Amartology St. Theophan the Recluse and etc. Vasily Zenkovsky

Annotation. The purpose of this article is to study the metaphysical causes of human sinfulness according to St. Theophan the Recluse and etc. Vasily Zenkovsky. St. Feofan and others Vasily used different terminology to express their views, but came to similar conclusions. The author of the article comes to the conclusion that the category of sin is of a spiritual nature. The very possibility of sinning is rooted in man’s godlikeness. Oblivion of God leads to a state of existential incompleteness, accompanied by “an unsatisfied thirst,” “longing for infinity.” Man strives to quench this metaphysical thirst for God with sin, but this only intensifies it. Abstract. The purpose of this article is to study the metaphysical causes of human sinfulness according to St. Theophan the Recluse and archpriest Vasily Zenkovsky. St. Theophan and pater Vasily used different terminology to express their views, however, they came to similar conclusions. The author of the article comes to the conclusion that the category of sin has a spiritual nature. The very possibility of sinning is rooted in the godlike nature of man. Forgetfulness of God leads to a state of existential incompleteness, accompanied by “nothing to satisfy thirst”, “longing for infinity”. Man seeks to quench this metaphysical thirst for God with sin, but this only increases it. The purpose of this article is to answer the question about the metaphysical causes of human sinfulness according to St. Theophan the Recluse and etc. Vasily Zenkovsky. St. Feofan and others Vasily used different terminology to express their views, but came to similar conclusions. A comparative analysis of their theories will allow us to evaluate the contribution that these authors made to the development of the problem under consideration. It is important to note that we compare the views of St. Feofana and others. Basil, not because of the influence of the first on the second, but on the basis of the similarity of the positions that they expressed independently of each other - St. Theophan in soteriological, and Archpriest. Vasily Zenkovsky - in pedagogical aspects. The cause of private sins is rooted in the defeat of human nature by original sin. Moreover, original sin, while affecting precisely human nature, is located outside of it. This is how St. writes about it. Theophan the Recluse: “Our inner confusion and disorder are innate to us, but not natural (my italics - D.S.), are not in our nature as an essential part of it, but are squeezed between the natural parts and upset them” [6, p. 73]. Developing the generally accepted provisions of Orthodox anthropology and amartology, St. Theophan notes that the main consequence of original sin is falling away from God. The arbitrary isolation of man from God has a number of important anthropological consequences that are important for St. Theophan precisely from the point of view of the development of sin. The central thesis characterizing the anthropology of St. Feofan, is that a person is not self-sufficient. Due to the fact that man is the image of God, all the powers of his soul, namely the mind, will and heart, seek their fulfillment in God. In conditions of defeat of human nature by sin, this filling does not occur. However, the very need for some kind of existential completeness in a person remains. However, insofar as he has turned from God to himself, a person subject to original sin begins to look for this fulfillment in himself. The result is a fall into various types of sin associated with pride of mind, defeat of the will and sensual aspirations of the heart. In the book “The Path to Salvation” by St. Theophan the Recluse writes about this as follows: “Having turned away from God, a person stops at himself and makes himself the main goal of his entire life and activity. This is also because after God there is nothing higher for him than himself; especially because, having previously received all fullness from God, and now being empty from Him, he hurries and worries about how and with what to fill himself. The emptiness that has formed in him, through falling away from God, constantly kindles in him an unsatisfied thirst, indefinite, but incessant” [5, p. 131–132]. “He has fallen from God, who is the fullness of all things; itself is empty; All that remains is to spread out, as it were, into infinitely varied things and live in them” [5, p. 133]. Thus, the loss of connection with God leads a person to an “unsatisfied thirst” - “undefined, but incessant.” This metaphysical thirst captures all the forces of the human soul, namely the mind, will and heart. “The emptiness of the mind gives rise to a concern for much knowledge, exploration, torture, inquisitiveness. The emptiness of the will produces many desires, the desire for many possessions or all-possession. The emptiness of the heart, deprived of the enjoyment of the One, Who is everything, creates a thirst for many and varied pleasures” [5, p. 133]. We find the same logic of the development of sinfulness in the works of Rev. Vasily Zenkovsky. O. Vasily contrasts the natural and personal principles in man. Let's look at this dichotomy in more detail. Central to the entire theological system, Archpriest. Vasily Zenkovsky is a category of personality [1]. It is in the personal beginning that the image of God lies. The personal principle in a person, according to Zenkovsky, is not absolute, since it is limited, firstly, ontologically, and secondly, empirically. Ontologically, it is limited by what is “above it” (God, the sphere of values). Empirically, by what is “next to it” (“the social environment, morals and, in general, “social tradition”) and “below it” (“that is, all subhuman nature, its laws, its “blind” processes, the play of chance in the life of the earth, in the life of the cosmos” [2, p. 17]). Thus, the individual is not autonomous. It is “always connected with some social whole, it is included in the order of nature, in its inner life it is turned to the world of values, it seeks support and