5) Ф. Ф. Гусев.

In the essay by F. F. Gusev: “Exposition and Critical Analysis of the Moral Teachings of Schopenhauer” (Moscow, 1877), with particular clarity and unwavering consistency, a view of love for God is drawn as an affective state, excluding, at the moment of its highest tension, any real opportunity to actively serve people and even spend life in society. Since, to use the expression of the author of this work, “a fiery and intense feeling of love for God serves as the predominant motive and starting point of Christian asceticism, which therefore, in the form of its external and internal activity, was determined precisely by the property and nature of the feeling of love for God, reaching the greatest intensity and receiving a dominant influence on consciousness,” 380 then we are obliged to consider this view from the side of its foundations and conclusions in more detail. According to the author, love for God, not only in ascetic contemplatives, actually existed in the form of a feeling “reached to extreme tension and ardor” 381, it had the character of “passionate love”, 382 “affective attraction”, 383 was represented by them under the image of a man’s fiery love for a woman, under the image of a strong and living thirst, the satisfaction of which is depicted as rapture, sometimes reaching the point of “frenzy”, 384 (i.e. e. ecstasy), - not only in fact was the situation exactly this way in the history of Eastern contemplative asceticism, 385 but it should be so normally due to the peculiarities of the nature of God as an object of love. 386 According to general psychological laws, love for God, as a mental phenomenon, is composed of the representation of the object of love - God, 387 “an insensible, spiritual and, moreover, infinite being, 388 representation, combined with “specific excitement in the form of spiritual pleasantness or joy” 389 and at the same time with the desire to unite with God, to engage with Him and some (?) visualization of Him, some (?) direct communication with Him.” 390 The representation of the object of love - God must be central and dominant in consciousness,” 391 “serving as its direct object and falling, so to speak, into its very focus.” 392 But, by the nature of the object of love - God, as a being “non-sensual, spiritual and, moreover, infinite,” His representation requires complete and undivided concentration of consciousness on Him, when a person “forgets everything and does not know any other impression or sensation.” 393 Man, therefore, can find satisfaction of his fiery love for God solely and exclusively in a state of pure prayerful contemplation, 394 “which form is” therefore “the only one adequate to the nature of the insensible and infinite object of love.” 395 Equally, due to the limitations and a certain amount of the innate power of feeling, on the one hand, on the other hand, by the very property and content of the intense feeling of love for God, “the purest spirit, the highest being and the unconditional personality,” 396 love for God can only be complete when it is completely and undividedly focused on Him alone. 397 Therefore, not to mention the complete incompatibility with true love of God of affection and love for a woman, which lie at the basis of marriage and condition it, 398 even the love for neighbors commanded by Christ and serving as “a sign and criterion of a person’s actual belonging to Christianity” 399, with the strong development of love for God, although it is not completely displaced from the consciousness of such a person and does not completely remain inactive, 400 however, undoubtedly, in the author’s opinion, it is decisively outweighed by this latter, recedes into the background, 401 loses the significance of the stimulus and motive of activity, 402 “the defining beginning of life.” 403 It is mainly expressed not in active and direct service to people, but manifests itself as pity, benevolence and fervent prayer for the salvation and pardon of people.” 404 True and ardent love for God, which could find its satisfaction only in the “form of mental contemplation,” 405 as the only form adequate to the nature of the insensible and infinite object of love, 406 necessarily 407 led the individuals embraced by it, according to the previously established laws of the limited “quantity” of conscious and emotional 408 force, to the specialization of moral activity on “themselves, on their own individuality,” 409 and also to asceticism, that is, to celibacy, renunciation of the world or withdrawal from it and constant warfare with the flesh and all sinful desires, or to feats of severe and even selfless struggle with the body and all vicious movements.” 410 Renunciation of the world in the sense of complete removal from it had the goal of liberation, isolating oneself from external impressions, which, acting on a person’s external feelings, take possession of his consciousness to one degree or another for some time and taking away “some part” of it from the object of love - God, thereby preventing undivided contemplation. 411 According to the author in question, if abstract thinking requires possible complete isolation from external impressions, so that its concentration is hindered even by light and other, sometimes completely insignificant impressions, then all the more so must this be affirmed regarding contemplation, the subject of which is the most perfect and infinite spirit. 412 Celibacy is also a natural and necessary condition for an undivided, undistracted concentration of thought and feeling on God. The feeling of love for God, having reached the point of strong tension and ardor, does not leave any room in a person for simultaneous love and affection for a woman, 413 since these feelings and inclinations, being in conflict and even contrast with each other, 414 cannot simultaneously coexist in the soul of a person. 415 In addition, family life “takes away a greater or lesser share of a person’s attention and energy,” “entertains him with worries and needs, and, therefore, is incompatible with “spiritual or mental prayer,” which requires complete self-collection, complete concentration of the spirit. 416 But the concentration of consciousness and feelings completely and undividedly on one idea of God is hindered not only by external impressions, but also by internal aspirations and feelings that relate not to God, but to other objects and arouse another series of ideas, striving to penetrate the consciousness and master it. 417 “Hence the need and need for a radical limitation of aspirations, whose awakening distracts consciousness from the object on which it should be completely and completely concentrated; some suppression and limitation of needs that interfere with the desired or necessary concentration or composure of the spirit is required. 418 Sensuality with its rooted desires and aspirations especially hinders the purity and intensity of contemplation. If the body is not spiritualized through strict abstinence, in the sense of limiting and suppressing to the greatest possible extent its sensual urges and needs, then it serves as an obstacle to the soaring of the spirit, intense mental contemplation and the intoxication of love for God through this contemplation. 419 A preponderance of the spirit over the body is necessary, 420 achieved by weakening the body, “at least in relation to its muscular and fatty fullness”, 421 an inevitable strict and harsh attitude towards food 422 in relation to its quantity and type. 423 We deliberately dwelled in more detail on the presentation of the view of F. F. Gusev, since this view represents a systematic development of thoughts actually expressed by some “ascetic contemplatives (for example, John Climacus, partly even Isaac the Syrian, etc.) and presents a generally psychologically correct picture of one of the types of ancient eastern asceticism, which developed mainly in Palestine and Syria. But the question is whether this view is fundamentally correct, whether it represents the normative state of affairs in terms of its foundations and consequences. The scientific basis for this view is the psychological fact of the narrowness of consciousness and the opinion, supported especially by the psychologist Ben, about the limitedness and quantitative certainty of the amount of emotion inherent in a person. Due to these properties, God, according to the author, can only be the subject of human consciousness, occupy a central position in it, when this consciousness is not entertained by anything extraneous, by any other ideas coming from both the external world and the internal sphere of the individual. In the same way, a feeling can only be directed with all its strength “with all the power of emotion” 424 towards God when nothing else attracts this feeling to itself and, therefore, in no way takes it away from God or weakens its intensity. 425 We have to object, first of all, to the author’s very presentation of the fact of the narrowness of consciousness in man and the quantitative limitation of the power of emotional ability in him. “We will have the clearest consciousness about any object only then, says the author, when all the power of consciousness innate to us is directed towards this object, when consciousness is entirely focused on it alone, and is not in the slightest degree distracted from it. Any part of consciousness that is simultaneously or in close succession directed at another object disappears for that object and reduces the strength and clarity of its consciousness. 426 Here, obviously, the law of the so-called narrowness of consciousness is meant, but it is expressed very imprecisely. In a clear consciousness, indeed, there can be at the same time a limited number of representations, of which one occupies a central position, but it cannot be said that the presence in consciousness of any representation reduces the clarity of another or others. Consciousness, by the nature of its activity, is a correlating, comparing and discriminating ability. Clarity of consciousness is directly dependent on the perfection of the acts of comparison and difference. This determines the psychological fact that the clearest representation of an object occurs according to the law of contrast. Complete isolation of ideas in our consciousness is therefore not only impossible, but also undesirable. The author refers to the fact that a serious thinker, busy solving some difficult problem or discussing some subject, tries to concentrate entirely on the subject of his mental work. 427 This is undeniable in the sense that the thinker tries to analyze more carefully and deeply the concepts and ideas included in the circle and plan of his work, to discover connections and similarities between them, or to find differences and, accordingly, to establish one or another connection and system in them. Of course, all thoughts and ideas that are not part of the association of his work are carefully eliminated - he tries to distract himself from them. As for the conditions and external auxiliary methods of concentration, they can be, as indeed they are, very different and even directly opposite, depending on the personal way of thinking and the individual character and habits of the person. In vain, F. F. Gusev, summarizing some facts, asserts that “even light and other, sometimes insignificant, impressions interfere with complete concentration of thinking.” 428 He cites the example of Descartes, who, as is known, remained for 16 hours every day in bed, and during this time in the bedroom the shutters were closed and the curtains were drawn so that external impressions would not interfere with the concentration of his thinking, as well as Malebranche, who worked with the shutters closed, since the light disturbed him. To these two examples, many others of the same kind can be added, but at the same time, it must be said that from the lives of poets and thinkers, equally numerous facts of a completely different nature are known, which decisively prevent us from accepting the thought of the author under discussion as a general proposition, much less a psychological law. Thus, Montaigne tells about one Paduan scientist that this latter, like Seneca, could work successfully only when a circle of acquaintances gathered in his room, making noise and laughing: this noise and laughter helped the scientist to concentrate faster and deeper, to go deeper into himself. 429 In the same way, from the life of the ancient ascetics - contemplatives, one can point out examples of both kinds similar to those given: some of the contemplatives could maintain complete concentration of thought on God solely and exclusively under the condition of complete freedom from external impressions, while on others the latter did not have a dissipative influence and even contributed to the education and strengthening of a contemplative mood in them. In this case, we must have in mind, and indeed we do, the states of higher, intense contemplation, generally not often achieved, which bear the general name of “ecstasy.” Contemplation, understood even in such an exceptional state, which reaches its highest revelation in “ecstasy,” however, according to the teachings of some ascetics, does not require unconditional and complete detachment from everything external for its implementation, although it should, in fairness, admit that it is precisely such – as complete as possible – detachment in ascetic literature that is presented as a general rule, the most common and most valid condition for achieving perfection in contemplation, while the opposite is considered rather as rare exception. Thus, in the justification and practice of Christian contemplative asceticism, we observe not one (as it appears from the author under discussion), but two main, most noticeable and prominent directions. The point of their divergence should be recognized (together with a partially different understanding of the very content and features of the state of contemplation) - mainly, precisely the view on the attitude of contemplatives to external impressions, and in connection with this, to other people. While some ascetics teach (of course, to the extent possible and practically implementing their worldview) that the contemplation of God excludes (at least ideally strives to exclude) all other views, ideas, impressions.... and, therefore, because of this - and real relationships with other people, love for whom, prescribed by Christianity, is understood only in the form of inner sympathy, which finds its expression and manifestation almost exclusively in prayer for them - other ascetic mystics do not consider the contemplation of God an obstacle to the implementation of active love, to the living and comprehensive realization of their loving relationships with the world and people in concrete activity. According to the main meaning of the first typical view, God in His infinite, absolute perfection, in His universality contains everything in Himself in the sense that for a person devoted to contemplative love in God, the possibility and necessity of any living real relationship to anything other than God alone is excluded. According to the meaning of this worldview, if expressed philosophically, God turns out to be absolute, so to speak, in a negative sense in relation to everything else, which is either unnecessary or even directly harmful for the implementation of true relationships with God. The Divinity has an unconditional value for a person, so that everything else, in the implementation of a living real relationship of the human person to the Divine, loses all meaning and significance in the eyes of the former. What is the point of admiring the reflection of the sun's rays - a weak, distant reflection of divine perfections in the world, in creation, when a person can achieve and, finally, achieves contemplation of the Sun-Deity Himself directly? The majestic, enchanting beauty of the magnificent starry sky not only does not attract the surprised, enthusiastic gaze of the inhabitants of the sublunary world when the sun, this physical king of the universe, appears on the horizon, but it is also necessary, due to the very appearance of the main luminary, to be hidden from the eyes of the observer. Until the sun leaves the horizon, a person cannot, and, perhaps, does not strive to contemplate the night “small” luminaries. By analogy with this external phenomenon, shouldn’t all other objects, phenomena, interests also hide from a person’s inner gaze... when the immaterial Sun of Truth shines brightly on his spiritual horizon, when he perceives the “non-evening” light of this Sun, when he strives, strives for this light with his whole being, is chained to this contemplation, admired by it, every minute afraid of losing his unearthly bliss? A positive answer to these questions is given by one of the branches of mystical asceticism. God must be everything for the contemplative mystic, - therefore, any turning of consciousness, attention, love of a person to any other - even the most sublime and sacred - object, besides God, is already, for the reasons indicated, a sign of weakening of attention, darkening of love for God, decline of spiritual life, trampling and violation of divine absolutism: God, then, is not everything for a person, if he turns even temporarily and even to some extent to another, no matter how it is - the other is beautiful, good and sublime. Of course, this question in practice was not resolved as conveniently and easily as in the theoretical worldview - in fact, at least some mystics felt an antinomy here: after all, Christianity commands not only to reject everything - both external objects and neighbors - to abandon everything for the sake of following Christ, which leads to the Heavenly Father, but no less clearly, definitely and decisively, it commands to love people and the creation of God in Christ and for Christ. Renunciation of everything in Christianity is not a final and unconditional matter, but only a methodological means for acquiring true, proper Christian attitudes towards people and the whole world, which a person also cannot help but love, since God Himself loves them, as His creation, as the work of His hands, as a real reflection of His perfections. Consequently, those who wish to truly follow Christ do not have the right opportunity to cross out from their religious life the proper relationship both to their neighbors and to the world. Figuratively speaking, the spiritual Sun does not blind the spiritual gaze of the contemplator and does not prevent him from paying attention to other people, but allows his spiritual eyes to penetrate deeper and see more correctly. In any case, even with the indicated general, basic point of view on the conditions and essence of the contemplation of God, still, as we see, the need to define and indicate some way of real, positive relationships with others was not eliminated. This method is actually indicated, although the main point of view, which we briefly described, did not favor this deviation from the rigor of the conclusion from the general provisions accepted by it. From here one can observe two currents in the works of even one ascetic of a mystical direction (for example, St. Isaac the Syrian), and both currents, with all the well-founded correctness of each of them, taken separately, are in little agreement with each other, are not completely in harmony with one another. 