Evagrius’ understanding of the spiritual life has been succinctly summarized as ‘the mind’s long journey to the Holy Trinity’.[1] This journey can be envisioned as a helix, a geometrical form which combines both linear direction and circular movement.[2] The linear motion consists of ‘progress’ (προκοπή) or ‘ascent’ (anabasis /ἀνάβασις) towards God which is at the same time characterized by a ‘circular’ movement between the poles of praktiké (ἡ πρακτική) and theoretiké (ἡ θεωρητική): that is, between the ascetical (‘ethical’ or ‘practical’) life and the contemplative life. Fundamental to Evagrius’ model of spiritual progress is his conviction that the Christian praktikos πρακτικός or ascetic should mature into a γνωστικός, a ‘knower’ or ‘sage’ skilled in contemplation and capable of imparting spiritual knowledge. He describes sequential levels or stages of spiritual progress, but he does not thereby imply that it is possible to completely rise above the praktiké and ‘graduate’ from the quest for virtue. As the praktikos makes progress he learns to perceive the work of asceticism from an increasingly contemplative perspective.[3] And since the struggle against certain passions continues until the very moment of death,[4] even the mature gnostikos must continually advance in virtue, practicing ascetical vigilance.[5] Thus the journey towards God is not a simply a movement beyond praktiké into theoretiké: spiritual progress includes a gentle oscillation between these two poles in such a way that continuing attention to the changing demands of praktiké yields ever greater contemplative refreshment

      This terminology was already well-established in Evagrius’ day. The distinction between ὁ βίος πρακτικός and ὁ βίος θεωρητικός stems from Plato and Aristotle,[6] and had already been used to describe monastic communities by Philo of Alexandria in the first century. [7] Similarly, the Christian gnostikos who attains charity (ἀγάπη) and ‘dispassion’ (ἀπάθεια) is a prominent theme in Clement of Alexandria’s depiction of the idealized Christian who ascends through asceticism to contemplation.[8] Thus Evagrius’ description of the ascetical praktikos and the contemplative gnostikos is not his own invention:[9] his contribution consists, rather, in his analysis of the interrelationship between the two poles of spiritual life which these titles represent, and in his augmentation of an earlier simple, bipartite model through the application to it of exegetical categories which Clement of Alexandria had described and which Origen later employed to illustrate the soul’s journey towards God.[10]

      Evagrius presents in detail his model of the spiritual life in his trilogy of Praktikos, Gnostikos, and Kephalaia Gnostica. In the Praktikos he identifies praktiké with monastic ascesis and he describes in detail both the battle against tempting thoughts (λογισμοί) and the monk’s quest for the virtues. This struggle is meant to culminate in love and apatheia, freedom from domination by the passions. In the Gnostikos Evagrius describes the Christian contemplative, who is not necessarily a monk; the gnostikos is, rather, a biblical exegete and spiritual teacher. The Kephalaia Gnostica is a spiritual workbook containing proverbs intended for meditation by the gnostikos. The divisions of the spiritual life described in these texts can be illustrated as follows:

      The praktiké is the most basic level and corresponds to ethical instruction. Evagrius refers to the contemplative level of spiritual life as either gnostiké or theoretiké, reflecting his equation of spiritual knowledge with contemplation.[11] The gnostiké is subdivided into contemplation (or knowledge) of God in creation (φυσική) and contemplation of the divine nature (θεωλογική).[12] Before describing in more detail Evagrius’ model of praktiké and gnostiké it will be helpful to consider first the psychological, anthropological, and cosmic contexts or “arenas” in which spiritual progress takes place.