replenishment in God” [3, p. 35]. The fact that a person has a personal principle likens him to God. God is truly Existent; His existence is radically different from the existence of the creatures He created. And the fact that a person also has a certain autonomy, the ability to oppose himself to others, even to God, is a “reflection of the Absolute” in him. That is why the personal principle, from the point of view of Arch. Basil, is the main expression of the image of God in man [3, p. 64–65]. The last thesis is important to emphasize: the image of God, according to Zenkovsky, is embedded not in the nature of man, but in his personality. Prot. Basil explains in a rather original way the connection of human nature with the personal principle in it, using the Chalcedonian Oros and the Christological terminology developed after its adoption to illustrate their relationship. If everyone has a common nature (that is, all people are of the same essence by nature), then the personality is unique, it hypostasizes nature. Personality and nature are inseparable, but at the same time they are functionally independent of each other. This fact explains why the presence of the image of God in a person (personality) does not exclude the possibility of sin (rooted in fallen nature) [2, p. 15]. It is in the dichotomy of the personal and natural principles that the cause of human sinfulness lies. The combination of the created nature of man and the personal principle in him is an internal contradiction. Self-consciousness, going back to the beginning of personality, cannot be derived from created human nature; it could not arise either from the depths of consciousness or through the gradual evolution of the psyche and, thus, has a direct Divine origin [3, p. 66]. It is part of the spirit; thanks to him, in fact, spiritual life is possible. The task of spiritual life, according to Rev. Vasily, is to subordinate the nature of man - his personality. In man, as a result of sin, nature suppresses the personal principle. An ideal example of unity between nature and personality is, according to Zenkovsky, God the Trinity Himself, in Whom each of the Hypostases expresses and manifests the Divine nature. Speaking about the need to subordinate nature to the personal principle, Zenkovsky argued that “personality... is not only given, but also given” [4, p. 333]. Thus, the revelation of the image of God is a creative task that is solved by a person during his life [4, p. 83]. Speaking about the development of sin in man, Rev. Vasily identifies two moments in spiritual life: “longing for Infinity” and “searching for God” [3, p. 83]. Essentially, the yearning for Infinity and the search for God are inseparable from each other, but as a result of sin, a tragic separation occurred between them. Its result was the emergence of two poles of spirituality - light and dark. The doctrine of “dark spirituality” occupies a fairly significant place in the theological system of Archpriest. Vasily. We can talk about “dark spirituality” in the case when the quenching of the thirst for Infinity occurs without union with God - then the gap between the external and internal content of a person only deepens, what is called “self-deification” occurs [3, p. 122]. When formulating the doctrine of “dark spirituality,” Zenkovsky refers to the teaching of St. Macarius the Great about the spiritual darkness hidden in us. It is significant that sin, according to Zenkovsky, does not eliminate the image of God in us, but is possible precisely because the image of God is present in us as an internal impulse to spiritual life, as a personal principle [3, p. 116]. The mystery of sin lies not in the loss of the Divine image in us, but in the replacement of the search for God with yearning for Infinity, not personified in God. Thus, if you follow the logic of Prot. Vasily Zenkovsky, sin is not a consequence of the loss of the Divine image in man, but on the contrary, it is possible precisely because the image of God is indelibly imprinted on the personal beginning of man. Thanks to self-awareness, a person seeks depth in himself, seeks meaning. But, having broken away from God, instead of the Kingdom of Heaven hidden in the heart, he finds “selfhood” there. Comparing the views on the reasons for the sinfulness of St. Feofana and others. Basil, it should be noted that while St. Theophan spoke about the extranatural origin of sin, Rev. Vasily argued the opposite. This difference is due to the different understanding of the term “nature” by these authors. Zenkovsky separated nature and personality and saw the meaning of human life in bringing them to mutual agreement. St. Feofan, when he spoke about nature, meant what Zenkovsky meant by personality. Returning to the thoughts of St. Theophan the Recluse on the causes of sin, it should be noted that it is selfhood, self-deification that is the cause of inner emptiness and at the same time “an unsatisfied thirst” - “undefined, but incessant,” as the saint wrote about it. Zenkovsky called this state “longing for infinity.” Based on the above, we can conclude that the category of sin is of a spiritual nature. The very possibility of sinning is rooted in man’s godlikeness. Oblivion of God leads to a state of existential incompleteness, accompanied by “an unsatisfied thirst,” “longing for infinity.” Man strives to quench this metaphysical thirst for God with sin, but this only intensifies it. 1. Antonevich A.V. The principle of individuality in V.V. Zenkovsky’s pedagogy. The problem of individuality and personality // Human philosophy: educational and humanitarian technologies. St. Petersburg, 2008. 2. Zenkovsky V., prot. Principles of Orthodox anthropology // Vestnik RHD. Paris-New York-Moscow. 1998. No. 2. 3. Zenkovsky V., prot. Problems of education in the light of Orthodox anthropology. Klin, 2002. 4. Zenkovsky V., prot. Psychology of childhood. Leipzig, 1924. 5. Theophan the Recluse, St. The path to salvation. M., 2008. pp. 131–132. 6. Theophan the Recluse, St. What is spiritual life and how to tune in to it. M., 2012.