identification of quotes and personalities, but also those fragments in which the stylistic and semantic content is not consistent with the context.