Материал: Strategii_organizatsii_smyslovogo_prostranstva_v_arabo-musulmanskoy_kulture

ordained Elias ibn ʿUbayd, the bishop of Jerusalem, as the metropolitan of Damascus”25.. The suggested identifiication would become impossible if we assume that al-Arfādī lived in the eleventh century, as suggested by Troupeau, along with the additional witness of the Vat. ar. 657, according to which Elias al-Ǧawharī only “copied” the Book of the Concordance of Faith.. It should also be noted that Troupeau’s suggestion was based on his evaluation of the Bodleian Library text, which had undoubtedly undergone a later editing; hence, Troupeau’s conclusion can be subject to revision.. It may be added to our survey that “Elias, the bishop of Jerusalem” is also known as the author of the Book of Casting Away the Sorrows (Kitāb fī tasliyat al-aḥzān) published by the Italian orientalist Giorgio della Vida (1886—1967)26, and thatAssemani also attributed a Nomocanon Arabicus to “Elias Geveri”27..

Troupeau characterized theVatican recension as being an abridged one (“unerecensionabrégée”)28,butinactualitytheproblemoftherelationship between the two manuscripts containing the treatise in question is more complex.. First of all, the Vat. ar. 657 witnesses to evident omissions in the text of the Bodleian Library manuscript, despite the fact that the latter recension was characterized by Troupeau as “complete” (“une recension complète”)29 — for example Vat. ar.. 657, fol. 8v:13—15 and Vat. ar. 657, fol. 9r:1 are lacking in the Bodleian Library manuscript.. Second, it is

25Henricus Gismondi, Maris, Amri et Slibae de patriarchis Nestorianorum commentaria / Ex codicibus Vaticanis edidit ac latine reddidit Henricus Gismondi (Romae: Excudebat C.. de Luigi, 1896—1899), Pars II, 80—81 (Ar.. text), 46—47 (Lat.. tr..); В. В. Болотовъ [Vasilij V. Bolotov], Изъ исторiи Церкви сиро-персидской

[[Chapters] From the History of the Syro-Persian Church] (Saint Petersburg, 1901) 120/1190..

26GérardTroupeau,Catalogue des manuscrits arabes..Premièrepartie:manuscrits chrétiens..Vols..1—2(Paris:Bibliothèquenationale,1972—1974),vol. I,176(№206:1); Giorgio Levi della Vida, “Il conforto delle tristezze di Elia al-Ğawhari (Vat. ar. 1492)”, In: Mélanges Eugène Tisserant (Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1964) (Studi e testi, 232), vol.. 2: Orient chrétien, pt.. 1, 345—397..

27Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis, vol. 3:1, 513—514; Graf, Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur, vol. 2, 133—134.. See also: Bo Holmberg, A Treatise on the Unity and Trinity of God by Israel of Kashkar (d. 872). (Lund Studies inAfrican and Asian Religions, 3).. Lund: Plus Ultra, 1989 (passim); Gianfranco Fiaccadori, “On the Dating of Īliyā al-Ǧawharī’s Collectio canonica”, Oriens Christianus 68 (1984), 213—214; Hubert Kaufhold, “Nochmals zur Datierung der Kanonessammlung des EliasvonDamaskus”,OriensChristianus68(1984),214—217;GianfrancoFiaccadori, “Īliyā al-Ǧawharī, Īliyā of Damascus”, Oriens Christianus 70 (1986), 192—193..

28Troupeau, 1969, 198..

29Ibid., 197..

obvious that the Bodleian library text, in comparison to that of theVatican, looks stylistically edited.. Thus, the literary particle qad is more frequently used in the Bodleian Library text than in the Vatican text30.. Since one can hardly imagine that these particles would be systematically removed for thesakeof“abridgement”,itstandstoreasonthattheBodleianLibrarytext addedtheparticlestoimprovethestyle..Itshouldbenotedthataverysimilar sort of editing is evident in yet another treatise that the same Bodleian Library manuscript contains: The Treatise on the Union by Ibn aṭ-Ṭayyib (fol. 104r—105r),whenitiscomparedwiththeotherrecensionofthework (Vat. ar. 145, fol. 67v—71v)31..

When compared with the two manuscripts mentioned above, the synopsis made by Muʾtaman ibn al-ʿAssāl presents readings characteristic of thesamebranchofthemanuscripttraditionoftheBookoftheConcordance of Faith to which the text of the Bodleian Library belongs.. It is curious, however, that the Coptic encyclopedist omitted the paragraph devoted to the various ways of making the sign of the cross.. Only towards the end of his synopsis, Ibn al-ʿAssāl remarks that “the Jacobites made the sign of the cross from the left side to the right, and the others made it in the opposite way”.. He explains that he “did not indicate this because it was widely known and because both ways were equally acceptable, and the subject was trivial”32..

