YURY N.

ARZHANOV

THE ARABIC VERSION OF THE SYRIAC GNOMOLOGIES

“ON THE SOUL” BY MUBAŠŠIR B. F TIK

1. M UBAŠŠIR B . F TIK

Abu l-Waf al-Mubaššir ibn F tik (died in 1087)1 was originally from Syria (he
was born in Damascus) but spent most of his life in Egypt, where he made a successful ca-
reer as a private scholar at the court of the Fatimid caliphs. According to the Muslim histo-
rians, Mubaššir studied mathematics, astronomy and philosophy in Cairo and composed
a history of the Fatimid caliph al-Mustan ir which unfortunately was lost. His only work
which is available to us is the book, “The Choicest Maxims and Best Sayings” (Muḫt r
al- ikam wa-ma sin al-kalim), composed probably in 1048–49 (440 H.)2.
This book consists of a number of sections bearing the names of the famous
sages of Antiquity and including some biographical information (mostly in form of
anecdotes) and collections of sayings attributed to them. Among these names are
Shem, Hermes, Asclepius, Solon, Zeno, Pythagoras, Alexander the Great and Greg-
ory of Nyssa (or Nazianzen), so that the whole collection is presented as a compen-
dium of universal wisdom originating from the Greek philosophers, Jewish sages and
Christian saints. The structure of the sections in the collection of Mubaššir is found in
the earlier gnomology of the 9th century attributed to unayn b. Is q which bears the
title Naw dir al-Fal sifah, or d b al-Fal sifah, and still earlier in Diogenes Laer-
tius’ “Lives and opinions of eminent philosophers” (end of the 2nd – beginning of the
3rd cent.). Both the works of unayn and of Diogenes Laertius could be regarded as
possible sources of Mubaššir, but the scholarly consensus is that Mubaššir did not
rely on any single source but drew freely from a wide spectrum of texts3.
1 See about him: Rosenthal, F., Al-Mubashshir ibn Fâtik: Prolegomena to an abortive Edi-

tion // Oriens 13/14 (1960/1961), 132–158; idem, Al-Mubashshir b. F tik // Encyclopedia of

Islam (New edition). Vol. VII. Leiden/New York: Brill, 1993. P. 282–283; Cottrell, E. J., al-
Mubashshir b. F tik // Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy (Philosophy between 500 and
1500). Ed. by H. Lagerlund. Vol. 2. Dordrecht et al.: Springer, 2011. P. 815–818.
2 Published by Abd ar-Ra m n Badaw in Madrid in 1958 with the Arabic title Muḫt r al- ikam

wa-ma sin al-kalim and with the parallel Spanish title Bocados de Oro thus using the name of
the Spanish translation of the 13th century (the book was reprinted in Beirut in 1980). Russian
translation of selected maxims: - - - . -
. . . . . .( . .« -
», , . ) // № 1(7),
4 (1998). . 18–52 [reprinted in: -
. . . . . . . . . 3- . 3. ., 2010. . 300–324.]
3 Franz Rosenthal: the influence of unayn was not decisive (Rosenthal, Al-Mubashshir ibn Fâtik:

Prolegomena, 135). Cf. about the apophthegms of Diogenes: Overwien, O., Die Sprüche des
Kynikers Diogenes in der griechischen und arabischen Überlieferung. Stuttgart 2005. S. 153–154.

312
 THE A RABIC VERSION OF THE SYRIAC G NOMOLOGIES “O N THE S OUL” BY MUBAŠŠIR . F TIK

The collection of Mubaššir shows a number of connections with the texts that
either were composed in Syriac or translated into it in such a way that the Syriac
versions could be to some degree thought of as original works. The most evident
connection of this kind is traced in the part of Mubaššir’s collection dedicated to the
history of Alexander the Great. In his analysis of the chapter “History of Alexander”
Bruno Meissner concluded at the end of the 19th century that Mubaššir’s text is based
on the version of the “Alexander-Novel” which is represented by the Syriac trans-
lation of the “Pseudo-Callisthenes”4. The Syriac version is distinguished by several
additions to the original text which reflect the Christian interpretation of the history
of Alexander, and these Christian elements are also found in the text of Mubaššir5.
At the end of the chapter on Alexander, Mubaššir includes the laments of the
philosophers made at the site of the grave of the great Macedonian. This section has
the form of a gnomology and is also preserved in the Syriac version, which should be
considered as its earliest instance6. These laments appear first in an Arabic translation
in the d b al-Fal sifah of unayn b. Is q, which could have served as a source for
Mubaššir, but the latter could have also become acquainted with the Syriac gnomo-
logy through other channels.
The third example of the connection between the work of Mubaššir and the Syriac
literature is found in the last part of Muḫt r al- ikam which contains a long list of sayings
of different philosophers7. Among these sayings we find a number of sentences which
appear to be an Arabic version of the Syriac gnomologies dedicated to the topic “soul”.

