Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_004
I. Miroshnikov
In this chapter, I would like to discuss theThomasine views on the nature of the human soul and its relationship with the body. I will mainly discuss sayings 29, 87, and 112. I will argue that theGospel of Thomas does not adhere to the tripartite anthropological model. In my opinion, sayings 29, 87, and 112, while using different terms (“soul” vs. “spirit”), express the same idea of body-soul dualism. I will also argue that, while the importance of Platonism for the understanding of Thomasine anthropology can hardly be overestimated, saying 112 should not be read as a concise paraphrase of Tim. 87c–89a. Amuchmore viable option is to read this saying against the background of Phaed. 64a–70b. Inwhat follows, I will briefly present the sayings that appear to be crucial for this discussion—viz., sayings 29, 87, and 112. I will then focus on the terminology employed in these sayings andascertainwhether theGospel of Thomasdistinguishes the flesh (σάρξ) from the body (σῶμα), and the soul (ψυχή) from the spirit (πνεῦμα).My answer to both questionswill be in the negative: Thomasine anthropology is bipartite; the only anthropological distinction this text maintains is between the corporeal (body/flesh) and the incorporeal (soul/spirit). Finally, I will point out that the Gospel of Thomas does not commend the balance of the body and the soul, but rather maintains that the body and the soul are hostile to each other and thus exhorts the reader to despise the former and take care of the latter.
{"title":"The Gospel of Thomas and the Platonists on the Body and the Soul","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_004","url":null,"abstract":"In this chapter, I would like to discuss theThomasine views on the nature of the human soul and its relationship with the body. I will mainly discuss sayings 29, 87, and 112. I will argue that theGospel of Thomas does not adhere to the tripartite anthropological model. In my opinion, sayings 29, 87, and 112, while using different terms (“soul” vs. “spirit”), express the same idea of body-soul dualism. I will also argue that, while the importance of Platonism for the understanding of Thomasine anthropology can hardly be overestimated, saying 112 should not be read as a concise paraphrase of Tim. 87c–89a. Amuchmore viable option is to read this saying against the background of Phaed. 64a–70b. Inwhat follows, I will briefly present the sayings that appear to be crucial for this discussion—viz., sayings 29, 87, and 112. I will then focus on the terminology employed in these sayings andascertainwhether theGospel of Thomasdistinguishes the flesh (σάρξ) from the body (σῶμα), and the soul (ψυχή) from the spirit (πνεῦμα).My answer to both questionswill be in the negative: Thomasine anthropology is bipartite; the only anthropological distinction this text maintains is between the corporeal (body/flesh) and the incorporeal (soul/spirit). Finally, I will point out that the Gospel of Thomas does not commend the balance of the body and the soul, but rather maintains that the body and the soul are hostile to each other and thus exhorts the reader to despise the former and take care of the latter.","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"74 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117119609","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_005
I. Miroshnikov
The following four chapters focus on the Thomasine notion of perfection. I begin with the notion of “oneness.” Many Thomasine sayings invite the readers to “become one.” This motif was discussed in a seminal article by A.F.J. Klijn, who argued that it comes from the Jewish speculations about Adam being “one.”1 In this chapter, I am going to revisit Klijn’s hypothesis and show that, even though the Thomasine motif of becoming one might have been influenced by certain Jewish traditions, it was to a great extent shaped by Platonist thought. I am also going to discuss whether the Platonist origins of the motif might shed some light on the sayings of the Gospel of Thomas that employ the term μοναχός.
