|
Understand the Christian Learning Environment
Syriac is Aramaic or
Western Aramaic the language of Christ |
|
In order to understand the Christian learning environment that
produced Junillus's Instituta Regularia Divinae Legis (c.542
A.D.), one must return to the ancient Hellenistic school.
Although early Christianity encountered difficulties with the
Greeks' love of Homer and the Pantheon, the Church Fathers
maintained a pedagogic, linguistic, and even philosophical
connection to the classical school of antiquity. Indeed, the
Syriac theological schools in Edessa and Nisibis, where Paul, the
original author of the Greek text transformed by Junillus into
the Latin Instituta Regularia Divinae Legis, both learned and
taught, were the inheritors of the classical Greek educational
system formulated by Plato and deduced by Aristotle. This
dependence on the ancient Greek school curriculum, conjoined with
the Christian scholarship emerging from Antioch, provided the
foundation for the eventual structure of the Christian school in
Mesopotamia. With the advent of "evangelism," man, who had been
trained in the classical arts of oratory and philosophy, could
now open himself to grace, faith, baptism, and Christianity.
The schools of Edessa and Nisibis were natural outgrowths of
this Christian dependence upon Greek educational standards.
Their faculties and students, already acquainted with the
hermeneutics of Aristotle, now were presented with a unique
Greek-Syriac-Christian confection, in which the ultimate
educational goal was the glorification of God's word through His
beloved son, Jesus Christ.
Christianity and Classical Education
The term "Christian education" (paideia en Christo) was first
used by St. Clement of Rome in 96 A.D. The earliest Christian
doctrinal teaching was offered by didaskaloi, "teachers," who
instructed catechumens. The catechumen system achieved its final
form in Rome in 180 A.D., where a student followed a carefully
monitored program of study for three years. Eventually the
didaskaloi lost their specialized role to the priest and,
finally, the bishop.
Often misinterpreted as a religion more interested in
salvation than study, Christianity, like Judaism, was a religion
of the Book, based on the written revelation (the Old Testament)
and the writings of the New Testament, which were added later and
recognized as canonical. Indeed, the earlier Greek word for
"canon" -- graphe -- is the equivalent of the Hebrew katuv,
signifying the importance of the written word to both traditions.
Further, like Judaism, the "tradition" (paradosis in Greek;
masorah in Hebrew) in Christian literature was constantly growing
and expanding. After the study of canon law - the disciplinary
rules and regulations - an early Christian scholar was exposed to
the spiritual literature of the day, that is, apologetics,
polemics, and dogmatic theology of the Church.
In Egypt and the eastern Mediterranean, Christianity brought new
life into the languages of the people, and
concomitantly influenced the development of education and
literature in Coptic and Syriac. Yet throughout antiquity,
Christians rarely established their own theological schools, a
fact which underscores not only the special nature of the
theological schools of Edessa and Nisibis but also the
significance of Junillus's Instituta Regularia Divinae Legis as a
primary source of these Christian institutions of Late Antiquity.
It is imperative, then, to first investigate the formulators of
the doctrinal movements and the "schools" that antedated Edessa
and Nisibis, as the composition of these Syriac theological
institutions was a synthesis of the philosophies, creeds, and
exegetical principles that emerged in such loci as Antioch,
Alexandria, and Mopsuestia.
The School of Antioch
Although there is no record of a formal school such as
apparently existed at Alexandria, the "school" of Antioch
represented a group of theologians that shared similar doctrinal
characteristics. The scholars and teachers that were associated
with the exegetical principles and Christology emerging from
Antioch influenced profoundly the curricula and theological
perspectives of the schools of Edessa and Nisibis.
There were two distinct periods in the history of the school
of Antioch. The first period, beginning in the late third
century and continuing to the early fourth century, was marked by
the contributions of Lucian, who conducted an important
didascalion about 270 A.D. Lucian's scholarly achievement was an
edition of the Septuagint revised on the basis of the Hebrew
Bible, a text that was accepted as authoritative both in Antioch
and Constantinople. It seems likely that Lucian's work gave the
theology of Antioch its Scriptural orientation toward historical
and literal exegesis. In addition, Lucian, by defending his
disciple Arius, became embroiled in a controversy over the divine
and human natures of Christ. Henceforth, the great defenders of
the humanity of Jesus were inextricably associated with the
Antiochene school.