430 In any case, there is no doubt that contemplation, understood, characterized and implemented as an ecstatic state and presented as an unconditional, self-sufficient ideal, is not conducive to external activity, focusing attention on something extraneous. According to another, no less typical view, God is an absolute being not only in this respect, but also - mainly - in the sense that He is the Creator, Provider and Sustainer of the world, the Father of people who are brothers among themselves; Therefore, God requires from a Christian a positive, active relationship, based on living heartfelt sympathy, towards the world, in particular and especially towards people. Striving to realize his religious-mystical, ethical-normative relations with God, a person certainly cannot carry them out separately, apart from everything, as a separate self-enclosed, self-enclosed personality, but certainly achieves this only in connection with other people who make up the Church, in the arena of the saved and redeemed “World”. The relationship of a Christian mystic to God, according to the worldview presented, is, so to speak, a part, an inevitable, obligatory moment of his relationship with God. Not only that. The attitude of a Christian to the “World” created and saved by God is an obligatory, necessary means of achieving true communion with God, not only in the sense that the world, being a reflection of divine perfections, a reflection of divine glory, serves for a person as a ladder leading him to God, therefore, not in a methodological sense only and therefore only in a passing meaning - no, this attitude of a Christian to the world and people is much deeper, more important, more essential: a proper close relationship with the world is absolutely necessary for achieving communion with God in that highest mystical sense that the closest unity of man with God is achievable only on the condition that a Christian becomes a member of the “Body” of the God-Man, “Which is the Church” (Col 1:24). In relation to communion with God and, consequently, true mystical life, only the collective church, and not the isolated individual principle, is “the fullness of Him who fills all in all” (Eph 1:23). This point of view, with deeper penetration into it, had to necessarily modify the mystic’s attitude towards everything external, objectively given, which can no longer be considered in itself as an almost insurmountable obstacle, a negative authority in achieving communion with God, but, on the contrary, is a prerequisite for achieving precisely mystical unity with God, the means and moment of real communion with God. Consequently, if representatives of the first main direction, aware of the fundamental necessity and essential importance of cultivating love for people, however, on the basis of personal experience, as well as psychological considerations, come to the conviction that they can express their sympathy for their neighbors almost exclusively in prayer, and in some cases recognize as an ideal even the complete elimination from consciousness of everything that does not relate directly to God, the second direction recognizes it as necessary and actually feasible to experience and demonstrate love for others in the form of real, direct participation in their life activity, in real help and comprehensive - not just prayerful - assistance. In this case, neighbors are the object not only of consciousness and feeling, but also of conscious aspiration. At the same time, which is especially important for us in this case, the exercise of love for one’s neighbors is understood by them not only from a moral point of view, but precisely mystically, as real service to Christ himself. That is why the apparently significant difference between the two points of view described turns out to be in reality not fundamental, significant, but rather secondary, since these views determine only different ways of fulfillment and implementation, various forms of manifestation, discovery and disclosure in the essence of one Christian religious ideal. Of course, the two directions we have briefly characterized in living historical reality, in their real, concrete expression in literature and life, are not as sharply separated from each other as they are now presented to us - in fact, we do not encounter a completely consistently expressed disclosure of the principles of both. On the contrary, elements of both directions of the mystical worldview are often closely intertwined with each other, transforming into one another in barely noticeable shades (as can be seen, for example, in the work of St. Isaac the Syrian). However, the existence of precisely the two main trends we have outlined in Orthodox asceticism and mysticism is beyond any doubt, since it is possible to document the presence in the relevant literature of those psychological and theological prerequisites that inevitably should have led - and indeed led - to the conclusions we had outlined. Let us turn to a detailed examination and precise documentary justification first of the first of the generally outlined directions of mystical asceticism. At the same time, with regard to this particular direction, we consider it more convenient and expedient to first consider its theoretical basis, and then cite from the history of Christian asceticism several of the most striking examples of its possible consistent and strict actual implementation. In this case, we will indicate only the main, most essential provisions of the theological and philosophical justification of the first direction. The starting point in this case for ascetic mystics is the observation that those who love tend to neglect everything else and become attached to the one they love. 431 Hence “the righteous has one heart and a simple heart, looking to one God.” 432 And this is determined not only by the ideal requirements of the properties of pure contemplative love for God, but also - mainly - by those abnormal conditions that, in the present, far imperfect, reality, a person must inevitably take into account when achieving the intended high goal. “Our fickle heart must be constantly directed towards the contemplation of God, because in its bends lies an insidious enemy who tries to distract the mind from this saving activity.” 433 The soul, truly striving for the Lord, fully and completely extends its love to Him, and, as much as it has strength, becomes attached to Him alone by its own will, denies itself, and does not follow the desires of its mind, because, due to the evil that is inseparable from man and always deceives him, the mind of man has an evil direction. 434 This is why “life in God is a decline of feelings. When the heart lives, feelings fall. The revolt of feelings is the death of the heart.” It follows from this that “the conscience does not receive justice from virtues performed between people.” 435 If it is established that “the work of the heart serves as a bond for external feelings,” 436 then the position is no less firm that “virtue lies in the fact that a person does not occupy his mind with the World”: after all, “the heart cannot remain in silence and without dreams while feelings act on a person” (οσον αί αισθησεις ένεργοΰοι τινά ). And from here it is not difficult to be convinced that “bodily passions do not come into inaction, and evil thoughts do not leave a person without desert” (ανευ της έρήρου). 437 On the other hand, it is no less clear that “mental movements arising from God disappear in the heart of a monk who turns and spends time with worldly people (μετά των κοσμικών). 438 If a person, “without bringing his feelings into silence, does not feel peace in his thoughts,” 439 then there is no doubt that “caring about the affairs of life leads to confusion (ταράσσει) the soul, confusion by them confuses and deprives the mind of silence.” 440 This is why, “a person cannot see the beauty that is within him until he abhors all beauty outside of him and dishonors it. He cannot raise his gaze directly to God until he has completely renounced the world.” 441 This demand must be fulfilled in the most decisive manner. “Whoever wishes, as a fruit from the pacification of thought, to reap the joy of doing the innermost, even without seeing (external objects and other people), the sounds of the voice alone disturb the peace of his heart.” 442 And from here it is indisputable that “a person should run away not only from the bothersomeness of passions, but also from his feelings, and immerse himself in his inner man, and remain there in solitude.” 443 Therefore, the saints whom we delight have enclosed their feelings with divine laws, as if with bolts and locks, and handed the keys to their minds (τω νω τάς τούτων ένεχειρισαν κλεις). 444 only in this case does the “mind” (νους) become capable of contemplation and become completely susceptible to the influence of the Divine on it. “The mind, without being scattered over external objects and not being entertained by the World under the influence of feelings, enters into itself, and from itself ascends to the thought of God; illuminated by this Kindness, he comes into oblivion about nature itself; the soul is not carried away either by worrying about food or worrying about clothes, but, free from earthly worries, directs all its zeal towards acquiring eternal blessings. 445 In this respect, νους - this spiritual eye - is similar to the organ of physical vision - the eye. Both the eye and the νους cannot divide their visual power into many objects at one time. 446 The same idea about the similarity in this respect of the mind (νους) with the eye is revealed in more detail by St. Basil the Great. According to the teachings of the saint, “one should try to have a silent mind. Just as an eye, which in a constant movement sometimes turns to the sides, sometimes turns up and down, cannot clearly see what is in front of it, but on the contrary, if it wants to make its vision clear, it is necessary to fix its gaze on one visible object, so the human mind, if distracted by thousands of worldly worries, cannot clearly perceive the truth... Every day brings with it its own darkness to the soul, and the nights, receiving as an inheritance the worries of the day, deceive the mind with the same ideas. The only way to escape from this is to move away from the whole World). 447 There cannot and should not be any concessions or compromises here, and unswerving, in the strictest sense, adherence to this principle is required. “Whoever partly (κατά τι μόριον) observes himself and is attentive to himself, and partly has fun (κατά τί δέ περισπώμενος) and sins, does not devote himself entirely to God ( ολον ουκ άνάκειται θεω ). For one must completely devote oneself (to God), both in soul and in body, in order to be completely well-ordered and not lack (όπως άρτιος εΐη και μή ελλιπής). 448 Striving to achieve such perfection, “the mind not only removes the bad, but generally drives out everything extraneous and intruding. 449 From here the meaning and significance of the ascetic principle becomes clear - protecting the “mind” of the contemplator from “multiplicity”. 450 According to Rev. Isaac the Syrian, “the beginning of true life in man is the fear of God. But he does not tolerate being in someone’s soul together with the guy of the mind, because by serving the senses the heart is scattered, losing its delight in God.” 451 That is why “one who has tasted silence, who has begun to practice some contemplation, will not agree to bind the mind with concerns about the body and, having distracted it from knowledge, when it mostly soars in the highest, turn it to earthly affairs.” 452 “If a Christian, according to St. Basil the Great, one should not be distracted or distracted by anything from the remembrance of God,” 453 then it is not surprising that “many saints, engaged in practicing good, but earthly, deeds, are distracted from the contemplation of the highest good (God) and slowed down in the pursuit of God” (quamvis bonorum operum, terrenis tarnen studiis occupatos a contemptatione summi illius boni retrabunt ac retardant). 454 According to the same St. ascetics, “those who place the essence of all their joy and bliss only in the contemplation of spiritual, divine objects, when, even a little and involuntarily, forcibly are distracted from it by their thoughts, subject themselves to the punishment of repentance, as if for some kind of sacrilege; mourning that they preferred the unimportant creature to which the gaze of their minds turned to their Creator, they attribute to themselves almost the vice of wickedness. Turning the eyes of their hearts with all their liveliness to the contemplation of the splendor of the glory of God, they cannot tolerate even the fleeting shadows of carnal thoughts, and they turn away from everything that distracts the gaze of the mind from the other world.” 455 So, the saints who constantly keep God in mind, as if walking on tiptoe along ropes stretched at a height, are correctly compared to walkers on ropes. They, placing the essence of their salvation and life on the narrow path of that rope (i.e., the memory of God), think that they will immediately suffer a cruel death if their foot, even a little wavering, leaves the path, or goes beyond the line of the saving direction.” 456 From this point of view, the instructions of the saints are also quite understandable and natural. ascetics - mystics Macarius the Great and Isaac the Syrian. According to the first, one should raise one’s mind and thoughts to God (in fact, collect, concentrate in Him), and not contain in one’s thoughts anything other than the hope of seeing Him. Therefore, let the soul gather and pacify, like playful children, the thoughts scattered by sin; let him bring them into the house of his body, constantly fasting and waiting with love for the Lord when He comes and really gathers her into one. 457 As for Rev. Isaac the Syrian, then in some cases he gives instructions to pay all attention exclusively to the feat of prayer. Even handicrafts are assigned, as it were, only for the weak and imperfect, while for the more perfect, according to the thought of St. Father, it can be a cause of confusion. 458 After all these prerequisites, it will not sound like an excessive exaggeration to say that the contemplation of God absolutely excludes everything else for the mystic, 459 and therefore communication with other people. 460 According to Rev. Isaac the Syrian, those who live in the world involuntarily divide their attention between their neighbors and God, while those living in silence can devote themselves entirely, undividedly and unhindered to God. So, therefore, the contemplator must be completely free from everything worldly, not excluding works of charity. Example Ap. Paul is not convincing, because he was the only one who could combine contemplative and active perfection. Therefore, a true monk should not think that, besides himself and God, there is anyone else on earth whom the monk should take care of. 461 This is confirmed by the following observation. “When someone sees various faces and hears various voices that disagree with his spiritual pursuit, and enters into conversation and various communications with those around him; then he cannot find free time favorable for the mind to see itself in secret, and, having purified its thoughts, to intimately talk with God in prayer.” 462 This is the reason why “the monk does not mix with the world, but remains only with God.” 463 Violation of this condition is accompanied by the most disastrous consequences for the perfection of contemplation. But in the figurative expression of Abba Anthony, “just as fish, remaining on land for a long time, die, so monks, being outside their cells for a long time, or staying with worldly people, lose their love of silence (προς τον της ησυχίας τόνον εκλύονται ). 464 And vice versa: according to the thought of Rev. Isaac the Syrian, “as much as a person moves away from conversations with people, the same amount he is rewarded with a bold conversation with his mind with God.” 465 Thus, it turns out that an interview with God can be an obstacle (συγχυσις) to a conversation even with spiritual brothers - the mind is not sufficient to conduct two interviews (ουχ ικανοί δέ ό νους προς δύω ομιλίας ). 466 Therefore, St. the father says that fulfilling the duty of love is the work of lay people or monks who are only insufficient, while hermits offer a pure and immaculate sacrifice of thoughts to Christ. 467 How beautiful and praiseworthy is love for one’s neighbor, if only concern for it does not distract from the love of God! How pleasant is conversation with spiritual brothers, if only the ascetic can maintain a conversation with God during it! But the fact of the matter is that the ascetic must beware lest, under these plausible pretexts, he lose his secret work and life and unceasing conversation with God.” 468 In this sense, the words of Rev. should be understood and interpreted from this point of view. Isaac the Syrian: “Christ loves when silence is honored, even if his children are neglected.” 469 According to Abba Theodore of Ferme, “a person who has recognized the sweetness of the cell avoids his neighbor, but without any contempt for him.” 470 According to the same ascetic, in order to be a true monk, it is necessary to cut off compassion from oneself. 471 Also characteristic in this regard is the saying of Abba Alonia: “If a person does not say in his heart: in the world I alone and God, he will not find peace” (ούχ εξει άνάπαυσιν). 472 That is why some fathers loved complete silence, did not bother to maintain love for their neighbors, did not make efforts to calm them down, and were not ashamed to avoid meeting those who were considered respectable people. 