|
|
St. Benedict Contemplates the Universe in a Single Ray of Light, Medieval illum MS. |
|
|
St. Benedict Contemplates the Universe in a Single Ray of Light, Medieval illum MS. |
INTRODUCTON
A complete assessment of the Kephalaia Gnostica has always proven elusive, partly because of the complex and often bewildering structure of this work, and also because the complete text survives only in Syriac and Armenian translations with extant Greek fragments and parallels available for only about one-sixth of the complete text. An even more fundamental textual problem obscured its proper assessment until relatively recently. Frankenberg’s 1912 edition of the Syriac text (which includes a commentary by the seventh-century anti-Origenist abbot, Babai the Great)[1] contains no evidence of the controversial Origenist doctrine condemned by the councils. Matters were clarified in 1958, when Antoine Guillaumont published the critical edition of a new Syriac version based on a manuscript tradition he designated S2.[2] This version exists in only a single manuscript.[3] Although known in antiquity, it had been denounced by ancient Syriac authors as the work of heretical forgers who were alleged to have intentionally altered texts by ‘the blessed abbot Evagrius’ in order to justify their own teachings.[4]
The surviving Greek fragments of the Kephalaia Gnostica uniformly attest to the priority of the S2 version,[5] revealing the more widespread S1 tradition to be a drastic re-editing of Evagrius’ text ,in which all passages suggestive of controversial Origenist doctrine had either been eliminated or modified. This (expurgated) S1 version appeared very quickly, possibly anticipating by several decades the anathemas of 543 and 553. The Syriac manuscript evidence places it no later than the first third of the sixth century; and an Armenian translation of S1 may have been made sometime in the fifth century, that is within a century of Evagrius’ death in 399. The existence of both expurgated and unexpurgated versions of Evagrius’ works during the sixth century reflects an uneasy attitude of reverence for his writings combined with anxiety concerning their orthodoxy which is well-attested elsewhere in the monastic literature of the period.[6]
The Kephalaia Gnostica was never intended to be read in isolation from Evagrius’ other works. He describes it as the final volume of a spiritual trilogy consisting of Praktikos, Gnostikos, and Kephalaia Gnostica. In the conclusion to the prologue of the Praktikos Evagrius sets out what he hopes to accomplish in these texts:
Περὶ δὲ τοῦ βίου τοῦ τε πρακτικοῦ καὶ τοῦ γνωστικοῦ νυνὶ διηγούμεθα, οὐχ ὅσα ἑωράκαμεν ἢ ἠκούσαμεν, ἀλλ' ὅσα τοῦ καὶ ἄλλοις εἰπεῖν παρ' αὐτῶν μεμαθήκαμεν, ἑκατὸν μὲν κεφαλαίοις τὰ πρακτικά, πεντήκοντα δὲ πρὸς τοῖς ἑξακοσίοις τὰ γνωστικὰ συντετμημένως διελόντες·[7]
But concerning the life of the praktikos and the gnostikos I now propose to describe in detail not [merely] what I have heard or seen, but what I have also been taught by [the elders] to say to others. I have compactly divided matters of the praktiké into a hundred chapters, and matters of the gnostiké into fifty plus the six hundred.
Evagrius here explains that his trilogy has an underlying twofold division based on the division of Christian life into praktiké and gnostiké. The one-hundred chapters of the Praktikos constitute the first division, while the fifty chapters of the Gnostikos and the five hundred and forty chapters of the Kephalaia Gnostica[8] constitute the second. The Kephalaia Gnostica is the longest and most obscure of these three books. Although divided into six ‘centuries’, each consisting of ninety sentences or kephalaia, the significance of this division is not immediately apparent, nor is there an orderly progression of ideas within each century. In the introduction to the Praktikos Evagrius warns his readers to expect just this kind of obscure explication in the Kephalaia Gnostica:
καὶ τὰ μὲν ἐπικρύψαντες, τὰ δὲ συσκιάσαντες, ἵνα μὴ δῶμεν τὰ ἅγια τοῖς κυσὶ μηδὲ βάλωμεν τοὺς μαργαρίτας ἔμπροσθεν τῶν χοίρων.Ἔσται δὲ ταῦτα ἐμφανῆ τοῖς τὸ αὐτὸ ἴχνος αὐτοῖς ἐμβεβηκόσιν.[9]
And some things I have concealed and shadowed over, so that we do not give holy things to dogs nor cast pearls before swine (Mat. 7:6). But these will be clear to those who have themselves embarked on the same search.
Here he states that his meaning will be clear only to those who are following the same ‘search’ or ‘path’ as he. The word ἴχνος literally means ‘track, trace’ or ‘clue’. It suggests a hunt for prey which leaves traces on a track or path, which are only visible to those who know what to look for. And, indeed, the five hundred and forty sentences of the Kephalaia Gnostica appear to present a very meandering path. A large number of these kephalaia are citations from Evagrius’ exegetical scholia; but they generally lack any indication of the text being explicated. Nearly one-sixth of the sentences are allegorical definitions of words or concepts, such as ‘crown of justice’ (I.75), ‘chariot of knowledge’ (II.51), ‘moon’ (III.52)’, stars’ (III.62), ‘tunic’ (IV.74), ‘cloud’ (V.13 and V.16), ‘fish-hook’ (V.37), ‘arrow’,(VI.53), and ‘stone knife’ (VI.66). As has been described,[10] Evagrius considered familiarity with allegorical definitions to be an essential skill for the gnostikos.
At first glance these scattered definitions appear to lack any clear association with each other or with ideas presented in nearby kephalaia. On closer inspection, however, the definitions are sometimes drawn from a common biblical chapter or verse,[11] or occur in (albeit scattered) clusters which progressively explicate a common theme, such as the celestial bodies and heavenly powers (III.37-65), symbols of priestly sacrifice (IV.12-79), symbols of spiritual warfare (IV.28-82), and successive articles of the Nicene Creed (VI.28-61). Since the definitions comprising these thematic clusters are separated, often widely so, from each other by intervening sentences which explicate very diverse concepts, the existence of these clusters only becomes apparent to the reader after multiple re-readings of the text.
The only hint Evagrius gives as to the underlying structure of this work is found in the last sentence of the book: ‘Scrutinize our words, O our brothers, and explicate with zeal these centuries, according to the number of the six days of creation.’[12] This seems to refer only superficially to the creation narrative in Genesis 1-2:[13] instead, the six centuries of the Kephalaia Gnostica seem intended to encompass the whole of history, from the primordial Monad to the apokatastasis. Thus the first century begins with ‘the unopposed good’, which is rapidly followed by ‘opposition’ (I.2-4, 10), principles and qualities (I.5-8) and assorted discussions of demons, temptation, and human psychology. The second century invites meditation on those aspects of creation’s multiplicity which most directly affect human beings. The third century invites the reader to contemplate the heavens through definitions of the world (III.36), the sun (III.44), the moon (III.52), the stars (III.37 and 62), and the angels (III.65). The fourth century progresses through symbols of priesthood and sacrifice, described above. The fifth century invokes the symbols of cloud (V.13 and 16) and resurrection (V.22 and 25), then progresses through symbols of spiritual combat (V 28-45) to images of the heavenly city (V.74-82) and the heavenly temple (V.84). The sixth and last century invites meditation on themes apparently drawn from the creed, including the Father (VI.28-30), the difference between begetting and engendering (VI.31-32), the crucifixion (VI.38 and 40) and death of Christ (VI.40-42), the ‘living and the dead’ (VI.61); and the century culminates in the theme of spiritual submission (VI.68-70).