This problem of Christology began to dominate the learning
environments of the late fourth century. Diodore of Tarsus, who
developed a dualistic Christology that characterized the school
of Antioch, was a predominant figure. His disciples -- John
Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Nestorius, and Theodoret of
Cyr -- subscribed to his doctrines. Theodore of Mopsuestia
became the official exegete (mepasqana) of the Persian Church;
Nestorius became the center of the controversy between the
Monophysites and Dyophysites. These two scholars' contributions
to both Mesopotamian Christianity and the doctrinal teachings
promulgated in Junillus's Instituta Regularia Divinae Legis shall
be examined in fuller relief below.
With respect to the subject of biblical exposition, the
conflict between the school of Alexandria and the school of
Antioch was clearly drawn. The Alexandrians adhered to the
allegorical interpretation of Scripture; the Antiochenes were
devoted to literal exegesis. The subject of Christology,
however, elicited emotional and religious responses and
distinctions that were to transcend these academic environs and
affect the political and religious life and practice of
Christianity in the Syriac Orient for centuries to come. Diodore
of Tarsus helped initiate this controversy in the last decades of
the fourth century by speaking of Christ as simultaneously
representing the "Son of God" and the "Son of Mary." Mary was
viewed by this Antiochene scholar as the mother of a man, rather
than a mother of God. The Word of God and the Son of Mary were
both Sons of God; the one by nature, the other by grace. These
formulations served as the basis for the doctrinal creeds and
exegetical writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia, whose expository
writings served as the foundation and inspiration for the schools
of Edessa and Nisibis, and particularly for Paul, the sixth
century author of the manual of Scriptural exegesis, later to be
known through the hand of Junillus as the Instituta Regularia
Divinae Legis.
Theodore of Mopsuestia
Theodore, born in Antioch (c.350), was a disciple of Diodore
of Tarsus. Ordained a priest of the Church of Antioch in 381, he
became, in 392, bishop of Mopsuestia in Cilicia. His life and
writings are connected with Nestorius, who in 428, the year of
Theodore's death, rose to the office of bishop of Constantinople.
Much of Theodore's literary and theological reputation was
bestowed upon him posthumously. After the condemnation of
Nestorius by the Council of Ephesus (431), charges of heterodoxy
were raised against Theodore's teaching by several prominent
bishops, and most particularly by Cyril of Alexander, who wrote
Contra Diodorum et Theodorum, effectively cementing the
association between these two Antiochene scholars. But
Theodore's popularity depended upon the prevailing Church
attitudes of the day. At the Council of Chalcedon (451), the
Fathers accepted the epistle of Ibas of Edessa that praised
Theodore as a "herald of truth and doctor of the Church" (ActConc
Oec 2.1:392). During Ibas's episcopate, many of Theodore's works
were translated into Syriac, thus elevating his position in the
Nestorian Church, which ultimately conferred upon the prolific
commentator the title mepasqana, "the interpreter." Yet in 553,
the Fathers assembled at the Second Council of Constantinople
condemned his writings, and Theodore was anathematized as
heretical. This decision was upheld until 1932, when the
publication of a Syriac text of Theodore's Cathechetical Homilies
re-opened the controversy. Theodore is viewed from two
perspectives: some see his work and teachings as orthodox; others
connect his writings to the errant doctrines of Nestorianism.
Nearly all of Theodore's many commentaries are left to us in
fragments; the only complete work in Greek is his Commentary on
the Twelve Minor Prophets (PG 66: 123-632). There are Syriac
versions of his Catechetical Homilies and his Controversy with
the Macedonians. There is extant a Latin version of his
Commentary on the Minor Epistles of St. Paul.
As noted above, the inspiration for Theodore's principles of
exegesis may be derived from the school of Antioch, which
insisted on the literal and historical sense of the text, as
opposed to the allegorical approach advocated by the school of
Alexandria. Theodore's typology is patent in his commentary on
the book of Psalms, in which he subscribes to the following
principles: David is the author of all the Psalms; each Psalm
refers to a historical situation, to be determined in the light
of the argument of the Psalm as a whole; this situation can be
either in the life of David or future to him; in the latter case,
David foresees the future event and speaks words appropriate to
it. Of the 80 Psalms whose commentary has endured, Theodore
places 50 in the history of Israel from the time of Solomon to
that of the Maccabees, while assigning only 3 to Christ. His
Commentary on the Minor Prophets demonstrates a similar concern
by the author to promulgate the actual historical situation
envisioned by each Prophet.
