39

has been arrayed by the power of nature, nor to these who by their very essence have their lot with the good does opposition belong (for thus the blame would fall back upon the Creator), but from their own choice, in the privation of the good, they slide away towards evil. And yet the God-fighting tongue has attempted to bring the nature of the Only-begotten into this rank. For he cannot say that, while positing the essence of the Father to be light, surpassing in glory and brightness, he supposed the essence of the Only-begotten to be also light, but somehow dimmer and, as it were, obscured. For not even this belongs to a pious mind, for the likeness of the image to be taken away in dimness. But still, it were a thing to be wished that he could be accused of these things. For our struggle for correction would not be great. But as it is, the difference of the unbegotten with respect to the begotten is not one of more and less, as of a lesser light to a greater, but is as great as the separation of things that can in no way coexist with each other. For it is impossible for that to which one of the two belongs ever to pass over through change to its opposite, so as to become either begotten from unbegotten or, conversely, to change from the begotten to the unbegotten. Therefore, for one who has once declared that by as much as the begotten differs from the unbegotten, by so much must light differ from light, not even this argument is left for an escape. For pure light, being the same in kind as a sort of faded and dimmer light, differs in intensity alone; but the un- 29.637 begotten is not an intensification of the begotten; nor indeed is the begotten any diminution of the unbegotten; but the separation between them is, as it were, diametrical. For those, then, who posit that begotten and unbegotten are essence, these and even more absurdities than these will follow. For opposite will have been begotten from opposite; and instead of natural kinship, a certain necessary conflict, even in their very essence, will appear between them. And this contains more ignorance than impiety, to say that the essence of anything whatsoever is opposite to essence, since it has long been agreed even by the wise men outside (whom, whenever they do not find them supporting their blasphemies, they dismiss as worthless), that it is impossible for opposition to exist in essence. But if, as is true, one were to accept that the begotten and the unbegotten are certain distinguishing properties observed in the essence, leading one by the hand to the clear and unconfused conception of the Father and the Son, he will both escape the danger of impiety and preserve consistency in his reasonings. For