94

of Him who created them, but the vision not of the divine nature, lest the slanderers again have an occasion, but of the glory of His nature, which the Lord gave to the disciples and through them to all who believed in him and showed their faith through works, which he also wished them to see; “I wish,” for, he says to the Father, “that these may see my glory, which you have given me, because you loved me before the foundation of the world”; and again, “glorify me, Father, with yourself with the glory that I had with you before the world was.” So also to the human nature he gave the glory of the divinity, but not the nature; Therefore the nature of God is one thing and its glory is another, even if they are inseparable from each other; but even if it is other than the divine nature, it would not be counted among things in time, not being by preeminence, but being inherent in the divine nature itself in an ineffable manner. However, not only to the mixture hypostatically united to himself did he give this glory that is above all beings, but also to the disciples; “for I,” he says, “the glory which you gave me, Father, I have given them, that they may be one, just as we are one, I in them and you in me; that they may be perfected into one.” But he also wished them to see it. This, then, is the glory, through which we possess in ourselves and truly see God.

How then do we both possess and see this glory of the divine nature? Is it by examining the principles of beings and through them hunting for the knowledge of the power and wisdom and providence of God? But it is another eye of the soul that sees these things, by which the divine light, the glory of his nature, according to what was said above by Saint Isaac and all the other fathers, is not seen; this light is therefore other than the light that is named from knowledge. Therefore not everyone who has the knowledge of beings or sees through it (p. 444) has God dwelling within, but the knowledge itself of created things, from it conjecturing God as from an image. But he who ineffably has and sees that light no longer from an image, but with a true vision established above all created things, both knows and has God within himself; for he is never separated from the eternal glory. But let us not, because of the excess of the benefaction, disobey and become unruly, but believing in him who partook of our nature and imparted the glory of his own nature, let us seek how one possesses and sees this. How then? By keeping the divine commandments; for to the one who keeps them the Lord promised his own manifestation, which, proceeding, he subsequently also named “an abode of himself and of the Father,” saying, “if anyone loves me, he will keep my word and my Father will love him and we will come to him and make our abode with him,” and “I will manifest myself to him.” That by his word he means his commandments is therefore clear, since also above in place of the now-mentioned “word” he has put them: “for he who has,” he says, “my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me.”

So from this also it is shown, and especially according to the words of the philosopher and the doctrines according to him, that this vision of God is in no way knowledge, even if he wishes anything rather than this. But we too must know, when we say that this vision is not knowledge, that this is by way of preeminence, just as God is also not a being; for we have believed him to be beyond beings. But how, even against the philosopher's will, is it shown from his words that this divine light is other than knowledge? He says that the keeping of the commandments is not able to drive out the darkness of ignorance from the soul, but learning and persistent study according to it; but that which does not drive out ignorance could never be able to provide knowledge. That, therefore, which according to him does not provide knowledge, bestows this vision (p. 446), according to the words of the Lord; this vision therefore is not knowledge, not that one should not both consider and call this knowledge

