56

If indeed someone, not having rotted away in books nor grown old in the investigation of them, has come to know God so much that, striving for everything, he approaches Him purely, how much purer is he than the one who scrutinizes everything and seems to have knowledge of all things, but then is fluttered about this world and towards it empties all or most of the love of his soul, and has not loved God, who is above all, with his whole soul and heart? Besides, if indeed the Greeks have found the truth in existing things, well then you too, following them through their studies, claim to find it; but since they, having attempted to raise up lofty arguments of knowledge against God, (p. 294) were more divided in their tongues than those who built the tower at Chalane, so as not only to disagree, but even to speak against one another, to which of the dissenters will you yourself grant the edifice of truth, so that, following him, through this truth we might find the source of truth that is through all things? We know only Him to be the finder and speaker of truth, who speaks from God, who says, "But we have the mind of Christ"; and again, "But we speak the wisdom of God." Therefore we, and those with him, following with the appropriate faith, are guided towards the acquisition of divine and saving wisdom; but He did not see fit to declare to us the principles of created things and to teach and advance us through division and analysis and syllogism and definitions. Why? Because "if we do not know the truth in such things, nothing will hinder us toward the blessedness in the promises," according to the great Basil. Since you are clearly caught contradicting him, declaring darkened and impure and imperfect those who do not know the truth in such things, are you then not ashamed, do you not cover yourself, do you not sink down, but you contend for falsehood and add to your wickedness, asserting that the commandments of God without the studies cannot purify and perfect man. But for us, even if the education of the Greeks were of indubitably precise truth, even so it would not happen to be especially sought after; for even with this part of the truth being absent, true blessedness is attainable. But since the education of the Greeks also holds this truth to be debatable, how could we accept you saying that it leads to one and the same form and end as the wisdom given by God, which is truly true, truly saving, which is not dissolved along with this age?

(p. 298) After boasting, then, as if he had caught us liable, since we contradict the sayings falsified by him, he proclaims against the rational heavens, I mean the apostles. For while the brother of God clearly speaks of two wisdoms, the one from above and the one from below, and the one pure and gentle, and the other psychic and demonic, and Paul having indicated two wisdoms by saying, "For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know God," he himself expressly fights those who speak of two or even more wisdoms, and the reason is that "no one yet," he says, "has defined the knowledge of this or that person as wisdom." But indeed the brother of God, O philosopher, defined the knowledge of him who shows his works from a good manner of life as a pure and heavenly wisdom, but the knowledge of him who does not live in a good manner of life he defined as a psychic, demonic, and earthly wisdom. Naturally; for the same knowledge, changing along with the ways of those who possess it, has wrought contrary wisdoms in their souls. Besides, if the knowledge of no one is philosophy, then no one anywhere is a philosopher and you have destroyed yourself through your own words, O philosopher, or I do not know what to call you, since in no soul, according to you, does philosophy have a foundation, and no one at all being named after it.

And what of the one who says, "The first wisdom is to despise the wisdom that lies in speech and in spurious and superfluous antitheses," which one should both praise and "embrace," he says, "as having conquered the wisdom that is being brought to nothing"? Does he not show that there are different wisdoms? The

56

Εἰ δή τις μή κατασαπείς ἐν τοῖς βιβλίοις μηδέ καταγηράσας ἐν τῇ τούτων ἐρεύνῃ τοσοῦτον ἐπέγνω Θεόν, ὡς πάντα ἐφέμενος τούτῳ καθαρῶς προσχωρῆσαι, πόσῳ καθαρώτερος τοῦ πάντα φυλοκρινοῦντος καί τήν εἴδησιν ἁπάντων δοκοῦντος ἔχειν, εἶτα περί τόν κόσμον τοῦτον ἐπτοημένου καί πρός τοῦτον κενοῦντος τό φιλοῦν τῆς ψυχῆς τό πᾶν ἤ τό πλέον καί τόν ὑπέρ πάντα μή ἐξ ὅλης ψυχῆς καί καρδίας ἠγαπηκότος Θεόν; Ἄλλως τε, εἰ μέν τήν ἐν τοῖς οὖσιν ἀλήθειαν εὑρήκασι Ἕλληνες, καλῶς καί σύ τούτοις ἑπόμενος διά τῶν κατ᾿ ἐκείνους μαθημάτων ταύτην εὑρεῖν ἰσχυρίζῃ, ἐπεί δ᾿ἐκεῖνοι γνώσεως ὕψώματα κατά Θεοῦ ἐγείρειν ἐπιχειρήσαντες, (σελ. 294) μᾶλλον τῶν ἐπί τῆς Χαλάνης τόν πύργον οἰκοδομούντων διῃρέθησαν τάς γλώσσας, ὡς μή διαφωνεῖν μόνον, ἀλλά καί κατ᾿ ἀλλήλων φωνεῖν, τίνι τῶν ἀντιφωνούντων αὐτός δώσεις τήν τῆς ἀληθείας οἰκοδομήν, ὅπως ἑπόμενοι τούτῳ διά τῆς ἀληθείας ταύτης τήν πηγήν τῆς διά πάντων ἀληθείας εὕροιμεν; Ἡμεῖς ἐκεῖνον μόνον ἴσμεν ὄντα τῆς ἀληθείας εὑρετήν καί ρήτορα, ὅς ἀπό Θεοῦ λαλεῖ, ὅς φησιν, «ἡμεῖς δέ νοῦν Χριστοῦ ἔχομεν»˙ καί πάλιν, «ἡμεῖς δέ λαλοῦμεν Θεοῦ σοφίαν». Τούτῳ τοίνυν ἡμεῖς καί τοῖς κατ᾿ αὐτόν μετά τῆς προσηκούσης ἑπόμενοι πίστεως, πρός κτῆσιν θείας καί σωτηρίου σοφίας χειραγωγούμεθα˙ δεῖν δ᾿ οὗτος οὐκ ἔγνω λόγους ἐξαγγέλλειν ἡμῖν κτισμάτων καί διά διαιρέσεως καί ἀναλύσεως καί συλλογισμοῦ καί ὁρισμῶν παιδεύειν καί προάγειν ἡμᾶς. ∆ιατί; Ὅτι «ἐάν μή εἰδῶμεν τήν ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις ἀλήθειαν, οὐδέν ἡμῖν ἐμποδίσει πρός τήν ἐν ἐπαγγελίαις μακαριότητα», κατά τόν μέγαν Βασίλειον. Πρός ὅν σύ σαφῶς ἀντιλέγων φωραθείς, ἐσκοτισμένους καί ἀνάγνους καί ἀτελεῖς ἀποφαινόμενος τούς μή εἰδότας τήν ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις ἀλήθειαν, εἶτ᾿ οὐκ ἐντρέπῃ οὐδέ ἐγκαλύπτῃ οὐδέ καταδύσει σαυτόν, ἀλλ᾿ ἐπαγωνίζῃ τῷ ψεύδει καί τῇ κακίᾳ προστίθης, τάς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐντολάς τῶν μαθημάτων ἄνευ μή δύνασθαι φάσκων καθᾶραι καί τελειῶσαι τόν ἄνθρωπον. Ἡμῖν δ᾿ εἰ καί ἀναμφισβήτως ἀκριβοῦς ἦν ἀληθείας ἡ τῶν Ἑλλήνων παιδεία, οὐδ᾿ οὕτως ἄν διαφερόντως περισπούδαστος ἐτύγχανεν οὖσα˙ καί τούτου γάρ ἀπόντος τοῦ μέρους τῆς ἀληθείας, ἡ ἀληθής μακαριότης ἀνύσιμος. Ἐπεί δέ καί τήν ἀλήθειαν ταύτην ἀμφισβητήσιμον ἡ τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἔχει παιδεία, πῶς ἄν σε παραδεξαίμεθα λέγοντα πρός ἕν καί ταὐτό φέρειν ταύτην εἶδός τε καί τέλος τῇ παρά τοῦ Θεοῦ δεδομένῃ σοφίᾳ, τῇ ὄντως ἀληθεῖ, τῇ ὄντως σωτηρίῳ, τῇ τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ μή συνδιαλυομένη;

