Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 50:1, Winter 2015

THE ENLIGHTENMENT OF ZEN BUDDHISM

AND THE HESYCHASTIC VISION OF THE DIVINE LIGHT

George C. Papademetriou

My intention here is to present the religious phenomena of Zen and Hesychasm,

analyzing similarities within the mechanism of prayer and movements within the
respective faiths. There is a common way that the transcendent light is exposed in Zen
Buddhism and Hesychasm, but at the same time there is conflict between traditional
Eastern Christian ideas on the communion with God and the Western approaches to
God that are manifest in the Eastern and Western understanding of God.
The divine light in the Christian tradition and enlightenment in the Oriental
religions are two different experiences. The common characteristics of the breathing
exercises in Hesychasm and Zen make the study of these common religious phenomena
interesting. Byzantine monks in the East were free persons and at the same time
obedient to traditional authority. The bishops were elected from the monastic
community. The Byzantine society respected monks who were completely devoted to
God and who engaged in unceasing prayer, fasting, and restraint. This unceasing prayer
was very important for the monks, who adopted a variety of techniques and theories
developed in relation to it. Traditionally, there are two schools of thought on the matter
within Christianity: (1) The school of Evagrios of Pontos (Asia Minor), which is based
on Platonism, with an epistemological approach to purify the “mind” and unite with the
divine spirit; and (2) the school of Makarios, leading toward Neoplatonism, with an
approach of purifying the heart.
The monks of the fourteenth century leaned toward the Makarian school of thought.
They emphasized that the human being is body, heart, and spirit that participate in the
blessed vision of the uncreated light and especially in prayer. In this way the whole
human being is transformed and deified, a process known as “theosis.” The purpose of
the monks in prayer is literally to attain communion with God.
The “light” is a universal symbol of God and God’s Reign, in contrast to darkness
and its misery. The symbol of God as “light” was commonly used in Greek philosophy
and religious tradition in the mystery religions (“enlightenment”: as vision of god or
goddess); this was also true in Gnosticism, in the heretical sects of Judaism and
Christianity. In the Christian creed Jesus Christ is the Son of God, viewed as “Light of
Light,” and the entire Christian theology, ethics, and liturgics are imbued by this
symbolism of “light.” It is true that some Eastern writers speak of God in apophatic
terms and symbolism. This is true only in a few neoplatonic theologians who speak of
God in an absolute apophatic way. For them, God is beyond, as described in the
writings of Dionysius the Areopagite, Maximus the Confessor, and others. However,
according to the claim of the apophatic way, “God is light” more than darkness.
Especially within the Christian life and theory, it is in the “Uncreated light” that the
symbols of the “light” are manifest in the created world. This is also evident from the
Hebrew Bible. This transcendent light is manifested in Jesus Christ, through his whole
life and teaching, and especially in the Transfiguration on Mount Tabor and his
Resurrection. In this light, all the faithful participants in their daily life will participate in
the eschaton, in the End of Days. The hesychasts of the Holy Mountain make every
57
58 Journal of Ecumenical Studies
effort to attain exactly this type of life. This type of theological language concerning
God and communion with God always had a real and symbolic taste of the transcendent
now, as well as the hope for a more complete taste and fulfillment of God in the future.
The hesychasts introduced an intensive realism and a time of completeness in relation
with the divine light and filled with God; this fulfillment was realized in their own
practice of prayer and in their expectation that during prayer they participate in true
uncreated light and are therefore transfigured by the light of the holy transfiguration.
This is the point that we need to make the connection to Zen Buddhism. Zen
developed around the seventh century C.E., from Mahayana Buddhism. Within
Mahayana Buddhism, new practices that led to the Buddhist enlightenment were
developed. The yoga of Indian Buddhism moved into a new cultural setting of China
and Japan, with the transmission of these practices to those regions. The Indian
philosophical practices of yoga were rooted deeply within the people of China and
Japan. The historical details of the integration of yoga in the culture of China and Japan
are beyond the scope of the present study. 1 It should be emphasized that Zen in all its
traditional forms tends to be an apophatic transcendent reality, which goes beyond
acceptance and apopheticism, beyond all rational dualistic thought, as “viewed in our
true nature.” This is the idea of “seeing is nonseeing, knowledge is nonknowledge,
reason is nonreason.” All the expressions of faith in Zen practice, even the most
negative, must be understood metaphysically.
We will touch on additional points of the relation to Zen to attain perfection of the
mind within this framework. A branch of Zen, northern Zen, believed in gradual
attainment. However, within the southern, dominant school of Zen, it was the goal of
sudden enlightenment in which the focus was on emptiness and nothingness, and the
extent that nothing exists was emphasized. This truly was not symbolic of nothingness
but actually the certainty of the supreme reality that exists beyond all categories and
concepts.
The practical method and enlightenment are not connected as cause and effect, but
most likely as an equivalent. Meditation—that is, some type of programmed method—is
not a necessary means to attain enlightenment. Spiritual guidance, however, is necessary
and contributes to aid in proceeding toward the revelation of the light. One who
proceeds in this process must therefore have a teacher (guru) to whom one must give
complete and blind obedience. There are, however, people who cannot reach this
absolute dedication; this does not mean that those people will never attain enlightenment
but that they will not do so within this lifetime. Last but not least significantly,
enlightenment is attained not only once but numerous times.
The above-stated method for achieving enlightenment gives some indications of the
similarities of the practices of Zen monasticism and the Eastern Orthodox eschatological
tradition of prayer. In the hesychasts of the Holy Mountain we find prayer closely
related with the practice of purification and enlightenment. Their theology is apophatic,
a series of negatives that ultimately lead to communion with the divine grace, a supreme
positive. They identify the practice with the vision of the divine light. They also have a
teacher (guide) to whom they give absolute, blind obedience. Enlightenment for them

