30

inconceivable. "For no one has ever seen God; the only-begotten Son of God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has made Him known." How then, they say, are not those clearly in error who claim to see God newly as light in themselves? And if one of them should again bring forward the word of the only-begotten of God, saying that "the pure in heart shall see God" and "I will manifest myself to them, dwelling in them with the Father," immediately they say that contemplation is knowledge (p. 182) and do not know that they are speaking inconsistently; for just as the divine is invisible, so also is it inconceivable. Therefore, those who dogmatize that the intellectual vision of God in light is a deceitful phantasm and a demonic energy, because of God’s invisibility, ought also to drag down knowledge to similar mockeries because of God's inconceivability. But as for knowledge, we choose to say nothing in opposition to them; for they speak in harmony with us, even if they do not understand what they are saying. For there is also the knowledge concerning God and the dogmas related to Him, a contemplation, which we call theology, and the natural use and movement of the powers of the soul and the members of the body bring about a reformation of the rational image; but this is not the perfect comeliness of our nobility from on high and the supernatural union with the super-luminous light, from which alone comes both theologizing securely and the natural standing and moving of the powers of the soul and of the body within us; therefore, by abolishing this, they have abolished all virtue and truth.

Concerning there being, then, no more mystical and higher contemplation than the knowledge of which they speak, nor there being any such contemplation of God at all, because of God’s invisibility, having been initiated by those who have been in true contemplation, we will ask them: what does it seem to us, does not even the Holy Spirit see the things of God? But indeed it "searches even the depths of God." If, then, someone were to say that he sees the pure light without the Holy Spirit, you would rightly object, saying: "how could the invisible be seen?" But if someone, having put away the spirit of the world (which the fathers call an intelligible darkness lying upon unpurified hearts), if someone, then, having put this away and been purified from every personal will and having risen above every human tradition and brief delay (p. 184) that creates an obstacle to the required earnestness, even if it be plausible, according to the great Basil, and having gathered together the powers of the soul as much as possible and established a vigilant supervision of the intellect, first lives among natural and God-pleasing contemplations according to the intellect, then, having ascended above himself, should receive in himself the Spirit from God, who knows the things of God as the spirit of man knows the things in him, and having received these things for this reason, as the great Paul preaches, that he might know the things mystically bestowed on him by God, "which eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and have not entered into the heart of man," how would this person not see through the spirit the invisible light? And how would this light, though seen, not be again invisible and unheard and inconceivable? For it is seen by those who see "what eye has not seen and ear has not heard and has not entered into the heart of man." For these receive spiritual eyes and have the mind of Christ, through which they both see the invisible and conceive the inconceivable; for He is not invisible to Himself, but to those who conceive and see through created and natural eyes and reasonings. But to those to whom God has fitted Himself as a governing member, how would He not, through Himself, also manifestly grant the contemplation of grace?

And how would he not deem worthy of the words of the theology of the Song of Songs, praising the spiritual power engendered in their eyes, saying to them, "Behold, you are beautiful, my love; your eyes are doves"? through which they also, perceiving the beauty of the spiritual bridegroom, give back a lavish speech of praise. And so it is not unclear to the initiated what this dove is which the bride, having

30

ἀπερινόητον˙ «Θεόν γοῦν οὐδείς ἑώρακε πώποτε˙ ὁ μονογενής Υἱός τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὁ ὤν εἰς τόν κόλπον τοῦ Πατρός, ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο». Πῶς οὖν, φασίν, οὐχί σαφῶς πλανῶνται οἱ τόν Θεόν ὡς φῶς νεορῶς ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ὁρᾶν ἰσχυριζόμενοι; Κἄν τις αὐτῶν αὖθις τόν μονογενῆ τοῦ Θεοῦ λόγον προσενέγκῃ λέγοντα ὅτι «οἱ καθαροί τῇ καρδίᾳ τόν Θεόν ὄψονται» καί «ἐγώ ἐμφανίσω αὐτοῖς ἐμαυτόν, μετά τοῦ Πατρός τούτοις ἐνσκηνώσας», εὐθύς θεωρίαν τήν γνῶσιν (σελ. 182) λέγουσι καί οὐκ ἴσασιν ἑαυτοῖς ἀνακόλουθα λέγοντες˙ ὡς γάρ ἀόρατον, οὕτω καί ἀπερινόητον τό θεῖον. Τούς γοῦν τήν ἐν φωτί νοεράν ὅρασιν Θεοῦ διά τό τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀόρατον φαντασίαν ἐψευσμένην καί δαιμονικήν δογματίζοντας ἐνέργειαν ἔδει καί τήν γνῶσιν διά τό τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀπερινόητον πρός τάς ὁμοίας κατασπᾶν ἐρεσχελίας. Ἀλλ᾿ ἡμεῖς περί μέν τῆς γνώσεως οὐδέν ἀντιπεῖν πρός αὐτούς αἱρούμεθα˙ συνῳδά γάρ λέγουσιν ἡμῖν, εἰ καί μή συντᾶσιν ὅ τι λέγουσιν. Ἔστι γάρ καί ἡ περί Θεοῦ καί τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτόν δογμάτων γνῶσις, θεωρία, ὅ θεολογίαν ὀνομάζομεν, καί ἡ τῶν τῆς ψυχῆς δυνάμεων καί τῶν τοῦ σώματος μελῶν κατά φύσιν χρῆσίς τε καί κίνησις ἀναμόρφωσιν ποιεῖται τῆς λογικῆς εἰκόνος˙ ἀλλ᾿ οὐ τοῦτό ἐστιν ἡ τελεία τῆς ἄνωθεν ἡμῖν εὐγενείας εὐπρέπεια καί ἡ πρός τό ὑπερφαές φῶς ὑπερφυής ἕνωσις, παρ᾿ ἧς μόνης ἐγγίνεται καί τό θεολογεῖν ἀσφαλῶς καί τό κατά φύσιν ἑστάναι τε καί κινεῖσθαι τάς ἐν ἡμῖν δυνάμεις τῆς ψυχῆς καί τοῦ σώματος˙ ταύτην οὖν ἀναιροῦντες συνανεῖλον πᾶσαν ἀρετήν καί ἀλήθειαν.