473 If for every Christian, according to St. Basil the Great, “it is difficult to have concern for public affairs, for it is a long-standing idea that those who are zealous for virtue do not accept public positions with pleasure,” 474 then this is even more necessary to say about contemplatives: caring for others in one form or another is necessarily accompanied, according to their observation, by a violation of the contemplative mood. According to Rev. I. Kaccian, no one, snatching the helpless from the hands of the strong, the poor and the beggars from those who rob him, at the same time as he is busy with the work of intercession, can contemplate with a calm spirit the glory of Divine greatness. Likewise, no one, delivering food to the poor, or helpfully receiving a crowd of strangers, can, at the very time when he is preoccupied and amused by the provision of these services, unimpededly contemplate the immensity of the highest bliss. In general, any disturbance by the sorrows and worries of this life prevents the contemplation of the state of the future century with an exalted heart, free from earthly attachments. 475 From what has been said, the reason is explained why hermits and hermits, according to St. Isaac S., “all the days of their lives they loved the desert and out of love for God (διά την πρόςτόν Θεόν αγάπην) they had their dwellings in the mountains, dens and abysses of the earth. 476 According to Gregory the Theologian, “Elijah willingly preached wisdom at Carmel, and John - in the desert, and Jesus Christ Himself performed the work before the people, and prayers - for the most part in freedom and in the deserts. This taught a lesson that in order to have an undisturbed conversation with God, one must plunge into silence and, albeit somewhat, lift one’s mind away from impermanence.” 477 Thus, the desire, if possible, to completely renounce any distraction of attention in order to carry out undivided contemplation, led some ascetic mystics to the conviction of the need to isolate themselves from all external impressions, to the determination to move away from people, to avoid any meeting with them. To acquire one priceless pearl - the undivided and complete contemplation of God - the ascetic mystic sacrificed everything, including his relationships with his neighbors. There is no doubt that this sacrifice was not easy for the ascetics, but they did not think about making it either, since for them it was certain that in any other way, besides this condition, they could in no case achieve unity with God in undivided contemplation. Undivided unity with God was both the initial goal and the final result of their asceticism. According to Macarius of Egypt, “It is impossible to receive the All-Holy Spirit except by becoming alien to everything that is in this age, devoting oneself to the search for the love of Christ, so that the mind, freed from all worries about material things, is directed only towards this one goal, and thus is worthy to be with Christ in one Spirit.” 478 According to the teachings of Vasily V., the thought of God established in a person, through constant remembrance of Him, is the indwelling of God Himself in us. Thus, a person becomes a church of God when the constant remembrance of God is not interrupted by earthly concerns - only the lover of God, who avoids everything, retires into God. 479 This is, in general terms, the main points and main provisions, the theological-philosophical and experimental-psychological justification for solitary, completely detached mystical asceticism. For a more vivid, visual presentation of the matter, we will also indicate several of the most striking examples of the actual implementation of the described trend in the history of Christian asceticism. Reasonings of Rev. Isaac the Syrian about the impossibility of combining prayer and handicraft, and even going out to fetch water without entertainment, 480 find their concrete expression in the example of Abba Silouan. One day the named Abba, going to water the garden, covered his face with a cupola and looked only at his feet. When asked about the reason for this behavior, the elder answered: “I do this so that my eyes do not see trees, and my mind is not entertained by them in its activities.” 481 Abba Arseny (one of the desert dwellers of Skete), whom the venerable. John Climacus called him “a model of silence” and “a silent man equal to the angels,” in response to his prayer to teach him how to be saved, he heard a voice twice: “Arseny! run from people, and you will be saved” (φεύγε τους ανθρώπους, καί σώζη). 482 Obedient to this voice, Abba Arseny, for God’s sake, did not talk with anyone about anything, even about spiritual benefits. The other, for God's sake (διά τον θεόν), spoke all day and received all the wanderers who came; and he, instead, chose silence and silence. 483 Here is one of the characteristic sayings of this wonderful Abba: “if someone remains in silence (έν ησυχία) and hears the voice of a sparrow, then his heart no longer has the former peace (ούκ έχει ή καρδία την αυτήν ησυχίαν ), - especially the rustling and noise of the reeds. 484 One day Abba Macarius reproached him with a reproach filled with love, saying: “Why are you running from us?” 485 The elder replied to this: “God sees that I love you, but I cannot be together - both with God and with people” ('Oh είναι μετά τοΰ θεου και μετά των ανθρώπων ). 486 Iliodor, who lived hopelessly in a monastery for 62 years from the age of three, “never saw anything of this life” ( θεασάμενος πώποτε ). He said that he didn’t even know the type of pigs, roosters, etc. 487 Hesychasts generally avoided communal monasteries, finding that it was impossible to indulge in contemplation in them. 488 Gregory of Sinaite not only avoided cenobitic monasteries, but found living together even with his disciples inconvenient. A similar trait is characteristic of hesychasts in general. 489 Gregory Palamas demanded the strictest solitude from those who wished to practice hesychia and contemplation. For those who have chosen a truly monastic life, frequent communication even with other monks is inconvenient, since constant contact with them disrupts communication with God. 490 Removal from people, generally understood as a means of achieving contemplative perfection, in the worldview of some ascetics acquired the meaning of a self-sufficient means, so that the entire center of gravity of asceticism was sometimes transferred to it. 491 These are, in general and essential terms—the main provisions and some of the most striking examples—the essence and meaning of the first direction of mystical asceticism. However, as we have previously definitely stated, the characterized direction is not the only one; Along with it there is a different type of view with different shades of theological and psychological justification and a corresponding difference in actual implementation. Not all ascetics are mystics, but only “some belittle the importance of truth in public life and prefer to it the sorrows and feats of silent sojourn and monastic life.” 492 With all consistency, a contemplative ideal carried out to the end is generally very rare. In any case, this point of view, if not completely forgotten, then obscures, moving into the background, the commandment of love for one’s neighbors, and what is meant is the implementation in a certain, strictly defined form - only the commandment of love for God. Meanwhile, Christ indicated not only this latter, but, together and along with it, also the first. Although love for God is “the first and greatest commandment,” the second is also not an unimportant matter, but extremely significant and unconditionally obligatory, because it is called by Christ “similar” to the first 493 and is placed along with it, as a no less obligatory requirement of religious and moral perfection, as a condition no less essential and important for achieving salvation. From this undoubtedly truly evangelical point of view, the characterized direction is undoubtedly not exhaustive of the entire fullness, integral, ideal requirement of true Christianity: 494 in relation to one’s neighbor it is limited (at least in its main tendency, in the final result) almost exclusively to the negative side, exhausted by the position: “keep your conscience in relation to your neighbor” (serva conscientiam tuamab omni malo proximi tui). 495 Meanwhile, according to the meaning of the second direction, not a negative, but a positive attitude towards one’s neighbors, towards the world, not only constitutes a direct duty and a necessary obligation of every determined Christian, but such an attitude is absolutely necessary for achieving even contemplative perfection. This view is based, just like the first, on psychological experience, but the data of this observation are not against, but on the contrary, strongly in favor of external activity, which, in the form of handicrafts, alms, etc., is a true, valid, and sometimes, in some cases, an absolutely necessary ascetic means for achieving concentrated contemplation. According to the thought, for example, of St. Nile of Sinai, those who refuse handicrafts under the pretext that they must pray unceasingly, in fact, do not pray. By doing this in idleness they think to give the soul freedom from worries, they entangle it in a labyrinth of inexorable thoughts ( λογισμών) and through this they make her incapable of prayer (άνεπιτήδειον προς την προσευχήν). 496 and this is because “the matter for thought is an anchor that gives it a safe direction ( άγκυράν ειοώς τής οιανοίας είναι τό εργον ). 497 Handicraft does not at all interfere with prayer. When you stretch out (κινή) your hand to work, then let the tongue sing and the mind pray (προσεύχεσθω). for God requires that we always remember Him ( απαιτεί γαρ άει παρ ’ ημών ό θεότ μνημονεύεσαι ). 498 Therefore, even during work, unceasing prayer is possible, 499 as we actually see in the history of asceticism. For example, the needlework of Pachomius the Great and Palemon was to spin wool and prepare hair shirts. They worked not for themselves, but also remembering the poor, according to the Apostle. If the elder, while awake, noticed that they were overcome by sleep, they went out onto the sandy plain of the mountain and from here (actually - οΰτως) carried sand in baskets from place to place, depressing the body for sobriety in prayers (καταπονουντες το σώμα εΐ But in the words of St. Athanasius of Alexandria, “the monasteries in the mountains were like tabernacles filled with the divine faces of psalmists, lovers of the word (or teaching), fasters, prayer books, who were pleased with the hope of future benefits, and who, doing handicrafts in order to be able to give alms, had love and harmony among themselves.” 501 John Cassian tells about the Egyptian monks that they were constantly busy with handicrafts in their cells that they did not lose the psalms from their memory and never abandoned their thoughts about Holy Scripture; thus combining prayers with handicrafts, they spend the whole day in those services for which they gather in other monasteries at certain hours. 502 Continuously, not only during the day, but also late at night, engaged in work, “they think that the more diligently they are in handicrafts and works, the more will their desire for the highest purity of spiritual contemplation manifest.” 503 St. Anthony V. saved himself (έσώζετο) by alternately praying and working, according to the instructions of the Angel. 504 Even states of highest contemplation - ecstatic - could be achieved during work. So John Kolov was engaged in contemplation (τη θεωρία) while weaving baskets. 505 They told about Abba Lufoy? that if he did not quickly lower his hands when he stood in prayer, then his mind immediately admired upward. Therefore, when he happened to pray with his brothers, he tried to quickly lower his hands so that his mind would not remain in admiration for long. 506 It is told about Isidore the Stranger in Lavsaik that he had such spiritual grace and such knowledge (γνώσίν) of St. Scripture and understanding (κατάληψιν) of divine dogmas, that even during the meal, at the hours when he usually ate food with the brethren, his mind came into ecstasy and secluded him. When asked to talk about the state of ecstasy, he said that he was wandering in thought and was delighted by some contemplation. 507 What has been said so far confirms and illustrates the necessary importance of labor and handicraft for the implementation of true contemplation, according to the view of some authoritative ascetics. But, according to the teachings of the ascetic mystics themselves, even more important, essential, and necessary for this purpose is the manifestation of active love for one’s neighbor (mainly in the form of alms). According to the teachings, for example, Rev. Isaac the Syrian "without love for one's neighbor, the mind cannot be enlightened by divine conversation and (divine) love." 508 “Just as oil is needed for a lamp to shine, so almsgiving nourishes knowledge in the soul. The heart’s key to divine gifts is given by love for one’s neighbor.” 509 Only if almsgiving is combined with prayer will the soul see the light of truth. 510 “Nothing can bring the heart closer to God like alms.” 511 Whoever wants to be in communion with God with his mind, to receive and experience in himself the feeling of “delight” in this communication, without the counteracting influence of feelings, must serve alms. 512 This path, according to St. Father, not only the best, most reliable and expedient, but precisely the only one - there is no other. 513 According to St. I. Chrysostom, “alms are the wing of prayer; If you don’t give a prayer wings, then it doesn’t fly, but when the soul is inspired, it quickly flies to heaven. 514 Such a complete coincidence of thoughts on this issue by Rev. is extremely significant. Isaac, this “desert philosopher”, a remarkable representative and interpreter of contemplative silence, on the one hand, and St. Chrysostom, representative and preacher of the necessity and possibility of high moral and mystical Christian perfection in society, among the ordinary, difficult, but not insurmountable conditions of worldly life, on the other. From what has been said, it is clear why not only at the lowest level of contemplative achievement, but also at the highest level, achieved only by a few, when contemplating, for example, “light,” love and beneficence do not lose their obligatory meaning for the mystic, but retain it in full force. 515 Likewise, the achievement of contemplative perfection, with dispassion possible for a person, does not necessarily mean a loss of attention to people and their vital interests, since it is precisely this state that leads him, on the contrary, to “insight into human things.” 516 In the same way, the mystic-contemplator does not necessarily lose attention in general to the external world, to the contemplation of nature, - receptivity to impressions coming from the outside. According to the teaching, for example, of the same ascetic, when the mind revolves in the sphere of the supersensible (υπέρ φύσιν), then the senses (αισθήσεις) can dispassionately (άπαθώς) study the causes of things, study their nature (τάς φύσεις), properties (ποιότητας), actions (ένεργείας) and meaning (λόγους, rationes). 517 Of course, all these circumstances only weaken to a large extent F. F. Gusev’s statements regarding the incompatibility of contemplation and any external activity, internal concentration and simultaneous perception of external impressions. A certain amount of justice still remains behind them, in the sense that all external relations of the mystic-contemplator must still be regulated, one way or another, so as not to actually serve as an obstacle to the achievement and preservation of contemplation, understood in the true sense. Communication with people indeed cannot be, so to speak, indiscriminate, uncontrolled and unlimited, but still it is not eliminated, when contemplation is achieved, of course. The general meaning of the patristic views on this subject is expressed very precisely and definitely, for example, by Gregory the Theologian. The Holy Father praises, among other things, “moderation in communication with others and in avoiding communication—communication for the edification of others and deviation for one’s own instruction in the mysteries of the Spirit—who fully approves of moderation in such communication, which preserves solitude in the midst of society itself, and moderation in such deviation, which preserves brotherly love and philanthropy in the midst of solitude itself.” 518 According to the teachings of the saint, “philosophy does not consist in gloominess, but in firmness of soul, in purity of mind and in a sincere inclination towards goodness. And at the same time, you can have any appearance you want, and treat anyone you want, and remain alone with yourself, hiding your mind from feelings, and live in a circle of people and acquaintances, secluded in society itself, and philosophize among those who are not wise. 519 Under such conditions, it is possible and desirable to combine desert living and community life so that the latter does not interfere with contemplation. Athanasius V. (during his stay in the Egyptian desert) “to such an extent harmonized desert life and community life and united both silent work and active silence into one, that he convinced us to designate monasticism more as good behavior than bodily removal.” 520 In some cases, solitude serves as a refuge for the weaker, while the strong in spirit, without prejudice to their contemplative achievements, go among people (εις το μέσον των ανθρώπων). 521 It is possible, of course, in rare cases, to realize contemplative perfection in conditions that are apparently decidedly unsuitable for it. Here is one convincing example of this kind. Saint Pitirim, a hermit, a man experienced in ascetic virtue (... αρετήν), an angel appeared and said: “Why do you exalt yourself with your exploits, as a pious one and living in such a place? Do you want to see a woman more pious than you (ευλαβεστέραν)? Go to the convent of Tavennis, and you will find one there who wears a bandage on her head; she is better than you (εκείνη σου άμεινων έστί), for she fights with such a crowd: she serves everyone in different ways, and although everyone despises her (she was a holy fool) - she has never departed from God in her heart.” 522 The conclusion from all this is that “for one who has achieved spiritual health (τώ σταθόντι έν τή τής ψυχής ΰγιεία), community with many is not harmful if he is sober in his affairs (ου "523 therefore, Speaking fundamentally, external solitude is not at all necessary for the purposes of contemplation. 