Вторая часть. Жизнь святого Серафима Саровского

Chronological table of the life and exploits of St. Seraphim of Sarov III. Stages of the life of Saint Seraphim of Sarov The archives of the Diveyevo community tell in detail about the last eleven years of the life of the Rev. Seraphim. But little is known about the previous sixty-two years, and mainly the forty-two of them lived in Sarov. In the lives, this gap is not too noticeable, because their authors, not bothering with a preliminary assessment of the integrity of the witnesses, on the one hand, do not dare to cite many episodes described in the archives, and on the other hand, do not want to trust these witnesses even in those cases when they expose the machinations of such a significant person as the pseudo-disciple Joasaph. And he, although he aroused the disapproval of the Holy Synod, nevertheless managed to create in public opinion, even during his lifetime, the idea of ​​himself as the spiritual heir of St. Seraphim, publishing four versions of his life. However, it was precisely the fight with Joasaph that was one of the main concerns of the monk in his last years. And finally, in a vain effort to create a chronologically verified life, biographers sacrificed valuable data about the last period of his life for the sake of a detailed presentation of the often incoherent information about his life in the monastery, the Sarov Monastery wanted to make public. As already mentioned, the abbots of Sarov chose to remain silent about the most significant events of his monastic life. We know only a few episodes about which the monk himself told the Diveyevo sisters and a few relatives, as well as the main stages that can (except for two) be accurately dated. All biographies insistently suggest that Rev. Seraphim lived for forty-two years as an ascetic withdrawn from the world, and twelve years before his death he suddenly became an old man by inspiration from above. Attempts are being made to somehow explain the previous stages of his life (ostentatious silence since 1807, returning from the hermitage to the monastery and going into seclusion on May 8, 1810, exit from the seclusion, which is not exactly dated, and the resumption of hermit life from November 25, 1825) either by his poor health, or by the desire to devote himself to asceticism, or by some kind of inspiration from above. None of these explanations are satisfactory. A careful study of the documents indicates that Rev. Seraphim had already been an elder since he was thirty-six or forty years old, and not after sixty-two. One thing is certain: it was at the age of sixty-two that he showed his gift of working miracles: “According to the grace given to me from the Lord, I am the first to heal you,” he said to Manturov in 1821 (157 3/4). As for the data about the first nineteen years of his life before entering the path of monasticism, they are as reliable and accurate as their sources, for they were collected by Motovilov during the searches he undertook in the homeland of St. Seraphim immediately after his death. Chichagov, to whom we owe the preservation of the archives, did not try to make public what the Sarov abbots wanted to hide: then his work would not have passed through spiritual censorship and canonization of St. Seraphim would be at risk. He limited himself to comparing all known data, making them public with all the mutual contradictions and inconsistencies. At the same time, he wrote down, from the words of some monks, the oral tradition about St. Seraphim, and not just the censored version, since his first edition of the archives dates back to 1896, and in previous years he must have visited Diveyevo and Sarov more than once. This is what he wrote about the hermit period of the saint’s life (1794–1810). “During his stay in the desert,” the Sarov elders of that time said, “all the brethren were his disciples” (74 1/3; see also 73 3/4). In another place, referring to the document, he cites a bitter remark of one Sarov monk about the indifference of the community to the memory of the saint (581 bottom - 582 top). We would like to show that the biography of Rev. Seraphim requires revision: both among the community and among the pilgrims of St. Seraphim began to serve as an elder already at the age of thirty-six or forty, and the thousand-day pilgrimage should obviously be attributed to the beginning of his hermit’s life. Abbot Isaiah I (1794–1806) highly valued Rev. Seraphim. Since Nifont, elected rector in 1806, was hostile towards him, Rev. Seraphim demonstratively stopped caring for the monks (only about them). In 1810, Nifont, under a plausible pretext, forces him to leave the hermitage and return to the monastery. It is very likely that Rev. Seraphim continued to receive pilgrims and Niphon decided to put an end to this. Having received a ban on visits and not wanting to remain the spiritual mentor of the brethren with the abbot condemning him, Rev. Seraphim went into seclusion. No later than four and a half years later, and under circumstances of which we are not told, he resumed his eldership, receiving both pilgrims and “many of the brethren” (110 1/2). It is very likely that Rev. Seraphim, like Elder Leonidas, whom we will talk about, was too famous for it to be possible to prohibit him from receiving visitors for a long time. While accepting the laity, he could not refuse the brothers who turned to him. But for the sake of peace in the community - no less than out of vocation - from the end of 1825 he began to spend daytime in the desert. Explaining the lifestyle changes of Rev. Seraphim by his prudence, we do not at all want to deny that he was guided at the same time by instructions from above, as biographers claim, although this data, gleaned from the lives published by the Sarov Monastery, raises doubts. After all, the lives refer, in addition to revelation, to his state of health. But, as has already been said, the history of the construction of St. Seraphim of the Diveyevo Monastery testifies, according to reliable documents, that the instructions received in revelations never bound the monk’s sanity: one did not interfere with the other. Harassment of Rev. Seraphim, associated with eldership, fit perfectly into the historical context. The same thing happened with the holy Bishop Tikhon and his disciples. A few years after the death of Rev. Seraphim, the first Optina elder Leonid (1829–1841) endured even more severe oppression than that suffered by the Venerable. Seraphim. After forty years of eldership, he was recalled from the desert, which he himself had built, and was forced to live not even in a monastery, but in a monastery. 