1______________ 1
For a fuller study on Zen, see Heinrich Dumoulin, Zen Enlightenment:
Origins and Meaning, tr. John C. Maraldo (New York and Tokyo: Westerhill, 1979 [orig.: Der
Erleuchtungsweg des Zen im Buddhismus (Frankfurt a/M: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, 1976)]).
Zen Enlightenment and the Hesychastic Vision of the Divine Light 59

was in practice a religious life, a taste of the truth of God and God’s promise. This was
not experienced by all, but it seems that the hesychasts did not condemn the rest of the
monks or people who did not practice “Hesychasm.”
The Zen that is practiced in monasteries is usually under the supervision of an
experienced spiritual teacher in an atmosphere of worship in the presence of the icon of
Buddha, fasting and reading the scriptures, and spending many hours during the day
doing “zazen.”2 This is the attainment of the proper physical position of the “yogi” and
the control of breath, which demands much time and long hours of practice. Zazen has a
triple purpose: the search to concentrate energy; the experience of the supreme truth as
united with the universe that is expressed in warm enthusiasm and the resulting freedom
and joy, very often with miraculous events; and the experience of the highest way in all
our existence and in our daily life, especially in showing sympathy and love for all
living things.
The attainment of all these goals is not an easy task. To attain them, one goes
through numerous negative experiences such as doubt, hopelessness, psychological
pressures, tears, pain, visions, and hallucinations—visions from the devil. The victors
over these anxieties and nervous exhaustion attain an inner stillness, peace, and physical
tranquility. Breath control is directly connected with the abdominal muscles. The goal of
the ascetic is to dominate the mind. How can this be done? Control of the mind can be
attained by the position of the body and a certain way of breathing. The breathing
muscles contract, and the entire body and muscles stretch in the way that the diaphragm
dominates all of the body. The great intensity of the breathing muscles regulates its
development, which is significant. This regulation of time is determined by the
developed intensity of the diaphragm.3
There are many signs evident in the liberation experience of Zen, such as ecstatic
joy and exaltation and strong emotions; the world seems to flood from the transcendent
light, and superior and wonderful phenomena occur. To assist the concentration of the
mind from the bodily position and breath control, often they repeat the enigmatic word
“miou,” the revelation of which leads to enlightenment.4
Regarding the details of the practice of enlightenment in the hesychasts we have
limited information, as the sources do not have many details. Gregory Palamas wrote
nine treatises defending the practice of the monks against the serious criticism of
Barlaam of Calabria, who attacked the hesychasts’ psychosomatic method of prayer.
That is the idea that through prayer and control of breath the monk concentrated on the
middle of the body that is the navel to attain a vision of the energies of God. For
Barlaam, God is known through symbols from the created world, instead of
experiencing the divine energies. He called the hesychasts by the derogatory name,
2
2______________ ”Zazen” is the Zen practice of sitting in meditation.
3
3______________ See Aarom Hoopas, Zen Yoga: A Path to Enlightenment through Breathing,
Movements, and Meditation (Tokyo, New York, and London: Kodensha International, 2007), pp. 36–45. See
also Alain Danielson, Yoga: Method and Reinterpretation (London: Christopher Johnson, 1949), pp. 19–48;
and Katsuki Sekida, Zen Training: Methods and Philosophy, ed. A. V. Crimsove, tr. A. V. Namyolos (New
York: Weatherhill, 1983 [orig., 1975]), pp. 44–89.