1.3.2.1 The Praktiké - Ascetical Practice

      Evagrius’ understanding of ὁ βίος πρακτικός differs that of most of his predecessors[32] in that he means by it, not manual labor, social activity, or external activity of any sort, but rather the inner work of moral improvement and purification of the thoughts. Evagrius’ principal treatise on this fundament of spiritual life, The Praktikos, is also subtitled The Monk, since for Evagrius the praktiké is identical with monastic ascesis. The process of spiritual purification which constitutes the praktiké entails inner warfare with the demons, which Evagrius calls ‘the opposing powers’ (αἱ ἀντικείμεναι δυνάμεις).[33] Demonic attacks usually take the form of λογισμοί, thoughts or mental images which tempt the monk to sin. Evagrius believed that demons cannot read human minds and that they therefore have no direct access to the innermost thoughts of their victims. Nevertheless, they are skilled at interpreting external expressions which reveal the inner dispositions of human beings,[34] and they are able to set the memory in motion and to form ‘strange fantasies’ in the nous. νοῦς.[35] More rarely, usually in the case of hermits and those who are spiritually advanced, the demons may attack the monk physically and cause bodily harm.

      The labors of the praktiké are rewarded by God with the birth of love and the gift of apatheia, ‘dispassion’ or ‘freedom from compulsion’. Apatheia does not mean freedom from temptation, since Evagrius emphasizes that certain temptations will continue until death.[36] Rather, it refers to freedom from the inner storm of ‘passions’,[37] irrational drives which in their extreme forms would today be called obsessions, compulsions, or addictions. According to Evagrius, apatheia will be present in varying degrees in regard to different passions. Since the art of resisting temptation must be practiced until death, that part of the praktiké which consists of this art must be regarded as continuing throughout life, as well. Thus although Evagrius often describes ‘progress’ from the praktiké to the gnostiké, he does not mean by this that the praktiké is a spiritual phase or stage which can be wholly transcended; rather, it is a training period during which essential skills are learned, skills which are necessary for spiritual growth and which must be continuously practiced throughout life.

1.3.2.2 The Praktikos, Student of the Self

      As Evagrius describes in Peri Logismon 17, cited above, the inner world of νοήματα, ‘the concepts of this present age’, are not only the soul’s responsibility, its charges; they are also its source of spiritual nourishment: ‘from these sheep he is fed and clothed’.[38] The ‘shepherd’ is required to both protect and to learn from his ‘sheep’: in order to defend them he must understand the nature of the different noemata with which the mind is filled. Evagrius constantly emphasizes the need to distinguish between demonic logismoi and the noemata which come from angels or from neutral sense-perception.[39] While angels provide noemata as spiritual food, demons employ the ‘wolf-like’ logismoi to pervert the natural powers of the soul and to lead it into error:

Δεῖ οὖν τὸν ἀναχωροῦντα φυλάττειν νύκτωρ, καὶ μεθ´ η῾με´ραν τοῦτο τὸ ποίμνιον, μήτι τῶν νοημάτων γένηται θηριάλωτον, ἢ λῃσταῖς περιπέσῃ, εἰ δὲ ἄρα τι τοιοῦτο συμβαίη κατὰ τὴν νάπην, εὐθέως ἐξαρπάζειν ἐκ τοῦ στόματος τοῦ λέοντος ἢ τῆς ἄρκτου.

Γίνεται δὲ τὸ νόημα τὸ περὶ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ θηριάλωτον, εἰ μετὰ μίσους νέμοι τὸ ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ τὸ περὶ τῆς γυναικὸς, εἰ μετ´ αἰσχρᾶς ἐπιθυμίας στρέφοιτο παρ´ η῾μι῀ν, καὶ τὸ τοῦ ἀργυρίου, καὶ τοῦ χρυσίου, εἰ μετὰ πλεονεξίας αὐλίζοιτο. Καὶ τὰ νοήματα τῶν ἁγίων χαρισμάτων, εἰ μετὰ κενοδοξίας κατὰ διάνοιαν βόσκοιτο· καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων δὲ νοημάτων ὡσαύτως συμβήσεται, κλεπτομένων τοῖς πάθεσιν.[40]

Ιτ ισ τηερεφορε προπερ φορ τηε ανξηοριτε το γυαρδ τηισ φλοξκ ατ νιγητ ανδ βψ δαψ, σο τηατ τηε ξονξεπτσ αρε νειτηερ ξαυγητ βψ ωιλδ βεαστσ νορ φαλλ ιντο τηιεῃεσ’ ηανδσ· ιφ τηισ σηουλδ ηαππεν ιν τηε ωοοδεδ ῃαλλεψ ηε μυστ ιμμεδιατελψ σνατξη [ιτ] φρομ τηε μουτη οφ τηε λιον ορ τηε βεαρ (cf. 1 Sam. 7: 35).

