Augustine (354 - 430)

Hayagriva dasa: Augustine believed that the soul was spiritual and incorporeal, but he also believed that the soul of an individual does not exist before birth. The soul gains immortality only with the death of the body and then continues to live in eternity.
Srila Prabhupada: If the soul is created, how can it be immortal? How can the soul sometimes not be eternal?
Hayagriva dasa: Augustine used to say that the soul becomes immortal after its creation, but at some point it comes into being.
Srila Prabhupada: Then what does he consider death?
Hayagriva dasa: Augustine recognizes two types of death: physical death, when the soul leaves the body, and soul death, which the soul experiences when God abandons it. When a person is cursed, he faces not only physical death, but also the spiritual death of his soul.
Srila Prabhupada: Figuratively speaking, when a person forgets his place, he experiences something like death, but the soul is eternal. What Augustine calls spiritual death is oblivion. When a person loses consciousness, he forgets who he is, but when he dies, his consciousness will not return to him. Of course, unless a person achieves freedom from material existence, he is spiritually dead even while existing in material form. Forgetting your true essence is a kind of death. But when we live in God consciousness, we are truly alive. In any case, the soul is eternal and survives the destruction of the body.
Hayagriva dasa: Augustine believed that in some cases the state of oblivion becomes eternal.
Srila Prabhupada: This is wrong. Our consciousness can always be revived - this is the belief of the Krishna Consciousness Movement. We say that a person is unconscious during sleep, but if you call him again and again, the sound of his name enters his ear and he wakes up. Likewise, the process awakens us to spiritual consciousness. Then we can live a spiritual life.
Hayagriva dasa: Augustine used to say that God eternally rejects the damned soul, dooming it to eternal torment.
Srila Prabhupada: She may be “forever outcast” in the sense that she may remain in oblivion for millions of years. It may seem like an eternity, but our spiritual consciousness can be revived at any time through good communication, through the method of hearing and chanting.
Therefore devotional service begins with sravanam - hearing. Listening is extremely important, especially in the beginning. If we hear the truth from a self-realized soul, we can awaken to spiritual life and remain spiritually alive in devotional service.
Hayagriva dasa: In The City of God, Augustine mentions two cities, or two societies: demonic and divine. In one city the unifying factor is the love of God and the spirit, while in the other the love of the world and the flesh predominate. Augustine writes: “These are two loves, one of which is holy, and the other unholy; one is universal, and the other is individualistic; one is obedient to God, and the other asserts itself in competition with God.”
Srila Prabhupada: A similar allegory is given in the Srimad-Bhagavatam. The body is compared to a city, and the soul is compared to the king of this city. There are nine gates in the body and the king can leave the city through these gates. A detailed description is given in Srimad-Bhagavatam.

Hayagriva dasa: Augustine seems to recognize the transcendence of God, but denies that the Lord is omnipresent as Paramatma, accompanying each individual soul. He writes: “God is not the soul of all things, but the creator of all souls.”
Srila Prabhupada: Then how do we understand that God is all-pervasive? Paramatma is accepted as the Supersoul in both the Brahma-samhita and the Bhagavad-gita.
upadrashtanumanta ca bharta bhokta mahesvarah
paramatmeti chapy ukto dehe 'smin purusah parah
“There is another in this body, a transcendental enjoyer. It is the Lord, the supreme controller, who supervises the living entity and sanctiones all his activities and who is called the Supersoul” (Bg. 13.23). God is present in every atom.
vishtabhyaham idam krtsnam
ekamshena sthito jagat
“With one part of Myself I pervade and support the entire universe” (Bg. 10.42).
vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvam yaj jnanam advayam
brahmeti paramatmeti bhagavan iti sabdyate
“Learned transcendentalists who have realized the Absolute Truth call this non-dual substance Brahman, Paramatma or Bhagavan” (Bhag. 1.2.11). Of course, God has the potential for omnipresence. There's no denying it.
Hayagriva dasa: Augustine objects to Origen's assertion that the body is like a prison. He writes: “If the opinion of Origen and his followers that matter was created so that souls could be imprisoned in the body, as in a penal colony for sins, had been true, then those whose sins were lighter would have had lighter and exalted bodies, and those whose crimes are great have lower and more severe bodies.”

Srila Prabhupada: The soul, in essence, is an integral part of God, but it is imprisoned in various kinds of bodies. In Bhagavad-gita Krishna says:
sarva-yonisu kaunteya murtayah sambhavanti yah
tasam brahma mahad yonir aham bija pradah pita
“Know, O son of Kunti, that all forms of life are generated by material nature, and I am the father who gives the seed” (Bg. 14.4). Various types come out of the mother, material nature. They are found in earth, water, air and even fire. However, individual souls are integral parts of the Almighty, who fertilizes this material world with them. The living entity then comes to the material world through the womb of some mother. The soul appears to emerge from matter, but it is not made of matter. Souls, eternally part and parcel of God, assume different types of bodies according to their righteous and unrighteous actions or desires. The desires of the soul determine a higher or lower body. In any case, the soul remains the same. Therefore it is said that those who are advanced in spiritual consciousness see the same souls in each individual body, be it the body of a brahmana or a dog.
vidya-vinaya-sampanne brahmane gavi hastini
shuni chaiva shwa-pake ca panditah sama-darshinah
“Humble sages, possessed of true knowledge, look equally upon a learned and well-bred brahmana, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater [untouchable]” (Bg. 5.18).
Hayagriva dasa: Augustine saw Adam as the root of humanity. He writes: “God knew how
It would be beneficial for this society when it is often reminded that the human race has its roots in one person precisely in order to show how pleasing it would be to God if people - although there are many of them - were united.”
Srila Prabhupada: Our Vedic concept is similar. We say that humanity originated from Manu. From Manu we get the Sanskrit word manushyah, which means “descended from Manu” or “human being.” Manu himself comes from Brahma, the first living being. Thus living beings come from other living beings and not from matter. Brahma, in turn, comes from the Supreme Lord as a rajo-guna avatar. Brahma is the incarnation of rajo-guna, the mode of passion. Ultimately, all living beings come from the Supreme Being.
Hayagriva dasa: Like Origen, Augustine believed that the soul is created at a certain moment, but unlike Origen, he denied reincarnation: “It is enough for all these adherents of Plato to frighten us with reincarnation as a punishment for our souls. Transformation is ridiculous. It cannot be that souls return to this world for punishment. If we are created - even mortal - thanks to God, then how can returning to the body - a gift from God - be a punishment?
Srila Prabhupada: Does he really think that if we receive the body of a pig or similar low creature, then this is not a punishment? Why does someone get the body of King Indra or Lord Brahma, and someone get the body of a pig or an insect? What will he say about the pig's body? If the body is a gift from God, then it can also be God's punishment. If a person deserves a reward, he receives the body of Brahma or King Indra, and if he deserves punishment, he receives the body of a pig.
Hayagriva dasa: What can you say about the human body? Is this a gift or a punishment?
Srila Prabhupada: There are many people who are prosperous and those who suffer. Sufferings and pleasures come to us according to the body. As explained in Bhagavad Gita:
matra-sparsas tu kaunteya shitoshna-sukha-duhkha-dah
agamapayino 'nityas tams titikshasva bharata
“O son of Kunti, happiness and sorrow come and go, replacing each other like winter and summer. They arise from the contact of the senses with the objects of perception, O descendant of Bharata, therefore one must learn to bear them patiently, remaining equanimous” (Bg. 2.14). An old person may be very sensitive to cold, while a child may not feel it. Perception is relative and depends on the body. An animal can run without clothes and not feel the cold, but a person cannot. Thus, the source of pleasure and pain is the body. We can view this as either a punishment or a reward.
Hayagriva dasa: According to Augustine, the soul of each individual person is not necessarily sentenced to suffer on earth for its own desires or sins, but for the original sin of Adam, the first man. He writes: “When the first couple (Adam and Eve) were punished by God's judgment, the entire human race... was present in the first man. And what was generated is human nature, not originally created, but what it became after the first sin of their ancestors and the judgment over them - at least this refers to the sinful and mortal principle in people.” In this sense, the individual takes upon himself the karma of the entire family.
Srila Prabhupada: If this is so, then why does he call the body a gift. Why does he say that this is not a punishment? The first person was punished, the person after him was punished, and so on. Sometimes a father's illness is inherited by his son. Isn't this a form of punishment?
Hayagriva dasa: Then the human form is already a punishment in itself?
Srila Prabhupada: Yes. And at the same time, one can view human life as a gift because it is given by God. We should think that if the Lord gave us this body as a punishment, then it is His mercy, because by being punished we can purify ourselves and advance towards God. Devotees think like this. Although this body is a form of punishment, we consider it a reward because by undergoing punishment we are advancing towards God realization. Even if the body is given by God so that we can reform, it can therefore be considered a gift.
Hayagriva dasa: According to Augustine, the physical body precedes the spiritual: “What is sown into the natural body grows the spiritual body. If there is a natural body, then there is also a spiritual body. But the first is not the spiritual, but the physical. The first man was from the earth; the second - from heaven... But the body, which belongs to the life-giving spirit, will become spiritual and immortal and under no circumstances will it be able to die. It will be immortal just as the created soul is immortal.”
Srila Prabhupada: Why does he talk about immortality only in connection with man? Every living being has an immortal body. As we said, entering a mortal body is a form of punishment. The individual undergoes an evolutionary process from lower to higher species. Every soul is part and parcel of God, but due to some sinful activities the living entity comes to the material world. The Bible says that Adam and Eve lost Paradise due to disobedience to God and ended up in the material world. The soul belongs to the celestial paradise, the planets of Krishna, but somehow or other it fell into this material world and accepted a body. According to our activities, we rise or degrade, sometimes becoming a demigod, sometimes a human being, sometimes an animal, sometimes a tree, sometimes a plant. But in any case, the soul always remains away from the material body. This is confirmed in Vedic literature. Our real spiritual life begins when we become free from material contamination, or transmigration.
Hayagriva dasa: Speaking of peace, Augustine writes: “Peace between mortal man and His creator consists in consistent obedience, governed by faith, according to the eternal Law of God; peace between man and man consists in a regulated commonwealth... Peace in the heavenly city consists in a perfectly ordered and harmonious community of those who find their joy in God and in each other in God. Peace in its ultimate meaning is the calm that comes from order.”
Srila Prabhupada: Peace means to come into contact with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. A person in ignorance thinks that he is the enjoyer of this world, but when he comes in contact with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the supreme controller, he understands that the enjoyer is God. We are servants whose purpose is to please God. A servant provides for the needs of his master. Actually the master does not need anything, but he enjoys the company of his servants, who in turn enjoy His company.
A man who serves the people is very happy when he gets a good position in the government, and the master is happy to have a very faithful servant. This is the relationship between the individual soul and God, and when this relationship is broken, the individual soul is said to exist in maya. When this relationship is restored, the individual is in his spiritual consciousness, which we call Krsna consciousness, by which he understands that the Supreme God is the actual enjoyer and owner, as well as the Supreme Being. When we understand the transcendental qualities of God, we become happy and have peace.
Hayagriva dasa: Augustine believed that neither activity nor meditation in itself is enough. It is necessary that one complement the other: “A person should not be so committed to thinking about God that during his thoughts he does not think about the needs of his neighbor, just as he should not be so absorbed in activity as to do without thinking about God.”
Srila Prabhupada: If you do not think about God, how can you be active in His service? Actual meditation is meditation on the Supreme Personality of Godhead, or Paramatma, who resides in the depths of the heart. However, activity and meditation must go hand in hand. If we sit and think about God, that is commendable, but it is even better if we work for God as God desires. If you love me and just sit and think about me, that is commendable. This can be considered meditation. However, if you love me, it is better that you follow my commands. This is more important.
Hayagriva dasa: Augustine imagined the spiritual world as a world in which the movements of spiritual bodies “will be so inexpressibly beautiful that I dare not say anything about them except that they will be as balanced, as graceful and as beautiful as a place becomes in which there is no nothing inappropriate. Wherever the spirit wishes to be, there the body will be in the blink of an eye... God will be the source of all satisfaction. He will be the consummation of all our desires, the object of our endless contemplation, our inexhaustible love, our unceasing praise... Souls in bliss will still have free will, but sin will have no power to tempt them.”
Srila Prabhupada: Yes, sin cannot touch one who remains in contact with God. According to our desire, we associate with the modes of material nature and get different types of bodies. Nature, as the agent of Krsna, provides us with the opportunity by providing us with a material body, which is like a machine. When the son insists: “Dad, give me a bicycle,” the loving father gives in. As explained in Bhagavad Gita:
isvarah sarva-bhutanam hrid-dese 'rjuna tisthati
bhramayan sarva-bhutani yantrarudhani mayaya
“The Supreme Lord, O Arjuna, resides in everyone's heart and directs the wanderings of all living entities, who are as if in a machine created by the material energy” (Bg. 18.61). The Supreme Father, Krishna, is located in the depths of everyone's heart. According to the desire of the living entity, the Father provides him with a body made of material energy. This body is doomed to suffer, but the spiritual bodies in the Vaikunthas are not subject to birth, old age, disease and death, or the threefold suffering. They are eternal and full of knowledge and bliss.
Hayagriva dasa: According to Augustine, mind, reason and soul are one and the same.
Srila Prabhupada: No, these are different entities. The mind acts in accordance with the intellect, and the intellect of different living beings is different. Their minds are also different. The intelligence of a dog is not equal to the intelligence of a human being, but it cannot be said that a dog does not have a soul. The soul is placed in different bodies, which have different types of intelligence, different ways of thinking, acting, feeling and wanting. The mind and intellect differ depending on the body, but the soul remains the same everywhere.
Hayagriva dasa: By identifying the soul with the body and mind, Augustine could justify the killing of animals. He writes: “Indeed, some people try to stretch the interpretation of the prohibition (“Thou shalt not kill”) in order to protect animals and livestock and to outlaw the killing of such animals. But then why not include here plants and everything else that has roots and feeds from the soil. Leaving all this nonsense aside, we do not apply “Thou shalt not kill” either to plants, because they have no feelings, or to irrational animals that fly, swim, run or crawl, because they are not related to us by either intimacy or common ties . According to the wise law of the creator, they are intended for our use, dead or alive. It remains for us to apply the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” only to man, to himself or to others.”
Srila Prabhupada: The Bible says “Thou shalt not kill” without any qualifications. Vedic philosophy allows one living being to serve as food to another living being. It's natural. As stated in the Srimad-Bhagavatam, animals with hands eat animals without hands. Four-legged animals eat those who cannot move, as well as plants and vegetables. Thus, the weak serves as food for the strong. This is the law of nature. However, our philosophy of Krsna consciousness is not based on the fact that plant life is less sensitive than animal life and animal life is less sensitive than human life. We look at all human beings, animals, plants and trees as living beings, spirit souls. We can eat animals or plants - in any case, we inevitably must eat some living beings. Therefore, it becomes a matter of choice. Apart from vegetarian or non-vegetarian diet, we are mainly interested in Krishna prasadam. We accept only the remnants of what Krishna eats. In the Bhagavad-gita, Krishna says: patram pushpam phalam toyam yo me bhaktya prayachchati tad aham bhakty-upahritam asnami prayatatmanah “If a person offers Me a leaf, a flower, a fruit or a little water with love and devotion, I will certainly accept his offering” (B.- g., 9.26). This is our philosophy. We take care to eat the remnants of Krsna's food, which we call prasadam, mercy. We should not touch meat or anything that cannot be offered to Krsna.
yajna-sishtasinah santo muchyante sarva-kilbishaih
bhunjate te tv agham papa ye pacanty atma-karanat
“The devotees of the Lord are freed from all kinds of sin by eating food that has been sacrificed to the Lord. Those who prepare food for the sake of enjoying it themselves, truly eat only sin” (Bg. 3.13).

