For these writers, see R. Beulay, La lumière sans forme (Chevetogne: Éditions de Chevetogne, 1987); S. Brock, Spirituality in the Syriac Tradition (Moran Etho, 2, Kottayam: SEERI, 1989) pp. 12–16; 31–36; P. Bettiolo, ‘Letteratura siriaca’, in A. Di Bernardino (ed.), Patrologia, vol. V (Genoa-Milan: Marietti, 2005) pp. 479–490.

For these writers, see R. Beulay, La lumière sans forme (Chevetogne: Éditions de Chevetogne, 1987); S. Brock, Spirituality in the Syriac Tradition (Moran Etho, 2, Kottayam: SEERI, 1989) pp. 12–16; 31–36; P. Bettiolo, ‘Letteratura siriaca’, in A. Di Bernardino (ed.), Patrologia, vol. V (Genoa-Milan: Marietti, 2005) pp. 479–490.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

See S. Brock, ‘From Qatar to Tokyo, by Way of Mar Saba: The Translations of Isaac of Beth Qaṭraye (Isaac the Syrian)’, Aram 11–12 (1999–2000), pp. 475–484 (476–477); idem, ‘Syriac into Greek at Mar Saba: the Translation of St. Isaac the Syrian’, in J. Patrich (ed.), The Sabaite Heritage in the Orthodox Church from the Fifth Century to the Present (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 98, Leuven: Peeters, 2001) pp. 201–208.

See S. Brock, ‘From Qatar to Tokyo, by Way of Mar Saba: The Translations of Isaac of Beth Qaṭraye (Isaac the Syrian)’, Aram 11–12 (1999–2000), pp. 475–484 (476–477); idem, ‘Syriac into Greek at Mar Saba: the Translation of St. Isaac the Syrian’, in J. Patrich (ed.), The Sabaite Heritage in the Orthodox Church from the Fifth Century to the Present (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 98, Leuven: Peeters, 2001) pp. 201–208.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

See Brock, ‘From Qatar to Tokyo’, pp. 478–480, 484; Brock, ‘Crossing the Boundaries: An ecumenical Role Played by Syriac Monastic Literature’, in M. Bielawski and D. Hombergen (eds.), Il monachesimo tra eredità e aperture (Studia Anselmiana, 140, Rome: Pontificio Ateneo S. Anselmo, 2004) pp. 221–238 (221–227); Chialà, Dall’ascesi, pp. 286–306, 325–364.

See Brock, ‘From Qatar to Tokyo’, pp. 478–480, 484; Brock, ‘Crossing the Boundaries: An ecumenical Role Played by Syriac Monastic Literature’, in M. Bielawski and D. Hombergen (eds.), Il monachesimo tra eredità e aperture (Studia Anselmiana, 140, Rome: Pontificio Ateneo S. Anselmo, 2004) pp. 221–238 (221–227); Chialà, Dall’ascesi, pp. 286–306, 325–364.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Beulay, La lumière sans forme, p. 35. For Pseudo-Macarius’ influence, see pp. 35–94.

Beulay, La lumière sans forme, p. 35. For Pseudo-Macarius’ influence, see pp. 35–94.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

On this theme, see Chialà, Dall’ascesi, pp. 158–160, where the author emphasises the importance, for Isaac, of the acknowledgement of ‘weakness’, and the link between this and humility. See also Louf’s introduction to his translation of Isaac’s ‘Second Part’, where he describes how, for Isaac, ‘weakness’ is revealed in the midst of ‘temptations’ and ‘solitude’ and stresses the fact that becoming aware of one’s ‘weakness’ gives birth to humility: A. Louf, Isaac le Syrien. Oeuvres Spirituelles—II (Bégrolles en Mauges: Abbaye de Bellefontaine, 2003) pp. 25–26, 33, 56–57. For an approach to the theme of weakness and suffering in Isaac, see my ‘Human Frailty and Vulnerability in Isaac the Syrian’, Studia Patristica, forthcoming.

On this theme, see Chialà, Dall’ascesi, pp. 158–160, where the author emphasises the importance, for Isaac, of the acknowledgement of ‘weakness’, and the link between this and humility. See also Louf’s introduction to his translation of Isaac’s ‘Second Part’, where he describes how, for Isaac, ‘weakness’ is revealed in the midst of ‘temptations’ and ‘solitude’ and stresses the fact that becoming aware of one’s ‘weakness’ gives birth to humility: A. Louf, Isaac le Syrien. Oeuvres Spirituelles—II (Bégrolles en Mauges: Abbaye de Bellefontaine, 2003) pp. 25–26, 33, 56–57. For an approach to the theme of weakness and suffering in Isaac, see my ‘Human Frailty and Vulnerability in Isaac the Syrian’, Studia Patristica, forthcoming.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