 It is thus that the thought of a brother is caught by wild beasts - if it pastures what is within us with hatred: with regard to a woman, if we turn aside to shameful desire; with regard to gold and silver, if we settle down with greed. And the concepts of the holy gifts [of God are caught by wild beasts] if we mentally graze on vainglory: and the same happens in the case of other concepts if they are plundered by the passions.

      Evagrius here describes different ways in which the soul can be misled. The vices of anger, lust, avarice, and vainglory are presented as the consequences of relaxed vigilance, ‘shameful fantasies’, and failure to properly employ the helpmates of epithumia and thumos. Evagrius’ underlying desire to order and explain the spiritual life is particularly evident in his use of different systems to classify the passions, exemplified here in his depiction of anger, lust, avarice, and vainglory. Of these various systems, his classification based on the eight tempting-thoughts is the most familiar and provides the structure of the Antirrhetikos, De octo spiritibus malitiae, and most of the Praktikos. In these works the λογισμοί (or the demons responsible for them) are ranked as follows: first, gluttony; second, lust; third, avarice; fourth, sadness; fifth, anger; sixth, acedia; seventh, vainglory; and eighth, pride. These roughly correspond to the divisions of the tripartite soul, beginning with the ἐπιθυμητικὸν, moving through the θυμικὸν and concluding with intellectual temptations. This forerunner of the medieval seven deadly sins is not, however, the only system Evagrius employs, nor is it fully comprehensive.[41]

      Evagrius explains these different classifications at length in order to teach the praktikos the art of discernment, the ability to understand which demon is oppressing him and which remedy he should employ. Evagrius offers a rich variety of spiritual remedies to be applied in times of temptation, most of them consisting of the ordinary tools of monastic ascesis, such as fasting, keeping vigil, intercessory prayer, psalmody, almsgiving, and deeds of compassion. The praktikos is thus both a guardian and a student of the inner world of his own thoughts. He learns to distinguish among his noemata which come from God or the angels and which represent delusions from his enemies. He learns this art from spiritual teachers, from his own experience, and above all from Christ:

νʹ Εἴ τις βούλοιτο τῶν μοναχῶν ἀγρίων πειραθῆναι δαιμόνων καὶ τῆς αὐτῶν τέχνης ἕξιν λαβεῖν, τηρείτω τοὺς λογισμούς, καὶ τὰς ἐπιτάσεις σημειούσθω τούτων, καὶ τὰς ἀνέσεις, […] καὶ ζητείτω παρὰ Χριστοῦ τούτων τοὺς λόγους.[42]

50. If any monk wishes to experience the savage demons and to become acquainted with their art, he should observe his [tempting] thoughts and note [down] their intensification and diminution […] and he should seek from Christ the logoi (inner meanings) of these things.

      The success of the praktikos is thus dependent on his relationship with Christ. It is through prayer, ‘conversation of the nous with God’,[43] that he receives aid against the enemy[44] and learns from Christ the λόγοι or inner meanings of temptations. The search for these logoi through prayer and through pondering the words and example of Christ in the Scriptures is one of the means by which the ascetical  praktikos becomes a contemplative or gnostikos.