39 Having accused the elder of heresy, the bishop forbade him to wear the vestments of a schema-monk. In the nunneries he cared for, his students were persecuted. Some were expelled as heretics, others were reduced to the position of novices or placed under the strictest supervision. However, Father Leonid did not stop serving as an elder, since the abbot sympathized with him. In vain they hid him in a hard-to-reach cell. The question arose about his deportation to one of the Siberian monasteries, but the elder said that even in Siberia he would not stop accepting those who would turn to him. It is noteworthy that he, like Rev. Seraphim (313 1/2), going against the will of the church authorities, referred not to suggestions from above, but to the duty of conscience: he could not refuse those who needed his advice. And in fact, a monk cannot, without falling into sin, obey the instructions of his superiors if they go against his conscience. Before tracing the various periods of the life of Rev. Seraphim, let’s say a few words about his health, because this was often referred to when explaining the vicissitudes of his life’s path. Health of St. Seraphim Rev. Seraphim was very active all his life; he always forced himself to undergo significant physical exertion, to which until the very end he added the practice of mortification: going to the nearby desert and returning from there (two and a half kilometers), he put a knapsack with stones on his back and often did not take it off even while working in the garden (196 top). As far as is known, the disease constrained him only three times. Two years after entering Sarov, he fell ill with dropsy for three years, from which he was cured after a vision he had. At the age of thirty-four, having become a priest and serving every day, he was forced to temporarily interrupt his ministry due to illness in his legs, which were covered with ulcers (59 top). Russian ascetics very often suffered from leg disease; this is attributed to the fact that they usually pray standing. This illness was fleeting, for a few months later Rev. Seraphim became a hermit. And finally, having become a victim of a brutal assassination attempt at the age of forty-five, he recovered in just five months. He died at the age of seventy-three, apparently from a heart attack: he had suffered from shortness of breath since at least sixty-six. All this is not said at all to deny the seriousness of the Rev.’s ailments. Seraphim, but because his state of health is an insufficient explanation for the change in his lifestyle, as is often the case in the lives published in Sarov. Thus, one of the reasons why he became a hermit is said to be terrible headaches. 40 But if he needed fresh air, it is not clear why he could not simply open the window in his cell, the air in which, due to the huge number of burning candles, was so suffocating that it caused inconvenience to visitors. What Rev. Seraphim, like many monks, became a hermit; it was a completely natural thing. Already from the time of his arrival in Sarov, he spent his free hours in a forest hut (47 bottom). One day Rev. Seraphim was crushed by a tree he had cut down, and from then on he could not straighten his back (86 bottom). After the attempt on his life, he walked only leaning on a stick or hatchet. As a result of the disease, he lost his hair twice (449 1/4). According to N. Levitsky (p. 171), after his death, a large ulcer was discovered between his shoulder blades - an ulcer with which the devil struck him. One thing never ceases to amaze: from the day the monk became a hermit, he apparently never himself served or concelebrated the liturgy, at least under the abbot of Isaiah I; Meanwhile, he was in heartfelt unity with the community. Apparently, he, following the desert fathers, believed that liturgy was possible only together with the brethren. Previously, he served daily and almost continuously for five years and nine months (51 2/3) from the time of his ordination as a deacon until his ordination to the priesthood and for another year that elapsed after his ordination until the beginning of his hermit life. All his life, as a priest, he received communion and confessed very often. The Calling of St. Seraphim to Hesychasm Having entered Sarov at the age of nineteen, Rev. At the age of seventeen, Seraphim made a pilgrimage to Kyiv, where he sought the advice of Elder Dosifei. It was he who advised him to retire to Sarov (43 1/2 - 44 top): “Come, child of God, and remain there. This place will be your salvation, with the help of the Lord. Here you and your earthly journey will end. Just try to acquire unceasing memory of God through the constant invocation of the name of God like this: Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner. Let all your attention and training be in this: walking and sitting, doing and standing in church, everywhere, in every place, going in and out, let this unceasing cry be in your mouth and in your heart; with him you will find peace, you will acquire spiritual and physical purity, and the Holy Spirit, the source of all good things, will dwell in you and guide your life in holiness, in all piety and purity. In Sarov, the rector Pachomius lived a godly life; he is a follower of our Anthony and Theodosius! 41 This text needs the following comments: - So, Rev. Seraphim began to say the Jesus Prayer even before he entered the monastery, and the goal was to acquire the Holy Spirit. This is the same teaching as in the Discourse, but there is not the slightest hint of the Jesus Prayer. The abbot Pachomius taught the same thing, whose only surviving instruction, addressed to hermits, explains to them how their lifestyle will help them acquire the Holy Spirit (Paterikon, p. 68 bottom - 70 1/3). - Rev. Seraphim learned Dositheus’s instruction so well that this teaching was eventually attributed to him, since he, in turn, taught the same thing and often in the same words (Paterikon, 186 below). Only on the basis of the short life of St. Seraphim, published in Diveevo in 1874, Chichagov managed to restore its ownership to the elder Dosifei. – A few years later, Elder Dosifei sent one of his students to Elder Paisius Velichkovsky (who died much later, in the same year when St. Seraphim became a hermit). 