524 Being a monk does not mean being outside of people and the world. 525 The unconditional withdrawal of the famous ascetic Arseny from people receives from this point of view a different ethical-psychological, not literal, but rather allegorical interpretation - in the sense of the requirement of deep concentration and self-control. Thus, one can live together with many others and “lead a solitary life of one’s own will,” as well as “in the solitude of one’s thoughts move around in a crowd of people.” 527 Not only in solitude, but also in all situations and among crowds, one can be saved and be rewarded with great gifts from God. 528 Moral perfection and contemplation are achievable in the world. 529 Thus, a person’s external actions, his behavior, have only the most secondary importance; true dignity belongs to the internal mood, depending on the intention and goal animating the ascetic. From this point of view, one should look at silence, silence. “Some people talk from morning to evening, and meanwhile, in reality, maintain silence (σιωπήν κρατεί), because he does not say anything without benefit.” 530 Only from this is explained the possibility of the high contemplative perfection of some Christians living in the midst of the world and undergoing public service. Even in such conditions - far from often, however - it is possible to achieve such contemplative-prayerful perfection, which is usually achievable in hermitic asceticism, at its highest levels. Cases of this kind, noted in ascetic writing, are very significant. Here's one of them. It was revealed to Abba Anthony in the desert: “there is someone in the city like you (ομοιός σοι), a doctor of art, who gives his excess to the needy and every day sings the Trisagion with the angels (πασαν την ημέραν τό Τρισάγιον ψάλλων μετά των αγγέλων ). 531 Therefore, in other words, this man has achieved precisely high contemplative perfection. According to Bl. Theodoret, “for those who choose contemplation, life in cities and villages is not the least obstacle. And Mavsima, and zealots of serving God like him, showed that it is possible for those who convert among the world to reach the very pinnacle of virtues.” 532 In his history of asceticism, Theodoret directly notes that contemplative perfection was achieved by ascetics not only in solitude, but also among other people, in communication with them. “Lest anyone think that virtue is limited to place, and that the desert alone is convenient for achieving such virtue, we will now transfer the word to inhabited places and show that they do not contain the slightest obstacle to the acquisition of wisdom (τη τής φιλοσοφίας κτησει ήκιστα ταύτην έμποδών γινομένην )". 533 True, equal perfection in both hermit and communal virtues, their joint actual implementation in one person was not often encountered at all, but nevertheless such cases are sometimes noted in ascetic writing. According to, for example, John Cassian, “it is difficult to find perfection in everything in one and the other way of life (i.e. in the hermitage and in the community), because neither the hermit can fully achieve non-acquisitiveness or contempt and deprivation of material things, nor the cenobite - purity of contemplation, although it is known that Abba Moses, Paphnutius and two Macarii completely achieved both. They were so perfect in this and that kind of life that when, having gone farther than all the inhabitants of the desert, they insatiably enjoyed the solitude of the desert as much as possible for them, they did not in any way seek human communities, however, they so tolerated the visits and weaknesses of those who came to them that when countless numbers of brethren flocked to them for meeting and instruction, with unshakable patience enduring the almost constant anxiety of hospitality, they seemed to be in everything During their lives they did not learn anything else, or did not practice anything other than to serve those who came, so that everyone was perplexed in which way of life they had more skill, that is, in the desert purity, or in the life of Cenob, the greatness of their souls was more amazingly manifested.” 534 In any case, however, examples of combining high contemplation with activity among people in the history of Christian asceticism are far from rare. Here are some of them. During the disasters of the Church, Vasily V. did not consider it sufficient to mourn the disaster in silence and only raise his hands to God, seek from Him an end to the surrounding disasters, and, meanwhile, rest; on the contrary, he made it his duty to bring something and provide some kind of help. 535 In Asclepius, Theodorit notes love of strangers and brotherly love (φιλοξενία καί φιλαδελφία) along with conversation with God! (ή προς τον θεόν όμιλία). 536 While still living with people in the village, Asklipius spent an ascetic and moderate life (ασκητικόν καί κόσμιον), without suffering any harm from communicating with many (μηδεμίαν έκ της των πολλών επιμιξίας λώβην έλκυσαι), having become famous in one and another kind of life - both in the community and in solitude (τω τε πολιτικω, καί ερημικω). 537 Simeon the Stylite “with his humility was accessible, affectionate and courteous (εύπρόσοδος λίαν έστΐ, καί γλυκύς καί έπίχαρις), answered each of those talking to him ( προς έκαστον των δια λεγομένων ). Having received from the generously gifted Lord the gifts of teaching (διδασκαλίας), he daily, twice, offered instructions (οις εκαστης ημέρας τας παραινέσεις ποιούμενος )... One could see him judging, pronouncing correct and fair decisions ( καί οικαίας τας ψόφους έκφέροντα ). But he was doing these and similar things after the ninth hour. He spent the whole night and day until the ninth hour in prayer. διατελει προσευχ όμενος ). 538 It is said about Publius that “no one ever saw him spend even the smallest part of the day in idleness; psalmody was followed by prayer, prayer was followed by psalmody, after one or another he turned to reading the Divine Scriptures, then followed by caring for the visitors who came, then by any of the necessary matters (είτα ή των άφικνουμένων επιμελεια ξένων επειτα αλΛο τι των αναγκαίων έργων εγινετο ) 539 Akaki “succeeded both in his solitary life and shone with the bright rays of virtue when he was awarded the rank of bishop and received control of Veria. During 58 years of caring for his flock, he, however, did not leave the monastic way of life (ούκ εΐασε μέν τής ασκητικής πολιτείας το είδος) and combined hermit (ascetic) virtue with social virtue (ασκητικήν καί πολιτικήν έκέρασεν αρετήν) - applying more diligence to the first, and observing foresight with the second, he combined into one (usually) separated one.” 540 Remembering the Apostolic sayings, 541 Theodosius “he himself worked and convinced his cohabitants to combine physical labor with spiritual exploits (αυτός τε είργάζετο, καί τούς όμοσκήνους παρήνει τοΐς κατά ψυχήν πόνοις καί τούς σωματικούς συνεισφέρειν ίδρωτας ). He found it unfair and strange for monks to use the works (fruits) of other people's hands. Performing in due time (είς καιρόν) the prescribed divine services (θείας λειτουργίας), he devoted the intervals between them to work (τή εργασία); He especially cared about pleasing (service - θεραπείας) to wanderers, entrusting their management to persons who were adorned with meekness and modesty and together acquired love for their neighbor (τήν περί τον πέλας κεκτημένοις αγάπην ). 542 Abraham “after his life as a hermit, adorned the bishop’s see προεδρίαν ). That is why he is especially worthy of mention because, forced to change the type of life, he did not change the image of it ( ); without abandoning ascetic suffering, he spent his life at the same time both in hermitic exploits and in the labors of the bishop. 543 For whole days he was present at controversial cases of litigants and convinced them to reconcile with each other... 544 It is narrated about Jacob of Nisibius that, having left (after his elevation to the episcopal rank) solitude in the mountains and, against his will, choosing to live in the city, he did not change his way of life (τά μεν χωρία ήμείβετο, ή δέ πολιτεία μεταβολήν ουκ έδεχετο) (relating to food, sleep and clothing). Only his work increased, and the new works were more varied than the previous ones (πολλαπλάσιοι των προτέρων έγένοντο). To fasting, to the feats of vigilance and to the hair shirt were added all kinds of concerns for the needy (αί οι ’ ολου των δεόμενων φροντίδες), i.e. caring for widows, orphans, fair defense of the oppressed... He endured these various labors out of love and fear for the Lord πονους ήσπα , ετο , ατε οη οιαφεροντως και ποίΐών καί δεδιώς τον των προβάτων χύριον ). And the more he acquired wealth of virtue, the more he received the grace of the Holy Spirit ( μειζονως και της του παναγίου ΙΙνευματος άπήλαυε χάριτος ). 545 The ascetic Limnaeus, remarkable for his high contemplation and almost complete solitude from people in retreat, 546 was nevertheless distinguished by his love of humanity (φιλανθρωπία), caring for the blind and the poor. 547 Isaac the Syrian notes the act of Macarius Vel., which serves as a denunciation of those who neglect their brethren; 548 Abba Agathon, “the most experienced man of all the monks of that time and who respected silence and silence more than anyone else”; 549 in particular, he is known for caring for a sick wanderer for five months. 550 This behavior is called the most perfect love (αύτη έστίν ή τελεία αγάπη). 551 About a brother who achieved special prayer perfection, 552 Isaac the Syrian tells that he often worked for three or four days with the brethren when they needed him... This brother was skilled in every service (ην γάρ έμπειρος καί εις πασαν 553 Theodoret tells about Zebinas that he spent days and nights in prayer and therefore spoke a little (ολίγα αττα) with those who came to him, not allowing himself to distract his thoughts from heavenly (κατάγειν εκ των ουρανών ουκ ήνείχετο την διάνοιαν); but very soon leaving them, he immediately turned again to prayer, so as not to move away from the Lord even for a minute (ωτ μηδέ προς βραχύ χωριστείς του των δλων θεοϋ). 554 However, it is said about him that, being adorned with the virtue of love of strangers (φιλοξενία), he allowed many of those who came to stay with him until the evening (μενειν την εσπέραν πολλούς των ώς αυτόν άφικνουμένων έκέλευεν ). 555 About Elpidia in Lavsaik it is said that he “like a queen bee, lived among the brethren, and inhabited this mountain like a city.” 556 And many such examples could be given. So, even the deepest contemplation does not necessarily require that everyone immersed in it must certainly renounce all other impressions and thoughts, except thoughts about God alone. The general psychological property of any strong and deep love is indeed that the representation of its object becomes central and dominant in consciousness, is always, so to speak, in the focus of consciousness, determining its general background and determining the selection of other representations. But does this mean, therefore, that the dominant idea completely crowds out all other ideas and thoughts, leaving them no longer any place in consciousness? In reality, it happens that all other ideas, concepts and thoughts are perceived by consciousness from the point of view of the main idea, all life and activity of consciousness is painted in its color - it is the dominant idea that determines the course of associations, the direction of all mental work. 557 F. F. Gusev, speaking about the complete concentration of the energy of consciousness and the intensity of feeling on the thought of one God and justifying the need for such a state on the general properties of love as a well-known mental phenomenon, completely silences the property of love, according to which the lover strives not only to be with his loved one, to enjoy seeing him, - in Gusev’s words, to “engage with him,” but at the same time has an irresistible desire to show his love in practice, to express it tangibly and practically actions that are pleasant and pleasing to the one for whom he has love. The lover even decides to part with his beloved and bears it resignedly and patiently, even with joy, if it is necessary for the good of the beloved, or benefits him in some way. After all, a person does not consist of one mind and is not entirely exhausted in its contemplative needs - at the same time, he is certainly an active being. There is no other property of the being and manifestation and love of man in God. According to the teaching of Holy Scripture, love for God, contrary to Gusev’s statement, is expressed not in exclusive contemplation, abolishing and excluding all activity, but certainly in active service to the good of others, which is done for the sake of Christ, out of love for Him. 558 Likewise, the analysis of data from specifically ascetic writing does not at all authorize us to agree with Gusev’s statement that “the exclusive direction of moral activity towards one’s own and individual self-improvement (and not towards the improvement of others, he explains a little earlier) constitutes a necessary consequence of the fiery love for God that has filled the soul and the resulting attraction to mental prayer and spiritual contemplation.” 559 According to, for example, St. Chrysostom “there is nothing colder than a Christian who does not care about the salvation of others.” 560 This requirement concerns monks no less, if not more, than all Christians in general. According to the teachings of Rev. Nile of Sinai, “blessed is the monk who with all joy looks at the salvation and prosperity of everyone as if it were his own” 561 “A monk is one who considers himself to be with everyone and sees himself in everyone.” 562 Hence the ascetic, according to the teachings of the teacher. Isaac the Syrian, must always remember that he too is involved in earthly nature, and do good to everyone. He should not reproach those asking for his prayers and deprive them of words of consolation, so that they do not perish and their souls are not collected from the ascetic. 563 At the same time, in relation to a good deed, all people of the ascetic must be equal. For in this way he can attract the unworthy to goodness. And the Lord shared meals with tax collectors and harlots, and did not separate those unworthy from Himself, so that in this way he would draw everyone to the fear of God and so that through the physical they would come closer to the spiritual. 564 Even those ascetics whom Gusev has in mind were no longer exclusively devoted to contemplation - it was only their primary business and occupation. When circumstances called them to do so, they left their desert for a certain time, appeared in crowded places and took one or another active part in active life. The head of the hermit's life, Anthony Vel. “with more zeal than anyone else, he also cared about the protection of the offended, and for this purpose he often went to the cities, since many, complaining to him, strenuously asked him to intercede for them with the authorities and city officials.” 565 At the same time, “the ascetic interceded for the offended with such force that one might think that he himself was suffering the insult, and not someone else.” 566 When a severe famine occurred in the city of Ephesus, Ephraim the Syrian, taking pity on the villagers who were dying of hunger, became a trustee of the poor, and with money delivered to the saint, at his persuasive request, by rich citizens, he provided assistance to those in need: he built houses with different departments, placed the sick there, fed the hungry, buried the dead, etc. 567 Abba Apollonius chose as his feat (ταύτην εόχεν την ασκησιν) caring for the sick, providing them with everything they needed. Before his death, he handed over his belongings and bequeathed to continue his service to another like him. 568 Abba Agathon said: “If I could give my body to a leper and take his body for myself, I would willingly do it. For such is perfect love" (αυτή γάρ έστιν ή τελεία αγάπη). 569 And indeed, this Abba once looked after a sick wanderer for three months, fed him and generally took care of him. 570 Abba Eulogius saw in the square a crippled man who had neither arms nor legs and, having prayed to God, made the following vow: Lord! In Your name I take this crippled one, and I will rest him until my death, so that for his sake I too may be saved (ινα κ ’ αγώ διά τουτου σωθώ). Anthony Vel. at the end of their lives (they died almost simultaneously) he told them: “you will soon receive crowns from Christ - he is for you, and you are for him. 571 It was said about Abba Mark the Hermit, who lived near the monastery of Penthncula, that for sixty-three years (sexaginta tres; in Russian translation - sixty-nine) 572 he fasted for whole weeks, so that some considered him incorporeal (sine carne esse); Meanwhile, he worked day and night and gave everything to the poor, but he himself did not accept anything from anyone. 573 In Alexandria, in the monastery of Abba John Skopts, lived an old man so merciful that his contemporaries did not see anyone else like him; He was merciful not only to people, but also to dumb animals. Getting up early, he went to all the dogs that were in the monastery and gave them food, sprinkled flour for the small ants, and wheat for the large ones, soaked crackers and threw them on the roof for the birds. 574 It is said about one elder who lived in the cells of Khuziva-(Cuziba) that he spent whole days (singulis diebus) in deeds of mercy, shown and performed in various ways: either he sowed the fields of poor villagers with his own seeds, secretly from the owners, then he supported travelers with bread and water walking along the road to Jerusalem, helping the weary to carry their burdens, he carried children on his shoulders, repaired shoes, dressed naked, buried the dead on the road. 575 The compassionate love for others among some ascetics reached especially touching responsiveness and tenderness. Abba Macarius, for example, prompted, undoubtedly, by such love, goes to Alexandria for a fragrant flatbread, marshmallow (πάστιλον) for the sick person, at his request. 576 From Gusev’s point of view, carried out sequentially, all these and similar cases testified to the inconsistency of love for God in ascetics, to the weakening of its intensity in them. 577 Not only that. Human life, by its very essence, in its present, independent of man and irreducible conditions of ordinary earthly existence, represents in itself insurmountable obstacles to the realization of the contemplative ideal in all its rigor and equanimity. 