Evagrius’ division of this work into centuries ‘according to the days of creation’ provides more than an invitation to meditate on cosmic history. Many passages invite the reader to apply the allegorical method to lofty theological concepts in order to appreciate these doctrines in more personal, spiritual terms, or as it might be put today, at a more existential, psychological level. The Kephalaia Gnostica is above all else a workbook for meditation. Evagrius seems relatively uninterested in providing unambiguous theological definitions: his purpose is to tantalize, not necessarily to satisfy. He invites his reader to ‘scrutinize’, that is to search more deeply in his texts and in the history of creation itself for the God who lies behind the letter of the text and the external appearances of creation. The Syriac word used to translate the opening verb in Evagrius’ last sentence, ‘Scrutinize our words […] ‘, means ‘to trace, track, seek out, investigate’[14], possibly translating the Greek ἐξιχνεύω. Throughout the Kephalaia Gnostica Evagrius invites such ‘scrutiny’ through the use of allusion, hints, paradox, and above all through symbolic imagery drawn chiefly from the scriptures. It therefore follows that one would need to exercise great care in using texts from the Kephalaia Gnostica to assess the orthodoxy of Evagrius’ dogmatic theology. Nevertheless, this is precisely what theologians from Justinian down to the present have attempted to do.
[1] Cod. Vat. Syr. 178.
[2] A. Guillaumont, Les six Centuries des ‘Kephalaia Gnostica’ d’Évagre le Pontique, Patrologia Orientalis 28.1, no. 134 (Paris, 1958).
[3] British Library Add. 17.167: A. Guillaumont, Les ‘Kephalaia Gnostica’, pp. 201-202.
[4] In his commentary on the Kephalaia Gnostica, Babai the Great (abbot of Mt. Izla from 604-628) warned his readers aganst ‘alterations conforming to heretical opinions,’(Frankenberg, pp. 44-45), by which he apparently meant the unexpurgated S2 version. It is interesting to note that this allegation of heretical ‘insertions’ into the master’s texts had been invoked much earlier in Origenist tradition: Rufinus employed it (in spite of Jerome’s vituperative protests) to justify his own avowedly-expurgated translation of Origen’s De Principiis.
[5] A. Guillaumont, Les ‘Kephalaia Gnostica, pp. 201-202
[6] Abba Barsanuphius (d.c. 543) was once asked whether it is permissible to read Evagrius. He replied that although one must not accept Evagrius’ [unorthodox] teachings, his texts may be read according to the example of the angels in the parable of the wheat and the tares, who keep what is good and reject the bad: Τὰ μὲν δόγματα τὰ τοιαῦτα μὴ δέχου.Ἀναγινώσκει δὲ αὐτοῦ εἰ θέλῃς τὰ πρὸς ὠφέλειαν ψυχῃς, κατὰ τὴν παραβολὴν τὴν ἐν τῷ Εὐαγγελίῳ περὶ τῆς σαγήνης ὡς γέγραπται, ὅτι τὰ μὲν καλὰ εἰς ἀγγεῖα ἔβαλον, τὰ δὲ σαπρὰ ἔξω ἔρριψαν, PG 86.891-902. A much darker admonition concerning Evagrius is given by John Moschus (c. 550-619) who tells the story of a monk who visited Kellia and, despite warnings that ‘the demon which misled Evagrius’ still inhabited the place, insisted on staying in Evagrius’ cell. Within a week the monk had committed suicide, (The Meadow 177).
[7] Evagrius, Praktikos Introd. 9, SC 171, p. 492.
[8] There is no satisfactory explanation for the discrepancy between the six hundred chapters Evagrius promises and the actual five hundred and forty chapters of the Kephalaia Gnostica. In the seventh century Abbot Babai the Great included with his text and commentary on the Kephalaia Gnostica a ‘Supplement’ of sixty chapters, taken mostly from a work now known as the Skemmata. It does not seem originally to have had any connection with the Kephalaia Gnostica: Muyldermans, ‘Evagriana’ pp. 44-48 and ‘Évagre le Pontique’, pp. 73-83.
[9] Evagrius, Praktikos Introd. 9, SC 171, pp. 490-492.
[10] Above, Chapters 1.3.2.2. and 6.1.1, especially p. 48, n. 266.
[11] Examples include: Exodus 28-29, from which many of the definitions in Kephalaia Gnostica IV.28-72 are taken; and Eph. 6:17 which supplies the subjects of many definitions in Kephalaia Gnostica V.28-34.
[12] Evagrius, Kephalaia Gnostica conclusion, Guillaumont p. 257
[13] There is, for example, no obvious correlation between the assignment of deffinitions (such as those of stars, mountains, angels, or human beings) to any particular century in the Kephalaia Gnostica and the day of creation assigned to those objects in Genesis1-3.
[14] Payne Smith, Compendious Syriac Dictionary, p. 424.
A selection and translation from: Antoine. Guillaumont, Les ‘Kephalaia gnostica’ d'Evagre le Pontique et l'histoire de l'origénisme chez les Grecs et chez les Syriens. (Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 1962)
|
[p. 31] |
|
|
THE CONTENT: ESOTERICISM |
|
|
The content; esotericism. The problems relating to the title, composition and text of the Kephalia gnostica having been examined, the time has come to study the contents of this work. The task is not easy, not only because the complete text can only be reached through translations and in the rather special conditions that we have just seen, but above all because of the very nature of the book and the intentions of its author. The sentences of Evagrius already enjoyed among the ancients a solid reputation for obscurity: the historian Gennadius, who had tried to translate them into Latin described them as valde obscures (“very dark”).48 |
Le conienu ; ésotérisme. Les problémes relatifs au titre, a la composition et au texte des Kephalia gnostica ayant été examinés, le moment est venu d’étudier le contenu de cet ouvrage. La tâche n’est pas aisée, non seulement parce que le texte complet n’en peut être atteint qu’ά travers des traductions et dans les conditions assez spéciales que nous venons de voir, mais surtout ό cause de la nature même du livre et des intentions de son auteur. Les sentences d’Evagre jouissaient déjό chez les Anciens d’une solide réputation d’obscurité : valde obscures disait d’elles l’historien Gennade, qui s’était essayé ό en traduire en latin 48.. |
|
48. De uiris inlustribus, XI, ed. Collected, TU, 14, Leipzig, 1896, p. 65 (cf. PL 58, 1067 n) “Editit et paucas sentiolas ualde obscures et, ut ipse in his ait , solis monachorum cordibus agnoscibiles, quas similiter ego Latinis edidi” (He also published a few sentences that were very obscure and, as he says in these, recognizable only in the hearts of monks, which I similarly published for the Latins.) It is impossible to say for sure which collection of sentences Gennadius refers to with these words in his valuable notice on the works of Evagrius. |
44. De uiris inlustribus, XI, éd. Rιcuλansον, TU, 14, Leipzig, 1896, p. 65 (cf. PL 58, 1067 n) : « Editit et paucas sentiolas ualde obscures et, ut ipse in his ait , solis monachorum cordibus agnoscibiles, quas similiter ego Latinis edidi. On ne peut dire silremeot quel recueil de sentences Gennade désigne par ces mots dans sa précieuse notice sur les œuvres d’Evagre. |