From the book "Dialectical Spiritualism"

In the process of development of society and history, two categories of human existence can be distinguished , 2 categories of people: 1. those who live according to God. 2. those who live according to man - the city of God and the city of earth.

Continuation from the city of earth to the city of God. If the earthly city is the daily life of man, then the city of God is the true being of the symbolic expression of the universality of history, determines the laws of history.

Historical formation occurs due to the fact that earthly man becomes historical, God's, when he experiences a spiritual and religious transformation. As a result of transformation, history is born.

History is the movement of each individual towards the inner man of God, from which the city of God grows, the phenomenal manifestation of which becomes the church.

Scheme of history: unity of God and man--------break due to sin----Christ, reunion.

It is the Fall that leads to the differences between the world of the city of God and the city of earth. That's when human history begins.

The main goal of history is the reunification of the city of God and the city of earth through the atonement of original sin through repentance, repentance, and righteous activity. The historical process is predetermined, history inevitably moves towards a specific goal.

The central point of history is Christ, his life, which represents the meaning and direction of history. The driving force of history is faith, the religious experience of transformation, when a person experiences an internal religious transformation and begins to act. History is something that must end in accordance with faith.

Aurelius Augustine (Blessed)(354 - 430) - Christian theologian, Bishop of Hippo (North Africa, Roman Empire), laid the foundations of Catholicism as the main direction of Christianity at that time. He was one of the founders of early scholasticism. The main work of Augustine the Blessed - “On the City of God” - over the centuries became a widespread religious and philosophical treatise, on which medieval theologians relied when studying and teaching scholasticism.

Other famous works of Augustine are: “On the Beautiful and Fit,” “Against the Academicians,” “On Order.”

The following main provisions of the philosophy of Augustine the Blessed can be distinguished:

The course of history, the life of society is a struggle between two opposing kingdoms - the Earthly (sinful) and the Divine;

The earthly kingdom is embodied in government institutions, power, army, bureaucracy, laws, emperor;

The divine kingdom is represented by clergy - special people endowed with grace and close to God, who are united in the Christian Church;

The earthly kingdom is mired in sins and paganism and will sooner or later be defeated by the Divine kingdom;

Due to the fact that most people are sinful and far from God, secular (state) power is necessary and will continue to exist, but will be subordinated to spiritual power;

Kings and emperors must express the will of the Christian Church and submit to it, as well as directly to the Pope;

The Church is the only force capable of uniting the world;

Poverty, dependence on others (usurers, landowners, etc.), submission are not pleasing to God, but as long as these phenomena exist, one must come to terms with them and endure them, hope for the best;

The highest bliss is human happiness, which was understood as deepening into oneself, learning, understanding the truth;

After death, the righteous receive an afterlife as a reward from God.

2. A special place in the philosophy of Augustine the Blessed is occupied by reflections on God:

God exists;

The main proofs of the existence of God are his presence in everything, omnipotence and perfection;

Everything - matter, soul, space and time - are the creations of God;

God not only created the world, but also continues to create at the present time and will create in the future;

Knowledge (feelings, thoughts, sensations, experience) is real and self-sufficient (self-reliable), but the highest, true, irrefutable knowledge is achieved only by knowing God.

Ontology A. built around the doctrine of God as the principle of being. The existence of God himself, A. believes, can be deduced from a person’s self-consciousness, from the self-reliability of his thinking, while the existence of things can only be deduced in a more distant way. With his ontology, A. anticipated a number of ideas of R. Descartes. Unlike ancient thinkers, A. was one of the first to pay attention to the problem of the formation of the human personality and the development of society and its history. The first problem is considered by him in “Confession” - a lyrical and philosophical autobiography, in which, on the basis of deep psychological introspection, A. revealed the internal development of himself as a person from infancy to the adoption of Christianity, showed the inconsistency of this formation and came to the conclusion that only Divine grace can save man, to save him from sin. The problem of the development of society is presented by A. in his main work “On the City of God.” In it, A. developed the Christian philosophy of world history, according to which there are two opposite types of human community: the earthly world as the property of the devil (statehood) and the opposite world of God, which is represented by the Catholic Church. Hence the task of the church is to overcome the world of the devil, converting all humanity to the “true faith.” The content of world history A. reduces to this struggle, which must turn the “militant church” into a “triumphant church.” At the same time, A. believed that all violence, be it violence against a child or state violence, is a consequence of a person’s sinful depravity. Although it is inevitable, it is worthy of contempt. Hence, although A. recognized the state power, he characterized it negatively, calling it a large gang of robbers. Claiming that without the help of God a person is only capable of sin, A. contradicted his own teaching about the church as the “only saving” power of Christianity, which he exalted in every possible way, placing it even above the Gospels. A. Played an important role in the development of Catholic dogma. He actually developed the Christian doctrine of divine predestination, the sinfulness of the human race, Divine grace, mercy, atonement, reward after death, sacraments, etc. Essentially, in his teaching the Christian Church received theoretical (theological) justification for its doctrine. Aquinas's authority in matters of philosophy and theology in the Middle Ages was generally recognized and indisputable throughout Catholic theology until the 13th century, until Thomas Aquinas.

In his epistemological concept Augustine proceeds from the phrase that the Savior utters: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.” Therefore, Augustine is confident that the problem of the existence of truth and its knowledge is fundamental, key for Christian philosophy. If truth does not exist, as skeptics claim, then God does not exist. And if the truth is unknowable, then God is unknowable and all paths to salvation are closed to us. Therefore, for Augustine it is extremely important to refute the skeptics, it is important to prove that the truth both exists and is knowable.

Augustine devotes his first treatise, Against the Academicians, to this problem, in which he sets out his arguments against skepticism. Skepticism is Augustine's worst enemy; he undermines the foundations of morality, proving that everything is true or everything is false, and a person only chooses what he likes. Skepticism undermines the foundations of religion, proving that there is a God or that there is no God, as everyone pleases.

Developing a Christian understanding of man

Augustine interprets the problem of man from the point of view of two Christian dogmas: on the one hand, man is the image and likeness of God, and on the other, he is a sinful being, for our first parents committed original sin. Therefore, when Augustine describes man as the image of God, he often exalts him, but immediately shows that man, as a sinful being, is not perfect, and often falls into seeming pessimism.

The idea that the descendants of Adam bear personal responsibility for the sin of their forefathers as for their own sin is alien to Orthodoxy. Thus, in the resolution of the Council of Carthage in 252 it was said that “baptism should not be forbidden to a baby who, having barely been born, had not sinned in anything, but only, having descended in the flesh from Adam, received the infection of ancient death through birth itself,” and that when At baptism, he is forgiven not his own, but the sins of others. The legal understanding of “original sin” as a crime for which all people are responsible as for their personal sins was first introduced into the theology of the blessed one. Augustine in his polemic with the Pelagians, who generally denied the corruption of human nature as a result of the Fall of Adam. However, Augustine noticed the main thing correctly: the sinful corruption of human nature is hereditary and the inclination to sin manifests itself at an early age. (Based on lectures by Akhm. Alypius).

Therefore, Augustine’s anthropology cannot be understood without his Christology, without the fact that the Savior performed the act of atonement for human sins.

Speaking about the creation of man, Augustine says that man was created from nothing - both his body and soul. Man, according to Augustine, is the unity of soul and body. Man is “a substance consisting of body and soul, endowed with reason.” Here he objects to the Platonists, who argued that the essence of man is only the soul. Augustine corrects the Platonists by saying that man is a rational soul in control of his body.

The body is not the grave of the soul, for, as Augustine writes, answering the Platonists who argued that the body is a fetter, the tomb of the soul: “Does anyone love his own fetters?” Body and soul have a good nature, provided that the body is conceived as that part of human nature that is subordinate to the soul. But because of the Fall, the body came out of submission, and the opposite happened: the soul became a servant of the body. Christ, by His atoning sacrifice, restored the original order, and people again understood that the body must serve the soul.

1. Trinity of the soul

Although a person is a unity of soul and body, body and soul are still completely different substances. Moreover, the soul is given preference. Although both of them are changing, the soul has no spatial structure and changes only in time. And if so, then the soul does not mix with the body, but is always in the body. The soul is the basis of life, the rational principle; It is the soul that imparts life to the body and allows us to experience the sensory world through the body. But the soul does not mix with the body, remaining connected to it, but not merged.

The depth of the soul manifests itself as the unity of the trinity

1) consciousness (memoria),

2) reason (intelligentsia) and

3) will (voluntas)

and, therefore, there is an image of the divine trinity.

Blessed Augustine emphasized that will is an attribute of nature.

2. The soul is immortal, but not eternal

Our soul is immortal, but not eternal. Augustine distinguishes between these terms because only the unchangeable is eternal. Matter, according to Augustine (unlike the Platonists), is not nothing, but is higher than non-existence; Augustine calls matter everything that changes. Consequently, there is matter not only sensible, but also intelligible. If there is intelligible matter, then it also has some intelligible form. In particular, our soul, according to Augustine, is formed spiritual matter.

Since the soul is changeable, it also participates to some extent in non-existence, therefore it too was created from non-existence. This is what unites our soul with the material world, and what distinguishes it is that its change occurs only in time, and not in time and space, like with material objects.

Augustine uses the concept of “matter” rather in the Plotinian sense than in our everyday understanding. For Plotinus, the soul is matter for the mind, the mind is matter for the one, i.e. matter is everything that can perceive some form, and form, as we remember, also cannot be perceived only as a material spatial category. Form is everything through which the cognition of objects is realized. Augustine understands the terms “matter” and “form” in approximately the same way. Therefore, when Augustine says that our soul has matter and form, in no case should we perceive this in a sensory way.

Blessed Augustine says that a person would not have died if he had not sinned.

Augustine the Blessed(lat. Augustinus Sanctus, full name Aurelius Augustine; 354-430) - philosopher, influential preacher, Christian theologian and politician. A saint of the Catholic Church, called blessed in Orthodoxy. One of the Church Fathers, the founder of Augustinianism, which dominated Western Europe until the 13th century, when it was replaced by the Christian Aristotelianism of Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas. He had a huge influence on Western philosophy and Catholic theology.

In the Western Church the veneration of St. Augustine began early and was very widespread. His memory is celebrated by the Catholic Church on August 28. His name was included in Eastern monthly books only in the 19th century. His memory was probably included in the Russian month book according to the “Synaxarist” of St. Nicodemus the Svyatogorets and is celebrated by the Russian Orthodox Church on June 15 according to the old style.

Augustine (Aurelius) was born on November 13, 354 in the African province of Numidia, in Tagaste (now Souk-Aras in Algeria). He owes his initial education to his mother, the Christian Monica, an intelligent, noble and pious woman, whose influence on her son, however, was neutralized by his pagan father, who was a Roman citizen and small landowner. Augustine's father was baptized only before his death in 371.

In his youth, Augustine showed no inclination towards traditional Greek, but was captivated by Latin literature. After finishing school in Tagaste, he went to study at the nearest cultural center - Madavra. In the fall of 370, thanks to the patronage of a family friend who lived in Tagaste, Romanian, Augustine went to Carthage for three years to study rhetoric. In his youth, Augustine was in the most secular mood and, living in Madaura and Carthage, completely surrendered to the whirlwind of pleasures. In 372, Augustine's son Adeodate was born in concubinage. The thirst for something higher awoke in him only after reading "Hortensius" Cicero. Reading Cicero, Augustine is imbued with a “love of wisdom,” but the Holy Scriptures do not make a favorable impression on him (this is often explained by the rudeness of his contemporary translation - Itala). He attacked philosophy, joined the Manichean sect, to which he remained faithful for about 10 years, but not finding satisfaction anywhere, he almost fell into despair; and only acquaintance with Platonic and Neoplatonic philosophy, which became accessible to him thanks to the Latin translation, temporarily gave food to his mind. After reading some of Plotinus's treatises in the Latin translation of the rhetorician Maria Victorinus, he became acquainted with Neoplatonism, which presented God as an immaterial transcendental Being.

Augustine taught rhetoric first in Tagaste, later in Carthage. Around this time, Augustine undertook his first literary philosophical experience - he wrote the treatise “On the Beautiful and the Appropriate” ( De pulchro et apto), now lost. In the “Confession,” he dwelled in detail on the nine years he wasted on the “husk” of Manichaean teaching. The fascination with Manichaeism gradually passes, Augustine begins to realize its inconsistency. Augustine's next intellectual passions were the skepticism of the New Academy, and then Neoplatonism.

In 383 he went from Africa to Rome, where he wanted to find a teaching position, but he spent only a year there and received a position as a teacher of rhetoric in Milan. Having attended the sermons of Ambrose of Milan, Augustine understood the rational conviction of early Christianity. After this, he began to read the letters of the Apostle Paul. Ambrose's preaching and reading of the Holy Scriptures produced a radical change in his way of thinking and living. The Catholic Church even dedicated a special holiday (May 3) to this event.

About the Holy Scriptures and the comprehension of its hidden meaning, Augustine wrote: It was "something incomprehensible to the proud, dark to the children; a building shrouded in mystery, with a low entrance; it becomes taller the further you move". And everyone doesn't "was able neither to enter it nor to bow his head to advance further"(Augustine. Confessions III, V, 9).

And about the sermons of Ambrose: "I listened diligently to his conversations with the people, - he wrote several years later, not for the purpose that he should have, but as if looking closely to see whether his eloquence corresponded to his fame, whether it was exaggerated by praise or underestimated; I listened to his words with the greatest attention and carelessly neglected their content. I enjoyed the charm of his speech... Although I did not try to study what he was talking about, but only wanted to listen to how he spoke..., but thoughts entered into my soul at the same time as the words, which I accepted cordially, which I was indifferent to. I couldn't separate one from the other. And when I opened my heart to what was said eloquently, then immediately what was said truly entered into it - it entered, however, gradually... The repeated resolution of the mysterious passages of the Old Testament especially affected me; their literal understanding was killing me. Having heard the explanation of many texts from these books in a spiritual sense, I began to reproach myself for the despair into which I once came, believing that those who despise and ridicule the Law and the Prophets cannot be resisted at all.". (Augustine. Confessions V, XIII-XIV, 23-24).

Ambrose's sermons affected Augustine so strongly that he finally decided to break with the Manichaeans, having become disillusioned with their teaching: “I did not consider it possible during this period of doubt to remain in a sect to which I had already preferred certain philosophers,- wrote Augustine, - To these philosophers, however, I refused to entrust the treatment of my weakened soul, because they did not know the saving name of Christ. And I decided to remain a catechumen in the Orthodox Church, bequeathed to me by my parents, until something specific appears before me, to which I am directing the path."(Augustine. Confessions V, XIV, 25).

