Глава I. На рубеже Античности и Средневековья

1.1. Temporal and spatial coordinates The basis of the European cultural tradition is the ancient culture and the culture of Christianity. In this regard, Byzantium attracts special attention, since Constantinople became the center transmitting the heritage of Hellas to the Middle Ages. After the division of the Great Roman Empire into the “Greek East” and the “Latin West,” the culture of Constantinople, until the 6th century, was influenced by the centers of Hellenistic culture in the East, which arose during the first wave of Hellenization during the campaigns of Alexander the Great. One of these centers was Alexandria of Egypt. Traditionally, the period of transition from late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages is interpreted as an era of ideological crisis, characterized by the heterogeneity of ideological trends and eclecticism of philosophy. The Early Byzantine period is the era from the reign of Constantine the Great (324–337) to Heraclius (610–641). Early Byzantine culture is experiencing its formation, being nourished by many sources. This is partly explained by the diversity of the ethnic composition of the Eastern Roman Empire, for which not only linguistic but also dialectal differences were important, and partly by the religious syncretism of Rome and the specificity of its philosophical syntheses. The transition from Antiquity to the Middle Ages has its own temporal and spatial coordinates. The initial milestone of this transition is the territorial division of the empire into two parts during the reign of Diocletian (284–305), which was a necessary measure in wartime conditions. The unity of the empire was restored by Constantine I the Great (306–337), but he moved the capital of the empire to the East. In 324, on the site of Byzantium, the former Megarian colony and the main city of the Roman province of Europe, the emperor founded the new capital of the Roman Empire - Constantinople. Six years later, the city was consecrated by both Christian bishops and pagan priests. This marked the beginning of the division of the empire into the “Greek East” and the “Latin West”. This process was completed in 395, after the death of the last emperor of a unified Roman Empire, Caesar Flavius ​​Theodosius Augustus (379–395), who divided the empire between his sons Arcadius and Honorius. The transition of Christianity from the religion of a persecuted community to the “universal religion of the universal empire” began with the adoption of the Edict of Milan in 313, which legalized Christianity. Under Emperor Theodosius, Christianity was established as the state religion of the Roman Empire. As Yu. A. Kulakovsky notes, “in the ancient world, the concept of religion was inseparably linked with the idea of ​​the state. Every political union had its own gods, who protected its existence and enjoyed the worship of its members” 94. In this vein, the process of formation of early Byzantine statehood also tended to turn to “their gods.” The historical existence of the Christian empire in the East was determined by the emergence of a union of state and church, which was reflected in the political theory of the symphony. Speaking about the initial period of the existence of the Eastern Roman Empire, V.V. Bolotov notes that the union of imperial power and the church arose not so much on the initiative of the church as of the emperors, since during times of persecution the church emerged as a flexible, resilient organism that did not need state support 95 . The early Byzantine period was an era of incomparable flowering of patristic theology. Among its most important representatives are the “great Cappadocians”: Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory the Theologian. The early Byzantine period was marked by a number of events important for the history of the church. At this time, the definition of the dogmas of the Christian faith, approved by the Ecumenical Councils, the design of the rites of daily and annual worship, and the formation of the rite of the Byzantine Church took place. It was during this period that monasticism arose in the East, the first monasteries of ascetics arose, and monastic rules were formed. At the same time, the formation of the patristic philosophical and dogmatic system occurred, preceding the creation of the beautiful edifice of Byzantine culture. The rise of Constantinople as the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire marked the beginning of the emergence and development of early Byzantine culture, the prehistory of which is associated with the “apology of culture” in patristic theology. This term refers to a stage-by-stage transition in the church's relationship to the pagan heritage. In the first centuries of Christianity, the cultural heritage of antiquity, to put it generally, was rejected along with the denial of polytheism; subsequently the course changed, the pagan wisdom of past centuries is considered as “particular reflections of a torn truth,” as foresight and intuition of the truths of Christianity, which should have been reunited into a holistic and harmonious picture. That is why entire blocks of pre-Christian experience and knowledge are borrowed. They seem to be strung together on an axis, brought into a new agreement, reflecting the Christian worldview. We are talking about building a kind of universal culture. The tradition of “apology of culture” is developed by the “great Cappadocians.” The general attitude of the Cappadocians to culture, learning, and philosophy is expressed by Basil the Great in his “Word to Young Men on the Benefits of Pagan Books,” by Gregory of Nyssa in his treatise “On the Life of Moses the Lawgiver,” and by Gregory the Theologian in his homilies, including those addressed to Emperor Julian. In these texts, the Cappadocians continue the tradition of “apology of culture,” dating back to Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Gregory the Wonderworker. Philosophy and “external sciences” are considered by them as the initial stage of knowledge of God, their purpose is auxiliary in relation to the truths of faith. Gregory of Nyssa in his treatise “On the Life of Moses the Lawgiver” speaks about his attitude to the heritage of pagan philosophy and learning with his characteristic desire to combine what “seems to be the opposite”: “Pagan education is truly sterile. She constantly experiences labor pains, but never gives birth to a new life... Don’t all of her embryos, vain and unformed, die even before birth, never reaching the light of the knowledge of God?” 96. He further writes: “Those who come to a free and virtuous life are thus credited with stocking up on the riches of pagan education, with which people who are alien to the faith are adorned. Moral and natural philosophy, geometry and astronomy, the science of logic and everything that people outside the Church do, the teacher in virtue commands to take over as if on loan from those who were enriched by it in Egypt. They will come in handy later, when you need to decorate the church of God’s sacrament with verbal decoration” 97. Gregory the Theologian echoes him: “I think that everyone who has intelligence recognizes learning (παιδευσιν) as the first good for us. And not only this noblest and ours (learning), which, placing no value on sophistication and pomp in words, has (its object) only salvation and intuitable beauty, but also external learning, which many Christians, out of ignorance (κακως ειδοτες), abhor as unreliable, dangerous and moving away from God. (In the sciences) we accepted the research and speculative (side), but rejected everything that leads to demons, delusion and the abyss of destruction. Therefore, there is no need to disparage learning, as some do, but we need to recognize as stupid and uneducated those who, holding this (opinion), would like everyone to be like them, so that their own (stupidity) would be invisible in the general mass and in order to avoid being accused of ignorance” 98 . The homilies of Gregory the Theologian are pathetic, denouncing Emperor Julian the Apostate for the fact that the latter, by removing Christians from education, seeks to turn them into a marginal sect. In “A Homily to Young Men on the Benefits of Pagan Books,” Basil the Great speaks of Homer as a teacher of all virtues; pagan learning should be the initial stage in knowledge and education, preparing for further ascent in the comprehension of divine truth. The problem of the attitude of the Cappadocians to philosophy, scholarship and culture was considered by philosophers, theologians, and historians of pedagogy as a science. Hegumen Hilarion (Alfeev) showed that in the views of the “great Cappadocians” on philosophy three main motives can be traced: the teachings of Christ are opposed to philosophy as human wisdom, pagan philosophers are criticized for their religious views and disagreement with each other in ideological issues. At the same time, ancient Greek philosophy is considered as a “preparatory teaching” paving the way to Christ, and in this regard it becomes a “strong stronghold” and “ally” in the establishment of faith, and “philosophy” is understood in a broad sense as “the best that each of these schools says about justice and pious knowledge.” The “concept of “Christian philosophy-philosophy” as love for Divine Wisdom - Christ” is formed: here “philosophy” is understood as the highest calling of God’s Providence in conjunction with grace-filled help from above, the life of a philosopher (φιλοσοφειν) is the path of the chosen one, it is akin to monasticism. Such a philosophy is not only a teaching, a doctrine, but also a contemplation; public life serves as a test of virtue for a representative of “philosophy” 99 . V. M. Lurie draws the reader’s attention to the First Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Romans as a New Testament source of the teaching about the three stages of knowledge of God, outlined by Gregory of Nyssa in the treatise “On the Dispensation of Man”: “Only one has worthily comprehended God’s creation - he himself, truly created by God and in the image of the Creator, transformed the soul of Basil, our common father and teacher, who with his contemplation made the high structure of the universe and the world arranged by the true wisdom of God made it understandable for many to be known to those who are led to contemplation by his (St. Basil’s) knowledge” 100 . Regarding the above statement, Lurie notes: “This phrase reflects the well-known “theory of knowledge”: rational knowledge of the world (συνεσις - “knowledge”), which St. possesses and transmits. Vasily, is only a preparation for contemplation (theory), which alone leads to knowledge (gnosis). The New Testament basis for this teaching is evidently found in Rom. 1:20" 101 . V. N. Lossky examines the epistemology of the Cappadocians in the prism of its place and significance in the tradition of Alexandrian philosophy. He compares the teaching of the “great Cappadocians” with the “intellectual mysticism” and “superintellectual mysticism” of the Neoplatonists and Origen: “Here we are not talking about intellectual contemplation, striving to embrace a certain primary simplicity, the unity of simple substance. Object of contemplation. - “three Lights forming One Light”, “united radiance” of the Most Holy Trinity - a trinity secret hidden even from the seraphim. “There is only one name that expresses the Divine nature: amazement, which seizes us when we think about God,” 102 he quotes Gregory of Nyssa. V. N. Lossky joins the point of view expressed by J. Danielou: the blissful spectacle (το μακαριον θεαμα) in the Phaedrus is revealed to souls walking across the vault of heaven 103. J. Daniélou notes: “the introduction of θεωρία inside oneself, the “Interiorization” of contemplation, which reveals itself, as St. teaches. Gregory of Nyssa, in a purified heart, in the mirror of the soul, marks a complete revolution in the Platonic perspective" 104. This revolution is associated with the doctrine of the image of God in man and the internal knowledge of God; here the Cappadocians introduced into epistemology the theme of contrasting the “internal” and “external” man of the Apostle Paul. No less important is the development of the theme of contemplation among the Cappadocians. Gregory the Theologian established a classic formula for all subsequent Christian thought about the limits of knowledge of God: God is knowable by actions and unknowable by Essence; this limit is the darkness that separates us from the light of the Holy Trinity. For Gregory of Nyssa, “the darkness into which Moses penetrated on the Sinai peak, on the contrary, is a mode of communication with God that exceeds the contemplation of light in which God appeared to Moses in the Burning Bush at the beginning of his journey. If God first appears as light and then as darkness, then for Gregory of Nyssa this means that there is no vision of the Divine essence, and union appears to him as a path that surpasses vision and θεωρία, a path that passes beyond reason, where knowledge is destroyed and love alone remains, or rather, where gnosis becomes agape. Desiring God more and more, the soul continually grows, surpassing itself, going beyond itself. And as she unites more and more with God, her love becomes more ardent and insatiable” 105. It is worth stopping here: the categorically strong construction of Christian philosophy grows out of the experience of knowledge of God, which surpasses knowledge and contemplation. The works of St. Gregory combine the seemingly impossible: philosophy and mystical experience; It should be emphasized: if Gregory the Theologian forever defined the formula of Christian epistemology as knowledge of God by actions and unknowability by Essence, then it was Gregory of Nyssa who made a “revolution of the Platonic perspective” in defining “divine darkness” as a mode of communication with God. The apophatic principle of epistemology as interpreted by Gregory of Nyssa has its own background in the tradition of pagan and Christian philosophy. 