The cultural heritage of Middle-Eastern Christianity was so inflluential in the rest of the Christian world that it frequently attracted the attention of scholarsstudyingparticularchurchtraditions..Itisnotsurprising,therefore, that Middle-Eastern Christian practices became an intriguing subject for historiansoftheoriginsoftheRussian“OldBelievers”,amovementwhich itself frequently referred to some Middle-Eastern Christian practices as proofs of the truthfulness of its own tradition..

In 1847, in the Colloquia of the Imperial Society for Russian History and Antiquities at the University of Moscow, Philaret Gumilevskiy (1805—1866), who was then the bishop of Riga, published his study

30Cf.. Vat.. ar.. 657, fol.. 5r:15, fol.. 7v:16—17, fol.. 8v:1, fol.. 10r:11, fol.. 13r:5..

31See various readings indicated in: Gérard Troupeau, “Le traité sur l’Union de ‘Abd Allāh ibn al-Ṭayyib”, Parole de l’Orient 8 (1977—1978) 141—150; repr.. in: Gérard Troupeau, Études sur le christianisme arabe au Moyen Âge, Essay VII.. The Vatican version of this text was also alleged to have numerous omissions, but in actuality has no evident textual defect..

32Wadi, Pirone, Maǧmūʿ uṣūl ad-dīn wa-masmūʿ maḥṣūl al-yaqīn, Vol.. 1/SOCh 6a, 192..

The Worship of the Russian Church in the Pre-Mongolian Period33.

Concerning the various ways of making the sign of the cross, bishop Philaret cited a Middle-Eastern Christian author who had touched on the subject in his treatise: “The Nestorian author Elias of Damascus who lived in the late ninth century, intending to reconcile the Syrian Monophysites with the Orthodox and the Nestorians, wrote as follows: ‘As to the fact that they do not agree with each other in making the sign of the cross, this is not an obstacle at all.. Some of them, for instance, make the sign of the cross with one fiinger and move the hand from the left side of the body to the right.. Others do it with two fiingers, and do so from the right side to the left… Jacobites sign themselves with one fiinger.. By making the sign of the cross with two fiingers, from right to left, Nestorians and Melkites (Orthodox) confess the faith that the divinity and the humanity [of Christ] were united while on the cross’ (Assemani Bibl.. Orient.. T. 3.. P. 2.. p. 383)”34.. This testimony was taken, as the author clearly indicated, from the famous encyclopedic work of the Maronite scholar Joseph Simon Assemani (1687—1768), the Bibliotheca orientalis, even though the refe­ rence provided was imprecise, and the other part of the Bibliotheca orientalis whereAssemani had discussed this passage in more detail along with the parallelArabic quotations, was not referenced at all35..

This testimony, introduced by bishop Philaret into Russian studies of Churchhistory,drewbothcriticismandlivelyinterest36..In1870,archimandrite Nikanor (Brovkovich) (1826/7—1890/1), subsequently archbishop of KhersonandOdessa,publishedhisstudy,entitledTheChurchofSt.Sophia in Constantinople: A Witness to the Ancient Orthodox Sign of the Cross.. Being an expert in Latin and a polemicist, he enthusiastically translated and commented on the quotations from the treatise De concordia Fidei “by Elias of Damascus, Metropolitan of the Nestorian community,” found in Assemani’s Bibliotheca orientalis37. Following Assemani’s account,

33 Филаретъ (Гумилевскiй), еп.. Рижскiй, Богослуженiе Русской Церкви домонгольскаговремени,Чтенiя въ Императорскомъ обществѣ исторiиидревностей Россiйскихъ 7 (1847) 1—42..

34Ibid., 31, n.. 2.. Italics in the original..

35The correct reference is: vol. 3, pt. 2, 388 and vol. 3, pt. 1, 513—516..

36ThecriticsregardedthetestimonyasanargumentinfavouroftheOldBelievers.. See Letter 84 (especially its postscript) in: Письма Филарета, Архiепископа Черниговскаго, къ А. В. Горскому (Москва, 1885) 216—217; Е. Голубинскiй,

Къ нашей полемикѣ съ старообрядцами, Чтенiя въ Императорскомъ обществѣ исторiи и древностей Россiйскихъ 3/214 (1905) 246..