4
4______________ A “koan” is a fundamental part of the history and lore of Zen Buddhism. It consists of
a story, dialogue, question, statement, or single word, the meaning of which cannot be understood by rational
thinking but may be accessible through intuition, thus leading into enlightenment.
60 Journal of Ecumenical Studies
“omphaloskopoi.” The works of Palamas are theological defenses of the hesychastic
practices.
The monks of Athos in their practice of the vision of the divine light do not repeat
an enigmatic word as in Zen Buddhism but, rather, “the prayer of Jesus”: “Lord Jesus
Christ, have mercy on me.” That is the expression of repentance and also the attainment
of the goal—the vision of the divine light is possible through the assistance of the
“Lord.” Therefore the conflict between Palamas and Barlaam is the criterion of truth.
For Palamas, the criterion for truth is the holy tradition, that is, the Eastern Christian
ascetical practices and the interpretation of the scriptures. For Barlaam, knowledge of
creation from studies of nature and scientific studies and practicing the commandments
of God and reading of scriptures are sufficient to open the way to God. Truth is
something different from each of those. For Palamas, truth is the communion with God,
and Barlaam believed that ignorance did not promote but was actually a setback in
religious knowledge and communion with God. Philosophy for him was necessary for
the understanding of God, taught by nature and the scriptures.
Palamas understood the divine light and the communion of the divine in terms of
symbolic expressions of God and the communion with God as the response of the soul
to the plans of God. For Palamas the divine light was not symbolic but “real,” for it
“defined” the human person (Triad 1.3.23). All the revealed visions of the Bible are
interpreted as visions of God with the physical eyes, which are elevated with God’s
grace to a high plane. For this reason, Palamas logically concluded the “uncreated grace
of God.” The Divine essence is ineffable and beyond any conception, for divine
energies that flow from God's essence are in immediate communion with the human
person through the Holy Spirit. Barlaam accused Palamas for the expression of two
divinities (Triads 3.1.4) or polytheism (Triad 3.2.9). Palamas did not go into detail
regarding the “definition of man” (Triad 3.1.28), nor did he articulate what is (theosis)
“deification” because of the nature of the topic (Triad 3.1.33). For Barlaam, all these
were blasphemies.

A Christian Response to Yoga

Next, I would like to examine some points of incompatibility in the essential

teachings of Christianity and yoga. Professor Gregory Ziakas has pointed out that the
understanding of the human person is different within Christianity and Buddhism.
Christian biblical teaching on the human person is unique and unrepeatable in the
history of the world—it is not “transmigrated” as taught within Hinduism and
Buddhism. Humans were created by God in God’s “image” and “likeness”—terms that
refer to the rational and volitional attributes—and were destined to be unique and
unrepeatable persons for all eternity (Gen. 1:26). Contrary to this, for the Buddhist and
Hindu believer, both human being and world are tied to the veil of the eternal cycle of
reincarnation and repetition of human and world. The constant concern of Buddhists and
Hindus is to be “liberated” from this cycle of “genesis” and corruption, known as
“Samsara.”5
5
5______________ Gregory D. Ziakas, “Dialogue between Christianity and Buddhism from an Orthodox
Christian Perspective,” Epistemonike Epeterida Theologikes Scholes (Thessalonike: Aristotelian University of
Thessalonike, 1998), pp. 155–181.
Zen Enlightenment and the Hesychastic Vision of the Divine Light 61

