42

not the one who has received, for not only is the one who has not possessed it unable to know it, but if he does not lend a believing ear to those who have been fortunate, he does not think it exists at all, considering the truly existing contemplation to be blindness, not as being beyond sense and knowledge, like some sacred darkness, but as being in no way and nowhere existent. But if, in addition to his inexperience and disbelief, he is also clever at doing evil, full of a meddlesome spirit, utterly audacious and a despiser of the most venerable things, he not only condemns it as non-existent, but also misidentifies the divine radiance, alas, as a demonic phantasm, which you say, brother, that some have now suffered.

And their final pretext is that God is invisible, but the devil disguises himself as an angel of light; not understanding this, that truth pre-exists all disguise. If, therefore, by imitating the existing truth the devil disguises himself as an angel of light, then there exists in truth an angel of light, the good angel. And what light does he announce to be an angel of light, if not that of God, whose angel he is? Therefore God is light, whose angel of light is the angel of God; for it did not say "he disguises himself as the angel who is light," but "the angel of light." If, then, the evil angel were imitating only knowledge or virtue, one might conclude that also (p. 234) the illumination that comes to us from God provides only knowledge and virtue; but since he also provides a phantasmal light other than virtue and knowledge, there is, therefore, also a true, divine, noetic light other than virtue and knowledge. And that phantasmal light is the evil one himself, who, being darkness, imitates the light; but this truly illuminating light of angels and of men equal to angels is God himself, who, being truly an ineffable light, is both seen as light and makes light those who are pure in heart, for which reason he is called light, not only as the banisher of the darkness of ignorance, but also as the radiance of souls, according to Saint Maximus and Gregory the Theologian. And that this radiance is not simply knowledge nor virtue, but is beyond all human virtue and knowledge, you will learn clearly from Saint Nilus; "for the mind," he says, "gathered into itself, contemplates nothing of the things of sense or of reasoning, but naked thoughts and divine rays, gushing forth peace and joy." Have you seen the contemplation that is raised above every deed, character, and thought? Have you heard him who said before that the mind is contemplated by itself as being like the color of heaven, now showing you this plainly, being illuminated by a divine ray? Obey him also as he teaches the way that leads to this blessed experience and vision; "for prayer," he says, "seeking attention, will find prayer, for which one must strive with vigilance"; for he who has truly prayed by uniting his mind with divine prayer, this man has been illumined by the splendor of God. Do you wish to learn again from the divine Maximus? "He who has made his heart pure," he says, "will know not only the principles of inferior things and of things after God, but also sees God Himself."

Where are they who through outward and foolish wisdom (p. 236) dogmatize about the knowledge of beings and the ascent to God? "Having come to be in this heart," he says, "God deigns to inscribe His own letters through the Spirit, as if on Mosaic tablets." Where are they who consider the heart within incapable of receiving God, and this when Paul says to receive before all else the law of grace, "not on tablets of stone, but on tablets of fleshly hearts"? As the great Macarius also says, "the heart is the ruler of the whole instrument, and, when grace takes possession of the pastures of the heart, it reigns over all the thoughts and members; for there is the mind and all the thoughts of the soul; there, therefore, one must look, to see if grace has inscribed the laws of the Spirit." But again one must hear from Maximus, who was illumined through purity both in knowledge and beyond knowledge: "a pure heart," he says,

42

μή ὁ λαβών, μή ὅτι γάρ ὁ μή ἐσχηκώς αὐτήν οὐδέ γνῶναι δύναται αὐτήν, ἀλλ᾿ εἰ μή πιστόν ὑπέχοι τοῖς εὐμοιρηκόσιν οὗς, οὐδ᾿ εἶναι ὅλως οἴεταί τι, τήν ὄντως οὖσαν θεωρίαν ἀβλεψίαν λογιζόμενος, οὐχ ὡς ὑπέρ αἴσθησιν καί γνῶσιν οὖσαν, οἷόν τινα γνόφον ἱερόν, ἀλλ᾿ ὡς μηδαμῇ οὖσαν μηδαμῶς. Εἰ δέ πρός τῇ ἀπειρίᾳ τε καί ἀπιστίᾳ καί δεινός ᾖ κακουργεῖν, περιέργου γέμων φρονήματος, πάντολμός τις καί καταφρονητής τῶν σεβασμιωτάτων, οὐηκ ἀνυπαρξίαν μόνον αὐτῆς καταψηφίζεται, ἀλλά καί πρός δαιμονιώδη φαντασίαν, φεῦ, τήν θεϊκήν λαμπρότητα παραγνωρίζει, ὅ καί νῦν τινας λέγεις, ἀδελφέ, παθεῖν.

