Life, theological works and moral and ascetic teaching of St. Nile of Sinai

Contents Preface Chapter 1. Life of St. Nile of Sinai Chapter 2. Theological and ascetic works of St. Nile of Sinai I. Works on Christian virtues and vices 1. To Agathias 2. A word on prayer 3. On the eight evil spirits (vicious passions) 4. On various evil thoughts 5. A word on the Gospel saying: Whoever has a vagina, let him take it also fur: and those who do not have, let him sell his robe and buy a knife (Luke 22:36) II. Treatises on monastic life 1. “Tales of the massacre of the monks on Mount Sinai and the captivity of Theodulus, son of Nilov” 2. “A word of praise to Albian” 3. “A word of asceticism” 4. “To the most venerable Magna, deaconess of Ancyra, a word of non-covetousness” 5. “That those who spend their lives in silence in the deserts are superior living in cities, even if many of the ignorant seem to have the opposite” 6. “To Eulogius the monk” 7. “Admonition to monks” III. Letters IV. Maxims (moralizing words) or sayings 1. Collection containing 99 sayings 2. “Instructive chapters” V. Lost and unauthentic works A. Lost works of Rev. Nila B. Inauthentic writings by Rev. Nila Chapter 3. Moral and ascetic teaching of St. Nile of Sinai A. Teaching about man and the purpose of his earthly life B. Obstacles on the way to achieving the final goal C. Means to achieve the goal Teaching of Rev. Nile of Sinai on monasticism The inner life of a monk 1. Reading the Holy Scriptures and pious reflections. 2. Attention to yourself and self-knowledge. 3. Contemplation. 4. Dispassion and life in the Spirit. Conclusion 1. Features of the dogmatic teaching of Rev. Nila. 2. Features of the moral teaching of the Rev. Nila. 3. Features of the teaching of the teacher. Nila about monasticism. 4. Personal characteristics of the teacher. Nila. Life and works of Rev. Nile, the ascetic of Sinai, belong to the second half of the 4th and the beginning of the 5th century, that is, that era of Christianity, which, due to the number and glory of the teachers of the Church, is rightly called the “golden age of Christian enlightenment.” Studying this era, scientists, which is very natural, turned primarily to the greatest saints of that time: Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, John Chrysostom, Jerome of Stridon, Ambrose of Milan (Milan) and Augustine of Hippo. Next to these great lights of Christian enlightenment, St. Neil, at first glance, occupies a modest place. Overshadowed by the shadow of his famous contemporaries, his personality remains a little aloof, and therefore learned theologians have paid much less attention to him. Until 1915, there was not a single monograph devoted to the life and teaching of this great teacher of the Church, who became especially famous as the spiritual leader of monks. And only in modern times two works appeared in German: 1) the Catholic work of Dr. Fr. Degenhart “Der hl. Nilus Sinaita. Sein Leben und seine Lehre vom Moenchtum.” (Beitraege zur Geschichte des alten Moenchtum und des Benediktinerordens. 6. Heft), Muenster in Westf., 1915; 2) Protestant work by K. Heussi “Untersuchungen zu Nilus dem Asketen”. (Texte und Untersuchungen. 42. Band. Heft 2), Leipzig, 1917. To this day, not a single work has appeared in Orthodox theological literature with a systematic presentation of the moral-ascetic teaching of St. Nile of Sinai 1. In pathological and ascetic collections we find brief information about his life, as well as individual fragments from his treatises and letters, but they are presented without a strictly defined plan and do not give a clear and complete picture of the moral and ascetic teaching of this holy father. If our modest work could at least partially fill this gap in Orthodox theological literature, then we will consider our goal achieved. In this work, we were, for the most part, inspired by the following advice from the reverend himself. Nila: “Let theologians examine the lives of the saints and the virtues of those people who withdrew from the world and tried to hide themselves, and let them study the beauty for which they stand out, in order to imitate the way they lived” 2. Chapter 1. Life of St. Nile of Sinai Data about the life of Rev. Nile of Sinai are very scarce. His traditional biography is based on brief notes by the monk George, known as Amartola (mid-9th century) 3, George Kedrin (12th century) 4 and on a slightly more extensive presentation in the Constantinople Synaxar (under November 12 and January 14) 5 and in the “Church History” of Nikephoros Callistus (14th century) 6. However, the main source of the biography of St. Nile is his own story about the murder of the Sinai monks - “Tales of the massacre of the monks on Mount Sinai and the captivity of Theodulus, son of Nilov,” known in literature under the name “Narrationes” 7. Place of birth of Rev. Neil can be identified from his (?) letter to Iliodor 8 and “Eulogy to Albian” 9. It is in the letter to Iliodor, which speaks of the monks living in Sinai, that among them there is a certain Galatian by birth, who, together with his son, has been carrying out the feat of fasting for many years. The following describes the sudden attack of the barbarians on the Sinai monks and the capture of the son of the mentioned elder. However, the young man, through the intercession of the martyr Plato, is miraculously saved and returns to his old father. This letter, which tells of the miraculous rescue of one young man from barbarian captivity and his return to his grieving father, undoubtedly refers to the same event, which is described in detail in the Narrationes, 10 and on this basis it can be considered that it speaks of St. Nile. The whole narrative is in general agreement with the Narrationes, and therefore Tillemont 11, Ceiller 12, Kunze 13, Bardenhewer 14, Degenhart 15 and others consider the birthplace of St. Nile Galatia. Albian’s commendable word makes it possible to identify the city in which he was born, that is, Ankyra, because Rev. Nilus says about Albian that he comes from Galatia and is a pet of the city of Ancyra 16. It is further narrated that he came to familiarize himself with fasting among the monks who were undergoing the feat of fasting with us: “with us” - that is, “outside the city, on the mountain.” Thus, about the city of Ancyra, the birthplace of Albian, Rev. Nile speaks of his hometown, which gives the right to consider Ancyra of Galatia as the birthplace of St. Nila 17. K. Heussi mentions one manuscript of the 10th century, in which the works of St. Nile have the title “The Book of St. Nile the Ascetic from Ancyra of Galatia: Letters” 18. This title, as well as the extensive treatise by Rev. Nila “To the most venerable Magna, deaconess of Ancyra, a word of non-covetousness” 19 confirm the assumption that St. Neil was born in Ancyra of Galatia and that Ancyra was the place with which, as the place of his birth, the venerable. Neil maintained constant contact. Although Nicephorus Callistus in his “Ecclesiastical History” clearly says that St. Neil of Sinai was born in Constantinople, yet his opinion cannot be confirmed by any evidence and, as we have seen, is in conflict with certain passages from the works of the Venerable himself. Nila. Therefore, leaving aside the statement of Nicephorus Callistus as evidence coming from a writer of a later time (XIV century) and therefore “non-authoritative” 20, we agree with the opinion of the majority of scientists who consider the birthplace of St. Nile Ancyra of Galatia. Unfortunately, we do not have accurate data on the basis of which we could determine the time of birth, work and death of the saint. Nila. Any chronological calculations related to his life are only approximate. In his works we find memories of persons and events that show us the path to chronological research, namely: in the works of St. Nile tells of a barbarian attack on Sinai monks dating back to the beginning of the 5th century; Emperor Arcadius (395–408) is mentioned, to whom two letters are addressed; one of these letters 21, telling about the expulsion of St. John Chrysostom, speaks of the earthquake that occurred in Constantinople 22, and the other contains a reproach to the mentioned emperor for the unjustified expulsion of the hierarch of Byzantium John 23. In addition, the letter to Diocletian (Diocletian) 24 also points to the end of the 4th century, since it mentions that Diocletian saw with his own eyes the already aged heretic Apollinaris, and, as is known, Apollinaris died around 390. All this information is indisputable evidence that the activities of Rev. Nile dates back to the end of the 4th - beginning of the 5th centuries. The starting point in determining the date of his birth is the barbarian attack on Sinai, which, we assume, took place in 410 25. About the years of old age, Rev. Nile, we find evidence in the Narrationes, namely: in Chapter VI the Venerable himself. Nil speaks of his old age's exhaustion, and in another place his son Theodulus calls him "the old father." This gives reason to assume that during the attack of the barbarians, St. Neil was about 60 years old. This means that the date of his birth can be attributed to somewhere in the year 350. Regarding the origin of Rev. Nile, we have direct evidence from Nicephorus Callistus, who writes that, thanks to his high origin, St. Nil was the prefect of Constantinople 26. What Rev. Neil indeed came from a wealthy family, apparently from the Narrationes, where he himself says that the love of solitude conquered everything in him and forced him to leave his home, fatherland, relatives, friends, household members and estate. We do not have any information about whether the parents were Rev. Nile by Christians or pagans, and also where St. Neil was baptized and how his youth proceeded. From the already mentioned testimonies of monk George Amartol, George Kedrin and Nicephorus Callistus, it is obvious that St. Neil of Sinai was one of the closest disciples of St. John Chrysostom. However, there is a direct indication of this in the works of the Venerable himself. We won't meet Neil. And yet, from his courageous letters sent to Emperor Arcadius, in which he defends the persecuted saint, it is clearly clear that St. Neil was one of the devoted and ardent admirers of St. John Chrysostom 27. Honoring Saint Chrysostom in them, he calls him “the pillar of the Church,” “the light of truth,” “the trumpet of Christ.” In the works of the Venerable himself. Nile, the literary influence of St. John Chrysostom. In addition to the two letters testifying to this, 28 there are a number of others, which, as Haidacher proved, bear the imprints of the influence of St. John Chrysostom 29. In addition to the literary influence, which indisputably confirms the knowledge of St. Nile of the works of St. John Chrysostom, there is evidence that suggests that St. Neil was personally acquainted with St. John Chrysostom and used his advice and teachings. The basis for such an assumption, as Kunze and Degenhart 30 believe, is given to us by the Rev. himself. Neil in his work “On Various Evil Thoughts” 31, where he claims that he had the intention to talk more extensively about the fact that demons do not know human thoughts, but guess about them by our body movements; however, the “holy priest” turned him away from fulfilling this plan. But this “holy priest” is none other than St. John Chrysostom, because in many places where Saint Chrysostom is directly spoken of, he is given similar epithets. So, for example, in a letter to Diocese Sever 32 Rev. Neil calls St. John Chrysostom “heavenly man”, “God-inspired man”, “holy man”, and in a letter to Bishop Anastasius 33 - “wonderful priest”, etc. Therefore, we can rightfully, together with Kunze and Degenhart, conclude that under the “holy priest” is St. John Chrysostom, and thereby confirms the direct personal acquaintance of St. Nile with Saint Chrysostom. In addition, the daring letters of Rev. Nile in defense of the persecuted St. Chrysostom and his frank, without any fear, denunciation of his enemies, including even the emperor himself, become more understandable to us if they trace their origins to one of the disciples close and devoted to their teacher. So, the testimony of the monk George Amartol, George Kedrin and Nicephorus Callistus that St. Neil was a disciple of St. John Chrysostom, have a high degree of probability. If Rev. Neil was one of the closest disciples of Saint Chrysostom, then the question arises at what period of his life and where their meetings took place. Since St. John Chrysostom first appears in Constantinople in 398, that is, at the time when St. Neil was already at Sinai 34, then their personal acquaintance could have taken place at an earlier period in the life of the saint. Nile, when Saint Chrysostom was in Antioch. It was here that the reverend could come. Neil from Ancyra to listen to the sermons of St. John Chrysostom and strengthened under his direct spiritual guidance. One can assume something more, that is, that Rev. Neil received an excellent education in Antioch, which at that time was one of the main cultural centers. And although he himself in many places speaks of pagan wisdom with blatant contempt, equating it to “garbage”, to “dust”, to a “heap of sewage” 35, and calls its practice “useless chatter” 36, however, in his works we recognize traces of high classical education. “A negative attitude towards Hellenic wisdom,” says J. Stieglmeier, “did not prevent him from introducing various material from pagan literature into his spiritual teachings.” At the same time, “he shows knowledge of ancient pagan writers even higher than usual” 37. As for the social position occupied by Rev. Nile before accepting monasticism, we find information about this in the Constantinople Synaxarion 38, in other Greek synaxarions and monthly books, as well as in the “Church History” of Nikephoros Callistus 39. All these sources say that Rev. Neil, coming from a famous family, occupied a high social position, as he was the “eparch of the city of Constantinople.” What Rev. Neil, indeed, was well aware of the “brilliance of worldly glory,” as can be seen from a short letter to Eparch Bacchus, in which he, probably based on personal experience, warns Bacchus about possible disappointment, since “the closer he is to the royal chambers, the heftier worries and storms await him” 40. In the Synaxarion of Nicodemus 41, in the Greek monthly books 42, as well as in the Slavic Prologue for November 12, 43, we read that St. Neil was the eparch of Constantinople "during the reign of Mauritius." However, this remark cannot be considered reliable, since the activities of Rev. Nila dates back to an earlier time. Rev. Neil as a contemporary of St. John Chrysostom and Emperor Arcadius could not live during the reign of Emperor Mauritius (582–602), that is, at least 175 years after the era of Emperor Arcadius (late 4th - early 5th century). The Constantinople Synaxarion attributes the activities of St. Nile as the Constantinople eparch during the reign of Emperor Theodosius the Great. The last evidence is quite reliable, since during the reign of Emperor Arcadius, the Venerable. Neil was already a renowned monk, whose prayers the emperor himself asked for 44. As for the family life of Rev. Nile before accepting monasticism, we have testimony about it from the Venerable himself. Neil in his Narrationes 45, where he tells the story of his life. From it we learn that Rev. Neil was married and had two sons 46. However, his love for solitude, which gradually grew and strengthened in him since his youth, forced him to leave not only a brilliant social position, but also a happy family life. This touching scene of the end of marriage is described in sufficient detail by the reverend himself. Nile. When he had already decided to leave the world, he took his two sons, brought them to his mother, and here, handing over the younger one to her, and keeping the eldest, that is, Theodulus, for himself, he informed his wife of his intention. Moreover, he announced this in such a tone that his wife immediately felt that his decision was irrevocable; and, on the one hand, obeying the inevitable, and on the other, having before her eyes the eternal blessings awaiting the Nile for this sacrifice, she gave her consent to this, although parting with her husband and son caused her great sorrow and tears. The reason that prompted Rev. Neil leaves the world, his wife and children, we learn from himself. He says: “I consider it more decent for every rational creature not to indulge in excessive pleasures and not to abuse legal permission, but to limit oneself in this as soon as possible? Otherwise, when finally the strength weakens, the lusts fade away and the peace of old age itself comes, success in chastity will be attributed not to efforts, but only to the necessity that comes in old age? A fighter cannot boast of victory and the fact that he did not fall if he had no one to fight with. But it is an honor to the ascetic if, in the bloom of youth, in the flame of lusts, in the fire of passions, his mind triumphs over desires and suppresses in himself a strong desire for married life, although it is legal, thereby confirming that he has perfect power over himself.”47 Consequently, the reason that prompted Rev. The Nile to leave the world and people is purely ascetic, that is, we are talking about a strong desire to acquire eternal benefits through self-denial during the prime of bodily strength. In what year did Rev. Neil left the world and became a monk, we cannot determine exactly, but there is data that allows us to calculate this approximately. On the one hand, the fact that he was already married and had two sons, and on the other, his own admission that he left the world “in the bloom of youth, in the flame of lusts, in the fire of passions,” gave reason to Fessler, Schwitz, Degenhart and others to make the assumption that Rev. Neil left the world at the age of about 40 years, that is, about 390 48, since we took 350 49 as the year of birth. We can deduce the image of his residence in Sinai from “Narrations” 50, where he describes in detail and lovingly the exploits and virtuous life of the Sinai monks. From his narrative it becomes clear to us that the Sinai monks lived either in separate cells, or in dugouts and caves. Their cells were separated from each other by approximately 20 stadia 51 . This remoteness of the cells was not a consequence of hatred of people, but only of the desire to talk with God in complete silence, since the noise of the environment distracts thoughts from the necessary intense attention. On Sundays, the monks gathered in church, where they offered prayers together, partook of the holy mysteries and spent time in mutual conversations and reading, and were also strengthened by the moral teachings of more experienced monks. The oldest ascetics set forth teachings on how to avoid love of glory and pride, which in desert life are “pitfalls lying near the pier.” Perfect love reigned in the relationships between the monks. Each of them tried to provide the other with everything he needed. They did not know buying and selling, for they did not have “Caesar’s gold” in use, but they exchanged vegetables and fruits, mutually giving one to another with all generosity from the one who had what. The food of the Sinai monks was very meager: it usually consisted of vegetables and fruits, but bread was an exception, since only a small number of monks worked with great difficulty on the infertile land. Some of the monks ate food every other day, others twice a week, and still others only on Sundays. In general, the monks, in order not to “lose a lot of time serving the flesh,” cared little about food, but mostly “served God soberly with a pure mind, without burdening their thoughts with satiating the body and not pleasing the voluptuousness of the belly.” This was also the case in Sinai and the residence of St. Nile, who, having left his “homeland, friends and property” and becoming a hermit, spent a life full of painful labors and exploits. “For a long time,” he says, “this desert gave me the opportunity to spend my life pleasantly, enjoying great silence and, with a favorable wind, heading towards my goal.” However, this peaceful life was destined to be interrupted: Rev. Neil suffered a very serious temptation. One Sunday morning all the monks, and with them the Rev. Nil and his son Theodulus, as usual, gathered in church for worship. But as soon as they performed the service, suddenly, like a whirlwind, the barbarians attacked them. They burst in “like mad dogs,” and first rushed to steal the dry fruits the monks had prepared for the winter, and then they took the monks out of the church and began to chop them with sabers. First they pierced with sabers the “priest of the holy place,” then the “elder who was with him,” and finally the youth who served them. After this, the barbarians captured one part of the monks, and forced others to flee, “giving a sign with their hands.” Among the latter was Rev. Nile, while his son Theodulus was among the captives. Touchingly describes the Rev. Neil his separation from his son. Tied to his son with tender love, he did not even think about his own salvation and did not have the strength to leave, but “silently” remained in place. Prompted by his son, who gave him signs with his eyes, he, after everyone else, moved from his place and followed the remaining monks, who were heading up the mountain. “My legs,” says the reverend. Neil, - they moved forward after them, I don’t know how the body followed them, but my heart did not want to go and forced me to often turn to my son. So, following those in front, I came to the mountain and from a height watched as my unfortunate son was taken away and how he stealthily walked away. throws his gaze at me." After the barbarians left, Rev. Nile, together with the remaining monks, descends from the mountain at night and bury the bodies of the holy martyrs, and then goes to Paran in search of his son. Here he receives the first news of the fate of his son: one young man, who escaped from barbarian captivity, came to Paran and told the reverend. Nile that the barbarians decided to sacrifice him and Theodulus the next morning as a sacrifice to the dawn. With this intention, they had already made an altar and piled firewood, without telling the condemned anything. The fugitive, having learned from one of the captives, who understood the barbarian language, about their intention, immediately informed Theodulus about this, convincing him to flee together. However, Theodul rejected the young man’s proposal, saying “that it is impossible to escape from the will of God, whatever it may be, even if you retire to the most impregnable fortress.” Thus, Theodulus, doomed to death, remained, while the young man who told about all this, taking advantage of the darkness of the night, ran away. The news of the terrible danger threatening Theodulus aggravated the grief of the saint. Neil, and he, having lost his composure, was ready to fall into complete despair. However, he was encouraged by the behavior of one woman, who was no less dejected than the reverend. Nila, for she received news of the death of her son, killed by the same barbarians. And yet this grief did not deprive her of courage. On the contrary, having learned that her son was killed and that he bravely fought with the bloodthirsty villains, she put on white clothes and with a cheerful expression on her face brought prayers of thanksgiving to God for the fact that He was worthy to accept the pure soul of her son into His hands. This woman showed great strength of spirit, based on a living faith in God and on boundless devotion to God's Providence. The mood of a pious woman was conveyed to the Rev. Neil, so that “he felt ashamed for the great cowardice to which he had succumbed, grieving for his son.” And from that moment he bravely endures this temptation, completely surrendering to the will of God; he seems to forget about his misfortune and, together with other monks, leaves to bury the brethren killed by the same barbarians in the vicinity of Paran. Meanwhile, after this attack, the inhabitants of Paran sent two envoys to the barbarian king with a complaint. When did Rev. Nile, having paid his last debt to his dead brothers, came to Paran; the envoys had already returned from the barbarian king, carrying with them written promises of peace and an invitation for all the victims and those whose relatives had been taken into slavery to come to the king. At the same time, the king promised that he would punish the guilty and return the looted property. Having heard such favorable news from the messengers, the Faranians sent a new embassy, ​​providing it with rich gifts for the king. Among those sent was the Rev. Nile. To the place where King Ammon lived, it was necessary to walk 12 days through the waterless desert. When all the supplies of water they had taken with them were depleted, the members of the embassy, ​​exhausted by severe thirst, dispersed in different directions on the eighth day of their journey in search of a source of water. Rev. Nile, having separated from the others, climbed one hill and noticed a stream not far away, around which a large detachment of barbarians was camped. They, as soon as they noticed the reverend approaching them. Neil, pounced on him, grabbed him, “tied him up and carried him away. Nile calmly surrendered himself to the barbarians." “I,” he says, “who was tied, torn, dragged, did not pay attention to it and, being tormented, did not know what they were doing to me; Was my whole mind occupied with the thought of finding my son? Either I will find him with them and then I will willingly remain in slavery with him so that I can enjoy seeing him, or I will be killed, and this will be the end of my misfortunes.” Meanwhile, while the attention of the barbarians was absorbed by St. Neil, an armed embassy appeared on the hill; his unexpected appearance so amazed the barbarians that they, overcome with fear, fled, leaving the Venerable at the place of their camp. Nile and a large amount of plunder. Having rested at the source and quenched their thirst, the envoys continued their journey the next day and four days later they safely arrived at the barbarian king. Rev. here. Neil was "sworn" that his son was not killed and that he had been sold to someone in Elusa. Rev. Neil immediately sets off with two guides to Elusa. On the way, he meets a young man who tells him the good news that his son Theodul is really alive and that everything is very good with him, because he was bought by a priest. Arriving in Elusa, Rev. Neil first goes to the church of God to offer a prayer of gratitude to God, and then goes to the bishop, where his touching meeting with his beloved son takes place. After silent hugs and tears of joy, Theodul told the story of his salvation. From it we learn that the barbarians did not make a sacrifice to the dawn only because they slept through the appointed time; then they sold it to a peasant in Subaita, and he sold it to the Bishop of Elusia. After listening to his son's story, Rev. Neil confessed to him that during his grief he made a vow to God: if his son remained alive, he would lead an even more abstinent and strict life. In response to this, Theodulus exclaimed that he, too, would be very willing to participate in the fulfillment of this vow and labor together with him, for he considered himself to be abundantly filled with the grace of God. The Elusian bishop did not prevent them from fulfilling their intentions and generously released them, having previously ordained them as priests - as a reward for their labors and exploits. Having accepted the blessing from the bishop, father and son return to Sinai, where they spend time in labors and exploits for the rest of their lives. About the year of death of Rev. Neil, we do not have exact data, but we can assume that Rev. Nile died around 430 52, that is, in the era preceding the Third Ecumenical Council, because in his works he unequivocally condemns the Nestorian errors that had already appeared by that time 53. Memory of Rev. The Nile is glorified in the Orthodox Church on November 12, and in the Roman Catholic Church on January 12. In the Constantinople Synaxar, in the monthly books, as well as in Nicephorus Callistus, we find evidence that during the reign of Emperor Justin II (565–578) the relics of St. Nila and other Sinai ascetics were transferred to Constantinople and placed under the altar of the Church of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul. Chapter 2. Theological and ascetic works of St. Nile of Sinai Rev. Neil left behind a large body of written work, testifying to his exceptional writing abilities and rich personal spiritual experience. 54 St. Patriarch Photius (second half of the 9th century) in his work entitled “Library” gives the theological works of St. Neil gave a brief but very commendable assessment, speaking of their perfection 55 . And indeed, the works of Rev. The Nila are distinguished by the purity and plasticity of their language, correct and lively style and clarity of thought. They are imbued with a fiery faith in God and devotion to the Holy Church. According to the form of presentation of the essay by Rev. The Nila are divided into treatises, narratives, sayings and letters. As for their content, although we find in St. Neil's exegetical and dogmatic passages, yet the nature of his works is predominantly moral and ascetic: the subject of constant reflection and teaching by the Rev. The Nile is spiritual life in general, and in particular monasticism, which is the best path to the realization of Christian ideals. When reviewing the works of Rev. Neil, for greater simplicity and clarity, we, following the example of Fessler, Degenhart, Bardenhewer and others, will divide his works into the following groups: 1) essays on Christian virtues and vices; 2) writings on monastic life; 5) lost and inauthentic works. Let's move on to a review of works from the first group. I. Works on Christian virtues and vices In the introduction by Rev. Neil himself talks about the reason that prompted him to start writing this work. The situation was like this: when one day, in thought, he was walking outside the city “among the beauty of the copses, with the singing of birds and the quiet breeze of the pure breeze,” a certain monk named Agathius approached him and told him about one pious woman, Peristeria 57, whose life was a true example of Christian virtue. Abstinence, love for the poor, constant stay in prayer and reading the word of God, participation in any grief of your neighbor, care for the monks and their protection - these are the features with which the monk Agathius characterized the Peristeria. A woman possessing such virtues surprised the reverend. Nile, and he, inspired by the narrative of Agathias, decided to leave the work already begun on the Psalms and begin this one, which could bring great benefit, “turning people away from a life of luxury and establishing them in prudence.” This treatise, consisting of 12 sections, can be divided into three parts according to its content. The first part talks about the duties and virtues of a person in relation to himself. Rev. here. Neil discusses in detail about abstinence as “the beginning and basis of all virtues,” then warns about the danger of vanity and urges “to choose goodness not for the sake of human glory, but for the sake of reward from God,” for “human praise, with its pleasantness, actually destroys what deserves reward.” And as a means in the fight against “vain thoughts,” he recommends prayer and reading the Holy Scriptures, since they “lift our gaze to grief” and “offer the kind of pleasure that the seraphim feel, constantly surrounding the throne of God.” In the second part, Rev. Neil talks about a person's relationship with his neighbor. Here man is viewed as a “social being.” Just as “in our body each organ takes care not only of itself, but, according to natural law, sharing common labor, the organs serve each other, so each of us is insufficient for himself, but feels the need for others in everything.” This is where man’s responsibilities towards his neighbor stem. Mercy and compassion for one's neighbor are the main virtues that prepare for a person “a great treasury of incorruptible wealth.” However, a great obstacle to the path of virtue becomes the desire for earthly goods and the arrogance associated with it, seducing a person from the path of virtues and turning his thoughts to “fleeting pleasures.” In the desire to turn people away from addictions to earthly goods and awaken in them a love for mercy and compassion, St. Nile, in three whole chapters, describes the pitiful fate of the gospel rich man (Luke 16:19), who did not show mercy to the suffering Lazarus. He equally condemns people who, while protecting wealth, justify their actions by saying that they need their savings to provide for their children and grandchildren. He calls such parental care vain, because the property left behind is by no means absolutely reliable. “There are so many examples,” writes Rev. Neil, “that children who receive a huge estate from their parents reach extreme poverty”; and vice versa, “children of poor parents become so rich that they arouse the envy of greedy people.” “If the constancy of what is left to children is unreliable, and the benefits of virtues are recognized by everyone, why then do they not prefer the known to the unknown?” Earthly concerns for children and relatives of St. Neil considers them “offensive to God,” because “by this supposed concern for children,” we appropriate to ourselves the work of God, arranging the life of each person in a way that is useful for him. In the third part, Rev. Neil speaks of spiritual warfare and temptations that are certainly associated with a virtuous life; at the same time, he considers the devil, “who hates all good,” to be the culprit of all temptations. After all, the devil attacks all the saints, since it is impossible to please God without causing the envy of the serpent, who hates those who succeed in the honor with which he was overthrown for pride. But all these trials “not only do not cause harm, but moreover: they bring great benefit,” since “the fragrance of virtue then increases when it is accompanied by many temptations.” Next, Rev. Neil advises, following the example of the great sufferer Job, to endure all sorrow patiently and without complaining, for “The ruler of our life does not allow trouble and battle to exceed the strength of the fighter. If sometimes he allows even this, then he works a great miracle, Himself filling the lack of the weak nature with the help of His grace.” Thought about God's Providence St. Neil illustrates with a number of examples from Scripture. It reminds us of Sarah, who, with God’s help, was saved from desecration by the depraved king; about David, who was captured many times by the bloodthirsty Saul, but who still escaped unharmed each time; about Sampson, Hezekiah, Elisha, the three youths, etc. At the end of this extensive treatise, Rev. The Nile tells of the great glory destined for those who willingly give alms and courageously endure the temptations associated with this feat. Rev. Anastasius of Sinaiti (VII century) in his “Quaestiones” cites three large quotations from this treatise 58, attributing them to the monk Nilus. However, in the 17th century, S. Tillemont was the first to suggest that the author of the treatise addressed to Agathius was apparently some other monk Nilus, since the style of this work is “less refined” and the thoughts are not as “excellent” as those of the ascetic Nilus 59. Of the new researchers, K. Heussy 60 and O. Bardenheever 61 agreed with Tilmon’s opinion. K. Heussi talks about this in more detail. In his opinion, “the author of the treatise “Peristeria” cannot in any way be identical with the author of Nile’s letters, because in the treatise, if we compare it with the collection of Nile’s letters, there are characteristic differences” 62. The latter basically boil down to the following: a) the author of the treatise in his introduction is surprised at such a virtuous woman as Peristeria was. But such a surprise could not have occurred to the author of the letters, who knew many monks and nuns who spent their lives in asceticism; b) in the treatise, monasticism is placed in last place and there is no teaching about demons characteristic of monasticism, while in the letters the main attention is paid to monasticism and demonology; c) the form and style of the treatise are different from the form and style of the letters. Nevertheless, having carefully studied the treatise, we decide to refute the opinion of K. Heussi, considering his argumentation to be very unconvincing, and in some places also inaccurate. For clarity, we will answer Heussi’s arguments separately for each point. A. The surprise expressed in the treatise that there are people who lead pious, virtuous lives does not apply to monks and nuns, but to Peristeria, that is, to a woman living in a world where such a virtuous life was undoubtedly the exception. On the other hand, Degenhart's remark that the author's surprise can be understood as a “simple rhetorical figure” used by Rev. deserves attention. Nile, in order to express the praise of the pious and virtuous Peristeria. B. The theme of the treatise is the general problems of the ascetic life of the laity. Talking about alms, wills and rewards for good deeds, Rev. Neil sought to awaken in the reader the desire to lead a truly Christian life, which was distinguished by Peristeria. In the treatise we do not find a single place that would diminish the importance of monasticism or “relegate it to last place.” Rev. Neil does not touch upon the issue of monasticism, because this work is intended for laymen who, following the example of the Peristeria, were supposed to seek the path to salvation in the world. Heussy’s remark that the treatise lacks demonology, which is a characteristic feature of works on monasticism, loses - after reading the 2nd, 3rd and 4th chapters of the 10th section - all grounds, since in these chapters we are talking about the cunning of the devil, “the culprit of all evil.” Q. As regards external form and style, the differences that exist between the treatise and the letters of Rev. Nila, seems quite natural to us, because the style always corresponds to the subject of the story. The topics of letters addressed to different persons always become random questions that do not find such broad and complete coverage in them as in a treatise, where thoughts are expressed more consistently, gaining scope and integrity. In addition, the difference in style mentioned by K. Heussi can at the same time be explained by the fact that Rev. Neil wrote the treatise as a young man, while the letters date from much later in his life. Thus, K. Heussi's argumentation is not sufficient to refute the authorship of Rev. Nile, and therefore we believe, together with Ceillier, Degenhart and others, that the treatise “Peristeria” belongs to the pen of Rev. Nila. This work consists of a preface and 153 small chapters. From the preface it is clear that Rev. Neil wrote it at the request of a friend, who repeatedly consoled and encouraged him in his sorrows and, apparently, was the vicar of a certain monastery, since Rev. Neil, at the end of the preface, addresses him with his desire to “ask the brethren” to pray for him, the “weak.” F. Degenhart claims that it was Abbot Afphonius, who, being a friend of St. Nila, corresponded with him often 64. The entire preface contains an interpretation of the number 153, which Rev. Neil took from the gospel narrative (John 21:11). The complex and unclear symbolic explanation of the numbers 100, 28 and 25 is reminiscent of the doctrine of numbers proposed by Pythagoras, with which, apparently, the Rev. Neil knew him well. As for the treatise on prayer itself, it is one of the best ascetic works of St. Nila. In these short chapters he expressed his rich personal spiritual experience and deep understanding of the mystery of the human soul. Based on the fact that prayer is “a conversation between the mind and God,” Rev. Neil addresses the monks with teachings, where he explains the state of mind in which the person praying is. Anyone who wants to pray to God must, first of all, free themselves from passionate thoughts, sadness and rancor, for “grudge thickens darkness in the mind of the person praying and darkens his prayer.” In prayer, we must ask God for “what is good and beneficial to our souls,” and not for something pleasing to us to come true: we must pray for cleansing from passions and for deliverance from every temptation. Imitating the angels, you need to pray not for yourself, but for others. Then Rev. Neil also speaks in sufficient detail about the struggle with demons that every person praying must endure, for “demons envy the person praying and by all means try to prevent a person from fulfilling his good intention, seducing him and influencing his mind.” Drawing attention to the fact that when praying, you need to protect yourself from all kinds of delusion, Rev. Neil warns: it is not how many prayers that are important, but how you pray, remembering the Gospel commandment: “When you pray, do not say too much” (Matthew 6:7). In the last chapters Rev. Neil speaks of prayer as “the most divine of all virtues.” It brings joy that exceeds any other joy. The question of the authenticity of this work disappears, because the reverend himself. Neil, in his work “On Various Evil Thoughts,” 65 speaks of his treatise “On Prayer.” In addition, we have a very ancient testimony in “Apophthegmata Patrum” (“Paterikon”), where from this treatise there are 8 quotations with the name of St. Nila 66. Likewise, St. Photius in his “Library” 67 says that St. Neil wrote a treatise “On Prayer”, consisting of 153 chapters. Meanwhile, K. Heussi expressed the opinion that the treatise “On Prayer” in the form in which we have it was compiled by a later editor, since in Cod. Berol. 