DEMONS AND PRAYERS: SPIRITUAL EXERCISES IN THE MONASTIC COMMUNITY OF GAZA IN THE FIFTH AND SIXTH CENTURIES BY BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY Prayer may do what it likes—just as God can. It gives orders on earth, it holds back in heaven. Prayer is a god amongst human beings. (Martyrius, The Book of Perfection 40) What should a monk do to make progress? What spiritual exerci inner exertions of thought and will—should he practice to attain perfection? These questions are repeatedly asked in the monastic milieu, including that of the monks of Gaza in the fifth and sixth centuries.’ Despite the fact that without the help of the Fathers the whole ascetic pursuit would have seemed impossible, several spiritual exercises were listed by the teachers in Gaza to mould their disciples and guide them to self-transformation: attention to oneself (rpoooy}) and vigilance at every moment, watching the I wish to thank Aryeh Kofsky, David Satran and G. Guy Stroumsa for their comments and suggestions on this paper. This research was supported by The Israel Science Foundation founded by The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. "A. de Halleux (ed), Martyrius (Sahdona): Ocwres spirituells, 1H, CSCO 252, Scriptores Syri 10 (Louvain: 1965), p. 13. Eng. trans. in S. Brock, The Syriac Fathers on Prayer and the Spiritual Lif, CS 101 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian, 1987), pp. 218-19, 2 See, for example, Barsanyphius and John, Questions and Answers 196; 197; 202; 203: 249; 351. For Questions and Answers 1-616, I used the edition of F. Neyt, P. de Angelis- Noah and L. Regnault, Barsanuphe et Jean de Gaza: Correspondance, Sources Chrétiennes 426, 427, 450, 451 (Paris: Cerf, 1997-2001) (hereinafter QA). For Questions and Answers 617-836, I used the Greek edition of Nicodemus Hagiorites, Venice, 1816, 2nd ed. S.N. Schoinas (Volos, 1960) (hereinafter Volos}. * See, for example, QA 124, 197, SC 427, pp. 462-69, 624-27; QA 260-261, SC 450, pp. 232-37; QA 225, SC 450, p. 140. For this aspect in the correspondence of Barsanuphius and John, see L. Perrone, “Phe Necessity of Advice: Spiritual Direction as a School of Christianity in the Correspondence of Barsanuphius and John of Gaza,” in B. Bitton- Ashkelony and A. Kofsky (eds), Christianity in Gaza in Late Antiquity, forthcoming, © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2003 Vigitiae Christianae 57,2 200-221 Also available online — www.brill.nlDEMONS AND PRAYERS 201 heart (viwic), examining conscience {ovveiénors), meditation (uehém), self mastery (érxpdteta), a complete climination of passions (éxé@eta), and humil- ity (taneiveeis). I wish to discuss here an additional component, neglected by scholars—that is, the emergence of individual prayer in ascetic culture as a factor of spiritual progress. In the rich corpus of writings that has come down to us from Gaza—including the Asceticon of Abba Isaiah (d. 491), the Instructions of Dorotheus, the famous sixth-century abbot of the cocnobium near Gaza, and above all the vivid correspondence of the spir- itual guides Barsanuphius and John (known as the Old Men) with monks and laymen, containing more than 800 questions and answers—the theme of private prayer is elaborated with great clarity and appears to have been a major method of training for modifying the individual.* In this framework, I will confine myself to discussing very briefly three private and spontaneous types of prayer: unceasing prayer (&BiéAewtos xposevyth/edy), pure prayer (apocevxi xaBapé), and remembrance of God (uviun Ge08). I shall argue that although such types of prayer were not new for Christians in the fifth and sixth centuries, in Gaza they gained new meaning, formulation, and function. They became the most radical method for cultivating the self, transforming its level, and ensuring an encounter with the divine. As the title of this article suggests, its starting point is Pierre Hadot's groundbreaking study Exercices spirituels et philosophie antique. Hadot focussed on the notion in antiquity that true philosophy is spiritual exercise—that is, first and foremost a way of life, an art of living leading to an altered level of the self? Drawing on the portrayal of monasticism as a philosophia depicted by Christian writers from the fourth century on, Hadot identified * For the history of the monastic community in Gaza and its corpus of writings, see B. Bitton-Ashkelony and A. Kofsky, “Gazan Monasticism in the Fourth-Sixth Centuries,” Proche Orient Chrétien 50 (2000), pp. 14-62. * T have adopted here the term “spontaneous prayer,” a term currently used in the phenomenological study of F. Heiler (Prayer: A Study in the History and Psychology of Religion, German original 1920, Eng. trans. S. McComb, Oxford: 1937) to distinguish all sorts of private prayer from the fixed liturgy. ° P, Hadot, Exercices spirituels et philosophic antique (Paris: Etudes Augustiniennes, 1987), Eng. trans. Amold I. Davidson, and Michael Chase, Philosopley as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995). T quote from the English version. ? Hadot defined spiritual exercise as: “Une pratique volontaire, personnelle, destinée & opérer une transformation de Vindividu, une transformation de soi.” In Pierre Hadot: La philosophic comme maniire de viore. Entretiens avec Jeannie Carlier et Arnold 2. Davidson (Paris: Albin Michel, 2001), p. 144. For the term spiritual exercise, see ibid., pp. 143-52. 1 wish to thank Jacques Schlanger for drawing my attention to this book202 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY the components of the spiritual exercises listed in ascetic works as those prevailing in the Greco-Roman world. He based himself on various Greek philosophical schools (Stoicism, Epicureanism, Platonism, the writings of Philo of Alexandria, Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, and Plotinus) and on monas- tic sources. The latter were mainly those whose provenance is the desert fathers of Egypt, Evagrius’ Praktikos, Cassian’s Conferences, and Dorotheus’ Jnstructions.* This is not the first time that a comparison of ancient philos- ophy with monastic texts has been made. Endre von Ivanka, for example, pointed out that the genre of Keodate (chapters), in which Evagrius Ponticus wrote, existed already in the Stoic and Neoplatonic philosophical traditions, drawing on the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius and on Porphyry’s collection of excerpts from Plotinus.’ Hadot went beyond mere questions of literary form; he strove to show the concrete perspective of ancient phi- losophy, its existential dimension, and how this “art of living” was widely shared by Christianity. With his new approach to ancient philosophy Hadot provided an important key for deciphering monastic texts and contextual- izing them in the philosophical tradition.!° However, as Hadot concen- trated on the continuity between pagan and Christian spiritual exercises, he emphasized in particular their similarities, somewhat muting the dis- tinctions between them; hence, in his study, the peculiarities of monastic spiritual exercises were to some extent passed over. Michel Foucault, who adopted Hadot’s framework for interpreting ancient thought,"’ has also discussed the subject of spiritual exercises, though using a different terminology—namely, techniques du sei.'