In contrasting Zen with Christianity, one may ask if are there signs of similarity
between Christianity and Buddhism that are to be engaged in the dialogue of love and
peace in the world. At first hand, there are certainly numerous differences that are
negative, but there are also many interesting similarities that can be the subject of
creative dialogue. The Buddhist is willing to discuss issues of religion in dialogue.
The negative aspects that are not discussable from the Christian point of view are
the fundamental teachings of the Christian doctrine of the person. The center of the
Christian view of revelation is the completion and salvation of the human person.
According to scriptural teaching, humans are unique persons, “unrepeatable” in the
history of the world, and therefore not under the law of “transmigration” as Buddhism
teaches. Humankind was created, according to Christian doctrine, “in the image” and
“likeness” of God. These terms extend to the “rational” and “irrational” elements of the
human person, who is destined as a unique and unrepeatable person in all eternity (Gen.
1:26). The biblical teaching from the beginning with the creation of the world is a linear
and unrepeatable history that leads the world to a definite end that God determined. God
is the beginning, the middle, and the end. Christ said “I am the Alpha and Omega, the
first and the last” (Rev. 1:8). God is, in essence, the “Pantocrator.”
In Buddhism, by contrast, the origins of the human person and the world have no
meaning. Both are tied to the wheel of the eternal cycle of repetition. They do not have a
stable-constant existence. That which constantly occupies the Buddhist and the Hindu is
the flight from the pain of the eternal cycle of birth and corruption known as “Samsara.”
There is a similarity between Christianity and Buddhism in that both seek
liberation, but, there are great differences. In Christianity after the fall of humankind,
that is, after the ancestral disobedience, the human person is inclined to evil and sin. The
Buddhist believes that this world is entirely deception. The Christian also believes that
the enslavement of the human being to the world gives pain that is derived from
afflictions of sin. However, the Christian does not accept that all of life is pain. Jesus
Christ stated, “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this
world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world” (Jn. 16:33).
The curse of affliction is not the world but the personal misfortunes of the rational
being, that is, the human. The great seventh-century theologian Maximos the Confessor
said that we must not fight nature, which God created, but the disorderly and unnatural
movements and energies that come from our inner being. 6 For this reason the Christian
never denies the world or the nature of pain and does not seek increasing happiness
outside the world. Christians may live in the world or as monastics, but all lift the cross
of pain in remembrance of the example set forth by Christ. For Christians, even though
pain is the product of sin, it is not always evil. It also could be a blessing from God,
something that is used by God as a teaching tool. For the Buddhist the constant
persistence in the world is without purpose and a vain pursuit. Salvation for Buddhism
is flight and liberation from the world of pain. That is the end of anxiety and pain.
Enlightenment is the ideal goal for the Buddhist. This is also true for the Orthodox
Christian. However, for the latter, enlightenment or the vision of the divine light or
theosis is not only the product of moral perfection but also the ontological
6
6______________ Maximos the Confessor, Letter to Thalasios, J. P. Migne, PG 91, 489 B.
62 Journal of Ecumenical Studies
renewal of the whole human person. For the Buddhist, enlightenment is to extinguish all
that is personal. Enlightenment for the Buddhist is the knowledge of the mechanism that
causes human wretchedness, the pain in this corrupt world. This enlightenment means
the complete liberation of humankind from all space and time and the conscious state
where the “ego” is negated in the infinity of the absolute other—in the timeless and vast,
which is indescribable. A prominent Hindu philosopher wrote: “One of the fundamental
conditions of attaining it is the complete elevation of the moral life, including the
absolute control of all passions and desires, the abandonment of worldly ambitions and
hopes, and the attainment of an unruffled peace of mind.” Furthermore, he said that
“there is a state in which the five senses, thought, intellect, and mind all cease to
operate, and this highest stage of absolute sense-restraint is called ‘Yoga,’ or spiritual
union.”7
For Orthodoxy the purpose of enlightenment is not the flight of the soul but the
moral and ontological renewal of the whole human person, which is not lost in the
cosmic infinity of nirvana but unites—is in communion—as a perfected person with the
personal God and other human beings.
The Orthodox approach to the vision of divine light takes two forms: the positive
(cataphatic), and the negative (apophatic). The integration of both the apophatic way
and the cataphatic way is the best method of attaining the true vision of the divine light.
In the cataphatic way, consisting of a ladder of hierarchies of theophanies, we see God's
wisdom as manifested in the created world. The apophatic method is the negation of all
material concepts from the inner life or essence of God. In our human experience we
enter into the inner mysteries of the divine, uncreated energies, and, in the vision of the
divine light, we participate and commune with the divine gifts. This avoids the heresy of
becoming one with the essence of God, because, in Orthodoxy, the “likeness” is the
theosis (glorification), which is salvation by grace—freely given to the hesychast by
God. This way to the vision of God’s energies is not attained with philosophical,
intellectual exercises but solely with the experience of God’s grace in the heart.