Theodore, in his theological considerations, insists on the
human soul of Christ and on the significance of His free moral
activity in the work of redemption. He replaces the phrase
"Word and flesh" with the formula "Word and assumed man."
Consonant with the Dyophysite position expressed by Diodore and
later espoused by Nestorius and the bishops of the schools of
Edessa and Nisibis, Theodore also asserts that the two natures of
Jesus constitute "one Son" and "one Lord" because they are united
in one person.
Nestorius
Nestorius, born in Euphratesian Syria 31 years after Theodore
of Mopsuestia (c.381), was destined to have his name permanently
linked with the great mepasqana because of his Dyophysite
pronouncements and the adoption by the faculties of Edessa and
Nisibis of his and Theodore's polemics and commentaries.
Together, Theodore and Nestorius served as the wellsprings of the
two Mesopotamian schools that carried the banner of Nestorianism.
Nestorius used his position as bishop of Constantinople (428)
to preach against the title Theotokos, "Mother of God," that was
given to the Virgin Mary. He claimed a more authentic title
should be the Mother of Christ. This doctrine was challenged by
Cyril of Alexandria and, later, Pope Celestine, who anathematized
Nestorius and condemned him as a heretic at the Council of
Ephesus in 431.
Although much of Nestorius's sermons and teachings were
ordered to be burned, the doctrine of Nestorianism survived and
served as the basis for Dyophysite teachings in the fifth and
sixth centuries, particularly at Nisibis, which had inherited the
mantle of Syriac scholarship from Edessa. Fragments of
Nestorius's letters and sermons have been preserved in the Acts
of the Council of Ephesus, citations in the works of St. Cyril of
Alexandria (Nestorius's creedal adversary), and through the
interpolated Syriac text, The Bazaar of Heracleides, an apology,
written near the end of his life (c. 436).
The Christological thought of Nestorius is dominated by
Cappadocian theology and is influenced by Stoic philosophy.
Although Nestorius never spoke of the human Jesus and the divine
Jesus as "two sons," he did not consider him simply as a man.
However, differing from Cyril of Alexandria, who posited one sole
nature (mia physis) in Christ, Nestorius defined a nature in the
sense of ousia, "substance," and distinguished precisely between
the human nature and the divine nature, applying in his
Christology the distinction between nature (ousia) and person
(hypostasis). Nestorius refused to attribute to the divine
nature the human acts and sufferings of Jesus. This last
statement underlines the ultimate difference between Nestorius
and Cyril. Nestorius distinguished between the logos (the
"divine nature") and Christ (the Son, the Lord), which he saw as
a result of the union of the divine nature and the human nature.
After the Council of Ephesus, a strong Nestorian party developed
in eastern Syria that found its strength and intellectual support
in the School of Edessa. After the theological peace achieved in
the agreement of 433 between Cyril of Alexandria and John of
Antioch, a number of dissenting bishops affiliated themselves
with the Syriac Church of Persia, which officially adopted
Nestorianism at the Synod of Seleucia in 486. The Nestorians
were expelled from Edessa in 489 by the Emperor Zeno and
emigrated to Persia. It was thus that the Nestorian Church broke
away from the faith of the Church of Constantinople and the
Byzantine Empire.
The Nestorian spirit was redoubtable. Secured in the Persian
Church, it continued to flourish in the seventh century despite
persecution from the Sassanids, and after the invasions of the
Turks and Mongols. Nowhere is its intellectual vibrancy and
spirit more apparent than in its theological school, Nisibis, the
successor to Edessa. It is here where our narrative leads, and
the explication of the environment that produced Paul's
Dyophysite text and Junillus's Instituta Regularia Divinae Legis
begins.
The School of Edessa
Edessa occupies a singular place in Christendom. Presently
called Urfa, a modern Turkish city of some 80,000 inhabitants, it
was once associated with Jesus and early missionary activities of
the Church. Pilgrims came to Edessa (the Syriacs called the city
"Orhay") from Mesopotamia, Persia, and the Far East. Traditions
about the city reached the countries of Western Europe; its
monasteries and caves housed saints, scholars, and poets. Edessa
is generally regarded as the birthplace of Syriac literature and
philosophy.
