44

What light does an angel of light announce, if not that of God, whose angel he is? God, therefore, is light, of whose light the angel of God is an angel; for it did not say “he impersonates the angel who is light,” but “the angel of light.” If, therefore, the evil angel were impersonating only knowledge or virtue, it would follow from this understanding that the illumination (p. 234) from God that comes to us 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, impersonates 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 also called light, not only as the banisher of the darkness of ignorance, but also as the splendor of souls, according to Saint Maximos and Gregory the Theologian. But that this splendor is not simply knowledge nor virtue, but is beyond all human virtue and knowledge, you may learn clearly from Saint Nilus: “for,” he says, “the mind, gathered into itself, contemplates nothing either of the things of sense or of the things of reason, but naked thoughts and divine rays, gushing forth peace and joy.” Have you seen the contemplation that is raised above work and character and all reasoning? Have you heard him who said before that the mind is contemplated by itself as something very like a heavenly color, now clearly showing you this, that it is illuminated by a divine ray? Be persuaded by 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 soberly”; for he who has truly prayed by uniting the mind with divine prayer, this one has been illumined by the splendor of God. Do you wish to learn again also from the divine Maximos? “He who has made his heart pure,” he says, “will not only know the principles of things subordinate and after God, but also beholds God Himself.”

Where are those who through external and foolish wisdom (p. 236) dogmatize about the knowledge of beings and the ascent to God? “For being in this heart,” he says, “God deigns His own letters to be inscribed by the Spirit, as on certain Mosaic tablets.” Where are those who consider the heart within incapable of receiving God, and this when Paul says that it, before others, receives the law of grace, “not on tablets of stone, but on fleshy tablets of the heart”? As also the great Macarius says, that “the heart rules the whole instrument, and when grace takes possession of the pastures of the heart, it reigns over all the thoughts and the members; for there is the mind and all the thoughts of the soul; there, therefore, one must see if grace has inscribed the laws of the Spirit.” But again one must listen to Maximos, who was illumined through purity both in knowledge and beyond knowledge: “a pure heart,” he says, “is that which will present the mind completely formless to God and ready to be stamped only by His types, through which He is wont to become manifest.” Where are those who claim God is known through the knowledge of beings alone, neither knowing nor accepting the manifestation that comes from union, and this when God says through one of the God-bearers, “learn not from man, not from a tablet, but from My own illumination and sun-like radiance within you”? For how is the formless mind, which is stamped also with the divine types, not superior to the knowledge that comes from beings?

But for the mind to be stamped with the divine and ineffable types of the spirit also differs greatly from the ascent of the intellect to God through negations. And theology is so distant from this theophany in light and so distant from that toward God

44

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, «ἐστίν ἡ παντάπασιν ἀνείδεον παραστήσεται τόν νοῦν τῷ Θεῷ καί μόνοις τοῖς αὐτοῦ ἕτοιμον ἐνσημαίνεσθαι τύποις, δι᾿ ὧν ἐμφανής πέφυκε γίνεσθαι». Ποῦ εἰσιν οἱ διά μόνης τῆς τῶν ὄντων γνώσεως τόν Θεόν ἰσχυριζόμενοι γινώσκεσθαι, τήν δ᾿ ἀπό τῆς ἑνώσεως ἐμφάνειαν μήτ᾿ εἰδότες μήτε προσιέμενοι, καί ταῦτα τοῦ Θεοῦ διά τινος τῶν θεοφόρων λέγοντος, «μάθετε οὐκ ἀπ᾿ ἀνθρώπου, οὐκ ἀπό δέλτου, ἀλλ᾿ ἀπ᾿ αὐτῆς τῆς ἐμῆς ἐν ὑμῖν ἐλλάμψεως καί ἡλιοβολίας»; Πῶς γάρ ὁ ἀνείδεος νοῦς, ὁ καί τοῖς θείοις ἐνσημαινάμενος τύποις, οὐχ ὑπεράνω τῆς ἀπό τῶν ὄντων γνώσεως;

Ἀλλά καί τῆς δι᾿ ἀποφάσεων πρός Θεόν ἀνόδου τῆς διανοίας τό θείοις καί ἀπορρήτοις τόν νοῦν ἐνσημαίνεσθαι τοῦ πνεύματος τύποις κατά πολύ διενήνοχε. Θεολογία δέ τοσοῦτο τῆς ἐν φωτί θεοπτίας ταύτης ἀπέχει καί τοσοῦτο τῆς πρός Θεόν