Ibn al‘Assal: What He Has, and What Is Against Him
Church Laws:
Ibn al-‘Assal: What He Has, and What Is Against Him¹
The Sons of al-‘Assal
Safi al-Dawla Ibn al-‘Assal is the most famous Coptic writer who collected the laws of the Church in the Middle Ages, in his well-known work entitled:
The Safi Collection of Ibn al-‘Assal
The book was written in the year 1235 AD, during the era of Pope Cyril III, known as Ibn Laqlaq (the 75th Patriarch), and in the time of the Ayyubid state. It is said that he compiled this book at the request of the Holy Synod of the Coptic Church, as he was a Coptic scholar—indeed, he was the most prominent scholar of his age—and he was one of three brothers known as the Sons of al-‘Assal.
So who are the three brothers, the Sons of al-‘Assal?
-
Mu’taman al-Dawla Abu Ishaq.
-
Hibat Allah Abu al-Faraj al-Hakim al-As‘ad.
-
Safi al-Dawla al-Amjad Ibn al-‘Assal, who was the most famous of them.
These three held high positions in the state and also had status in the Church. They were among the scholars who excelled in many sciences:
They were scholars of the Coptic language.
They wrote books on Coptic grammar, and also compiled dictionaries of the Coptic language and the five introductions to this language. Among their most famous works in this field are: al-Sullam al-Muqaffa‘, al-Dhahab al-Musaffa, al-Sullam al-Kabir, and other books.
They are considered among those who brought about a revival in the Coptic language and its use. It had been abolished in government bureaus in the year 706 AD during the reign of al-Walid ibn ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan (of the Umayyad state…).
They also have many theological writings:
On the eternity of God, His oneness, His attributes, the Trinity and unity, the mystery of the divine Incarnation, the Resurrection, the state of the soul after death, the book al-Tabsira fi al-‘Aqa’id al-Nasraniyya, a book on the principles of religion, al-Firdaws al-‘Aqli, and an interpretation of what is mentioned in the Gospels concerning the sufferings of Christ…
They have studies in the Holy Bible:
Including an introduction on the principles of its interpretation, ضبط translations of the New Testament, and comparisons between what is found in the Greek, Coptic, Syriac, and Arabic languages… They wrote about the Epistles of Saint Paul the Apostle, and about his life, faith, and martyrdom. They also have an extensive commentary on the Gospel of John.
They also had studies and dialogues with the Muslims of their time,
and responses to those who claimed that the Gospel was corrupted. Among their most famous writings in this field is the book al-Sahaih fi al-Radd ‘ala al-Nasa’ih. They also had remarks on the debates of Shaykh ‘Isa al-Nashi’ and Imam Fakhr al-Din ibn al-Khatib.
They also wrote books on the calculation of the Abqati calendar, and books on Church laws.
It is not surprising, after all this, that the Church entrusted Safi al-Dawla Ibn al-‘Assal with collecting the Church laws, which he gathered in his book al-Majmu‘ al-Safawi. The word al-Safawi is derived from his name (Safi al-Dawla).
The Safi Collection
It was good that he named it al-Majmu‘ (the Collection), because in this book he was more of a collector than a scholar, for he was not a scholar in the precise sense of the word.
For a scholar is supposed not only to collect information, but to examine, verify, scrutinize, compare, correct, and distinguish the true from the false, and the official laws from the forged laws. But he did not do that; rather, his book collects a mixture of sound and false material.
The merit of Ibn al-‘Assal is that he classified and organized the laws.
This is something for which he is undoubtedly to be thanked. This classification appears very clearly in the first part of his book, which includes (23) chapters.
In the first part of his book he spoke about:
The Church — the divine books — baptism and entering the faith — the patriarchs — the bishops — the Church ranks — monks and nuns — widows and laypeople — the liturgy and liturgies — the Eucharist and the Lord’s Supper — prayer and fasting — almsgiving, tithes, firstfruits, and vows — endowments — Sunday and Saturday — feasts — martyrs and confessors — apostates — the sick and the dead… etc.
In these chapters he collected as much as he could of Church laws (whether authentic or forged).
As for the second part of his book, it consists of articles that he wrote, and they are not laws, meaning they are not a Codex.
This does not prevent him from citing in some parts a few verses or a small number of laws. But they are, as a whole, of his own composition, and some of them are purely his own thought.
The most important chapter in the second part is that dealing with marriage and divorce.
Criticisms of the Safi Collection
He included many forged laws.
For example, it is known that the Holy Council of Nicaea issued only twenty canons. There exists a forged collection attributed to the Council of Nicaea that includes 84 canons, which no Church recognizes. What happened is that Ibn al-‘Assal used both collections, marking one with the symbol (Niq) and the other with the symbol Nicaea.
He did not alert the reader that these canons were forged. Rather, they appeared in his book in an ordinary manner, with no distinction between them and others.
He also included forged laws attributed to the Apostles,
among them the so-called Canons of ‘Alyah Sihyun—whose symbol with Ibn al-‘Assal is (‘A). This collection was also included by Ibn Kabir. Any scholar who examines it can discover its falsity.