? According to him, tech- nologies of the self permit individuals to effect, on their own or with the ® Hadot, Spiritual Exercises, pp. 131-36. * E. von Ivanka, “KE@AAAIA: Eine byzantinische Literaturform und ihre antiken Warzeln,” Byzantinische Zeitschrift 47 (1954), pp. 285-291. For Evagrius Ponticus as philoso- pher, see A. Guillaumont, “Un philosophe au désert: Evagre le Pontique,” Reoue de Uhis- toire des religions 181 (1972), pp. 29-56 (= Aur origines du monachisme chrétien, Spiritualité Orientale 30 [Abbaye de Bellefontaine: 1979], pp. 185-219) For an application of Hadot’s notion of spiritual exercises to Christian monastic texts, see J. Driscoll’s thorough study on Evagrius: The Ad Monachas of Eoagrius Ponticus: is Strudure ond a Select Commetary, Studia Anselmiana 104 (Roma: $. Anselmo, 1991), pp. 361-84, "On the influence of Hado’s study on Foucault, =» Arnold I. Davidson, “Spiritual Exercises and Ancient Philosophy: An Introduction to Pierre Hadot,” Critical Luguiry (6 (1990), pp. 475-82. M. Foucault, “Technologies of the Self” in L. Martin, H. Gutman and P, Hutton (ods), Technologios of the Self; A Seminar with Mickel Foucault (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1988), pp. 16-49.DEMONS AND PRAYERS 203 help of others, a certain number of alterations in their own bodies and souls, thoughts, conduct, and mode of existence, thus transforming themselves 50 as to attain a certain state of happiness, purity, wisdom, perfection, or immortality.!? Foucault for his part considered obedience and penitence to be new technologies of the self in monastic culture.'* It is quite striking, however, that in neither Hadot’s Spiritual Exercises nor Foucault’s analyses is the element of prayer counted among Christian spir- itual exercises; indeed, prayer does not appear among the components of the Greek and Roman philosophers’ spiritual exercises. Th of course that prayer was not important in pagan society in general and among philosophers in particular." But it seems that in the first and sec- ond centuries there was a fundamental difference concerning the concept and function of prayer in the religious life of pagans and Christians: pagans used private prayer not so much for shaping the self but mainly for mak- ing requests to the gods and expressing their gratitude.'® Scrutinizing the various philosophic writings, especially those of the Stoics, to which Pierre Hadot turns very frequently, what emerges is that the philosophers’ chief concern with regard to prayer was its ethical dimension; thus questions such as whether one should pray and if so to what purpose, preoccupied "8 Foucault, “Technologies of the Self,” p. 18. On Foucault’s growing interest in new Christian techniques for shaping the self, see fragments of Foucault in J. Carrette (ed.), Religion and Culture: Michel Foucault (New York: Routledge, 1999), pp. 41-47, 158-81. Sce also Hadot’s criticism of Foucault’s concept of “techniques of the self,” which he found too much centered on the “self”: P. Hadot, “Reflections on the Notion of ‘the Cultivation of the self",” in Timothy J. Armstrong (ed.), Mickel Foucault Philosopher (New York: Routledge, 1992), pp. 225-32. “ Hadot (Spiritual Exercises, p. 139), too, recognized penitence and obedience as two fundamental virtues. SH. S, Versnel, “Religious Mentality in Ancient Prayer,” in H. S. Versnel (ed), Faith Hope and Worship: Aspects of Religious Mentality in the Ancient World (Leiden: Brill, 1981), pp. 1-63; P. A. Meijer, “Philosophers, Intellectuals and Religion in Hellas,” in Faith Hope and Worship, pp. 232-45; A. Méhat, “La priére dans le monde gréco-romain,” Dictionnaire de Spiritualti, XU (Paris: Beauchesne, 1986), cols. 2202-2211 (hereinafter DSpir) For a comprehensive study on prayer in the archaic and classical periods, see S. Pulleyn, Prayer in Greek Religion (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), where further bibliography is provided. ‘© A point made clear in Pulleyn, Prayer in Greek Religion, pp. 4-15. This statement is well attested in F. Chapot and B. Laurot (eds. and trans.), Corpus de prires grecques et romaines, vol. 2 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2001). For the case of Marcus Aurelius’ prayer (Meditations V, 7), see R. B. Rutherford, The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: A Study (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), p. 91.204 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY their minds.” But philosophical discussion on the device of prayer for improving the self was a marginal matter." In my view it is possible to discern and trace a shift in this concept of prayer in pagan culture with the spread of Neoplatonism," for instance, in the writings of Plotinus, Porphyry and Iamblichus.” This change seems most perceptible and elo- quent in Proclus’ Jn Timaeum, in which he devoted his discussion to the essence of prayer and its necessity as a spiritual mechanism for leading the soul toward the divine.”! In early Greck Christian thought it was Clement of Alexandria, followed by Origen, who laid the foundation for the con- ception of prayer as a state of mind (koréotaatc cig xpooevyfic), as a spir- itual exercise and way of life, rather than as a text or a sequence of words uttered at a fixed time and place.” A simple question of course arises: why? Why did pagans in the early centuries not use prayer as a spiritual exercise? At this stage of my research I am not able to give a satisfactory explanation. However, I am inclined to seek it in the differing concepts of the self in the ancient world and early Christianity. More particularly, the © This topic was most directly introduced by Maximus of Tyre, Dissetatio 5, M. B. Trapp (ed.), Maximus Trius, Disserlationes (Leipzig: Teubner, 1994). For an annotated Eng. trans., see P. W. van der Horst, “Maximus of Tyre on Prayer,” in H. Cancik, H, Lichtenberger and P. Schafer (eds}), Geschichte-Traditon-Reflexion: Festschrift fir Martin Hlengel zum 70, Geburtstag (Tibingen: 1996), pp. 32437. See, for example, Meditations IX, 40, where Marcus Aurelius proposes using prayer not for requests but rather for advocating the ideal of self-sufficiency. For Marcus Aurelius’ approach to prayer, see Rutherford, The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, pp. 200-205. ® To this topic I devote my article “Should One Pray? The Necessity of Prayer in the Greco-Roman World” (forthcoming) ™ Plotinus, Enneads 5.1.6, with J. Rist, Plotinus: The Road to Reality (Cambridge: Cambridge, 1967}, pp. 199-212; Porphyry, Ad Marcellam 11-12, 15-16, 19, 24, K. O'Brien Wicker (ed.), Porphyry the Philosopher To Marcella (Atlanta: Scholars, 1987). A good sum- mary of Porphy’s concept of prayer is provided by Proclus, Jn Timaeum II, 64a-c, Greek text and Fra. trans. in Corpus de pritres grecques et romaines, pp. 393-95; lamblichus, De Mysteriis II, 11 V, 26. % Proclus, Ja Timacum I, G5a-e, Corpus de pritres grecques et romaines, pp. 396-98. ® Clement of Alexandria, Stomatis VII, 42.1, SG 428, ed. and trans. Alain le Boulluec (Paris: Gerf, 1997), p. 146; Origen, On Prayer 12. For the history of the term xaxé- ‘rao%s tig mpooevgiig, see I. Hausherr, Noms du Christ et voies doraison, Orientalia Christiana Analecta 157 (Rome: Pont. Institutum Oricntalium Studiorum, 1960), pp. 137-50. On Origen’s tendency to spiritualize the Christian cult and prayer, see J. Daniélou, Origine (Paris: La Table Ronde, 1948), pp. 40-63. See also Evagrius’ definition of prayer; Evagrius, Chapters on Prayer 3: “Prayer is a continual intercourse (outhta) of the mind (vo¥g) with God.” On this definition of prayer and its philosophical roots, see A. Méhat, “Sur deux definitions de la priére,” Origeniana Sexta (1993), pp. 115-20.DEMONS AND PRAYERS 205 classical world’s lack of reflexivity about the self, noticed by many schol- ars, probably affected the mechanism of forging the self or changing its level of being It is noteworthy in this context that the very concept of progress (rpoxom#)—a continuous ladder of ascent, a pivotal idea in monas- tic culture in which the device of prayer was of prime importance®— played little part in the philosophical thinking of the early Hellenistic age.” The idea of progress involves a sort of tension about the self, manifest in monastic sources, but only implicit in Greck philosophy in general. For instance, the reader of Marcus Aurclius’ Medifations cannot fail to be aware of its undercurrent of serenity, My aim here is not simply to mention one item missing from the lists of spiritual exercises drawn up by Hadot and Foucault. It is, rather, to highlight an additional crucial factor accounting for the difference between pagan and Christian spiritual exercises disregarded by both scholars and yet closely related to the topic of individual prayer —that is, demons, called by Peter Brown “the stars of the religious drama of late antiquity.”