CONCEALMENT_darkening_shadowing_over

CONCEALMENT as PEDAGOGICAL TECHNIQUE

epikrypsantes and syskiantes

Evagrius Praktikos, Letter to Anatolius

syskiantes

Evagrius, Eulogius 18 : Conceal what may lead to vainglory (others praising you)

SKOTEIN

  Gnosticus  44.11  ἐπισπορέα͵ τῆς σωφροσύνης ἴδιον ἀπεκρίνατο εἶναι· δικαιο σύνης δὲ πάλιν͵ τὸ κατ΄ ἀξίαν ἑκάστῳ τοὺς λόγους ἀποδιδόναι͵ τὰ μὲν σκοτεινῶς ἀπαγγέλλουσαν͵ τὰ δὲ δι΄ αἰνιγμάτων σημαίνουσαν͵ τινὰ δὲ καὶ φανεροῦσαν πρὸς ὠφέλειαν τῶν ἁπλουστέρων.

USED in NEGATIVE SENSE : DARK TEACHINGS LACKING PRUDENCE and WISDOM

     Sententiae ad monachos 126.6  ἀπόστησον δὲ σὴν ψυχὴν ἀπὸ γνώσεως ψευδοῦς. καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ πλεονάκις λελάληκα πρὸς αὐτούς͵ σκοτεινοὺς δὲ λόγους αὐτῶν ἐξιχνίασα͵ καὶ ἰὸν ἀσπίδων εὕρηκα ἐν αὐτοῖς.

Sententiae ad monachos 132.1  Σοφία κυρίου ὑψοῖ καρδίαν͵ φρόνησις δὲ αὐτοῦ καθαίρει αὐτήν. Λόγοι προνοίας σκοτεινοὶ καὶ δυσνόητοι κρίσεως θεωρίαι͵ ἀνὴρ δὲ πρακτικὸς ἐπιγνώσεται αὐτούς. Καθαίρων ἑαυτὸν ὄψεται φύσεις νοεράς͵

     Scholia in Proverbia 50.1l  ἡμᾶς͵ ἕως ἂν ὁ ἥλιος τῆς δικαιοσύνης τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ἡμέραν ἡμῖν ἐπιλάμψῃ. 4, 19  αἱ δὲ ὁδοὶ τῶν ἀσεβῶν σκοτειναί͵ οὐκ οἴδασιν πῶς προσκόπτουσιν Οὐδὲ τὸν τρόπον πῶς ἁμαρτάνουσιν οἱ ἀσεβεῖς

APOKRYPTO

????? KG

?Letter 41.1  Letter 55? Physician hides instruments

SCHOLION 13 on 30.21 p. 497

SCHOLION 7 on Ps 17.12!!!   ????

Accommodation: “descent” ([συγ]κατάβασις) to hearers’ level of understanding (Gnost 6): [1.] Analogous to Christ’s [pastoral] descent in Incarnation: by his descent He shepherds us (Sch. 241 on Prov 22.1); [by knowledge we become His friends ~Sch 4 on Ps 22.5] ). [2.] requires prudence in what is shared (Gnost 12. 14, 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35). [3.] entails danger of loss [of knowledge] (ad Mon 63) and fixation on superficial (Gnost 29, 34). On betrayal of nous by “inferior,” and balance among virtues cf. Prayer 1.  In Desert Fathers: Gr.Alph: Antony 1.13; Joseph Paneph 9.6.1; Gr.Sys: Joseph Paneph 8.4; Anon. 8.22.  Clem. Alex. uses συμπεριφορά (accommodation): warns that it must not become habitual (διάθεσις) : Strom. 7.12.80.8. Clem. employs both συμπεριφορά and συγκαταβαίνων re:. Timothy's accomodation to Jews Strom 7.9.53.3-4;  and “with demonstration (ἀποδείξεως ), necessity to condescend (συγκαταβαίνειν ) to questions (ζητήσεις )”,  Strom 7.15.92.3.2. cf. Gnost. 10.

.

Apophthegm Antony 13:  Antony enjoying himself with brethren (χαριεντιζόμενον μετὰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν ), explains: “It is the same with the work of God. If we stretch the brethren beyond measure they will soon break. Sometimes it is necessary to come down to meet their needs.”  Οὕτως καὶ εἰς τὸ ἔργον τοῦ Θεοῦ· ἐὰν πλεῖον τοῦ μέτρου τείνωμεν κατὰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν͵ ταχὺ προσρήσσουσι. Χρὴ οὖν μίαν μίαν συγκαταβαίνειν τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς.