A favorable geographical location enabled Edessa to achieve
early prominence. A north-south road from Armenia bisected
Edessa, continuing through Harran and the cities of Syria. An
east-west road linked Edessa to Nisibis and points beyond in the
Far East with the fords of the Euphrates in the west. Caravans
of traders carried spices, gems, and muslin from India, and silk
from China on these ancient highways.
First conquered by the Greeks, and ruled by the Seleucids from
302 until 130 B.C., Edessa fell into the hands of the Parthians
and, finally, the Romans in 49 A.D. Although Edessa was
proclaimed a colonia in 214 A.D., the thought and culture of
Orhay, like the culture of the entire oikoumene, remained Greek.
The coins of Edessa bore legends in Greek. The wealthy families
of the city sent their sons to study in Antioch, Beirut,
Alexandria, and Athens. The greatest Edessan philosopher,
Bardaisan, was predominantly influenced by Greek thought.
There was great religious ferment in the Syriac orient in the
second and third centuries. A Jewish community flourished in
both Edessa and Nisibis, and the latter city served as a
storehouse for Jewish contributions to the Jerusalem Temple.
Jews lived side by side with the pagan community, and even shared
a common burial ground. In addition, the Church was contending
with the heresies of Marcionism and Gnosticism during this
period. A cult center dedicated to the worship of astral deities
sprang up in Palmyra as well as in Harran, and in nearby
Hieropolis a Temple was supported by monies from Babylonia and
Assyria. Edessa's residents were similarly engaged in planet
worship. Christianity made subtle inroads into this eclectic
world of religious thought and practice, and ultimately emerged
triumphant. A Christian church was established at the beginning
of the third century; by the fourth century Edessa was
acknowledged as the first kingdom to adopt Christianity as its
official religion.
Edessa attracted both scholars and controversy. Beginning
with St. Ephraim, Father of the Syriac church at Edessa in the
fourth century and author of innumerable hymns, biblical
commentaries, and political tracts, as well as a participant in
the defense of Nisibis against Persian attack in 350, scholars at
Edessa were constantly engaged in deflecting the heresies of
Marcion and Mani. However, St. Ephraim's successor, Rabbula, who
became Bishop of Edessa in 411/412, had difficulty sustaining
theological unity; at that time, Christianity was divided by the
arguments over the natures of Jesus, leading to the creation of
the Monophysite and Dyophysite factions.
The Dyophysite party ("two-natures of Jesus"), led by Diodorus
of Tarsus, Theodoret, and their disciples, had achieved
prominence in Church and scholarly circles of Mesopotamia.
Guided by Nestorius, these scholars struggled against the
Monophysite party ("single-nature of Jesus"), led by Cyril of
Alexandria and his disciples. Although the scholarly tradition
of Edessa was founded, in large part, on the theological
commentaries of Theodore of Mopsuestia, who advanced the
Dyophysite tradition, Bishop Rabbula turned away from his
colleagues and the renowned Theodore, replacing the works of
Antiochene theologians with Cyril's Monophysite texts.
This controversy and capitulation by Bishop Rabbula prefigured
the dissolution of the School of Edessa. Despite a resurgence of
Dyophysite leadership under Rabbula's successor, Hiba, who was
credited with the translation of the texts of Diodorus and
Theodore of Mopsuestia from Greek into Syriac, the weight of
official opposition by both the Church and the Persian empire was
oppressive. Bishop Cyrus, who ascended to office in 471,
persuaded Emperor Zeno to act decisively against the Nestorian
heresy. This heresy, as explained above, emanated from
Nestorius's assertion that Mary should be viewed not as the
Theotokos, the "Mother of God," but as the Mother of Jesus' human
nature only. Although the distinction was semantic, it elicited
religious and political reactions that directly affected the
destiny of the Dyophysite school of Edessa, which, in 489, was
summarily closed. The Edessan scholars, however, migrated to
nearby Nisibis, where they would transfer their academic and
theological concerns to Edessa's successor, the School of
Nisibis.