1.3.2.3 The Gnostiké - The Science of Contemplation

      The realm of contemplation and spiritual knowledge which Evagrius calls theoretiké and gnostiké extends beyond the realm of the praktiké, the inner world of thoughts and temptations, to embrace the whole of creation and even the creator himself. In the act of contemplation the nous employs ‘spiritual senses’ to apprehends intelligible realities not apparent to the physical senses.[45] This noetic vision is a participation in the realities perceived, and it has the power to effect change in the nous:

Ὥσπερ αἱ αἰσθήσεις ἀλλοιοῦται διαφόρων ἀντιλαμβανόμεναι ποιοτήτων,

οὕτω καὶ ὁ νοῦς ἀλλοιοῦται ποικίλαις θεωρίαις ἐνατενίζων ἀεί.

Just as the senses are changed through being receptive of different qualities,

so also the nous is changed, through constantly gazing at multiform contemplations. [46]

      Evagrius believed that the mind is stamped, like wax receiving an imprint, by the thoughts or images which it chooses to receive into itself. This is particularly true of logismoi, tempting thoughts of demonic origin;[47] but as this text from the Kephalaia Gnostica makes clear, it is also true of pure, elevated contemplations. The highest of the noemata, the thought of God himself, by its nature leaves the mind unstamped since God is incorporeal.[48] The Christian must exercise care and discernment in choosing subject matter for contemplation, since the change in the nous which contemplation effects is of supreme importance for the journey of the nous towards God:

III.42. Contemplation is

spiritual knowledge of the things which have been and will be:

it is this which causes the nous to ascend to its first rank.[49

      Evagrius’ gnostikos discovers that the journey towards God is actually a return of the nous to the God from whom it has fallen away. Through contemplation the nous is able to re-ascend to its original τάξις, its ‘first rank’.[50] However, as he explains elsewhere, this return of the nous to its primordial state is impossible apart from Christ. Unaided the nous cannot rise above the world of sin and death to which it is subject. Re-ascent to its first rank is only possible because of what God accomplished through the incarnation, death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ. Through his incarnation we

 are brought to a new birth and freed from sin.[51] Similarly, the descent of God into death and Christ’s ascension to the Father is what makes possible our ascent:

(56) he descended (?Tk = καταβαίνω[52]) and endured all that we had acquired since we stepped out of our nature: that is, everything from conception to death […] (58) Since we have corrupted our nature by our free will, we have come to our present conception and birth which are subject to the curse. But he, remaining what he is, by his grace has taken upon himself with birth all that follows birth until death […] He frees us from them in that he who had not sinned took these things voluntarily upon himself; for we are unable to ascend (?pk = ἀναβαίνω[53]) above them by ourselves […] But not only did he not remain in [things subject to the curse], but he also enables us to ascend (?o@= ἀναβαίνω[54]) out of them; because he, as we said, descended (?Tk) to them in his love - not because of [his] sin.[55]

      In this text intended for a very advanced gnostikos,[56] Evagrius presents the soteriological basis for his theology of contemplation. Through the incarnation God has ‘taken upon himself’ human birth and death, and all that lies between them. Evagrius contrasts God’s providential and compassionate descent (κατάβασις) with the impossibility of our unaided ascent, our ἀνάβασις, a term Evagrius often employs to describe the contemplative’s ascent to lofty spiritual teaching and the vision of God.[57] Thus the contemplative ascent of the nous is predicated on the descent of God into our ‘conception, birth, and death’ followed by the ascension (ἀνάβασις) of Christ to the Father.

      Similarly Evagrius writes in Peri Logismon of the risen Christ who in his turn ‘raises up the reasoning soul’ to contemplation ‘of all the ages’.[58]    This ‘contemplation of the ages’ is the discipline of physiké, the contemplation of God in creation, ‘that which has come into being’ (θεωρία τῶν γεγονότων). By this Evagrius generally means the contemplation of created beings possessing a nous, rather than the contemplation of inanimate matter or non-rational living things.[59] It is with the origin and fate of intellects that Evagrius is chiefly concerned: his interest in non-rational creation extends chiefly to the presence within all created things of the hidden logoi, the inner ‘meanings’ or purposes of the creator which the gnostikos can learn to perceive.[60] Two of the most importantof these, the logoi of providence and judgment, will be discussed in detail in chapter 6.2