OTHER APOPHTHEGMATA:
mostly negative - "descending to logismos"; but these are positive in sense of accommodation as an act of charity

Joseph of Panephesus 1 (Gk.Alph. 228.13)  [Reserve strict asceticism to privacy: when with others, [accomodate]

Joseph of Panephesus 2 (Archbishop John and Eulogius - Gk.Syst. Bk.8.4.[31]) [to accomodate (and keept strictness secret) is an act of love and drives out vainglory)]

Anonymous Brother: (Gk.Syst. Bk 8.22) (Brother who "did not eat bread") told: Don't display your way of life to others

Clement of Alexandria,

Strom. 7.12.80.8 sumperifoma (συμπεριφορά) accomodation, indulgence, companionship, social relations

) Accomodating must not become disposition διάθεσις

      συμπεριφέρω συμ-περιφέρω, f. -οίσω, to carry round along with or together, Plat. II. Pass. to be carried round together, Id. 2. συμπεριφέρεσθαί τινι to have intercourse with one, Polyb.: to adapt oneself to circumstances, c. dat., Aeschin. 3. to be well acquainted with things, Polyb.

and Strom 7.9.53.3-4, [sumperifoma and sugkatabano] Clement uses συγκαταβαίνων and συμπεριφορά as synonyms both Timothy "accommodating himself to the Jews, became a Jew that he might gain all. . .who submits to accommodate himself merely for the benefit of his neighbours, for the salvation of those for whose sake he accommodates himself"   ὁ τοίνυν μέχρι τῆς συμπεριφορᾶς διὰ τὴν τῶν πέλας σωτηρίαν συγκαταβαίνων (ψιλῶς διὰ τὴν τῶν δι' οὓς συμπεριφέρεται σωτηρίαν),

and Strom 7.15.92.3.2  [sugkatabaino] There being demonstration, then, it is necessary to condescend to questions, and to ascertain by way of demonstration by the Scriptures themselves how the heresies failed, and how in the truth alone and in the ancient Church is both the exactest knowledge, and the truly best set of principles ?. (ἀποδείξεως δ' οὔσης ἀνάγκη συγκαταβαίνειν εἰς τὰς ζητήσεις καὶ δι' αὐτῶν τῶν γραφῶν ἐκμανθάνειν ἀποδεικτικῶς, ὅπως μὲν ἀπεσφάλησαν αἱ αἱρέσεις, ὅπως δὲ ἐν μόνῃ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ καὶ τῇ ἀρχαίᾳ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἥ τε ἀκριβε^7.15.92.4 στάτη γνῶσις καὶ ἡ τῷ ὄντι ἀρίστη αἵρεσις.)

Stromata 6.15.123.3.4  - 124.2.2 Paul circumcised Timothy because of the Jews who believed, in order that those who had received their training from the law might not revolt from the faith through his breaking such points of the law as were understood more carnally, knowing right well that circumcision does not justify; for he professed that all things were for all by conformity [κατὰ συμπεριφορὰν], preserving those of the dogmas that were essential, that he might gain all. αὐτίκα ὁ Παῦλος τὸν Τιμόθεον περιέτεμεν διὰ τοὺς ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πιστεύοντας͵ ἵνα μή͵ καταλύοντος αὐτοῦ τὰ ἐκ τοῦ νόμου σαρκικώτερον προειλημμένα͵ ἀποστῶσι τῆς πίστεως οἱ ἐκ νόμου κατηχούμενοι͵ εἰδὼς ἀκριβῶς ὅτι περιτομὴ οὐ δικαιοῖ· τοῖς πᾶσι γὰρ πάντα γίγνεσθαι ὡμολόγει κατὰ συμπεριφορὰν σῴζων τὰ κύρια 6.15.124.2 τῶν δογμάτων͵ ἵνα πάντας κερδήσῃ.

additional for [sumperifor]

See also in Clement    {check Origen for this: Com.Matt. 11.8.43 and 4 others  also Nyssa EpCan ad Leo.45.228.36;  45.236.13  Basil? Gr.Naz?

MANY IN APOPHTHEMATA PATRUM!!!} mostly negative - "descending to logismos" but not Antony and two others, has sense of "acting like others" and hospitality

additional for [sugkatab]

Clement

7.15.92.3.2

Strom 3.9.67.2.5 ;

6.15.124.1.5

Paed 2.1.9.4.7.  [sumperiform]

ἡ βρῶσις ἡ Χριστοῦ· κομιδῇ δὲ ἄλογον καὶ ἀχρεῖον καὶ οὐκ ἀνθρώ πειον βοσκημάτων δίκην πιαινομένων θανάτῳ τρέφεσθαι͵ κάτω βλέποντας εἰς γῆν τοὺς ἐκ γῆς ἀεὶ καὶ κεκυφότας εἰς τραπέζας͵ τὴν λίχνον διωκάθοντας ζωήν͵ τὸ ἀγαθὸν ἐνταῦθά που κατορύξαντας περὶ τὴν οὐκ ἐσομένην ζωήν͵ μόνην κολακεύοντας τὴν κατάποσιν͵ δι΄ ἣν πολυτιμότεροι γεγόνασιν μάγειροι γεωργῶν. Μὴ γὰρ ἀφαι ροῦμεν τὴν συμπεριφοράν͵ ἀλλὰ τὸν ὄλισθον τῆς συνηθείας ὡς συμφορὰν ὑποπτεύομεν.