The first recorded director of the School of Edessa was
Qiiore, who in the early part of the fifth century exhibited not
only ascetic and scholarly qualifications, but also
administrative ability. Occupying the Chair of Exegesis
(mepasqana in Syriac), he replaced the texts of St. Ephraim with
those of Theodore of Mopsuestia. This was a seminal decision.
By selecting Theodore's writings as his preeminent textual
source, Qiiore embarked upon a course of study that was to
intermingle the deductive principles of Aristotle with Theodore's
Dyophysite creed.
Under Hiba, the Syriacs busied themselves with the
translations of Theodore's theological works, but they were
similarly engaged in translations of the Greek peripatetic
philosophers, of Greek works on history, geography, and
astronomy. Proba achieved distinction in his translation of
Greek philosophical works. The Hermeneutics and Analyticon of
Aristotle have survived in manuscript form; part of the Isagoge
of Porphyry is extant. Subsequently, the theological studies at
Edessa and Nisibis were grounded in the logic of Aristotle.
Proba's commentaries on Aristotle and Porphyry marked the
beginning of a philosophical literary activity which would
ultimately establish Aristotle's Organon as the methodological
foundation for East Syriac thought. The deductive principles of
Aristotle were utilized specifically in the teaching of
Scripture. Later, this influence upon the School of Nisibis is
patently revealed in the Latin text below, which is a
translation, from the Greek, of Paul's sixth century manual of
scriptural and theological exegesis -- a manuscript that is
Aristotelian in structure and Mopsuestian in content.
Junillus's Instituta Regularia Divinae Legis (c.542) reveals
the Syriacs' absorption with and dependence upon Greek,
particularly Aristotelian, principles of logic. Nevertheless,
the main occupation of these monks and their students was the
preservation and copying of religious texts and manuscripts,
among which the Bible was pre-eminent. While it is difficult to
ascertain if Tatian's Diatessaron was composed at Edessa or
Adiabene, whence he came, there is little doubt of the close
scholarly ties between these two communities of Late Antiquity.
It is possible that the Separate Gospels and various books of the
Peshitta and other Syriac versions of the Bible were composed at
Edessa. Philoxenus of Mabbog, who studied at Edessa, effected a
new translation of the Greek Bible into Syriac around 508. A
Syriac version of the entire Old Testament, and reputedly the New
Testament, was produced by the Nestorian scholar, and
Edessan-trained, Maraba I, in the middle of the sixth century.
The Greek texts translated into Syriac and the dissemination
of Syriac texts to foreign communities did not necessarily have
their nascence in Edessa, but they all traversed that city's
intellectual crossroads, ingested first by the faculty and then
by the students of the School. The importance and intellectual
centrality of the School of Edessa is proved by the documentation
preserved by its successor, the School of Nisibis. The model for
Nisibis was Edessa -- in its academic structure, its curriculum,
its faculty, and its students. While Nisibis became the great
school of the Syriac Orient, its intellectual foundations lay in
the School of Christian Edessa, Nisibis's western neighbor, "the
blessed city."
The School of Nisibis
The chronicler of the day, Barhadbeshabba, described the
transfer of students and faculty from Edessa to Nisibis: "Edessa
darkened and Nisibis brightened." Edessan expulsion and
relocation of this anathematized community of Nestorian scholars
and disciples in Nisibis reinvigorated the intellectual and
academic environments of the Syriac Orient.
Administratively, the School of Nisibis replicated the School
of Edessa. The director of the school was called rabban, who
concomitantly occupied the "chair of exegesis" (mepasqana).
Chosen by the teachers of Nisibis, the rabban primarily
supervised the faculty and course of study. In other areas of
school administration he relied upon his chief administrative
aide, the rabbaita, who had the equivalent responsibilities of
our modern "dean." He was responsible for the entire school
administration -- from carrying out academic policy to ensuring
the school's proper daily operation. He was at once manager,
steward, and chief academic officer.
The first faculty chair listed beneath the mepasqana is that
of the maqreiana. The Syriac root of this word means "to read."
One may posit from this meaning a group of teachers who guided
the students from elementary instruction in reading to every kind
of advanced study in textual, lexical, liturgical, and
grammatical areas. Paul, who created the isagogic manual later
translated and adapted by Junillus, occupied the position of
maqreiana at the School of Nisibis.