1.4. "Topos" of the polemics between paganism and Christianity The transition from Antiquity to the Middle Ages is reflected in persistent metaphors and is often thought of as a system of oppositions. The study of A.H. Armstrong is devoted to the origin of Christian philosophy, opposed to pagan philosophy. He dates its beginning to the end of the 2nd century, singling out from the Greek apologists Aristadas, Justin Martyr, Tatian, Athenagoras and Theophilus of Antioch, and from the Latin ones - Minucius Felix and Tertullian 106. In the work of A. A. Spassky “Hellenism and Christianity. The history of the literary and religious polemics between Hellenism and Christianity in the early period of Christian history (150–254)" 107 shows that the polemics between Hellenism and Christianity "from external and superficial observations, as we see partly in Minucius Felix and especially in Lucian of Samosata, goes into the very depths of mystical and religious issues, when both worldviews, Hellenistic and Christian, act in all their integrity and conduct polemics on the basis of central and deep issues of being and life, moreover, the attacking side is Celsus, and the defending side is Origen. Interest in the polemic was also intensified by the fact that here two equal forces, equally assimilating the entire culture of their time, having studied the philosophy and all the mystical traditions of the religions they defended, mercilessly entered into a struggle.”108 Origen writes his eight books “Apologies against Celsus” about sixty years after writing the “True Word” of Celsus, thus entering not so much into philosophical disputes with Celsus, but into opposition to pagan Hellenism as such. In the perspective of further considerations, it should be noted that not so much documentary primary sources as legend point to the fact that Origen went through the same school as Plotinus, studying in Alexandria with Ammonius Sakkos (taught in Alexandria between 192–224): in this scheme, two co-scale figures of patristic and pagan Platonism are identified, Plotinus and Origen. The same “oppositional pair” will be formed by the Cappadocians and the crowned Neoplatonist Emperor Julian, with whom Gregory the Theologian and Basil the Great studied together in Athens, receiving a truly royal education. The author of the monograph “The Alexandrian School in the History of Philosophical and Theological Thought,” V. Ya. Savrey writes: “Since the 3rd century. n. e. Alexandrian Neoplatonism follows the path outlined by Celsus; Moreover, this path of apology for paganism moves further and further away from the path of strict philosophical reflection. Porfiry does not hide his hostility towards Christians. Under Iamblichus and Julian the Apostate, “the restoration of polytheism becomes the main task of the Neoplatonic school,” which again moves to Athens” 109. Let us emphasize the following points: since the polemics between Christian and pagan philosophy by the time of the Cappadocians had already moved “to the very depths of mystical and religious issues,” Alexandria should be the center of attention. It became the nest for the formation of Neoplatonism with the special status of a myth in Plotinus, and it was also the “topos” of Jewish liturgics, according to Lurie, one of the components of the language of Byzantine philosophy. There, liturgics and myth probably came into contact. Alexandria is attractive in the sense of considering the genesis of symbolic realism of Gregory of Nyssa as one of the representatives of the Alexandrian thought tradition, who indirectly experienced the inoculation of the philosophy of Athens. The genre uniqueness of Gregory of Nyssa’s treatise, due to this genesis, will be discussed below. Since the division of Antiquity and the Middle Ages passes through the boundary line within the philosophy of Neoplatonism, it is to him, or more precisely to its founder, Plotinus, that one should address. Under the name of Neoplatonism, the doctrine entered into the history of philosophy, the founder of which is Plotinus (204 205–270). He comes from Egypt and belongs to the world of Hellenistic culture. The biography of Plotinus is known mainly thanks to the biography compiled by Porphyry, which preceded the Enneads. Plotinus arrived in Alexandria at the age of about 27 to study philosophy, spending eleven years studying with Ammonius Saccos. In 243, wanting to get acquainted with Eastern teachings, he joined the campaign of Emperor Gordian III against Persia. The emperor was killed by his own soldiers, Plotinus escaped to Antioch, after which he arrived in Rome in 244. There a circle of friends and students formed around Plotinus. Around 263 he begins to write down some of his conversations. The last period of Plotinus’ life is associated with Campania, where, seriously ill, he finds refuge in the estate left after the death of his friend Zeph. Plotinus died in 270. His last words are known: “I strive to raise the divine in me to the divine in everything.” The search for complete truth takes Plotinus beyond the Platonic tradition to the implementation of philosophical synthesis. As Henri notes: “Plotinus would be surprised if he were considered the founder of a new, Neoplatonic school. He saw himself as a Platonist pure and simple, without prefixes or qualifications - in other words, as an interpreter and follower of Plato. Plato, from his point of view, possessed the truth, the complete truth" 110. Yu. A. Shichalin characterizes Plotinus’s attitude to Platonism as follows: “Of course, for Plotinus it would look strange to say that truth - that which actually exists and that surpasses any partial being - is the property of one or another school. It’s just that Plotinus, together with Plato and other divine men, himself saw and knows what can be assumed from his writings. And when he considered that it was his duty to convey the news of this, he turned to the writings and texts of Plato and the tradition close to him as to that which, more than anything else - in relation to our human weakness - is capable of raising us to the divine in everything" 111. Let us immediately pay attention to the particularly upbeat tone of an essentially academic study: we are talking about a special experience - life, contemplation, knowledge - one can only speculate. John M. Rist notes something similar, agreeing with Harder: “Besides a natural inclination to his own themes, Plotinus was able to expound philosophy based on two sources: from the traditional works of the great thinkers of the past and from his own sense of kinship with the spirit of Being” 112. However, in Rist's statement the emphasis is placed somewhat differently: he emphasizes Plotinus's many appeals to his predecessors, mainly the Pre-Socratics, Pythagoreans, Platonists, Peripatetics, and Stoics (not excluding polemics), but also emphasizes the freedom of Plotinus as a thinker, rather than a commentator on these texts. Thus, Rist states the presence of a philosophical synthesis carried out by Plotinus and focuses on the originality of his teaching. In our case, Plotinus’ involvement in the Alexandrian school is of interest from the point of view of the genesis of philosophical synthesis; its implementation occurred at the time of the action of Plotinus the scholar and author of the Enneads. The sections of the Enneads are thematized by Porphyry: the first Ennead is devoted to fundamental ethics, the second and third to the philosophy of nature and the material universe, the fourth to the Soul, the fifth to the Divine Mind, and the sixth to the One as the first principle 113. In the sixth Ennead, Plotinus writes: “Total being contains within itself everything that exists and, therefore, there is a plurality; consequently, it is not unity at all, and if unity belongs to it, it is only due to its participation in the one. Further, if a being has life and intelligence, for it cannot be thought of as dead, it again turns out that it is plural. Finally, a being is plural insofar as it is mind, and even more so if it contains within itself the entirety of ideas, for an idea is not a pure unity, but rather a number, and not only is each individual idea, but also a collective idea: it is also a unity, like the world. Moreover, the One is first, while existence, mind, ideas are not first” 114. This fragment of text introduces us to the main provisions of the philosophy of Neoplatonism. Plotinus formulates his doctrine of the One as the origin of all things, located beyond the boundaries of essence. The One is the source of the outpouring (emanation) of Nous, giving it freedom. Nous is both united and omnipresent, containing within itself the true world - the world of ideas. In a similar way, the outpouring of the World Soul from Nous occurs; it is divided into separate souls. Matter arises as the lowest stage of emanation. The sensory world is an illusory reflection of the world of ideas. The last and highest goal of the soul, separated from the one, is reunification with it through ecstasy, in relation to which knowledge is only a preparatory stage. The entire sphere of existence - mind, soul, cosmos - turns out to be the realization of one thing: mind and soul - in eternity; space - in time. Opposed to the One is matter, which hierarchically closes the lower boundary of being. For Plotinus, matter is an incorporeal, non-affective subject, a relatively indefinite subject; it provokes the higher to fall into the lower. “She is a mirror, reflected in which the higher gives birth to the lower as its likeness. So, the sphere of existence is covered, according to Plotinus, by the power of the superexistent one and limited by the weakness of the carrier matter,” comments Yu. A. Shichalin 115, reconstructing Plotinus’ system of ontological constructions. Developing the interpretation of the theory of emanation by J. M. Rist, I. V. Berestov emphasizes that the emanation of the Mind (Nusa) occurs not “out of necessity”, but “by the own will” of the one (Principal): 1) “An action that provides freedom to another in relation to the actor is good; 2) The action of the First Principle is the most free and good of all possible actions; 3) The degree of existence of something is proportional to the goodness of its action” 116. Thus, Berestov introduces the reader to Plotinus in the philosopher’s consideration of the themes of ontological freedom and the goodness of the freedom of the one. A.F. Losev places emphasis differently when commenting on the VI Ennead. In goodness he sees the mystical meaning of the teachings of Plotinus 117; in Plotinus’s teaching on number, he distinguishes the essence of Plotinus’ dialectic: “1. Number is the potency of intellectual existence, or... the principle of categorical understanding of existence, for it creates five categories of existence - identity, difference, rest, movement and existence. 2. Number is the energy of a mental being, or the design of an object, resulting from the correlation of the meaning of an object with the principle of mental separation and matter... 3. Number is the eidos of a mental being, or the individual construction of an object, i.e., a symbol is obtained... in the objective-hypostasis-real (meaning of this word)” 118. Losev’s commentary is remarkable not only for the meaning of the interpretation of Plotinus’s dialectics, but also for the fact that Losev, starting with the Pythagorean understanding of number, builds up the tools immanent in Plotinus’s philosophical synthesis and gradually includes elements of the teachings of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics to adequately recreate the meaning of the VI Ennead. In terms of further considerations, it should be noted that the triad “potency-energy-eidos” will appear in the constructions of Gregory of Nyssa, as well as the five mentioned categories of Plato in the reception of Plotinus. The statement of one of the most significant scholars of Plotinus, A. H. Armstrong, characterizes not only the style of the Enneads and the intellectual culture of Plotinus, but also the degree of partial sympathy that the latter inspires among scholars studying his legacy: “... it is quite easy to detect inconsistencies in the Enneads, and, as we will see, every reasonable interpreter of Plotinus sooner or later encounters quite a large number of antinomies or contradictions in his thought. But the inconsistency of Plotinus is the incoherence of the greatest mind, and it is very different from the incoherence of the average Platonists or Philo, mediocre people who could never properly cope with their material. A.F. Losev, speaking about the methods of internal formulation of speech in Plotinus, speaks out with greater certainty: “Attention is drawn to the special style in Plotinus, which is difficult to denote by any Greek term and which he uses in his internal statements. These are those numerous passages from his treatises where he talks about his mystical ascents... these passages are distinguished by a very restrained form, a very modest, almost epic narrative, but underneath they feel a huge inner power that would give anyone else a reason for the most unrestrained, most excited and flowery style. Here Plotinus uses many different kinds of images and myths, but he uses them very restrainedly and nobly, which is why this style of his can be called free-archaistic” 120. Plotinus's freely archaic style stems from his general attitude towards myth. For him, myths are by no means a sphere of fantasy or poetic fiction, but “the most authentic being... the fundamental principles of being and life” 121. Plotinus came to the dialectics of the object and the dialectics of the subject in their indestructible unity - to the dialectics of myth. Consequently, the archaization of texts is associated with their philosophical-ontological or symbolic function. The Neoplatonists' attraction to proto-philosophy and to forms of mythological thinking can be considered as an intention to bring philosophy closer to one with religion, the formation of intellectual mysticism. Anticipating further discussions about the philosophy of Gregory of Nyssa, we note that the combination of “seemingly opposite” for him, unlike Plotinus, is only partly a sacred formula, reflecting deep intuitions as a philosophical myth; to a greater extent - in Gregory of Nyssa this principle is rationally realized. With a dose of impressionism, we note the movement of Neoplatonism towards theurgy and the oppositely directed movement of patristic Neoplatonism towards the construction of a rational structure, a bed containing divine Revelation. Rist, noting the essential aspects