Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Editors
Editorial Board
volume 1
By
Robert W. Thomson
leiden | boston
The Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available online at http://catalog.loc.gov/
LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2017010683
Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface.
issn 2405-7045
isbn 978-90-04-34320-7 (hardback)
isbn 978-90-04-34321-4 (e-book)
∵
Contents
Preface ix
Bibliography 215
Index of Biblical Quotations and Allusions 222
General Index 227
Preface
The origin of this monograph was rather fortuitous. In 2005 the authorities at
the Armenian Library of Manuscripts in Erevan, the Matenadaran, kindly pro-
vided me with a disk of the text in Mat 1422 of Nersēs of Lambron’s Commentary
on Revelation, and also a Xerox copy of the other text in the same manuscript,
Nersēs’ Commentary on the Dormition of John. The former was of great help in
the preparation of my study of his Commentary on Revelation [published in
2007]; but the latter remained unexamined in my filing cabinet for some years.
Then, in 2011, I was invited to read a paper at the 30th anniversary meeting of
the Association International des Etudes Arméniennes, to be held that October
in Budapest. This prompted me to resurrect the hitherto neglected Xerox and
to examine the text more seriously. At the time I was interested in what Nersēs
had to say about John as “the beloved disciple” and his relationship with the
family of Jesus. My short paper was politely received, but sparked no great inter-
est. However, one question from the audience concerning the reception of the
apocryphal Acts of John in Armenia, which I could not answer at the time, did
cause me to look more carefully at this Commentary as a whole. What follows
is the result of that investigation. I have not discovered an unknown Armenian
version of the Acta Iohannis [to be distinguished from the equally apocryphal
Acts of John by Prochoros], but I hope that I have rescued from almost complete
oblivion a work by one of the most famous scholarly figures of medieval Arme-
nia.
x preface
Robert W. Thomson
The Oriental Institute
University of Oxford
Introduction: Nersēs and the Dormition
1 For earlier commentaries see Thomson, “Was There an Armenian Tradition of Exegesis?”
2 There is a general resumé of Nersēs’ works, with references to manuscripts and colophons,
in Akinean, Nersēs Lambronacʿi. The dates of the commentaries are: Catholic Epistles, 1176;
Liturgy, 1177; Revelation and Dormition of John, 1179; Twelve Prophets, 1180; Psalms, begun 1178,
completed 1181; Wisdom Books, 1197. For Nersēs’ translations of Greek law codes see Kaufhold,
Die armenischen Übersetzungen byzantinischer Rechtsbücher and Burgmann and Kaufhold,
Bibliographie zur Rezeption des byzantinischen Rechts.
3 Peter Cowe has informed me that Anushawan Tanielian is engaged on a study of this com-
mentary. For details of texts published before 2005 see Thomson, A Bibliography of Classical
Armenian Literature to 1500ad; and “Supplement to A Bibliography of Classical Armenian Lit-
erature to 1500 ad.” Significant texts and translations published since then include: Tanielian,
Nersēs of Lambron: Commentary on the Wisdom of Solomon, and Thomson, Nerses of Lambron:
Commentary on the Revelation of Saint John. Theo van Lint informs me that the works of Ner-
sēs are currently being prepared for publication, and will take up four volumes in the large
format series Matenagirkʿ Hayocʿ.
4 For the edition of 1736 see Hay Girkʿĕ, no. 431; translation into modern Armenian by Stam-
bōlcʿean, Ganjasar 6.
5 In the standard Armenian Bible edited by Zōrapean, Venice 1805 [henceforth Z], the 29 page
Supplement [Yaweluac] contains the following texts: Sirakʿ, Xōskʿ Sirakʿay, iii Ezr, Prayer of
Manasse, iii Corinthians, Dormition of John, Request of Euthalius.
2 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
regarded the text as an authentic record of the evangelist’s death. Since John
was considered to be the author of the Book of Revelation, it not surprising
that Nersēs’ Commentary on the Dormition is frequently associated with that
on the Book of Revelation in the manuscript tradition.6
This commentary has no internal indication of its date, but is generally
ascribed to the year 1179. During that year Nersēs was working on his commen-
tary on the Psalms [which he did not finish until 1181], and he also wrote his
commentary on Revelation. The commentary on the Hangist srboyn Yovhannu
was prompted by a repeated request from Stepʿannos vardapet. Nersēs says:
“The letter of your Honour, O holy father, reached me once and twice, urging
me to a critical investigation of the prayers of the theologian [and] apostle John.
And I thought it more important [to undertake] that task obediently, than to
keep a slothful silence.”7 This Stepʿannos is known from other sources as a the-
ologian and “court deacon, dran sarkawag,” in the entourage of the Catholicos
Nersēs Šnorhali. In a colophon added in 1193 to the famous Bible of 1066 written
at Sebaste, it is said that “for his unerring knowledge he was called Yakobcʿi.”8
The significance of the epithet remains unclear. This seems to be the first of his
biblical commentaries suggested to Nersēs by a spiritual father.9
The text on which Nersēs wrote his commentary is quite short. It is the final
part of the apocryphal Acts of John the Evangelist. Oral traditions about John
the evangelist were known to writers of the late second century, but the Acts of
John in its surviving form does not seem to be clearly attested until the fourth
century, and what has survived is incomplete. Extracts of different length are
preserved under different titles. The last section, known as the Dormition of
John or the Metastasis, was detached at an early date to be read on the feast-day
of St John, and was included in menologia. It has a richer manuscript tradition
in Greek than the other sections, and versions were made at different times into
6 See further below, 21–23. For Armenian translations of the Book of Revelation see the Intro-
duction to Thomson 2007, and for its reception in Armenia, idem 2014.
7 See pp. 3–4 of the translation below. These page numbers refer to the printed edition [C] and
are reproduced in the margins of the English translation.
8 Vasn anmolor čanačʿeloy kočʿi sa Yakobcʿi, Matʿevosyan, Hayeren Jeṙagreri Hišatakaranner, 208.
The ms is Mat 311. See also the references to Stepʿannos in a gospel of 1173 written at Skewra,
Yovsepʿean, Yišatakarankʿ Jeṙagracʿ, col. 446, and in a colophon added to the Bible of 1066
written in Sebastia, item 258 in Yovsepʿean: at the end of Luke the scribe Grigoris describes
its repair by the vardapet Stepʿanos, dran sarkawag. See also Ačaṙyan, Hayocʿ Anjnanunneri
Baṙaran, s.v. Stepʿannos 82.
9 See the Appendix: Nersēs and his Biblical Commentaries for further information from colo-
phons concerning the requests to Nērses for commentaries.
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 3
10 See Junod and Kaestli, Acta Iohannis, 1983, 40–41. Yet even a cursory comparison of the
Greek and Armenian texts of the Dormition shows significant differences between them.
For a general discussion of the Acta see also Junod and Kaestli 1982.
11 This paragraph is based on the information given by Junod and Kaestli 1983.
12 Text of Mxitʿar in Anasyan, Haykakan Matenagitutʿiwn, vol. i, col. 907.
13 See the section below: Manuscripts of the Armenian Dormition, which lists those mss
containing the text that are not liturgical books.
14 See the descriptions of biblical mss in Adjémian, Grand Catalogue des manuscripts armé-
niens de la Bible.
15 ms no. 14; see Catergian, Ecclesiae Ephesinae de Obitu Joannnis apostoli narratio ex versione
armeniaca, Armenian text titled: Hangist eranelwoyn Yovhannu. Catergian notes that this
short text was usually combined in larger collections rather than circulating alone, and
gives a long list of exemplars, pp. 30–31.
4 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
16 I am grateful to the authorities at the Matenadaran for providing photographs of the text
in Mat 1422. In the translation of the commentary below, where the Dormition appears as
a series of lemmata, the divergences between C and M are indicated in the notes.
17 For a summary of its contents see Junod and Kaestli 1983.
18 Ankanon Girkʿ iii, ed. Čʿrakean, 190–292; the author introduces himself on p. 192. Transla-
tion by Leloir in Écrits apocryphes. Cf. Peeters, Bibliotheca Hagiographica Orientalis, items
458–467, and for Nersēs’ commentary, ibid. item 480.
19 P. 89 of the text in C. The page numbers of the 1736 printed edition are marked in the
margins of the translation below. In Armenian the “seventy” [or “seventy-two;” see note
to Thomson, The Teaching, §503] are never listed by name. On the number see Metzger,
“Seventy or Seventy-two,” and Major.
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 5
trench and gave up the ghost.20 The whole text only takes up three columns in
Zōhrapean’s edition. The commentary by Nersēs, on the other hand, runs to 92
pages in the manuscript 1422 from the Matenadaran.21
Although Nersēs begins his work with a description of John’s early years, he
then indicates that little was known about his life apart from the information
to be found in the New Testament. He states that the account of John’s death,
when he uttered the prayers quoted in the Dormition, “has no beginning nor
any narrative of the circumstances of his original career.”22 He therefore was
unacquainted with the Acts of John.
Indeed, the Acta Iohannis do not seem to have been known in Armenia at all.
There is no attested text of it, and Armenian commentators on the Gospel of
John are unaware of John’s activity there described. Stepʿannos Siwnecʿi in the
eighth century ignores details of John’s life. And although the commentaries
by Sargis Kund [written in 1177], Mattʿēos Ĵułayecʿi [1391] and Grigor Xlatecʿi
[1400] remain unpublished and unavailable for scrutiny, Grigor Tatʿewacʿi, who
sums up the previous tradition, seems to have been unaware of the Acta
Iohannis. Tatʿewacʿi does, however, include some information about John in his
own Commentary on the Gospel: John wrote his Gospel in Greek in Ephesus,
seventy-one years after the Ascension.23 In his Oskepʿorik, Grigor describes
the Dormition, nnǰumn, basing himself on the well-known text, but without
mentioning the commentary by Nersēs.24 The Acts by Prochoros were thus the
prime source of information about the activity of the evangelist for medieval
Armenians.
Nersēs certainly seems acquainted with the Acts of John by Prochorus, for he
explains the name Biwros [one of the companions of John in his final days]
as Prochorus, “one of the seventy in whose name this history of John has been
accepted among some.”25 He specifically notes that John saw the destruction
of Jerusalem by Titus [in 70ce], that he was familiar with the other three
gospels,26 and that Eusebius testifies to his death at Ephesus. Yet he places
20 In the Acts of John by Prochorus John simply disappears. On the other hand, Armenian
historians were aware of relics of John in Constantinople; see note to p. 13 of C below.
21 The 1736 printed edition, which is in the small format of 12 × 7 cm, runs to 155 pages of text.
The Armenian text of the Dormition printed below is from M 1422.
22 P. 10 in C.
23 Grigor, Meknutʿiwn, 22, 320. For Armenian traditions about languages and places where
the gospels were written see Thomson, forthcoming.
24 Grigor, Oskepʿorik, 132–132.
25 P. 89 in C.
26 Cf. n. 23 above.
6 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
John’s exile to Patmos in the time of Hadrian [117–138] before his restoration
to Ephesus in the reign of Trajan [98–117]! Nersēs must have been relying on
his memory rather than on a direct reading of Eusebius.27
Regarding the early life of John, why, asks Nersēs, was John called “the
beloved disciple”? He explains that John and James, called brothers and sons
of Zebedee in the gospels of Matthew and Mark, were the sons of a daughter
of Joseph “the father of the Saviour.” He does not name this daughter, but other
texts in Armenian indicate that she was called Sałomē.28 James was older than
John; and this is proved, says Nersēs, by the painted images of the disciples [ jew
nkaragir patkeracʿn]. For John is depicted as a youth, while James is of the same
age as Christ.29 John’s mother lived in Joseph’s house while she was suckling the
child, that is, in the same house in which Jesus was raised. So it happened that
they were brought up together, and Jesus was involved in John’s upbringing, in
accordance with the natural love of children for the young. The holy Mother
of God also loved him. For that reason, the love of Christ for John was kindled
even before Christ was revealed by signs and miracles, and that is why they
called him “the beloved disciple” and “son of the teacher.”
Where did Nersēs acquire this information about John’s youth? Two kinds of
sources immediately spring to mind: previous commentaries on the Gospel of
John, and apocryphal lives of the apostles.
Before 1179, when Nerses wrote his commentary, several commentaries on
the Gospel of John were available in Armenian, both original works and trans-
lations. The earliest original commentary is that by Stepʿannos Siwnecʿi of
the early eighth century on the Four Evangelists, Meknutʿiwn čʿoricʿ awetaran-
čʿacʿn.30 The title is somewhat misleading, as the largest part of the text deals
with Matthew, Mark is allotted less than a page, while Luke and John share the
remainder. In any event, Stepʿannos gives no information about John’s upbring-
ing. The only other original Armenian commentary on John predating Nersēs
is that by Sargis Kund, composed in 1177, only two years before Nersēs wrote his
commentary on the Hangist Yovhannu. This has not been published yet.31
The only Greek commentary on the Gospel of John translated into Arme-
nian before the time of Nersēs is that by John Chrysostom. It has a complicated
textual history,32 but it contains no relevant information about John’s child-
hood. The commentaries on John by Origen and Cyril of Alexandria were not
translated.
Of the commentaries in Syriac that were translated into Armenian the
earliest is Ephrem’s Commentary on the Diatessaron. This, however, probably
belongs to the circle of Ephrem rather than to the fourth century Ephrem
himself. It frequently refers to the brothers James and John,33 but it does
not mention their early upbringing. Based on Syriac sources but written in
Arabic is the Commentary on John by Nonnus of Nisibis, who was known in
Armenian as Nanay the Syrian teacher. This was translated into Armenian in
the mid-ninth century; the original, alas, did not survive. Nonnus provides a
few details about the writing of the gospel, but says nothing of John’s earliest
years.34
The Commentary on the Gospel of John by Theodore of Mopsuestia survives
in Syriac translation. It was not known directly in Armenia.35 Although it is of
interest for details about the writing of the four gospels and John’s preaching
at Ephesus, it offers no information about John’s childhood. Nor in original
commentaries in Syriac which were not rendered into Armenian, like that by
Moses bar Kepha of the ninth century, do we find the information we are
seeking, though Moses does give details about the writing of the four gospels.
31 See Petrosyan and Ter-Stepʿanyan, 93. I have not been able to check the content of that
commentary.
32 The first part, §1–13, was translated from Syriac and the rest, § 14–88, from Greek. This is
mostly lost; by the 11th century only 33 chapters survived. The remainder was translated
again for Gregory Vkayasēr in 1117 at Drazark by Tʿeopʿistē the Greek rhetor and Kirakos
vardapet. For translations of Syriac texts into Armenian see Mathews, “Syriac into Arme-
nian.”
33 Notably to their request to sit on the right and left hand of Jesus, Mark, ch. 10.
34 See the Introduction to the translation by translation by Thomson.
35 Although some of Theodore’s works circulated in Armenia in the fifth century, later he was
generally rejected as a “Nestorian” heretic for his dyophysite position. See the discussion
in Garsoïan, L’Eglise, ch. ii: “Les crises et la transformation du Ve siècle.” Also, Theodoret’s
commentaries were known under a pseudonym, e.g. Epiphanius; see Outtier, “La version
arménienne.” It is worth noting that Vardan Arewelcʿi’s Commentary on the Psalms evinces
extensive parallels with Theodoret on the Psalms.
8 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
So let us turn to the realm of apocryphal traditions, a field that greatly appealed
to Armenians, and to which they were not inhibited from adding some texts of
their own.36
That Joseph, husband of the Virgin Mary, was a widower with children from
his first marriage was well known from the Protoevangelium of James, with
its expansions in the Armenian version.37 The eldest of his sons was James,
not the brother of John but the future first bishop of Jerusalem, and three
more are named in the Armenian Martyrdom of James.38 But it is not possible
here to expound the multifarious, and often contradictory, traditions about
the relatives of Jesus. The closest parallel to the tradition echoed by Nersēs
comes in the Armenian History of James and John.39 Here we are informed that
Salome was the mother of James and John, the same Salome as appears in the
Protoevangelium as midwife at the birth of Jesus. She was a daughter of Joseph,
and thus a sister to Jesus: as the author of the text explains: “Just as the sons of
Joseph were called brothers of Jesus, so also his daughters [were called] sisters.”
This text does not seem to have any known Greek model, though Hippolytus of
Thebes [circa 980] knows that Jesus was the uncle of John, being the brother of
Salome the daughter of Joseph.40
This short History of James and John is also interesting for its specifically
Armenian connection. After a paragraph on the childhood of James and his
brother John, the story immediately turns to the decapitation of James by
Herod, mentioned in Acts 12.2. James’s head and body became separated. The
head was taken to Jerusalem by an angel, whereas the body, after being placed
in a coffin, was washed by the sea to Spain where it cured a blind woman. The
local inhabitants regarded it as a “headless god,” until St Paul arrived on his
travels and taught them better. As for the head that was taken to Jerusalem,
according to this text it was buried by the Virgin Mary, James the brother of
the Lord, and John the evangelist. This James, the brother of the Lord, is the
James in Jerusalem mentioned frequently by Paul in his Epistles. Eusebius in his
Ecclesiastical History explains that there were two Jameses: James the brother
of the Lord, also known as James the Just, who was chosen by Peter, James,
and his brother John after the Ascension to be the first bishop of Jerusalem;
and James the brother of John who was beheaded by Herod.41 But the point
of our Armenian text is that the head was buried in an appropriate place, over
which was later built a splendid and glorious church, “which is the vankʿ and
žołovateł of the Armenian uxt.” I leave to historians of the Holy Places the origin
of this story in its relationship to the history of the Armenian Patriarchate in
Jerusalem.42 Nersēs probably never went to Jerusalem himself,43 but in the year
that he wrote this Commentary on the Dormition of John he also composed
his Commentary on the Book of Revelation, in which both the earthly and the
heavenly Jerusalems figure prominently.
Nersēs’ Commentary on the Dormition of John is primarily concerned with
interpreting the meaning of the extensive prayers and exhortations expressed
by the Apostle before he falls asleep. It follows Nersēs’ usual commentary style,
that is, a brief quotation from the text, i.e. the “lemma,” followed by his own
comments. The short text is broken into small sections, sometimes each lemma
being restricted to a single word. Nersēs places the text as a whole into a schema
of Christ’s Incarnation and the reconciliation of God and man, and explains the
significance of the passage quoted for the spiritual life, drawing extensively on
biblical parallels, previous Armenian theological texts, and Armenian versions
of patristic writings.
In his exposition Nersēs’ follows a long-standing Armenian tradition of
expression regarding the nature of God and the person of Christ. His the-
ological terminology has its roots in the earliest Armenian texts, especially
the Teaching of Saint Gregory that forms the longest section in the History of
Agatʿangełos as we now have it.44 These ideas recur in Armenian theologians
down through the centuries, and parallels may be found in the writings of Ner-
sēs’ own relative and mentor, his great-uncle the Catholicos Nersēs Šnorhali,
who ordained him to the priesthood in 1169. Naturally, the Armenian technical
vocabulary had been enriched over time, but the fundamental ideas remained
consistent. Here follows a synopsis of the terminology.
Theological Terminology
God
The being of the Godhead is expressed by the abstract noun ēutʿiwn, derived
from the verb “to be, exist,” and standard in Armenian theology, 56.45 The
nature of God’s ēutʿiwn cannot be defined, because it is incomprehensible,
anhas 81, and incorporeal, anmarmin, 69.46 The being of God can also be
expressed by the term ełinutʿiwn, 129, derived from the verb ełanim which
has the nuance of “coming into being,” and is not used in the Teaching.47
Ēutʿiwn can also be used in the sense of “essence,” as when Nersēs states
that “an image bears in itself the essence and form, ēutʿiwn ew jew, of a liv-
ing thing,” 85. The stem ē in the plural can be used for existent things: thus
“the nature of beings, bnutʿwn ēicʿs, proclaims God,” 98. Nersēs also uses the
stem goy in the sense of the bodiless forms being existent, 98. Matter, niwtʿ,
is an image of the existent, goy, and material things are non-existent in that
sense, angoy, 98–99. Nersēs diverges here from the use of goy and its deriva-
tives in the Teaching for the existence of created beings; nor does he use
the expression linelutʿiwn, found in the Teaching for the existence of created
things.
Trinity
There is “a single divinity of the Trinity, errordutʿeann mi astuacutʿiwn, of Father,
Son and Spirit”, 70. Each has a name and individuality of person, anun ew
yatkutʿiwn anjnaworutʿeancʿ, 70; the stem anjn is also used for person, 71.48 Only
once does Nersēs refer to hypostasis, zawrutʿiwn, when discussing the signifi-
cance of an image, nkaragir or nkaragrutʿiwn, 84–85. The image represents the
essence, ēutʿiwn, and form, jew, of the living being, but not the hypostasis. The
45 All page references are to the printed text of C, whose page numbers are reproduced in
the margins of the translation below.
46 Note here the expansion of Ps 49.13–14.
47 The adjective aneł, “uncreated,” is common in Armenian. Nerses does not use it in this
text, but it is found elsewhere in his writings; see references in the nbhl, s.v.
48 Anjn is a standard term for “person,” e.g. Nersēs Šnorhali, Bankʿ čʿapʿu, 170. Dēmkʿ, lit. “face,”
is also common: Šnorhali uses the two terms interchangeably, Bankʿ čʿapʿu, 98.
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 11
Christ
Nersēs’ prime concern is with Christology, and he devotes much attention to
the mode of the Incarnation. He takes pains to stress the divinity and humanity
of the incarnate Christ; but in line with long-standing Armenian tradition he
makes it clear that the nature, bnutʿiwn, of Christ is divine and eternal, 117.49
The union of human and divine in the person of Christ is expressed by a wide
range of terms, from the simple “becoming a man” or “taking a body” to the
more complex “mingling” of the divinity and the body.
“To become a man” may be expressed literally by mard linel, 60, 83, or by
the derivative verb mardanal, 35, 76, 82; these have parallels in the Teaching.
Instead of “man, mard,” Nersēs may refer to flesh or body. The Armenian term
marmin has both connotations, thus blurring the distinction possible in Greek
between sarx and sōma.50 So Christ may be said to “take a body, marmin aṙnul,”
66, 107, or to “become flesh, marmin linel,” or the derivative marmnanal, 36,
71, 102. This last is the verb used to translate Cyril of Alexandria’s formula:
“One nature of the incarnate Word, mi bnutʿiwn Banin marmnacʿeloy.”51 To
“put on” or “clothe oneself, zgenul,” is also used by Nersēs, as it was in the
Teaching. For example, “the Son clothed himself with body and soul, zgecʿaw
marmin ew hogi,” 27. More common than the clothing metaphor is that of
“mingling, xaṙnumn,” another expression found in the earliest Armenian texts.
This mingling did not alter the state of the natures, 36: “For he was seen as a
man by nature, and was understood as God in truth.” “He mingled his divinity
with this body,” 74. “In the nature of Christ there was mingling with the divinity,”
133. The mingling is “without confusion, anšpʿotʿ,” 56,52 or očʿ špʿotʿumn, 74.
One expression used by Nersēs for “in-carn-ation,” is the literal ner-mard-
utʿiwn, 83,53 ner being a prefix invented in the Hellenistic style of translation
to render the Greek en; thus nermardutʿiwn renders enanthrōpēsis. By “Hel-
lenistic” in this connection is meant a style of literal rendering from Greek,
where not only were innovative compounds created on the pattern of Greek
49 In his Synodical Oration, 84–86, Nersēs notes that in declaring Christ to be God and man
there is the danger of identifying “nature” and “person.”
50 The word mis, specifically “flesh,” is rarely used in a Christological context, and normally
means “meat.”
51 Nersēs emphasises Cyril’s teaching in his Synodical Oration, e.g. 88–90.
52 See Lampe, s.v. asygchytos.
53 Nermardutʿiwn is also found at p. 77 in a short passage found only in the manuscript M.
12 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
compounds, but also the syntactical pattern of Greek was imitated. Such trans-
lations became common in the sixth and later centuries.54 Similarly the Greek
oikonomia in the sense of Dispensation or Incarnation was rendered in Arme-
nian by tnawrēnutʿiwn; t[u]n renders oikos, and awrēn is nomos, plus the Arme-
nian abstract ending -utʿiwn.55 Also common in Nersēs for Christ’s Dispensa-
tion is the term “service, matakararutʿiwn,” 28, 108, 135. Matakarar means “stew-
ard,” and is used as such in the Armenian Bible. The abstract noun is found in
some translations, but was not used by native Armenian writers in the early
period.56
Instead of Christ taking a “body,” Nersēs may say that “he accepted in the
flesh the condition of the body like every man: kreacʿ marmnov zmarmnoyn
kirs orpēs amenayn mard, 27;” or: “in the condition of the body he lived without
sin, kriwkʿ marmnoy anmeł varecʿaw, 111.” The term “condition,” kirkʿ, refers
to all the bodily characteristics that are common to the human lot: hunger,
thirst, weariness, etc. They are natural properties: “He offered to the Father
his own innocent body with its natural properties, arkeal aṙaǰi Hawr ziwrn
anmeł marmin bnakann kriwkʿ,” 67.57 Or “Christ, having taken a body [or flesh,
marmin], with its attributes lived without sin, Kʿristos aṙeal marmin, iwr kriwkʿ
anmeł varecʿaw,” 107.
The term axtkʿ can be used in a similar way. Axtkʿ, however, also has over-
tones of “passions,” i.e. those attributes that disturb the soul: “He [Christ] did
not accept any physical passions in his fleshly body [or bodily flesh], očʿ i mar-
nakan marminn axticʿ inčʿ hiwtʿ ĕnkalaw, 36.”58
Thus in Christ “the light of the Godhead was united, miacʿaw, with the
darkness of our nature, 27; the Godhead was united, miacʿeal, with the body, 28;
the flesh [or body, marmin] of the Son was united, miacʿeal, with the Godhead,”
48. For this union the verb mianal is most commonly used. The noun for “union”
is miutʿiwn, described as “ineffable, ančaṙ, 36, 133, anxaws,” 74, or “unconfused,
anšpʿotʿ,” 75. “Christ is one after the ineffable union,” 36; “no speech can indicate
the mode of the union, miutʿiwn, of God with the body, for it is seen as a
54 See Muradian, Grecisms, with references to the extensive bibliography on this topic.
55 See pp. 72, 78. This expression is not found in the earliest authors or the Teaching. A similar
expression, tntesutʿiwn, lit. “oversight of a house,” is found in many translations, but also
in the Demonstration attributed to Yovhannēs Mandakuni, G.Tʿ, 33. The latter, however, is
a later text of dubious authenticity; see Garsoian, l’ Église, 140–141, n. 27, for discussion and
bibliography.