Soon after Augustine became a catechumen, his mother Monica, a deeply religious and very pious woman, came to Milan. She made a lot of efforts to introduce her beloved son to the Christian faith and the true church. However, before Augustine met Ambrose, her efforts were unsuccessful. And even at the moment of meeting her son in Mediolan, she discovered that he was still at a crossroads. Augustine wrote about this: “She found me in great danger: I despaired of finding the truth. From my message that I was no longer a Manichaean, but also not an Orthodox Christian, she was not filled with joy... her heart did not flutter in stormy delight when she heard that To a large extent, what she prayed to You every day with tears has already been accomplished; I have not yet found the truth, but being confident that You, who promised to fully fulfill her prayers, will complete the rest, she very calmly, completely. answered me with conviction that before she leaves this life, she will see me as a true Christian: she believes this in Christ.". (Augustine. Confessions V, I, I).

Monica fervently prayed for her son and regularly attended church, where her religious soul was captivated by Ambrose, “She loved this man like an angel of God, having learned that it was he who had so far brought me to doubts and hesitations.”(Augustine. Confessions VI, I, I). The bishop, in turn, also drew attention to a fiery Christian, so pious and righteous that her lifestyle, diligent attendance at church, and good deeds aroused the warmest feelings in him. During meetings with Augustine, Ambrose invariably congratulated him on having such a mother and lavished all kinds of praise on her. And during the conflict with the imperial court over the basilica, Monica, along with other believers, did not leave Ambrose and stayed awake in the church and lived in prayer, "first in alarm and vigil".

I, of course, had no opportunity to ask in detail what I wanted; how he thought about this in his heart, Thy holy prophecy. There were only short conversations. In order for my anxiety to subside, I needed a conversation at my leisure, and Ambrose never had that. I listened to him among the people, every Sunday, “truly dividing the word of truth,” and more and more I became convinced that it was possible to unravel all the slanderous intricacies that those deceivers wove in their enmity against the Scriptures.”(Augustine. Confessions VI, III, 3-4).

And under the influence of Ambrose, Augustine again took up reading the Old Testament. Now, after the bishop’s sermons, he looked at this book with different eyes, and it no longer seemed as absurd to him as when he first read it. “I listened with pleasure as Ambrose often repeated in his sermons to the people, diligently recommending, as a rule: “the letter kills, but the spirit gives life.” When, removing the mysterious veil, he explained in a spiritual sense those passages that, being understood literally , seemed to me a preaching of perversity, then nothing in his words offended me, although I still did not know whether these words were true."(Augustine. Confessions VI, IV, 6).

Step by step, slowly and difficultly, Augustine walked to Christ; his path to Salvation was long and painful. On this path, Simplician, his father, was also his guide. "by the grace of God, Bishop Ambrose, who truly loved him like a father"(Confession VIII, II, 3). Long, faith-filled and meaningful conversations with Simplician, who was able to devote much more time to Augustine than Ambrose, also played a big role in the formation of the future father of the Christian church. On the path to finding spirituality and truth, Augustine also had stories about the life of the most popular, thanks to Athanasius the Great, Christian hermit Anthony and other monks and hermits; and Old Testament texts, which, thanks to Ambrose, he now perceived completely differently than before; and the letters of the Apostle Paul, who opened the way for Christianity to the Roman Empire. All this led Augustine to the recognition of Christianity as the only true teaching, in search of which he spent his entire previous life. And finally, he made his final choice in favor of Christ, laid down the “burden of teaching” and went to Kassitsiak, his friend’s villa not far from Mediolan. There he indulges in conversations with friends, reflections on faith and spirituality, writes his first philosophical treatises (modeled on Cicero’s “Tusculan Conversations”) and prepares to undergo the sacred sacrament of baptism.

Now unable to communicate with Ambrose directly, Augustine writes letters to him in which he sets out his previous errors and his present desire to become a Christian. He asks the bishop for advice on which books of Scripture he should read to better prepare for baptism. Ambrose, despite his enormous busyness, always answered him and recommended reading the prophet Isaiah, because, as Augustine himself understood, he "speaks more clearly than others about the Gospel and the calling of the Gentiles"(Confession IX, V, 13).

At the beginning of 387, Augustine, together with his friend Alypius and his fifteen-year-old son Adeodatus, returned to Milan and signed up for baptism. Alypius, in order to tame his body, dared to do an unusual act: “he walked barefoot across the icy soil of Italy.” Finally, on April 24, 387, the long-awaited day arrived, towards which Augustine had been working all his life: “We were baptized, and anxiety for our former life fled from us. In those days I could not get enough of the wondrous sweetness, contemplating the depth of Your intention to save the human race. How much I cried over Your hymns in Your church. These sounds flowed into my ears, the truth filtered into my heart, I was overwhelmed with awe; tears flowed, and I felt good with them."(Augustine. Confessions IX, VI, 14).

After baptism, Augustine decides to return to Africa and soon leaves Mediolan, as it turns out, forever. Before leaving for Ostia, Augustine's mother Monica died. Her last conversation with her son was well conveyed at the end of “Confession.” After this, part of the information about Augustine’s further life is based on the “Life” compiled by Possidio, who communicated with Augustine for almost 40 years.

After returning to Africa, he sold all his property and distributed it to the poor. According to Possidia, upon his return to Africa, Augustine again settled in Tagaste, where he organized a monastic community. There he spent some time in strict solitude, but Augustine's fame as a learned theologian and ascetic spread throughout Africa. In 391, during a trip to Hippo Rhegium, where there were already 6 Christian churches, the Greek bishop Valerius willingly ordained Augustine as a presbyter since it was difficult for him to preach in Latin. In Hippo, the new presbyter is engaged in teaching and preaching, helping the elderly Bishop Valery. During his presbytery, Augustine founded the first monastery in Numidia. He also deals with the interpretation of Holy Scripture and polemics with the Manichaeans. In 395, Bishop Valerius made Augustine his vicar. The following year, after the death of Valery, Augustine was elevated to the See of Hippo and remained there for 35 years, until his death.

The time of episcopacy became for Augustine the time of writing a huge number of works of a dogmatic, exegetical, apologetic and pastoral nature; he preached many sermons. In 397-400 at the request of St. Pavlina Milostivogo writes his wonderful autobiographical story "Confession". Augustine's most significant dogmatic work was written in 400-415. treatise "On the Trinity", which had a greater influence on the development of subsequent Western theology. Having survived the capture of Rome by Alaric in 410, Saint Hippo from 413 to 426 wrote a monumental work in 22 books, “On the City of God,” dedicated to the problems of history and the relationship between the Kingdom of God and the earthly state.

Augustine's theological and church activities can be divided into several stages according to the main directions of his polemics. The initial stage is a fairly successful polemic against Manichaeism. Augustine held many debates with the Manichaeans and wrote many theological works on this topic. The next stage was a long and persistent struggle against the Donatist split that was then spreading in Africa. The Bishop of Hippo developed a broad polemic with the schismatics; in 411, through his efforts, he convened a council in Carthage, which condemned the Donatists. In the fight against the schism, Augustine receives the support of state authorities, which leads to the final victory of the Church over the schismatics.

The fight against the teachings of the British monk Pelagius becomes a new stage in the Saint’s activity. In 412, the Council of Carthage condemned the follower of Pelagius Celestius, and the new Council of Carthage in 416 re-condemned Celestius, also Pelagius himself. However, Rome's attitude towards Pelagius was ambiguous, and even after the Great Council of Carthage in 418, Pelagianism found many followers. In polemics with him, Augustine formulates a doctrine about the meaning of grace in the matter of salvation, known as the doctrine of predestination. The result of all of Augustine’s polemical activities is the essay “On Heresies” (428-429), where he gives a brief description of 88 heresies, starting from Simon Magus and ending with Pelagianism. Undertaking a revision of his entire literary activity, Augustine wrote in 426-427 “Revisions” in two parts, where he catalogs and critically evaluates 93 of his works.

In 426, Augustine, weakened by illness and old age, elected presbyter Heraclius as his successor, to whom he transferred part of his responsibilities. In 430, Hippo was besieged by the Vandals who invaded North Africa from Spain. During the siege of St. Augustine fell ill and died peacefully on the tenth day of his illness on August 28.

The remains of Augustine were transferred by his followers to Sardinia to save them from the desecration of the Arian Vandals, and when this island fell into the hands of the Saracens, they were ransomed by Liutprand, king of the Longobards, and buried in Pavia in the church of St. Petra. In 1842, with the consent of the pope, they were again transported to Algeria and preserved there near the monument to Augustine, erected to him on the ruins of Hippo by the French bishops.

2. Creative heritage

Augustine's creative legacy is enormous: it includes 93 works in 232 books, as well as more than 500 letters and sermons (In Russian translation: Creations. Parts 1-7. - Kyiv, 1901-1912.). The complete collection of all the works attributed to Augustine is so extensive that even in the 6th century. Isidore of Seville wrote that anyone who claimed to have read all of Augustine's works should immediately be declared a liar (EEC, p.125). Augustine's works cover almost all genres and styles known in his time: his works are devoted to philosophy, polemics with Manichaeans and heretics, dogmatic issues, historiosophy, and Christian ethics. Some of his works touch on various aspects of the relationship between pagans and Christians and, more broadly, Christian and ancient culture.

Augustine's works are divided into several classes:

Autobiographical:

• Confession Confessions(13 books) - 397-401
• Revisions Retractations(2 books) - 426-427

Philosophical:

• Against academics Contra academicos(3 books) - 386 g.
• About the Blissful Life De beata vita- between 386 and 391
• About the order De ordine(2 books) - between 386 and 391
• Monologues Soliloquia(2 books) - 386 or 387 g.
• About the immortality of the soul De immortalitate aniniae- 387, 389
• About music De musica(6 books) - 387 g.
• About the quantity of the soul De quantitate aniniae- 388 g.
• About the teacher De master- 389

Apologetic:

• About the true religion De vera religione - 389-391
• On the benefits of faith to Honoratus De utilitate credendi ad honoratum- 391 or 392 g.
• About faith in the invisible De fide rerum quae non videntur- 400; 410 g.
• About the City of God to Marcellinus De Civitate Dei ad Marcellinum(22 books) - 413-427

Polemical:

• On heresies to Quodvultdeus De haeresibus ad Quodvultdeum- 428-429

Anti-Manichaean:

• On the morals of the Catholic Church and the morals of the Manichaeans De moribus ecclesiae catholicae et de moribus manichaeorum(2 books) - 388 g.
• About free decision De libero arbitrio(3 books) - 1 book. - 388; 2-3 books. - 391; 395
• About the Book of Genesis against the Manichaeans De Genesi contra manichaeos(2 books) - 388 or 390 g.
• About two souls against the Manichaeans De duabus animabus contra manichaeos- 392 g.
• Against Secundinus the Manichaean Contra Secundinum manichaeum- 399 g.
• Reasoning against Fortunatus the Manichaean Disputatio contra Fortunatum manichaeum- 392 g.
• Against Adeimantus, disciple of the Manichaeans Contra Adimantum manichaei discipulum- 394 g.
• Against the message of the Manichaean, called the Basic Contra epislolam manichaei quam vocant Fundamenti- 397
• Against Faustus the Manichaean Contra Faustum manichaeum(33 books) - 397-398
• Against Felix the Manichaean Contra Felicem manichaeum- 398 g.
• On the nature of good against the Manichaeans De natura boni contra manichaeos- 399 (405?) g.

Anti-Donatist:

• Psalm against Donatus Psalmus contra partem Donati- 393 g.
• Against the Epistle of Parmenian Contra epistolam Parneniani(3 books) - 400 g.
• On baptism against the Donatists De baptismo contra donatistas(7 books) - 400 or 401 g.
• Versus Cresconia-grammar Contra Cresconium grammaticum(4 books) - 405 or 406 g.
• Summary of the controversy against the Donatists Breviculus collationis contra donatistas(3 books) - after 411
• Against the Donatists after the dispute Post collationem contra donatistas- 412 g.
• Against the writings of Petilian Contra litteras Petiliani(3 books) - 401 or 405
• Debate with Emeritus, Donatist Bishop Gesta cum Emerito, donatistarum episcopo(2 books) - approx. 418
• Against Gaudentius, Bishop of the Donatists Contra Gaudentium, donatistarum episcopum(2 books) - 421 or 422 g.

Anti-Pelagian:

• On retribution and remission of sins, as well as on infant baptism to Marcellinus De peccatorum meritis et remissione et de baptizmo parvulorum ad Marcellinum(3 books) - 411 or 412
• On the Spirit and the Letter to Marcellinus De Spiritu et littera ad Marcellinum- 412 g.
• On Nature and Grace to Timasias and James De natura et Gratia ad Timasium et Jacobum- 413 or 415 g.
• About the deeds of Pelagius De gestis Pelagii(7 books) - 417
• About the Grace of Christ and about original sin against Pelagius and Caelestius De Gratia Christi et de peccato orieinali contra Pelagium et Coelestium(2 books) - 418 g.
• About marriage and lust for Valery De nuptiis et concupiscentia ad Valerium(2 books) - 419 or 421 g.
• Against the two messages of the Pelagians Contra duas epistolas pelagianorum(4 books) - 420 or 421 g.
• Against Julian the Pelagian Contra Julianium pelagianum(6 books) - 421 g.
• About the soul and its origin De anima et ejus origine(4 books) - 421 g.
• About Grace and free decision to Valentine De Gratia et libero arbitrio ad Valentinum- 426 or 427 g.
• About Reproach and Grace De correptione et Gratia- OK. 427
• On the predestination of the saints to Prosper and Hilary De praedestinatione sanctorum ad Prosperum et Hilarium- 428 or 429 g.
• About the gift of perseverance [in goodness] De dono perseverantiae- 428-429
• Against Julian's second answer, unfinished essay Contra secundam Juliani responsionem, imperfectum opus(6 books) - 429 g.

Anti-Arian:

• Against the Arian preaching Contra sermonem arianorum- 418 or 419 g.
• Dispute with Maximin, Arian Bishop Collatio cum Maximino, arianorum episcopo- 427 or 428 g.
• Against Maximin Contra Maximum(2 books) - 428 g.

Against other heresies and religions:

• Against the enemy of the law and the prophets [Against the Marcionites] Contra adversarium legis et prophetarium(2 books) - 421 g.
• To Orosius against the Priscillianists and Origenists Ad Orosium contra priscillianistas et origenistas- 415 g.
• Reasoning against the Jews Tractatus adversus Judaeos- 429 or 430 g.

Exegetical:

• About the Book of Genesis literally. Unfinished Book De Genesi ad Litteram, liber imperfectus- 393 or 394 g.
• Commentaries on the Psalms Enarrationes in Psalmos- 392-418
• Explaining Some Points from the Book of Romans Expositio quarumdam propositionum ex epistola ad Romanes- between 393 and 396
• Preliminary Exposition of the Book of Romans Epistolae ad Romanes inchoata expositio- between 393 and 396
• Exposition of the book of Galatians Expositio epistolae ad Galatas- between 393 and 396
• About the Lord's Sermon on the Mount De Sermone Domini in Monte(2 books) - 394 g.
• About Christian teaching De doctrina christiana(4 books) - 396; 426
• Gospel Questions Quaestiones Evangeliorum(2 books) - 397 or 400 g.
• Notes on the Book of Job Adnotations in Iob- OK. 399
• On the agreement of the evangelists De consensu evangelistarum(4 books) - 400 g.
• About the Book of Genesis Literally De Genesi ad litteram(12 books) - 401-414
• Discourse on the Gospel of John Tractatus in Johannis Evangelium- 407-417
• Discourses on the Epistle of John to the Parthians Tractatus in Epistolam Johannis ad Parthos(10 books) - 415 or 416 g.
• Conversations on the Seven Books Locutiones in Heptateuchum(7 books) - 419 g.
• Research on the Seven Books Quaestiones in Heptateuchum(2 books) - 419 g.
• Mirror from the Holy Scriptures Speculum de Scriptura Sacra- 427 g.

