89

he was saying that they said the knowledge of existing things is completely unprofitable and (p. 438) evil, and that the passions are demons consubstantial with the soul, and not a few other such things. But these things were not enough for this new accuser; he added, alas, also the things concerning the essence of God. And since he decided to fabricate this also against those men, having considered from where this great and terrible fabrication of slander might get its plausibility, he brought forward the prophetic revelations through light and the supposed contradictions from these, which no one else ever spoke, except this one who opposes them. Whether, then, he prevails against them fighting with himself, or not, is no concern of ours; let us leave him to be struck and beaten by himself.

But after this struggle of slanders he strips for another, hastening to show that the only light for the contemplative mind is the knowledge of created things, so that, this having been shown, everyone who has not studied the physics of Aristotle and the theology of Plato and the astrology of Ptolemy might be shown to be darkened and impure. For this reason he also insolently attacks and slanders with base epithets those who do not advocate for illumination through thoughts alone, saying in these very words: “But those concerned with inhalations say that there are two lights shown intelligibly by God to the holy: one of knowledge and another hypostatic, which is said to appear in a special way to those who have advanced far in inhalations.” Let us see, then, who they are whom he disparages through such epithets as heterodox; for when these have been shown, it will be demonstrated along with them that there is a light far better and more divine than knowledge, revealed only to those who see through the Spirit, not only to those still living, but also to all the saints from eternity. That he accuses not this one or that one of our contemporaries, but simply all those who embrace the sacred and hesychastic life, the written tradition (p. 440) coming down to us from the fathers clearly shows, which is praised by those who have advanced in virtue and by the divine men who formerly were of our number, as we know, and which demonstrates its benefit through the experience of the initiates, after he first sophistically distorted and slandered it, and then from it to name everyone and to advance his argument for a common slander.

And since for most of the ancient saints we venerate it was possible through experience both to learn and to teach about the light of grace, we, as if defending the evangelical commandments, brought forward for testimony those sayings, which were also in agreement with the confession of those not brought forward, signifying that the oracles also teach thus; in the same way here also we will set forth those patristic sayings, which he who announces these things claims have also been written according to the instruction of all the others. Thus says Isaac, the faithful and sure interpreter of such things, that “we possess two eyes of the soul, as the fathers say.” Have you heard that all the fathers say this? At any rate, they say that “we have two eyes of the soul and the need for the vision through each is not the same; for in one eye we see the things hidden in natures, that is, the power of God and His wisdom and His providence for us which is comprehended from the majesty of His governance over us; and in the other eye we contemplate the glory of His holy nature, when God is pleased to lead us into the spiritual mysteries.Inasmuch then as they are eyes, the light is what is seen by them, but inasmuch as the need for the vision through each is not the same, a certain doubleness appears in the vision of this light; for by each of the eyes a different light is seen, which is not seen by the other. And what each of these is, this divine Isaac explained to us, saying that the one is the comprehension of God’s power and wisdom (p. 442) and providence and simply the knowledge of the

89

αὐτός ἔλεγεν εἰπεῖν αὐτούς ἀνόνητον παντάπασι καί (σελ. 438) τήν γνῶσιν τῶν ὄντων πονηρά καί τά πάθη δαίμονας συνουσιωμένους τῇ ψυχῇ καί ἕτερ᾿ ἄττα τοιαῦτα οὐκ ὀλίγα. Ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἀπέχρησε ταῦτα τῷ καινῷ τούτῳ κατηγόρῳ˙ προσέθηκε δέ, φεῦ, καί τά περί τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἐπεί δέ καί τοῦτο πλάσασθαι κατά τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐκείνων ἔγνω, διασκεψάμενος πόθεν ἄν σχοίη τό εὐπαράδεκτον τό μέγα τοῦτο καί δεινόν πλάσμα τῆς συκοφαντίας, τάς διά φωτός προφητικάς προήνεγκεν ἀποκαλύψεις καί τάς ἐκ τούτων δῆθεν ἀντιθέσεις, ἅς οὐδείς ποτ᾿ εἶπεν ἄλλος, ὅτι μή ὁ ταύτας ἀντικείμενος οὗτος. Εἴτ᾿ οὖν κρατεῖ κατά ταύτας ἑαυτῷ μαχόμενος, εἴτ᾿ οὔ, λόγος ἡμῖν οὐδείς˙ ἀφῶμεν αὐτόν ὑφ᾿ ἑαυτοῦ πληττόμενόν τε καί κοπτόμενον.