2. S YRIAC GNOMOLOGICAL COLLECTIONS “O N THE S OUL ”

Syriac collections of sentences with the title “On the Soul” have been preserved
in several manuscripts dating from the 7th to the 20th centuries which mostly are of a
compendious character, first of all in anthologies of ascetic works8. Several maxims
from the gnomologies also appear in the “Book of Perfection” by Martyrius Sahdona

4 Meissner, B., Mubašširs Aḫbâr el-Iskender // Zeitschrift der Deutschen morgenländischen Ge-
sellschaft 49 (1895), S. 523–627; Cottrell E., Al-Mubaššir ibn F tik and the α Version of the Al-
exander Romance // The Alexander romance in Persia and the East, ed. by R. Stonemann et al.
Groningen 2012. P. 233-253.
5 See review in: Meissner, 620ff.
6 See the text: Brock, S. P., The Laments of the Philosophers over Alexander in Syriac // Journal

of Semitic Studies 15 (1970), 205–218 [repr. with the same pagination in: idem, Studies in Syriac
Christianity. Ashgate 1992. Ch. VIII].
7 Arabic text: Badaw , 296–322. German translation of this section: Rosenthal, F., Das Fortleben

der Antike im Islam. Zürich/Stuttgart 1965. S. 173–199. English translation: Rosenthal, F., The
Classical Heritage in Islam. Transl. from the German by E. and J. Marmorstein. London/New York
1975. P. 124–144.
8 See the list of the Mss. in: Zeegers-Vander Vorst, N., Une gnomologie d’auteurs grecs en tra-

duction syriaque // Symposium Syriacum 1976 (OCA 205; 1978), 163–177, especially p. 166–167.

313
YURY N. ARZHANOV

leading to the assumption that the 7th century is the possible time of their composi-
tion. The gnomologies preserved in the Syriac ascetic anthologies differ considerably
from each other both in length and in content. Considering the fact that not even two
of them are quite identical we can hardly imagine that these sentences were under-
stood and transmitted in the form of a unified gnomology. Thus we cannot speak of
one literary work but rather of a literary form of a collection of sayings attributed to
ancient authors and dedicated to the topic “soul”.
These gnomologies became an object of scholarly interest for the first time in
1862 when Benjamin Harris Cowper published an English translation of the sen-
tences preserved in the Ms. Add. 14618 of the British Library9. The Syriac text of
this collection compared with another Ms. of the BL, Add. 14614, was printed by
Eduard Sachau in 187010. In 1894, Agnes Smith Lewis edited a catalogue of the
Syriac Mss. preserved in the convent of St. Catharine on Sinai where she repro-
duced a fragment from the Ms. Syriac 16 containing a large collection of sayings
on the soul which differed from the text edited by Sachau11. Viktor Ryssel later
published a German translation of the texts of Sachau and Lewis12. Neither the
editors of these texts nor their translators were able to say anything conclusive
about the origins of the collections, although Cowper supposed that the gnomic
sayings translated by him could have served as a part of an apology of Christi-
anity13. Ryssel refrained from providing any theories speculating on the names
of the sages in the Syriac gnomologies that to a large extent remained unknown
from the other sources.
Since then there has been one major study of the Syriac collections of sayings
“On the Soul”: in 1978 Nicole Zeegers-Vander Vorst published an article in which
she presented all available data about the Syriac gnomologies14. Although some
new manuscript evidence has come to light since her work, the overview of Zee-
gers-Vander Vorst remains the work with the most depth in this field.

9 Cowper, B. H., Syriac miscellanies: Extracts relating to the First and Second General Councils,

and various other quotations, theological, historical and classical. London 1861. P. 43–47.
10 Sachau, E., Inedita Syriaca: Eine Sammlung syrischer Übersetzungen von Schriften griech-

ischer Profanliteratur. Mit einem Anhang. Wien 1870. S. 76–79. Another short collection of say-
ings from the Ms. Oxford 331 was published by Sachau as part of the introduction on pp. V–VII.
11 Lewis A., Catalogue of the Syriac MSS. in the convent of St. Catharine on the mount Sinai.

Studia Sinaitica I. London 1894. P. 26–38.

12 Ryssel, V., Neu aufgefundene graeco-syrische Philosophensprüche über die Seele // Rheinisches

Museum für Philologie, N. F., 51 (1896), p. 529–543.

13 Cowper, Syr. misc., 105, n. 45: “These extracts are written in a very obscure style, and are

evidently taken from some apology or defence of Christianity, the writer of which embodied
them in his treatise. What apology it was I cannot say. Neither have I traced the extracts to
their sources. Indeed some of the names of the authors are quite unknown to me.”
14 Zeegers-Vander Vorst, N., Une gnomologie d’auteurs grecs en traduction syriaque // Sympo-

sium Syriacum 1976 (OCA 205; 1978), p. 163–177.