|
[p.32] |
|
|
Babai, in the Introduction to his Commentary, sought the reasons why “these Chapters of knowledge were written with such complete obscurity.” 49 And for modern [authors] they are no clearer.50 |
Babai, dons l’Introduction ό son Commentaire, recherchait les raisons pour lesquelles e ces Chapitres de science ont été écrits avec une aussi cοmpléte obscurité 49 Et pour les modernes elles ne sont pas glus claires 50 |
|
This obscurity, far from being accidental, was intended by Evagrius, as he himself warns his reader in his Letter to Anotolius, after the lines already quoted where he presents his trilogy formed by the Practicos, the Gnosticos and the Képhalαiα gnostica: |
Cette obscurité, loin d’être accidentelle, e été voulue par Evagre, comme il en prévient lui-même son lecteur dans sa Lettre ά Anotole, aprés les lignes déjà citées o(i il présente sa trilogie formée du Practicos, du Gnosiicos et des κéphalαiα gnoslica : a |
|
“We have explained what concerns practical life and the gnostic life... dealing on the one hand, in a hundred chapters, with practical things, and, on the other hand, with gnostic things in fifty chapters in folds of the six hundred, hiding some things, covering others with shadow, so as not to give what is holy to the dogs and not to cast pearls before swine. But these things will be clear to those who have advanced in the same footsteps 51.” |
« Nous, avons exposé ce qui concerne la vie pratique et la vie gnostique... en traitant d’une part, en cent chapitres, des choses pratiques, et, d’autre part, des choses gnostiques en cinquante chapitres en plιts des six cents, en dissimulant certaines choses, en couvrant d’ombre les autres, afin de ne pas donner ce qui est saint aux chiens et de ne pas jeter les perles devant les pourceaux. Mais ces choses seront claires pour ceux qui se seront avancés sur les mêmes traces 51. » |
|
Defining in his Gnosticos the virtue of justice, that the gnostic must practice his teaching, he affirms that the characteristic of this virtue is “to distribute the word according to the dignity of each, stating some things obscurely, expressing others by riddles and formulating some clearly for the benefit of the simple 52.” This advice that he gave to the gnostic, Evagrius scrupulously followed. Of all his works, the Kephalaia gnostica are by far the most obscure, because the truths contained therein are those which it is most important to cover with a veil and to express in enigmas, so that they are within the reach only of those who are worthy of them, that is to say, of those who are sufficiently advanced in the path of gnosis to be able to truly understand them . 53 |
s Définissant, dans son Gnosticos, la vertu de justice que le gnostique doit pratiquer dans son enseignement, il affirme que le propre de cette vertu est « de distribuer la parole selon la dignité de chacun, énonçant certaines choses obscurément, exprimant les autres par énigmes et en formulant certaines clairement pour l’utilité des simples 02.» Ce conseil qu’il donnait au gnostique, Evagre l’a scrupuleusement suivi. De tous ses ouvrages, les Kephalaia gnoslica sont de beaucoup le plus obscur, parce que les vérités qui y sont contenues sont celles qu’il importe le plus de couvrir d’un voile et d’exprimer par énigmes, de façon ό ce qu’elles soient à la portée seulement de ceux qui en sont dignes, c’est-li-dire de ceux qui sont assez aνances dans la voie de la gnose pour pouvoir les comprendre véritablement 53. |
|
49 FRANKENBERG, p. 16, 1. 1. |
45. FRANKENBERG, p. 16, 1. 1, |
|
50. “A learned but very difficult treatise,” said BADGER of the Six Centuries, who, with a curious mind, had seen some of the manuscripts well before they were published (The Nestorians and their rituals, II, London, 1852, p. 370, in note). |
50. e A learned but very difficult treatise s, disait des Six Centuries BADGER qui, esprit curieux, en avait vu certains manuscrits bien avant qu’elles ne fussent éditées (The Nestoriens and their rituels, II, L,andres, 1852, p. 370, en note). |
|
51. PG 40, 1221 c. |
51. PG 40, 1221 c. |
|
52. Gnositcos 146 (Syriac), FusκΚΕκunnο, p. 552. The Greek text of this sentence, preserved by Socnsve (HΖ, IV, 23; PG 67, 520 s), is reproduced in PG 40, 1285 b. |
52. Gnositcos 146 (syriaque), FRANKENBERG, p. 552. Le texte grec de cette sentence, conservé par Socnsve (HΖ, IV, 23; PG 67, 520 s), est reproduit dans PG 40, 1285 b. |
|
53. Cf. Gnosticos 139 (Syriac), FRANKENBERG, p. 550 “Let the sublime discourse concerning the judgment be hidden from adolescents and young people, because it easily engenders slackness: indeed, they do not understand the sufferings of the rational soul condemned to ignorance. s The Greek text of this sentence is preserved in the Commentary of Oecumenius on the Apocalypse: Εὐάγριος δὲ λαντανέτω φησὶ τοῦς νεωτὲρους κσὶ τοὺς κοσμικοὺς (which invites us to read in the Syriac câlmâyé instead of de câlaimé) ὁ περὶ κρίσεως ὑψηλότερος λόγος· οὐ γὰρ ἴσασιν πόνον ψυχῆς λογικῆς καταδικασθείσης τὴν ἄγνοιαν (H. C. Hoskier, The complete Commentary of Oecumenius on the Apiealyps, Ann Arbor, 1928, p. 122, l. 23-25). These truths concerning eschatology and apocatastasis, which must be carefully concealed from those who have not yet attained to gnosis, are precisely those which will be discussed in the Kephalaia gnostica. |
53. Cf. Gnositcos 139 (syriaque), FRANKENBERG, p. 550 e Que soit caché aux adolescents et aux jeunes gens le discours sublime concernant le jugement, parce que facilement il engendre le relόchement ils-ne comprennent pas, en effet, les souffrances de l’Sme raisonnable condamnée ό l’ignorance. s Le texte grec de cette sentence est conservé dans le Commentaire d’ίΕcuménius sur l’Apocalypse : Εὐάγριος δὲ λαντανέτω φησὶ τοῦς νεωτὲρους κσὶ τοὺς κοσμικοὺς (ce qui invite ό lire dans le syriaque câlmâyé au lieu de câlaimé) ὁ περὶ κρίσεως ὑψηλότερος λόγος· οὐ γὰρ ἴσασιν πόνον ψυχῆς λογικῆς καταδικασθείσης τὴν ἄγνοιαν (H. C. Hoskier, The complete Commentary of Oecumenius on the Apiealyps, Ann Arbor, 1928, p. 122, l. 23-25). Ces vérités concernant l’eschatologie et I’apocatastase, qu’il faut dissimuler avec soin à ceux qui ne sont pas encore parvenus k la gnose, sont précisément de celles dont il sera question dans Ies $4hαlαiι gnostica. |
|
[p.33] |
|
|
This hermeticism imposes on the work its modes of expression and composition. Evagrius formulates his thought in series of sentences or, more precisely, of chapters (κεφάλαια) which often contain several sentences, to the point of sometimes reaching a certain length. Without a direct link with the one that precedes it or with the one that immediately follows it, each chapter must be self-sufficient. It is, in principle, devoted to a single idea, which is condensed, summarized, and in some way “recapitulated.” Like the biblical “proverb,” the sentence is by definition an enigma, which must arrest the reader’s mind and provoke his reflection. 54 |