56 See the examples quoted s.v. in the nbhl.
57 To express the same idea the term ancʿkʿ is used in the Teaching, e.g. § 379.
58 See also the lemma on p. 127 of the text.
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 13
Person
Nersēs indicates that a human person is composed of three parts, but he is not
consistent as to what these are. First he refers to body, marmin, spirit, šunčʿ
[lit. “breath”] and mind, mitkʿ, 40. Mind is the charioteer or driver, kaṙavar,
of the body and spirit.62 This šunčʿ is the “breath of life, šunčʿ kendani,” that
God “breathed, pʿčʿeacʿ, into the face of Adam” after he had been formed
from the dust, hoł, of earth [Gen. 2.7].63 Animals have this spirit, but they
do not possess “intellectual, imacʿakan” activity, 98–99, for the mind is this
intellectual, imanali or imacʿakan, faculty. This “animal spirit is disorderly,” for
59 This abstract noun is derived from two stems: yar, “beside,” and kicʿ, “partner.”
60 See references s.v. in the nbhl.
61 See the many examples s.v. synapheia in Lampe, and the discussion in Grillmeier, Christ
in Christian Tradition, i, esp. 463.
62 Here Nersēs echoes Ełišē, History of Vardan, 15: marmnoy ew hogwoy mitkʿ en kaṙavar; cf.
Plato, Phaedrus, 246a–b.
63 Cf. the commentary of Hamam, 257, to the “breath of mankind, šunčʿ mardkan,” of Prov.
20.27: “The Word put on the mind of mankind and this rational nature with breath, zmits
mardkan ew zbnutʿiwns banaworakan šnčʿovn zgecʿeal Banin.” And compare the discussion
of the tenth century Gregory of Narek’s anthropology in his Commentary on the Song of
Songs in Petrossian, Commentaire, 246–251.
14 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
“we are composed of three [parts] in an ineffable mixture: a rational soul, hogi
banakan, an irrational spirit, anban šunčʿ, and a tangible body, zgali marmin,”
128. The disorderly spirit governs the senses, zgayarans, and fights against the
mind, embroiling it in sin. According to this analysis the relationship between
soul and mind is not clear. On the other hand, Nersēs says: “This visible body
has an invisible soul, hogi, and through it moves and is called alive.64 And when
the soul leaves the matter, tarr, of the body, the soul is not diminished but the
body is deprived of life,” 93.
It is not our purpose here to study the whole range of Nersēs’ theological
works. But a brief comparison with his own Synodal Oration [Atenabanutʿiwn]
of the year 1179 may be of interest;65 not only was this delivered in the same
year as Nersēs wrote his Commentary on the Dormition, in his Oration he is
particularly concerned with defending the Armenian Christological position
against the Greek Chalcedonian tradition. In his Commentary on the Dormition
Nersēs rarely uses the term “nature, bnutʿiwn,” but in the Synodal Oration he is
concerned that the Chalcedonian use of “two natures” be interpreted in line
with Armenian tradition. Thus he explains: “We confess Christ to be God and
man,” 76,66 and Christ was “ineffably united from two natures,” 82. “We distin-
guish the individuality, yatknutʿiwn, of the names of the natures, and confess
their essence, ēutʿiwn, to be not united but separate, 82.” Armenian councils,
claims Nersēs, oppose the division of God and man, but our opponents falsely
claim that we say the specific nature of God changed to that of man, 86.67 By
saying “one nature of the incarnate Word,” we confirm the individuality of the
natures in accordance with Saint Cyril, 88, and declare the ineffable unity of
the two [natures] in one person, mi anjaworutʿiwn; for Cyril’s formula proclaims
the unity in accordance with the person, miaworutʿiwn ĕst anjnaworutʿean, 90.
And Nersēs cites a number of earlier Armenian theologians to confirm his posi-
tion.
64 Again there is a direct parallel in Ełišē, 15: the soul, hogi, is the life of the whole body.
65 Cf. note 49 above.
66 In this paragraph the page numbers refer to the Synodal Oration in the edition of Venice
1812: Armenian text on even-numbered pages, with facing Italian translation. That trans-
lation, by a Catholic Mekhitarist, is sometimes misleading. For example the Armenian
ančaṙ xaṙnumn, “ineffable mingling,” an ancient expression in Armenian, does not mean
“ipostatica unione,” 85.
67 Yatuk bnutʿiwn Astuacoy pʿoxeal zmardoyn.
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 15
68 Although some doubt has been raised concerning its attribution to Athanasius himself,
rather than “an Athanasian milieu [see the entry “Athanasius” in the odch],” it was
certainly accepted in Armenia as a genuine work of the Alexandrian patriarch.
69 The most detailed description of the Armenian manuscripts of works by, or attributed
to, Athanasius is by Avagyan, Die armenische Athanasius-Uberlieferung; see also Anasyan,
Matenagitutʿyun i, col. 321–368; and for the biography of Antony col. 324–329. See also
Casey, “Armenian Manuscripts of St. Athanasius,” for a description of two collections of
his works.
70 For the text of the Armenian version of the Life of Antony see Tayecʿi, 533–614. A dubious
colophon, Tayecʿi, Introduction, 20 [reproduced in Matʿevosyan, Hišatakaranner, 3], claims
that it was translated in the year of Maštocʿ death. In his edition of the Greek text Bartelink
notes the existence of the Armenian version of the Vita published by Tayecʿi, but has no
comments about it [unlike the Syriac and other ancient versions].
71 Animate: šnčʿawor, lit. breathing; for šunčʿ see above. 63.
72 See Athanasius, Life of Antony, §50–53.
16 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
Through these [words] we learn that there are two paths for the souls of
men after death.78 For the pure, among whom the prince of this world
does not find anything of his own, there awaits a battle with the author-
ities and powers of the air who are below heaven.79 Escaping from these
according to their deeds and faith,80 the souls reach Christ and stand
there beside him in the delight of joy. And they come with him at the
Second Coming,81 not so that they may enter into judgment, but so that
they may judge the others through their own virtues,82 in accordance with
what Christ said. For just as the Apostles [will judge] Israel,83 likewise all
those perfect in virtue [will judge] those who transgressed in their con-
duct on the same path. And putting on bodies, they will inherit in them
everlasting life,84 as Christ said.
However, those who were unable to acquire a chaste life but evinced in
their actions the activity of Satan, since the weight of their sins overcomes
the activity of their benevolence, the just law of God does not allow them
to cross over beyond the evil demons who are under heaven, but they too
remain under heaven in expectation of the future judgment and mercy
of God, who in this fashion will easily expiate them, that is, with gifts and
compassion.
Nersēs then adduces several examples from the New Testament to bolster his
argument.85 He then continues:
beloved of God, here we learn and tremble. How much need have we for
preparedness before that journey!
89 Uluhogian, “Repertorio.” See also the article on Basil in Armenian translation in Anasyan,
Matenagitutʿyun, ii, col. 1344–1405.
90 For the Armenian text and translation of the Asceticon see Uluhogian, Il Libro delle
Domande.
91 For the Armenian text see the edition by K. Muradyan, and for translation and commen-
tary, Thomson, Saint Basil of Caesarea and Armenian Cosmology. In his earlier monograph
on Basil in Armenian Kim Muradyan drew attention to parallels between the Hexaemeron
and the works of Eznik and Anania Širakacʿi; see ch. 5 of his Barseł Kesaracʿin.
92 For varieties of dreams cf. Eznik, §177–178, 252–256; he distinguishes three types: 1. the
continuation of mental activity when asleep, 2. those caused by God for encouragement,
like Joseph’s and Daniel’s, 3. those caused by the Devil to lead men and women astray.
See also Basil, Hexaemeron. iii 9, babblings; iv 1, apparent reality, v 2, dreams fade, vi 1,
God speaks as in a dream, ix 1, allegorical explanations and illusions of dreams. Further
references in Lampe, s.v. onar.
93 See Isa 29.8.
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 19
gible eyes, and he heard his voice not with tangible ears. In this fashion it
is necessary to make a turning away from the pleasure of the senses, like
the one who is asleep, and to assert the knowledge of God and his promise
through the activity of the mind, so that the one to whose eyes the dream
appeared trustworthy may see God and his glory that was promised like-
wise in a trustworthy vision, just as the dream appeared. So that when
he asks his mind: Did you see God? it may testify to him: I saw, just as it
also testifies about the dream. Such activity of the eyes all saints have pos-
sessed, and in this way they have approached God; and it is possible to be
occupied in the reading of his words and learning them.
94 Nersēs, 38. For this definition of man in Armenian see Davitʿ Anyałtʿ, Definitions and
Divisions of Philosophy, ch. 3 [identical wording in Nersēs]. For naming and nature cf. Basil,
Hexaemeron, iv 5, with the same example.
95 Outsiders: artakʿinkʿ, a standard term for pagans, especially philosophers, e.g. David,
Definitions, §14; see also below, p. 139 in C. Movsēs Xorenacʿi, i 3, contrasts the fables of
the artakʿinkʿ with the Christian scriptures. For the spheres surrounding the earth see the
references in the Index of Topics in Thomson, Saint Basil, s.v. Spheres.
96 Gen 1.7.
97 Earth: hoł, lit. dust, soil. For the concentric spheres see Thomson, Saint Basil, 44, 47.
20 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
ones, that is, of the luminaries, because through you they have their courses
and movements. And you, who are their legislator,98 when you wished you
held back the sun from its course in the time of Joshua;99 and you made it
go back in the time of Hezekiah.100 In this fashion you control through your
laws the other elements that are below it. Air you made the course for birds;
and water you gave as resting-place for aquatic [animals]; the earth as habi-
tation for living beings; and hell101 as the station of demons. As Satan said to
God: “I have come after travelling through the earth and going about below
heaven.””102
Also discernible are reflections of Dionysius the Areopagite regarding the
angels and their ranks, e.g. p. 8; or 38, regarding Christ walking on water. There
are also several parallels of vocabulary regarding the nature of God.
Conclusion
Like the majority of Nersēs’ commentaries, this one too emphasizes spiritual
reflection on the words of scripture. In the Dormition the prayers attributed
to John, based on the canonical scriptures, offer a particularly apposite occa-
sion for such meditation. Nersēs did not attempt any historical study of John’s
life, but was concerned with the spiritual lessons to be learned from his edi-
fying death. Other points do emerge, as we have seen, and no doubt further
unacknowledged debts to the Fathers of the Church and traditional Armenian
exegesis will emerge after further study in due course.
The Hangist was to become an extremely popular text, as witnessed by the
number of copies circulating in the century after Nersēs’ death in liturgical
books and Bibles. It was not included in the early Armenian lists of the bib-
lical canon, but its increasing popularity may have been influenced by the
association of the Book of Revelation, which Nersēs had also retranslated and
commented upon, with John the Evangelist.103 In recent times it is rarely men-
98 Legislator: awrinadir; the cognate awrēnsdir is used of God in Exod 24.12, Jas 4.12.
99 Josh 10.12–13.
100 4Kgdms 20.10–11.
101 Hell: sandarametkʿ; as the habitat of demons see Lampe, s.v. daimōn, b 4. For the ruler
of the underworld see Ełišē, Homilies, 297–299, and Armenian parallels in Thomson’s
translation, ibid, 97–100.
102 Job 1.6.
103 For the translations of the Book of Revelation in Armenian see Thomson, “The Reception
of the Biblical Book of Revelation in Armenia.”
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 21
tioned in studies of Nersēs of Lambron and his times, but it seems worthwhile
to rescue this work by one of the most renowned medieval Armenian theolo-
gians from an unjustified oblivion.
Matenadaran
603 [1709]
682 [17c]
1113* [1648, written in Constantinople]
1161* [1407]
1172* [17c]
1372 [1681]
1389 [17c]
1391 [1414]
1405* [1651, 1765, Izmir, Eǰmiacin]
1409* [1298, Glajor]
1416* [1662, Siwnikʿ, Šatikʿavankʿ?]
1417* [17c]
1418* [1280, 1288, Xorin anapat, Yovhannavankʿ]
1419* [1318, Glajor]
1422* [1284, Glajor, Bǰni?] = M104
104 This is the manuscript used for the translation below in conjunction with the printed
22 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
Jerusalem
68 [1729–1735, Caesarea]
425 [1679, Adana]
458 [13c, Cilicia]
830* [1677, Jerusalem]
929 [17c, Jerusalem]
998* [1623]
1072* [1611]
1137 [nd, np]
1587* [nd, np]
Venice
1142 [14c]
1162 [17c]
edition [C]. In his description of the manuscripts written at Glajor [Mathews and San-
jian, Armenian Gospel Iconography, 197–205] Sanjian frequently identifies the Commen-
tary on the Dormition as a “Commentary on John.” But he sometimes gives the traditional
Armenian title “He was with the brethren.” This is very misleading. Nersēs is not known
to have composed a commentary on the Gospel of John, as opposed to his adaptation
of that by Andreas and Aretas on the Book of Revelation. His Commentary on the Dor-
mition of John is usually identified in Armenian by its opening phrase or by the title
“Investigation of the Prayers of John,” or as the “Falling asleep (hangist or nnǰumn) of
John.”
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 23
Vienna
78 b [1779, cp]
382 [1284, Ałbercʿ vankʿ, Vayocʿ Jor]
571 [1283, Mliči vankʿ, Cilicia]
New Julfa
Bzommar
Paris
Galata
79 [1709]
209
Adana: 2 Glajor: 2
Amida Jerusalem: 2
Caesarea Łōneay [Konya]
Cilicia: 2 Šatikavankʿ [Siunikʿ]
Crimea Xorin anapat [Adana/Feke]
Diyarbekir Vayocʿ Jor: 2
Ejmiacin: 2 Venice: 2
The Dormition [in Armenian Hangist] is not found in the canon list of Anania
Širakacʿi, who places Revelation after the Catholic Epistles, and those books
before Romans. Yovhannēs Sarkawag [11th c.] places Revelation and the Hangist
at the very end of the list. Grigor Tatʿewacʿi [14th c.] places Revelation then the
Hangist after the gospel of John, before Acts.106
Item no. 189:107 Jerusalem 1925. This is a full Bible dated to 1269, written at
Erznka. Revelation and the Hangist follow the Gospel of John before the
Pauline Epistles.
No. 14: Matenadaran 195. This is a partial Bible dated to 1284–1288. The gospel
of John is followed by Revelation, then the Hangist, then Acts.
No. 192: Jerusalem 540. This is a partial Bible dated to 1291–1298, written at
Glajor. It contains the Gospels, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles,
Revelation, the Hangist, Wisdom books.
No. 17. Matenadaran 179. A full Bible dated to 1292. At the end iii Cor.
is followed by Revelation, then the Hangist, then the Prayer of king
Manasē.
105 The following information is taken from Chahé Adjémian, Grand Catalogue de manuscrits
arméniens de la Bible; see pp. xcvii–ciii for a discussion of the Armenian Canon of the New
Testament.
106 The earliest dated Armenian Bible, written in 1080, does not contain the Gospels, Revela-
tion or the Hangist.
107 Note the manuscripts are listed by Adjémian according to collection, not chronologi-
cally.
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 25
No. 19. Matenadaran 181. A partial Bible dated to 1295 written at Mleči
vankʿ. It begins with the Wisdom of Sirach, then Revelation, the Hangist,
Epistles of Paul, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Request of Euthalius, Isaiah,
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song, Wisdom, Letter of the Corinthians to Paul,
iii Corinthians.
Undated
No. 22. Matenadaran 1500, of the 13th century. This is a čaṙĕntir written by
Mxitʿar Ayrivanecʿi at Ayrivankʿ. It contains the Gospels of John, Matthew,
Mark, Luke, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Request of Euthalius, Martyrdom
of Paul, Pauline Epistles, Revelation, the Hangist, followed by the Old
Testament and the Deaths of the Prophets.
No. 281. Leiden, Academy Library 25 of Armenian collection, dated to 13th
century. Revelation and Hangist come after the Catholic Epistles, before
the Wisdom books and Prophets.
No. 231. New Julfa 162, dated to the 13th–14th century. This is a partial Bible,
containing Matthew, Mark, Luke, [but not John], Revelation the Hangist,
the Pauline Epistles, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Psalms, Wisdom books,
Prophets.
No. 250. Venice 6. Full Bible, dated to the 13th–14th century. Revelation and
Hangist at end.
No. 271. Vienna 71. Full Bible dated to the 13th–14th century. Revelation and
the Hangist come at the end.
108 Only Grigor’s Eulogy has been published in full; see the Bibliography.
109 Literary: kʿertʿolakan.
110 Monastery: uxt, but vanoraykʿ just above.
111 I.e. Andrew and Aretas of Caesarea.
112 Locked up: knkʿeal, lit. “sealed,” perhaps “hidden away.”
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 27
and script, well written and elegant, which had belonged to Athanasios, patri-
arch of that city. I requested it with entreaties from that well-disposed man,
and on receiving it hastened with the book to the patriarchal throne, to my
lord Catholicos, the saintly Grigorios. When he was informed of this he greatly
rejoiced, and ordered it to be translated by the Metropolitan of Hierapolis, Con-
standeay, who was staying there under the auspices of the patriarch. With the
help of God and of the holy Lord113 we began—he to translate and I to write;
and we dedicated this wonderful and divine commentary on Revelation to the
studious children of the Armenian church.
I beg you readers and lovers of wisdom, that when you understand the
depths of God’s wisdom through examining this, you will pray Christ to pre-
serve in peace the holy patriarch, my lord Grigor, the kindly disposed cause
and instigator of this translation, during this life and to receive him as heir to
his saints in the future kingdom of heaven. May Christ also make worthy of his
mercy through your prayers the metropolitan Constandeay who translated it,
and Basil the monk who provided the exemplar.
This commentary to the divine Revelation was translated in 628 of the
Armenian era,114 at the holy and patriarchal see called Hṙomklay, which is
surrounded by the elysian waters of the Euphrates, that provides for all bodily
needs of the inhabitants through God’s providence, under the protection of the
Cross that bore God of Vanik,115 and of other wonderful saints who were put to
rest there to the glory of God. But it was corrected from the copy in literary116
style in the sheltered hermitage of saint George in the middle of the Taurus
mountains, which is on the Bluff117 of Cilicia at the beginning of Pamphylia,118
by the hand of the humble bishop of that metropolis Tarsus, the miserable
Nersēs, through the grace and mercy of Christ, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
113 Lord: the mss read either tnn “of the house [i.e. patriarchate]” or tṙnn “of the Lord” [i.e.
the Lord Catholicos Grigor].
114 5 Feb. 1179–4 Feb. 1180.
115 Monastery of Vanik: see Thierry, no. 458.
116 Literary: see n. 109 above.
117 Bluff: gah, “precipice,” perhaps “defile.”
118 See Thierry, nos. 286, 288, for two hermitages dedicated to St. George in this region.
28 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
Ephrem, I was unable to help my weak mind because of not having the text
adequate for the investigation. Then I set to work to occupy myself in the
silence of the hermitage119 to compare it and Cyril’s with each other;120 and if
by us anything was added to complete a lack, [it was] for the ease in reading of
myself and others who might wish to profit. I beg the holy fathers and brothers
not to blame my presumption, which was caused by my ignorance. Now if you
reckon this labour worthy of good memory, may Christ remember you in his
promised blessings, through the entreaties of his holy prophets and our holy
father Ephrem. And to him be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
119 Does yanapatakan lṙutʿiwns refer to a specific heritage, or mean in eremitical silence?
120 I.e. Nersēs bases his work on the Commentaries by Ephrem and by Cyril [of Alexandria].
121 Hetʿum ii of Lambron died in 1143.
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 29
his throne and among his brothers and offspring.122 He presented to his eldest
son Hetʿum the lordship of his ancestral throne, but his son dedicated to God
he appointed as head of the holy church and monastery built by himself. The
eldest was given by God’s grace intelligence and wisdom, and he went to the
king of the Greeks Manuēl and received his father’s honour of sebastos with
rich gifts.
Now the one who was in the monastic state, after being instructed in youth-
ful studies, in the sixteenth year of his age was brought by his pious mother to
the Catholicos, the holy Nersēs who had succeeded to the throne of his brother
Gregory, adorned with all wisdom and knowledge.123 The latter in accordance
with the request in the faith of his brother’s sister, accepted the youth and
ordained him priest in monastic orders, and called his name Nersēs. His mother
left him at his feet for instruction, and went to worship the holy places of
Jerusalem.
But Nersēs remained at the patriarchal throne only a few days, strengthened
in the spirit by the grace of ordination, and desired an untroubled life of soli-
tude and reading. The holy Patriarch, delighted at the youth’s wide learning
sent him to the monasteries on the Black Mountain. Travelling around them
and practicing mortification and contemplative exercises he progressed and
advanced to the fullness of virtue in the love of Christ. After [some] years he
returned to his ancestral throne, but despite the desires of his parent and broth-
ers he did not agree to remain as head of the [monastic] community which had
been bestowed on him by his father, but remained in solitude in uninhabited
places in the mountains with his spiritual instructor John [Yohannēs]. This was
sweeter for him than all luxury. And the hermitage of his dwelling was called
the Mother of God of Sałru,124 on the stream of the river Žerakra; and near it
was the church of Saint George, where in a narrow chamber by night and day
he was tireless in reading, save only for performing the task of the holy liturgy.
Then in the year oiě [628 = 1179]125 the holy Patriarch Nersēs died in Christ;
he was succeeded on the holy throne by his brother’s son Gregory, nicknamed
122 Awšin died in 1170 and was succeeded by his son Hetʿum iii.
123 This is Nersēs iv, known as Šnorhali, [“full of grace”], Catholicos 1166–1173.
124 It was here, with the encouragement of the same spiritual father, that Nerses composed
his Commentary on the Liturgy in 1177. For the site see Thierry, Répertoire, 53, item 282.
125 Oiě would be 1179, which is an error. Matʿevosyan prints 1173, the correct date of the
Patriarch Nersēs Šnorhali’s death, which in Armenian letters would be oib. Samuēl does
not give Nersēs’ date of birth [after his elder brother in 1151], which occurred in 1153. He
was ordained priest aged 16, thus in 1169, since which time he had spent an unspecified
number of years in solitary study, and consecrated bishop aged 23, thus in 1176.
30 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
Tłay, who was the son of his [Nersēs’] father’s sister.126 He summoned to himself
the youthful Nersēs with a written command; and the latter, because of his
inseparable love for him and also because of lacking instruction in letters,
hastened to his relative, the holy Patriarch, and through his care and that of
holy vardapets, he studied and became learned in the wisdom of the Old and
New Testaments. At twenty-three years the Patriarch ordained him bishop of
Tarson, also of Lambron and the surrounding provinces, and sent him to his
own with honour.
When he arrived he evaded the preoccupations of his pastorate and in-
creased his desire for reading of the scriptures. But since he was unable to
have leisure in accordance with his desire, he fled hither and thither to distant
places. Now since he had studied Greek literature in his youth at the insistence
of his mother, with a desire for wisdom among them [Greeks] he entered the
island of Cyprus, in order to remain there in poverty to complete his study of
their rhetoric. But the wishes of his mother and the love of his brethren did not
permit it; when they heard, they brought him back by force. When he realized
that he could not go far away, he returned again to his first hermitage called
Sałru, in which he had a narrow chamber and his instructor and spiritual father
John dwelt.
There he gathered all the divine scriptures, and shut himself up in that place
for a period of years. In the body he remained occupied with the word of God,
which is sweeter to the palate of those who chew it than honey to the mouth.
On the Lord’s feasts he served the thanksgiving of the mystery of the holy
Eucharist; and on other days he remained in his individual chamber occupied
in reading and in writing and in prayer.
Then his spiritual father and instructor John, when on occasion sitting with
him would examine the meaning of the Psalms; and he begged him to elucidate
them in writing and to leave it for the help of those coming afterwards. Then,
at the will of God and in obedience to his advisor, he began to write down the
investigation of the songs of the Psalms in the course of the days of his age
of twenty-six, in the year six hundred and twenty-seven [1178], finishing in his
twenty-ninth year.
After this he hastened to the mountain near to great Antioch, to the monas-
teries there which were distinguished by the Latins and Greeks for their di-
vinely-pleasing rules and religious conduct. After dwelling there for some days
he translated the Commentary on the Revelation of John. Then compelled once
more by love of the Patriarch, the holy Gregory, who summoned him with a
126 Nersēs’ father was Awšin ii, whose sister Marie married Basil the father of Gregory iv.
introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’ 31
127 This is Rubēn iii, 1145–1187. For the Armenian princely families in Cilicia see in general
Dédéyan, Les Arméniens entre Grecs, Musulmans, et Croisés.
128 See 3Kgdms, ch. 21 for Ahab, Jezebel, and Naboth’s vineyard.
129 Muslims: aylaser. Jerusalem was captured in 1187.
32 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
was proceeding to the East for the salvation of the holy places, the great prince
Leon decided to send our holy father to meet him as an ambassador. Because of
that decision he came to the holy Patriarch Gregory to receive his commands
and wishes. On that same journey the nomadic130 tribe of Ismael launched
an attack, and slew with the sword the brothers and monks travelling with
him near the city of Maraš, and bore off the pack-animals; he alone remained
through the care of God and his relative, bishop John, and the vardapet Gēorg.
And because he had with him the other book of the Commentary on the holy
Liturgy and ecclesiastical rites, dictated by himself through the grace of the holy
Spirit, and that was seized by the brigands and there was no copy, he was greatly
distressed. On his return to us again, taking care lest also the Commentary on
the Psalms, which was his composition, should suffer some upset and no copy
remain, he urged the monk our brother Gēorg to begin and write. He willingly
undertook this, prepared the material and made a beginning. Then a princely
command arrived in haste [to follow] the road that the Roman king of the
Germans had taken. As travelling companion he took with him Gēorg and me
the humble Samuēl, and commanded [me] to finish what had been begun by
him. That I happily undertook, and with firm faith to the glory of God I finished
in the year oltʿ [1190]. This was three years [after] the destruction of the holy
places of Jerusalem.
When our father went down to Tarson in order to sail on the journey before
him, the emperor arrived at Iconium, and after a few days his army [reached]
Tarson, and he stayed in order to meet them.
Now I did not delay in writing this book, because I received from him illu-
mination of the spirit in sitting beside [him] alone in the holy monastery, but
I bade [him] farewell, and through the care of Christ I arrived at the last point;
and I served those who came later as steward the mixed cups of divine wis-
dom from our spiritual father that delights souls for the consolation of healing
afflicted bodies. And at the end of this I left a little account of the course of his
life, lest there remain any doubt in future time for the enquirer as to the who,
and whence, and how, as he have today regarding many of our fathers and teach-
ers of the Armenians, that is, David Nerginecʿi,131 and Grigor Narekacʿi, and
Movsēs Xorenacʿi, and others in the richness of whose words we delight. But
although we desire to know the how of their lives and activity, we have not a sin-
gle word about the history of these blessed ones. For that reason up until today
it is the thirty-eighth year of his life [which] we have indicated briefly. And we
beg Christ to give him for us further length of days as head with good pastorship
and prudent visitation, solicitous of this monastery and prelate of the people.
[157] This blessed and most wise teacher of ours, the holy Nersēs of Lambron,
was born in the year of the Armenians ob [602, begins 11/2/1153]. In the sixteenth
year of his age he was ordained a monastic priest by Nersēs Catholicos and
called Nersēs, because his original name was Smbat. When he was twenty-four
[158] he was appointed archbishop of Tarson of Cilicia and the surrounding
provinces by Grigoris Catholicos.