See Dörries, Symeon, pp. 378–389, for whom letters 2–8 ‘of the Egyptian’ were not written by the same author as the rest of the corpus; W. Strothmann, ‘Die erste Homilie des Alexandriners Makarios’, in W. Strothmann (ed.), Makarios-Symposium über das Böse (Göttinger Orientforschungen, Syriaca, 24, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1983) pp. 99–108 (99), for whom also the first letter is of another author: W. Strothmann (ed.), Die Syrische Überlieferung der Schriften des Makarios, 2 vols (Göttinger Orientforschungen, Syriaca, 21, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1981), II, xxv (hereafter: Strothmann, I or II). Until recently, apart from the first letter (see below), and the third (partially corresponding to a writing of Ammonas in one manuscript: see F. Nau [ed.], Ammonas, successeur de saint Antoine. Textes grecs et syriaques [PO, 11.4, Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1915] pp. 484–486), these letters were not known in their original language, and the Syriac version was the only witness including all of them. Thanks to Géhin’s research, we are now aware of the existence of a Greek manuscript (12th century) where the letters ‘of the Egyptian’, with the exception of ‘Letter 4’, are preserved: for their analysis and edition, see P. Géhin, ‘Le dossier macarien de l’ Atheniensis gr. 2492’, Recherches Augustiniennes et Patristiques 31 (1999), pp. 89–147. Géhin’s analysis of these letters shows their differences from the ‘Pseudo-Macarian’ writings: though not attributing them to the historical Macarius of Egypt, Géhin highlights their links to the ‘Egyptian’ milieu (Scetis) and to the tradition of the Apophthegmata, and does not exclude the possibility that they might convey something of Macarius the Egyptian’s original teaching. They might have been written by a 5th-century monk, who gave shape to pre-existent ‘Macarian material’. Rubenson, more recently, wrote that the first two letters might have been written by Macarius; see S. Rubenson, ‘Argument and Authority in Early Monastic Correspondence’, in A. Camplani and G. Filoramo (eds.), Foundations of Power and Conflicts of Authority in Late-Antique Monasticism (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 157, Leuven-Paris-Dudley: Peeters, 2007) pp. 75–87 (78–79).

See Dörries, Symeon, pp. 378–389, for whom letters 2–8 ‘of the Egyptian’ were not written by the same author as the rest of the corpus; W. Strothmann, ‘Die erste Homilie des Alexandriners Makarios’, in W. Strothmann (ed.), Makarios-Symposium über das Böse (Göttinger Orientforschungen, Syriaca, 24, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1983) pp. 99–108 (99), for whom also the first letter is of another author: W. Strothmann (ed.), Die Syrische Überlieferung der Schriften des Makarios, 2 vols (Göttinger Orientforschungen, Syriaca, 21, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1981), II, xxv (hereafter: Strothmann, I or II). Until recently, apart from the first letter (see below), and the third (partially corresponding to a writing of Ammonas in one manuscript: see F. Nau [ed.], Ammonas, successeur de saint Antoine. Textes grecs et syriaques [PO, 11.4, Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1915] pp. 484–486), these letters were not known in their original language, and the Syriac version was the only witness including all of them. Thanks to Géhin’s research, we are now aware of the existence of a Greek manuscript (12th century) where the letters ‘of the Egyptian’, with the exception of ‘Letter 4’, are preserved: for their analysis and edition, see P. Géhin, ‘Le dossier macarien de l’ Atheniensis gr. 2492’, Recherches Augustiniennes et Patristiques 31 (1999), pp. 89–147. Géhin’s analysis of these letters shows their differences from the ‘Pseudo-Macarian’ writings: though not attributing them to the historical Macarius of Egypt, Géhin highlights their links to the ‘Egyptian’ milieu (Scetis) and to the tradition of the Apophthegmata, and does not exclude the possibility that they might convey something of Macarius the Egyptian’s original teaching. They might have been written by a 5th-century monk, who gave shape to pre-existent ‘Macarian material’. Rubenson, more recently, wrote that the first two letters might have been written by Macarius; see S. Rubenson, ‘Argument and Authority in Early Monastic Correspondence’, in A. Camplani and G. Filoramo (eds.), Foundations of Power and Conflicts of Authority in Late-Antique Monasticism (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 157, Leuven-Paris-Dudley: Peeters, 2007) pp. 75–87 (78–79).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Sin. Syr. 14. See A. Smith Lewis, Catalogue of the Syriac mss. in the Convent of St. Catharine on Mount Sinai (Studia Sinaitica, 1, London: Cambridge University Press, 1894) p. 17. This manuscript, a Chalcedonian monastic anthology, includes also extracts from Isaac’s works. See Brock, ‘Crossing the boundaries’, pp. 225, 234–235.

Sin. Syr. 14. See A. Smith Lewis, Catalogue of the Syriac mss. in the Convent of St. Catharine on Mount Sinai (Studia Sinaitica, 1, London: Cambridge University Press, 1894) p. 17. This manuscript, a Chalcedonian monastic anthology, includes also extracts from Isaac’s works. See Brock, ‘Crossing the boundaries’, pp. 225, 234–235.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

See Beulay, La lumière sans forme, pp. 40–42.

See Beulay, La lumière sans forme, pp. 40–42.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

See Bedjan, p. 500. Isaac’s mentioning of Aeg. ep. 1 has been pointed out by Marriott, Strothmann and Beulay. See G.L. Marriott, ‘Isaac of Nineveh and the Writings of Macarius of Egypt’, JTS 20 (1919), pp. 345–347 (346); Strothmann, II, xv–xvi; Beulay, La lumière sans forme, pp. 36–37; 39.

Bedjan, p. 495.

Bedjan, p. 498.

Bedjan, p. 499.

Bedjan, p. 499.