of Plotinus’ teaching, says that the philosophy of the “king of metaphysicians” went beyond the finite world of the Greeks, and that Plotinus identified “fundamental questions about man, his nature and his place in the world” 122. The dialectic of subject and object is manifested in the ontologization of anthropology in Plotinus. The work of V.V. Semenov shows that Neoplatonism not only addresses the fundamental questions of existence, but also touches upon the sphere of archetypes of consciousness: the transcendental One, Mind, soul and nothingness 123, which determines the paths for the further development of philosophy, including the philosophy of the Cappadocians. From this fragment of the text, a number of aspects should be highlighted in advance, necessary from the point of view of how the philosophy of Plotinus preceded the formation of the symbolic realism of the anthropology of Gregory of Nyssa: this is the ontologization of anthropology in Plotinus; the thematization of the “Enneads” as a harbinger of the thematization of the treatise “On the Structure of Man” and the appearance in Plotinus of the triad “potency - energy - eidos”, important for the subsequent constructions of Gregory of Nyssa. Noteworthy is Plotinus’s interpretation of eidos as a symbol, which anticipates similar reasoning by the saint of Nyssa. When describing the process of degeneration of one type of culture into another, a certain diffuse zone appears in the field of view of the researcher, where the “old” and “new” tend to polarize, but have much in common. Often we are talking about the eclecticism of philosophy and worldview in the era of transition from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. This problem is addressed in the works of A. H. Armstrong 124 , V. V. Bychkov 125 , J. Dillon 126 , V. Ya. Savrey 127 , R. V. Svetlov 128 and A. L. Khosroev 129 and others. Bychkov interprets the heterogeneity of ideological currents as an eclecticism of worldview, which is a sign of the crisis of the Hellenistic culture of Rome, points to the diversity of philosophical schools, the spread of Gnostic teachings, and the popularity of the mystery cults of the East among both the elite and the plebs. J. Dillon corrects this panoramic description, emphasizing that eclecticism of thinking is alien to professional philosophers who remain faithful to the traditions of the school, but, at the same time, Dillon notes a tendency towards the convergence of individual schools. This trend is the focus of attention of A.L. Khosroev, who notes its implementation using the example of the philosophy of Alexandria. He shows that the tendency towards synthesis, which emerged in the Stoic Posidonius (c. 135 - c. 50 BC) and the Platonist Antiochus of Escalon (c. 130 - 68 BC) as Platonizing Stoicism and Stoic Platonism, will be characteristic of both Roman philosophy during the Empire in general, and Alexandrian philosophy in particular. It is this tendency towards synthesis that Khosroev, entering into some contradiction with himself, calls “eclecticism”. However, he indicated (with reference to Diogenes Laertius) that the term “eclectic teaching” refers to its founder, the Alexandrian philosopher Potamon (the turn of the 1st century BC - the 1st century AD). Khosroev (with the mentioned minor terminological glitch) shows that Alexandrian Platonism tends towards synthesis, it was prepared by Antiochus of Escalon (who brought together the teachings of Plato, Aristotle and the Stoic Zeno), Eudorus of Alexandria, a student of Antiochus, who supplemented his teaching with elements of Pythagoreanism, Potamon (whose teaching is apparently close to the teaching of Antiochus), Arius Didymos. Of greatest interest are the nuanced characteristics of Alexandrian philosophy given by Khosroev. He emphasizes that the tendency towards synthesis in the Alexandrian philosophical tradition has a specific coloring. Philosophy is influenced by the scientific and exegetical traditions that took shape in Alexandria before the emergence of the philosophical school. “Founded by Ptolemy I Soter on the advice of Demetrius of Phalerus, a friend and student of Theophrastus, only the Museum could unite around itself an intellectual team of mathematicians, naturalists, and doctors. During the time of the Ptolemies, philosophy played practically no role in the circle of Alexandrian sciences” 130. He also points out that the cultural atmosphere of Alexandria became a conductor of the mutual influence of Jewish and Greek cultures. Thus, Aristobulus (2nd century BC), the predecessor of Philo of Alexandria in terms of allegorical interpretations, taught: “everything that Greek philosophy could achieve was already said in the Pentateuch of Moses and was borrowed from there by the Greeks - an idea that Philo will constantly pursue” 131 . (This topic is significant, and it deserves a separate detailed consideration outside the scope of this text, since one should assume the influence of the Jewish component of culture on Plotinus and the Neoplatonists, as well as the Egyptian one). Khosroev continues: “This topos survived Jewish culture for a long time and, in addition to being accepted by Christian authors, also influenced the neo-Pythagorean Numenius (2nd century AD); Wed his statement: “Who is Plato if not Moses, speaking the Attic dialect” 132. (In Numenia from Apomeia, Losev sees a predecessor of Neoplatonism). Summarizing what has been said, we note: Neoplatonism reflected the tendency towards synthesis, which first emerged among the philosophers of the Academy as a reaction to skepticism. Neoplatonic synthesis predominantly assimilates elements of the teachings of Aristotle, the Stoics, and the Pythagoreans. In the Alexandrian tradition, philosophical synthesis as a “first order” synthesis becomes a “second order” synthesis, involving science, natural philosophy, exegesis in its core, and through the exegetical tradition, it also gravitates towards forms of religious consciousness. Savrey also points out the convergence of the philosophy of Neoplatonism with science and exegetical tradition; he also speaks of philosophy as the religion of “the most educated people”; on this matter, V. N. Lossky speaks more precisely and definitely, as mentioned above, when speaking about the tradition of intellectual mysticism 134. It is appropriate to turn to the fundamental distinction between “synthesis” and “eclecticism” made by A.F. Losev. He, pointing to Plotinus’ predecessors (Gaius, Albinus, Apuleius, Atticus, Ammonius Saccas), states: “Many people even now consider the late Platonists to be some kind of unprincipled eclectics. In fact, the involvement of various kinds of Platonic, Aristotelian, Posidonian, and also Stoic principles in general had its own fundamental orientation. It was a search for the essential unity of Platonism, Aristotelianism and Stoicism; and this was achieved by Plotinus in the most luxurious, most beautiful and convincing form" 135. 1.8. Ontology of the Cappadocians Previously, we were talking about the ontology of the Enneads, which did not open, but closed the era of Antiquity; the beginnings of Christian ontology were laid in the works of the Cappadocians. Its development is carried out by the Cappadocians in dogmatic theology, primarily in the categorical definition of the Trinitarian dogma, in eschatology, and in anthropology. Consideration of these aspects of the heritage of the “great Cappadocians” is represented by a powerful research tradition of Church historians, which allows us to resort to the briefest abstract presentation with the placement of only some accents determined by the needs of this work. The most consistent and profound ontology of the Cappadocians was developed in the field of Trinity theology. Here philosophy has a liturgical purpose, but does not lose its creative character. Researchers of the theology of the Holy Fathers have repeatedly emphasized not only the semantic aspects of ontological definitions, but also the transformation of the categorical apparatus of ancient philosophy taking place in the philosophy of the Cappadocians. V.V. Bolotov was one of the first to address this problem: “What is often overlooked today is the exquisitely subtle understanding by the three Great Cappadocians of the source of the distinction between the Persons of the Holy Trinity in the affirmation of Consistency - homoousia. Namely, that the source is not in ousia (which was where pre-Nicene thought was confused and from which two extremes were born - Marcellianism and Arianism), but in the relationships of the Persons of the Holy Trinity. St. Basil reasoned: “Father is the name of God, not in essence and not in action, but in the relation that the Father has to the Son or the Son to the Father.” The Father is “greater” than the Son in causality and equal in nature. This is also a kind of subordinatism, but not in divinity and not in essence (as in Origen and even in Athanasius), but in hypostatic relationships. It is this overcoming of subordinationism... that constitutes the brilliant achievement of Cappadocian theology” 136. The observations of V. M. Lurie and Archimandrite Cyprian (Kern) are of fundamental importance: we are talking about the categories of “essence” (ουσια) and “hypostasis” (υποστασις) in the Trinitarian dogma. If Archimandrite Cyprian, as a representative of the previous generation of patristic researchers, turning to the Trinitarian dogma, points out the dependence of the categorical apparatus of the Cappadocians on Plotinus and Aristotle, then Lurie clarifies the essence of the transformation of the categorical apparatus that has occurred. So Archimandrite Cyprian writes about the Cappadocians: “They succeeded, more than ancient philosophy, in finding out what existence is in the Hypostasis. If Plotinus was the first to distinguish “essence” as “being in general” from “hypostasis”, as “definite being,” then something deeper and more significant in meaning was revealed to the Cappadocian fathers. They, in the person of St. Basil, based on their Aristotelian Substantia abstracta et concreta, they saw in essence and Hypostasis the difference between the general and the particular (“essence and Hypostasis have the difference that exists between the general and the particular, between a living being in general and a given person”)” 137. Lurie shows that when referring to Aristotle’s “Categories”, the concept of “essence” in theology remains Aristotelian and clarifies: “Basily the Great assigns in Christian theology the term “essence” exclusively for those essences that Aristotle called second, that is, for generic concepts” 138, universals. As for “hypostasis”: “Basily the Great and Gregory the Theologian replace the concept of “first essence” with the concept of “hypostasis,” but they do it in such a way that the meaning of the Christian term extends far beyond the Aristotelian definition. When Basil the Great defines Aristotle (or rather, one of its two varieties: the first essence) is replaced by a new category - hypostasis. We can say it differently: instead of the Aristotelian “first essence,” a new category, the eleventh, will be introduced” 139. The description of intra-trinity relations and the description of the incarnation of the Logos required the Cappadocians to interpret the hypostasis as a container of essence, and not just as a certain part of the general whole. The change in the categorical apparatus was caused by the need to make it suitable for a “fundamental restructuring of ontology” in the situation of changing historical eras of Antiquity and the Middle Ages. A kind of polemic with Plotinus also unfolds on the pages of the treatise “On the Constitution of Man.” Using the example of a comparative analysis of the treatise of Gregory of Nyssa “On the Structure of Man” and the VI Ennead of Plotinus, one can see both the direct borrowing by Gregory of Nyssa of Plotinus’s categorical apparatus (in the description of cosmogony, he uses five ideal categories of Plato in the reception of Plotinus: “essence”, “movement”, “rest”, “identity”, “difference” (Plotinus, VI Ennead)), and their polarization teachings (in chapter XXIV of the treatise “Objection to those who assert that matter is co-eternal with God”). In Chapter XXIV, Gregory of Nyssa formulates his theory of “creation from nothing” and the theory of the energetic nature of matter. Its ultimate goal is to abolish the concept of the coeternity of matter as the principle of evil - to God. The doctrine of the energetic nature of matter can and should be considered in connection with the doctrine of apocatastasis. This teaching is the most complex and problematic part of the legacy of the Nyssa saint; because of its Neoplatonic component, Gregory of Nyssa was not included in the rank of Ecumenical teachers and saints. In works on the theology of patristics, considerable research attention has been paid to it; against this background, let us allow ourselves to focus only on some particulars of the relationship between the doctrine of apocatastasis and Neoplatonism, comparing the Enneads and the treatise On the Constitution of Man. The doctrine of apokatastasis was reflected in VII, XVIII–XXVIII, especially in chapters XXI and XXV of the treatise “On the Structure of Man.” Turning to the Enneads, emphasis should be placed on A. F. Losev’s interpretation of Plotinus’ dialectic as a dialectic of number. In the restoration of man, there is a return from plurality to singularity (not even to the state of Adam (since Gregory of Nyssa emphasizes: the Bible does not speak at first about Adam, consisting of dust and spirit, i.e., a duality, but about man: “Let us make man in our image and likeness”)). The theory of “divisions” introduced into the theology of patristics by Gregory of Nyssa, the main one of which is the division into male and female sexes and the corresponding, ascetic in nature, doctrine of overcoming these dualities, is also connected with the image of “return to singularity.” This teaching was developed by Maximus the Confessor 140. In the doctrine of apokatastasis by Gregory of Nyssa, eidos determines the individual, personalistic traits of a person; eidos (appearance) remains unchanged with changes in age, which corresponds to the immutability of the prototype. Eidos is darkened by the “brutality of passions,” and is restored as it is freed