συμπεριφορά    συμπερι-φορά , ἡ,  ACCOMODATION/COMPANIONSHIP

A.intercourse, companionship, society, Plb.5.26.15, Phld.Hom.p.21 O., D.S.3.64: pl., social intercourse, Phld. Ind.Sto.3, Cat.Cod.Astr.8(4).178.

2. accommodating temper, indulgence, complaisance, UPZ110.44 (ii B.C.), Plb.1.72.2, 23.2.10, Plu. 2.124b, POxy.1590.5 (iv A.D.); ἡ τῶν νόμων ς. Epicur.(?) Oxy.215 ii7; “κατὰ -ὰν λέγειν” Phld.Piet.115; “ἡ πρὸς τὰ τέκνα ς. καὶ ὁμόνοια” OGI308.17 (Hierapolis, ii B.C.); “ὄχλων” Jul.Or.6.200c; ς. ποιεῖσθαι Χρημάτων to be indulgent in demanding repayment, IG12(5).860.14 (Tenos, i B.C.).

[συμπεριφέρω συμ-περιφέρω, f. -οίσω, to carry round along with or together, Plat. II. Pass. to be carried round together, Id. 2. συμπεριφέρεσθαί τινι to have intercourse with one, Polyb.: to adapt oneself to circumstances, c. dat., Aeschin. 3. to be well acquainted with things, Polyb. ]

συγκατάβασις    συγκατά-βα^σις , εως, ἡ,  CONDESCENSION/ACCOMODATION

On the mystical significance of priestly ministry and the Eucharist: Gnost 14; Prak 100, KG 2.44; 5.32;  Monks 118-120; Letter on Faith 4/[14]; Letter 49 (on spiritual priesthood). Sch.15 on Ps 67.24; allegory of Christ's flesh and blood: Sch 61 on Prov. 5.11.  Sch. 13 on Eccl. 2.25.  On thoughts of priesthood as source of vainglory: Prak 13, Thoughts 21, 28; Ant 7.3, 7.8, 7.26. 7.36, 7.40. Priests among those dwelling on Zion Sch 12 on Ps 131.16;  vested in righteousness having received the celestial myrrh that is the knowledge of God, Sch 4 on Ps 132.2; and in the four virtues that are the gospel's wedding garment: Sch 7 on Ps 131.9.  Evagrius was warned by his priest not to teach openly that demons do not know our thoughts (only God is καρδιογνώστης) Thoughts 37.

Christ is the Great high Priest (Heb 4.14) who offers supplications on our behalf (Heb 5.7). Evagrius believed that this role is shared by the gnostikos or teacher, who, conformed to Christ, enables others to “return from vice and ignorance to virtue and knowledge” KG 5.46; 6.90; Gnost. 48. cf Gnost.49

Macarius was famed as "the priest of Kellia": he is a spiritual physician in Prayer Prl. 1

FUNCTION of PRIESTS

purify and pray

CHRIST the HIGH PRIEST (and HUMAN IMITATION)

pray and heal / separate some from evil - others from ignorance

In series of scholia on friendship: Sch 164 On Prov 17.17.  Angels and men are brothers of each other (isangeloi?) and sons of Christ: Sch 163 On Prov 17.17. The acquisition of wisdom and spiritual knowledge enables each rank of the logikoi to assist those below: cf. KG 5.46, 6.76; 6.86 (text and note) 6.90; Prak 24; 76; 100; Gnost 50.  On the healing from vice and ignorance: Christ is the Great high Priest (Heb 4.14) who offers supplications on our behalf (Heb 5.7). This role is shared by both the angels (celestial powers) and the gnostikos or teacher, who, conformed to Christ, enables others to “return from vice and ignorance to virtue and knowledge” KG 5.46, 6.76; 6.86 (text and note) 6.90; Prak 24; 76; 100

ALLEGORY of EUCHARISTIC VESSELS

Sacred Vessels are pathetikon and logistikon - Inseperably Mixed
[wine and water: knowledge of incorporeals and contempl. of corporeals

HONOR of PRIESTS

MACARIUS the PRIEST of KELIA

PRIESTHOOD as TEMPTATION to VAINGLORY

UNITED in FRIENDSHIP with CHRIST, , we are NECESSARILY UNITED to ONE ANOTHER in FRIENDSHIP

Add also texts based on word-searches.

 IN THE SCHOLIA on PSALMS:   SEE ALSO Scholion 5 On Ps 132.3  knowledge unites  (sunaptei) the angels and saints
        and 189 on Prov below: Because spiritual friendship is virtue and the knowledge of God, grace through which we are united in friendship with the holy powers  AND Praktikos 56: ...the food of the soul is knowledge ...which is the only means by which we can normally be united with the holy powers, since our union with incorporeal [beings] naturally occurs because of the similarity of our disposition with theirs.