        Every hierarchy of phenomena and beings in the created order can serve as an object of contemplation by the gnostikos, depending on his level of spiritual maturity. The interior world of human psychology, understood within the framework of the Platonic tripartite soul, becomes in Evagrius’ system a reflection of the great cosmic drama. Although the nous has fallen from essential knowledge and from union with God, it nevertheless most closely resembles our unfallen state and bears the image of God. The nous interacts with the material universe by means of the soul, which Evagrius specifically identifies with τὸ παθητικὸν, the part of the self subject to passion.[61]

      Evagrius encourages the gnostikos to use the scriptures as a starting point in reflecting on the significance of natural phenomena, human relationships and history, and the various ranks of angels and demons. He encourages a progressive ascent, corresponding to one’s own inner spiritual progress, from contemplation of things perceptible by the senses to intelligible realities perceptible only by the nous. However Evagrius is not always consistent in the contemplative vocabulary he uses to describe this movement. On the one hand he encourages ascent from the contemplation of corporeal [beings] (ἡ θεωρία τῶν σωμάτων) to that of ‘incorporeals’ (τῶν ἀσωμάτων);[62] and in certain texts he makes it clear that by ‘incorporeals’ he means angels and perhaps other celestial beings such as stars.[63] Yet he also teaches that all the logikoi have been united to bodies since the fall, and that none are therefore fully incorporeal.[64] Thus in regard to the contemplation of angels Evagrius often uses the term ‘incorporeals’ in a rather loose way to refer to beings whose bodies are less coarse and material than our own.

      Even more ambiguous is Evagrius’ description of progress from ‘second’ to ‘first’ natural contemplation, terminology he employs in ten chapters of the Kephalaia Gnostica but in no other texts.[65] He associates second natural contemplation with the diversity of creation and with Christ, the author of that diversity; linking it to St. Paul’s praise of ‘the manifold wisdom of God’ in Ephesians 3:10 (ἡ πολυποίκιλος σοφία τοῦ θεου). First natural contemplation is an intermediate step between second natural contemplation and knowledge of the Blessed Trinity.[66] Evagrius does not clearly define

 the subject matter of first natural contemplation, but he appears to associate it with both ‘the knowledge concerning the logikoi, [67]) and knowledge (?sK[= γνῶσις[68]) ‘of the person of Christ’.[69]

      Four different interpretations of the ascent from second to first natural contemplation have been suggested. The first is that the distinction between these two levels corresponds to the aforementioned (inexact) distinction between corporeals and incorporeals, and thus refers to the respective contemplation of earthy and celestial beings in their current embodied state.[70] A second interpretation is that first natural contemplation refers to the perception experienced by angels; second natural contemplation is the name given to that experience when it is enjoyed by human beings.[71] A third suggestion is that second natural contemplation has as its subject matter the results of the fall, namely the second, material creation, while first natural contemplation is concerned with the first creation of incorporeals, interpreting the word ‘incorporeals’ in its strict sense as the logikoi in their original, naked state of union with God.[72] According to this third interpretation, first natural contemplation is the attempt to peer beyond the confines of time, back into the first creation and forward into its eschatological restoration.[73] A fourth interpretation is that first natural contemplation does not concern the logikoi or any other aspect of creation in itself, but is rather contemplation of their concealed logoi, the divine intentions and meanings which all created things contain.[74] Still less clearly defined are Evagrius’ occasional references to ‘third natural contemplation’.[75]

      Despite this ambiguity in Evagrius’ definitions of first and second natural contemplation, it is clear that his spiritual doctrine includes all four models of contemplative ascent described above. These different levels of contemplation reflect his conviction that the gnostikos should engage in contemplation corresponding to his level of spiritual maturity, that is to the degree to which he has begun to experience restored union with God. Evagrius describes means by which the contemplative can inwardly become more simple and immaterial, more like what he is destined to be in eternity, namely a ‘naked nous’ reunited with God. The Christian at prayer should rise from material concerns ‘towards formless and immaterial knowledge’ (πρὸς ἄϋλον καὶ ἀνείδεον γνῶσιν).[76] He should strive always to see the real purposes (logoi) of God beneath the complexity of external appearances, returning constantly to the knowledge that union with God is his origin and his destiny.

