This book, one of the earliest by Christos Yannaras, was first published in 1967 and has become a contemporary classic. Yannaras begins by outlining Heidegger's analysis of the fate of western metaphysics, which ends, he argues, in a nihilistic atheism. Yannaras's response is largely to accept Heidegger's analysis, but to argue that, although it applies to the western tradition of what Heidegger calls "onto theology" (which regards God as a 'being', even if the highest), it does not take account of the Orthodox tradition of apophatic theology, of which Dionysius the Areopagite is a pre-eminent example. A God 'beyond being' escapes the criticism of Heidegger, and provides an alternative to Heidegger's nihilistic conclusion.
Christos Yannaras (Greek: Χρήστος Γιανναράς) was a Greek philosopher, Eastern Orthodox theologian and author of more than 50 books which have been translated into many languages. He was a professor emeritus of philosophy at the Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, Athens.
Is it possible that an atheist withdrawal from God is more faithful to the original ecclesial event of the Logos becoming flesh, even preserving its mystery, in comparison with the effort of Western scholastic theology to comprehend the essence of the highest being? A provocative question, yet the case of Heidegger merits a sustained theological response. Drawing inspiration from Heidegger's Nietzschean critique of the tendency towards ontotheological intellectualization of the godhead that made its way into to Christianity as early as the introduction of Neoplatonism, and from the apophanticism of Pseudo-Dionysius, Yannaras seeks to contest what he calls religionized metaphysics’ insistence that our finite intellect, through the labor of abstraction, can come grasp some of God’s essences, even if not all of them. If the very idea of God, infinite in form and content, overflows the semantics of essence and ruins every effort at representational capture, we can only imagine how much more the godhead itself transcends our impoverished categories. Between the creator and existent beings there can be no analogical relationship of likeness, just as one cannot bridge the rift between being and absolute void. To ‘know’ transcendence is to gracefully allow the sand painting to dissolve before one’s eyes without attachment; a form of non-knowledge (Incidentally, this is why the term ‘negative theology’ is a bit of a misnomer, since we also do not know what God is not). Nonetheless, for Yannaras, the creature is not completely cut off from God. There is indeed another path to ‘know’ the godhead which steers clear off the two extremes of optimistic dogmatism and anti-idolatrous skepticism—one that is dear to the tradition of Eastern Orthodoxy. Enter the distinction between essence and energia. Energia, or divine energy is neither an exhaustive nor partial representation of God with which our intellect can become one. Energies are acts of the person (manifestations of intention, intellect, judgement, etc.) that offer humanity an opportunity to experientially participate in a personal divine-human communion with God through the undivided Church. Only such dialogic communion with products of the divine will, not divine essence, can created beings participate in the original ecclesial event of salvation without reserve and come to ‘know’ the Creator.
Wonderful book, which would benefit all of us if more theologians in the 'West' would have read. especially those engaged in studies on Heidegger and Nietzsche and 'post-modernism'.