314 [ . : ]
THE A RABIC VERSION OF THE SYRIAC G NOMOLOGIES “O N THE S OUL” BY MUBAŠŠIR . F TIK

The minimal interest scholars have taken in the Syriac gnomologies “On the
Soul” could be explained by two main features of these texts. First, the Syriac
gnomic collections were originally regarded (by Cowper, Sachau and Ryssel) as
probable translations of some Greek originals, which made them a possible vehicle
for the transmission of Greek texts in late Antiquity. The failure of the search for a
Greek Vorlage led to the loss of scholarly interest in the Syriac collections15. Sec-
ond, the evident inconsistency of the transmission of the gnomic collections gave
no basis for regarding them as a unified corpus of texts. The result has been that the
Syriac gnomologies have, up to now, remained partly unedited and little studied.
However the two difficulties mentioned should be reconsidered in the light of the
following considerations:
Regarding the first point, the gnomic collections “On the Soul” should be
placed in the broader context of the corpus of Syriac ethical philosophical texts16.
The latter includes several treatises which bear the names of authors of Antiquity,
e.g., the dialog “Socrates”17 and the text entitled “Memra of Aristotle about the
Soul,”18 both preserved in the Ms. BM Add. 14658. However, most of the ethi-
cal texts are anonymous treatises as the work entitled, “A Treatise of a Certain
Philosopher on the Soul”, preserved in the Ms. Sinai Syriac 1619. The first of the
compositions mentioned seems to be a pseudepigraphon written in the style of
the Platonic dialogues, whereas the second and the third among them turned out
to be free translations of the text Ad Tatianum de anima assigned to Gregorios
Thaumaturgos20 which in turn offers a periphrasis of the two chapters from the De

15 Cowper: “Neither have I traced the extracts to their sources…” (105, n. 45). Zeegers-Vander

Vorst: “Bien entendu, si nous avions conservé le texte grec, celui-ci, dans la mesure où il serait
identifié, nous fournirait la clé du problème. Mais le «grec», s’il a jamais existé, semble irrémédia-
blement perdu” (173).
16 Cf.: ., « , , -
...»: - // № 61:
Syriaca • Arabica • Iranica. – , 2012. . 217–237. [“Let us consider how the soul
was praised by those who were skillful in wisdom...”: Syriac translations of the Greek popular
philosophy // Simvol 61: Syriaca • Arabica • Iranica. Paris-Moscow 2012. P. 217–237 (in Rus-
sian)].
17 Lagarde, Analecta Syriaca, 158–167. German transl.: Ryssel, V., Der pseudosokratische Dialog

über die Seele // Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, NF, B. 48 (1893), S. 175–195 (see p. 185ff.).
English transl.: Newbold, W. M., The Syriac dialogue «Socrates» // Proceedings of the American
Philosophical Society 57 (1918), 99–111.
18 Cf.: Wright, W., Catalogue of Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum, acquired since the

year 1838. Vol. 3. London 1872. P. 1157.

19 Text: Lewis A., Catalogue of the Syriac MSS., 19–26. Translation: Ryssel, V., Zwei neu aufge-

fundene Schriften der graeco-syrischen Literatur // Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, N.S., 51
(1896), 1–20.
20 Baumstark A., Geschichte der syrischen Literatur. Bonn 1922. P. 170, n. 5.

315
YURY N. ARZHANOV

natura hominis of Nemesius of Emessa21. However, even those Syriac composi-

tions that seem to be translations of the Greek works demonstrate a large amount
of freedom in the transmission of the originals so that they can be considered
largely as original works22. We thus have to assume that the whole corpus of the
ethical philosophical works, which is preserved in Syriac bears the stamp of free
translation and of pseudepigraphy.
As to the second point, it should be noted that in the diverse picture of the Sy-
riac gnomic collections “On the Soul”, we must assign a special place to the version
preserved in the Ms. Sinai Syriac 16 published by A. S. Lewis and translated by
V. Ryssel. A comparison of the known collections shows that most of them are closely
related to the collection of the Sinai Ms. coinciding with it in a large part of the sen-
tences and in their general sequence23. Thus the Ms. Sinai Syriac 16 not only gives us
one of the earliest evidences of the Syriac gnomic collections “On the Soul”, but also
conveys an impression of their original composition.

3. T HE A RABIC VERSION OF THE S YRIAC SENTENCES

The significance of the Sinai Ms. is also stressed by the Arabic version of the Syri-
ac sentences “On the Soul” which is found among the apophthegms of the authorities
of Antiquity included in the last part of the anthology of Mubaššir b. F tik. Some of
the most evident examples are listed below. The text of the Arabic sentences is cited
according to the edition of ͑A. Badaw and with the numbers given to them (in the
German and English translations) by Rosenthal. The Syriac text is primarily cited ac-
cording to the edition of Lewis and following the numbers in the German translation
of Ryssel.

21 Cf. Zonta, M., Nemesiana Syriaca: New Fragments from the Missing Syriac Version of the De

natura hominis // Journal of Semitic Studies 36 (1991), p. 223–258.

22 Cf. on the Syriac version of Alexander of Aphrodisias’ “On the Principles of the Universe” in:

King, D., Alexander of Aphrodisias’ On the Principles of the Universe in a Syriac Adaptation // Le
Muséon 123.1–2 (2010), p. 159–91.
23 Cf. the analysis of N. Zeegers-Vander Vorst in: Une gnomologie…, p. 169–170.