42 In vain we will ask ourselves why Elder Dositheus did not send him to Elder Paisios: Dositheus had a prophetic gift and, obviously, this was the will of God. – We can only confirm that Sarov was indeed a school of hesychasm. The Jesus Prayer was honored there from its very foundation, from the first years of the 18th century (Paterikon, 36 1/2; 32 3/5; 40). The ascetic fathers and, in particular, the Philokalia have been read there since at least 1798 (Paterikon, 88 1/2 - 89 1/2). – Archpriest S. Chetverikov classifies Sarov as one of the monasteries inhabited by the disciples of Elder Paisius, meaning Elder Nazarius of Sarov, the Valaam abbot. But there is no evidence that Rev. Seraphim was a disciple of Elder Nazarius; he left Sarov two years after the priest entered. Seraphim and returned there only for the last five years of his life, when the forty-four-year-old Seraphim himself was already an old man. 43 – Archpriest S. Chetverikov does not name Diveevo among the monasteries committed to the teachings of Elder Paisius, but mentioning St. Seraphim, does not speak of him as a disciple of Elder Paisius. Bearing in mind that the Sarov Monastery tried to keep silent about the eldership of St. Seraphim, we note that his eldership, according to known documents, had the following differences from the eldership of Paisius: a) we have no evidence that Rev. Seraphim practiced “revelation of thoughts,” as did Elder Paisios and subsequently all the Optina elders, the first of whom, Leonidas, was accused of heresy for precisely this reason; 44 b) we have no evidence that Rev. Seraphim taught the “art” of the Jesus Prayer; 45 c) in addition to the Jesus Prayer, Rev. Seraphim often ordered the reading of the Angelic Greeting (75 top). Finally, let’s say a few words about “Elder Dositheus.” According to I. Kontsevich, 46 in reality it was a woman who, living in a separate cave, received permission from the relevant authorities to wear the dress of a monk 47. The life of St. Seraphim in the community It is noteworthy that the mentors Rev. Seraphim trusted him so much that in the fifth year of his life in the monastery, when he was only twenty-four years old, they sent him on a trip around Russia to collect donations for the construction of a hospital and a church. 48 Having returned, he himself worked on its construction, and it was this hospital church that he mainly visited from the very day he became a hermit until his death. He was thirty years old when, accompanying Abbot Pachomius and his assistant (treasurer) Isaiah on a trip, he visited the Diveyevo community with them and they found its founder near death. She, endowed with the gift of clairvoyance, obtained from them a promise to take care of the community she founded. She had the right to this, for the Sarov Monastery owed her a lot: it was a debt of justice, as the Venerable himself explained. Seraphim (316 bottom – 318 top). This debt passed to him in 1806, when Pachomius' successor Isaiah resigned as abbot and soon died; Nifont, who replaced him, completely stopped caring about Diveyevo. There is no doubt that Rev. Seraphim remained faithful to the task entrusted to him. In fact, as we will see, he had sent converts to Diveyevo before, especially since Elder Isaiah showed much less zeal for this community than Elder Pachomius (97 top). Until 1821, the saint’s help was obviously only spiritual, and during his retreat he was forced to interrupt that too. However, starting from 1821, he took care of Diveevo not only spiritually, but also financially and administratively. On the way back, Elder Pachomius and his companions stopped again in Diveyevo. The founder died, and they participated in the burial. Rev. Seraphim did not want to stay in Diveyevo for the funeral meal, which traditionally follows the burial, and returned to Sarov alone in the pouring rain (12 km). This episode is the only one in his entire life when he, relying on his clairvoyant gift, visited Diveevo. So, even from those ancient times, he tried, as far as it depended on him, not to give rise to slander, the object of which he more than once became later. Novice Rev. Seraphim was entrusted to the elderly monk Joseph, who should have become abbot after Pachomius if he had not fallen ill at that time. Elders Joseph and Isaiah became his godfathers in monastic life 49 . Elders Pachomius and Joseph were close to him, but Elder Isaiah, his confessor, was close to him to a lesser extent (181 top). Let us clarify that we are talking about Isaiah I. Rev. Seraphim became a hermit shortly after the death of Abbot Pachomius (November 20, 1794) and remained until he received instructions to return to the monastery on May 8, 1810. Elder Pachomius himself gave him his blessing for this. Hermitage was not considered something irrevocable, for after this the monk was offered several times to become the abbot of the monastery. Usually hermits took a student with them, but the Rev. Seraphim settled alone from the very beginning, because those who tried to join him lacked perseverance. For other hermits, the disciples were more like cell attendants, and, obviously, none of them continued the feat of their teacher after his death (73 lower - 75 1/2). And finally, judging by the Patericon, the saint’s contemporaries were the last Sarov hermits. According to the Patericon and the life of St. Seraphim, there were three of them (not counting Nazarius, who was a hermit only from 1804 to 1809). We know nothing about Hieromonk Dorotheos, except that he died in October 1825. During the following winter, Rev. Seraphim used his desert, which was located near the miraculous spring; then they built him a new one. The other two considered young Seraphim their teacher. Methodius, who was twenty years older than him, became a hermit in 1798. He visited the monk twice a month. In 1811, he was admitted by Niphon to schema 50 and took the name Mark. Until his death in 1817, he lived in a hermitage near the monastery and came to church every Sunday 51. It was his life that Monk Sergius compiled simultaneously with the life of St. Seraphim. Deacon Alexander visited him once a month. He apparently died in 1840 52 . Mark and Alexander left us several memories of the saint. The