578 According to the author, love for neighbors in ascetics, embraced by a fiery love for God, is expressed mainly in the form of compassion, condolences for all living things, as well as in tearful prayers for pardon and the salvation of all. 579 However, St. Scripture and ascetic writing speak not only of this form of expressing love for one’s neighbors, but demands from every Christian that he contribute to the true good of his neighbors by all measures and means at his disposal. 580 According to the teachings of the teacher. Isaac the Syrian, the Lord, to make people like the Heavenly Father, appointed mercy (τήν ελεημοσύνην) because it brings the merciful closer to God. Therefore, a Christian must constantly force himself, at all times internally (εσωθεν), to be merciful to all rational nature (υπέρ πάσης τής φύσεως τών λογικών). 581 At the same time, not a single person dares to say regarding the acquisition of love for his neighbor that he succeeds in it with his soul if he ignores that part which, to the best of his ability, in accordance with the time and place, is fulfilled physically when the occasion presents itself. 582 Whoever, for example, neglects the sick, will, in the figurative expression of the saint, “not see the light.” Whoever turns his face away from someone who mourns, his day will be darkened. 583 The sign of someone who has achieved perfection is to sacrifice everything, even life, for their neighbors. 584 At the same time, people become like God precisely by the perfection of love for their neighbor, by the actual outpouring (ύπερεκβλύζειν) of their love for mankind, extending to the sacrifice of life itself. 585 Only some, as an exception, are not required to give alms. 586 According to the teachings of St. Vasily V., since a person consists of soul and body, he must love people both in the soul, exposing them and admonishing them and in every way leading to conversion, and in the body, doing good to them when they need what is necessary for life. 587 “The elders said that everyone should consider the position of their neighbor as their own, and sympathize with him in everything, and rejoice with him, and cry, and live like that, as if wearing the same body, and take care of themselves as if any sorrow were to happen to him.” 588 According to the teachings of the teacher. Isidore Pelusiot, one must have a merciful soul (έλεήμονα τήν ωυχήν). He who has such a source will exude everything beautiful. If he has money, he will spend it; if he sees someone in misfortune, he will mourn him; if he meets an offended person, he will extend his hand (to help) and will not leave him (to do) anything that depends on him.” 589 According to St. John Chrysostom, “the love of saints tends to help in bodily needs.” 590 Manifestations of this love are “alms” (ελεημοσύνη), “goodwill” (φιλοφροσύνη), intercession for those suffering injustice and consolation for those who cry.” 591 For the sake of love for one's neighbor, according to the teachings of ascetics, one should sometimes abandon even such feats as fasting. 592 The revealed teaching acquires all the greater significance because, according to ascetic teaching, it is impossible for an ascetic to avoid communicating with people, since he successfully strives to realize the ideal of religious and moral perfection: the more diligently and sincerely he strives to move away from people, the more ardently and uncontrollably people will look for him - they will look for him and will certainly find him. According to the teacher. I. Cassian, who burns with true and perfect love for the Lord and cleaves to Him with complete fervor, no matter what inaccessible places he goes, these places will necessarily be visited by people (necesse est ea ab hominibus frequentari). At the same time, the closer to God the heat of God’s love makes true ascetics, the greater the multitude of holy brethren will flock to them. For, according to the word of the Lord, a city standing on the top of a mountain cannot be hidden 593) 594). In general, according to the teacher. Isidore Pelusiota, “a person worthy of praise must be a lover of God and a lover of humanity, so as not to despise people under the pretext of the height of virtue and perfect devotion to God, and not to neglect God for the sake of people.” 595 The concepts of love for God and love for neighbors, according to the teachings of St. Scriptures and St. Fathers of the Church, correlative, inseparably connected with each other, presupposing and conditioning each other. This is not how the author presents the matter. According to him, love for God and love for people are two different “elements” that can either outweigh one another in a person’s soul, or, in some cases, “receive in it the uniformity of their tension, even relative.” 596 Love for God is strong and fiery only when it decisively outweighs love for people in a person’s soul, as a result of which “the object of his energetic moral activity is self-improvement, and not the improvement of others, in which the exclusive direction of a person’s moral activity towards their own individual self-improvement is a necessary consequence of the fiery love for God that has filled their soul and from it the resulting attraction to mental prayer and spiritual contemplation. 597 This view of the author is based on his recognition, in agreement with Ben, of the limitations and quantitative certainty of the amount of emotion innate to a person. 598 The author recognizes as quite fair Bain’s remark that “the amount of emotion has its limits in every human soul, and we cannot find it at many points in the same abundance as when it is limited to a few points.” 599 Hence - “a person can reveal the greatest strength of emotion for any object only when all or almost (?!) the entire amount of emotion innate to him is directed towards this object.” 600 We cannot, without significant reservations, agree with Ben's statement and Gusev's conclusion based on it. Is it really possible, for example, that with the birth of a new family member, the mutual love of parents for each other and for their children, and the love of children for their parents and among themselves, decreases? Is it possible that with the addition of a new member to a circle of friends - due to this alone - mutual love and affection in it decreases? Definitely not! Ben and, after him, Mr. Gusev, when they establish the psychological fact of the limited amount of sensory energy, they undoubtedly mean passionate, sexual love. Indeed, sexual love, when it reaches a state of passion, excludes the possibility of the emergence and existence in the soul next to it of a similar affective love for another person of the same sex. 601 The person, indeed, seems to be completely absorbed in his feelings and, apparently, even grows cold towards the faces he dearly loved before this stormy outburst of passion. The basis for such a violent nature of sexual love depends on the neuro-sexual arousal of a person, which covers him completely. But with such a stormy character, even sexual love usually does not last long, and then either takes on the character of a more reasonable and calm love, and in this case it does not lose, but wins in comparison with the first period of volcanic passion, or, which happens in such cases much more often and more usually, it is replaced by complete indifference, often even hatred towards the object of one’s former fiery love. In the last two cases, the predominance of the physiological lining in passionate love reveals itself headlong. Moral love for God and neighbors, which is the only thing we are talking about here, does not have such an exclusive character. On the contrary, its property is that it strives to expand the number of its objects without compromising its qualitative perfection and completeness of content. The development and strengthening of love for neighbors not only does not displace love for God in a person, does not reduce its intensity, but, on the contrary, testifies to its growth and improvement in a person, so that these are actually not two types of love, different from each other, but one complex, mental phenomenon, two sides of the same moral state, genetically and organically inextricably linked. Mutual selfless love between Christians serves as a sign and criterion of the reality of the presence of love for God in them. And this is based on the general psychological law of the state of love. Sincere and strong love for a person makes for us the sweetest and dearest things that are dear and pleasant to him. “My friend’s friends are my friends,” says the proverb. And this love for everything dear to the beloved person not only does not weaken, on the contrary, it nourishes and strengthens the love for him. Hence, love for God implicitly necessarily includes love for His creatures and especially for man, as the object of His primary love and care. In the same way, striving to cultivate love for others in place of the former egoism, a person gradually imparts to his life and spiritual mood the direction that constitutes the property of Divine life. But such kinship in the direction of will and life between God and man, according to the general psychological law, represents the most favorable soil for the emergence and development in the human soul of love for God. “No one has ever seen God. If we love each other, then God abides in us, and His love is perfect in us. 602 “Whoever says: I love God, but hates his brother, is a liar; For he who does not love his brother whom he sees, how can he love God whom he does not see? And we have this commandment from Him, that whoever loves God should also love his brother.” 603 “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves him who begot him loves him also who is born of him.” 604 The teaching about the complete mutual dependence and inseparability of love for God and love for neighbors is clearly and definitely revealed by St. the fathers of the church. According to the teachings, for example, St. Basil the Great, the Lord Himself gave order to His commandments, determining that the commandment of love for God is the first and greatest, while the second in order and similar to the first, or better yet, serving as a complement to it and dependent on it, is the commandment of love for one’s neighbors. 605 According to the Monk Ephraim the Syrian, “everyone, first of all and by all means (προ πάντων καί πανταχώς) should try to have sacred love and fear of God in his heart,” constantly asking them for himself from God, striving by constant remembrance of the Lord and heavenly love to daily return them to himself, with the help of grace. In this case, he can easily succeed in pure love for his neighbor ( καταρθωσαι δυνάμεθα ). Put the first in first place, then the second, following the first, occurs in order ( πρώτοις επόμενα ακολούθως ). But if someone neglects the first great commandment - the love of God - and intends to be concerned about fulfilling the second commandment, then this can only result in “external service to the brothers,” and this feat can never be pure, healthy and sincere. A person who is far from “the remembrance of God, from love and striving for Him,” will certainly grumble and complain about the service of the brethren, finding it a difficult and difficult task, or he will begin to dream of himself as a “worthy and great” person, deluded by the thought “of his hard work for the benefit of everyone.” “When a person is far from the remembrance of God and from the fear of God, then he necessarily seeks glory and seeks praise from those whom he serves.” Only then is a person enriched by “pure and God-pleasing deeds of love for the brethren,” when “his mind and spiritual disposition are always occupied with thinking about God and striving for Him.” 606 According to the teachings of St. I. Chrysostom, “God’s love is connected with ours and united with it, as if by a chain. Therefore, the Lord sometimes speaks of two commandments, and sometimes of one, for whoever accepts one of them cannot fail to fulfill the other. 607 For if abiding in God is conditioned by love, and love is conditioned by keeping the commandments, and the commandment is that we love each other, then abiding in God is born from our mutual love for each other” 608). 609 “Just as a soul without a body is not called man and, in turn, a body without a soul, so love for God (cannot be called by this name) if it is not accompanied by love for one’s neighbor.” 610 In the same spirit, the teaching on this issue is revealed by Cyril of Alexandria. The Holy Father calls the commandment about love for neighbors, in relation to the commandment about love for God, “contiguous and related” (γείτονα τε καί αδελφήν). 611 Along with love for God, one should also exercise love for the brethren. The lack of one of them is the lack of both. 612 These virtues seem to be adjacent to each other and as if an indissoluble pair of horses brings the one who has tried to rule them well to the single most perfect beauty of piety before God. 613 Abba Dorotheos, proving the position that “the more one unites with one’s neighbor, the more one unites with God,” uses the following comparison to illustrate this idea. Let us imagine a circle on the earth, that is, some circular outline from the circulation of a compass near the center. Let us assume that this circle is the world, the center of the circle is God, and the straight lines running from the circle to the center, i.e., the radii, are the essence of people’s lives. How much people approach the center of the world, i.e., God, how much they approach each other. And vice versa - as they get closer to each other, they get closer to God. 614 Hence, the purpose of the suffering of the Son of God was to unite people not only with God, but also with each other. 615 Thus, according to Christian teaching, service to others cannot be considered separately from service to God. Serving your neighbor is the best way to please God, the most effective means of cultivating love for Him. 616 And this is actually because love in its property is likeness to God, how much of this likeness people can achieve. 617 God has no need for anything, but rejoices when he sees that man “lays to rest his image and honors this latter for his sake.” 618 “He who loves the Lord has first loved his brother; for the second serves as proof of the first.” 619 “Man, by nature weak and frail, can become like God, approach Him in no other way, but only through love, which he pours out from the fullness of his heart on the good and the evil.” 620 That is why “no service is more pleasing to God than mercy, and the Righteous Rewarder does not reward His love for mankind for anything so much as for love for mankind.” 621 Thus, it is love, “especially, preferably before other virtues, that brings one closer to God (αυτή μάλιστα ή αρετή, εγγύς είναι ποιεί Θεοϋ) since “it is what man has in common with God.” 622 From here it is clear why “the saints strive for precisely this sign - to become like God by perfection in love for their neighbor.” 623 Even the apparently purely ascetic virtue of “purity” has its source in an actual loving attitude towards one’s neighbor. 624 That is why “to prove who His disciple is, Christ did not demand extraordinary signs and wonders (although in the Holy Spirit he gave the power to do this too), but commanded mutual love for each other. Christ everywhere puts together commandments about love for God and neighbors, and counts doing good to others as doing good to Himself.” 625 “The property of love is to almost manifest itself in relation to every person bearing the image of God, as it does in relation to the Prototype.” 626 Consequently, “only a person who does charity truly embodies the image of God. His charity is also useful to him. Like the helmsman, he brings about the salvation not only of others but also of his own.” 627 Thus, a Christian must imitate God’s love for mankind precisely because “the most divine thing in man is that he can do good” (τούτο εχει. μάλιστα θειον άνθρωπος, το ευ ποιεϊν ). God is pleased by love for mankind more than by all other exploits together (of course, distribution of property, exhaustion of the body, withdrawal from the world, etc.). This is the only gift, an immaculate gift. 628 At the same time, love for humanity for a Christian is a necessity, and not a matter of arbitrariness, a law, and not advice. 629 Nothing can bring the heart closer to God like alms. 630 Hence, in order to be in communion with God, it is necessary to “serve alms.” Thanks to this very feat, a Christian “is depicted with holy beauty, with which he is likened to God” and “communion with the Divine” is achieved. 631 There is no other way to spiritual love, which imprints an invisible image, if a person does not first of all begin to be generous to the same extent as the Father is perfect. 632 The result is that it is impossible for a Christian to be saved except through his neighbor. 633 “Both life and death depend on one’s neighbor. For if we gain a brother, we gain God.” 634 This is why concern for the salvation of others is necessary. Without it, personal perfection is nothing. 635 Even “contemplation,” which, as we know, was given such enormous importance in the theory and practice of Eastern asceticism, was still placed below love. 636 So, “to seek what is useful for everyone - this is the rule of the most perfect Christianity, this is its exact purpose, this is the height of perfection. Nothing can make a Christian an exact imitator of Christ than caring for his neighbors ( το κήδεσθαι των πλησίον); Whether someone fasts, sleeps on bare ground, exhausts himself, but if he does not care about his neighbors, then he does nothing important and is still far from the standard ( ταύτης τής εικόνος έστηκας ). All the great and valiant men of antiquity especially had this in mind. Each of them sought to achieve benefit not for himself, but for his neighbors; This is why they became especially famous. If someone practices even the highest wisdom, but does not care about others who are perishing, then he will not have any boldness before God. 637) 638 It is interesting that the same teaching can be found definitely expressed in specifically ascetic monuments. Here are some of the most typical examples. Akakios (Bishop of Veria) says to Julian, who spent his desert life in contemplation: “I will show you a way to serve God more than how much you serve now (πλέον ή νυν αυτόν θεραπεύεις); And I say this not only according to my own consideration, but according to the teaching of Him Himself. The Lord, who once asked Peter whether he loved Him more than others, and having learned what he knew before Peter’s answer: “You know that I love You” (John 21:15), showed him by what feat he would please Him more (ύπέδειξεν αύτω τι δράσας πλέον αυτόν θεράπευσειεν ). He says: “If you love Me, feed My sheep, feed My lambs.” So, father, you should do the same: the flock is in danger of perishing from wolves (apian false teaching), but it is deeply loved by the One who is dearly loved by you; It is the nature of those who love to do what is pleasant to their loved ones" ( επιτερπει γινόμενα ). 