In this preface, I want to address three topics: first, the origins of this book; second, some aspects of its content; and finally, a few concepts that I would like to explore further.
During my previous research into Franciscan sources, including Greek Patristics and the Desert Fathers, I was naturally drawn towards hesychasm. This transition was not merely a shift in focus but a deeper exploration of how radical spiritual experiences â whether framed as voluntary poverty or other forms of asceticism â inform philosophical insights.
Therefore, I propose a study of Palamasâ works to emphasize the philosophical, rather than solely the theological aspects. My further engagement with Palamasâ writings confirmed that light was a central metaphysical concept foundational to his thought, beyond a mere theological symbol. This realization led me to approach his work through a specific metaphysics of light. Throughout this book, I analyze various aspects of Palamite thinking about light and endeavor to synthesize these dispersed elements into a coherent system that concentrates on the metaphysical dimension of light, which represents Palamasâ primary interest.
Palamasâ philosophical proposal exemplifies the complexification of what appears to be a simple experience. Experience is indeed a fundamental concept in the works that Palamas wrote to defend the principles of the hesychasts, as it is from a concrete experience, which needed legitimization, that a complex entanglement of theological and philosophical terms emerges. Is the need to legitimize an experience a consequence of the existence of a doctrinal corpus required to be orthodox?
As I have discovered, another peculiarity of hesychasm, and of conventional Christian thought in general, is the need to conform to what is considered orthodox. As mentioned in this work, physical postures and mental dispositions during prayer, monastic disciplines, and spontaneous theological perspectives conveyed from ear to ear, have been transformed and arranged in Palamasâ work into a metaphysical system or âquasiâsystemâ, employing sophisticated terminology.
Looking back at the results of my research, I can see that there are aspects I emphasized more than necessary, such as the history of the exegesis of the Transfiguration episode. I also must admit that I began this work with an ideological spirit, which I tried to rid myself of during the writing process. At times, I found myself passionately defending Barlaam, while equally attacking . Essentially, my intention was to show that Barlaamâs proposal is just as legitimate as Palamasâ and had the same right to be disseminated.
There are some questions that remain open and which I intend to explore further. These include the direct or indirect reception of Palamas in the Latin world, from Ioannes Lei to Louis Thomassin, especially in the context of debates on the beatific vision. The project I am currently working on focuses precisely on this subject.
In closing, I must say that this work has been enriching not only intellectually but also experientially. Once more, I extend my gratitude to everyone who contributed directly or indirectly to its realization.