properties, being like certain characteristics and forms observed in the essence, divide what is common by their distinguishing marks; but they do not break the consubstantiality of the essence. For example, the Godhead is common, but Fatherhood and Sonship are certain properties; and from the combination of both, of the common and of the particular, our apprehension of the truth comes about; so that, on hearing "unbegotten light," we understand the Father, and on hearing "begotten light," we receive the concept of the Son; insofar as they are light and light, there is no opposition between them, but insofar as they are begotten and unbegotten, an antithesis is observed. For this is the nature of properties: to show otherness in the identity of essence; and though the properties themselves are often distinguished from one another, standing in opposition, they do not tear apart the unity of the essence; as with the winged and the walking, and the aquatic and the land-dwelling, and the rational and the irrational. For since one essence underlies them all, these properties do not alienate the essence, nor persuade them, as it were, to rebel against themselves; but by the power of the distinguishing marks, placing as it were a light in our souls, they guide us to the understanding that is attainable by our minds. But this man, having transferred the opposition of the properties to the essence, from this draws out the occasion for his impiety, frightening us like children with his sophisms: 29.640 that if indeed the light were other than

39

φύσεως δυνάμει συντέτακται, οὐδὲ τούτοις κατ' αὐτὴν τὴν οὐσίαν πρὸς τὸ ἀγαθὸν λα χοῦσι τὴν ἐναντίωσιν (οὕτω γὰρ ἂν ἡ μέμψις ἐπὶ τὸν ∆ημιουργὸν ἐπανίοι), ἀλλ' ἐκ τῆς οἰκείας προαιρέ σεως ἐν τῇ τοῦ καλοῦ στερήσει πρὸς τὴν κακίαν ἀποῤῥυεῖσιν. Ἀλλ' ὅμως εἰς ταύτην τὴν τάξιν ἡ θεομάχος γλῶσσα τὴν φύσιν τοῦ Μονογενοῦς περι αγαγεῖν ἐπεχείρησεν. Οὐ γὰρ δὴ ἐκεῖνο εἰπεῖν ἔχει, ὅτι, τὴν τοῦ Πατρὸς οὐσίαν φῶς εἶναι τιθέμε νος, ὑπερβάλλον δόξῃ τε καὶ λαμπρότητι, τὴν τοῦ Μονογενοῦς φῶς καὶ αὐτὴν, ἀμαυρότερον δέ πως καὶ οἱονεὶ τεθολωμένον ὑπέλαβεν. Εὐσεβοῦς μὲν γὰρ διανοίας οὐδὲ ταῦτα, τῷ τῆς εἰκόνος ἐν τῇ ἀμαυ ρότητι παραιρεῖσθαι τὴν ὁμοιότητα. Πλὴν ἀλλ' εὐχῆς ἦν ἄξιον ταῦτα αὐτὸν ἔχειν αἰτιᾶσθαι. Οὐ πολλοῦ γὰρ ἂν ἔδει τοῦ ἀγῶνος ἡμῖν εἰς διόρθωσιν. Νυνὶ δὲ τῷ ἀγεννήτῳ πρὸς τὸ γεννητὸν οὐχὶ κατὰ τὸ μᾶλλον καὶ ἧττον ἡ διαφορὰ, ὡς τῷ ἐλάτ τονι φωτὶ πρὸς τὸ πλεῖον, ἀλλ' ὅση ἡ τῶν πάντη ἀλ λήλοις ἀσυνυπάρκτων διάστασις. Ἀμήχανον γὰρ ᾧ θάτερον συνυπάρχει, ἐκ μεταβολῆς ἄν ποτε πρὸς τὸ ἀντικείμενον μεταβῆναι, ὥστε ἢ ἐξ ἀγεννήτου γεν νητὸν γενέσθαι, ἢ ἀνάπαλιν, ἀπὸ τοῦ γεννητοῦ μετα βαλεῖν πρὸς τὸ ἀγέννητον. Τῷ τοίνυν ἅπαξ ἀποφη ναμένῳ, ὅτι ὅσον παρήλλακται τὸ γεννητὸν