32

the invisible light through the Spirit? How would this light not again be invisible and inaudible and incomprehensible, even though it is seen? 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 understand the incomprehensible; for it is not invisible to itself, but to those who understand and see through created and natural eyes and reasonings. But to those into whom God has fitted Himself as a governing member, how would He not, through Himself, also manifestly grant the vision of grace?

How would He not deem them worthy of the expressions of the theology of the Song of Songs, praising the spiritual power that has been engendered in their eyes, saying to them, “Behold, you are beautiful, my love; your eyes are doves”? through which they too, perceiving the beauty of the spiritual bridegroom, give back a lavish speech of praise. It is not, then, unclear to the initiated what this dove is which the bride, having in her eyes, also then for the first time clearly gazes at the beauty of the bridegroom God and relates in more detail that beautifying comeliness for the hearing of the (p. 186) faithful standing around. For as the light in the eyes, united with the rays of the sun, becomes light in actuality and thus sees sensible things, in the same way also the mind, having become one Spirit with the Lord, thus clearly sees spiritual things. Nevertheless, the Master remains there in another way, higher than according to the groveling reasonings of those who attempt to contradict spiritual men, invisible; for no one has ever seen the whole of that beauty, which is why, according to Gregory of Nyssa, “no eye has seen this, even if it is always seeing”; for it sees not how great that is, but to the extent that it has made itself receptive of the power of the divine Spirit, to that extent it sees. And in addition to this incomprehensibility, even the comprehension they have, they have incomprehensibly, the most divine and newest thing of all; for those who see do not know that by which they see these things, nor that by which they both hear and are initiated, either the knowledge of things that have not yet happened or the science of things that always are, because of the incomprehensibility of the Spirit, through whom they see; “for according to the cessation of all intellectual activity does such a union of those being deified with the light beyond come to be”, as the great Dionysius says, not being according to cause or according to analogy, since these are according to the activity of the mind, but being according to abstraction, yet not being this abstraction itself; for if it were only abstraction, it would be up to us—but this is the dogma of the Messalians—whenever one might wish to ascend into the ineffable mysteries of God, just as Saint Isaac also says concerning them. Therefore, contemplation is not only abstraction and negation, but union and deification, after the abstraction of all things from below that give form to the mind, coming to be mystically and ineffably by the grace of God, or rather, after the cessation which is greater than abstraction; for abstraction is an image of that (p. 188) cessation. Wherefore also to separate God from all created things belongs to every believer; but the cessation of intellectual activity and the union with the light beyond after it, being as it were a passion and a deifying end, belongs only to those whose hearts have been purified and graced. And why do I speak of the union, when even the brief vision required, for a time, the chosen disciples, and these having come into an ecstasy from all sensible and intellectual perception, and by not seeing at all having received true seeing and by suffering unknowingly having admitted the sensation of things beyond nature? But that these both saw, and did not properly see according to sense or mind, with God's help as the discourse proceeds we shall show.

