The composition of the treatises of the “Second Collection of St. Isaac the Syrian” and its destructive parts. Part 1

Abstract: The article reviews the publications of critically and uncritically published texts of the Second Collection of St. Isaac the Syrian. A fact has been established: the majority of scientific works devoted to various aspects of the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian, used a database of uncritically published texts, which, in turn, reduces the level of objectivity of these works, the conclusions of which can be revised if necessary. The composition of the treatises of the Second Collection is heterogeneous. This fact suggests the intervention of scribes who violated the original composition of the treatises. The lens of the study of the first part of the article is the 3rd treatise “Chapters on Knowledge”. A textual review and comparative analysis of the content of this work reveals traces of interpolation and inconsistency with the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian. The article also indicates the presumptive author of the composition of the treatises of the Second Collection - the Nestorian monk Simeon the Persecuted, who lived in the monastery of Rabban Isho, where a corpus of texts called “Second Collection” was created. To prove this thesis, the style and other literary characteristics of this writer are cited, which were noticeably reflected in some treatises of the Second Collection. Despite the fact that half of the treatises of the Second Collection, in which S. Brock saw a homogeneous composition, were published critically, a more detailed review of these treatises casts doubt on the origin of some of them by St. Isaac. The second part of the study will be devoted to a review of these dubious treatises. Parts of events must be folded so that with rearrangement or removal of one of the parts would change and the whole was upset, because then, the presence or the absence of which is imperceptible, is not part of the whole. Review of editions and publications The original discovery of the manuscript of the Second Collection belongs to Paul Bejan, who published its fragments in 1909, in an appendix to the First Collection (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 582–600). Unfortunately, the manuscript was subsequently lost. In 1983, another manuscript of the Second Collection was discovered by Sebastian Brock in the Bodleian Library. It dates back to the 13th–14th centuries. (Bodleian syr. e. 7) 1 . In 1995, S. Brock prepared a critical edition of treatises 4–41, which made up almost half of the entire collection (Isaac of Nineveh, 1995) 2 . Two years later, in 1997, in the magazine “SOBORNOST” he published a translation of the missing 1st and 2nd treatises, which represent the beginning of the manuscript. This publication does not meet the necessary standards of critical publication [Brokc, 1997]. From the English translation by S. Brock when compared with the Syriac text [Muravyov, 2016, 79] Met. Hilarion (Alfeev) made a Russian translation of the Second Assembly. The text was published in 1998, and was subsequently reprinted seven times (Isaac the Syrian, 2013). The translation of the 3rd Discourse, or “Chapter on Knowledge” (hereinafter referred to as “CH”), is an extensive work that contains almost half of the Second Collection and represents a complex composition of four “centuries” 3 [Kessel, 2015, 252], with each individual “century” having 100 chapters, the second “century” - 105 chapters, - published by the Italian scientist P. Bettiolo in 1985 in Italian (Isacco di Ninive, 1985). This publication, like the 1st and 2nd Conversations, does not meet the standards of a critical publication. Thus, we can assume that since 1997, the entire corpus of the so-called. The second collection, attributed to the authorship of St. Isaac the Syrian. The Russian translation of “GZ” (fragments) was carried out by Met. Hilarion (Alfeev) (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 75–85). The translation from Syriac of the 1st centenary was made by S. S. Turkin (Turkin, 2014). The publications of the listed Russian translations of “GZ”, as well as the Italian version, do not meet the standards of critical publication. A group of specialists - M. G. Kalinin, T. B. Lidskaya, A. M. Preobrazhensky and S. S. Turkin, republished 10 chapters of the 1st centenary with Syriac text, based on a translation previously completed by S. Turkin (Kalinin et al., 2020). The translation from Syriac (using Italian, English and Russian) of selected chapters of the 2nd centenary along with the Syriac text was carried out by A. D. Makarov (Makarov, 2018). It is important to note that the genuine scientific work on identifying the Second Collection as a work belonging to the pen of St. Isaac the Syrian, was carried out by the Oxford scholar S. Brock on only half of the collection 4. The rest of the Second Collection was never critically published for nearly 30 years. Nevertheless, in the scientific community, despite the fragmentation and precocity of half of the published translations of the Second Collection, the published editions were received positively. Which, in turn, gave rise to a mass of various types of research and scientific publications relating to the entire corpus of the Second Collection. Thus, within 20 years since the publication of the Second Collection, the number of scientific works using its materials, including dissertations, exceeded several hundred. With all due respect to such research scientific activity, unfortunately, it is necessary to note the significant defectiveness of the work produced - for the reason that the overwhelming number of studies were based on uncritically published translations of the Second Collection. And this fact, of course, cannot give any full guarantee of the scientific quality and objectivity of the result of these studies, because “no study of the theology of this or that author is possible without the presence of critically published texts, for only a critical edition makes it possible to eliminate the distortions that have penetrated into the text in the process of its handwritten transmission over the centuries” [Kessel, 2015, 307] 5. The use of uncritically published texts in dissertations and scientific works may cause the public presentation of incorrect and hasty conclusions. For this reason, a revision of published works containing this scientific flaw may in some cases become necessary. Our research is analytical in nature, its purpose is to conduct a critical review and revision of individual texts of the Second Collection for their content and attribution to the authorship of St. Isaac the Syrian. The results of the study, we believe, will contribute to the improvement and coordination of further scientific development of the extensive heritage of the Syrian mystic. Our method of revision and identification of the text will be based on three criteria, some of which are proposed by the Venerable himself. Isaac the Syrian at the very beginning of the First and Second Assembly (Isaac the Syrian, 2016, 269; Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 49) 6. 1) Obvious contradictions 7 related to ascetic practice, epistemology, angelology and cosmology. 2) The difference in exegetical methods, given the severity of this problem in the East Syrian tradition. 3) The presence of dogmatic and polemical texts, taking into account the fact that St. Isaac categorically prohibits reading such literature. 1. Heterogeneity of the treatises of the Second Collection Second collection of works by St. Isaac the Syrian consists of 41 treatises, including the Epistles; Letters; Sentences consisting of four “centuries”, or hundreds: “GZ”, Prayers, Conversations, which were recorded by students (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 235); as well as polemical and dogmatic writings. When reviewing such a wide variety of genres in the Second Collection, the question inevitably arises whether there is a logical connection between the treatises. For what reason did the editors or scribes decide to combine a work so different in composition and content into a single whole? If we try to discover thematic connections between the treatises, it will be possible to identify their original core, around which further parts of the collection subsequently began to form and group. We believe that similar questions worried Professor Sebastian Broca, publisher of the critical text of the Second Collection. The critical edition of exactly half of the texts of the Second Collection indicates that the criteria for such a decision were the uniformity of content and the logical sequence of the treatises. In fact, researchers note that the style and content of the 3rd treatise, “GZ,” differs very sharply in “the use of complex syntax, as well as the presence of difficult-to-translate language structures” [Makarov, 2018, 39], it uses “long and complex passages, full of breaks and repetitions, which can be tiresome. Teaching can sometimes seem confusing and idle" [Betiollo, 1985, 13]. This sign indicates the obvious intervention of the census taker. For this reason, S. Brock quite rightly leaves aside this dubious part of the Second Collection and publishes the main part, containing a more or less logical sequence of treatises. As mentioned above, two years later the Oxford scholar supplements this edition with two missing treatises, which represent the beginning of the manuscript of the Second Collection. It is in this form that the treatises of the Second Collection exist for 30 years. The absence of “GZ” does not cause any particular embarrassment in the scientific community, the impression of something missing, otherwise for what reason do these chapters, containing almost half of the Second Collection, remain critically unpublished for so many years? On the contrary, we see that the scientific consensus accepted the Second Collection without the “GZ” as a complete work. Not without interest is the opinion of Alexey Vladimirovich Muravyov, who aptly defined the 3rd treatise, “GZ”, as the “Third Collection” [Muravyov, 2016, 109], the composition and volume of which does not raise much doubt that this is a separate work. However, we will return to a more detailed analysis of the “GZ” in order to show their artificial inclusion in the corpus of the Second Collection, and we will consider the precarious authenticity of this work. 1.1. Thematic composition of the treatises of the Second Collection To identify the thematic core around which the remaining treatises of the Second Collection are grouped, we will follow the logic of the publisher of the critical text. The main thematic block of the Second Collection, which S. Brock chose and on which he carried out significant research, is treatises 4–41. To this group of treatises Sebastian Brock subsequently added two more treatises containing the beginning of the manuscript. There are 40 treatises in total, the authenticity of which was beyond doubt among the Oxford researcher. Indeed, an analysis of the content of these treatises reveals, for the most part, their thematic unity. The exception is several treatises: 11th, 14th, 38–41st, the content of which violates the thematic sequence and creates separate semantic blocks. These treatises are polemical and dogmatic in nature, contain anachronisms and, judging by the style and exegetical methods, have a clear sign of their authorship. The second part of our study will present an analysis and analysis of the content of these treatises. 