πρὸς τὸ ἀγέννητον, τοσοῦτον ἀνάγκη παρηλλάχθαι τὸ φῶς πρὸς τὸ φῶς, οὐδ' οὗτος ὁ λόγος πρὸς ἀποφυγὴν ἀπολείπεται. Φῶς μὲν γὰρ τὸ ἀκραιφνὲς τοῦ οἷον ἐξιτήλου καὶ ἀμαυροτέρου φωτὸς, τῷ γένει ταυτὸν ὑπάρχον, τῇ ἐπιτάσει διενήνοχε μόνῃ· τὸ δὲ ἀγέν 29.637 νητον οὐχὶ ἐπίτασίς ἐστι τοῦ γεννητοῦ· οὐδὲ μὴν τὸ γεννητὸν ὕφεσίς τίς ἐστι τοῦ ἀγεννήτου· ἀλλ' οἱονεὶ κατὰ διάμετρον τούτων ἐστὶν ἡ ἀπόστασις. Τοῖς μὲν οὖν οὐσίαν τιθεμένοις τὸ γεννητὸν καὶ ἀγέν νητον ταῦτα καὶ ἔτι πλείω τούτων ἀκολουθήσει τὰ ἄτοπα. Ἔσται γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ ἐναντίου τὸ ἐναντίον γε γεννημένον· καὶ ἀντὶ τῆς φυσικῆς οἰκειώσεως ἀναγ καία τις αὐτοῖς καὶ κατ' αὐτὴν τὴν οὐσίαν ἡ στάσις ἀναφανήσεται. Τοῦτο δὲ πλείω τῆς ἀσεβείας τὴν ἀμαθίαν ἔχει, τὴν οὐσίαν λέγειν καὶ ᾡτινιοῦν τῶν ἁπάντων ἐναντίαν εἶναι τῇ οὐσίᾳ, πάλαι διωμολογημένου καὶ παρὰ τοῖς ἔξω σοφοῖς (οὓς, ὅταν μὴ εὕρωσιν οὗτοι συναγωνιζομένους ταῖς βλασφη μίαις αὐτῶν, ὡς οὐδενὸς ἀξίους παραλογίζονται), ἀμήχανον ὑπάρχειν ἐν οὐσίᾳ τὴν ἐναντίωσιν. Εἰ δ' ὅπερ ἐστὶν ἀληθὲς, γνωριστικάς τινας ἰδιότητας ἐπι θεωρουμένας τῇ οὐσίᾳ δέχοιτό τις εἶναι τὸ γεννητὸν καὶ τὸ ἀγέννητον, πρὸς τὴν τρανὴν καὶ ἀσύγχυτον Πατρὸς καὶ Υἱοῦ χειραγωγούσας ἔννοιαν, τόν τε τῆς ἀσεβείας διαφεύξεται κίνδυνον, καὶ τὸ ἐν τοῖς λογι σμοῖς ἀκόλουθον διασώσει. Αἱ γάρ τοι ἰδιότητες, οἱονεὶ χαρακτῆρές τινες καὶ μορφαὶ ἐπιθεωρού μεναι τῇ οὐσίᾳ, διαιροῦσι μὲν τὸ κοινὸν τοῖς ἰδιά ζουσι χαρακτῆρσι· τὸ δὲ ὁμοφυὲς τῆς οὐσίας οὐ δια κόπτουσιν. Οἷον, κοινὴ μὲν ἡ θεότης, ἰδιώματα δέ τινα πατρότης καὶ υἱότης· ἐκ δὲ τῆς ἑκατέρου συμπλοκῆς, τοῦ τε κοινοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἰδίου, ἡ κατάληψις ἡμῖν τῆς ἀληθείας ἐγγίνεται· ὥστε, ἀγέννητον μὲν φῶς ἀκούσαντας, τὸν Πατέρα νοεῖν, γεννητὸν δὲ φῶς, τὴν τοῦ Υἱοῦ λαμβάνειν ἔννοιαν· καθὸ μὲν φῶς καὶ φῶς, οὐδεμιᾶς ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐναντιότητος ὑπαρχούσης, καθὸ δὲ γεννητὸν καὶ ἀγέννητον, ἐπιθεωρουμένης τῆς ἀντιθέσεως. Αὕτη γὰρ τῶν ἰδιωμάτων ἡ φύσις, ἐν τῇ τῆς οὐσίας ταυτότητι δεικνύναι τὴν ἑτερότητα· καὶ αὐτὰ μὲν πρὸς ἄλληλα ἀντιδιαιρούμενα πολλάκις τὰ ἰδιώματα, πρὸς τὸ ἐναντίον διίστασθαι, τήν γε μὲν ἑνό τητα τῆς οὐσίας μὴ διασπᾶν· ὡς τὸ πτηνὸν καὶ τὸ πε ζὸν, καὶ τὸ ἔνυδρον καὶ τὸ χερσαῖον, καὶ τὸ λογικὸν καὶ τὸ ἄλογον. Μιᾶς γὰρ οὐσίας τοῖς πᾶσιν ὑποκειμένης, τὰ ἰδιώματα ταῦτα οὐκ ἀλλοτριοῖ τὴν οὐσίαν, οὐδὲ οἱονεὶ συστασιάζειν ἑαυτοῖς ἀναπείθει· τῇ ἐνερ γείᾳ δὲ τῶν γνωρισμάτων, ὥσπερ τι φῶς ταῖς ψυχαῖς ἡμῶν ἐντιθέντα, πρὸς τὴν ἐφικτὴν ταῖς δια νοίαις σύνεσιν ὁδηγεῖ. Ἀλλ' οὗτος, τὴν τῶν ἰδιω μάτων ἀντίθεσιν πρὸς τὴν οὐσίαν μετακομίσας, ἐντεῦθεν τὴν ἀφορμὴν τῆς ἀσεβείας ἐφέλκεται, ὥσπερ παῖδας ἡμᾶς μορμολυττόμενος τοῖς σοφίσμα 29.640 σιν· ὅτι, εἴπερ ἕτερόν τε εἴη τὸ φῶς παρὰ