1487 s.15 there is no preface, and other manuscripts contain a different number of chapters (namely: 150 and 166) 68 . However, Heussy's argument is unconvincing, since the discrepancies we find in the manuscripts are easily explained by the will of the copyist, who, guided by his own goals, could omit the preface and some chapters, as well as add individual quotations from other places. Therefore, Heussi's doubts regarding the origin of the preface seem unfounded 69. Proof that this treatise was highly respected even in ancient times is the work “Pandect of the Holy Scriptures”, owned by Antiochus, a monk of the Palestine Lavra, Ven. Sava (beginning of the 7th century), in which, as Haidacher proved, there are many chapters copied verbatim from the treatise of St. Nila “On Prayer” 70. 3. About the eight evil spirits (vicious passions) 71 This treatise, consisting of 19 chapters, is intended mainly for monks. In it Rev. Neil gives them very useful advice and instructions for spiritual life, expressing his thoughts in a style reminiscent of the book of Proverbs of Solomon. Using vivid and very clear comparisons and antitheses, he discusses the main passions, describes in detail the characteristics of each individually, points out their harmful fruits and gives wise advice on how and by what means to combat them, contrasting each vice with a virtue opposing it. He begins his treatise with a description of abstinence, praising it as the beginning of a virtuous life. He then proceeds to describe the eight main sins with which a person must wage a decisive struggle. The sins are the following: 1) immoderation in food and drink (gluttony); 6) despondency (depressed spirit); This eightfold list of the eight main passions was widespread in early ascetic literature 72 and became the forerunner of the doctrine of the seven deadly sins 73 . However, the first ascetic writer in whose writings the doctrine of the eight passions was accurately and definitely stated was Evagrius of Pontus (died c. 400) 74 . His list of major sins is somewhat different from the lists of St. Nila and Rev. John Cassian 75. Namely: for Evagrius, sadness is in fourth place, and anger in fifth, while for St. Neil and Rev. John Cassian, on the contrary, places anger in fourth place and sadness in fifth. Zeckler, who devoted a separate work to the issue of the eightfold scheme of sins, believes that the treatise of St. Nile's account of the eight passions is difficult to separate from the work of Evagrius of Pontus 76. This opinion would have a basis if the creator of the eightfold scheme was Evagrius, but the appearance of this scheme is the fruit of the joint efforts of the leaders of Egyptian monasticism, and Evagrius, on the one hand, and the Venerable. Neil, on the other hand, is responsible only for the written treatment of this teaching. Comparing the works of Evagrius and St. Nila, we will see that they consider the same sins in the same number, but everything else, including the order of listing the sins, is different for them. This gives us reason to join Degenhart’s opinion that the treatise of St. Nila “On the Eight Evil Spirits” was written independently of the work of Evagrius 77. 4. About various evil thoughts 78 This treatise, consisting of 27 chapters, is devoted to a detailed examination of the devil’s wiles (evil entanglements) and the means that demons use in the fight against humans. The author describes here different types of temptations and motives for evil, based on the three main human passions: voluptuousness, love of money and love of fame (Chapter 1). Describing in the smallest detail all the ways in which bad thoughts take possession of a person, the author teaches how and by what means one must fight various kinds of temptations. The authenticity of this work has not been disputed until recently, since, according to established opinion, at the end of this treatise there is a reference by the author to the treatise “On Prayer” 79, which, as we have seen, was written by Rev. Nile. However, in modern times, Degenhart and Heussy discovered that some chapters of the work “Capita practica ad Anatolium”, written by Evagrius Ponticus, coincide word for word with certain passages of this treatise 80. The mentioned researchers, trying to explain the similarity of these places, come to completely different conclusions. K. Heussi believes that the controversial chapters belong to Evagrius, and considers the essay “On Various Evil Thoughts” to be “secondary and very doubtful.” This opinion at first glance seems quite logical: after all, since Evagrius is older than St. Nile, then, of course, he could not borrow them from the latter, and therefore similar chapters in the treatise of St. Nile belongs to Evagrius. However, after a thorough study of the text of the treatise by Rev. Neil, we join the opinion previously expressed by Degenhart: all of the indicated similar places in the treatise of St. Nila are organically connected with the text of the treatise and cannot, contrary to the opinion of K. Heussi, be removed from the text without violating its unity, while in Evagrius Pontus the same places can be easily omitted. This becomes most obvious when interpreting that fragment 81, which refers to the treatise “The Word on Prayer.” In the text of Evagrius this place is incomprehensible, because Evagrius does not have a similar treatise, whereas in the treatise of St. Nile, it is appropriate, because it has a direct connection with the work of the same author that is already known to us - the treatise “On Prayer”. The similarity of individual places in the works of Rev. Degenhart explains Nile and Evagrius by later interpolation. Namely: when at the V Ecumenical Council (553) some of the works of Evagrius Pontik were condemned, his admirers, in order to preserve the works of Evagrius they revered, began to distribute the latter under the glorious name of St. Nila. And subsequently, copyists mixed up certain passages of these two writers. This can explain the presence in the works of Evagrius of entire passages taken from the works of St. Nila. 5. A word on the Gospel saying: He who has a vagina, let him take the fur; but he who has not, let him sell his robe and buy a knife (Luke 22:36) 82 This treatise, consisting of 10 chapters, is devoted to a deeply allegorical interpretation of the Gospel text: Now, whoever has a bag, take it, and also the scrip; and whoever does not have it, sell his clothes and buy a sword (Luke 22:36). Under the Rev.'s clothes Nile means virtue, and above all - meekness and humility, and by the sword - the study of the word of God, which is a powerful weapon in the fight against the enemies of the Christian faith. Degenhart dates the writing of this work to the period preceding the tonsure of St. Nila into monasticism, because the treatise itself does not say anywhere about monasticism or monks 83. II. Treatises on monastic life 1. “Tales of the massacre of the monks on Mount Sinai and the captivity of Theodul, son of Nilov” 84 This work consists of seven tales. It is not limited to the story of the death of the Sinai monks and the taking into slavery of Theodulus, the son of St. Nila. In it we find interesting vivid pictures related to the description of monastic life in Sinai, as well as detailed discussions about Divine Providence. This work is especially interesting for us because in it the author himself retells the story of his life in the first person. The story begins with a description of how Rev. Nile, who lost his son Theodulus after an attack by barbarians, came to Sinai Paran, mourning his fate. His despair and grief attracted the attention of some ascetics, who, wanting to console the elder, began to compassionately ask him about the reasons for his grief. Answering their questions, the author tells them the story of his life. From it we learn how he, driven by an irresistible desire to bear the burden of asceticism, left, with the consent of his wife, a happy married life and, together with his eldest son Theodulus, went to Sinai, being “inspired by the thought of silence and solitary ascetic living.” Here he lived for a long time, “enjoying the great silence.” But their monastery was attacked by barbarians, who took with them, along with other monks, his beloved son. Having no information about his fate, the old man, tormented by fatherly love, fell into deep despair, indulging in heavy thoughts about the possible fate of Theodul. Then the narrator, in the same conversation with the mentioned ascetics, proceeds to describe the life of the barbarians who attacked the Sinai monks. These are nomads who live by hunting and plunder. Their religion lies in the veneration of the morning star (“Lucifer”), to which they sacrifice, first of all, beautiful young men who were captured by them. And if there are none, then a white camel without any flaws is sacrificed. The sacrificial animal is brought to its knees. After walking around the victim three times, accompanied by solemn chants in honor of the morning star, the head of the ceremony inflicts the first blow on the victim, which at the same time is a sign for other participants. The latter immediately pounce on the victim and cut it into pieces with swords. Very eloquently, although at times exaggerated, the bloodthirstiness with which the crowd rushes towards the sacrificial animal, wanting to get a part of it, is described. Then the narrator moves on to the story of the life of the Sinai monks, expressively presenting their pious life and great ascetic deeds. Next, he talks in detail about the barbaric attack on Sinai, the captivity of Theodulus, his difficult fate and, finally, his rescue and return to Sinai with his father. This work serves as the only source of information about the life of St. Nila. Traditional biography of St. Nila is based mainly on the Narrationes. The authenticity of this work has not been disputed until recently. However, in modern times, K. Heussi tried to refute the autobiographical meaning of “Narrationes”, considering this work as written in the 5th century by an unknown author under the influence of a Greek novel 85. The similarity of the Narrationes to Greek novels gave K. Heussi a reason to be “to a certain extent” skeptical about the historical value of these narratives.” O. Bardenhever and P. Care are largely inclined to accept his opinion, since they also believe that the name “Sinaiticus”, adopted by St. Neil, inaccurately 86. The argumentation of K. Heussy, directed mainly against the work of F. Degenhart, was recently subjected to detailed consideration. Following the principle that folk novels serve as a poetic expression of events in the life of a particular people, Degenhart rightly notes that only in that case it would be possible to leave a tradition that recognizes the historical authenticity of Narrationes if the events and deeds of that era forced us to do so by natura sua (by their nature) 87 . However, Heussi does not and cannot provide such arguments. The similarity of "Narrationes" with Greek novels is explained only by imitation of the form and style of the ancient writers, who Rev. The Nile, according to J. Stiglmayer 88, were well known. The external similarity of “Narrationes” and Greek novels does not give the slightest right to deny the historicity of the narrative itself and to look, contrary to centuries-old tradition, instead of St. Nile by some new and unknown author of the 5th century. Finally, we dare to present the results of our own careful comparisons. We drew attention to the fact that in a short essay by Rev. Nile's "Eulogy to Albian" 89, the authenticity of which no one disputes, there are several passages that are very similar to individual narratives in the Narrationes. We are referring to the pictures of the life of the Sinai monks in the Narrationes and the description of the exploits of Albian in the Eulogy to Albian. Both works convey the same thoughts, namely: care for the soul, associated with contempt for everything earthly, tireless ascent to “mountain wisdom” and imitation of “angelic life”. Both the Sinai hermits and the monk Albian are content with little, thereby imitating the life of the angels, because “the absence of any needs is a property only of incorporeal beings.” Both the Sinai monks and Albian sought to “please God,” and they cared about the flesh only to the extent that it was necessary to maintain bodily life. Both the Narrationes and the Eulogy to Albian indicate that the monks did not know about the “royal coins.” These above-mentioned thoughts inherent in both works, as well as the general similarity of their style and content, allow us to conclude that the author of “Narrationes” is Rev. Neil, because both works belong to the pen of the same author, and the authenticity of the “Eulogy to Albian” has not been disputed until now. 2. “Eulogy to Albian” 90 This work is a short but beautifully composed eulogy to the monk Albian, whose virtuous life the author sets as an example for monks to follow. Considering the stories about the lives and deeds of famous ascetics useful, Rev. Nile depicts in fresh and lively tones the life of the humble ascetic Albian, in the hope that “at least some will love his virtues and feel love for them,” for “the human soul,” by some natural aspiration, “devotes itself to the beautiful.” And indeed, the vivid descriptions of Albian’s exploits are easy and interesting to read, teaching us “angelic life.” 3. “The ascetic word” 91 This treatise, consisting of 75 chapters, testifies to the enormous ascetic experience of the author and his deep knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, which he interprets, as a rule, allegorically. According to its content, this treatise can be divided into three parts. The first part (chap. 1–20) explains the origin and meaning of monastic life “as true philosophy,” and at the same time describes the shortcomings of monasticism contemporary to the author. The second part (chap. 21–41) sets out the doctrine of mentors (leaders) of monks. It presents the high spiritual qualities that a monastic mentor should possess, and also lists his duties and emphasizes the difficulty of his calling; Moreover, advice is given that one should not compete about accepting such a burden, for “the hardest thing is to rule souls” (chap. 27). The third part calls on ordinary monks, to whom it is dedicated, to fulfill their duties, which are essentially: obedience, renunciation of earthly goods and a constant struggle with passions. In conclusion (chapter 75), the author reminds of the “eternal good” awaiting the one who has adorned his life with deeds of virtues. The question of the authenticity of this treatise was first raised by Tillemont. He suggested that “The Ascetic Word” is a work of a much later time, since it is difficult to attribute the weakening of monastic life, with which the author is struggling, to the end of the 4th or the beginning of the 5th centuries 92. Following Tillemont, Schwietz in recent times tried to prove that in the first chapters (and especially in Chapter 7) there are places that represent later interpolation. For the presence of a monastery with a high level of organization of its own economy and relaxation in monastic discipline, as described in the treatise, “contradicts all reliable evidence about Eastern monasticism in the 4th and early 5th centuries 93. However, this attempt by Schwitz, as O. Bardenheever testifies, “was not successful” 94. Degenhart 95 and even Heussy 96 disagree with Schwitz's opinion. Degenhart draws attention to the fact that the shortcomings of monastic life described in this treatise are of a general nature, for greed and inconstancy, condemned by the author, were criticized in many letters of St. Nila. According to Schwitz's logic, these places were added at a later time. However, there is no basis for such an assumption. On the other hand, the existence of a monastery with a high organization of its own economy in the era of St. Nile is also confirmed by the testimony of Palladius of Elenopolis, who died around 430. In his “Historia Lausaica,” Palladius of Elenopolis talks about monasteries that could accommodate several thousand monks 97 . Naturally, in order to supply food and meet other urgent needs of such a large number of people, there had to be a high organization of their own economy. And indeed, in Palladius we find evidence that the monasteries had their own bakeries, pharmacies, libraries, reading rooms and various agricultural implements. Thus, the argument of Schwitz, who attempted to prove that some chapters of the treatise we are considering are a later interpolation, cannot withstand criticism, and there the reliability of this treatise remains indisputable. K. Heussy and O. Bardenheever rightly believe that this work by Rev. Neil wrote a little earlier than the treatise “The Word of Non-covetousness”, since in the first chapter of the latter the reverend himself. Neil says that he “recently” composed a “Word to those living a monastic life,” in which he reproached the monks for their addiction to getting rich and enjoying “earthly pleasures” 98 . For this reason, we can assume that “The Word to Those Living a Monastic Life” is the treatise we are considering, “The Ascetic Word.” Since “The Word to Those Living the Monastic Life” was written around 426–427 99, the treatise “The Ascetic Word” can be dated to 425. 4. “To the Most Venerable Magna, Deaconess of Ancyra, a word of non-covetousness” 100 This treatise consists of 67 small chapters. It is a continuation of the above-mentioned treatise “The Ascetic Word”. In this essay, Rev. Nile commands the monks, first of all, to renounce all kinds of earthly attachments (chap. 1–12), and then expounds his doctrine of triple poverty. The greatest poverty is characteristic only of a small number of people who do not care at all about material wealth, but wholly devote themselves to serving God, as our ancestors did in paradise before their fall. The saints are also distinguished by such poverty, who, being free from all bodily worries and living only with the thought of the salvation of their souls, completely trusted in God’s Providence and renounced all property (chap. 13-21). Average poverty Neil especially recommends it for monks. It consists in the fact that part of the time is devoted to manual labor in order to acquire the means necessary to satisfy the primary bodily needs, and the rest of the time is spent in prayer and reading the word of God (chap. 21-29). Small or “small” poverty consists of complete commitment to everything earthly. Those monks who spend day and night caring for the flesh, thereby showing a tendency towards “the slightest poverty,” Ven. Neil strictly condemns and demands that they change their lifestyle (chap. 30–41). Then he lovingly exhorts and encourages the monks so that, following the example of the holy apostles, they earn their own living and do not cause costs to others. Engaging in physical labor does not harm the monks in their “care of the soul,” because they wisely distribute their time, paying attention first of all to “their most important work” (chap. 42). Next, Rev. Neil teaches how to imitate God and how to achieve that state that the Apostle Paul speaks of, that a person lives “not according to the flesh... but according to the Spirit” (Rom. 8:9) (chap. 42–51). To do this, it is necessary to reject earthly concerns and completely surrender to reflection on the Divine law and His nature (chap. 52–64). At the end of the treatise, Rev. Neil additionally gives some more advice regarding abstinence, patience and humility, intended primarily for new monks. This treatise can be considered one of the later works of Rev. Nile, since its origin dates back to 426–427 years. The basis for this is Chapter 21, which talks about Alexander, the founder of the so-called “ever-sleeping monasticism”, who, as mentioned in the treatise, “recently” aroused “royal Constantinople”, and the activities of Alexander “Akimit” (“vigilant”) in Constantinople, as is known, date back to the period 426-427 101. 5. “That those who spend their lives in silence in deserts are superior to those who live in cities, even if the opposite seems to many of the ignorant” 102 This treatise consists of 27 chapters. It details the advantages of the anchorite life compared to the pious life of citizens. The first reason that elevates anchorite life above city life, in the opinion of St. Nile, is that life in the desert contains fewer temptations, and therefore it is safer than life among the bustle of the world. The second foundation of Rev. Neil sees the heights of eternal blessings. For good deeds (virtues), performed in secret with the sole purpose of pleasing God, bring eternal benefits to the doer as a reward. The entire treatise is written in a lively and sincere tone. Expressing his thoughts, Rev. Neal resorts to successful comparisons that give his argument vividness and persuasiveness. Particular attention is drawn to the amazing comparison of the anchorite with a turtle dove, which releases its chicks to freedom, and the people living in the city with a dove, which, having fed its young, gives them to people for slaughter. The time when this treatise was written is unknown. F. Degenhart, based on the introduction, which in some places bears traces of an energetic and excited tone, concludes that this work by Rev. Neil wrote just before entering the monastery. “Perhaps,” writes F. Degenhart, “the reason for writing this treatise was the desire of the people around him to keep him from going into the desert and their arguments regarding the fact that one can lead a pious life in the city” 103. 6. “To Eulogius the Monk” 104 This is one of the best essays by Rev. Nila. In it, the author reveals rich personal spiritual experience and deep knowledge of monastic life. His lively and eloquent teachings on spiritual warfare are useful not only for monks, but also for laity. Rev. Nile, as can be seen from the 1st chapter, was encouraged to write this treatise by a certain monk Eulogius, whom he calls “O initiated into the secrets of virtues Eulogius.” The treatise consists of 34 chapters. In it Rev. Nile talks, first of all, about monastic life and the daily temptations associated with it, then about virtue in general, about long-suffering and the fact that one must strive both for external peace with others and for internal peace between the body, spirit and soul. In conclusion, there is a discussion about the difference between “rejoicing in the Lord” and “sorrow for God,” on the one hand, and sinful joys and sorrows, on the other. Besides this, Rev. Neil gives advice on how to endure the sorrows that come upon us and, revealing the deceit and pretense of demons in spiritual warfare, teaches the reader how to overcome passions and how to cultivate and kindle in oneself the main virtues: humility, selflessness (literally, “non-selfishness”), abstinence and hospitality. This treatise was undoubtedly written after a long stay in the desert, for, as Degenhart rightly notes, it shows that “the author has a deep knowledge of monastic life” 105. We find mention of the treatise “To Eulogius the Monk” in Nicephorus Callistus, who considers it one of the best works of St. Nila 106. 7. “Instruction for Monks” 107 This work is a teaching on spiritual life intended for monks. It consists of 33 short sayings. The most interesting is the explanation of the essence of the Christian feat in the fight against the main passions. Rev. here. Neil briefly but clearly shows by what means one must destroy sinful inclinations in oneself. With the help of strong comparisons, he points out the need for spiritual warfare in general, 108 and especially fasting, prayer, reading the word of God and singing psalms. He also talks about poverty, patience, humility, silence, etc. What Rev. Nilus is the author of this work, it is impossible to dispute, although Holstenius (Holstenius) attributes it to Evagrius Pontik. For, as Zoeckler (Zeckler) 109 and Degenhart 110 correctly note, the formula glaitaus prep. Nile, not the formula glatiaus of Evagrius. Letters from Rev. Nile are most fully represented in the edition of Leo Allatius 112, which was included in the edition of Minya 113; they are divided into 4 books. There are 1061 letters in total. The significance of this rich heritage of Rev. No one can question Neil, because, as the author of the article about St. Neale in “A Dictionary of Christian Biography,” “there is no richer source for illustrating the life of that time, that is, the end of the 4th century, than this correspondence, which Rev. Nile communicated with all levels of society, from the emperor to simple and unknown monks" 114. On the other hand, letters from Rev. Nile also testify to the enormous authority that he enjoyed in wide circles of his contemporary society. Therefore, at the VII Ecumenical Council, when deciding the issue of venerating icons, both disputing sides in their disputes sought support in the works of St. Neil, whom everyone appreciated. Two of his letters - to the eparch Olympiador 115 and the Silentiary Iliodor 116 - were read at the fourth meeting of this Council (October 1, 787) 117. But, nevertheless, it should be recognized that some letters in the abbreviated form in which they have come down to us could not have come from the pen of Rev. Nila. Some of these letters consist of only one sentence with an adjective (or participial phrase) or are short maxims (moral teachings) or extracts from other of his letters and writings. Other letters from Rev. Nile, due to its similarity with the works of some Church Fathers, and especially with the works of Saints John Chrysostom, Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus, gave rise to doubts about their authenticity. However, parallel passages found both in the letters of Rev. Neil, as well as in the works of other authors, do not yet give us the right to consider the letters themselves unreliable. After all, Rev. Neil, when it came to dogmatic and exegetical questions, was in the habit of citing passages from the writings of the holy fathers to support his opinion. This feature of his is clearly visible in letters to Deacon Xenodorus 118 and Presbyter Jeria 119, where Rev. Neil, answering the questions of Xenodorus and Jeria, relies on the Bishop of Constantinople, St. John Chrysostom and gives his opinion. These letters indicate that Rev. Neil sought to ensure that his instructions were based on the teachings of the Church and the Holy Fathers. Therefore, he often takes into account the works of the latter as the most reliable source of church teaching 120. Thus, parallel passages, quotations and borrowings from the works of other holy fathers that we encounter in letters cannot serve as a solid basis for rejecting their authenticity. According to the content of the letter, Rev. The Nila can be divided into dogmatic, exegetical and moral-ascetic. Letters directed against pagans and Jews are dogmatic, as well as against heretics in general, and in particular against the Gnostics, Manichaeans, Orientists, Novatians, Arians or Eunomians, Macedonians and Apollinarians. In addition, there are letters in which Rev. The Nile proves the existence of God, talks about His properties, teaches about Divine Providence, the trinity of Persons of the Divine, explains the incarnation of the Savior, and expounds the doctrine of the eternal virginity of the Mother of God. Rev. Neil also teaches in his letters that the origin of evil must be sought in free will. He also speaks about original sin, and partly concerns the teaching about the Church and its dissemination by the holy apostles. In addition, there are letters in which Rev. The Nile teaches about the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the dead and eternal bliss. We find a sufficient amount of correspondence in which Rev. Neil explains the Holy Scriptures. In some letters he interprets it allegorically, and in others he gives a literal, historical interpretation. Old Testament Rev. Neil usually explains allegorically. However, he himself, in a letter to Presbyter Maxim, draws attention to the fact that the allegorical interpretation of past events is caused by the needs of “spiritual teaching” and that thereby he in no way wants to diminish their literal meaning or “reject history.” In some exegetical letters we find etymological explanations of Old Testament personal names and place names. The last group of letters - moral and ascetic - marks the richest and most precious contribution to ancient Christian literature. These letters fully reflected the entire human life with all its virtues and vices. They also indicate how to combat sinful habits and achieve spiritual perfection. The letters of this group are very useful not only for monks, but for all Christians. First of all, in these letters, Rev. Neil teaches us faith in God and Christ the Savior. He often strengthens our hope in the mercy and goodness of God, and especially when we repent of our sins, or when we are tempted, or when we are oppressed by this or that sorrow. Trust in God in the letters of St. Nila is associated with fear of God and patience. Rev. Neil tirelessly calls the sinner to repentance, vividly depicting to him the power of repentance. In these letters, he talks about sins in general and why God allows them, and also describes different types and states of depravity. Rev. Neil often points out the main sins that must always be overcome in life. These are the essence: unbelief, blasphemy, pride, love of glory (vanity), gluttony (gluttony) and fornication, love of money and anger, sadness (dejection), fear and despair. Along with this, he offers effective means of combating them. As such means, he especially notes faith in Christ, self-denial, vigilance, humility, obedience, patience and fasting. The fight against sins and demons in the teachings of St. Nila is always associated with the hope of acquiring eternal bliss as a reward for a glorious victory over them, and this is a strengthening incentive in life. The letters also indicate how one should endure various temptations. Rev. Neil teaches that various kinds of sorrows in this life are sent by God for our salvation, and therefore we must endure them not only with patience and faith, but also with thanksgiving and spiritual joy. To overcome various obstacles in the spiritual life of St. Neil repeatedly in his letters advises to constantly remain in prayer, in the singing of psalms and in the careful reading of the Holy Scriptures. In addition, he often speaks of both love for God and love for neighbors and even enemies. In many places Rev. Neil extremely praises alms and virginity as the fruits of love for people and for God. Among the letters there are also those that are intended exclusively for monks. In them Rev. Nile instructs the monks, encourages them and corrects them, and sometimes reproaches them for wandering and inconstancy. IV. Sentences (moralizing words) or sayings Rev.'s maxims Nila are individual thoughts in which moral and ascetic truths are clearly and concisely expressed. Their number exceeds 200. 