316 [ . : ]
THE A RABIC VERSION OF THE SYRIAC G NOMOLOGIES “O N THE S OUL” BY MUBAŠŠIR . F TIK

Mubaššir b. F tik, Syriac gnomologies “On the Soul”

Muḫt r al- ikam wa-ma sin al-kalim

: ‫ܐ‬ ܿ ‫ܝܕܿ ܐ ܐ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܘܪܘܣ ܐ ܿ ܂‬

‫ܐ ܕ ܪܘܥ‬ ̇ ‫ܿ܂ ܐ‬ ‫ܐܕ‬ ‫ܼܐܕ‬
‫ء‬ ̈
‫ܐ ܕ ܐ‬ ̈ ‫̈ܒ ܐ‬ ‫ܐ܂‬ ̈ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܘ ܠ‬
: ، ، ‫ܪܐ ܘ ܐ‬ܼ ‫ܐ ݁ ݂ܐ܂ ܘ‬ ‫ܿ ܒܐ ܘ‬ ‫ܿܗ܂‬ ‫ܕ‬
. ‫̈ܐ܂‬ ‫ـܐ ܘ ܪܒܐ‬ ܼ ‫ܼ̈ ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ݁ ‫ܐ܂ ܘ‬
‫ء‬ ܿ
‫ܓܐ ܓܐ܂ ܘ ܪ ܘ ܿ ܒ܀‬ ܿ ‫ܘ ܐ ܕܬܬܠ܂ ܕ‬

Ryssel № 3, not found in the Ms. Sinai

Badaw 305.6–7 / Rosenthal № 67 Syriac 16, but preserved by several other Mss.

: ‫̇ ܕ ܐ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ̣ ‫ܐ̇ ܂‬

، ‫ܐ܂ ܐ ܐ ܐܢ‬ ‫̇ ܒ‬ ̇ ‫܂ ܘ ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬
: ̇
‫܂ ܐܘ ܐܬ ̣ ܝ ̣ܗܘ‬ ̇ ‫ܕ‬ ̇ ̇ ‫̣ܒ‬ ̇ ‫ܓ ܒ ܂ ܗ ̣ܝ‬
، ‫̇ ܒ ̇܂‬

Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, f. 110a1,

Badaw 305.8–11 / Rosenthal № 68 2–17 (Lewis, p. 26), Ryssel № 12

: ‫ܐ܂‬ ‫̣ܐ ܘܒ‬ ̇ ‫ܣ ܐ ܂ ܒ ܐ ܐ‬

‫ܗܘ‬ ‫ܐ‬
̣ ̣
. ‫ܐ܂ ܘܕ ܐ‬ ̈ ‫̣ܐ ܕ‬ ‫ܓܐ‬ ̈ ̇ ‫ܘ ̇ܐ܂‬
̣
‫̈ ܬܐ ܕ ܐ ܪ ̣ ܂ ܘܒ ܐ ܕ ܐ‬ ‫ܗ ̣ܐ܂ ̇ܗܘ‬
̇
‫ܐ ܕ ܬ‬ ̇ ‫̣ ܐ ܒ ܐ܂ ܘܐ ܐ ܕ ܐ‬
‫ܐ‬ ̇ ‫̣ܐ܂ ܗ ̣ܐ ܐ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܒ ܐ ܐ‬
‫̇ ̇ܐ܂‬ ‫̇ܐ܂ ̇ܗܘ ܕ ̇ ̣ܥ ܕ ܐ ̇ ܘ‬ ‫ܕ ̣ܬ ܪ ܐ‬
‫ܒ ܕ܀‬ ‫ܐ ܐ‬ ‫ܐ ܘ‬ ‫ܡ ܕ‬

Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, f.110a1,18–110a2,2

Badaw 305.12–14 / Rosenthal № 69 (Lewis, p. 26–27) / Ryssel № 13

‫ء‬ : ‫ܐ‬ ̈ ‫ܡ‬ ‫ܒ‬ ‫̣ ܐ ̣ ܂ ܐܢ ̇ܬܬ ܐ ̈ܒ‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫ء‬ ̇ ‫ܐ ܗܘ ܕ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܘ ̈ ܒ ܐ܃ ܒ ܕ ܐ‬
‫ܐ‬ ‫ܒ ܐ ܕܗܒܐ ܘ ̈ܒ ܐ ܘ ܓ ܐ܇ ܘ ̇ ܕ‬
، ̇
‫̇ ܇ ܘ ܐ ܗܘܐ ܐ ܗܘ ܕ ܡ‬ ‫ܐ ܗܘ‬
‫܂‬ ̇‫ܘ‬ ‫ܐ ܘܒ ܐ ܕ‬ ‫ܕ ܂ ܒ‬

Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, f. 110a2,3–14

Badaw 305.15–18 / Rosenthal № 70 (Lewis, p. 27) / Ryssel № 14

317
‫‪YURY N. ARZHANOV‬‬

‫ء‬ ‫ء‬ ‫‪:‬‬ ‫ٮ‬ ‫ܐ ܘ̈ ܐ‬ ‫ܘ̈‬ ‫̣ܣ ܐ ̣ ܂ ̈ܘ ܐ ܘ ̈‬ ‫ܐ‬

‫ء‬ ‫ܡܕ ܐ ܒ‬ ‫ܘ̇‬ ‫ܘ ܒ ܐ܇ ܕܐ‬
‫ܙܕܩ ܗܘ ܕ ̇ ܒ ܘܢ ܓ ܐ ܉ ܘ ̇ ܒ ܢ‬ ‫ܒ ̇ ܒ ܐ܆ ̇‬
‫ء‪،‬‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫̇‬
‫ܡ ܕ ܐ ܒ ܇ ܘܪ ܘ ܒ‬ ‫̇‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܐ ܐ ܇ ܕܐ‬
‫؛‬ ‫̇ܓ ܒ ̇ ܝ ܕܐ‬ ‫ܒ ܡ ܕܐܦ ܗ ܢ ܒ ̣ ܒ ܂‬
‫̇ܗܝ ܕ ̇ ܒ ܘ‬ ‫ܐ܂ ܐ ܐ‬ ‫̈‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܡ ܕܨܒ‬
‫̈‬ ‫̈‬
‫ܘ ܐ ܘ ܘ ܐ܂ ܘܓ ܐ ܘܢ‬ ‫̈‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܐ ܇‬
‫̈ ܬܐ ܕ ̈ ܐ‬ ‫܇ ܐ ܕܬܒ ̇‬ ‫ܘ ܐܒ‬
‫ܐ ܐ܀‬