      As the nous advances in its understanding of the deeper purposes of God in ‘all that has been and will be’, it will increase in its capacity to perceive God himself and it will ultimately be rewarded with ‘knowledge of the Holy Trinity’, [77] which in the present age only Christ possesses; [78] but which he will ultimately share with all. At the summit of Evagrius’ model of Christian spirituality is theologia, contemplation of the divine nature and union with God. To describe the action of Christ in effecting this state Evagrius, like Athanasius, writes of the divinization of humankind:

(60) He, namely the ‘leaven’ of deity, who in his mercy has concealed himself in the unleavened dough of mankind, has (yet) not only not spoiled his nature and his taste and his power, but thoroughly leavened the whole mass of dough with all that is his […] (61) Thus in the same way as this one [became] human for their sake, so also those on his account [become] God.[79]

      To describe this ultimate state and the stages which precede it Evagrius attempts to formulate a vocabulary of Christian contemplation. One distinctive feature of this vocabulary is his tendency to use the terms gnosis and theoria almost interchangeably. In the Scholia on Psalms Evagrius states, ‘gnosis is contemplation of the Blessed

 Trinity.’[80] In the text from Kephalaia Gnostica III.42 cited above he turns this definition around and defines theoria (A[�N?) as a particular kind of spiritual gnosis (?sK[).[81] This definition of contemplation as ‘knowledge of things which have been and will be’ had already been suggested by Clement of Alexandria in the Stromateis.[82] For Evagrius both theoria and gnosis, spiritual vision and spiritual knowledge, are terms which describe the proper activity of the nous. However, although Evagrius uses these terms interchangeably when describing the contemplation of creation, he tends to prefer gnosis to theoria when describing the highest levels of contemplation, namely the direct apprehension of God. Thus in describing Christ’s knowledge of the Father which we are destined to share he generally employs the terms ‘essential knowledge’ (γνῶσις οὐσιώδης) and ‘knowledge of the Trinity’, and less commonly ‘contemplation’ (θεωρία) of God or the Trinity.[83]

1.3.2.4 The Gnostikos, Exegete and Teacher

      Evagrius believed that progress in contemplation entails responsibility for the spiritual progress of others.  The principal textbook of spiritual progress is the Bible: thus Evagrius’ gnostikos is a biblical exegete who searches the scriptures for beneficial insights. He must be able to ‘give a word to each, according to his worth’.[84] In order to do this he must become completely familiar with all the levels of meaning contained in the scriptures, from ethical instruction, through the contemplation of creation, to the mysteries of the Trinity. He must understand spiritual ‘definitions’ and the customary expressions of scripture (Gnostikos 17 and 19),

as well as the rules for allegorical exegesis (Gnostikos 18, 20, and 21). In the scriptures the gnostikos discovers a symbolic world of history and story that helps him to express both the ‘ethical’ insights he learned as a praktikos and the new mysteries of creation he is exploring as a contemplative.

      An important pattern for Evagrius’ gnostikos is the work of the angels. The angels exemplify and symbolize the gnostiké: they behold the face of God; they understand the deep logoi of God; their bodies and thoughts are simple and pure; and they mediate God’s providence, guiding those below them back towards God. Quoting Jesus’ term for the sons of the resurrection in Luke 20:36, Evagrius describes the monk who attains true prayer while yearning for the heavenly father’s face as ἰσάγγελος, ‘equal to the angels’.[85] The gnostikos who engages in ‘angelic practice’ and seeks divine gnosis[86] must also share in the angels’ work of mediation by praying for others,[87] by aiding others in their spiritual struggle[88] and by curing them.[89]

