Of course, it would be good if each of us had such an old woman as Amma Synclitica, Amma Sarah, Amma Theodora and other venerable ascetics. But I think that even in the flourishing times of monasticism, not everyone had such elders and such elders. For example, we sometimes read in the patericons that a certain elder came, for example, to Anthony the Great and brought his disciple with him. One can understand that this elder sought from the great ascetic edification for himself and, perhaps, for his disciple. In addition, it can be assumed that the great elders, the great leaders were simply physically incapable of constantly, daily monitoring all their children. Here too you see that sisters D. and A. can hardly cope with you; And imagine the ancient times when thousands of monks lived in monasteries! Pachomius the Great led several monasteries, and each had a thousand or more monks. Could Pachomius the Great, whom all of them, of course, considered their spiritual mentor, guide them directly? Of course, this is impossible. And at the same time, it is also impossible to imagine that these people were without leadership. This means that each of them was instructed by some elder or spiritual father, whatever you call him. In general, they had leaders, but, apparently, not as outstanding in their spiritual qualities as Pachomius the Great. And we know nothing about these people: neither their names, nor any special virtues. St. John of the Ladder says: let passionate people be happy, because after their healing they can be helpers and guides for everyone. Because, having the experience of struggling with passions (if, of course, they really fight them), they can share this experience with others - their brothers or sisters. And John Climacus also says that there are people who, being in the mire of passions, as if in a pit, warn those who pass by not to fall into this pit as well. And the Lord, seeing their good deeds, finally delivers them from passion. That is, a person can be a mentor even when passions are active in him, he does not necessarily have to be dispassionate. But it is one thing when a person wages a struggle with passions and, as it were, detaches himself from his own struggle, leads others, and another thing when he leads under the influence of passion - such a person really does not have the right to be an elder. If someone who is subject to pride to such an extent that he does not notice it and is guided by it in his actions, instructs others, then, of course, he will do harm. And a certain person, even if he has pride, struggles with it and stands above it, he notices it and guides it not under the influence of this passion, but as if in spite of it - such a person has the right to be a leader, and he will help others.

Such a correction is necessary with regard to the defenders of the eldership and the people who glorify it. This is not only theoretical, but also vitally important. It is impossible to idealize the elder, because in this way we actually overthrow him. First we idealize it, then we see that it does not correspond to the ideal, and we lose faith in it. You need to approach it simply and, if I may say so, in a businesslike way, and then there will be benefits. We must remember two things: that an elder does not have to be a saint and that if we do not engage in mental work, no elder will help us. In fact, it will not even be needed.

Question. Is it necessary to convince of the benefits of mental activity people who believe that prayer will inevitably lead to delusion, and that prayer is the work of the saints? The dispute was about the fact that first one must acquire repentance and humility, and then dare to say the Jesus Prayer, and not achieve repentance through prayer.

Answer. It's like saying, "Eat first, and then cook dinner." How can you eat first if you don't have dinner ready yet? This is simply absurd. Maybe there are other ways to achieve repentance and humility, but in any case, it is prayer. And in the broad sense of the word, this method will still be mental action. Suppose I read not the Jesus Prayer, but the Psalms, I begin to practice attentive, repentant reading of the Psalms. Theoretically, this is possible, but much more difficult. If we cannot acquire repentance and humility with the help of the Jesus Prayer, it is difficult for us; if we manage to fall into delusion, even engaging in the Jesus Prayer, which in its content is a prayer of repentance, which by its content teaches us not to rely on ourselves and thus to humble ourselves, then all the more will we fall into delusion, reading some long prayers. Therefore, it seems to me that it is almost impossible to achieve repentance and humility without mental action, without the Jesus Prayer, in practice. Theoretically, yes, it is possible to acquire these virtues by practicing prayers a lot, but at the same time you still need to manage to watch your inner life. And this is much more difficult when reading long prayers, for example, penitential canons, than when engaging in the Jesus Prayer. Is it worth convincing someone of the benefits of smart action? Looking at you, a person can say: "This is the result of intelligent action." You have to save yourself. And besides, a lot depends on who will convince. If I try to persuade you, yes, I have the right to do so, and it is even my duty; If this is done by the monastery elders or abbess, it is also their duty to persuade, and not yet everyone, but those people who obey them or trust them in some way, turn to them. And some ordinary novice, who, perhaps, by her behavior can still seduce some worldly person, of course, must remain silent, because this is not her business.

Question. In the convent there are sisters who know a lot both spiritually and educationally, but nevertheless are not particularly successful; Why does this happen, why does quantity not turn into quality?

