Andrei Iakovlevič Borisov (1903–1942) and his Studies of Medieval Arabic Philosophy. [bull ]A.Ia. Borisov, Materialy i issledovaniia po istorii Neoplatonizma na srednevekovom Vostoke [=Materials and Studies on the History of Neoplatonism in the Medieval East], ed. by K. B. Starkova, Pravoslavnyi Palestinskii Sbornik, Issue 99 (36), St. Petersburg, 2002, 256pp., ISBN 5-86007-216-3

[...]Borisov notes that there was another oriental edition of the ThA (no place, 1296ah = 18781879), a reference which he found in one of the catalogues of O. Harrassowitz-Verlag.21 This edition was not available to him and was apparently not even known to Dieterici. 170 ALEXANDER TREIGER ArgatI hab-bMem),35 who quotes under this title the famous ekstasis passage from the ThA. Since the title al-Lulu is preserved in a fragment of the Arabic original of the treatise (II Firkovich Collection, hebr.-arab., MS 4811 [date: 638 = 12401241], fol. 10r), the Hebrew BedIMlah* cannot be simply explained away as a corruption of theologia (this was suggested by Steinschneider and Dieterici and accepted by all scholars prior to Borisov). ESSAY-REVIEW: BORISOV AND HIS STUDIES 177 Borisov gives a list of Isaac Israelis philosophical works that includes the following treatises: (1) Kitb al-Us*t *uqisst [sic!] (preserved only in Hebrew and Latin), (2) Kitb al-H*udd wa-al-rusm (preserved in fragments of the original Arabic and of two Hebrew translations58 and in a Latin version), (3) Bustn al-h*ikma f masil min al-ilm al-ilh (lost), (4) Kitb al-Madh al il al-mant*iq (lost), (5) Kitb f al-h*ikma in 11 chapters [mmar] (lost), (6) Book of Spirit and Soul (Sfer h-rah* we-han-nefe) (preserved in one fragment in Arabic59 and in an integral Hebrew version)60 and nally (7) Kitb al-G { awhir (of the Arabic text of this book approximately one half is preserved, and the whole treatise seems not to have been longer than Kitb al-Us*t *uqisst [sic!]); the author shows on philological grounds that there is no reason to suspect the attribution of this work to Isaac Israeli (given in the manuscript) (pp. 1213). There follows an edition of, and a textual commentary on, the fragments (pp. 17882). Since these were independently edited in 1957 by A. Altmann, it is useful to compare the two editions.70 In many cases Borisovs readings are superior to Altmanns, who was unable to consult the original manuscript and worked from a microlm; in several cases Borisov also completes lacunas in Altmanns edition.