In describing the effect of the Passion on the disciples, Jesus quotes the words of the prophet Zechariah: "I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered" (Zech 13:7; Mk 14:27). Immediately after his arrest, a disorderly flight begins. The only one who did not run away is Peter. He follows the escort from a distance and eventually enters the court of the high priest at the time when Jesus is being interrogated in the palace itself. Peter is able to enter this courtyard thanks to the recommendation of "another disciple who was known to the high priest" (Jn 18:15-16) and who followed Jesus with him. The "other disciple" is not named, but there is no doubt that the Apostle and Evangelist John himself is meant.

Peter, Mark tells us, followed Jesus from afar, "even inside the court of the high priest; and sat with the attendants, and warmed himself by the fire." (Mk 14:54). There is nothing more natural than this fire on a March night in Jerusalem. "Meanwhile, the slaves and servants, having made a fire, because it was cold, stood and warmed themselves. Peter also stood with them and warmed himself" (Jn 18:18).

Peter is already doing the same things that others are doing, and for the same reasons that others are doing. He already imitates others, but there seems to be nothing remarkable about it. It is cold, and everyone is warming themselves by the fire, Peter is also warming himself with them. At first, we do not understand why this is noted. However, in a text so stingy with specific details, this detail cannot be accidental. Three of the four evangelists mention this fire. They must have reasons for this. We must try to find them in Mark's text, which is the most primitive, as we are always told:

And it came to pass, when Peter was in the courtyard below, that one of the high priest's maidservants came, and when she saw Peter warming himself, and looked at him, and said, "Thou hast also been with Jesus of Nazareth." But he denied, saying, "I do not know and do not understand what you say." And he went out into the front yard; And the rooster crowed. The maidservant, seeing him again, began to say to those standing there, "This is one of them." He again renounced. After a while, those who stood there again began to say to Peter, "Surely you are one of them; for thou art a Galilean, and thy tongue is alike. And he began to swear and swear, I do not know this man of whom ye speak. Then the rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered the word that Jesus had spoken to him, "Before the crows twice, thrice shalt thou deny me; and began to weep (Mk 14:66-72).

At first, we think Peter is just lying. Peter's denial could have been reduced to this lie, but nothing is rarer than "just a lie," and in this case, too, on reflection, the lie loses all its smoothness. What, in fact, was demanded of Peter? He was required to confess that he had been with Jesus. But after his arrest, there were no disciples or community left around Jesus. Now there is no one really with Jesus, not Peter or anyone else. As is known, existentialist philosophers saw in "being-with" one of the main modalities of being. Martin Heidegger calls it Mitsein, which literally translates as "being-with".

The arrest clearly took away all future from being-with-Jesus, and Peter seems to have lost even the memory of his past being with him. He answers, as if in a dream, like a man who no longer knows where he is and what is wrong with him: "I do not know and do not understand what you are saying." Perhaps he really doesn't understand. He is in a state of deprivation and deprivation, reduced to a vegetative existence, to elementary reflexes. It's cold, and he goes to the fire. To squeeze closer to the fire, to stretch your hands to the fire with others, means to behave as if you are already one of them, as if you are already with them. The simplest gestures have their own logic, and it is always not only biological, but also sociological, and all the more authoritative, because it is located far below the threshold of consciousness.

Peter wants only one thing, to bask with others, and since he has lost Mitseina because of the collapse of his universe, he cannot, while warming himself, help but vaguely dream of the existence that shines there, in this fire, and it is to this existence that all the eyes directed into the fire, all the hands stretched out to the fire, silently point.

Fire in the night is much more than a source of heat and light. As soon as it lights up, we position ourselves around it; Beings and things are built in a new configuration. A moment before there was a simple crowd of people, a crowd where everyone was on his own, and suddenly a community was outlined. Hands and faces turn to the flame and are illuminated by it in response; it is like a benevolent response of a certain god to a prayer addressed to him. People, since they all look into the fire, can no longer help seeing each other; they can exchange glances and words; community and communication are established.

Because of this fire, new Mitsevina capabilities vaguely arise. "Being-s" is re-outlined for Peter, but in a different place and with different participants.

Mark, Luke, and John again mention fire at the moment when (in Mark and Luke) the maidservant intervenes for the first time. It can be said that her intervention was caused not by Peter's presence in the courtyard, but by his presence by the fire: "... One of the high priest's maidservants came, and when she saw Peter warming himself and looked at him, she said, 'And you were with Jesus of Nazareth' (Mk 14:66).

Peter, apparently, pushed closer to the fire and found himself in a bright light, that is, in full view of everyone. Peter, as usual, went too fast and went too far. Fire allows the maid to recognize him in the dark, but this is not the main role of fire. The servant girl herself probably does not fully understand what scandalizes her in Peter's behavior, what exactly makes her address him so boldly, but in Mark's work, fire certainly plays a role here. The Nazarene's companion acts like he's at home, like he has a place around that fire. In the absence of the fire, the servant girl would not have experienced, or would not have experienced such indignation against Peter. Fire is not just a decoration, it is something much more important. "Being-s", if it became universal, would lose its value, so it is based on exclusion. The handmaiden speaks only of "being-with-Jesus," but there is also a second "being-with"—being around fire; it is what really interests the servant, because it is her own "being-with"; she decides to protect his inviolability — and denies Peter the right to warm himself by this fire.

John makes the servant a "doorkeeper", a guardian of the entrance. It is she who allows Peter to enter the courtyard on the recommendation of another student. That is, the maid plays the role of a guard. This idea is excellent in itself, but it leads the evangelist to assert that Peter was recognized immediately, before he approached the fire. That is, the maid does not recognize a stranger by the light of the fire, which means that her indignation, unlike in the version of Mark and Luke, is not caused by the intimacy and ritualism of the scene. On the other hand, in John, it is not the common voice of all the servants who calls out to Peter for the third time, but one person, a relative of the one whose ear Peter cut off in a vain attempt to protect Jesus by violence at the time of his arrest. John's version reinforces the traditional interpretation, which sees in Peter's denial the only motive: fear. Without excluding fear as one of the motives, it should not be given decisive importance, and all four versions taken together, if read carefully, oppose this interpretation, and even the version of John, which at first seems to confirm it. If Peter had really feared for his life, as most commentators believe, he would never have entered this courtyard, especially if he had been recognized right at the entrance. He would have felt threatened at once; He would have run away without hesitation.