He translated from Greek the History of saint Gregory the Pope called Tiakō-
los,134 and the canonical book of the holy father Benedict, by which lived all
the nation of the Romans, in the sixteenth year of his life. And in the year
627 [1178] he began a commentary on the Psalms of the prophet David. In the
year 628 [1179] he translated the commentary of the vision of saint John the
theologian [and] evangelist from Greek into Armenian. And the “He was with
the brethren,” which is this book, he himself commented on at the request of
132 This is taken from a colophon in Matenadaran 4211 [written in 1292] that contains Nerses’
commentaries on Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Wisdom.
133 Bishop: aycʿelu.
134 History: Sic! The reference is to the Dialogues of Pope Gregory i, the Great.
34 introduction: nersēs and the ‘dormition’
[160]
By the mercy of God and through the intercession of the holy Theotokos this
holy book was printed in the year of the Armenians 1185,137 in the patriarchate
of holy Eǰmiacin of Lord Abraham, Catholicos of all Armenians,138 and in the
patriarchate of holy Jerusalem and of Constantinople of Lord Gregory and
Lord John, holy bishops and theological teachers, in the recently established
press of the clerk Basil of Sebaste and of my brother clerk Jacob. In the city of
Constantinople, at the cost and expense of Lord Petan, son of the honourable
and spiritual clerk Paul.
Now you, who come across this [book] remember in your pure prayers the
above-mentioned reasons for it; and may you be remembered by Christ our
Lord. Amen.
the text out loud, Esayi would not have pronounced am, the abbreviation for
amenayn [“all”], for example, as if it were am [“year”].6 Otherwise, his spelling
has been respected, including inconsistencies and variations from standard
classical Armenian. Where Esayi has omitted a letter, this has been added
between brackets ⟨x⟩; and where a superfluous letter has been written this
is put in parentheses [x]. His punctuation, which consists primarily of semi-
colons, has also been kept, even when the English translation construes the
passage somewhat differently.7 Furthermore, capital letters are only printed
when used in the manuscript, with the exception of the first letters of personal
names and of God. Esayi’s use of interrogative marks is haphazard; I have
printed these only where they appear in the text. The sense of a passage may
thus only be obvious from the translation.
Esayi wrote his text as a continuous whole, marking the lemmata of the
Dormition by signs in the margins. I have separated these sections of the
commentary into paragraphs, rather than producing a continuous text; and I
have also introduced paragraph divisions in the commentary in order to break
up very lengthy passages. Chapter numbers have been added to accord with
modern divisions of the text. It will thus be easier for the reader to find a given
passage than if he were to peruse Esayi’s copy. Occasionally words or brief
passages that belong to the text are found in the margins of the manuscript.
These seem to have been added by Esayi himself as he corrected what he
had written. They have been integrated into the Armenian text, with a note
to indicate their source.
Esayi’s departures from the standard orthography of classical Armenian fall
into various categories, which are listed just below. But it should be stressed
that Esayi is not consistent in this regard, so the references to folio numbers
give only some examples of the variations, not every occurrence. The interested
reader will be able to see from the printed text how often, or rarely, Esayi departs
from the norm.
Changes in Consonants
6 Esayi normally indicates abbreviations by a stroke above the word; but occasionally -el, for
the participle ending in -eal, is not marked.
7 The occasional error has been corrected in a note, leaving the written form in the text.
Note to the Armenian Text 37
h. omitted before vowel. ogikʿ [175r] for hogikʿ; Abraam [182v] for Abraham.
This is very common, but Esayi is not consistent.
k>g. angeal [171r] for ankeal; angołin [186v] for ankołin; dastiaragel [147r]
for dastiarakel; mangamb [143r], mankancʿ, mangunkʿ [162v] for the
corresponding forms of manuk; tung [152v] for tunk.
s>š. aštičan [146r], for astičan. This change is rare.
t>d. ĕndrecʿer [169r] for ĕntrecʿer.
tʿ>d. ordovkʿ [167r] for ortʿovkʿ. This change is rare.
z>s. asdeacʿ [145v], asdē [159v], asdecʿin [182v] for the verb azdel. But the
regular azdeacʿ [167r], azdē [184r] also occur.
a>zero. This only occurs in astuac. But since Esayi always abbreviates
the forms of that noun, it is only observable in the compound at 165v:
astucutʿiwn.
ay>a. This reduction is very common, but not universal.
ea>e. arbanek [174r] for arbaneak; irers for irears.
ĕ. Esayi occasionally adds the shewa to break a cluster of consonants.
iw>e. erkeł [174v] for erkiwł.
oy>o. This is common for genitive endings, but not universal. Note the
inconsistent Ordwo iwroy sirelo [183r: “of his beloved Son”].
u [ու]>w [ւ]. This is common before vowels: anwan for anuan; arwest for
aruest.
w>zero. This is common before vowels or diphthongs: hogov [161r] for hogwov,
zgaloy [152v] for zgalwoy.
Verbal Forms
ayakʿ>aekʿ. For the 3ppl: imaneakʿ [168r] for imanayakʿ. This is the only
example.
e>ē. The imperfect endings -ei, -ein, etc. are often written -ēi, -ēin. But there is
no consistency.
ea>eay. For the 2ps imperative: xotoreay [153r] for xotorea.
el>il. The passive infinitive is occasionally spelled with -il.
+ ē. Monosyllabic 3ps aorists sometimes have a prefixed ē: ēac [166v]; ēaṙ
[186r].
ēr>-iwr. The 3ps imperfect is rarely spelled with -iwr: imaniwr [152r].
38 Note to the Armenian Text
Other Anomalies
The preposition i is commonly found before y+vowel, where y is already the
same preposition in reduced form: i yerkinsn [175v]; i yogocʿn [182r]. Or it reflects
the medieval pronunciation of initial e as ye: aṙ i yews [187v].
The superfluous addition of y before a vowel: yimacʿakan [179v] for imacʿa-
kan. This is the only example.
Use of the plural marker kʿ for cases other than the nominative: zturkʿ
[155v]; i karcikʿ [173v] for i karcis; ĕnd mełančʿakankʿs [172v], where the s is the
demonstrative suffix [“with us sinners”].
The following Armenian text is taken from Matenadaran 1422. The folio num-
bers of the manuscript are indicated in the margins [e.g. 142v]; and for compar-
ative purposes the corresponding page numbers of the printed edition, Con-
stantinople 1736, are also marked in the margins. To avoid confusion the latter
are preceded by C. Where the two texts differ, the translation is based on the
better reading. It therefore does not always reflect exactly the text of Mat 1422.
Obscurities are elucidated in the notes.
[Matenadaran 1422]
142r
Տեսութիւն քննութեամբ աղաւթից սուրբ աւետարանչին
C3
Յոհանու ի խնդրոյ Ստեփանոս վարդապետի
յակոբեցւոյ ի տէր Ներսէսէ յաշակերտէ իւր եւ հոգեւոր
որդեկէ. Աստուածովն եւ Հոգիդ սուրբ Աստուած։
Title in C:
Title in M:
8 Title page of C: View of the prayers of the historical account of the Dormition of the theologian
[and] evangelist John by Nersēs of Lambron, archbishop.
42 Armenian Text of the Commentary
The letter of your Honour, O holy Father,9 reached me once and twice, urging
[me] to a critical investigation of the prayers of the theologian10 [and] apostle
John. | And I thought it more important [to undertake] that task obediently C4
than to keep a slothful silence, | believing that an account of the wisdom in the 142v11
divine [scriptures] is not an investigation for human skill, nor the eloquence
in them praise for them, or their weakness censure. But each person has the
same [understanding] according to his own measure of faith, from the one
who distributes among mankind the variety of grace, towards whom praise is
directed by those listening. From that fear let us not retreat, or hide his gift,
or be profaners and robbers of things divine in the necessity of revealing that
request. But let us attempt always to remain in human lowliness and attribute
everything to him, serving his glory in worshipful humility.
So because this John was the beloved disciple of our Saviour,12 to whom C5
he also entrusted the virgin Theotokos,13 first it is right for us to investigate
how he arrived at Ephesus of the Asians as illuminator,14 and after how many
years. Furthermore, first to learn how he alone was called “beloved disciple,”
which we wish [to elucidate] as follows. John and James were the sons of the
9 Father: Stepʿannos is named only at the end, C, p. 156; see further the Introduction, 2.
Page references to the text in C are to the printed edition of 1736, marked in the English
translation below in the margins; those to the Introduction refer to this book.
10 John as theologian, astuacaban: this is not used of him in the Bible. Origen introduces a
quotation of Jn. 1.1 with the phrase: “Ho theologos graphei,” Johanneskommentar, 483. Cf.
also Athanasius, Contra Gentes §42, and C, pp. 115, 117, 156 below.
11 Folio numbers in Mat 1422 are distinguished from the page numbers of the printed edition.
12 John 13.23, 20.2, 21.7, 20.
13 John 19.26–27. Theotokos: astuacacin, a literal calque and the standard Armenian expres-
sion as also C, p. 94. Cf. Tiruhi, “Lady,” p. 10 and Tiramayr, “Mother of the Lord,” p. 154.
14 As illuminator, C: to illuminate, M.
44 Armenian Text of the Commentary
143v Յակոբոս դստեր Յովսեփա անուանելո փր|կչa հաւր որդիք էին։ եւ երէց
էր Յակոբոս քան զՅոհաննէս։ իսկ զՅոհաննէս մանուկ, հաստատէ զմեզ
ձեւ նկարագիր պատկերացն առ Քրիստոսիւ լինել, որով իմանամք թե
Յակոբոս էրէց էր քան զՔրիստոս ըստ ժամանակաց մարմնո, կամ
համահասակ։ իսկ Յոհանէս մանուկ եւ տղա։
C6 եւ գոլով դստերն Յովսիփա ի տան նորա ստընդիա մանգամբն | յորում
եւ Քրիստոս սնանէր։ ի դէպ էր ձեռասուն լինել նորա Քրիստոսի եւ
նովաւ դաստիարակեալ. ըստ որում է մանգանց բնական սէր առ տղայս։
այլ եւ սրբոհոյ Աստուածածնին սիրեցեալ։ վասն այնորիկ եւ ընտրեալ
յաշակերտութիւնն Աստուածոյ ամենեցուն յայտնի էր Քրիստոսի որ առ
նա նախ սնուցելն սէր մինչչեւ էր յայտնեալ նշանովքն. վասն այնո-
րիկ եւ սիրելի զնա անւանէին աշակերտ եւ որդեակ վարդապետին։
առ այս ապաստան եւ մայրն զգահ երիցութիւննb համարձակութեամբ
յարքաութեանն ունել խնդրէր։ զի ձեռասուն էր նորա որդին։ Իսկ եթէ յետ
այնորիկ եւ սոքա կոչմամբ եկին յաշակերտութիւնն, չէ ինչ ընդդէմ ասա-
ցելոցս։ քանզի մինչեւ յայն ոչ Քրիստոսի զանձն յայտնեալ էր եւ ոչ նոցա
առ նմա որոշեալ, այլ սնանելովն ի ձեռն նորա մնաին նոքա ընդ իշխա-
C7 նութեամբ | հաւրն իւրեանց Զեբեթեայ եւ Քրիստոս ընդ Յովսէփա։
a Read փրկչին.
b Read երիցութեանն.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 45
daughter15 of Joseph called | the father of the Saviour. And James was older 143r
than John. Now the form of the illustration of the images confirms for us John
as younger relatively to Christ. Whereby we understand that James was older
than Christ in bodily time, or of the same age. But John was younger and a
youth.16
And since the daughter of Joseph nursed John as a child in his house | C6
in which Christ also was raised, it was appropriate for Christ to be brought
up and educated with him. And “beloved,”17 in that there is a natural love of
children for youths, and also the blessed Theotokos18 loved [him]. Therefore,
after he was selected for God’s19 discipleship it was clear to all that Christ
had earlier nurtured love for20 him before Christ21 was revealed through the
signs.22 Therefore they called him “beloved disciple” and son of the teacher.
As confirmation for this his mother boldly requested he might have superior
rank in the kingdom, because her son was raised [with the Lord].23 Now if after
that these also came to discipleship by a summons, that in no way contradicts
what we have said, because until then Christ had not revealed himself, nor had
they decided [to go] with him, but despite being raised with him they remained
under the authority | of their father Zebedee,24 and Christ under that of Joseph. C7
15 Daughter: called Salome. The closest parallel to the tradition echoed by Nersēs comes
in the Armenian History of James and John, in Ankanon Girkʿ, iii, 293–299. Here we are
informed that Salome was the mother of James [Yakobos in Armenian] and John. A Salome
also appears in the Protoevangelium as midwife at the birth of Jesus. She was a daughter
of Joseph, and thus a sister to Jesus: as the author of the text explains: “Just as the sons of
Joseph were called brothers of Jesus, so also his daughters [were called] sisters.” This text
does not seem to have any known Greek model, though Hippolytus of Thebes [circa 980],
Fragmentum i, knows that Jesus was the uncle of John, being the brother of Salome the
daughter of Joseph; he provides a great deal of information about the family relations of
Joseph and Mary. Cf. Sargis Kund, Commentary on the Catholic Epistles, 21 [On the Epistle
of James], for the family members in Joseph’s household; his comments are echoed on
p. 272 in his commentary on the Epistle of Jude.
16 Grigor Tatʿewacʿi on John 13. 23 notes: “Some say that he was younger and the son of his
sister,” i.e. Jesus’ sister, a daughter of Joseph not named by Tatʿewacʿi. I have not seen
elsewhere in Armenian texts this argument of age from images.
17 And “beloved”: om. M.
18 Theotokos: Astuacacin. See note 6 above.
19 God’s: their, C.
20 Nurtured love for: been nurtured with, C.
21 Christ: he, C.
22 John ch. 2, esp. vv. 11, 22.
23 Matt 20.20.
24 Matt 4.21, etc.
46 Armenian Text of the Commentary
143v Իսկ յետ մկրտութեանն թող լիքa նա զ|տունն Յովիփա, եւ սոցա հրա-
մայեաց զիւրեանց հայրն լքանել եւ իւր հետեւել։ յետ որոյ յամենայն
խորհուրդb զերիսն միայն ընդ իւր առնոյր առանձինն յայլ աշակերտացն,
այսինքն զնոսա եւ զՊետրոս։ զոր եւ զայս ոչ է պարտ առանց քննութեան
թողուլ։ զի յաղբիւրէն բարեաց եւ իմաստութեան զի՞արդ լինէր իրս
առանց խորհրդոյ կամ մարդկան ինչ աչառանաւք։ Իսկ եթե ասէ ոք
վասն զի՞ նոքա անընդմիջաբար սիրէին, կամ ի Յուդաէ խորշէր։ ոչ այսու
լուծումն կարծեացս զտեղի առնու, զի անմարթ էր զսիրելին միայն սիրել
նմա որ զայս ոչ եդ աւրէնս։ կամ ի Յուդաէ զխորհուրդն իւր թաքուցանել
C8 եւ ատելութեան նիւթ նմին | ընձեռել։
այլ քանզի յերկնից էր եւ նոցա դասուցն որոշիչ։ կամեցաւ զկարգ
երկնաւորացն եւ յերկրի աղաւտապէս ի պատիւ պաշտաման իւրոյ նկա-
րել։ այսինքն զի անդր ուսաք զմի դասն եւ զերիս կարգման ընդմիջա-
բար ի պաշտաւն աստուածութեանն կանխեալ։ որ անուանին աթոռք,
սէրոբէք, եւ քէրովբէք.c եւ նոցա միջնորդութեամբ գիտութիւն լուսա-
փայլութեանն յաստուածութենէ անտի ի ստորին դասն հեղեալ։ որոց
144r ապացոյց եւ կամ ճշմարտապէս ասել համահա|ւասար ընտրեաց զերիս
միշտ յանմիջաբար հաղորդութիւն իւրոց խորհրդոցն։ յաղագս որոյ եւ
զաստուածական նորա էութենէ բնութեանն չետ թոյլ հոգին այլ ումեք
ճառել բայց միայն սմա, որ զայն վերնոցն անընդմիջաբար պաշտամանն
C9 ընդկալաւ հաւասարութիւն։ | եւ եհեղ մեզ գիտութիւն ըստ կարութեան
տանելո մարդկան, յայնմանէ զոր ինքն առ իւր ունէր ծովացեալ անչափ
քան զտանել աշխաարհի, որպէս եւ ասաց։
այսպէս եւ նոցա է աւրէնք որ վերինն են, զի որում ինքեանք անչափ
յաճախութեամբ հաղորդին, տան ներքնոցն զնոյն որպէս եւ տանելն
կարեն։ Իսկ զի ի Քրիստոսէ յանձն եղեւ սմա Աստուածածինն ինքն
Now after the baptism he left | the house of Joseph,25 and he commanded 143v
them to leave their own father and to follow him.26 After which, in all his plans
he took with him only the three alone from among the disciples, that is, them
and Peter.27 One must not leave this without investigation, for from the source
of blessings and wisdom how could events be without plan or [conducted]
through some human partiality? Now if anyone says: Why did they immediately
love [him], or [why] he was abhorred by Judas,28 not thereby would he find
a solution to these suppositions. For it was impossible for him to love only
the beloved one, since he did not impose this rule; or to hide from Judas his
thoughts and hand to him a cause for hatred.
But because he who distinguished their ranks was from heaven, he wished C8
to indicate the order of the heavenly ones also dimly on earth for the honour of
his worship. That is, we have thus learned the one rank and the three orders to
have immediate priority in the worship of the Godhead, those who are called
thrones, cherubim and seraphim.29 And through their mediation knowledge
of his brilliance flows from the Godhead to the lower ranks.30 As proof of this,
or to speak truthfully, | co-equally he chose the three as always immediately to 144r
share in his plans.31 For which reason the Spirit did not allow anyone else to
describe *the nature of his divine essence,32 save only the one who received
that equality of service with the celestial ones directly; | and he poured out C9
on us knowledge in accordance with human ability, from what he himself
possessed within himself in abundance, immeasurably more than the world
could sustain, just as he said.33
In this fashion it is also the rule for those who are celestial ones, that from
the one in whom they themselves share in immeasurable abundance, they give
the same to those34 below as much as they are able to sustain it. Now, that
a Read զՅակոբոս.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 49
the Theotokos was entrusted to him by Christ he himself narrates, and that he
sustained her with him and did not abandon service of the holy virgin until
her death.35 And this is clear from what Paul said, writing to the Galatians:
“After fourteen years I went up to Jerusalem, and I saw36 James and Cephas and
John.”37 And before this with Barnabas he hastened with the evangelist to Asia,
according to the account of the Acts of the Apostles;38 | after which also with C 10
Timothy.39 Therefore he appointed Timothy to the church | of the Ephesians, 144v
which the apostle had instructed before John’s coming there.40
Now after the death of the Lady41 John came to Ephesus, whence42 he was
exiled to the island of Patmos by king Hadrian; and he was returned again to
Ephesus by Trajan.43 At which time God desired to transfer the length of his
course in the world to heaven. And before his death we received from him these
prayers that he offered. But this account has no beginning nor any narrative of
the circumstances of his original career, which historians preserve as a habitual
rule, likewise no description of the martyred heroism of the other apostles.44
For this we do not have anything | accurate to say, except that from the complete C 11
story extract[s] have been given to us, just as also of Thomas.45 For [either]
the beginning of the whole occurred too late, or because those who had the
Spirit did not have zeal at the times of the apostles to compose a remembrance
commensurate with the length of the history, just as is the custom of those
confirmed in earthly46 mysteries. But only the circumstance of each one’s death
did they indicate, which runs as follows.47
35 John 19.26–27.
36 And I saw: to see, C.
37 Nersēs has combined several references in Galatians, ch. 2.
38 Paul, Barnabas and John: Acts 15.37.
39 Paul and Timothy: Acts ch. 16.
40 1Tim 1.3. The Acts also associate Paul and Timothy with Corinth, Thessalonica and Phi-
lippi; see 2Cor 1.19, 1Thess 3.2, Phil 2.19.
41 The Lady: tiruhi, femine form of tēr, lord, often used for the Virgin Mary; cf. above at n. 13.
42 Whence: and, C.
43 There is confusion here. According to Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, iii xviii, 1, John was
exiled to Patmos in the days of Domitian; he was restored to Ephesus in the reign of
Trajan, Eus. Ecclesiastical History, iii, xxiii, 1. Hadrian followed Trajan [in ad 117], as Movsēs
Xorenacʿi knows, History, ii 54–55.
44 I.e. Nersēs does not have the complete Acts of John. Story: patmutʿiwn, also used in
Armenian of the Acts of the Apostles.
45 See the bho for the Acts of Thomas in Armenian: only several “epitomes” have survived.
46 Earthly: heavenly, C.
47 Here ends Nersēs’ Introduction. For a discussion of the Dormitio [Metastasis] as a literary
construct see Junod-Kaestli, ii, 564–580.
50 Armenian Text of the Commentary
a Read այնմ.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 51
He says was, but he does not indicate in which place or city this occurred. How-
ever, we understand Ephesus, because there Eusebius testifies his dormition.49
And the place is clear which today is honoured with much glory. For he was
there, as was said, after his return from the island of Patmos, having grown old
through length of time, because the time of the kings50 confirms us in this,
since he saw also the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus and the gospels of the
evangelists.51 And he was with the brethren52 over a length of days, | leaving in53 C 13
the world the grace of remains by Christ.54
He says he was joyful in the Lord and not in the body, because divine and
human joy are opposed. That is, who is joyful in God is happy through hope
even though weary in the body; but who [is joyful] in the world is pampered
in the body but anxious in hope. And his own [people] *rejoiced in hope55
in Christ in the joy that is impenitent and without contradictions;56 for all
things contrary to the body increase it and do not diminish it. Accordingly, as
much as57 the torments of Christ58 are increased | in us, likewise through Christ 145v
48 §106: the standard division of the Dormitio is into 10 sections, § 106–115. [I]: the ten
divisions of the text in Z, however, do not correspond to these.
49 Eusebius, he, iii xxxi, 3: John sleeps at Ephesus. Dormition: nnǰel, lit. “falling asleep;” the
noun nnǰumn is standard.
50 I.e. Trajan and Hadrian.
51 I.e. John’s own gospel was the last of the four to be composed. Cf. Thomson, “Armenian
Traditions concerning the Writing of the Gospels.”
52 Direct quotations of the lemma in the commentary are printed in italics.
53 In, M: to, C.
54 But the tomb was empty, C, pp. 153–154, where Nersēs notes “we do not have his body.”
On the other hand, Yovhannēs Drasxanakertcʿi, History, xii 7, refers to relics of John
the evangelist brought to Constantinople from Ephesus in the time of Constantius; and
Movsēs Dasxurancʿi, History, ii 48, attributes the transfer to Justinian.
55 Rejoiced in hope: it is clear that they rejoiced in this, M.
56 Contradictions: opposition, M.
57 As much as: just as, C.
58 Of Christ: om. M.
52 Armenian Text of the Commentary
a Read նորոգած.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 53
our59 consolation is increased.60 Christ himself said: “When they will despise
you, rejoice,”61 and not: When they will not torment [you]. In faith in this
saying | the blessed apostle was joyful with the brethren, that is, through C 14
participation in the torments of Christ.
And one day, because it was Sunday and alla the brethren were
gathered around him,b he began to speakc as follows.
a. All: om. C. b. Around him: om. C. c. To speak: + with them, C.
Sunday is translated into our language as “of the Lord.”62 And because it was the
custom of the Jews to do no work on Sabbath days,63 to gather together, and be
occupied in listening to the Law, the apostles transferred this respect for the
Sabbath to the first day of the week, the day64 of Christ’s illuminating resur-
rection, on which they held their gathering according to the Jewish custom. In
accordance with this resolution,65 the brethren who were absent gathered from
a distant place around the apostle to honour the first day of the week by com-
muning66 with each other. And no one was expecting67 his death that | he had C 15
announced.68 Then in accordance with his custom he began to instruct them
before the breaking of the communion bread.
For just as those born from one blood are called brethren according to the flesh,
likewise we who are born from one Spirit in Christ are called brethren accord-
ing to the Spirit.69 Now who is not renewed in this birth is far from the name
of brother, as the apostle says, and apart [from it].70 But because these were all
59 Our: om. C.
60 2Cor 1.5 = Z.
61 Matt 5.11–12.
62 Sunday: kiwrakē; of the Lord: terunakan.
63 Days: + and, C. No work: cf. Exod 20.10, etc.
64 The day: om. C.
65 Resolution: xorhurd, or thought, plan, mystery.
66 By communing: hałordutʿeamb, or by [taking] communion; cf. John 20.19.
67 Expecting, ditēr, C: aware of, gitēr, M.
68 Previously announced: this is not in the Dormitio or in the Armenian Acts of Prochoros.
69 Cf. Matt 23.8.
70 1Cor 5.11? Heb 2.11? But there is no reference to baptism there.
54 Armenian Text of the Commentary
a Read սակայն.
b Read գործի.
c Բանից bis [sic!].
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 55
such, therefore they were called brethren. And in adding also fellow-servants,
he distinguishes the clergy71 in the ranks72 of their inheritance; because all
ministers, in accordance with the rank of their individual ordination,73 be it
priest | or deacon, are co-workers with each other and serve a single worship. All C 16
these are participants and brethren of the Lord’s kingdom and fellow-servants
in accordance with the truthful promise: “I do not pray for these alone, but
for all who believe in me through their word, that they may be one just as74
you, Father, are75 in me and I in you and they in us.”76 Do you see77 the true
communion of all in the glory of the unending kingdom?
You knowa how many powerful deeds God has bestowed on you
through me, how many signs, how many [acts of] grace.
a. Do you know? C.
71 Clergy, vičakelocʿ, meaning heirs, and by extension clergy, i.e. a calque on klēroi. See the
Greek of the lemma.
72 Ranks: sing. C.
73 Ministers: paštōneaykʿ, lit. “servants,” but often used of the lesser clergy. [“Fellow-servants”
renders caṙayakicʿkʿ.] Ordination: ǰeṙnadrutʿiwn, lit. laying on of hands.
74 Just as: om. M.
75 Are: om. C.
76 And they in us: om. C. John 17.20–21, with variants from Z.
77 Do you see, M: you see, C.
78 Junod-Kaestli, 570, note that what follows is a sort of anamnēsis, where John reviews all
that Christ has done through him for the brethren.
79 Without measure, ančʿapʿ: that much, aynčʿapʿ, M.
80 Instrument, gorcikʿ, C: gorc, deed, M.
81 Miracles: sing. C.
56 Armenian Text of the Commentary
After the signs he recalls the teaching, which is the consolation and joy of
souls. | And he confirms how appropriate this was for their knowledge of the C 18
faith, since when the hearer becomes a witness of the truth, what need does the
speaker have of other testimonies for its confirmation? Directions, refreshments,
services. In these different fashions one must understand that this is the fruit
of teaching, to be director to the disciples | and to correct everything that 147r
lacks in them. This I did, he says. And refreshment, because [when] there is
perplexity of thoughts in doubtful suppositions, by resolving that the teacher
gives them82 refreshment from confusion. Services,83 that is, by teaching them
to minister and instruct and to bring them to the measure of the stature of
perfect84 understanding.
This is fruit for the disciples that they gave from the seed of the service85 of
the teacher. Glory, because they learned the promise of future glory through
his word. Faith, because not merely did they hear the same, just as many of
mankind, but through direction they were confirmed in faith in the sayings.
