61

suitably for each thing and thought, up to even the simple movements consisting in soul and body, to be harmonized.

If, therefore, the difference of particular things is incomprehensible, and the account of the providence that properly suits them is consequently infinite, but not, because the account of providence for particulars happens to be infinite and unknown to us, ought we to make our own ignorance a refutation of the all-wise care for created beings, but rather to hymn and accept all the (14∆_254> works of providence without examination, in a manner befitting God and beneficially, and to believe that what happens happens well, even if the reason for it is unattainable for us. But when I say all things, I mean those of providence, for not those things done badly by us according to the principle of what is in our power; for these are entirely foreign to the principle of providence. The manner, therefore, signified by this great teacher concerning the power and grace of the saints according to reason and contemplation, I have conjecturally—but not declaratively (for our mind falls far short of the measure of truth according to him)—briefly traced in my account through what has been said, and as if tracking by footprints, I say the following only by way of conjecture.

61. A DIFFERENT CONTEMPLATION OF THE MATERIAL DYAD PASSED THROUGH BY THE SAINTS...

A different contemplation of the material dyad passed through by the saints, and what is the unity conceived in the Trinity.

And by coming to be beyond the material dyad, on account of the one conceived in the Trinity

unity, I suppose he means the saints, to have come to be beyond matter and form, from which bodies are composed, or the flesh and matter, which he said they, having passed through, were deemed worthy to be united with God and to be mingled with the purest light, that is, the relation of the soul to the flesh, and through the flesh to matter, or, to speak generally, having laid aside all natural affinity of the sensitive substance for the sensible, and having genuinely taken hold of divine desire alone, on account of, as I said, the unity conceived in the Trinity. For having known that the soul lies midway between God and matter, and that it possesses unifying powers towards both, I mean the intellect towards God and sensation towards matter, they completely shook off sensation along with sensible things, according to the relative activity in disposition, but according to the intellect alone they ineffably 1196 appropriated it to God, (14∆_256> to whom the whole [soul], having been wholly united in an unknown way, as an image of the archetype according to intellect and reason and spirit, having seen that it possesses a resemblance according to likeness as far as possible, they were mystically taught the unity conceived in the Trinity.

And perhaps the teacher also called the spirited and appetitive parts a material dyad, because they are powers attached to matter and belong to the passionate part of the soul, and are in rebellion against reason, and are able to scatter the intellect into many things, unless one from the beginning knowingly bridles and yokes them to oneself. If someone should master these and persuade them to be borne fittingly towards what is necessary, yoked in servitude to the dominion of reason, or even having abandoned them completely might abandon them, and alone holds to the unwavering Gnostic charm of love through reason and contemplation, and has been contracted from many things to one and only pure and simple and indivisible movement of the most virile power according to desire, according to which he has philosophically established for himself permanence around God unceasingly in the identity of perpetual motion according to desire, he is truly blessed, having obtained not only the true and blessed union with the holy Trinity, but also the unity conceived in the holy Trinity, as simple and indivisible and uniform according to his power towards the

61

προσφόρως καθ᾿ ἕκαστον καί πρᾶγμα καί νόημα, μέχρι καί τῶν ψιλῶν κινημάτων τῶν κατά ψυχήν καί σῶμα συνισταμένων, ἁρμόζεσθαι.

Εἰ οὖν τῶν κατά μέρος ἀκατάληπτός ἐστιν ἡ διαφορά, καί τῆς ἁρμοζούσης αὐτοῖς εἰκότως προνοίας ἄπειρος ὁ λόγος, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ, ἐπειδή ἄπειρός τε καί ἄγνωστος ἡμῖν τῆς τῶν κατά μέρος προνοίας ὁ λόγος τυγχάνει, τήν ἰδίαν ἄγνοιαν ἀναίρεσιν ποιεῖσθαι τῆς πανσόφου τῶν ὄντων κηδημονίας ὀφείλομεν, πάντα δέ καί ἀνεξετάστως, θεοπρεπῶς τε καί συμφερόντως, τά (14∆_254> τῆς προνοίας ἐφυμνεῖν ἔργα καί ἀποδέχεσθαι, καί καλῶς γίνεσθαι τά γινόμενα πιστεύειν, κἄν ἡμῖν ὁ λόγος ἐστίν ἀνέφικτος. Πάντα δέ λέγων τά τῆς προνοίας φημί, οὐ γάρ τά κακῶς ὑφ᾿ ἡμῶν κατά τόν τοῦ ἐφ᾿ ἡμῖν λόγον γινόμενα· ταῦτα γάρ τοῦ κατά τήν πρόνοιαν λόγου παντελῶς ἀλλότρια. Τόν μέν οὖν σημαινόμενον τρόπον περί τῆς τῶν ἁγίων κατά τόν λόγον καί τήν θεωρίαν δυνάμεώς τε καί χάριτος ὑπό τοῦ μεγάλου τούτου διδασκάλου κατά τό δυνατόν στοχαστικῶς, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἀποφαντικῶς (πολλῷ γάρ ἀπολείπεται τῷ μέτρῳ τῆς κατ᾿ αὐτόν ἀληθείας ὁ ἡμέτερος νοῦς), διά τῶν εἰρημένων ὑποδραμών τῷ λόγῳ, καί ὥσπερ ἰχνηλατήσας, τοιόνδε καθ᾿ ὑπόνοιαν μόνον φημί.