Cet hermétisme impose ό l’ouvrage ses modes d’expression et de composition. Evagre formule sa pensée en des séries de sentences ou, plus exactement, de e chapitres s (κεφάλαια) qui souvent comportent plusieurs phrases, au point d’atteindre parfois une certaine longueur. Sans lien direct avec celui qui le précède ni avec celui qui le suit immédiatement, chaque chapitre doit se suffire lui-même. Il est, en principe,’consacré :λ une seule idée, qui y est condensée, résumée, en quelque sorte e récapitulée r. A l’exemple du « proverbe biblique, la sentence est par définition une énigme, is laquelle doit s’arrêter l’esprit du lecteur et qui doit susciter sa rétlexiοn 54. |
|
54. Cf. Proverbs, 1, 5-6:
Let the wise man listen,
and he will add his knowledge (quoted from our translation in the Bible de la Pléiade, t. II, Paris, I959, p. 1350). Evagrius drew heavily on Proverbs in his metrical sentences To the Monks and To a Virgin (texts edited by H. GRESSMAN, TU, 39, 4, Leipzig, 1913, p. 143-165). His “chapters” in prose also reflect this law of the sapiential genre. These collections are not composed to be read in one go, but to be meditated on sentence by sentence, and the enigmatic journey is justified by the need to retain the reader’s mind and force him to reflect. |
54. Cf. Proverbes, 1, 5-6 :
Que le sage écoute, et il ajoutera lι son savoir (cité d’après notre traduction dans la Bible de la Pléiade, t. Il, Paris, I959, p. 1350). Evagre s’est fortement inspiré des Proverbes dans ses sentences métriques Aux moines et A une vierge (textes édités par H. GRESSMAN, TU, 39, 4, Leipzig, 1913, p. 143-165). Ses αΡ chapitres s en prose se ressentent aussi de cette loi du genre sapiential. Ces recueils ne sont pas composés pour être lus d’un trait, mais pour Être médités sentence par sentence, et le tour énigmatique se justifie par la nécessité de retenir l’esprit du lecteur et de l’obliger lι la réflexion. |
|
Some chapters are true riddles, in the form of questions, for example: II.38. Whose is the nature in the days before the Passion, and what is the knowledge of Holy Pentecost? 55 II.42. Who will come to the holy Passover and who will know the holy Pentecost? 56 |
Certains chapitres sont de vraies devinettes, en forme de questions, par exemple II.38 : « De qui est la nature dans les jours d’avant la Passion, et de qui est la science de la Pentecόte sainte? 55 »; 11, 42 : e Qui viendra lu P$que sainte et qui connaitra a Pentecόte sainte 56 |
|
55. Unless otherwise indicated, we always quote the Képhαlαio gιοsticα according to version S2. It will be noted, by referring to the edition (The Six Cen(uries, p. 76), that here S, has deleted the interrogative form, |
55. Sauf indication contraire, nous citons toujours les κéphαlαio gιοsticα d’après la version S2. On remarquera, en se reportant k l’édition (Les Six Cen(uries, p. 76), qu’ici S, a supprimé la forme interrogative, |
|
56. See also Sentences II, 9, 74; IV, 27; VI, 77. |
56. Voir aussi les Sentences II, 9, 74; IV, 27; VI, 77. |
|
Sometimes the question is asked indirectly, for example V, 72: If the “four arms” are divided from a single “river”, let us say the world where it was created had only one, so that the body also understands the Paradise of which it will drink” VI, 77, etc. |
Parfois la question est posée indirectement, par exemple V, 72 : e Si les e quatre bras » se sont divisés i partir d’un seul e fleuve », qu’on dise le monde oiι a été im seul euuve, afin que le corps comprenne aussi le Paradis d’ού il boira s; VI, 77, etc. |
|
Some sentences make us guess who is meant, by means of formulas which designate without naming, for example “There is one who...”, a formula which generally must be understood of Christ: II. 24: 4 There is only one who has acquired names in common with the others »; |
Certaines sentences laissent ι deviner de qui il s’agit, au moyen de formules qui désignent sans nommer, par exemple e Il y en n’un qui... », formule qui génerálement doit s’entendre du Christ : 1l, 24 : 4 Il y en a un seulement qui a acquis des noms communs avec les autres » ; |
|
[p.34] |
|
|
II, 37: “There is one among all beings who is nameless and whose region is not known”; II, 41: “There is one who, without the four and the five, knows the forty and the fifty II, 43: “ there is one who was left there and the same will be found there; II, 53: “There is only one who is adorable, the one who uniquely has the unique; |
II, 37 : « I1 y en a un parmi tous les êtres qui est sans nom et dont la région n’est pas connue »; II, 41 : a Il y en a un qui, sans les quatre et les cinq, connait les quarante et les cinquante II, 43 : « y en a un qui a été laissé lά et le même y sera trouvé s; II, 53 : « en a un seul qui est adorable, celui qui uniquement » |
|
The multiplication of these allusive formulas in the same sentence can make it a true enigma; for example I,6: “By comparison, we are one thing, something else is what is in us, and something else, that in which we are; but all together are that in which we are and that in which is that in which we are”, - a sentence in which is simply affirmed the distinction of the intellect from the soul and the body, and the connaturality of the body with matter 57 |
La multiplication de ces formules allusives dans une même sentence peut en faire une véritable énigme; par exemple I,6 « Par comparaison, nous, nous sommes une chose, autre chose est ce qui est en nous, et autre chose, ce en quoi nous sommes; mais tout ensemble sont ce en quoi nous sommes et ce en quoi est ce en quoi nous sommes », sentence dans laquelle sont simplement affirιnées la distinction de l’intellect, de l’âme et du corps et ]a connaturalite du corps avec la matière 57. |
|
57. See also the following better sentences, 7 and 8, and also I,17. |
57. Voir aussi les mieux sentences suivantes, 7 et 8, et également I, 17. |
|
The symbolism of numbers provides several of these allusive expressions, “four” and “five”, for example, designating the matter formed of the four elements and the five senses 1, 15 : “When the four are removed, the five will also be removed; but - when the five are removed, the four will not be removed with them”; I, 16 : “That which has been separated from the five is not separated from the four; but that which has been separated from the four is also separated from the five”; II, 39 : “The five are related to the fifty, and these are the preparers of the science of these”; II, 40 : “The four are related to the forty, and in these is the co-element of the forty”; 11, 41: “There is one who, without the four and the five, counted the forty and the fifty.” |