37Никаноръ [Бровковичъ], архим.., Цареградская церковь святой Софiи— свидѣтельница древле-православнаго перстосложенiя, Православный собесѣд­

Nikanor wrote: “Who was this Elias of Damascus? … Elias ..... nicknamed Geveri (Гевери), the Nestorian bishop of Jerusalem, was ordained metropolitan of Damascus by the patriarch John on the 15th of July of the year 1204 of the Greek era (i..e.. since Alexander the Great), [corresponding to the year] 893 of the Christian era.....”38 Thus, owing to archimandrite Nikanor, “Elias Geveri” (Илiя Гевери) became a reality in Russian studies of Church history39..

The following introduction of the Book of the Concordance of Faith, which also provides a useful summary of the treatise, and the chapter discussing the various ways of making the sign of the cross are presented below in an English translation prepared by Nikolai N.. Seleznyov in consultation with DmitryA.. Morozov..

The Book of the Concordance of Faith

Introduction

(Vat. ar. 657, fol. 4v:1—6v:7)

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate, from Whom we seek help.. We [begin] transcribing the book which was copied by the learned, respectable holy father, pure, worthy, spiritual Mār Elias of the Lord, al-Ǧawharī, the metropolitan of the noble Jerusalem (al-Quds), the earthly throne of God, pastor of pastors of Christians and leader of those washed clean with the water of baptism, may his prayer embrace us and all the faithful..Amen..

This40 book is about the concordance of faith, the origin of religion, and the pride of orthodoxy41 (of the Syrians named Nestorians, Melkites, andJacobites;atreatiseofsaintMārElias,mayGodsanctifyhispurespirit and have mercy upon us according to his prayer..Amen..)42

никъ, издаваемый при Казанской Духовной Академiи 3 (1870) 189—202.. Nikanor’s reference, like that of bp.. Philaret, is to the second part of the third volume of the Bibliothecaorientalis,butheaddsanotherreference—tothemoredetaileddescription of the treatise in the fiirst part of the third volume of the B. O.

38Ibid., 190.. Italics in the original..

39Archimandrite Nikanor’s study was reprinted as part of his book О перстосло-

женiи для крестнаго знаменiя и благословенiя [Concerning the arrangement of fingers for making sign of the cross and blessing; in Russian]. Бесѣда Никанора,

Архiепископа Херсонскаго и Одесскаго (Saint Petersburg, 1890)..

40Absent (abs..) in Troupeau’s edition (T)..

41T added (add.): glorious..

42T: abs.

(Mār Elias)43 said: 144. When I looked at the magnifiicence of the Chris­ tianfaith45 [fromthepointofviewof]thetruthfulnessofthefaithinGod— Who is Great and Glorious! — 46 the appropriately celebrated services47 to the Creator of (heaven)48 and earth, and of what is upon (it)49, 50, according to the law of guidance commanded by the Merciful Creator51, propagated52 throughout the Orients of the earth and its Occidents53, among the peoples and nationalities scattered over remote countries and all the lands, [while] every nation among them is proud of what it has of the Christian religion54, common for all (upon the earth)55, and of [its own] confession56; then I saw that a situation inspired by the devil57 overtook some [of] these peoples, and consequently, there happened a divergence58 of some of them from the others following the way of passion (opposed to the mind)59, and so they split into many divisions of which one could speak for long.. But even if they do, all their multiplicity aside, agree60 in opinions and differ from each other in passions, they are reducible to three divisions (fiiraq), for they ascend to three denominations (maḏāhib) as their roots61, namely (the division of the Nestorians, the division of the Melkites, and the division of the Jacobites); everything that exists apart from these three communities

43T: ʿAlī ibn Dāwūd al-Arfādī, prosperous in God and a slave of obedience to

Him..

44Paragraph numbers follow Troupeau’s edition..

45T add.: and found it brilliant..

46T add.: pure faith..

47T add.: proper..

48T: heavens..

49In the MS used by Troupeau: in them [i.. e.. in the heavens]..

50T add.: ornated with beloved knowledge..

51T add.: rich..

52T: being spread..

53T add.: and its remotest, and its nearest, manifestly, abundantly..

54T add.: and rejoice at what it has..

55T abs.

56T add.: in the truthful Gospel which is the principle of religion, and a part of faith, and the light of truth; In the synopsis of Muʾtaman ibn al-ʿAssāl: in the Gospel, the truthfulness of which is strong..

57T add.: cursed..

58T add.: and mutual disagreement..

59T: which passes [limits] the minds / which infects minds..

60T: mutually part with [each other]; Troupeau translates in French: elles s’écartent..

61T add.: and they are an offshoot of them..