from them. The doctrine of the energetic nature of matter allows us to see in the doctrine of apocatastasis, conventionally speaking, the “law of conservation of energy”: not only the primary elements that were part of a person are reunited, but also qualitative characteristics, the personal composition of which is determined by eidos. Eidos (appearance) changes, according to Gregory of Nyssa, with the arbitrary choice of evil. The theory of trichotomy introduced into the doctrine of man allows Gregory of Nyssa to give a new interpretation of apocatastasis in comparison with Plato and Plotinus in the issue of human free will in relation to the choice of good and evil. The topic of the Platonic origins of apocatastasis is revealed in Likhodedov’s dissertation, and Lurie, in his response to it, showed that in both Plato and Plotinus the topic of human freedom of choice remained unresolved 141 ; It is not clear why the translator and commentator of the treatise “On the Constitution of Man” does not detail the resolution of the topic of free will by Gregory of Nyssa. To begin with, the tree of paradise of the knowledge of good and evil, according to Gregory of Nyssa, is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Evil in the interpretation of Gregory of Nyssa is relative: as the incompleteness of man’s misappropriation of the Divine Economy; as a mistaken preference for “the imaginary of that which pleases the senses.” The imaginary nature of this preference, which does not correspond to the dignity of man 142, is dispelled by the memory of sorrows. The educational and good meaning of sorrows, their difference from evil, is an ascetic theme introduced by Gregory of Nyssa into the theory of apokatastasis. Ontology in the apokatastasis of Gregory of Nyssa acquires an ascetic and soteriological meaning. The question of apocatastasis in Plotinus and Gregory of Nyssa turns into a question of anthropology about human free will and - consistently - a question of ontology about the different ontological status of different levels, gradations, being 143. This polemical dialogue between Gregory of Nyssa and Plotinus shows the dynamics of the demarcation of the ontology of Antiquity and the Middle Ages. 1.9. Ways of influence of pagan and patristic Neoplatonism on the culture of the transitional era The ontological ideas of the Cappadocians are capable of representing the worldview of their era to the extent that they are practically connected with the realities of their time. In this regard, it is appropriate to turn to the topic posed by Shichalin’s research - the institutional design of Platonism, Neoplatonism 144. This perspective reveals the scale of influence of a philosophical school on culture, showing the teaching not in its local, professional meaning, but in its practical relationship with the worldview of its era. Shichalin showed that the institution of school is important for the preservation and development of the tradition of philosophical thought. In this regard, Plotinus and his followers are faithful to the Platonic tradition; the school doctrine of Neoplatonism was developed by Plotinus' student, Iamblichus of Chalcis. Neoplatonism at this time and later was represented by philosophers of the Roman (III century. Plotinus, Porphyry), Syrian (IV century. Iamblichus Sopater of Apamea, Dexippus), Pergamon (IV century. Aedesius, Emperor Julian (361–363)), Alexandrian (IV-VII centuries. Hypatia, Isidore, Stephen of Byzantium) schools. The function of the school in Platonism is broader than solely maintaining the tradition of philosophizing: the synthesis carried out by the middle Platonists allows Platonism to summarize the achievements of ancient culture and represent it; but, most importantly, the school institution takes on a load that can be distributed among religious, scientific, educational, and state social institutions. This explains the significance of the philosophical synthesis of Neoplatonism as the ideological basis of the culture of late Antiquity. In the applied aspect, the influence of Neoplatonism on the culture of late Antiquity is revealed in a change in the experience of worldview, which was reflected in the symbolism of culture and in its sacralization. These shifts were most clearly manifested in state ideology and in the symbols of state power, which is quite legitimate in the logic of the tradition, which began with Plato, who formulated the philosophy of the state. In fact, the channels of influence of Neoplatonism on representatives of power were - in the case of Plotinus - his closeness to the Senate (some of his Roman students came from the senatorial class) and some sympathy for Plotinus on the part of Emperor Gallienus 145. In Rome, the title "imperator" was the title that soldiers awarded to a commander for outstanding services; the official title of the first rulers of Rome was "princeps senatus" - the first in the Senate, although both Gaius Julius Caesar and Gaius Julius Octavian Augustus had the title of emperors. “The princeps was not a king. The idea of ​​slavish obedience to a ruler was alien to the Romans of the first centuries of our era (in practice, of course, it happened differently - under such rulers as Caligula, Nero or Commodus). They considered having a king (rex in Latin and βασιλεύς in Greek) to be the lot of barbarians. Over time, the ideals of the Republic faded into oblivion. Aurelian (270–275) finally included the word dominus - lord - in his official title. The era of dominance has come, replacing the principate. But it was only in Byzantium that the idea of ​​imperial power took on its most mature form. Just as God is the highest of the whole world, so the emperor heads the earthly kingdom. The power of the emperor, who stood at the top of the earthly empire, organized in the likeness of the “heavenly” hierarchy, is sacred and protected by God... (the title of Basileus of the Romans was officially adopted in 629 by Heraclius I, although the people began to call their rulers that way much earlier)” 146, states S. B. Dashkov in the monograph “Emperors of Byzantium.” In this regard, it is permissible to note a number of coincidences: a new formula in Aurelian’s title appears in the year of Plotinus’s death, that is, when the idea of ​​hierarchy had already received discursive expression in the philosophy of Neoplatonism; The title of Heraclius falls during the activity of Maximus the Confessor, who compiled commentaries on the works of Dionysius the Areopagite on hierarchy. S. S. Averintsev wrote about the influence of the Areopagite on the formation of this idea in relation to imperial ideology 147 . “New civilizations arise only where the corresponding ideas have matured in the minds,” notes the historian of Byzantine philosophy V. M. Lurie 148 . When describing the process of degeneration of one type of culture into another, a certain diffuse zone appears in the field of view of the researcher, where the “old” and “new” tend to polarize, but have much in common. Neoplatonism as a philosophy of culture manifests itself most fully during the reign of Emperor Flavius ​​Claudius Julian, a follower of Iamblichus, who tried to create a hierarchy of pagan priesthood, develop the theology, symbolism and dogmatics of a new religion based on Neoplatonism. It was he, who went down in church history as Julian the Apostate, who became the main opponent in philosophical polemics and political confrontation with the Cappadocians. The Cappadocians inherit the tradition of Neoplatonism in terms of involvement in the school in the aspect of its institutional design and due to their involvement in the Athenian and, mainly, Alexandrian schools, and also because the school tradition also develops in Christianity along with the emergence of the catechetical school in Alexandria. The scale of influence of the “great Cappadocians” on the culture of the Middle Ages increases even in comparison with the place and significance of Platonism and Neoplatonism in the culture of Antiquity, which is explained by the fusion of philosophy and religion into a single philosophical and dogmatic system, as well as the missionary focus of the activities of the church fathers in the era of the transition of Christianity from the religion of a persecuted community to the religion of the Ecumenical Empire. In this vein, the activity of the administrative activities of Basil the Great, the participation of the Cappadocians in the formation of the liturgical order and ritual of the early Byzantine Church, the influence of the “great Cappadocians” on the formation of the sermon as a rhetorical genre, as well as the formation, under their influence, of visual preaching in the language of liturgical art, were of particular importance. Not the least important place in this matter is occupied by the perception of the Gospel as a pedagogical, “school” system, where God is called the Teacher, the apostles are called students. 1.10. “Disintegration of style” and “άρχή” in the culture of late Hellenism The influence of philosophy on the worldview of the era cannot be considered as a unidirectional process; there was a certain counter movement that created the field for the development of philosophical thought, the atmosphere of its formation. The culture of the transitional era in its most visual forms - fine arts and literature - allows us to outline the boundaries of this phenomenon in general terms. Let us return to an important particular – Losev’s definition of the internal style of Plotinus’s speech as free-archaistic. Since earlier we talked about the special status of myth in the philosophy of Plotinus and the fact that the confrontation between paganism and Christianity goes “into the depths of mystical and religious issues,” it is appropriate to pay attention to the border zone of their interaction. The influence of Neoplatonism on culture is carried out, one might say, by two counter currents, “from below” and “from above”. The reason for this lies in the special status that myth and the concept of άρχή acquire in Neoplatonism and among Plotinus’ immediate predecessors. Neoplatonism provokes the “disintegration of style” in the sphere of artistic culture, the essence of which was the “archaization” of style in literature and art. In domestic and foreign science, the transition from late Hellenistic culture to the culture of early Byzantium is described in detail, but not entirely consistent in the literature on philosophy, aesthetics, history of literature and art. The moment of crisis was singled out for detailed consideration and analysis by E. Kitzinger 149, who devoted a monographic study to the “disintegration of style.” The author starts from the analysis of a group of monuments in which “grassroots” folklore traditions and the desire for the archaization of the artistic form were identified with unexpected force. A typical example of this is the image of the tetrarchs, the paired portrait of the co-rulers Diocletian and Maxcentius, and later the portrait of Constantine and the arch of Constantine. The paradox of these monuments is that they come from imperial workshops, and not at all from a provincial craft center and, accordingly, the “coarsening” and archaization of style is not so much an indicator of the decline of the craft tradition, but rather a kind of declarative statement. In portrait images, Kitzinger distinguishes not only and not so much a “reduction” of style, but a re-emphasis of meaning: the artists’ attention is focused not on conveying the individual portrait characteristics of the heroes, but on embodying the idea of ​​the sacred foundations of power. In the paired portrait of Diocletian and Maxcentius, this undoubtedly official monument does not preserve even a hint of classical kalokagathia and its manifestations in the art of Rome. The style of the monument clearly refers to ancient sculpture from the archaic era. The same tendency appeared in the reliefs of consular diptychs, where the form is emphatically archaic. Kitzenger singles out the problem of the “patron” as the dominant style-forming factor in art and points out that the “barbarian” traditions shook the classical system not so much as a spontaneous breakthrough from below, but as a result of directed policies. Kitzinger associates this revolution with the activities of Diocletian (284–305). Kitzinger sees the relationship between the process of “disintegration of style” 150 in the sphere of artistic culture with the emperor’s oppositional orientation towards the aristocracy towards the army and the plebs, which was associated with the militaristic policy of the ruler. Diocletian revealed a huge reservoir of artistic traditions, which until that time had been hidden under the cover of official art; heterogeneous ethnic traditions received legalization and actively influenced the process of development of the style of the empire. Kitzinger's concept is important because it identifies a turning point in the development of late ancient art at the turn of the Middle Ages, but allows for clarification. It should be emphasized that the archaization of form is typical specifically for monuments of official art, that is, it has an ideological character. The function of imperial portraits, consular diptychs, etc. is not so much aesthetic as representational - a portrait could replace the person of the emperor or consul who was absent at a particular ceremony, respectively, and the ideas expressed in the works of this circle depend little on the creative attitude of the master, but reflect the goals and ideas of the customer. We dare to suggest that it was the Neoplatonic interpretation of άρχή that determined the strengthening of archaization in the style formation of imperial monuments; in this case, it is appropriate to resort to the authority of V.N. Zalesskaya, who directly pointed out the influence of Alexandrian exegesis on the works of this circle, as well as the relationship of one of the groups of the so-called “Byzantine antiquity” with imperial ideology 151. The special status of myth in the teachings of Plotinus, reflected even in his characteristic style of speech, becomes the basis for the convergence on the basis of Neoplatonism of such seemingly heterogeneous style-forming factors as the influence of the East (diverse in itself 152) in the style of literature and art, the influence of folklore and the already mentioned orientation towards antiquity. In terms of the problematics of this work, the fact that Alexandria was the “supplier” of the esoteric teachings of the East is important; R.V. Svetlov draws attention to it in the monograph “Gnosis and Exegesis” 153. If the formation of the classical Roman portrait was based on the tradition of ancient kalokagathia, which interacted with the naturalism of the sacred portrait of the ethnic tradition of the Romans, then during this period the collapse of kalokagathia occurs. The identity of spiritual and physical perfection recedes into the background. There is a spiritualization of the image. It is achieved by enhancing the activity of the formal elements of the figurative language: the textured processing of stone acquires self-sufficient significance, and the linear principle predominates in carving. Violation of the symmetry of anatomical proportions leads to increased expression of the image. The idea of ​​“disembodiment” of the spirit leads to a change in the structure of the image. The formal elements of the language acquire an independent status under the influence of the artistic traditions of Syria and Iran, anticipating the birth of symbolism. Middle Platonists and Neo-Pythagoreans show sensitivity to such trends from the East. In particular, and importantly, they are resorted to by the direct predecessors of Plotinus, who had a significant influence on him, Numenius of Apamea and Ammonius Saccas. Unfortunately, little reliable information about them has been preserved, but, apparently, Numenius was somehow connected with both Alexandria and Rome 154, while Ammonius is a representative of the Alexandrian school. “It is known.. that Numenius in his teaching paid great attention to the teachings of the Brahmans, Jews, magicians and Egyptians...” 