1.2. Thematic core of the treatises Second meeting of St. Isaac the Syrian's content is a continuation and development of those topics and questions that were raised and voiced in the First Assembly. As A. Vensenk rightly notes, The first meeting of St. Isaac the Syrian “is much more connected with a state of purification and illumination than with a state of perfection and unity” [Wensinck, 1923, 27]. The main theme that links the treatises of the Second Collection into a single whole is devoted to silence and the methods or practices that a hermit must undergo in order to achieve the goal of silence, that is, it describes “states of perfection and unity” with God. The purpose of silence is to achieve inner illumination ( ͡ ͡ ͢ ͗ ͪ ͘ ͡ ͢ ͠ ͓ ͘ ) or the feeling of God ( ͡ ͡ ͓ ͫ ͢ ͘ ͬ ͐ ͒ ͐ ͗͗͠ ͒ ), to achieve sanctification and overshadowing ( ͡ ͡ ͢ ͢ ͘ ͒ ͒ ) by the Holy Spirit, being in constant amazement and joy before God, Who pours out a stream of Divine mysteries on the workers of sacred silence. This pneumatological theme of the treatises represents the highest point of achievement in patristic writing and requires the most careful study. The main block of treatises, containing a detailed methodology of ascetic practice, with the help of which valuable experience of communication with God is carried out and achieved, consists of 32 treatises. We will use the numbering of treatises proposed by S. Brock, which was also reflected in the Russian translation. These are the following treatises: 1–2, 4–10, 12–13, 15, 8, 18–37. The first treatise of the Second Collection is a lengthy epistle, in which, as if in its infancy, there are practically all the themes set out in more detail in the corpus of the Second Collection. We believe that this message created the conditions thanks to which correspondence and spiritual communication arose between St. Isaac and a group of hermits. The next part of the study involves clarifying the main idea of ​​St. Isaac - for what purpose are treatises written, what topics are allowed to be included in them and which ones should not even be voiced, and how the reading method is carried out. Reading for St. Isaac is “the beginning of the path of life” (Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 4). Just like prayer, the method of reading 9 serves as a means of unity with God, “for without reading it is impossible for the mind to get closer to God” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 210). The experience of reading helps a changeable nature to maintain spiritual balance and avoid despondency (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 260). The Monk Isaac considers reading as a medicine through which the mind “according to its illness or health, seeks verbal nutrition that would give it material for contemplation” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 260). Since reading can bring not only benefits, but also harm - clouding of the mind, St. Isaac warns his addressee which works he should not read. “Don’t read ( ͠ ͐ ͬ ͩ ͪͪ͐ ),” he instructs, “that contains lies, or that which instructs monks and laity indiscriminately, or that tells you about events and clashes that took place in the Church, or polemical words and refutations of the opinions of one side or another.” Reading should also not jump “from one topic to another” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 48–49). 1.4. Prohibition of reading dogmatic literature Reverend Isaac is strict about reading literature that speaks about the dogmas of the Church and the teachings of other confessions. “Beware of reading heretical teachings (δόγματα), for this, more than anything else, arms the spirit of blasphemy against you” (Isaac the Syrian, 2024, 503; Ἰσαὰκ ὁ Σύρος, 2012, 269) 10. The monk warns: “Know that not every book teaching about faith is useful for cleansing the conscience and focusing thoughts. Most books containing indications of dogmas are not useful for purification" (Isaac the Syrian, 2024, 382). Only two types of reading are of spiritual benefit—those “taken from the Scriptures of the Spirit, or from the writings of the great teachers of the Church. Again, there are people for whom even reading about economics does not bring any benefit or help. For the most part, they become even more darkened, because they much more need reading about how to pacify passions” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 210). It must be added that the prayer and spiritual experience of St. Isaac actually created conditions under which the mind of the monk could “mysteriously penetrate into the Divine Holy of Holies” and receive in contemplation “true knowledge of the glorious nature of [God’s] greatness” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 261). However, this divinely revealed experience, the sensation and experience of which is not fully reflected in the Scriptures, was classified by the Reverend Father as a forbidden topic, just like dogmatic writings. For “it happens that, due to their mystery, it is not permissible to dare to write them down. And it happens that, since they are not even written down, it is impossible to talk about them” 11 (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 262). So, the ascetic reading methodology outlined by St. himself. Isaac the Syrian in the indicated treatises of the Second Collection is a litmus test with the help of which treatises and fragments that do not belong to the pen of the latter are easily detected. In fact, the appearance of treatises in which forbidden topics are raised (in this case, these are “confessional polemical”, “dogmatic”, “mysterious insights and Divine revelations”, about which “it is impermissible to dare to write them down”), then “that which instructs monks and laity indiscriminately”, as well as treatises, the content of which “speaks, confusingly jumping from one topic to another” - a veto on the reading of which imposed by the Venerable himself. Isaac, literally in the first and penultimate treatises of the Second Collection (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 48–49, 261), naturally shows that these treatises were added to the Second Collection at a later time by subsequent scribes. 2. Destructive parts of the Second Assembly 2.1. Brief overview of the contents of “GZ” Let us move on to the analysis of the most extensive treatise of the Second Collection, which is called “Chapters on Knowledge”, or “Gnostic Chapters”, and by numbering is the third treatise. This work is disproportionately large in volume (see: [Kessel, 2015, 253]) and makes up almost half of the entire Second Collection. The structure of the 3rd treatise itself shows that this is a separate work, consisting of four “centuries”-centuries of the so-called. maxims, or chapters. Some chapters on asceticism largely duplicate what has already been said in various treatises of the Second Collection. The content of the chapters, despite the chaotic nature and lack of logical sequence (there is no mathematical order in the second centenary), is in many ways reminiscent of the “Gnostic Chapters” of Evagrius. The compiler or compilers (as will be seen later) clearly pursued the goal of imitation of this work and set themselves the task of making a synthesis - combining the cosmological and eschatological teachings of Evagrius and the concept of the two centuries of Theodore of Mopsuestia. The result was “a work quite difficult to understand and translate” of a dogmatic and cosmological nature, “presented in lengthy sentences using complex syntax 12, as well as the presence of difficult-to-translate language structures. The systematization of chapters, as well as the consistent development of thought from one chapter to another, is practically absent” [Makarov, 2018, 39]. Other publishers describe similar philological “symptoms”: “The text is not at all simple. Paragraphs are sometimes long, complex, full of tedious imagery and repetition. His teaching may seem complex and difficult. There is no evolution either within the centurions or between them. Even if often one maxim follows another, continuing the given topic. In this case, the caesura between them is arbitrary. Subsequently, the argument may change dramatically. But the text of a certain statement may not be understood by us, being presented in a condensed and not entirely clear form” [Betiollo, 1985, 17]. These valuable observations from the publishers encourage us to focus on the warnings and instructions of the saint himself. Isaac, which he does at the beginning of the Second Assembly, literally before the treatise “GZ” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 48–49) 13. Order of St. Isaac directly attributes the contents of “GZ” to forbidden literature, which a hermit or monastic should not read. Nevertheless, such an obvious fact, lying on the surface and not requiring much proof, is practically ignored or, so to speak, goes unnoticed by most scientists. 