La symbolique des nombres fournit plusieurs de ces expressions allusives, k quatre » et « cinq », par exemple, désignant la matière formée des quatre éléments et les cinq sens 1, 15 : t Quand seront enlevas les quatre, seront enlevés aussi les cinq; mais -quand seront enΙevés les cinq, ne seront pas enlevés avec eux les quatre s; I, 16 : « Ce quia été séparé des cinq n’est pas séparé des quatre; mais ce qui a été séparé des quatre est déliνré aussi des cinq s’; II, 39 : e Les cinq sont apparentés mix cinquante, et ceux-liι sont les préparateurs de la science de ceux-ci s; IΙ, 40 : « Les quatre sont apparentés aux quarante, et en ceux-liι est la coiitemnplation des quarante »; 11, 41 : «Il y en a un quui, sans les quatre et les cinq, contait les quarante et les cinquante ». |
|
From [sacred] scrpture come a certain number of images and metaphors, for example that of the grain and the ear, taken from chapter 15 of First Corinthians, and which serves to describe the succession of bodies or worlds 58 . A symbolism of scriptural origin to which Evagrius often resorts, to designate the succession of worlds, is that of the |
De l’écriture proviennent uun certain nombre d’images et de métaphores, par emeniple celle duu grain et de l’épi, prise au chapitre 15 de la I” sυχ Corinthiens, et qui sert iι décrire la succession des corps ou des mondes 58. Un symbolisme d’origine scripturaire auquel Evagre recourt souvent, pour désigner la succession des mondes, est celui des |
|
days: either “today”, “tomorrow” and “the third day”, a distinction based on Luke, 13, 32 59, or “Friday”, “Saturday” and “Sunday”, or even a “sixth day”, symbol of the present world, “seventh day” and “eighth day”, symbols of the two eschatological times 60 .. |
jours : soit « aujourd’hui s, e demain » et e le troisième jour », distinction fondée sur Luc, 13, 32 5, soit e vendredi s, « samedi » et e dimanche », ou encore a sixième jour s, symbole du monde présent, e septύéme jour » et τ huitième jour », symboles des deux temps eschatologiques 59. |
|
But it is above all allegorical exegesis, practiced in the manner of Origen, which provides him with an inexhaustible mine of symbolic and figurative expressions |
Mais c’est surtout l’exégèse allégorique, pratiquée ä la manière d’Origéne, qui lui fournit une mine inépuisable d’expressions symboliques et figurées. |
|
58. Cf. 1, 24 and II, 49. |
58. Cf. 1, 24 et II, 49. |
|
59. Cf. I, 90; 111, 9; 1V, 26, |
59. Cf. I, 90; 111, 9; 1V, 26, |
|
60. Cf. V, 83 and 11, 7. We also have sixth, seventh and eighth years, cf. V, 8. |
60. Cf. V, 83 et 11, 7. On a aussi sixième, septi4me et huitième années, cf. V, 8. |
|
[p.35] |
|
|
Evagrius takes from Origen the allegorical interpretation of the events of the Exodus: the exodus from Egypt , a symbol of evil, the journey in the desert, the conquest of Palestine under the leadership of Joshua, the fight against the Philistines, the installation in Jerusalem and Sion, symbols of the highest contemplations.61 |
Evagre reprend á Origène l’interprétation allégorique des événements de l’Exode : la sortie hors de l’Egypte, figure de la malice, la marche dans le désert, la conqυête de la Palestine sous la conduite de Josué, la lutte contre les Philistins, l’installation s Jérusalem et Siun, figures des plus hautes contemplations 61. |
|
This symbolism is, on the whole, clear. More veiled is that which is based on the allegorical interpretation of chapter 28 of Exodus, principally that of the vestments of the high priest, and which appears in many sentences of the IVth Century 62 : all this symbolism relates to Christ, of whom the high priest is the symbol, and it is perhaps when it is a question of Christ - we will see the reason for this later - that the symbolism becomes the most secret. |
Ce symbolisme est, dans l’ensemble, clair. Plus voilé est celui qui se fonde sur l’interprétation allégorique du chapitre 28 de l’Exode, principalement celle des vêtements dit grand-prêtre, et qui apparaït dans de nombreuses sentences de la IV° Centurie 62: tout ce symbolisme se rapporte au Christ, dont le grand-pretre est la figure, et c’est peut-être lorsqu’il s’agit du Christ — nous en verrons plus loin la raison — que le symbolisme se fait le plus secret. |
|
Referring to Scripture is
for Evagrius a means of providing guarantees of his thought; but
allegorical exegesis allows him to use it very freely and to make
Scripture serve as the expression of a system which is not only foreign
to him, but which is also, as we will see, singularly heterodox. The
spiritual interpretation of Scripture has, moreover, been held in the
work of Evagrius, on the side of pure and simple speculation, a large |
La référence á l’Écriture est
pour Evagre un moyen de donner des garanties sur sa pensée; mais
l’exégèse allégorique lui permet d’en user très librement et de faire
servir l’Écriture ~ l’expression d’un système qui non seulement lui est
étranger, mais aussi qui est, on le verra, singulièreιτιent hétérodoxe.
L’interprétation spirituelle de l’Écriture a tenu, d’ailleurs, dans l’inuvre
d’Evagre, côté de la spéculation pure et simple, une large |
|
61.See Sentences IV, 64; 1, 6, 21, 30, 36, 68, 71, 88; VI, 47, 49, 64. |
61. Voir sentences IV, fi4; 1, 6, 21, 30, 36, 68, 71, 88; VI, 47, 49, 64. |
|
62.Sentences 48, 56, 66, 69. 72, 75, 79. |
62. Sentences 48, 56, 66, 69. 72, 75, 79. |
|
63. Evagrius’ commentaries are clearly designed to aid the spiritual reading of Scripture (see in particular the Commentary on the Psalms, whose references have been given above, n. 29). They also focus on the terms which present the most difficulty in this regard; these are sometimes grouped systematically: thus a small collection of sentences gives the allegorical meaning of the words of Scripture, mainly from the Levioticus, which designate diseases, then of the name of animals appearing in chapter 30 of Proverbs (PG 40, 1264 d-1288 b). |
63. Les commentaires d’Evagre sont visiblement faits pour aider iι la lecture spirituelle de l’Écriture (voir notamment le Lommezuteire des Psaumes, dont les références ont été dοnnées ci-dessus, n. 29). Aussi s’attachent-lis aux termes qui présentent le plus de difficulté â cet égard; ceux-ci sont parfois groupés systématiquement : ainsi une petite collection de sentences donne la signiAication allégorique des mots de l’Écriture, principalement du Léνifique, qui désignent des maladies, puis des noms d’animaux figurant au chapitre 30 des Proverbes (PG 40, 1264 d-1288 b). |
|
We touch here on another cause of the hermeticism of the book, which lies in its composition. This [text] is as unsystematic as possible. A theme eventually emerges from each of the six centuries: the first deals mainly with cosmology and the present condition of created beings; the second and third, with contemplations by which the intellect can gradually rise to its first state; the fourth and fifth, more specifically with Christ and his soteriological role; the sixth, with eschatology and the final universal restoration. Nevertheless, each century also deals with every subject other than the one that forms the dominant theme.. |