639 The ascetic Ammianus says to Eusebius, who lived in complete solitude and complete confinement, “I will show you the path along which you will be inflamed with even more love and will serve more diligently the One Whom you love (εγώ σοι τρόπον έπιδείξω, δι ού καί τον έρωτα πλεΐον εξάφεις , και τον έρώμενον θεραπεύσεις ). For whoever turns this concern to himself, I think, will not escape the reproach of pride (φιλαυτίας). The Divine Law commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves. And the distinctive property of love is to make many participants in its wealth αγάπης έστί κατορθώματος ίδιον ). 640 The brother asked the elder, saying: “There are two brothers, one of whom is silent in his cell (quiescit in cella sua), extending the fast to six days (a week) and putting a lot of work on himself, and the other serves the sick. Whose work is more accepted by God (cujus opus magis acceptum est Deo)? The elder answered him: “even if the brother who fasts for six days hangs himself by the nostrils, and then he cannot compare with the one who serves the sick” (si frater ille, qui sex diebus jejunium levat, appendat se per nares, non potest esse aequalis illi, qui infirmantibus deseruit). 641 For his efforts to convert his flock from their sins to God, the bishop is promised “a great reward, as an imitator of the Lord Himself, who, having descended from heaven, spent his life on earth for the salvation of people” (plurima merces, imitando Dominum tuum, qui coelos quidem reliquit, in terris autem demoratus propter salutem hominum est). 642 Thus, according to the general meaning of the teachings of St. fathers and ascetics - mystics, active, living communication with others is not an external, accidental, secondary means of real unity with God, but the most real, necessary means, since only under the condition of life in the Church is real mystical unity with Christ achieved. 643 Consequently, F. F. Gusev’s statement that love for God is expressed in undivided contemplation, excluding any practical activity - that only this kind of contemplation is the only adequate form of expression of love for God - turns out to be one-sided, inaccurate and therefore incorrect. According to Orthodox teaching, there are two main paths of communion with God, and not one - the path of contemplative, solitary monastic life, on the one hand, and socially active, lived for the sake of God, in the form of promoting the implementation of the kingdom of God on earth, on the other. In this case, of course, only their predominant, main direction is understood, but not their exclusive content, which would completely displace and completely, completely absorb the other. Not only in the worldview, but also in the historical implementation of asceticism, we do not encounter such exclusivity; it only makes itself known in isolated cases. In general, according to the normative requirement of Christianity, Christian life should be, if possible, holistically - a harmonious embodiment of the principles of both. 644 However, the imperfection of earthly conditions and the individual limitations of each person separately are the reason that a Christian can realize the Christian ideal not in its full, integral content, but only in part, cultivating in himself primarily one or another virtue, with a predominance of contemplation or activity. Based on the Scriptures (εκ των Γραφών), one can make the indisputable observation that “not everyone followed the same path and preserved it to the end (ουδέ πάντες τήν αυτήν οδόν ώδευσαν, ή εως τέλους έκράτησαν ). Many moved from an active life to contemplation, stopped all work, began to observe the Sabbath according to the spiritual law and rejoiced in God alone, being filled with divine consolation, being kept by grace from thinking about anything else, always being in amazement (είς εκπληξιν), i.e. in ecstasy, as having reached the end of desires, although only in the form of a pledge. Others saved themselves to the end in an active life, resting in the hope of receiving reward in the future.” 645 “Beautiful is contemplation, beautiful is activity; the first - because it rises above the earthly, leads into the Holy of Holies and raises the mind to that which is akin to it; the other because, by accepting Christ and serving Him, she proves the power of love through her deeds.” 646 This coincidence of psychological and mystical results, with a sharp visible difference in lifestyle, is explained by the law that essentially the same mood can manifest itself in different ways to the contrary. “Some people talk from morning to evening, and meanwhile maintain silence (σιωπήν κρατεί), because he does not say anything without benefit.” 647 From this point of view, the question is also resolved: “what is better, to speak or to remain silent?” – “Whoever speaks for God does well; He who is silent for God does equally well. 648 From this point of view, the ascetic teaching regarding the equivalence of prayer and conversation with the brethren is completely justified. “If one of the Fathers meets, or a weary wanderer, it will be imputed to the ascetic to stay with him instead of true prayer ( τοιοΰτου στήναι ). 649 On the day on which an ascetic grieves for someone who is suffering in any respect, for a good or evil person, he is a martyr who suffered for Christ - he is honored to become a confessor. 650 That's not enough. Even the “peace” (ησυχία), necessary for the “contemplation” of God, is achieved by some, due to their individual characteristics, more conveniently and successfully not in solitude, but in community. 651 Therefore, Basil the Great sometimes praises the social life, and sometimes the hermitage ( άναχώρησιν), meaning that truly diligent ones gain benefit for themselves in two ways, each according to the best of his ability, according to the difference and according to the goal that he has outlined for himself. 652 Hence, according to the ascetic view, if three, for example, live in one place, and one of them is well silent (ησυχάζει καλώς), the other is sick and thanks God, the third serves with a pure thought (μετά καθαρού λογισμού ), - all three work equally ( οί τρεις μιας εργασίας είσίν ). 653 When entering the path of asceticism, two brothers had the goal of pleasing God (τοΰ σκοπού είχοντο έκαστος του άρέσαι Θεψ). But each of them sought to fulfill this goal in a different way (ένηλλαγμένη τή πολιτεία). One, having distributed all his property at once, devoted himself to asceticism and prayer (τή ασκήσει προσεσχειν και τή προσευχή), and the other, in the monastery he built, received the sick, elderly, etc. After their death, Abba Pamva recognized them as equally perfect before the Lord (άμφότεροι τέλειοί είσι προς τόν Κύριον), equal before the Lord (ίσοι προς τον Κύριον ). He saw them standing side by side (αμα) in paradise. 654 However, Eastern Christian mysticism, sometimes expressing in the person of individual, very prominent representatives, the doctrine of equality in essence of both designated forms of truly Christian life, often actually places contemplation above activity. Here, for example, is one of the typical narratives. “One of the Fathers prayed to God, saying: “Lord! Reveal this matter to me. “One for the sake of Your name runs away from people (φεύγει διά το ονομά σου), and the other for the sake of Your name receives them with open arms” (εναγκαλιζεται διά το ονομά σου ). (Here we mean Apsenius and Moses). And then he was shown two large ships on the river. On one he sees Abba Arseny and the Spirit of God floating together in silence ( πλέον εν ησυχία εις ενα [or εν ]), and in the other swims Moses and the angels of God, who feed him with honeycomb.” 655 And so the active (practice) Christian life, carried out in two main directions, is divided into many activities and exploits (erga multas professiones studiaque dividitur). Some make solitude in the desert and purity of heart (summam intentionis suae erga eremi secreta et cordis constituunt) the main goal of their aspirations. All these ascetics united with God in the closest and closest way through silence in the desert (familiarissime Deo per Silentium solitudinis cohaesisse). Others applied all their care to the instruction of the brethren, to the care of the monks. Some devoted themselves to the pious feat of hospitality (xenodochii), and achieved high perfection in asceticism. Macarius Alex., for example, was in no way inferior to anyone who was in the solitude of the desert (nulli eorum, qtii solitudinis secreta sectati sunt, inferior sit). Some chose to take care of the sick as their deed, others took upon themselves to intercede for the poor, the oppressed, or were engaged in teaching others, or giving alms to the poor, and in their mood and piety they were reputed among great and lofty men (iuter magnos ac summos viros, pro affectu suo ac pietate viguerunt). 656 The Lord Savior, having proposed a teaching not about one, but about various beatitudes, thereby showed people “many changes in different kinds of life” (άλλειώσεις πολλάς έν διαφόροις πολιτείαις). “Every person, on every path in which he moves towards God, by all means opens before himself the door of the heavenly kingdom.” 657 To the question of one of the fathers: “What good deed should I do?” Abba Nisteroi answered: “Are not all things equal?” (ούκ είσί πασαι αί εργασία ιδαι). Scripture says: Abraham was hospitable, and God was with him; Elijah loved silence (ησυχίαν) - and God was with him; David was meek, and God was with him. And so look at what your soul desires according to God and guard your heart.” 658 The saints said that in many souls special predispositions are noticed: in some the natural kindness of the soul is manifested, in others - a tendency to asceticism. 659 This is why Abba Apollos called some to contemplation, and convinced others to perform active virtue. 660 Indeed, in the practice of Eastern monasticism we see two main types, and not one. According to the testimony of, for example, Blessed Theodoret, “some labor together (κατά συμμορίαν άγωνιζόμενοι), and there are countless such societies (μυρία τοιαυτα συστήματα), – receive imperishable crowns and reach the desired end (ποθούμενης ανόδου). Others, having chosen a solitary life and wanting to talk with God alone (μόνω τω Θεω προσλαλεΐν μελετώντες), achieve victory without receiving any human consolation.” 661 “Some surround themselves with some kind of fences and avoid any gathering of people, while others, without using any fence, are accessible to everyone who wants to see them.” 662 What is the general meaning of F. F. Gusev’s fundamental reasoning in a scientific sense on this issue? F. F. Gusev did not grasp with sufficient depth and did not highlight with sufficient certainty the dual unity of the Christian religious and moral ideal, which means - inseparably, but also unmerged - the education and implementation of “love” both for God and for neighbors, for God’s sake. He separated and isolated both of these equivalent demands from each other, sought to show their incompatibility and gave a decisive advantage to the first, almost completely obscuring the second. As a result, there was an inconsistency between its provisions and the definite and indisputable teaching of Holy Scripture and its patristic interpretation. For the implementation of love for one's neighbors, F. F. Gusev actually did not find a place in his depiction of the Christian ideal. Responsibilities to neighbors, isolated from purely religious Christian duties, turned out to be not a favorable, but rather a directly obstructive condition in the implementation of the latter. The author conducts his reasoning straightforwardly, sincerely, with conviction; his provisions and conclusions undoubtedly have some real data behind them, both psychological and historical, and yet his straightforwardness, turning out to be one-sided, does not resolve the question, although, apparently, it simplifies it - Gusev ignored another kind of equally undoubted data. From here he cuts the knot, but does not untie it. When analyzing the views of F. F. Gusev, we, in particular, reveal and prove the following main theses: 1) To realize the contemplation of God, unconditional detachment from all external impressions is not necessarily required. 2) Such renunciation is neither possible nor desirable, since in order to achieve precisely mystical unity with God it is necessary to be “merciful”, and this quality necessarily presupposes external activity, and therefore, paying attention to the “external”. 3) And indeed, contemplatives - ascetics, generally speaking and without taking into account some particulars, showed their mercy to people not only by praying for them, but also by various external activities, according to the testimony of historical monuments of asceticism. 4) Love in God is impossible without the implementation of active love for neighbors, just as 5) Christian service to the true good of others cannot be considered separately from religious service to God in isolation from it. 6) Love is an indispensable content and therefore a prerequisite for achieving godlikeness and communion with God. 7) The ideal of a Christian ascetic is a harmonious combination of contemplation and activity. 8) There are two main historically determined paths of communication with God, and not one - the path of contemplative - solitary life and the path of social - active life, of which each receives one or another religious - moral significance and dignity depending on the mood that animates the Christian - love for God and neighbors, and in relation to the latter - certainly also for the sake of God. What are the general results of the polemics between A.F. Gusev and F.F. Gusev regarding the essence, features and conditions of asceticism? F. F. Gusev, accepting and categorically affirming the position that love of God - this highest and necessary Christian commandment - in a completely characteristic way is expressed only in exceptional contemplation, proves the complete and decisive incompatibility of contemplation, in essence, with activity for the good of others. Hence, according to F. F. Gusev, the commandment to love one’s neighbors is expressed among Christian ascetics only in the internal mood of benevolence and prayerful communication. The active manifestation of love for neighbors becomes both unnecessary and impossible, in view of the requirements, characteristics and conditions of contemplative love for God. Thus, contemplation seems to absorb and exclude activity. The predominance of one mood can only occur to the obvious and significant detriment of another. As for A.F. Gusev, based on the idea that the commandment to love one’s neighbors is prescribed in Christianity as the most important and necessary duty - as a mood that is obviously not opposed to the latter, but completely consistent and harmonious with it, only complementing and revealing it - he tries to prove that the combination of contemplation and activity is obligatory for all Christians. But exactly how these moods are mutually reconciled psychologically, in a living personality, how the antagonism of “contemplation” and “activity” into which these states are presented by F. F. Gusev is eliminated - these and similar questions are not clarified to any sufficient extent by A. F. Gusev. To successfully complete this work would require an accurate and thorough analysis of Christian teaching, based on an extensive and independent study of both Holy Scripture and - especially - patristic writing, which requires special work. Without fulfilling this condition, every researcher about “asceticism” finds himself without solid ground; he cannot even establish with certainty and certainty the meaning and meaning of the most central and basic ascetic concepts and terms, which, for example, “contemplation”, “activity”, “world”, etc. This is the main reason that the controversy between the two described scientists - the Gusev brothers - turned out to be typical for all subsequent times, not excluding the present. Theological thought constantly oscillates, as it were, between two poles - between “contemplation” and “activity”, without being able to achieve a balance that is undoubtedly very desirable for both sides. To confirm our thought, let us at least refer to the polemics that have arisen with particular force in recent years on the pages of some of our spiritual journals on the same eternally new and eternally old question - about the relationship of “personal salvation” to the “public good”, about the relationship of “contemplation” to “activity”, about the service of monks to the world, about the true tasks of monasticism and its true ideal, etc. The reason for this controversy was a small note by the writer and publicist A.V. Kruglov, “In the service of the world - in the service of God,” 663 the general and main tendency of which is quite visible from its very title. The most typical participants in the controversy that flared up regarding Mr. Kruglov’s article are, in our opinion, Archimandrite. (now bishop) Nikon 664 and prof. S. I. Smirnov. 665 If we keep in mind the general meaning and fundamental views of the named writers, then it can be argued that the first is adjacent to the direction whose exponent was F. F. Gusev, while the second rather approaches, in its general direction, A. F. Gusev. Thus, under the pens of these most respected writers, the ideas of their literary predecessors seemed to be resurrected again, to come to life in our literature, only, of course, in a slightly different formulation, in a different guise, with a different coloring. O. Nikon recognizes exceptional contemplation as the highest, most perfect, most characteristic manifestation, expression and implementation of the Christian duty of love for God. According to him, the goal of monasticism is to cultivate a prayerful mood and the achievement of inner spiritual life.” 666 For a monk, “the only thing needed is prayer,” 667 “the inner spiritual practice of the Jesus Prayer.” 