Unity, because they were not disunited in86 knowledge of the faith of glory, as
were once the Corinthians, one being of this opinion and another of that;87 but
they all were in one word and in one spirit.88 Gifts, because after this faith they
too received freely the grace of God to work signs and make instruction, just like
the apostles.89 Presents, because instead of all these travails he has prepared for
them compensation of future glory, | *since what is here is gift and grace, while C 20
what is there is present and compensation.90 But see the splendour of the order
of these words. First the power | of signs, whereby they were persuaded of his 147v
teaching; and then the teaching which they learned; after that the fruit of their
piety from the word. And present of the compensation of the fruit from God,91
who receives the same through those who labour here.
How much and how many things given to you have you seen with
your own eyes, which werea not visible to these eyes nor wereb
audible to these ears!
a, b. are, C.
Once more he trusts in them as witness[es] of the grace distributed. For you
have seen, he says, how much it is, and you know that what has been given to you
from God through my intercession and oversight is immeasurable. But in saying
that it is not visible | to these eyes nor audible to these ears, he does not mean his C 21
own signs or teaching, but the knowledge given to them by God through these,
since that is visible to the spiritual eyes and not to the tangible one. The former
through its profound understanding is able to hear92 and comprehend the glory
there, because the senses are the intermediary and teacher of tangible things
and they bring us to knowledge of them. But God is not tangible, nor are his
glory and gifts,93 but spiritual.94 So spiritual eyes and ears approach thither, but
not tangible ones. | And faith in him leads to the approach to that knowledge 148r
and the hope in God and love that flow from him, in pursuit of which aversion95
from the pleasure of the senses and occupation solely96 with spiritual activity
[are required]. | When that occurs, then his light and knowledge appear to C 22
him, to which light tangible eyes cannot approach nor tangible ears learn. And
that these ones, to whom he said this, have attained such knowledge is clear
from the letter: for he says, “I write to you, fathers, because you have come to
know that one who is from the beginning.”97 But because among us a vision of
this spiritual [knowledge] is very dim and turns to oblivion, therefore we are
unable to believe in his account of the same because of being inexperienced
and unfamiliar [with it].
[2]103 Now let us be firm in him, remembering him ina all your works.
a. Him in: om. C.
To be firm in him is for spiritual eyes. And Christ spoke thus: “Abide in me and C 25
I in you,”104 for | “God is spirit”105 and not flesh. In him the spirit abides; and 149r
it abides when it stands apart from the desires of the flesh and the senses. In
this fashion he seeks [us] to be firm. Remembering him106 in all your works; for
when the remembrance of God will be clear to the mind, [and] it is not difficult
through the tongue’s will to approach forbidden thoughts,107 then the flesh also
follows the will. In this way we are the temple of God108 when our spiritual
[faculty] is clothed with his recollection.
You have knowna the mystery of his providence that has been
accomplished for mankind, for what reason the Lord accom-
plished it.
a. You have known: Do you know? C.
103 For the division of the Dormition into ten sections in Z cf. n. 48 above.
104 John 15.4.
105 John 4.24.
106 Here C and M both express him, absent in the lemma of C.
107 The meaning of this phrase is unclear.
108 1Cor 3.16.
109 Deut 32.4; Psalms passim.
110 Cf. Gen 2.17, 3.22. “With independent will, anjn išxan,” only appears in the Armenian Bible
in 1Ezra 4.28, simply referring to the king’s power. For the concept of free will in Armenian
see Eznik’s treatise, which is devoted to the concept of anjnišxanutʿiwn. The title given to
this untitled work by Mariès, De Deo, is misleading.
111 The first person called just, ardar, in the Armenian Bible is Noah.
64 Armenian Text of the Commentary
to sin.112 | The Enemy113 was the instigator of that will, and he slandered them 149v
to God that their own will and nature were sinful.114 | There was no one of C 27
mankind who could rebut him, because all had sinned. God sent his Son, who
came and became a steward and servant115 for the salvation of the flesh and a
champion116 for God the just creator of the same.
Hence he clothed himself117 in body and soul, and endured in the flesh the
conditions of the body like every man, and in the soul those of the soul.118
In that condition he did not sin,119 because the light of the Godhead was
united120 with the darkness of our nature. And when Satan struggled to cause
that nature to stumble like darkness, the light saw his tricks and did not allow
it, in accordance with the saying: “The light shone in the darkness”—that is,
in the body—“and the darkness did not comprehend it”—that is, Satan.121 He
did not comprehend either of the two, for he was unable to attain the body
through sin, nor | to comprehend the Godhead that was united with the body. C 28
For, he says: “None of the princes of this world recognized him, since if they had
recognized him122 they would indeed not have crucified the Lord of glory,”123
but they would have called him apparently124 Son of God.
So when he had completed the mystery of his dispensation125 of the body
demonstrating it to be sinless, he did not permit sin to be mingled with his
natural condition, | but remained in body and soul sinless126 and perfect. That 150r
sinless body, for the sake of the sins of everyone, he willingly offered as a
sacrifice to God the Father.127 And in that body, to which death did not have the
power to approach, he accepted death, the punishment and curse of sin, and
was called a curse for our sake.128 And the second Adam129 purified us from sin
and from the curse which Satan130 had cast on the first Adam. | And through C 29
his righteousness he condemned the guilty cause of our sin and the traitor.131
For that single body demonstrated that all bodies would have been sinless in
their condition, unless you had deceived.132
To this the Father was judge, and he justified legally the Son’s dispensation,
and through him he tore up our transgressions.133 His death forgave the sins of
all. Satan remained under the condemnation of our sins, and we were clothed
in righteousness through Christ. For as the apostle says: “Just as by one man
condemnation [fell] on all, likewise by one righteousness, righteousness of life
[came] on all.”134 Life occurred after the payment for Adam’s debt, just as Christ
acted: for first he died, and then | he came to life. Thus we, who first were C 30
born in the body from Adam and after that in the spirit by Christ, must die
in accordance with the nature of the old father, and then arise in accordance
with the new Father.135 And because this hope | of a second life was confirmed 150v
by him, we die willingly to the life of this world and its pleasures in the water of
the font, just as He did;136 and we look forward to that life and are not willingly
of this world.
So you must know all this, he says, and what goes with it. And because Christ
showed this nature as sinless, [you] must137 endeavour always in sinlessness
to be a champion138 of Christ and of his righteousness, and not of Satan by
sinning.
127 Heb 9.14.
128 Gal 3.13.
129 1Cor 15.45.
130 Satan: om. M [the subject remaining unspecified].
131 Traitor, dawačan: i.e. Satan. For various names given to Satan see n. 113 above.
132 You had deceived: ēir du patreal. This could be either active or passive: You [i.e. Adam] had
been deceived, or: You [i.e. Satan] had deceived.
133 Tore up: pataṙeacʿ, not a biblical term, but for the language of debt see Rom 4.4, and for
the cheirograph Col 2.14. For Armenian parallels see Xosrov Anjewacʿi, Commentary on the
Liturgy, §74; also Stone, Adam and Eve, esp. 80–81.
134 Rom 5.18, somewhat garbled. In the Epistle to the Romans Paul develops the argument of
debt and condemnation.
135 Eph 4.22–24 for the old man and the new.
136 Christ’s baptism: Matt ch. 3, Mark ch. 1, Luke ch. 3, John ch. 1.
137 Must: om. M.
138 Champion: see n. 116 above.
68 Armenian Text of the Commentary
The Lord himself begs you through me, wishing that youa remain
without offences, without deceit, without wantonness.b
a. You: om. M. b. Wantonness: pl. C.
By offences and deceit,139 he means sinning by us against Christ. And that this is C 31
so, let us learn by an example. Just as some general, taking his troops, hastens
to the king in order to bring judgment on the wrong-doing of his enemies, but
when the troops who have vowed to serve him are before the king they become
protectors against his enemies; have they not then betrayed the general and
offended him? In the same fashion we have died to the desire of this world
and placed our hope in heaven. And he testified before the Father: “They are
not of this world.”140 Christ is always defaming Satan before the Father and
condemning him through his body. And we, who are his troops,141 he wishes to
C 32
assist in this through our142 sinlessness. However, our abandoning that || path
151r
and rolling in sin with crooked pleasure and becoming champions of the will
of Satan, that is an offence to Christ and betrayal of the pact of death with him.
But we say to commit sin is to act crookedly with unrepentant will, and not to
stumble unwillingly and again repent. For this is temptation unto143 sin, and
that is service to the same. This, he says, the Lord begs you through me not to
commit. And see that he begs and does not command, in a brotherly and not
lordly fashion.
For he knows the insult that is from you; he knows also the dishon-
our.a He knows the deceit; he knows also the wantonness in your
disobeying his holy commandments.
a. Dishonour, anargutʿiwn [as in commentary]: vileness, anardutʿiwn, C.
He reveals the things spoken as a pretext, that is, all this dishonour | of the name C 33
and glory of God is effected by us in our144 disobeying his commandment. For if
he who keeps the commandments glorifies it, then who does not keep it insults
it. And what is the commandment? Love for God and for each other; and this is
a Read եցոյց.
b Read ստիպեալ.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 71
the source of all blessings.145 Behold, the same is not foreign to the condition of
our nature, but is pleasing to all. So if, departing from our nature, we contravene
its condition and the laws which in accordance with its nature he decreed for
us to walk in, we have deceived ourselves and the law-giver. But understand
the disobedience is transgression with contempt and perverted mind, | and not 151v
stumbling. For behold this same one indeed writes: “If we say [we] do not have
sin, we deceive ourselves.”146 So then, the disobedient one147 is he who reckons
sinning as the law. If someone, whether with a small or | great transgression, so C 34
behaves, he has disobeyed the commandment.
What other grief has he that this, that he demonstrated the straight148 and we
walk crookedly; he declared our nature to be sinless, and we through sin render
it wicked; he provided [our] necessary needs liberally, and we stray into desire
for superfluities? Do not wrong, he says, the one who tramples on the straight
laws, and do not make [him] grieve.
The benevolent: For this is the nature of God: benevolence, through which he
guides heaven and earth in accordance with each one’s advantage, and makes
all share in his goodness.149
The compassionate: Compassion is the fruit of his goodness. Now he was | C 35
benevolent for us and gave as fruit his compassion, because he became man150
from the abundance of his goodness,151 being constrained to have compassion.
The merciful: Now his mercy is his commiseration; for he shared in sufferings
with us and was an intercessor towards God152 and a mediator of his153 expia-
tion.154
145 Love for God and keeping the commandments: cf. 1John 5.2–3.
146 1John 1.8, not Z.
147 The disobedient one, C: among the disobedient, M.
148 Straight: ułił, or “upright,” a persistent theme in the Psalms and Proverbs.
149 Goodness: barutʿiwn. In the following lines the text alternates between goodness and
benevolence, barerarutʿiwn, lit. the doing of good.
150 Became man: mardacʿaw. Cf. the verb marmnanal, to become body/flesh, as below, and the
discussion in the Introduction, s.v. Theological Terminology.
151 Goodness: benevolence, C; see n. 142 just above.
152 Rom 8.34, Heb 7.25, 1John 2.1.
153 His: om. C.
154 Rom 3.25, 1John 2.2, 4.10.
72 Armenian Text of the Commentary
The holy:155 For there is156 a compassion which is not holy; that is, the one
which is human. But he in doing this is holy, because only for the sake of helping
us | he bore his humiliation,157 and not for his own need. 152r
The pure: For he has nothing hazy158 mixed with his will or his nature, to
appear in a different form or become something else, but he is pure. Just as he
appears mild159 and holy, so indeed he is.
The undefiled: For he did not endure any human defilement | in the thoughts C 36
of his mind’s will in becoming flesh.160
The immaterial: Because he did not accept any material passion161 in his
bodily flesh, and162 because in mind and body he was pure, which for us is
impossible. For although some have purified their body, they have not [puri-
fied] their easily-swayed mind; whereas he was undefiled in mind and body
[and] unaffected163 by material passions.
The only: For only he of mankind was adorned with these [attributes].
The one: For he is one after the ineffable union of the divinity and the
flesh.164
The unchanging: Because he was not changed in the union, nor did the
ineffable mixture165 alter the state166 of the natures. For he was seen as a man
by nature, and the same was understood as God in truth. | C 37
The certain:167 For he was not seen as man by deception, or move among
them by deceit, or speak confusedly.168
The undeceiving: *For he did not deceive the righteousness of his lordship
in mercifully working salvation.169
155 The following adjectives [printed in bold] are part of the text of the Dormition, but not
clearly indicated as separate lemmata by Nersēs.
156 There is: om. M.
157 Humiliation: xonarhutʿiwn; cf. Phil 2.8.
158 Hazy: šamandał, obscure, foggy.
159 Mild: kʿałcʿr, as of Christ’s yoke, Luke 6.35.
160 To become flesh: marmnanal; see n. 150 above.
161 Passion: axtkʿ; for this aspect of the bodily condition see the Theological Terminology.
162 And: om. C.
163 Unaffected: anhiwtʿ, lit. immaterial.
164 For the union, miutʿiwn, see the Theological Terminology.
165 Mixture: xaṙnumn. For this common expression to render the Incarnation see parallels in
the Theological Terminology.
166 State: tesutʿiwn, lit. idea, view, conception.
167 Certain: stoyg, lit. authentic, real.
168 Confusedly: om. M.
169 For his mercifully working salvation did not deceive the righteousness of his lordship, M.
74 Armenian Text of the Commentary
a ի om. corr.
b յլայս? զայս corr.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 75
The patient:170 For he did not use his authority or his punishing power, as
on Israel in the desert.171 But he accomplished everything compassionately for
mankind and mildly. | And because he was able to punish, yet did not wish [to 152v
do so], he showed his power on the irrational plant of the fig-tree.172
For he was intelligible [as] God, and became tangible man. And the same who
[is] intelligible God is visible Jesus. | But not in accordance with the intelligence C 38
of the spiritual beings is he comprehensible to the holy angels, nor in accor-
dance with the sensation of tangible mankind is he utterable by the tongue.175
The concealing of their faces from attaining the unattainable comprehension
by the wings of the seraphim make this clear,176 and the inability of mankind
to stretch out to the same. For he knows that he slept, but how his sleeping177
disturbed the sea he is unable [to know].178 He knows that he ran, but how over
the fluid waves,179 he stops180 short of knowing. Thus the name of God Jesus is
unattainable for heavenly and earthly ones.
But one must enquire what is the name of his nature, because the name
defines the essence of the nature, just as the man [is defined as] living, rational
and receptive of mind.181 But creatures do not know what defines his nature,
but they name him from the progression of his activities, | as he demonstrated: C 39
good, merciful. All these [epithets] define the will of his activity, and are not
indicators of his nature.
Our life is holy when it is not contaminated with foul passions, neither the soul
by thoughts nor the body by deeds. And this is gladness for him, because we
pattern his image in ourselves189 and not that of the outsider.190
For if Paul, who only received a taste of the abundance of the love of the
Godhead, said: “Who is sick and I am not sick; who stumbles and I am not in
a fever?”191 then Christ, who became man and died, not for his own sake but
for us, | when he sees us through impure lives sneering at such192 grace, what C 41
fever of suffering193 will he not endure? However, | when we remain chaste and 153v
live not enjoying this world but only running through it and being zealous for
that,194 he rests on seeing us in this [state].
Impatience is the cause and reason of all passions, as [is] endurance of bless-
ings. When we are adorned with patience, he is confident in our co-suffering,
that is, not being disturbed by all passions and not being deflected and desist-
ing from the course of virtue.
189 For the image of Christ in us see Rom 8.29, 1Cor 15.49.
190 Outsider: ōtar, foreigner, other, stranger. Here Satan is implied, the stranger as opposed to
the true shepherd of John 10.5.
191 2Cor 11.29 [M = Z]. For the “taste” cf. Heb 6.4–5.
192 Such: om. M.
193 Suffering: vštakcʿutʿiwn, lit. co-suffering; but sympathy seems inappropriate here.
194 It, that: Nersēs contrasts sa, this world, and na, the chaste life. Running: Paul often uses
this verb for the passage through life, e.g. 1Cor 9.24, 26.
80 Armenian Text of the Commentary
He teaches the character of pure love, | that is, fatherly and not lordly, since C 43
it is for the father to smile at his son’s sobriety, | that is, because compassion 154r
controls the inner man as the mover of his soul.199 In this way Christ too
after sharing totally in our condition, except for sin,200 experienced fellow-
suffering, not only the experience of our sad201 states but also of the joyful
ones. Behold, our course is before his all-seeing202 eyes. Just as he is sad at
the inappropriate, likewise he smiles at the appropriate. And this is sobriety:
because we are bound203 to the darkness of the body and it is easy for us to be
deceived.204 Then, when taking as guide the light of his knowledge we become
195 Everywhere, unity: see Paul, passim, and the Psalms, esp. 54.15, 58.6.
196 The mysteries of God, ay [i.e. astuacoy] xorhrdocʿs: ays xorhrdocʿs, these mysteries, C.
197 Unity: Here Nersēs uses miełinutʿiwn, not miabanutʿiwn as in the lemma. The latter has the
sense of togetherness, being of one accord; the former means singleness, and can be used
of the Trinity or of the unity within the Son. See Theological Terminology.
198 Words: sing. M.
199 Mover of his soul: šaržičʿ anjinn; on p. 93 of C Nersēs indicates that the soul, hogi, moves
the body.
200 Heb 4.15.
201 Sad, trtmakan: bodily, marmnakan, M.
202 All-seeing: amenahayeacʿ; used of Christ in Ps-Dionysius, eh, iii 3.10, but in the Bible only
at Wis 7.23 in a list of epithets of wisdom.
203 Bound: close, C.
204 To be deceived, džril, C: to transgress, držil, M.
82 Armenian Text of the Commentary
This is the end206 and completion of everything, that all forms of virtue are
performed for that sake, so that thereby we may make our way to the love of
God. And this is not the limit or boundary of love, like the capability of the body
for endurance or the denial of will for unity. But this, which these beget, that is
our love for God, is unlimited and unending. And as much as anyone stretches
out [to it], that much the lack of desires increases. But whoever reckons himself
to have attained the limit of love, for that reason he thinks he does not love.
Otherwise, the seeing of the beloved is the end of the love of every lover. And
in as much as it is now impossible for us who so desire to see | our beloved,207 154v
hence the unending desire always increases until it attains him. | I omit saying C 45
that especially then it does not cease, in accordance with the Apostle: “These
three are one,208 and greater than these is love,”209 because it is210 unlimited.
But observe for me at the end of these sayings the modesty of his teaching
and be astonished, for in his admonitory [words] he did not say, as is the custom
of other books: “Do not make God angry,”211 or “Do not disturb [him],”212 but:
“Do not insult and do not cheat.” Then, changing to exhortation, he does not
say: “Be pure and just for the sake of glory or for the promised crowns,”213
but that Christ will smile and rejoice at your purity. What do we learn from
the subtlety214 of the passage of these words,215 save the pure and natural
205 Hunter: orsoł, as on p. 67 of C. See Ps 90.3, Prov 11.8, for orsoł as the spiritual enemy; further
references to Satan in the nbhl, s.v. The verb is also used for fishing; cf. Matt 4.19, Luke 5.10.
Agatʿangełos, Aa §81, refers to hunting/fishing for men with the hook of the Cross.
206 End: vaxčan, in the sense of aim or final cause.
207 Cf. 1Cor 13.12.
208 Are one: om. C.
209 1Cor. 13.13. The Armenian nt translates meizōn toutōn by a comparative, mec kʿan zsosa,
not a superlative.
210 Because it is: om. C.
211 Jer 25.6.
212 Do not disturb: mi xrovecʿucʿanēkʿ; this phrase does not seem to be attested in the Arme-
nian Bible.
213 1Pet. 5.4 for the “crown of glory.”
214 Subtlety, nrbutʿenē: purity, srbutʿenē, C.
215 These words: sing. M.
84 Armenian Text of the Commentary
Քանզի զի՞նչ այլ ինչ ունիցիմ ասել ձեզ ունիք զԱստուածոյ ձերոյ
զգրաւականն։
state of love, in which the offender is grasped, not by fear but by shame, | C 46
which is greater than fear. Its nature moves its possessor and not outward
appearances.216 The learning of these sayings is within us: who searches, finds
by himself.
[3]217 This now I speak with you, brethren, hastena to the task before
you, now to complete it inb the Lord.
a. Hasten: hastening, M. b. To complete [it] in: being completed by, M.
All tasks are accomplished for his sake so that they may give fruit in future
time, much for a little, as the husbandman hopes when sowing. But your
fruit is not uncertain, he says, | in the hope of giving fruit, but it is the fruit 155r
of perfect work in that Christ at the right hand of your Father is head and
crown-giver.218 Only I speak so that you may be zealous and courageous for
the same, so that you may not lose because of laziness219 the grace which
through his own labour and cross you possess from the Father. | For the fruit C 47
of your task has been accomplished, not by you but by Christ, for he made you
sons220 of God.221 Only do you hasten to his grace through your works,222 not
trusting in your own virtue for righteousness, because that is impossible, as the
Apostle says: “Although I am mortified and tormented, yet I do not have my
own righteousness, but that of the faith of Christ.”223
For what else would I have to say to you? You have the pledge of
your God.
That is, the body of Christ, for it224 is the earnest of our salvation and life.225 So
if you did not have that, it would be appropriate for me to prolong my teaching.
But since you are all believers and you know that the Son of God took flesh | for C 48
your sake and sat on the right hand of the Father,226 as hope of life and earnest
of the adoption of God,227 and through the Spirit you chew and taste this grace,
in which you rejoice, I do not have anything further to offer as confirming
support for [this] saying to those established on this firm base. | 155v
That is, the grace of the Holy Spirit. For after Jesus as mediator between God
and mankind228 brought our pledge229 to the Father, he received that gift from
the Father as an earnest and spread it upon us. And he made peace, not in vain
but as confirmation of the earnest. For when the flesh of the Son was united
with the Godhead, and the divinity of the Spirit dwelt on mankind, they firmly
became one. And then the Spirit operated openly upon them. | Therefore, just C 49
as they believed in Christ’s being in heaven, so also [they believed] in the Spirit
on earth.
Indispensable:230 because they cannot then escape anywhere from him, neither
men nor demons. Furthermore, because with irreproachable foundation he
will come with righteous judgment to crown the righteous and torment the
sinners, he says it is sufficient precaution for you to look to that awesome day.
Now he posited three [things], he who directs the three terms to us: the pledge,
which guards the love and the mind always with him in heaven; the gifts of the
Spirit, who entrusts power and fortifies against the snares231 [of the devil]; the
recollection of the coming, which exhorts to glory, and terrifies through fear.
When these so operate in simplicity of the Spirit, | there is no communing of C 50
such a one with the world or the treachery of deceits. | 156r
226 E.g. Mark 16.19, Acts 7.55. But in the many allusions to this phrase “God” or “power,” not
“Father,” are used.
227 Adoption: Rom 8.15.
228 1Tim 2.5.
229 Pledge: grawakan, as in the previous lemma. In this lemma the Greek text has arrabōnas
for the Armenian gifts, zturs; cf. n. 225 above.
230 Indispensable, anhražest: om. C.
231 Snares, džrankʿ, C: transgressions, držankʿ, M. For the same variant see above, n. 204.
88 Armenian Text of the Commentary
For if you will no longer sin, which you did in ignorance, he will
forgive you. But if, after knowing him and finding mercy from
him, you live in that fashion, then he will reckon the original [sin]
against you and you will not receive mercy from him.
Let no one, on hearing this, regard *the pledging of God’s mercy as something
insignificant232 under the definition of this saying, but let us examine its true
meaning. Now we reckon their knowledge of Christ not [to be] a crying out
with the mouth: “We are Christians,” as one may now see in the world, those
who know this and its like. Yet what Christianity is or “what the hope of
their calling,”233 they are totally unable to declare by the testimony of [their]
heart, | but they are in a mental state of disbelief, just as their action indicates. C 51
However, their paganism234 is235 a sin of ignorance. But when they knew Christ,
they did not know [him] to no purpose, but received as mercy the grace of
the Spirit, which clearly testified in their hearts:236 “We are sons of God.”237
And through them it accomplished various signs, as the apostle indicates to
the Galatians and Corinthians.238
The grace of their knowledge and wisdom that they received from the Spirit
was greater than that of the signs239 of their works; that is, because the inner
man240 of them all saw with irreproachable faith the future glory and Christ
and his works. He says: After finding such mercy, | if you again live in pagan 156v
indifference, dragged down not by thoughts241 of faith | but merely by the C 52
pleasure of the body, you will not receive mercy from him.242 Now today faith is
extinguished from the world, because according to each one’s ability we hasten
to the task, and we do not at all know on which faith we build that. I say faith,
not knowledge of the Godhead but knowledge of the grace of the mysteries243
a երկու: բ in ms.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 91
of Christ. So although someone has been baptized, if after his baptism he grows
old and ignorant of this knowledge of the faith, be he clerical or lay,244 when
he turns and undertakes to learn the same, and recognizes the magnitude of
Christ’s mercy towards us, his own heart testifies: Whatever I sinned up to now
was through ignorance, and God will forgive me. But if I stumble again, my
repentance will be difficult and not this light. Accordingly, he frightens | such C 53
blessed ones: You shall not receive mercy.
But first one must know and receive mercy, and then this. Today we know not
totally, and the grace of knowing belongs to few. Many, not only the baptized
but also the baptisers, totally do not know in their inner man245 the power of
the mystery of faith.246 For such people, until they know righteousness through
grace, the door of God’s mercy is open whenever | they please. Whereas, if 157r
they think ignorance is pleasing and do not attempt to pursue knowledge, they
themselves deliver themselves to the impartial tribunal.
He wished to seal *his teaching for the disciples by prayer248 like a virtuous
husbandman; for after casting his249 seeds onto the land he irrigates them with
water, so that | he may make them rapidly grow.250 C 54
The letter O beginning the section has two meanings: one, astonishment min-
gled with incomprehension; and the other, again astonishment [mingled] with
interrogative contradiction.251 And this the Apostle indicates in one place:
“O depths of the majesty and wisdom of God!”252 This is amazement that
244 Clerical: krōnawor, lit. religious, often used of monks; lay: ašxarhakan, lit. of the world.
245 In their inner man: Rom 7.22.
246 Of faith: through faith, M.
247 [4]: see n. 48 above.
248 His teaching … prayer, C: the prayers of his teaching for the disciples, M.
249 His: om. M.
250 The theme is reminiscent of Matt ch. 13, Mark ch. 4, Luke ch. 8.
251 Contradiction: hakaṙakutʿiwn, i.e. expecting a negative response; the Armenian renders
the Greek antilogia.
252 Rom 11.33. In this paragraph C consistently punctuates the exclamations as interrogative
statements. The Armenian o [alternate spelling ov] is ambiguous, being used for both the
interrogative pronoun Who? and the exclamation O!