          The movement from praktiké to gnostiké, from ‘fear of God’ to ‘knowledge of mysteries’, is here presented as ascent from the status of servant or slave to that of friend. Christ’s gift of knowledge is depicted as an ennobling invitation to share with a new-found friend at table. Evagrius undoubtedly intends his reader to interpret the ‘knowledge of mysteries’ shared at the ‘table’ of Christ as essential knowledge, that gnosis of the Father which Christ alone can share with others, and which is the subject of the christological scholia on Psalms 44 and 104.

          This image of servants elevated by essential knowledge to the status of friendship and table-fellowship with Christ suggests a possible explanation of one feature of Evagrius’ texts on prayer which some commentators have regarded with suspicion: namely, the relative paucity of direct references to Christ in Evagrius’ texts on prayer. In De oratione Christ is unambiguously mentioned by name or title only three times.The title ‘Christ’ appears in De oratione  introduction and ch. 115; the title, ‘Son of God’, is used once in ch. 59. Evagrius’ uses of the title, ‘Lord’, in De oratione are much more ambiguous than in the Scholia on Psalms, where this title generally refers to Christ. In De oratione the majority, if not all of these appear to refer to ‘the Lord of Hosts’; that is, the Father. On closer examination, however, it becomes apparent that Christ is in no sense neglected in this treatise: on the contrary, Evagrius cites Christ’s words on prayer from the gospels fourteen times in De oratione: De orat. 17, 21, 30, 31, 33, 39, 59 (twice), 88 102, 113, 147, 151 (twice).

One who attains that ‘pure prayer’ which Evagrius recommends in De oratione enjoys a state analogous to the ‘friend’ depicted in this scholion. Christ is not as it were ‘in front of’ or ‘above’ the one who prays: the imagery of this scholion suggests that Christ ‘sits beside’ the gnostikos who understands mysteries, sharing ‘as with a friend’ his knowledge of the Father. For the one who ‘prays purely’ it is not so much a question of calling Christ by name or invoking him by title: rather, the friend who ‘sits with Christ at table’ has carefully attended to Christ’s teaching on prayer and now imitates his example. Whereas in the Scholia on Psalms and in the practice of psalmody Evagrius emphasizes the perception of Christ in the ‘richly diverse wisdom’ of salvation history and creation, in De oratione and during the interval for prayer which follows each psalm Evagrius encourages the laying aside of images and words in order to enjoy that ‘immaterial and uniform’ wisdom which is Christ’s gift of knowledge of the Father.

IN THE SCHOLIA on PROVERBS:

Gehin Scholies aux Proverbes DOCTRINE SPIRITUELLE            53-54 L'AMITIÉ SPIRITUELLE

[FRIENDSHIP: Scholia on Proverbs: 69;  120;  143;  150;  157;  173;  189;  304.]

esp 120 and 304 where Friends of CHRIST ARE FRIENDS OF EACH OTHER on mutual friendship and friendship in God: "...friendship is the virtue and the knowledge of God by which we  become friends of God and of the holy powers, for in this friendship the friends of the same person are also the friends of each other." [also in 304]

143 15, 28a  δεκταὶ παρὰ κυρίῳ ὁδοὶ ἀνθρώπων δικαίων· διὰ δὲ αὐτῶν καὶ οἱ ἐχθροὶ φίλοι γίνονται Παύλου κηρύξαντος· οἵ ποτε ὄντες ἐχθροὶ κατηλ λάγησαν τῷ θεῷ διὰ τοῦ θανάτου τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ· πλὴν προσεκτέον εἰ πάντες οἱ ἐχθροὶ διὰ τῶν δικαίων φίλοι γίνονται͵ ἵνα καὶ πᾶσιν εἴπῃ ὁ Χριστός· οὐκέτι ὑμᾶς καλῶ δούλους͵ ἀλλὰ φίλους.

Gehin Scholies aux Proverbes DOCTRINE SPIRITUELLE            53-54 L'AMITIÉ SPIRITUELLE

BOOK of GOD

       Evagrius adopted Origen’s terminology in his own definition of the book of God as the contemplation of nature.[1]  Unlike Origen, however, Evagrius did not believe that the ability to read the book of creation is reserved to the denizens of heaven; nor did regard the starry firmament as its principal pages.  Rather, Evagrius believed that Ecclesiastes 3:11 attests to the existence of an inner universe, a microcosm within the heart wherein each person may contemplate the divine intentions and purposes (logoi):

Eccl. 3.11: “All the things he has made are beautiful in his time: he has also set the ages in their heart...”