Dogmatic:

• About 83 different questions De diversis quaestionibus LXXXIII- 388-395 or 396 g.
• About faith and symbol (faith) De fide et symbolo- 393 g.
• About the Christian struggle De agone christiano- 396-397
• On various questions to Simplician De diversis quaestionibus ad Simplicianitni(2 books) - 396 g.
• About Trinity De Trinitate(15 books) - 400-415 g.
• Enchiridion to Lawrence, or about Faith, Hope and Love Enchiridion ad Laurentium, sive de Fide, Spe et Charitate- 421 or 423 g.

Moral and ascetic, dedicated to various issues of spiritual life:

• About abstinence De continentia- 395 g.
• About monastic work De opre monachorum- 400 g.
• About marital good De bono conjugali- OK. 400-401
• About holy virginity De sancta virginitate- 400-401 g.
• About Demon Divination De divinatione daemonuin- 406 g.
• About the benefits of fasting De utilitate jejunii- 408 or 412 g.
• About faith and works De fide et operibus- OK. 413
• On the benefit of widowhood to Juliana De bono viduitatis ad Julianam- 414 g.
• On the improvement of human justice De perfectione justitiae hominis- OK. 415
• About patience De patientia- 418 g.
• Against lies Contra mendacium- 420 g.
• About adulterous marriage De conjugiis adulterinis(2 books) - approx. 420 g
• On the veneration of the dead to Paulinus De cura pro mortuis gerenda ad Paulinum- 421 or 424 g.

Pastoral:

• About teaching the catechumens De catechizandis rudibus- 399 or 400 g.

Sermons:

• Sermones

Letters:

• Epistolae- 386-429

The most important letters, subsequently published as separate books:

• On single baptism against Petilian (letter 120) De unico baptismo contra Petilianum- 410 or 411 g.
• On the Grace of the New Testament to Honoratus (letter 140) De Gratia Novi Testamenti ad Honoratum
• On the Contemplation of God to Paulinus (letter 147) De videndo Deo ad Paulinum- 413 g.

Augustine's influence on the fates and dogmatic side of Christian teaching is almost unparalleled. He determined the spirit and direction of not only the African, but also the entire Western church for several centuries to come. His polemics against the Arians, the Priscillians, and especially against the Donatists and other heretical sects, clearly demonstrate the extent of his importance. The insight and depth of his mind, the indomitable power of faith and the ardor of imagination are best reflected in his numerous writings, which had incredible influence and determined the anthropological side of the doctrine of Protestantism (Luther and Calvin). Even more important than the development of the doctrine of St. Trinity, his research on man's relationship to divine grace. He considers the essence of Christian teaching to be precisely man’s ability to perceive God’s grace, and this basic position is also reflected in his understanding of other dogmas of faith. His concerns about the structure of monasticism were expressed in the founding of many monasteries.

About creation and being

In his doctrine of Creation, Augustine proceeds from the proof of the created nature of the world, from which the existence of the Creator necessarily follows. Concrete experience shows that all comprehensible objects are transitory and changeable. From this Augustine deduces the presence of an imperishable Being, which is the Creator. This approach is based on the Platonic idea that everything really what exists is immutable, and everything that is transitory does not really exist.

Therefore, transitory objects cannot exist on their own: the imperishable Creator creates everything with His Word. Thus, St. Augustine understands the description of the creation of the world in the book of Genesis, like St. Gregory of Nyssa, in an allegorical sense. This approach is explained by the fact that Augustine used the teachings of Plato to overcome Manichaean ideas. In addition, as already noted, the Church Fathers explained and preached Christianity to listeners whose thoughts were educated in the spirit of Greek philosophy. Therefore, all of Augustine’s ideas are based on Platonic monism, which basically boils down to the fact that everything that truly exists exists spiritually in God. This philosophy underlies both his doctrine of man, whom Augustine describes as a soul inhabiting a body, and also the basis of his theory of knowledge resulting from such an anthropology.

God created matter and endowed it with various forms, properties and purposes, thereby creating everything that exists in our world. The actions of God are good, and therefore everything that exists, precisely because it exists, is good. Evil is not a substance-matter, but a defect, its corruption, vice and damage, non-existence.

God is the source of existence, pure form, the highest beauty, the source of good. The world exists thanks to the continuous creation of God, who regenerates everything that dies in the world. There is one world and there cannot be several worlds.

Matter is characterized through type, measure, number and order. In the world order, every thing has its place.

God, world and man

The problem of God and his relationship to the world appears as central to Augustine. God, according to Augustine, is supernatural. The world, nature and man, being the result of God's creation, depend on their Creator. If Neoplatonism viewed God (the Absolute) as an impersonal being, as the unity of all things, then Augustine interpreted God as the person who created all things. And he specifically differentiated the interpretations of God from Fate and Fortune.

God is incorporeal, which means the divine principle is infinite and omnipresent. Having created the world, he made sure that order reigned in the world and everything in the world began to obey the laws of nature.

Man is the soul that God breathed into him. The body (flesh) is despicable and sinful. Only humans have a soul; animals do not have it.

Man was created by God as a free being, but, having committed the Fall, he himself chose evil and went against the will of God. This is how evil arises, this is how a person becomes unfree. Man is not free and involuntary in anything; he is entirely dependent on God.

From the moment of the Fall, people are predestined to evil and do it even when they strive to do good.

The main goal of man is salvation before the Last Judgment, atonement for the sinfulness of the human race, unquestioning obedience to the church.

Doctrine of will and grace

Will is one of the fundamental abilities of man, which Augustine comes to after a long analysis of moral life and the possibility of choosing certain alternatives in it. Also, the will is the guide of intellectual knowledge. The ability of “free decision” of the will provides for the freedom of human action, its autonomy, and the possibility of choosing alternatives. Ideally, a person’s will should have the ability to determine itself and be truly free. Such freedom was lost with the Fall of man.

Augustine makes a distinction between good and evil will. Good will orients a person towards good, and evil will towards evil. The responsibility of each person for the act he has committed justifies the justice of divine retribution.

The force that largely determines a person’s salvation and his aspiration to God is divine grace. Grace is a special divine energy that acts towards a person and produces changes in his nature. Without grace, human salvation is impossible. The free decision of the will is only the ability to strive for something, but a person is able to realize his aspirations for the better only with the help of grace.

Grace in Augustine's view is directly related to the fundamental dogma of Christianity - the belief that Christ has redeemed all humanity. This means that by its nature grace is universal and should be given to all people. But it is obvious that not all people will be saved. Augustine explains this by saying that some people are not able to accept grace. This depends, first of all, on the capacity of their will. But as Augustine had to see, not all people who accepted grace were able to maintain “constancy in goodness.” This means that another special divine gift is needed that will help maintain this constancy. Augustine calls this gift “the gift of constancy.” Only by accepting this gift can those “called” become “chosen.”

Augustine developed his ideas about will and grace in a dispute with Pelagius.

According to Pelagius, our nature is neutral - neither good nor evil is inherent in it. Evil is committed by us as an abuse of free will. Babies are good by nature and are only potentially carriers of sin. Baptism “for the remission of sins” therefore makes sense only upon reaching adulthood, when a person already has free will and is capable of consciously committing a sin. To this, Augustine objected that sin is not only the result of free choice: it is a property of the very fallen nature of man. If a person is not with Christ, then he is against Christ. How can one be against Christ if not through sin? Therefore, unbaptized infants are also sinful. As stated in the Latin translation of Rom. 5, 12: in quo omnis peccaverunt, "in whom (Adam) all sinned." Adam is understood as all of humanity as a whole, therefore all people are sinners, “the mass of those who are perishing.”

Essentially, the dispute between Augustine and Pelagius comes down to the opposition of will and grace. Pelagius argued that sin is rooted in the will. Augustine, following the Apostle Paul, insisted that we often do what we do not want, or, on the contrary, we want what we are unable to do, and, therefore, will and actions are not connected with each other - we sin against our will !

So from now on how by one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, since all sinned in him(Rom. 5:12), the entire mass of the perishing passed into the power of the destroyer. So no one, no one at all, is free from this and will not be freed except by the grace of the Redeemer.

For Augustine, sin is rooted in the very nature of man, and not in his will: “They also put forward the following argument: if a sinner gives birth to a sinner, so that the guilt of original sin must be washed away by baptism in infancy, then it follows that righteous offspring are born from a righteous person. But this is not so... A person gives birth because he continues to lead the old way of life among the sons of this world, and not because he is striving for a new life among the sons of God."

Thus, the children of Christians are no exception. For from flesh is born flesh; the cause of sinfulness is lust, in which we take part. This kind of reasoning formed the basis of the idea of ​​the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary and the celibate priesthood.

Augustine presented his theory in the form of a diagram consisting of three parts:

Adam - can not sin.

Christ cannot sin.

We cannot help but sin.

However, Blessed Augustine was not very logical and consistent in his constructions. Following pastoral needs, he forgot about his theories and became a realist. When St. Augustine speaks about human life in his writings, he still recognizes the existence of positive principles. Good will exists in man, just as there is the possibility of cooperation with the divine will. However, the older Augustine became, the more pessimistic his worldview became. The crowning achievement of his pessimism is the theory of predestination.

Doctrine of Predestination

Augustine's doctrine of divine predestination is closely related to the problem of human free will and the action of grace. Predestination according to Augustine is an act of divine love and mercy towards the fallen human race.

Before the Fall, the first people had free will - freedom from external (including supernatural) causality and the ability to choose between good and evil. The limiting factor in their freedom was the moral law - a sense of duty to God.

After the Fall, people lost their free will, became slaves to their desires and could no longer help but sin.

The atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ helped people turn their gaze back to God. He showed by his death an example of obedience to the Father, obedience to His will ( “Not my will, but yours be done” OK.). Jesus atoned for Adam's sin by accepting the Father's will as his own.

Every person who follows the commandments of Jesus and accepts the will of God as his own saves his soul and is allowed into the kingdom of heaven.

Predestination (lat. praedeterminatio) - one of the most difficult points of religious philosophy, associated with the question of divine properties, the nature and origin of evil and the relationship of grace to freedom.

Initially, from the general “mass of destruction” God chose those worthy of eternal bliss. The number of predestined ones is constant. But none of the people knows about their fate, and therefore, the personal moral perfection of each person does not lose its meaning. In the context of the presence of predestination, human free will takes on the connotation of a subjective experience of freedom, but not the ontological ability to be saved or perish only by one’s own efforts.

People are able to do good only with the help of grace, which is incommensurate with merit and is given to those who are chosen and predestined for salvation. However, people are morally free creatures and can consciously prefer evil to good.

One might think that there is a predestination to evil on the part of God, since everything that exists ultimately depends on the omnipotent will of the omniscient Deity. This means that persistence in evil and the resulting death of these creatures is a product of the same divine will, which predetermines some to good and salvation, others to evil and destruction.

This idea of ​​absolute predestination was developed by Augustine, although his teaching had various mitigating reservations. The question of predestination was resolved dogmatically: we cannot know everything we believe ( "Believe so that you may understand"- Augustine's credo).

This theory left an indelible mark on Western theological thought. We find its most consistent expression among the Calvinists. In Augustine himself we do not find absolute confidence in his rightness. In his younger years, he believed that a person himself could take steps towards salvation. Later, in a polemic with Pelagius and as a result of clashes with reality, he lost faith in this possibility, but until the very end his doctrine of predestination and grace suffers from some inconsistency. In general, we can say that his thought is characterized by a hopeless attitude towards human nature.

The doctrine of time and memory

Of particular interest in Augustine's teaching is his concept of time.

Time is a measure of movement and change. The world is limited in space, and its existence is limited in time.

In his writings, he examines the paradox: time is usually viewed as a combination of past, present and future. But the past no longer exists, the future does not yet exist, and the present is only an infinitely brief moment between the past and the future, and it does not have any duration. Arguing on this topic, Augustine comes to the concept of psychological perception of time. The past and the future still exist, but in people’s minds: the past is a memory, the present is contemplation, the future is expectation.

Augustine discovered a fundamental connection between memory and time: we know about time only because we remember the past. Moreover, just as all people remember the past, some are able to “remember” the future, which explains the ability of clairvoyance. As a consequence, since time exists only because it is remembered, it means that things are necessary for its existence, and before the creation of the world, when there was nothing, there was no time.

Eternity - it neither was nor will be, it only exists. In the eternal there is neither transitory nor future. In eternity there is no variability and no intervals of time, since intervals of time consist of past and future changes in objects. Eternity is the world of thoughts and ideas of God, where everything is once and for all.

Good and evil

Speaking about the actions of God, thinkers emphasized his omnibenevolence. But there is also evil going on in the world. Why does God allow evil?

Augustine argued that everything created by God is, to one degree or another, involved in absolute goodness - the all-goodness of God: after all, the Almighty, in creating creation, imprinted a certain measure, weight and order in the created; they contain an extraterrestrial image and meaning. To the extent that there is goodness in nature, in people, in society.

Evil is not some force that exists on its own, but a weakened good, a necessary step towards good. Visible imperfection is part of world harmony and testifies to the fundamental goodness of all things: “Any nature that can become better is good”.

It also happens that the evil that torments a person ultimately turns out to be good. So, for example, a person is punished for a crime (evil) in order to bring him good through atonement and pangs of conscience, which leads to purification. In other words, without evil we would not know what good is.

Doctrine of knowledge

Man is endowed with intelligence, will and memory. The mind turns the direction of the will towards itself, that is, it is always aware of itself, always desires and remembers. Augustine's assertion that the will participates in all acts of knowledge became an innovation in the theory of knowledge.

Stages of knowledge of truth:

• inner feeling - sensory perception.
• sensation - knowledge about sensory things as a result of reflection by the mind on sensory data.
• reason - a mystical touch to the highest truth - enlightenment, intellectual and moral improvement.

Reason is the gaze of the soul, with which it contemplates the true by itself, without the mediation of the body. In the study of sciences, people are helped by authorities and reason. One should trust only the most excellent authorities and lead one's life accordingly.

The statement that a person consists of soul and body is directly related to the idea of ​​​​two levels of knowledge. At one level, cognition is related to bodily sensations: we see, hear, etc. and thus learn about changeable objects. Such knowledge is unstable, impermanent. But there is, in addition, knowledge of the soul. The soul is capable of comprehending unchanging, permanent objects. For example, only through knowledge of the soul can we assert that 2 + 2 = 4 always, eternally. This kind of knowledge is based on an intuitive, inner vision of truth. Further, Augustine argues as follows: I know that 2 + 2 = 4, but I, my soul, are changeable: I cannot be sure of anything, for I am mortal. This implies the necessity of the existence of an eternal, unchanging God: otherwise no eternal ideas are possible. This thought is one of Augustine's few optimistic ideas. The philosophical definition of God directly follows from it: God, according to Augustine’s definition, is an unchanging Being, Essence. This is what is meant in the book of Exodus: I Am That I Am(Ex. 3, 14). The definition is based on the already mentioned Platonic principle “to truly be is to always be.”