‫‪Badaw 305.19 – 306.2 / Rosenthal № 71‬‬ ‫‪Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, f. 110a2,15 – 110b1, 2‬‬
‫‪(Lewis, p. 27) / Ryssel № 15‬‬

‫ء‬ ‫‪:‬‬ ‫̣ ܗܘܘ‬ ‫܃ ܐ‬ ‫̈ ܐܕ‬ ‫̣ܣ ܐ ̣ ܃ ܐ‬

‫‪،‬‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫ܗܪܓܐ‬
‫̣‬ ‫ܐܐ ܕ ܬܪ ܐ܃ ܘܗ ܐ‬ ‫ܗܐ‬ ‫ܘܐܪ ̣‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫ܗ ܬ̈ ܐ ̈ ܬܐ ܕ ܩ ܒ ܘܢ܇‬ ‫ܐ܃ ܘ ̣‬ ‫ܒ‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫ܗ ܐܘ̈ ܐ ܘ ̈ܒ ܐ܆ ̇ܒ ܗܘ ̣ ܘ ̇‬ ‫ܘܕ̈ ̣‬
‫‪.‬‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫ء‬ ‫ܬܪܐ‬ ‫ܗܘܐ‬ ‫ܬܐ܇ ܕ‬ ‫ܬܐ ܕ‬ ‫ܒ‬
‫ܬܐ܂‬ ‫ܬܐ܇ ܘ ̇ ܪ ̇‬ ‫̇‬
‫ܕܪܕܦ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܕ‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫ܣ ̈ ܐ܇ ܕܐ‬ ‫ܗܘ‬ ‫̇ܣܓ ̈‬ ‫ܘ‬
‫ܬܗ܂ ܘܗܘܬ ̇‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܗܪܐ ܕ‬ ‫ܓ ܐ܇ ܘ ܐ ̈‬
‫̣‬
‫ܒܓ ܐ ̈ ܘܢ ܐ ܐ ܒ ܐ܃܀‬

‫‪Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, f. 110b1, 3–24‬‬

‫‪Badaw 306.3–8 / Rosenthal № 72‬‬ ‫‪(Lewis, p. 27–28) / Ryssel № 16‬‬

‫ء‬ ‫ٯ ‪:‬‬ ‫ܢ ܐ ̣ ܂ ܐ ܐ ܕ ܐ ܐ ܕ ܐ܃ ܐ ܬܗ ܗܘ ̇‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫܃‬ ‫ܐ ܐ‬ ‫ܒ ܇ ܘܕ ̇ܐ ܕ‬ ‫̇ ܒ ̇ܗܘ ܡ ܕ̈‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫̣ ܂ ܗ ܐ ܐܦ ܪ ܐ ܕ ܐ‬ ‫̇ܗ ܢ ܕ ܕܪ ̇ ܒ ܐ‬
‫‪.‬‬ ‫̇‬
‫ܐ܂ ܘܗܘ‬ ‫̈‬ ‫̇‬
‫̈ ܐ ܕܓ ܐ ܕ‬ ‫ܒ‬ ‫ܕ ̇ܒ ܇‬ ‫ܕ̇‬
‫ܪܚ ܘ ܒ‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܕܐ ܬܗ ܐ ܢ‬ ‫ܡ ܕ ̣ܐ ܐ‬
‫̣‬
‫̣ܐ‬ ‫܃ ̇ ܐܒ ܘ‬ ‫ܐܢ ܓ ̇ܨܒܐ ܕ ̇ ܠ ܐ ܕ‬
‫̇ܐܡ ܡ‬ ‫ܐ ܡ ̇ ܐ܂ ܐ ܓ‬ ‫ܐ‬
‫̈ ܐ ̈ ܬܬܐ ܕ ̈ܓ ܒ ܇ ̇ ܐܠ ܒ ܂ ܐ ܓ‬
‫̇ܗܘ ܗܘ ܐܦ ̇ ܐܒ ܒ ̇ ܂‬ ‫ܪܓ ̣ ܗܘܐ ܒ ̣ ܘ‬