      This work of spiritual healing is facilitated as the gnostikos learns to apply to his own struggles and those of others the exegetical tools he employs in interpreting the scriptures. He learns to apply in his relations with others the insights and skills he acquires through the praktiké, especially the art of discernment. He is to become ‘salt for the impure and light

 for the pure’.[90] This allusion to the Sermon on the Mount (Mat.5:13-14) implies that the gnostikos must be aware of both the potential and the limitations of those who come to him for advice. He must therefore:

ιε´ Γνώριζε καιρῶν καὶ βίων καὶ ἐπιτηδευμάτων τοὺς λόγους καὶ τοὺς νόμους ἵνα ἔχῃς ἑκάστῳ τὰ συμφέροντα ῥᾳδίως λέγειν.[91]

15. Learn to know the logoi and the laws of circumstances, [ways of] life, and occupations, so that you can easily tell each what is useful for him.

      While the life of the angels offers a model of spiritual progress, the fate of the demons provides a stark reminder of the fate awaiting those who misuse their freedom, ignoring providence and preferring ignorance and vice, and who therefore face an upcoming judgment full of pain and darkness. Evagrius’ version of hell, however, was less threatening than that of classical Jewish and Christian orthodoxy: it resembles medieval versions of purgatory in being something like an agonizing school of correction, to be avoided at all costs,[92] but from which all who are sent there will ultimately emerge.[93] Evagrius was aware that his teaching could be misunderstood and that even if properly understood it might give scandal. He was particularly apprehensive that ‘the logos of judgment’ containing the doctrine of transformations and renewed bodies would be especially suspect. He warns his readers that the gnostikos, the ascetic progressing in contemplation who now considers himself ready to teach others, must be extremely cautious in this regard:      He was well aware that his doctrine of limited, albeit dreadful, suffering after death could have a dangerous effect on immature pupils: thus he advised the γνωστικός to be cautious in his teaching and to adapt it to the particular circumstances of his hearers.[94]

λς´ Λανθανέτω τοὺς κοσμικοὺς καὶ τοὺς νέους ὁ περὶ κρίσεως ὑψηλότερος λόγος, γεννῶν ῥᾳδίως τὴν καταφρόνησιν· οὐ γὰρ ἴσασιν ὀδύνην ψυχῆς λογικῆς καταδικασθείσης τὴν ἄγνοιαν.[95]

36. [You must] keep hidden from seculars and from the young the more exalted logos concerning judgment, for this easily engenders [their] contempt: they do not understand the suffering of the reasoning soul condemned to ignorance.

      Spiritual knowledge, Evagrius reminds his readers, entails both responsibility and risk. If the gnostikos is incautious in his teaching, and in particular if he speaks boldly and arrogantly concerning matters that are easily misunderstood, then he is guilty of abusing sacred things on the very threshold of the Temple. The careless misuse of these logoi carries grave penalties for the teacher:

 κα´ Πρόσεχε σεαυτῷ μήποτε κέρδους ἕνεκεν ἢ τοῦ εὐπαθεῖν, ἢ δόξης χάριν παρερχομένης, εἴπῃς τι τῶν ἀπορρήτων καὶ βληθῇς ἔξω τῶν ἱερῶν περιόλων, ὡς καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν τῷ ναῷ τὰ τῆς περιστερᾶς τέκνα πιπράσκων.[96]

24. Take care that you never, for the sake of profit, well-being, or fleeting glory, talk about those things which should not be revealed, and [thus] be cast out of the sacred precincts, like those selling the pigeon chicks in the temple. (cf. Mt 21, 12-13).

      Evagrius’ gnostikos must constantly exercise the virtue of prudence and the art of discernment in determining what his hearers may profitably be taught. He must maintain the broadest possible horizon in his contemplative efforts: he must strive to perceive himself and the whole of the cosmos from the perspective of a divine origin and destiny. All multiplicity is to be comprehended as pointing either back in time to the unity from which it fell, or ahead into that restored union towards which it is moving.