{"slug":"khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-azymis","id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-azymis","title":"De azymis","title_source":"De azymis","author":"John of Damascus","genre":"other","date":"","tradition":"greek","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","generated":"2026-11-15T06:27:33Z","cost_usd":0.001643},"source":{"registry_id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-azymis","work_id":"khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-azymis","edition":"khazarzar","language":"","license":"Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer","url":"http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/John%20of%20Damascus_PG%2094-96/De%20azymis.pdf"},"stats":{"passages":2,"english_words":410,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":1568,"commentary_units":12,"commentary_kinds":7,"derived_notes":0,"ambiguities":3,"work_notes":5,"external_links":0,"timeline":5},"summary":{"work":"khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-azymis","abstract":"The treatise 'De azymis' argues against the use of unleavened bread (azyma) in the Eucharist, defending leavened bread as the sole valid matter. It is a polemical work directed at Latin practice, traditionally attributed to John of Damascus (c. 675–749), though its authenticity is questioned. The work may date from the later iconoclast or post-iconoclast period, possibly 8th–9th century. It was cited in later Byzantine anti-Latin polemics, especially during the 11th–13th centuries, and appears in collections of patristic testimonies against the filioque and azyma. The text uses scriptural and patristic citations, including Matthew 26:26 and Cyril of Jerusalem, but does not always identify them precisely.","historical_context":"The treatise is rooted in the Byzantine theological and liturgical tradition, likely composed in a Greek-speaking monastic or ecclesiastical setting, possibly in Palestine or Constantinople. Its attribution to John of Damascus is traditional but uncertain; the work may have been produced in the 8th–9th centuries, during or after the iconoclast controversy, when debates over liturgical practices intensified. The text was transmitted through Byzantine manuscript collections and later printed editions, but its stemmatic basis is unknown. The Khazarzar edition provides no critical apparatus or manuscript witnesses. The work engages in the East-West controversy over the use of azymes, which became a key issue in the schism between the Greek and Latin churches, especially from the 11th century onward.","significance":"The treatise is a significant witness to the Byzantine polemic against Latin liturgical practices, particularly the use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist. It reflects the theological and cultural tensions that contributed to the East-West Schism. The work's attribution to John of Damascus, even if disputed, lent authority to later anti-Latin arguments. Its use of scriptural and patristic citations illustrates the exegetical and historical arguments employed in medieval Christian controversies.","timeline":[{"date":"c. 675–749","event":"Traditional date of John of Damascus, to whom the work is attributed."},{"date":"8th–9th c.","event":"Possible composition period, during or after the iconoclast controversy."},{"date":"11th–13th c.","event":"The treatise is cited in Byzantine anti-Latin polemics, especially regarding azymes and the filioque."},{"date":"1054","event":"East-West Schism, in which the azyme controversy was a key issue."},{"date":"Post-Byzantine","event":"The text appears in printed editions and patristic collections."}],"relations":[{"work":"John of Damascus, 'Expositio fidei'","relation":"Attributed to the same author, but authenticity of 'De azymis' is questioned.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Cyril of Jerusalem, 'Catechetical Lectures'","relation":"Cited in the treatise as a patristic authority.