The Mystical Theology of Orthodoxy

and Buddhist Transcendental Meditation

While Orthodox mystical theology and Buddhist transcendental meditation have

many phenomena in common, they are not the same. Though we find many
phenomenological parallels, there are different contexts in the teaching and
interpretation of each religion. In the Orthodox Christian East there always has been a
close relationship between cataphatic and apophatic mystical experience. In this, the
mystical theology of the Orthodox Church describes apophatically the mystical
experience—in what is known as the apophatic way—or via negativa. This means the
Orthodox East does not describe the divine in any form. There are two ways of
theology, the positive and negative; St. Dionysios the Areopagite suggested approaching
the mystery of God “through gnoseos kai agnosias.”8 According to the mystical
theology of the Eastern Church, the meeting of God is in the spiritual life and
7
7______________ S. N. Dasgupta, “Lecture III: Yoga Mysticism,” in his Hindu Mysticism {Six Lectures]
(New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., 1959 [orig., 1927]), pp. 61 and 62.
8
8______________ Dionysios the Areopagite, On the Divine Names, PG 3, 872 A.
Zen Enlightenment and the Hesychastic Vision of the Divine Light 63

experience. It is impossible for humans to conceive of the mysterious God with

meditation of the mind or rational contemplation. For Orthodoxy, “God is light within
light” and at the same time absolute darkness—the “divine cloud.”9
The unknowable nature of God is taken up by the early Fathers—that God is
absolutely other, unknown, and inconceivable. To arrive at the inconceivable nature of
God humans need to follow the apophatic way of mystical theology. This method points
not to what God is but to what God is not. 10 Gregory the Theologian said, “The Father is
infinite essence and without description.”11 Dionysios the Areopogite insisted that it is
impossible to describe God, because God is ineffable. The only thing that can be said is
that God has nothing in common with sensible or rational beings. God is not being or
nonbeing but beyond all being.12 Here lies a parallel with Zen that denies speaking of
the metaphysical reality of God.
In Hesychasm, we find certain phenomenological parallels. Prayer often follows the
rhythm of breathing. Such an enlightenment in the effort of self-concentration in certain
bodily positions (yoga) to the rhythm of breathing and silent contemplation is present in
all manifestations of Buddhism. The later Fathers of the church defined the precise
content of mystical theology. The great mystic Maximos the Confessor (558–662), who
preoccupied himself in a systematic way with the content of mystical theology, said that
God has a moving love toward the world. In this act of moving love God reveals
something of Godself that he called “amethektos,” or incommunicable. He spoke of
God as taking part in God’s activity but not partaking in God’s essence. The whole
world is the result of God’s creative life. The world was created by God’s love and from
this love is preserved and is in the end reunited with God (theosis) and thereby saved.
God is the only living reality that is continuously moving toward humankind, and
humans are continually moving toward God. For God, love is a way of existence.
Simeon the New Theologian (975–1035) had an integration of the mystical
theology of both Maximos the Confessor and the Divine Ascent in John of Sinai (526–
605). The Ladder of Ascent is a spiritual method that guides the believer in a gradual
ascent to perfection. This work is still a significant guide today in Orthodox monasteries
in which the core is the vision of the “uncreated light.” According to Simeon, the
believer can unite with God to see the divine and uncreated light in one’s heart. Union
with God is attained through the thematic nature of Christ, the second person of the
Holy Trinity. For this reason the believer is not absorbed in the divine essence but is in
union with God as a perfect person and has a vision of the light in God’s glory.13
The most significant phenomenological expression of Eastern Orthodox mystical
theology that has some parallels with Hindu and Buddhist practices is Hesychasm. The
dominant figure of Hesychasm is St. Gregory Palamas, Archbishop of Thessaloniki. The
hesychasts believed that the intellect (nous) concentrated in the heart, and by noetic
9
9______________ Moses entered in the divine cloud of the unknown; see Exodus 20–21. See Clement of
Alexandria, Strondler's 5, 12 PG 3, 10 33 B; Gregory of Nyssa, Life of Moses, PG 44, 377 A mar 316B, 773B;
and Dionysius the Areopagite, On Mystical Theology, PG. 3, 1033 B, 773 B.
10______________ 10Clement of Alexandria. Stromates 5, 11 PG 90 1117 C.
11______________ 11Discourses on Theophany, 38.
12______________ 12The Mystical Theology 4 PG 3, 1043 A-1048 B.
13______________ 13Syméon le nouveau théologien, Hymnes 1–15, intro., text, and notes Johannes Koder,
tr. Joseph Paramelle, Sources Chretiennes 156 (Paris : Cerf, 1969).
64 Journal of Ecumenical Studies
unceasing prayer the believer could attain enlightenment and the vision of the “divine
light” as it was manifested in the Transfiguration of Christ on Mount Tabor. The
hesychast usually sits cross-legged and with a bowed head, and the prayer follows the
rhythm of one’s breathing.
A similar method is approached in Yoga. Patañjali spoke of focusing and
concentrating on an object to help the mind center in the heart. This is a meditational aid
in which the posture must be “steady and comfortable.”14 Patañjali spoke of breath
control, “the cutting-off of the flow of inhalation and exhalation.”15
The vision of divine light is practiced today in Orthodox monastic life. Unceasing
prayer cleanses the heart and causes the mind to descend to the heart. Unceasing prayer
cannot be deformed to “Christian yoga” and to transcendental meditation. In seeing
phenomenological similarities in the methods of external manifestations and even in
linguistic expression, this does not mean that these are essentially the same. Similar
external phenomena may be similar, but fundamentally different, in context. Yoga in the
West became a fashion, whereas in India and China within Hinduism and Buddhism
these issues are a matter of life. In the West, this fashion is preferred as a matter of
seeking the mysterious. In the East, if one examines the religious life and social fabric,
one would be moved by some topics, but all of these are not necessary for revelation.16
Yoga is based on the philosophical system of Sakhya. Though Yoga believes in
God, yet this God, Isvara, according to Patañjali, is not the creator God. God is an ideal
soul, which always possesses true knowledge and therefore does not submit to the
eternal cycle and transmigration. The aim of the yogi is “liberation,” that is, the state
that helps the soul to separate matter completely. Only through moral cleansing and the
right path of life and the systematic ascesis of the body and the instruments of emotion
can the yogi attain this high aim. Their views seem phenomenologically to be similar to
Hesychasm, yet they are completely different. For example, God is not an ideal soul or
spirit but a personal God. In Hinduism the personal God is inconceivable. “Liberation”
from the eternal cycle is not compatible with the Christian faith, so Hesychasm seeks
“liberation” as freedom from sin and the devil.
The vision of uncreated light is practiced today by the monks of the Orthodox
Church. This prayer is the invocation of the name of Christ, said in one of the following
ways: (1) Lord Jesus Christ, son of God, have mercy on me a sinner; (2) Lord Jesus
Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me; or (3) Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have
mercy on us and your world.
This prayer cannot be changed to a so-called Christian yoga or to some form of
Buddhist transcendental meditation—a term introduced to the West by the new religious
cults that were derived from Hinduism or Buddhism. Every religion and civilization has
its own way of expression of the mysterious and the infinite. There are some similarities
in the methods and phenomenal (external) appearances or even in the language, though
this does not mean they are essentially the same thing, for these methods differ
completely in their content.

14______________ 14Georg Feuerstein, The Yoga-Sūtra of Patañjali: A New Translation and Commentary
(Folkstone, Kent, U.K.: William Dawson and Sons, 1979), p. 90.
15______________ 15Ibid., p. 92.
16______________ 16See Gregory Ziakas “Christianity and Buddhism,” in Epistemonike Epeterida
Theologikes Scholes, New Series, Tmema Theologias Festschrift in honor of Professor Antonis-Aimilios
Tachiaios, vol. 1 (Thessalonike: Aristotelian University of Thessalonike, 1998), pp. 178–197.
Zen Enlightenment and the Hesychastic Vision of the Divine Light 65