2.2. Handwritten tradition "GZ" At the moment, the handwritten tradition of the text of the “GZ” is quite well studied (see: [Kessel, 2013, 245–247; Turkin S. 2014, pp. 113–115; Kalinin et al., 2020, 18–20]. It is worth noting one feature: a review of the manuscripts containing the “GZ” indicates that in its entirety (405 chapters) this work is found in only one of them (Bodleian syr. e. 7); continued to be revised and the text of “GZ” was “doomed to constant reduction” [Kessel, 2013, 254]. The following fact is also indicative. In 13 manuscripts in which the presence of “GZ” is recorded, the maximum number of chapters from individual hundreds does not exceed 60, the minimum is one chapter out of 405 chapters! In this regard, the following thesis suggests itself: the handwritten tradition itself serves as a good indicator of the authenticity of the texts included in the “GZ”. We believe that sifted material not recorded by manuscript tradition is a strong sign that the text is dubious. 2.3. A break in the composition of the Second Collection and a fragment of interpolation To begin with, we will show the compositional gap that the insertion of the 3rd treatise “GZ” made between the 2nd and 4th, and also consider the sloppy traces of interpolation and damage to the text left by the copyists, and then move on to the analysis of the chapters themselves. The second treatise in the Second Collection is devoted to the theme of unceasing praise of God: “The soul, which is constantly occupied with praising God, remains in the creatureliness of its nature,” and through this “constant conversation of praise to God,” the “glory of the Divine Nature” is revealed to the soul (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 72). At the end of the conversation, the same thesis is repeated: “As I said above in this conversation, when the soul is moved to the enjoyment of glory, thanks to constant conversation with Him, and it is happy to remain in it (the conversation) unceasingly, it will know by the grace of the Holy Spirit what it will ultimately be clothed in” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 73). A little higher, the monk warns that “the one who imparts knowledge to his disciples should not lead them to perfect knowledge from the very beginning, without first teaching them properly the letters of the alphabet and how to read in sequence” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 73). Thus, the 2nd treatise is a kind of introduction to the next one, devoted to the topic of prayer. And indeed, in the 1st paragraph of the 4th treatise one hears a continuation of the “alphabet” theme: “Our intention is to organize conversations about inner prayer and consistently present them in alphabetical order” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 87). Treatise 4 then proceeds with instructions on the purpose of prayer, concluding with an invitation to “enjoy the very communion with God in the prayerful reflections that we are about to compose” (Isaac the Syrian 2013, 89). The 5th treatise contains prayers with an alphabetical acrostic. From the point of view of thematic composition, the 4th and 5th treatises form a single whole, since the 4th serves as a preface to the next one. 2.4. Collective addressing In “GZ”, as well as in the next fragment, where interpolation was carried out by the scribes, the replacement of both the addresser and the addressee from personal to collective stands out. From the 1st to the 4th treatise, the monk writes on his own behalf and addresses his addressee “my brother.” As noted above, Rev. Isaac the Syrian enjoyed very great authority during his lifetime, so in his writings he appears as the first person, sometimes writing about himself in the third person. However, collective addressing, with sharp transitions from the first person and back to the plural, is not typical for the entire corpus of the saint’s works and is found only in “GZ”. When reading these fragments, the thought naturally arises that there is a damaged text. Let's take a closer look at what traces of insertion the scribes left. So, between the 2nd and “4th” 14 treatises, having changed the numbering, they inserted an essay that, in genre, style, and volume, is strikingly different from all the treatises in the Second Collection. Realizing that such an obvious inconsistency, violating the harmonious composition of the book, could cause bewilderment among the reader, the scribes made the following inscription before the 4th treatise: “The words of the same Mar Isaac, other works compiled by him after the “Chapters on Knowledge” (our italics - Hierom. N.) [as] instructions and explanations regarding our venerable service in silence." In a work where there is a continuous numbering of chapters, there is no need to explain that after the 3rd treatise comes the 4th, especially since there are no such explanations in the inscriptions to other treatises of the Second Collection. We believe that such a remark may indicate a change in the original numbering of the treatises. Let us consider in detail the traces of the scribes. In the 1st paragraph of the 4th treatise they write: “Now, by the grace of God our Savior, we have completed ( ̫ ͠ ͡ ͢ ͢ ) (italics here and below are ours - Hierom. N.) these “Chapters on Knowledge”, in which great power lies, - after all, grace itself has clearly ordered them. For my conscience testifies to me ( ͣ ͗ ̇ ͕ ͐ ͠͝ ͓ͪ͝ ͬ͐ͪͬ͝ ) that the energy [contained] in them is not from our human strength ( ͕͚͢͝͠ ͕͢͝͠ ͫ͐͢), since we are worth nothing in our way of life, and we do not have enough knowledge to allow us to rise to such a height of the sacraments set forth in this essay. When we have now reached ( ͕ ͩ ͪ ͒ ͢ ͢ ) that which follows those “Chapters" written with the help of our Lord, we ( ͢͠ , lit.: to us ) intend to point out [the various types of] internal prayer and set them out sequentially in alphabetical order" (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 87; Isaac of Nineveh, 1995, 1). For contrast, let's cite the first line of the 2nd paragraph: “You should also know about this, my brother” ( ͐ ͚ ͝ ) (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 87; Isaac of Nineveh, 1995, 1). It is easy to see that the text was damaged by copyists. The addressing here moves from the collective to the personal plane and back, and in the sentence “We lack knowledge that allows us to rise to such a height of the sacraments set forth in this work,” the scribes imperceptibly transferred their thoughts “to themselves” into the text, positioning their thoughts as the thoughts of St. Isaac. In fact, doesn’t it seem absurd that St. Isaac wrote about himself that he (we) did not have enough understanding to understand the essay that he himself wrote? Such a confession would have to be considered madness, and the essay unsuitable for reading. For illustrative purposes, here is another corrupt passage in which the scribes left traces of their influence: “Those who are [confused while reading] this book when they see that any of these chapters of knowledge are written in some places of the book above the lines, let them not think that this was done by mistake. For these chapters on knowledge are a kind of explanation of most of the phrases of this book. Therefore, [this was done] both for [their] understanding and for the greater convenience of the reader, due to the fact that this book was written by us (ঠৢ) for the remembrance of our souls (॥৕࢞ ̣ দૢ) . As I wrote at the beginning of the book, [based] on all the teaching [contained] in the Scriptures, and a little on the temptations that befell me. We have written these chapters on knowledge above each of the sections, so that with their help we can clarify for the mind those difficult to read [places]. For there are [some] words, each of which in the context of [this book] has a different meaning: [taken separately], by themselves they have a different meaning” (Turkin, 2014, 131). It is difficult not to notice the unity of the copyists' style in these two fragments 15 . The inconsistency in terms of addressing is striking, occurring in small fragments and expressed in the use of 1st person pronouns, either in the singular or in the plural: “I/us/our/we/me.” It becomes obvious that the scribes want to “play the role” of St. Isaac the Syrian. It is also characteristic that the scribes try to “canonize” their scholia, convincing the reader “not to be confused” and “not to think that this was done by mistake,” assuring that it was deliberately written by the saint himself. Isaac. It is interesting to note that this warning addressed to the reader appears in chapter 41, while the comments begin literally from chapter 2. However, G. M. Kessel directly says: “Although the origin of the scholia has not yet been established, there is no doubt that they do not belong to [venerable] Isaac and were added at a later stage in the transmission of the Second Part” [Kessel, 2013, 250] 16. He also believes that the division of “GZ” into ““centuries” should be considered as a later editorial work” [Kessel, 2015, 253]. Let us recall that for St. Isaac, reading is a method of “approaching God,” in which the mind is “illuminated” and receives “material for contemplation” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 210, 260). In connection with this, Rev. Isaac strictly and categorically prohibits reading that literature that introduces disorder into the mind, “instructs indiscriminately and speaks confusingly, jumping from one topic to another”: the result of such reading will only be a clouding of the mind (see: (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 48–49)). “GZ” falls under this category of prohibited reading. This conclusion is confirmed not only by the publishers of “GZ”, whose opinions we cited above, but also by the very content of this work: “For there are words, each of which in the context has a different meaning, in themselves they have a different meaning” (Turkin, 2014, 131). Such “clear” argumentation is characteristic of most of the “GZ”. Several conclusions follow from this: firstly, “GZ” is an essay from those that St. Isaac does not recommend reading, he literally forbids it (ठॐ ͬͩપ); secondly, this work is in the nature of collective creativity, which is confirmed by rough traces of editorial work; and, thirdly, this work was added by later scribes to the original composition of the Second Collection. Traces of interpolation reflect the texts of the treatises between which the insertion was made. Let us move on to further confirmation of this thesis and consider the significant contradictions that the author of the “GZ” has with the Second, as well as the First, collection of St. Isaac the Syrian. In order to clearly present the differences of opinion of the author of “GZ” and etc. Isaac and show the contradictions between them, we will compare their teaching about God and angels, as well as statements regarding asceticism and anthropology. Quotes from “GZ” will be given from sources translated into Russian, which, in turn, will allow the reader to independently check and familiarize themselves with the text, as well as more objectively perceive its meaning, since the published texts of “GZ” in Russian translation have undergone a certain scientific editing. Both authors call God the Father and Creator of the universe, the difference being the act of creation itself. At St. Исаака Бог творит все из ничего, тогда как у автора «ГЗ» не только ангелы рождаются Отцом (об этом будет сказано ниже), но и буквально все творение рождается Отцом благодатью: «Бог есть поистине Отец, Который породил все благодатью (ܕܠܟܠ ܒܛܝܒܘܬܐ ܐܘܠܕ)» ( Исаак Сирин , 2013, 81). Moreover, according to the concept of Theodore of Mopsuestia, this born world of the author of “GZ” is in a sinful state and imperfection. The author of “GZ” in the 4th centenary states: “God, wise in everything [and] Lord of the universe, has beautifully designed this world in [its] weakness. And He wanted to create it [exactly] the way it flows now, and not wanting to [create] something else: be it sinlessness or the absence of temptations or immunity to change and weakness. [And] this world did not pass over, against His will, into something else, whereas [God] would have wanted it to flow differently” [Bumazhnov, 2012, 181]. A similar thought can be found in the 3rd centenary: “We became mortal not because we sinned, but we were inclined to sin because we were mortal” [Kavvados, 2016, 140]. From the above chapters, it becomes clear that the author of the “GZ” believes that the world was created by God already with sin and temptation, and human nature inclined towards sin only for the reason that it was already mortal, i.e., was in a passionate state, because, according to the author of the “GZ”, this is exactly how God created it. Researchers of these fragments quite rightly noted that such a teaching was “undoubtedly borrowed from Theodore of Mopsuestia” [Kavvados, 2016, 140; Bumazhnov, 2012, 177–178]. Let us also add that the concept of “two centuries” in the form in which it is reflected in Theodore of Mopsuestia and the East Syrian followers of this teaching, including the author of “GZ”, in St. Isaac the Syrian is completely absent. His famous phrase: “The world mingled with God, and creation and the Creator became one!” 17 (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 97) and similar statements (see: (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 46, 48, 101, 110)) clearly indicate that in the thought of St. Isaac there is no such teaching 18; similar expressions are in the nature of the idea of ​​“two worlds” - the one above and below. Cosmological and anthropological teaching of St. Isaac the Syrian is strikingly different from the ideas of Theodore of Mopsuestia 19. The Monk Isaac claims that “God, by His sole good pleasure, suddenly brought everything from non-existence into existence, and every thing appeared before Him in perfection” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 256; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 101). “For in what God created there is no disorder, but He gives complete moderation and order to nature” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 42). The state of Adam's nature before his crime was in perfect health, holiness and incorruptibility, so that even "a fragrance emanated from Adam before his crime" (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 577; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 253). For this reason, from the lips of St. One can hear a fair reproach from Isaac: “Therefore, let no one blaspheme God, as if He put passions and sin into nature” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 26; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 21). In fact, Rev. Isaac calls the teachings of Theodore of Mopsuestia and his follower, the author of “GZ”, blasphemy! 20. Let us give another example of the cosmological reflections of the author of “GZ”: “Time moves where there is action of bodies; where there are no bodies, there are no changes; where there is no change, there is no time; where there are no times, no bodies, there is nothing above or below a single hypostasis ( qnoma ), but in each hypostasis there is equality ( ͩ ͢ ͘ ͡ ͐ ͫ ͘ ͝ ͬ͐͘ ) 21 , as the equality of hypostases ( ͫ ͘ ͝ ͬ͘ ͐ ͕ ͩ ͢ ̈͘ ͡ ͡ ͐ ) in unlimited entities" [Ilarion, 2017, 95]. Metropolitan Hilarion, in his study, places this chapter in the section “The Created World” and offers his commentary: “In the beginning there was only God, one in three equal hypostases,” etc. [Ilarion, 2017, 95]. In the new translation, a group of translators decided to insert their own addition into this chapter, which, as it seems to us, is far removed from the thoughts of the author of “GZ” and, in fact, distorts the original idea of ​​this chapter. The author of this chapter follows Evagrian cosmology and describes the future monadic unity of hypostases, the diversity of which will consist only of shapes and colors. A group of translators, for an unknown reason (such a reason is not in the context and content of this chapter), with additional phrases and sentences translates the thought of this chapter into an anthropological plane. Вот фрагмент предложенной интерпретации: «Там, где нет тел, нет высших и низших в одной ипостаси [то есть людей в их нынешнем устроении: с тонкой душой и материальным телом], но в каждой из ипостасей [обнаруживается] равенство [души и тела], подобно равенству ипостасей (ܐܝܟ ܫܘܝܘܬܐ ܕܩܢܘ̈ܡܐ), [чьи] сущности not connected (lit. “in unconnected entities.” - clarification given in the footnote by the authors. - Hierom. N.)" (Kalinin et al., 2020, 27). It seems to us that such interpretations, despite the “convenience” of the proposed reading, rather grossly distort the author’s original thought rather than clarify its content. The Christology of the author of “GZ” is in a close and even, one might say, subordinate form and connection with Angelology, and follows the concept of Origen and Evagrius: the collection of fallen minds into a monad. The editors of the “GZ” built parallels with the “Gnostic Chapters” of Evagrius, placing some of its chapters directly into the text of the “GZ” (Turkin, 2014, 125). According to the teachings of the author of “GZ”, “Christ is the High Priest not only for people, but also for angels. His sacred rites are not limited to this world. It will continue until the salvation of all sentient beings” [Conference: Apokatastasis in the Syrian tradition, 2014, 184]. The image of Christ in the “GZ” performs a service function of Origen-evagrist eschatology and is strikingly different from the humble image of Christ that is found in the writings of St. Isaac (see: (Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 33 233–235, 237–238, 371; Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 99, 186)), from the memory of Whom “a person has humility of heart” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 186). The Christological teaching of the author of “GZ” is based on the scheme of Theodore and Nestorius “Word – Man”. The consequence of this position is the introduction by the author of “GZ” of the fourth hypostasis – “the Man Jesus” – into the bosom of the Holy Trinity, “where the Father, the Son and the Spirit are inseparably located, and the mediator the Man Jesus, who is from us” (Turkin, 2014, 143). However, we have shown that St. Isaac the Syrian is within the framework of the Alexandrian Christological position: “The Word is flesh” (see: [Nikon Skarga, 2024]). Based on this position, the teaching of St. Isaac the Syrian does not distort the dogma of the Holy Trinity; the Hypostasis of the Son literally undergoes the process of incarnation ( ̡ ͡ ͒ ͪ ͢ ͫ ͢ ͘ ͬ ͐ ) and perceives human nature into His Hypostasis. This is how St. Petersburg writes about it. Isaac: “We do not mean faith by which a person believes in the difference between the venerable and the Divine Hypostases, in the exclusive and unique nature of the Divinity itself and in the wonderful dispensation accomplished in humanity by the perception of our nature (👒👐👢👫👘👑👑👑👑👑𝑟𝑑𝑟𝑑𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑧𝑑𝑧𝑑𝑧𝑑𝑧𝑑𝑧𝑑𝑧𝑑𝑧𝑧𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑𝑑)” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 376; Isaac the Syrian, 2024, 64–65). The author of “GZ,” following the Theodorian tradition, shares such concepts related to Christ as “First-born” and “Only-begotten.” The first concept designates Christ as a man, the second as God: “The Lord Christ is the First-born and Only-begotten. One and the other do not coexist in a single nature, for “firstborn” presupposes many brothers, while “only begotten” does not presuppose any other being, born before Him or after Him” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 77). However, for Rev. Isaac, namely “Jesus Christ (Unlike the author of “GZ”, St. Isaac collectively names the attributes of human nature. - Hierom. N.) - the Only Begotten from Thy womb" (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 93). This theological position goes back to St. Ephraim the Syrian, for whom the concepts “First-born” and “Only-begotten” were synonymous. Также «учение о втором, другом (ܐܚܪܢܐ), рождении предвечного Сына является принципиально важным положением христологии [прп.] Ефрема» [Заболотный, 2020, 118–120], а отсюда и принципиально важной и уникальной особенностью