The text states that “he has also given them the ages,” that is the logoi  of the ages; because it is there [in the heart] that we have the “kingdom of heaven within us,” as the Lord has said; (cf. Lk 17.21).[2]

For Evagrius it is the inner world of concepts, temptations, fantasies, and prayers that constitute the principal subject matter for natural contemplation.  God has entrusted each human being with responsibility for an inner universe of thoughts and concepts that must be tended and guarded just as a shepherd guards a flock:

The concepts (noemata) of this present world - these the Lord gave to man, like sheep to a good shepherd: for it is written, He has placed the ages (ton aiona) in his heart; (Eccl. 3:11)  yoking to him indignation (thumos) and desire (epithumia) as helpmates, so that with the first he may drive away the wolf-like concepts, while with desire he may lovingly tend the sheep, assailed as he often is by the rain and winds...  And if, weary from our toil, a certain acedia  overtakes us we should climb up a little onto the rock of knowledge and converse with the Psalter, (cf. Ps 48:5)  plucking with the virtues the strings of knowledge: let us again tend our sheep as they pasture below Mount Sinai, so that the God of our fathers may also call to us out of the bush (cf. Exod. 3:1-6) and grant us the logoi of the signs and the wonders. (cf. Exod. 7:9, 11:9-10)[3]

In this metaphor of shepherd and flock Evagrius portrays his model of spiritual progress: namely, an alternating rhythm of ascetical practice (praktiké) and contemplation (theoria).  Following Plato and the later Aristotelian tradition,[4] he depicts the soul as tripartite, ruled by the “shepherd”, the logistikon or reasoning faculty that is chiefly responsible for developing the virtues of prudence, understanding and wisdom.[5] The “shepherd” makes use of the pathetikon, the passionate portion of the soul and source of the powers of thumos (indignation) and epithumia (desire).  These powers or energies, “yoked to [the soul] as helpmates”, are intended by God to be used “according to nature”; but they will overwhelm the soul as passions if misused or present in excess. When exercised according to nature the epithumetikon contributes the virtues of temperance, love, and continence,[6] while the thumikon provides courage and patient endurance.[7] Through the practice of diakrisis (discernment) the praktikos learns to employ these “helpmates” in the contexts of interpersonal relationships, dreams, and thoughts, especially thoughts that occur during prayer.[8] The Christian ascetic or praktikos learns the nature of the different noemata (concepts, ideas) with which the mind is filled, and is able to distinguish between logismoi, demonic tempting-thoughts, of gluttony, lust, avarice, sadness, anger, acedia, vainglory, and pride;[9] as well as to “tend” the beneficial noemata that come from angels or from neutral sense-perception.[10]  The labors of the praktiké are rewarded by God with the birth of love and the gift of apatheia, “dispassion” or “freedom from compulsion”.[11]

The ascent of the shepherd onto the “rock of knowledge” reflects Evagrius’ hope that the Christian praktikos will, over time, mature into a gnostikos, a biblical exegete and teacher able to contemplate the divine logoi, the inner meanings and purposes of God that are concealed beneath surface appearances.  For Evagrius’ gnostikos learning to read the “Book of God” has less to do with a heavenly record of events than with the divine intentions that inexorably lead all fallen beings towards eventual reunion with God.  It is this “book” that can be read in both the macrocosm of biblical salvation history and in the microcosm of the human heart:

In this scholion Evagrius identifies the “Book of God” with natural contemplation (theoria physiké), “the contemplation of bodies and incorporeal [beings];” however his emphasis is not on angels or those in heaven, but rather on “the purified nous”, that is the inner world of the contemplative, that “has come to be written”, and can thus be read in the Book of God.   A preceding scholion (Scholion 6 on Psalm 138) links “this same book” with both the saving passion of Christ and the particular needs of the fallen soul. Thus “reading” the Book of God entails contemplation of sacred scripture together with the both macrocosm of salvation history and the microcosm of the individual soul’s unique spiritual journey.  He further condenses his definition by emphasizing “the logoi of providence and judgment”. This uniquely Evagrian formula[13] recurs throughout his writings, and is found in the Gnostikos, in ten passages of the Kephalaia Gnostica,[14] in Evagrius’ first, sixth, and seventh Letters, and in all the collections of his scholia that have been edited to date, that is, his scholia on Psalms, on Proverbs, and on Ecclesiastes. Since these two logoi are keys to interpreting the Book of God it is important to be clear what Evagrius means by them.