‫‪Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, f. 111b1, 12–2,2‬‬

‫‪Badaw 306.11–13 / Rosenthal № 74‬‬ ‫‪(Lewis, p. 30–31) / Ryssel № 23‬‬

‫‪318‬‬ ‫[‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫‪:‬‬ ‫]‬

 THE A RABIC VERSION OF THE SYRIAC G NOMOLOGIES “O N THE S OUL” BY MUBAŠŠIR . F TIK

: ‫̇ܣ‬ ‫ܒܒ ܐ ܐ܇ ܕ‬ ̈ ‫ܐܐ‬̇ ‫ܪܘ ̣ܣ ܐ ̣ ܂ ̇ ܕ‬

، ، ̇ ̈ ‫ܒ ܪܗ ܒ ̇ ̈ܒ ܐ܂ ܘ‬ ̇ ‫̈ ܐ ܒ ̈ ܐ܂‬
‫ܪܗ‬ ‫ܣ‬
! ‫ܕ ܣ ̈ ܐ܂ ܘܐ ܐ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ̣ ̣ ‫ܬܐ‬
، : ̇ ̈‫̇ ܒ ܐ ܒ ܘܢ ܐ ̇ ܥ܆ ܕ‬ ‫ܪ ܒ ܘܢ ̇ܨ ܐ ܘ‬ ̇
̣
، ‫ܗܐ‬ ‫ܡ ܕ̈ ̇ ܂ ܘ‬ ̇ ‫ܕܣ ܇‬
‫ܘܣ‬ ̇ ‫ܡ‬
! ، ‫ܬܐ܂‬ ‫܂ ܐ‬ ̇‫ܕ‬ ‫ܘܢ ܣ ܐ‬̈ ‫ܒ‬ ̈
‫ܣ ܐ܂‬̈ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܬܐ ܕ ܐ‬ ‫ܘ‬

Badaw 306.14–18 / Rosenthal № 75 Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, 111b2, 3–18

(Lewis, p. 31) / Ryssel № 24

This comparison demonstrates that the Arabic translation is closest to the ver-
sion of the Syriac sentences which is preserved in the Ms. Sinai Syriac 16. In two
cases (e.g., in the first sentence cited above), the collection of Mubaššir seems to
be based on a tradition other than the Sinai Ms. But the parallels with the latter are
more numerous, and what is more significant, in the collection of Mubaššir we find
a block of sentences which correspond perfectly with a block of sayings in the Ms.
Sinai Syriac 16 both in the order and the form of sentences as well as in the attribu-
tion of particular maxims to persons who seem to be unfamiliar to both the Syriac
and Arabic readers.
As concerns further parallels with Ms. Sinai Syriac 16, a number of senten-
ces attributed to Plutarch are cited by Mubaššir immediately after the gnoms listed
above. These sentences turn out to be long quotations from the two treatises which
are preserved in Syriac under the titles: “On the advantage to be derived from one’s
enemies”24 and “On the ascesis”25. Both of these texts were included in the Ms. Sinai
Syriac 16. The parallels from the text of the first treatise of Plutarch (“On the advan-
tage to be derived from one’s enemies”) are listed below according to the edition of
Badaw and the German translation of Rosenthal for the Arabic part and according to
the folios in the Sinai Ms. for the Syriac:

24 Edited with an English transl.: Nestle, E., A Tract of Plutarch on the advantage to be derived
from one’s enemies. Studia Sinaitica IV. London 1894. German translation: Ryssel, V., Zwei neu
aufgefundene Schriften der graeco-syrischen Literatur // Rheinisches Museum für Philologie,
N.S., 51 (1896), S. 1–20.
25 The Syriac text of the MS BL Add. 17209 (where the beginning of the tract is missing) was

edited in: Lagarde, P. de, Analecta Syriaca. Leipzig 1858. P. 177–186. German translation
based on the edition of de Lagarde: Gildemeister, J.; Bücheler, F., Pseudo-Plutarchos, Peri
askeseos // Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, N. F., 27 (1872), 520–538. The beginning
preserved in the Sinai Ms. together with a German translation was published by: Rohlfs, W.,
Pseudo-Plutarch, Peri Askeseos // Paul de Lagarde und die syrische Kirchengeschichte. Göt-
tingen 1968. P. 176–184.

319
‫‪YURY N. ARZHANOV‬‬

‫‪:‬‬ ‫̣ܘܐ‬ ‫ܬܪܐ ܐܘ ܒ ܒ ܇ ܕ‬ ‫ܐܦ ̇ ܓ‬

‫‪،‬‬ ‫܂‬ ‫ܒ̈‬ ‫ܒ‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܒ ܘܒ ܇ ܘܗܘ‬ ‫ܙܗ‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫̣ ܐ‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܪ ܡ ܒ ̇ ܐ ܂ ܘܕ‬ ‫ܘ ܐ‬
‫!‬ ‫܂‬ ‫ܘܢ ̈‬
‫ܗܘ‬ ‫̇ ܘܐ ܒ‬ ‫̇ ܂ܐ ܐܕ ܐ‬

‫‪Badaw 319.15–17 / Rosenthal № 151a‬‬ ‫‪Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, f. 69b.2,9–18‬‬

