ტერმინები φύσιѕ და ύπóστaσιѕ ქრისტოლოგიური დავის მთავარი საკითხი ბერძნულსა და სირიულში (V-VI სს.)

Abstract
Greek terms φύσιѕ and ύπóστασιѕ, which constituted the main issue of the Christological controversy in the 5th-6th centuries, in their turn, caused certain problems both in Greek and Syriac. The negative attitude of Catholicos Ishoʿyahb II is known towards the definitions of the Council of Chalcedon, when the discussion concerned two natures and one hypostasis. Great theologian Severos of Antioch also expressed the same disapproval. Certainly, Ishoʿyahb and Severos have different starting points: the former unequivocally considers unity in incarnated Christ, and the latter considers as absolute reality the possession of two natures, divine and human in one and the same incarnated Christ. But, in addition to different starting points, these two theologians also understand differently the meaning of these technical terms. Ambiguity is both in Greek and in Syriac. However, in the latter, an additional difficulty appears which is related to the different connotations of Syriac equivalents. It may be noted that for Severos φύσιѕ is in fact a synonym of ύπóστασιѕ. Such an interpretation of the term is definitely unacceptable for the Dyophysite wording of Chalcedon. For Ishoʿyahb, on the contrary, kyana/φύσιѕ according to the meaning is much closer to oύσια than to ύπóστασιѕ. Hence, the Dyophysite position is given principal importance.
Description
Keywords
φύσιѕ, ύπóστασιѕ, kyana/φύσιѕ, იშოიაბი, სევეროს ანტიოქელი, Ishoʿyahb, Severos of Antioch
Citation
სამეცნიერო კონფერენცია ტოგო გუდავა – მეცნიერი და მასწავლებელი, ეძღვნება დაბადებიდან 100 წლისთავს, თეზისები, 20 დეკემბერი 2022, გვ. 55-57