This approach differs significantly from the absolute, apophatic theology of St. Gregory of Nyssa. If the idea that 2 + 2 = 4 exists in God, then this means that we can know God through our intuitive knowledge. In this area, Eastern and Western theology do take radically different paths. For, according to Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa, Dionysius the Areopagite (pseudo-Dionysius) and other Eastern fathers, God is absolutely above everything, beyond everything that is accessible to our understanding, and “emerges” from His inaccessibility Himself as a personal God, and not by virtue of created cognition.

Doctrine of the Holy Trinity

Augustine wrote his book On the Trinity at the end of his life. It sums up his entire concept of God. This book subsequently became the basis of the classical Western, “psychological” understanding of the Holy Trinity: This is how the Trinity abides: reason, love, knowledge; unmerged, but plural in themselves, mutually all in all... Thus, in the mind there is a kind of image of the Trinity: knowledge - the offspring of reason - and its word regarding itself; the third element constitutes love, and all three constitute unity and one essence.

Augustine begins his argument with man, created in the image of God, and, based on his understanding of human psychology, draws conclusions regarding the Holy Trinity. He realizes that this is not enough, so he continues: In this supreme Trinity, incomparably superior to all, the Persons are inseparable: three people cannot be called one person, but the Trinity is called one God, She is one God. Further, the trinity of the Trinity is different from the human one. Man, this image of God, consists of three elements, being one person. There are three Persons in the Trinity: the Father of the Son, the Son of the Father and the Spirit of the Father and the Son... In this image of the Trinity (man), three elements belong to man, but are not man, whereas in the supreme Trinity, the image of which we are talking about, three Persons are not belong to God, but are Him, being themselves three Persons, and not one. And this, without a doubt, is amazingly incomprehensible or incomprehensibly amazing: for, although the image of the Trinity is one person, and the supreme Trinity itself is three Persons, this divine Trinity of three Persons is more inseparable than the human trinity in one person.

This remote, not very successful analogy with man represents an attempt to put an end to the Arian heresy once and for all: Augustine wants to show that the Son and the Holy Spirit belong to the very essence of God. Unlike Gregory of Nyssa, for whom the image of God represents all of humanity in a collective sense, for Augustine it is one abstract person.

This logic of reasoning - from one person to the Trinity - found its extreme expression in Western heresies, Sabellianism and modalism. The Eastern approach, which consists in asserting the trinitarian nature of God and only then proving that these three constitute a unity, opens the way to Arianism. Both approaches are valid, but neither is free from the danger of heretical misunderstandings and abuses.

For greater clarity, Augustine resorts to a wide variety of analogies: Further, when I speak of my memory, intellect and will, each of these different names refers to different entities, but these three entities unite to give rise to separate names (for each of these names is the result of the activity of memory, intellect and will). In the same way, the voice of the Father, the flesh of the Son, the love of the Holy Spirit - each of them arises from the joint activity of the Trinity, although these manifestations relate to the corresponding Persons.

But this doesn't help much either. Augustine tries his best to understand everything to himself and explain to others. Where the Eastern fathers would have directly said that we are dealing with a mystery that cannot be explained, but can only be contemplated, the Western theologian does not abandon his efforts. He attempts to explain the trinity of God from a philosophical point of view in terms of "relative predicates." The essence of God is one, but within this essence there are relative differences. Augustine is well aware that he does not use the terms “essence” and “hypostasis” in the same sense as the Greeks: They (the Greeks) also use the term hypostasis in contrast to ousia, essence; and many of our writers, exploring these issues in Greek sources, adopted the phrase: “one ousia, three hypostases.” In Latin it sounds like “one essence (essentia), three substances (substantia).” But in our language "essence" has the same meaning as "substance", so we avoid using this formula: we prefer to say: "one essentia or substantia and three Persons" - a phraseology that was used by many Latin authorities.

The book On the Trinity also discusses the issue of the Holy Spirit: In the relationship of the Trinity... The Father who begets the Son is His source. Whether He is also the source of the Holy Spirit is not an easy question, for “He (the Spirit) proceeds from the Father.” And if so, then by virtue of this He (the Father) is the source not only in relation to what He gives birth or creates, but also in relation to what He bestows. This also sheds light on the question that worries many, why the Spirit is not also the Son, since He “proceeds from the Father.” For He does not come forth as begotten, but as given: therefore He is not called the Son, since He is not related to the Father as the Only Begotten. Nor was He created like us to receive adoption as sons. ...If the gift has its source in the giver, then it should be recognized that the Father and the Son are the sources of the Spirit: not two sources, but one in relation to the Holy Spirit, just as in relation to Creation the Father, Son and Spirit are one source, one Creator, one Lord.

We also find this understanding of the Holy Spirit as a gift in Saint Hilary of Pictavia. In attempting to reconcile this with Scripture's statement that "the Spirit proceeds from the Father," Augustine is forced to relativize the differences between the Father and the Son. This approach inevitably leads to the conclusion that the Spirit is somewhat of secondary importance. Such a theological understanding of the Holy Trinity would subsequently serve as a convenient justification for the Filioque, the addition of which to the Creed would receive dogmatic justification in the West.

Doctrine of the Church and the Sacraments

When Augustine begins to talk about the Church and the sacraments, we see a completely different side of him, at his best. It is interesting that his views on the Holy Spirit are not reflected in his teaching about the Church: The person who possesses the Holy Spirit is in the Church, which speaks in the language of all people. Everyone who is outside the Church does not have the Holy Spirit. That is why the Holy Spirit deigned to reveal Himself in the languages ​​of all nations, so that man, belonging to the one Church speaking all languages, could realize that he has the Holy Spirit... The body consists of many members, and one spirit gives life to all the members... Just as our spirit (that is, our soul) is in the members of our body, so the Holy Spirit is in the members of the Body of Christ, the Church... While we are alive and well, all the members of our body perform their functions. If one member falls ill, all the other members suffer along with it. But since this member belongs to the body, it will suffer, but cannot die. To die means to "give up the spirit." If you cut off any part of the body, it retains the shape of a finger, hand, ear, but there is no life in it. This is the state of man outside the Church. You ask, does he receive the sacraments? - Receives. Baptism? - He also has baptism. Confession of faith? - And he has it. But this is just a form. And it is vain to boast of form if you do not possess the life of the Spirit.

We see with what urgency Augustine emphasizes the role of the Holy Spirit as the main creative force of the Church.

In addition to the teaching about the Church, Augustine's sermons contain sound teaching about the sacraments: The reason why they (bread and wine) are called sacraments is that we see them as one thing and understand something else. What we see has an appearance; what we understand has spiritual fruit. If you want to understand the Body of Christ, listen to the words of the Apostle: And you are the body of Christ, and individually members (1 Cor. 12:27). If you are the body and members of Christ, then on the altar lies your secret: what you partake of is your own secret. Your answer "Amen" is addressed to yourself, and with this answer you ascend. You hear the words "body of Christ", you answer "Amen". Be a member of Christ so that your “Amen” may be true.

Augustine understands the Eucharist realistically in terms of the unity of the Church. The Eucharist is the Eucharist insofar as there is a Church celebrating the Eucharist. Our “Amen” is addressed to ourselves, to our nature, which forms part of the body of Christ. The Holy Spirit must descend both on the Gifts and on us, and only this makes the sacrament possible. The sacrament of the Eucharist is understood as a consequence, as a seal of our unity, as the body of Christ, the Church.

Augustine expresses his views on the Church and the sacraments also in the context of polemics with the Donatists, who did not want to recognize as valid the ordinations performed by bishops who had compromised themselves during persecution. By Augustine's time this was old history, and Donatism was firmly established in Africa as a sect with an elitist mentality that made extremely brutal demands regarding the validity of baptism (from a "legitimate" bishop or not). St. Augustine's arguments against Donatism first of all affirm the catholicity of the Church. In a letter addressed to the Donatist Bishop Honoratus, he writes: Please be so kind as to answer the following question: do you happen to know why Christ should lose His property, which had spread throughout the world, and for no apparent reason find it preserved only among Africans, and even then not all of them? The Catholic Church truly exists in Africa because God willed and ordained that it should exist throughout the world. Whereas your party, called the party of Donatus, does not exist in all those places where the writings, speeches and acts of the apostles found their distribution.

Simply put, Augustine argues that the Church should be for everyone. Although conciliarity does not mean universality, it is, in any case, built on this principle.

Regarding the sacraments, Augustine discusses the problem of "efficacy": The reason why Blessed Cyprian and other eminent Christians ... decided that baptism into Christ could not exist among heretics and schismatics is that they failed to distinguish between the sacrament and the effectiveness of the sacrament. Due to the fact that the effectiveness of baptism, which consists in liberation from sins and sincerity, was not found among the heretics, they assumed that the sacrament itself did not exist among them. But... it is obvious that within the unity of the Church, people who are vicious and lead a bad life can neither give nor receive remission of sins. Nevertheless, the pastors of the Catholic Church throughout the world clearly teach that such people can both receive the sacrament of baptism and perform it... The sanctity of baptism does not depend on the shortcomings of the person receiving or performing it, even if he is a schismatic... One who is baptized by a schismatic can be baptized into salvation if he himself is not in schism... If the schismatic turns away from his abomination and reconciles himself with the Catholic Church, his sins are forgiven by the power of the baptism he received because of mercy.

We can conclude that by “reality” we mean the reality of the bestowal of grace, and by “efficacy” we mean the perception of this grace by the person receiving the sacrament. The principle of differentiation between these two concepts was subsequently the cause of many disputes and disagreements. It is unlikely that it can be used in terms of Orthodox ecclesiology. Baptism is entry into the Church, therefore baptism into condemnation (without entry into the Church at all) is impossible by definition. In view of this, it is not entirely clear which baptism is considered “ineffective.” On the other hand, the Church has never believed in the sacraments as magic: in each case, a free perception of grace by a person is necessary, and therefore his readiness and dignity. The Orthodox approach to the sacraments, being alien to a rationally precise distinction between reality and effectiveness, rather presupposes discernment and the ability to pastorally recognize the gifts of the Spirit. The Church always recognizes (or does not recognize) the sacraments in relation to itself. Church sacraments are the life of the Church itself as the body of Christ, therefore the Church has the responsibility to wisely recognize and make decisions in specific circumstances.

The doctrine of history, politics and state

Augustine substantiated and justified the existence of property inequality between people in society. He argued that inequality is an inevitable phenomenon of social life and it is pointless to strive for equalization of wealth; it will exist in all ages of man's earthly life. But still, all people are equal before God, and therefore Augustine called for living in peace.

The state is the punishment for original sin; is a system of domination of some people over others; it is not intended for people to achieve happiness and good, but only for survival in this world.

A just state is a Christian state.

Functions of the state: ensuring law and order, protecting citizens from external aggression, helping the Church and fighting heresy.

Augustine argued for the superiority of spiritual power over secular power. The state is necessary due to the fall of man and his inability to independently take the path of faith. Having accepted the Augustinian teaching, the church declared its existence as an earthly part of God's city, presenting itself as the supreme arbiter in earthly affairs.

In the 22 books of his main work, “On the City of God,” Augustine makes an attempt to embrace the world-historical process, to connect the history of mankind with the plans and intentions of the Divine. He develops the ideas of linear historical time and moral progress. Moral history begins with the fall of Adam and is seen as a progressive movement towards moral perfection gained in grace.

In the historical process, Augustine identified six main eras (this periodization was based on facts from the biblical history of the Jewish people):

• first era - from Adam to the Great Flood

• second - from Noah to Abraham

• third - from Abraham to David

• fourth - from David to the Babylonian captivity

• fifth - from the Babylonian captivity to the birth of Christ

• sixth - began with Christ and will end with the end of history in general and with the Last Judgment.

Humanity in the historical process forms two “cities”: the secular state - the kingdom of evil and sin (the prototype of which was Rome) and the state of God - the Christian church.

“Earthly City” and “Heavenly City” are a symbolic expression of two types of love, the struggle of egoistic (“self-love brought to the point of neglect of God”) and moral (“love of God to the point of forgetting oneself”) motives. These two cities develop in parallel through six eras. At the end of the 6th era, the citizens of the “city of God” will receive bliss, and the citizens of the “earthly city” will be given over to eternal torment.

In his teaching, Christian conviction, even fanaticism, was combined with realism and moderation. Thus, Augustine combined the concept of a “better life” (happiness from God) with the capabilities and abilities of man, with realistic humanism: a person does not hate a person because of his vice, he noted, he does not love vice because of a person, but he hates vice and loves person. Augustine sharply contrasted church and state. With his assertion that the “earthly city,” that is, statehood, is associated with the kingdom of the devil, he laid the foundation for many medieval heresies. But at the same time, he discussed the idea of ​​renewing the “earthly city” in line with Christian virtue: all forms of government must respect God and man.

Definition 1

Aurelius Augustine – ($354 – $430) key figure in Christian philosophy, theologian, representative of patristics, founder of Augustinism, the Augustinian order.

Augustine's views and writings were prepared by the previous tradition of Christian thought and Latin patristics. The teachings of St. Augustine - the culmination of all patristics .

Many parts of his life can be traced back to his autobiography, Confessions. The most significant and monumental work is “On the City of God.”

It is known that he approached Christianity through Neoplatonism, skepticism, and was converted by Basil the Great.

In the work "Confession" Augustine turns to God, talking about the journey that everyone is destined to take: from imperfection to Man. A person confesses to God, who knows everything about him, before whom his conscience is open. But it is not the Creator who needs it, but the person himself in order to verbalize the life he has lived.

Memory theme

In the tenth book of the Confessions, Augustine touches on theme of memory.

Memory consists not of sensory objects, but of their images, instantly appearing before the mental gaze of the one who remembered them.

A person has at his disposal everything that he can perceive with his senses, everything, with the exception of what is forgotten. In this place, he meets himself and begins to remember what he did, when, where and what he felt at that time, and how he did it.

There are all his knowledge that a person received in the process of comprehending the liberal sciences, and that knowledge that he has not yet forgotten. We do not contain images, but the objects themselves. Everything is in memory, and it is not the image of the object that is retained by it, but the object itself

Note 1

To remember something, a person uses the power of his memory, with the help of which he is able to find and name the desired image. Mental states are stored in memory

Memory is the soul, the mind. Augustine calls memory the “stomach” of the soul, and joy and sadness food.

“I name the image of the sun - and it is in my memory; I remember not the image of the image, but the image itself, which appears when I remember it. I say “memory” and I know what I’m talking about. And where can I find out about it, if not in memory itself? Does she really see herself with the help of an image, and not directly?”

When we talk about forgetfulness, we also extract the concept of it from our memory.

“But if we retain in memory what we remember, then, if we did not remember what forgetfulness is, we could not, having heard this word, understand its meaning; forgetfulness, therefore, is remembered by memory: its presence is necessary in order not to forget, and at the same time, when it is present, we forget. Doesn’t it follow from this that it is not forgetfulness itself that is present in memory when we remember it, but only its image, for, if it were present itself, it would make us not remember, but forget.”

A person stores himself as a complete image in his memory. “Here I am, remembering myself, I, the soul.