христологии прп. Isaac the Syrian, different from the Christology of the author of “GZ” 22. Angelology St. Isaac the Syrian has been very well studied (see: [Conference: Angelology of St. Isaac the Syrian, 2014, 137–161; Hilarion, 2017, 97–101]). In these works there are contradictions between the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian and the author of "GZ" were not noted. Perhaps they were simply not noticed, since the researchers were pursuing a different task, so we will try to fill this gap. Let's start with an analysis of the doctrine of the angelic hierarchy. One of the first and obvious contradictions is that the author of “GZ” does not have a clear idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe angelic hierarchy. When familiarizing yourself with the chapters in which angelic forces are mentioned, you will notice that the author of “GZ” adheres to the teachings of Origen and Evagrius about the falling away of minds from the One and their return to the Monad. In this heretical teaching, the concept of hierarchy is virtually absent, therefore the author of “GZ” states: “Some verbal beings do not have names, while others have many names. Those without names [were created] first” (Third Centurion, 2019, chapter 3). The teaching of St. Isaac the Syrian does not agree with the teachings of the author of “GZ”. Firstly, the teaching about the angelic hierarchy of St. Isaac directly borrowed from the treatise “On the Heavenly Hierarchy” by Dionysius the Areopagite (see: [Ilarion, 2017, 97; Böle, 2021, 218]). In this treatise, the nine-rank hierarchy of angels is strictly divided into groups and names (cf.: (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 187–188; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 70–71)). Secondly, Rev. Isaac, contrary to the entire Syrian tradition, puts the seraphim in first place [Böle, 2021, 218], which doubly disagrees with the opinion of the author of “GZ”, who claims that the first verbal beings “have no names.” From the further considerations of the author of “GZ” it becomes clear that he does not know the teaching on the interpretation of the names of the angelic hierarchy, which St. Petersburg cites in his writings. Isaac the Syrian. Thus, he again states: “In the [angelic] worlds there is no name, no naming, no reading among the intelligible natures in relation to any [angelic] being, but they all exist in their world without name or naming. And all those infinite quantities of their worlds, innumerable [angelic] natures, understand each other beyond these differences - through high knowledge without name and letters” (Third Centurion, 2019, ch. 6). It can be noted that the author of “GZ” does not agree with St. Isaac, not only regarding the doctrine of the angelic hierarchy, imprinted with names, but also with the fact that the higher ranks teach the lower ones, and that the lower ranks do not have access to the knowledge that the higher ranks possess (see: (Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 75); [Conference: Angelology of St. Isaac the Syrian, 2014, 143]). But let us turn to the doctrine of the further emplacement of 23 angels, which is proposed by the author of “GZ”. The author of “GZ” asserts that “the knowledge of the Father of the holy angels is accomplished visually (࡯ບ𝑡)” (Turkin, 2014, 131), while St. Isaac says that the village in which the Invisible God dwells “dulls the eyes of the Seraphim,” who do not have enough visual ability to openly look at God, but only “through the formless ( ̕ ͡ ͐ ͚ ͙ ͐͘ ) perception of that unknown Essence” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 518; Isaac the Syrian, 2024, 519). It also becomes interesting that the author of “GZ” angels, like people, speak in “sensual speech”: “The verbal natures first learned from the Creator himself to use sensual speech ( ͡ ͡ ͪ ͓ ͫ ͢ ͝ ͬ ͕ ͡ ͡ ͬ ͐ ) Also, we, people, sensually received from the Creator the use of the sounds of sensual speech ( ͕ ͓ͪͫͬ͐͢͡͡͝)'' (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 75). At the same time, Rev. Isaac the Syrian's angels “speak without lips ( ͡ ͡ ͠ ͡ ͝ ͢ ͕ ͐͠ ͦ ͘ ͡ ͡ᐐ), see without eyes, hear without ears” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 130), have “silent movements and disembodied feelings” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 518; Isaac the Syrian, 1909, 518; 2024, 519). And finally, at the end of the comparative review of angelogy, it is necessary to add that the doctrine of the origin of angels by the author of “GZ” has a dogmatic feature: “God is truly the Father for rational beings whom He gave birth to ( ͕ ͐ ͘ ͠ ͕ ) according to His good pleasure” (Turkin, 2014, 120). According to the teachings of the author of “GZ,” God directly “gives birth” to intelligent beings, while according to the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian "wonderful angelic, verbal and intelligent natures, out of nothing He suddenly created 24 ( ͒ ͒ ͑ ͝ ͑ ͘ ͢ ) in nine-rank orders ( ͕ ͒ ͬ ͫ ͝ ͥ 1909, 187–188). In general, we can say that the author of “GZ”, apparently, although he is familiar with the teachings of Dionysius the Areopagite about the angelic hierarchy, his ideas about it come from other sources. Also the more developed teaching of St. Isaac the Syrian about the internal epistemological function of angels (see: [Conference: Angelology of St. Isaac the Syrian, 2014, 145–150]) is unknown to the author of “GZ”. The doctrine of the origin of angels, as shown by A. R. Fokin, the author of "GZ" borrows for the most part from Evagrius and Origen, it is based on the theory of decay and assembly into "monads" or "genads" of "pure minds", but in the author of "GZ" "this Origenistic eschatology is not expressed as clearly and systematically as in Evagrius" [Conference: Apokatastasis in the Syrian tradition, 2014, 187]. For clarity, we will cite one chapter from the second hundred, which reflects the teaching of the author of “GZ” about the disintegration and assembly of the “genad”. Publishers and translators of “GZ” into Russian prefer to leave such fragments untranslated for the purpose, as we believe, so as not to discover obvious charm and misconception in the teachings of the author of “GZ” and thereby not alienate the reader. It will be about the fall and restoration of the fallen angels: “Look at the light, which, since the first harmonious purity and beauty, set the first ranks in motion, and is glorified by its first creations, this same light has darkened and taken away its clarity when it comes to the second brothers, with numerous individual divisions, continuing to be glorified by the first contemplation. This very light will become, at the end of the movement of that world, the clothing of the One who is the goal of all creation.” [Φωτόπουλος, 2010, 210]. Protopresbyter John Photopoudos gives an explanation for this chapter: “the darkened light is the fallen Lucifer,” which will later become the clothing “with which Christ will clothe himself? (question mark put by the author - Hieronymus N.)" [Φωτόπουλος 2010, 210]. If we turn to the writings of St. Isaac the Syrian, we will see the opposite statement: “Demons are extremely unclean” and the essence of “fiends of darkness” (𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑧𝑧𝑠𝑧𝑧𝑠𝑧𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖠𝖅𝖠𝖅𝖅 order. For it is impossible for the sons of darkness ( ͒ ͢ ͝ ͚ ͫ͐͘͟͟ ) to approach the light” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 184–196; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 69–72). The monk exhorts us to avoid exaltation, so that we do not suffer the same fate as the fallen Dennitsa: “God did not create you inaccessible to the deplorable, so that if you desire deity, you would not inherit the same thing as the original Dennitsa, who later became Satan for a crime” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 187–188; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 299). Also, at the very beginning of the Second Assembly, the monk warns his addressee about the hostility of the demons, “preparing destruction” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 50–51). He himself prays for those “who endure fierce battles with demons,” and asks the Lord: “You yourself bring down the pride of my enemy before me, you destroy the power of his tricks against me, you humiliate his exalted pride” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 100, 97–98). The given examples do not make it possible to reconcile them with the enthusiastic eschatology of the author of the “GZ”; on the contrary, they serve as a clear sign that the teaching of the author of the “GZ” is opposite to the teaching of St. Isaac the Syrian. Let us consider the aspects of the asceticism of the author of “GZ” - the doctrine of passions and virtues, and see how much they agree with the teaching of St. Isaac the Syrian. In the second hundred, the author of “GZ” touches on the issue of concentration and distraction of the mind. Humility for him is “the limit of concentration of the mind,” while passions scatter the mind through images (Makarov, 2018, 48). Further, the author of “GZ” states: “Whenever the mind is scattered, the members of 25 ( ̗ ͕ ̈͡ ͐ ) humility break away” (Makarov, 2018, 48). Quite a strange formulation, which is not typical for the teachings of St. Isaac regarding the virtue of humility. Further, the author of “GZ” states: “If, however, you say that a thought collected in itself can think evil, then show me at least one of the evil passions that arises in the mind without images” (Makarov, 2018, 48). Let us turn to the teaching about the passions of St. Isaac the Syrian and let's see if the monk can show the author of "GZ" passions that do not have or do not produce images. Abba Isaac the Syrian says: “Not all passions fight by attacking thoughts. For there are passions that show only sorrow: negligence, despondency, sadness do not attack with the attack of thoughts and pleasure, but only impose heaviness on the soul”; and again: “The passions are aroused either by some images, or by a feeling without images and by memory without passionate movements and thoughts, and then they do not produce