1. Collection containing 99 sayings 121 In the manuscripts, as reported by Suaresius (Suaresius) 122, there are 135 of these sayings. The last 36 sayings were omitted, since they were literal excerpts from other works of St. Nila. Thus, sayings 100–121 are taken from the treatise “De voluntaria pauperdate”, and 121–135 from the treatise “De monachorum praestantia”. F. Degenhart believes 123 that these moralizing words of Rev. Neil wrote at the end of his life, since they contain extracts from the treatise “On Non-Acquisitiveness,” and the latter, as we said above, could not have been written earlier than 427. 2. “Instructive chapters” 124 This work in Min's edition consists of 139 sayings, at the end of which 8 more moralizing words are added, taken from Suarecius's dissertation. About the “Instructive Chapters” by Rev. Nile we find evidence from the holy fathers. Yes, Rev. Maximus the Confessor (582–662) literally quotes one saying, namely the 28th 125, under the name of St. Nila. St. Photius in his “Library” also mentions this work by St. Nila 126. Nikephoros Callistus also speaks about him 127. Thus, there is no doubt that the “Instructive Chapters” were written by Rev. Nile. However, in modern times, in connection with these sayings, the difficult problem of their authorship has arisen, and especially the authorship of the gnomic alphabet, that is, the 24 sayings with which the “Instructive Chapters” begin in Min’s edition. In some manuscripts they are designated by the name of Evagrius Pontik. Therefore, modern scientists 128 are inclined to consider Evagrius Pontik to be the author of these sayings. Degenhart defends the authorship of Rev. Nile, since “the living form, different from the dry wisdom of Evagrius, is very reminiscent of the style of the treatise of St. Neil "On the Eight Evil Spirits" Bardenhewer believes that this question can only be resolved after a thorough study of the manuscripts and maxims of Evagrius. V. Lost and Inauthentic Works A. Lost works of Rev. Nila 1. "About sadness." In his letter to Polychronius, the Venerable himself. Neil says that he willingly fulfills his request and sends him the book “On Sorrow” 129, written for himself and for his pious friends. This place testifies to the subsequently lost work of St. Nila. The letter of Polychronius Haidacher (Haidacher) is included among the inauthentic letters, since it contains passages literally borrowed from the preface to the treatise of St. John Chrysostom “On Sorrow”, intended for the monk Demetrius. But, as we noted earlier, Rev. Neil often resorted to literal borrowings from the works of the saint. Therefore, the passages we encounter that are common to him do not provide grounds for denying the authenticity of the letter to Polychronius. Perhaps Polychronius, as Degenhart rightly notes, was just as deep an admirer of St. John Chrysostom, like Xenodorus, to whom the Rev. Neil answered questions with the words of St. John Chrysostom. Rev. Neil did this with quotes from St. John Chrysostom in the same way as fans of any writer do today. He wrote his covering letter in the words of a teacher who was equally revered by both the writer of the letter and the addressee 130 . 2. The treatise “Against the Hellenes”, which Nicephorus Callistus testifies to, in the opinion of this latter, should be placed in first place 131. An interesting suggestion by K. Heussi is that perhaps Nicephorus Callistus is talking only about some collection of letters from St. Nile, which are polemical in nature 132. 3. Of course, Peru Rev. Nile owns the subsequently lost Commentary on the Song of Songs. Procopius of Gaza (VI century) and Michael Psellus (XI century) clearly testify to this. Procopius of Gaza in his work “Commentary to the Song of Songs” 133 61 times quotes the name of St. Nila. Both the sheer number of passages indicated and their volume force us to conclude that Procopius took this material from the lost “Commentary on the Song of Songs,” written by St. Neil. As proof that the author of the mentioned commentary is Rev. Nile of Sinai, and not some other Nile, is served by the fact that the Venerable himself. Neilus, in his letters, interprets some verses from the Song of Songs in exactly the same way as those quoted from Procopius. We find the second proof of this in Michael Psellus. He owns the compilation work “Herminia” 134, in many places of which he provides an interpretation of individual passages of the Song of Songs. This joint presentation of the interpretations of the three holy fathers gives rise to the assumption, as Bardenheever incidentally notes, that “all three of the mentioned holy fathers in the interpretation of the Song of Songs completely, or at least for the most part, follow the same path” 135. 4. St. Photius in his “Library” 136 cites five fragments from the sermons of St. Neil: two large excerpts from his sermon on Easter and three shorter ones from his sermon on the Ascension. All these passages are found in Min's 79th volume, dedicated to St. Neil is 137. 5. At Rev. Anastasia Sinaita (second half of the 7th century) in his “Questions” 138 there is a fragment taken from the work of St. Nile, written by "Eucarpius the monk". This Eucarpius is undoubtedly identical with Eucarpius, whom St. Nilus mentions in a letter intended for Pionius, the son of Eucarpius. In it Rev. Nile calls Eucarpius “blessed” and “his sincere friend” 139, B. Inauthentic writings by the teacher. Nila 1. "Tractatus moralis et multifarius" 140. This is nothing less than a sermon, of which Degenhart says that it “is so different in its language and style from the other works of Rev. Neil, that it is impossible to even think about his authorship" 141. 2. The Reference Book of the Stoic Epictetus 142 is a paraphrase of a pagan work. In it, some pagan passages were replaced by Christian thoughts - and this is how the book of practical wisdom turned out. Despite the fact that in many manuscripts this paraphrase is attributed to Rev. Nilu, a number of scientists (Bardenhewer, Degenhart, Fessler, etc.) consider it inauthentic. We find detailed arguments for this opinion in Degenhart. The processing of the pagan work was done, first of all, very crudely and cannot relate to any period of the theological activity of St. Nila. “If,” Degenhart claims, “Neil had ever written such a work in his early youth, he would certainly have burned it later.” 143 Moreover, the changes and corrections made are fundamentally different from Neil's style and foreign to his language. In the same way, there are places in the content that cannot belong to the pen of the Rev. Nila. While Epictetus and paraphrase talk about the benefits of the theater, Rev. Neil, in his letters, decisively proves its harm to the soul and prefers staying in a church or with pious monks to the theater. Such a diametrically opposed examination of the same subject cannot in any way be attributed to Rev. Neil, who is undoubtedly constant in his views. Probably the author of this paraphrase was a certain admirer of Epictetus; being among the monks, he wanted to draw their attention to his work. For this purpose, he used in his falsification the deeply revered and authoritative name of St. Nila. Degenhart suggested that the author of this paraphrase could be the monk Komasius, who had previously been an orator to whom Venerable. Neil in his letters addresses himself most decisively, condemning his adherence to the ideas of pagan writers 144. 3. "De vitiis quae opposita sunt virtutibus." This is a short essay. It consists of four chapters. In Ming it is found as an addition to the treatise “To the monk Eulogius” 145. Although many patrollers 146 consider this work to be original, it must still be admitted that Degenhart's argument 147 regarding its inauthenticity is very convincing. “This treatise,” writes Degenhart, “has the goal of briefly showing the vices that are contrary to virtues. A work of this kind should be an extract from a work that examines the subject in more detail.” 5. "De octo vitiosis cogitationibus" 148. Among the arguments given against the ownership of this work by Rev. Neil, special attention is deserved by the fact that the author, contrary to the custom of the Rev. Nila does not say a word about what exactly prompted him to turn to the same topic for the third time. In addition, there are quotations with the name of their author, which also indicates a way of writing that differs from the way the Rev. wrote. Nile. Finally, in this work the honorific name St. appears. Gregory of Nazianzus "The Theologian", which was learned to him only at the Council of Chalcedon in 451, that is, after the repose of St. Nila. 6. Poems of praise about asceticism. In some manuscripts this work is attributed to Ven. Nile, and in others it is cited as the work of John the Geometer, under whose name it is also found in Min 149. The language and style of these poems are radically different from the language of St. Nila. In this relatively small work, as Degenhart claims 150, we come across many mythological passages that are not found not only in the major treatises of St. Neil, but also in his letters. Such a way of writing, associated with vain scholarship, is completely alien to St. Neil, and therefore his authorship is rejected. Chapter 3. Moral and ascetic teaching of St. Nile of Sinai From the above review of the written works of Rev. Neal, it is obvious that his theoretical views did not find expression in a complete system. Among the works of Rev. Neil there is not a single work in which the essence of his worldview would be systematically and completely reflected. For Rev. Neil, as a true ascetic ascetic, the main ones are not problems of abstract theological knowledge and not philosophical reasoning, but practical issues related to spiritual improvement and human salvation. Therefore, philosophical and dogmatic issues are only partially reflected in his works. Rev. Nile, like other famous ascetics (St. Anthony the Great, Macarius of Egypt, Isaiah of Nitria, John Cassian, Evagrius Pontik, etc.), turns his attention not to the abstract revelation of God’s existence, but to the conditions for a person’s approach to God and the assimilation of God’s mercy, to the indication of those Divine properties that, penetrating into a person’s consciousness, have an educational effect on his soul - and calls for feat and repentance as necessary conditions for accepting God's grace. Rev. Neil, as an experienced teacher of ascetic life, is far from the false and arrogant conviction of the limitlessness of human knowledge, and therefore he does not strive for an abstract logical explanation of dogmatic concepts. If dogmatic-theoretical discussions are found in his treatises and numerous letters, they are usually brief and based solely on the Holy Scriptures, without delving into the essence of the subject. Such places partly serve only as a reflection of the fierce and fiery struggle that in the 4th and early 5th centuries the Church had to wage with various heretical sects encroaching on the foundations of Christian doctrine. The power of the Rev. Nile, which lies in the moral aspect, and the main direction in which his thought moves lie in the area of ​​asceticism, that is, practical moral activity. If he sometimes dwells on dogmatic explanations, he almost always does so only in those cases when the dogmas directly come into contact with the moral and practical area, namely: when reflecting on the matter of salvation and redemption of man and on the future righteous judgment. But the word of Rev. Nila manifests itself in its strength, freedom and effectiveness only when it concerns monastic life, moral holiness, the feat of virtue, the severity and variety of sins and temptations. When he speaks about these subjects, then we see him in a sphere that is pleasing to him and we notice that he expresses exactly what is deeply ingrained in his heart and what he has felt, experienced and verified through personal experience with all his might. We will try to select the rich material that Rev. Neil invites us to the moral-ascetic area, and present it in the following system. A. The doctrine of man and the purpose of his earthly life. The doctrine of free will. About God's Providence and grace. Attitude to wealth, fame, earthly wisdom and pleasures. B. Obstacles on the way to achieving the final goal. The doctrine of sin. Demonology. B. Means to achieve the goal. The doctrine of virtue. Monasticism. A. The doctrine of man and the purpose of his earthly life In one of his letters, Rev. Neil calls man “the most beautiful creation of a man-loving God” 151. What exactly is the advantage of man over other earthly creatures and what elevates him above all nature created by God? To this question the Rev. himself. Neil responds in a second letter addressed to Presbyter Oliverius. He, in particular, writes: “Although the sun is in the sky and shines with its bright rays, it was nevertheless created to serve people, created by command and by law, and not by God’s hands. And only man - this amazing living being - was created by the hands of God, adorned with immaterial (Divine) fingers, and into him (God) breathed a rational soul" 152. Consequently, according to the teachings of Rev. Nila, man's advantage over other creatures lies primarily in the very act of his creation. While other material and living nature was created only by the commandment (commandment) of the Creator and according to His law, God Himself takes a special and direct part in the creation of man, decorating him with His immaterial (literally, “non-corporeal”) fingers. On the other hand, the composition of human nature itself strongly distinguishes it from the rest of the material world. By his body, man belongs to the visible world, while with the invisible, spiritual world he is connected by a “living and rational soul” 153, which is the breath of God and as such contains a reflection of Divine perfection. The human soul, bearing within itself the image of the Creator, brings a person closer to incorporeal beings and elevates him to the level at which he is “made less than an angel” (Ps. 8:6). Man, according to the teachings of Rev. Nile, occupies an exceptional position: he is the bearer of two worlds, he is a “microcosm” 154, and as the crown of all creation, he is destined for the most complete and perfect life, closest to the Divine life. God endowed man as the bearer of the “image and likeness of God” with “exclusive honor” and entrusted to him His royal rights over visible nature, where man “has power over all animals.” The superiority of man over earthly creations, according to Rev. Nilu, is closely connected with the essence of his nature, similar to the Divine nature. While other sensory beings, being produced from the earth, strive only for the earth, an exception is made for man. He, being the owner of the soul, “this wonderful creation of God,” is intended to “direct his spiritual gaze to His Creator” as the Source of his being and life and in Him to seek for himself “unceasing joy and bliss.” In order to have the ability to rise and achieve “godlike” perfection, the human soul is endowed with special powers or qualities, which are reason and free will. Man, as a rational being, knows not only what he directly perceives with his senses, but with his thoughts he can ascend and see what is above and beyond the senses, and even what surpasses all his powers. At the same time, the human mind treats bodily feelings and impressions received through them not as a slave, but as a true master. “When the mind,” says Rev. Nile, - guards the feeling, not a single member works against sin.” Therefore, the human mind in relation to the feelings is a “ruler”, it is a “lord”, and thanks to its ability to rise to the knowledge of God, it can be called the “throne of God”. The second, no less important feature of the human soul, on which moral life and human activity are based, is free will, that is, the ability of the soul in its actions, using complete freedom, to choose the path to what is good and holy. Submitting to the will of God, she succeeds in virtue and ascends to likeness to God (to God-likeness). However, a person can choose another path - the path of anger and sin, the path of resistance to the will of God. This inherent ability of the human soul to choose between good and evil, as well as its free inclination in one direction or the other, independent of external motives, found its expression in the teaching of St. Nila. “Soul,” testifies Rev. Neil, - is distinguished by free will, because he can have the same inclination to both good and evil" 156. Elsewhere, the thought of Rev. Nile about free will is expressed even more clearly: “It is in our will,” he writes, “that it is whether we put on the bright wedding garment or whether we take off and change our clothes, sometimes for the better, and sometimes for the worse, and choose first one, then the other, because man was created free” 157 . “God could stop those who do evil even against their will,” says Rev. Nile, - however, He does not stop them by force, so that human freedom is not limited. Consequently, according to his own desire and of his own free will, a person is either rewarded or punished” 158. Thus, free will makes a person morally responsible for his actions before God. In addition, in his teaching, Rev. Neil clearly emphasizes the idea that evil is nothing more than a deviation from God's will, and that the reason for this lies in free will, and not in nature, for otherwise God Himself would be the creator of evil. “It’s shameless to say,” says Rev. Neil - that evil stems from nature; It is not in nature, but in free will" 159. In another letter, explaining the nature of sin, Rev. Neil, in particular, writes: “Do not think that sin is some kind of living, intelligent being... Sin usually begins and loses its meaning in human freedom” 160. Both the fall of our ancestors and the consequences associated with it - the deprivation of pristine righteousness and damage to human nature - were the result of the first people’s free deviation from the Divine will. Man, while in paradise, was in close communication with God, Who was for him the Source of moral purity, spiritual perfection, “enduring joy” and bliss. Thus, the grace of the Creator, reviving the first man, filled his entire pure and dispassionate nature, making him the true ruler of the whole earth. “Hearing God’s pleasant words and watering his soul with ineffable conversation,” the first man “ate the food prepared for him by nature itself.” And the Fall, as St. Petersburg understands it. Nile, removed man from his previous direct communication with God, perverted his pure and perfect nature and deprived him of the moral perfection that he had hitherto possessed. In human nature after the Fall, evil appeared, known under the name of passions (opposite to the state that in his nature was called dispassion) 161. The disobedience of the first man was ultimately the reason that “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin” (Rom. 5:12). With the advent of death, the harmony that previously existed between body and soul was thus disrupted. “The soul, being immortal, but burdened with a mortal earthly body, now seeks through death to free itself from the mortal, in order to then again accept its incorruptible body and joyfully abide with the Lord.” As a consequence of the Fall, man's royal power over nature was shaken. To purchase food for himself, a person was forced to “pick up a shovel, a sickle and a plow and plow the land that, shortly before, itself produced everything a person needed.” Obeying the punishment spoken by God: “by the sweat of your face you will eat bread” (Gen. 3:19), man began to “sow, water, reap, carry sheaves, thresh, winnow, grind, mix flour with water, bake with fire... and thereby receive bread with sorrow.” And living nature, which once obeyed and served man as its master, has emerged from its former subordinate position. Moreover, man himself “began to fear the rage of beasts, the poison of reptiles, the attacks of strong animals... For disobedience to God, he lost everything that he possessed thanks to obedience” 162. Although the consequences caused by the Fall were very serious, for they disrupted the structure of the entire earth, and made man himself incapable of direct communication with God, yet the Lord, “who created everything according to His goodness and takes care of everything,” did not want to leave man to himself; He did not allow death and the power of the devil to reign in the human race instead of true life. Speaking about God's Providence, Rev. Neil does not seek to comprehensively embrace and explain this Divine action, for he believes that the human mind is not able to fully comprehend God's ways. “Who is able to penetrate,” asks the reverend. Neil - to the courts of God? Who can understand the truth of God's economy? Any human mind is lost when entering into a deeper investigation of this subject." However, about the object of God's Providence, about man and the possibility of his correction, St. Neil speaks more extensively and clearly. In his opinion, “The Lord can correct humanity without torment, for if God wants to transform a bad thing into a better one, then everything will obey His command.” “If the Lord,” says Rev. Nile, “from non-existence gave man existence (life), then all the more can He correct man, already created, corrupted in sin and passing into a state unnatural for him” 163. “To God,” writes Rev. Nile in another place - it is possible to transform the hardened and petrified human hearts into a fruitful and fertile (spiritual) land” 164. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, the Lord, in His care for man, most of all shows mercy, pure and perfect love. “God,” says Rev. Neil - has no need for anything, but out of His mercy and for our good reveals His care, for which nothing can be repaid. He has mercy on everyone and “His sun shines on the evil and on the good, and gives rain on the righteous and on the unjust” (Matthew 5:45).” “Therefore, after the Fall,” writes Rev. Neil, “God did not leave the disobedient transgressor of His commandments, that is, man, without His care and did not deprive him of His help, but again prescribes the law for a different way of life, corresponding to his (man’s) sinful state.” He gradually revealed himself to the darkened human soul and, out of His infinite mercy and “compassionate” love for man, taught him how to please God in order to be saved, that is, in order to get rid of sin and thereby return himself to his pure, pristine state. And when our moral illness intensified, when sin took a dominant position in man, God sent His chosen ones to people, preachers of truth and teachers of virtue... Through Moses, the greatest among the prophets, He revealed His law to people, “the essence of which was the cutting and destruction of sin.” Mosaic Law, according to the teachings of St. Nile, had a temporary and transitory meaning, because “it was taught for a while and in accordance with the state of those who are young in mind.” He had to educate people whose moral nature was damaged, and prepare them to meet the promised Savior of the world, “Who with His perfect and high rules of morality replaced this law.” Although the Old Testament law, with its strict requirements and formidable punishments, made people “slaves who served the law under fear and whips,” nevertheless, it also had a crude moral meaning. Instilling in people reverent fear and awe of the greatness and power of God, he produced in the human soul, on the one hand, an awareness of the justification of legal demands, and on the other, a conviction of one’s own sinful guilt and spiritual weakness for moral self-improvement. Thus, the moral purpose of the Old Testament law comes down to the fact that, under the severity of this law, hardened human hearts were softened, that their proud arrogance was broken, and that the thought of a humble person rushed to God, from whom man should expect supernatural help. Rev. Neil emphasizes this educational significance of the law and, repeating the words of the holy Apostle Paul, calls it “the law-educator (educator)”, “moral educator” and “educator-steward” (Gal. 3:24). When the Mosaic Law fulfilled its task, in its place, as the Rev. teaches. Neil, a new and most perfect work of God’s Providence has come - the work of the incarnation of the Son of God, a work in which the secret of boundless mercy and the highest Divine love for the human race is reflected. With the coming to earth of the Son of God, the path of salvation was opened for people and they were given grace-filled means for eternal life. For “as death grew strong in Adam, so it weakened and became weak in the death of Christ” 165. According to the teachings of Rev. Neil, from the union of God the Word with human nature, all grace-filled and saving consequences flow. The Divine Word (Lovgo"), having assumed human flesh, killed in man the principle (principle) of sin that possessed his being, and made it possible for him to combine with God, his renewal (recreation) and ascent to God. Between the individual human personality and the God-man Christ “the power of incarnation” 166 such a close connection has been established that actually exists between every person and the progenitor Adam. The incarnate Son of God thus becomes the Bearer of all humanity. The saving significance of the incarnation lies precisely in the fact that a person is not left on his own, with his personal weakness, but his weakness and personal imperfection are covered by the perfection of God, who loves people and took their weakness upon Himself. For our sake, He became everything that makes us ourselves, except sin. Having really (ontologically) united His life with ours, He no longer separates Himself from us. For our sake He becomes one with us, sinners and disobedient to God; For our sake, He Himself becomes, as it were, disobedient to God, however, our disobedience is transformed in Him into perfect obedience to God’s will. Thus, in the person of Jesus Christ we have the New Adam, who re-established the union of God with men. This thought about Jesus Christ as an ideal Man, as a new Adam and as the Bearer of all humanity, who reconciled man with God, Rev. Neil deliberately emphasizes in a letter to Bishop Silvanus 167. In this letter, interpreting Psalm 21, in which Christ says: “O God, my God, consider me, what have you forsaken me?” - Rev. Neil writes: “Christ was not abandoned by the Father and the Divine Son, since otherwise it would have turned out, as the Arians and Eunomians falsely imagine, that Christ was afraid of suffering... But who, asks the Venerable. Nile, forced the Savior to become incarnate and ascend to the cross?.. Not against his will, but voluntarily and with great joy He went to the cross.” And further, in the same sense, the reverend himself. Neil answers the question posed: “In our place, Christ says: God, my God, attend to me. Christ depicts our face in Himself" 168. “Before that we were abandoned, but now we are accepted and saved by the sufferings of the impassive Christ... By pronouncing the words of the psalm, He, as it were, assimilates to Himself our foolishness and sinfulness... Besides this, His cry and tears, and the fact that He prayed and was heard, as well as His submission (see: Heb. 5:7) - He wonderfully collects all this in our place and places it in Himself. For as the Word He was neither obedient nor disobedient. This is characteristic only of subordinates and those occupying second place, and not of Him... Meanwhile, in the form of a slave, of His own free will, He descends upon fellow servants and slaves and takes upon Himself an alien form (guise). He carries within Him all of me and everything inherent in me, so that - like fire melts wax or like the sun dispels the vapor of the earth - He destroys the worst in me in Himself, and through combination with Him He entrusts to me what is peculiar to Him." 169 So, according to the teachings of Rev. Neil, man's relationship to Christ is similar to man's relationship to Adam. Thanks to the incarnation of God the Word, man is truly united with the human nature of Christ, ascended to God. Together with this union, man also grows into the inseparably united Divine nature of the God-Man, “Who, even after receiving the image, or flesh, from the Holy Virgin did not lose His Divinity and did not lose it” 170. A person, becoming like Christ, can assimilate and embody in his personal life the path, quality and content of the life of Christ the Savior, “Who is pasture for all the faithful, both food and clothing.” This likeness to Christ serves as the means by which a person becomes an actual participant in Christ's merits. Spiritual communication with Him makes a person able to be grafted into Divine eternal life and perceive eternal bliss. This determines all human life, as well as its purpose, the highest ideal and its true essence. Rev. Neil teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ first made the way for our lives. “He showed the image of a pure life, ever ascending with his soul above carnal passions” 171. Elsewhere, the idea is even more clearly expressed that the purpose of human life lies in the pursuit of God, in communication and living union with the Creator, Who is the Source of indescribable beauty and great joy. “If you marvel at the beauty of present things, then marvel even more at what is to come; If creations are beautiful, then the Lord who created them is even more and much more beautiful. If this is what is temporary, then what is eternal?” 172 To this eternal and living union with God, St. Neil constantly calls on people, because he believes that the purpose of earthly life is for “earthly man to change into heavenly man.” “Leave the earthly,” he lovingly teaches one of his many disciples, “and grab hold of the heavenly... Direct your love along a different path. Move your thoughts from this vain life into another world. Reject earthly things and seek heavenly things; leave the corruptible and you will find the imperishable; run in thought from the temporal, and you will meet the eternal... Try about this with all diligence, and you will find good with God.” “A Christian should live like this,” writes Rev. Neil, paraphrasing the words of the Apostle Paul (Heb. 11:13–16), - to always feel like a stranger here on earth. He should have his refuge where our permanent abode is, and he should not consider anything that exists here important, considering great only that which relates to his future fate.” Calling the reader to moral success, to aspiration towards God and to become like Christ, Rev. Nile encourages us with the hope of eternal bliss, closely connected with communion with God. “Nothing makes us so good-natured and joyful,” he writes, “as the teaching of true wisdom and... the thirst for future, that is, eternal, blessings” 173. “Bliss is in heaven,” writes Rev. Nile to the monk Limenius - it is impossible to express it in words, to comprehend it with the mind, or to grasp it with a thought” 174. To achieve this, a complex internal process of growth and prosperity is necessary; one has to go through the path of ascension “from strength to strength” (2 Cor. 3:18) (in the synod. text: “from glory to glory”, cf.: Ps. 83:8 - Translator’s note), until a person reaches maturity, does not come “to a perfect man, to the measure of the full stature of Christ” (Eph. 4:13). He needs this in order to be worthy of “the honor of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 3:14). However, speaking about the need for constant moral improvement on earth, Rev. Neil examines the natural moral powers of New Testament man and comes to the conclusion that man is weak and that on his own, without the help of grace, he cannot achieve salvation. A person’s own weakness fills him with the thought that he should not look for support for spiritual growth in himself and in his weak natural powers, but that all his gaze must be directed to the Creator as the Source of Divine grace, for “no one can come to Me,” says the Savior Christ, “unless it is given to him from My Father” (John 6:65) 175. Although Rev. Nile, like other ancient Eastern writers, the question of God's grace is not the subject of special study, 176 however, from individual treatises, and especially from his numerous letters, we can extract a number of places in which the doctrine of help from above is expressed quite clearly. Divine grace as a force that “revitalizes, fills (lit. “permeates.” - Approx. Per.) and saturates souls" is the main factor in the rebirth and salvation of man. Grace, flowing from the property of God's merciful love, manifested itself in the Old Testament and, as an internal force, encouraged people to direct their gaze to God, seeking help from Him. This grace of Rev. Neil calls “legal,” in contrast to the New Testament, “evangelical” grace, which is poured out on people in abundance thanks to the redemptive feat of Christ the Savior. “In ancient times,” says Rev. Neil - when we became like slaves, we had legal grace. Now the Lord gives us no longer as slaves, but as beloved children, the grace of the Gospel, the greatest and most powerful first, by virtue of which we ascend to perfection, and are enriched with the highest wisdom, and as sons we boldly approach God, partaking of His Divine light.” Therefore, Divine grace as a force that revives and elevates a person’s spiritual life to perfection is the main mover in the matter of salvation and sanctification of a person. In addition, in the teaching of Rev. Nile also noted a characteristic feature of God's grace, which consists in the fact that grace acts not externally, but in the hidden depths of the human soul and in unity with the spiritual nature of man, producing internal renewal in man and making him capable of accepting Christ into himself. “A great feat is needed,” writes Rev. Nile, - so that a person can seek and receive an undisturbed state of mind in which the Sovereign Lord dwells and about which the Apostle says: “Do you not know that Jesus Christ lives in you?” (in the synodal text: by faith “Christ will dwell in your hearts” (Eph. 3:17), and also: “Do you not know that... the Spirit of God dwells in you?” (1 Cor. 3:16), or: “Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?” (1 Cor. 6:15). - Approx. transl.). For there, in some inexpressible and incomprehensible world, there really exists some other heaven, illuminated by God’s very grace” 177. Recognizing the necessity of God's grace for moral success and salvation of man, Rev. Neil, as usual, does not go into an abstract dogmatic study of the question of salvation. In his letter to a certain Asklipiades, he asks: “If you do not demand an explanation from the doctor who comes to you how he heals, but only ask him to heal you, why then do you try God’s way of salvation?” And he further teaches: “When approaching the Lord in repentance, do not be curious to find out the way to cleanse your sins, but only believe, be amazed, worship and praise. And if you are really inquisitive, then show me an image of Divine skill, as from a homogeneous substance, I mean dust, a rational being was created - a man, made up of many parts. If you cannot answer how God created you, then do not seek an explanation of how the soul is healed by Divine power and God’s love for mankind... For where God acts, it is not appropriate to examine the image of salvation” 178. In the works of Rev. Nile comes across thoughts that deeply illuminate the moral problem associated with the doctrine of grace, namely: the problem of the relationship between two principles - Divine and human - in the matter of salvation, or the problem of the relationship of sanctifying grace to free will. From the numerous disjointed passages in his letters and treatises, we rightly conclude that Rev. Neil recognizes both Divine grace and human freedom as equally necessary factors in the matter of salvation, although he attaches paramount importance to grace. So, for example, in a letter to Orivasius, Rev. Neil says: “Although we have been awarded free will, without assistance from above we cannot accomplish a single glorious deed on the path of our present life... Therefore, let us not attribute victory to ourselves in our deeds. It depends on us whether we will choose the best and whether we will take care of it, and God’s is to fulfill our good intentions” 179. In another letter from Rev. Neil explains: “From what the saint (David) said: “Who will give me a wing like a dove” (Ps. 55:7), we learn that the gift of spiritual wings belongs to God, so that we can freely avoid destructive passions... But the Lord does not give Divine spiritual grace to everyone, but only to those who, in labor, in self-exhaustion, and sweat, pray to Him day and night” 180 . Rev. Neil teaches that “one must always pray, because the Lord does not give His grace to anyone, but to those who pray unceasingly, regardless of fatigue and without sparing strength and sweat” 181 . Thus, from these quotes the thought of the Rev. is quite clearly visible. Neil about the unconditional necessity in the matter of salvation of both Divine grace and personal participation on the part of man himself. For the rebirth of man into a new creature is possible only with the harmonious interaction of both factors. And yet, in a number of scientific and theological works, researchers of Pelagianism, based on individual letters of St. Nile are inclined to see diametrically opposed elements in his teaching: either imprints of Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism, or echoes of the teachings of the blessed. Augustine (Augustinianism) 182. In our opinion, there are no deep grounds for such conclusions, since the letters of Rev. Nila, directed to certain individuals, have mainly a moral and practical purpose. Answering private questions and adapting to the spiritual needs of a particular addressee, Rev. Neil in some letters especially emphasizes the Divine factor in the matter of salvation, and in others - the human factor, that is, free will, without whose participation the beginning and development of a new, grace-filled life is impossible. As evidence of the correctness of our conclusions, we present a short letter from Rev. Nile to the decemvir Leonidas, selected by us from a large number of letters of similar content. This letter clearly expresses his view of the relationship between grace and free will. Rev. Neil says: ““No one can come to Me,” said our Savior Christ, “unless it is given to him from above” (in the synodal text: “unless it is given to him from My Father” (John 6:65) – Transl.); because faith in Christ is not a small, insignificant matter. For this (that is, for entering into faith, for access to faith) assistance from above is necessary, for truly believing is the property of a courageous soul; but in order for such a soul to believe, it needs tenderness, which only God can give. However, assistance from above requires our consent, free appropriation." Thus, Rev. Neil sees in the matter of salvation a close and inextricable relationship between Divine and human powers, or, what is the same, a synergy of Divine grace and human freedom. The influence of help from above does not suppress human strength and individual abilities; on the contrary, this beneficial influence itself is conditioned by human submission to the Divine power. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, in the matter of salvation, a person is not only an object of influence of Divine grace, but also a subject who must himself freely take part in his salvation, acquiring the Kingdom of Heaven by honest behavior, good deeds and firm faith, “becoming like God in everything.” Although “this likening is possible as a commandment of the One who guides the strength of everyone,” however, a person “bound in flesh to the earth” must overcome in himself this attachment to the earth and to earthly pleasures, which are obstacles to achieving the “honor of the highest calling.” Special attention to Rev. Neil devotes attention to renunciation of attachment to earthly, perishable goods, such as: wealth, fame, earthly wisdom and bodily (carnal) pleasures. Attitude of Rev. Nile's desire for material wealth logically stems from his general view of earthly life as a time of preparation for eternal life. In comparison with this latter, earthly life with all its joys and sorrows is just a “sleepy dream”, one moment lost in the infinity of the other life. Earthly life is “a time of condescension and forgiveness... a time of struggle and achievement,” and the other life is “a time of unwashed (incorruptible) righteous judgment,” “a time of retribution for good and bad deeds,” “a time of reward for labor.” He who wins the victory here on earth will receive a crown there, in eternity, where the feat is already over and where the correction of sins has ceased. From this view of earthly life as a time of spiritual perfection stems the attitude of St. Nila to wealth. Material goods, like all earthly relationships, should in human hands be only a simple instrument or means that helps us in the matter of personal spiritual growth. However, if our heart clings to wealth, then this latter gradually acquires power over us, and ideal spiritual benefits are then completely forgotten. In this case, love for earthly goods becomes in its essence the same as idolatry with a preference for mammon to God (see: Matt. 6:24). “I consider it extremely unreasonable,” writes Rev. Nile, “to abandon concern for the heavenly and eternal and to exhaust oneself on earth with care for the mortal, inventing thousands of ways to acquire temporary and unreasonable self-interest” 184. “Excessive concern for the physical,” he says in another place, “is, in fact, a delusion... because the end of (such) affairs is sterility, and all this work does not bring the slightest benefit for the future life. Every worker must benefit from his own labor in order to be rewarded with unceasing and immutable pleasure in heaven” 185. In the works of Rev. Nile we come across certain passages that seem to indicate the need for complete contempt for what is associated with life on earth. However, from other places it is clear that this contempt and neglect must be understood in the sense of religious and moral growth and the dominance of the spiritual personality of a Christian over the sensual, material. In other words, they must be understood in the sense of free, dominant possession of sensory life. We will give several quotes illustrating the view of Rev. Nile for material wealth. Thus, urging the monks to keep the vow of non-covetousness, he writes: “For some reason, we consider what we were taught to neglect to be great; Why are we attached to money and possessions, thereby wasting our minds on many useless worries? These worries turn us away from careful efforts about the most essential things; those who pursue life’s brilliance and joys are dragged into a deep abyss” 186. In another letter from Rev. Neil says: “It is said: “Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:21). For what are the actions and what are they directed towards, such is, undoubtedly, the way of thinking, such are the memories and such is the direction of the mind. Therefore, it is necessary to pay special attention to heavenly, inconspicuous wealth” 187. “Nothing else makes us so cheerful,” writes Rev. Nilus in a letter to the presbyter Eurycles - as a study of true philosophy (philosophy) that one must despise everything visible, strive for eternal goods and recognize nothing human as lasting: neither health, nor bodily strength, nor sensual pleasures, nor riches, nor possessions, nor honors, nor pleasures, nor anything else like that” 188. Based on the above quotes from Rev. Neil could be credited with a pessimistic thought about the need for the most decisive renunciation of everything connected with the earth. However, such a conclusion would be incorrect, since it would contradict the general good spirit of the teachings of this reverend father. Denial of material goods Rev. Neil and his contempt for everything earthly must be understood in the sense of condemning the abnormal human attitude towards these very material goods, that is, when these latter in themselves become the goal of life for a person, and the satisfaction of the highest aspirations of the human spirit is relegated to last place - and thereby the true meaning of our life is obscured. However, if wealth and material goods in general are means of expressing mercy and love for one’s neighbor, and, thus, they help a person climb the ladder of spiritual improvement, then such use of wealth by St. Neil wholeheartedly approves. So, for example, the tribune Sosipater, who showed many benefits to the monks, Ven. Neil shows his love and gratitude in the letter. “Guided by Divine knowledge,” he writes, “you, most noble one, make your efforts and do everything in accordance with this knowledge, following its rules and laws. Therefore, you distribute all your wealth preserved by God to the monks, for whom you show great love... By doing this, you will undoubtedly enter the Heavenly Kingdom, together with the monks, as their good companion and servant” 189. Considering material wealth only as a means of showing compassion and love for others, Rev. Neil often calls people to charity, because only in it does wealth acquire its true meaning and true meaning. Thus, based on the text of Holy Scripture: “He who does good to the poor lends to the Lord” (Proverbs 19:17), Rev. Neil argues that every person should give away his wealth, “in order to find it multiplied there (in heaven) ...” And further: “Everything that is not given to charity is truly vain and useless and does not accompany us after death ... But each of us must take everything to the place where we ourselves are moving, so that, being called, we go there willingly, knowing that we have collected there a huge treasury of incorruptible blessings” 190. A true Christian, according to the teachings of St. Nila, above all the vicissitudes inextricably linked with the possession of material goods. His moral self-discipline, coupled with joy in the Lord (see: Phil. 4:4), is not violated either by abundance, or by lack or deprivation of earthly goods. “A Christian differs from infidels in that way,” writes Rev. Nile to the famous official Stration, who has different opinions about things. A pagan, looking at the sky, peers into it and marvels, because he considers the sky to be God... He looks at the earth, at the water and bows to them... We don’t think like that. Turning our gaze to heaven, we marvel at the Creator of it, for we know that heaven is not God, but only the work of God... We look at creation, and it directs us to the Creator of all creatures. A pagan sees wealth and is amazed at it as if it were some kind of miracle, but I look down on the same wealth and mock it... The pagan sees trouble and grumbles, but I look at poverty - and jump and rejoice, for I recognize virtue as true wealth" 191. Condemning addiction to material wealth, Rev. Neil also warns the reader against the “net” of human glory, which deprives a righteous life of true Christian meaning and distorts the main moral goal of human improvement. “And know, most noble one,” writes Rev. Nil to Komit Irim, who was striving to occupy the high chair of the eparch, - know that this ridiculous and disgusting glory bestowed upon you by people is small, insignificant, fleeting and no better than spring flowers” ​​192 . In another letter from Rev. Neil, with tender love, edifies his student so that he does not indulge in earthly amusements. In particular, he warns him against the thirst for earthly honors. “See, son,” he writes, “that, seeking glory from people, you are not left without the glory of God.” “Do not sell the work of your hands for human glory, and do not give away future glory for worthless praise. The glory of man is in the dust; and its power fades away on earth, but the glory of virtue is eternal.” “Glory,” testifies the Rev. Neil, “I am blind, because in life those people are often honored who, neither by their deeds nor by their words, have brought any good to anyone.” Turning people away from “blind” glory, Rev. Neil, however, favorably views the desire of young men who devote themselves to monastic life to “earn the favor of wise people,” but this favor, which the venerable. Neil calls "the greatest of his praises" is only a means by which they could "learn to seek praise from God alone." In his condemnation of human claims to acquire wealth and human glory, St. The Nile strongly reproaches those who indulge in various earthly pleasures. “Woe to you, most unfortunate among people,” he writes to Prion, “that for a small and perishable pleasure you earn yourself an eternal flame” 193. Earthly joys, as the Rev. teaches. Nile, scatter human thought and, captivating a person’s feelings, mind and will, deprive the soul of the peace it needs for spiritual life. “It’s not fun for the soul,” he writes in another place, “to spend time in theaters and on horse riding. On the contrary, it is terrible damage. If you want to find true peace of mind, then hurry to church or to where the monks work. Here you will find much consolation and great relief for your suffering heart." 194 So that people are convinced of the benefits of being in church, on the one hand, and of the inferiority of earthly entertainment, on the other, Rev. Neil advises everyone to compare their inner experiences. “Test yourself,” he instructs, “how you feel leaving the church and the monastery, and how you feel after the theater or horse racing. Compare one and the other day, and you will clearly understand the benefit received from being in the church and monastery, and the loss from visiting the circus and theater. Expressing the view of Rev. Neil on human life and his teaching about the meaning of earthly relationships, we must dwell on one very noticeable feature of his worldview. We will talk about his negative attitude towards secular science and the wisdom of this age. This characteristic feature of Rev. Nila, like his entire train of thought, as well as his deep faith, are determined by his general ascetic attitude. With all his soul he was devoted to the lofty teaching of the Christian revelation and only in it, in its perception and assimilation, did he see that heavenly wisdom that alone is worthy of decorating human thought. Everywhere in his treatises and letters he testifies to himself as a person for whom the only wisdom is faith in Jesus Christ, the Holy Scriptures and the Church. In comparison with this, the most brilliant pagan learning seemed to him insignificant, not worthy of any attention from Christians. Therefore, Rev. Nile strictly condemns people, and in particular Christians, “who have climbed the high mountain of Christ’s philosophy (philosophy)” 195 and at the same time continue to kindle Hellenic wisdom in themselves and engage in poetry, composing “lean words.” Such hobbies of some Christians, Rev. Neil considered it an insult to the holiness and heights of revealed teaching; therefore, with his characteristic sincerity, he notes: “There is nothing more empty and more firmly tied to the earth than worldly wisdom, although, due to its characteristic shamelessness, it tries to soar in the heights” 196. The same feeling of indignation Rev. Nile also expresses in a letter to the scholastic Nikotichus, whom he reproaches for the fact that, having adopted Christianity, he did not abandon “Hellenic madness” and in his speeches always cites the opinions of Hellenic philosophers, and he blames his “priests for their simplicity, despite their virtuous and glorious life. But if we delve into the simple church words of our priests, continues the Rev. Nile, - and if we fulfill them, we can easily acquire an immaculate way of thinking. On the contrary, while practicing Hellenic sciences, people indulge in impurity and licentiousness” 197. Entirely devoted to holy Christian wisdom, Rev. Neil believes that, apart from it, there is no need to look for anything else, either for oneself or for others, and therefore not only does not advise engaging in secular science, but, on the contrary, energetically discourages all such activities, calling on Christians to concentrate their energies on living (active, practical) virtue. “What benefit will you have,” he writes to the philosopher Aphrodisius, “if you do not apply diligence to active (practical) virtue, but continue to engage in, as it seems to you, rational philosophy, boasting that you know the measure of the sun, the movement of the stars, the size of the sky; and, moreover, often even daring to “theology,” attempting to penetrate where the truth is inaccessible and where research is dangerous, and at the same time live worse than pigs wallowing in cronyism” 198. In another letter from Rev. Neil condemns those who engage in pagan rhetoric and learn to express themselves beautifully, forgetting about the ascetic side of Christian life. “He who does not care about moral matters and does not imitate Christ in this, but who thirsts for eloquence, is like a man who believes that he is eating stone bread; which, of course, he won’t get enough of, but will break his teeth” 199. One monk, a former rhetorician who, after taking monastic vows, continued to study Hellenic sophistry and collected Greek secular books, Rev. Neil writes: “Why do you, even after renouncing the world, so carefully collect this garbage, this dust, this dirty heap of Hellenic books, which are not only not useful, but also harmful” 200. That scientific direction in Christianity, which tried to find a connection and harmony between Greek philosophy and Christianity, was alien to the ascetic spirit of St. Nila 201. For feats of asceticism, the goal of which is moral ascent to likeness to Christ, Greek philosophy, in the opinion of St. Nila, can't give anything. It is not only not useful, but also flawed. It is flawed because it is saturated with a pagan spirit, the spirit of idolatry. “Aren’t you ashamed,” exclaims the Rev. Nile in a letter to Eleutherius, to call Diogenes, Pythagoras, and Plato temperate and wise, who reached such sterile wisdom that they even worshiped motionless and dead idols?! 202 However, the negative attitude of Rev. Nile's devotion to pagan wisdom does not give us the right to attribute to him narrow obscurantism. On the contrary, we are convinced that Rev. Neil, if he lived in our time, in which serious literature and any true science give us many spiritual elements and connections with Christianity, he would not, of course, dispute the value of scientific wealth. And that secular wisdom that Rev. condemned. Nile, was pagan wisdom. When looking at it, a pious Christian experienced a feeling of hostility and disgust for lies, which, however, disappear in the light of the Divinely revealed truth. The power and warmth of the Divine, enlightening grace of St. Neil received it in his ascetic deeds and felt it directly, based on personal experience. He spiritually dwelt in the living and unquenchable light of Divine truth and therefore did not feel the need for Hellenic philosophy, that is, in the weak flashes of its cold glow. B. Obstacles to achieving the final goal The religious and moral development of man and his assimilation to God is, on the one hand, a deep internal process, and on the other, a complex and constant struggle to overcome various obstacles. About these obstacles, Rev. Neil speaks in detail, revealing deep knowledge of the most intimate aspects of the human soul. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, the obstacles standing in the way of human deification and ascent to the heavenly kingdom can be subjective and objective. It depends on where their source is located, that is, whether it is based on a weak and damaged psychophysical human nature or comes from outside as the influence of an alien and hostile demonic force on a person 203. Obstacles of a subjective nature are human sins, and objective ones are the various machinations of the devil and his servants, who have once and for all chosen evil and are attempting in every way to interfere with the implementation of human salvation, producing moral anomalies in people. Rev. Neil and his doctrine of sin In the previous chapter devoted to the teaching of Rev. Neil about man, we have already become acquainted with his views on the essence, nature and character of sin. Expressing the views of Rev. Neil on the consequences of the fall of the first people, we also touched upon his teaching about “passions,” that is, about such a state of the soul in which its disorder and the wrong direction of its development find its strongest and most significant expression. Passion, being a disease of the will par excellence, also affects other mental forces and human abilities. Under the influence of one passion or another, which becomes, as it were, second human nature, not only the will, but also the intellectual and emotional forces are distorted and acquire a one-sided, false direction, and thereby the harmony of the entire psycho-physical life of a person is disturbed. That is why passions as mental illnesses attract special attention from Rev. Nila. In the review of his written works, we have already seen that special studies and a huge number of his letters are devoted to a detailed analysis of passions and the presentation of means and methods of combating them. All the immensity of the most varied passions that tear a person apart from within, Rev. Nile divides into two groups: physical passions and mental passions. “Bodily passions (gluttony and fornication),” says Rev. Nile, “originate from the natural needs of the body, and spiritual passions are born from the needs of the soul” 204. But this still does not mean that Rev. Neil understands bodily (carnal) passions only as exclusively physiological processes. On the contrary, there is reason to attribute Rev. Nilu shared the opinion of other ascetics that the connection between the physiological and mental elements in bodily passions is so close that it is difficult to draw a boundary between them. So, for example, in the treatise “To Eulogius the Monk,” analyzing the passion for fornication, Rev. Neil writes: “Know that two separate types of fornication are combined together: physical fornication and spiritual fornication.” Therefore, the center of gravity of bodily passions, as well as predominantly spiritual passions, is also located in the soul. Bodily passions and their specific characteristics, according to the teachings of Rev. Nile, cannot be explained only by the natural functions of the human body, since these latter are only a reason or starting point for them, and in the further process of their gradation, the most important significance belongs to the soul. As a result, bodily passions - not as physiological phenomena, but as mental falls - are subject to moral responsibility and depend on how the soul “combines with the seductive idea that has arisen in it.” In other words, to what extent passions belong to the sphere of mental life. Touching upon the process of development of passion or the way in which a conceived passion grows in the soul and is realized in practice, Rev. Neil says: “The chaotic aspirations of the senses usually produce passionate thought and shameful desire, desire-pleasure (lust), and then approval; after this comes the commission of sin in practice” 205. Thus, in the development and intensification of passion, all sides of the soul take part at the very beginning: reason, feeling and will, and the action of the mind plays the main role in this process. Darkness and weakness of the mind are a necessary condition, the starting point, or beginning, of passion, as well as its completion. Therefore, the very passion of Rev. Neil calls it an “evil thought,” giving the concept of “thought” a moral meaning and content borrowed from the “properties” corresponding to a given passion. Any passion, according to the teachings of Rev. Nila, through thought one becomes the master of man. Therefore, the reason for the slavery of this or that passion must be sought in the distance from “pure natural thoughts.” Realizing the need to fight “evil thoughts,” Rev. Neil reduces all the variety of different passionate thoughts to the eight most dangerous sinful passions, or passionate dispositions (moods) that prevent a person from walking along the path of moral improvement. His octal diagram, Rev. Nil, like Evagrius and St. Cassian begins with a presentation of the coarsest, lowest and at the same time specific vices, gradually moving on to characterize more subtle passions that are difficult to notice, as they require deeper self-examination. First place among vices, according to the scheme of Rev. Nile, is occupied by gluttony, which is “the beginning of passions,” because it “gives birth to voluptuousness and many other vices. From gluttony, like branches from a tree trunk, other passions grow. The love of money, anger, sadness and other defects are the fruit and offspring of gluttony.” But of all of them, “gluttony is most akin to voluptuous excitement. And nature itself, wanting to show their affinity, determined the place of the genitals below the abdomen, meaning by this proximity their close relationship. After all, if this passion weakens, then it weakens due to the exhaustion of the womb, which is located above its organs, and if it intensifies and begins to rage, then the power is given to it from above (that is, the womb). Gluttony is the feeder and breadwinner of not only this passion. Gluttony kills all good in a person, for as soon as it prevails and reaches the pinnacle of its power, then such good qualities as abstinence, virginity, courage, patience and other virtues immediately disappear and perish.” 206 According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, a characteristic mental feature of a person consumed by the passion of gluttony is the thirst for pleasures 207. “For gluttonous people,” he says, “mere variety in the taste and smell of prepared dishes is not enough, but a variety of colors is also needed, which should arouse their desire for food, so that even before the start of the feast their eyes will enjoy yellow, white and other colors. In order to again please the sense of smell, it is necessary to add the most pleasant spices to food, and in order for dishes to delight the larynx, substances with different properties must be mixed: sweet and spicy must be mixed with bitter and salty. In the same way, one should not deprive the sense of vision of joy. Therefore, for eating, various dishes are made, painted with picturesque colors. All this is done so that the stomach trusts the senses as skilled judges who know how to well evaluate everything they perceive.” In accordance with this, the passion of gluttony is not so much an external quality as an internal, spiritual property - a thirst for pleasures that comes first and easily takes possession of the entire soul of a person. In this case, a person consciously, by his own free will, alters the inevitable and natural need to nourish the body, making it the cause and source of self-pleasure. So that a person does not fall under the influence of this destructive passion, for “when the physical prevails, then everything falls into sleep: the mind, the soul, and the heart,” Rev. Neil, as a general rule, suggests “not to waste much time pleasing the flesh, but to soberly serve God with a pure mind, without burdening your thoughts with the nourishment of the flesh and the smell of food, and without indulging the voluptuousness of the belly.” As for bodily nutrition, Rev. Neil, although he taught that a person should eat food only once a day, and, moreover, plant food, however, the choice of one or another type of food, in his opinion, is subjective. For food, says the Rev. Neil, must correspond to the individual properties of each person. So, for example, in a letter to Bishop Philo, who asked for guidance regarding monastic food, Rev. Neil writes: “Just as the physique of certain people varies, and some are sick and others are healthy, in the same way it is necessary to determine the different foods, in accordance with the needs of each individual person. Healthy people should be given the simplest vegetables; for the weak, for their comfort, more refined vegetables grown in the garden, and for the extremely exhausted and weakened, meat should be given in moderate quantities to strengthen their strength” 208 . According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, food should be taken daily in moderation and “not to the point of satiety.” “It is not a sin,” he writes to the monk Chariton, “to take moderate food every day at a certain hour. But if you descend to bodily needs, then you must turn your thoughts to heaven as quickly as possible, without bringing up with it any of the earthly concerns” 209. In his bodily nutrition, a person must avoid satiety, because “a full stomach draws a person’s thoughts down to the ground, making him drowsy during prayer.” And just as a dirty mirror cannot reflect the features of the face in front of it, in the same way the mental power, dulled by satiety, does not accept God’s knowledge, for the mind cannot ascend to the mountain in order to perceive the fragrance of the contemplation of God.” Decrying gluttony as one of the most dangerous passions, Rev. Nile, in contrast to her, exposes abstinence as “the beginning of an active life, just as a flower marks the beginning of a fruit.” Christian, according to the teachings of Rev. Nila, must take care of a temperate lifestyle, which is characterized by the fact that there is a measure and limit in the use of certain objects, that is, there is a real need for the object, and not just a craving for pleasure. So, for example, in a letter to Bishop Epiphanius, Rev. Neil writes: “In order for our body to be calm and not inflamed by any passion arising from satiety, it is appropriate to take care of a temperate lifestyle. As a measure and rule when eating, it is necessary to introduce not pleasure, but a real need. And if pleasure is often mixed with need, because the impoverishment of the mind can make everything pleasant, then one should not reject needs because of the pleasure that may come... On the contrary, while extracting what is useful from everything, one must despise the very feeling of pleasure and, having used what is needed, glorify God.” Thus, with the normal satisfaction of bodily needs, the element of sensual pleasure manifests itself, according to the teachings of St. Nila, in its true expression and meaning as a secondary, secondary and dependent element, while with the passion of gluttony, pleasure and pleasure in themselves are the goal for which food is consumed. In the latter case, a complete perversion of the normal order is observed, since the feeling of pleasure acquires a dominant meaning that does not belong to it, and, distinguished by its extremely intense force, violates a person’s self-control (autocracy). As a means in the fight against gluttony, St. Neil recommends abstinence, moderation and constant control over your body. This is achieved by fasting and vigil. “Just as a horse tied with a bridle obeys the will of man, so the flesh, tamed by fasting and prayer, does not break out of the hands of the thoughts that tamed it and does not neigh under the yoke of passionate lusts.” In close connection with gluttony is another bodily passion - fornication, which occupies the presented Rev. Neil's scheme of sins is in second place. This passion, more than any other, defiles the purity necessary for Christian life and, as the Rev. teaches. Neil, is a direct consequence of gluttony. “Who has filled the belly and promised to be chaste,” says the Rev. Neil, is like a man who claims that he will stop the force of the flames that have engulfed the straw. Just as it is impossible to contain the raging flame spreading through the straw, in the same way the lust for carnal sins, inflamed by satiety, cannot be curbed.” Therefore, “one who indulges in voluptuousness is quickly overcome and bound by voluptuousness, for he who is defeated in the small must yield to the greater” 210. Warning the monks against this dangerous passion, Rev. Neil constantly advises them to avoid female company. “The view of a woman,” he says, “is like a poisoned arrow, piercing the soul and injecting poison into it.” In order to protect themselves from these arrows, monks should beware of frequent meetings and acquaintance with women. “If you want to be chaste,” teaches Rev. Neil, - avoid meeting women and don’t ever allow them to confide in you, because they respect you at first, and then shamelessly push you into everything. At the first meeting, they lower their gaze, speak meekly, shed tears with feeling, dress decently, sigh sadly, ask about cleanliness and listen attentively. When you see them for the second time, their gaze is a little higher (more elevated), and the third time they already look with a shameless grin and even more than that, they laugh loudly. Finally, they come dressed up and take a pose that clearly portends passion: they raise their eyebrows, do not leave their eyelashes alone, bare their necks, express tenderness with their whole body, utter tender words that draw them into passion, and by the very manner of speech they try to seduce the ear until with all their might they seize the soul. And this is a bait for you, which with a skillfully woven snare lures you into death and casts you into destruction. Protect yourself so that they do not lead you into temptation even with modest words, for they contain hidden deadly bestial poison.” To defeat prodigal passion, St. Neil recommends, first of all, moderation in food and immediately after that solitude as an excellent means for eliminating the external causes of temptations and passionate lusts. “A chaste soul,” says Rev. Nile, “seeks solitude in the desert, just as a ship rushes to the pier during a storm.” How dangerous life is for the soul under ordinary conditions, that is, among people, and how much it provides food for various temptations and fornication, can be seen from the letter to the Silentiary Nikaret, in which St. Neil, in particular, says: “Whoever is enchanted and delighted by a shameful desire through his ears and eyes, whether he wanted it or not, is already in the full sense an adulterer” 211. However, the elimination of external conditions does not yet ensure complete success in the fight against this passion, because “lust, lust” can also be inflamed by thoughts. Therefore, Rev. Neil gives advice to the monks not to indulge in “memories of women” and “not to linger in thoughts that force one to interview a female image (lit. “do not talk for a long time with thoughts that force you to have conversations with the woman you imagine.” – Approx. trans.), because incessant ideas about women damage chaste skills. However, all a person’s efforts in the multifaceted struggle against fornication can be crowned with complete victory only with God’s gracious help. Therefore, Rev. Neil, in many of his letters, encourages his disciples to humbly resort to prayer in the fight against fornication, “which is a reliable remedy for passions in general.” “By prayer to God,” he writes to church ecclesiastic Julian, “a person can get rid of prodigal eyes and thereby no longer see unclean lust; and from the Lord’s grace he can receive new eyes, with which he will ultimately see the beauty of fragrant and holy chastity” 212. To the monk Aetius, who often suffered from the temptation of lustful thoughts, Rev. Neil, among other things, says: “Hurry up and resort to the solid pillar of humility; and, armed with vigil, long prayers and the singing of psalms, you will see with your own eyes the destruction of your enemies” 213. Another monk, exhausted in the fight against prodigal temptations, Ven. Neil encourages with the following words: “We must not weaken in battle, for we have a great Defender, the Holy Spirit, with whose assistance we can easily extinguish all the devil’s fiery arrows of shameful lusts and memories” 214. The closest and most immediate connection with carnal vices is the spiritual passion of love of money, which occupies the diagram of St. Nila third place. This passion consists of an intense and insatiable desire to acquire money, estates, and external material benefits in general. Because of its gross material object, the love of money serves as a kind of connecting link in the transition from elementary carnal passions to purely spiritual passions. A characteristic property of the passion of love of money is its insatiability, which is not satisfied with any success in achieving material goods, but, on the contrary, becomes more and more irritated and inflamed by this. “Like the sea,” says Rev. The Nile, which absorbs many rivers, does not overflow, and the lust of a money lover is not satisfied with the collected wealth. If he happens to double it, he wants to double it again and does not cease to strive for this until death stops his vain labor” 215. This unquenchable thirst for the accumulation of external goods does not stem from real human needs, since, according to the teachings of St. Nila, for a natural human need it is enough to eat bread and water every day “and not to the point of satiety.” All other carnal lusts are alien to human nature. In accordance with this, the core of the