first hermitage, Rev. Seraphim was called distant in contrast to the near one, where from 1825 until his death he spent the daytime, returning to the monastery in the evenings. The distant hermitage was five or six kilometers from the monastery, that is, twice as far as all the others. It consisted of one room and a vestibule. According to Levitsky (p. 49), a hatch in the floor opened the entrance to the underground, where the monk hid if he wanted to avoid meeting visitors. One deck served as a table for him, the other as a seat. Glory of St. Seraphim From that time on, the glory of St. Seraphim spread far beyond the monastery. He was thirty-seven years old, and had only been a priest for three years when he was first offered the position of rector. And after all, we were talking about the oldest monastery, which, having gone through a period of decline and attachment to the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, again regained its independence 53. In 1804, after an attempt on his life, a medical council was invited to Sarov, which arrived from the main district town, located sixty kilometers from the monastery (85 1/2 bottom). It is quite obvious that all this was unusual for the monk. In 1806, when the ill Isaiah I resigned as rector, the community elected Rev. Seraphim, “according to the unanimous desire of the brethren,” as stated in accordance with the usual formula (93 below). It seems to us that the offer was not sincere: the brethren offered him the leadership, because they knew that he would refuse; later, when the monastery embarked on a path not approved by the monk. Seraphim, the monks could say that he should only blame himself for this. And finally, in 1821, the governor passing through Sarov expressed an insistent desire to receive the blessing of St. Seraphim. During this period he was forced, despite his disgust, to pose for artists several times. One of the portraits of fifty-year-old Seraphim was painted by a skilled master (497 1/3, Chichagov does not provide a reproduction of it). The magazine “Nadezhda” (No. 10, p. 424) reproduced the portrait of St. Seraphim in his youth, but apparently this is a different portrait, for in it the Rev. Seraphim cannot be given more than thirty-five years. This is also the creation of a skilled artist. The characteristic features of the Rev. are easily recognizable in him. Seraphim, only the hands seem stylized: these are the hands of a person not accustomed to physical labor. This portrait, like two others dating back to the last years of the saint (one of them was reproduced by Chichagov on the front side of page 494), have one common feature in which one can see evidence of their authenticity: after the canonization of the saint. Seraphim's skillful hand imperceptibly turned them into icons, adding a thin golden halo. As we have seen, Rev. Seraphim was the spiritual mentor of the Sarov monks. They visited him in the hermitage, but he avoided some of the brothers (74 1/2). He received monks mainly in the monastery cell, where he spent the daytime on Sundays (73 1/2). In the hermitage, and possibly in the monastery, the monk also received pilgrims. Robbers in 1804 demanded money from him, saying: “Worldly people come to you and bring money.” He did not deny visits from the laity: “I don’t take anything from anyone” (83). 54 Apparently, pilgrims came to him even before he became a hermit, for from the very beginning the Rev. Seraphim asked Elder Isaiah for his blessing not to accept women in the desert (60 1/2 - 62 1/2). “There are different versions of this story that do not change the essence of the matter,” admits Chichagov. In any case, it is obvious that, by blocking the path leading to his hermitage with trees, the monk tried to isolate himself not only from women, but also from men and monks. However, this was only a temporary measure, and it is very tempting to see in it an indication of the period when he indulged in the “stylite” life. Once the abbot of the monastery sent to Rev. Seraphim candidate for hermit. The elder allowed him to build a cell next door, but he did not have enough perseverance (88 bottom 89). The local deacon, having become a widower, began to visit Rev. Seraphim and Mark. Later he became a monk under the name Timon and became the abbot of the desert (76 1/2 - 77 below). Twenty years later, he visited the elder a few months before his death (443 top - 444 1/2). We have no evidence that Rev. Seraphim cared for the Diveyevo sisters while he was a hermit, but around 1801 he sent at least one convert to them: in 1861, Sister Evdokia Efremovna announced to Bishop Nektary that she had been in the community for sixty years (645 1/2; repeated by Philaret on P. 681 1/2). However, she was the second sister whom Rev. Seraphim transferred to the mill, and all the first sisters were from among those whom he sent to Diveevo himself. Probably most of the sisters of that time were the spiritual daughters of St. Seraphim, or perhaps Elder Isaiah, his confessor while he was alive. The fact is that forty of the fifty-two sisters left the community in 1796 due to the unreasonable severity of Ksenia Mikhailovna, the abbess elected that year (98 1/2). It was the lack of sanity of this abbess (who lived until 1839) that forced the Rev. Seraphim will gradually provide the Mill community with complete independence. However, even with such an abbess, her community in 1825 numbered fifty sisters. Rev. Seraphim told his loved ones that at some time, he did not say exactly which time, he spent a thousand days in continuous prayer: at night on a stone in the forest, and during the day on another stone, transferred to the desert. Note that the Sarov monks, apparently, were the last to learn about this. The Sarov archive preserves a draft of Abbot Nifont’s response to the secret request of the Tambov bishop: “About the exploits and life of Fr. We know Seraphim; no one knew about any secret actions, or about standing on the stone for 1000 days and nights” (82 3/4). How could the monk disappear for almost three years without anyone noticing? After all, he interrupted his old age’s care of monks and pilgrims and stopped coming to church on Sundays. Of course, one can assume that he appeared in two places at the same time, but this is a bold and arbitrary hypothesis. For by perfect solitude St. Seraphim could only be used during periods