irritation” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 484–485; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 190–191). The above quotes in comparison create the impression that the author of “GZ” never read the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian. For a deeper comparison, here is a statement by the author of “GZ” about virtue. In the second centenary he writes: “We hermits have locked our doors not in order to practice virtue, but in order to become dead to virtue itself” [Ilarion, 2017, 128]. To this radical statement by St. Isaac the Syrian can find the following answer: “We, monks, do not honor silence without mercy” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 566; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 247). Moreover, Rev. Isaac teaches that it is in silence that virtues begin to flourish and, on the contrary, “conversation with people burns the root of the mind, which has begun to produce from itself the grain of virtues ( ̡ ͝ ͬ ̈ ͡ ͐ )” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 132; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 355). And the “virtue of silence” itself, as St. Isaac the Syrian (Ἰσαὰκ ὁ Σύρος, 2012, 532; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 112), in the series of virtues does not occupy the first place, but is in third place in the order of descent: “So, love for God comes from an interview with Him, and prayerful reflection and teaching are achieved silence, silence - non-covetousness, non-covetousness - patience..." (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 440; Isaac the Syrian, 1911, 167). So, the identities in the doctrine of virtue in the author of “GZ” and others. Isaac the Syrian is not found. If in the doctrine of the passions the author of “GZ” demonstrates his unfamiliarity or poor acquaintance with the works of St. Isaac, then in the teaching on virtue the author of “GZ” distorts the idea of ​​the monk and tries to look smarter than him 26. 4. The reason for the inclusion of “GZ” in the Second Assembly and the authorship of the ideological compiler - Simeon the Persecuted? At the end of the study, it is necessary to resolve one more puzzling question: for what reason was such a heterogeneous work in all respects, almost exceeding in volume the entire Second Collection, was included and interpolated into the composition of this collection? In our opinion, the answer to this question can be given by discovering the identity of the scribe and identifying his ideological views. In this regard, a number of publications made by Alexander Valerievich Tamrazov and dedicated to one little-known author, Simeon Gonim, attracts attention. Several interesting parallels can be drawn between the personality of Simeon the Persecuted and the creation of the corpus of treatises of the Second Collection: 27 1) In the monastery of Rabban Isho, at the time when Simeon was there, a corpus of texts is created, which are attributed to Mar Isaac, Bishop of Nineveh, and are designated as the Second Assembly (see: [Tamrazov, 2025, 236]) 28. 2) A.V. Tamrazov gives several literary details that characterize Simeon’s writing style and style. A similar characteristic style is reflected in the texts of the “GZ” included in the Second Collection: a) “alphabetic and numeric symbolism”, which is reflected in the “GZ” by dividing hundreds into “centuries”. The presence of “interpretations”, “graphic expression” reflected by various symbolic “elements and other graphic details”, “scholia” 29 - all “these techniques are designed to create an aura of maximum mystery. Simeon the Persecuted clearly gravitates towards this” [Tamrazov, 2025, 221–222]. b) In the introduction to the 4th treatise, following after the “GZ”, one can observe a similar stylistic “symptomatology” recorded by Alexander Valerievich: “The deixis of the introduction... where the first-person remarks are not surrounded by the context characteristic of indirect speech, allows us to place Simeon in the deictic center. Here, attention is drawn to the absence of the particle ͠͡ (lam), which is used, among other things, to introduce indirect speech or quotes" [Tamrazov, 2025, 226]. Similar “symptoms” are recorded in the 41st chapter of the first centenary, where the author of “GZ” on behalf of St. Isaac tries to instill in the reader the idea that the interpretations-scholia placed in the text of the chapters were made by the reverend father himself 30. Quotes about “equality of hypostases” directly refer to the editorial work of Simeon the Persecuted. 3) Simeon the Persecuted established himself as a “great compiler” and creator of pseudepigraphs [Tarmazov, 2025, 257]. A.V. Tamrazov convincingly showed how Simeon appropriates, that is, rewrites under his own name various works of other authors. Thus, they were assigned the “Book of Unity” by Babai the Great [Tamrazov, 2022, 150–157; Tamrazov, 2025, 227]. The seven memr-centurites found in the Mosul 907 manuscript, attributed to a certain “mar Isaac,” were compiled by Simeon (in some manuscripts the attribution of Simeon was preserved), as well as two large treatises included in the Fifth Collection of pseudo-Isaac, the Persecuted One rewrites under his own name [Tamrazov, 2025, 207, 229]. 4) And finally, the last detail, which, perhaps rightly, made this writer Persecuted. Simeon has two extremes: on the one hand, he is a zealous preacher of the Nestorian heresy, writing texts in defense of this doctrine with particular expression, and on the other hand, the Persecuted One has great sympathy for the heresy of apocatastasis - the doctrine of universal salvation. The above pseudepigrapha created by this author contain all these themes. Summing up the research So, we have carried out a brief review of the first three treatises of the Second Collection of St. Isaac the Syrian, which to this day remain unpublished critically. The main object of the study was the 3rd treatise, which in its structure and content differs sharply from all the treatises of the Second Collection and in fact makes up half of the entire collection. Its structure and content have all the hallmarks of a separate work, which some researchers have rightly designated as the “Third Volume.” The style of the treatise, which in many places confirms the presence of collective creativity in its creation, and in some fragments reflects an obvious forgery, when the author-editors attribute to St. Isaac’s comments and admit that they do not understand the text of the treatise itself, gives a clear idea of ​​its artificial inclusion in the Second Assembly. Traces of such artificial introduction are confirmed by the presence of the following facts. Firstly, the development of thought in the 2nd and 4th treatises, connected by a common idea, is disrupted. Secondly, damage to the text is revealed, manifested in traces of interpolation introduced in the title of the 4th treatise (for more information, see Section 2.3). Thirdly, a comparative analysis of the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian and the author of “GZ” showed the presence of serious disagreements between them in matters of asceticism and dogmatics. The divergence of opinions on these issues gives a clear idea of ​​the different paradigms of thinking among the authors under study. Fourthly, there are stylistic differences between the “GZ” and the original works of St. Isaac, and almost all researchers who have attempted to translate “GZ” speak about this. And finally, fifthly, at the very beginning of the Second Meeting of St. Isaac forbids reading literature like "GZ". Reading for St. Isaac the Syrian is the main instrument with which he balances his spiritual states, therefore the system he developed, or, better said, the “hygiene” of reading, does not allow the hermit’s mind to encounter such chaotic information, which is the main array of “GZ”. Perhaps we can add a sixth, significant textual fact - this is the handwritten tradition of the “GZ”. The version of “GZ” in its entirety of 405 chapters was not reflected in any of the known manuscripts! The scribes' familiarity with this work forced them to choose the “best” or the one that was in tune with the thoughts of the saint. Isaac the Syrian. Based on these facts, it is necessary to put forward the following thesis - witnessing “authentic” chapters, which can be attributed with great caution and further verification to the pen of St. Isaac the Syrian, the handwritten tradition itself may act. The frequency of the presence of the same copied chapters in different manuscripts may be an additional argument in favor of the authenticity of the text. The rest of the “GZ” array, which remained outside the framework of the handwritten tradition known to us, after additional verification, must be transferred to the category of forged texts attributed to St. Isaac the Syrian. The discovered parallels, specific quotes, literary features and ideological views of Simeon the Persecuted most likely allow us to see in the person of this “great compiler” the creator and designer of the heterogeneous composition of treatises of the Second Collection. Of course, we admit that both his previous like-minded people and his subsequent disciples could have participated in the formation of the treatises, but the main ideologist of such a composition, which has come down to us in the only manuscript (Bodleian syr. e. 7), containing the “complete” version of the Second Collection, in our opinion, is Simeon the Persecuted. Based on the ideological views of the writer who received the “talking” nickname, we can assume and outline the reasons for the inclusion in the Second Collection of treatises that were not written by St. Isaac the Syrian, through which the “great compiler”, i.e. Simeon the Persecuted, wanted to give some logical completeness to his views: 1) The inclusion of “GZ” in the Second Collection, in our opinion, is nothing more than a second attempt to create a large-scale project similar to the “Gnostic Chapters” of Evagrius (version S 2), containing the heretical views of this writer. Simeon, as stated above, clearly had sympathy for such ideas. It was the inclusion of “GZ” in the Second Assembly under the authoritative name of St. Isaac, according to Simeon, ensured the