Nous touchons la a une
autre cause de l’hermétisme du livre, |
|
The six centuries cannot, in any way, be assimilated to the six parts of a systematic treatise, because the way in which Evagrius expounds his thought is anything but discursive. |
Les six centuries ne sauraient itre, en aucune façon, assimilées aux six parties d’un traité systematque, car la façon dont Evagre expose sa pensée n’est rien moins que discursive. |
|
[36] |
|
|
Babai perceived and described well this singular character of the composition of the Kephalaia gnostica: |
l3abai a fort bien vu et décrit ce caractère singulier de la composition des κ phαίαια gnostica : |
|
“ He does not write in a discursive or rhetorical manner, but he cites each chapter in itself and for itself, condensing it, gathering it, enclosing it and delimiting it in itself and for itself, with a profound and marvelous wisdom. |
« Il n’écrit pas d’une manière discursive ou rhétorique, mais il cite chaque chapitre en lui-même et pour lui-même, le condensant, le ramassant, l’enfermant et le délimitant en lui-même et pour lui-ineme, avec une sagesse profonde et merveilleuse. |
|
Then he abandons the subject of this chapter, as if to rest in some abode, and he begins another subject by composing another chapter in the same way, then he returns to the first in another form, then leaves it to begin another, to then return to the previous one, treating sometimes of the divinity, sometimes of creation and creatures, to then return to providence. |
Puis il abandonne le sujet de ce chapitre, comme pour se reposer en quelque demeure, et il commence un autre sujet en composant de la meme façon lin autre chapitre, puis il revient au premier soιιs une autre forme, puis le laisse pour en commencer un autre, pour revenir ensuite nu ρrécédeu1, traitant tantôt de la divinité, tantôt de la création et des créatures, pour revenir ensuite à la providence. |
|
He begins to speak of the activity and distinction of rational beings, then abandons this subject to turn to the mysteries placed in the intellects of creatures or in the contemplation of holy scripture, then again he returns to the former, then turns to the latter, to return to the intermediaries: in short, in a way that is never the same and always different, he stops and gives up, then sets off again, whether to distinguish, or unite, or to do neither, so that all places do not know rest from his spiritual endeavors.” 64 |
I1 se met à parler de l’activité et de la distinction des êtres raisonnables, puis abandonne ce sujet pour se tourner pers les mystères placés .dans les intellections des créatures ou dans la contemplation des livres saints, puis de nouveau il retourne aux premiers, se tourne ensuite vers les derniers, pour revenir aux intermédiaires, bref, d’une manière jamais pareille et toujours di(férente, il s’arrête et abandonne, puis se remet en route, soit qu’il distingue, soit qu’il unisse, soit qu’il ne fasse ni l’un ni l’autre, afin que ne soient pas connus de tous les lieux de repos de ses démarches spirituelles. » 64 |
|
64. FRANKENBERG, p. 46, 1-12. |
64. FRANKENBERG, p. 46, 1-12. |
|
Such is, indeed, the way Evagrius writes. His composition is not linear, but rather polyphonic: it is never a single theme that continues to its complete expression to be linked to a following one that will develop in the same way; it is often two themes that intertwine like two threads on the weft, sometimes in a fairly regular and prolonged way, to the point of forming two series of sentences that intersect, one made up of sentences with even numbers, the other of sentences with odd numbers; 65 but soon this regular composition is broken, other subjects come to mingle with the two previous ones, one of these two only reappears at longer and more irregular intervals, drowned in other series of themes which intertwine in an often inextricable manner. |
Telle est bien, en effet, la ‘minière d’écrire d’Evagre. Sa composition n’est pas linéaire, mais plutöt polyphonique : ce n’est jamais une seule lenséc qui se poursuit jusqu’ό complète expression pour s’enchainer ό une suivante qui se Υdévelopperail de même; ce sont souvent deux thèmes qui s’entrecroisent comme deux fils sur la trame, d’une façon parfois assez régulière et prolongόe, nu point de former deux séries de sentences qui xfternent, l’une faite des sentences ό numéros pairs, l’outre des sentences ii numeros impairs 65; mais bientôt cette composition régulière est rompue, d’autres sujets viennent se mêler aux deux précédents, l’un de ces deux ne réapparaît plus qu’a intervalles plus longs et irréguliers, noyé dans d’autres séries de thèmes qui s’entremêlent d’une manière souvent inextricable. |
|
65. See, for example, series 111, 6 ( naked nous), 8 (nous possessing the last garment), 10 (imperfect nous), 12 (perfect nous), 14 (deficient soul), 16 (perfect soul); this alternates with a series of sentences concerning the theory of successive changes (7, 9), by which one returns to the theme of the incorporeality and nakedness of the intellect (II, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21). |
65. Voir, par exemple, la série 111, 6 (noûs nu), 8 (noûs possédant le dernier vêtement), 10 (noûs imparfait), 12 (noûs parfait), 14 (âme déficiente), 16 (âme parfaite); elle alterne avec ue série de sentences concernant la théorie des changements successifs (7, 9), par laquelle on rejoint le thème de l’incorporéité et de la nudité de L’intellect (II, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21). |
|
Thus the thought progresses on several points at once, and, if the reader’s mind has been attentive enough not to let go of any of these threads, little by little the author's main ideas will become clearer and a vigorous system of thought will be revealed, [now] as firm and coherent as the expression had at first seemed incoherent and elusive. |
Ainsi la pensée progresse sur plusieurs points ό la fois, et, si l’esprit du lecteur a été assez atίcntif pour ne lâcher aucun de ces fils, peu ό peu les idées maîtresses de l’auteur se préciseront et υιι vigoureux systetue de pensée se révélera, aussi ferme et cohérent que l’expressioń en avait paru d’abord incohérente et insaisissable. |
|
[p.36] |
|
|
With repeated readings many sentences that had seemed enigmatic become clearer, situated in the system that emerges from the whole, while others take on a different meaning from that which they had at first appeared to have. Above all, many will take on a deeper meaning than that which appeared at a first reading, to the point that a single sentence will appear as potentially containing the entire system in an extremely condensed form. 66 |