Καί ἡ τελευταία πρόφασις αὐτοῖς ὅτι ὁ μέν Θεός ἀόρατος, ἄγγελον δέ φωτός ὑποκρίνεται ὁ διάβολος˙ οὐδέ ταῦτο συνιέντες, ὅτι πάσης ὑποκρίσεως προϋφέστηκεν ἡ ἀλήθεια. Εἰ τοίνυν τήν οὖσαν ἀλήθειαν ὑποκρινόμενος ὁ διάβολος ἄγγελον ὑποκρίνεται φωτός, λοιπόν ἔστιν ἐν ἀληθείᾳ φωτός ἄγγελος, ὁ ἀγαθός ἄγγελος. Ποῖον δέ φῶς ἐξαγγέλλων ἄγγελός ἐστι φωτός, εἰ μή τό τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὗ καί ἔστιν ἄγγελος; Φῶς ἄρα ὁ Θεός, οὗ φωτός ἄγγελός ἐστιν ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἄγγελος˙ οὐ γάρ εἶπεν «ὑποκρίνεται τόν ὄντα φῶς ἄγγελον», ἀλλά «τόν φωτός ἄγγελον». Εἰ μέν οὖν γνῶσιν μόνην ἤ ἀρετήν ὁ πονηρός ἄγγελος ὑπεκρίνετο, ἦν ἄν ἐκ τοῦ συνιδεῖν ὡς καί (σελ. 234) ὁ παρά τοῦ Θεοῦ φωτισμός ἐγγινόμενος ἡμῖν γνῶσιν μόνην παρέχει καί ἀρετήν˙ ἐπεί δέ καί φῶς φαντασιῶδες παρέχει παρά τήν ἀρετήν καί τήν γνῶσιν ἕτερον, ἔστιν ἄρα καί φῶς νοερόν ἀληθές θεϊκόν παρά τήν ἀρετήν καί τήν γνῶσιν ἕτερον. Κἀκεῖνο μέν τό φανταδιῶδες φῶς αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ πονηρός, ὅς σκότος ὤν τό φῶς ὑποκρίνεται˙ τό δέ φωτιστικόν πρός ἀλήθειαν τοῦτο φῶς ἀγγέλων καί ἰσαγγέλων ἀνθρώπων αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ Θεός, ὅς, φῶς ὤν ἀληθῶς ἀπόρρητον, καί ὡς φῶς ὁρᾶται καί φῶς ποιεῖ τούς καθαρούς τήν καρδίαν, διό καί φῶς καλεῖται, μή μόνον ὡς τοῦ σκότους τῆς ἀγνοίας διώκτης, ἀλλά καί ὡς λαμπρότης ψυχῶν κατά τόν ἅγιον Μάξιμον καί τόν θεολόγον Γρηγόριον. Ὅτι δέ ἡ λαμπρότης αὕτη οὐ γνῶσις ἁπλῶς οὐδ᾿ ἀρετή, πάσης δέ ἀνθρωπίνης ἀρετῆς καί γνώσεως ἐπέκεινα, παρά τοῦ ἁγίου Νείλου μαθήσῃ σαφῶς˙ «εἰς ἑαυτόν» γάρ, φησίν, «ὁ νοῦς συναγόμενος, οὐδέν οὔτε τῶν κατ᾿ αἴσθησιν οὔτε τῶν κατά λογισμόν θεωρεῖ, γυμνούς δέ νόας καί θείας αὐγάς, βλυζούσας εἰρήνην τε καί χαράν». Εἶδες τήν ὑπερανῳκισμένην ἔργον τε καί ἤθους καί λογισμοῦ παντός θεωρίαν; Ἤκουσας τοῦ πρότερον εἰπόντος ὑφ᾿ ἑαυτοῦ θεωρεῖσθαι τόν νοῦν οὐρανίῳ χρώματι περεμφερῆ, νῦν αὐγῇ θείᾳ καταυγαζόμενον φανερῶς σοι τοῦτο δείξαντος; Τούτῳ πείθου καί διδάσκοντι τήν πρός μακαριστόν τοῦτο πάθος τε καί θέαμα φέρουσαν ὁδόν˙ «προσευχή» γάρ, φησί, «προσοχήν ἐπιζητοῦσα, προσευχήν εὑρήσει, ἐφ᾿ ἥν σπουδαστέον νηφόντως»˙ ὁ γάρ ὄντως προσευξάμενος τῷ συνάψαι τόν νοῦν τῇ θείᾳ προσευχῇ, οὗτος πεφώτισται τῇ αἴγλῃ τοῦ Θεοῦ. Θέλεις πυθέσθαι καί Μαξίμου τοῦ θείου πάλιν; «Ὁ τήν καρδίαν», φησίν, «καθαράν ἐργασάμενος οὐ μόνον τῶν ὑποβεβηκότων καί μετά Θεόν γνώσεται τούς λόγους, ἀλλά καί αὐτόν ἐνορᾷ τόν Θεόν».

Ποῦ εἰσιν οἱ διά τῆς ἔξω καί μωρανθείσης σοφίας (σελ. 236) τήν γνῶσιν τῶν ὄντων καί τήν πρός Θεόν ἄνοδον δογματίζοντες; «Ἐν γοῦν τῇ καρδίᾳ ταύτῃ γεγονώς», φησίν, «ὁ Θεός ἀξιοῖ τά ἴδια γράμματα διά τοῦ πνεύματος ἐγχαράττεσθαι, καθάπερ τισί μωσαϊκαῖς πλαξί». Ποῦ εἰσιν οἱ τήν ἐντός καρδίαν ἀνεπίδεκτον Θεοῦ λογιζόμενοι, καί ταῦτα Παύλου πρό τῶν ἄλλων δέξασθαι λέγοντος τόν τῆς χάριτος νόμον, «οὐκ ἐν πλαξί λιθίναις, ἀλλ᾿ἐν πλαξί καρδίας σαρκίναις»; Καθά φησι καί ὁ μέγας Μακάριος, ὅτι «ἡ καρδία ἡγεμονεύει ὅλου τοῦ ὀργάνου, καί, ἐπάν κατάσχῃ τάς νομάς τῆς καρδίας ἡ χάρις, βασιλεύει ὅλων τῶνλογισμῶν καί τῶν μελῶν˙ ἐκεῖ γάρ ἐστιν ὁ νοῦς καί πάντες οἱ λογισμοί τῆς ψυχῆς˙ ἐκεῖ τοίνυν δεῖ σκοπεῖν, εἰ ἐνέγραψεν ἡ χάρις τούς τοῦ Πνεύματος νόμους». Ἀλλ᾿ αὖθις ἀκουστέον τοῦ καί κατά γνῶσιν καί ὑπέρ γνῶσιν διά καθαρότητα πεφωτισμένου Μαξίμου˙ «καρδία καθαρά», φησίν,