positive fate of the dissemination and acceptance of these ideas among readers. Fortunately, it can be said that the manuscript tradition, as in the case of the Gnostic Chapters (version S2), rejected this marginal work; 2) Inclusion in the Second Volume of the 11th (Christological) 31st and 14th (anti-Messalian) treatises not belonging to the pen of St. Isaac the Syrian, ensured, on the one hand, the veiling of the pronounced “Alexandrian” Christological position of St. Isaac the Syrian, on the other hand, the obscurity of some of the vaguely expressed “Messalian” views of the reverend father 32; 3) The addition to the body of the Second Collection of the last block of treatises (38–41), containing a detailed doctrine of apokatastasis 33, also corresponds to the plan of Simeon the Persecuted. The stylistics of this group of treatises, the presence of an anathema 34 against those who do not honor Theodore of Mopsuestia 35 , and the characteristic exegetical methods allow us to consider them as forged texts 36 . Having completed the first part of the study, we outlined the heterogeneous contours of the Second Assembly, identified places of interpolation and identified significant differences between the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian and the content of texts of a dubious nature. The result of our research encourages the 3rd treatise, or “Chapters on Knowledge,” published under the name of St. Isaac the Syrian, at this stage were transferred to the category of forged texts. When preparing a critical edition of this work, it is necessary to take into account the facts presented above in this study. We have also previously indicated the ideological author of this composition - the “great compiler” Simeon Gonimy. Getting acquainted with the literary activity of this writer, it can be assumed that the monastery of Rabban Isho, where a corpus of texts called “The Second Collection of Mar Isaac the Syrian, Bishop of Nineveh” was created, was actively involved in the creation of pseudepigrapha. This attested fact could not but be reflected in the creation of the corpus of texts of the Second Collection. In the second part of the study, we will continue a detailed analysis of dubious texts and try to identify the original version of the Second Collection - the ascetic composition of the treatises of St. Isaac the Syrian, the authenticity of which, we believe, there will be no doubt. 1. Aristotle (2007) – Aristotle. Rhetoric. Poetics. M.: Labyrinth, 2007. 2. Athanasius of Alexandria (2015) – Athanasius the Great, St. Creations. M.: Siberian Blagozvonnitsa, 2015. T. 1. 3. Isaac the Syrian (1911) - Isaac the Syrian, St. Ascetic words. Sergiev Posad: Type. St.-Tr. Sergius Lavra, 1911. 4. Isaac the Syrian (2013) – Isaac the Syrian, St. 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. 5. Isaac the Syrian (2016) - Isaac the Syrian, St. 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.: Ed. house "Yask", 2016. 6. Isaac the Syrian (2024) – Isaac the Syrian, St. Ascetic Words, presented in order of increasing virtue: new translation / Comp. monk Damascene (Milis), prev., comment. and ed. hierome Nikon (Skargi), prev., trans. and note. hierome Silouana (Konstantinov). Kozelsk; St. Petersburg: Vvedensky stauropegial male convent of Optina Pustyn; SPbDA, 2024. 7. Kalinin et al. (2020) – M. G. Kalinin. "Chapters on Knowledge" by Isaac the Syrian. Part I / Sir. text, trans. and comm. M. G. Kalinina, T. B. Lidskoy, A. M. Preobrazhensky, S. S. Turkin // Bible and Christian Antiquity. 2020. No. 2 (6). pp. 15–33. 8. Makarov (2018) – A. D. Makarov. Selected chapters of the second word on knowledge. Venerable Isaac the Syrian / Preface, publ. and lane with sir. A. D. Makarova // Theological works. 2018. Vol. 47–48. pp. 38–53. 9 . Turkin (2014) - S. S. Turkin. The first word about the knowledge of St. Isaac the Syrian: introduction and translation // Church and Time. 2014. No. 3 (68). pp. 109–146. 10. The third hundred (2019) – The third hundred of the chapter on the knowledge of Isaac the Syrian, (1–13) / [Electronic resource]. URL: https://hesychasm.ru/forum/index.php?topic=4031.0 (access date: 06/5/2025). 11. Athanasius Alexandrinus (1965) – Athanasius Alexandrinus. De incarnatione //Athanasiana syriaca. Part I/Ed. by R. W. Thomson. Louvain: Secrétariat du Corpus SCO, 1965 (CSCO. Vol. 257; Scriptores syri. T. 114). 12. Brock (1997) – S. P. Brock. Two unpublished texts by St Isaac Syrian // Eastern Churches Review. 1997. Vol. 19.No. 1. P. 7–33. 13. Isaacus Ninivita (1909) – Mar Isaacus Ninivita. De perfectione religiosa / Ed. par P. Bedjan. P.; Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1909. 14. Isacco di Ninive (1985) – Isacco di Ninive. Discorsi spirituali: capitoli sulla conoscenza, preghiere, contemplazione sull’argomento dellf gehhena, altri opuscoli / Trad. P. Bettiolo. Magnano: Qiqajon, 1985. (Padri orientali). 15. Isaac of Niniveh (1995) – Isaac of Niniveh (Isaac the Syrian). ‘The Second Part’, Chapters IV–XLI / Ed. and transl. by S. P. Brock. Louvain: Peeters, 1995. (CSCO. Vol. 554–555; Scriptores syri. T. 224–225). 16. Ἰσαάκ ὁ Σύρος (2012) – Ἰσαὰκ ὁ Σύρος, ὅσιος . Λόγοι ἀσκητικοί / Κριτ. ἔκδ. M. Πιράρ. Ἅγιον Ὄρος: Ἱερὰ μονὴ Ἰβηρῶν, 2012. 17. Kessel (2015) – G. M. Kessel. Isaac of Nineveh’s Chapters on Knowledge // An Anthology of Syriac Writers from Qatar in the Seventh Century / Ed. by M. Kozah et al. Piscataway (NJ): Gorgias Press, 2015. (Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies. Vol. 39). P. 263–280. 18. Böle (2021) - Böle R. The Formless Light: An Introduction to the Study of the East Syrian Christian Mystical Tradition. M.: Publishing house. House "Cognition", 2021. 19. Bumazhnov (2012) – Bumazhnov D. F. A world beautiful in its weakness. St. Isaac the Syrian on the Fall of Adam and the imperfection of the world according to the unpublished text Centuria 4, 89 // Symbol. 2012. No. 61. pp. 177–194. 20. Dunaev (2002) – Dunaev A.G. Part I AUTHOR // St. Macarius of Egypt. Spiritual words and messages. Collection of type I (Vatic. graec. 694) / Prev., trans., commentary, index, A. G. Dunaeva. M.: Indrik, 2002. 21. Hilarion Alfeev (2017) – Hilarion (Alfeev), Met. The spiritual world of St. Isaac the Syrian. St. Petersburg: Oleg Abyshko Publishing House, 2017. 22. Zabolotny (2020) – Zabolotny E. A. Syrian Christianity between Byzantium and Iran. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2020. 23. Kavvadas (2016) – Kavvadas N. The Antiochian foundation of Ishak’s theology // 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.: Ed. house "Yask", 2016. pp. 137–142. 24. Conference: Angelology of St. Isaac the Syrian (2014) – Seraphim Seppala, priest. Angelology of St. Isaac the Syrian // Venerable Isaac the Syrian and his spiritual heritage. Materials of the First International Patristic Conference of Church-wide Postgraduate and Doctoral Studies named after Saints Cyril and Methodius. M.: [Church-wide postgraduate and doctoral studies named after. St. Cyril and Methodius], 2014. pp. 137–161. 25. Conference: Apokatastasis in the Syrian tradition (2014) - A. R. Fokin. Apokatastasis in the Syrian Christian tradition: Evagrius and Isaac // Venerable Isaac the Syrian and his spiritual heritage. Materials of the First International Patristic Conference of Church-wide Postgraduate and Doctoral Studies named after Saints Cyril and Methodius. M.: [Church-wide postgraduate and doctoral studies named after. St. Cyril and Methodius], 2014. pp. 173–187. 26. Makarov (2018) – A. D. Makarov. [Preface] Selected chapters of the second word on knowledge. Venerable Isaac the Syrian / Preface, publ. and lane with sir. A. D. Makarova // Theological works. 2018. Vol. 47–48. pp. 38–40. 27. Muravyov (2016) - A. V. Muravyov. Ascetic Dictionary of Mar Ishak // 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.: Ed. house "Yask", 2016. pp. 379–390. 28. Nikon (Skarga) (2020) – Nikon (Skarga), Hierom. The influence of St. Ephraim the Syrian on St. Isaac the Syrian // Diakritis. 2020. No. 2 (6). pp. 83–107. 29. Nikon (Skarga) (2021) – Nikon (Skarga), priest. Venerable Isaac the Syrian and Theodore of Mopsuestia: alliance or disagreement? (Review of the 1st meeting of St. Isaac the Syrian) // Christian reading. 2021. No. 3. pp. 276–294. 30. Nikon (Skarga) (2022) – Nikon (Skarga), priest. “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. No. 2. pp. 25–51. 31. Nikon (Skarga) (2024) – Nikon (Skarga), priest. Christological features and the problem of authorship of the 11th treatise from the Second Collection of St. Isaac the Syrian // Christian Reading. 2024. No. 4. pp. 26–36. 32. Tamrazov (2022) – A. V. Tamrazov. Simeon the Persecuted and his “Book of Unity”: a review of the manuscript heritage. Notes preceding the critical edition // The Bible and Christian Antiquity. 2022. No. 2 (14). pp. 170–183. 33. Tamrazov (2024) – A. V. Tamrazov. A newly discovered fragment from “Contra magos” and previously unpublished Syriac quotations from other works of Theodore of Mopsuestia. Introductory article, critical text, Russian translation and commentary // The Bible and Christian Antiquity. 2024. No. 2 (22). pp. 15–35. 34. Tamrazov (2025) - A. V. Tamrazov. Updated data on the written heritage of Simeon the Persecuted: to the problem of the composition and authorship of the “Fifth Collection” of Isaac the Syrian. Detailed description of the Dominican Friars of Mosul 907 manuscript: observations and comments // Bible and Christian Antiquity. 2025. No. 1 (25). pp. 202–239. 35. Wensinck (1923) – A. J. Wensinck. Introduction // Mystic Treatises by Isaac of Nineveh / Transl. by A. J. Wensinck. Am., 1923. P. xii–xvi. 36. Bettiolo (1985) – P. Bettiolo. Capitoli // Discorsi spirituali: capitoli sulla conoscenza, preghiere, contemplazione sull’argomento dellf gehhena, altri opuscoli / Trad. P. Bettiolo. Magnano: Qiqajon, 1985. P. 17–36. 37. Brock (1995) – S. P. Brock. Introduction // Isaac of Niniveh (Isaac the Syrian). ‘The Second Part’, Chapters IV–XLI / Ed. and transl. by S. P. Brock. Louvain: Peeters, 1995. (CSCO. Vol. 555; Scriptores syri. T. 225. P. XXXVIII–XL). 38. Kessel (2013) – G. M. Kessel. Nev Manuscript Witnesses to the Second Part of Isaac of Nineveh // Studia patristica. 2013. Vol. 64. P. 245–257. 