of heavy snowfall. As for food, he grew most of what he needed himself, and brought bread from the monastery. It seems that the period of stylitehood coincides with the time when the monk ate food alone, which also lasted a little less than three years (72 bottom - 73 top; 232 2/3). Snit is a wild plant that Russian peasants used to feed themselves during the hungry years. Rev. Seraphim dried it for the winter. “And the brothers were surprised at what I ate!” One piece of evidence encourages us to connect this ascetic feat of the monk with his struggle against demons (238 4/5). We don't know much more about this. The lives published in Sarov describe in detail his struggle with demons; in them, the stylite period marks completion and victory. But they don't provide a single piece of evidence. Such a description of the hidden life of saints is subject to hagiographic cliches: if an ascetic is recognized as a saint, it is inappropriate to admit that his inner life surpasses our understanding. And we invent, according to our wretched ideas, what the inner life of the saint was like, forgetting that after death we will be ashamed to meet him. It seems to us more correct to attribute this episode of the life of St. Seraphim to the beginning of his hermit life, when he was less bound by eldership. In any case, it cannot be attributed to 1806, since from that time moral responsibility for the Diveyevo community fell on him. It is also impossible to attribute him to 1804, when he barely recovered from the brutal assassination attempt: the abbot of the monastery, who was his friend, could not, having stopped seeing him, not worry about his health. Venerable Seraphim and the disciples of Paisius Velichkovsky Let us finally say about the little that we know about the relationship between the Rev. Seraphim with the disciples of Elder Paisius, although this topic refers to the last period of his life. As has already been said in connection with the calling of St. Seraphim, nothing is known about the influence of Elder Nazarius on him, but one of Nazarius’s disciples, who became the monastery’s confessor, was a student of St. Seraphim 55. Hilarion helped the monk receive visitors (750 bottom - 751 top; 387 bottom). Since the elder himself never went to Diveevo, it was to Hilarion that he entrusted the tonsure of some of the sisters (307 1/2 - 308 4/5). Rev. Seraphim would like to entrust him with the entire Diveyevo community after his death, but knew that he “could not” (probably because, having an official position in the monastery, he could not directly go against the will of the abbot; 453 1/3). Finally, in 1824, he sent him to the city of Ardatov, located forty kilometers from Sarov, to confirm the new abbess 56. In 1861, this abbess will testify against Joasaph. We are talking about one of the three communities that, according to Joasaph, were entrusted to him by the venerable. Seraphim. The spiritual father of the Moscow Elder Dosithea was Elder Alexander, a disciple of Elder Paisius. She guided the spiritual life of the brothers Timofey and Jonah Putilov and inspired them to become monks in Sarov 57 . They arrived there in 1805 58 . Archpriest S. Chetverikov quotes two letters of recommendation to Sarov. one is about Timothy and Jonah, the other is only about Timothy (262 1/4 - 263 bottom). Timothy moved to another monastery, where he took the name of Moses; in 1821 he was invited to Optina Pustyn and founded the famous monastery there. It was he who called Elder Leonid to Optina and, having become rector of both the monastery and the monastery, allowed Elder Leonid to continue his activities against the will of the diocesan bishop. In his eldership, Timothy was helped by another brother, Alexander, who became a monk Anthony. It can be assumed that Elder Dosifeya wanted to introduce the Putilov brothers to the school of the Venerable. Seraphim. Elder Alexander's letters contain only general instructions. It is also possible that Timofey left Sarov precisely because of the election of Nifont as abbot in 1806. But about any relationship, Rev. We don’t know anything about Seraphim and the future founder of the Optina monastery. Jonah settled in Sarov and took the name Isaiah. Unlike his brothers, Archpriest S. Chetverikov does not count him among the disciples of Elder Paisius. Having become assistant (treasurer) of Abbot Nifont in 1822, he led those who took up arms against the Venerable. Seraphim and the Diveyevo community. He succeeded Niphon in 1842 (Isaiah II). Elder Alexander in 1810 moved from Moscow to Arzamas, a district town, becoming the abbot of the monastery 59. About his relationship with his former spiritual son Isaiah or Rev. We also know nothing about Seraphim. The contribution of another community, which also arose in Arzamas and was created by a disciple of Elder Paisius, Maria Petrovna Protasyeva, seems more fruitful. Her spiritual father was Elder Fyodor Ushakov, a disciple of Elder Paisius, and after the death of the elder, Archimandrite Paisius himself. After the death of Elder Paisius (1794), his follower, Elder Sophrony 60, became her spiritual father. about Maria Protasyeva’s relationship with Rev. Seraphim 61 knows nothing. But in 1815, the abbess of this community, Olga Vasilievna Striganova, asked for spiritual care from a certain Andrei Medvedev, who became her spiritual mentor. Later he was to become Archimandrite Anthony, locum tenens of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, confessor and mentor of Metropolitan Philaret. At first, Andrei, being a pilgrim, sought entry into Sarov, but was accepted by Abbot Nifont only after his second visit in 1818. Since Abbot Nifont did not allow him to go to the city to meet with Olga Striganova, after a year and a half she achieved his transfer to a monastery located five kilometers from Arzamas 62. Having entered there in 1820, he was its rector from 1826 to 1831 63 . Then, during a trip to Moscow, he was noticed by Metropolitan Philaret, who made him his locum tenens. It was he who in 1861 received from the hands of Motovilov a report on what happened in Diveyevo and handed it over to Metropolitan Philaret. As we have already said, Metropolitan Philaret informed him in detail about the progress of the investigation that had begun. Anthony (Medvedev) - he should not be confused with Anthony the Blind - continued to attend