接下来的四章主要讨论托马斯的完美观。我从“一体”的概念开始。许多多玛西的格言都邀请读者“合而为一”。A.F.J.克莱恩(A.F.J. Klijn)在一篇开创性的文章中讨论了这一主题，他认为，这一主题来自犹太人对亚当是“一体”的猜测。在本章中，我将重新审视克莱恩的假设，并表明，尽管托马斯式的成人主题可能受到某些犹太传统的影响，但它在很大程度上是由柏拉图主义思想塑造的。我还将讨论柏拉图主义起源的主题是否会对托马斯福音中使用μοναχ ο ς一词的说法有所启发。
{"title":"The Gospel of Thomas and the Platonists on Oneness","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_005","url":null,"abstract":"The following four chapters focus on the Thomasine notion of perfection. I begin with the notion of “oneness.” Many Thomasine sayings invite the readers to “become one.” This motif was discussed in a seminal article by A.F.J. Klijn, who argued that it comes from the Jewish speculations about Adam being “one.”1 In this chapter, I am going to revisit Klijn’s hypothesis and show that, even though the Thomasine motif of becoming one might have been influenced by certain Jewish traditions, it was to a great extent shaped by Platonist thought. I am also going to discuss whether the Platonist origins of the motif might shed some light on the sayings of the Gospel of Thomas that employ the term μοναχός.","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128977664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_011
I. Miroshnikov
In chapter 1, I have dealt with the “mixed signals” of saying 12. It is worth noting that the text of this saying appears to be problematic. Since the analysis of Gos. Thom. 12 plays an important role in my discussion of the date and compositional history of the Gospel of Thomas, it seems justified to give here a treatment of the problems related to the text of this saying. The expression ⲡⲙⲁ ⲛⲧⲁⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲉⲓ ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ, “(the place) where1 you came from,” in Gos. Thom. 12:2 is problematic. Quite remarkably, the Berliner Arbeitskreis offers two different interpretations of this phrase. In the first edition of their translation of the Gospel of Thomas, they suggested thatⲡⲙⲁ renders theGreek expression ὅπου ἐάν, as it does in the Sahidic translation of Matt 8:19. According to their hypothesis, in the GreekVorlage ὅπου ἐάνwas followed by a verb in the aorist subjunctive, whichwas probably confused with the aorist in the indicative and thus rendered as the Coptic perfect. Assuming that ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ should be understood as ⲉⲙⲁⲩ,2 they suggested the following rendering of ⲡⲙⲁ ⲛⲧⲁⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲉⲓ ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ: “Wherever you will have come to.” This is essentially a translation not of the Coptic text, but of its Greek retroversion, ὅπου ἐὰν ἔλθητε.3 In the subsequent editions of the translation by the Berliner Arbeitskreis, this hypothesis was revised. According to their second, much more appealing, proposal, ⲉⲓ ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ in Gos. Thom. 12:2 stands in contrast to ⲃⲱⲕ ϣⲁ, “to go to,” and thus should express the idea of “coming from.” Indeed, there are reasons to suspect that ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ can be used as an equivalent of ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲛϩⲏⲧ⸗ or ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ.4 Thus, the definitive English translation of Gos. Thom. 12 prepared by the Berliner Arbeitskreis (and slightly modified by Stephen J. Patterson and James M. Robinson) reads as follows:5
在第一章中，我已经处理了说12的“混合信号”。值得注意的是，这句话的原文似乎有问题。自围棋分析以来。在我对多马福音的日期和构成历史的讨论中，《多马福音》第12章扮演了一个重要的角色，在这里处理与这句话的文本相关的问题似乎是合理的。表达式ⲡⲙⲁⲛⲧⲁⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲉⲓⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ,”(地方)where1你来自在神仙。12:2是有问题的。值得注意的是，《柏林艺术》对这句话提供了两种不同的解释。第一版的多马福音的翻译,他们建议ⲡⲙⲁ呈现theGreek表达式ὅπουἐάν,Sahidic翻译的是马特车。根据他们的假设，在希腊语vorlage中，ου ο ν在主虚拟语气中后跟一个动词，这可能与指示语气中的主虚拟语气混淆了，因此被译为科普特完成语气。假设“式子”应该被理解为“式子”，2他们建议将“式子”译为“式子”:“无论你来到哪里”。从本质上讲，这不是科普特文本的翻译，而是它的希腊逆转录版本，ς ου ν ο λθητε.3在《柏林艺术评论》的后续版本中，对这一假设进行了修订。根据他们的第二个，更吸引人的提议，在Gos中。Thom. 12:2与“去”(去向)形成对比，因此应该表达“来自”的意思。的确，有理由怀疑，“式子”可以用作“式子”的同义词，即“式子”或“式子”因此，Gos的权威英文翻译。由柏林艺术学院(berlin Arbeitskreis)编写的Thom. 12(经Stephen J. Patterson和James M. Robinson稍作修改)内容如下
{"title":"The Greek Vorlage of Gos. Thom. 12:2","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_011","url":null,"abstract":"In chapter 1, I have dealt with the “mixed signals” of saying 12. It is worth noting that the text of this saying appears to be problematic. Since the analysis of Gos. Thom. 12 plays an important role in my discussion of the date and compositional history of the Gospel of Thomas, it seems justified to give here a treatment of the problems related to the text of this saying. The expression ⲡⲙⲁ ⲛⲧⲁⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲉⲓ ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ, “(the place) where1 you came from,” in Gos. Thom. 12:2 is problematic. Quite remarkably, the Berliner Arbeitskreis offers two different interpretations of this phrase. In the first edition of their translation of the Gospel of Thomas, they suggested thatⲡⲙⲁ renders theGreek expression ὅπου ἐάν, as it does in the Sahidic translation of Matt 8:19. According to their hypothesis, in the GreekVorlage ὅπου ἐάνwas followed by a verb in the aorist subjunctive, whichwas probably confused with the aorist in the indicative and thus rendered as the Coptic perfect. Assuming that ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ should be understood as ⲉⲙⲁⲩ,2 they suggested the following rendering of ⲡⲙⲁ ⲛⲧⲁⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲉⲓ ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ: “Wherever you will have come to.” This is essentially a translation not of the Coptic text, but of its Greek retroversion, ὅπου ἐὰν ἔλθητε.3 In the subsequent editions of the translation by the Berliner Arbeitskreis, this hypothesis was revised. According to their second, much more appealing, proposal, ⲉⲓ ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ in Gos. Thom. 12:2 stands in contrast to ⲃⲱⲕ ϣⲁ, “to go to,” and thus should express the idea of “coming from.” Indeed, there are reasons to suspect that ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ can be used as an equivalent of ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲛϩⲏⲧ⸗ or ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ.4 Thus, the definitive English translation of Gos. Thom. 12 prepared by the Berliner Arbeitskreis (and slightly modified by Stephen J. Patterson and James M. Robinson) reads as follows:5","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121551478","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_006
I. Miroshnikov
Inwhat follows, I argue that “standing” in these, aswell as in a fewotherThomasine sayings, denotes the Platonist idea of divine stability; it is, therefore, no coincidence that these two metaphysical concepts, stability and oneness, are brought together. I first discuss interpretations of Thomasine “standing” by April D. DeConick, Michael AllenWilliams, and Robert Murray, and argue that the context of the Thomasine sayings that deal with “standing” does not support the proposals of these scholars. I then discuss the multifold meanings of the expression ⲱϩⲉ ⲉⲣⲁⲧ⸗ in these sayings as well as in their Greek Vorlagen. Finally, I discuss the Platonist parallels to the sayings that seem to refer to “transcendental ‘standing.’ ”1
在接下来的文章中，我认为“站”在这些以及其他一些托马斯的说法中，表示柏拉图的神圣稳定观念;因此，稳定性和统一性这两个形而上学的概念结合在一起，并不是偶然的。我首先讨论了April D. DeConick、Michael AllenWilliams和Robert Murray对托马斯“站立”的解释，并认为托马斯关于“站立”的说法的上下文并不支持这些学者的建议。然后，我讨论了在这些说法以及他们的希腊Vorlagen中表达的多重含义:最后，我将讨论柏拉图主义与似乎指“先验”地位的说法的相似之处。’”1
{"title":"The Gospel of Thomas and the Platonists on Stability","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_006","url":null,"abstract":"Inwhat follows, I argue that “standing” in these, aswell as in a fewotherThomasine sayings, denotes the Platonist idea of divine stability; it is, therefore, no coincidence that these two metaphysical concepts, stability and oneness, are brought together. I first discuss interpretations of Thomasine “standing” by April D. DeConick, Michael AllenWilliams, and Robert Murray, and argue that the context of the Thomasine sayings that deal with “standing” does not support the proposals of these scholars. I then discuss the multifold meanings of the expression ⲱϩⲉ ⲉⲣⲁⲧ⸗ in these sayings as well as in their Greek Vorlagen. Finally, I discuss the Platonist parallels to the sayings that seem to refer to “transcendental ‘standing.’ ”1","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129014262","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_007
I. Miroshnikov
In this chapter, I deal with the Platonist background of Gos. Thom. 61, a short dialogue between Jesus and a certain woman by the name of Salome. Most scholars believe that theCoptic text of Gos.Thom. 61 is corrupt; therefore, along with interpreting the dialogue, I will also offer philological analyses of certain Coptic words and expressions present in the text. Below is the Coptic text of Gos. Thom. 61 and its English translation:
{"title":"The Gospel of Thomas and the Platonists on Immutability and Indivisibility","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_007","url":null,"abstract":"In this chapter, I deal with the Platonist background of Gos. Thom. 61, a short dialogue between Jesus and a certain woman by the name of Salome. Most scholars believe that theCoptic text of Gos.Thom. 61 is corrupt; therefore, along with interpreting the dialogue, I will also offer philological analyses of certain Coptic words and expressions present in the text. Below is the Coptic text of Gos. Thom. 61 and its English translation:","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126960960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_008
I. Miroshnikov
{"title":"The Gospel of Thomas and the Platonists on Freedom from Anger","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"84 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126218570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_009
I. Miroshnikov
{"title":"Thomasine Metaphysics of the Image and Its Platonist Background","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124892506","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_010
I. Miroshnikov
{"title":"Concluding Remarks","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128181574","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_003
I. Miroshnikov
{"title":"The Gospel of Thomas and the Platonists on the World","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_003","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"110 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129563376","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-06DOI: 10.1163/9789004367296_002
I. Miroshnikov
{"title":"Setting the Scene","authors":"I. Miroshnikov","doi":"10.1163/9789004367296_002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367296_002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":447913,"journal":{"name":"The Gospel of Thomas and Plato","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132326197","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：