It is not surprising if what is outside of me is far from me, but what is closer to me than myself? And so I cannot understand the power of my memory, but without it I could not name myself.” The memory contains everything that was in the soul.

We know about God only because we are already involved in him. He is in our memory. Thus, in memory we do not deal with the same thing that we once experienced. This is what a person uses to reconstruct himself, his image. This is the only way the person himself appears. Memory allows him to look at himself from the outside, to meet himself. Without it, a person is not able to call himself.

Plato's influence

Augustine's worldview is a sensitive and meaningful compilation of Christian teachings with ancient philosophy, Neoplatonism.

With the help of this teaching, he comprehended the problems of the universe. He saw philosophy as a means of proving the truth of religion.

Note 2

The foundation of his theology is the teaching of Plato and the Neoplatonists. Augustine believed that it was these philosophical concepts that could solve the problems posed.

An Augustinian variation on Paton's philosophy of ideas, Christian Platonism, was believed in a theological and personalistic sense. Augustine said that in God there is an ideal image of the real world. Augustine, like Plato, has two worlds, one ideal in God, the other real in the world that arose through the embodiment of ideas into matter.

St. Augustine was in agreement with the tradition of Greek philosophy and did not deny that the meaning of human existence lies in happiness, which is determined by philosophy. Happiness can only be found in God. Through knowledge of God and through trials of the soul, human happiness can be achieved.

Thinking in the style of Plato, Augustine proposes to posit the soul spiritualistically. The soul is a substance, original, not corporeal. It has nothing material, but only has the function of thinking, memory and will, differing from the body in perfection. This is a characteristic understanding of the soul in ancient philosophy. Augustine models it in the light of the Christian religion and adds an important feature - the perfection of the soul comes from God, it is close to him and immortal. There is a certain knowledge about the soul; with the help of the soul we cognize the highest idea of ​​good, the idea of ​​God.

The page layout of this e-book corresponds to the original.

About the blessed life.

ONE BOOK

This book, written for three days, contains competitions dedicated to Theodore, which reduce the matter to the determination that the blessed life consists exclusively in the knowledge of God.

Chapter I.

Preface

Dedicates the book to Theodore, and reveals to him what

by a kind of wind he was driven into the harbor of Christians skoy philosophy.

Reason for competition.

If only, most benevolent and great Theodore, in that harbor from which they enter the country and onto the soil of a blessed life, they would bring this direction with their minds ( to the ship) and self-imposed good will: I don’t know whether I would or would not have reason to say that a much smaller number of people would then have reached this harbor; although even now, as we see, very rare and few are included in it. For when God, or nature, or the law of necessity, or our will, or something else connected with this, or all of this together (for this question is very obscure, although you have already taken up the task of explaining it) throws us as if for no reason and as it were necessary into this world as if into some stormy sea; how much and who would give

an account of where he needs to strive, which way to return, if someday some adversity, seemingly unfortunate to the stupid, did not nail the ignorant and wandering, against even their will, and contrary to the direction they had taken, to the most desirable land?

So the people whom philosophy can accept (into its harbor) seem to me like three kinds of sailors. One of them is those who, from a short distance, where their age, which controls the mind, finds them, with the help of a small wave and blow of the oars, they leave and take refuge in this peaceful place; and from there the rest of the citizens, whoever they can, are given the clearest sign of what to do, so that those who are inspired by this will strive for them. Another genus, opposite to the previous one, are those who, seduced by the deceptive appearance of the sea, decided to go out into the open sea, dared to sail away from their homeland and often forget it. If (I don’t know how this happens, but it happens in an extremely mysterious way) the wind blows from the stern, which is considered favorable, they reach the greatest disasters, proud and rejoicing that they are constantly flattered by the most deceptive bucket of pleasures and honors. What, in fact, can they wish for in such circumstances, which, pushing, catch them, if not bad weather, but, if not enough, then a severe storm and contrary wind, which would lead them, although crying and sighing, to joys true and strong? However, many of this kind, who have not yet wandered very far, are brought back by certain and not so great sorrows. These are those people who, either due to the sad and tragic fate of their wealth, or due to annoying failures in small matters, as if for lack of other things to do, having read the books of learned and wise people,

They awaken in some way in the harbor itself, from where no promises of the insidiously smiling sea can lure them out. The third kind of people among these are those who, either on the very threshold of youth, or having been blown by the wind for a long time, see some signs behind them, remember among the waves about their dear homeland, and, without being deceived in any way, without hesitation at all, rush to her in a straight direction; and most of them, having lost their way from the straight path among the fogs, or locating it according to the setting stars, or being seduced by certain temptations, postpone the time of a good voyage and wander further; They are often exposed to danger. Often, they too are driven to their most desired and peaceful homeland by the collapse of fleeting blessings, as if by some storm contrary to their efforts.

But all of them, no matter how anyone was brought to the land of blessed life, should be extremely afraid and with special caution avoid one terrible mountain located in front of the harbor itself, which causes great danger to those entering. For it is so brilliant, so clothed in false light, that it offers itself to those who have not yet arrived, but also to inhabit it, and promises to satisfy all their wishes, just like the most blessed earth; but very often he attracts people from the harbor itself and sometimes keeps them on himself, letting them enjoy the height itself, from where it is pleasant for them to look at others with contempt. However, the latter often remind those walking to beware of rocks hidden under the water, or not to consider it easy to climb to them; and in the most favorable manner they instruct how to enter (the harbor) without being exposed to danger from the proximity of this land. Envying them in their emptiest glory, they thus show the place

most reliable. Under this mountain, which those approaching philosophy and entering its region should be wary of, common sense allows us to understand nothing more than a proud passion for the emptiest glory. To such an extent it does not have anything dense and solid within itself that it plunges and absorbs the proud people walking on it into the breaking, fragile soil and, returning them to darkness, deprives them of the brightest home, which they have almost already seen.

If this is so, take heed, my Theodore, for in you I see and always honor the only and most capable person who can satisfy my desires, take heed, I say, to which kind of people from the said three I belong, in what place I am in your I’m looking at what kind of help I can probably expect from you. I was twenty years old when, at the school of rhetoric, I read the famous book of Cicero, called Hortensius, and was inflamed with such a love for philosophy that I thought of switching to it at the same time. But there was no shortage of fogs for me that made my path difficult; For so long, I confess, I was guided by the stars plunging into the ocean, which misled me. At first, a certain childhood timidity kept me from researching this kind of research; and when I became more cheerful, dispersed this darkness and came to the conviction that one should rather believe those who teach than those who command, I came across such people to whom this light, perceived by the eyes, seemed worthy of veneration on a par with the highest and divine. I didn't agree with this; but I thought that under this cover they were hiding something great that they would reveal someday later. When, after their dispersion, I escaped from them, especially after I had crossed this sea, my rudders, opposing all the winds, held Akara in their hands for a long time among the waves.

demics. Then I came to these lands; here I recognized the northern constellation, to which I could entrust myself. From the speeches of our priest, and sometimes from yours, I saw that you should not think of anything corporeal when you think about God, nor when you think about the soul; since this is the one thing of all that is closest to God. But, I admit, the attractiveness of a woman and a career kept me from plunging immediately into the bosom of philosophy: having experienced this, I then decided—as only the happiest few manage—to rush with all sails and oars into this harbor and calm down there. Having read several books of Plato, of whom I know you to be an ardent follower, and comparing with them, as best I could, the authority of those who have taught us the divine secrets, I was inflamed to such an extent that I was ready to cut off all these anchors, if my opinion had not swayed me some people. Then, what else could be done but for a storm, considered a misfortune, to come to the aid of me, who had indulged in empty exercises? And so I was overcome by such heartache that, not being able to bear the weight of that profession, which, perhaps, would have carried me to the sirens, I dropped everything and brought the shattered ship into the desired calm.

So you see in what philosophy, as if in a harbor, I float. But although this harbor opens wide before me and although its space is no longer dangerous, it does not completely exclude error. For I absolutely do not know in which part of the earth, the only blessed one, I should approach and land. In fact, what solid thing have I developed when the question of the soul still shakes me and leads me to bewilderment? Therefore, I beg you, in the name of your virtue, in the name of philanthropy, in the name of the union and communion of souls, extend your hand to me. And this means

love me and believe that in turn I love you and you are dear to me. If I beg this from you, then very easily and without much effort I will achieve the most blissful life, the owner of which I consider you to be. And so that you know what I’m doing and how I’m gathering my friends to that harbor, and so that from here you can more fully recognize my soul (I don’t find any other signs with which I would show myself to you), I decided to address you and dedicate the beginning of my competition to your name, which, it seems to me, came out both more reverently and more worthy of your name. And this is very natural: because we were talking about a blessed life; but I don’t see anything that should more be called a gift from God. I am not embarrassed by your eloquence: for I cannot be afraid of what I love, although I do not possess it; and I am even less afraid of the heights of fortune: for in your opinion, no matter how great it is, it is of secondary importance; over whom it dominates, it makes them themselves second. Now I ask you to listen to what I convey to you.

The Ides of November was my birthday. After dinner, so modest as not to burden any of the mental faculties with it, I invited everyone who shared the table with us that day, as every day, to sit in the bathhouse; because this place seemed to me appropriate to the weather and secluded. There were with me - I dare to make them known by name to your rare cordiality - firstly, my mother, to whose merit, I think, everything I live belongs; then my brother Navigius, then my citizens and students Trigetius and Licentius; even I wanted my cousins, Lastidian and Rustic, to be there; although they do not tolerate anyone even from grammarians, I considered their general common sense necessary in the work that I was undertaking. - Reality, finally, is with us and the least of all in the years,

but whose abilities, if love does not deceive me, promise something great; This is my son Adeodatus. When they set their attention, I started like this.

Chapter II

First day competition

We consist of soul and body. Food is necessary for the body: And for the soul there is a kind of food. He is not blessed who does not have what he desires. But not everyone who has what he desires is blessed. What a person must acquire in order to be blessed. Who has God. An academician cannot be blessed, therefore he is not wise.

Does it seem clear to you that we consist of soul and body? - When everyone agreed, Navigius answered that he does not know this - - Do you know absolutely nothing, I ask, or something that you don’t know. should this also be included? - I don’t think so, he answers, so that I don’t know anything. - Can you, I ask, tell us something of what you know? - I can, he says. - Tell me, I say, something, if it's not hard for you. And when he hesitated, I asked: Do you at least know that you are living? “I know,” he said. “You know, therefore, that you have life?” No one can live otherwise than by life. I know, he says, and this too. “You also know that you have a body?” He said that he knows. So, do you already know that you consist of body and life? - By the way, I know this too; But whether only the body and life exist, I don’t know. “So, I say, you don’t doubt these two, body and soul; but you don’t know if there is something else that serves to replenish and improve

the creation of man. - Yes, he says. - What is this, - we, I say, will explore, if we can, at another time; and now, since we all agree that a person cannot be either without a body or without a soul, I ask everyone: for which of them do we need food? - For the sake of the body, says Licentius. The rest hesitated and reasoned among themselves how food could seem necessary for the body, when it is required for life, and life belongs only to the soul. “Does it seem to you, I said then, that food has to do with that part which, as we see this, food grows and becomes stronger? - Everyone agreed with this, with the exception of Trigetius. He objected: Why didn’t I grow larger as a result of my gluttony? “All bodies,” I said to this, have their own size established by nature, which they cannot outgrow; however, they become smaller in volume if they lack food, as we most easily notice in animals. And no one doubts that the bodies of all animals lose weight as soon as they are deprived of food. “To lose weight,” Licentius objected, does not mean to decrease. For what I wanted, I said, what was said was enough. For the question is, does food belong to the body? And she belongs to him, because the body, when deprived of food, is reduced to thinness. - Everyone agreed that this is so.

Isn’t there, I asked, food for the soul as well? Does knowledge seem to you to be the food of the soul? “Quite so,” answered the mother: I believe that the soul feeds on nothing other than the understanding of things and knowledge. When this opinion seemed doubtful to Trigetius, his mother said to him: Didn’t you yourself now teach us where the soul comes from and where it feeds? For, after one dinner dish, you said that you didn’t notice what kind of utensils we used, because you were thinking about something else, although from the blue itself

Yes, he could not hold back his hands and teeth. So, where was your spirit at the time when it did not observe this while you were eating, from there and with this kind of food, believe me, and your soul is fed, fed, that is, by speculation and reflection, if it can learn something through them - something. “Don’t you agree,” I said when they argued noisily about this subject, “that the souls of the most learned people are, in their own way, fuller and greater than the souls of the ignorant?” “Undoubtedly so,” they answered. “So, it would be correct to say that the souls of those people who are not enriched by any science, not saturated with any good knowledge, souls are thin and, as it were, hungry? - I believe, Trigetius objected, that the souls of such people are full, but of vices and debauchery. - This is what I said, it represents - believe me - a kind of infertility and, as it were, hunger of the spirit. For just as the body, when it is deprived of food, is almost always subject to diseases and abscesses, which serve as an indication of hunger in it; Likewise, the souls of those people are full of such ailments that indicate their hunger. On this basis, the ancients called debauchery the mother of all vices, because it is something negative 1) that is, because it is nothing. The opposite virtue to this vice is called temperance. So how did this last one get its name? from the fetus 2), for the sake of some spiritual productivity, is called debauchery from barrenness, i.e. from nothing: for nothing is everything that is destroyed, that is destroyed

________________

1) Nequidquam sit, yes Not-something, i.e. Not There is something, otherwise: represents something negative. Nequidquam is a play on words with nequitia, debauchery.

2) Temperance, frugalitas,... from the fruit, and fruge: again a play on words.

It seems that it is disappearing and, as it were, constantly dying. That is why we call such people dead. On the contrary, there is something abiding, constant, always remaining the same: this is precisely virtue, a significant part of which, and the most beautiful, is called moderation or abstinence. If this does not seem so clear to you that you can understand, then at least agree with me that for both bodies and souls - since the souls of the ignorant are, as it were, full - there are two kinds of food , one healthy and beneficial, the other unhealthy and harmful.

And if this is so, then I believe that on my birthday I should offer a slightly better meal, not only for our bodies, but also for our souls, since we agree among ourselves that a person consists of body and soul, But I will offer you this meal only if you are hungry. For if I try to feed you when you are unwilling and disdainful, then I will waste my labor in vain; but it would be more desirable that you demand more of this type of food than bodily food. This will happen if your souls are healthy; because the sick, as we see it, even when their bodies are ill, refuse their food and do not accept it.—With a satisfied look on their faces and in one voice, they all said that whatever I make, they already accept and thank me in advance.