® Though demons and evil are as old as humanity itself, the evolution of Christianity from the third century on seems to be marked by an accentuation of the role of the “evil powers” in religious life.” The fading of the ancient ® G. G, Stroumsa, “Caro salutis cardo: Formation de la personne chrétienne,” in idem, Savoir et salut (Paris: Cerf, 1992), pp. 199-223 (= “Caro salutis cardo: Shaping the Person in Early Christian Thought,” History of Religim 30 {1990}, pp. 25-50). For previous bib- liography, see esp. pp. 199-203; G. G. Harpham, The Ascetic Imperative in Culture and Gniticim (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1987), pp. 27-43: Hadot, “Reflections on the Notion of the Cultivation of the self.” % See, for example, Evagrius’ treatise, Chapters on Prayer, where prayer as a spiritual exercise plays a hugely important role in the monk’s spiritual progress. For the idea of progress in Evagrius’ teachings, see J. Driscoll, “Spiritual Progress in the Works of Evagrius Ponticus,” Studia Anselmiana 115 (1994), pp. 47-84. ® For marginal concept of progress in Greek philosophy, see E. R. Dodds, “The Ancient Concept of Progress,” in idem, The Ancient Concept of Progress and other Essays on Greck Literature and Belief (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972), pp. 1-25, esp. p. 18. ® P, Brown, The World of Late Antiquity AD 150-750 (London: ‘Thames and Hudson, 1991), p. 54 2 On demonology in Greek philosophy and in Hellenistic and early Christian literature, sce ©, Colpe (ed.}, “Geister” (Damonen), Reallexikon fir Antike und Christentum, IX (Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1976), cols. 612-26, 640-68, 688-756; Jean Daniélou, “Démon,” D&pir, LIL (Paris: Beauchesne, 1957}, cols. 142-89; P. Brown, “Sorcery, Demons, and the Rise of Christianity from Late Antiquity into the Middle Ages,” in M. Douglas (ed.), Witchcraft, Confessions and Accusations (London: Tavistock, 1970), pp. 17-45; Jonathan Z. Smith, “Towards Interpreting Demonic Powers in Hellenistic and Roman Antiquity,” ANRW 16.1 (1978), pp. 425-39. See also, G. B. Kerferd, “The Origin of Evil in Stoic Thought,” Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 60 (1977/78), pp. 482-94.206 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY dichotomy between good and bad demons, widespread in Greek philoso- phy and early Christianity, and the emergence of a perception of demons as purely “evil powers,” were among the most spectacular developments of late antique Christianity2® The shift of demons in the Christian dis- course from the context of idolatry, as in early Christianity, to the realm of ethics and temptations was a long process and enormously significant in shaping the self in late antiquity. The demonology of Tertullian in the West and of Origen in the East was obviously representative of the con- siderable change that had occurred. Tertullian showed himself to be a man of the past in this respect, since along with the Apologists he continued to embrace the topic in relation to paganism.” Focusing his interest on the idea of the pompa diaboli—the assembly of demons in the pagan city—he located the conflict between demons and Christians as occurring in pub- lic life, in the city, rather than in the inner life? Origen on the other hand approached the matter from the angle of the spiritual life; essentially, the theme of spiritual combat propelled his angelology as well as his demonology. For him demons were a matter of internal struggle, one in which the soul was the arena of batile.*! Evagrius Ponticus (345-399), his spiritual disciple, would at the end of the fourth century condemn demons for their manipulative nature and their desire to blind the mind and deprive it of spiritual contemplation? Although a comprehensive explanation for this change is elusive, it is easy to agree that theories of demons were an integral part of the ascetic complex. In the psychology of ascetic culture the devil and demons penetrated into the daily routine and took over the life of monks and nuns.” ® Brown, The World of Late Antiquity, pp. 53-54. ® Sec, for example, Tertullian, De spectaculis 4, 24; Apology 22-23. For Tertullian’s demonology, sce also Daniélou, “Démon,” DSpir III, cols, 174-80. ® J. H, Waszink, “Pompa Diaboli,” Vigiliae Ghristiance | (1947), pp. 13-41 * On Origen’s demonology, see A. Monaci Castagno, Origene predicatore ¢ il suo pub- blico (Torino: Franco Angeli, 1987), pp. 151-75; H. Crouzel, “Diable et démons dans les homélies d’Origéne,” Bulletin de litterature ecclesiastique 95 (1994), pp. 303-31; idem, Origen, Eng. trans. A. S. Worrall (Edinburgh: 1989), pp. 211-14; idem, “Origene précurseur du monachisme,” in Théologie de la vie monastique. Etudes sur la tradition patristique, Théologie 49 (Aubier: 1961), pp. 25-27; Daniélou, “Démon,” DSpir II, cols. 182-89. ® Evagrius, Kephalaia Gnostica WV, 47, ed. Antoine Guillaumont, Patrolagia Orientalis 28 (Paris: 1958), p. 156 (hereinafter KG). ® J, Burton Russell, Satan: The Early Christian Tradition (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981), p. 149. Russell has claimed that in the third and fourth centuries the power of the devil seemed to grow as the security of life in the Roman Empire waned. On early Christian demonology, see E, Ferguson, Demonology of the Karly Christian WorldDEMONS AND PRAYERS 207 To neglect this shift in religious atmosphere, as the analyses of Hadot and Foucault seem to do, means to ignore the mainspring of the monas- tic spiritual exercise. It is to deprive this culture of its breath, its life. This empire of demons challenged man in late antiquity and, paradoxically, offered him a framework for perfection. In the words of Barsanuphius: “It is temptation that causes man to progress.”* As Averil Cameron has observed, the ascetic discourse called for a developed demonology against which to define itself and over which it could assert its repeated victories.** There can be no spiritual progress (xpoxomi), Barsanuphius declared, with- out identifying the trickery of the demons.” “The envy of the devil (986vos 0% &af85A0v) blinds your heart” said Barsanuphius, “thus you consider the onapoi as good thoughts”; hence true spiritual labour according to him is to combat the Aoyispoi that troubled the monk." And the ultimate tech- nique for identifying the Aopiopot is by launching a prayer.” To his dis- ciple Dorotheus he said: “If you want to progress, labour! Seck to remain with the saints... and not with the dirty demons.”*! In a sense, to over- look the everlasting war against demons in the history of late antique ascetic culture means to disregard the perpetual horror and anxiety in which this society was wrapped, as well as its delights once its enemies were vanquished. To combat these diabolical assaults the spiritual leaders of monastic soci- ety developed a range of weapons. I maintain that the new perspective on demons in late antique Christian society was crucial to the emergence of private prayer as a tool of spiritual exercise in ascetic culture. Thus toward the end of the fourth century the subject of demons is given tremendous emphasis in works dealing with prayer—for instance, Evagrius’ treatise (New York: E, Mellen Press, 1984), pp. 105-42. For further bibliography on demons in the Greco-Roman world, sce R, Valantasis, “Daemons and Perfecting of the Monk's Body: Monastic Anthropology, Daemonology, and Asceticism,” Semeia 58 (1992), pp. 47-49. 4 Foucault, however, recognized that demons and Satan can play an important role in religious life, as is clear from his discussion on the sixteenth century. See Foucault, “Religious Deviations and Medical Knowledge,” in Religion and Culture, pp. 50-56. 8 QA 496, 499, SC 451, pp. 616, 622; Valantasis, “Daemons and Perfecting of the Monk's Body,” pp. 59-66. » A, Cameron, “Ascetic Closure and the End of Antiquity,” in V. L. Wimbush and R. Valantasis (eds.), Asceticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), p. 158. 