Rev. Seraphim when he was a monk near Arzamas and left valuable memories about it: St. Seraphim explained to him to what extent and under what conditions he uses the gift of clairvoyance (370 top - 372 bottom); in 1831, anticipating his departure, which he takes as a warning of imminent death, he turns to Rev. for advice. Seraphim; he leads him out of error, saying that Divine Providence will soon entrust him with a huge laurel; Anthony cannot believe this, but the monk assures him and names the names of the Sarov monks, who, like his orphans (he would actually support them in 1861), will go to him (378 1/2 - 382 1/2). Obviously, Anthony was completely devoted to the Venerable. Seraphim and, undoubtedly, conveyed his veneration to Metropolitan Philaret. Chichagov omitted another episode mentioned in “Optina Hermitage and Its Time” 64. In 1818 or 1819, the future Archimandrite Anthony, wanting to entrust his will to the elder, turned to Rev. Seraphim, but he only pointed him to the image of the Savior and the Mother of God, reproaching him for striving for the easy path. Perhaps this is a special case, or maybe Rev. Seraphim wanted to place Olga Striganova, a student of Elder Paisius, in his care. We do not know whether Rev. Seraphim community of St. Alexy, but before his death he cited her as an example to the Diveyevo community: let the sisters not seek the status of a monastery, but live as a simple community in order to maintain their independence (318 1/2). Founded in 1814, this community, like Diveyevo, received official recognition in 1842, but the status of a monastery was granted to it only in 1897 65 . In 1861, when there were from 500 to 600 sisters in it, Bishop Nektary wanted to make it, like the Diveyevo community, a monastery and committed a number of illegal actions. Metropolitan Philaret, on his own behalf and on behalf of Archimandrite Anthony, reported this to the Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod (659 lower 660 1/2). All this fragmentary information about the contact of St. Seraphim with the followers of Elder Paisius (Velichkovsky) look like a crumbling ancient mosaic, in which only individual fragments have been preserved; In the unity of the composition, two different motives are visible. Rev. Seraphim and the disciples of Elder Paisius met by chance and collaborated, but their spiritual experience did not coincide. If the spiritual sons of Elder Paisius Velichkovsky did not recognize one of the greatest Russian elders as their teacher, obviously his appearance did not correspond to the concept of an elder developed among them 66 . The saint's return to the monastery and his life in seclusion Following the lives published by the Sarov Monastery, Chichagov reports on the circumstances of the return of the Venerable. Seraphim to the monastery with the following information. In 1806, Isaiah I resigned as rector, and Nifont was elected in his place. Being too weak to visit Rev. Seraphim in his hermitage, Isaiah asked the monks to take him in a cart. On December 4, 1807, he died, and the sensitive heart of the monk was filled with such grief over the death of his last friend that his thoughts were transferred to all his last losses; at the same time, he was consoled by the fact that in the new rector he saw a man of outstanding merit, who appreciated and loved him, Rev. Seraphim. However, with the death of Elder Isaiah, his asceticism took on a new spiritual direction (93 2/3 - 95 top). He became a “silent man”: he closed the door to visitors, and if he met someone in the forest, he fell prostrate on the ground and remained in this position until the person he met left. This went on for three years, and for some time he stopped coming to the monastery on Sundays and holidays. On Sundays, especially in winter, when he could not eat fruits from his garden, the novice brought him bread and cabbage. This weekly visit took place in complete silence (101 1/2 - 102 1/2). Previously, on Sundays and holidays the monk received communion in the monastery; Now, after a thousand days of stylization, he suffered from leg disease and could no longer walk as much. It was unknown who brought him the Holy Gifts, but everyone was firmly convinced that he was not left without the sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ. Hegumen Nifont convened a monastery council, at which it was decided to invite the monk to resume visiting the monastery on Sundays, if he could do it, or otherwise finally return to the monastery cell. Rev. Seraphim chose the second offer and returned to the monastery on May 8, 1810 (104 1/4 bottom). It can be assumed that if Chichagov made these inconsistencies known to the general public, it was not without a secret hope that in more favorable times the contradictions would be revealed. And may the reader generously forgive me for having reproduced here a brief summary of these inconsistencies. They are: We are told that after standing on the stone for a thousand days, St. Seraphim was no longer able to make it to the monastery. However, it is obvious that during the entire period of his stylite life, he also did not come there. Apparently, Stylite Stolite Rev. Seraphim cannot be dated to 1807, for at that time Elder Isaiah and the monks accompanying him visited him. In this case, this period must have begun no later than 1805, upon his return to the hermitage five months after the attempt on his life. (Well, this is apparently unlikely.) Thus, Rev. Seraphim was not supposed to appear in the monastery from 1805 to 1810. However, just above (101) it is written that he “was silent for three years and stopped visiting the monastery for some time” (more precisely, from December 4, 1807 to May 8, 1810). It is incomprehensible to the mind how such a disciplinary measure could be taken in relation to the Rev. Seraphim without prior notice. However, not only this was done, but also the message about the decision of the Council and the receipt of the monk’s answer were entrusted to the young monk who carried him food (104 2/3 - bottom). It is not clear why Abbot Nifont, if he treated the Venerable with such respect. Seraphim (95 top and passim), did not dispatch the cart that served the elder Isaiah to transport the crippled saint. Seraphim to the monastery: after all, in May the forest paths are quite passable. As for the mentioned pretext for the reverend’s return, it