‫)‪, lines 5–9‬ܗ ‪(cf.: Nestle, p.‬‬
‫‪:‬‬ ‫ܕܬ ̇ ܒ ܒܒ ܉ ܐ‬ ‫ܐܢ ܒ ̇‬ ‫ܘܐ ܗ‬
‫‪.‬‬ ‫ܐ܂ ܐ ܐ ܐ‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܙ ܐ ܬ ܗܝ܉ ܘ ܐ ܕܓ ܐ ܘ ܐ‬
‫‪.‬‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫ܙܗ ܐ‬ ‫ܕܗ ܉ ܘܗܘܝ ̇‬ ‫ܒ‬ ‫̇ ܐ‬ ‫ܒ‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫܂ ܐܢ ܕ‬ ‫ܐ܂ ܘ ̇ ܐ ܘ ܐ ܐ ܬ‬ ‫ܘ‬
‫‪:‬‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫ܗܘ ܪ ̣‬ ‫̣ ܪܓ ܐ ܐܦ ܐ ܕܬܨ ̇ ܗܝ܉ ̣‬
‫–‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫ܨܘ ̣ ܐ ܕ ܗܝ ̇ܐܡ ܐ ܂ ̇ ܠ‬ ‫ܐ‬
‫ܬ‬ ‫܂ܕ ܐ‬ ‫ܒ ܪ ܟ ̇‬
‫ܘܬܒ ܐ ܒ‬
‫̣ ܒ ܬܐ܂‬ ‫ܐ ܐ܇‬ ‫̇‬
‫ܬ ̣ ܇ ܕܐ ܐ ܐ ̣‬
‫̣‬ ‫ܐ‬ ‫ܗܝ ̣ ܐ܉ ܐܘ‬ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܐܢ ܗ‬
‫ܐ܉ ܐ ̇ ܓܐ ܐ ܒ ܒ ܬܐ܂‬ ‫ܐ܂ ܘܐܢ ܕ‬
‫ܐ ̈ܓ ܓ ܐ‬ ‫ܗܝ ̇‬ ‫ܘܐܢ ܙ ܐ ܬ‬
‫ܡ ܕܗ ܐ ̣ ܐ ܘ ̣ ܇‬ ‫ܓ‬ ‫ܕܒ ܪ ܟ܉‬
‫ܪ ̇܂‬ ‫ܨܘ ܐ ܕ ̇ ܐ‬

‫‪Badaw 319.18–320.5 / Rosenthal № 151b‬‬ ‫‪Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, f. 70b.1,31–2,30‬‬

‫)‪, lines 9–22‬ܙ ‪(cf.: Nestle, p.‬‬

‫)‪(Antisthenes cited by Plutarch:‬‬

‫‪:‬‬ ‫܂‬ ‫ܐ̣ ܐ‬

‫‪:‬‬ ‫ء‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫ء‬ ‫ܕ ̇ ܘܐ ܒ ܐ ܒ ܘܒ ܘܗܝ܉‬ ‫ܕ ̣ ܐ‬ ‫ܕ ܐ ܐ‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫܃ ܐܘ ܒ ̈ ܒܒܐ ̈ ܐ܂‬ ‫ܐ ̇ܒ‬ ‫ܐܘ ̈ ̇ ܐ‬
‫̇‬
‫ܐ ܕܐ ̣ ܃ ܘܗ ܢ‬ ‫̈‬ ‫̇‬
‫ܒ ܪ ܓ ܕܗ ܢ‬
‫܂‬ ‫̈ ܐ ̇‬ ‫܉‬ ‫̈‬

‫‪Badaw 320.6–8 / Rosenthal № 151c26‬‬ ‫‪Ms. Sin. Syr. 16, f. 71b.1,18–29‬‬

‫)‪, lines 10–15‬ܛ ‪(cf.: Nestle, p.‬‬

‫‪:‬‬ ‫ܕ ܒܐ܃ ܘ ܐ ̣ ܐ‬ ‫ܕ ܕܕ ̣‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫̈ ܐ ܒ ̈ ܐ܉ ̇ܙܕܩ‬ ‫ܕ‬ ‫̇ ܃‬ ‫ܕܒ‬
‫‪،‬‬ ‫ܪܐ܂‬ ‫ܗܝ‬ ‫̇‬ ‫ܕ ܒ ̈ ܒܒ‬ ‫ܗ‬

‫‪Sin. Syr. 16, f. 71b.1,30–2.5‬‬

‫‪Badaw 320.9–11/ Rosenthal № 151d‬‬ ‫)‪ , lines 15–18‬ܛ ‪(cf.: Nestle, p.‬‬

‫‪26 Cf. Diogenes Laertius VI.12; Gnomologium Vaticanum 424 (Sternbach, 159: Platon; cf. Stanzel‬‬

‫‪15). Arabic: Ibn Duraid XXVII and Ibn Hindu 94 (Alexander).‬‬

‫‪320‬‬ ‫[‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫‪:‬‬ ‫]‬

THE A RABIC VERSION OF THE SYRIAC G NOMOLOGIES “O N THE S OUL” BY MUBAŠŠIR . F TIK

: ‫ܒ ̇ܝ‬ ̇ ‫̣ ܂ ܐ‬ ̇ ‫ܐ ܐ ̈ ܓ ܐܐ ܐ ܕ‬
، ‫܁‬ ̇ ‫̇ ܒ ܘܢ ܨܘ ܐ ܐܘ ܐ ܐ‬ ‫ܕܐܢ ܐ‬
‫̇ܗܘ ܕ ̇ ܐ ܘܢ܂‬ ̣ ‫ܐ ܐ ܕܒ ̇ ܐ‬
، ‫ܪܐ܁ ܕ ܐ ܗܘܐ ̇ ܘ‬ ̇ ̇ ‫ܐܬ ܐ ܕ‬ ̈ ‫ܬ‬ ‫ܒ‬
– ̇
‫̣ ܕܐ܃ ܐ ܐ ܗ ܢ ܬܘܒ‬ ̇ ‫ܘܢ‬ ‫ܐܕ‬ ̇
‫ܒ ̈ܘ ܐ‬ ‫̇ ̣ ܂ ܗ ܐ ܐܦ ̇ܗ ܢ‬ ̇‫ܗ‬
̈
‫ܘ ܘܢ ܕ ܬ ܕܐ܂‬ ‫ܒ‬ ̇