36 A une nouvelle lecture, bien des sentences qui avaient paru énigmatiques s’éclaireront, situées dαπs le système qui se dégage de l’ensemble, d’autres prendront un sens différent de celui qu’elles avaient paru d’abord avoir, beaucoup surtout se chargeront d’un sens plus lourd que celui qu’elles avaient pris Δ première lecture, au point que telle sentence apparaitra comme contenant en puissance, d’une Façon extrêmement condensée, le système tout entier 66. |
|
66. Thus V, 85: “The first nature is for the One, the second towards the One, and the same in the One.” |
66.Ainsi V, 85 : « La nature première est pour l’Un, la seconde vers l’Un, et le même dans l’Un. » |
|
|
|
DEFINITIONS
KEPHALAIA
GNOSTICA:
CENTURY
FOUR
|
IV,1. logikoi – all the scriptures |
IV,31. |
IV,61. [?] UNCOVERING/explanation |
|
IV,2. |
IV,32. LOBE of LIVER |
IV,62. |
|
IV,3. |
IV,33. |
IV,63. [4] PROPITIATORY |
|
IV,4. HEIR of Christ |
IV,34. |
IV,64. |
|
IV,5. |
IV,35. |
IV,65. |
|
IV,6. |
IV,36. [noetic] FAT |
IV,66. [5] PECTORAL |
|
IV,7. richly-diverse WISDOM |
IV,37. |
IV,67. |
|
IV,8. COHEIR of Christ |
IV,38. gift of LANGUAGES |
IV,68. |
|
IV,9. HEIR/INHERITANCE |
IV,39. |
IV,69. [6] COAT |
|
IV,10 writers of true teaching |
IV,40. KEYS of Kingdom |
IV,70. “flee from prison” |
|
IV,11. |
IV,41 |
IV,71. |
|
IV,12.[noetic] CIRCUMCISION |
IV,42 HUNDREDFOLD Eternal Life |
|
|
IV,13. |
IV,43. Jacob’s Ladder |
IV,73. |
|
IV,14 PLEDGES |
IV,44. SABBATH |
IV,74. |
|
IV,15. Children / Adults |
IV,45. Manoah - Judges |
IV,75. [8] ROBE |
|
IV,16. ONLY BEGOTTEN |
IV,46. FOUR CORNERS |
IV,76. |
|
IV,17. |
IV,47. |
IV,77. |
|
IV,18.[noetic] ANNOINTING |
IV,48. [1] TURBAN |
IV,78. |
|
IV,19. ONE |
IV,49. |
IV,79. [9] CINCTURE |
|
IV,20. FIRST-BORN |
IV,50. |
IV,80. DESCENT/ASCENT of Christ |
|
IV,21. ANNOINTING |
IV,51. |
IV,81. |
|
IV,22. Symbolic Sacrifice |
IV,82. REFUGE |
|
|
IV,23. MOSES & ELIJAH |
IV,53. Tower |
IV,83. |
|
IV,24. FIRST-BORN from Dead |
IV,54. |
IV,84. |
|
IV,25. TEMPLE (light/oil) |
IV,55. |
IV,85. |
|
IV,26. Today = FRIDAY |
IV,56. [3] EPHOD |
IV,86. |
|
IV,27.Dove- BAPTISM of Jesus |
IV,57. |
IV,87. |
|
IV,28.[noetic] UNLEAVENED BREAD |
IV,58. |
IV,88. THREE ALTARS |
|
IV,29. (Lamp) OIL |
IV,59.blasphemers of BODY |
IV,89. |
|
IV,30. wealth of God |
IV,60. |
IV,90. |
KEPHALAIA
GNOSTICA:
CENTURY
FIVE
|
V,1. ADAM |
V,31.[noetic] SHIELD |
V,61. |
|
V,2. |
V,32. cups (water / wine) |
V,62. |
|
V,3. |
V,33. (iniquitous Bursar) |
V,63. |
|
V,4. ARCHANGEL |
V,34.[noetic] HELMET |
V,64. |
|
V,5. |
V,35. Bread |
V,65. PRAKTIKOS / GNOSTIKOS |
|
V,6. JERUSALEM─ZION |
V,36.(Prom.Land) PHILISTINE |
V,66. NOUS - virtues/knowledge |
|
V,7. ANGEL |
V,37.[noetic] HOOK [?fish-] |
V,67. Trees / Source of Life |
|
V,8. (Jubilee/sabbath) of LAND |
V,38. |
V,68. [noetic] PHILISTINE - opposes |
|
V,9. |
V,39. SKY |
V,69. TRINITY Water/Tree of Life |
|
V,10 FIRSTBORN |
V,40.[noetic] MOUNTAIN |
V,70. |
|
V,11. |
V,41.[noetic] WORLD (cosmos) |
V,71. [noetic] GIANT/Raphaite - fights |
|
V,12. |
V,42. World created in mind |
V,72. Four Sources-One River |
|
V,13.[noetic] CLOUD |
V,43. [noetic] PATH |
V,73. |
|
V,14. |
V,44. NAZARENE (wine) |
V,74. [noetic] CITY - noetic natures |
|
V,15. |
V,45. NOUS / HAIR - NAZARENE |
V,75. |
|
V,16.[noetic] DARKNESS |
V,46. HIGH PRIEST |
V,76. GNOWING NATURES |
|
V,17. |
V,47. |
V,77 [noetic] GATES - virtues |
|
V,18. |
V,48. Venerate flesh of Christ |
V,78. |
|
V,19. RESURRECTION of BODY |
V,49. NEW (false) GOD |
V,79. |
|
V,20. |
V,50. |
V,80. [noetic] DEADBOLT - free will |
|
V,21. Egypt, Jerusalem, Mt Zion |
V,51. |
V,81. NOUS Fashions Worlds |
|
V,22. RESURRECTION of SOUL |
V,52. NOUS - pure/purer/purest |
V,82. [noetic] WALL - apatheia |
|
V,23. |
V,53.[spiritual] SPIR. SACRIFICE |
V,83. Circumcisions |
|
V,24. |
V,54. |
V,84. [noetic] TEMPLE - pure Nous |
|
V,25. RESURRECTION of NOUS |
V,55. |
V,85. |
|
V,26. |
V,56. |
V,86. VAINGLORIOUS MAN |
|
V,27. THUMOS blinds |
V,57. |
V,87. |
|
V,28.[noetic] SWORD |
V,58. NOUS - discerns sensations |
V,88. ZION / JERUSALEM |
|
V,29. |
V,59. SENSATION |
V,89. |
|
V,30. (Prom.Land) PHILISTINE |
V,60. NOUS - powers |
V,90. |
THEMES
ORDERS of BEINGS (KG 1.11)
APOKATASTASIS notes on KG 1.40 ; 3.9;
FIRST and SECOND NATURAL CONTEMPLATION: 2.2; 2.3;
EPEKTASIS: 1.71; quench insatiability: 1.65);
LIGHT of THE NOUS ( [On the light of the nous and its possible origins: cf. KG 1.35, 1.74; 1.81, 2.29; 3.44, 3.52, 5.15; Sch.258 on Prov. 23.22 ; Prak. 64; Gnost. 45; Prayer 74, 75,; Thoughts/Peri.Log. 17, 30 39, 40, 42; Skem. 2, 4, 23, 25, 27; Letters 17.3; 30.1; 39.5; Antiret. 6.16.]
CHRISTOLOGY as Lord Who comes with the word (4.18; 4.21; Nuancing in KG 6
PROVIDENCE: For Evagrius “providence” refers to God's ongoing provision of what each reasoning being requires in order to return to divine union. It concerns both free will on the part of the reasoning being (KG 6.43) and the assistance constantly provided by angels (Sch 7 On Ps 16.13(2-3); Sch 38 On Eccl 5.7-11) and also provided by every rank of reasoning being in “varied worlds” to those below them (KG 6.76).
JUDGMENT: KG 3.47; Sch 8 On Ps 1.5(1) Evagrius uses the term “change” to describe what he also calls “judgment” or “the logos of judgment:” namely, the successive transformations that clothe the nous in a new body and world as part of its re-ascent to union with God. Cf. Sch.5 On.Ps 118.7. As above, notes on KG 3.38 and 3.40.
INTRODUCTION
There is a close relationship between Evagrius’ exegetical scholia and his gnomic kephalaia. The difference in them lies chiefly in structure and organization of the collections: whereas the scholia explicate select, successive verses from a biblical book, the kephalaia are generally arranged in a deliberate, often obscure order. Evagrius’ kephalaia are generally intended as an aid towards θεωρία, prayerful contemplation of the creator and his creation; they therefore do not usually provide the orderly and detailed discussions found in the paranetic treatises. Instead they are composed of a variable but often symbolic[1] number of kephalaia, a word which is often translated as ‘chapters’, but which in Evagrius’ case could be better rendered as ‘sentences’, or more precisely, ‘sentence-summaries’. These kephalaia are often arranged in parallel couplets or thematic ‘chains’ of variable length. Within these chains concepts are contrasted and explored from different perspectives. There is often a didactic purpose behind both the ordering of concepts within chains and the sequence of chains within treatises, but this underlying purpose may not be immediately apparent; it sometimes becomes so only after multiple re-readings and careful study of the text. The development of ideas in the Kephalaia Gnostica, for example, has been described as ‘polyphonic’[2] rather than progressive, and ‘[deliberately] enigmatic […] for the sake of stimulating meditation’.[3] This description could be aptly applied to Evagrius’ other collections of kephalaia as well.