17 QA 202, SC 427, p. 638. * QA 236, SC 450, p. 168. * QA 103, SC 427, p. 420. ” QA 166, SC 427, p. 566, "QA 256, SC 450, p. 219.208 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY Chapiers on Prayer—in comparison with earlier works on prayer such as those written by Tertullian and Origen. Evagrius was certain that “the angels and the demons approach our world; we do not approach their world.” Although the bodies of demons have color and form, they evade the human senses. When they want to appear to man they transform themselves and resemble totally his body, without showing their own form.* In this onto- logical reality, Evagrius perceived the time of prayer as dangerous, since the ranks of demons stand facing the person who is praying: “Beware, then, of the ambushes of the adversaries.” Nevertheless, he was certain that “He who prays unceasingly escapes temptation,”** and by true prayer the monk becomes the equal of an angel” (lodyyeAoc). The monastic community in Gaza shared with Egyptian monasticism the obsessive sensitivity ta the presence of demons in its life.” Barsanuphius was certain that the devil goes about on every side to vex by envy and by anger. Scholars have pointed to the geographical relationship between demons and the desert.” Though the spiritual guides of Gaza adopted demonclogical theories previously prevalent in the Egyptian desert, the © KG ML, 76. "KG I, 22. On Evagrius’ theory of demons, see J. Burton Russell, The Dal: Perceptions Of Evil fem Antiquity to Primitive Christianity (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1982), pp. 177-85. Evagrius, Admonition on Prayer, in. Brock, The Syrizc Fathers on Prayer, pp. 72-73. © Evagrius, Ad Monachos 37, Greck and Eng. trans. J. Driscoll, The dd Menackos of Evagrius Ponticus, p. 37. # Evagrius, Chapters on Prayer 113. % On the intense focus on demons in Egyptian Christian literature, see D. Frankfurter, Religion in Roman Egypt: Assimilation and Resistance (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), pp. 273-7. On Antony's demonology and its possible roots in Origen’s teach- ing, see S. Rubenson, The Lelters of St. Antony: Monasticism and the Making of Saint (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1905), pp. 86-88 and Letter VI, ibid., pp. 218-20. For an overview of this subject in the monastic literature, see A. and C. Guillaumont, “Démon: Littérature monastique,” DSpir, IIL (Paris: Beauchesne, 1957), cols, 189-212. For a care- ful and comparative discussion on the demonology of Antony, Ammonas, and Paul of ‘Temma, =» D. Brakke, “The Making of Monastic Demonclogy: Three Ascetic Teachers on Withdrawal and Resistance,” Church History 70:1 (2001), pp. 19-48. See abo, M. R. Vivian, “Daniel and the Demons: The Battle Against Evil as Central to the Authority of the Monk,” Studia Patrstica 35 (2001), pp. 191-97. ® QA 93, SG 427, p. 394. ® Brakke, “The Making of Monastic Demonology”; Guillaumont (“Démon: Littérature monastique,” DSipr II, cols. 190-91) stressed that the demons attacked mainly the anchorite monk. For demonic powers as a locative category, see Smith “Towards Interpreting Demonic Powers.” pp. 429-30.DEMONS AND PRAYERS 209 geographical aspect was now downplayed: the desert was no longer the ultimate location of demons, nor was the anchorite monk any longer the only favoured target of demons.” In Gaza, these undesired constant com- panions of monks were no longer confined within the boundaries of their ancient field of combat; their presence was now also pervasive in the urban monastic zone and its surrounding villages. Thus it comes as no surprise that in this corpus the camouflage of the demons permanently preoccu- pied both monks and laymen.”' There was no need to withdraw from the monastery in order to fight demons. John affirmed his certitude with regard to the cell of Barsanuphius, in which the Old Man enclosed himself as in a tomb, “No demon can penetrate it, not even their prince—the devil.” Before addressing the topic of prayer in the monastic community of Gaza, two general observations scem called for: It is not possible to deduce a general theory of prayer in the school of Gaza, since no systematic teach- ing on prayer is to be found in its corpus. However, the wealth of refer- ences to prayer in the correspondence of Barsanuphius and John shows its centrality in the spiritual exercises of this community. John himself once stated that he wrote frequently about the subject of prayer.* A glance at the Questions and Answers reveals that although prayer by the sixth century had enjoyed a long history in monastic culture, confusion on the matter was rife among both monks and laymen. Some of the questions simply reflect ignorance about the technique of prayer in this society, others an earnest search for a code of politesse. In this context it may be well to recall that Barsanuphius and John had no adherence to any specific vopog avevnarixés, spiritual law.’ Important historical events in Egypt, particularly in the monastic colony at Scetis * See Brakke (“The Making of Monastic Demonology,” pp. 39-40) on the case of Ammonas, who entertains the view that the demons inhabit the desert in particular and that one can fight them only when alone to argue the superiority of one form of the monastic life over another, See also J. E. Goehring, “The Encroaching Desert: Literary Production and Ascetic Space in Early Christian Egypt,” Joumal of Early Christian Studies 1 (1993), pp. 281-96 (= Ascetcs, Society, and the Desert: Studies in Early Egyptian Monasticiom (Harrisburg: Trinity Press, 1999), pp. 73-88). 5 QA 405-7, 414-415, SC 451, pp. 470-76, 486-90. ® QA 142, SC 427, p. 520. * QA 544, SC 451, p. 690. QA 325, SC 450, p. 322; QA 712, Volos, pp. 322-23. ® A term used by Mare the Monk (early-fifth century) to designate monastic disci- pline: Treatise, vol. I, ed. and trans. Georges-Matthieu de Durand, Mare le moine: Traité I, SC 445 (Paris: Cerf, 1999), pp. 74-129.210 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY during the late fourth century and first half of the fifth, led to the estab- lishment of the monastic center at Gaza. Though this community can easily be depicted as heir to the Egyptian monastic tradition, especially of Scetis and Kellia, the monastic tradition of this region had its own dis- tinctive character. Several letters confirm that the monks were well versed in the writings of such prominent ascetics as Basil of Caesarea (330-379), Evagrius Ponticus, and John Chrysostom (d. 407). Likewise, the school of Gaza shows a lingering and deeply rooted spiritual affinity to the Apophthegnata patrum—a collection of sayings of the Desert Fathers that was probably redacted in the Gaza region.” Its teaching, however, did not adhere to any particular spiritual trend; its teachers, having to compete with earlier traditions, showed no hesitation in deviating from it in some cases. Whereas Evagrius Ponticus in Egypt and Diadochus Photicus (400-468) in Greece, for example, offered philosophical and sophisticated methods for recon- structing the self, the Fathers in Gaza elaborated a relatively simple scheme of spiritual progress, in which the vehicle of prayer was central.® In this course of iechniques du soi the teachers of Gaza had one golden rule: to offer to each individual the advice suitable to his specific condition, phys- ical or psychological. The basic assumption of Barsanuphius was: “God does not make demands of any man beyond his power.”