32

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 ἐν τοῖς ὄμμασι καί αὐτή τῷ τοῦ νυμφίου Θεοῦ τότε πρῶτον τρανῶς ἐνατενίζει κάλλει καί εἰς ἐπήκοον τῶν (σελ. 186) πιστῶς περιεστώτων ἀφηγεῖται διεξοδικώτερον τήν καλοποιόν εὐπρέπειαν ἐκείνην. Ὡς γάρ ἡ ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς αὐγή, ἑνωθεῖσα ταῖς ἡλιακαῖς αὐγαῖς, φῶς ἐντελεχείᾳ γίνεται καί οὕτως ὁρᾷ τά αἰσθητά, τόν αὐτόν τρόπον καί ὁ νοῦς, ἕν Πνεῦμα μετά τοῦ Κυρίου γεγονώς, οὕτω τά πενυματικά τρανῶς ὁρᾷ. Μένει δ᾿ ὅμως καί ἐκεῖ τρόπον ἕτερον, ὑψηλότερον ἤ κατά τούς χαμερπεῖς λογισμούς τῶν τοῖς πνευματικοῖς ἀνδράσιν ἀντιλέγειν ἐγχειρούντων, ἀόρατος ὁ δεσπότης˙ οὐ γάρ ἑώρακέ ποτέ τις τό πᾶν τῆς καλλονῆς ἐκείνης, διό καί κατά τόν Νύσσης Γρηγόριον «ὀφθαλμός τοῦθ᾿ ἑώρακεν οὐδείς, εἰ καί ἀεί βλέπει»˙ οὐδέ γάρ ὅσον ἐστίν ἐκεῖνο, ἀλλά καθόσον ἑαυτόν ἐποίησε δεκτικόν τῆς τοῦ θείου Πνεύματος δυνάμεως, κατά τοσοῦτον βλέπει. Πρός δέ τῇ ἀκαταληψίᾳ ταύτῃ, καί ἥν ἔχουσι κατάληψιν ἀκαταλήπτως ἔχουσι, τό θειότατον ἁπάντων καί καινότατον˙ οὐ γάρ ᾧ ταῦτα βέπουσι τοῦτ᾿ ἴσασιν οἱ βλέποντες, οὐδ᾿ᾧ ἀκούουσί τε καί μυοῦνται, ἤ τήν τῶν μήπω γεγονότων γνῶσιν ἤ τήν τῶν ἀεί ὄντων ἐπιστήμην, διά τό ἀκατάληπτον τοῦ Πνεύματος, δι᾿ οὗ ὁρῶσι˙ «κατά γάρ ἀπόπαυσιν πάσης νοερᾶς ἐνεργείας ἡ τοιάδε γίνεται τῶν ἐκθεουμένων πρός τό ὕπερθεν φῶς ἕνωσις», ὡς ὁ μέγας λέγει ∆ιονύσιος, κατ᾿ αἰτίαν μέν οὐκ οὖσα ἤ κατά ἀναλογίαν, ἐπεί ταῦτα κατ᾿ ἐνέργειάν ἐστι τοῦ νοῦ, κατά δέ ἀφαίρεσιν οὖσα, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ αὐτό τοῦτο οὖσα ἀφαίρεσις˙ εἰ γάρ ἀφαίρεσις ἦν μόνον, ἐφ᾿ ἡμῖν ἄν ἦν ἀλλά τοῦτο τῶν Μασσαλιανῶν ἐστι τό δόγμα , ἡνίκ᾿ ἄν τις ἐθελήσῃ ἀνέρχεσθαι εἰς τά τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀπόρρητα μυστήρια, καθάπερ καί ὁ ἅγιος Ἰσαάκ περί αὐτῶν φησιν. Οὔκουν ἀφαίρεσις καί ἀπόφασις μόνη ἐστίν ἡ θεωρία, ἀλλ᾿ ἕνωσις καί ἐκθέωσις, μετά τήν ἀφαίρεσιν πάντων τῶν κάτωθεν τυπούντων τόν νοῦν, μυστικῶς καί ἀπορρήτως χάριτι γινομένη τοῦ Θεοῦ, μᾶλλον δέ μετά τήν ἀπόπαυσιν ἥ μεῖζόν ἐστι τῆς ἀφαιρέσεως˙ ἀπεικόνισμα γάρ ἐστιν ἡ (σελ. 188) ἀφαίρεσις τῆς ἀποπαύσεως ἐκείνης. ∆ιό καί τό χωρίζειν πάντων τῶν κτισμάτων τόν Θεόν παντός ἐστι πιστοῦ˙ ἡ δέ νοερᾶς ἐνεργείας ἀπόπαυσις καί ἡ μετ᾿ αὐτήν πρός τό ὕπερθεν φῶς ἕνωσις, οἷόν τε πάθος οὖσα καί τέλος θεουργόν, μόνων ἐστί τῶν κεκαθαρμένων καί κεχαριτωμένων τήν καρδίαν. Καί τί λέγω τήν ἕνωσιν, ὅτε καί ἡ πρός βραχύ θέα τῶν ἐκκρίτων τέως ἐδεῖτο μαθητῶν, καί τούτων κατ᾿ ἔκστασιν γεγονότων πάσης αἰσθητῆς καί νοερᾶς ἀντιλήψεως καί τῷ μηδόλως ὁρᾶν τό ὄντως ὁρᾶν εἰσδεδεγμένων καί τῷ πάσχειν ἀγνώστως τῶν ὑπέρ φύσιν τήν αἴσθησιν προσιεμένων; Ἀλλ᾿ ὅτι μέν οὗτοι καί εἶδον καί οὐχί κατ᾿ αἴσθησιν ἤ νοῦν κυρίως εἶδον, σύν Θεῷ προϊόντος τοῦ λόγου δείξομεν.