He placed before the reader many collections of laws attributed to the Apostles: among them the canons recognized by our Church (127 canons in two books, one containing 56 canons and the other 71, published by Patrologia Orientalis);
and the canons of Clement in a collection of books;
and the previously mentioned canons of ‘Alyah Sihyun;
and a letter from the Apostle Peter to Clement!!
He presented all of them as if they were sound canons. Strangely, he would mention in the introduction of his book that these are known among the Nestorians or among the Melkites…
The entire fourth chapter consists of forged canons:
It is the chapter concerning the patriarchs, and all of it is from the forged canons attributed to the Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. This is clear from their numbers: 37 — 44 — 45 — 46 — 51 — 76… etc. Their contents cannot satisfy any scholar who examines information before publishing it.
He says in the fourth chapter [attributing Canon 37 to the Council of Nicaea, which is one of the forged canons] that the Fathers of the Holy Council of Nicaea:
“ordered that there be only four patriarchs in the whole world, like the four Evangelists, the four rivers of Paradise, the four winds, and the four elements…”
Of course, this is unreasonable speech and cannot be applied practically amid the many Churches. It was never issued by the Holy Ecumenical Council of Nicaea… Moreover, what is the meaning of linking the number of patriarchs to the number of Gospels, and to the four rivers and the four winds…?!
What is worse than this is that he adds, to the number of four patriarchs, another principle that is against the doctrine of his Coptic Orthodox Church, when he says about the patriarchs:
“And the chief among them and the one who precedes is the holder of the Chair of Peter in Rome, as the Apostles commanded”!!
This principle of universal primacy was forbidden by the Lord Christ Himself.
It never happened that the Apostles commanded anything like this, neither in the Apostolic Canons nor in the Didascalia. Moreover, the Holy Scripture explains to us that the founder of the See of Rome is Saint Paul the Apostle (Acts 28:30–31), according to the Lord’s command to him to preach in Rome (Acts 23:11).
In the ordering of the sees, he mentions in the same forged canon:
“And second is the holder of the See of Alexandria, and third the holder of the See of Ephesus”!
Whereas Church canons place the See of Antioch immediately after the See of Alexandria. His mention of the See of Ephesus here is because it is located in Asia Minor. By this he intends the See of the city of Constantinople, which had not yet been built (at the time of the Council of Nicaea) and was not at that time the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire.
Ibn al-‘Assal justifies the advancement of the See of Ephesus by attributing to the Council of Nicaea [forged Canon 38] that the Patriarchate of Ephesus should be transferred to the royal city, so that honor may be for both the priesthood and the kings together…!!
Then this chapter adds something strange regarding Ethiopia, also attributing it to the Council of Nicaea (in the forged canons: Canon 42), saying:
“The Ethiopians shall not have over them a patriarch from among their own learned men, nor by their own choice from themselves”!!
Knowing that during the convening of the Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in the year 325 AD, the Church of Ethiopia had not yet been founded. It was founded by Pope Athanasius of Alexandria in the year 329 AD, who sent to it its first bishop, Saint Frumentius. Pope Athanasius was a deacon at the convening of the Council of Nicaea. There was no issue before the Council of Nicaea concerning Ethiopia and the appointment of a patriarch for it!!
Among the errors of Ibn al-‘Assal is his reliance on the laws of kings:
The laws of kings are not Church laws and are not binding. Strangely, he says about them that they were “summarized for kings from many statements in the Council of Nicaea”!! What does the legislation of Justinian, for example, have to do with Nicaea?! And if the source of the laws he used and called (the taltasat) was the Council of Nicaea, why did the council not issue them explicitly?
Among his errors also are the laws of bodily punishments:
He mentioned, in the punishment for adultery (chapter 48), the cutting off of noses, shaving of hair, and exile. He likewise mentioned this in the punishment for murder (chapter 47), and what he stated regarding the seeker of vengeance (the avenger of blood). This is an Islamic expression that has no relation to Church laws. There is absolutely no bodily punishment in Church laws such as cutting off noses!!
He also mentions, in the chapter on sorcery, a law that permits killing the sorcerer.
He likewise differentiates in the laws between slave and free, which is against the teaching of the New Testament, which says there is no difference between slave and free.
Among his errors is also his reliance on his own personal thought.
In many chapters, such as chapter 21 on the sick, chapter 18 on endowments, chapter 16 on almsgiving, chapter 11 on laypeople, the benefits of fasting (chapter 15), and most of chapter 14 on prayer.
Among his errors also is what he mentioned regarding fasting, about the Friday of Heraclius before the Great Fast (chapter 15), and his statement about eating fish in the established fasts, without excepting Wednesday and Friday, for example.
In general, the man has effort, and he also has errors.
His book is considered a research work, not a register of laws (Codex).
¹ An article by Pope Shenouda III – in al-Kiraza Magazine – issues 45, 46 – the twenty-second year, dated December 9, 1994.
For better translation support, please contact the center.