love of money lies in a false understanding of the true and absolute good and in an abnormal, perverted attitude towards material wealth, to which the highest self-sufficient value is acquired. A person burdened with the passion of love of money places his hope in wealth, seeing in it both the meaning and purpose of his life. The essence of the passion of love of money lies in the subordination of a person’s soul, and especially his will, to material goods, which for the soul in its impulses “to achieve a higher rank” are “earthly shackles” 216. In his letters, Rev. Neil resolutely rebels against this passion, which is very harmful to the soul, openly and sharply condemning people prone to the love of money. So, for example, in a letter to one noble official Lycurgus, he writes: “Who won’t laugh at you? Who will not reproach you for your boundless love of money? Who will not mock your madness, with which you, without knowing the limits, collect money and are considered the master of what you cannot take with you when you die? 217 To rich people Rev. Neil points out the responsibility they bear for misusing the wealth God has given them. “For whom do you collect gold, so that you do not know the measure? - he asks the rich man Loves. “Know that the more abundant your treasury, the greater and more terrible eternal torment awaits you” 218. Special attention to Rev. The Nile devotes itself to those monks who, under various pretexts, indulge in selfish thoughts and concerns, although they have taken a vow of non-covetousness. With clear comparisons and antitheses, he points out the vanity and destructiveness of their material acquisitions and the great benefits of poverty. “A rich monk,” he says, “is like an overloaded ship that can easily be sunk by the waves of the sea during a storm” 219. “He is bound by earthly cares and concerns, like a dog with a chain... And if death comes to him, then he leaves the earth with sorrow and pain. He gives up his soul, but does not take his eyes off what he has... He parts with his body, but does not part with his property.” On the contrary, “a monk who does not covet possessions is like a traveler who does not carry anything with him and finds refuge for himself in any place. He is like an eagle, flying high and descending only when his need forces him to do so.” Such a monk is “above all temptation. He laughs at everything material, rises high and, moving away from earthly things, lives a heavenly life... At the hour of death, he joyfully moves from here, because his wings are light and he has not tied his soul to any earthly worries.” To combat the love of money, St. Neil advises reading the Holy Scriptures and praying without ceasing. The fourth place in the scheme of sins is occupied by anger, which, according to St. Nila, represents “mad passion.” “It can easily darken the minds of those people who have knowledge, and make the human soul wild, forcing it to shy away from all communication with people.” According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, the passion of anger is especially akin to the love of money and is partly its consequence. After all, people who strive to get rich, when faced with obstacles in the realization of these selfish goals, usually lose mental self-control and indulge in anger. “Lovers of money,” says the Rev. Neil, “must inevitably be angry with people who prevent them from achieving their material goals” 220. The angry state is not limited to the desire to eliminate obstacles encountered along the way; it is also accompanied by a hostile attitude towards people. This is a mental state associated with an indomitable desire to take revenge on one’s enemy. “Anger,” teaches the Rev. Neil, is a thirst for revenge." This characteristic psychological feature of anger, characterized by unbearable persistence, disrupts spiritual harmony and brings discord into the life of the soul. Under the influence of anger, the human mind becomes darkened and weakened so much that it loses its ability to reason, becomes rude and deprived of true knowledge (knowledge). “Angry thoughts,” writes Rev. Nile, darken the mind, just as a cloud hides the sun behind itself.” In religious and moral terms, the passion of anger testifies to a lack of love both for God and for people, as well as a lack of patience and meekness, these true Christian virtues. Naturally, a person engulfed in the flames of anger cannot properly perform a Christian feat. Therefore, “the prayer of a person irritated by anger is a vile incense before God, his singing of psalms is an unpleasant sound to the ear, and his gift is a worm’s sacrifice” 221. Commanding us to abstain from this passion harmful to the soul, Rev. Neil relies on the words of Christ the Savior (see: Matthew 5:22) and says: “It is not good to be angry at all: both without a reason and with a justified reason, for this the Lord rightfully forbade” 222. In order to achieve complete victory over anger, Rev. Neil teaches that, of course, it is necessary to cultivate and strengthen long-suffering and meekness. Noting the advantage of long-suffering over anger, Rev. Neil clearly compares the impressions that people around him create under the influence of both an angry and a patient person. “Infuriated and possessed by anger,” says Rev. Nile, “the eyes are cloudy, bloodshot and indicate an excited heart, but the face of a patient person is calm, the eyes are pleasant and look straight... A long-suffering monk is like a spring that gives everyone sweet water to drink.” Fifth place in the presented teacher. Nile's scheme of sins is occupied by sadness. This passion is a consequence of the withering of mental strength, a reaction to passionate states, which is based on the power of sensual egoism or attachment to material wealth. From here comes the connection of sadness with other passions, because it is their fruit. “Sadness,” writes Rev. Nile, “binds the one overcome by passions” 223, for it is “the consequence of failures in carnal desires, because lusts accompany every passion. He who has conquered lust has overcome passion, but he who has conquered passion will not be overcome by sadness. Neither the abstinent one grieves because the food was not successful, nor the chaste one because he did not fulfill the unreasonable impulses of licentiousness, nor the meek one because he could not take revenge, nor the humble one because he was deprived of human honors, nor the one who loves non-covetousness because he suffered damage. They have resolutely rejected the lustful desire of all this, and just as an arrow does not pierce one clothed in armor, so these dispassionate ones are not hurt by sorrow.” But sadness has the closest connection with anger, in which passionate impulses reach the strongest degree and after an attack of which an inevitable mental reaction occurs, absorbing mental strength. “Sadness,” says the Rev. Neil - this is dejection of the soul. It comes from angry thoughts,” because “failure to take revenge gives rise to sorrow.” The characteristic feature of this passion is that it “weakens the discerning mind” and “takes away feeling from the soul.” Therefore, “a person who indulges in sadness does not know spiritual joy.” He is unable to “offer pure prayer.” Just as “ties bind the legs and hinder movement, in the same way sadness hinders intelligent feats.” It, relaxing and fettering active human power, paralyzes a person’s spiritual abilities and therefore becomes an obstacle to all that is good. From this worldly “bitter sadness,” according to the teachings of St. Neil, we must distinguish between “sorrow for God.” Worldly sadness is a “disease of soul and body” 224, testifying to a person’s boundless love for this world and his inclinations towards selfish pleasures, and “sadness for God” is dissatisfaction with one’s moral state, which, due to sinfulness, interferes with the achievement of a high goal - communication with God. Therefore, the difference between these two types of sadness is huge. Worldly sadness is characterized by gloomy melancholy, which wastes a person’s spiritual and moral strength, and “sorrow for God,” having God as its basis, attracts a person to moral ascent, gives birth to and strengthens living activity in him and encourages him to the Christian feat of comprehensive improvement and likeness to God. “Sorrow for God,” teaches Rev. Nile - strengthens the soul with tears" and "cleanses the human heart mired in sins" 225. In order to free oneself from evil sadness, a person, as the Rev. believes. Neil, must strive towards dispassion, for “he who rules over passions, by virtue of this, conquers sadness.” It is natural for a person in this difficult battle to place all his hope in grace-filled help, and therefore sincere prayerful repentance is extremely necessary. “The temptation of unbearable sadness,” writes Rev. Nile, “can be destroyed by abundant tears, good hopes and love for the Sweetest Savior Christ.” When the decline in mental strength manifested during sadness reaches a stronger and more intense degree, then the human soul is seized by a new passionate state, known as despondency. This passion in the scheme of Rev. Nila is in sixth place. We can characterize it as complete rejection and paralysis of the entire life of the soul, because the depression that accompanies any spiritual and moral activity of a person begins to dominate the entire soul of this or that person. “Despondency,” testifies the Rev. Nile, is the flabbiness (lethargy) of the soul” 226, reaching such a degree that the soul is deprived of strength and sobriety and becomes incapable of living activity. Naturally, other passions in such conditions, due to the weakness of the mind and indecision of the will, do not meet any resistance. They easily deprive the soul of inner peace, just as without much effort “a light breeze shakes a weak reed.” The characteristic properties of a person over whom despondency has prevailed are fickleness of desires, indifference to everything around him and laziness. “Despondency,” says Rev. Nile, expels the monk from his home,” but nowhere does he find peace. Not content with his environment, he “comes up with a tempting picture of wanderings...” However, “just as a plant carried from one place to another does not bear fruit, so a wandering monk does not bear the fruit of virtue.” Nothing satisfies him. The monk, captivated by despondency, does not find peace in his own cell. “His eyes are constantly turned to the door, and his thoughts are occupied with visitors. As soon as the door creaks, he immediately jumps up; If he happens to hear a voice, he looks out the window and does not look away from it until he becomes numb while sitting. While reading, he often yawns and dozes off, rubs his face, stretches out his arms and, looking up from the book, looks carefully at the wall; then he turns his gaze back to the book, reads a little, turns over the pages; shows curiosity to see the end of the word, counts the pages, sheets and finally, closing the book, puts it under his head and falls asleep in a weak sleep, because hunger excites his soul and forcibly makes him think about himself.” Such a monk is “lazy in prayer” and incapable of “diligently fulfilling the work of God.” There are also remedies against despondency (dejection of spirit). According to Rev. Nila, “despondency is cured by constancy and doing any task with attention and the fear of God.” “In any matter,” advises Rev. Neil, set a limit for yourself and don’t interrupt your work until you finish what you set for yourself. At the same time, pray to God wisely and intensely, and despondency will flee from you.” In seventh place in the scheme, Rev. The Nile is a subtle and difficult to detect passion of vanity, which hides enormous dangers for religious and moral life, because it arises and develops in the human soul along with a virtuous life, that is, when a person wages a successful struggle against carnal and coarse spiritual passions. “Vanity,” says Rev. Nile, is an unreasonable passion that easily mixes with any good undertaking" 227. Thus, success in the ascetic life and the acquisition of certain virtues are, according to the teachings of St. Nila, a certain prerequisite for the emergence of vanity and sharply isolate this passion from other vices. If other passions, as we have already seen, are in direct genetic dependence among themselves, so that the development and strengthening of one passion gives rise to and provides food for another, then the passion of vanity “grows together with the virtues and does not leave them until it weakens.” In other words, it arises and develops after victory over other passions, and deliberately - after success in the fight against carnal vices. Vanity, having at its core the desire for selfish satisfaction of personal pride, destroys and destroys the internal value of human virtue, preventing the acquisition of the crown of true righteousness before God. “A vain man,” says the Rev. Neil - turns his virtuous life into nothing. He does his deeds not for the sake of God, who clearly rewards deeds done in secret, but in order to show what he has done to people who cannot give him any reward. People can only honor this man with praise and thereby deprive him of great and eternal honor. For anyone who undertakes any kind of work for the purpose of making people marvel at him is no different from a theatrical (disgraceful) actor who is content with the payment he receives. That’s why a vain person, accepting praise from people, has no right to ask for a reward from God” 228. By doing good deeds for the sake of “receiving human glory,” a person naturally turns all his attention to the external side of virtue, as a result of which its internal, spiritual content is gradually destroyed and, under the influence of selfish complacency, remains desolate. “Vanity,” writes Rev. Nile - brings the human soul to nakedness and devastates it; it scatters all the fruits that a person has collected for a long time with great difficulty and suffering. Thus, a person loses vigil, fasting, almsgiving, lying on the bare ground, and other ascetic deeds because of vile love of fame." 229 The devastation of the soul due to vanity is so great that the rougher passions that have already been defeated, without meeting resistance, again begin to dominate the human soul. “A man defeated by human vanity,” says Rev. Neil, “cannot be at peace either with himself or with his neighbor, because he quickly falls into grief, irritability, anger, rage, confusion, sadness and shame.” Condemning vanity, Rev. Neil focuses special attention on the fight against him. “Above all,” he writes to one of his students, “fight vanity” 230. In order to prevent the development and strengthening of vain impulses in the soul, Rev. Neil points out the means and methods of struggle. Since thoughts of love of glory usually arise in the soul from the consciousness of one’s successes in moral improvement, Rev. Nile, following the example of St. The Apostle Paul advises us to never think that we have reached the goal, but “forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, let us press toward the goal for the prize of the high calling” (Phil. 3:13–14). “Contemplating what has already been done,” teaches the Rev. Neil - usually indulges in pride to the point of madness. And he who looks at what remains to be done must necessarily become humble and meek; and in the unknown, that is, whether he will achieve what he strives for or not, he finds the strongest incentive to humility... A mind driven to the highest and humbled by concern for what constitutes the object of its jealousy will have no time to think about its successes.” Moreover, Rev. Neil advises to avoid external causes of vanity and therefore constantly demands from his students to do all their good deeds in secret. Eighth and last place in the said prep. Nile's scheme of sins is occupied by pride, which is closely related to vanity, for “the appearance of vanity foreshadows pride, just as a flash of lightning precedes a clap of thunder” 231. The development and strengthening of selfish aspirations leads a person to a state of pride, in which self-exaltation and selfishness appear in a stronger and more open form. A person, blinded by an uncontrollable thirst for earthly glory and human honors, shows in vanity a lack of love for God and forgets the glory of God. In pride, disdain for the Divine glory and everything that surrounds us breaks through; and this leads a person to apostasy. As a result of the reign of pride in the human soul, the very foundation of religious and moral life is destroyed and the possibility of correct relationships both with God and with people is excluded. “Pride,” says Rev. Nile, raises his thoughts to the point of arrogance, teaches to disdain people and looks with contempt at every fellow tribesman as something insignificant. She leads human thought to madness, does not recognize God's Providence and the care of the Most Perfect, and believes that all the graces that she enjoys are the consequences of her personal merits. Pride does not want to see God’s cooperation in what it does and what it succeeds in, because it considers itself strong enough for any good deed. Being weak in all respects, she, in her self-confidence, thinks that her strength will succeed in everything.” A proud person considers his own personality to be the center of the entire universe, and everything else for him is only a means for his personal self-exaltation. Therefore, in his relations with people there is no place for “neither agreement, nor unity of thoughts, nor mutual love,” but instead of all these purely Christian principles, which “the Spirit of God values ​​and loves above all else,” malice, “envy and bitter hatred” reign in the soul of the proud man. Therefore, it is not surprising that other passions in the human soul corrupted by pride find quite favorable soil for their development. “People given over to pride,” writes Rev. Nile, - they are deprived of grace-filled help and fall either into fornication, or theft, or murder, or some other unlawful act. Pride is the greatest sin. Because of her, the inventor of all evil – the devil – was cast from heaven to earth.” In contrast to pride, Rev. Nile exposes humility as a true Christian virtue, elevating a person to heaven and preparing him for the face of the angels 232. Before achieving humility, it is necessary, as St. Neil, be attentive to everything that is included in the circle of our daily lives. In a letter to the scholastic Alcibiades, who asked him to open the way to fight pride, Rev. Neil says: “If you want to avoid this empty and ungodly pride, and achieve humility, and have this blessed gift, then zealously practice everything that contributes to this goal. For the soul is usually likened to what it is occupied with and to what it is always doing; This is what she imprints on herself, taking the appropriate form. Therefore, your appearance, your clothes, your gait, the position in which you sit, your food, your bed - in a word, let everything about you be modest. In the same way, let your speech, body movements, and conversation with your neighbor be in meekness, and not in arrogance. Be kind and friendly to your brother, kind to your opponents, humane and compassionate to the poor, ready to calm and console the sick, visit any person when he is suffering, in hard work, in sorrow, and generally do not despise anyone; in conversation, be kind, in your answers sincere, wish everyone well and be accessible to everyone” 233. Undoubtedly, this feat, which leads a person to complete victory over pride, is not easy to achieve in life. Human strength alone is not enough for this. Therefore, Rev. Neil demands from his students not to indulge in laziness, not to lose heart and to tirelessly ask for help in the name of Christ. For “if we heartily, with fear and reverence turn our eyes to our Master, then He, without a doubt, will come with love to serve everyone, and then neither Satan, nor passion, nor disaster, nor any sin whatsoever can triumph over a person” 234. B. Means to achieve the goal The process of religious and moral ascent in the teaching of St. We can look at the Nile from two sides: positive and negative. The positive side consists in the active expression, development and strengthening of those spiritual forces which - while maintaining the purity of the soul - elevate a person to ever greater spiritual heights in order to bring him closer to his ultimate goal: unity with God. The negative side is expressed in a person’s desire for moral purification, for his liberation from the power of sins, passions and demonic machinations, which are obstacles to his spiritual improvement. The first, that is, the positive, side of the spiritual process lies at the basis of moral success. It is constituted by virtue, which Rev. Neil pays a lot of attention. In one of the previous chapters, we became acquainted with his definition of virtue and especially noted that this concept of St. Nile comes from the word “feat”. In this definition one can see the influence of the ancient Greek doctrine of virtue as a bodily (physical) strength. However, Rev. Neil gives this concept a spiritual, religious and specifically Christian meaning. In accordance with general Christian teaching, he considers any pure moral force as a gift from God. Therefore, virtue as the ability for good or moral behavior is for the saint. Nile is nothing other than “God’s tunic” 235. It differs in that “it humbles a person’s train of thought.” The feeling of humility, which, according to the teachings of St. Nile, an essential property of Christian virtue, marks an absolutely new element for ancient philosophical ethics. Individual virtues: wisdom, courage, prudence and social justice, known back in the era of Homer, were acquired from the Rev. Nile has religious and purely Christian features. By their strength and their significance and meaning, they are connected with the main theological virtues: faith, hope and love. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, these three virtues: faith, hope and love - embrace our entire relationship with God. They constitute the main and necessary basis of all higher spiritual life and create favorable conditions for the emergence, development and strengthening of other virtues. “He who has these three virtues from the Holy Trinity: faith, hope and love,” says Rev. The Nile is like a city surrounded by a triple wall and protected by these virtues as arsenals” 236. And demons, the enemies of people, seeking to overthrow a person into destruction, make attempts, as the venerable man teaches. Neil, to shake this solid and reliable foundation of his moral life. “The demon, this source and painter of vice,” he writes to the monk Faumasius, “has only one goal: to plunge every person into severe and inconsolable sadness and remove him from God’s faith, hope and love, that is, from everything that is most important and most powerful in piety before God” 237. These three Christian virtues are Rev. Nile places one directly after the other, considering them necessary for the attainment of divine joy and for the taking on of the “wedding garment” in the court of the Lord. Every Christian should, according to the teachings of St. Neil, first of all, firmly believe in God and our Lord Jesus Christ. “Faith in the most philanthropic Lord Christ,” he writes to Bishop Eleutherius, “is our great protection, great help, security and encouragement (instilling courage)... For the remembrance of the beloved Lord Christ and firmly rooted and unshakable faith in Him during our battle and endless fear will drive away - like a warning, peaceful, bright and meek angel - fear and shame, will fill the soul with good nature and make close to God those who were once separated from Him.” Faith, according to the teachings of Rev. Nila is an action in which “man approaches God, and God approaches us.” In other words, in the very act of faith, human and divine power interact. “How beautiful and wondrous is reciprocity,” he notes in one of his letters, “when a person hurries to serve God, and God unfailingly brings His servant closer to Himself.” Faith in Christ, in His incarnation, atoning death and in His Resurrection, as the Rev. teaches. Nile, should form the basis of moral exploits, because only with the help of the Divine means given by the Redeemer can a person overcome various obstacles, strengthen and develop his spiritual powers and finally achieve perfection. “By bringing faith to God,” he writes, “offering it as a wonderful gift, we received from heaven the highest and incomparable grace: the communication of the Holy Spirit... God, accepting faith from people, endows them with heavenly gifts, gives them the grace of the Gospel, thanks to which they ascend to perfection, and become wise in heavenly wisdom, and boldly, like sons, approach God, and become partakers of the light of the Divine.” Faith in Christ, which has ever purified and continues to purify true believers, according to the teaching of St. Nila, cannot be limited by any human mind, nor by the laws of the visible world in general, but must be based on the words of the Savior Himself, the Creator of the universe, whose strength and power transcend the boundaries of natural laws. “By uniting with Christ,” writes Rev. Nile Drakontius - the faithful must maintain unshakable faith; they must firmly believe in everything that He said... Whether He promises something unusual, whether He foreshadows something supernatural, it is not appropriate for us to demand examples; We should neither go into exploring the boundaries of nature, nor pay attention to the abilities of the listener; We need to keep in mind only one thing: what is the greatness of the Foretold One and what is the power of the One Who Gives the Promise and who can easily change everything for the better and by His power transcend the laws of nature itself” 238 . Firm faith, affirming the words of the Savior, according to the teachings of St. Nila, receives its strength and strength not in the hope of earthly reward, but in the hope of receiving eternal benefits in the life to come. “You will be recognized as faithful,” he writes to one of his disciples, “if, even without reward, you do not stop expecting and hoping that, according to God’s promise, you will receive eternal blessings in the future life. After all, if the Lord immediately, suddenly and without delay rewarded for good deeds, then it would rather be a purchase than piety, and one would think that we are reverent not out of our piety, but out of self-interest” 239 . A reminder of eternal heavenly blessings and salvation is a favorite means of encouraging listeners, used by St. Neil; He often resorts to it when he edifies his disciples in faith and piety. So, for example, trying to strengthen the monk Faumasius in faith and in zeal for virtue, he writes to him, in particular, the following: “Endure temptations with thanksgiving, and be strong in faith and in the way of thinking, and through unceasing vigil, glorious abstinence and constant prayer, do not deviate from the All-Perfect; and so you will see the end. And the end of those who strive for Christ is salvation” 240. “To us, the faithful,” writes Rev. The Nile is in another place - a crown of life, glory and incorruption is being prepared, a crown woven for those who wait for the Lord" 241. Those same people who indulge in inconsolable sadness, experiencing the misfortune that has befallen them, such as the death of their most beloved people, etc., and thus showing their lack of faith, Rev. Neil reproaches with love and at the same time consoles, in order to thereby strengthen their weakened faith. So, one mother, grieving for her dead son, Rev. Neil writes: “If you firmly believe that after the completion of this world there will be a resurrection of all the dead, why then do you incessantly cry and are inconsolably tormented? If your beautiful son Nikoret, your only son, has died, then you will see him on that day more beautiful than the sun and in unspeakable glory and joy. You will see how he stands before the royal throne and prays for you to Christ, the most philanthropic King of all. And then you will be comforted, for you will see that your son, born from your womb, dwells in the courts of heaven and has boldness before the Creator of all things, before God, enjoying a pure and incorruptible life. Therefore, put an end to this reproachable cowardice and immeasurable crying. Accept blessed joy, be filled with good aspirations and good hopes, so that with your tears you do not upset your son and do not arouse the wrath of the Master against yourself. Remember also what the apostle writes: “I do not want to leave you, brothers, in sorrow (in the synod. text: “in ignorance.” - Approx. trans.) for the dead, so that you do not grieve like the pagans (in the synod. text: “like others. - First note), having no hope” (1 Thess. 4:13). Therefore, “rejoice always. Pray without ceasing. In everything give thanks: for this is the will of God for you..." (1 Thess. 5:16-18)" 242. The same thoughts, but only in a more strict form, Rev. Neil repeats in a letter to Theon, the ruler of the city. “To grieve and cry inconsolably over dead relatives,” he says, “is a sign of disbelief and despair. The one who believes that the buried person will rise from the dead is strengthened by hope, thanks God and, changing crying to joy, prays that the deceased will receive eternal forgiveness, and that he himself (i.e., the one crying - approx. transl.) will turn to correcting his own life" 243 . From the above quotes it is clearly visible how, according to the teachings of Rev. Nila, another divine virtue is closely connected with faith in God - hope in the mercy of the Creator and in His gracious help. Faith in God and in the redemptive merits of Jesus Christ serves as an inexhaustible source of “living water” from which another divine virtue—Christian hope—draws its strength. In this sense, the Apostle Paul calls our Lord Jesus Christ “our hope” (1 Tim. 1:1) or the foundation of our hope. On the other hand, again, hope for grace-filled help and promised eternal bliss strengthens our faith and in difficult circumstances of life is its solid foundation. Hope gives strength to our weak will in doing good, in deeds of piety; it sanctifies and touches our heart and leads us, as sons and heirs of God, to that eternal bliss in the kingdom of heaven, “which cannot be expressed in a word, nor comprehended with the mind, nor grasped with a thought” 244. That's why Rev. Neil in his letters so often turns to the hope of God's mercy, convincing his disciples to draw strength and strength for their exploits in anticipation of grace-filled help and eternal bliss. “Let us trust in God,” he writes to Deacon Xenogor, “let us have hope, even if we see that we do not suddenly and easily receive what we ask... For God wants us to always trust in Him” 245. Another student, monk Florion, physically relaxed, Ven. The Nile, strengthening his trust in God, protects him from spiritual relaxation and despair. “If you are exhausted in body,” the Rev. writes to him. Neil, don’t lose heart at the thought that there is no one to console you. “It is better to trust in the Lord than to trust in man” (Ps. 118:8). There is no doubt that God will show you the way to consolation; The Source of wisdom will not fail to find a way for your salvation” 246. With faith and hope, according to the teachings of Rev. Nila, Christian love is inextricably linked. All these three divine virtues, necessary for our salvation, develop in the human soul simultaneously and one along with the other. Living faith, expressed in hope, finds the fulfillment of its aspirations in love. Faith and hope are the paths leading to true Christian love. For the Christian faith cannot be dead. She strives for self-expression (to manifest itself externally), and this external expression is carried out in the fulfillment of the law and in deeds of love. Faith is the beginning of the Christian life, and love is its accomplishment. This thought by Rev. Neil is sharp in his succinct definition of godliness. “Piety,” he writes, “consists of two parts: pious dogmas and good deeds... Therefore, one should not be separated from the other” 247. Although when listing the Divine virtues love takes the last place in order, nevertheless, as the Rev. teaches. Neil, according to her merit, she belongs to the first place. To define the concept of love, Rev. Neil uses the words of the Apostle Paul, who gave love an unsurpassed characteristic (see: 1 Cor. 13: 1-8). Repeating the words of the Apostle Paul, Rev. Neil understands love as the fulfillment of the law. The first and highest object of love and at the same time its essence, according to the teachings of St. Nila is God Himself. “Love,” says Rev. Nile, “has nothing of his own except God, because God is love” 248. Since the ultimate goal of human life is to become like the Divine nature, the need for love for human life is clearly deduced from this goal. Without love, everything in earthly life has no significance or purpose. “Without her,” says the reverend. Neil, “there is no benefit from anything earthly.” However, love as a Christian virtue, Rev. The Nile sharply separates from sensual and sinful impulses (lusts), “which the Greeks called love (eros). One,” he writes, “is love for God, and the other is a kind of animal and sensual lust (instinct).” These two concepts, according to the teachings of Rev. Nila, should not be mixed. After all, it is Christian love that serves as the most powerful weapon in the fight against internal sensual movements. And the desire to cleanse oneself from sins and passions makes no sense if there is no love. “You will not be able to suppress passions,” says the reverend. Nile, “if you don’t first warm your heart with the fruits of love.” Therefore, divine love as the life-giving power of the soul occupies a middle place in spiritual life. “Love,” writes Rev. The Nile is a capital city of virtues... If we acquire love, we will extinguish passions and rise to the skies. And “just as the sun smiles on the whole earth with its golden rays, so love with its radiant deeds greets every soul.” Rev. Neil constantly demands from his students that they kindle within themselves love and devotion to God. Those who, moved by love for God, have already left earthly things and “chose the good and eternal flowering part of Divine teachings,” he encourages warmly and with love. So, for example, he writes to Deacon Euthymius: “While others rejoice in luxurious houses, gold, silver and other earthly blessings, you, glorious servant of Christ, constantly look with your eyes at the invisible King, enjoy His sweetness, fill your soul with hope for Him, and are consoled by your unfading love for Him... Therefore, the Savior and The Creator of the whole world answers you that no one can take away your joy and joy (see: John 16:22)” 249. Speaking about the love of God, Rev. Neil does not limit himself only to its internal, contemplative side, but pays great attention to its external, practical (active) side. This external side determines our attitude towards people. After all, love for God, as the main force of God’s kingdom, is not limited only to itself, but extends its action to everything around us, striving wherever it can to gather all that is good. It unites all rational beings into a unanimous community for moral improvement, and its main, guiding principle is the desire for “unanimity and mutual brotherly love, which is most valued and loved by the Spirit of God” 250. “The distinctive feature of love,” says Rev. Neil, “is that it makes the mood of all people the same.” Here all the faithful are mutually united in love for Christ, like members of one body. They are so connected by mutual compassion that each of them, in the words of the Apostle Paul, “rejoices with those who rejoice and weeps with those who weep” (Rom. 12:15). “True love is justifiably called in the Holy Scriptures the fulfillment of the law, because it embraces the most perfect part of the law and, prohibiting blaming a neighbor or doing him any kind of evil, demands from us that we voluntarily forgive him everything and do only good to him.” For “a matter of love,” writes Rev. Neil, is to be generous; It’s not her place to be angry. Anger arouses sadness and indignation, and love weakens these three, that is, anger, sadness, and indignation.” Following the example of Christ the Savior, Who prayed for His enemies on the cross, we, according to the teachings of St. Nila, are obliged to humbly forgive insults to their enemies and suppress in themselves any feeling hostile to them. To this end, Rev. Neil writes this to Presbyter Theodore, who, overwhelmed by hatred, has lost his spiritual peace: “If you make strenuous efforts and dispel the cloud of hatred within yourself, you will find spiritual peace. And after you leave hatred of your neighbor, you will be filled with godly love for Christ, so that the look of your brother, which seemed hostile and unkind to you, now, when your thought is illuminated with light, will be desirable and pleasant for you” 251. To another disciple, who, encouraged by true Christian love, did good to his enemies, Rev. Neil writes admiringly: “Everyone - both angels and people - praises your virtuous soul, for you take care of children and living and dead enemies. By caring for the children of living enemies, you thereby force their fathers to make peace with you. And by caring for the children of dead enemies, you gain the great favor of the Lord... Even if you have sinned a lot, you will be free from any punishment, for by showing mercy and showing philanthropy towards your enemies, you become like the philanthropic Lord” 252. In order for mutual love and compassion between people to develop and strengthen, God teaches the Rev. Neil has arranged our earthly life in such a way that all people feel the need for each other. He bound people with different needs, which no one can satisfy alone and because of which everyone is forced to seek the assistance of others. Thus, each person, accepting help from his neighbors and providing them with his own help, little by little gets used to the idea of ​​the unity of people before God and the need for a mutual union of fraternal help. On the other hand, again, feeling the lack of his personal strength and his dependence on others, a person learns humility, which gives rise to a feeling of gratitude and love for other people who have helped him. “Each of us,” writes Rev. Neil, cannot satisfy himself, but needs the support of others. And this was wisely arranged by God, who perfectly guides our lives. Need equalizes unequals: it raises the humiliated to incredible heights, and brings the exalted down to the ground, among simple people. Thus, this continuous mutual communication leads people to the closest moral union and to an equal union of their thoughts” 253. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, nature itself encourages us to communicate with each other, thereby creating a favorable basis for the moral unity of people and strengthening their mutual love. However, pure Christian love for one’s neighbor, in his opinion, is not limited to concerns about external good, but has as its ultimate goal the spiritual purification of one’s neighbor and his salvation. “We must pray to God not only for our own cleansing, but also for the cleansing of our neighbor, imitating the angels in this” 254. “Blessed is he who joyfully looks upon the salvation and prosperity of every neighbor as his own. It is good for the man who honors every neighbor as god after God.” Love is the main content of the moral kingdom. All other virtues, as spiritual gifts or moods of the soul, constitute either the properties of love, or its partial implementation in the visible world, or serve only as means to achieve love as the main goal of all moral exploits, which without love lose their meaning and significance. Love embraces and unites all virtues and all people mutually and with God. Therefore, Rev. Neil calls love “the capital city of all virtues.” To gradually strengthen a person’s zeal for other virtues, according to the teachings of St. Neil, there are forces that motivate him to Christian deeds. These forces are genetically dependent on three divine virtues: faith, hope and love. However, first of all, zeal for active Christian piety is kindled by the constant memory of God. To emphasize this more strongly, Rev. Nile writes to one noble dignitary, Sosander: “Just as we constantly breathe in the air, so it is fitting for us to constantly praise and magnify the Lord... For a wise and God-loving mind must immutably preserve the memory of the Creator. “I remember God,” says David, “and sigh” (according to church glory: “I remembered God and rejoiced,” Ps. 77:4 - Transl.). Therefore, if the remembrance of the Lord produces joy in our souls, then let us not be so lazy as not to take advantage of it” 255. “Let us strive,” he teaches in another letter, “not to spend a single moment of our breath without remembering God, for the remembrance of Him is the greatest good” 256 . A person whose mind is deprived of the thought of God and the memory of Him “sins in the external senses.” And vice versa, remembering God not only cleanses the soul from sin, but also determines grace-filled help from above. “In times of deep spiritual despair, the memory of God softens sorrow and produces joy, consoling the heart with unspeakable joy.” “God does not forget those who remember Him,” says Rev. Nile. – On the contrary, He carefully guards the person in whom the words of the Lord abide. For He Himself speaks through the mouth of the prophet: Since My words are in them, I will keep them in My memory.” As a strong incentive to a pious life, St. Neil also mentions the fear of God. Based on the words of Holy Scripture (Ps. 111:10), he calls the fear of God “the beginning of all wisdom” 257, that is, the beginning of a life filled with virtues. Fear of God must be distinguished from the usual feeling of fear of any danger, for, according to the teaching of St. Nila, the fear of the Lord produces in the soul a living desire and zeal for Christian achievement. Explaining the difference between the two types of fear, Rev. Neil writes: “It is said: “Do not be afraid of the fear of the night (Ps. 90:5), that is, from the fear of humans and demons, for the fear of God is called daytime and light; he gladdens the heart" 258. “If you do not fear God,” he writes in another place, “then the consequence will be restlessness (anxiety, confusion) and insensibility. Fear of God would produce good feelings in your soul and lead you to repentance” 259. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, the fear of God arises in the soul, on the one hand, from the consciousness of our sinfulness before God, and on the other, thanks to reflections on His infinite greatness and the belief that He is the Judge and Giver. “From the punishment of God’s judgment,” he says, “one must put on the fear of God, so that through the fear of eternal fire an unquenchable desire for a pious life can be kindled in a person.” The fear of God, which awakens in the soul of every person a craving for virtue, Rev. Nile often seems to soften things with the teaching about God’s love for mankind, to which he often refers in his instructions. Thus, wanting to soften the heart of Presbyter Charicles, who dealt strictly with repentant sinners, he in particular writes the following: “Isn’t the Holy Scripture preached not only the severity and wrath of God, but also God’s immeasurable and incomprehensible love for mankind... When our sins are great, then the Lord pours out on us, the repentant, the abundance of His mercy, and it destroys the fruit of our evil deeds. Therefore, it is appropriate for you to think not only about judgment, but also about Christ’s love for mankind” 260. And the bright side of God's judgment - the hope of heavenly blessings - serves as an important motive for awakening the desire for virtue. “God will glorify pious people for their deeds,” says Rev. Nile, - and will crown them on the day of judgment, when he will judge everyone not according to erroneous earthly concepts, but according to the truth, determining the true value of our actions.” Inextricably linked with the remembrance of God and the fear of Him, repentance stands as the most powerful force for virtuous deeds. It is cultivated and strengthened in the soul under the influence of complex internal experiences. On the one hand, the thought of God’s infinite greatness and light, and on the other, the consciousness of one’s own weakness and sinfulness awakens in a person sincere repentance for crimes committed and “crying” for sins. This repentant mood is not limited to only contrition of the heart from the consciousness of one’s sins. Him, as the Rev. teaches. Neil, we are characterized by an active and encouraging force for good, because the desire to free ourselves from sin and make amends before God produces in our soul a firm determination to emerge from a sinful state onto the path of virtue: to leave the previous way of life and turn from sinful darkness to the light of Christ. A repentant mood is a necessary condition for moral recovery. “If anyone has sensed evil in their actions,” says Rev. Nile, - and imagined in his thoughts the terrible torment in the next century, he, with his voluntary repentance, will cure himself even before departing from this life" 261. Repentance brings revival to the soul, for it fills a person with strength and courage for a new spiritual life. “It revives a person who was previously killed by sin, as a confirmation [thereby] of the coming rebirth and victory of the resurrection.” Spiritual rebirth, which is achieved through a repentant mood, is achieved with the assistance of Divine grace. Grace is poured out abundantly on those who repent, for “by repentance a person is rewarded with God’s great mercy.” In order to clarify the idea of ​​the power of grace-filled help brought by repentance, Rev. Neil uses a colorful comparison with a tree: “Just as a tree that has already dried up due to lack of water sprouts shoots again if they begin to water it, so a soul killed by sin, if it repents, is granted the mercy of its Master and, having been cleansed from evil, partakes of spiritual grace, feeding the human mind with abundant spiritual power and bearing the fruits of righteousness” 262. “Wonderful repentance has such power,” writes Rev. Nile in another place - which in an instant relieves many sins; He also delivers those who resort to him at the last moment of their lives, struggling with their souls on their deathbed” 263. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, repentance is a “gift of God.” As such, it is the beginning of “the most perfect, pure and unshakable virtue.” Here, with the assistance of grace, which pours out abundantly on the repentant, people are given a real opportunity to “celebrate the feast of renewal and to adorn themselves with various virtues.” The process of repentance determines the entire course of life, sets the main tone for Christian deeds and gives it the main content. Repentance attracts the repentant sinner to success in virtue. For Christian virtues represent only the cultivation and development of those inclinations, the beginning of which is already the process of repentance. The closest and strongest connection with repentance is the main Christian virtue - humility. Her rev. Neil pays special attention in his teaching. By its psychological nature, humility is the complete and decisive opposite of pride. To be humble means to have the most sincere conviction that we have nothing of our own and cannot do any good without God’s protection and without His gracious help. “Why are you exalted, O man, reaching above the clouds, being dust and dust? Look at your nature: you are earth and ashes and will soon be reduced to dust; Now you are great, but after a while you will be a worm. Why are you raising a neck that will soon decay? Yes, a man is great when God helps him; and since he is abandoned by God, he recognizes the weakness of his nature. You have nothing good that you would not receive from God. Why do you boast of a stranger as if you were your own? Why do you boast of the grace of God as if you were your own acquisition? Recognize the Giver and do not boast too much; You are God’s creature, do not separate yourself from the Creator. God helps you, do not deny the Benefactor" 264. Meanwhile, humility, although it fills a person with the consciousness of his insignificance and a feeling of deep dependence on God, is not just a passive mental state that could cause a weakening and fading of a person’s own activity. After all, sincerely aware of his deep spiritual poverty, a Christian strives with all the strength of his soul to fill it from the inexhaustible source of Divine grace. Thus, in humility - for the sake of joint action aimed at the good of man - the energy of his psychophysical nature and the almighty power of God's grace are united. Hence the word “humility”, as the Rev. understands it. Neil, as well as his teacher St. John Chrysostom, does not quite correspond to the content of the concept. And Rev. Neil often uses another term instead - “humility”, which more precisely defines the positive side of this virtue, since it contains the idea of ​​a person’s conscious and free participation in this process. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, humility is the most important virtue, without which a person cannot be saved. It is also a necessary condition for the development and strengthening of all Christian virtues. “Humility,” says Rev. Nile is a wall of other virtues; it completely preserves the wealth of the soul” 265. Therefore, Rev. Neal constantly demands from his students that they resort to “the unshakable pillar of humility” 266. “Most of all,” he writes to the ascetic Vincent, “humble your heart, consider yourself worthless and humiliate yourself, so that you do not creep into pride, and instead of wheat you reap tares, and your labors do not go to waste” 267. In order to more clearly highlight the meaning of humility, Rev. Neil, in his teachings, often recalls the Gospel tax collector, who was justified before God by humility alone. So, for example, to his student, who grieved because he did not have material means and therefore could not provide help to the poor, Rev. Neil writes: “The publican was saved by humility alone. And the Lord Himself says that “whoever humbles himself will be exalted” (Matthew 23:12). Therefore, Saint David displays humility in his justification, saying: “Listen to my prayer, for I have greatly humbled myself” (Ps. 142:7); and further: “See my humility and my labor, and forgive all my sins” (Ps. 24:18). Therefore, do not grieve and do not say: I have no money so that I can constantly give to the poor. After all, if you have nothing, then God does not require (this) from you. Just don’t hesitate to bring to the Savior what you have, that is, a contrite and humble heart and warm prayer, and He who loves the humble and honors them with His consolation will not humiliate you.”268 To the humble the Lord sends down Divine grace, pouring out rich spiritual gifts. Jesus Christ Himself, with His life on earth, showed us the greatest example of humility. And Rev. Neil encourages emulation of this ideal. Thus, in a letter to the committee Theodit, he, in particular, says: “The Lord and Master of all, living in the flesh among people, showed everyone an example of humility and commanded us to imitate Him, saying: “Learn from Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls” (Matthew 11:29)” 269. True humility, stemming from a deep awareness of our imperfection and dependence on God, also determines our attitude towards people. A person imbued with Christian humility not only does not become arrogant or proud in front of others, but sincerely considers himself unworthy, worse and inferior to other people. “A faithful Christian,” writes Rev. Neil, “must be humble before everyone, because to humble yourself only before a few is false humility” 270. In addition, with the correct conduct of religious and moral life, the consciousness of a Christian should always be imbued with a sense of his personal imperfection and powerlessness in comparison with the religious and moral ideal to which Christianity points. After all, no matter how high the degree of human spiritual life may be, it, however, can never be considered final and sufficient. Assimilation to the infinite Divine model is a process that takes place forever, but can never be realized in its entirety. Therefore, Rev. Neil constantly affirms his students in the consciousness of their weakness and insignificance. He does this even when they succeed in a virtuous life. “The Lord protects from pride those,” he says, “who are already ascending to the heights of virtue, for he commands: “When you have done everything commanded you, say: we are worthless servants, because we did what we had to do” (Luke 17:10)” 271. The human soul, illuminated by this Divine light, is filled with true humility and prepares favorable soil, as well as a strong and solid foundation for the development and strengthening of other Christian virtues. The fruit of deep humility and constant memory of one’s sins is, first of all, meekness, which St. Neil calls “the greatest good” 272. Under the meekness of St. The Nile implies a peaceful mood of the human spirit, combined with caution, so as not to anger anyone and not to be irritated by anything. A characteristic sign of the influence of this virtue on the soul of a Christian is that, in spite of anger, it curbs the chaotic excitement of our feelings and suppresses in the soul any grumbling against God and hatred of people. “A meek person, even if he endures trouble,” says Rev. Neil - does not leave love. For the sake of love, he shows generosity and kindness and covers and endures everything” 273. However, Christian meekness, based on true love for God and neighbor, can in no way be interpreted in the sense of non-resistance to evil and vice. “Prepare yourself,” the Rev. teaches. Neil - to be meek and warlike: meek towards people, and warlike towards the enemy. For anger can only be used in the fight against the enemy - the serpent...” Therefore, Rev. Neil says: “Let a meek man also be militant, and let him not extend his meekness to flattering thoughts,” which attract us to sin. However, in the fight against evil, a person must be careful so that, while driving out vices, he does not arouse in his soul hatred and “warfare towards his neighbor.” According to the teachings of Rev. Nile, the greatest example of Christian meekness was shown to us by Jesus Christ Himself, Who, having laid the firm foundation of all virtue, surpassed “in His meekness all meekness.” In close psychological connection with meekness is another Christian virtue: patience. Both of these virtues - meekness and patience - act on our feelings, controlling them and protecting them from painful extremes in their manifestation. Interferences encountered on the path to the implementation of human intentions can cause double evil in the soul: severe confusion and irritation of feelings, turning into the passion of anger, or excessive weakening and suppression of mental abilities, instilling despondency in a person and leading him to despair. These two virtues are directed against these abnormal states of human spiritual life: meekness against anger, and patience against despondency. In its philological meaning, the word “patience” means constancy, balance, and steadfastness of the human spirit in achieving a set goal. Christian patience is put in contrast to exhaustion of the spirit. It signifies loyalty to the chosen direction of religious and moral life and inner perseverance in overcoming obstacles on the path of goodness and a godly life. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, a true Christian must easily and courageously endure internal and external temptations and, in general, all troubles, accepting them as a necessary means sent by God to test our faith and to promote our moral growth. After all, everything that happens to us in life is not a blind accident, but the wise management of God’s Providence. “If you,” writes Rev. Neil to one of his disciples, “if you are exposed to many and frequent bodily ailments, sorrows and various disasters, then do not be cowardly at all, but as a brave fighter, increase your gratitude to God a hundredfold” 274. For the Lord sends us sorrows and various temptations out of endless love for us and for our own good. Thanks to temptations, we come to know our greatest Benefactor and, exhausted from the struggle with misfortunes, we resort to the philanthropic Christ, asking Him for help.” A person inspired by such thoughts does not bow in spirit before obstacles, but patiently bears the cross of life, protected by the good hope of God’s help in every trouble. From the many letters in which Rev. Nile teaches his students patience; our attention is especially drawn to his letter addressed to the monk Davurius. In this letter we will find one of the best characteristics of patience, and the excellent form and style of writing, making us remember the language of St. John Chrysostom, give us the right to call it a hymn to patience. Rev. Neil explains the words of the Holy Scripture and says: “Patience according to God is a great help in times of temptation. For the Lord says: “Through your patience save your souls” (Luke 21:19). The Lord did not say: in your fasting, or in your silence, or in your singing of psalms, although all this contributes to the salvation of the soul, but he definitely emphasized: “in your patience.” In patience, that is, in every temptation, whatever it may be: an insult, or humiliation from some person, or bodily weakness, or one or another attack from people or demons. “Through your patience save your souls.” However, not only in your patience, but also in all thanksgiving, prayer, and humility, bless and glorify the Savior of all, God, the greatest Benefactor, who brings everything into harmony and controls everything for our benefit. And the Apostle Paul writes: “Let us run with endurance the race that is set before us” (Heb. 12:1). For what is greater than this virtue? What is stronger or stronger than patience in God? Patience is the king of all virtues, the basis of good deeds, a quiet haven. It is peace in times of war, silence during a storm, security amidst adversity. Patience makes a person harder and stronger than diamond... Neither weapons, nor bows, nor battering guns, nor flying stones, nor spears, nor demonic militias, nor the devil himself with all his army can harm a person who has acquired patience in Christ.” In this characterization of patience, Rev. Neil emphasizes the deep psychological connection that patience has with other Christian endeavors. According to his teaching, a person will be able to acquire the fruits of Christian virtue only when he is imbued with patience and when he lives under the cover of this virtue. Therefore, patience is “the basis of good deeds,” that is, a necessary quality of a Christian’s inner mood when implementing the principles of a spiritually grace-filled life. Patience is in close connection with abstinence (2 Pet. 1:6), which, as we have seen, Rev. Neil sets up a counterpoint to gluttony. Pointing out the deep meaning and importance of abstinence, Rev. Neil talks about it as a powerful and necessary means in the fight against the original “carnal” passions. And just as gluttony is the source of passions, so is abstinence for St. Nila is “the beginning and foundation of all other virtues” 275. In the chapter in which we outlined what was presented by Rev. Nilo teaching about sin, we talked about abstinence as a means in the fight against carnal passions, and especially against gluttony. Here we can only supplement our characterization of this virtue. After all, the scope and content of the very concept of “abstinence” in the teaching of St. Nila is interpreted much more broadly and goes beyond the scope of physical abstinence itself. Rev. Neil teaches that abstinence does not only apply to bodily food; it extends to everything that can serve as an obstacle to a godly life. So, for example, he writes to one of his students: “Fast and abstain not only from bread, wine, meat and other dishes and drinks, but much more carefully from thoughts, from bad and harmful conversations, from irritability, from envy, from ridicule and from other similar obscenities.” The same thought Rev. Nilus also expresses in a letter to the tribune Hypasius: “Just as there is fasting in relation to food, there is also fasting in relation to irritability, to the lust for power, to envy, to boasting, to the love of money, to anger, to despondency, to laziness, to idle curiosity, to excitability and the like.” In accordance with this object of abstinence, according to the teachings of St. Nila, there must be, on the one hand, natural bodily needs (food and drink), and on the other, the sinful and passionate lusts of human nature. Naturally, Rev. Nile also applies different methods of abstinence in relation to different objects. Regarding sin and passions, he commands decisive and absolute abstinence, the ultimate goal of which is the complete eradication of sin and the mortification of passions. When abstaining from bodily needs, a person must set himself the task of acquiring the power of the spirit over the flesh, and not weakening and killing the body. The most perfect goal of abstinence, according to Rev. Nilu, the one “so that we mean not so much suffering, weakening and weakness of the body, but freedom of mental movements” 276. Bodily abstinence has the goal of adapting the body to serve the higher, spiritual needs of man. This is where the general rule in the teaching of St. Nila: physical labor, fasting, vigil and other bodily virtues should be applied depending on the place, time and individual characteristics of the person; as their positive moral content they have an ennoblement of the heart and an elevation of the soul. However, bodily exploits, like all human efforts in general, are insufficient to achieve the main goal - to recreate the likeness of God in oneself and to achieve the closest unity with God. Human efforts alone, even though they would be applied with great zeal, are not enough for this, for “unless the Lord builds a house, those who build it labor in vain” (Ps. 126:1). Therefore, all virtues, according to St. Nila are the “gift of God,” that is, they are acquired, cultivated and strengthened in the soul with the help of grace, without which a person’s path to spiritual growth is generally closed. For the acquisition of grace-filled gifts and union with God, there is one powerful means. This remedy is prayer, about which Rev. Neil says that she is “more divine than all virtues” 277. “Prayer,” he says, “prepares a person for conversation with God and brings us into unity with Him. After all, God accepts even despised people into a union of love and is not ashamed of being friendly with them, while love instills boldness in them.” Thus, through the power of prayer, a person ascends to God and unites with Him. Constantly remaining in prayer makes a person a “church of God” and elevates him to the heights of all virtues. The connection between prayer and other virtues is continuous and reciprocal: exercise in Christian virtues brings the soul into a perfect prayerful mood; and vice versa, prayer, kindled by love for God, nourishes, strengthens and sanctifies the virtues, raising them to perfection. That's why Rev. Neil calls prayer “the mother of all virtues.” Due to the particularly important importance of prayer in religious and moral life, Rev. Neil teaches that without prayer one cannot be saved, for it is the main and indispensable duty of a Christian. Therefore, in a letter to Subdeacon Leander, he says: “Prayer has great strength and power. Therefore, one must always pray: both day and night; for the Lord does not give grace to everyone, but only to those who pray to Him unceasingly... If we are lazy in prayer, we will suffer great loss and, not wanting to unite with the Lord in prayer, we will cut ourselves off from God” 278. In another letter, urging the monk Theodore to constantly warm up the mood of prayer in himself, Rev. Neil, in particular, notes: “If talking with some kind person brings us benefit, then how much benefit will we have by talking day and night with the Lord.” According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, the beneficial effect of prayer on the human soul lies, first of all, in cleansing the soul from sins and passions. “Prayer,” he says, “offered to Christ without internal division and distraction, is omnipotent; so omnipotent that it resurrects the dead, heals every disease of the soul and body, casts out demons, takes away the power of sorcerers, extinguishes unreasonable carnal passions, destroys lusts aroused by demons and suddenly heals mental ulcers that were considered incurable” 279. However, the effect of prayer is not limited to this. It also has a powerful positive force, enlightening a person and elevating him to the highest level of all virtues. “Prayer,” writes Rev. Nile - not only cleanses and nourishes people, but also has the power to make the one praying as radiant as the sun”; She also imparts to him the grace-filled power to “walk unhindered along the path of virtue.” During the prayer itself, a person must wage an internal battle with various thoughts that weaken prayer concentration. “Avoid,” teaches the Rev. Neil, “any thought about everyday worries, because they confuse you, disturb you and weaken the strength of your strength.” To achieve living unity with God, the human mind during prayer must free itself from all sensual thoughts and, “leaving earthly things, live in heaven.” “He who prays in spirit and in truth,” says Rev. Nile - honors the Creator not in created [matter], but glorifies Him in Himself." According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, the complete liberation of the mind from material (sensory) objects is a characteristic feature of contemplative prayer. The inner, spiritual principle predominates in it. Without words, without images, without bows, this action of prayer is performed in the depths of the spirit. Rare people reach this highest level of prayer, which is why Rev. Neil calls such a prayer “the prayer of the perfect.” It is not limited by time, place, or anything external. “It is the elevation of the mind, its complete release from sensory objects: when the mind approaches God with ineffable sighs, and God sees the disposition of the heart, expressing its will without a single word” 280. Therefore, in order to be worthy of pure and perfect prayer, a person must empty his mind of all concrete contents in order to enable the mind to enter into complete union with God. For only under such conditions is perfect prayer possible, not occupied with anything other than thoughts of God as an infinite Being. The Apostle Paul had such a prayer, ascended to the third heaven and not knowing whether he was then in the body or outside the body (see: 2 Cor. 12:2). All the power and grace-filled strength of perfect prayer stems from close, immediate and living unity with God. “Prayer,” testifies Rev. Neil is a conversation between the mind and God. During prayer, a person’s mind “stands before the Lord and talks with Him without any mediation” 281 . Naturally, such close unity with the Source of holiness and purity can only be achieved under the necessary and indispensable condition that the human soul will first be cleansed of sinful impulses. “If to Moses,” writes Rev. Nile, - whoever tried to approach the bush was forbidden to approach until he took off the shoes from his feet (Ex. 3:5), just as then you must not give up every passionate thought if you want to behold God, Who is above all comprehension and feeling, and to talk with Him.” Passions “darken the mind and darken his prayer.” Therefore, one who is burdened with passions and thinks in such a state to begin prayer “is like a man who, drawing water, pours it into a bottomless barrel.” Another widespread type of prayer is St. Neil calls it “active prayer.” This prayer consists of an external (sensory) and internal (spiritual) process, with the external preceding the internal. “There is,” says the Rev. Nile, is another type of prayer: when words are spoken, and the mind carefully follows them and knows to whom he is addressing his petition” 282. When moving from the external (sensual) side to the internal prayerful mood, a person must endure a battle with various thoughts that darken our mind and deprive it of proper internal concentration. “Often,” says Rev. Neil, - turning away from the words of prayer, we follow thoughts that lead us astray... At such moments, only our appearance reveals the prayerful anticipation: we bow, kneel, and from the outside it seems as if we are praying, but in fact we are mentally busy with something else: talking with friends, angrily answering enemies, feasting with guests, building houses, planting trees, traveling, etc. And in general we agree with everything that the thought shows us, trying to tune our heart to passions.” Rev. Neil resolutely rebels against such prayer and warns his disciples, demanding from them that through external prayer they create an internal prayerful mood. For the external side of prayer: words, bows, throwing - all this is only a means intended to lead our mind to inner, spiritual prayer. “Pray,” he says, “not only with external, bodily movements, but with great fear turn your mind to spiritual prayer” 283. Following the example of Christ the Savior, who taught that man must seek “first the kingdom of God and His righteousness” (Matthew 6:33), Rev. Neil believes that the subject of prayer can only be that which is in accordance with God’s will and that contributes to the salvation of our soul. “Do not pray,” he admonishes, “for your desires to be fulfilled, since they do not always agree with the will of God... It is better for you to pray as the Divine Teacher taught us, saying: “Thy will be done” in me (Matthew 6:10). In general, in everything, ask God only for what is good and useful for the soul.” Finally, the subject of prayer can be prayer itself, which, according to the teaching of St. Nila, like all other virtues, is a “gift of God.” “If you want to pray,” he says, “then you need God, who Himself gives prayer to the one who prays. Therefore call upon Him for help, saying: “Hallowed be Thy name, Thy kingdom come.” The teaching of Rev. Nile of Sinai on monasticism Acceptance of monasticism and monastic vows Tonsured into monasticism at the time when the Rev. lived. Nile (that is, at the end of the 4th - beginning of the 5th centuries) was a whole liturgical rite 284. In the works of Rev. Nile, it is not fully stated. Only in individual works are there passages that to a certain extent indicate the components of this ritual. Rev. Neil, sharing the generally accepted opinion 285, considers monastic tonsure as one of the sacraments that strips off the tonsured person “the old man, which is corrupted by the deceitful lusts” (Eph. 4:22), and clothes him in the new man, “who is renewed in knowledge in the image of Him who created him” (Col. 3:10) 286. The very rite of accepting monasticism, according to the teachings of St. Nile, is a solemn liturgical rite aimed at pouring out special Divine grace on the tonsured person. This is clearly evident from his letter addressed to the monk Amphilochius, who seemed to be weakening in spiritual warfare. Comforting him and strengthening him, Rev. The Nile points him to the Divine grace that accompanies the monk in his earthly life and helps him in matters of spiritual improvement. “Remember,” writes, in particular, Rev. Neil, “that you, having entered upon the most honorable monastic face, are anointed, like blessed David, with a mysterious oil... I call the grace of the Holy Spirit Divine unction” 287 . In another letter sent to the recluse Philomena, Rev. Neil also mentions individual acts of the rite of tonsure itself. Here he turns to Philomena with the question: “When did you put on this honest monastic robe? Which Abba laid his blessing hand on you?” 288 From this letter it is obvious that the rite of monastic tonsure during the time of St. Nila was already associated with putting on special monastic clothes, with reading certain prayers and with the laying on of the Abba's hands. In addition to these actions, the rite of monastic tonsure, as noted in many places in the works of St. Nile, also includes monastic vows, that is, voluntary obligations to fulfill everything that “high monastic dignity” requires. How indispensable the keeping of vows was considered is evident from the treatise “The Ascetic Word,” in which the Venerable himself. Neil says that “it is better to die than to do anything contrary to the vows” 289. Vows, which, according to the teachings of St. The Nile, which is one of the main conditions for acceptance into the monastic order, in the broadest sense of the word is a solemn promise that the person tonsured “will take up the cross and follow Christ, leaving everything: father, boat, nets and all types of occupations, and at the same time he will dissolve all family ties and even the memory of it.” But special attention to Rev. Neil pays attention to the requirements associated with these vows, that is, with the strict maintenance of 1) obedience, 2) chastity and 3) non-covetousness. 