Answer. Spiritual success does not depend on education, but on various spiritual qualities, initially on zeal. Then, of course, humility, obedience, and similar spiritual qualities are very important. And education means nothing here. For example, Elder Silouan was illiterate, but he was also highly successful. Anthony the Great was completely illiterate. Of course, education does not hinder spiritual progress, but it does not contribute either; It is a neutral thing that can both benefit a person or even other people through him, and harm if he uses it incorrectly. For example, Origen was an unusually educated man, but he used his abilities to the detriment of the Church and became one of the outstanding, so to speak, heresiarchs. In his books there were so many false teachings that many heretics later borrowed them from him; Origen is the founder of almost all heresies, he has propagated so many different errors. But he was a man of genius. So education is not of fundamental importance. As for "those who know much in the spiritual sense"... What does it mean to know a lot in the spiritual sense? Real spiritual knowledge is experienced. This is valuable. And when a person has read a lot of books, for example, the Holy Fathers who write on ascetic topics, then this is not spiritual knowledge, it is purely theoretical training that a person can use; it would be useful if there were zeal and diligence. And if a person reads books, but does not do anything, then, perhaps, there will be harm from this. Daydreaming may arise. Take, for example, the book of Isaac the Syrian: while you are reading, it seems to you that you are Isaac the Syrian. You read Symeon the New Theologian, you think: "I am Symeon the New Theologian." And so on. And a person dreams of himself, but in fact does not lead a spiritual life; It turns out that he is looking at a picture on which a source of water is drawn, but he does not drink this water. Or he dreams that he is walking, but he is actually lying and sleeping. This is what happens to someone who reads a lot of books, knows a lot, but does nothing. And on the contrary, if a person, perhaps, knows little in this respect, has read few books, but has his own experience, tries to fulfill what he has learned, reads in order to fulfill and verify his own experience, he can succeed much more.

It is probably about the Jesus Prayer that its quantity turns into quality, and even then not always, but only when a person shows some diligence. Because if he carefully follows the rule and even reads a prayer throughout the day, but does not diligently pay attention, then quantity will never turn into quality.

You have such a book - "Pray Without Ceasing", it tells about the Athonite ascetics. The following case is described there. One monk, who was in obedience to an elder who, like all Athonite monks, fulfilled the rosary rule, began to persuade his elder to engage in mental work as the Holy Fathers teach, that is, to try to bring the mind into the heart. At first he resisted; Then the monk, who was in obedience, based on the writings of the Holy Fathers, nevertheless convinced his mentor of the need for such work, and he began to do this in his old age, towards the end of his life, and felt some changes in prayer. And before that, for many years, he read everything on the rosary, as it should be, but he did not feel anything like this. Why didn't quantity turn into quality? Some people, having zeal for spiritual progress and not noticing this zeal in themselves, considering it something self-evident, not highlighting it as some special feature, pray the Jesus Prayer unceasingly, all the time, and this quantity turns into quality for them. But they do not notice that it has turned into quality for a reason, but thanks to the diligence that they did not know how to evaluate or even consider in themselves. Here's how this secret is explained. As for the quantity of knowledge, how can it turn into quality?

Question. Tell me about grace. How to keep it? How not to squander praying for others, for enemies?

Answer. Why is it necessary to think that if we pray for others, we are wasting grace? It's just that when we pray for people of little faith, people who lead an unchristian or obviously sinful way of life, it is difficult for us to do this, but when we pray for a person who leads a pious life, or for ourselves, then it is easier for us, it is easier for us. The point is not that we keep grace or spend it, but rather that we gain more or less; and sometimes it is so difficult to pray that all attention is scattered. I think that in practice one should do this: having prayed for one's relatives - a little and moderately and with a blessing, one should pray for oneself and through repentance acquire the proper spiritual disposition, attention to prayer, humility.

Question. At work, I often just enjoy singing. Is this correct? Then, of course, my attention in prayer weakens, and I reproach myself for this.

Answer. Well, if singing distracts from prayer - what to do? Of course, when you hear something beautiful, especially for the first time or not used to it yet, then it is very impressive and your attention is distracted. This is natural. But this does not mean that you need to fight this beauty. After a while, a person gets used to it, and good singing, on the contrary, contributes to prayer, evokes real feelings that are necessary at a particular moment of the service. This is especially true of Znamenny chant, which is designed precisely to evoke appropriate feelings at certain moments of the service. It seems to me that the Supraśl chant is very inspiring. When I serve the Liturgy and our singers sing the Supraśl chant, it helps me a lot to pray. Now I am used to it, and when our singers first began to sing this Liturgy, I saw a sharp difference from how I had to concentrate and even force myself not to pay attention to the singing when it was partes. Indeed, partes singing distracts from prayer, it generally evokes a mood that is not at all prayerful: a kind of melancholy, sadness, sentimentality - anything but real concentration, composure. And it does not elevate the soul, but on the contrary, it draws it to the earth. I experienced this a long time ago, when I was still a layman, when I went to church. In the Assumption Cathedral of our city, they sang very well, I mean professionally, but they sang partes works, performed Tchaikovsky, other, less known, composers. But it was simply impossible to pray. Firstly, not a word was understood, and secondly, with such singing, you do not pray at all, but as if you are present in a concert hall.

But if the correct chanting distracts with its beauty, then it is out of habit. A few services will pass, you will get used to it - and then, on the contrary, it will help you pray. There is nothing you can do about it: when a person sees something new, it naturally distracts him. If we go into a church and see some beautiful icon, it will also attract our attention precisely because of its beauty and distract us from our inner concentration. But later it will also contribute to our prayerful mood, when some, at least a small habit is formed.

Question. And if you do not have the opportunity to visit those churches where they sing Znamenny chant, is it very bad?