39. Φωτόπουλος (2010) – Φωτόπουλος Ἰ., πρωτοπρεσβ . Ἀββᾶς Ἰσαάκ ὁ Σύρος. Ὁ ἀδικημένος ἅγιος. Ἀθῆναι: Ἔκδοσις “ΤΗΝΟΣ”, 2010. Alexander Valerievich Tamrazov revised the dating of this manuscript, see: [Tamrazov, 2025, 236]. This publication served as the basis for translation into six foreign languages. Researchers prefer to call these so-called “centuries” “centuries”. Unfortunately, S. Broca's method, which used terminological pairs, or stable phrases, as a unit of analysis of the text of the First and Second Collections, remains insufficient without taking into account the terminology of “GZ”. In these chapters you can find phrases that are not in the terminological base of St. Isaac the Syrian (see: [Brock, 1995, XXXVIII–XL; Muravyov, 2016, 379–390]). This fact may cast doubt on certain chapters that contain new terminology. A critical edition of the First Collection, thanks to which St. Petersburg became well-known in world literature. Isaac the Syrian was published much belatedly in 2012, 17 years after the critical edition of the Second Collection. A kind of “anachronism” occurred, as a result of which the critical edition of the First Collection seemed to look ahead, focusing on the critical edition of the Second Collection. The fact of such a “reverse” influence was noticeably reflected in subsequent studies. This also does not take into account the chronological distance between the two editions, which amounts to 5 centuries. It is necessary to introduce an additional method for detecting forged texts, which mainly takes into account the opinion of the saint himself. Isaac: what is permissible to read and what texts are not permissible even to record in writing. This methodology greatly facilitates the way of identifying texts in the newly appeared volumes (3–6), appearing in the manuscript tradition under the name “Mar Isaac”. The basic principle that researchers use to assert the unity between the First and Second and other newly-minted collections attributed to the pen of St. Isaac the Syrian, is a reference to parallel places. The method of detecting contradictions and incompatibility of ideas in the comparative analysis of individual topics in these collections is not used by anyone. Such a one-sided approach may be fraught with inaccurate conclusions. In our study, we try to fill this methodological shortcoming. We exclude tracts 16–17, which belong to the First Collection. More details about the method of reading from St. Isaac, see: [Ilarion, 2017, 259–270]. A. Muravyov gives a slightly different translation: “Beware of reading the works of those who tempt fearful minds in order to weaken them” (Isaac the Syrian, 2016, 269). We may be talking about the doctrine of apokatastasis, which, like nothing else, is capable of weakening the power of piety. Lit. “The written [word] does not dare to attack them, for it is not permitted.” G. Kessel speaks of “confused syntax” [Kessel, 2015, 254]. See other above in section. 1. The obvious relationship between the 2nd and 4th treatises allows us to make the assumption that in the original version, before the introduction of the “GZ”, the 4th treatise was the third. We also admit the following possible process of formation of the “GZ”: the 1st treatise has at the end a certain “appendix”, in which St. Isaac placed some of his thoughts for his addressee. Over time, in the process of handwritten tradition, this “application” could be expanded, supplemented by some other statements of the saint. Isaac the Syrian, which scribes collected from various sources. At some stage this “appendix” was organized into separate chapters. The final stage already required the transfer of this “application” to the Second Assembly. Such a process of forming an “application” could not guarantee that all the texts included in it belong to the pen of St. Isaac the Syrian. A similar style can be observed in Simeon the Persecuted, see: [Tamrazov, 2025, 226]. In the manuscript Cambridge Or. 1144, which reflects the early stage of the formation of the Second Collection, unlike the Bodleian manuscript, the scholia are in the margins, see: [Kessel, 2013, 256]. We have shown (see: [Nikon Skarga, 2024]) that the thought of St. Isaac about the “one body of the world” in the context where this phrase is found goes back to St. Athanasius of Alexandria (Athanasius Alexandrinus. De incarnatione, §41, 52; Athanasius of Alexandria, 2015, 140–141, 247, 297). Review of the problem associated with the concept of “two centuries” by St. Isaac the Syrian, see: [Nikon Skarga, 2021, 289–290]. For a detailed analysis, see: [Nikon (Skarga, 2021). On the contrary, we see that St. Isaac teaches about the “difference of Hypostases ( ͒ ͦ ͘ ͪ ͫ ͢ ͑ ͕ ͩ ͢ ͘ ͡ ͡ᐐ)” (Isaacus Ninivita, 1909, 376; Isaac the Syrian, 2024, 64). The doctrine of the “equality of hypostases” (૫ธทททททททททททท byททททททท) can be found in Simeon the Persecuted in his introduction to the quotation of Theodore of Mopsuestia from the work "Contra magos" (see: [Tamrazov, 2024, 25]). The content of Theodore’s quote has many similarities with the content of this chapter of “GZ”; we do not exclude that the allusion to this quote could serve as an ideological composition for the author of “GZ”. More details about the Christology of St. Isaac the Syrian and the influence of St. Ephraim the Syrian, see: [Nikon Skarga, 2020; Nikon Skarga, 2024]. The attribution of bodily qualities to angels reveals the presence in the author of “GZ” of traces of Origen’s teaching about the descent of minds into bodies. The Monk Isaac the Syrian repeatedly emphasizes that angels were created before visible creation: “He created legions of angels, countless in number, out of nothing ( ͡ ͢ ͠ ͐ ͡ ͕ ͡ ), being in His own Being, when there was no one” (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 57, 130). Other that not only angelology, as researchers note (see: [Böle, 2021, 218]), but also a broader layer of the teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian is in sharp opposition to the East Syrian tradition, see: [Nikon Skarga, 2021]. Makarov gives the wrong translation: “parts”. In addition, let us point out one more interesting fact. The ascetic terminology of the author of “GZ” is very similar to the terminology of Joseph Hazzayi, in particular, in such terms as “purity” and “clarity”. In the fourth centenary there are two chapters in which the author of “GZ” gives a clear distinction between these terms, while in St. Isaac the Syrian lacks such a division. According to R. Böhle, “purity” and “clarity” in St. Isaac - concepts are interchangeable, “more related to each other and are not the object of a clearly defined technical difference” [Böle, 2021, 148]. About the text of these two chapters, R. Böhle expressed the following judgment: “one should be absolutely sure that this is really [St.] Isaac, since this difference is not found in him in other places” [Böhle, 2021, 171, note. 166]. Indeed, at Rev. Isaac, not only are “purity” and “clarity” interchangeable terms, but the definition and function of these terms differ from those of the author of “GZ”. On the contrary, the definitions of these terms clearly fit into the table of terms by Joseph Hazzayi, proposed by R. Böhle (see: [Böhle, 2021, 147]). In light of the above, and also taking into account the syncretic composition of the “GZ”, we believe that these chapters may belong to Joseph Hazzaya. Considering that in the written heritage of Joseph Hazzayi there was a work with a similar name, we also do not exclude that other chapters or even most of the chapters of “GZ” may belong to this author. A.V. Tamrazov calls them “intriguing parallels” [Tamrazov, 2025, 236]. A.V. Tamrazov points out two more manuscripts created in this monastery: Mosul 907 and Mingana syr. 544, which contain texts attributed to St. Isaac. Moreover, some treatises (Nos. 11, 12, 19) from these codes are identified as belonging to pseudo-Isaac, bishop. Nineveh, and are part of the “Fifth Assembly”. Of these, Simeon appropriates the 11th and 12th treatises for himself, that is, he rewrites them under his own name (see: [Tamrazov, 2025, 236]). Compare: (Bodleian syr. e. 7, fol. 20, 30, 40, 42, 49v, 59, 54r, 59, 60). Let us remember that these scholia are in the Cambridge Or. 1144 are in the fields. For a complete analysis of this pseudepitroph, see: [Nikon Skarga, 2024]. Some “Messalian” provisions of St. Isaac the Syrian was anathematized under Catholicos Timothy I (see: [Dunaev, 2002, 235, prem. 635]). Eschatology of St. Isaac the Syrian, although it has its own original features, does not correspond to the teaching of apokatastasis. We will prepare a separate publication on this topic in the future. Confessional expression is a characteristic feature of the literary and polemical style of Simeon the Persecuted and, on the contrary, is alien to St. Isaac the Syrian. The Monk Isaac the Syrian calls some aspects of the teachings of Theodore of Mopsuestia blasphemy. See above. In the first treatise of the Second Assembly of St. Isaac the Syrian ironically mentions the “Interpreter” ( ̡ ͡ ͫ ͩ ͢ ͡ ) (Isaac the Syrian, 2013, 49). Other fragments of citations of Theodore of Mopsuestia in the texts of the Second Collection require separate study for interpolation. See also a separate study of quotes from Theodore of Mopsuestia in the First Collection [Nikon Skarga, 2022]. A complete overview of the comparative teachings of St. Isaac the Syrian and Theodore of Mopsuestia, see: [Nikon Skarga, 2021]. It is interesting to note that Böhle, in his book “The Formless Light”, in the section “Apocatastasis”, indicates the following fact: “It is noteworthy that Joseph Hazzaiah, to substantiate this teaching, uses the same argument from Scripture, which in the text of Solomon of Basra is attributed to Theodore” [Böhle, 2021, 256] - and cites a fragment of a quote from Theodore, which is found in the 39th treatise of the Second Assembly (see: [Böle, 2021, 205]). Indeed, the argumentation and style of the author of treatises 38–41 is very close to the texts of Joseph. It is possible that in the manuscript tradition this block of treatises appeared under different names and, after the editorship of Simeon the Persecuted, it was enshrined in the texts of the Second Collection.