Питання щодо проявлення «містичного світла» на прикладі давньоцерковної християнської містики
Лисенко, Олександр Віталійович
Лысенко, Александр Витальевич
MetadataShow full item record
The research object of this article is a process of origin of «Tabor Light» in a man, and the immanent and transcendent mechanisms of such origin. The fundamental differences in understanding and interpretation of sense-image of «Tabor Light» in the religious and mystical tradition of the Orthodox Christianity appear with the differentiation of spiritual (mystical) experience into the abstractspeculative (Clement of Alexandria, Dionysius the Areopagite), and moralpractical (Origen, Evagrius of Pontus, Macarius Egyptian, Maximus the Confessor, Isaac Sirin, Simeon the New Theologian). In the first area the central point is the doctrine of God as the central monad, namely the divine light — fotismos — is understood primarily through Gnostic enlightenment and some simplification, which is just a moment of deification, the return of the human spirit from the «sense- phenomenal world» into the qualitativeless bosom of substantial being in the act of speculative metaphysical ecstasy. Activity of the Logos is seen only in terms of descending powers of heaven and earth hierarchy of ranks, rather than separate and apart. In moral and practical direction of dominance there is an intimate experience — a sense of divine light as a certain quality of life. Here, in the act of mystical love (erotes — ahapes) alive and God-creative communication of the soul with Christ takes place in spiritual travail feat. Catharsis as the primary necessary condition of deification in moral and practical direction is replaced by praxis — the ethical foundation of asceticism. Fotismos — appearing in the human soul of Christ in transfigured form — performs separate functions in terms of moral and practical direction, but is not a symbol of the Divine Monad, as the representatives of abstract and speculative direction thought. Hence, the deification in moral and practical direction of the ancient church mystics is understood as the product of direct communication of the soul with the personality of God the Son, the culmination of which is the identification with the second hypostasis without loss of individual identity as opposed to metaphysical ecstasy, leading to the divine monad in abstract speculative way. If the abstract speculative area, that has experienced significant influence of Neoplatonism, recognizes the priority of ecstatic mind-conceiving (with some negation of other modes of human attitude to reality ) and defines «Tabor Light» exactly as an attribute of the divine nature, which appears through the steps of elimination of the nature of reality, the maximum simplification and involving into the Divine being, the second variant of mystical experience characterizes a higher and more differentiated level of development of Christian consciousness and self-consciousness. Moral and practical direction, without diminishing the value of the Christian Logos, recognizes the feeling of love as the driving force of the spiritual and mystical development. Human cognitive abilities are not offset by representatives of this trend, but, rather, human essence is imagined as consciously disclosed in maximum fullness. And that is the «Tabor Light» that is understood as essential creative of Logos — Second Hypostasis of the Holy Trinity in the soul of the believer. In this case, the person is involved into the Being of the Divine Trinity (not impersonal monad), and it is precisely because of unification and identification with the essence of Christ, which also serves as the ultimate goal of deification.Предметом исследования является процесс возникновения «Фаворского света» в человеке, а также имманентные и трансцендентные механизмы его происхождения. Фундаментальные различия в понимании и трактовании «Фаворского света» в религиозно-мистической традиции православия возникают с размежеванием направлений духовного (мистического) опыта на абстрактно-спекулятивный (Климент Александрийский, Дионисий Ареопагит) и нравственно-практический (Ориген, Евагрий Понтийский, Макарий Египетский, Максим Исповедник, Исаак Сирин, Симеон Новый Богослов). Сравнительный анализ этих направлений и является главным заданием работы.