80

it provides to those who suffer for the sake of that which is truly desired; for through it, having been utterly captivated by that love-charm and having, as it were, risen up against the flesh, through communion with the divine Spirit by means of prayer and love, they live perceiving these passions of the flesh only in order to judge them.

And what need is there to write more on these matters? For it is clear to all, if it has not also become clear to this wise man, that we were commanded “to crucify the flesh with its passions and desires,” not so that we might destroy ourselves, putting to death every energy of the body and power of the soul, but so that we might abstain from base appetites and actions and demonstrate our flight from them to be irreversible, and that we might become men of the desires of the spirit, according to Daniel, living and moving in them with a perfect mind, and always manfully advancing forward, like Lot coming out of Sodom, who by always pressing on and remaining unmoved toward the things behind kept himself alive, while his wife who turned back was put to death. That the dispassionate, therefore, keep the passionate part of the soul alive and active for what is better, and do not put it to death, I think has been sufficiently demonstrated.

But now let us see how this philosopher, although he applied all his great intelligence to the introductory teachings on prayer of the venerable Nikephoros, nevertheless had no more power than to slander, distort, and malign, damaging himself and his own words through these slanders, but not that holy man. First, then, he begins by lying about the man, saying that he was the first (p. 400) to hand down such teachings, which he insolently called “inhalations.” For many years before, other spiritual men had introduced these things in almost the same words and concepts, and in the writings of all the fathers one could find many sayings that bear witness to them, such as is that of the one who built for us in words the spiritual Ladder. For he says, “Let the memory of Jesus be united with your breath, and then you will know the benefit of stillness.” After this, when that holy man says, “Force your mind to enter into the heart with the inhaled breath” (that is, to be united to this and to observe what is in the heart, according to the great Makarios: for he says, “the heart governs the whole instrument, and when grace has taken possession of the pastures of the heart, it governs all the members and the thoughts; there, then, one must observe whether grace has inscribed the laws of the Spirit”), while he, then, is in every way in agreement with these great men, again this man acts insolently through slander and, separating “force” from “the mind,” he joins it to the inhaled breath, and having thus slanderously corrupted the meaning along with the words, he then himself blows hard against “forced inhalations,” proving them to be most absurd. But also when that man speaks of the *mind* meaning the *energies* of the mind, and says that those who practice prayer must recall these, which are poured out through the senses, and prepare them to turn inward, the philosopher again slanders him, saying he means the *essence* of the mind; for in this way he supposed he would find many points to use against the sayings of the holy men.

But when we in turn were clarifying the truth, he, having nothing to say in opposition, says, “Let our words be a teaching for those who might have been misled by the apparent absurdity.” And so you, who teach what you did not understand—one might say to such a teacher—were you misled or not? (p. 402) For if you were misled, how can you claim to be a teacher on this very matter, when you needed someone to teach you and learned the truth from us? But if you were not misled, how can you insult, on the basis of what seems absurd to you, one who intended nothing absurd, and this not because he spoke badly, but because you thought badly? For if he was wrong in both respects, how could you, being his accuser, have overlooked the intended meaning and proceeded only against what is apparent? It was necessary, then, if you were to keep

80

τοῖς ὑπέρ τοῦ ὄντως ἐφετοῦ πάσχουσι παρέχει˙ δι᾿ αὐτοῦ γάρ ἐκείνῳ τῷ φίλτρῳ κατ᾿ ἄκρας ἁλόντες καί οἷον ἐπαναστάντες τῆς σαρκός, τῇ δι᾿ εὐχῆς καί ἀγάπης πρός τό θεῖον Πνεῦμα κοινωνία, τά σαρκός ταῦτα πάθη κατά μόνον τό κρίνειν αἰσθανόμενοι, διαγίνονται.

Καί τί δεῖ πλείω τούτων γράφειν; ∆ῆλον γάρ ἐστι πᾶσιν, εἰ μή καί τῷ σοφῷ τούτῳ γέγονε σαφές, ὡς «σταυρῶσαι τήν σάρκα σύν τοῖς παθήμασι καί ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις» προσετάγημεν, οὐχ᾿ ἵν᾿ ἡμᾶς αὐτούς διαχειρισώμεθα, πᾶσαν σώματος ἐνέργειαν καί ψυχῆς δύναμιν νεκρώσαντες, ἀλλ᾿ ὡς ἄν τῶν μέν φαύλων ὀρέξεών τε καί πράξεων ἀποσχώμεθα καί τήν ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν φυγήν ἀνεπίστροφον ἐπιδειξώμεθα, γενώμεθα δέ τῶν ἐπιθυμιῶν τοῦ πνεύματος ἄνδρες, κατά τόν ∆ανιήλ, τελείῳ φρονήμασι ζῶντες ἐν αὐταῖς καί κινούμενοι καί ἀνδρικῶς ἀεί χωροῦντες εἰς τό πρόσῳ, κατά τόν ἀπό Σοδόμων ἐξιόντα Λώτ, ὅς ἀεί προβαίνων καί ἀκίνητος πρός τά ὀπίσω μένων ζῶντα ἑαυτόν διετήρησε, τῆς εἰς τοὐπίσω στραφείσης συζύγου νεκρωθείσης. Ὅτι μέν οὖν ζῶν ἔχουσι καί τά κρείττω ἐνεργοῦν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ νεκροῦσιν οἱ ἀπαθεῖς τό τῆς ψυχῆς παθητικόν, ἱκανῶς οἶμαι δεδειγμένον εἶναι.