® To Andrew, who was asking about unceasing prayer and whether he ought to have a rule (xavév), Barsanuphius emphatically responded that a man living in solitude, especially one who is bedridden, has no rule (kavéve: obx éet)! Barsanuphius gave precise instructions as to how a monk should pass each day: “You ought to sing psalms a litle, recite by heart a little, search and watch the thoughts a little." But he stressed that the Fathers had no need % §. Rubenson, “The Egyptian Relations of Early Palestinian Monasticism,” in A. O'Mahony with G. Gunner and K. Hintlian (eds,), The Christian Heritage in the Holy Land (London: Scorpion Cavendish, 1995), pp. 35-46. ° The most comprehensive study of this problem is G. Gould, The Desert Fathers on Monastic Community (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993), pp. 1-25, where previous bibliography is provided. ™ See, for example, QA 140, 143, SC 427, pp. 516, 520-24. © For Diadochus’ teachings, see his Hundred Gnostic Chapters, Sermons on the Ascension and Vision, ed. and trans. E. de Places, Diadogue de Photicé, Oewres spirtuelles, SC. Shis (Paris: Cerf, 1966). QA 78, SC 427, p. 362. | Q4 87, SC 427, p. 378. For the same approach concerning recitation of psalms, see QA 23, SC 426, pp. 211-12. ® QA 85, SC 427, p. 374, Evagrius, in his work De jgiunio [in J. Muyldermans (ed.)],DEMONS AND PRAYERS 211 for rules, since their entire day was regulated. Each monk ought to pray according to his ability.® Hence the most distinctive mark of the spiritual direction in this community was the flexibility of its instructions. In a world extensively attended by evasive demons and temptations, resistance should be practiced continuously. Hence the command in 1 ‘Thessalonians 5:17: “Pray constantly” (&Siaheintos xposedyecte), which provided the textual basis for the concept of unceasing prayer, acquired a tremendous new role in monastic culture. In early Jewish and Christian sources unceasing prayer was the affair of the angels, mentioned mainly in a mystical context, in the heavenly liturgy.* This was radically changed in the ascetic milieu of the ensuing generations. For Origen the idea of the virtuous life was continuous prayer to God and fulfillment of 1 ‘Thessalonians 5:17.°° It became one of the most obvious weapons against demons and bad thoughts. The Life of Antony is among the carliest exam- ples of the growing tendency to employ unceasing prayer in this battle.” Evagrius Ponticus draws attention to this very important fact: Foagriana Syriaca, Bibliothéque du Muséon 31 (Louvain: 1952], p. 116) suggested rather a different schedule for the monk’s daily exercises: “The hours of the day will be for you as follows: The hour of reading, the hour of the office, the hour of prayer, and during your whole life the remembrance of God.” °S QA 85, 126, SC 427, pp. 374, 478-80. % See, for example, The Apocabpse of Abraham, Eng. trans. G. H. Box (London: SPCK, 1919), pp. 57-59; Similitudes of Enoch, 39:12-13; Passio sanctarum Parpetuae et Felictatis 12, ed. and trans, H. Musurillo, The Acis of the Christian Martyrs, vol. 1 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972), p. 120. In this text (generally dated to A.D. 200), is an account of the ascent of the martyrs to heaven in three stages. At the third stage they entered the heavenly city were they saw four angels: “And we heard the sound of voices in unison chanting endlessly: &ytos, tytos, éy.oc,” ® Origen, On Prayer 12,2. On this aspect of Origen’s On Prayer, see A. Monaci Castagno, “Un invito alla vita perfetta: Il MEPI EYXHE di Origenc,” Studia Ephemeriis Augustinianum 57 (1997), pp. 126-34; L. Perrone, “Prayer in Origen’s Contra Celsum: The Knowledge of God and the ‘Truth of Christianity,” Vigiliae Ohvistianae 55 (2001), p. 18. % On unceasing prayer as a weapon against demons, sec for example, Apoph. N 66; N 409, pp. 136. © The Life of Antony 5. 39, 51, SC 400, pp. 142, 240-42, 272-74; M. Marx, “Incessant prayer in the Vita Antoni,” Studia Anselmiana 38 (1956), pp. 108-35; J. Kevin Coyle, “Early Monks, Prayer, and the Devil,” in P. Allen, R. Canning and L., Cross (eds.), Prayer and Spirituality in the Barly Church, Vol. UL (Queenstand: Australian Catholic Univ., 1998), pp. 229-49, J. Daniélou (DSpir III, p. 168) was too quick to assert that in the Shepherd of Hermas (Mandate XI, 14-17) “On trouve ici le théme de la puissance de la priére pour chasser les démons.” Yet in the Greek text published by M. W. Holmes (The Apostolic Fathers, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999, p. 408), the verb “to pray” does not appear.212 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY We have received no command to work, to pass the night in vigils and to fast constantly. However, we do have the obligation to pray without ceas- ing... prayer makes the mind (voi<) strong and pure for combat, since by its very nature the spirit is made to pray. Moreover, prayer even fights with- out the aid of the body and combats the demons on behalf of all other pow- ers of the soul. The teachers of Gaza dealt directly with this type of prayer more than once and advised on its concrete realization, Abba Isaiah, in one of his lessons of spiritual guidance, preached love of continuous prayer (ovvexs nposetyeo8a1) as the way to illuminate one’s heart. Continuous prayer, according to him, was a tool by which the monk could defeat captivity (ciquakooia).”” Following the prevalent view, the Old Men too identified demons as the major obstacle on the path leading to God, and unceasing prayer as the ultimate remedy.” Barsanuphius recounted to Dorotheus his personal struggle with the demon of luxury and his Aoyicot, lasting five years. Only by constant supplication did he resist and was delivered, con- cluding: “A continuous prayer with tears puts an end to this thing.””? The perception of the devil as a powerful and authoritative entity once raised the simple question by one of the monks in Gaza: “Who gave to the devil its power and authority?” This sharp and embarrassing question was apparently anathema to Barsanuphius. According to him it was not nec- essary to know the answer. But he was certain that to pray unceasingly prevents all evil, because “this prayer doesn’t leave any space in us for the devil.””* Hence, the device of unceasing prayer is used by monks not only in order to “leave no crevice in the day or night in which the merely per- sonal could emerge,” but rather as an unceasing exercise that guarantees the elimination of evil, demons, and Aonouot. In Barsanuphius’ view, the time of liturgy is also suitable for fighting the demons. One should cry ® Evagrius, Praktitos 49, SC. 171, pp. 610-13; Ad Monachos 37. On the nature and role of the vod in Evagrius’ writings, see D. Bertrant, “Force et faiblesse du Nodg chez Eivagre le Pontique,” Studia Patristica 35 (2001), pp. 10-23. ™ Abba Isaiah, Lagos 16, Greek text edited by Augoustinos Monachos (Jerusalem: 1911, Qnd ed. S. N. Schoinas, Volos: 1962), p. 88. * Ibid, p. 94 » QA 255, SC 450, p. 214. ” QA 258, SC 450, p. 228. QA 127, SC 427, pp. 480-82. * QA 848, This letter is preserved only in ms, Paris gr. 873, Fr. trans. Barsamuphe et Jean de Gaza: Correspondance (Solesmes: Solesmes, 1993), 2nd ed., p. 535. ” As claimed by Harpham, The Ascetic Imperative in Culture and Criticism, p. 25.DEMONS AND PRAYERS 213 unceasingly in spirit (xpavyéCov édtaAetnrac to vol) in the sanctuary of the interior man: “Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord Sabaot, the heaven and earth are full of your glory” (“Aytos, éptos, dog, Kipiog EaBad®, xAnpne 6 odpavag wot in yi tig 86Eng cou).”* According to him, through the terrible, awesome sound of this cry the devil trembles and leaps out of the soul, and the demons flee in shame.” Certainly, the use of silent trisagion here is one of Barsanuphius’ most striking teachings concerning the way to put demons to flight. Although unceasing prayer already had a long history in monastic culture by then,” from the letters of Barsanuphius and John one can perceive the frequency with which the question “How can one pray unceasingly?” (a6i- adeintas npocedyeoBai) was asked and its acute relevance still for monks and pious laymen in sixth-century Gaza.” In several instances Barsanuphius approached the precept of unceasing prayer in the same spirit as is revealed in the Apophthegmata®—that is, simply to pray in every situation and every place (1 Tim, 2:8).* But unceasing prayer is not merely a vague recommendation to pray; it comprises a short phrase that includes the name Jesus and it should be uttered without interruption. To Dorothcus, when he was ill, desperate, and violently attacked by luxury, Barsanuphius wrote that the devil had launched a war against him; he suggested that Dorotheus pray unceas- ingly, and he transmitted to him a formula of unceasing prayer: “Lord, Jesus Christ, save me from all shameful passions.” On another occasion ™ Isaiah 6:3. 