92 Armenian Text of the Commentary
is above comprehension. After which he adds: “Who knew the mind of the
Lord?”253 This is a junction of incomprehension with a question. And this
custom is David’s. Once he said antithetically:254 “Who will describe the power
of the Lord?”255 Once: “Who made his angels spirits?”256 “Who established
the earth?”257 These sayings are astonishment. In this way this blessed one
now brings the upward gaze | of his all-pure eyes close to his beloved light, C 55
and mingling light with light258 is overcome by the incomprehensibility of
the sublime,259 | and the only refuge is in the astonishment of his wondering 157v
amazement. He arranges the beginning of each section260 the same, whereby
he indicates each saying wondrous in accordance with its own nature.
He calls the virtues crown, which prior to this he taught the disciples in order.
You, Jesus, wove states this. How? Because first he bore in himself and in his own
body all forms of blessings, and he himself having woven the virtues with each
other thereby crowned his own body, and then taught us261 to weave the same
crown | and to attain a share in the same glory. And what the crown was that he C 56
placed on his head, the weaving with each other entwined with the virtues of
Jesus,262 the Apostle declares: “He was obedient263 unto death and the death of
the cross.”264 Now when he was obedient, the Father wove the crown; but when
by his death he brought his obedience to an end, he bound the woven crown to
his head. That is, because: “He granted him a name above all names, and the
knee of all will bend”265 to the image of Adam,266 who was united to the image
of the Father with unconfused mingling.267
The unfading flower is his body flowering in glory | and in the being of the 158r
Godhead. But the many flowers | are the people hastening to him with various C 57
forms of virtue: one with the quality of martyrdom, and268 another with the hue
of asceticism; one with virginity, and another with the chastity269 of marriage;
one with poverty, and another with mercy; one with lawfulness,270 and another
with obedience. All these, like various limbs to the head,271 in this fashion Christ
joined to his own272 body and caused to participate in his own273 glory. For he
said:274 “I am alive, and you will be living. I in the Father, and you in me and
I in you.”275 And the Apostle said: “Until we all attain the perfect man in the
measure of the stature of the perfection of Christ.”276
By life-creating word one must understand the commandments, for he said his
commandments are everlasting life.277 And as for by what power the mortal
can | acquire immortality, Christ sowed *the hope in this world that there is C 58
another life, first278 representing it in his own body, and then teaching us to
acquire the same.
265 Phil 2.9–10 = Z. Will bend: bends, C.
266 Image of Adam: Rom 5.14, Adam is an image, ōrinak, of him who was to come. For Christ
as an image of God cf. 2Cor 4.4, Col 3.10.
267 United, miacʿaw; unconfused mingling, anšpʿotʿ xaṙnumn: see the Introduction, s.v. Theo-
logical Terminology.
268 And: om. M.
269 Parkeštutʿiwn implies chastity within marriage, not abstinence from all intercourse.
270 Lawfulness: awrinadrutʿiwn, implying the laying down of laws.
271 For this paragraph see Rom ch. 12, 1Cor ch. 12; for Christ as head, glux, Eph 4.15, Col 1.18.
272 Own: om. M.
273 Own: om. M.
274 He said: om. M.
275 John 14.19–20.
276 Eph 4.13.
277 Cf. Matt 19.16–17.
278 The hope … first: first the hope in the world that there is another life, M.
96 Armenian Text of the Commentary
a Բժշկ։բժիշկ corr.
b Բշկես։բժշկես corr.
c Read չափ.
d զարդարութիւնն։ զիւր արդարութիւնն corr.
e ճաշակել։ ճանաչել corr.
f Read չարութիւն.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 97
An eager desire begets these words, which no powerful interpreter can compre-
hend. For who can measure the love of John for Christ? Whence came these to
prediction? | So see what he says: You alone became guardian and physician of 158v
mankind. And the measure of the care is that279 he gave us his righteousness,
and took our sins upon himself,280 and died for our sake,281 this same is also
the free healing.282 For by grace he gave the gifts283 of the Spirit to the world,
and not in accordance with our works. | And he came and consoled all our igno- C 59
rance and righted our pains, because he taught that we are always reconciled284
by the grace of Christ as long as we are in the body. “The blood of Jesus, he said,
purifies us from all our285 sins.”286 When the power of the mystery is with the
body and the spirit as sustenance, it lets [me] recognize that I am always healed
freely.
We know two characteristics of Satan: wickedness and pride; for if he were not
proud, he would have repented at his wicked [deeds].287 The same288 is also the
source of all human sins. From wickedness is born pollution of the body and
voluptuousness. And from pride [are born] forms of spiritual and animate289
sins. From these, small and great, only our Lord was innocent in the body,290 | C 60
through whom we who have experienced them are justified291 and purified.
He takes297 righteousness with salvation, because there are many who save
without righteousness but by employing the energy of their power; whereas he
does not [act] in this manner, but | with righteousness, because he took our C 61
body and living in its own condition298 by his innocence put the slanderous
Enemy299 to shame. Then he gave the just one as ransom to God the Father for
us unjust ones, according to Peter,300 and he freed us from servitude to Adam’s
condemnation.301 For just as we died in the sins of the old [man], through the
righteousness of the new we were made alive.302
O youa are always, and close to all, and everywhere, my God Jesus.
You through your gifts protectb all those who hope in you.
a. You: + who, C. b. You, protect, cackes: I was protected, cackeay, M.
He himself [John] revealed his [Christ’s] eternity by saying in the gospel: “From
the beginning was the Word.”303 Now one must investigate how he is close to
all and everywhere. This we understand not according to304 his nature, when
he says: “I am with you all the days,”305 | and: “Abide in me, and I in you,”306 C 62
but [we understand] him according to our knowledge and according to his
providence. | For just as the element307 of the sun is in heaven, and spreading 159v
its light generally is close to all, in the same way we attempt to understand the
Godhead who is superior to this example.308 And we say he is in all309 those
who know him. For just as closeness is the approach of a body to a body, in
the same way closeness to God through the pure faith of the Spirit is called
participation. And he is a temple for that,310 because he is close to all through
his power and his oversight. But not all [are close] to him. For example, the sun
is close to me, but when I shut my eyes I am not close to it; and when I open
them, we participate in each other.311
In this way too the spiritual312 light of God | has an influence as far as the C 63
distinction of breath and spirit.313 As long as the eye of the spirit is closed, it
cannot see the one who is close-by. But if it is opened, it sees. Lack of faith closes
it and despair that we do not believe the scriptures which call him close,314
because of our315 not seeing him in the body. Hence we do not hope or request
to be helped, supposing that he is far from us by an interval of the air. Therefore
he did not say: You protect316 all, but he made a distinction: Those who hope in
you, that is, those who see your light you care for, because for him who does not
hope it is inappropriate to pray. As if to say to the sun: | “Shine on closed eyes;” 160r
it responds: “I am shining.” Let he who wishes317 open his eyes to this318 light
and enjoy it. In the same way too God | is a light319 close to all; but he does not C 64
protect the spiritual eyes of all, nor does he shine on and unite with them, but
only on those who in hope and faith open their minds, and draw the light that
flashes close to them into themselves.
This [term] slanderer David often repeats in many places.320 Who looks with
his mind learns his tyranny and slandering, that is, in his holy psalms, when he
says: “Because the princes sat down and slandered me;”321 and: “They opened
their mouths against me and said: Yes, yes, our eyes have seen.”322 Also many
other [examples].
However, we must enquire what this slandering is. We understand it from
Job, for God questioned the virtue | of the blessed one, and he slandered C 65
[him].323 In the same way one can see him making accusations before God
about all mankind. That is, because without our will he is not able to make
us stumble in our thoughts, save if he brings danger to the outer body, as to Job
and the martyrs, over whom he was unable to rule in that way. But he often
rules over us, because on seeing in us | [our] pleasure in sin in our thoughts, he 160v
mingles with that the urging of his own turbulent thoughts and presses [us] to
sin, indicating the same to be sweet to the appetites of the body.
And when we are unable to win the battle but carry out the thought by
deed, he slanders [us] before God: “Willingly and by constraint of nature they
plunged into that, and not by | the deceit of my324 tricks and by force. For which C 66
a Read խնդրեալ.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 105
reason mankind is crooked325 like me, and unworthy of mercy.” But he [John]
says to Christ: You know. How? Because you took a body,326 and he did not
succeed in persecuting you. You were tempted regarding help for us in danger,
and you are a compassionate327 high-priest.328 So thus we shall state that the
king’s son329 came and shared in our poverty, and experienced all our misery,
and then went to the Father. And if330 anyone else will slander us before him,
then taking hold of the Son’s feet, we shall take refuge in him, saying: “You
saw and knew. You well know whether he speaks falsehood or truth.” And he,
testifying before the Father, will put the slanderer to shame. In this fashion
Christ continually | acts as priest for us, and puts Satan’s slander to shame C 67
through his own sharing of affliction in the body. The one who is the deceiver | 161r
he condemns in place of us deceived ones, casting before the Father his own
innocent body with its natural properties,331 which thus remained superior to
sin and justified the race of mankind that had been cheated by the frauds and
tyranny of the invisible hunter.332
§ 109 [5].333 Then he askeda for bread ⟨and⟩ he gave thanks as follows:
a. He asked: Having asked: C.
Up to now this was334 not giving of thanks335 nor prayer for us as he was about
to do, but for the salvation of his disciples, to whom he spoke these words. But
then after this he wished also to carry out remembrance336 of the Lord’s body,
as was their custom. And we learn from the history | of the Acts of the Apostles: C 68
Once, they were participating in the breaking of bread and prayer;337 and once,
after Paul had extended his teaching, he broke the bread and gave to them.338
For they had received from Christ the command and new covenant, and to do
this always as a memorial of his own mysteries.339 That is, with this tangible
bread we eat through the Spirit and faith your body and the salvation [that
comes] from it. For this reason he too after prayer asked for bread *in order to
carry out340 this mystery, so that by taking341 the bread, the Lord’s body, with
thanks for the blessings which he would receive in spirit and body, [he might
let] the disciples participate in Christ.342
Մուտ դրանն է իմանալ կամ զերեւելն նոցա որպէս պատմէ յերեկոի միա-
շաբաթուն, կամ զմարմնանալն։ զի որպէս դուռն արար զմարմինն եւ
նովաւ եմուտ աստուածութիւնն յաշխարհս։ զոր փառաւորեմք, այսինքն
Հաւր նուիրեմք, եւ առաջի դորա վերաձայնեմք թե զայս ընկալաք
կամաւք քո շնորհս ի ձեռն միածնիդb քո։
Only you, Jesus; that is,348 taking this bread we seal it through your mystery, and
offer it349 to our God and your Father as a gift, which is you.350
Before Christ appeared, no one knew the name Father or Son concerning the
Godhead, | but they praised him only as God, which included the three Persons; 162r
for all the scriptures accept concerning351 the three [the names] God and Lord.
But when Christ, the Son of God, appeared in the body, he revealed to us the
name of the Father and the individuality of the persons.352 Hence we learned to
name the single divinity of the Trinity as Father and Son and Spirit. This person
of the Father, he says, we praise | through you in that you are the person of the C 71
Son.353
a Read զմտանելն.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 111
For he became the first-born from the dead360 in the body for the eternal
resurrection;361 and he showed everyone that it is possible for bodily ones after
dying to rise and remain in incorruption.362 And, he says, we offer this grace
received from you to the Father because [you are] our intercessor.363 | C 72
That is, the path364 in the body that he made after the resurrection from the
dead to heaven,365 and sat on the right hand | of the Father,366 among the 162v
eternal ones as purifier367 and high-priest for us.368
Զաղն։
These Christ sowed.374 But while he himself was on earth, their faith did
not grow in anyone’s heart. But the disciples even after the resurrection were
named children for their child-like activity.375 But then the Spirit came and
caused what he had spoken to flourish. In a few small words he enumerates
the greatest:
The word.
For after the Spirit we recognized that he who had appeared to us in the
beginning was the Word from the Father.376
The grace.
He himself through grace was humbled377 from heaven, became incarnate,
and dwelt in our nature.378
The faith.
For whose sake? Through the grace of the Word, and not in accordance with
debts379 was he humbled to this, for the sake of our having faith, that is, | for the 163r
sake of making firm in us the knowledge of his divinity through the miracles,
and the salvation of mankind | through his immeasurable compassion. C 74
The salt.
For just as salt flavours foods and makes them tasty,380 likewise he through his
appearance to us flavoured our human tastelessness381 and made it tasty382 for
God the Father. That is, because he mingled his divinity with this body,383 and
sweetened this body with his divine salt.384
374 Word: John 1.1; grace: John 1.14, 17. The noun “faith, hawat[kʿ],” does not occur in John’s
gospel, but see 1John 5.4.
375 John 21.5.
376 John 1.1.
377 Phil 2.8.
378 Incarnate, marmnacʿeal, nature, bnutʿiwn: see the Introduction, s.v. Theological Terminol-
ogy.
379 Debts: Rom 4.4; see p. 29 of C above.
380 Matt 5.13, Mark 9.50, Luke 14.34–35.
381 Tastelessness, anhamutʿiwn, M: immortality, anmahutʿiwn, C.
382 Cf. 1Pet 2.3.
383 Mingled: see Theological Terminology.
384 Sweetened, anušeacʿ: cf. the Pauline imagery of sweet, anoyš, at 2 Cor 2.15.
114 Armenian Text of the Commentary
Զանխաւս մարգարիտն։
Զգանձն։
a Read պատմութիւն.
b զճառել։ զ above line.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 115
When he said the unity of God was the salt385 of this body, he added: the
inexpressible pearl,386 thereby confirming the ineffable unity that is superior
to the word. For by inexpressible he means387 that388 no speech or description
of a word can attain him or indicate the mode of the union of God with
the body. For it is seen as a mingling and not a confusion,389 and a unity
by nature and | individuality of beings in the same one.390 The natures were C 75
not changed, because they were united as one can see other united [things].
And the unconfused union did not become a conjunction,391 as we find the
unaltered proximities of things with us. But the individualities are seen in unity,
and the unity in the individualities, which is beyond the comprehension of
speech or human mind and tongue to express.
The treasure.
In the gospel Christ called himself treasure392 and pearl,393 and this one [John]
repeats those names. He is treasure because he is the cause | of all spiritual 163v
wealth for the one acquiring it. Now, in a field,394 because it was covered395 in
a body, which is not attainable for everyone or desirable but only for those who
know; they sell everything pertaining to this life and acquire it in their heart for
the price of love. | C 76
Զարաւրն։
Զուռկանն։
Զմեծութիւնն։
a եւ above line.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 117
The plough.
For this treasure, who was made man by grace and united with us ineffably
and given as salvation to the world, did not wait until we hastened to him and
embraced his grace in our lack, but he himself became a plough396 through
the word of his teaching and working of signs, and tilled and sowed in us the
knowledge of our salvation.
The net.
The very same is the word that he cast into this world and caught397 mankind
from the sea of sin to salvation.398
The greatness.
Because he caught not for death, but he raised up those gathered by the net to
the greatness of the unending kingdom.399
396 Luke 9.62. For the varied symbolism of the plough see the examples from Irenaeus in
Danielou, Primitive Christian Symbols, s.v. These would be known in Armenia from the
Armenian version of Contra Haereses, Books iv and v. In his Commentary on the Psalms,
Vardan compares the Cross of Christ with the plough; see the nbhl, s.v. arõr.
397 Net: Matt 13.47. Caught: orsacʿ, or hunted, based on Matt 4.19 etc; see the discussion above
at p. 43, n. 205.
398 For the sea of sin see the Teaching, §568, with the parallels in Thomson n. 391.
399 Cf. Eph 3.8, 2Pet 1.16.
400 Veil: patruak, “covering,” as 1Pet 2.16.
401 E.g. John 3.13.
118 Armenian Text of the Commentary
Զճշմարտութիւնն։
Զհանգիստն։
C 78 Զգիտութիւնն։
The truth.
Whom above he posited as faith, here he calls truth.402 For this grace of human-
ity truly became salvation for us by you, he says,403 and not by404 any supposed
deceit.
The repose.
Rightly | repose,405 because406 there is no other repose and joy for a troubled 164r
soul407 *than the recollection of and reflection on his incarnation.408 That is,
if one is a fornicator one finds him providing repose [for] a fornicator.409 If a
robber, one sees him merciful to the robber.410 If a tax-gatherer, he sat411 at table
with tax-gatherers.412 And to the very least he was humble. For all the hopeless,
if they turn from their troubles to hope in him, will gain repose. | C 78
The knowledge.
Զզաւրութիւնն։
Զպատւիրանն։
Զհամարձակութիւնն։
Զազատութիւնն։
pray, he said, that you may know what is the hope of his calling and what the
abundance of his power among us.”417
The power.
Now Paul indicates what the power is:418 “For by his grace, he says, you are saved
through faith and not by works.”419
The commandment.
After faith he sets down the commandment420 that we received, because we are
perfected by them both.421
The confidence.
When we are strengthened through the faith and fortified by the command-
ment, he gave us confidence422 regarding himself in saying: | “Remain in me, and C 79
my words in you. | *Whatever you seek in my name will be done for you.”423 And 164v
we who remained and kept [his words] know that they asked with confidence
and received.
The freedom.
For he freed the prisoners through his grace;424 that is, because every man knew
the life of this world as true, and to this he was subject as much as he could, then
he came and preached a different life, and freed the mind and desire of all from
temporary captivity to sin.425
Տե՛ս թե զի՞նչ ասէ։ քանզի այս ամենայն անւանքս ասէ, ոչ եթե բնութեան
էութիւնc աստուածութեանդ է յայտնիչ, այլ մարդասիրութեանդ ցոյցք։
For when someone is freed, not immediately is he liberated from this world, but
the latter pursues him; he is driven by glory or by amusement or by pleasure.
Perhaps it even happens that it destroys him. Now the one freed has no other
place to flee for refuge426 | than427 Christ, to whom he is bound by prayer and C 80
faith. And he paints the promises and his condition before his eyes, and day by
day urges him on to hasten with zeal to the general of the combat.428
He abridges the things spoken in order. That is, they flee to you because
they have recognized you alone as root of immortality.429 He says he is root of
immortality not in accordance with his430 divinity, but according to the body,
because he became the origin and root of the body being immortal. | And no 165r
other body was changed to immortality after death before him.
And source of incorruption and foundation of ages.
This is the same again, for from Christ flowed hope and | knowledge for C 81
us mortals of becoming incorruptible.431 And those who hope in eternal life
set the construction of their faith and hope upon him as on a foundation.432
Accordingly the Apostle writes: “Whom we have as an immovable base for
ourselves beneath the veil.”433
Named all this for our sake, so that when we call you by these
[epithets] we might know your greatness.
See what he says. For all these names are not indicators of the nature of the
essence of your Godhead, but pointers to your benevolence, since that made
426 Flight, pʿaxust: as Matt 24.20; refuge: apastan; cf. 2Cor 1.19.
427 Than, kʿan: because, kʿanzi, M!
428 Combat: mart, 1Tim 6.12. Christ is not called general, zawraglux, in the nt, though Satan
is so called in the Armenian version of Rev 20.9 [not in the Greek]. Cf. 2 Tim 2.24 for the
soldiers of Christ, zawravar.
429 Wis 15.3.
430 His [suffix -n]: om. M.
431 For incorruption see 1Cor 15.52–54.
432 Construction, šinuac: Eph 2.21; foundation, himn: Eph 2.20–21.
433 Based on Heb 6.19.
124 Armenian Text of the Commentary
a Read բնութեանդ.
b խորհրդաբար bis.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 125
you salt, pearl, plough, and net. And434 your greatness435 is defined by the
naming of your436 works and not by the definition of your nature, because that
is incomprehensible.
Let no one suppose that he means his divinity is invisible now to the world yet
comprehensible to the pure, because this remains incomprehensible even to
the pure, as he himself wrote in his letter: “Beloved, now we are sons of God,
and it is not yet clear what we shall be.437 | We know that438 when he shall be 165v
revealed, we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. And everyone
who has this hope in himself, purifies himself just as he is pure.”439 Now behold,
we have learned that his divinity is now incomprehensible and in the future
it will become visible. Invisible now means the mystery of his incarnation,440
which he also named with various appellations. For he is invisible to many, and
only clear to the pure who practise his wisdom and purity | and seek441 the same. C 83
That is, when he became man Christ442 did not change [our] substance443 or
alter our nature, because his task would have appeared unwilling to everyone;
but he became man mystically,444 and was again raised up.445
Who wishes sees him and his mysteries; and those who did not wish did
not see, nor do they see him.446 What is it that they see? The pure ones [see]
the mystery of his incarnation447 through the eyes of faith. That he said in
his letter:448 “We are now sons of God,” but through hope and not in reality,
a Read զաշխատութեան.
b է above line.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 127
mystically and not visibly, “because it is not yet clear what we are.”449 But the
pure ones see through the faith: “When he will be revealed, we shall be similar
to him,” those who were born from the spiritual dough of our patriarch the new
Adam.450 For the sake of this hope | they purify themselves from the deceits of C 84
this world; | and as much as they purify [themselves], that much451 the more 166r
they see the image of the greatness of his grace.452 Accordingly he says:
Man being figured in you alone.
That is, who becomes your man and keeps unsullied the becoming your
limb,453 in his spiritual eyes this greatness of the grace is figured,454 and not
in those of all; for the man of Christ is he who has put him on455 and is his
temple.456 In457 such a one he is figured through the operation of faith and by
the knowledge of the mind and by the purity of the body. Therefore the Apostle,
being a man of the same [Christ], showed458 in himself his image.459 He says:
“Now we460 see through a mirror by an example.”461 But see the accuracy of
the saying; for he says figured and not actualized, | because just as the image C 85
bears in itself a figure, the essence and the form of the living being, but not the
power,462 in this way too the pure ones are able to figure and to see the future
greatness in the purity of their minds, but they experience the power and the
glory463 now not actually but by hope alone. And as a result they endure the
troubles and tribulations of bodies. Now who is not a man of Christ and temple,
and is not pure nor464 resembles the pure, is not now able to see in himself the
Ընդ հացին կարկառ նոցա եւ զշնորհսն։ եւ շնորհ զոր եթե ոչ զոր ինքն
ասաց արիւն Յիսուսի սրբէ զմեզ յամենայն մեղաց։ սակս որո եւ ի
բաշխելն աղաւթէր արժանի նոցա լինել տրիցն որ ի Տեառնէ։ եւ արժա-
C 87 նաւորութիւն չիք այլ ինչ բայց միայն հաւատ | եւ գիտութիւն։ հաւատալ թե
որպէս մարմինս Ադամա դատապարտէ զիս թեպետ եւ ոչ յանցեայ ընդ
նմա։ մարմինն Յիսուսի սրբէ զիս թեպետ եւ ոչ եմ սուրբ որպէս զնա։ եւ
մարմին Քրիստոսի է յորժամ ընդ հացին Հոգւով զխորհուրդ եւ զշնորհ
նորա մարմին լինելոյն գիտէ եւ ուտէ։
a Read վայելել.
b ածեալ։ ա 2 omit corr.
c իւր + իւրով. See note to translation ad loc.
d տնաւրինութեանն։ տնաւրէնութեանն corr.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 129
image and figure of the future glory by faith and hope, nor sketch it in his mind | 166v
nor enjoy its future reality.465
As Christ said: “Father I pray for these and not for466 the world.”467 In this way
he brought to fulfilment | his plan468 with the Father; and thus, offering to him C 86
his own Son,469 through his titles of grace for the sake of our470 dispensation
brought completion to the mystery. For he did not need a length of words in
order to bring to reconciliation or incline to mercy [the one] who possessed
the same conciliator in himself dwelling in ineffable peace.471
§ 110 [6]. And breaking the bread, he presented it to them, praying on behalf
of each brother that he would be worthy of the grace of the Lorda
and of the holy thanksgiving.b
a. Of the Lord: om. C. b. Thanksgiving: gohutʿiwn, the Greek eucharistia.
With the bread he offered to them also the grace. What grace? Not what he
himself had said: “The blood of Jesus purifies us from all sins,”472 for which
reason in distributing it he prayed that they473 would be worthy of the gifts that
[come] from the Lord. And there is no other worthiness save only faith | and C 87
knowledge: to believe that just as this body of Adam condemns me, although
I did not transgress with him, in this way474 the body of Christ475 purifies me,
although I am not pure like him. And the body of Christ is when with the bread
through the Spirit he knows the mystery and the grace of his becoming flesh476
and eats [it].
When he too had tasted likewise, he said: “And may there be a part
for me with you and peace,a my beloved. *And the peace of the
Lord [be] with you.b”
a. And peace: om. C. b. And the peace of the Lord ⟨be⟩ with you: om. M.
For just as through the spirit we are all one in Christ,477 then we must be one 167r
in the mystery of communion in his body. For which reason he himself tasted
with the brethren, participating with them in the salvation and peace which
was granted by the distribution of the body of Christ.
He said to Biwros: “Take | with you twoa of the brethren, with two C 88
baskets and pick-axes, and follow me.”
a. Two, C: om. M.
The brethren had gathered with him in the house or in the church478 where he
had spoken the word to them and distributed the communion. However, the
secret mystery of his death he hid from them, lest in any way they be troubled;
for it was by his own will and not by force, and it was appropriate for the
disciples to know his taking leave. Just as Paul after the prophecy of Agabos in
Jerusalem even said: “Why do you weep479 and break my heart?”480 so lest he
endure that, he did not indicate his plan, but merely began the task of burial
by ordering the disciple to take the brethren, spades, pick-axes and baskets to
fashion the coffin.481
And Biwros without delay | did what John the servant of God had C 89
commanded him.
This Biwros seems to be Prochoros, one of the seventy,482 in whose name this483
history of John has been accepted among some supposedly.484
§ 111. And the blessed John, coming out of the house, went | in front of 167v
the gates,a having ordered the multitude to depart from him.
a. Gates: sing. C.
For when he came out, they all came outside with him. But by a command he
prevented them,485 seeing486 that the crowd to whom he had spoken the word
was many. For no one sincerely accepted the faith of Christ in general and kept
it with unswerving progress487 like the city of Ephesus, as is clear regarding
them from488 the letter of Paul to them.489
As we have learned from eyewitnesses,490 the place where he was pleased his
grave should be is away from the city of Ephesus and raised up. He came to the
tomb and there indicated his plan in reality and not by word: “I, this brother,
have a journey before me.” But they did not dare to question him, because there
was no further speech in them, from which boldness is born, but patience and
482 Seventy: In the Teaching the number of apostles and disciples (in addition to the original
twelve) is given variously as seventy, §686, or seventy-two, § 457, 612; see also n. 323 to
§503 in Thomson’s translation. See also Metzger, “Seventy or Seventy-two disciples?”
483 This, -s: the, -n, M. This implies that Nersēs was familiar with the Acts of Prochoros, but not
the Acta Iohannis of which the Dormitio is the final section; see the Introduction.
484 Supposedly: karcewkʿ. This implies that Nersēs had doubts [karcikʿ, suspicions] about the
authenticity of these Acts.
485 Them: om. M.
486 Seeing: and see, M.
487 Progress: yaṙaǰadimutʿiwn, as in 1Tim 4.15.
488 From: in, M.
489 I.e. Eph 1.15.
490 Eyewitnesses: Nersēs here refers to his contemporaries, not to the text of Prochoros.
134 Armenian Text of the Commentary
silence and respect for the saint, just as they did for Christ; for they saw him
and did not dare to ask questions.491
And while they were digging he spoke the word of life with them.