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Matthew 26:26","relation":"Scriptural citation used to support leavened bread in the Eucharist.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Luke 22:19","relation":"Reference to Christ taking bread (ἄρτον), not azyme, at the Last Supper.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Byzantine anti-Latin polemical collections","relation":"The treatise is included in collections of testimonies against the filioque and azymes.","key":"","label":null,"url":null}],"external_links":[],"cautions":["The attribution to John of Damascus is traditional but not securely established; the work may date from the 8th–9th centuries or later.","The Khazarzar edition provides no critical apparatus or manuscript witnesses; the Greek text may derive from late printed editions or conflated sources.","The stemmatic basis of the text is unknown; readers should verify scriptural and patristic citations against standard critical editions."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","cost_usd":0.000481,"generated":"2026-11-15T06:27:33Z"},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Patrologia Graeca text (khazarzar mirror)","url":"http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/John%20of%20Damascus_PG%2094-96/De%20azymis.pdf"}],"checks":{"work":"khazarzar-john-of-damascus-de-azymis","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":2,"translated":2,"commentary_passages":2,"commentary_units":12,"english_words":410,"source_letters":1564,"commentary_kinds":7},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The treatise argues against the use of unleavened bread (azyma) in the Eucharist, defending leavened bread as the sole valid matter. It is a polemical work directed at Latin practice.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The work is traditionally attributed to John of Damascus (c. 675–749), but its authenticity has been questioned. It may date from the later iconoclast or post-iconoclast period, possibly 8th–9th century.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The treatise was cited in later Byzantine anti-Latin polemics, especially during the 11th–13th centuries, and appears in collections of patristic testimonies against the filioque and azyma.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The Khazarzar edition provides no critical apparatus or manuscript witnesses. The Greek text may derive from late printed editions or conflated sources, and its stemmatic basis is unknown.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The work uses scriptural and patristic citations (e.g., Matthew 26:26, Cyril of Jerusalem) but does not always identify them precisely. Readers should verify quotations against standard critical editions.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: other in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 2 narrative."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: khazarzar — Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":2},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"ΤΟΥ ΑΓΙΟΥ ΙΩΑΝΝΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΔΑΜΑΣΚΗΝΟΥ ΠΕΡΙ ΤΩΝ ΑΖΥΜΩΝ Ἰστέον, ὅτι οἱ τὰ ἄζυμα προσκομίζοντες, νεκρὰν σάρκα, καὶ οὐχὶ ζῶσαν προσφέρουσιν. Ἡ γὰρ ζύμη ἀντὶ ψυχῆς τῷ φυράματι γίνεται, καὶ τὸ ἅλας ἀντὶ τοῦ νοός· ὁ γὰρ Κύριος σῶμα ἔμψυχόν τε καὶ ἔννουν ἐκ τῆς Ἀειπαρθένου προσλαβόμενος, διὰ τελείου ἄρτου εἰκότως παρέδωκε τὸ τῆς Καινῆς Διαθήκης μυστήριον· εὐλογήσας αὐτὸν, καὶ κλάσας, καὶ εἰπών· «Λάβετε, φάγετε· τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά μου.» Καὶ ὁ Λουκᾶς ἐν ἁγίῳ Εὐαγγελίῳ αὐτοῦ, «Καὶ λαβὼν ἄρτον, φησὶν, εὐχαριστήσας ἔκλασεν.» Ἰδοὺ δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς ἄρτον εἶπε λαβεῖν τὸν Χριστὸν, καὶ οὐκ ἄζυμον. Οὐ γὰρ ἔτι ἦν, πέμπτης οὔσης τηνικαῦτα ἡμέρας· δεκακαιτρίτη γὰρ ἦν ἡ σελήνη τότε, καὶ οὐκ ἦν ἄζυμον διὰ τὸ μήπω γενέσθαι.