7 QA 241, SC 450, p. 188. ™ The classic treatment of unceasing prayer is [. Hausherr, Hésychasme et pritre Orientalia Christiana Analecta 176 (Rome: Pont, Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1966), pp. 255-306; G. Bunge, ‘“Priez sans cesse”: Aux origines de la priére hésychaste,” Stutia Monastica 30 (1988), pp. 7-16; C. Stewart, “John Cassian on Unceasing Prayer,” Monastic Studies 15 (1984), pp. 159-77; M. Belda, “The Concept of Continual Prayer According to John Cassian,” in Prayer and Spiritualiy, Vol. IL, pp. 127-43. ® QA 710, Volos, p. 322. ® “How can one pray unceasingly? Since the spirit becomes tired of God's labour?” This question, preserved in the Apophthegmata, pointed to the technical and psychological problems inherent in this precept. The answer is that by no means should one understand it as prescribing that the liturgy be at fixed hours. Rather, during every physical activity, and when eating or sleeping, one should pray (Apoph. J 714, p. 299). For this saying, see the text published by J.-C. Guy, “Un entretien monastique,” Recherches de science religicwse 50 (1962), pp. 235-36, 240-41), who dated it to the second half of the sixth century. On unceasing prayer in the Apophiiegmata, see L. Regnault, “La priére continuelle ‘monologistos’ dans la littérature apophtegmatique,” Irénikon 47 (1974), pp. 467-93 * QA 441, SC 451, pp. 518-20. © QA 255, SC 450, p. 214.214 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY Barsanuphius prescribed a similar prayer for Dorotheus to recite unceas- ingly: “Jesus come to my help.” When one of the fathers was wonder- ing whether it was better to adhere to the formula “Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me” or to recite psalms, John took a moderate stance and advised combining the two. Moreover, unceasing prayer can be interpreted as inner prayer. Thus in one case John explained to a sick abbot who was unable to hold the liturgy that from a sick person God does not expect a corporal liturgy but rather a spiritual liturgy—that is, prayer (Obx Aeoupyiav sopatimy, GAAG mvevparisty, tobt’ got thy ebztiv)—since the command is to pray without ceasing (‘A8iadeixtas xposeizeo%e).* To a layman who directly questioned the practice: “How can one pray without ceasing?” Barsanuphius explained that when one is alone he should say psalms and pray aloud and in his heart (év + ordyarn Kai 2h xapbiq mpocebxeatax), but when he is in a public place or with others, he need not recite psalms aloud, only in spirit (uévn th S1avoig)."° The Old Men repeatedly stressed that one should pray unceasingly—that is, without limit or stint.” Prayer in general served in monastic culture as a promoter of spiritual progress. However, it becomes clear that only those who are perfect are worthy to recite certain prayers. For instance, Abba Isaiah has explained that the prayer “Our Lord in Heaven .. . Sanctify your Name” (Anaotito 2 Svoyd gov) (Matt. 6:9) is appropriate only for the perfect (rott0 tv teheiwv éotw), “since there is no way that the name of God shall be sanctified by us as long as we are dominated by the passions (xa®av).” Barsanuphius and John had been asked whether it was good to meditate or to pray in the heart without words continuously. They answered that this is reserved for the perfect—those who are able to master their intel- lect and keep it in awe of God (Todto tav teheiov éovi tov Svvayévey xoBepvav tbv voby Kai eig tov g6Bov tod Beod Zxew)..” For those monks not % QA 268, SC 450, p. 252. ® QA 175, SC 427, p. 578. QA 212, SC 427, p. 662. ® QA 710, Volos, p. 322. On the obstacles of unceasing prayer in the monastic milieu, see A. Guillaumont, “Le probléme de la priére continuelle dans le monachisme ancien,” in, idem, Etudes sur la spiritualité de Orient Chrétien, Spiritualité Orientale 66 (Abbaye de Bellefontaine: 1996), pp. 131-41. ” Q4 241, SC 450, pp. 186-90. ™ Abba Isaiah, Logos 26, p. 184; Apophtegmata, Systematic Collection, ed. and trans. J-C. Guy, SC 387, p. 106. ® Q4 431, SC 451, p. 508. See also K. Ware, “Silence in Prayer: The Meaning of Hesychia,” in B. Pennington (ed.), One Yet Tivo Monastic Traditions East and West, CistercianDEMONS AND PRAYERS 215 able to guard unceasingly the presence of the spirit toward God, the Old Men advised combining meditation and “prayer of the tongue.”” One of the important questions Barsanuphius faced in this context was the degree of perfection to which unceasing prayer belonged. Here he was very clear, answering Andrew, one of his disciples, that it belongs to the state of dndera,"" a state that for him was perceived also as a grace (épicua) conferred by God. In his answer Barsanuphius demonstrated great familiarity with the teachings on prayer of Evagrius,° who sharply insisted that “the state of prayer can be aptly described as a habitual state of unshakable calm” (énéBew).! To the question of how one can acquire “the perfect prayer” (npocevg} teXeta), Barsanuphius answered in purely Evagrian terminology: It is to converse with God without distraction and recollect all your thoughts and senses (oti zd hadfjoas 1 Be &pepBaorwc, év tH ovvaeyew Shove tods hopiopods neté tv aiofmmptar) ...to be dead to the world and everything belonging to the world... The mind (vot) should be present before God and speak to him. We recognize that we are praying when we are delivered of all agita- tion and we see that the spirit rejoices to be illuminated in the Lord ( vods onioGeig év Kupig). And the sign that one has touched on the perfect prayer is a state without any disturbance; even though the whole world attacks us we are not disturbed .. 2° Studies 29 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian, 1976), p. 29. Ware noticed that for Gregory Palamas in the fourteenth century everybody could undertake unceasing prayer. © QA 431, SC 451, p. 508. * QU 87, SC 427, p. 376. ® QA 141, SC 427, p. 518. ® On Evagrius’ terminology and theory of prayer, see D. A. Ousley, “Evagrius’ ‘Theology of Prayer and the Spiritual Life,” Ph. dissertation, The University of Chicago, 1979; G. Bunge, “The Spiritual Prayer: On the Trinitarian Mysticism of Evagrius of Pontus,” Monastic Studies 17 (1986), pp. 191-208; C. Stewart, “Imageless Prayer and the Theological Vision of Evagrius Ponticus,” JECS 9 (2001), pp. 173-204, % Bvagrius, Chapters on Prayer 52, PG 79:1177, Eng. trans. J. E. Bamberger, The Praktikos: Chapters on Prayer, Cistercian Studies 4 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian, 1981), p. 63. For a different view regarding Evagrius’ influence on the monastic community in Gaza, sce F. Neyt, “Le vocabulaire de Barsanuphe et de Jean de Gaza,” Stutia Patrstica 12 (1975), pp. 247-53. Neyt has concluded, on the basis of the letters sent by the Old Men to Dorotheus, that the influence of the Evagrian terminology was rather minor. However, it is difficult to agree with the conclusion about the deliberate avoidance of the term éné@eua in the correspondence, see Conespondance, SC 427, p. 507, note 6. The editors believe that it reflects the tendency of the Old Men to distance themselves from Evagrian terminology. ® QA 150, SC 427, pp. 536-39. The last statement echoes the story told by Evagrius about a spiritual man: while he was praying a viper crawled up to him and seized his216 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY Similarly, when one of the fathers in Gaza asked whether meditation (uekémn) rendered a prayer pure (xotei xoBapav xposeugty), John, following Evagrius’ teaching, clearly identified the state of pure prayer as one devoid of passions, devoid of self-will, Hence meditation, he said, is not “a pre- lude” (ropacxevastixh) to pure prayer (xaBapég npocevyiic)..