is absurd. And he is like this: forcing him not only to participate in the Sunday liturgy, but also to receive Holy Communion weekly; however, the Sarov hermits, as we saw in the example of the hermit Mark and the stylite period of the monk himself, were not required to do this. Chichagov apparently emphasizes such an incongruity, noting that no one doubted that someone brought him Holy Communion. Who does he mean? No one in the monastery could bring them on their own initiative, much less the local parish clergy could do this; The monastery was located at the mouth of the formidable rivers Sarovka and Satis, and in order to get to the Sarov Forest, it was necessary to cross one of the two bridges located at the entrance to the monastery and go around it. Chichagov undoubtedly hints that the Holy Communion of St. An angel brought it to Seraphim. We have no evidence of this in the life of the monk himself, but at the same time he mentioned a similar mystical experience, consoling one widow, whose husband, not through his own negligence, was unable to receive communion before his death: “Sometimes it happens like this... another wants to receive communion, but for some reason his desire will not be fulfilled, completely independent of him. In such an invisible way one is granted communion through the Angel of God” (388 top). The case of the bringing of Communion by an angel is attested in the life of his spiritual daughter Pelageya 67. There had to be very good reasons for Rev. Seraphim stopped coming to the monastery, because all his life he was devoted to the community. We, of course, have the right to believe that an angel brought him Holy Communion. Be that as it may, no one could be forced to take communion more than once a year. Monks and the most devout laymen usually received communion four times a year. The biographies of the most zealous monks indicate that they received communion once, sometimes twice a month. This was allowed to the schema monks with greater ease, but Rev. Seraphim was never admitted to the schema and, undoubtedly, did not strive for it, for this would have required him to live a more secluded life, as happened with Elder Leonidas. Whenever Rev. Seraphim attended the liturgy, he was allowed to receive communion as a special exception, and this is evidence of the authority that he enjoyed before his election as abbot of Nifont. He himself did not dare to impose on the Diveyevo sisters the obligation to receive communion more than sixteen times a year, adding only that the more you receive communion, the better. So, no matter how strange the pretext used by Abbot Niphon was to return St. Seraphim under the roof of the monastery, he was no less clever in the sense that he presented Abbot Nifont in the best light, while at the same time forcing the Rev. Seraphim be silent. One can only guess about the true reasons for the reverend's recall. Below we will see (Chapter VIII, pp. 214–225) what exactly can be learned about the relationship between Abbot Niphon and the Venerable. Seraphim. Metropolitan Arseny hints that the monk became a victim of real or imaginary disciples. But he was not naive at all, and only after his death he became a victim of the machinations of Joasaph and his accomplices, however, Abbot Nifont did not care about this. Nifont's successor, Isaiah I, admitted that he did not allow the Rev. Seraphim, when he was a hermit, received pilgrims. It was precisely about the return of the monk in 1810, for later he was never allowed to live in the hermitage, forcing him to spend the night in a monastery. The reason for his return could also be the fact that since 1807 he resumed senile care for pilgrims, while at the same time refraining from receiving brothers. In addition, it is known that with his prayers the saint averted the wrath of God hanging over Sarov; It is quite possible that this anger was caused by a worldly spirit instilled in the community by Abbot Niphon: this is hinted at by another piece of evidence, unfortunately very brief. In order not to be forced to condemn the abbot, Rev. Seraphim avoided meetings with his brothers, and then became a recluse. Hegumen Niphon gives the impression of an ambitious and narrow-minded person, who was, moreover, on the best terms with the famous fanatic Archimandrite Photius 68 (Paterikon, pp. 94–95). About the years spent by the Rev. Seraphim in seclusion, nothing is known, except for a very striking touch: diligently studying the Holy Scriptures, he read it in seclusion, but out loud, so that he could be heard outside. It can be assumed that he did this while struggling with absent-mindedness, but he not only read the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles in this way, but also interpreted them, and many came to listen to his words for instruction (108 1/4). Obviously, he was not thinking out loud for his own sake - this was an opportunity to continue his elder care for the brethren without the risk of turning part of the brethren against the abbot, for the listeners were left alone with their own conscience. Various release dates are given. Seraphim from the retreat or, more precisely, from the moment when he began to receive visitors. It is best to dwell on his own words, recorded in the Diveyevo archives: on December 9, 1825, going with two sisters to the distant desert, he told them that he was visiting these places for the first time since he left the seclusion twelve years ago. Thus, he came out of seclusion towards the end of 1813, after three and a half years (184 top). Reports according to which he received visitors from 1815 to 1820 without saying a word to them probably come from some monks who came to him out of curiosity, perhaps unkind. It was in 1821 that Rev. Seraphim performed the first miraculous healing. Whatever the circumstances that allowed him to resume receiving pilgrims, Abbot Nifont still did not trust him and did not allow him to leave the monastery until the day when on weekdays he began to spend daytime in the nearby hermitage. For Rev. Seraphim, to whom people came for advice from all over Russia, life among the brethren since 1810 was full of humiliation and even dishonor. So, he was accused of stealing timber (186 3/5 - 187 3/5) and debauchery (247 4/5 - 248 1/2); he tried his best to hide this scandal (248 1/2). The second investigation was conducted personally by Isaiah