Other faculty positions included: mehageiana, a teacher
entrusted with elementary instruction; sapera, a "scribe," who
taught the discipline of writing and copying manuscripts; baduqa,
a term which means "to search," "to scrutinize," -- thus a
teacher of philosophy, that is, the philosophy of the Greeks
translated into Syriac.
The reputation of the School of Nisibis rested on its chair of
biblical exegesis, headed by its first director and mepasqana,
Narsai, who began his tenure in 489. As the School of Edessa
served as the model for the School of Nisibis, so too were the
Antiochene traditions of biblical exegesis, based on the works of
Theodore of Mopsuestia, handed down by Narsai to his beloved
students. Theodore resembled Judah HaNasi, the great compiler of
the Jewish Oral Law (the Mishnah) at the end of the second
century. Theodore collected and organized earlier theological
and exegetical scholarship; he brought forth a synthesis in his
writings that was unsurpassed by any of the succeeding
generations of Christian theologians. The School of Nisibis
adopted Theodore's exegetical method, which rejected the
allegorical approach in favor of pure grammatical, historical,
and typological analysis. Indeed, Paul's manual exemplifies
Theodore's typological approach. The Nestorian community's
opposition to the allegorical world of Alexandrian exegesis is
reflected in Theodore's comment: "They, indeed, turn everything
backwards, since they wish to make no distinction in the divine
Scripture between what the text says and a dream in the night."
The School of Nisibis was a serious environment of academic
instruction and rigorous biblical exegesis. Study hours were
arduous; students spent the entire day copying manuscripts,
reading, hearing lectures, and learning liturgical recitation.
These academic sessions took place during the period of the
"great mautba" ("session") that met from November through July.
Abraham De-Bet Rabban and his Faculty
In 510, after Narsai and Elisa bar Quabaie had governed the
School of Nisibis, Abraham De-Bet Rabban assumed the directorship
and office of mepasqana. Abraham seems to have been a nephew or
close family friend of the great Rabba, "the Great." Originally
called Narsai himself, when his father brought him to the "great"
Narsai to live, he became "Abraham." Living in the same
monastery cell with the poetic master, Abraham learned
mimetically to respect and practice the patterns of discipline,
good works, scholarship, and asceticism personified by Mar
Narsai.
Abraham was interested in scholarship, but he was even more
interested in scholarly clarification. Therefore, during the
first quarter of the sixth century, he undertook the labor of
elucidating the commentaries of Theodore of Mopsuestia, which
presented great difficulties, even in Syriac translation, to his
fledgling scholars. This pedagogic activity affected the entire
curricular development at the School of Nisibis. During this
period, Jausep Huzaia contributed a system of accents and
translated the grammar of Dionysios Thrax in order that his
students might better grasp the intricacies of the different
"forms" of Syriac. Mar Aba, a peripatetic scholar, was the most
accomplished teacher and scholar of biblical exegesis, and
published commentaries on both Old and New Testament books. He
introduced the genre of jurisprudence into Syriac literature; he
is credited with the translation of the Old Testament from Greek
into Syriac; he translated the liturgical works of Theodore of
Mopsuestia and Nestorius.
The Contribution of Paul
Most of these works have not survived the convolutions of the
centuries. Yet, one faculty member's work remains that
underscores both Abraham De-Bet Rabban's goals of textual
explication and the scholarly traditions of the Schools of
Edessa/Nisibis. Paul was a maqreiana, who served under Abraham
De-Bet Rabban in the first half of the sixth century. His
contribution to the biblical studies program at the School of
Nisibis consisted of an introductory guide to the School's
studies in biblical and theological exegesis.
Paul's treatise was composed in Greek. Although the original
manuscript has disappeared, a Latin recension was compiled by
Junillus, who lived in Constantinople, serving as quaestor sacri
palatii under Justinian I from 541-549. Junillus discloses his
meeting with Paul in the preface to Instituta Regularia Divinae
Legis. There, addressing bishop Primasius, a fellow North African, he
explains that he has
seen a certain man, Paul by name, a Persian by birth,
who was thoroughly taught by a school of the Syriacs in the city
of Nisibis, where divine law is taught by public teachers in an
orderly and regular fashion.... I [Junillus] had read certain
rules with which that man was accustomed to imbue the minds of
his students, who were instructed in the superficial aspect of
divine Scriptures, before he revealed the depths of exposition,
in order that in time they might get to know the intention and
order of the very causes which are found in divine law, that each
detail might be taught not sporadically and chaotically, but in
a regular fashion.