\n\nΤῇ ιεʹ γὰρ τῆς σελήνης νενομοθετημένον ἦν ἐσθίειν ταῦτα. Τῇ δὲ ιδʹ τὸν ἀμνὸν καὶ μόνον ἤσθιον· διὸ καὶ τὴν δεκακαιτετάρτην τοῦ αὐτοῦ μηνὸς τῆς σελήνης, Πάσχα προσαγορεύει ὁ νόμος· τὴν δὲ ιεʹ αὐτὴν καὶ Σάββατον ὀνομάζει. Εἰ οὖν ὁ Χριστὸς ἐτύθη κατὰ τὴν δεκακαιτετάρτην τῆς σελήνης, ἡμέρᾳ Παρασκευῇ· τὸ δὲ Σάββατον ἦν τῶν ἀζύμων ἑορτὴ, ὅτε τὰ ἄζυμα ἤσθιον, πότε ταῦτα τοῖς ἀποστόλοις παρέδωκεν, ὅτι λέγουσιν παρὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων ταῦτα λαβεῖν; Οὐδὲ γὰρ τὸ Πάσχα τὸ νόμιμον κατὰ τὸν χρόνον ἔφαγεν ὁ Χριστός. Καὶ γὰρ μετὰ τὸ δειπνῆσαι, παρέδωκε διὰ τῆς τοῦ ἄρτου κλάσεως, τὸ τῆς Καινῆς Διαθήκης μυστήριον κατὰ τὴν πέμπτην ἡμέραν. Ὅτε δὲ ἑορτὴ τῶν Ἀζύμων ἦν ἐν τῷ Σαββάτῳ κατὰ τὴν ιεʹ ἡμέραν τοῦ μηνὸς, ἐν τῷ τάφῳ ἔκειτο ὁ Κύριος.","english":"Of Saint John of Damascus, On the Azymes. It is to be known that those who offer azymes offer dead flesh, and not living flesh. For leaven serves as soul to the dough, and salt as mind; for the Lord, having assumed a living and intelligent body from the Ever-Virgin, fittingly handed down the mystery of the New Testament through complete bread, having blessed it, and broken it, and said: \"Take, eat; this is my body.\" And Luke in his holy Gospel says, \"And taking bread, having given thanks, he broke it.\" Behold, he too said that Christ took bread, and not azyme. For it was not yet the time, since it was then the fifth day; for the moon was then the thirteenth, and there was no azyme because it had not yet come to be.\n\nFor on the fifteenth of the moon it was ordained to eat these. On the fourteenth they ate only the lamb; wherefore the law calls the fourteenth of the same month of the moon Passover, and the fifteenth itself it also calls Sabbath. If then Christ was sacrificed on the fourteenth of the moon, on the day of Preparation, and the Sabbath was the feast of the Azymes, when they ate azymes, when did he hand these down to the apostles, that they say they received these from the apostles? For Christ did not even eat the legal Passover at that time. For after supping, he handed down the mystery of the New Testament through the breaking of bread on the fifth day. But when the feast of the Azymes was on the Sabbath, on the fifteenth day of the month, the Lord lay in the tomb.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"ἄζυμον","severity":"info","text":"The author argues that azyme bread lacks leaven, which he equates with soul, and salt, equated with mind, making it dead flesh.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Λάβετε, φάγετε· τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά μου","severity":"info","text":"The passage quotes Matthew 26:26, the institution of the Eucharist, to support the use of leavened bread.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Καὶ λαβὼν ἄρτον, φησὶν, εὐχαριστήσας ἔκλασεν","severity":"info","text":"A reference to Luke 22:19, where Christ takes bread (ἄρτον), not azyme, at the Last Supper.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"δεκακαιτετάρτην","severity":"info","text":"The author uses Jewish calendar calculations: Passover on the 14th of the moon, azymes on the 15th, to argue Christ's Last Supper was before the azyme period.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"text","lemma":"πέμπτης οὔσης τηνικαῦτα ἡμέρας","severity":"info","text":"The Last Supper is placed on Thursday (fifth day), with the moon at the 13th, before the azyme feast began on the 15th.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Περὶ τῶν Ἀζύμων","severity":"info","text":"This treatise is part of the Byzantine polemic against the Latin use of azymes, a key issue in the East-West schism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text uses 'ἄζυμον' (azyme) and 'ἄρτον' (bread) distinctly; the English draft renders both as 'bread' or 'azyme' inconsistently, but the argument hinges on the contrast."