Evagrius employs the term “providence” (pronoia) to highlight both the divine gift of free will[15] and God’s ongoing provision to reasoning beings (logikoi) of what each requires in order to return to divine union.[16] God’s providential care is always mediated, transmitted to the different ranks of the logikoi chiefly by other (usually higher-ranking) logikoi.  All the logikoi, especially those above the human level, are entrusted with responsibility for mediating divine providence to those beneath them. [17]  At the summit of this great cascade of divine compassion is Christ “who keeps watch over all”.[18] The gnostikos’ progress in contemplation enables him to share in the providential “angelic practice”[19] of praying for others,[20] aiding them in their spiritual struggle,[21] and curing[22] by teaching them how to increase in virtue and knowledge. The knowledge he communicates carries with it, in turn, an impulse, almost a compulsion, to assist others.[23] Thus the logos of providence enables the gnostikos both to bear in mind God’s constant ministering presence in all human circumstances and to recall that grace is mediated, often by friends, acquaintances, abbas and ammas and even angels who facilitate those acts of free choice that enable reasoning beings to make spiritual progress. In serving as a spiritual guide the gnostikos always proceeds from the conviction that God’s providential guidance is somehow perceptible, however obscurely, in all human circumstances, even in what is perceived as abandonment by God. [24]

For Evagrius the logos of “judgment” (krisis) does not refer to punishment or condemnation: it describes, instead, God’s gift to all reasoning beings of the bodies and environments (“worlds”) they require in order to make spiritual progress.[25] “Judgment” describes a series of progressive transformations. The first ‘judgment’ was God’s original, providential creation of the material universe in response to the kinesis or fall of the reasoning beings he had brought into being. Subsequent to this first judgment all reasoning beings undergo a series of transformations at which each receives a new body and environment suited to its changed spiritual state. The final “judgment” designates that complete transformation which will restore all things to union with God. Evagrius’ use of the term judgment, krisis, may reflect ancient medical vocabulary, where Hippocrates and Galen used it as a technical term to describe a “critical period” that heralds a change leading either to improvement or deterioration in the patient’s condition.[26] Evagrius similarly uses krisis to describe a fundamental transformation that facilitates movement either upwards towards virtue and knowledge or downwards into vice and ignorance. Meditation on the logos of judgment thus enables the gnostikos to interpret the rich diversity of the cosmos, including the unique qualities and circumstances of each person, as God’s gracious gift of a specific environment and body that will best facilitate the return of each reasoning being to that divine unity from which all have fallen. The complexity and variety of creation and of human experience thus should serve as a constant reminder to the gnostikos of the diverse paths and circumstances that lead to God.

Light of the Nous

Evagrius undertook a journey in the company of Ammonius to consult with John of Lycopolis (or “of the Thebaid”) on the question whether the inner “light of the nous” perceived during contemplation is a reflection of the divine light, or whether  it arises from the inherent luminosity of the nous itself (Antirrhetikos 6.16). John did not commit himself to a definitive answer; however, in this kephalaion Evagrius suggests three possible sources of the light: [1] reflection (“knowledge”) of or “mixture with” the divine light (cf. KG 1.35, 2.29; 3.52; Skemm.27); [2] the incorporeal nature of the nous (KG 3.44); [3] the act of contemplating beings (KG 5.15; 1.81). On the light of the nous: cf. KG 1.74;  KG 1.81; Sc.Prov.258; On Prayer 74 & 75.; P.Log. 17, 39, 40 & 42; Skem 2;  4;  23; 25; 27; Letter 39.5.

[summary:]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 75; Thoughts/Peri.Log. 17, 39, 40, 42; Skem. 2, 4, 23, 25, 27; Letter 39.5; Antiret. 6.16.

[corrected for distribution:] 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 75; Thoughts/Peri.Log. 17, 39, 40, 42; Skem. 2, 4, 23, 25, 27; Letter 39.5; Antiret. 6.16.

.”  In several texts Evagrius describes this “spiritual vision” of “purified nature” as the light or radiance of the nous[1],

Praktikos 64: “The proof of apatheia is that the nous begins to behold the gentle radiance proper to it,” SC 171,648.

Gnostikos 45: “... those who are also able at the time of prayer to contemplate the light of their nous illuminating them.,” SC 356, 178.

On Prayer, 75: “The angel of the Lord [...] moves the light of the nous to undeviating activity.’ PG 79,1183.

Antirrhetikos 6.16: “the intellect also cannot be illuminated while praying without the grace of God,” Frankenberg, 525.  [John of Lycopolis offers his opinion here]:

Skemmata 2: “If any would see the state of their nous, let them deprive themsel[ves] of all concepts (noemata)[:] and then they will see themselves like a sapphire or the color of heaven; (Exod. 24:10) but this cannot be accomplished without apatheia, since it requires the cooperation of God who breathes into them the kindred light,” Muyldermans, “Evagriana,” Le Muséon 44, 38.

Letter 39.6: “... another heaven, where the vision is of light and of the “spiritual place,” where the grand logoi of beings are seen and where the holy angels gather among those who are worthy.”

most clearly in Peri Logismon:

When the nous  has stripped off “the old man” and put on that [which comes] from grace, (cf. Col. 3:9-10)  then it will see its own state at the time of prayer, like a sapphire or the color of heaven, which Scripture calls the place of God that was seen by the elders under Mount Sinai (cf. Exod. 24:20).Peri Logismon 39 SC 438, (1998) 286-288 (cf. Skemmata 2).