ΞΑ (61). ΘΕΩΡΙΑ ∆ΙΑΦΟΡΟΣ ΤΗΣ ∆ΙΑΒΑΘΕΙΣΗΣ ΥΠΟ ΤΩΝ ΑΓΙΩΝ ΥΛΙΚΗΣ ∆ΥΑ∆ΟΣ...

Θεωρία διάφορος τῆς διαβαθείσης ὑπό τῶν ἁγίων ὑλικῆς δυάδος, καί τίς ἡ ἐν τῇ Τριάδι νοουμένη ἑνότης.

∆ιά δέ τοῦ ὑπέρ τήν ὑλικήν δυάδα γενέσθαι, διά τήν ἐν τῇ Τριάδι νοουμένην

ἑνότητα, τό ὑπέρ τήν ὕλην γενέσθαι καί τό εἶδος, ἐξ ὧν τά σώματα, τούς ἁγίους λέγειν ὑπονοῶ αὐτόν, ἤ τήν σάρκα καί τήν ὕλην, ἅσπερ διασχόντας ἔφη Θεῷ συγγενέσθαι καί τῷ ἀκραιφνεστάτῳ κραθῆναι φωτί καταξιωθῆναι, τουτέστι τήν πρός τήν σάρκα τῆς ψυχῆς σχέσιν, καί διά τῆς σαρκός πρός τήν ὕλην, ἤ καθόλου εἰπεῖν, πάσης τῆς αἰσθητικῆς οὐσίας πρός τήν αἰσθητήν ἀποθεμένους φυσικήν οἰκειότητα, τῆς δέ θείας μόνης γνησίως ἐπιλαβομένους ἐφέσεως, διά τήν, ὡς ἔφην, νοουμένην ἐν Τριάδι ἑνότητα. Μέσην γάρ κειμένην Θεοῦ καί ὕλης τήν ψυχήν ἐγνωκότες, καί τάς πρός ἄμφω ἑνοποιούς δυνάμεις ἔχουσαν, τόν νοῦν λέγω πρός τόν Θεόν καί πρός τήν ὕλην αἴσθησιν, τήν μέν αἴσθησιν μετά τῶν αἰσθητῶν παντελῶς ἀπετινάξαντο, κατά τήν ἐν διαθέσει σχετικήν ἐνέργειαν, κατά δέ τόν νοῦν μονώτατον ἀῤῥήτως 1196 αὐτήν τῷ Θεῷ προσῳκείωσαν, (14∆_256> πρός ὅν ὅλον ἀγνώστως ἑνωθεῖσαν ὅλην ὡς ἀρχετύπου εἰκόνα κατά νοῦν καί λόγον καί πνεῦμα, ὡς ἐφικτόν καθ᾿ ὁμοίωσιν ἔχουσαν τό ἐμφερές θεασάμενοι, τήν ἐν τῇ Τριάδι νοουμένην ἑνότητα μυστικῶς ἐδιδάχθησαν.

Τυχόν δέ καί τόν θυμόν καί τήν ἐπιθυμίαν ὑλικήν δυάδα προσηγόρευσεν ὁ διδάσκαλος, διά τό προσύλους καί τοῦ παθητικοῦ τῆς ψυχῆς μέρους αὐτάς εἶναι δυνάμεις, καί πρός τόν λόγον στασιαζούσας, καί εἰς πολλά σκεδάσαι τόν νοῦν δυναμένας, εἰ μή ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐπιστημόνως ἄγχων ἑαυτῷ ὑποζεύξειεν. Ὧν εἴ τις κρατήσειε καί ἐφ᾿ ἅ δεῖ πρεπόντως φέρεσθαι πείσειε, δουλικῶς ὑποζευγμένας τῇ δυναστείᾳ τοῦ λόγου, ἤ καί παντελῶς αὐτάς ἀπολιπών ἀπολίποι, καί μόνος τῆς ἀῤῥεποῦς κατ᾿ ἀγάπην γνωστικῆς διά λόγου καί θεωρίας ἔχεται θέλξεως, καί πρός μίαν καί μόνην ἐκ τῶν πολλῶν καθαράν τε καί ἁπλῆν καί ἀδιαίρετον τῆς κατ᾿ ἔφεσιν ἀῤῥενωτάτης δυνάμεως κίνησιν συνεστάλη, καθ᾿ ἥν περί Θεόν ἀκαταλήκτως ἐν ταυτότητι τῆς κατ᾿ ἔφεσιν ἀεικινησίας ἑαυτῷ φιλοσόφως ἐπήξατο τήν μονιμότητα, μακάριος ὄντως ἐστί τῆς ἀληθοῦς τε καί μακαρίας τυχών οὐ μόνον ἑνώσεως τῆς πρός τήν ἁγίαν Τριάδα, ἀλλά καί ἑνότητος τῆς ἐν τῇ ἁγίᾳ Τριάδι νοουμένης, ὡς ἁπλοῦς καί ἀδιαίρετος καί μονοειδής κατά τήν δύναμιν πρός τήν