Do we want to be blessed, I asked, entering the conversation again? - As soon as I uttered these words, everyone answered with one voice that this is so. - Do you consider the one who does not have what he desires to be blessed? - No, they answer “So, blessed is everyone who has what he desires?” “Blessed,” the mother answers, if he desires and has good things; if she wants bad, then she is unhappy, even if she had it. - You, mother, I tell her with

a smile of joy decisively took possession of the very strength of philosophy. Only, due to a lack of words, no doubt, you did not express yourself as extensively as Tullius, with whose saying your words agree. Exactly, in the essay Hortensius, written by him in praise and defense of philosophy, he says the following: “Here, everyone—not philosophers, however, but people ready to argue—say that the blessed are those who live the way they want; but this is not true, since wanting what is not decent is in itself the greatest misfortune. Not getting what you want is not so much disastrous as wanting to get what you shouldn’t. For the depravity of the will does more evil to everyone than the fortune of good. “With these words, she (the mother) spoke in such a way that we, completely forgetting about her will, thought that some great man was sitting with us, while I understood, as far as I could, from what and how divine a source they flowed.” But, says Licentius, you must tell us what everyone should desire and what he should strive for in order to be blessed. “If you like,” I told him, invite me to your birthday, I will willingly eat whatever you offer me .—On the same conditions, I ask you to eat from me today, and not to demand what, perhaps, has not been prepared.—When he began to regret his modest and fearful remark, I said: So we agree that whoever does not have that what he desires cannot be blissful; and on the other hand, not everyone is blessed and he who has what he desires? - They answered that they agreed.

Would you not agree, I ask, with the fact that he is unhappy who is not blessed? - There were no doubters. - So, I ask again, everyone who does not have what they desire is unhappy? - Everyone agreed that this is so. “Well,” I continue, a person must prepare for himself,

to be blessed? It may be that at this feast of ours it will be served, so that Licentius’s hunger will not remain unsatisfied: for, in my opinion, I should prepare for him what he would have whenever he wanted.—They said that this is certain.—So, , I say, it must always be abiding, independent of fortune and not subject to any accidents. Because we cannot have anything mortal and transitory at the time we desire and as quickly as we desire.” Everyone agreed with this. But Trigetius objected: There are many such lucky people who have in abundance these things that are perishable and subject to chance, but pleasant for real life, so that they do not lack anything that they desire - To this I said to him: Does it seem To you, blessed is he who is afraid? “I don’t think so,” he says. But can, I say, everyone not be afraid if he can lose what he loves? - He cannot answer. - However, these random benefits can be lost. Consequently, the one who loves them and possesses them cannot be blessed. He did not argue against this. “But,” the mother objected, even if he were calm about the fact that he would not lose all this, in that case he cannot be satisfied with this kind of thing. This means that he is unhappy just because he remains constantly in need. - To this I said to her: Doesn’t a person seem blessed to you if he has all these things in abundance, if he limits his desires, and, satisfied with these things, enjoys them decently and with pleasantness?—In that case, she answered, he is blessed not by these things, but by the moderation of his spirit. “Great,” I said; There shouldn’t be any other answer to this question, not even from you. So we have no doubt

in no way that the one who decides to be blessed must acquire for himself that which always abides and that cannot be stolen by any fierce fortune. - With this, Trigetius noted, we agreed even earlier. - Don’t you think, I asked, God is eternal and always abiding? - This, answered Licentius, is so certain that there is no need for a question. - Others agreed with this pious answer. - So, I said, blessed is he who has God.

When they joyfully and quite willingly accepted this, I said: I think that we should ask nothing more than about which of the people has God; for such a one will be truly blessed. What do you think about this? - To this Licentius said that he who lives well has God; and Trigetius - that he has God who does what is pleasing to God. Lastidian also agreed with the latter’s opinion. “Our youth, the least of all, answered that he who has God does not have an unclean spirit.” The mother approved of all opinions, but especially the last one. Navigius was silent; and when I asked him what he thought, he answered that he liked the latter. I should, I thought, also ask Rusticus, who was silent and at a loss, more through shyness than reflection, what his opinion was on such an important subject; he agreed with Trigetius.

Then I said: I have everyone’s opinion about a truly great subject, beyond which nothing should be asked, and nothing can be found; if only we will explore it as calmly and sincerely as we began. But since today there would be a lot of this, and since there is a kind of immoderation in food and for souls, how soon they pounce on everything beyond measure and greedily (for in this case

they digest it poorly, from which there arises no less danger for the health of minds, as from hunger): then, if you wish, we will tackle this question tomorrow from hand to mouth. Now I ask you to enjoy only what it occurred to me, your servant, to quickly serve at the table; and that, if I’m not mistaken, it was made and baked, as it were, with school honey, like those dishes that are usually served last.-Hearing this, everyone seemed to reach out to the dish that was brought in, and forced me to quickly say what it was.-And What do you think, I said: isn’t this whole question you raised already over with the Academicians? - As soon as this name was heard, those three to whom this subject was known quickly stood up and seemed to stretch out their hands to help - how this is done - to the servant bringing in (the food), showing in the best possible words that they did not intend to listen more willingly about anything.

Then I put the matter this way: obviously I said that he is not blessed who does not have what he desires, as you proved a little earlier. Meanwhile, no one seeks what he does not want to find; They are constantly looking for the truth, the trace. want to find her. But they don't find her; therefore, they do not have what they desire and therefore are not blessed. But no one is wise except the blessed one; therefore, the Academician is not wise. - At the same time, as if immediately grasping everything, they screamed. But Licentius, dwelling on the subject with great attention and caution, was afraid of his consent and added: I grabbed it along with you, because I cried out, amazed at this conclusion. But I won’t let anything into my stomach, but I’ll save my part for Alivius: let him suck it with me or convince me why I shouldn’t touch it. “Sweet,” I said, should

rather be afraid of Navigius, with his damaged spleen. - On the contrary, he said, grinning; such things will heal me. I don’t know why, but this twisted and prickly thing that you suggested has, as someone put it about Imet honey, a sharp-sweet taste, and does not bloat the stomach at all. Why is all this, although it stings the palate a little, I can put it into my stomach with great pleasure. For I don’t see how your conclusion could be refuted.” “It absolutely cannot,” said Trigetius. Therefore, I am glad that I have long since developed an unfriendly attitude towards them (Academicians). I don’t know under what influence of nature or, more accurately, of God, I don’t even know how they should be refuted, but I will be their decisive opponent.

And I, Licentius said to this, will not leave them yet. So, objected Trigetius, you disagree with us? “And you,” he asked in turn, do you disagree with Alypius on this? “I have no doubt,” I said to this, that Alypius, if he were here, would agree with my conclusion. For he could not hold the absurd opinion that the one who does not have such spiritual good as he most ardently desires is considered blessed, or that they (Academics) do not want to find the truth, or that the one who not blessed: for what You were afraid to taste is seasoned with these three (positions), as if with honey, flour and nuts. - Would he, Licentius objected, be carried away by this little childish bait, abandoning that abundance of Academicians, which if spilled, would this short thing, I don’t know what to call it, destroy or absorb? - As if, I said, we are asking about something extensive, especially against Alypius: for from his own body he can conclude that this little thing is no less strong and useful.

But you, who have decided to judge based on the authority of the absent, why do you not approve of gold? Do you think he is blessed who does not have what he desires? Or do you deny that Academicians want to find the truth that they are strenuously searching for? Or does someone wise seem to you not to be blessed? “Blessed is he who does not have what he desires,” he said, laughing as if with his heart. “When I ordered that these words of his be written down, he said, groaning: “I didn’t say that.”? when I gave a sign that this too should be written down, he said: “I spoke.” And when I gave a sign that this too should be written down, he said: “I spoke.” But I once ordered forever that not a single word should remain unwritten. Thus I kept this young man within the bounds of respect and constancy.

But while we, jokingly, seemed to force him to listen to his portion, I noticed that the others, who did not know the whole matter, but wanted to know what we were talking about among ourselves so pleasantly, looked at us without laughing. They seemed to me—as usually happens very often—to be similar to people who, being at a feast among very hungry and greedily-grabbing comrades for food, are in no hurry to take due to their respectability, or are timid due to shyness. And since I was treating, and at this feast I represented the face of some great man, and, moreover, to speak out fully, treating a true person, I could not allow this; and the difference and inequality at my table alarmed me. I smiled at my mother. She, as if with complete readiness to order that something was missing from her pantry, said: Tell us, what kind of people are these Academicians and what do they want? - When I briefly and clearly outlined the matter, so that none of them remained ignorant, she said: these people are fitful (so

We have a common name for people who are susceptible to epilepsy); and with this she stood up to leave, Then we all began to disperse, being satisfied and rejoicing that the end had come.

Chapter III.

Second day competition.

Who has God enough to be blessed? Nechi-

The strong spirit is usually called in two ways.

The next day, also after lunch, but a little later than the day before, sitting down in the same place, I said: you came late to the feast, what happened to you, I think, was not due to the unripeness of the food, but due to the confidence in their smallness: no It seemed to you that you needed to rush to what you thought you would soon eat. For it was impossible to think that there were many remains left where so little would have been found on the very day of the feast. It may be good. But what is prepared for you, neither do I know, nor do you. For there is another who does not cease to serve everyone with both all kinds of food and this kind of food; but for the most part we stop eating, sometimes due to ill health, sometimes due to dampness, sometimes because of being busy with business, and that this other, being in people, makes them blessed, regarding this, yesterday, if I’m not mistaken, we came among ourselves to piety and firm agreement. Since reason has proven that blessed is he who has God, and none of you opposed this opinion, then the question was proposed about who, in your opinion, has God? To this question, if I remember well, three opinions were expressed: “Some believed that he who does what is pleasing to God has God; some said that he who lives has God

Fine; finally, according to others, God dwells in those who do not have the spirit called unclean.

But maybe by different words you all meant the same thing. For if we pay attention to the first two opinions, then everyone who lives well thereby does what is pleasing to God; and everyone who does what is pleasing to God, therefore lives well: living well means nothing more than doing what is pleasing to God. But maybe you see it differently? They agreed with me. But the third opinion should be considered a little more carefully; because in the Christian religion the name unclean spirit, as far as I understand, is usually used in two ways. On the one hand, this is a spirit that from the outside, taking possession of the soul and disturbing the feelings, exposes people to some kind of demon, and to expel which those with the power are invited to lay hands and make spells, that is, to expel them through religious ritual spells. But, on the other hand, every unclean soul in general is called an unclean spirit, that is, a soul defiled by vices and errors. So, child, I ask you, who expressed this opinion, of course, with a brighter and purer spirit: who, in your opinion, does not have an unclean spirit, is he who does not have a demon, which usually makes people possessed; or the one who cleanses his soul from all vices and sins? - It seems to me, he answered, that he does not have an unclean spirit who lives chastely. - But, I asked, who do you call chaste - is it the one who is neither what does he not sin, or the one who abstains only from impermissible cohabitation? - How, he answered, can one be chaste who, abstaining from impermissible cohabitation, does not cease to defile himself with other sins? He is truly chaste who is devoted to God and trusts in Him alone.

- Having made an order that these words of the youth be written down as they were expressed to him, I said: Such a person certainly lives well, and whoever lives well necessarily lives like that; but maybe you imagine it differently? - He and the others agreed with me. - Therefore, this, I said, is one of the opinions expressed.

I’ll ask you a few more questions: does God want man to seek God? - They answered in the affirmative. - I also ask: can we really say that the one who seeks God lives badly? - In no case, they answered. - Answer me and to the third question: can an unclean spirit seek God? - This was rejected by everyone, with the exception of the somewhat doubtful Navigius, who then agreed with the opinion of the others. - So, I said, if the one who seeks God does what is pleasing to God and lives well, and has no unclean spirit; and whoever seeks God does not yet have God: then not everyone who lives well, does what is pleasing to God, and does not have an unclean spirit, must certainly be considered to have God.—When everyone began to laugh that they were caught by their own concessions, mother, who had been in amazement for a long time, asked me to unravel and explain to her the conclusion I had made through inference. - When this was done by me; she said: But no one can reach God if he does not seek God. “Very well,” I answered; However, the one who only seeks has not yet reached God, even if he lived well. This means that not everyone who lives well has God. “I think,” she objected, that no one has God; but whoever lives well, He is merciful to him, and whoever lives poorly, He is hostile to him. In this case, I said, yesterday we unfoundedly agreed that he is blessed who has God. Because although

Every person has God, but not everyone is blessed. “A merciful God, add,” she said.

Do we agree, I said, enough, at least, that blessed is he to whom God is merciful? “And I would like to agree,” answered Navigius, but I am afraid that you will not draw the conclusion that blessed is the one who is still searching, especially that Academician, who yesterday was called, although by the common people and not quite Latin, but, as it seems to me, a completely apt name for the epileptic . For I cannot say that God is hostile to a person who seeks God: if it is not decent to say this, then He will be merciful to him, and the one to whom God is merciful is blessed. Therefore, the one who seeks will be blessed. But everyone who seeks does not yet have what he desires. Consequently, the person who does not have what he desires will also be blessed - and this seemed absurd to all of us yesterday, and as a result we thought that the darkness of the Academicians had been dispelled. And therefore Licentius will triumph over us, and, as a prudent doctor, he will prescribe punishments for those sweets that I recklessly ate, contrary to my health.

When even his mother smiled at this, Trigetius said: I do not agree that God should necessarily be hostile to those to whom He is not merciful; I think there is something in between. “However,” I answered him, do you agree that this average person, to whom God is neither merciful nor kind, has God? “When he hesitated in answering, his mother said: it is another thing to have God, another thing not to be.” without God. “What is better,” I asked, “to have God, or not to be without God?” “As far as I can understand,” she answered, my opinion is this: whoever lives well has a merciful God, and whoever lives poorly has God, but

hostile. But whoever only seeks God and has not yet found Him has Him neither merciful nor hostile; but he is not without God. - Isn’t that the same, I asked everyone, and your opinion? “That’s it,” they answered, “Please tell me, I say, doesn’t it seem to you that God is merciful to the person to whom he benefits?” They said that this is so. looking for? He is good, they answered. “So, I say, whoever seeks God, God is merciful to him, and everyone to whom God is merciful is blessed.” Therefore, the one who seeks will be blessed. And whoever seeks does not yet have what he desires. Consequently, the one who does not have what he desires will also be blessed. “To me,” my mother objected, “the one who does not have what he desires does not seem blessed at all.” In this case, I noted, not everyone is blessed to whom God is merciful. - If, she said, reason requires this, I cannot deny. - So, I concluded, the following division will result: everyone who has already found God and to to whom God is merciful, therefore he himself is blessed; the one who seeks God, God is merciful to him, but he is not yet blessed; and the one who distances himself from God through vices and sins is not only not blessed, but God is not merciful to him either.

When everyone agreed with this, I said: All this is good; Only I fear that you might be swayed by what we already agreed on earlier, namely, that everyone is unhappy who is not blessed. From this it will follow that that person is unhappy who considers God to be merciful in himself; because we have not yet called such a one blessed while he is seeking God... Is it already, as Tullius says, calling the gentlemen who own many estates on earth, rich people, people who have everything?

by virtues, shall we call the poor people? But pay attention to whether it is true that everyone who is unhappy is in need, just as it is true that everyone who is in need is unhappy? For in this case it will also be true that misfortune is nothing other than need—an opinion which, you thought, I approve of when it was expressed. But today it will take a long time to talk about this; why I ask you not to disdain to gather at this table tomorrow too. When everyone said that they accepted the invitation with complete readiness, we stood up.

Chapter IV.

Third day competition.

Should talk about the question proposed on the eve. Anyone in need is unhappy. The wise man needs absolutely nothing. Every poor person is in need. Mental poverty. Fullness of spirit. Who is finally blessed?