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"Ἀζύμων οὖν μὴ ὄντων πρὸ τῆς ἑορτῆς τῶν Ἀζύμων ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ ἐνιαυτῷ, ποῦ εὑρέθησαν τότε τὰ ἄζυμα, ὅτε μετὰ τῶν αὐτοῦ μαθητῶν τὸ δεῖπνον ἔφαγεν ὁ Χριστός; Παύσασθε οἱ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ ἀντιμαχόμενοι.\n\nΚαὶ τὸ, «Ἦν δὲ Παρασκευὴ τοῦ Πάσχα,» οὕτω νοεῖται. Ἡτοίμαζον γὰρ, οἷον καὶ παρεσκεύαζον τὰ τῆς ἑορτῆς τοῦ Πάσχα· καὶ τὸ, «Αὐτοὶ οὐκ εἰσῆλθον εἰς τὸ πραιτώριον, ἵνα μὴ μιανθῶσιν, ἀλλ' ἵνα φάγωσι τὸ Πάσχα,» πῶς νοήσεις, εἰ τῇ πέμπτῃ ἦν τὸ Πάσχα; πῶς τῇ Παρασκευῇ πρὸς τὸ πραιτώριον οὐκ εἰσῆλθον, ἀλλ' εὐλαβοῦντο προκαθαιρόμενοί πως διὰ τὴν τοῦ Πάσχα μετάληψιν;","english":"Since azymes do not exist before the feast of the Azymes throughout the entire year, where were the azymes found at that time, when Christ ate the supper with his disciples? Cease, you who fight against the truth.\n\nAnd the phrase, \"It was the Preparation of the Passover,\" is understood thus. For they were preparing, that is, making ready the things of the feast of the Passover. And the phrase, \"They themselves did not enter the praetorium, lest they be defiled, but in order to eat the Passover,\" how will you understand it, if the Passover was on the fifth day? How on the Preparation did they not enter the praetorium, but were scrupulous, purifying themselves in some way beforehand for the partaking of the Passover?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"Ἀζύμων","severity":"info","text":"The term 'azymes' refers to unleavened bread, associated with the Jewish Passover. John argues that since azymes were only used during that feast, Christ could not have used them at the Last Supper, which he places before the feast.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἦν δὲ Παρασκευὴ τοῦ Πάσχα","severity":"info","text":"This phrase echoes the Gospel accounts of the Passion, e.g., Matthew 27:62, Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, John 19:14. John interprets 'Preparation' as the day of preparing for the Passover feast, not necessarily a Friday.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Αὐτοὶ οὐκ εἰσῆλθον εἰς τὸ πραιτώριον, ἵνα μὴ μιανθῶσιν, ἀλλ' ἵνα φάγωσι τὸ Πάσχα","severity":"info","text":"This alludes to John 18:28, where the Jewish leaders do not enter the praetorium to avoid defilement before eating the Passover. John of Damascus uses this to argue that the Passover meal occurred on the day of Preparation, not earlier.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"text","lemma":"τῇ πέμπτῃ","severity":"info","text":"John questions how the Passover could be on the fifth day (Thursday) if the disciples were purifying themselves on the Preparation day (Friday). This reflects a chronological debate about the timing of the Last Supper.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Παύσασθε οἱ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ ἀντιμαχόμενοι","severity":"info","text":"This imperative serves as a rhetorical climax, directly addressing opponents. It marks a shift from logical argument to exhortation, typical of polemical treatises.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"πῶς νοήσεις","severity":"caution","text":"The Greek 'πῶς νοήσεις' (how will you understand) is a rhetorical question challenging the reader. The English draft renders it as a direct question, but the force is polemical, expecting no answer.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'τῇ πέμπτῃ' could mean 'on the fifth day' (Thursday) or 'on the fifth' (of the month). The reading taken is 'Thursday' based on the context of the Passover chronology debate.","The reference to 'the feast of the Azymes' is ambiguous: it could mean the Jewish Passover or the Christian feast of Unleavened Bread. John uses it to argue against the use of azymes in the Eucharist."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]}]}