The basic structure of Ephrem’s understanding of the interpretation of Scripture may be summarized along the following lines. Scripture possesses two kinds of meaning, the outer historical meaning, and the inner spiritual meaning, ‘the hidden power’ as Ephrem sometimes calls it. These two coexist as intimately as do the humanity and divinity in the incarnate Christ. Ephrem’s belief in the presence of the ‘hidden power’ could be said to correspond to the traditional doctrine of the divine inspiration of the Scriptures.
The inner meaning, or ‘hidden power’, is as objectively present in Scripture as is the outer historical meaning. But whether its presence is actually perceived by the reader or hearer of Scripture is another matter, for this inner meaning can only be perceived by the inner eye, and the light by which that eye operates is the light of faith. That light is always available, but the individual inner eye can at will shut this out, or dim it. Whether a person makes any use of this inner mode of vision in the first place, and then, the extent to which she or he does so, is thus ultimately a matter of free choice, the exercise of free will. Put in different terms, the extent to which an individual can see with this inner eye will depend on the extent to which he or she is open to the continuing inspiration of the Holy Spirit. To appreciate the inspiration of the biblical text the reader must himself be open to the inspiration of the Spirit.
Sebastian Brock. The Luminous Eye: The Spiritual World Vision of Saint Ephrem the Syrian (Cistercian Publications, 1992), page 162
I had just finished reading this work two nights ago. Unfortunately most of the reading was during a transitory time of moving from one country to another and therefore I wasn’t able to appreciate the whole work as I should. Nonetheless, I enjoyed this last chapter and especially this small section that you referred to. In all, it amounts to the inner spiritual vision that views all things and Dr. Brock emphasizes how St. Ephrem advises to remain having 20/20 vision. I had typed up the two paragraphs that refer to this and attached it here.
I was wondering when you would be writing about this book as I saw it on your reading list. I noticed another Blogger said he will be reading it through the Fast. http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2008/12/11/the-luminous-eye/
The inner meaning, or “hidden power” (ie. the true interpretation of the Scriptures), is as objectively present in Scripture as is the outer historical meaning. But whether its presence is actually perceived by the reader or hearer of Scripture is another matter, for this inner meaning can only be perceived by the inner eye, and the light by which that eye operates is the light of faith. That light is always available, but the individual inner eye can at will shut this out, or dim it. Whether a person makes any use of this inner mode of vision in the first place, and then, the extent to which she or he does so, is thus ultimately a matter of free choice, the exercise of free will. Put in different terms, the extent to which an individual can see with this inner eye will depend on the extent to which he or she is open to the continuing inspiration of the Holy Spirit. To appreciate the inspiration of the biblical text the reader must himself be open to the inspiration of the Spirit.
Symbols and types play a central role. Some idea of how these operate for Ephrem can be illustrated by an analogy. Scripture could be described as a darkened plate of glass between humanity and divine reality (Ephrem’s “truth”). The outer meaning corresponds to what can be seen on the surface of the glass: this is the object of enquiry for biblical scholarship. But on this surface are a whole number of pinpoints of varying size, where the glass is clear, thus giving the possibility of vision through and beyond the glass itself. These pinpoints correspond to Ephrem’s raze, symbols and types. Their very presence on the glass is, in the first place, only visible to the inner eye which sees by the light of faith. But given that the inner eye does perceive them, then two rather different things will affect the vision of this eye: it may be obscured by sin or distorted by wrong belief (both very important points for Ephrem), and, secondly, any strength it has will depend on the strength of its faith. The greater the faith, the closer to the glass will the inner eye get, with a twofold result: in the first place it will see yet more pinpoints, that is raze or symbols, on the glass through which to look beyond to “truth”; and secondly, the eye will get a much wider vision of the truth the closer it gets to the glass. This helps to explain why raze or symbols are multivalent; to say that a symbol can point to only one thing, has only one interpretation, is to misunderstand what these symbols are all about.(p. 162-1630
How about that! I just finished last night. Most of it was slow reading because I was laid out with the flu (ugh). All better now. And those two paragraphs certainly are provocative. I thought instantly of theoria, really.
I thought the same thing as well, theoria, and St. Ephrem’s explanation of the way to it. His work is beautiful. The only thing I find better then reading books like this is reading the hymns themselves.
I’m an ER nurse, I’m glad you’re feeling better. The flu is an awful thing.
Yes, Matthew, the hymns are much better themselves! But this kind of thoughtful, diligent summary that Brock is an expert of is a good second place.
Thanks, again. It was a brutal flu that I caught. I’m still coughing a bit.