Ἀλλά μετά τόν ἐκ συκοφαντιῶν ἀγῶνα τοῦτον πρός ἕτερον ἀποδύεται, δεῖξαι σπεύδων ὡς φῶς νῷ θεωρητικόν ἡ γνῶσις μόνη τῶν κτισμάτων ἐστίν, ἵνα, τούτου δειχθέντος, ἐσκοτισμένος καί ἄναγνος ἀποδειχθῇ πᾶς ὁ μή τήν Ἀριστοτέλους φυσιολογίαν καί τήν Πλάτωνος θολογίαν καί τήν Πτολεμαίου ἀστρολογίαν ἐκμελετήσας. ∆ιά τοῦτο καί τούς μή τόν διά νοημάτων μόνον φωτισμόν πρεσβεύοντας ὑβριστικῶς ἐπεξέρχεται καί φαύλαις ἐπωνυμίαις διασύρει, φάσκων ἐπί λέξεως οὕτως˙ «ἀλλ᾿ οἱ περί τάς εἰσπνοάς δύο λέγουσιν εἶναι τά δεικνύμενα ὑπό τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῖς ὁσίοις φῶτα νοητῶς˙ ἕν τό τῆς γνώσεως καί ἕτερον ἐνυπόστατον, ὅ διαφερόντως τοῖς πόρρω ἐλθοῦσι τῶν εἰσπνοῶν φαίνεσθαι». Ἴδωμεν οὖν τίνες οὕς δι᾿ ἐπωνυμιῶν τοιούτων ἐκφαυλίζει ὡς ἑτερόφρονας˙ τούτων γάρ δειχθέντων, συναποδειχθήσεται ὡς καί τῆς γνώσεως ἔστι τι μακρῷ κρεῖττον καί θεοειδέστερον φῶς, μόνοις τοῖς διά τοῦ Πνεύματος ὁρῶσιν ἀποκαλυπτόμενον, οὐ τοῖς ἔτι περιοῦσι μόνον, ἀλλά καί τοῖς ἐξ αἰῶνος ἅπασιν ἁγίοις. Ὅτι δ᾿ οὗτος καί τῶν ἐφ᾿ ἡμῶν οὐ τόν δεῖνα ἤ τόν δεῖνα, πάντας δ᾿ ἁπλῶς αἰτιᾶται τούς τόν ἱερόν καί ἡσύχιον ἀσπαζομένους βίον, δείκνυσι τρανῶς τό παράδοσιν ἔγγραφον (σελ. 440) ἀπό τῶν πατέρων ἐς ἡμᾶς κατιοῦσαν, ἐπαινουμένην τε παρά τῶν ἐπ᾿αρετῇ προηκόντων καί τῶν πρῴην ἐξ ἡμῶν γεγονότων, ὡς ἴσμεν, θείων ἀνδρῶν καί τό λυσιτελές ἐπί τῶν εἰσαγομένων διά πείρας ἐπιδεικνυμένην, διαστρέψαντά τε καί διαβαλόντα πρότερον σοφιστικῶς αὐτόν, εἶτ᾿ ἀπ᾿ αὐτῆς ὀνομάζειν ἅπαντας καί τόν λόγον ἐπί διαβολῇ κοινῇ προάγειν.

Ἐπεί δέ καί τῶν ἐκ παλαιοῦ προσκυνητῶν ἡμῖν ἁγίων πλείστοις ἐξεγένετο διά πείρας μαθεῖν τε καί διδάξαι περί τοῦ φωτός τῆς χάριτος, ἡμεῖς, ὥσπερ ταῖς εὐαγγελικαῖς συνηγοροῦντες ἐντολαῖς, ἐκείνας παρηγάγομεν πρός μαρτυρίαν τάς ρήσεις, αἵ καί τήν ὁμολογίαν συνεπεφώνουν τῶν μή παραγομένων ὡς καί τά λόγια οὕτω διδάσκει προσημαίνουσαι˙ τόν αὐτόν κἀνταῦθα τρόπον ἐκεῖνα τῶν πατερικῶν προθήσομεν ρημάτων, ἅ καί κατά τήν ὑφήγησιν τῶν ἄλλων πάντων γεγράφθαι ὁ ταῦτα ἐξαγγέλλων ἰσχυρίζεται. Φησί τοίνυν Ἰσαάκ, ὁ πιστός τῶν τοιούτων καί ἀσφαλής ἐξηγητής, ὅτι «δύο ὀφθαλμούς κεκτήμεθα ψυχικούς, καθώς λέγουσιν οἱ πατέρες». Ἤκουσας ὅτι οἱ πατέρες πάντες τοῦτο λέγουσι; Λέγουσι γοῦν ὅτι «δύο ψυχικούς ἔχομεν ὀφθαλμούς καί οὐχ ἡ αὐτή χρεία τῆς δι᾿ ἑκατέρου θεωρίας˙ ἐν ἑνί μέν γάρ ὀφθαλμῷ τά κεκρυμμένα ἐν ταῖς φύσεσιν ὁρῶμεν, ἤγουν τήν δύναμιν τοῦ Θεοῦ καί τήν σοφίαν αὐτοῦ καί τήν περί ἡμᾶς πρόνοιαν αὐτοῦ τήν καταλαμβανομένην ἐκ τῆς μεγαλειότητος τῆς κυβερνήσεως αὐτοῦ εἰς ἡμᾶς˙ καί ἐν τῷ ἑτέρῳ ὀφθαλμῷ θεωροῦμεν τήν δόξαν τῆς φύσεως αὐτοῦ τῆς ἁγίας, ὅτε εἰς τά μυστήρια τά πνευματικά εὐδοκήσει ὁ Θεός εἰσάξαι ἡμᾶς.Ἧ μέν οὖν ὀφθαλμοί, φῶς τό ὑπ᾿αὐτῶν ὁρωμένον, ᾗ δέ οὐχ ἡ αὐτή χρεία τῆς δι᾿ ἑκατέρου θεωρίας, διπλόη τις φαίνεται ἐν τῇ τοῦ φωτός τούτου θεωρίᾳ˙ ἑκατέρῳ γάρ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν ἄλλο φῶς ὁρᾶται, ὅ θατέρῳ οὐχ ὁρᾶται. Τούτων δ᾿ ὅ τί ποτέ ἐστιν ἑκάτερον ἐξηγήσατο ἡμῖν ὁ θεῖος οὗτος Ἰσαάκ, τό μέν κατάληψιν εἰπών τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ δυνάμεως καί σοφίας (σελ. 442) καί προνοίας καί ἁπλῶς τήν ἀπό τῶν κτισμάτων προσγινομένην γνῶσιν τοῦ