            In the next sentence Evagrius describes this vision of the sapphire “place of God” as the consequence of the ascetical practice and successive replacement of thoughts he has recommended to Anatolius:

The nous is incapable of seeing the place of God within itself unless it is raised above all the concepts [noemata] of external objects.  But it will not be raised up unless it strips off the passions chaining it down with concepts [noemata] of sensory objects.  And as it lays aside passions through the virtues, the more subtle tempting-thoughts are laid aside through spiritual contemplations; and these, in turn are laid aside when there appears to it the light that imprints it with the place of God at the time of prayer.[3]

            Evagrius elsewhere calls this vision of the nous as the place of God “resurrection”.  In the Kephalaia Gnostica he describes a threefold resurrection: from vice to virtue, (“resurrection of the body”); from subjection by the passions to apatheia,(“resurrection of the soul)  and from ignorance to the state of spiritual knowledge (“resurrection of the nous).[4]

CHRIST THE BRIDEGROOM

Letter 25:6.b. Nevertheless, “fight the good fight” (1Tim 6:12), in order to be “crowned with the wreath of justice” (2 Tim 4:8) and to behold Christ the bridegroom, (Mt 25:1) whom you now seek through good works, which is in actuality the search for the Lord.

In a final sequence of biblical citations Evagrius concludes his letter by joining the military and competitive imagery of praktikē to the contemplative vision of “Christ the bridegroom.”    This brief catena of three texts, which he repeats verbatim with the same explanation in Letter 20.1is a coded reiteration of the threefold ordering of both spiritual progress and biblical exegesis: praktiké; physiké; theologiké.  The “good fight” of 1 Tim. 6:12 describes praktiké, the “fight” against tempting thoughts to attain apatheia.  The “crown of justice” is a metaphor Evagrius frequently employs as a symbol of contemplation and spiritual knowledge.[2]  Since Origen’s third-century commentary and homilies on the Song of Songs “Christ the bridegroom” had become a widely-used means of describing the soul’s union with of God. [3]  However, despite this increasing popularity of nuptial metaphor among Christian thinkers, Evagrius is surprisingly sparing in his own use of spousal imagery: it is only here and in seven other texts that he deliberately invokes the image of Christ as bridegroom:

Sentences for Virgins, 11, 43, 52, 55;

Peri Logismón 42;

Letter 20,1;

Scholion 256 On Proverbs 23:18.

  Of these a close parallel to his use here is Peri Logismon 42, where Evagrius describes the allegorical “eye” of the nous that is able at the time of prayer to “contemplate the blessed light of the holy Trinity” and thus “ravish the heart of the bridegroom.”Peri Logismon 42, SC 432 (1998), 296-297

DIVINE_DISTRACTION

[Central/focal image in Thoughts - Sheep to Shepherd - seek to see the logoi in created things - striveto look further  upwards to apprehend true logos.  [In spir dire do this with people and their histories]

Schol.42 on Eccl.5.17; knowledge of God is joy, food of soul, divine distraction

Schol.45 on Eccl.5.19  Distraction of/from God is true knowledge that separates from objects of sense

Schol.15 on Eccl 3; God gives distractions that become like biblical texts, leading to contemplation of the logoi

[Schol.40 on Eccl.5.13; Evil distraction]   [FIND ALSO - IMPASSIONED empathe distraction peispasmos - or is it impassioned noemata? esp. in On Prayer

[Good Logismoi and Theorémata]

Add Scholion 256 on Prov. 23.18: Proper logismoi and spiritual contemplations (theorémata) are said to be the descendants of the nous; and thus the soul is said to be barren (childless) that does not have these descendants, which are naturally engendered by the spiritual bridegroom

Thoughts 4;  Thoughts 8 .  diff, betw, angelic, human, and demonic thoughts (logismoi);    There is also an activity of the memory that is not demonic: it is caused by ourselves or by the angelic powers;  28, angelic dreams reveal logoi;  28, contemplation of all ages, from apatheia to "wings of knowledge" from "Holy Dove" [?=angels/Holy Spirit?;]  31;  logismoi: angelic, freely-willed, natural;   41 imprinting and non-imprinting noemata;   17 Noemata of this worls given as sheep to shepherd;  l

:Schol 1 on Ps 137.1   (psalm/hymn; chant without distraction - attend to meaning - or .. .;  [[cf Sch 79 on Pd 118.71;  stamped and unstamped  Sch 1 on Ps 140.2(1)]]

UNDISTRACTED PRAYER On Prayer 17; On Prayer 35; On Prayer 118  [75 Angel with single word moves light of nous to UNDEVIATING activity;  142 not simply words but angelic practice and divine knowledge]]
Praktikos 63, Praktikos 69    [24 on angels suggesting spiritual desires.hedone;    76 on presence of Angels give spiritual contemplation; 80 cannot withstand angelic logismoi];