Sin. Syr. 16, f. 72a.1,4–21

Badaw 320.12–16 / Rosenthal № 151e (cf.: Nestle, p. ‫ ܝ‬, lines 9–16)

The second treatise of Plutarch (“On the ascesis”) has been preserved not only in
the Sinai manuscript. Nevertheless, the appearance of excerpts from both treatises by
Mubaššir immediately following the quotations from the gnomology “On the Soul”
makes it very probable that the Ms. Sinai Syriac 16 reflects the version of the text
used by Mubaššir.

4. T HE TIME OF THE A RABIC TRANSLATION

How could a Syriac collection of sayings on the soul which had to be very
close to the Ms. Sinai Syriac 16 become one of the sources for the Muḫt r
al- ikam wa-ma sin al-kalim? Though Mubaššir b. F tik was probably born
in Damascus, we have no indication that he knew Syriac which by the 11 th
century had already long ceased to serve as the main literary language in this
region, having been superseded by Arabic. All the Syriac texts which we may
consider as sources of Mubaššir could have been translated into Arabic be-
fore his time. The Arabic version of the “Alexander Novel” and the laments
of the philosophers on Alexander were integrated into the gnomology d b
al-Fal sifah composed by unayn b. Is q in the 9 th century. That makes it
rather improbable that it was Mubaššir himself who did the translation of a
Syriac collection “On the Soul” before including some if its sentences into
his compendium.
Thus the translation of the Syriac gnomologies into Arabic must be assumed
to have been accomplished between the 7th century AD (the date of the Ms. Sinai
Syriac 16 as the earliest witness to the collection) and the 11th century (the time
of Mubaššir). The Ms. Sinai Syriac 16 points to the region of Palestine and Sinai
where this translation could have taken place. That is the time and the geograph-
ical area which are associated with the large translation movement from Greek
and Syriac into Arabic.
The monasteries of Palestine and Sinai in the period following the 9th cen-
tury turned into the centers of this translation activity which was primarily
accomplished by the monks of the so-called “Melkite” communities. S. Grif-
fith wrote a number of articles labeling this translation movement as “Chris-

321
YURY N. ARZHANOV

tian kal m”27. The texts which Griffith analyzed in his works reflect above all
polemical interests and this could also explain why the Syriac gnomological
collections “On the Soul” could have become part of the translation process28.
However, this process might not have been restricted to polemical texts; this is
shown in the overview of the texts written in so-called “Middle Arabic” presented in
the study of this phenomenon by J. Blau29. The Arabic Christian Mss., mainly stem-
ming from the Monastery of St. Catharine on Sinai where the Syriac collection “On
the Soul” was also found, contain translations of a wide spectrum of texts including
“apocalyptic” literature (such as 4 Esra and 2 Baruch), hagiographic works (such as
“Vita Arethae”) and “Sayings of the Egyptian Fathers” (apophtegmata patrum). This
last category is even closer to the gnomic collections “On the Soul” than the polemi-
cal treatise studied by Griffith.
The Arabic translation of the Syriac gnomologies must have taken place in the
context of the translation activity in Palestine and Sinai which took place parallel
to the larger translation movement of Greek texts into Arabic associated with the
Abb sid culture and having Bagdad as its main center. The inclusion of the Arabic
version of the Syriac collections into the work of Mubaššir shows that the Christian
Arabic translations played a vital role in the Muslim culture of Palestine and Egypt.

27 Cf. his articles: The Monks of Palestine and the Growth of Christian Literature in Arabic //

The Muslim World 78 (1988), 1–28; Greek into Arabic: Life and Letters in the Monasteries of
Palestine in the Ninth Century, the Example of the Summa Theologiae Arabica // Byzantion 56
(1986), 117–138; From Aramaic to Arabic: The Languages of the Monasteries of Palestine in
the Byzantine and Early Islamic Period // Dumbarton Oaks Papers 51 (1997), 11–31. An over-
view: Griffith, S. H., The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims in the
World of Islam. Princeton University Press, 2007.
28 Cf. the proposal of Cowper (Syriac miscellanies, 105, n. 45) that these texts could serve as part

of “some apology or defense of Christianity”.

29 Blau, J., A Grammar of Christian Arabic, based mainly on south-Palestinian Texts from the

first millennium. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, Vols. 267, 276, 279; Subsidia,
T. 27–29. Louvain 1966–1967. See vol. 1.

322 [ . : ]
 Я Я

ХРИСТИАНСКИЙ
ВОСТОК
CЕРИЯ, ПОСВЯЩЕННАЯ ИЗУ ЧЕНИЮ
ХРИСТИАНСКОЙ КУЛЬТУРЫ НАРОДОВ АЗИИ И АФРИКИ

ТО 6 (XII)
Я Я

« Я : ,
, Я »
( , 14.09.2011 – 16.09.2011)

, -
« »,
2013