155. According to Porphyry, Plotinus “followed Ammonius everywhere and, under his leadership, achieved such progress in philosophy that he wanted to get acquainted with what the Persians practiced and in which the Hindus had achieved perfection” 156, the training itself with Ammonius had the character of a mysterious initiation. For us, this information is noteworthy, since it testifies to the transparency of the borders between Rome and Alexandria, as well as between the esoteric teachings of the East and the philosophical tradition of Neoplatonism 157. In terms of influence on artistic style, “Neoplatonic aesthetics” and “artistic traditions of the East” can be brought together as phenomena of the same order. Discussing the symbolism of the early Middle Ages, S. S. Averintsev directly points out that the legitimacy of the Neoplatonists’ appeal to the East was, in fact, set by Plato: “The sacralization of Greek philosophy proceeds with an eye to the idealized and generalized image of the Eastern sage - an image in which the Persian “magician”, the Indian gymnosophist and the Egyptian “priest” merge to the point of indistinguishability. It is not for nothing that early Christian thinkers, who were especially keenly aware of the signs of the times, so often recall the contemptuous words put by Plato into the mouth of the Egyptian priest, who allegedly spoke with Solon in Sais: “Oh, Solon, Solon! You Greeks will forever remain children, and a Greek cannot be an old man: after all, you do not have a teaching that would turn gray with time!” All this is typical for the era. But one thing should not be forgotten: the orientalization of ancient culture in the last centuries of its existence was by no means an accidental and external - relative to the essence of ancient culture - “invasion”, “dominance” or “influx” of some alien “oriental element”. On the contrary, this Orientalization was the logical conclusion of the paths of ancient culture itself, a consequence of its own internal contradictions and weaknesses, but also the implementation of the fundamental task inherent in its foundations. If the attraction to the East as its complementary opposite was not part of the essence of ancient culture, Plato, for example, would have to be excommunicated from ancient culture” 158. The spiritualism of the art of the East finds its parallel in the revival of the heritage of the Greek archaic in the sphere of artistic culture. One of the most general trends in the development of literature is the appeal to archaic forms of ancient heritage. The manifestations of this trend are varied. This is a restoration of the Doric dialect, archaic vocabulary and metrics in the works of Sinesius of Cyrene 159. In the expressive style of Nonna of Panopolitan, there is a revival of mythological speech structures: ...give me a narthex, mimallons, and a shoulder variegated tunic, instead of the usual tunic, dress my chest full of Maron's divine fragrance; let the deep Eidothea and Homer leave a rough seal skin to Menelaus! 160 The abundance of synonyms, metaphors, antonomasies is similar to the speech structures of Neoplatonic and patristic apophathesis 161. Allegories, metaphors, parabolas and paraphrases of early Byzantine literature often serve to convey transcendental meaning. In literature, the archaization of language is akin to turning to folklore sources. The invasion of vernacular elements into literary genres can be traced in the examples of both Christian and heretical writing. Thus, Arius, being a brilliant speaker, “reduces” his style to shocking forms, focusing on the demands of the crowd. A new genre of early Byzantine literature is monastic chronicles, which formed the basis of the “patericons”. S.S. Averintsev and L.A. Freiberg point out that their language was influenced by the fruitful influence of folklore: “They said about Abba Ammon that some came to him to sue. The elder, hearing this, pretended to be stupid. And one woman said to another who was standing near her: this old man is playing the fool. The elder heard her, and, calling her, said to her: “How much work have I done in the deserts to acquire this foolishness, and should I really lose it for you?” 162 Intonations and images of everyday vernacular are characteristic of patericons. However, one should not determine the essence of the genre of “monastic chronicles” solely on this basis. Let us note right away: this is a sophisticated vernacular, often it is a deliberate “archaization”. Among the “simpletons” of this genre are Athanasius of Alexandria, Sophronius of Jerusalem, and John Moschos. For example, the name of Athanasius of Alexandria is associated with the definition of the dogmas of the Christian faith. The sophisticated vernacular of the patericon texts captures the mystical experience of the founders of desert living. It, like the vernacular parables of the Old and New Testaments, as well as the Haggadah (the exegetical genre of Jewish weekly teachings, explanations of the morality of the Pentateuch in the form of parables, stories, fables, parabolas, legends, etc.), serves to convey mystical meaning. The apothegmas that make up the patericons are born from the teaching in Scripture, one of the constant monastic activities, from the “conclusion of the mind in the words” of Scripture, perceived as the gospel in the desert and living guidance in the work of asceticism. The “paradigm” of monastic service becomes not the ideal type of the Hellenic sage and hero, that is, not the “divine man,” but the biblical “man of God” (D. Barton-Christie, A. I. Sidorov, V. M. Lurie). Characterizing the linguistic environment of Egyptian monasticism, in which folk monastic chronicles appear, V. M. Lurie says that this is the environment of Hellenistic Judeo-Christianity: “If it did not experience the Hellenization of the “second wave” that captured in the 3rd century. only intellectuals, then its very “Jewish” (more precisely, the Old Testament - belonging to the Egyptian communities of the Old Testament Church) basis was Hellenistic. In Egypt, always and everywhere, and not only in the school of Origen, Christianity was preached in the Greek language and, more precisely, in the language of Greek culture" 163. In this example, we see that along both the Jewish and Hellenic lines, the decline in style, “archaization” become a kind of sacred sign. The development of the genre of “monastic chronicles” also reflects a tendency towards strengthening the sacred meaning. The patericons include not only teachings (apophthegmas), but also hagiographical narratives that go back to the ancient genres of bios and encomium 164. Bios are part of patericons and also exist as an independent genre. In accordance with the nature of genre formation in the medieval era, “genre conglomerates” 165 are formed on the basis of bios - synaxariums ("assemblies") and minologies ("calendars") - readings corresponding to the annual liturgical circle. Once again, it is necessary to emphasize the sacralization of texts, on the one hand, and on the other, the merging of anthropological and cosmological ideas in a genre that reflects the sacred order of the universe, the picture of the world as a whole 166: a “densification” of the genre structure occurs, since the personal-emotional principle and ideas about the cosmos, the annual liturgical circle are combined. Earlier it was said about the attraction to the folklore or archaic tradition of writers of various persuasions: the heresiarch Arius, and Saint Athanasius, and the pagan Synesius. Similar changes occur in liturgical hymnography, which has ancient, Jewish, and Syrian prehistory. In the early Byzantine era, the most significant representative of this genre is Ephraim the Syrian, his works are written in an easy-to-remember five-syllable system, which corresponds to the needs of preaching. About works of this kind, Gregory of Nyssa writes: “Travelers in a cart and on a ship, artisans engaged in sedentary work, in short, men and women, healthy and sick, are downright considered to be punished if anything interferes with repeating these sublime lessons” 167 . Syrian poetry, states Averintsev, was the last “in time, not in importance” source of early Byzantine hymnography; its formation was preceded by the mutual influence of Greek and Semitic cultures starting from the “first wave” of Hellenization, namely: biblical poetry in the transmission of the Septuagint; the later Jewish hymns of synagogue worship (including the genre of piyut, in which Greek influence is undoubtedly discernible), the special structure of oral preaching with its semantic and sound parallelisms 168. The completion of the formation of the canonical structure in the hagiographic canon occurs in the 6th century, that is, it coincides in time with the formation of the canon in the tradition of fine arts. From the above it follows: “archaization” in early Byzantine culture is a comprehensive process associated with the worldview of the era, and not with external technical techniques of art. There is no doubt that archaization, Orientalism, the interaction of Hellenic and Jewish cultures, and the sacralization of forms of artistic thinking are not random and isolated phenomena of late Hellenistic and early Byzantine culture. They obviously have a common ideological basis. From this arsenal, ideas and forms are borrowed that reflect the sacred principles of existence. These stylistic impulses interact with the philosophy of Neoplatonism. Plotinus divides images into aesthetic images and signs that are non-aesthetic in nature. These signs indicate the reality of divine existence. According to a very widespread opinion, the relationship between image and prototype, so significant for the entire culture of the Middle Ages, was introduced into its arsenal by Plotinus 169. The basis of the principles of symbolization, which took shape in the aesthetics of Neoplatonism (a material sign indicating spiritual content), is not only the opposition to the matter of the spirit, characteristic of the teachings of Plotinus, but also the technique of typology, learned by him from Jewish exegesis. Neoplatonism influenced the development of symbolic forms in art, as well as the special sacred status of the de-aestheticization of the artistic form, which, as we see, is associated with the mentioned archaization. In Numenius of Apamea, one of the predecessors of strictly systematic Platonism, close to the Pythagoreans, the meaning of the concept of άρχή is revealed by the following context: “all souls are embraced by a common, already World soul... no matter how different they are from each other... and no matter how different bodies they define... This cycle begins with the Milky Way with the descent of the soul through the heavenly spheres to the earth... and with a gradual incarnation into matter, the soul becomes more and more involved in evil... Only having freed itself from the bonds of the body, the soul unites with its “beginnings” - archai and begins its path of ascent to heaven” 170. 