Schol.15 on Eccl 3.;  Schol.40 on Eccl.5.13;  Schol.42 on Eccl.5.17;  Schol.45 on Eccl.5.19

:Schol 1 on Ps 137.1   (psalm/hymn; chant without distraction - attend to meaning - or .. .;  [[cf Sch 79 on Pd 118.71;  stamped and unstamped  Sch 1 on Ps 140.2(1)]]

On Prayer 17; On Prayer 35; On Prayer 118  [75 Angel with single word moves light of nous to UNDEVIATING activity;  142 not simply words but angelic practice and divine knowledge]]

Praktikos 63, Praktikos 69    [24 on angels suggesting spiritual desires.hedone;    76 on presence of Angels give spiritual contemplation; 80 cannot withstand angelic logismoi];

Thoughts 4;  Thoughts 8 .  diff, betw, angelic, human, and demonic thoughts (logismoi);    There is also an activity of the memory that is not demonic: it is caused by ourselves or by the angelic powers;  28, angelic dreams reveal logoi;  28, contemplation of all ages, from apatheia to "wings of knowledge" from "Holy Dove" [?=angels/Holy Spirit?;]  31;  logismoi: angelic, freely-willed, natural;   41 imprinting and non-imprinting noemata;   17 Noemata of this worls given as sheep to shepherd;  l

CONTRASTS

ANGER

Anger /thumos: Prak. 11, 15, 20, 22, 23; 24; 38 62; 63, 73. Gnost. 4, 5;  10, 45. Thoughts 2, 9, 10, 16, 19, 24, 25, 27, 32, 34, 42.  Prayer 64. Skemmata 9, 23; 24; 43. ad.Mon.109.  ad Virg 8.  KG 1.68, 3.34,  4.38; 4.47; 5.11, 5.27, 6.63.  Eulogius 5; 6, 7;  9,  17; 18.  Letter 27, 56,   Antirr. 5, 5.6, 5.8, 5.12, 5.32.  Sch.60 on Prov.5.9;  Scholia: 4 on Ps 6.8(1);  25 on Ps 17.49;  7 on Ps 30.10;  9 on Ps.73.19; 1 on. Ps 131.1.  Eight Thoughts 9, 10

DEMONS

Composition: KG 1.68; 4.37, 6.25, 6.26; Antirr. 4.22. Actions: KG 5.18, 3.78. Perception: KG 5.78, 6.2, 6.69. Bitterness: Antirr. prl.4; Eulogius 22. Interactions with human beings: KG 1.22, 1.57, 1.68; 2.14; 3.4, 3.50, 3.76, 3.78; 4.13; 5.11; 6.69, Permissible Insult (hatred) of: KG 5.47; Thoughts 19. Battles with demons: Prak. 21, 34, 48, 54, 58, 63, 73, 83; Gnost.25, 44; KG 3.41; cf. Prak. 24, 76; Antirr.4.22.

Merciless “subterranean demons”, frightening even to the other demons whom they torture: KG 4.33. Sch 1 On Ps 55.2;  Sch 5 On Ps 62.10-11;  Sch 10 On Ps 68.15;  Sch 8 On Ps 70.20;  Sch 13 On Ps 76.13(2);  Sch 8 On Ps 103.9;  Sch 5 On Ps 118.7; See esp. Sch 2 On Ps 134.6;  Cf. Prayer 104.

CREATION of WORLDS in Nous

The ability of the purified nous to fashion worlds is explained in KG 5.81, KG 5.12 (cf. KG 5.41 5.42). as a contemplative perception rather than a power of physical creation. Evagrius explains this in detail in Schol 15 on Eccl. 3,10-13, commenting on Eccl 3.11, He has placed the world (or age aiona) within his heart. See also Peri Logismon (Thoughts) 17. and Skemmata (Reflections) 39 , 38, and 14: here a characteristic of the anchorite. Pure hearts enter the “field” that is contemplation of the noetic world: Sch.291 on Prov.24.27. cf. Sch.38 on Eccl.5.7-11.

XXX

Humility: esp. Prayer 96. Cf. Prak. 33, 57, 58; Gnost. 28; Thoughts 23; KG 4.73; Sch.1 on Ps.89.3; Prayer 135. 

Pride: Prak. 6, 13, 14, 33, 57. Thoughts 1, 14, 18, 21, 23; Antirhet 8; Skemm 40, 41, 44, 49, 57

Vainglory: Prak 6, 13, 30. 31. 32, 57. 58;  KG 5.86; Thoughts 14, 15, 17, 21, 28, 29, 30; On thoughts of priesthood as source of vainglory: Prak 13, Thoughts 21, 28; Ant 7.3, 7.8, 7.26. 7.36, 7.40.

XXX

This Webpage was created for a workshop held at Saint Andrew's Abbey, Valyermo, California in 2001....x.....  ’ “”.