Περί τοῦ μή εἶναι τοίνυν τῆς γνώσεως ἧς αὐτοί λέγουσι μυστικωτέραν καί ὑψηλοτέραν θεωρίαν, μηδ᾿ εἶναι ὅλως τοιαύτην θεωρίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ διά τό τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀόρατον, παρά τῶν ἐν ἀληθεῖ θεωρίᾳ γεγονότων μυηθέντες, ἐρωτήσομεν αὐτούς˙ τί ἡμῖν δοκεῖ, οὐδέ τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον ὁρᾷ τά τοῦ Θεοῦ; Ἀλλά μήν αὐτό «ἐρευνᾷ καί τά βάθη τοῦ Θεοῦ». Εἰ μέν οὖν χωρίς Πνεύματος ἁγίου ὁρᾶν ἔλεγέ τις τό ἀκήρατον φῶς, καλῶς ἄν ἀντιπίπτοντες ἐλέγετε˙ «πῶς ἄν ὁραθείη ὁ ἀόρατος»; Εἰ δέ τις ἀποθέμενος τό πνεῦμα τοῦ κόσμου (ὅ σκότος νοητόν ἐπικείμενον ταῖς μή κεκαθαρμέναις καρδίαις οἱ πατέρες ὀνομάζουσιν) εἴ τις οὖν ἀποθέμενος τοῦτο καί καθαρεύσας παντός οἰκείου θελήματος καί ἀπαναστάς πάσης παραδόσεως ἀνθρωπίνης καί πρός ὀλίγον ἀναβολήν (σελ. 184) ἐμποιούσης τῇ ὀφειλομένῃ σπουδῇ, κἄν εὐπρόσωπος ᾖ κατά τόν μέγαν Βασίλειον, καί τάς τῆς ψυχῆς δυνάμεις ὡς ἐνόν συναθροίσας καί νηφάλιον ἐπιστήσας τήν τῆς διανοίας ἐπισκοπήν, πρῶτον μέν ἐν τοῖς κατά φύσιν καί θεαρέστοις διαζῇ κατά νοῦν θεωρήμασιν, εἶθ᾿ ἑαυτόν ὑπεραναβάς ἐν ἑαυτῷ λάβοι τό ἐκ Θεοῦ Πνεῦμα, ὅ οἶδε τά τοῦ Θεοῦ ὡς τό πνεῦμα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τά ἐν αὐτῷ καί ταῦτα διά τοῦτο λαβών, καθάπερ ὁ μέγας κηρύττει Παῦλος, ἵν᾿ εἰδῇ τά ὑπό τοῦ Θεοῦ χαρισθέντα μυστικῶς αὐτῷ, «ἅ ὀφθαλμός οὐκ εἶδε καί οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσε καί ἐπί καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη», πῶς οὐκ ἄν ὁρῴη οὗτος διά τοῦ πνεύματος τό ἀόρατον φῶς; Πῶς δ᾿ οὐκ ἄν εἴη πάλιν ἀόρατον καί ἀνήκουστον καί ἀπερινόητον τοῦτο, καίπερ ὁρώμενον, τό φῶς; Ὁρᾶται γάρ ὑπό τῶν βλεπόντων «ἅ ὀφαλμός οὐκ εἶδε καί οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσε καί ἐπί καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη». Πνευματικούς γάρ λαμβάνουσιν οὗτοι ὀφθαλμούς καί νοῦν ἔχουσι Χριστοῦ, δι᾿ ὧν καί βλέπουσι τόν ἀόρατον καί νοοῦσι τόν ἀπερινόητον˙ οὐ γάρ ἑαυτῷ ἀόρατός ἐστιν, ἀλλά τοῖς διά κτιστῶν καί φυσικῶν ὀφθαλμῶν καί λογισμῶν νοοῦσι καί ὁρῶσιν. Οἷς δ᾿ ὁ Θεός ἑαυτόν ἐνήρμοσεν ὡς μέλος ἡγεμονικόν, πῶς οὐχί δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ καί τήν τῆς χάριτος ἐμφανῶς παράσχοι θεωρίαν;

Πῶς δ᾿ οὐκ ἄν τῶν τῆς ἀσματικῆς θεολογίας ἀξιώσαι προσρημάτων, ἐγκωμιάζων τήν ἐγγεγενημένην πνευματικήν δύναμιν τοῖς ὄμμασιν αὐτῶν, «ἰδού εἰ καλή», λέγων πρός αὐτούς, «ἡ πλησίον μου˙ ὀφθαλμοί σου περιστεραί»; δι᾿ ὧν καί αὐτοί, τῆς ὡραιότητος αἰσθόμενοι τοῦ νοητοῦ νυμφίου, δαψιλῆ τόν τῶν ἐγκωμίων ἀντιδιδόασι λόγον. Οὐκ ἄδηλον δ᾿ ἄρα τοῖς μεμυημένοις τίς αὕτη ἡ περιστερά ἥν ἡ νύμφη σχοῦσα