And he encouraged those who had come with him from the house,
instructing and confirming them in the majesty of the Lord, and
praying | for each one of them all. C 91
One must suppose that the multitude had departed, but all the disciples had 168r
come with him. With them he spoke the word of confirmation and prayed,
having learned from Christ because he too acted likewise on the evening of
the betrayal:492 first he spoke with them, and then in his prayer to the Father
turned his words to their behalf.493
The harbinger of death is pain494 and illness, or violent killing. But he495 was
alien to these, so how were they able to understand without [his] informing
[them] of the unfamiliar deed?496 Furthermore, because they all had heard
the word of Christ: “I wish that he remain until I come,”497 and they hoped the
blessed one would have immortality with length of days, | relying on that they C 92
were unable to understand this unexpected death.
[7] And when the young men had finished their digging round abouta
as he desired, the blessed one stripped off the garmentsb in which
he was clothed, and formed as it were a bed in the bottom of the
trench, and stood [clothed] only in his shirt.
a. Round about: šrǰanakaw, perhaps “in a circle.” b. Garment, M.
He did this as an example for the act to come, that just like garments, so also I
am now about to strip off my body, which is laid out in the depth of the grave
a այլ։ առ corr.
b ճաճութիւն: հաճութիւն corr.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 137
without the soul that put it on.498 And the latter rises up to God for whom it
longed.
We must know that the interpreter of the saying is unable to reveal the meaning 168v
of the prayer, because prayer499 has mingled with the body the wish, | desire, C 93
and longing of the utterance for the one who receives the prayer. This is the
condition of the soul of the inner man and not of the spoken word. Now
just as this visible body has an invisible soul and through it moves and is
called alive,500 but when the soul lacks the matter of the body, it is in no way
diminished but [the body] is deprived of life; in the same way too the prayer
of this holy one501 when uttered by him502 was alive, because it held mingled
with it the soul of love and desire that was a pleasing odour for God. So the
body of this word remained with us but not the life, the invisible desire and
love whereby this moved and acted; and we possess the matter of the word
undiminished like the body. But the soul of the desire whereby the latter was
alive remained with John; and also with those who, mingling his desire with
their own, | made it alive again and offered it to God. C 94
For this reason it is inappropriate to subject the prayer to interpretation,
when it is not possible to demonstrate the desire with the same. Through these
written words understand for me without writing by the purity of mind within
you that inexpressible desire from which grow the shoots503 of these words.
For John’s speech, was directed to Jesus, that of the beloved disciple for his
loving teacher, | that of the child of the Theotokos for the older brother,504 the 169r
supplication of the one embracing the breast for the one embraced.505
498 See the Introduction, s.v. Theological Terminology for Nersēs’ views on body, soul, spirit.
499 Prayer: the prayer, M. Nersēs is here making a general statement.
500 The soul, hogi, is the life of the body: as Ełišē, History of Vardan, 15. See also Gen 2.7: Adam
became a hogi kendani when God breathed into him the šunčʿ kendani.
501 This holy one: the holy ones, M.
502 Him: them, M.
503 Shoots: sing. M.
504 See Nerses’ own Introduction above, where Nersēs indicates that Jesus was John’s elder
step-brother; cf. also John 19.26–27. Theotokos: Astuacacin, as above; see p. 6 of C for her
loving John.
505 John 13.25, 21.20.
138 Armenian Text of the Commentary
a Read զո՛ս.
b զլինել։ զլինելն corr.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 139
When you hear this “O”,506 understand the incomprehensibility towards which
he looked, straining with his skilled pupils.507 He was unable to explain the
same in perceptible speech, because he did not say “Jesus” or “Lord,” but “O,”508
that is, | because the calling of the name indicates the one to whom he speaks to C 95
be distant, whom he awakens by the name and then addresses. Now the latter,
not like someone distant but being close and nearby, reckons the saying “O”509
alone to be sufficient.
You chose us for the apostolate of the gentiles.
And when was the choice? Before the creation of the world according to
Paul.510 Now why did he say for the apostolate of the gentiles? Because previ-
ously they511 had been sent to the Jews. But when they disavowed the grace, he
said: “Go henceforth, make disciples of all the gentiles.”512
Those whom he chose before the world, when he wished he sent to the world
as preachers of salvation and as evangelists of the kingdom of heaven. | C 96
Տես թե զինչ ասէ` զի դու միշտ կեցուցանես եւ զայս կամիս։ բայց կեան ոչ
ամենեքեան բայց կարողքն։ եւ այս յամենայն դարս։ զի Էնովք իւր դարին
է յանդիմանիչ, որք թէ կամեցեալ էին ընդ նմա էին կացեալ։ եւ Նոյ` իւրոյն։
մարգարէքն` Իսրայէղի։ եւ առաքեալքն եւ սուրբքն` հաթանսաց։ որ բուռն
C 97 եհար | զփրկութենէն երբ եւ կամեցաւ հաստատեցաւ։ եւ այս յայտ առնէ
զնորա միշտ խնամելն, եւ զոչ փրկելոցն մարմնական ախտիւք զտկա-
րութիւնն։
Oa youb did not ever desist, but always give lifec to those who are
able.d
a. O: Interrogative, C. b. You: + who, C. c. Life: + even, ew C. d. Able, karoł: those in
need, karõt, Z.
See what he says: You always give life, he says,515 and this you wish, but not all
live save those who are able;516 and this in all ages. For Enoch is the reprover of
his own age,517 those who if they had wished would have stood with him; and
Noah of his; the prophets, of Israel; and the apostles and saints, of the gentiles.
Whoever518 grasped | salvation whenever he wished was confirmed. And this C 97
reveals his perpetual care and the weakness through bodily passions of those
not saved.519
That is, his invisible things are understood and seen by us created ones,520
because these shadowy things are an image of the immaterial ones. The altar521
that Moses set up according to the model that he saw on the mountain makes
this clear, and the worshippers on it who worshipped as a parable and model
of the heavenly things according to the Apostle.522
And this can be confirmed, that all these perceptible things were fashioned
by God as a paradigm of the spiritual things.523 Even the philosophers of the
gentiles did not hesitate to say this, because they called that spiritual thing
being524 and a form,525 while these material things are non-existent and an
image of the existent | because of their changing and corruption. And because C 98
the form and beings are bodiless, it is clear that the forms526 [are] also the same,
by the fact that they are seen immaterially in thoughts. Thus one can see the
nature of beings527 is a declarer | of God, and he is simple528 and superior to his 170r
created handiworks.
526 Form: here Nersēs uses jew, the more literal rendering of form or shape.
527 Beings: ēkʿ. For the terms goy and ē meaning existence see the Introduction, s.v.Theological
Terminology; Nersēs diverges from the usage in the Teaching, for which see Thomson,
Teaching, 15–17.
528 Simple, parz: for God as “simple” see the many examples in Lampe, s.v. haplous. Ps-
Dionysius, Heavenly Hierarchy, ii 2, stresses that one should not apply the multiple forms
that occur on earth to the heavenly and divine simplicities.
529 Animate: šnčʿawor, lit. breathing; see p. 39, n. 185.
530 See Athanasius, Life of Antony, §50–53.
531 Metaphor: yełašrǰumn, lit. transformation. The more usual expression is yełapʿoxumn, for
which see Muradyan, Grecisms, 242.
532 Justice: pl. M.
533 Ps 35.7.
534 I.e. through intellectual activity, imacʿakan nergorcutʿiwn.
535 For men imitating animals by looking to the ground see Basil, Hexaemeron, ix 2.
536 His, -n: om. M.
144 Armenian Text of the Commentary
Oa youb made the solitary and wild soul sober and tame.
a. O: Interrogative, C. b. You: + who, C.
See that the order of these sayings follows directly in this fashion. For when
he came, men were solitary and wild in spiritual knowledge. | They did not C 100
know that another life existed or another god superior to this earth; | but 170v
they transferred their desire for the love of God to gold and silver and similar
phantasies537 of mankind. But see how he gently tamed them. He538 gave
himself as a man to those who worshipped men; those who loved images
he allowed to worship his own image;539 and540 in this way *he rendered
them sober541 and tamed them. For when they said to the gentiles that God is
invisible, incomprehensible, immaterial, those who were contaminated with
love of the material were not persuaded and were not tamed. But when they
said he is a man, was crucified for our sake, loved us, ate542 and drank with
us, and ascended to heaven before our eyes, they gave way to these persuasive
words. | And thus through the body of Christ they were subjected to faith in his C 101
incomprehensible Godhead.
In the person of a man he accepts543 all the gentiles because of their going
on a single path. And what was their thirst? Piety.544 For in accordance with
their natural disposition they all thirsted with a desire for piety. And because
they were unable to attain the incomprehensible through mortal wisdom, they
turned to material things545 and began to worship them. See how Paul bears
witness to this: “Men of Athens, he said,546 I see you in all respects pious.”547
սէրս տեսանեմ զքեզ։ ասէ եւ Քրիստոս վասն անառակ որդւոյն թե` ասաց
171r ի միտս իւր յարուց|եալ գնացից առ հայր իմ։
C 102 եւ այս է գնալն զի Աստուած | փափագէին եւ խնդրէին ունել հեթանոսք։
բայց ի խնդրելն եւ ի գնալն հեռագոյն կացին յԱստուածոյ զի մինչ յաւդ
տկարացին ժամանել։ իսկ ի հեեռուստ տեսեալ զնա Հայրն յայն փափագ
գթացաւ եւ եկն ընդ առաջ նորա, այսինքն զի Միածինն եկն եւ մարմնա-
ցաւ եւ անգեալ զպարանոցաւ բնութեան մեր համբուրեաց զմեզ, եւ
ինքն ապա ի դիմաց մեր զՀայրն հաշտեցոյց ուժգին արտասւաւքն եւ
աղաւթիւքն։a արդ զայս ասէ ծարաւ եւ զսոյն տալ զոր ի տերունի առա-
կէս ուսաք, զի ծարաւ էր մարդկան աստուածպաշտութեանն, եւ նա եկն եւ
զովացոյց զնոսա ինքեամբ ոչ տուեալ զինքն իմանամի Աստուած միայն
նոցա զոր ոչ կարէին տեսանել, այլ ընդ իմանալւոյն եւ զգալին,b ընդ
C 103 աստուածութեանն եւ զմարմիննc կերակուր ընդ անմարմնութեանն |
եւ զարիւնն ըմպելի։ եւ այս քաղցրացոյցd ի քիմս նոցա զգիտութիւնն
Աստուածոյ, եւ զծարաւ նոցին զովացոյց զի զԱստուած միշտ մարմնով
յինքեանս ունին եւ ճաշակեն մտաւք զմարմինն եւ ըմպեն իմաստութ-
եամբ զարիւնն որովք զսուրբ լինելն իւրեանց ի ձեռն վշտակից քահա-
նաապետին հաւատան, եւ զմտեալնe ի կեանս ուր նա եղեւ մարմնով
առաջնորդ։
a եւ աղաւթիւքն bis.
b զգալինի։ զգալոյնի corr. Sic!
c զմարմին։ զմարմինն corr.
d քաղցրացոյց։ ր above line.
e Read զմտանելն.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 147
Christ too said concerning the dissolute son: “He said in his mind: I shall arise
and go to my father.”548 | 171r
This is the going, that the gentiles had a desire for God | and sought to possess C 102
him,549 but in their seeking and going they remained far from God, since they
were able [only] to attain empty words.550 But when the Father saw them551
with that desire from afar, he had pity and came to meet them. That is, the
Only-begotten came and was incarnate;552 and falling on the neck of our nature
he kissed us.553 Then on our behalf he himself reconciled the Father with his
powerful tears and supplications.554 So thirst means this, and to give the same
that we have learned from the555 parable of the Lord. For mankind was thirsty
for piety and he came and refreshed them with himself. He did not give himself
to them only as a spiritual God, which they were unable to endure,556 but with
the spiritual also the tangible; with his Godhead also his body as food; with
his incorporeality also | his blood to drink. And this rendered the knowledge C 103
of God sweet in their palates,557 and refreshed their thirst; for they possessed
God perpetually in the body, and tasted his body with their minds, and drank
his blood through wisdom. Thereby they558 believed that they became pure
through the high-priest559 who shared their afflictions, and that they entered
into life where he became their leader in the body.
548 As in the parable of the Prodigal Son, Luke 15.18 [I … father = Z].
549 Him: om. M.
550 Empty words: ōd, lit. wind; cf. 1Cor 14.9.
551 Them: him, M.
552 Was incarnate: marmnacʿaw; see the Introduction, s.v. Theological Terminology.
553 Luke 15.20.
554 And supplications: bis, M!
555 The: this, M.
556 Endure, tanel: see, tesanel, M.
557 Ps 118.103.
558 They: + also, M.
559 High-priest: for this theme, based on the Epistle to the Hebrews, and an Armenian parallel
see above p. 66 of C at n. 328.
560 Dying, meṙeal: or dead.
561 Based on Col 2.13.
148 Armenian Text of the Commentary
mankind had fallen as if dead into merely earthly and corruptible desires,
and totally were unable to562 know the punishment prepared for the day on
which God will judge the secrets of mankind.563 | Hence Christ appeared with C 104
righteousness and taught them. For if they had been crooked564 like Satan
willingly, it would have been a deprivation of truth to save them;565 but if
unwillingly, it was necessary to make them wise. Therefore he was revealed and
awoke them566 from their deathly state.567 Then they willingly arose, stood up
and hastened to follow him.
They were dead to the faith and had gone astray, and were drowning in [lawless]
deeds, because they did not know a different life or the definition of benevo-
lence for this life here. Hence Christ did two things: through the faith he gave
them life and raised them from the sea of lawlessness;568 and through the law
he instructed them. He did not give a law only | by word, but also [gave] his own C 105
self in deed. For: “I have loved, he said, and you have loved; I was humbled and
you will be humbled and569 become low. In the body I left the world and chose
death, and570 you too did this.” “Who finds his soul, he said, will lose it; and who
will lose [it] like me, will find it,571 equal to me.”572 This law was not573 merely
a word, but it had a witness to the words and the demonstration, who574 was
able to raise them all from the sea of lawlessness575 | and subject them to the 172r
true law.
562 Were unable to: did not, C.
563 Rom 2.16.
564 They had been crooked: koranayin, Ps 105.43.
565 Them: om. M.
566 Them: om. M.
567 Deathly state, meṙelutʿiwn: the only biblical use of this term in the Armenian Bible is in
Rom 4.19, for Sarah’s womb.
568 Cf. the “sea of sin,” Teaching, §553, 568.
569 Be humbled and: om. M.
570 And: om. M.
571 Will find it: om. M.
572 Based on Matt 10.39.
573 Was not, očʿ ēr: which was not, or čʿēr, M.
574 Who, or [or which]: om. M.
575 Cf. n. 568 above.
150 Armenian Text of the Commentary
a ի om. corr.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 151
How did Satan totally overcome them?576 It is clear that it was from the knowl-
edge of God and the hope577 of immortality. Of these two they had despaired,
and he had sweetened for them all | the delights578 alien to our nature. How- C 106
ever, they were not pleased with the same, but remained hostage to the fear
of death; especially as they discovered the definition of our579 natural virtues
and had organized their cities with laws. As the Apostle says: “The gentiles who
did580 not know the law, by nature worked the [deeds] of the law.”581 When
Christ saw them in subjection to Satan, with natural zeal they rebelled from
him and took pleasure in following the divine will, as the benevolent and just
one582 had made himself known as Saviour and liberator583 from the tyrant584
who controlled them.
576 Thee being no grammatical gender in Armenian, the lemma does not indicate who, or
what, the “one overcome [herkʿeloyn nma]” by Satan might be. The Greek has nenikēmenē,
which refers to the soul.
577 Hope, yoys: light, loys, C.
578 Delights: sing. C.
579 Our, -s: om. M.
580 Did: do, M.
581 Rom 2.14 [not Z].
582 Benevolent and just: Rom 7.12, but referring to the law, not applied directly to Christ.
583 Saviour: pʿrkičʿ; this reflects the lemma in the version in Z. Liberator: cf. Gal 4.31, 5.1.
584 Tyrant, bṙnawor: not used in the Armenian nt, but for parallels see Lampe, s.v. tyrannos.
For Satanʿs tyranny see also pp. 64, 67, 164 [in C]; for other names given to Satan see p. 26.
585 The Greek lemma refers to the soul, not the plural “mankind.”
586 Instead of, hakaṙak: opponent, hakaṙakord, as in the lemma, M sic!
152 Armenian Text of the Commentary
Ձեռն Քրիստոսի զգործսն իւր ասէ։ քանզի այս է գրոց սովորութիւն, ըստ
այնմ աջ Տեառնb արար զաւրութիւն եւ բարձր արար զիս։ եւ գործ այլ զոր
իմանամք մարդկամ վերածիչ եթե ոչ զխաչն։ զի այն էր որ զփրկութիւն
մեզ մատակարարեաց որպէս ցուցաւ։ քանզի ի նմա բեւեռեաց զհակա-
ռակն մեր ըստ առաքելոյ, այսինքն զմեղսն։ եւ յորժամ Քրիստոս անմեղն
մեղք անուանեցաւ եւ որպէս զմեղս մեռաւ, մեք արդարացաք շնորհաւք
նորա։ եւ յորժամ արդարացաք արժանի եղաք եւ զհոգին ընդունել։ եւ
C 109 առեալ զհոգին յարեաք ի դժոխական | իրաց մարմնոյս պատրանաց, եւ
Christ took flesh and in its attributes587 lived without sin.588 In place of the
disobedience589 of the old Adam, he was obedient to the Father unto death,590
and the innocent body which had not sinned he gave as a sacrifice to the Father
by his death like a guilty one. Now the innocent death reconciled591 God with
us sinners, and it condemned Satan in our place. And in return for the death
of the Son the Father gave to mankind the Spirit he had received, which came
and was spread over the universe. And it established everyone in God and in
refuge with him, | and put Satan’s snares592 to shame before them, because “no C 108
one is able to call Jesus593 Lord except through the holy Spirit.”594
Oa you gave it your hand, and raised it from the deeds of hell.
a. O: Interrogative, C.
By the hand of Christ he means his works, because this is the custom of
scripture in accordance with the [saying]: “The right hand of the Lord worked
power, and raised me.”595 And what other act do we understand as raising
mankind save the cross, because it was that which effected596 our salvation,
as was indicated? For according to the Apostle to that he nailed our opponent,
that is, sin.597 And when Christ, the innocent, was called sin598 and died like
sin,599 we were justified by his grace.600 And when we were justified we became
worthy to receive the Spirit; and receiving the Spirit, we were raised from the
deeds of hell, | the deceits of this body, and we began to comprehend the C 109
587 Attributes [of the flesh]: kirk’; see the Introduction, s.v. Theological Terminology.
588 2Cor 5.21.
589 Disobedience: obedience, M! See Rom 5.19.
590 Cf. Phil 2.8.
591 Reconciled: 2Cor 5.18–19. The theme of sacrifice is that of the Epistle to the Hebrews, which
Nersēs had expounded earlier, p. 69.
592 Eph 6.11.
593 Jesus: zys, M; ys, C.
594 1Cor 12.3 [M = Z].
595 Ps 117.16 [not Z].
596 Effected, matakarareacʿ: for the importance of the abstract noun matakarutʿiwn in the
sense of “economy, dispensation,” see the Theological Terminology.
597 Based on Rom 6.6; cf. Eph 2.16.
598 2Cor 5.11.
599 Sin: + and, C.
600 Rom 3.24.
154 Armenian Text of the Commentary
supernal glory and to strive for it and to attain it.601 | In the same602 fashion 173r
we were set upright by the hand of Christ. For in Jerusalem, in which Christ for
many years was unable to convert anyone to himself in that they had not been
justified and made worthy of the Spirit, after the removal of our sin through
his cross on one day Peter with one word made disciples of three thousand
people,603 because he drew the Spirit onto them with the word that he had
received from the hand of Christ, and he set them upright.
This saying is clear, because Christ taught us bodily ones to hate the life of
the body and to attain the status of the bodiless.604 For up until him there
was not this hope; because Moses in return for keeping the law promised one
would have vineyards and olive trees, a gentle and luxurious life.605 | But when C 110
our Lord came, he extricated us from this pattern of life606 and preached the
denial of the self607 and of possessions,608 so that willingly hating this temporal
[life] we might find, he said, the eternal one.609 The race of mankind followed
that, and this hope of immortality became sweet in their palate,610 which they
acquired through torments rather than the extreme life of luxury of the body,
the end611 of which is612 close.
Do you see what he says? You showed it its own enemy, because up until Christ
men did not know Satan clearly; or through his activity desire for sin existed
among us, but they ascribed it to nature. | For although the history of the 173v
Acts of the Apostles says that the Sadducees did not confess angel, demon, | C 111
and613 resurrection,614 yet just as the resurrection was in their thoughts and was
confirmed through Christ, likewise too knowledge of Satan and his activity. Just
as he showed the Enemy615 that he himself in the condition616 of the body lived
without sin, he showed mankind that your committing sin is not from your
nature or enjoyment of freewill alone,617 but from the Enemy who mingles his
own poison with the simplicity of your minds and causes [you] to commit sin.
So if anyone, like me, takes care deliberately to preserve himself from natural
passions and the attacks of the Enemy, he eats as I ate and does not sin, he
sleeps like I slept and does not trespass, he labours and fears as I did and is not
guilty. Likewise618 they all learned and saw their Enemy put to shame before
them.
Now who619 is ours | or who the Enemy’s, is clear to everyone, because C 112
the superfluous is his, and the natural and necessary [is] of our will. The
things of which we are condemned by the accusation of the mind are his,
and the irreproachable ours. Understand me, that when mankind accurately
understood the Enemy, they brought the contest620 as it were to a head, with
the result that weakened by his invisible activity, in bodily fashion he armed621
for battle with them.
a Read մարմինս.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 159
O622 most eloquent sayings! | But do not think that [this] knowledge confirms623 174r
that of piety, because what need did this have of purity? But Jesus purified
the consciousness of the mind that was always being muddied and fouled by
satanic plans, in that he placed the laws as seal and boundary for its thoughts,
but not for its deeds, | in saying: “Moses said, do not commit adultery; but I say, C 113
do not lust.”624
Now when he suppressed evil lust by the sword of his word,625 the conscious-
ness of our mind was purified and adorned with its own natural beauty. For
Satan had fouled this, and when he persuaded it626 to its own will, our body
carried out the mind’s will like a servant; and men were unable to be purified
by the fact that they did not have the laws of the mind. But Christ taught war
against thoughts; he said in the battle of the mind [we should] conquer the
enemy, and in that way always to purify it and keep it as a temple627 prepared
for the Godhead, in saying: “The eye is the lamp of the body,” that is, the mind. “If
your eye is pure, all your body will be shining; and if it is evil, your body [will be]
dark.”628 And: “A good man from the good | treasures of his heart pours out the C 114
good.”629 Having studied this, mankind easily became virtuous, because in630
the contest of knowledge they fought against the alien thoughts and rapidly
were purified.
Oa youb are Father of the holy ones above the heavens, and God of
the heavenly ones; you are the law of the ethereal ones | and path 174v
of the airy ones, guardian of the earthly ones and terror of those
in hell.c
a. O: Interrogative, C. b. You: + who: C. c. Those in Hell: sandarametakankʿ, as
Philipp. 2.10.
So Paul, hierarch631 of Christ’s thoughts, says: “We have a high-priest who has
passed into heaven, Jesus the Son of God.”632 And Christ himself prayed for
his own: “Father, I wish that where I am, they too may be with me.”633 Now if
Christ passed into heaven and wished that his holy ones might pass [there also],
of which others above heaven is he named | Father unless of those to whom C 115
the Apostle wished to demonstrate the superiority of the grace of Christ?634
Furthermore, he boldly writes: “May the Lord illuminate the eyes of your hearts
in order that you635 may know what is the hope of his calling.”636 And what
that is he adds by saying: “For God himself637 raised Christ from the dead, and
sat him at his right hand among the heavenly ones, above all authority and
rulership and power and every name that is named. And the one whom he
placed over them he set as head of the church.”638 Now whom Paul calls head,
our theologian639 posits as Father; and he indicates his church as his limbs and
sons,640 whom Christ wished to settle above heaven with himself, saying: “I wish
that where I am, they too may be with me.”
The same length and width of his love641 that they themselves knew [he
made] secure, and | they prayed that we might learn through faith. So the head, C 116
Christ, | passed to heaven, and above the heavens his limbs and body became 175r
appropriate for the head, of whom he is Father. Now [he is named] Father,
because by the seed of the word from the womb of the church down below
631 Hierarch: kʿahanayagorc, a calque on ierourgos. See Rom 15.16, describing Paul as ierour-
gounta.
632 Heb 4.14 [not Z].
633 John 17.24 [not Z].
634 Of Christ: om. M.
635 You: we, M, which is the text of the Armenian nt in Z.
636 Eph 1.18 [not Z].
637 Himself: om. C.
638 Eph 1.20–22 [not Z].
639 For John as “theologian,” cf. pp. 3, 115, 117, 156 in C.
640 Limbs: Rom ch. 12, 1Cor. ch. 12. Sons: Heb 8.14, 12.7.
641 Eph 3.18.
162 Armenian Text of the Commentary
he begat the church of the first-born written in heaven,642 who have him here
as Father in hope and there in deed.
But how the souls of the holy ones are with him and gathered together, he
himself indicates at the end of this prayer. And the Apostle says:643 “You have
approached the city of the living God, Jerusalem in heaven, and the souls of
the perfected righteous ones”644 And many of the saints saw the ascent of their
souls645 to heaven and wrote [it down]; like Antony saw his own and that of
Ammon.646 Their Father is Christ, and they are647 above heaven, who in the
passible body | waged the incorporeal battle, and were zealous to aim for their C 117
Father.
And God of the heavenly ones.
That is, because he is creator of the angels and perpetual nourisher648
through the illumination of his grace. *He guards them through his providence
of immutable incorruption and through his eternal nature;649 for all this was
administered and is managed for them by their creator God.
You are the law of the ethereal ones and path of the airy ones.
See for me the purity of mind and the perspicacity of the spiritual eyes of
our theologian.650 For despite being on earth, he does not run to things below,
but comes down from above. First he entered to the one | who is above heaven 175v
and spoke his first words with him; and then from below he draws the mind
out from the veil and makes his way in a humble direction. | Then he came to C 118
the sons by Christ, whose Father is Christ and who are above heaven, to heaven
a Read սահմանաց.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 165
and651 to the angels whose God he is and who are below them; thence he is
humbled to the ether, that is, the light.652
Some of the outsiders have called this the fifth element, and others a perpet-
ually moving and round form that contains this earth.653 To that he says: You
are the law of the ether,654 that is, through your providence; for it continuously
moves and does not change. Whence does it attain the unchanging movement,
which cannot be seen elsewhere, save from the legislation of the laws of God
which controls it? But because he posits [it as] numerous, you are the law of
the ethereal ones,655—it is clear that the ether is the firmament that Moses
named,656 and it contains within itself the fire, and the fire the air, and the air
the water, and the water the earth657 |—he says: You are the law of the ethereal C 119
ones, that is, of the luminaries, because through you they have their courses and
movements. And you, who are their legislator,658 when you wished you held
back the sun from its course in the time of Joshua;659 and you made it go back
in the time of Hezekiah.660 In this fashion you control through your laws the
other elements that are below it. Air you made the course for birds; and water
you gave as resting-place for aquatic661 [animals]; the earth as habitation for
living beings; and hell662 as the station of demons. As | Satan said to God: “I 176v
have come after travelling through the earth and going about below heaven.”663
He said: You are their terror, and thereby you subdue them from their envy for
mankind.