° From these letters we might conclude that what we have seen here is not simply an adoption of vague terminology, that of “pure prayer”—a term extremely rare in the days before Evagrius and clearly associated with his treatise Chapters on Prayer.” Rather, the two Old Men were sharing here the very concept of Evagrius’ prayer, perceiving it as an ascent of the mind to God, consisting in the renunciation of all things, that is the goal of spir- itual progress reserved only for the perfect who practice spiritual exercises leading to the stage of éndBew. Although the Old Men’s vocabulary and concept of prayer linked them with the Evagrian tradition, their intellectual profiles were distinctly differ- ent from that of Evagrius; they were far removed from his theology and speculative mysticism. And to follow Evagrius’ teaching was not so ob- vious for a community that identified him as an Origenist. Nevertheless, Barsanuphius and John never actually rejected his teaching as a whole. Their followers forced them to tackle the ensuing question openly: were they permitted to read Evagrius’ writings? Barsanuphius answered nervously and at length, rejecting what seemed to him “doctrines that lead to dark- ness” and ordering the questioning monk not to accept Evagrius’ doctrines but to read what is “useful to the soul.”* Barsanuphius advised him not to involve himself in this problem, but to walk along the path of the Fathers—that is, the path of humility, obedience, tears, asceticism, poverty, foot. He did not so much as lower his arms until he had finished his customary prayer. Evagrius, Chaplers on Prayer 109, Eng. trans. p. 73 and note 50, where a similar passage from Babylonian Talmud (Berakoth 5, 30b) is quoted. % QA 177, SC 427, p. 578-80. ° On this term in early Christian literature, see 8. Brock, Asaac of Nineveh (saac the Syrian): “The Second Part,” Chapters IV-XLI, CSCO 555 (Louvain: Peeters, 1995), pp. 2-3, note 5. ™ On this aspect of Evagrius’ Chapiers on Prayer, see I. Hausherr, “Le traité de ?Oraison a’Evagre le Pontique,” Rawe d’Ascétique et de mystique 35 (1959), pp. 1-26. ” Q4, 602-3, SC 451, pp. 812-14. The anti-Origenist tenor of Barsanuphius and John is revealed in letters 600-607. Sce the discussion on these letters in A. Guillaumont, Les ‘Kiphalaia grostica’ d’Evagre le Pontique et Uhistoire de Vorigénisme chez les grecs et chez les griens, Patristica Sorbonensia 5 (Paris: Seuil, 1962), pp. 124-28; D. Hombergen, “Barsanuphius and John of Gaza and the Originist Controversy,” in B. Biton-Ashkelony and A. Kosky (eds,), Christianity in Gaza in Late Antiquity.DEMONS AND PRAYERS mie detachment of the self, etc." All this, he explained, was to be found in the sayings of the Fathers and in their Vitae. As Antoine Guillaumont has shown, in this matter the two Old Men’s stance vis-a-vis Evagrius’ writ- ings was similar to that reflected in the Apophthegmata patrum.'! In a sense, theological controversies counted for little in the practice of shaping the self in the monastic culture. For a community that adopted the anti-intel- lectual ideal of Abba Isaiah it is not surprising that theology played a minor role in its spiritual direction;'” indeed, the Old Men totally forbade the discussion of theology.'® To pursue Evagrius’ monastic teaching on prayer, then, was not an obvious choice for the monks of Gaza. However in the Evagrian teaching on pure prayer they found what was needed for those who were perfect. Unceasing prayer is closely connected to another sort of prayer—namely, remembrance of God (uvfjun 808). Invoking the name of God unceasingly was the ultimate fulfillment of 1 ‘Thess. 5:17.!°% While unceasing prayer and pure prayer served as a technique of introspection mainly for the per fect, the nature and function of remembrance of God was different. The idea of remembrance of God was of course not born in monastic culture. ‘The ancient writers who evoked this topic include Philo, Marcus Aurelius, Origen, and many others."% In monastic culture we encounter a clear transformation of this biblical and philosophical idea into an independent pattern of prayer serving as a device for spiritual progression." ‘The monks of Gaza cultivated a particular form of memory of God, a type of prayer that served as a “techniques du soi” in the words of Michel QA 600, SC 451, p. 810. Guillaumont, Les Kephalaia gnostica, p. 127. See, for example, Abba Isaiah, Logos 6.1; 26.18, 30.4; Q4 469, SC 451, pp. 568- 73; QA 698, Volos, p. 320. "8° QA 694, Volos, p. 319. " QA 709, Volos, p. 322. "% Philo, The Migration of Abraham 36, ed, F. H. Colson, LCL IV, p. 162; idem, The Special Lames Ul, 171, ed. F. H. Colson, LCL VIL, p. 412; ibid. I, 133, p. 174; idem, On the Virtues 165, LOL VIL, p. 264; idem, Vila contemplatioa 26, LCL IX, p. 126. See also, A. Guillaumont, “Philon et les origines du monachisme,” in idem, Aux origines du monachisme chrétien, pp. 25-37; H. J. Sieben, “Mnimé Theow,” DSpir, X (Paris: Beauchesne, 1980), cols. 1407-14, Marcus Aurelius, Medilations VI, 7, LOL ed. C, R. Haines (Cambridge: Harvard, 1961), p. 132; X, 8, p. 270; A. Solignac, “La mémoire et Dieu,” DSpir X, cols. 996-99; Hausherr, Noms du Christ et voies d'oraison, pp. 156-62; Hadot, Spiritual Exercises, pp. 132-34. "© See, for example, Cassian, Collatimes X, 10, text and Fr. trans. E. Pichery, Conferences, SC 54 (Paris: Cerf, 1957), p. 85; K. Ware, “The Holy Name of Jesus in East and West: The Hesychasts and Richard Rolle,” Sobomost 4/2 (1982), p. 167.218 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY Foucault—that is, practices for the formation of a certain sort of self, Abba Isaiah in his discussion on perfection spells out various components of per- fection, stressing the necessity for remembrance of God for unceasingly stimulating someone on the road toward perfection.” For above all it is a tool for calming the Aoytopoi and various passions and temptations." Barsanuphius too assigned a central place to invocation of the name of God, and he perceived it as a prayer par excellence.'® Remembrance of God, tran- quillity of the spirit, and humility are the suitable dispositions for banishing all evil thoughts.” In several cases he considered it beyond the ability of the monk to vanquish passions; but through invocation of the name of God the devices (unyavfuora) of the enemies are reduced to nothing." According to circumstance the invocation of God’s name could be uttered aloud or in the heart, on the basis of Matt. 6:6, “Pray to your Father in secret, with the door shut.” When it is not possible to invoke him even in the heart, then it is sufficient to remember God in order to be safe, since in Barsanuphius’ eyes remembrance is more rapid than invocation." Barsanuphius and John by no means encouraged excessive habits of prayer, Thus to a layman who wanted to know how many times one should invoke the name of God (émxaobuar td Svoue t0% Beod) the Old Man wrote that it is preferable only once and in any case no more than three times.* Dorotheus asked if it was possible to banish his passionate thoughts by opposition or penance. Barsanuphius replied that opposition (dwrAéEar) and penance (émry:fjoot) are only for people strong enough to struggle successfully with the demons; others can only seek “refuge in the name of Jesus,” since for all passions, nothing is more efficacious than invoking the name of God.'"® So he advised him to recite without ceasing, “Lord Jesus Christ save me from shamefuul passions,” or simply, “Jesus, come to my aid.”!!8 " Abba Isaiah, Logos 23, "QA 661, Volos, pp. 311-10. "© QM 425, SC 451, p. 500. "9 QA 454, SC 451, p. 538. "QA 497, SC 451, p. 502. ' Barsanuphius inherited the exegetical tradition that identified the “inner cham- ber” (Matt. 6:6) with the heart and silent prayer. For this tradition in Syriac literature, see Brock, The Syriac Fathers, pp. 3, 14, 34, 170, 236-37, 8 QA 430, SC 451, pp. 506-8. "QA 479, SC 451, pp. 582-84. 45 QA 304, SC 450, pp. 294-96, See also QA 474, 563, 565, SC 451, pp. 576, 722-24. ©% QA 255, 268, SC 450, pp. 214, 250. See also, F. Neyt, “The Prayer of Jesus,” Sobonast 6/9 (1974), pp. 641-54, esp. p. 649.DEMONS AND PRAYERS 219 From the correspondence we can glean the development of the tradi- tion of remembrance of God. Dorotheus himself first consulted Barsanuphius as to whether he was worthy of practicing remembrance of God continu- ously, then he asked for instructions. Barsanuphius encouraged him to begin this practice and not to fear it.''’ Disturbed by his work treating his fel- low monks in the infirmary in the monastery, Dorotheus almost failed to remember God, and this troubled him. Could one remember God while working and in the presence of other people? Barsanuphius assured him each person can practice continuous remembrance of God according to his own measure.''® Dorotheus in turn recommended remembrance of God, saying that it accompanies the monk in all his activities!!? and comforts the soul, using as a textual basis Psalms 77:4.!° The “Jesus prayer” is not discussed in Dorothcus’ Insiructions, nor is the theoretical aspect of prayer in general." His main role was to transmit to his monks, and mainly to his disciple Dositheus, the instructions and formulas of prayer he had received from Barsanuphius and John," such as to pray unceasingly “Lord, ‘Jesus Christ, have mercy upon me” and “Son of God, save me.” During Dositheus’ illness his master urged that he not forget his prayer. But when he was moribund and no longer able to pray, Dorotheus instructed him to reduce his prayer and “simply remember God,”!" as remembrance of God consoles the soul (f uwfun to) Beod napaxate? thy woxhy).!2 This instruc- tion stems from Barsanuphius’ clear conviction that remembrance of God “js more rapid” than invocation of the Name. It is typical of Barsanuphius and John that their main concern was to provide their clients with immediate solutions to their problems and temptations, rather than searching out the causes of those problems. Thus when a monk (John of Beersheba) proposed “seeking out the causes of the 26 "7 Qf 266, SC 450, p. 246. On the “Jesus prayer” in the QA, see Neyt, “The Prayer of Jesus.” "QA 328, 329, SC 450, pp. 328-30, 4 Dorotheus, Onwres spiritulles 197, SC 92, p. 520. & Tbid., 126, p. 384. "= Later 12, Instruction 197, SC 92, p. 520. For a brief discussion on the necessity of continuous prayer in Dorotheus’ teaching, sec Instructions 38, SC 92, pp. 202-3. "2 See, for example, Instructions 186, SC 92, p. 500, where a short prayer is given for combating troubles that persist. " Life of Dositheus 10, SC 92, p. 138. On this prayer in Dorotheus’ teachings, see Hausherr, Noms du Christ et voies d’oraison, pp. 237-39. = Life of Dositheus 10, SC 92, p. 138. % Dorotheus, Znstructis 126, SC 92, p. 384. © Q4 430, SC 451, pp. 506-8.220 BROURIA BITTON-ASHKELONY temptations that rose up against him in diverse ways,” the Great Old Man advised him: “Labour not in searching out matters, but call out the name of Jesus, saying: “Jesus, help me” (kode tb Svoue. Iood, Aéyav- ‘Inood BofiBer y01).”” Barsanuphius honestly admitted that he did not know how the rem- edy of invoking of the name of God functions, nor how it annihilates pas- sions. However, he was unequivocal that “the fact of invoking God without interruption, is a remedy that not only avoids all the passions but also eradicates the act itself;”!* the Old Men were certain that the pvipn Beod “utterly destroys all that is evil.” This concept of remedy is quite far from Basil of Caesarea’ understanding of the noetic role of uvfpn @208, and dis- tant from Diadochus’ concept of reunification of the soul by perpetual uviun 80d." This conclusion fits with the general inclination in the Gaza monastic community to belittle the speculative and mystical approach. Frangois Neyt has claimed that the rise of the “Jesus prayer” in Gaza is linked to the anthropology of the Gazan school, which was centered in the first place on the idea of the heart, reflecting a simple and pragmatic conception of life; Evagrius’ school in contrast clearly distinguished between body, soul, and mind. Neyt’s schema is attractive, yet it is an oversimplification of the Gazan anthropology, and it too sharply opposes Evagrian and Gazan spirituality. Dorotheus himself, versed in Evagrius’ teaching, was looking for a clear and simple formula of prayer.""! So sharp a dichotomy between “7 Qf 39, SC 426, p. 240. QA 424, 565, SC 451, pp. 496-98, 724; QA 709, Volos, p. 322, where he made the claim that unceasing invocation of the name of God diminished the passions. ° Q4 693, Volos, p. 319. On the power of the divine name, see K. Ware, The Power of the Name: The Jesus Prayer in Orthodox Spirituality (Oxford: Fairacres, 1974), pp. 1-32; idem, “The Holy Name of Jesus in East and West,” pp. 163-84. '® See, for example, Basil, Leiter 2. 2, 4; Regulae Breiter Tractatae 157 with J. Eudes Bamberger, “MNHMH-AIA@EZIE: The Psychic Dynamisms in the Ascetical Theology of St. Basil,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 34 (1968), pp. 233-51; P. Rousseau, Basil of Caesarea (Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford: University of California Press, 1994), pp. 80, 225-26; G. Filoramo, “Mneme Teou e preghiera continua in Basilio,” Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum 66 (1998), pp. 179-87; J. Gribomont, Saint Basile: Evangile et église, 1, Spiritualité Orientale 37 (Bégrolles-en-Mauges: Abbaye de Bellefontaine, 1984), pp. 426- 42. On the role of remembrance of God in Diadochus’ teachings, see Diadochus, Hundred Gnostic Chaplers 59-61, 70, 97, SC Sbis, pp. 119-21, 130, 159; D, Hester, “Diadochos of Photiki: The Memory and its Purification,” Studia Patrstica 23 (1989), pp. 49-52 ' On the degree of Evagrius’ influence on Dorotheus, see L. Regnault and J. de Préville, Dorothée de Gaza: Onares spirituelles, SC. 92 (Paris: Cerf, 1963), pp. 76-77. For a more careful conclusion, see P. Canivet, “Dorothée de Gaza: Estil un disciple d’Evagre?” Revue des études grecques 78 (1965), pp. 336-46.DEMONS AND PRAYERS 221 two currents of spirituality, the one centered on the mind, the other on the heart, is somewhat misleading in the case of the community of Gaza,'* since, as we saw earlier, the mind has a central role in the Old Men’s concept of pure prayer. Two approaches can be identified in the letters of Barsanuphius and John for helping each client construct a new self through the mechanism ‘of prayer. First was their fidelity to Evagrius’ teaching on pure prayer, which was highly intellectual and reserved only for the perfect. But at the same time they also embraced the less demanding technique of the “Jesus prayer” and remembrance of God for the simple monks, since simple and unsophisticated methods were needed for everyday life as a therapy for passions. Discussions on pure and spiritual prayer in monastic culture in subsequent generations in the East, mainly in Syriac literature, attest to the difficulty the spiritual fathers experienced in offering it as a tool of sal- vation for all their flock. Adopting the “Jesus prayer” and developing various formulas illustrated the distinctively practical nature of spiritual exercises in the community of Gaza. It should be stressed that although the teachers of Gaza adopted Evagrius’ technique of pure prayer, there is no trace in the corpus of the concept and practice of contemplation @ewpta), which was an integral component of Evagrius’ spiritual progress. That aspect of Evagrius’ teaching was entirely ignored. Indeed on one of the rare occasions when Barsanuphius described the culmination of perfection as the total self-transformation of a monk toward a state of @éwoig he declared: “In this state there is no agitation nor distractions, while becom- ing entirely mind, entirely eye, entirely light, entirely perfect, entirely God”'*-~an ideal more honoured in the breach than in practice. Department of Gomparative Religion, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Mount Scopus, Jerusalem 91905, Israel Ashkelon@h?.hum.huj ™ Neyt, “The Prayer of Jesus,” p. 644. For opposition to such a dichotomy between Evagrius Ponticus and Macarius, see M. Plested, “Macarius and Diadochus: An Essay in Comparison,” Studia Patrstica 30 (1997), pp. 235-40. See for example, Isaac of Ninaek XXII, Eng. trans, Brock, pp. 252-63. "QA 207-208, SC 427, pp. 646-52.