II; as "treasurer" he is also responsible for the first. Let's end with a touching episode, which we owe to the reliable witness M.V. Nikashina. One day, a few months before the death of her husband, she found Rev. Seraphim collecting wood chips on the road: “Here, mother, the holy fathers blessed me to collect these wood chips for the Diveyevo orphans; winter will come, it will be necessary to light their stoves.” Then, she continues, taking me by the hand, he led me along the road to his ridges, where onions and potatoes were planted, and said: “But, mother, this is my wealth, this is how I live; Your husband’s wealth will go into other hands, but don’t be sad about it” (404 bottom – 405 1/4). While we know little about the first sixty-two years of the life of St. Seraphim of Sarov, the last twelve years, thanks to the Diveyevo archives, are known, one might say, day by day. But for the reasons mentioned, not a single biographer has yet taken advantage of this treasury of information. Chichagov himself, of course, presented the archival materials in full, but since he was forbidden to mention the humiliating position of the Rev. Seraphim since 1810, about which the general public was not aware, it is obvious that his efforts to circumvent the censor deceived the reader as well. In addition, Chichagov does not say anything about notebooks Nos. 40–60 of the sixty notebooks into which the Diveyevo archives are divided, except that these are Motovilov’s notes, and never refers to them. It may be that Motovilov outlined in them precisely this sad story, which we tried to restore to the best of our ability. A professional lawyer skilled in handling personal matters, Motovilov was able to collect extensive documentation. But Chichagov did not make anything public. A monastery is a small monastery near the main one, intended for the most zealous monks; It was in the skete that all the other Optina elders lived. His headaches must have come from sleeping only three hours a night, and apparently disappeared when he allowed himself longer rest (47 1/2; but see also 180 1/2). Holy founders of the Kiev Lavra. Archpriest S. Chetverikov. Elder Paisiy (Velichkovsky), p. 190–193. This is regrettable, for St. Seraphim and St. Herman of Alaska has so much in common with each other that it would be very gratifying to know that they had the same spiritual father. Revelation of thoughts is also practiced in many Western orders. A “practical” instruction has been preserved: the prayer should be said at least in a low voice, and not just internally, otherwise there is a risk of “harming yourself.” Kontsevich I. Acquisition of the Holy Spirit on the paths of Ancient Rus'. Paris, pp. 151–152. According to I. Kontsevich, Feofan, a student of Dosithea, later became a cell attendant and adviser to Metropolitan Gabriel of St. Petersburg, and then the abbot of the Novozersky monastery; according to S. Chetverikov, we must be talking about another Theophanes (255 1/4). After the death of the latter and on her advice (192 3/5), Dosithea’s disciple became a hermit on Solovki (254 2/3). Kontsevich refers to “The Life of Russian Ascetics” (Moscow, September 1908). Denisov (Monasteries..., p. 94 $) quotes a brochure published in Kyiv in 1906 by V. Znosko: “The cassock monk (maiden) Dosifei, recluse of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra and the first leader-mentor of St. Seraphim of Sarov.” A monk who is only allowed to wear vestments is called a ryassophore. The Kiev “elder Dosithea” should not be confused with his homonym, the “elder Dosithea” of Moscow, which will be discussed below. According to L. Denisov (Monasteries..., pp. 558–559; Life of our Venerable Father Seraphim of Sarov. M., 1904, pp. 374–379), Rev. Seraphim first showed his gift of clairvoyance at this time, predicting the founding of the monastery seventy-two years ago. August 13, 1786 (51 top). But, according to the Patericon (p. 72 below), Joseph died in 1785. There is no reason to believe that Abbot Niphon was hostile to hermitage as such. The Patericon clarifies precisely because in the last years of his life the hermit Mark came to church every Sunday, since this was not a general rule. Paterik, p. 156 1/3. Probably this elder Alexander is our hermit, since Hilarion, the author of the letter, was a venerable. Seraphim as a friend and collaborator. A former Valaam monk and probably a cell attendant of Nazarius, he became the confessor of the Sarov Monastery. Denisov L. Life…, p.91; Monasteries..., pp.763–764. Probably since 1825, when Rev. Seraphim took upon himself concerns about the material well-being of the Diveevo community, he began to accept offerings and his cell turned into a warehouse for various supplies, which the sisters gradually took away. See note above. 3 to page 50. Denisov L. Life..., p. 148–153. d Archpriest S. Chetverikov. Elder Paisiy (Velichkovsky), p.206. The date is taken from the Patericon (p. 178); Jonah is the future abbot of Isaiah II. Archpriest S. Chetverikov. Ibid., p.261 bottom. Ibid., p. 252 top and 218, note. A certain Protasova - a name phonetically almost identical - could not get the rev. Seraphim permission to make his portrait (496 bottom). Her daughter became a nun in Diveyevo. But, according to chronology and marital status, we are talking about another person (244 1/2 - 247 2/3). P. S. Kazansky dedicated a note to this monastery in the Orthodox Journal (Feb., 1878). A review of it can be found in the magazine “The Wanderer” (1878, No. 1). Denisov L. Monasteries..., pp. 535–536. Denisov L. Monasteries..., pp. 551–553. Kontsevich I. Optina Pustyn and its time. Jordanville, 1970, p. 551–553. The idea expressed by Archpriest Vsevolod Roshko is quite controversial. Although the Monk Seraphim, while guarding the Diveyevo monastery, deviated from one of the basic ascetic rules, which instructs monks to avoid communication with women in every possible way. His concerns about the Diveyevo nuns caused temptation not only among the Sarov monks, but also among the episcopate and the laity (editor's note). The Legend of... Pelageya, p. 104–105. Archimandrite Photius (in the world Peter Spassky) is one of the ideologists of the struggle against the Russian Bible Society, according to Archpriest. G. Florovsky, “ecstatic and visionary, who has almost completely lost the sense of church-canonical realities” (approx. per.)