1.11. The collapse of the ancient canon in the prism of dualistic teachings and the theory of dichotomy Spirituality in the spirit of late antique dualism is associated with disembodiment. Consequently, in artistic culture, the archaization of form is associated with the idea of ​​the priority of the spirit, which results in the repression of mimesis 171. Dualistic teachings, corresponding to the teachings of Plotinus, who in his teaching most accurately and fully reflected the “ontological and anthropological shifts” in the cultural atmosphere of the late Hellenistic period, were the reason for the collapse of the ancient canon. The dualism of flesh and spirit, sensual and noetic, constitutes the main contradiction of Neoplatonism, and, we note, not only pagan, but also pre-Cappadocia Christian, where the theory of dichotomy takes shape. The anthropological theory of dichotomy was included by Gregory of Nyssa in his teaching about man, but was transformed into a theory of the structure of man in the image of God the Trinity, called the theory of trichotomy. However, with Saint Nyssa the theory of dichotomy itself takes on a different meaning and meaning compared to its interpretation by his predecessors. The dominant concept that determines the structure of man, according to Gregory of Nyssa, becomes the “image of God.” The doctrine of man of Gregory of Nyssa is formed in direct dependence on the course of dogmatic thought of the “great Cappadocians” in the field of categorical definition of the Trinitarian and Christological dogmas, and in this regard, it represents the conciliar experience of Cappadocian unanimity. Characterizing the place and significance of the doctrine of man as the image of God in the history of patristic anthropology, Archimandrite Cyprian (Kern), says that the Saint of Nyssa summed up what was said before him about man, and “at the same time, Saint Gregory puts forward his opinion on this issue, and in this develops the ideas of that symbolic realism, which in later Christian writing will become especially widespread” 172. The dualism of the sensual - noetic in Neoplatonism led to the transition from aesthetic images to signs indicating spiritual content. V. Veidle emphatically calls them not symbols, but significative signs; they indicate not the signified as a whole, but one of its properties and do not imply correspondence between the signifier and the signified (an example is the discrepancy between Jesus Christ and the peacock or phoenix, as He was designated in the early Christian tradition). Such signs existed in both pagan art and early Christian art; Veidle made a distinction between them, emphasizing the difference between the signified and the prototype. In early Christian art, signs pointed to the sacrament of baptism and the Eucharist. The iconic nature of images is associated with the special status of de-aestheticization of the artistic form, which in this vein becomes a signal indicating sacred content. Since the term “archetype” appears already in Philo of Alexandria, the idea of ​​its influence on Plotinus is acceptable. Philo as a “Hellenizing Jew” becomes a conductor of the mutual influence of the Greek and Jewish traditions 173. In this vein, in the perspective of further consideration of the topic, it seems appropriate to highlight and consider the influence of the Jewish component of exegesis on the language and genre originality of Gregory of Nyssa’s treatise “On the Structure of Man” as a work of symbolic realism. This approach will allow us to compare in general terms the “free archaizing” style of Plotinus and the style of Gregory of Nyssa, which seems appropriate in accordance with the fact that Christianity is the religion of the Word, as well as with the fact that Aristotle’s idea of ​​the identity of form and essence, adopted by the Cappadocians, in a historical perspective will be very fruitful for the formation of symbolic realism and liturgical symbol. 1.12. Style of Gregory of Nyssa “The Six Days” of Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa’s treatise “On the Structure of Man” are two parts of a single exegetical work, an interpretation of the Book of Genesis. This interpretation arises against the background of a trend that emerged in the initial period of the formation of Christian exegesis, where the image of Christ was “overgrown” with anthropological reasoning. Where it was used to reveal esoteric secrets, it became part of a special picture of the world...” 174 T. Miller notes the double context of the interpretation of the image of Jesus Christ in early Christian literature, linking it with two types of Jewish exegesis: from it are borrowed the so-called Testimonia “Testimonies”, excerpts from the Bible concerning the Messiah, and methods of commenting on them, as well as apocalypses, "with their esoteric teaching about heavenly mysteries and the destinies of the world." It should be emphasized: “The Six Days” talks about “heavenly secrets”, “On the structure of man” is an anthropological treatise, both texts, according to the author’s explanations of Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa, are interpretations of the secret vision of Moses or esoteric works. Gregory of Nyssa directly calls his text “mysterious anthropogony.” Two independent types of interpretations interact and merge. Both the “Sex Day” and the treatise of Gregory of Nyssa are indeed associated with the tradition of apocalyptic literature. Thus, Basil the Great says: “If the beginning is temporary, then do not doubt about the end” 175. In the treatise of Gregory of Nyssa, one of the main themes is the theme of apokatastasis, the fate of man after the resurrection. Meanwhile, in the Jewish and early Christian traditions, “Six Days,” along with apocalypses, were an independent genre of esoteric literature. Among the commentators of the Hexaday are Philo of Alexandria, the early Christian exegetes Papias and Panten, as well as Rodon, Apion, and Candide mentioned by Eusebius. At the same time, Gregory of Nyssa, as if systematically moving backwards in history, relies on the original genres of Hellenic and Jewish exegesis for the Alexandrians. A. Desnitsky writes: “In general, it should be noted that the border between Jewish and Christian exegesis in the first centuries AD. e. was much more transparent than today - this can be judged at least by the influence of the ideas of Philo of Alexandria on Gregory" 176 . If the weekly reading of the Holy Scripture and interpretation of it to the people was the responsibility of the rabbis, then the saints also create their exegetical works as homily: “Conversations on the “Sex Days” - a collection of Lenten sermons, “On the Dispensation of Man” - an Easter message - thus, they have a liturgical purpose. The similarity with Jewish religious practice is not accidental, since it also influenced the formation of Christian worship in its most important part - anaphora 177. It should be noted the closeness - in general outlines - of the thematization of the treatise of Gregory of Nyssa to the sequence of worship: praise to God for the creation of the world and man; “natural consideration” and reasoning about salvation from wordless passions; discussion about food and drink in Paradise as communion of the word; reflection on death and apokatastasis; the medical chapter is devoted to the transition from the old man to the new and ends with the glorification of God. As a collection of sermons, the texts of Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa encourage the repentance that precedes Easter joy. This transition from metanoia as a “change of mind” to transformation gives the text the dynamics of spiritual ascent, imparting soteriological significance and mystical meaning to what is said, changing the cyclical closure of the Greek vision, where the beginning and the end are united. Calling the treatise “mysterious anthropogony,” Gregory of Nyssa points to the distance separating his mystical interpretation from the symbolic-allegorical works of his predecessors, and even from his own allegorical exegesis. Thus, Gregory of Nyssa makes a transition from the tradition of symbolic-allegorical exegesis of the Alexandrian school to the mystical tradition of liturgical interpretation, which was later succeeded by Maximus the Confessor as the author of “Mystagogy,” a central figure in the subsequent history of Byzantine theology. In the work, which presented the picture of the world from its creation to the last times, Gregory of Nyssa used typology (from the Greek “τϋηος” - “imprint”) - an interpretation technique characteristic of Jewish exegesis, used in apocalypticism and in eschatological commentary on the prophets. This technique was used by the rabbis to transfer the meaning of Holy Scripture to the events of the present time as an interpretation of the divine will to God's chosen people; it consists in a paired comparison of promise - fulfillment; past-future. This technique is from the 4th century. will become fundamental for Christian culture 178. Jewish exegesis influenced the formation of Cappadocian exegesis, just as synagogue worship influenced early forms of worship and liturgical poetry 179 . A. Desnitsky, in a publication devoted to the exegesis of Gregory of Nyssa, writes: “Where the exegete sees in the details of biblical narratives an indication of spiritual and moral concepts, we are talking about allegory. Where he finds prototypes of New Testament reality, historical and spiritual at the same time, we talk about typology” 180. The early forms of liturgical poetry arose against the background of the mutual influence of the Semitic and Greek literary traditions and were preceded by the translation of the Septuagint carried out in Alexandria. In this analogy between the Alexandrian exegetical tradition and hymnography, it is important to highlight the following particularity: the traditions of Old and New Testament poetry are connected by the sermons of the rabbis and the poetic genre of piyut; their unifying feature and root property is the parallelism of images, both in Jewish and Christian typology. Typology is not only a method of interpreting the sacred text, but a manifestation of parallelism as a way of thinking and reflecting the picture of the world by biblical authors. “Parallelism” refers to the expression of one thought in different ways or the construction of thoughts in pairs 181, while “the connections between the lines can be very diverse, from complete synonymy to complete contrast, but in any case, no statement remains isolated, all are included in long chains of expanded text” 182, writes A.S. Desnitsky in the monograph “The Poetics of Biblical Parallelism.” English Bishop Robert Louth, who in the 18th century. introduced the concept of parallelism into use, he explains it this way: “I call parallelism the correspondence between one verse, or line, and another. When a judgment is expressed in a line, and another one is added to it or under it in another line, similar or opposite in meaning or close in the form of a grammatical structure, then I call these lines parallel, and the words and phrases that are consistent with each other in these lines I call parallel members" 183 . “Parallel lines can be reduced to three types: synonymous parallels, antithetic parallels and synthetic parallels. It should be noted that these types of parallels are constantly mixed with each other and that this mixing gives the work variety and beauty” 184. S. A. Desnitsky and R. O. Yakobson 185 start from R. Laut’s definition in their studies on parallelism. The technique of typology is a special case of parallelism, and in the treatise of Gregory of Nyssa it is not reduced to a simplified scheme of paired comparisons by identity or difference. The fact that Gregory of Nyssa himself attached exceptional importance to it is evidenced by his statement at the beginning of the treatise: “... the entire content of our word will, perhaps, show the coherence and orderliness of what seems opposite, but is actually directed towards the same goal, because divine power thus finds hope for the hopeless and an outcome for the impossible” 186 . Not only the meaning, but also the construction of both this and the previous phrase attracts attention: “After all, it is necessary, I think, of everything related to man, nothing should be left unexamined: neither what we believe happened before, nor what we hope will be revealed in the future, and nor what is being contemplated now” 187 . Gregory of Nyssa resorts not to a paired comparison of the past present or a prophecy of fulfillment, but to a three-part composition: “happened before” - “is contemplated now” - “will be revealed in the future.” Moreover, the present time is framed as a time of contemplation, that is, it is removed from the historical “time of men” and correlated with the eternal existence of God. The interpretation of the category of time in the philosophical and dogmatic system of the Cappadocians differs from the ancient one. The Cappadocians introduced the concept of the creatureliness of time into cosmology, the reason for which was a polemic with Arius, who provoked a transition from the field of theological concepts to the soil of philosophy. In the subordinatism of Arius, Jesus Christ was called the first in time in the order of creation, which denied His Divinity. It was the polemic with heretics on the issue of the Incarnation that led the Cappadocians to introduce changes in the philosophical definition of time, which is reflected in both the “Six Days” and the treatise of Gregory of Nyssa. Evidence of the creatureliness of time was evidence of the deity of Christ. The cosmology of Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa differs somewhat in their interpretation of the category of time; in general, both texts give a summary picture: The Existence of God is eternal, it is timeless. The created era is the eon of angels and historical time, which is divided into periods from the creation of the world to the Nativity of Christ, from Christmas to the Second Coming. In communion with God, man, as the image of God, enters into timeless existence. Therefore, in the quoted fragment, “contemplation” is not only rooted in the historical present time, but is also a timeless communication with God. The past and future in “The Six Days” and in the treatise “On the Structure of Man” are given from the point of view of the limited, finite nature of time, which has a “beginning” and an “end.” This time is created: we are talking about the creation of the world by God and the resurrection. In the paired comparison of the typology, Gregory of Nyssa introduced an axis of symmetry that connected God and man: “now contemplated.” A symmetrical composition emerged. In the history of fine arts it was called “heraldic composition”. This compositional technique has been known since the times of primitive art, the masters of the Greek archaic readily turned to it, it became fundamental in the art of “Byzantine antiquity” and from it was transferred to the compositional structures of the canonical art of Christianity as one of the main types of compositional structure. The heraldic structure as a compositional device has also received theoretical understanding in literary criticism. S. S. Averintsev writes about him in “The Poetics of Early Byzantine Literature”, referring to the Akathist of the Roman Sweet Singer: Rejoice, glorious amazement of the angels! Rejoice, many-tearful wounding of demons! The two lines mirror each other. The author seems to see his shrine in the center, and good and evil on both sides, “right” and “left”. The center is given as a guideline so that the right can self-determine itself as the right and the left as the left, so that good is separated from evil and light from darkness. Being is cut in two, and this is “judgment” 188. In this compositional structure, Averintsev sees the axiological principle of organizing a literary text, which brings other analogies to mind. The technique corresponds to the law of triangulation, which most clearly prevails in Gothic art with its pointed arches, vimpergs, and spiers. There he symbolizes God the Trinity. Perhaps this composition was also a diagram of the hierarchy, reflected in the philosophy of Neoplatonism and adopted by patristics. Note that the Akathist is considered by scientists as the most important monument to the history of literature, or more precisely, poetry. Averintsev associates the appearance of rhyme in the literature of Byzantium with him. The monument is precisely dated - August 7, 626, in our case it is important to emphasize: the logic of the organization of this poetic text was anticipated by Gregory of Nyssa by two and a half centuries. In the Akathist, perhaps, not only its heraldic statics are important, but also the dynamics of the development of the hymn with the gradual and step-by-step revelation of the names of the Mother of God. This dynamics is intensified thanks to the verbal forms of hairetisms: “Rejoice!” Trying to find out how the technique of typology is modified in the treatise “On the Structure of Man,” let us consider a rhetorical device that is highly characteristic of the manner of presentation of Gregory of Nyssa. “Divine beauty does not shine in an attractive way in any form or appearance, but is contemplated in ineffable bliss through virtue. Therefore, just as painters transfer the images of people with the help of multi-colored paints to boards - like this... and our Creator, as if with paints, by imposing virtues, colored his image... These like colors of the image, with which the true appearance is depicted, are multiform and varied: it is not rouge and whitewash, and not some mixture of them with each other, and not a black line with which eyebrows and eyes are depicted, and not some kind of mixture colors that highlight deep features, and in general nothing made by the hands of painters; instead of this - purity, dispassion, bliss..." 