He said: Guardian of the heavenly ones, because he who is guardian of the
heavenly angels through divine providence also | through knowledge cares for C 120
and nourishes [them].664 He extends his spiritual power even *to the knowl-
edge of the demons665 who are in hell,666 not gently but in terror and violently,
so that in their implacable hatred they may not be illegally deceivers of the
race of mankind which became a stranger among them. This one may learn
from Job, because the providence of God and fear of him enclosed him from so
much poison of cruel evil.
And they have no hold over mankind, unless anyone willingly desire it, in
accordance with: “To whom you are prepared [to give] yourselves in obedi-
ence667 as servants, you are servants to whom you obey.”668 And the terror
of God669 which was upon them does this. David also says the same in many
places, as for example: “God thundered from heaven, and the one on high gave
forth | his voice, hail and coals of fire.”670 Do you see that the terror of God C 121
quenches671 the ferocity of their wickedness? For if they had not been pre-
vented by that and held back, they would have rapidly removed the memory
of mankind from the earth in their insatiable hatred.
O672 most pure soul, and sweetly addressing its sweetness! But who will give us 177r
the soul of the body of these words, that is, their mover and activator,673 namely,
the love and desire which produced these sayings? He says: Of your John; clearly,
of your beloved disciple,674 whom you made illustrious through the title of your
love. Take now his675 soul to yourself, and mingle his love with your love at this
appropriate time.676 | Perhaps being worthy of you; and if not him, who else? C 122
But down below he remains in this human condition, knowing no one else was
justified by works save only Jesus, and us by his grace,677 according to what
he wrote in his epistle:678 “If we say we have no sin, we lie, and the truth is
not in us.”679 So according to my works,680 he says, in my opinion I lack your
acceptance, because I am the least worthy servant of all; but in accordance with
your grace, worthy and681 emboldened.
§ 113 [8]. Oa youb kept me until this time untouched by intercourse with
women.
a. O: Interrogative, C. b. You: + who, C.
See the order of this prayer. First he682 blessed with thanks the grace which
Christ gave to everyone in the world; and then turning to his own person, he
attributes all his own virtue to the power of the same | and not to his own, in C 123
accordance with the saying: “Not I, but the grace of God which is with me.”683
In similar fashion684 he too said: You kept [me] until this time from the impulse
of desire, and not my own human | mind which is set in attention to evil.685 But 177v
your power mixed with this, allowed [me] to separate from evil and embrace
the good, that is, angelic virginity.686
Although he mentions687 the writings of the gospel and the law,688 yet in
fact he intends the perfection of the purity of his mind. He was kept from
intercourse not only of the body, but also of the mind, because he says to look
on a woman with desire was hard for the inner man and excessive. Now many
have observed the former, but the second rule [was] for a few, especially as | it C 124
was unattainable for anyone except himself; since the saints689 could keep the
body uncontaminated, but [in keeping] the mind from thoughts no one gave
himself as an example like him.
You saved, he says, and not my own effort, not only from the entanglements
of marriage but also from all pleasure of the senses which are accustomed to
wallow in this temporary life: one by looking, another by listening, others690
by speaking and acting. From these, he says, you saved me; that is,691 in this
tangible body you preserved my spiritual soul unaffected by the arrows692 of
the senses; and you led me to eternal [life], | to follow you in deeds and to be 178r
with you always in my spiritual mind. | C 125
686 For virgins as “angelic,” see Lampe, s.v. aggelos, O. For John as a “bodily angel,” see below,
p. 129 in C.
687 Here Nersēs omits the section in the Greek text that describes John’s being dissuaded from
marriage three times; for the passage see Junod-Kaestli, 576–578.
688 Law [not “of the law”]: pl. M. For the gospel and law see p. 113 in C.
689 The saints: they, C.
690 Others: sing. M.
691 That is, om. M.
692 Eph 6.16.
172 Armenian Text of the Commentary
Passion [is] of the body, all conditions which are outside our693 nature,
[namely] desires. I do not mean only what pertains to pollution,694 but also
pleasing the body through the eyes and being voluptuous with the ears and
being vile in word. And everything that by my spirit695 and body is done, deed
or thought, is called contamination.696 Now in man697 the natural impulse of
the intellectual is pure;698 and its growth and nourishment are the love and
knowledge of God, and so called. But, he says, you separated my mind from my
senses and from being afflicted by their pleasure, and you always kept me with
you; whereby I both dominated my senses, and instructed them on the same
path of impassibility.699 | C 126
C 127 սովոր է զմաքուր ոգիսն գրաւել։ | զիս ասէ ի քեզ պնդեցեր, եւ զկամս
եւ զսէր հանեալ յամենայնէ միայն ի քեզ ուսուցեր հաստատութեամբ
բեւեռել։
a զխորհրդոց bis.
b հակառակ bis.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 175
family, not on authority over many, which is accustomed to seize pure souls. | C 127
He says: You made [me] firm on you; and stripping off the wish and love for
everything [else], you taught me to be securely704 nailed solely on you.
The hidden passion of a soul705 is the state of its thoughts. And an open deed is
to bring to accomplishment in the body the desires of the thoughts. In me, he
says, you suspended both, because you purified my soul706 from evil thoughts
and my body from blameworthy deeds. But see that he says: You bridled, and
not: You restrained my thoughts;707 because restraint controls the deeds of this
body and not those of the incorporeal and ever-moving [soul].708 And this ever-
moving soul has freewill [to do] what it wishes and plans.709 So he did not
remove freewill from him so that he would not know710 evil, but he bridled his
C 128
thought | and rendered it slow711 to the same, | like the angels.712
179r
The disorderly that is in us is the animal spirit.713 For we are composed of three
[parts] in an ineffable mixture: from a rational soul and an irrational spirit
and a tangible body.714 And the spirit fights against the law of our mind, and
imprisons it in the laws of sin; that is, the one that is mingled with the senses.
704 Securely: hastatutʿeamb, from the same stem as the verb established in the lemma. Nailed:
cf. Ps 118.120.
705 A soul: souls, C.
706 You purified my soul: my soul was purified, M.
707 Thoughts: sing, M.
708 The soul, hogi, is ever-moving and self-moving, mštašarž, inkʿnašarž, and what is ever-
moving is immortal; see David, Definitions, §13.
709 Freewill, anjnišxanutʿiwn: this is the main theme of Eznik’s treatise, often misleading
entitled “Against the Sects” or “On God.”
710 Know, gitel: contemplate, ditel, C.
711 Slow, džuarašarž: lit. slow to move.
712 The angels: an angel, M.
713 Animal spirit: anasnełēns šunčʿ. For šunčʿ see the Introduction, s.v. Theological Terminol-
ogy.
714 Rational soul, irrational spirit, tangible body: hogi banakan, anban šunčʿ, zgali marmin.
176 Armenian Text of the Commentary
For one thing is the pleasure of the senses, and another that of the intellect,715
especially as they are opposed to each other; because sense enjoys pleasure and
the mind through its716 compunction is grieved. So this disorderly that grieves
the intellect is clearly the sensible717 spirit [which] you afflicted and expelled
through your power; that is, you disciplined and subjected it into assent to the
intelligent mind. | C 129
When he confirmed his mind on Jesus and through him bridled his spirit, he
also disciplined the senses in subjection to the mind. What impurity in the path
of this life could control that bodily angel,718 for we become sullied when they
oppose each other? As the apostle says: “The will is present to me, but not the
doing of good.”719 So when the spirit follows the will of the mind, and the body
that of the spirit, | through them the mind turns away from this world and is 179v
mingled with the one being720 of God, unsullied and righteous it goes on the
path to him, as he [John] went and confessed.
715 Intellect, imacʿakan: Nersēs seems to equate this with mind, mitkʿ.
716 Its: om. C.
717 Sensible: zgali, i.e. capable of sensation, a different nuance from tangible of the body.
718 John is an angel because of his virginity; see p. 123 in C above. For this idea see in general
Sfameni Gasparro. For the virginity of angels see references in Lampe, s.v. aggelos.
719 Rom 7.18 [not Z].
720 Being, ełinutʿiwn: for the vocabulary see the Theological Terminology.
721 Path: čanaparh, but “way, šawił,” in the lemma. The previous lemma has čanaparh.
178 Armenian Text of the Commentary
The faith of the intellectual [faculty] is activity. And on him who722 is not
free from the condition and will of the body, spiritual723 knowledge of the
Godhead often produces uncertainty and doubt. From this condition, he says,
you purified me. For just as someone | who724 has before his tangible eyes the C 131
light of the sun does not doubt, so too, having and seeing you and the splendour
of the spiritual glory in you before the eyes of my faith, I have not been at all
entangled in thoughts of doubt.
Our mind is intellectual and | its understanding is insatiable. To it others give 180r
different nourishment, that is, the wisdom of this world and the cleverness and
talent pertaining to this life, which is not pure or so called. But the true ones
direct it to its725 natural activity and what is pure, that is, to the knowledge of
God and to faith in his teaching.726 As the definition and goal of my knowledge,
he says, you set before me nothing other than always to approach you. And
although I am in the world, you did not at all permit | me727 to set my mind C 132
below this, but you decreed728 it should always be directed towards you and to
knowledge of you. This we learned [as] the order729 of the angels and the law
pertaining to divinity, which he declares about himself; and [like] an incorpo-
real one he shines out bodily among the corporeal ones.
But let no one say that from God alone was everything to whomever he gives
it, and it would have been easy for God in the same730 fashion to set this one
also731 aright. For this is insolence and denial of our freewill. But he [John]
raised himself willingly and zealously to the pinnacle of purity, and received the
a Read զաւրութեան.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 181
supreme grace. For if we confess the will of Christ as natural732 and do not sin,
how much the more for John! However, just as Christ made his own will follow
the divine one, and through the light of his divinity733 expelled the darkness of
our nature, in the same fashion | this one too, relying on the same,734 was made C 133
firm through his own will. And receiving the light of the power of the Spirit, he
willingly followed the leader735 and did not turn back. However, in the nature
of Christ | there was mingling with the divinity and ineffable and indivisible 180v
union;736 whereas his *love [was] through conjunction737 with Christ, and not
unity by nature.738
Do you see the confirmation of the earlier sayings by this next remark?739 For by
this he cures the suspicions of those who thought that by Christ alone this was
corrected for him, and not by being assisted by his own will. For if it was Christ’s
alone, it was not his own act, and if it were not his own act, he would not have
expected a reward. But it is necessary to understand that with the element740 of
our own will the divine | power is mingled, and through his and ours salvation C 134
is effected. He now attributed everything to Christ: “You directed my path and
strengthened [me] to chastity and bound my mind to you,” humbly submitting
and not at all recalling his own will before the one who sees everything.741
So lest on hearing this we suppose that Christ adorned him with such virtues
like irrational matter, he adds: You rewarded appropriately742 the deeds of each
one, that is, in accordance with the eagerness of my will and the austerity of my
body, you now rewarded me for my purity; and you promised to give as fruit for
this the glory and joy of the future life.
181r
Ո՛ եդիր յոգւոջ իմում մի ինչ ստացւած պատւական քան || զքեզ
C 135
համարել։
a Read ուղղեցաւ.
b կարաց bis.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 183
Blessed are you, divinely inspired one, and [blessed is] your soul. For you chose 181r
and loved the truly most precious things,743 and not the supposed ones to which
we impure ones are servants. Understand for me here the revelation of the two
wills, that is, of his own and God’s. For you said: You taught my soul to regard
nothing more precious than yourself, and I truly carried out that teaching and
did not reckon it onerous.744 In the same745 fashion from the zeal of these two
an undivided love was established between my love and your grace: you loved,
and I became a worthy dwelling-place of your love.
[9]746 Now, my Lord Jesus, I have fulfilled the service that I received from
you.
To call the Saviour of all his Lord alone provides an example of greater familiar-
ity of love, whereby he was bound.747 | For this God also did, calling himself748 C 136
God only of his own. Now the service749 is first and foremost the purity of his
own self, to which he was attentive with effort and will as to the temple of God,
in accordance with [the saying]: “Let each one know to keep his own vessel in
purity.”750 And after that, the ministry of the apostolic task, that is, to be a min-
ister to the gentiles, was entrusted to him through the preaching of the word,
as the Apostle says about himself:751 “This I brought to an end,” because until
reaching the end of my life, | he was unable to fix any stain on myself, and I did 181v
not reckon the preaching shameful.752
For | all works of austerity753 are for the sake of hope of that rest. So because you C 137
strengthened [me], he says, to endure this travail, for which you promised your
reward, make [me] worthy also of the compensation of your reward; since this is
the grace of his mercy, to offer rewards for the deeds of mankind.754 For behold,
men labour at a single task: one receives the reward because of his hope,755 and
the other, who was occupied with the same works, not at all. It is clear then that
works cannot accomplish anything, nor are they justificatory by nature.756 But
it is the grace of his mercy that justifies,757 which, he said, may you grant me.
Which is inescapable and ineffable salvation.
Inescapable means his sovereign justice, and salvation his mercy. | For sin- C 138
ners, he says,758 are unable to escape you when they disdain [you];759 nor are
the just deprived of the salvation in which they hoped. However, here we are
faced with a problematical investigation, as to760 what rest in fact this blessed
one seeks. Making for this in his course he is cautious in the following words
of this prayer. | For if he seeks [the peace] of the body, that he was to aban- 182r
don here in the tomb. But if he were to seek that of the soul, the peace of souls
exists without their body, because the Apostle says: “Each one in his own body
inherits whatever he has done, whether good or evil.”761 So if he inherits in the
body, what becomes of the souls after death? Do they indeed die also with the
body until the resurrection? Never! For we have no need of instruction from
the church concerning the immortality of the soul, | since the outside philoso- C 139
phers762 confess the same. And the Lord said: “They kill the body, and the soul
they cannot kill.”763
So what is the rest of the pure souls before the resurrection? Christ himself
taught this to us when Peter said to him: “We have abandoned everything and
followed you. What will happen to us? Then he said: You who followed me, and
everyone who comes, will receive a hundredfold in this world, and in the world
to come life everlasting.”764 But for those who did not follow him, it was not
thus, but he brings them to judgment; he demands mercy and love, and thereby
justifies them.
Through these we learn that there are two paths for the souls of men after
death.765 For the pure, among whom the prince of this world does not find
182v
anything of his own, there awaits a battle with “the authorities | and powers | of
C 140
the air who are below heaven.”766 Escaping from these according to their deeds
and faith,767 the souls reach Christ and stand768 there beside him in the delight
of joy. And they come with him at the Second Coming,769 not so that they may
enter into judgment, but so that they may judge the others through their own
virtues,770 in accordance with what Christ said. For just as the Apostles [will
judge] Israel,771 likewise all those perfect in virtue772 [will judge] those773 who
transgressed in their conduct on the same path. And putting on bodies,774 they
will inherit in them everlasting life,775 as Christ said.776
Those, however, who were unable to acquire a chaste life but evinced in their
actions777 the activity of Satan, since the weight of their sins overcomes the
activity of778 their benevolence, the just law of God does not allow them | to C 141
cross through the evil demons who are under heaven,779 but they too remain
under heaven in expectation of the future judgment and mercy of God, who
in this fashion will easily expiate them, that is, with gifts and compassion.
One could adduce many persuasive testimonies for this from the scriptures
and the780 saints, who indicated the same figuratively.781 First the Lord clearly
demonstrates it in the gospel in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus,782
because up to that time Abraham was still under the curse of Adam and
subject to the authority of darkness;783 and then he was freed | by the one 183r
who came and preached to the souls who were in prison, as Peter says.784 The
Apostle also writes; “May he save me, he says,785 from the authority of darkness,”
that is from the demons of the air, “and liberate me into the kingdom of his
beloved Son.”786 | And what kingdom it is he reveals to the Hebrews: “You have C 142
approached, he says,787 Mount Sion, the church of the first-born, to myriads
of angels and the souls of the just made perfect.”788 See that not only does he
mention the just, but that they are perfected just, who there enjoy delight.
So lest this account of the testimonies be increased too much, we place as a
seal to it the vision of Antony. For what they spoke figuratively789 because of the
inability of the neophyte believers to comprehend, by the will of God he clearly
saw and gave as nourishment to the perfect the same awesome knowledge. For
once he saw himself ascending into heaven; and in the air examiners790 came
to meet him and accused him of what he had done in his youth, from whom
he escaped unharmed. And again he saw Satan | spreading his hands through C 143
the air; some of the souls he seized and dragged down below. But those who
escaped and flew up, over them he791 gnashed his teeth. Antony saw this vision
Վանեսցի խաւարն։
Տկարասցի վիհն։
while awake,792 and Athanasius wrote it down,793 whereby they confirmed | for 183v
us the position of the soul: that when the saints have here overcome Satan, they
ascend to heaven794 to Christ; and those who weakened in the battle, lingering
under heaven795 await the future judgment. And how much the boldness and
scrutiny of the evil prince of the air are upon those beloved of God, here we
learn and tremble. For if John, possessed of such purity, believed they would
be ashamed not of their own conduct, but of the grace of Christ which he
requested, how much need have we for preparedness before that journey! | C 144
That is, may the fire—clearly Satan’s tyranny796—recede for my soul which is797
about to leave my body and run to you.
We do not know what the fire and darkness are there; they have learned798
and written as Paul says: “We have a battle with the powers799 of earthly
darkness.”800
Behold abyss there indicates the ambush of stumbling for the souls801 of those
on their way.
792 While awake: Athanasius, Life of Antony §65, says Antony was “as it were outside himself.”
See also above, p. 116 in C. Cf. the battle of demons and angels in Ašot’s death scene, Tʿovma
Arcruni, History, 251. For such visions and dreams in early Armenian authors see Thomson,
Łazar, 267–268, “Appendix on Dreams.” See also Nersēs Šnorhali, Yisus Ordi, stanza 792
= lines g 364–368, p. 142, for the demons who forcibly detain our souls on their way to
heaven.
793 Athanasius, Life of Antony, §65ff.
794 To heaven: om. M.
795 Heaven: erkni, C; pl. M.
796 Tyranny, bṙnutʿiwn: for Satan as “tyrant,” cf. p. 26 in C, n. 113 above.
797 Which is: who am, M.
798 Learned: + in the spirit, M.
799 Powers: sing. C.
800 Cf. Eph 6.12.
801 Souls: sing. C.
192 Armenian Text of the Commentary
Խամրասցի հնոցն։
Շիջցի գեհենն։
Not the future one, but that where the rich man thirsted.802
The same is his tyranny and insolence; because803 the continuation of the
saying804 | does not allow us to suppose this refers to the future one. C 145
These are those who oppose the holy angels who lead the soul;805 and their 184r
tax806 that they take from our deeds they spread in front [of us] as if in
writing.807 And808 when they do not overcome, but the operation of God’s
will, which we fulfilled, is superior to theirs, let them be809 ashamed at their
pointless condemnation.810
Let the demons be afraid; let the princes lose their senses.
For God is judge, and Satan the accuser;811 and he does not condemn without
his will. When God overcomes812 according to just law, that you do not have
power over him and the deed is good rather than evil, they [the demons] know
and trust the just law, | and in fear they lose their senses to do battle and prevent C 146
the ascent of the soul.
802 See p. 141 in C for the rich man and Lazarus. According to Luke 16.23 the rich man was in
hell, džoxkʿ, not gehen, as the next lemma. For the future furnace, hnocʿ, see Matt 13.42, 50.
803 Because: om. C.
804 Saying: pl. M.
805 Soul: pl. M.
806 Tax: for the theme of the evil spirits examining souls in their ascent and taking tax see the
references in Lampe, s.v. telōnēs.
807 In writing: for Paulʿs exposition of legal obligations and the cheirographē see Col 2.14; cf.
above, p. 29 of C.
808 And: for, M.
809 Let them be: they are, M.
810 I.e. of innocent souls.
811 Accuser: dataxaz, as Acts 25.16; the usual Armenian epithet for Satan is bansarku, slan-
derer, calumniator, as in the lemma just below; see further p. 26 in C, n. 113 above.
812 Overcomes: warns, M.
194 Armenian Text of the Commentary
Ընկճեսցին զաւրութիւնքն։
It is the power of Satan, who seized this authority from God to condemn us thus
after death in our course.813
Let those on the right hand stand; let those on the left hand not
remain.
Those on the right hand are the angels,814 advocates and witnesses of doing
good; while those on the left hand are the evil demons, opponents of the same
and accusers of evil deeds, in accordance with [the saying]: “Thousands shall
fall815 from your side, and816 myriads817 from your right hand.”818 Now, he says,
let those stand who are guides of your course for you; and let those who are
opposed in order to prevent that be exterminated. | 184v
We call him devil819 and Satan | from his work; for he is always casting words820 C 147
of evil thoughts821 into our heart and mind.822 Let Satan, because he is opposed
to all doing of good and salvation, be silenced, he says, and let him not be able
to calumniate me; may he be destroyed and not have the power to overcome
me.
a եւ above line.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 197
He has no other anger823 than at the salvation of mankind, and in his error
he strives to oppose that and to contrive excuses for condemnation. When I
am victorious through your grace, he says,824 his anger will be exhausted and
remain ineffective, and the error of his struggle will perish as impotent.
His instruments of torture are not irrational materials, as one can see of bodily
ones, because these do not feel shame; but they are evil | and hateful spirits. And C 148
they are unable to torture everyone, but [only] those whom they have subjected
to themselves. This is clear from the rich man and Lazarus.825 Now let them be
ashamed of themselves, he says, by me through your grace as victor in the battle.
As for example, he who plans to catch a bird stretches out his hands and says:
Perhaps it will not escape; and then when it does escape, he understands that
the rapidity of its wings aided it. | In this fashion too, Satan because of his 185r
exceeding wickedness stretches out his hands to catch the righteous, as with
Antony.826 But when he is unable, he is pained827 that the wings of their virtues
bore them upwards in accordance with the just laws of God.
May his children be tormented, and all his roota be thrown into
doubt.
a. Root: pl. C.
The children are the demons, accomplices of evil, who are tormented | by being C 149
overcome by the spotless, hoping that in accordance with all the evils we per-
formed towards them, to which they did not consent, we shall be condemned at
the impartial tribunal.828 And understanding that despite being a man he was
raised up sinless, they confirm that not their own will but our deceits make
other men sinful. For which reason they are thrown into doubt from fear of the
future judgment, understanding that not only by the body of Christ but also
through his grace we shall be condemned by his saints, because they know the
severity of the awesome punishment.829
Behold, he has indicated truly who the calumniators or violent ones830 on the
journey are. So when I am freed from their violence, he says, with | you I shall C 150
rest and be delivered831 thenceforth from labour, because for those freed from
this there is nothing else than | ineffable joy and indescribable delight832 with 185v
their hope, Christ.833
Who can describe that promise? “For eye has not seen nor ear heard, and it
has not fallen into the heart of man, what God has prepared for those who
love him.”834 Of this promise, he says, make me worthy; not for no reason, but
because it is a gift to the saints and those living chastely in your love. And I
through your grace have brought it to completion.
§ 115. And then, having sealed himself and having said: “Be with me, my
Lord Jesus Christ,”a
a. Christ: om. M.
He placed the mark of the sign of the saving cross as seal on his body | and soul, C 151
whereby Christ was imprinted on him, according to his saying: Be with me, that
is, your power, Jesus Christ and Lord.
829 Note the alternation of first and third person for the same subject.
830 Violent ones: bṙnadatkʿ, C; bṙnadatołkʿ, M; cf. the Devil’s tyranny, bṙnutʿiwn, n. 113 above.
Calumniators, bambasołk’, reflects the lemma anbasir, “without blame.”
831 And be delivered: om. C.
832 1Pet 1.8.
833 1Tim 1.1.
834 1Cor 2.9 [not Z]; cf. Isa 64.4.
200 Armenian Text of the Commentary
He carried out all these petitions awake in the body; and on completing them
he lay down prepared for the end, so that once his soul had been committed835
no one else would need to bury his body, especially so that his disciples might
confirm the same.
It is clear that [it was] the last [word],836 that you would hear no more from our
teacher bodily. But what peace would it be? That which he himself had received
from Christ when he said: “My peace I give to you.”837 | For even after my death, 186r
he said, I have love and peace with you, | and I am your intercessor838 before C 152
the one to whom I hasten.839
How is it possible for a man to experience at the same time these two opposites,
joy and tears, as happened to them? But one must understand that they did not
know his death was so certain, but they were betrayed in their thoughts. They
rejoiced in the hope that this prayer was not as we supposed, that he had been
designated to remain for immortality.840 And they wept, because they saw him
travelling on the road to death. Hence the vacillation of their doubts subjected
them to two minds and actions. Hope anticipating the thought, for joy; | and C 153
sight of the present action, for sadness and tears.
While they were thus841 agitated around him, he did not delay but rapidly
committed his soul before them. Now it would have been impossible842 for
them to dare to place a cover on the tomb, unless they had seen this accu-
a Read հոգն.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 203
rately;843 but they did see in reality that in front of them he fell asleep. And then
they hid his resting-place. But I do not think it superfluous to add also that844
this history845 has received fulfillment, that his body was raised from the earth
and is no longer here just as [the bodies] of the other | apostles or saints,846 186v
but only the empty tomb and the garment which he formed as a bed in the
trench.847
But why does he not recall here that [the same] is to be understood from
the gospels? For behold, they related at length and truly the account of the
torments of Christ, | but passed over the resurrection briefly, and were not at all C 154
concerned to describe the ascension save by one,848 taking refuge in our faith.
It was the same concern for the disciples of the teachers, and for the historians
of their lives. But we have learned for sure,849 and believe that after that they
came and opened the tomb, and they found it empty of the body of the blessed
one, because on paying the debt of our nature850 he had only taken a taste of
death, like the Mother of the Lord.851
But as for some saying that he will come in the future with Enoch and
Elias,852 we have not learned this from the saints who related this mystery.
Furthermore, because they have not yet died in the body, Enoch and Elias will
a Read զորոյ.