668 “Spiritual Contemplative Life”, 669 “silence is the highest ideal of monasticism.” 670 Thus, in the opinion of Fr. Nikon, “smart prayer”, internal work is the only and self-sufficient occupation of a monk; concentrating attention, turning consciousness to something external, to any external activity is not desirable, not acceptable, and psychologically not feasible. O. Nikon, however, does not withstand the absolutism of his judgments to the end; he makes various kinds of concessions and allows restrictions; but these concessions and restrictions are completely out of harmony with the nature of its basic premises, which require their consistent implementation to the end. According to his opponent Mr. Smirnov, “the property of the fundamental point of view of the arch. The Nikon on the charity of monks is such that it is impossible to maintain it to the end, without making any concessions, without allowing compromises, because the result of such a sequence would be conclusions that are clearly immoral and inhumane.” 671 As for the named article by Mr. Smirnov, its main task is, in the words of the author himself, “to provide accurate information on controversial issues in the history of ancient Russian monasticism.” 672 Being predominantly historical in nature, Mr. Smirnov’s research has very little to do with elucidating the actual fundamental views of even just Russian ascetics. The conclusion that “the silent ones or contemplatives of ancient Rus' did not consider the solitude of a monk to be his complete liberation from the duties of serving his worldly neighbors” 673 - this position is obtained by the author from observing mainly only historical facts from the life of Russian ascetics. On this basis, the author will draw the conclusion that “true contemplative monasticism” “presupposes mercy as the path to the ideal” and love for one’s neighbor as a means of “enlightening the mind with Divine conversation and love.” 674 G. Smirnov admits that from the point of view of strict, completely consistent contemplation, the “external charity” of the monks is nothing more than a “compromise,” although, incidentally, one that, from the point of view of the essence of Christianity, is absolutely “necessary.” 675 Thus, Mr. Smirnov essentially comes to the conclusion that strict contemplation and external activity stand in relation to each other in internal antagonism; they find it difficult to reconcile with each other, although their reconciliation, in one way or another, is necessary, since this is required by Christianity, which commands not only love for God, but also for one’s neighbor, and, moreover, active love. 676 But this reconciliation is achieved only in appearance, and not in reality. Love for one's neighbor in contemplative asceticism loses its independent meaning, and at best is a transitional step on the path to striving for real perfection, 677 and at worst even a “compromise.” The author also does not understand the way in which “contemplation” and “activity” were actually combined in the same persons. His own confession is very characteristic: “we do not know how both of them – the overseer and the teacher – combined pedagogy with monasticism. But somehow they combined. 678 Thus, Mr. Smirnov’s article, serious and learned, by the very nature of its main task does not give an exact answer to the fundamental questions that interest us, which, however, it postulates. It achieves its direct task with success, thanks to its sufficient scientific solidity and solid validity: the historical material attracted by it is distinguished by its abundance, accuracy, value, and hence its evidence. Ibid., p.176 cf. 164. Italics are ours. Ibid., pp. 164, 166 ff. Ibid., pp. 167, 168, 169, 170. Ibid., 168. Cf. Vasily V. Er. 2 (al. I) T. XXXII, col. 224С-225А. pp. 195–196 Wed. 187 pp. 196 pp. Wed. Nikita Stifat Pract. capit. centur. I. 32 col. 865D. Wed. Isaac the Syrian. Λογ. ХLIII. σελ 262. Λογ. LXXXI σελ. 452. Page 188–169. Wed. A. L. Nechaev. Modern experimental psychology in its relation to issues of school education. St. Petersburg. 1901 “Analyzing attention as a state of greatest clarity of consciousness, we see that this phenomenon is usually accompanied by a state of absent-mindedness (or reduced clarity) in relation to those phenomena that in this case are not the object of attention. Experimental studies have shown that by directing attention to one irritation, we thereby distract it from another.” Ibidem. According to prof. V.S. Serebrenikova, human consciousness is narrow not from the point of view of the impressions received, but from the point of view of the objects contemplated. The resulting impressions can be many. But many impressions can be embraced by consciousness only under the condition that they form one whole, one object of contemplation. A single subject can oppose only one object of contemplation. For the “I” there can only be one thing, independent of it, “not I”. But the narrowness of our clear consciousness is not absolute, but relative. Although, due to psychological necessity, we always contemplate one object, in this object we usually distinguish its component parts. The contemplated parts in an object do not fall apart into separate objects, but form a whole - due to the fact that one of the parts stands out clearly and forms, as it were, the center of contemplation, and the rest form the periphery, gradually plunging into the darkness of ideological consciousness. The central, clearly recognized part can be narrower or wider. Its breadth depends not so much on the number of impressions received, but on the complexity of the representation that is stored in memory and from the point of view of which the received impressions are interpreted. Christ. Thurs. 1902. March, pp. 322–323. “Any mental phenomenon can again be determined in consciousness as a phenomenon only in the case when its content constitutes one of many (at least two) elements of a complex mental product that makes up the existing content of consciousness.” Prof. V. N. Nesmelov. Science about man. T. I, p. 29. “Our perceptions are far from being such simple things as they seem to us. A direct impression or sensation is always connected here to a more or less complex group of other sensations and images that clarify its relationship and meaning. Only the synthesis of all these elements gives the sensation complete clarity and vividness; without them, it is perceived weakly and may even not be recognized at all.” Prof. P.P. Sokolov. Faith. Psychological study, page 36. “In mental life there are never single aspirations, but always a whole system of them. N. Lossky. Voluntaristic doctrine of will. Question Philosopher and psychol. 1902 March-April (62 books), p. 683. A. F. Gusev. On the issue of Christian asceticism. Orthodox Review 1888, part II, p. 606. A detailed explanation of the views of Rev. Isaac the Syrian on the issue that interests us, see below. Theodorite. Relig. Hist. Sar. XXI, col. 1452С.:... ' δέ προστετηκέναι, δν φιλοΰσι 7. αι στέργουσι. Yerba Seniorura § 6 col. 994 Α ... "imum ei et simplex est cor, ad Deum tantum respiciens." (Cf. Ancient Patericon, § 33, p. 412). I. Kassian. Decoenobior. institut. L. V, p. X, col, 225B. Totiesque nobis est ad contemplationem Bei lubrica cordis nostri pervagatio reducenda, qnoties subtilis hostis ab hoc intnitu mentem captivare pertentans, recessibus nostri cordis irrepserit.” Macarius E. N. V. s. VI. T. XXXIV. col. 505AB. ψϋχή γάρ ή αλη Ф ώς προς Κύριον τήν όρμ . ήν εχουσα, ολη ές δλου την αγάπην αυτής προς αυτόν ελκει, καί προς αυτόν μ . F ειαν τής χάριτος προσκτάται, και έαυτήν άρνεΐται, και τοΐς ϋελήμασι του νοό; αυτή; ούκ άκολου & εΐ, δτι δολίως πορεύεται. Isaac C. Λ . LXXIII. σ. 429 II καροια , καταπιπτουσιν αι αισ Ф ήσεις , η αναστασ :; των α᾿συησεων, εστιν ή νεκρωσι; τής καροιας ... εκ Ttuv αρετών, των μ. F ύτητα. Isaac S. Λ . LX, α . 361: ή εργασία τής καρδία ; δεσμός εστι των εξωτέρων μελών. Isaac S. A. I, σελ 2–3; cp. ibid. σ. 4, 7–8. It's him. Λ. XLIII, σελ 261; cp. ibid. σ. 266; σ. 268–269; cp. Λ. XIII, σ. 73–74. ibid., Λ . LVI c. 328: και τό ύπό τούτων συμφύρεσ Ф αι τον νοΰν συμφύρει και τη ; γαλήνη; εκβάλλει. ibid., Α . LXXIII, σ. 427–428. Isaac S. A. LXXXVI, σ. 519: ούκ έκ τή; όχλήσεω; των πα Ф ών μόνον , αλλά και έκ των α ’ ισ Ф ήσεων των εαυτού φευγειν αύτόν δει, και τού εσωτέρου αν Ф ρώπου εαυτού έγγύ; καταδύεσ Ф αι καί εκεί εμμένειν μοναχικώ ;. Bl. Theodorit. Hist. ßelig. PraefafcioT. LXXXII, col. 1288D-1289A. Vasily V. Ep. 2 (al. I. S. II, T. XXXII, col. 228AB. των αισ Ф ητηρίων επί τον κόσμον διαχεόμενος (dao mss. οιαφορούμενος) έπάνειοι μεν προ; εαυτόν δί εαυτού δέ πρός την περί ανασαίνει κάκείνω τω κάλλει περιλαμπόμενο ;, καί αυτής τή " ρύσεως λή F ην λαμβάνει μήτε πρό; μέριμναν , τήν ψυχήν κα Ф ελκόμενο ;, άλλα σχολήν από των γήινων φροντίδων άγων , την πασαν εαυτού σπουδήν επί τήν κτήσιν των αιωνίων αγα Ф ών μετατί Ф ησι Neil of Sinai. De monacborum praestantia p. XXIV. col. 1089 Sun: Ἐής διανοίας ού F ελούσης εχειν άλλην φροντίδα ? – ται. Παρενδυμεΐσ & αι ετερον παρά τό μεριμνώμενον οφ F αλμού δίκην προς εν δρώντος και πλείοσι επιμε – ρίζειν την όρατικήν δύναμιν ούκ έχοντος φύσεως. Vasily V. Ερ, II (al. I.) col. 224C-225 Α : έν ησυχία τον νουν έχειν πειρασ & αι προσ ήκει . Ώ ς γάρ οφ Ф αλμόν περιαγόμενον συνεχώς , και νυν μέν επί πλάγια , F την οδτω καί νουν αν Ф ρώπου υπό μορίων των κατά τόν κόσμον φροντίδων περιελκόμενον άμήχανον εναργως ένατενίσαι τη άλη F εία … ?? εξαπατώ "τόν νουν . Τούτων δέ μία φυγή , 6 χωρισμός άπό του κόσμου παντός. Methodius of Patara. Convivmm decem virginum. Or. V, c.II. col. 97C. Grigoriq Palamas. De mentati quietudine ool. 1080D: ού τά του πονηρού μόνον άπο – σμήχει κόμ . μ. ατος , ’ αλλά παν ’ επίκτητον έκ μ . έσου ποιείται, καν τής χρηστοτέρας η μοίρας καί διανοίας. Isaac S. Λ . LXXXI. σ. 459–460. Neil of Sinai. Sermo ascet. S. XXVI, col. 753С: Ού γάρ αν έ᾿λοιτό τις ήσυγίας γευσάμενος , καί Ф εωρία ποσώς σχολάζειν άρξάμενος, τοΤς περί των σωμ. ατικών φροντίσιν ένδήσαι τον νουν, άποστήσας αυτόν της γνώσεως, καί μετάρσιον τά πολλά φεροόμενον Yπί τά γήινα , κατασύρεσ F αι πράγματα. Vasily L. Er. XXII (al 411) T. XXXII col. 288:... ου δει τον χριστιανόν μ . ετεωρίζεσθακ καί των αυτου θελημάτων καί κριμάτων . I.Kaccian. Coli. XXIII, sar. IV, col. 1250 A. From the same. Coli. XXIII, sar. VIII. col. 1258AB: “Hi qui summam totius voluptatis et gaudii et beatitudinis suae, in divinarnm ac spiritalium rerum tantum contemplatione coustituunt, cum ab ea inviti vel paululum violentis cogitationibus abstrahuntur, velut quoddatn in se sacrilcgii genus praesenti poenitudinis puniunt ultione; ac vilissimam creaturam, ad quam sit detortus inentis intuitus, Croatori suo se praetulisse lugentes, turnip diferim impietatis sibi crimen ascribunt, et licet ad conspiciendam divinae gloriae claritatem oculos sui cordis summa alacritate convertant, tarnen etiam brevissimas carnalium cogitationum tenobras non ferentes, quidquis ab illo vero lumine mentis aspectmn vetrahit, exsecrantur. Coll. XXIII, sar. IX, col. 1259AB: recte igitur sanctos, φιϊ momoriara Dci stabiliter retinentes, quasi por extensas in sublimi linoas suspenso fermitur incessu, schoenobatis, quos vulgo funambttlos vocant, dixcrim comparandos, qui smmmam suao salutis ac vitae in angustissimo funie.nli illius tramitc eollocantes, atrocissimam se mortem protinus incursuros esse non ambigunt, si vol exigua pes eorum titubationc deviaverit, aut modum illius salutaris directionis cxcesserit. Cp. e. IV-V, col. 1250A-1252B. Collat. XIX, p. V, col. 1131B- 1132B. Makariy E. N. XXXI, p. I-II, col. 728D- 729A: πρόςον (Βεόν) οφείλεις συναγαγεΐν τον νουν καί τους λογισμούς καί μηδέν άλλο έννοεΐν, ή τήν προσδοκίαν αΰτοΰ κα F οραν. ν ΙΙτω ο ον ή ψυχή ώς τέκνα ρεμ όμενα συνάγουσα , καί νου F ετούσα τους άπό τής αμαρτίας ?? , ? ειας συναγάγοι αυτήν. Αογ. XXIII, σελ. 147–148. Wed. Simeon N. B.Or. XXVI, col. 450D: Talis Deum videt, quantum fieri potest, et quantum ipsi Deo libet, et semper eum videre studet, atque ut post obitum videat, porpetuó rogat, ct sola ejus visionc contentus, nihil praetorea requirit. According to Simeon N.B. (Or. XXVI. col. 451A), Dei gloria repleta (anima) non solum lmmanam gloriam pro nihilio putat, sed omnino nec ad oblatam sibi sese convertit! A Deo quippe visa, et ipsa vicissim eum videns, alium aliquem liominem videro, aut ab alio videri nunquam desiderabit. Isaac S. A. LXXIX, p. 448. Cp. I. Cassian. Collat. XXIII, p. IV-V, col. 1250A-1252B. It's him. Epist. III, σελ. 537–538. Cp. XLIII, σελ 261. Simeon N. B. Divinorum amoruni über. sar. IV, col. 516B: quicunquc monachus est, niuudo sc non miscet, et cum solo Deo perpetuo versatur. Apophthegmata Patrum, § 10, T. LXV, col. 77B. Cp. Verba Seniorum, II, 1, col. 858A. Cnfr. Isaac S. Ασγ. XLIII, σελ. 261. Isaac S. Λ . XLIII, σ. 261. Isaac the Syrian. Λ. LXXIII, σ. 427. Α. LXXVIII, σ. 442. Wed. Evagrius. Rer. monach. rat. c. V. col. 1256D. Isaac C. Epist. I, σελ. 530: ησοχια. Apoplith. Patr., § 14, col. 189D-192A: άν & ρωπος μ . αθών τήν γλο᾿. ύτητα του χελλίου, ούχ ώς άτιμάζων τόν πλησίον αύτου φεύγει. According to Evagrius, hermits who reach the state of “hesychia” should not only avoid visiting cities where they cannot find anything useful for themselves (Lib. cit. col. 1257BC), but also meeting with friends (p. VII, col. 1257D). Ibid., § 15, col. 192A: ’ εάν μή έκκόψω έμαοτόν άπό των οίκτιρμών τούτων , ούκ εώσί με είναι μοναχόν. Apophthegmata. De AbbateAlonio, §1, col. 133A; cp. Verba seniorum. XI, 5, col. 934A. Isaac C. Epist. I, σελ. 526. Examples of Apsenius and others, σελ. 626–530. Vasily V. Epist. CCXCIX (al. 352). T. ΧΧΧΙΙ, col. 1041D-1044C. I. Cassian. Collatio XXIII, cap. IV, col. 1250. In the original, the above thoughts are expressed in interrogative form, suggesting an unconditionally negative answer: Quis cripieus inopcm de manu fortiormn ejus, et egenum et pauperem a diripientibus eum, quis conterens molas iniquorum et de medio dentium eorum rapinas et torquens, in ipso intercessionis opere, divinae majestatis gloriam quieta mente suspiciat? etc. Isaac C. Λογ. V, σελ. 31. Gregory B. Oratio XXVI, sar. VII T. XXXV, ool. 1237A: Επειδή χαι ΙΙλίας ήδέως ένεφιλοσόφει τώ Καρμήλω, και ᾿Ιωάννης τη έρήμω, και Τησους αυτός, τάς μέν πράξεις τοΐς όχλοις , τάς εύχάς δέ τη σχολή και ταΐς ’ ερημίαις , ώς τά πολλά προσένέμεν . Τί νομο & ετών; οιμαι, τό χρήναί τι και ήσυχάζειν, ώστε άθολώτως προσομιλεΐν τοί θεώ, καί μικρόν έπανάγειν τον νουν από τών πλανωμενων. Macarius E. Liber de caritate, S. XXIV, col. 928B; του παναγίου δέ φησι τούτου ΙΙνεύ – ματος άμήχανον άλλως τυχειν, ε ’ ι μη πάντων τις τών του αιώνος τούτου ξένος γεν ο μένος , προς την ζήτησιν τής του Χρήστου αγάπης εαυτόν άποτάςειεν , ΐνα πασών τών κατά την ΰλην μερίμνων ανεβείς ο νους , περί τον ένα τούτον σκοπόν άπασχολήται μόνον % αι οΰτω καταξιωδείη μετά Χρίστου εις εν πνεύμα γενέσ & αι. Vasily V. Epist. II (al. I). With. IV col 229B: τούτο έστι Ф εού ένοίκησις , τό διά τής μνήμης ένιδρυμένον εχειν έν έαυτω τον F εόν ουτω γινόμενα ναός F εού , όταν μή φροντίσι γηίναις το συνεχές τής μνήμης διακόπτηται , μηδέ τοΐς άπροσδοκήτοις πάβεσιν ό νους ᾿εκταράττηται, άλλα πάντα αποφυγών ό φιλό Ф εος έπι Ф εόν άναχωρή , έξελαύνων .·. τά πά & η . Wed Isaac S. Λ . LXXVII, σ. 440. Apophtheg R., § 4, col 409B: "να μη " δωσιν οί οφθαλμοί μου τά δένδρα, και απασχόλησή ᾿νους μου άπό τής εργασίας αϋτοΰ εις αυτά. Cp. Vitae Patriun L. V. Verba Sen., XI, 28. coI. Apophtheg. §§ 1–2, col. 88BC.; cp. Vitae Patriun, LIII, 190, col. 801A. cp. ibid. II, 3, col 858B. Isaac S. Λ . LXXIX, σ. 448; cp. Λ. XXXIV, σ. 219–220; Epist, σελ. 526–529. ) Apophtheg, § 25, col. 96A; cp. Verba II, 5, col. 858C (here we talk about embarrassment in general from the cry of a bird audierit vocem avis). Isaac S. Epist. I, σελ. 528. Apophtheg. R. § 13, col. 92A; cp. Verba Scniorum,, XVIII, 5, col. 973D-974A. Wed. Isaac S. Loc. dt, σελ . 528; A.LXXIII, σ. 427; Λ. LXXVIII σ. 442; Λ. LVIII, σ. 354. Theodorite. Rcligios Historia, p. XXVI, col. 1468V; cp. about Zeno ibid., p. XII, col. 1396C. Radchenko. Kievsk. Univ. Known 1898 June, page 57. Ibidem, p. 115. Cf. Gregory Palamas. De mentali quietudine (AdXenam) T. CL, col. 1044A. Here is a typical example from the history of ancient Christian asceticism. One hermit once went out into the desert. After three days of traveling through this desert, he climbed onto a high stone and saw green grass below, and on the grass a man was grazing like an animal (hominem pascentem, tanquam bestiam). The hermit slowly came down from the cliff and grabbed the man. It was an old man completely naked. Unable to bear the smell of a man, the man who was grabbed with an effort escaped from the hermit’s hands and quickly ran. The brother chased after him shouting: “For God I am chasing you, wait for me.” But the elder, turning around, said to him: “And for the sake of the same God I am running from you.” The brother took off his clothes, and in this form I again chased the old man. When the elder saw that his brother had taken off his clothes and was already catching up with him, he stopped. His brother began to ask him: “Father, tell me the word, how to be saved”? (quo salvus efficiar). And he answered him: “run away from people, be silent and you will be saved” (Fuge homines, et tace, er salvus eris). Terba Seniorum, III, 10, col. 1008BC (cf. Ancient Patericon, XX, II, p. 455). This is an example of a consistently implemented hermitism, completely breaking with the world, with humanity, with culture. Such a hermit must really renounce all the comforts of human society, all the spiritual and material benefits created and accumulated by previous generations. He is a consistent individualist of pure water. “A strict hermit lives in a cave, eats only plants, drinks only water, does not light a fire and almost does not work physically.” Prof. S. I. Smirnov. Confession of the laity before the elders. Theologian Veste. 