189 Initially, the appearance of a person is emphasized and materialized, the rhetorician 190 does not simply designate the color of the blush, eyebrows, eyes, but instead of the concept of “color” he uses the concept of “paint”, which is devoid of abstraction. The paint is named roughly, without shades: “rouge”, “whitewash”, “black paint” 191. The paint is transferred to the boards. But this action is concrete: the painter endures it. The effect of a “portrait within a portrait” arises: the author not only places a verbal portrait in his text, but brings each word to the point of transforming it into a thing. When moving to the spiritual level, the Gnostic “dematerialization” does not occur, and there is no opposition between flesh and spirit. This is the paradox of the style of Gregory of Nyssa. It is not immediately possible to notice that “paint” and what was “made by the hands of painters” were part of the apophatic definitions: “not-whitewash”, “not-paint”, “not-mixing them with each other”, and only after this intermediate stage of negative definitions, St. Gregory resorts to cataphatic, direct definitions: “purity, dispassion, bliss.” This rhetorical device creates an image in which spirit is not opposed to matter, but is mixed with it. Consequently, the idea of ​​sensory-noetic perichoresis, associated with the Christological meaning of interpretation, is realized at the stylistic level of the text. In the typology of Gregory of Nyssa, the symbolic level of the text corresponds to and precedes the literal one. The “natural philosophy” and “natural science” part of the homilies of Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa “weights down” the literal level of the texts, reflecting the idea of ​​the reality of creation, the reality of the Heavenly Kingdom. The verbal image created by Gregory of Nyssa is one of the particular examples of his symbolic realism, which manifests itself as a general principle at the level of figurative structure and stylistics of the text. The peculiarity of this kind of construction is close to apothegmas. The ascending dynamics of the image is noteworthy. In order not to get lost in guesswork, let us turn to the explanation given by the author of the text himself. In Chapter XII of St. Gregory reveals the secret of the hierarchical connection and movement of a person’s inner life. This fragment of text is important from the point of view of Cappadocian anthropology and epistemology. It also serves as the basis for the aesthetics of the holy fathers: “After all, since of all things the most beautiful and excellent good is the Divine Itself, to which everything that strives for the beautiful strives, we therefore say that the mind, as created in the image of the Most Beautiful, while it participates in the likeness of the prototype, as far as it can contain, it itself remains in the Beautiful, and if somehow it finds itself outside the likeness, it is stripped of the beauty in which it was. And since, according to what has been said, the mind is adorned with the likeness of the beauty of the prototype, being formed by the features of what is revealed to it, as if reflected in a mirror, then, according to the same analogy with a mirror, we come to the conclusion that nature, controlled by the mind, is connected with the mind and is itself adorned with the beauty of what is adjacent to it, becoming, as it were, the mirror of a mirror. Human nature dominates and holds the material hypostasis in which it appears to the eye. So, as long as one possesses the other, the participation in true beauty passes through the entire series in a proportional manner, beautifying each time through what is located above that immediately adjacent to it. But if there is a dissolution of this good affinity, in other words, there will be, on the contrary, the superior to follow the inferior, then the substance itself, which has already departed from nature, will reveal its ugliness (because the substance itself is formless and disordered, and its formlessness will spoil the beauty of nature, which is decorated by the mind). Thus, the ugliness of matter is transmitted through nature to the mind itself, so that the image of God can no longer be seen in the features of the creature. For then the mirror-like mind creates images (ideas) of the reverse side of the good, and sweeps away the detection of the radiance of good, reflecting in itself the formlessness of matter. And thus the emergence of evil occurs, which occurs through the imperceptible deprivation of beauty. Everything that is characteristic of the First Good is beautiful; what happens outside of this connection and assimilation is always not part of beauty. So, if, as we already see, there is one true good, and the mind, as created in the image of the Beautiful, must itself be beautiful, and the nature contained by the mind is, as it were, the image of the image, then this proves that the material in us is adjusted and subordinated when it is controlled by nature, and is again upset when it is separated from the Subordinate and Component, and the affinity with the beautiful is dissolved. And this happens only when nature turns back, inclining towards desires not for the beautiful, but for that which needs to beautify. After all, it is inevitable that everything that is likened to the poverty of matter because of its ugliness and ugliness will itself be transformed in its own form as well. From this the theory proposed in the word consistently followed, from which we learn that in the human composition the mind is controlled by God, and our material life is controlled by the mind...” 192. What Gregory of Nyssa said reveals the correspondence of the tripartite symbol to the tripartite structure of man and the tripartite connection: the material nature of man, which he called the “image of the image” - the mind involved in the First Good (“the image of the Most Beautiful”) - the Beautiful God. The law that governs “our material life” is subtle and harmonious, the author uses words that correspond to the inner musical ear: “tuned”, “out of tune”; the argument of this narrative is “the desire for beauty.” In this chapter, St. Gregory provides medical evidence that the mind does not reside in any limited place (brain, heart or kidneys), but is dissolved in the entire bodily composition of a person. From this premise, Gregory of Nyssa moves on to the topic of the incontemplation of the mind: the mind, revealing the God-likeness of man, is uncontemplable in the same way as God the Trinity is uncontemplative. From here Saint Nyssa comes to designate the mystery of the human hypostasis, which surpasses knowledge and contemplation. That is, Gregory of Nyssa resorts to an apophatic definition of the hypostasis of man as the image of God, he affirms the ultimate unknowability of man as the image of God. Both the content of the chapter, and its composition, and figurative structure are involved in the movement from the scientific examination of nature to what is above contemplation. The tangible reality of one testifies to the undoubted reality of the other. You can pay attention to the sequence: “prototype” - “image” - “image of the image” in the words of Gregory of Nyssa. It anticipates the logical-dialectical construction of the hierarchy of images by St. John of Damascus in “Three words of defense against those who condemn holy icons or images,” a text that will serve as the basis for the theology of the image. The image as a liturgical symbol is effective and serves the deification of man. This can be repeatedly verified by carefully reading the treatise “On the Structure of Man” - and in this case it becomes a guide to asceticism. Lurie, commenting on the treatise, discovers St. Gregory's appeals to Hippocrates and Galen, who in pneumatological theory is the successor of the Alexandrian doctors Herophilus and Erasisprotus. This comment deserves special attention in relation to the mystical-ascetic aspect of the treatise’s content: “Here St. Gregory accepted the general statement of ancient physiology, which was also shared by Galen; According to this statement, the heart is the source of life, which receives air from the outside and from which air is transmitted throughout the body. The importance of this position for the history of anthropological views associated with Orthodox asceticism cannot be overestimated: it follows that, at least for many teachers of prayer, the requirement to connect the mind calling on the Name of Jesus with the breath... and the requirement to connect the mind with the heart sounded like equivalent” 193. From the above, we can conclude that symbolic realism received its form in the treatise “On the Structure of Man,” the main meaning of which is essentially the definition of the relationship between the Prototype and the image of God and the transformation of man. Typology in the reception of Gregory of Nyssa acquires special significance in the aspect of the saint’s interpretation of the concept “τϋηος” (imprint) in the circle of his scientific views: “And the vision inherent in the bottom of the eye seat, through images falling into the pupils, leaves an imprint inside” 194. The imprint is also discussed in the case when Gregory of Nyssa summarizes his observations on the physical composition of a person: “eidos”, the appearance that determines the individuality of a person, his personalistic features, independent of age, “becomes for the soul, as it were, an imprint of a seal” 195. Eidos may be hidden by the ugliness of passions, but “in health it again shows its own signs” 196. The philosophy of the “imprint” is seen by Gregory of Nyssa in the anatomical structure of the body: “Since what is solid and inflexible does not accept sensual energy, as can be seen in our bones or in plants, in which we know a certain type of life with which they grow and feed, but whose inflexibility does not accept senses, then for this reason it was necessary to introduce a kind of waxy device on which imprints of the falling material could be imprinted.” from outside. In such a way that this device does not leak due to excess moisture - after all, a wet print will not hold, nor does it resist printing due to excessive hardness - after all, an imprint cannot be applied to something that cannot be pressed through...” 197 . During the period of iconoclasm, John of Damascus gave a brief and comprehensive definition of the concept of “icon” (image) with the help of two others - “portrait” and “imprint” - such a capacious formula was preceded by a voluminous development of the theology of the image by Gregory of Nyssa in the treatise “On the Constitution of Man.” In the symbolic realism of Gregory of Nyssa, the dominant category is “image”; all the semantic lines of the narrative are drawn to it, as to the center: the doctrine of the fundamental principles of being, the doctrine of man, cosmology, theory of knowledge, natural philosophy and science, asceticism, soteriology. The “image,” connecting many semantic levels, retains the property of integrity, singularity, simplicity, similar to the simplicity of the uncontemplated human mind as a property of his God-likeness, thanks to which the image (icon) becomes a convenient mediator between God and man as the image of God. In designating the temporal and spatial coordinates separating Antiquity and the Middle Ages, Constantinople is not only the capital of the Christian empire, but also the center that transmitted the heritage of Hellas to the culture of Europe. Alexandria can be called the “prehistory” of Constantinople, which had a decisive influence on it until the 6th century. It is attractive as the birthplace of the philosophical synthesis of Neoplatonism and the philosophical-dogmatic system of patristics: their polemical dialogue determined the boundary between Antiquity and the Middle Ages. The intuitions of Plotinus and the divine knowledge of the Cappadocians belong to the realm of the spirit, where life begins and the appearance of the culture of the Middle Ages is formed. Kulakovsky Yu. A. History of Byzantium 395–518. T. I - St. Petersburg: Aletheya, 1996. P. 91. Bolotov V.V. Lectures on the history of the ancient church. – Pg., [b.i.], 1918. Saint Gregory of Nyssa. About the life of Moses the Lawgiver. – M.: Church of St. Kosma and Damian on Maroseyka, – 1999. P. 32. Saint Gregory of Nyssa. About the life of Moses the Lawgiver. – M.: Church of St. Kosma and Damian on Maroseyka, – 1999. p. 53–54. Gregory the Theologian. Quote from: Hegumen Hilarion (Alfeev) Life and teaching of St. Gregory the Theologian. – St. Petersburg: Aletheia, – 2001. P. 103. Hegumen Hilarion (Alfeev) Life and teachings of St. Gregory the Theologian. – St. Petersburg: Aletheia, – 2001. P. 99–130. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – St. Petersburg: AXIOMA, 1995. P. 7. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – SPb.:AXIOMA., – 1995. P. 7, 122. Lossky V.N. Theology and vision of God. – M. Publishing House of the St. Vladimir Brotherhood, 2000. P.187, 188. This theme is present in Iamblichus, Numenius of Apomeia, and Porphyry of Tire. The latter distinguishes between space and “intellectual space.” Lossky V.N. Theology and vision of God. – M.: Publishing House of the Holy Vladimir Brotherhood, 2000. P. 190–191. Lossky V.N. Theology and vision of God. – M.: Publishing House of the Holy Vladimir Brotherhood, 2000. P. 192–193. Armstrong A.H. Origins of Christian theology. Introduction to ancient philosophy. / A. H. Armstrong - St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, - 2003. P. 182. Spassky A. A. Hellenism and Christianity. History of the literary and religious polemics between Hellenism and Christianity in the early period of Christian history (150–254). Scientific publication. / A. A. Spassky - St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, 2006. Spassky A. A. Hellenism and Christianity. History of the literary and religious polemics between Hellenism and Christianity in the early period of Christian history (150–254). Scientific publication. / A. A. Spassky - St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, 2006. P. 140. Savrey V. Ya. Alexandrian school in the history of philosophical and theological thought. V. Ya. Savrey. – M.: URSS, – 2006. P. 170. Quote by: Rist J.M. Plotinus: the path to reality. / J. M. Rist - St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, 2005. P. 101. Shichalin Yu. A. History of ancient Platonism Yu. A. Shichalin. – M.: Greco-Latin Cabinet. 2000. P. 264. Rist J.M. Plotinus: the path to reality. / J. M. Rist - St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, 2005. P. 193. Armstrong A.H. Origins of Christian theology. Introduction to ancient philosophy / A. H. Armstrong. – St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, 2003. P. 105. Dam Ennead VI. 9 / Dam. Selected treatises. – M.: AST, 2000. P. 303. Shichalin Yu. A. Plotin. Yu. A. Shichalin // Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. – M.: Soviet Encyclopedia, 1983. P. 501–502. Berestov I.V. Is emanation necessary? / Rist J.M. Plotinus: the path to reality. Appendix I. V. Berestov. Is emanation necessary? – St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, 2005. P. 318. Losev A.F. Dialectics of number in Plotinus // A.F. Losev. Myth. Number. Essence. – M.: Mysl, 1994. P. 721. Losev A.F. Dialectics of number in Plotinus // A.F. Losev. Myth. Number. Essence. – M.: Mysl, 1994. P. 771. Armstrong A.H. Origins of Christian Theology. Introduction to ancient philosophy. / A. H. Armstrong. – St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, 2003. P. 194. Losev A. F. History of ancient aesthetics. Late Hellenism. A. F. Losev - M., 1980. P. 549. Losev A. F. History of ancient aesthetics. Late Hellenism. / A. F. Losev - M., 1980. P. 549. Rist J.M. Plotinus: the path to reality. / J. M. Rist - St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, 2005. P. 272. Semenov V.V. Archetypes of consciousness in Neoplatonism and patristics. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of philosophical sciences / V.V. Semenov. – St. Petersburg, 2006. Armstrong A.H. Origins of Christian theology. Introduction to ancient philosophy. / A. H. Armstrong - St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, - 2003. Bychkov V.V. AESTHETICA PATRUM. Aesthetics of the Church Fathers. / V.V. Bychkov - M: Ladomir., 1995. Dillon J. Middle Platonists / J. Dillon. – St. Petersburg: Aletheya, 2002. Savrey V. Ya. Alexandrian school in the history of philosophical and theological thought. / V. Ya. Savrey - M.: URSS, 2005. Svetlov R.V. Gnosis and exegesis. / R.V. Svetlov - St. Petersburg: RKhGI, 1998. Khosroev A.L. Alexandrian Christianity. / A. L. Khosroev - M.: Science, main editorial office of oriental literature, - 1991. Khosroev A.L. Alexandrian Christianity. / A. L. Khosroev. – M.: Science, main editorial office of eastern literature, – 1991. P. 67. Khosroev A.L. Alexandrian Christianity. / A. L. Khosroev. – M.: Science, main editorial office of eastern literature, – 1991. P. 68. Khosroev A.L. Alexandrian Christianity. / A. L. Khosroev. – M.: Science, main editorial office of eastern literature, – 1991. P. 68–69. Savrey V. Ya. Alexandrian school in the history of philosophical and theological thought. / V. Ya. Savrey. – M.: URSS, – 2006. P. 173. Lossky V.N. Theology and vision of God. V. N. Lossky. – M.: Publishing House of the St. Vladimir Brotherhood, 2000. pp. 147–193. Losev A. F. History of ancient philosophy. / A.F. Losev. – M.: Che Ro. – 2005. P. 110. Quote by: Kartashev A.V. Ecumenical Councils. – M., 1994. P. 113. Archimandrite Cyprian (Kern). Anthropology of St. Gregory Palamas. – M.: Pilgrim, – 1996, pp. 137–138. Lurie V. M. With the participation of V. A. Baranov. History of Byzantine philosophy. Formative period. – St. Petersburg: AXIOMA, – 2006. P. 81. Lurie V. M. With the participation of V. A. Baranov. History of Byzantine philosophy. Formative period. – SPb.: AXIOMA, – 2006. P. 82. See V. M. Zhivov, S. L. Epifanovich. Lurie V. M. Apokatastasis and free will. // SCRINIUV / Journal of patrolology, critical hagiography and church history. T. 2. St. Petersburg – pp. 470–480. In the theory of trichotomy, a person consists of “vegetative forces” - “animal forces” - the mind as the godlike person. The expression “force” corresponds to the teaching of Gregory of Nyssa about the energetic nature of matter. In the teachings of Gregory of Nyssa there is no concept of “matter”, since in ancient philosophy matter was the “principle of evil” (see Metropolitan Macarius (Oksiyuk)), it is contrasted with created “honest substance”. The material composition of a person in itself is not an “evil” principle, it is ugly (not he, but the mind directly communicates with God and then consistently and in a certain proportion conveys God-likeness to the material composition in which he, the mind, resides inconceivably and everywhere). Lurie V. M. Apokatastasis and free will. // SCRINIUV / Journal of patrolology, critical hagiography and church history. T. II. St. Petersburg: Byzantinorossica – pp. 470–480. In this aspect, the Cappadocians turn out to be the successors of the Platonic tradition. Rist J.M. Plotinus: the path to reality. J.M. Rist - St. Petersburg: Oleg Obyshko Publishing House, 2005. pp. 16–19. Dashkov S. B. Emperors of Byzantium. – M.: Publishing House “Red Square”, 1996. P. 20–21. Averintsev S.S. Poetics of early Byzantine literature. – M.: Nauka, 1977. Lurie V. M. History of Byzantine philosophy. Formative period. / V. M. Lurie with the participation of V. A. Baranov. – St. Petersburg: AXIOMA, 2006, p. 13. Kitzinger E. Byzantine Art in the making: Main lines of stylistic development in Mediterranean Art 3rd – 7th Centuru. – Cambridge. 1977. 175 p. Larousse encyclopedia of Byzantine and Medival art. (Gen. ed. R. Huyghe; Text by E. Evershed) - London, 1974. This refers to the collapse of the Roman artistic system at the turn of the transition from late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages. Zalesskaya V.N. Applied art of Byzantium of the 4th–12th centuries: experience of attribution. / V. N. Zalesskaya - St. Petersburg: State Hermitage Museum, - 1997. Bychkov V.V. AESTHETICA PATRUM. Aesthetics of the Church Fathers. – M., 1995. Svetlov R.V. Gnosis and exegesis. – St. Petersburg, 1998. Dillon J. Middle Platonists. – St. Petersburg, 2002. P. 346. Dillon J.. Middle Platonists. / J. Dillon. – St. Petersburg, 2002. P. 348. Dillon J. Middle Platonists / J. Dillon.. - St. Petersburg, 2002. P. 365. It should be noted that historians of philosophy attribute Numenius of Apomeia either to the Platonists or to the Pythagoreans. Averintsev S.S. Symbolism of the early Middle Ages (Towards the formulation of the question) http://www.geocities.com. katz_us_il aver Averintsev S.S. Byzantine literature of the 4th–7th centuries. – “History of Byzantium” vol. I. – M., 1967. P. 42. Nonnus of Panopolitan; cit. by: Zakharova A. Globe of the starry sky: the poetic system of Nonna of Panopolitansky / A. Zakharova, D. Torshilov. – St. Petersburg, Aletheia, – 2003. – P. 108. Averintsev S.S. Poetics of early Byzantine literature / S.S. Averintsev - M., 1997. - P. 146. Ancient patericon. – M.: Typo-Lithography by I. Efimov, 1899. – P. 274 (reprint, M., 1997). Lurie V. M. The Calling of Abraham. The idea of ​​monasticism and its embodiment in Egypt. – St. Petersburg, 2000. – P. 46. Popova T.V. Ancient biography and Byzantine hagiography. // Antiquity and Byzantium. – M., 1975. P. 218–265. Expression by D. S. Likhachev - Likhachev D. S. Poetics of Old Russian Literature. – M., 1979. Here we note the interaction of anthropology and cosmology in the sphere of the literary process - this is important in the aspect of further discussions about parallel processes in the philosophy of the early Platonists and Cappadocians - which will be discussed a little later. Gregory of Nyssa. Quote from: “History of Byzantium” vol. I. – M., 1967. P. 45. Desnitsky A. S. Semitic origins of Byzantine liturgical poetry. // Traditions and heritage of the Christian East. – M., 1996. P. 209–220. Contrary to popular opinion among established scholars, Plotinus himself was influenced by the exegetical tradition and, apparently, by the development of the concept of “archetype” by Philo of Alexandria and Clement of Alexandria. Numenius from Apomea. - Quote by: Losev A. F. Decree. op. P. 550. The archaization of form in literature and fine arts is associated with the evolution of the stylistic system: “a more archaic layer of culture appears in a later layer, paradoxically enhancing not the archaism, but, on the contrary, the impressive novelty of the work.” This general law of the development of artistic form was formulated by Abi Warburg; he calls it the “pathetic formula.” His influence extended mainly to the Greeks. Miller T. Byzantine exegesis. – Patristics. New translations. Articles. – Nizhny Novgorod, 2001. P. 217. Works like those of our holy father Basil the Great, Archbishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia. Part 1. – M., 1991. P. 9. Desnitsky A. Exegesis of St. Gregory of Nyssa (“On the Life of Moses”): marginal notes: http://www.desnitsky.ru Andr_Articl GregoryExeget.htm P. 6. Arenz M. Selected works on liturgics T. I. The Sacraments of the Byzantine Eulochius. – M.: Institute of Philosophy, Theology and History of St. Thomas, 2003. Archimandrite Cyprian (Kern). Eucharist. M.: Church of St. Cosmas and Damian on Maroseyka, 1999. Miller T. Byzantine exegesis. // Patristics. New translations. Articles. – Nizhny Novgorod: Publishing house in the name of the Holy Prince Alexander Nevsky. – 2001. P. 204–250. Desnitsky A. S. Semitic origins of liturgical poetry. – “Traditions and heritage of the Christian East. Proceedings of the international conference. – M., 1996. P. 209–220. The article includes a bibliography on this issue. Desnitsky A. Exegesis of St. Gregory of Nyssa (“On the Life of Moses”): marginal notes: http://www.desnitsky.ru andr_articl gregoryexeget.htm P. 6. Desnitsky A. S. Poetics of biblical parallelism. – M.: Biblical and Theological Institute of St. Apostle Andrew, 2007. P. 9. Quote by: Yakobson R. O. Grammatical parallelism and its Russian aspects // Yakobson R. O. Works on poetics. – M.: Progress, 1987. – P. 100. Quote by: Desnitsky A. S. Poetics of biblical parallelism. – M.: Biblical and Theological Institute of St. Apostle Andrew, 2007. P. 40. Yakobson R. O. Grammatical parallelism and its Russian aspects // Yakobson R. O. Works on poetics. – M.: Progress, 1987. – P. 100. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – St. Petersburg, 1995. P. 9. Averintsev S.S. Poetics of early Byzantine literature. – M.: CODA. – 1997. P. 248. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – St. Petersburg, 1995. P. 16. The emergence of the rhetorical genre of public preaching is associated with the Cappadocians. They receive initial training in the art of rhetoric from their father. Biographers of Gregory of Nyssa talk about his “seduction of youth”: he, being a reader in the temple, leaves this field and goes to teach the art of rhetoric in a pagan school. Literary historians point to the influence of St. Gregory of Nysse on the literature of the Eastern and Western Middle Ages with his allegorism (J. Danielou. Le sumbole de la caverne chez de Gregoire de Nysse. - “Jahrb. F. Antike und Christentum”, Erg. - Bd. 1, 1964. S. S. Averintsev. Byzantine literature of the IV-VII centuries - History of Byzantium. In 3 vols. T. I. - M., 1967) Historians of patristic writing associate the appearance of apophatic formulas with his name, which requires clarification (Arch. Cyprian (Kern) The Golden Age of the Holy Father's writing. - M., 1995). Apophatic definitions were first used by Gregory of Nyssa in relation to the Divine Essence (Arch. Sophronius (Sakharov)), but in philosophy his direct predecessor in the use of apophathesis was Plotinus. Three archetypal colors characteristic of folk art are used, which gives the fragment a shade of reduced imagery, close to the vernacular of apothegma. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – St. Petersburg, 1995. pp. 36–37. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – St. Petersburg, 1995. P. 151. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – SPb.: AXIOMA. 1995. P. 33. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – St. Petersburg: AXIOMA, 1995. P. 87. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – St. Petersburg: AXIOMA, 1995. P. 151. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. – St. Petersburg;: AXIOMA., 1995. P. 100.