(σελ. 298) Μετά δή τό μεγαλορρημονῆσαι, ὡς ὑπευθύνους ἡμᾶς λαβών, ἅτε τοῖς παρακεχαραγμένοις ὑπ᾿ αὐτοῦ ρητοῖς ἀντιλέγοντας, πρός αὐτούς διακηρύττεται τούς λογικούς οὐρανούς, τούς ἀποστόλους λέγω. Τοῦ μέν γάρ ἀδελφοθέου δύο σαφῶς λέγοντος σοφίας, τήν μέν ἄνωθεν, τήν δέ κάτωθεν, καί τήν μέν ἁγνήν καί ἐπιεικῆ, τήν δέ ψυχικήν καί δαιμονιώδη, καί τοῦ Παύλου δύο σοφίας ἐμφήναντος τῷ λέγειν «ἐπεί ἐν τῇ σοφίᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ οὐκ ἔγνω ὁ κόσμος διά τῆς σοφίας τόν Θεόν», αὐτός διαρρήδην μάχεται τοῖς δύο ἤ καί πλείους λέγουσι σοφίας, καί τό αἴτιον ὅτι «μηδείς πω», φησίν, «ὡρίσατο τήν τοῦ δεῖνος ἤ τοῦ δεῖνος γνῶσιν σοφίαν». Ἀλλά μήν ὁ ἀδελφόθεος, ὤ φιλόσοφε, τήν μέν γνῶσιν τοῦ ἐκ τῆς καλῆς ἀναστροφῆς δεικνύντος τά ἔργα αὐτοῦ σοφίαν ὡρίσατο ἁγνήν καί οὐράνιον, τήν δέ γνῶσιν τοῦ μή ζῶντος ἐν ἀναστροφῇ καλῇ σοφίαν ὡρίσατο ψυχικήν καί δαιμονιώδη καί ἐπίγειον. Εἰκότως˙ ἡ γάρ αὐτή τοῖς τρόποις τῶν κεκτημένων συμμεταβάλλουσα, τάς ἐναντίας σοφίας ταῖς ψυχαῖς ἐνειργάσατο˙ ἄλλως τε, εἰ μηδενός ἐπιστήμη φιλοσοφία ἐστίν, οὐδέ φιλόσοφος ἐστιν οὐδείς οὐδαμοῦ καί ἀπολώλεκας σύ σαυτόν διά τούς σαυτοῦ λόγους, ὤ φιλόσοφε, ἤ οὐκ οἶδ᾿ ὅπως σε ὀνομάσω, ἐν οὐδεμιᾷ ψυχῇ κατά σέ τῆς φιλοσοφίας ἐχούσης ἵδρυσιν, μηδ᾿ ἐπωνύμου ταύτης τῶν ἁπάντων οὐδενός ὄντος.

Τί δ᾿ ὁ λέγων «σοφία πρώτη σοφίας ὑπερορᾶν τῆς ἐν λόγῳ κειμένης καί ταῖς κιβδήλοις καί περιτταῖς ἀντιθέσεσιν», ἥν καί ἐπαινεῖν καί «ἀσπάζεσθαι», φησίν, «ὡς τήν καταργουμέην σοφίαν νικήσασαν»; Ἆρ᾿ οὐ διαφόρους εἶναι σοφίας δείκνυσι; Τήν