Translation of Nersēs’ Commentary with Notes 205
come in order that they may die, since it is impossible for the descendants
of Adam | not to taste his condemnation.853 But behold, he [John] did taste, C 155
because he fell asleep and committed his soul, and there is not another second
death for those who have854 died once. But he put on again the body after
death, if one should855 say put on, or leave this dubious856 mystery to the
incomprehensible wisdom of God and confirm what we [know] for sure, that
we do not have his body. | But where it is, God who transferred him knows. If 187r
it pleases anyone to receive as confirmation for this his saying in the gospel:
“Jesus did not say to him he would not die, but that I wish that he remain until I
come.”857 That is, Christ did not say John would not take a taste of death, which
he himself was about to undergo, but: “I wish that he remain” after dying, in
incorruptibility | eternally, just as you others were to be after the corruption of C 156
your bodies. Until is here defined as extension, as in many places,858 and not
as a point of completion; in accordance with the [saying]: “You are from ages
until ages.”859
This account we do not confirm [ourselves], but we trust its persuasiveness
in the wish of those who have scrutinized its accuracy;860 and especially in
yours, who in everything are a lover of truth and of wisdom, so that you were
not satisfied with your own but also drew us by this persuasiveness to temerity,
O father Stepʿannos, whose request the grace of God has brought to completion
through this miserable instrument, to his own glory and the adornment of your
faith and true love for this theologian.861 And not, as was necessary, did I bring
the whole of its significance to light, which would have been impossible for
me. But merely in the obedience of my | filial deference I zealously gave cause 187v
853 1Cor 15.21. Numerous references in the Bible indicate that Elias [Elijah] must come again.
Heb 11.5, following Gen 5.24, indicates that Enoch was “transferred [the verb pʿoxel is
used in both cases],” but not that he would come again. In his adaptation of Andreas of
Caesarea’s Commentary on Revelation, Nersēs cites Enoch and Elias together several times,
interpreting them as the two witnesses of Rev 11.3; and to the commentary on Rev 10.11 he
adds that they will come again to prevent the reception of Antichrist.
854 Those who have: sing. C.
855 If one should, tʿē part ē, M: although, tʿēpēt, C.
856 Dubious, karceawkʿ; cf. 2Cor 5.7, where it renders dia eidous and is contrasted with faith.
857 John 21.23 [not Z]; on the Greek text see Metzger, Commentary, ad loc.
858 In many places, i bazum tełis: or, “to many places.”
859 Ps 89.9 [= Z].
860 Accuracy, čšgrtutʿiwn, C: truth, čšmartutʿiwn, M.
861 I.e. John the Evangelist, Nersēs being the “instrument.”
206 Armenian Text of the Commentary
to your sagacity to raise even higher the wisdom of the same, through the grace
of Christ, our hope862 and light,863 who is blessed for ages of ages. Amen.
below heaven.”866 So it is God himself who guards and cares for, illuminates
and nourishes the heavenly angels through the abundance of his love.
The text printed below is that used by Nersēs for the lemmata of his commen-
tary. It is taken from Matenadaran 1422 [henceforth M], written in 1284 which,
with the only printed edition of the commentary [Constantinople 1736 from
unknown exemplars, henceforth C], forms the basis for the following English
translation of the commentary. It represents the text of M as faithfully as pos-
sible. Abbreviations have been expanded and the punctuation changed, where
appropriate to the sense.
A fully critical edition of the Armenian text, especially given its popularity
(as noted in the Introduction), is most desirable, but would require a much
wider investigation than the present enquiry, which is limited to Nersēs’ under-
standing of the meaning of this short text.
An Armenian text of the Dormition was printed in Vienna in 1877 by Joseph
Catergian with an accompanying Latin translation [henceforth V]. That text,
derived from liturgical manuscripts, is often divergent from the text used by
Nersēs, as is also the critical Greek text printed by Junod and Kaestli. The editors
of the Greek used V in the preparation of their edition, but not the lemmata
from the Commentary on the Dormition by Nersēs. The Dormition was also
included in the Armenian Bible, the standard version of which was published
in Venice by Zōhrapean in 1805 [henceforth Z].
In the English translation of Nersēs’ commentary the text of the lemmata has
been rendered from this Armenian text [M], with necessary corrections and
significant variants from C.1 The more extensive differences in V or the Greek
are only occasionally noted. So although the text printed below is that of M, the
English translation in the body of the commentary may follow C on occasion,
where it is clear from the commentary that M does not correspond precisely
with the exemplar of the Dormition that Nersēs had before him.
The spelling of M, written by Esayi Nčʿeci, often reflects his fourteenth
century pronunciation rather than the standard spelling of classical Armenian;
see the Note preceding the text of the full commentary. To avoid confusion, the
same spelling is followed here.
1 In other words, the text of M contains some obvious errors in addition to variants deriving
from an earlier text tradition.
210 nersēs’ armenian text of the ‘dormition’
aCZ: եղբարսն bC: Յօհաննէս; Z: Յովհաննէս cC: + ասէ dZ: om քանզի eZ: om
էր եւ fZ: եղբարք gC: om ամենայն hC: om առ նա iC: խօսիլ; CZ: + ընդ նոսա
jZ: + իմ kCZ: ծառայակիցք; Z: + եւ ժառանգակիցք lC: արքայութեան mC: գիտէ՞ք
nZ: զօրութիւն oZ: + քանի արուեստս pZ: որչափ qC: ո՞րպիսի rC: ո՞րչափ եւ
քանի՞ sC: տեսիք tCZ: երեւին uC: լինին; Z: լինիցին vC: om զնա wZ: + ի
xC: գիտէ՞ք; Z: գիտէք yZ: ի zZ: + եղբարք aaZ: կամեցեալ] եւ մաղթէ կալ abC:
+ ձեզ acC: անառակութեանց adC: զթշնամանս aeCZ: զնենգութիւնն afZ: +
աստուած agZ: + եւ ahC: աստուածն; CZ: + իմ aiZ: + արդ ajCZ: կրօնաւորութեան
akC: ձերում alC: ձեր amC: ձեր anZ: ժուժկալութեանս aoC: ձերում apCZ + ի
aqC: միաբանութեանն; Z: միաբանութեան arC: ձերում asCZ: զգաստութեան atC:
ձերում auZ: սիրելս avC: ձերում
nersēs’ armenian text of the ‘dormition’ 211
109 [Z: ե]Եւ ապա խնդրեացal հաց`am գոհացաւ այսպէս։ Զո՞ր աւրհնութ-
իւն կամ զո՞ր պատարագ կամ զո՞ր գոհութիւնan ի բեկանել հացիս
անւանեսցուք, այլ միայն զքեզ` Յիսուս.ao Փառաւորեմք Տէր զքո ասա-
ցեալդap հաւրaq անուն. Փառաւորեմք զմուտ դրաննar քո. Փառաւո-
րեմք զյարութիւննas քո որ քեւat ցուցաւ մեզ. Փառաւորեմք զճանա-
պարն քո. Փառաւորեմք զսերմն քո. զբանն, զշնորհսն,au զհաւատն,
զաղն, զանխաւսav մարգարիտն, զգանձն, զարաւրն,aw զուռկանն, զմե-
ծութիւնն, որ վասն մեր կոչեցար որդի մարդո,ax զճշմարտութիւնն,
զհանգիստն, զգիտութիւնն, զզօրութիւնն, զպատւիրանն, զհամարձա-
կութիւնն, զազատութիւնն, զառ ի քեզ փախուստն։ Զի դու ես Տէր
aC: փութացէք; Z: փութացեալ + ի bC: կատարել cCZ: տէր dZ: om ինչ eCZ:
գալուստ fZ: թողցէ gZ: + աստուած hZ: + եւ iZ: + եւ jC: վարիցիք kZ:
զառաջինսն lZ: ի նմանէ ողորմութիւն mZ: + առ նոսա nCZ: յաղօթս oC: ո՞; CZ: +
որ pCZ: հիւսեցեր qC: ո՞; CZ: + որ rC: անյթառամելի (sic); Z: յանթառամելի sCZ:
յօդեցեր tC: ո՞; CZ: + որ uC: զկենարար; Z: կենդանարար vC: ո՞; CZ: + որ wC: ո՞; CZ:
+ որ xC: ո՞; CZ: + որ yC: միայնդ; + ես zZ: գթածդ ես aaC: ո՞; CZ: + որ abC: միայնդ;
+ ես acC: ո՞; CZ: + որ adZ: յամենեսին aeZ: ամենայն afZ: քոյով agCZ: պարգեւօքդ
ahC: ծածկես aiCZ: + որ ajCZ: զչարախօսին akC: յամենայն alC: խնդրեալ amZ:
+ եւ anC: tr. գոհութիւն, պատարագ aoZ: + Քրիստոս apZ: ասացեալ aqC: հօրդ;
Z: հօր arCZ: դրան asZ: զյարութիւն atZ: om քեւ auCZ: զշնորհն avC: զանխօս; Z:
զանհաս awC: զարօրն axCZ: մարդոյ
212 nersēs’ armenian text of the ‘dormition’
aZ: աղբեւր bC: յաւիտենից; Z: յաւիտեանց cZ: զմեծութիւնդ dZ: + ի մէնջ eZ: եւ]
որ fCZ: + է gZ: + եւ hC: կարկառեաց iZ: + եւ jCZ: եղբօր kCZ: աղօթս lC: լինիլ
mC: om Տեառն nCZ: սրբոյ oZ: + եւ pZ: om եւ qZ: + եղիցի rZ: om լիցի sC: om եւ
խաղաղութիւն; խաղաղութիւն + ընդ ձեզ tC: + եւ խաղաղութիւն Տեառն ընդ ձեզ. եւ;
Z: + եւ uC: + դու vC: զեղբարցն] երկու յեղբարցդ; Z: երկուս յեղբարցդ wC: որթովք;
Z: որդւովք xZ: փայտատօք yZ: յապաղելոյ zC: Յօհաննէս; Z: Յովհաննէս aaC:
Յօհաննէս; Z: Յովհաննէս abM: գրայր (sic) acC: դրանն adZ: բազմութեան aeZ: ի
նմանէ afCZ: եղբօր agC: միոյ ahCZ: բրէին aiCZ: բրածդ ajC: մեծութեան akCZ:
աղօթս alCZ: վերայ amCZ: իմանայաք anZ: om որպէս եւ կամէր aoC: զհանդերձսն
apCZ: զգեցեալն aqZ: ստանայր arZ: համբարձ asCZ: յաղօթս
nersēs’ armenian text of the ‘dormition’ 213
aCZ: ո՞ որ bC: ո՞; CZ: + որ cC: ո՞; CZ: + որ dZ: մարգարէիցն eC: ո՞; CZ: + որ fZ:
կեցուցեր; C: + եւ gC: զկարօղսն; Z: զկարօտեալսն hC: ո՞; CZ: + որ iC: ո՞; CZ: + որ
jC: om եւ kC: ո՞; CZ: + որ lCZ: զգօն mC: ո՞; CZ: + որ nCZ: քոյով oZ: բանիւ pC: ո՞;
CZ: + որ qC: ո՞; CZ: + որ rCZ: ընկղմելոյն sCZ: յանօրէնութիւն tC: արագ աւրէնք]
M: արագօրէն; Z: արակ օրէնք uC: ո՞; CZ: + որ vCZ: Սատանայէ wZ: ընծայեցար
փրկիչ xC: ո՞; CZ: + որ yC: ո՞; CZ: + որ zZ: + զնա aaC: ո՞; CZ: + որ abZ: զնա acC:
կրօնաւորիլ; Z: կրօնաւորել adC: ո՞; CZ: + որ aeC: ո՞; CZ: + որ afZ: զգիտւթիւն; C: +
քո agC: ո՞; CZ: + որ ahZ: որոց aiZ: + ո որ ajCZ: օրէնքդ akCZ: օդականաց alZ:
երկրաւորաց amCZ: երկիւղ anCZ: զքոյոյ aoC: Յօհաննու; Z: Յովհաննու apCZ:
եղելոյ aqC: ո՞; CZ: + որ arCZ: ժամանակս asC: ո՞; CZ: + որ atC: om մարդ auC: ո՞;
CZ: + որ avC: մշտնջենաւորսն; Z: մշտնջենաւորն awC: ո՞; CZ: + որ axC: ո՞; CZ: + որ
ayC: ո՞; CZ: + որ azZ: ախտ baZ: նորին bbC: ո՞; CZ: + որ bcC: ո՞; CZ: + որ bdC: ո՞; CZ: +
որ beCZ: սայթաքելոյ bfCZ: + որ bgC: ո՞; CZ: + որ bhC: ո՞; CZ: + որ biCZ: գիտւթիւնն
bjC: ո՞; CZ: + որ
214 nersēs’ armenian text of the ‘dormition’
aZ: om արժանեաց bZ: հատուցանես cCZ: + որ dC: եդեր eCZ: ստացուած fCZ:
պատուական gC: համարիլ hCZ: ընկալայ iZ: արժանի արա] արժանաւորեա՛
jZ: քում հանգստեանդ kZ: om արդ lCZ: ընկրկեսցի mC: tr հուրն ընկրկեսցի
nZ: համրասցի oC: գեհեանն pC: իշխանքն qZ: զօրութիւնք նորա ընկճեսցին
rZ: կայցեն sZ: ձախակողմանքն tCZ: Սատանայ uCZ: զարհուրեսցի vCZ:
սուզեսցի wC: պատկառեսցին xZ: յարձակմունք yZ: կապեսցին zCZ: մանկունք
aaC: արմատք abC: տարակուսեսցին] Z: + եւ սգասցի մինչեւ ի սպառ acCZ: առ
adZ: խոստեցարն aeZ: որ afZ: զամենայն agZ: + թէ ahCZ: + Քրիստոս; Z: +
եւ aiCZ: կողմնեցաւ ajZ: om եւ akCZ: + եւ alC: + իւր amZ: + սուրբ առաքեալն
եւ աւետարանիչն Յովհաննէս. Եւ Յիսուսի փառք, եւ Քրիստոսի պատիւ եւ զօրութիւն
յաւիտեանս իաւիտենից. Ամէն։
Bibliography
Abbreviations
am Azgayin Matenadaran
avant Treasures of the Armenian Tradition
bho Bibliotheca Hagiographica Orientalis; see Secondary Literature
csco Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium
dos Dumbarton Oaks Studies
ectt Eastern Christian Texts in Translation
fbr Forschungen zur Byzantinischen Rechtsgeschichte
gcs Die Griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte
gt’ Girkʿ Tʿłtʿocʿ; see Armenian Texts
ha Handes Amsorya
hats Harvard Armenian Texts and Studies
jcsss The Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies
musj Mélanges de l’Université Saint Joseph
nbhl Nor Baṙgirkʿ Haygazean Lezui; see Secondary Literature
nts New Testament Studies
oca Orientalia Christiana Analecta
odch Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church
pg Patrologia Graeca
po Patrologia Orientalis
pts Patristische Texte und Studien
REArm Revue des études arméniennes
sc Sources chrétiennes
sh Subsidia Hagiographica
svtp Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha
tu Text und Untersuchungen
upats University of Pennsylvania Armenian Text and Studies
Z Armenian Bible, ed. Y. Zōhrapean; see Armenian Texts
Armenian Texts
Versions of the History attributed to Agathangelos, Ann Arbor mi, 2010. Translation
of the Teaching [= §259–715 of the History]: R.W. Thomson, The Teaching of Saint
Gregory [rev. ed.], [avant 1] New Rochelle, ny 2001.
Ankanon Girkʿ, vol. ii, ed. E. Tayecʿi, Venice 1898.
Ankanon Girkʿ, vol. iii, ed. Kʿ. Čʿrakean, Venice 1904.
Athanasius: S. Atʿanasi Ałekʿsandrioy hayrapeti Čaṙkʿ, Tʿułtʿkʿ ew Ĕnddimasacʿutʿiwnkʿ,
ed. E. Tayecʿi, Venice 1899.
Basil of Caesarea: Asceticon: Basilio di Cesarea: Il Libro delle Domande, ed. and trans.
G. Uluhogian [csco 536, 537, Scriptores Armeniaci 19, 20], Leuven 1993.
Hexaemeron: Barseł Kesaracʿi: Yałags vecʿawreay ararčʿutʿean, ed. K. Muradyan, Erevan
1984. Translation in Thomson, Basil of Caesarea and Armenian Cosmology; see Sec-
ondary Literature.
“Concerning the Twelve Holy Apostles, Yałags erkotasan surb aṙakʿelocʿ,” Ankanon Girkʿ,
iii, 471–473.
David/Dawitʿ Anyałtʿ. Sahmankʿ ew Tramatutʿiwnkʿ Imastasirutʿean, ed. S.S. Arevšatyan,
Erevan 1980. Armenian text reproduced with facing English translation and notes in
B. Kendall and R.W. Thomson, Definitions and Divisions of Philosophy by David the
Invincible Philosopher [upats 5], Chico ca, 1983.
Dionysius Thrax, Ars Grammatica. Greek and Armenian text in N. Adontz, Denys de
Thrace et les commentateurs arméniens, Louvain 1970, 1–76.
Dormition of John: Hangist eranelwoyn Yovhannu, ed. J. Catergian, Vienna 1877. Transla-
tion: J. Catergian, Ecclesiae Ephesinae de Obitu Joannnis apostoli narratio ex versione
armeniaca, Vienna 1887.
Ełišẽ. Commentary on Joshua and Judges. Armenian text in Matenagrutʿiwnkʿ, Venice
1859. Translation: R.W. Thomson, “A Commentary on Joshua and Judges attributed
to Ełišē,” REArm 31 [2008–2009], 59–99.
History of Vardan. Ełišēi vasn Vardanay ew Hayocʿ Paterazmin, ed. E. Ter-Minasyan,
Erevan 1957. Translation: R.W. Thomson, Elishē. History of Vardan and the Armenian
War [hats 5], Cambridge ma, 1982.
Homilies. Armenian text in Ełišēi Matenagrutʿiwnkʿ, Venice 1859. Translation: R.W.
Thomson, A Homily on the Passion of Christ attributed to Elishe [ectt 5], Leuven
2000.
Ephrem, Commentary on the Diatessaron. L. Leloir, S. Éphrem, Commentaire de l’ Évan-
gile concordant, version arménienne [csco 137, 145, Scriptores Armeniaci 1, 2], Lou-
vain 1953.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History: Patmutʿiwn ekełecʿwoy Ewsebiosi Kesaracʿwoy, ed.
A. Čarean, Venice 1877.
Eznik. L. Mariès and C. Mercier, Eznik, De Deo. po 28, 3, 4, Paris 1959.
Georgian Chronicles: Armenian Version. I. Abulaje, Kʿartʿli Cʿxovrebis Jveli Somxuri Tʿar-
gmani, Tbilisi 1953. Translation. R.W. Thomson, Rewriting Caucasian History. The
Medieval Armenian Adaptation of the Georgian Chronicles, Oxford 1996.
bibliography 217
Commentary on Proverbs. Text and translation: Prince Max, Herzog von Sachsen, Nerses
von Lampron, Erzbischof von Tarsus: Erklärung der Sprichwörter Salomos, 3 vols.,
Leipzig 1919, 1920, 1926.
Commentary on Revelation. Armenian text: Meknutʿiwn Yaytnutʿean S. Awetarančʿin
Yovhannu arareal S. Andrēi ew Aritasay episkoposacʿn Kesaru, Jerusalem 1855. Trans-
lation: R.W. Thomson, Nerses of Lambron, Commentary on the Revelation of Saint
John [huas 9], Leuven 2007.
Commentary on the Twelve Prophets. Meknutʿiwn srbocʿ erkotasan margarēicʿ arareal
eranelwoyn Nersisi Lambrōnacʿwoy, Constantinople 1826.
Commentary on the Wisdom of Solomon. A. Tanielian, Archbishop Nersēs Lambronacʿi:
Commentary on the Wisdom of Solomon, New York 2007.
Synodical Oration. P. Aucher, Orazione Sinodale, Venice 1838 [Armenian text and Italian
translation].
Nersēs Šnorhali, Yisus Ordi. Armenian text in Tn. Nersisi Šnorhalwoy bankʿ čʿapʿu, Venice
1928. Translation: I. Kéchichian, Nersès Šnorhali, Jésus fils unique du Père [sc 203],
Paris 1973.
Nonnus of Nisibis. Commentary on John: Meknutʿiwn Yovhannu Awetaranin, ed. Kʿ. Čra-
kʿean, Venice 1920. Translation: R.W. Thomson, Nonnus of Nisibis, Commentary on the
Gospel of Saint John, Atlanta ga, 2014.
Protoevangelion. Armenian text in Ankanon Girkʿ, ii. Translation: P. Peeters, Évangiles
apocryphes, ii: L’évangile de l’enfance, rédactions syriaques, arabe et arméniennes,
Paris 1914; A. Terian, The Armenian gospel of the infancy, with three early versions of
the Protoevangelium of James, Oxford 2008.
Pseudo-Dionysius. The Armenian Version of the works attributed to Dionysius the Are-
opagite, ed. and trans. R.W. Thomson [csco 488, 489, Scriptores Armeniaci 17, 18],
Leuven 1987.
Samuēl Skewracʿi, Patmutʿiwn Nersis varucʿ episkoposin, ergocʿs Sałmosis kʿnnawłi. See
Matʿevosyan 1988, 255–261.
Sargis Kund, Meknutʿiwn Katʿołikeacʿ Tʿłtʿocʿ, ed. H. Kʿyoseyan [Nor Ktakarani Grkʿeri
Meknutʿyunner 17], Ẽǰmiacin, 2003.
Stepʿannos Siwnecʿi, Meknutʿiwn čʿoricʿ awetarančʿacʿn, ed. G. Yovsepʿean, Erevan 1994.
Tatʿewacʿi. See Grigor Tatʿewacʿi.
The Teaching of Saint Gregory. See Agatʿangełos.
Tʿovma Arcruni. Tʿovmayi vardapeti Arcrunwoy Patmutʿiwn Tann Arcruneacʿ, ed. Kʿ. Pat-
kanean, St. Petersburg 1887; repr. Tiflis 1917, Delmar ny, 1991. Translation: R.W. Thom-
son, Thomas Artsruni. History of the House of the Artsrunikʿ, Detroit 1985.
Xosrov Anjewacʿi. Commentary on the Divine Liturgy. Armenian text with translation
by S.P. Cowe, New York 1991.
Vardan Arewelcʿi, Meknutʿiwn Sałmosacʿ, Astrakhan 1797.
Yovhannēs Drasxanakertcʿi. Yovhannu Katʿołikosi Drasxanakertcʿwoy Patmutʿiwn Ha-
bibliography 219
yocʿ, ed. M. Emin, Tiflis 1912; repr. Delmar ny 1980. Translation: K. Maksoudian,
Yovhannēs Drasxanakertcʿi. History of Armenia, Atlanta ga, 1987.
Yovhannēs Mandakuni [attr.], Demonstration, Apacʿoycʿ. Armenian text in G.Tʿ., 29–40.
Translation: M. Tallon, Livre des Lettres [= musj 32, fasc. 1], Beirut 1955, 105–138.
Y. Zōrapean, Astuacašunčʿ matean hin ew nor Ktakaranacʿ, Venice 1805.
[In addition to the texts noted above, further editions and translations of the various
Armenian works may be found in Thomson, A Bibliography of Classical Armenian
Literature to 1500ad, and “Supplement to a Bibliography of Classical Armenian
Literature.”]
Greek Texts
Acts of John. E. Junod and J.-D. Kaestli, Acta Iohannis, 2 vols [Corpus Christianorum,
Series Apocryphorum, 1 and 2], Turnhout 1983.
Aristotle, De Interpretatione. Loeb edition.
Athanasius: Vie d’Antoine, ed. G.J.M. Bartelink [sc 400], Paris 1994.
Contra Gentes and De Incarnatione, ed. and trans. R.W. Thomson, Oxford 1971.
Dormitio. See Acts of John.
Hippolytus of Thebes, Fragmenta, pg 117.
Origen, Origenes Werke iv, Der Johanneskommentar, ed. E. Preuschen [gcs 10], Leipzig
1903.
Plato, Phaedrus, Loeb edition.
Secondary Literature
Pétrossian, L., Grégoire de Narek: Commentaire sur le Cantique des Cantiques [oca 285],
Rome 2010.
Petrosyan, E. and A. Ter-Stepʿanyan, S. Grkʿi hayeren meknutʿyunneri matenagitutʿyun,
np 2002.
Širinyan, M.E., “Artakʿin ew nurb greankʿ,” Aštanak 2, 15–45.
Saswaliancʿ, T., Patmutʿiwn Erusałēmi, 2 vols, Jerusalem 1931.
Stone, M.E., Adam and Eve in the Armenian Traditions, Fifth through Seventeenth Cen-
turies [sbl, Early Judaism and Its Literature 38], Atlanta ga, 2013.
Thierry, M., Répertoire des monastères arméniens, Turnhout 1993.
Thomson, R.W., A Bibliography of Classical Armenian Literature to 1500ad, Turnhout
1995.
Thomson, R.W., Saint Basil of Caesarea and Armenian Cosmology [csco 646, Subsidia
130], Leuven 2012.
Thomson, R.W., “Armenian Traditions concerning the Writing of the Gospels: When,
Where, and in what Language?” Forthcoming.
Thomson, R.W., Nerses of Lambron: Commentary on the Revelation of Saint John [huas
9], Leuven 2007.
Thomson, R.W., “The Reception of the Biblical Book of Revelation in Armenia,” in
The Armenian Apocalyptic Tradition [svtp 25], ed. K.B. Bardakjian and S. La Porta,
Leiden/Boston 2014, 242–253.
Thomson, R.W., “Supplement to A Bibliography of Classical Armenian Literature to
1500 ad,” Le Muséon 120 [2007], 163–223.
Uluhogian, G., “Repertorio dei manoscritti della versione armena de S. Basilio de Cesa-
rea,” in Basil of Caesarea: Christian, Humanist, Ascetic, ed. P.J. Fedwick, Toronto 1981,
vol. ii, 571–588.
van Esbroeck, M., Aux origines de la Dormition de la Vierge: études historiques sur les
traditions orientales, Ashgate: Aldershot 1995.
Yovsepʿean, G., Yišatakarankʿ Jeṙagracʿ, Antelias 1951.
Index of Biblical Quotations and Allusions
Chapter and verse are given in accordance with standard Armenian numbering [as in z], which
for the Old Testament normally accords with that of the Septuagint. References are to pages of
this book.
Genesis Psalms
1.7 19, 165 17.14 167
2.7 137 33.15 77
2.17 63 34.21 103
3.22 63 35.7 16, 143
5.24 205 49.13–14 10, 107
6.5 65 54.15 81
12.17 75 58.6 81
89.9 205
Exodus 90.3 83
24.12 165 90.7 195
25.40 141 91.15 155
103.4 93
Leviticus 105.2 93
28.40 185 105.43 149
117.16 153
Deuteronomy 118.23 103
6.11 155 118.103 147, 155
10.17 107 118.120 175
32.4 63 118.151 101
32.18 163 135.6 93
Joshua Proverbs
10.12–13 20, 165 11.8 83
20.27 13
Judges
6.38 111 Isaiah
6.2 75
3Kingdoms [1Kings] 20.8 18
ch. 21 31 29.8 61
53.12 141
4Kingdoms [2Kings] 64.4 199
20.10–11 20, 165
Jeremiah
Ezra 25.6 83
4.28 63
Amos
Job 3.7 139
ch. 1–2 65
1.6 20, 167, 208 Matthew
1.8–11 103 ch. 3 67
28.10 181 4.13 47
index of biblical quotations and allusions 223
1Peter Revelation
1.8 199 10.11 205
2.3 113 11.3 205
2.16 117 20.9 123
2.24 97
3.11 77 Wisdom of Solomon
3.18 99 7.23 81
3.19 189 15.3 123
4.6 155
General Index
Names introducing biblical quotations, or mentioned within them, are not listed.