On the third day of our competition, the morning clouds that had driven us into the baths cleared, and in the afternoon the weather became very clear. We decided to go down to the nearest meadow, and when everyone sat down where it seemed comfortable, the rest of the speech was introduced in this way. “I said, “Almost everything that I wanted to achieve your consent with my questions, I received your consent.” Why is it that today, when we could interrupt this feast of ours for a while, there is either nothing left, or there is little left, for which I think I would need to get your answer. Mother said that misfortune is nothing more than need; and we co-

It was said that all those in need are unhappy. But are all the unfortunate people in need? This remained one of the questions that we could not resolve yesterday. Meanwhile, if reason proves that this is so: then it is completely found who is blessed; for such will be the one who does not need. Because everyone who is not unhappy is blessed. Consequently, blessed is he who has no need, if it is proven that what we call need is misfortune itself.

Why, asked Trigetius, from the obvious truth that everyone in need is unhappy, could not the conclusion be drawn that everyone in need is blessed? After all, I remember, we agreed that between the unfortunate and the blessed there is nothing in between. “But don’t you find, I said, something in between the living and the dead?” Isn’t every person either alive or dead? “I confess,” he answered, that there is nothing in between here either. But why this question? “And then, I said, I think you also admit that everyone who was buried a year before is dead.” He did not deny this. “Does it follow from this that everyone who has not been buried a year before is alive?” “It shouldn’t,” he answered. “So,” I said, “and from the fact that everyone in need is unhappy, it does not follow that everyone who is not in need is blessed.” ; although between the unfortunate and the blessed, as between the living and the dead, nothing in between can be found.

Some of them did not understand this immediately, but after I had made explanations and changes in expressions, as far as possible adapted to their understanding; then I said: So, no one doubts that everyone who is in need is unhappy. That there is something

necessary for the body of the wise, this cannot be an objection to us. For it is not the spirit itself that needs this, in which the blessed life rests. He is perfect, and no one who is perfect needs anything; but if there is something that seems necessary for the body, it uses it, and if not, the lack of it does not crush it. For everyone who is wise is strong, and everyone who is strong fears nothing. Therefore, the wise man is not afraid of either bodily death or illness, for the removal, or avoidance, or postponement of which it is necessary to have something in which he may be deficient. But he, however, does not stop using it properly if he has it. For the well-known saying is very true: “It is foolish to allow what you can avoid.” 1) Therefore, as far as possible and decent, he will avoid death and illness, and if he had not avoided it, he would have been unhappy, not because it happened to him, but because he did not want to avoid them when he could have avoided them - which is a clear sign of stupidity. So, without avoiding this, he will be unhappy not as a result of enduring such things, but as a result of stupidity. If he is unable to avoid them, although he tries diligently and decently, then, falling on him, they do not make him unhappy. For another saying of the same comedian is no less true. “Since what you desire is impossible, then desire what is possible” 2). How can he be unhappy if nothing happens to him against his will? For he cannot wish for what, in his opinion, cannot come true. He desires what is most certain, that is, when he does something,

1) Terent., in Eunucho,act. IV, scene. 6.

2) Terent., in Andria,act. II, scene 1.

does nothing other than according to some precept of virtue and the divine law of wisdom, of which he cannot be deprived in any way.

Now pay attention to whether every unfortunate person is in need. For what prevents us from agreeing with this opinion is the fact that many are furnished with a great abundance of random things that make everything so easy for them that, at their wave, everything that a whim demands appears. True, such a life is not easy to meet. But let us imagine someone like Oratus, according to Tullius. Who will say that Orat was in need - he, the richest, most luxurious, most tender man, who lacked neither pleasure, nor beauty, nor good and unspoiled health? He had as many souls as he wanted, the most profitable estates, and the most pleasant friends, and he used all this quite in accordance with his physical health, and in short, every intention and every desire of his was accompanied by happy success. Unless one of you says that he would like to have more than he had. We don't know this. But in this case it is enough for you to assume that he did not want more than what he had. Does it seem to you that he was in need? - Even if I agree, answered Licentius, that he did not want anything - although I don’t know how to allow this in a man who is not wise - however, being, as they say, a man of good sense, he he was afraid that he might lose all this in one unfortunate moment. For it was not difficult to understand that everything, no matter how great it is, depends on chance. “You, Licentius,” I said laughing, see an obstacle to this man in a blessed life in a good sense. Because the more insightful he was, the better he saw that everything

may lose this; this fear crushed him, and it sufficiently justified the popular saying that a crafty person is sincere in relation to his misfortune.

When at this both he and the others smiled, I said: however, we must delve into this more carefully, because although he was afraid, he did not need it; and that's exactly what the question is about. For to need means not to have, and not to be afraid of losing what you have. Meanwhile, he was unhappy because he was afraid, although he was not in need. Consequently, not everyone who is unhappy is in need - This, along with others, was approved by the one whose opinion I defended; but somewhat hesitantly she said: However, I don’t know and don’t yet fully understand how it is possible to separate misfortune from need and, conversely, need from misfortune. For even he, who was a rich man and abundantly supplied with everything, and, as you say, did not want anything more, nevertheless, being afraid of losing all this, needed wisdom. Wouldn't we call him needy if he needed silver and money if he needed wisdom? - At this, everyone exclaimed in surprise; and I myself was not a little pleased and glad that it was she who expressed the best that I was preparing to offer from the books of philosophers, as something great and last. “Don’t you see,” I said, that there are many and varied doctrines and another is a spirit devoted to God? For where did that thing that we marvel at come from, if not from God? - Decisively, Licentius exclaimed, nothing more true and divine than this could be said! For there is no greater or more disastrous deficiency than the lack of wisdom; and the one who needs wisdom can no longer need anything decisively.

So, I said, poverty of the soul is nothing else,

like stupidity. For it is opposite to wisdom, and as opposite as death to life, like blessed life to unhappy life, that is, without anything in between. Just as every person who is not blessed is unhappy, and every person who is not dead is alive, so, obviously, every person who is not stupid is a wise person. From this we can already see that Sergius Oratus was unhappy not because he was afraid of losing certain gifts of fortune, but because he was stupid. It follows that he would have been even more unhappy if he had not been at all afraid for these so random and fluctuating things that he considered blessings. In this case, he would be more careless not due to spiritual courage, but due to mental sleep, and an unfortunate person, immersed in the deepest stupidity. But if everyone who is deprived of wisdom suffers great poverty, and everyone who has wisdom does not need anything, then it naturally follows that stupidity is poverty. And just as every stupid person is an unhappy person, so every unhappy person is a stupid person. So it is undeniable that just as every poverty is misfortune, so every misfortune is poverty.

When Trigetius said that he did not quite understand this conclusion, I asked him: What do we agree on regarding this argument? - That, he answered, is that he is in need who does not have wisdom. - What does it mean, I say, to need? “Not to have wisdom,” he answered. What does it mean, I asked, not to have wisdom? - When he was silent to this, I added: doesn’t it mean to have stupidity? - Yes, he answered. - Therefore, I said, to have poverty is nothing more than to have stupidity; whence it is already necessary to call poverty otherwise when we are talking about stupidity. Although I don’t know how they could say: “he has poverty,” or “he has stupidity.” It would be

it is as if we said of some place devoid of light that it has darkness, which means nothing more than that it has no light. For to be dark does not mean that the darkness seemed to come or go; which simply means being deprived of light, just as being deprived of clothing means the same as being naked. For, with the approach of clothing, nakedness does not flee as if some moving object. Thus, when we say that someone has poverty, we also say that he has nakedness. For poverty is the name of lack. Therefore, in order to express, as far as possible, one’s thought, it is said: “he has poverty,” that is, as if: “he has lack.” So, if it has been proven that stupidity represents the most genuine and undoubted poverty: then see if the task you have undertaken has already been resolved. There remained a doubt between us as to whether we mean something other than poverty when we talk about misfortune. Meanwhile, we have given the reason why stupidity is correctly called poverty. So, just as every stupid person is an unhappy person, and every unhappy person is a stupid person, it is necessary to admit that not only everyone who is in need is unhappy, but also every unhappy person is a person in need. But if from the fact that every stupid person is unhappy, and every unfortunate person is stupid, the conclusion is drawn that stupidity is misfortune: then why not from the fact that everyone who is in need is unhappy, and every unfortunate person is in need, we can draw the conclusion that misfortune Is there anything other than poverty?

When everyone agreed on this, I said: Now we must consider who does not tolerate poverty; for he will be wise and blessed. Poverty is stupidity, and the name of poverty is usually denoted by something

type of infertility and deficiency. Please delve deeper into the care with which ancient people composed all or, as is obvious, some words, especially for such subjects, the knowledge of which is most necessary. You have already agreed that every stupid person is in need, and everyone who needs is stupid; I think that you agree that a stupid spirit is a vicious spirit, and that all the vices of the spirit are contained in one name: stupidity. On the first day of our competition, we said that debauchery was so called because it represents something negative, and that its opposite, abstinence, received its name from the fruit. In these two opposites, that is, abstinence and debauchery, being and non-being especially appear. What now do we consider the opposite of the poverty that we are talking about? - When they were somewhat slow in answering, Trigetius said: I would call wealth; but I see that poverty is the opposite of it. “There is closeness,” I noted; for poverty and poverty are usually taken to mean one and the same thing. However, another word should be found so that the better side does not remain with one name, so that the side represented by poverty and scarcity is abundant in the word, and the opposite side opposes it with only the name of wealth. For nothing can be more absurd than the paucity of the word on the very side that is opposite to paucity. If the word: completeness is applicable, said Licentius, then it seems to me directly opposite to paucity.

Maybe later, I said, we will talk about the word in more detail. But when seeking the truth, this is not what we should strive for. Although Sallust, who is very picky in his words, contrasts sufficiency with poverty, I nevertheless contrast it with fullness. But in this case we

let us fear grammarians; otherwise we would have to fear punishment for the careless use of words from those who left their property for us to use. -When they laughed at these words, I said: Since I decided not to neglect, when you are deep in God, your minds, as some kind of oracles, I invite you to pay attention to what this name means (completeness); for, I think, there is nothing more consistent with the truth. So, fullness and poverty are opposite to each other; and here, just as in debauchery and abstinence, the same ideas about being and non-being appear. And if poverty is stupidity itself, then fullness will be wisdom. Not without reason, many have called temperance the mother of all virtues. In agreement with them, Tullius in one popular speech says: “Let everyone understand how he wants, and in my opinion, temperance, that is, moderation and balance, is the greatest virtue” 1). And this is quite learned and quite decent. For he meant fruit, that is, what we call existing, as opposed to non-existent. But due to the popular way of expression, in which moderation is called frugality, he explained his thought by adding the words moderation and balance. We need to look at these two terms more closely.

Moderation is so named from the measure of balance—from weight. And where there is measure and weight, there is nothing too big or too small. So, fullness, which we contrasted with poverty, is a much better term than if we used the word excess. Because by excess we mean excess and, as it were,

_________________

1) Orat. pro Dejotaro.

spilling something too much. When there is more of this than is needed, then a measure is desirable; and too much needs moderation. Therefore, extreme excess is not alien to scarcity; both what is greater and what is less are equally alien to measure. If you look at the expression “secured state”, you will find in it the concept of measure. For a secured state is called from provision. And how can that which is excessive provide for it, when it often does more trouble than the little? So, everything that is small is equal, and everything that is excessive, because it needs moderation, falls into poverty. The measure of the spirit is wisdom. Since none of us denies that wisdom is the opposite of stupidity, stupidity is poverty, and poverty is the opposite of fullness: then wisdom will be fullness. In fullness there is measure, therefore the measure of the spirit lies in wisdom. Hence this famous and not in vain extolled first, practically useful, rule of life: “Nothing in excess” 1).

At the beginning of this competition, we said that if we find that misfortune is nothing other than poverty, then we admit that blessed is he who does not tolerate poverty. It has now been found; therefore, to be blessed means nothing more than not to endure poverty, that is, to be wise. If you ask what wisdom is (for it too is subject to discovery and investigation by reason, as far as this is possible at the present time), then it is nothing more than a measure of the spirit, that is, what the spirit uses to keep itself in balance , so as not to expand too much, nor contract below fullness. And it expands in luxury, in domination, in pride and other similar things, with which the souls of immoderate and unfortunate people think condescendingly.

__________________

1) Terent., in Andria, act I, scene. 1.

give yourself joy and power. On the contrary, it is reduced in dishonesty, fear, sadness, greed and other similar things, in which the unfortunate believe human misfortune. But when he contemplates the acquired truth, when, to use the expression of this youth, he holds on to it, and not disturbed by any vanity, ceases to turn to the falsity of statues, the load of which falls and is overthrown by the power of God, then he is not afraid of any immoderation, any poverty, and therefore, no misfortune. So, everyone who has his own measure, that is, wisdom, is blessed.

What kind of wisdom should be called wisdom, if not the wisdom of God? by divine testimony we know that the Son of God is nothing other than the Wisdom of God (1 Cor. I, 24); and this Son of God is truly God. Therefore, everyone who has God is blessed, a position with which we agreed earlier when we began this feast of ours. But what is wisdom, in your opinion, if not truth? For this is also said: I am the truth(John xiv. 6). Truth, in order to be truth, receives its existence from some highest measure, from which it originates and to which, complete, it returns. For the highest measure itself, no other measure is required; for if the highest measure is measured by the highest measure, then it is measured by itself. But it is necessary that the highest measure should also be a true measure, so that just as truth is born from measure, so measure is recognized by truth. So, truth was never without measure, nor measure without truth. Who is the Son of God?—It is said: True: Who, having no Father, who else is He but the highest measure? So, whoever comes to the highest degree through the truth is blessed. And this means having God in the soul, that is, enjoying God. Everything else, although from God, is without God.

Finally, from the very source of truth comes a certain exhortation, urging us to remember God, to seek Him and to passionately, without any disgust, thirst for Him. This illumination to our inner eyes comes from this mysterious sun. Everything that is true that we say comes from Him, even in the case when we are still afraid to boldly use and look at everything with our either unhealthy or newly opened eyes. And it is obvious that it is nothing other than God, whose perfection is not diminished by any rebirth. Complete and everything in Him is perfect, and at the same time this is omnipotent God. But for now, however, we are only looking, but from the very source, from the very - to use a well-known expression - fullness is not yet saturated, we must admit that we have not yet reached our measure; and therefore, although we use God’s help, we are not yet wise and blessed. So, complete spiritual satiety, a real blessed life, consists in piously and completely knowing who leads you to the truth, what truth you feed on, through which you unite with the highest measure. These three, after eliminating the vanity of various superstitions, reveal to the perceptive the one God in a single essence. - At the same time, the mother, recalling the words deeply engraved in her memory and, as if awakening in her faith, cheerfully uttered the famous verse of our high priest: “Look, Trinity, on those praying!” 1) and added: without any doubt, a blessed life is a perfect life, and striving for it, we must know in advance that we can come to it only with firm faith, living hope, and fiery love.

So, I said, the very measure convinces us to interrupt this feast of ours for a few days; that's why I

1) Ambrosius, in hym. Deus creator omnium.

I offer, to the best of my ability, thanks to the highest and true God the Father, Lord and Liberator of souls. And then I thank you, who, having unanimously accepted the invitation, showered me with many gifts. For you brought so much into our speech that I cannot help but admit that I am saturated with my guests. - When everyone was rejoicing and praising God, Trigetius said: How I would like you to feed us like this every day? - He answered in everything I must preserve and love moderation if you want our return to God.” After these words, since the competition was over, we parted.

The page was generated in 0.06 seconds!