Paul's text is divided into two books, and presented in a
catechetical manner. Junillus has taken the liberty of
reformulating Paulos's tract into a dialogue of questions and
answers between teacher, who in the manuscript is preceded by a
delta, and student, who is preceded by a mu.
Aristotle's principles of deductive logic, as explicated in
the Organon, delimit every subject undertaken by Paul. This
practice was consonant with the tradition of the Syriac
theologians. Aristotle's logic was employed by the Church
fathers as a weapon against heresy -- particularly against the
Monophysites, the dreaded doctrinal enemies of the School of
Nisibis. The Categories, Aristotle's chapters of logical and
philosophical definitions, were directed as an exegetical
instrument in purely theological works against the heresy of the
Severians.
Paul's manuscript provides a rare and complete view of the
Syriacs' attempt to authenticate the Dyophysite creed and
preserve it from the attacks of the Monophysites. We have
already demonstrated that the philosophy of Aristotle was
ensconced in the school of Antioch and later transferred to the
School of Edessa as a propaedeutic to the study of theology. The
Nestorian scholars at Nisibis, the School of Edessa's successor,
naturally continued this traditional adherence to Aristotle's
scholastic approach. Thus, all this Aristotelian paraphernalia
was utilized to explain and validate not a philosophy, but a
specific kind of Syriac theological scholasticism.
Where did the budding student exegetes, after assimilating
Paulos's theological manual, continue their scholastic
development? Were there further courses at the School of Nisibis
which offered a less "creed-oriented" theology? Did any of the
questions in the manual which bordered on the philosophical lead
to further inquiry within the School's walls? There is scant
indication that any of these questions may be positively
answered. Indeed, it must be remembered that "theological study"
at Nisibis did not involve abstract questions. Questions about
the Trinity, about God, about the governance of the universe were
thoughtfully considered, but definitively answered by faculty
members such as Paul. There was little room for deeper religious
and spiritual conjecture; there was instead a preponderant
emphasis upon Scriptural exegesis, philology, copying of
manuscripts, and liturgy -- matters which formed the core of the
School of Nisibis's life and curriculum.
The Literary Productivity of the School of Nisibis
The School of Nisibis produced exceptional scholars and
equally exceptional scholarship. Beginning with the poetic
renderings of Narsai, the literary efflorescence of the first
half of the sixth century encompasses the historical studies of
Abraham, Isai and Johanan of Bet Rabban, the liturgico-historical
ones by Thomas of Edessa and Qiiore, the polemical writings by
Paul and Thomas of Edessa, the apologetic work of Johanan of Bet
Rabban, and treatises in jurisprudence by Mar Aba.
The exegetical studies under Abraham's Directorship brought
the School of Nisibis its deservedly rich scholarly reputation.
Jausep Huazia created a diacritical sign system and a list of
homonyms that were used in the liturgical rendering of the
biblical texts. Nearly three centuries later, a codex,
attributed to Mar Babai in 899, elucidating the difficult words
and clauses in the biblical texts with critical notes and
explanatory annotations, speaks of nine accents, and credits the
origin of these signs to Jausep Huzaia. Thus inspired by the
manifold contributions of his faculty and guided by the
Dyophysite commentaries of Theodore of Mopsuestia as well as his
own talents as the School's administrator and mepasqana, Abraham
presided over a school tradition that was unmatched in the
contemporary Mesopotamian cultural world. This renaissance in
teaching, learning, and literary productivity was unable to be
maintained by later generations of the School, which were
weakened by political upheavals and the dispersion of the faculty
to other centers of study.
The reach of the School of Nisibis was extensive. The
accomplishments in the fields of biblical and exegetical studies
were conveyed beyond the Empire of the Sasanides to the West.
The scholar Cassiodorus, Roman writer, statesman, and monk
(c.490-583), paid homage to Nisibis in his ecclesiastical
writings; his Institutiones divinarum et saecularium litterarum,
written between 543 and 555, was intended to furnish the monastic
community with the means of interpreting Holy Writ, and his plan
of study revealed his acquaintance with Junillus's Instituta
Regularia Divinae Legis.
-- John F. Collins
|