1905 September, p. 3. See in the dissertation “Spiritual Father”..., p. 181. Isaac S. Epist. III, σελ. 534: σμικρύνουσι, και προκρίνουσιν αυτή; τάς θλίψει και τούς αγώνας του κα F ίσματος του ησυχαστικού και μοναστικού 3 ίου. “Having said that doing precepts serves as... an obstacle to contemplation, you clearly blasphemed love for your neighbor and preferred contemplation to it (έχεΐνο γάρ δ ειπας, ό᾿τι ή εργασία των ... αγάπην και προέκρινας τήν θεωρίαν ). Isaac C. Epist. IV, σελ. 571. Verba Seniorum, X, 31, col. 918 A.. Wed. Isaac S. Λογ. LVIII, σελ. 354. Neil S. De volunt. paupertate s. XXVIII. T. LXIX, col. 1001. It's him. Capita paraenetica, § 80, col. 1256. Cp. Apophtheg. P. col. 253BC; cp. Verba sen. XII, 9, col. 942ABC. Vita Pachomii p. IV, p. 26. Athanasius A. Vita Antonii, c. XLIV. col. 908A: ’Hv ουν ’ εν τοΤς δρεσι τά μοναστήρια ώς σκηναί πεπληρομέναι & είων χορών, ψαλλόντων, φίλολογούντων, νηστευόντων, ευχόμενων, άγαλλωμ – ένων έπι τή τών μ . ελλόντων έλπίδι και έργαζομ – ένων ε ς το ποιεΐν ελεημ – οσύνας, αγάπην τε και συμφωνίαν έχόντων ε ’ ις άλλήλουξ ;. I. Kaccian. L. III, p. II, col. 115 Α: ... ab eis incessanter operatio manuum privatim per cellulas exercetur, nt psalmorum quoque, vel caeterarmn Scvipturarum mcditatio num- quam penitus omittatur. Cni preces et orationes per singula momenta miscentes in his officiis, quae nos statuto tempore celebramus, totum diei tempus absumut. Ibid. L. II, p. XII, col. 102AB... crodentes se tanto sublimiovcm spiritualium contemplationum puritatnm inentis intuitu quaesituros, quanto diutius fuerint erga operis Studium ac laboris intenti. Cp. E. Theophan Letters to various people, page 378: “The Egyptian monks worked all day; but they didn’t leave Bora in their minds.” Apoplitheg. col. 208A, § 11; cp. Verba S,, XI, 14, col. 934C: Erat mens ejis occupata in contemplatione Dei. Apophtheg., col. 76AB; cp. Verba Sen. VII, 1, col. 893AB.; cp. about Hab Achilus Apophth., § 5, col. 125B. Apoplitheg. P. col. 428B, § 1... προσευχήν, ήρπαζετο ό νους αύτου άνω. Εί ουν συνέβη αδελφούς συνεύχεσ Ф αι αύτω, σπούδαζε ταχέως καταφέρειν τάς χεΐρας, ιμή αρπαγή ό νους αύτου καί χρονίση. Cp. Verba Scniorun LXII, § 11 col. 942. Hist. Laus. cap. I, col. 1009B-1010A… των αδελφών έςίστασ & αι τήν διάνοιαν του αγίου, καί ένεάζειν αυτόν, καί παρακαλού, μενον όιηγεΐσ & αι τά τής έκστάσειος, καί λέγειν, οτι άπεδήμησα τή διανοία άρπαγείς υπό & ευ > ρίας τίνος . Isaac Epist. IV, σελ. 548... καί τή αγάπη τή Ф εία φωτισ & ήναι . Cp. Λογ. XXXIV, σελ. 222–223. It's him. A. XXIII, σ. 427. τρέφει τήν γνώσιν έν τή ψυχή; ή κλείς τής καροίας των 9– είων χαρισμάτων έν τή αγάπη του πλησίον οίδοται. He is also Λ. XXIII, σ. 142:,.. όψεται᾿ σου ή ψυχή τό φως τής άλη & είας . Ibidim., σ. and44. ?? ελεημοσύνη. Λ. 1, σ. 9. (cf. Russian translation, p. 14). Ibid. Cp. Epist. IV, σελ. 549. I. Zlatoust. De jejunio et elecmosyna T. XLVIII col. 1060:... ή ποιήσγ, ς πτερόν τή ευχή, ού πέταται. δταν δέ πτερωδή ή ψυχή σοΰ, ιεις τόν ουρανόν. Wed. eg Nikita Stifata Pliysicor. capit ceut. 11, § 44, col. 920D. Nikita C. Pract. capit. cent. T, § 89, col. 893B: προοραταώτατον έν πράγμασιν άν Ф- ρωζίνοις, μακρόδεν ερχομένοις και μέλλουσι γίνεσδαι. Aka Pract. capit. cent. I, col. 861A; cp. ibid., §§ 51, 52 col. 873CD; cp § 90, col. 893C. Gregory B. Og. VI (De Pacel) sar. II, T. XXXV, col. 724B:,.. μέτρα τής είς τό κοινόν επιμιξίας καί ύποχω ρήσεως , τής μέν τους άλλους παιόαγογούσης, τής δέ τω ΙΙνεόματι μυσταγω – γουσης και τής μεν εν τω κοινω το ακοινον φυλαττουσης , της οε εν τω αμικτω το φιΑαοελφον και φιλάν θρωπον . Gregory B. Og. XXV. Sar VI, col. 1205AB:... και διάνοιας καθαρότητι , και γνησία τή προς τό καλόν νεύσει , όπως αν τοδ σχήματος εχωμεν , και οιστισιν αν ομιλωμεν , είτε ήμιν αυτοις μονοις συστελλοντες τον νοον, απο των αισθήσεων, είτε τοΐς πολλοΐς τε καί όμοφύλοις ᾿ιδιάζοντες έν τω κοινφ καί φίλοοοφουντες έν οο φιλο – σοφοδσιν. Grigort B. Og. XXI, sar. XX, col. 1104D (T. XXXV): ήσοχιον, και ησυχίαν έμπρακτον, ώστε πεισαι το μοναςειν εν τη εασταιτεια τοΰ τρόπου μάλλον , ή τή τοΰ σώματος αναχωρήσει χαρακτηρίζεσ Ф αι. Apoplltli. col. 293C. § 13. Ilist. Laus. P. XLII, col. 1106С:... τοαού – ω γάρ σχλω πυκτεύουαα, και οιαφόρως πάοαις δοολεύουσα, τήν εαυτή; καρδιάν, ουδέποτε άπέστησεν τοο θεού. Isaac C. Epist. IV, οελ. 546. Nikita C. Pract. capit. centur. I, § 72, col. 884CD. It's him. lbid., col. 885D-888A. melius est ut cum multis sis, et solitariam vitam agas voluntate, quam cum solus sis, esse cum multitudiue proposito mentis. Verba Seniorum. II, 14, col. 860A; cp. Ancient Patericon II, § 30, p. 34, where the above thought is expressed more firmly and categorically and is definitely attributed to Synclitia, while in Latin it is simply said abbatissa matrona. Simeon N. B. Og. XXVIII, T. CXX, col. 460C: Et qui in medio tumultu, et stre- pitu, et qui in coonobiis, et qui iu montibus, ac speluucis sunt, mandatisque Christi couvcnienter vivunt, salvantur, et maguis a Deo douis dignantur. It's him. Or. XXVIII, col. 497A (cp. ibid, col. 501D): Universis, etiam laieis, non mouacliis tantum, scmper, et quovis tempore poenitentiam agere, flere, et Deo supplicare perque actiones luijuscemodi etiam cacteras virtutes omnes comparare possibile est. Apoth. col. 328A, § 27. Cp. Verba Sen. X, 51, col. 921CD. Theodorite. Rel. Hist. 14, col. 1413 C: ήκιστα λω αται τοΐς φιλοσοφεΐν προαιρούμενοι; ή εν άστε σι και κώμαις ο ιατρική . ν Εδεΐςε γαρ ουτός τε και οί κατ ’ αυτόν τής το δ θεού φροντισται ίίερα – τταιας, ως ου νατό ν και εν μεσω πολλών στρεφόμενους, αυτής εφικέσ Ф αι τής των αρετών κοουωής . Theodorite. Relig. Hist. With. IV, T. LXXXII, col. 1340V. I. Cassian Collat. XIX, p. IX, col 1189В-1140B: et ideo iix utraque professione per omnia consummatum in.venire difficile est·, quia nee anachoreta ακτημοσύνην id est contemptum ac privationem materialium rerum, nec coenobita theoricam ad. intergum potest assequi puritatem, licet utrumque perfecte... noverim possedisse. Qui ita erant in utraque profes- sione perfecti, ut cum ultra omnes erenai accolas secedentes. insaciabiliter secreto solitudinis pascerentur, quantum in ipeis erat, neqnaquam inquirerunt humana consortia, tarnen ita frequentiam ac fragilitates ad se concurrentium sustinebant, ut cum ad eos visitationis vel profectus gratia innumera fratrum multitudo conflueret, tarn j'ugem repe susceptionis inquietu- dinem immobili patientia tolerantes, nihil aliud vel dedicisse vel exereuisse omni vitae sme tempore crederentur, quam ut communibus tantum advenientium officiis deservirent, ita ut apud CunCtos esset ambiguum, in qua potissimum professione eorumdem major esset industria idest, utmm in illa eremetica puritate, an in ista conversatione communi, magnanimitas eorum mirabilius aptaretur. Gregory B. Or. XLIII, c. XLI, T. XXXVI, col. 552B...o νχ αυτάρκες ύπολαμβάνιε , Ф ρηνεΐν ήσυχη τό πά Ф ος , καί πρός Ф εόν μόνον άίρειν τάς χεΐρας καί παρ ’ εκείνου των κατεχοντων κακών λύσιν ζητειν, αυτός δε κα Ф εόδειν αλλά τι καί βοη Ф εΐν, καί παρ ’ έαυτοϋ συνεισφέρειν (όετο οεΐν. Theodorite. Belig. Hist. cap. XXVI, col. 1481D-1484A. Theodoret.Rel. Hist. cap. V, col. 1352D. Bl. Theodorite. Rel. Hist., cap. II, col. 1313C: και τηξ μέν τήν ακρίβειαν , τηξ δε τήν οικονομίαν λαβών , εις έν τά διεστώτα οονήγαγεν. A similar story is told about Affonia Col.1356D. Sol. II, 9; Acts XX, 34. Theodorite. Rel. Hist. cap. X, col. 1389CD. Theodorite. Religiosa Hist. P. XXYII, col. 1420B:... μοναχικοΐς τε πόνοις , καί άρχιερατικαις περιστοιχιζόμενος φροντίσι, τοϋ βίου τόν δρόμον έςήνυσε. Bl. Theodorite. Religiosa Historia, cap. I, col. 1297BC. Theodorite. Rel. Hist. cap. XXII, col. 1453BC. Isaac C. Epist IV, p. 550. σελ. 551:... άνήρ έμ – ειρότατο ; › ησυχίαν ύπερ πάντας τιμών. Isaac S. Λ . LXXV, σ. 436. Relig. Hist., sar. XXIII, col. 1457B. Hist. Laus., c. CVI, col. 1211B. Wed. I. Zlatoust. De compuuetioue s. I. T. XLVII, col. 412. John 14:21; 15:10; 12–14, 17 . 1 Peter 4:8. 1 John 3:16,23; 4:11–12; 20–21; 5:1. Rom 8:8; 14:8–9; 15:2. Gal.6:2. Eph 5:1–2. Phil.2:4–5. Col 3:12. 2 Thessalonians 1:3, etc. John Chrysostom. In Acta Apostol. Homil. XX, p. IV, T. LX, col. 162: ούόέν ψυχρότερο v χριστιανού, ετέρους μή σώζοντος. Confr. In Genes. T. LIII, col. 36–37. Gregory B.. Ep. XI (al. XLI1I) ad. Gr. Ny SS. T. XXXVII, col. 44A: ου γάρ έαυτώ ζή τις μόνον, άλλα καί τω πλησίον. Neil C. De or. § 122 T. LXXIX, col. 1193 Β: μακάριός έστι μοναχός, 5 πάντων την σωτηρίαν και προκοπήν, ώς οικείον κατά πάσης χαρά; ορών. Ibid. col. 1193C:... άπαραλεί – πτω; δοκεΐν όραν. Isaac S. A. V, σ . 43:... λόγων τηξ παραησεω; αποστερεί ινα μη απολωντα, χαι απαιτη – η; τα; ψοχας αυτ των. Sozomen. Hist. Eccles. L. I, p. XIII, T. LXVII, col. 897D: about ν μην αλλά χαί περί τάς προστασίας των αοΓ ουιχενων ει χαι τις άλλος ύπερφυώς σπουδαιότατος έγένετο % αΙ τούτων ένε οί πολλακις εις τας πόλεις εφοιτα παροουρομενοι γαρ αύτω ??? έν τελεί. Afanasy A. Vita Antonii c. LXXXVII. T. XXVI, col. 964C-965A: οΰτω δέ τών αδιζουιΛένων προΐστατο, ως νορ, ίζειν ιλυ) άλλους, άλλαυτόν είναι τόν ττάσ οντα. Historia Lausiaca c. Cl, col. 1209A. Lib. cit. With. XIV, col. 1035C. Lib. cit. § 27, col. 11601). Confr. Vitac Patrum. lib. III, § 156, col. 792 CDs. l) Hist. Laus. With. XXVI, eol. 1073BC-1075D. Pratum. Spirit, p. XIII, col 127VO; Confr. Hist. Laus. With. IX, col. 1027A. Lib. cit. c. CLXXXIV, col. 213BC. Ibit., p. XXIV, col. 130B-D. confr. c. L1V col. 146BC. Apoth. col. 265C – 268A. §8. Cp. I. Cassian. Collat. XIV, p. IV, col. 956B-959A. Cp. I.Cassian. Collat. XXIII, p. IV-V, col. 1250A-1252B; pp. VII, col. 1253AB; col. 1253B-1254A; With. VIII, col. 1258B-1259A; With. X, col. 1260–1261A; With. XI, col. 1261–1262; With. XIII, col. 1268B. I. Zlatoust. Do laudilms s. Pauli Nomil. V. T. L, col. 498. Wed. John 15:10; 12–14; 3:188; Tim 5:9–10; Rom 15:2; Eph 6:II, etc. Isaac S. Epist IV, σ. 548. Ibidem, σελ. 552: περί πλησίον, οτι εν τή ψυχή αύτοΰ κατορ F οι, εάν άπολειφ F η τοΰ μέρους εκείνου, οπερ εν τω σωματι πληρουται κατα ουναμιν, και κατα τον καιρόν, και τον τοπον τον παρέχοντα χειρα εις τό πράγμα. Ibid., σελ. 533.cnfr. σελ. 554. Α. V, σ. 33–34. Cnfr. Αογ. XXX, σελ. 189. A.LXXIX, σ . 443, 446,448, Λ. LXXVIII, σ. 442. A. XXXIII, σ. 213–214. Vasily V. Regulae brevius traet. Inter. CLXXVI. T. XXXI, col. 1200AB: επειδή εκ βώ χατος και ψυχής συνέστηκεν ό άν F ρωπος κατά μέν τήν ψυχήν , άγαπήσωμεν τους τοιούτους , ελέγ – χοντες αύτους κα᾿ι νου Ф ετοΰντες, και παντι τρόπω εις επιστροφήν ενάγοντες ‘ κατά δέ τό σώμα εύεργε – τουντες αυτους επιδεομένους τών προς τό ζήν αναγκαίων. Cnfr. Its Regulae fusius tvact. interr. XXXVI. col. 1009C. Ancient Patericon. ХVII, 35; p. 385. Isidore P. Epist. lib. II, Er. CXXXX. T. LXXVIII, col. 537С. cnfr. Simeon N. B. Sar. pract. et. theolog., § III, col. 664B; § 112, col. 664C; § 113, ibid.; § 114, col. 664D-565A; § 115, col. 665A. I. Zlatoust. De laudibus S. Pauli Apostoli. Homil. ΙΙΙ, T. L, col. 485. It's him. In illud, vidua eligatiu. c. XV, T. LI, col. 336. Verba Sen. XIII, 10 col. 945C (Cp. Ancient Patericon XI, pp. 294–295). Verba S., § 2, col. 944A (cf. Patericon, § 2. p. 291). I. Kaccian. Collat. XXIV, p. XIX, col. 1310B. Epistolar. lib. III, Ep. CXXXVIII (Apollonio cpiscopo). Col. 836BC: yp ή τον εύδόκιμον od φιλό Ф εον είναι , και φιλάν Ф ρωπον , ί᾿να μήτε διά τό ύψος της αρετής κα ! το άνα – κείσ Ф αι τω 0 είω , των αν Ф ρώπων καταφρονοίη μήτε διά τους άν Ф ριόπους του F εού άμελοίη. Cnfr. I. Chrysostom De beatato Philogonio p. II-III, col. 752. p. 174 cf. p. 175; 195–199. For example, gr. speaks about this kind of love. A.K. Tolstoy: “love is cruel and selfish; she’s just busy with herself.” Don Juan. Complete collection poem. T. I, p. 92. Vasily V. T. XXXI, col. 908A. Wed. Simeon N. B. Or. XXIX, col 467D. Ephraim S. T. III, b. 340B-341D. Cnfr. Macarius E. De perfectione in Spiritu. With. XI, col. 849A. Όρας τοδ F εού τήν αγάπην συμπεπλεγμένην τη ήμετέρα , χαι ώσπερ σειράν τινα συνημ – μένην. → της προτέρας λαβόμ, ενον, μή τήν άλλην εχειν. Εί γάρ τό μ . ειναι άπό τής αγάπης γίνεται , ή δέ αγάπη από τής των εντολών τηρήσεως , ή δέ εντολή έστιν , ΐνα άγαπώμεν άλλήλους τό μεΐναι έν τώ Ф εώ άπό τής προς άλλήλους αγάπης γίνεται . In Ioannem Homil. LXXVII (al. LXXVI), p. I. T. LIX, col. 415. ) " Ωσπερ ψυχή άνευ σώματος ού παλείται άν & ρωπος ουδέ ήν σώμα άνευ ψυχής ούτωςουδέ αγάπη προς Ф εόν , εάν μή εχη άκόλου & ον αί τήν προς τόν πλησίον αγάπην. Words of I. Chrysostom, quoted by Maximus the Confessor in Loci communes VI (De amicis et fraterno amore, col. 757A). Kirill A. De adoratione in Spiritu et veritate lib. VII (De charitate in fratres). T. LXVIII, col. 480B. ibid., col. 480BC: ? την εις αδελφούς ως τό τε λείπεσ Ф αι μιας , τήν επ ’ άμφοΐν άπότευςιν έχει... Avva Dorotheus. Doctor VI p. IX, col. 1696VS: καί λέγω ύμΐν υπόδειγμα εκ των ΙΙατρών , ινα νοήσητε την δύναμιν του λόγου, "Χπό F εσ F έ μοι κύκλον είναι έν τη γή οιον, χάραγμα τι στρογγυλόν από διαβήτου κέντρου. ίδικώς τό μεσώτατον του κύκλου εως του κέντρου. F έτε τον νουν υμών εις τό λεγόμενον. Τούτον τόν κύκλον νομίσατέ μοι είναι τον κόσμον , αυτό δε τό μέσον του κύκλου τον Ф εόν, τάς δέ εύδείας τάς από του κύκλου επί τό μέσον τάς οδούς, ήτοι τάς πολιτείας των αν F ρώπων. Ἐφ ’ δσον ουν εισέρχονται οι άγιοι επί τά εσω έπιπο F ουντες F εοΰ και άλλήλων. Καί όσου πλησιάζουσι τω (?) εώ, πλησιάζουσιν αλλή – λοις, και όσου πλησιάζουσιν άλλήλοις, πλησιάζουσι τω F εω, "Ομοίως νοήσατε καί χωρισμόν . επι τα εςω , οηλον εστιν οτι οβον εςεργονται και μακρύνουσιν τοσοΰτον μακρύνονται άπ ’ άλλήλων, τοσοΰτον μακρύνονται άπό του F εοΰ. Wed. Simeon N. B.Or. XXII, col. 424B. Μ f 25:35–36, 40. Mark 9:37. Gal 6:2. Eph 5:1–2. Rom 14:18. I. Climacus. Gr. XXX, col. 1157B: αγάπη χατά μεν ποιότητα όμοίωσις F εοΰ χα &’ δσον βροτοΐς εφικτόν . Isaac S. Λ . V, σ. 33–34: ' Ф εός οΰ χρήζει τινός ευφραίνεται δέ δταν ’ ίδη τινά άνα – παύοντα τήν εικόνα αύτοΰ, χαί τιμώντα αυτήν δι ’ αυτόν. I. Climacus. Lib. cit. col. 1157C: αγαπών τόν Κύριον, τόν αδελφόν αύτοΰ προηγάπησεν. A= πόδειξις γάρ τοΰ προτέρου τό δεύτερον . I. Kaccian. Col. IX, p. X, col. 859A: in quo infirma et fragilis humana natura esse, sicut ille est, potest, nisi se in bonos et malos... ad imitationem Dei placida semper sui cordis effenderit cbaritate. Gregory B. Or. XIV (De pauperum amoge), p. V. T. XXXV, col. 864C: ουδενι γάρ οΰτω των πάντων , ώς έλέω , Ф εός Ф εραπεύεται , δτι μηδέ οΐχειότερον άλλο τούτου F εω ... ουδέ άλλω τινι μ . άλλον , ή φιλαν F ρωπία τό φιλάν F ρωπον άντιδίδοται παρά τοΰ διχαίως αντιμετοΰντος. I. Zlatoust. De laudibus S. Pauli Apost. Homil. III, p. I. T. L, col. 483. Isaac S. Λ . LXXXI, σ. 454.Cnfr. Neil S. Sentent. abducent. § 93 col. 1249A. Wed. Abba Isaiah. col. 1148C: bonitas mater est castitatis. Neil Sin. Sentent. abducent. § 50 col. 1244D-1245A. Vasily V. T. XXXI, col. 9Ί7 A... πλησίον ευποιΐαν εις εαυτόν μετατί F ησιν . Cp. I. Cassian. Col. XI. S. X, col. 859A. Evagrius P. Capita practica ad Anatolium c. LI. T.XL. col. 1236B: οι᾿αν καί τω πρωτοτυπώ σχεδόν . Klymeit Α. Stromata L. II, p. XIX. T. VIII, col. 1045ВС: τω γάρ όντι είχών τοΰ Ф εοΰ άν Ф ρωπος ευεργετών έν ω χαΐ αυτός ευεργετείται · ώσπερ γάρ ό κυβερνήτης , άμα σώζει καί σώζεται . Wed. Evagrius of Pontius. Rer. monast; rationes n. VI. T. XL, col. 1257B. Gregory B. Or. XVII, p. IX-X. T. XXXV, col. 976–977 Α :... ή χαίρει Ф εός μάλλον – η πάσιν όμου τοΐς άλλοις . δώρον ’ ίδιον , δώρον άμωμον ... Cnfr. Or. XIV, pp. V-VI. T. XXXV. col. 864CB. Isaac S. Λ . XXIII, σ. 144. Isidore I. Epist. lib. II. Er. CXXXX, col. 573С. He is the same. Or. XIV, p. XXXIX-XL. T. XXXV, col. 909 AC: όίει μή ανάγκην είναι σοι φιλαν F ρωπίαν , άλλ ’ αί᾿ρεσιν ; μηδέ νόμον, άλλα παραίνεσιν; Cnfr. Or. XXV, p. V, col. 1204 VS. I. Zlatoust. Homil. in Acta Apost. Homil. XXII, p. III. T. LX, col. 175; With. IV, col. 176. Cnfr. col. 318–320. Exposit, in. Psalm. CXLII. n. I, T.LV. col. 447–448. Neil Sin. § LI, col. 1245. Isaac. C. Λ. XXIII, σ. 144. Macarius E. Homil. XXXVII, p. III, col. 752C: ούκ εστι άλλως σω Ф ήναι, ε! μή διά τοΰ πλησίον. Saying of Abba Anthony. Apoplith. P. § 9 col. 77B: εκ τοΰ πλησίον έστιν ή ζο ) ή καί ο F άνατος . Cnfr. Verba Seniorum XVII 2. col. 973C. I. Zlatoust. Adversus oppugnatores vitae monasticae lib. III, p. II, T. XLVII, col. 360–351. Cnfr. Himself. De sacerdotio ilib. VI, p. X. T. XLVIII, col. 686. Cp. I. Kassian. Collat. XXIII, p. VI, col. 1252B:... ebaritatis, sine qua nemo Domînum promeretur contemplatione snbmittitur. Ouos γάρ evi σω Ф ήναι μ . ή τούτο εχοντα – αλλά κ ’ άν την άκραν φιλοσοφίαν άσκτ , ς , τών δέ λοιποιν άπολλυι ivüjv άμε. ης, οΰδεμίαν κτήση παρά F εω παρρησίαν. Cnfr. Apophtliegm. Patrum col. 372 § 14: το ε᾿λεος ευρεν παρρησίαν ενώπιον του F εού. I. Zlatoust. Homil. in. Epist. I ad Corintb. With. IV. T. LXI, col. 208–211. Theodorite. Relig. Hist. sar. II. T. LXXXII, col. 1320AB. Theodorite. Rel. Hist. sar. IV, col. 1341C and gave. Verba Sen. XVII, 18. col. 976B (cf. Patericon § 21, p. 378). Verba Sen. I, 16, col. 999D-1000A (cf. Patericon. XVIII, 44, p. 420). Cp. E. Feofan. Plot. Last Galatians (Gal 5:6), p. 337. Commentary. Last Ephesus (Eph 3:18). p. 216. Interpretation. Last Ear. ( Col. 3:15 ), p. 184. Commentary. and Last Solun. (Sol. 5:25), pp. 387–388. Gregory B. Og. IV (Contra Iulianum I). T. XXXV, col. 649B-652A. Gregory Sinait. Praecepta ad Hesycbastas T. CL, col. 1836BC. Gregory B. Og. XIV. (De pauperum amore). C IV, col. 874A. Apoth. P., col. 329A, § 27. Cnfr. Verba Sen. X, 51, col. 921CD. ibid.col. 357D, §147: ό λοιλών δια τον Ф εόν καλώς ποιεΐ , καί ό σιωπών διά τόν Ф εόν , ομοίως. Isaac C. Α . LXXVII, σ. 440. He is the same. Α. LVIII, σ. 352:... του Χρίστου διάκεισο, καί αξιω F είς ομολογίας. Cnfr. Nikita C. Physicorum capxtum Cent. II, § 76, col. 937A. Apophthegm. Patrum. col. 229D-232A, § 8. Isaac C. Epist. IV, σελ. 546:... εκαστω κατα την ουναμιν και την οια – ιροράν καί τόν σκοπόν , ον έ F ηκεν έν έαυτφ. Apoth. P., col. 329 Β, § 29. Confr. Verba Sen. X, § 52, col. 92ID; XXXVI, § and, col. 1053D. Uistor. Laus. With. XV, col. 1035D-1036. Apoth. R., § 38, col. 105AB. Cnfr. Vitae Petrum, lib. VII, p. § 2. col. 1040B-D. I. Kissian. Collat. XIV, p. IV, col. 956B-959A. Isaac S. Λ . XIX, c. 101: έκαστος άν Ф ρωπος εις ολα τα μετρα εν παση υοω , η πορεύεται προς αυτόν , αυτός ανοίγει έμπροσ Ф εν αύτου την πύλην τής βασιλείας των ουρανών. Apoth. P., col. 308 Α, § 2. Hist. Laus, ... μεν ευφυΐα οιανοιας, εν ταις οε επιτηοειοτης της ασκηεεως. Hist. Laus., c. LII, col. 1138B: συνεβίβαζε μ, ετελ F εΐνάρετήν. Cufr. Simeon N. B. Capit. practical. et theolog. § 87, col. 652AB. Theodorite. Religiosa listoria, p. XXVII, col. 1484D-1485A. Cufr. Historia Lausiaca, c. LXIX, col. 1172D. Relig. Hist., col. 1485A. Cnfr. With. XXX, col. 1493C. Soulful Reading. 1902. October, pp. 186–193. See a number of his articles: “The Orthodox Ideal of Monasticism” (Dushvn. Cht. 1902, October, pp. 194–209); “More on the ideal of monasticism” (ibid. 1903 January, pp. 107–120); “Monastic work and the work of God” (February, pp. 330–355); “An unexpected ally” (regarding Mr. Rozanov’s feuilleton) (March, pp. 543–545). See his extensive, scientific and detailed article: “How did the ascetics of ancient Rus' serve the world?” (Historical background to the controversy about monasticism). Theologian Herald. 1903 Martha pp. 516–580; April, pp. 716–788. Orthodox ideal of monasticism D. Read. Oct., p. 206. ) ibid., p. 201; Wed. p.199. Quote op. April, page 472. Quote op. March, page 516: author's italics. p. 763. Wed. p. 764. Italics are ours.