1. The essence and meaning of obedience lies in the monk’s readiness to subordinate all his will and desires to the will of God, which always guides a person to the better, and often contrary to his personal selfish desires and impulses. “Obedience to God’s commandment,” writes Rev. Nile, - usually bestows life and immortality, and disobedience - death and corruption" 290. For man himself, due to the limitations of his mind, does not have the opportunity to always correctly perceive the will of God and often chooses what brings him harm. The height and difficulty of spiritual life, the unknown of a better and more favorable path to ascent to spiritual perfection, the danger from falls or errors, obstacles from the enemy of our salvation - all this forces us not to rely on ourselves and not to trust ourselves, but to follow the guidance of an experienced mentor in everything. True obedience requires the monk not to contradict his mentor in anything, but to accept any of his commands with childlike simplicity and strictly carry them out as the will of God, without grumbling or objections, and even when his commands seem to make no sense. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, a monk must be a pure instrument for fulfilling the will of his mentor, controlling the will of his student, like an artist freely disposing of dead material. Rev. Neil writes: “Elder teachers need students who have renounced their will to such an extent that they are no different from dead objects or from matter in the hands of an artist. Just as an artist shows his abilities on matter, and nothing (material) resists his intention, in the same way a teacher, instilling in the soul of a student the knowledge of virtue, must encounter not obstacles, but the complete obedience of his students” 291. To the monk Theodore, Venerable. Neil writes: “If you have taken upon yourself glorious obedience, then do not be curious to find out the reasons for this or that order of the abbot, but try only to diligently do what is commanded to you, even if it is difficult and requires effort. After all, curiosity to find out the reason for the mentor’s command and the desire to evaluate his orders serve as an obstacle to your improvement” 292. Just as during a storm people on a ship obey any order of the captain, fully trusting his experience, in the same way those who, having abandoned their personal thoughts and desires, entrusted the salvation of their soul to another, must rely on the knowledge and spiritual experience of their leaders. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself gave us the highest example of true obedience. His human will yields, does not contradict, does not oppose, but submits to His Divine omnipotent will. On the imitation of Christ as the ideal of monastic life, St. Neil also points out obedience in his teaching. “Just as you have known Christ,” he writes, “so live in Christ, having learned from Christ obedience, for He was obedient to the Father “even to death, even the death of the cross” (Phil. 2:8).” In another place, where Rev. Neil praises the monks for their obedience, his voice sounds even more touching and heartfelt. “You, most blessed,” he says, “in addition to other virtues, are worthy of admiration because with different voices, like a mellifluous multi-stringed instrument, you proclaim a single song of piety. You, each doing his own thing, do not contradict each other in any way. Separated physically, you are united by mutual obedience in a single goal, like a musician who skillfully combines the high and low tones characteristic of different strings into one consonant, harmonious melody” 293. 2. The vow of chastity is primarily a voluntary commitment to a celibate, or virgin, life. This is the commitment of Rev. Neil clearly emphasizes in a letter to the monk Ferin in the following words: “A monk has no right to marry” 294. But abstinence from marriage, or virginity, is only the external, negative side of the vow of chastity. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, the concept of “chastity” includes not only bodily abstinence, but also has an internal, fundamental side: by embracing sensual desires, subordinating them to the mind, maintaining the purity of the soul, thereby providing the opportunity to develop and strengthen other virtues. “Those who care about preserving their innocence,” writes Rev. Nile to the monk Roman, - we are obliged to suppress in ourselves not only carnal lusts, but also pride, and vanity, and inclinations to lies and quarrels, and grumbling, and drunkenness, and idle talk, and any other vice. For I call the one who is abstinent both in soul and body a virgin” 295. According to Rev. Nila, the idea of ​​virginity was expressed by the Lord Himself in the parable of ten virgins (see: Matt. 25:1–13), of which only five entered the royal court, because they were pure in body and soul. And the other five, virgin only in body, remained outside the court, for they were defiled in thoughts. Thus, the vow of chastity is to maintain the purity of the soul and spiritual success. For striving for God and approaching Him as a spiritual Being must be accomplished in the spirit. Bodily abstinence from marriage serves only as a means to remove obstacles from the path of spiritual ascent. The difficulty and height of a chaste life gave St. Neil has the right to compare it with the residence of angels. So, for example, in a letter to the girl Anastasia, he writes admiringly: “I praise you for the fact that you surpass the moon with the light of your life and your humility. The most amazing thing is to see in an earthly body such a soul that spends the life of disembodied angels” 296. Virginity as a living sacrifice to God makes people “God’s altar, church and precious vessels.” An example of a chaste life, according to Rev. Nile, there was the prophet Elijah, who was the first to show a real chaste and equal-angelic celibate life. 3. The vow of non-covetousness is the monk’s voluntary renunciation of all earthly goods and attachments and the adoption of a life that strictly corresponds to the spirit of the Gospel 297. This renunciation is based on the words of the Lord Himself, who said to the rich young man: “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your property and give it to the poor; and you will have treasure in heaven; and come and follow Me, taking up the cross” (Matthew 19:21; Mark 10:21). The feat of voluntary poverty by Rev. Neil dedicated an extensive treatise 298 in which he expounds to the smallest detail his doctrine of triple non-covetousness. The most sublime non-covetousness is very rare in life, because there are few monks who devote their entire lives exclusively to serving God and, living on earth as our ancestors lived in paradise before the Fall, do not care at all about material things. All the saints were distinguished by such non-covetousness, living only with the thought of saving their souls and completely free from earthly worries. The antipode of this high spiritual state is the slightest poverty, manifested in complete devotion to earthly things. Rev. Nile strictly condemns monks who exhibit precisely this slightest poverty and spend day and night in earthly cares, and calls on them to adhere to the average poverty in their lives, which consists in the fact that the monk devotes only a small part of his time to caring about satisfying the most necessary bodily needs, and spends the rest of the time in prayer and reading the Holy Scriptures. “After all, the body needs little,” says Rev. Nile. - Therefore, take care of the body, but only enough to have it as a collaborator in your virtues. Caring for the body should not interfere with the improvement of the soul... If someone takes care of oxen, counts his flocks of sheep every day, carefully cultivates vineyards, oversees forests, fields and orchards, so that even for this work he does not have enough time, how can he think about God? When will he find time to read the psalms? When will he be able to pray to God? Even if he found a minute in between things to remember God, how could he offer a pure prayer to the Lord if his thoughts are occupied with what he is trying so hard to think about?” “Therefore, we flee from earthly worries,” writes Rev. Nile, let us despise possessions, money and everything that draws us into ourselves and darkens our thoughts. Let us lighten the load so that the ship can rise from the water and so that the pilot, that is, the mind, and the travelers, the thoughts, can be saved. If travelers sailing on the sea, during a storm, throw their own goods into the sea with their own hands in order to save the ship, thereby putting their lives above their property, why then, for the sake of a better life, do not we reject everything that drags our soul into destruction? Calling on the monks to keep the vow of non-covetousness, Rev. Neil gives a brilliant, unsurpassed definition of this virtue. “Non-covetousness,” he says, “is the eradication of the love of money, the fruit of love, the cross of life, a painless state, a blessing that does not evoke envy, a sky that knows no worries, a motionless sun and immeasurable wealth” 299 . A person achieves salvation, eternal life, or communion with God, through moral improvement, which, according to the teaching of St. Nile, and is the immediate goal of ascetic life. In previous chapters we have become familiar with this complex process of inner purification and ascension. Therefore, we can only point out individual ascetic means that St. Neil especially proposes monks as people who have chosen “the great path to perfect virtue” 300. These means include: 1) reading the Holy Scriptures and pious meditations; 2) attention to oneself and self-knowledge; 3) contemplation and 4) dispassion and living in the spirit. 1. Reading the Holy Scriptures and pious meditations. The important and profound significance of the Holy Scriptures for the spiritual purification and elevation of man is due to the very origin and essence of the Holy Scriptures, which are “God-breathed” and as such have their source in God Himself. The Word of God as the word of truth (John 17:17) and the word of life (Acts 5:20) gracefully sows in the soul the Divine seed of true life. For in the Holy Scriptures the “kingdom of heaven” is hidden. The fruits of the gracious influence of the Holy Scriptures are the rebirth, purification and sanctification of man. “Reading the Holy Scriptures,” writes Rev. Nile, “destroys every shameless and harmful idea, paints holy images in the soul and helps the soul so that, keeping within itself worthy memories of God, it acquires purity” 301, for “when reading the Holy Scriptures, the thought has no time to indulge in passions, but it steadily strives for the best.” “Teaching in the words of Holy Scripture eradicates everything that feeds evil thoughts, igniting at the same time a spiritual flame that warms the mind and brings it to a state where prayer becomes especially powerful.” “Reading the word of God with love can ultimately make even a malicious person good.” Such a significant influence of the word of God on the human soul gives the right to Rev. Neil to write the following: “The Divine Scripture, thanks to the secrets hidden in it, is water flowing into eternal life, holy water, healing and enlightening all the faithful.” “Divine Scripture is the guide to pure life; it offers us abundant food and great pleasure.” Naturally, we must approach the reading of the Holy Scriptures, as well as prayer, with a reverent and humble attitude. Only such reading of God's word is useful. If a proud thought and a desire to show off one’s knowledge in front of others are mixed into the reading of the Holy Scriptures, then this is St. Neal openly and severely reprimands. So, for example, to Deacon Eugene, who studied the Holy Scriptures with arrogant thoughts, he writes: “When reading the Holy Scriptures, you fall into pride, magnify yourself with your knowledge, and mock the ignorant. Thus, instead of fruits, you collect leaves. Desire instead to decorate your soul with godly deeds, for it is said: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees.”302 A similar reproach was uttered by Rev. Nile and the monk Paul, who, indulging in laziness, sat continuously over a book from early morning until sunset. Rev. Neil tells him in particular: “You know well that it is impossible to build a house from one stone. Therefore, do not think that it is enough to have only one virtue, that is, reading. You need to engage in prayer, and the singing of psalms, and physical labor, and long vigils, and in general various good deeds, so that you can please God and throw off filth and heavy laziness from yourself” 303. The most favorite part of Holy Scripture for Rev. Nila - psalms, which he often advises monks to chant, as the apostles once did, for in them blessed David “instead of the sadness of earthly life, shows unceasing joy” 304. “When you sing psalms,” he writes to Quintilius, “trying to retain the Most Perfect One in your memory, then the soul leaves vile and destructive passions and, filled with indescribable joy, rushes with love to God, hastening to immerse itself in Him and not preferring anything visible to this indescribable beauty” 305. To another of his disciples, the monk Callinicus, who had already won victory over the passions in spiritual battle, the Venerable. Neil gives the following advice for further success: “Hurry to climb the high mountain of virtues by frequent singing of psalms, self-improvement and high contemplation” 306. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, the singing of psalms is the most powerful weapon in the fight against demonic forces, which often attack the monk to interfere with his prayer. “Do not be afraid,” writes Rev. Nile to his disciple, but arm yourself first of all with prayer and the singing of psalms. After all, demons hate us, having a single goal: through various means, illnesses and sorrows, to convince our heart and mind not to trust in God... Therefore, recognizing their intricacies, do not throw away your spiritual weapons, that is, prayer and singing psalms, do not weaken, strengthen yourself and gather all your strength.” During the contrite reading of the Holy Scriptures, pious reflections also arise, which Rev. Neil especially recommends it for monks. A monk, when he is alone, reads the Holy Scriptures in silence, thinking about the transience and vanity of everything earthly, about his moral insignificance before God and about God's Providence, manifested in relation to the human race. He also reflects on God’s greatest good deed: the sending of the Only Begotten Son of God to earth, as well as the Last Judgment and unspeakable heavenly blessings. In these thoughts, a person finds a new source for himself, strengthening him in the fight against temptations and in moral growth. Naturally, a monk engaged in pious meditation must be free from all earthly attachments, so that “human thought does not have time to arouse the action of passions” 307. In order to alleviate the difficulties encountered on the path of monastic success, Rev. Neil usually advises thinking about heavenly blessings, for “the mind, overwhelmed with joyful thoughts, leaves the unpleasant and softens the severity of earthly burdens” 308. “Constantly think about the beauty of heavenly blessings,” teaches St. Nile, - and then no love for the earth and for earthly pleasures will enter your heart” 309. 2. Attention to yourself and self-knowledge. Attention to oneself in monastic life means that the ascetic concentrates the activity of the mind on the inner, spiritual basis of his life and his behavior, trying to assess his moral state. Attention to oneself helps a monk navigate his difficult emotional experiences, monitor his feelings and separate good from evil, beneficial from harmful, in his soul. Therefore, attention to oneself is necessary for a monk. Indeed, with inattention and weakening of spiritual discernment, one can easily abandon the true path of moral improvement. “Like the helmsman’s eye,” writes Rev. Nile, watches the raging waves vigilantly and carefully, because even a little inattention can lead to disaster, in the same way the mind of a monk, struggling with passions and evil demons, must be attentive” 310. Therefore, Rev. Neil in his letters often teaches attention to oneself as the most important and most necessary condition for the elevation of the soul and for its approach to God. So, for example, he writes to the monk Ermolai: “Be attentive to yourself (pay attention to yourself) and take care to do your job as best as possible” 311. Self-attention is closely related to self-knowledge, which, according to the teachings of St. Nile, serves as one of the main ascetic remedies. Self-knowledge is aimed at accurately measuring one’s spiritual strength and at clearly defining the positive and negative sides of one’s spiritual existence. This is an internal introspection of spiritual monastic life, necessary for further moral growth. Knowing oneself is the starting point in the process of a monk’s continuous ascent to the “honor of the highest rank.” Without mental deepening into oneself, purification of the soul and approaching God is impossible, and knowledge of God is also impossible. Therefore, Rev. Neil constantly challenges his students to know themselves. “First of all,” he writes to one monk, “know yourself, for knowing yourself is the most difficult thing. Having known yourself, you will have the opportunity to know God” 312. Thus, the content of ascetic knowledge consists, according to the teachings of St. Nila, on the one hand, is man himself, his inner nature, and on the other hand, God. It is clear that a monk is able to cultivate attention both to himself and to God only when he warms up reverent feelings in his soul and when he turns his mind entirely to the feat of his salvation, which, in essence, is the relationship between the spiritual nature of man and the Holy Spirit - God. This pious mood is called contemplation in ascetic literature. On the psychological side, contemplation is a religious intuition that gives a person the opportunity in empirical reality to see the immutable and eternal essence of things and to feel the Divine properties of the Creator in it. “I call him an Israeli,” writes Rev. Nile, who, through the contemplation of visible and invisible creatures, reaches the sight of the Creator Himself, God” 314. The same thought by Rev. Nilus expresses in his work “Tales of the massacre of the monks on Mount Sinai and the captivity of Theodulus, son of Nilov.” “Looking at the visible,” he says, “it is necessary to strive further through the visible, so that the soul is raised and closer to the knowledge of God, to this final limit of our desires” 315. However, according to the teachings of Rev. Nila, this main goal of contemplation cannot be fully realized, because “it is impossible to accurately know God’s nature,” and besides, “the human mind is not able to grasp the essence of God.” And yet, a person can partly feel and cognize the Divine properties of the Creator. High knowledge of God is available to man only with the gracious help of God Himself, when man directly feels and knows the Divine qualities of the Creator. Such unmediated contemplation of God comes very rarely, and ascetics usually call it “contemplation of the Lord in one’s heart.” Such an action of grace elevates [the ascetic] to a high degree of knowledge of God. A person receives another, less perfect knowledge of the properties of the Creator from contemplation of visible nature and observation of the expediency of the world order, that is, when the human mind, penetrating into visible phenomena, sees in them a reflection of God’s power and glory. Of course, knowing God through contemplation of nature, that is, through direct observation of it, is less perfect, because man knows God not by essence (not in Himself), but by the greatness of His deeds. To characterize the knowledge of God acquired through contemplation of nature, ascetics use a comparison of sunlight and its reflection in water. Contemplation of visible nature or its individual objects and phenomena serves as a kind of spiritual ladder along which the human mind, step by step, ascends to the contemplation of heavenly beauty. This path of ascent is easier and therefore more accessible to most people. Therefore, Rev. Neil especially dwells on the contemplation of nature and advises it to the monks. As the teacher teaches. Neil, there is nothing in nature that does not lead people to “moral or theological contemplation” 316. “Truly,” exclaims the Rev. Neil, - you can spend your whole life thinking about God’s actions. Raising his eyes to the sky, a person sees the sun during the day and the stars at night. Glancing at the earth, he sees various earthly fruits and many different animals. Looking at all this and noticing, in addition, thousands of different species of birds and animals in the air and in the water, a person is amazed at the wisdom of the Creator and glorifies God.” Rev. Neale further highlights the moral and practical aspect of contemplating nature, which is easily deduced from a detailed acquaintance with any visible object. After all, any thing and any phenomenon edifies the monk “how one should live and work in order to please God.” So, even during the harvest, the ant prepares food for the winter. Thus, he teaches the monk how to prepare in advance for the future life. The bee, using the flowers of plants, very skillfully prepares honeycombs and honey for the winter and, thus, shows us that we should follow the example of good people and prepare for ourselves the sweetness of the future life. Next, Rev. Neil, referring to the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 8:7), draws the monk’s attention to the turtledove and dove, which, although not gifted with reason, strictly obey the law of the Creator. Looking at them, monks must learn to submit to the will of God and fulfill it without grumbling. Even observing a dead element, the sea, gives us a moral lesson. The wind-driven sea often rises and appears to be trying to overflow its shores. But, obeying the will of the Creator, who limited the sea with sand (Jer. 5:22–23), it again returns to its limits. A monk must imitate the sea, suppressing every impure thought in himself, and especially eradicating senseless pride. In addition, every visible luminary teaches us something useful. Thus, the sun with its light raises our mind to the knowledge of the relationship between God the Father and God the Son. The moon, constantly changing its appearance, reminds us of the impermanence and vicissitudes of both earthly happiness and earthly sadness. The stars, being in the position appointed for them by God, teach us not to envy those who surpass us in fame and wealth and not to despise those who are small and insignificant in the eyes of people. For the stars are satisfied with their lot, that is, with the “measure of light that God has determined for them.” This is an excellent instruction to monks about the benefits of contemplating the visible nature of St. Neil ends with the words: “The Lord, desiring us to be wise as serpents and simple (meek) as doves (Matthew 10:16), forces us to be disciples of all nature.” According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, not every monk is able to begin contemplation. In order to successfully climb the high mountain of contemplation, purity of the soul is necessary, as well as dispassion, that is, complete suppression of passions. For, according to the words of the Apostle Paul, “there can be no fellowship of righteousness with lawlessness” (in the synod. text: “What fellowship of righteousness with lawlessness?” - Note trans.) (2 Cor. 6:14). This idea is especially emphasized by Rev. Neil in a letter to the monk Arsin. He writes: “When over time you extinguish all the destructive and harmful passions in yourself, then only then devote yourself to the contemplation of sublime things. If you have the audacity and try to climb the mountain before defeating the demons, then you will not receive God’s help and assistance” 317. 4. Dispassion and life in the Spirit. The struggle with passions is the inevitable earthly path of Christian life. And therefore, in the moral-ascetic teaching of St. Nila especially emphasized one obligatory condition for every monk, namely: purification of the soul and its liberation from passions. Passion, as the strongest enemy of our salvation, hindering a person’s spiritual progress, brings upon itself the sharpest arrows of the words of St. Nila. Rev. Passion Neil contrasts the high monastic virtue - dispassion, that is, complete liberation from passions and passionate thoughts. “In dispassion,” says Rev. Nile, everything that excites the mind is pacified, and the soul itself rises above all earthly lusts” 318. A characteristic feature of dispassion is freedom from vicious spiritual tendencies. However, the concept of dispassion is not limited to this alone. “He is dispassionate,” says the reverend. Nile, “who has won after defeat in many battles, and [he] is passionate [he] who claims to have acquired virtues without struggle.” At first glance, it seems that the two concepts – “victory over passions” and “liberation from passions” – are identical and have the same content. However, in essence, these two concepts are very different. The concept of “victory” also includes domination over something. The one who, out of a cowardly mood of heart, eliminates all danger from himself or avoids it himself, does not win. The honorable name of conqueror is given to one who with a courageous heart achieves dominion over his opponent. The concept of “liberation from something” is basically not connected with domination over something. You can free yourself from danger by simply removing it or by eliminating yourself from this danger. The latter can be seen in the moral work of the Buddhist ascetic. A Buddhist is more willing to withdraw from the world and its suffering, having no desire to fight against it. Buddhist dispassion has no active force. This is a state of complete indifference in which all feelings are extinguished, that is, when a person becomes passively dispassionate, gravitating towards non-existence, towards the desired nirvana. It is not such passive dispassion that Rev. writes. Nile. Dispassion, according to the teachings of Christian ascetics in general and St. Nila in particular is not limited to only the negative component, that is, liberation from passions, as the Buddha teaches, but also has an important active positive component. This is an intense spiritual state in which is the basis and beginning of a pure virtuous life. Christian dispassion is a purity of soul that actively contributes to the further success of a person and elevates him to the monastic ideal, to holiness. Having rejected everything that strengthened in him and fueled the egoistic way of life, the monk in a dispassionate state becomes like Christ, for he crucified the “old man”, “died to sin” in the “likeness of the death” of Christ (Rom. 6:6,2,5) and is resurrected together with Christ to a new, grace-filled life. The moral purity of the soul, usually associated with dispassion, gives the monk the opportunity to kindle in himself the love for Christ, which constitutes the main content of the dispassionate soul. This idea is brief, but very clear, Rev. Neil expresses it in the following words: “Love is the companion of dispassion” 319. Love, as the greatest Christian virtue, ignites the ascetic to further success, elevating him “to a perfect man, to the measure of the full stature of Christ” (Eph. 4:13), and contributes to the decisive completion of “the transition from bodily life to spiritual life, in which a person no longer lives in the flesh, but in the spirit.” Mentioning such a high spiritual state, Rev. Neil says that “this state is holy, peaceful and luminous; in it a person has no recollection of anything perishable.” Warming up within himself a feeling of grace, the ascetic little by little passes into the state of a “new man,” a highly enlightened and enlightened state of the human spirit, when the idea of ​​the sonship of God turns from theoretical knowledge into living contemplation. For “if monastic life begins in God, continues in ardent faith and is guided by the Divine Spirit, then the soul flies straight to heaven on gilded wings.” Thus, a person, while still here on earth, becomes in the literal sense of the word an inhabitant and citizen of the invisible world. But at this high stage of a virtuous life, the ascetic faces deliberately great temptations, which Rev. Neil describes in a lively and colorful manner. “When you ascend to the highest level,” he writes to the monk Eugene, “when you isolate yourself from the earth, when you completely hate earthly things, when you despise everything visible, when you truly love heavenly blessings, when you grab hold of the wings of heavenly eagles that easily soar to heaven, then—precisely then—you will see terrible temptations and endure terrible warfare.”320 In order to avoid temptations and possible falls, Rev. Neil teaches that even at the highest level of spiritual life one cannot attribute success to one’s own work, but only to the power of God, for “The Lord Himself protects from the fall of the virtues that have ascended to the heights, saying: “When you have done everything commanded you, say: we are worthless servants, because we did what we had to do” (Luke 17:10)” 321. We became acquainted with the life, works and moral and ascetic teaching of St. Nila. We can only highlight the main features of his teaching and the characteristic features of his personality, which we find in his dogmatic and moral teachings and in his teaching on monasticism. Let's briefly look at each of these features. 1. Features of the dogmatic teaching of Rev. Nila. A quick review of the works of Rev. Nile, the conclusion that naturally arises is that the dogmatic issues themselves are of interest to the Rev. There is very little Nile. He, as we have already emphasized, pays special attention to ways of bringing a person closer to God, and not to an abstract consideration of Christian dogmas. Rev. Neil did not set himself the task of explaining dogmatic issues in an abstract and logical way. Therefore, he does not have treatises that would be devoted to the disclosure of one or another dogmatic truth. Meanwhile, in his writings he sometimes touches on well-known provisions of dogma, but he does this only in those exceptional cases when these truths directly come into contact with the moral and practical area; in other words, when he wants to find a dogmatic justification for his ascetic teaching. And yet, in his numerous letters one can find very interesting passages concerning dogmatics, to which theological science has not yet paid attention. So, for example, to clarify and resolve the issue of the dogma of atonement, a letter to Bishop Silvanus 322 is very important, in which Rev. Neil gives an amazing interpretation of the Messianic Psalm 21 (“O God, my God, consider me, where have you forsaken me?”) in connection with Hebrews 5:7. At Rev. Nile Christian dogmatists can also find data concerning the holy sacraments and their number. After all, from the teachings of Rev. Nile's discussion of monasticism shows that he, along with other ascetics, considers monastic tonsure as one of the sacraments. Thus, the works of Rev. The Nile are of certain interest for dogmatics, and can be used in solving those issues that modern Orthodox dogmatic science pays special attention to. 2. Features of the moral teaching of the Rev. Nila. Moral teaching of Rev. Nila testifies to his deep knowledge and understanding of the subtlest aspects of the human soul. Without exaggeration, we can say that in the teaching of Rev. Nila, the entire spiritual life of man, with all his virtues and vices, was fully reflected. His teaching on sin in general, and in particular his eight-fold scheme of passions, deserves special attention. Rev. Neil, as a skillful and profound psychologist, describes the properties of each passion and the conditions in which this or that passion develops, pointing at the same time to its harmful consequences. At the same time, he also gives instructions on how to fight passions. Presenting very clearly the essence of sin, its origin, development and strengthening in the human soul, Rev. Neil simultaneously offers ways to combat it. Works of Rev. Neal's teachings on sin can be very useful in "revitalizing" the very dry section on sin as taught in schools. 3. Features of the teaching of the teacher. Nila about monasticism. According to the teachings of Rev. Nila, monasticism is not a goal, but only a means, a condition, or a tool for the assimilation of salvation accomplished by the Lord Jesus Christ. This view of monasticism is typical of Christian ascetics. For fasting, vigil, non-covetousness, virginity, obedience do not constitute perfection in themselves, but serve only as means by which a person can achieve his goal. And therefore the instructions and advice that Rev. gives. Nile to the monastics, strictly individual 323. As for the general direction that Rev. Neil in his teaching on monasticism, it can be described as the “golden mean” of Aristotle. 4. Personal characteristics of the teacher. Nila. In conclusion, we will highlight some characteristic qualities of the Rev. himself. Nila. Seeking personal improvement, he left the world and went into the desert. However, having retired from state and public life, Rev. Neil did not break his spiritual connection with people. A variety of people, from cities and monasteries, turned to him with numerous requests. And everyone received what they asked for. In his letters, Rev. Neil gives answers, advice, consolation and expounds teachings for spiritual life. He interprets certain passages of Holy Scripture, and also explains even difficult dogmatic truths simply and clearly. People of all classes and positions were equally equal for the Rev. Nila. Before us, as if in a kaleidoscope, flash the names of simple monks, abbots, archimandrites, bishops, high officials, generals and... even the name of Emperor Arcadius himself. In these letters, Rev. The Nile demonstrates Christian love - that true love which, zealously observing the dogmas of faith and protecting the authority of the Church, at the same time kindles in the soul sympathy for the suffering and rejoicing with the rejoicing. From the pages of these letters, Rev. appears before us as if alive. Nile, who, although he retired into the desert, continued to influence public and even state life with his high authority. Life of Rev. Nila serves as a vivid example of how great benefits can come to society from one true ascetic, an ascetic monk. After all, a genuine Christian ascetic serves as a beacon to [the entire] society; with his moral influence he can contribute to the spiritual revival of public life on the eternal principles of justice, peace and love. Reverently bowing before St. Neil, as before a true Christian ascetic, we, together with the Orthodox Church, prayerfully exclaim: “Rejoice, gardener of the mental paradise; Rejoice, great repository of virginity; Rejoice, red harp of the Spirit; Rejoice, root-cutting sword of passions; Rejoice, righteous men are on high; Rejoice, faithful representative of the earth-born; Rejoice, Nile, universal father" 324. In the “Glasnik of the Orthodox Church”, Belgrade, 1906 (pp. 197–214 and 315–325), V. Bosnjakovic’s study “Nile of Sinai” was published, which, unfortunately, was never published in full. Only the introduction was printed. “A word of praise for Albian” (Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.697A). See “Chronicle of George Amertol”, book IV, chapter 202 (Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.110, col.733(17). This brief note states that St. Nile of Sinai, along with Proclus, Palladius, Bryson, Theodoret, Mark and Isidore Pelusiot, was a disciple of St. John Chrysostom. George Kedrin in his work “Historiarum Compendium” literally repeats the expression of George Amartol, whose works he apparently used (Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.121, col.632B). The text of the synaxarion was compiled in the second half of the 9th or early 10th century. It was published by H. Delehaye. Propylaeum ad acta Sanctorum. Novembris. Synaxarium ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae. Bruxellis, 1902, p.217. In the “Ecclesiastical History” of Nicephorus Callistus we find references to St. Nile in three places: twice evidence is given that the famous ascetic Nile was a contemporary of St. Euphemia (476–573) and Rev. Simeon the Stylite (beginning of the 5th century) and together with Rev. Isidore, Mark and Theodoret was a disciple of St. John Chrysostom (see: Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.146, Histor. eccles., lib.XIV, cap.30, col.1156D and 1157A and cap.53, col.1249D–1252A), as well as more extensive information about him in chapter 54, book XIV (ibid., col.1256AB). Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.589–694. Contents of "Narrationes" see. in the second part of our work. See: Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.580–581. See: Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.695–712. In the presentation of events in this letter, there are still certain features that distinguish it from the narrative in “Narrationes”. So, for example, here a son is saved from slavery, using the miraculous help of the holy martyr Plato, and returns to his father on horseback. In the Narrationes, the father himself, after a long and tiring journey, finds his son in Elusa, in the bishop’s house... For us, this letter is very important, since, along with the “Eulogy to Albian,” it makes it possible to draw a conclusion about the place of birth of the saint. Nila: the author of this letter, whoever he may be, certainly tells about the life of the Venerable himself. Nila. Tillemont. Memoir pour servir a l'histoire ecclesiastique des six premier siecles. Band XIV. Paris, 1709, 189 f, 743. Cellier. Histoire generale des autuers sacres et ecclesiastiques. Bd. XIII. Paris, 1747, p.147. J. Kunze. Markus Eremita. Leipzig, 1895, p.63, note 3. O. Bardenhewer. Geschichte der altkirch. Lit. Freiburg im Br., 1924, IV Bd., p.163. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, p.25. See: Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.700С. The accuracy of this conclusion is also confirmed by a letter to Iliodor, in which the martyr of Ancyra Plato is called a fellow countryman, St. Nile (see: Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.580D). See: K. Heussi. Untersuchungen zu Nilus dem Asketen. Leipzig, 1917, p.92. See: Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.968. See: V. Bolotov. Lectures on the history of the ancient Church. St. Petersburg, 1907, vol. I, pp. 157–158. Epist., II, 265. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.336AB. K. Heussi in his work “Untersuchungen zu Nilus dem Asketen”, p.93, note 3, believes that the earthquake described by St. Neil, happened in 407. Epist. Lib. III, 279. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.521CD. Epist. Lib. I, 257. Ibid., col.177 BC. In all monthly books of the 11th and 12th centuries. on the day of January 14 (see the month book of Archbishop Sergius, vol. 1, M., 1876, p. 13 and the month book of Kosolapov, Simbirsk, 1880, p. 31) it is said that the barbarian attack on the monks living within Sinai, Horeb and the Raif desert took place twice. The first time was during the time of Diocletian and the Alexandrian Patriarch Peter, when the Saracens killed 40 monks in Sinai and 39 in Raifa; and the second time - in the 5th century, during the fasting of St. Nila. The Rev. himself Neil in his Narrationes we find confirmation of this evidence. At the end he says: “Others were also killed many years before... and their memory is glorified on the same day, that is, January 14.” The second attack on the monks is mentioned by Blessed. Jerome and Blessed Augustine. Blazh. Jerome, in a letter to Marcellinus and Anapsychius (Epist. 126, vol. 2. Migne lat.s., t. 22, col. 1086), which he wrote from Bethlehem in 411 (see note b, col. 1085), among other things, writes the following: “This year, when I wrote three books, a sudden attack of the barbarians, like an avalanche, swept through throughout Egypt, Palestine, Phenicia, Syria, and we have barely escaped their hands by the grace of Christ.” And the blessed Augustine in a letter to the presbyter Victorian (Epist. 111, Migne lat.s., t.33, col.422), written at the end of 409 (see note a. col.421), we read: “Recently, some of the brethren were killed by barbarians even in those Egyptian deserts that were removed from any worldly rebellion, so that the monks chose them as their place monasteries." Based on the above data from the letters of Blessed. Jerome and Blessed Augustine, we and other scholars believe that the barbarian attack on Sinai occurred around 410. Niceph. Call. Ist. eccles., XIV (54). Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.146, col.1256AB. Epist., lib. II, 265. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.336A and Epist., lib. III, 279. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.521CD. In the first letter of Rev. The Nile responds to the request of Emperor Arkady to pray for the deliverance of Constantinople from the increasing frequency of earthquakes. Rev. Neil is surprised that the emperor turned to him with such a request at a time when vice enjoys great freedom in Constantinople, and the great Saint John was expelled. His letter to Rev. Neil ends with the words: “My thought is killed by the excessive lawlessness committed in Byzantium.” In the second letter, Rev. Nile reproaches the same emperor for the unjust persecution of representatives of the Church and threatens him with misfortune for listening to the bishops sowing slander and gossip. One letter to Dean Xenodorus (Ep., lib. II, 293. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.345BC), in which he quotes the words of the Constantinople Bishop John: interpretation of the Gospel Matthew 3:16. Second letter to Presbyter Jeria (Ep., lib. III, 13. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.373BC), in which he quotes the words of St. John Chrysostom about courageously and meekly facing temptation and gives the example of the long-suffering Job. Haidacher. Chrysostomica. Roma, 1908, 226. See: Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita?, p.82. See: Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.1199–1234. Ep., lib. III, CXCIX. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.476BC. Ep., lib. II, CCXCIV. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.345C. Rev. The Nile apparently left the world around 390. See his letter to the monk Comasius, a former rhetorician (Ep., lib. II, 73. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.232D and 233A), in which Rev. Neil reproaches him for the fact that he, having already renounced the world, carefully collects “rubbish, and dust, and many impurities of Greek books.” See his letter to the grammarian Asclepius (Ep., lib. III, 24. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.381D). See J. Stiglmayer. Der Asket Nilus Sinaita und die antiken Schriftsteller (Zeitschr. fuer kathol. Theologie, III, 1915, p. 577). For its full translation, see K. Heussi in his “Untersuchungen?”, p.17. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.146, col.1256AB. Ep., lib. II, 258. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.331CD. Venice, 1819. T.1, p.262. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79.26. Note by Leo Allatius. Prologue. St. Petersburg, 1895, vol. 1, p. 151. See letter to Emperor Arcadius (Ep., lib. II, 265. Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79, col.336A). Testimony of the synaxar and Nicephorus Callistus that St. Nil was the prefect of Constantinople, which has recently been subjected to careful study. So, for example, S. Schwietz (Das morg. Moenchtum, II, 39) tries to derive this evidence from the “Apophthegmata Patrum” (Migne gr.s., t.65, col.249C), which speaks of a certain Sinai monk, who previously was “the eparch (i.e., prefect) of the praetorium.” According to Schwitz, this narrative was subsequently attributed to Rev. Nilus, since no other Sinai monk was known to occupy such a high position at court. Narrationes, II. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.600 et seq. In the Constantinople Synaxar and in the Greek Menaions it is said that St. Neil had a son and daughter, and that he and his son went to Sinai, and his wife and daughter retired to one of the Egyptian monasteries. On this basis, some patrolologists, for example, Filaret, Archbishop. Chernigovsky (see his work “Historical Teaching about the Fathers of the Church,” vol. III, paragraph 208, St. Petersburg, 1859, p. 75), make the assumption that the Rev. Nila, in addition to her son, had a daughter. However, in the works of Rev. Neil, we do not find confirmation of this. On the contrary, in “Narrationes” we read: “I, friends, have had two sons: the one whom I am mourning now, and the other who remained with my mother” (Migne gr.s., t.79, col.600C). It follows that the Rev. Nila had two sons. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.601AB. See: Enzyklopaedie der kathol. Theologie, Band IX, 1895. Freiburg im Br., p.398 and William Smith. A Dictionary of Christian Biography. London, 1887, Vol.IV, p.43. Degenhart and Schwitz believe that Rev. Neil left the world in 380, since 340 is taken as the year of his birth. J. Marx, without any argumentation in his work “Abriss der Patrologie” (1919, p. 108), claims that St. Neil became a monk in 404. Narrationes, III. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.613C et seq. 1 stage is equal to 240 steps or a distance of 2 minutes of walking. Filaret, Archbishop. Chernigovsky, believes that Rev. Neil died around 450 (see his work “Historical Doctrine of the Fathers of the Church”, III, paragraph 208. St. Petersburg, 1859, p. 75), but we do not find solid argumentation for such an assumption (see Realenzyklop. f. prot. Theol. Leipzig, 1904, Bd. 14, p. 90). It is known that St. Cyril of Alexandria, fighting against Nestorius, whose sermons were distributed among the monks, sent the latter letters against Nestorius (Migne, Cyril. Alex., t.X, Epist.XXVI, 140CD–141AB). Therefore, it is quite possible that Rev. Nilus, who maintained close ties with the world, was well aware of the Nestorian heresy. And although in his letters we do not find a mention of the name of Nestorius anywhere, nevertheless, the emphasis on the idea of ​​the union of two natures in Christ (Epist., lib. II, 292. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.345B) and the unity of His hypostases is not without polemical overtones (Epist., lib. III, 91. Ibid., col.428CD and Epist. 92, col.428D), as well as the use of the term “Theotokos” (Epist., lib. II, 180. Ibid., col.293A; Epist., lib. I, 247. Ibid., col.180D; De mon. exerc. 776A), suggests that Rev. Nile fought against the Nestorian heresy, which had already come out in a certain form. The term “Theotokos” gave rise to H. Keene to claim that Rev. Neil died after the Third Ecumenical Council, that is, around 435 (see H. Kihn. Patrologie. Paderborn, Band II, 1908, p. 235). The most complete collection of works by Rev. We find Neil in Migne Patrol. gr.s., t.79. This includes his letters from the edition of Leo Allatius (Rom, 1668), “Narrationes” from Anekdota Petrus Possinus, Paris, 1639, and the rest of his works from the edition of Suaresius (Rom, 1673). See: Photius, Bibliotheca CCI, Migne gr.s., t.103, col.672C. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.811–968. Hyacinthus Libellus (see: Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1323A), K. Heussi (“Untersuchungen...”, p.161), O. Bardenhewer (“Geschiste altkir. Lit.” IV, 177) believe that the Peristeria, which is narrated here, is identical with the Peristeria mentioned in the Acts of Chalcedon Cathedral (see: Mansi Col. Sacr. Concil., VI, col.1013). F. Degenhart believes that there is no solid basis for identifying these two Peristeria, since the common features in its characteristics (namely wealth and virtue) “can also be found in other individuals” (see his work “Beitraege zur Nilusforschung”, p. 10). See: Quaest. II, XI and XXI lecturers. Anastasia Sinaita (Migne gr.s., t.89, col.349C, 437C and 536BC) and “Peristeria” teacher. Nile (Migne gr.s., t.79, sectio IX, cap.V, col.829BC; sect.VI, cap.II, col.857D; sect.IX, cap.I, col.860ABC). See: S. Tillemont. Memoires pour servir a l'histoire eccelsiastique des six premiers siecles, 14, 209. K. Heussi. Untersuchungen…par. 22, pp.160–163. O. Bardenhewer. Geschichte d. altkir. Liter., T.IV, pp. 177–178. K. Heussi. Untersuchungen… p.162. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1165A–1199C. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, p.4; Migne gr.s., t.79; Epist. lib. III, CCXXXVII–CCXXXIX, col.493BCD. See: Migne gr.s., t.79, “De malignis cogitationibus”, cap.XXIII, col.1228AB. The reverend himself is here. Neil recalls that in his work “On Prayer” he already spoke about why thoughts about sensory things defile knowledge: “What is the reason that constant thoughts about sensory things defile knowledge, it is said in the chapters [of the treatise] “The Word on Prayer.” See: “Apophthegmata Patrum” (Migne gr.s., t.65, col.306ABC 1–8) and Nilus Sinaita “On Prayer” (Migne gr.s., t.79, cap.XIII, XIV, XVI, XVII, XIX, XX, LXXXIX, CXXI, col.1165–1169). The treatise “Apophthegmata Patrum” dates back to the second half of the 5th century. (460–500). See more details: W. Bousset. Apophthegmata. Tuebingen, 1923, p.68. Photius, Migne gr.s., t.103, "Bibliotheka", cod.CCI, col.672. K. Heussi. Untersuchungen… p.119, note 6. See: O. Bardenhewer. Geschichte d. altkir. Liter., T.IV, p.171. K. Heussi. Untersuchungen…, p.119, note 6 and Haidacher. Nilusexzerpte im Pandektes des Antiochus – Revue Benedictine, XXII, Nr.2,249. Migne gr.s., t.79, “De octo spirit. malit.”, col.1146–1164. See: Joannis Cassiani, Migne lat.s., t.49, Collat ​​V, cap.XVIII, col.635AB, where it is said that the doctrine of the eight cardinal sins is accepted everywhere. See: S. Zarin. Asceticism according to Orthodox Christian teaching, vol. I, book 2. St. Petersburg, 1907, p. 349. See: "De octo vitiosis cogitationibus". Migne gr.s., t.40, cap.I–IX, col.1272–1276AB. See: Joannis Cassiani, Migne lat.s., t.49, Collat ​​V, cap.II, col.611A. See: F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, p.5. See: O. Bardenhewer. Geschichte d. altkir. Liter., T.IV, p.171 and F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, p.6. Migne gr.s., t.79, “De diversis malig. cogit.”, col.1200D–1233. In particular, at the end of the 23rd chapter, the author recalls that in the treatise “On Prayer” he already spoke about the reason why thinking about sensory things defiles knowledge. See: Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, p.175 and K. Heussi Untersuchungen? p.164. Evagrius. Migne, P. gr.s., t.40, col.1237B–1237D. Migne gr.s., t.79, “Sermo”, col.1264 B–1285. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, p.8. Migne gr.s., t.79, “Narrationes”, col.589A–693. See his works: 1) Rec. on the book Degenhart in Theolog. Literaturzeitung", 1915, (No. 18/19), S.402; 2) “Nilus der Asket und der Ueberfall der Moenche am Sinai” in “Neue Jahrbuecher fuer das klassische Altertum”, 1916 (No. 37/38, 3. Heft), S.107; 3) an extensive monograph “Untersuchungen zu Nilus dem Asketen” (“Texte und Untersuchungen”, 42, 2), Leipzig, 1917. See: O. Bardenhewer. Gesch. der altkirch. Lit., 4. Band, par. 52, S.163–164 and P. Cayre. Precis de Patrologie, t.I, Paris, 1927, pp.495–496. See: F. Degenhart. Beitraege zur Nilusforschung, 1918, S.19. J. Stiglmayer. Der Asketiker Nilus Sin. und die antiken Schriftsteller in “Zeitsch. fuer cat. Theol.”, III, 1915, S.576. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.696–712A. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.720–809. S. Tillemont. Memoires pour servir a l'histoire eccelsiastique des six premiers siecles. Bd. XIV, Paris, 1709, p.208. S. Schwietz. Das morgenlaendische Moenchtum, Bd. II, 1913, S.60. O. Bardenhewer. Gesch. der altkirch. Lit., 4 Band, par.52, S.173. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, p.9. K. Heussi. Untersuchungen... S.50–51. See: Palladius Helehop. Historia Lausaica, cap.VII, Migne. gr.s., t.34, col.1020 A, where it is said that there were several thousand monks on Mount Nitria, and in another place Palladius reports that the Tavenian monasteries housed approx. 7000 people (chapter 38, col.1100C). Migne gr.s., t.79, “De volunt. paupertate", col.968C. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.720–809 and col.968–1060. See: O. Bardenhewer. Gesch. der altkirch. Lit., 4 Band, par.52, S.174 and Cabrol. Dictionnaire d'Archeologie chretienne, t.1, Paris, 1924, p.308. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1061–1093. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, p.12. Migne gr.s., t.79, "Tractatus ad Eulogium", col.1093–1140. Migne gr.s., t.146, “Eccles. Hist.”, lib.XIV, cap.LIV, col.1256B. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1235–1240AB. Ibid., col.1235B. Here, in particular, we read: “Just as it is impossible for an athlete who has not participated in the competition to be crowned, so it is impossible for him to become a Christian without a struggle.” Zoeckler. Evagrius Pontikus, 4. Hfet, Biblische und kirchenhistorische Studien, Muenchen, 1893, S.44. F. Degenhart. Derhl. Nilus Sinaita, p.12. We find the best classification of letters in J. Fessler (“Institutiones Patrologiae”, t.II, Pars altera, 1896, pp. 119–125). We took this work as a basis for our review of the letters of Rev. Nila. There are three known editions of the letters of St. Nile: the first edition, numbering 355 letters, belongs to P. Possinus (P. Possinus, Paris, 1657); the second, most complete, edition of L. Allatius (Roma, 1668); the third, including 316 letters, was carried out by Nikos Weis (he erroneously indicates the number of letters as 326). The last code of letters, i.e. Weiss, is based on a 13th-century manuscript found in 1908 in the monastery of St. Varlaam in Thessaly. K. Heussi, after a detailed comparison of all codices, comes to the conclusion that the manuscripts of Possinus and Weiss stem from the edition on which the edition of L. Allatius is based (see: K. Heussi. Untersuchungen... S.34–37). Migne gr.s., t.79, col.81–581. William Smith. A Dictionary of Christian Biography. Vol.IV, London, 1887, p.44. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.577BCD–580A. Ibid. Epist. lib.IV, 62, col.580BCD–581. Mansi. Collectio sacr. conciliorum, 13, pp.31–38. Migne gr.s., t.79. Ep. lib.II, 293, col.345BC. Ibid. Epist. lib., III, 13, col.373BC. Quotations and borrowings similar to those of Rev. Nile, is a common occurrence among the holy fathers. See about this: Leo Allatius. Diatriba de Nilus, Migne gr.s., t.79, s.48. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1240C–1249B. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, S.14. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1249С–1264A. See: Loci communes (Maximus Confessor), Migne gr.s., t.91, col.725D. Migne gr.s., t.103, col.672C. Migne gr.s., t.146, col.1256BC. See: O. Bardenhewer. Gesch. der. altkir. Literat., Band IV, par.52, S.174 and F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, S.14. Epist. lib. III, 11, Migne gr.s., t.79, col.373A. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, S.17. See: Niceph. Cal. Eccles. Hist., Migne gr.s., t.146, lib.XIV, cap.LIV, col.1256B. K. Heussi. Untersuchungen…, S.7. See: Procopius Gazacus, Comment. in Cant. Cant., Migne gr.s., t.87, col.1545–1754. Migne gr.s., t.122, col.537–686. See: O. Bardenhewer. Gesch. der. altkir. Literat., Band IV, par.52, S.176. Migne gr.s., t.104, cod.276, col.245–257. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1489–1501. Anastasius Sin., Migne gr.s., t.89, col.357BC. Epist. lib.III, 31, Migne gr.s., t.79, col.385D–387A. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1279–1286. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, S.18. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1285–1312. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, S.18–19. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, S.20. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1140–1144. Like, for example, Suaresius, Fessler-Jungmann, Kihn, etc. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, S.20–21. Migne gr.s., t.79, col.1436–1464. Migne gr.s., t.106, col.867–890. F. Degenhart. Nilus Sinaita, S.22. See letter of Auxentio (Ep. lib.IV, 42, col.569C). Ep. lib.II, 191, col.300CD. Ep. lib.I, 189, col.154C. In the teaching of Rev. Nile's view of man is dominated by the influence of a dichotomous view. according to which a person consists of body and soul. However, Rev. Nile, one can also find expressions that can be interpreted in favor of the trichotomous doctrine, according to which a person consists of body, soul and spirit. See the letter to Archbishop Regin, in which Rev. Neil says: “Thou art peace in the world” (Ep. lib.II, 119, col.252BC). We find a similar view of man in other holy fathers. In detail about the image and likeness of God, St. Neil says in the treatise “De volunt. paupertate", cap.45, col.1025C. See letter Eusignio satrapae (Ep. lib.III, 5, col.368A). Letter to Vicar Eupsychius (Ep. lib.II, 162, col.277A). See letter Cubiculario Faustino (Ep. lib.II, 328, col.361). Similar thoughts were expressed by the holy fathers both before and after St. Nila. So, for example, St. martyr Justin says: “If a person did not freely choose good, he would not be worthy of reward or praise, and also could not be punished if he were in himself bad” (Dialog. cum Tryph., n.43, Migne gr.s., t.VI, col.393B). St. Theophilus of Antioch, pointing to the high dignity of the human soul, says: “God created man free and autocratic” (Ad Autolycum, Migne gr.s., t.VI, col.1096A). St. Gregory of Nyssa, comparing man with other earthly creatures, writes: “The human soul shows its royal greatness and superiority over all earthly creatures in that, without obeying anyone, it freely and sovereignly disposes of its desires” (De homin. opific., cap 4 et 16, Migne gr.s., t.44, col.136B and 184B). St. John Chrysostom says: “God from the beginning created man autocratic, otherwise there would have been no need to punish him for breaking the commandments, nor to reward him for their fulfillment” (Homil. in Genesis, XVI, n.5., Migne gr.s., t.53, col.132. Compare also Homil. in Genesis, XIX, n.1, col.158; XX, n.1, col.166; XX, n.3, col.169). Rev. Macarius of Egypt in his “Conversations” says: “Our nature is receptive to both good and evil... You can direct your own will to what is good for you” (Migne gr.s., t.XXXIV, col.700C). Free will is presented in similar terms in Tertullian (De exhort. castlt. cap.1, Migne lat.s., t.2, col.963B), in Blessed. Augustine (Enchiridon, 105, Migne lat.s., t.40, col.291 and De ver. relig., cap.14, n.27, Migne lat.ser., t.34, col.133–134), in St. Gregory of Nazianzus (Oratio in Matt., XIX (1–12), n.16, Migne gr.s., t.36, col.301A), by Rev. John of Damascus (De fide orthodoxa, cap.25, Migne gr.s., t.94, col.957C) and others. See letter Zenoni Decemprimo (lib.II, 299, col.348D). We find the same thought in other holy fathers. So, for example, St. Methodius, Bishop of Tire, in his fragment “Ex libro de libero arbitrio” (Migne gr.s., t.18, col.264) considers man whom God created free to be the cause of evil; St. Basil the Great (Constit. monast., cap.II, Migne gr.s., t.31, col.1344B) proves that evil is nothing more than a deviation from good, and St. John Chrysostom in his “Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew” (XIX, paragraph 6), says: “Evil does not depend on nature, but on freedom” (Migne gr.s., t.57, col.282). Ep. Auxentio Ecdico, lib.II, 309, col.352B. See: Ep. Charitoni, lib.III, 254, col.516C. The word “pathos” (affectus) – “passion”, comes from the Greek. The verb “passhain” means “to suffer” and denotes such a state of a person when he is under one or another internal or external influence, due to which he suffers, being, as it were, in an abnormal state. St. John Chrysostom, characterizing passion, says: “No one causes us so much torment as passions that have intensified in the soul” (Expositio in Psalm. IV, 3, Migne gr.s., t.55, col.44). "Peristeria", sectio X, cap.3, col.832B. Other holy fathers have similar thoughts. So, for example, Rev. Anthony the Great says: “Our spiritual nature has fallen from the heights of glory and dignity into the abyss of shame and humiliation” (Ep. VI, Migne gr.s., t.40, col.1011B). Rev. Macarius the Great, pointing out the great loss that man suffered as a result of his fall, says: “Adam took into himself the leaven of dirty passions, which permeated the entire race of the old Adam” (Homil. XXIV, 2, Migne gr.s., t.65, col.1020D). See letter Cononi rempublicam gerenti (Ep. lib.IV, 39, col.568B). Ep. lib.III, 33, col.400C. See letter Ptolomaeo suncletico (Ep. lib.I, 2, col.84B; cf.: 1 Cor. 15:2). Epist. lib.I, CXV, col.133A. Epist. lib.I, CII, col.125CD–128AB. The same thought Rev. Neil expresses in another letter addressed to Methodius, in which he, in particular, writes: “When you hear the Lord crying from the cross: My God, My God! Why have you forsaken me? (Matthew 27:46) - know that He says this on behalf of all people born of Adam and, being the Intercessor... from the side of those protected by Him, he cries out to the Judge: we bear the guilt, we are robbed, humiliated. After all, if all of us, people descended from Adam, had not been abandoned by God, then we would not have been subjected to the reproach of thousands of sins and would not have begun to make sacrifices and worship stones, trees, waters, lifeless stars, monkeys, dogs, wolves, crocodiles, evil demons, and even the devil himself” (Ep. lib.II, CCLXXXIX, col.344C). This is the place of Rev. Nile probably borrowed from St. Gregory the Theologian, since in his “Oratio XXX, Theologica IV” (Migne gr.s., t.36, col.109ABC) we find entire phrases that literally coincide with the text of St. Nila. Epist. lib.II, XL, col.213D. "De monastica exercitatione", cap.IV, col.721 C.Сf. Epist. lib.II, LIV, col.224C. Epist. lib.III, CCCXIII, col.536B. Epist. lib.III, CXXI, col.440C. Epist. lib.I, CLXXVII, col.152B. Epist. lib.II, CCXXVIII, col.317C. Professor N.N. Glubokovsky emphasizes the fact that in ancient, especially in Greek-historical patristic literature, there are no separate discussions about this most important issue for human salvation (see his article “The Doctrine of Grace among Greek Church Authorities and Inter-Church Union” in the “Glasnik rpske Patrijarshye”, 1931, p. 274). Epist. lib.III, CXLVII, col.452D. Epist. lib.IV, XLIV, col.572AB. Epist. lib.IV, XV, col.557BC. Epist. lib.III, CCLXXI, Eupraxio diacono, col.517D–520A. Epist. lib.III, CCCXX, col.537CD. F. Degenhart. Derhl. Nilus Sinaita, 1915, S.65–68. Epist. lib.II, CCXXVIII, col.317CD. The word “choice, voluntary decision” or “choice, chosen way of life or thoughts” in ascetic literature means one of the main points in the religious and moral life of a person, namely the ability of a conscious decision or choice from various desires (intentions). See: S.M. Sarin. Asceticism according to Orthodox Christian teaching, vol. I, St. Petersburg, 1907, pp. 79–85, note 71. Epist. lib.II, LV, col.224C. “De volunt. paupertate", cap.37, col.1013B. "De monastica exercitat.", cap.XI, col.732A. Epist. lib.I, CXXXIV, col.140B. Epist. lib.III, CXXII, col.440CD. Epist. lib.II, CLVII, col.273CD. "Peristeria", sectio IV, cap.17, col.849A. Epist. lib.I, CCXXIX, col.165D–168A. Epist. lib.I, CCCXIX, col.197B. Epist. lib.II, CLIV, col.277D. Epist. lib.II, CCXC, Constantino comiti, col.344D–345A. Epist. lib.II, XLIX, col.220BC. Epist. lib.II, XLIX, Alexandro monacho ex grammatico, col.220A. Epist. lib.III, VIII, col.369CD. Epist. lib.II, CCLXIV, col.333D–336A. Epist. lib.IV, LII, Colorbasio, col.416D. Epist. lib.II, LXXIII, Comasio ex rhetore monacho, col.232D–233A. This trend, as we know, came out mainly from the famous Alexandrian school, which, under the influence and leadership of Panten, Clement and Origen, shaped Christian philosophy. Epist. lib.III, XVI, col.377 BC. In his treatise "De oratione" Rev. Neil says that a person must overcome two types of obstacles: passions and demons (see: “De oratione”, p. 135, col. 1196 B). However, it must be recognized that such a division of obstacles, although it is based on the teachings of the Venerable himself. Nile, is distinguished by a certain artificiality and can only be considered theoretically. According to ascetic teaching in general and according to the teaching of St. Nila in particular, subjective and objective obstacles in life are closely interrelated (interpenetrating), and in practice they are difficult to separate. (See: “Tractatus ad Eulogium”, cap.XIV, col.1109D–1112A). "Tractatus ad Eulogium", cap.XXIII, col.1124BC; cf. Epist. lib, II, LXIX, col.232B. "De monachorum praestantia", p.3, col.1064C. “De monast.” exercit.”, c.LVII, col.792A. The idea of ​​the close connection between gluttony and fornication is more concisely expressed elsewhere: “The thought of gluttony has as its completion the thought of fornication” (“De monast. exercit.”, c.XL, col.769B). This is the reverend's pleasure. Neil calls it “satisfaction of the larynx” (“De monast. exercit.”, c.58, col.792B). Ep. lib.II, CLX, col.276CD. Ep. lib.II, LIX, col.225C. "Narrationes", III, col.621B. Ep. lib.II, CCLXXXIV, col.341B. Ep. lib.II, CCXLII, col.325B. Ep. lib.II, LVIII, col.225BC. Ep. lib.I, CCXXII, Therino monacho, col.164CD. “De octo spirit. mal.”, cap.VIII, col.1153A. “De octo spirit. mal.”, cap.VII, col.1152C. Ep. lib.II, CXLVII, col.268BC. Ep. lib.II, CLIII, col.272D. “De monast.” exercit.”, cap.LV, col.788C. “De octo spirit. mal.”, cap.IX, col.1153D; col.1156A. Ep. lib.II, CCCV, Olympio questori, col.349C. “De octo spirit. mal.”, cap.XI, col.1156D. "Tract. ad Eulogium", c.VII, col.1104A. “De octo spirit. mal.”, cap.XII, col.1157B. Ibid., cap.XIII, col.1157C. “De octo spirit. mal.”, cap.XV, col.1160C. “De volunt. paupertate", c.LXV, col.1057B. Epist. lib.III, CCXXXI, col.492B. Epist. lib.IV, III, col.552B. “De octo spirit. mal.”, cap.XVII, col.1161C. “De octo spirit. mal.”, cap.XVIII, col.1164A. Epist. lib.III, CXXXIV, col.445ABC. Epist. lib.III, CCLXXII, col.520A. Sententiae, c.24, col.1241D. See letter from Rev. Nile to Deacon Seleucia (Ep. lib.I, CCXXXII, col.164D). Ep. lib.III, XXXIII, col.397C. Ep. lib.II, CCCXXVII, Dracontio vindici, col.360D. Ep. lib.III, CCLXIX, Juliano, col.517C. Ep. lib.III, XXXIII, col.388B. Ep. lib.I, V, Marcellino monacho, col.85A. Ep. lib.II, CLXX, Helenae illustri, col.285CD. Ep. lib.I, CCCXI, col.196 B. Ep. lib.I, CLXXVII, Limentio monacho, col.152B. Ep. lib.I, XXXIX, col.100D–101A. Ep. lib.II, LXI, col.228C. Ep. lib.II, CLXV, Symmacho, col.280A. "Tract. ad Eulogium", cap.XXIII, col.1124C. Ep. lib.II, XLI, col.216AB. Ep. lib.I, CXLVI, col.144A. Ep. lib.II, CCCVII, col.349D–352A. Ep. lib.II, CCCXX Joanni illustri, col.356CD. "Peristeria", sectio IV, cap.XIII, col.840 BC. "De oratione", c.XXXIX, col.1176B. Ep. lib.I, CCXXXIX, col.169D. Ep. lib.III, CCXCVII, col.529D–532A. "Institutio ad monachos", col.1240A; cf. "Tract. ad Eulogium", cap.XXIV, col.1125A. Ep. lib.I, XCVI, Soteruioni, col.124C. Ep. lib.III, CXXXVI, col.448A. Ep. lib.III, CCXLIII, col.497D–500A. Ep. lib.II, CXLIII, col.265B. Ep. lib.II, CCXXIX, col.317D–320A. Ep. lib.II, CCII, col.305D. "De octo spiritibus malitiae", cap.XVIII, col.1164A. "Peristeria", sectio XII, cap.XI, col.961C. Ep. lib.II, LVIII, Aetio monacho, col.225B. Ep. lib.II, LI, col.221C. Ep. lib.III, CCIII, Zoasimo Cigario, col.305D–308A. Ep. lib.I, CCCXXVI, Theodoto comiti, col.200D–201A. "Capita paraenetica", c.98, col.1257B. “De volunt. paupertate", cap.X, col.981D–984A. Ep. lib.I, CLXXX, col.152C. "Tract. ad Eulogium", cap.X, col.1105D. Ep. lib.III, CXXI, Eurycli presbytero, col.440B. "Peristeria", sectio II, cap.I, col.817B. Ep. lib.III, CCLXVIII, col.517BC. "De oratione", col.1200A. Ep. lib.III, CCCXIX, col.537C. Ep. lib.III, CCLII, Gerontio monacho, col.508A–509A. “De volunt. paupertate", cap.XXVII, col.1004A. "De oratione", cap.III, col.1168CD. “De volunt. paupertate", cap.XXVIII, col.1004B. "De oratione", cap.XXVIII, col.1173A. See: Innocent, Archbishop. Consecration into monasticism. Vilna, 1899. The view of monastic tonsure as a sacrament was very widespread in ascetic literature, both before St. Nila, and after him. So, for example, blessed. Jerome calls monastic tonsure a “second baptism.” We find similar thoughts in Rev. Theodora Studita, Rev. Simeon the New Theologian, Eustathius of Thessaloniki, Blessed. Simeon of Thessalonica, John of Antioch and others. Epist. lib.I, CCXLII, col.172 B. Epist. lib.II, XCI, XCII, Amphilochio monacho, Migne, gr.s., t.LXXIX, col.241BC. Epist. lib.II, XCVI, Philumeno enclisto, col.244B. "De monastica exercitatione", cap.XX, col.745C. Epist. lib.I, CCXLI, col.172C. "De monastica exercitatione", cap.XLI, col.769D–772A. We also find the idea of ​​the need for strict obedience in monastic life in St. Anthony the Great, St. Basil the Great, Rev. Ephraim the Syrian, Rev. John Cassian, Rev. John Climacus, Abba Dorotheos and other ascetics. Epist. lib.II, LXV, Theodoro monacho, col.229AB. “De volunt. paupertate", cap.LXIV, col.1056CD. Epist. lib.I, CCXXII, Therino monacho, col.164C. Epist. lib.III, CCXCVIII, Romano monacho, col.532A. This idea is very common in ancient ascetic literature. So, for example, Rev. Macarius the Great says: “Whoever keeps his body from fornication, but inwardly commits adultery with his thoughts, will receive no benefit from his virgin body” (Macarii Aegyptii, Homil. XXVI, n.XIII, Migne, gr.s., t.XXXIV, col.684A). According to Rev. Basil the Great, virginity is not only abstinence from having children. All life must be virginal, for a person can commit adultery with his word, his eye, and his hearing. In addition, a person can accept uncleanness in the heart, as well as corrupt chastity by immoderation in food and drink (See: Works of St. Basil the Great, in Russian translation. Published by P. Soikin, St. Petersburg, 1911. T. II, pp. 317–318, “The Ascetic Word”). St. John Chrysostom says: “A virgin must be pure not only in body, but also in soul... If a virgin’s body is immaculate, and her most important part, that is, her spiritual thoughts, is defiled, then what good does it benefit her (that is, the virginity of the body)? What is the benefit if the church is destroyed and only its fence remains?” (Joannes Chrys. De virginitate V, Migne, gr.s., t.XLVIII, col.537). Epist. lib.II, CXVIII, Anastasiae virgini, col.252A. “De volunt. paupertate", cap.LII, col.1036C. According to the teachings set forth in ancient ascetic literature, non-covetousness is one of the most important conditions of monastic life. “De volunt. paupertate", col.968–1060. "De vitiis quae opposita sunt virtutibus", cap.III, col.1141D. "Peristeria", sectio XI, cap.XXII, col.936B. "Peristeria", sectio IV, cap.IV, col.829A. Epist. lib.I, LXXXIII, Eugenio diacono, col.120B. Epist. lib.IV, LX, Paulo monacho, col.576D–577AB. Epist. lib.II, V, col.204B. Epist. lib.II, CLXI, Quintilio cancellario, col.277A. Epist. lib.III, XXXVIII, col.405A. Epist. lib.III, CCXCIII, col.528D–529A. "Peristeria", sectio XII, cap.VII, col.952B. Neil, Rev. Various chapters and thoughts. T.II. Moscow, 1858, p.237. "Oratio in Albianum", col.750D. Attention to oneself is considered by all ancient ascetic writers to be the main condition for monastic success. Epist. lib.II, XXV, Hermolao monacho, col.212A. Epist. lib.III, CCCXIV, col.536C. The word “contemplation” (“observation”, “examination”, “cognition”) emphasizes the moment of intense, prolonged observation or study of phenomena occurring before the eyes of the observer (see: S.M. Zarin. Asceticism. St. Petersburg, 1907. Vol. 1, book 2. P. 395, note 121). Epist. lib.II, CXXVII, col.253C. "Narrationes", I, col.589A–592A. “De volunt. paupertate", cap.LXI, col.1052B. Epist. lib.II, LXXXIX, Arsino monacho, col.241AB. “De volunt. paupertate", cap.LV, col.1041C. "Ad Eulogium", cap.XXIII, col.1124C. Epist. lib.III, CLXXV, Eugenio monacho, col.465BC. We set out the contents of this letter in the chapter relating to the doctrine of man and Divine Providence. Expressive evidence of this is provided to us by the letter of Rev. Nile to Bishop Philo regarding monastic food. In this letter, Rev. The Nile allows weak monks to eat even meat (Epist. lib.II, CLX, col.376CD). The end of the ikos in the rite of service of St. Nilu (Minea, November 12).