In his kephalaia Evagrius often deliberately imitates the sapiential literature of the Old Testament, particularly the Book of Proverbs. He inherited from Origen the conviction that the biblical wisdom literature sequentially symbolizes and teaches the necessity of moving beyond the material world into the spiritual or ‘intelligible’ realm; and he regarded the genre of proverbs as the best way to convey ‘intelligible things’.[4] The underlying structure of some of these collections reflects what Evagrius considered to be an essential ordering in the spiritual life. He believed that virtues are to be acquired in a specific sequence; [5] and in some of his works he makes it clear his doctrines progressively comprehended thus his readers were to memorize and meditate on his proverbs in a sequential fashion.[6] This understanding is important for the accurate interpretation of these texts since Evagrius, imitating the Book of Proverbs, often introduces concepts in an ambiguous or even polemical way in order to explore them more fully in succeeding sentences, or in chains which occur later in the text. In this way his readers are invited to experience for themselves both the progressive acquisition of spiritual knowledge and the interrelationships which exist between different doctrines. It thus follows that these kephalaia can only be accurately interpreted in light of their specific context and of the overall structure of the work in which they occur. Nevertheless, this approach to interpreting Evagrius’ more obscure texts and doctrines is a comparatively recent feature of Evagrian scholarship. [7]
The relationship between Evagrius’ choice of literary form and his didactic method is most clearly seen in the spiritual trilogy of Praktikos, Gnostikos, and Kephalaia Gnostica. Evagrius associates the Praktikos (which is subtitled ‘the monk’) with ascetical struggle (τὰ πρακτικά) and the Gnostikos and Kephalaia Gnostica with contemplative knowledge (τὰ γνωστικά).[8] The introduction to the Praktikos is written in the form of a letter, and the first two-thirds of the work provide a continuous prose discussion of virtues and vices, with only an occasional sprinkling of brief sentence-summaries.[9] However, immediately after chapter 60 in which Evagrius discusses the possibility of attaining ‘perfect apatheia’, he shifts the literary style of the remaining chapters, so that the latter third of the Praktikos consists almost entirely of gnomic sentences.[10] In the Gnostikos, the second volume of his trilogy, the majority of its 50 chapters are brief sentences; [11] and the 540 chapters of the Kephalaia Gnostica are Evagrius’ most obscure collection of gnomic sentences. The reader of this trilogy is thus initiated via a paranetic treatise into successive levels of spiritual knowledge which are described in progressively more compact and enigmatic kephalaia.
[1] In his introduction to De oratione Evagrius provides a detailed numerological analysis of the number of sentences in the work: 153 kephalaia, the same number as in the miraculous catch of fish in John 21:11. Similarly, the Kephalaia Gnostica is divided into six books of ninety chapters each; in the the last sentence Evagrius advises the reader to interpret the work ‘according to the number of the six days of creation’, (Kephalaia Gnostica VI.90, Guillaumont p. 419).
[2] Guillaumont Les ‘Kephalaia Gnostica’, p. 36.
[3] A. and C. Guillaumont, ‘Évagre’, Dictionnaire, col. 1736.
[4] Evagrius, Scholion 1 on Proverbs 1.1, SC 397, p. 90: ‘A proverb is a saying which by means of sensible things conveys the meaning of intelligible things,’ (Παροιμία ἐστὶν λόγος δι' αἰσθητῶν πραγμάτων σημαίνων πράγματα νοητά).
[5] Evagrius, Gnostikos 6, SC 356, p. 96: ‘Additionally, he strives to practice all the virtues, equally, continuously, and in proper order; for there is an orderly sequence among them and within himself; for the intellect is naturally betrayed by that which is weakest,’ (καὶ πειράσθω πάσας ἐπίσης ἀεὶ τὰς ἀρετὰς κατορθοῦν, ἵνα ἀντακολουθῶσιν ἀλλήλαις καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ, διὰ τὸ πεφυκέναι τὸν νοῦν ὑπὸ τῆς ἐλαττουμένης προδίδοσθαι). Cf. also Ad monachos 137 and Kephalaia Gnostica VI.90.
[6] This is particularly true of Evagrius’ trilogy of Praktikos, Gnostikos, and Kephalaia Gnostica. After beseeching later copists not to join together separate kephalaia, but rather to preserve their correct ordering and numbering Evagrius explains: “In this way the order of the chapters is safeguarded, and what is said will be clear,” Guillaumont, Traité Pratique 1, SC 170 p. 147. (οὕτως γὰρ ὅ τε κεφαλαιώδης σωθείη κανὼν καὶ σαφῆ γενήσεται τὰ λεγόμενα. Jeremy Driscoll notes this and emphasizes this point in his study of Evagrius’ Ad monachos (The ‘Ad Monachos’, fn 12, p. 3; cf also pp. 13-18, 305-306, 319-322)
[7] The principal exponents of this approach are G. Bunge and J. Driscoll, cf. above p. 5, n. 25.
[8] Evagrius, Praktikos, Introd. 9, SC 171, p. 492.
[9] Of the first sixty-one chapters of the Praktikos, only chapters 1-4 and 17-20 (13%) are unambiguously of the brief, gnomic type.
[10] Excluded from consideration here are the apophthegmata with which both the Praktikos and the Gnostikos conclude. Of the last third of the Praktikos 90% (chapters 61-71, 74-88, and 90) are of the gnomic type.
[11] All but eleven of the fifty chapters of the Gnostikos are brief sentences. The exceptions are: the four concluding apophthegmata (chapters 44-48) and chapters 14, 18, 20, 25, 28, and 34.
The difference between Evagrius’ exegetical scholia and his longer collections of gnomic kephalaia lies chiefly in the structure and organization of the collections: whereas the scholia explicate successive selected verses from a biblical book, the kephalaia are generally arranged in a deliberate, and often obscure order, which the reader is meant to puzzle out. Thus at the end of the Kephalia Gnostica he drops the tantalizing hint that the collection is to be interpreted “according to the days of creation,”suggesting that the work is a kind of hexameron.
Evagrius’ kephalaia are intended as an aid towards θεωρία, prayerful contemplation of creation and the creator; they therefore do not offer the ordered, detailed discussions found in the paranetic treatises. Instead they are composed of a variable but often symbolic[21] number of kephalaia, a word which is often translated as ‘chapters’, but which in Evagrius’ case could be better rendered as ‘sentences’, or more precisely, ‘sentence-summaries’.
The kephalaia are often arranged in parallel couplets or thematic ‘chains’ of variable length. Within these chains concepts are contrasted and explored from different perspectives. There is often a didactic purpose behind both the ordering of concepts within chains and the sequence of chains within treatises, but this underlying purpose may not be immediately apparent; it sometimes becomes so only after multiple re-readings and careful study of the text.[22] The development of ideas in the Kephalaia Gnostica, for example, has been described as ‘polyphonic’[23] rather than progressive, and ‘[deliberately] enigmatic […] for the sake of stimulating meditation’.[24] This description could be aptly applied to Evagrius’ other collections of kephalaia as well.
Evagrius, imitating the Book of Proverbs, often introduces concepts in an ambiguous or even polemical way in order to explore them more fully in succeeding sentences, or in chains which occur later in the text. In this way his readers are invited to experience for themselves both the progressive acquisition of spiritual knowledge and the interrelationships which exist between different doctrines. It thus follows that these kephalaia can only be accurately interpreted in light of their specific context and of the overall structure of the work in which they occur.
[21] In his introduction to De oratione Evagrius provides a detailed numerological analysis of the number of sentences in the work: 153 kephalaia, the same number as in the miraculous catch of fish in John 21:11. Similarly, the Kephalaia Gnostica is divided into six books of ninety chapters each; in the the last sentence Evagrius advises the reader to interpret the work ‘according to the number of the six days of creation’, (Kephalaia Gnostica VI.90, Guillaumont p. 419).
[22] Jeremy Driscoll described in detail the significance of the order and interrelationship between chains in Evagrius’ Ad monachos (The ‘Ad Monachos’, fn 12, p. 3; cf also pp. 13-18, 305-306, 319-322
[23] Guillaumont Les ‘Kephalaia Gnostica’, p. 36.
[24] A. and C. Guillaumont, ‘Évagre’, Dictionnaire, col. 1736.
This Webpage was created for a workshop held at Saint Andrew's Abbey, Valyermo, California in 2001