Νῦν δ᾿ ἴδωμεν πῶς ὁ φιλόσοφος οὗτος, καίτοι τήν ἑαυτοῦ πολύνοιαν πᾶσαν ἐπαφείς ταῖς εἰσαγωγικαῖς εἰς προσευχήν εἰσηγήσεσι τοῦ σεπτοῦ Νικηφόρου, ὅμως τοῦ συκοφαντῆσαι διαστρέψαι καί διαβαλεῖν πλέον ἴσχυσεν οὐδέν, ἑαυτόν καί τούς οἰκείους λόγους, ἀλλ᾿ οὐχί τόν ὅσιον ἐκεῖνον, διά τῶν συκοφαντιῶν τούτων λυμηνάμενος. Πρῶτον μέν οὖν ἀρχόμενος τοῦτο τοῦ ἀνδρός καταψεύδεται, τό πρῶτον αὐτόν (σελ. 400) παραδεδωκέναι λέγειν τάς τοιαύτας τῶν εἰσηγήσεων, ἅς ὑβρίζων εἰσπνοάς ἐκάλεσε˙ πολλοῖς γάρ χρόνοις πρότερον ταῦτα προεισηγήσαντο πνευματικοί ἄνδρες ἕτεροι καί ρήμασι καί νοήμασι σχεδόν τοῖς αὐτοῖς, κἀν τοῖς τῶν πατέρων ἁπάντων λόγοις πολλάς ἄν εὕροι τις φωνάς συμμαρτυρούσας αὐταῖς, οἷάπερ ἐστι καί ἡ διά λόγων ἡμῖν τήν πνευματικήν Κλίμακα τεκντηναμένου˙ «Ἰησοῦ» γάρ, φησί, «μνήμη κολληθήτω τῇ πνοῇ σου καί τότε γνώσῃ ἡσυχίας ὠφέλειαν». Μετά τοῦτο, «βίαζε τόν νοῦν σου» λέγοντος τοῦ ὁσίου ἐκείνου «μετά τοῦ εἰσπνεομένου πνεύματος εἰς τήν καρδίαν εἰσελθεῖν» (τουτέστι κολληθῆναι τούτῳ καί τά ἐν καρδίᾳ σκοπεῖν, κατά τόν μέγαν Μακάριον˙ «ἡ καρδία» γάρ, φησίν, «ἡγεμονεύει ὅλου τοῦ ὀργάνου καί, ἐπειδάν κατάσχῃ τάς νομάς τῆς καρδίας ἡ χάρις, ἡγεμονεύει πάντων τῶν μελῶν καί τῶν λογισμῶν˙ ἐκεῖ τοίνυν χρή σκοπεῖν, εἰ ἐνέγραψεν ἡ χάρις τούς τοῦ Πνεύματος νόμους»), ἐκείνου τοίνυν τοῖς μεγάλοις τούτοις παντάπασι συμφθεγγομένου, πάλιν οὗτος διά συκοφαντίας ἐπηρεάζει καί, διελών ἀπό τοῦ "νοῦ" τό "βίαζε" τῷ εἰσπνεομένῳ συνείρει Πνεύματι, καί συκοφαντικῶς οὕτω διαφθείρας μετά τῶν ρημάτων καί τήν διάνοιαν, εἶτα κατά τῶν βιαίων εἰσπνοῶν πολύς αὐτός πνεῖ, τῶν ἀτοπωτάτων οὖσας ἀποδεικνύς. Ἀλλά καί νοῦν ἐκείνου λέγοντος τάς ἐνεργείας τοῦ νοῦ καί χρῆν εἶναι διά τῶν αἰσθήσεων ταύτας ἔξω χεομένας ἐπανάγειν καί παρασκευάζειν εἴσω νεύειν τούς προσευχῆς ἐπιμελουμένους, ὁ φιλόσοφος νοῦν αὐτόν αὖθις συκοφαντεῖ λέγειν τήν οὐσίαν τοῦ νοῦ˙ καί γάρ οὕτω πολλῶν εὐπορῆσαι τόπων κατά τῶν ὁσίων φωνῶν ὑπενόησεν.

Ἡμῶν δ᾿ αὖθις τἀληθές διευκρινούντων, αὐτός ἀντιπεῖν οὐκ ἔχων, «ἔστωσαν», φησίν, «οἱ ἡμέτεροι λόγοι διδασκαλία πρός τούς ὑπό τοῦ φαινομένου ἀτόπου παρακρουσθέντας ἄν». Καί σύ τοίνυν ὁ διδάσκων ἅ μή συνῆκας, φαίη τις ἄν πρός τόν τοιοῦτον διδάσκαλον, παρεκρούσθης ἤ οὔ; (σελ. 402) Παρακρουσθείς μέν γάρ, πῶς ἀξιοῖς κατ᾿ αὐτό διδάσκαλος εἶναι τοῦ διδάξοντος δεηθείς καί μαθών παρ᾿ ἡμῶν τήν ἀλήθειαν, μή παρακρουσθείς δέ, πῶς ὑβρίζεις ἀπό τοῦ κατά σέ φαινομένου τόν μηδέν ἄτοπον διανοούμενον, καί ταῦτ᾿ οὐχ ὅτι κακῶς ἐξεῖπεν, ἀλλά κακῶς ἐνενόησεν; Εἰ γάρ ἄμφω κακῶς ἐκεῖνος, πῶς ἄν σύ, κατήγορος ὤν, τό νοούμενον παραδραμών, κατά μόνου τοῦ φαινομένου ἐχώρησας; Ἔδει τοίνυν, εἴπερ ἐφυλάξω