94

κτίσαντος αὐτά, τό δέ θεωρίαν οὐ τῆς θείας φύσεως, μή πάλιν σχοῖεν ἀφορμήν οἱ συκοφάνται, ἀλλά τῆς δόξης τῆς φύσεως αὐτοῦ, ἥν ἔδωκεν ὁ Κύριος τοῖς μαθηταῖς καί δι᾿ αὐτῶν πᾶσι τοῖς πιστεύσασιν αὐτῷ καί δι᾿ ἔργων τήν πίστιν ἐπιδειξαμένοις, ἥν καί ἠθέλησεν ὁρᾶν αὐτούς˙ «θέλω» γάρ, φησί πρός τόν πατέρα, «ἵνα θεωρῶσιν οὗτοι τήν δόξαν τήν ἐμήν, ἥν δέδωκάς μοι, ὅτι ἠγάπησάς με πρό καταβολῆς κόσμου»˙ καί πάλιν, «δόξασόν με σύ, πάτερ, παρά σεαυτῷ τῇ δόξῃ ᾗ εἶχον πρό τοῦ τόν κόσμον εἶναι παρά σοί». Ὥστε καί τῇ ἀνθρωπίνῃ φύσει τήν δόξαν ἔδωκε τῆς θεότητος, τήν φύσιν δέ οὔ˙ ἄλλο ἄρα φύσις Θεοῦ καί ἡ δόξα ταύτης ἕτερον, εἰ καί ἀχώριστα ἐστιν ἀλλήλων˙ ἀλλ᾿ εἰ καί τῆς θείας φύσεως ἕτερόν ἐστι, τοῖς ὑπό χρόνον οὖσιν οὐκ ἄν εἴη ἐναρίθμιος, οὐκ οὖσα καθ᾿ ὑπεροχήν, αὐτῇ δέ τῇ θείᾳ φύσει τόν ἄφραστον ἐνοῦσα τρόπον. Οὔ μέντοι μόνῳ τῷ καθ᾿ ὑπόστασιν ἡνωμένῳ ἑαυτῷ φυράματι ταύτην ἔδωκε τήν ὑπέρ τά ὄντα πάντα δόξαν, ἀλλά καί τοῖς μαθηταῖς˙ «ἐγώ» γάρ, φησί, «τήν δόξαν ἥν ἔδωκάς μοι, πάτερ, δέδωκα αὐτοῖς, ἵνα ὦσιν ἕν, καθώς ἡμεῖς ἕν ἐσμεν, ἐγώ ἐν αὐτοῖς καί σύ ἐν ἐμοί˙ ἵνα ὦσι τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν». Ἀλλά καί ὁρᾶν αὐτούς ἠθέλησεν. Αὕτη ἄρα ἐστίν ἡ δόξα, δι᾿ ἧς κτώμεθα ἐν ἑαυτοῖς καί ὁρῶμεν κυρίως τόν Θεόν.

Πῶς οὖν τήν δόξαν ταύτην τῆς θείας φύσεως κτώμεθά τε καί ὁρῶμεν; Ἆρα τούς λόγους τῶν ὄντων ἐξετάζοντες καί δι᾿ αὐτῶν θηρώμενοι τήν γνῶσιν τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ δυνάμεως καί σοφίας καί προνοίας; Ἀλλ᾿ ἕτερος ὀφθαλμός ἐστι ψυχῆς ὁ ταῦθ᾿ ὁρῶν, ᾧ τό θεῖον φῶς, ἡ δόξα τῆς φύσεως αὐτοῦ, κατά τό ὑπό τοῦ ἁγίου Ἰσαάκ καί τῶν ἄλλων πάντων πατέρων ᾶνωτέρω εἰρημένον, οὐχ ὁρᾶται˙ ἕτερον ἄρα τουτί ἐστι τό φῶς παρά τό φῶς ὅ τῆς γνώσεως ἐπώνυμόν ἐστιν. Οὐκοῦν οὐ πᾶς ὁ τήν τῶν ὄντων γνῶσιν ἔχων ἤ δι᾿ αὐτῆς (σελ. 444) ὁρῶν ἔνοικον ἔχει τόν Θεόν, ἀλλ᾿ αὐτήν τήν γνῶσιν τῶν κτισμάτων, ἐξ αὐτῆς ὡς ἐξ εἰκότος στοχαζόμενος Θεόν. Ὁ δέ τό φῶς ἐκεῖνο ἔχων ἀπορρήτως καί ὁρῶν οὐκέτ᾿ ἐκ τοῦ εἰκότος, ἀλλ᾿ἀληθεῖ καί τῶν κτισμάτων πάντων ὑπερανιδρυμένῃ θέᾳ, γινώσκει τε καί ἐν ἑαυτῷ ἔχει τόν Θεόν˙ οὐ γάρ χωρίζεταί ποτε τῆς ἀϊδίου δόξης. Ἀλλά μή διά τό ὑπερβάλλον τῆς εὐεργεσίας ἀπειθήσαντες ἀφηνιάσωμεν, πιστεύσαντες δέ τῷ μεταλαβόντι τῆς φύσεως ἡμῶν καί μεταδόντι τῆς δόξης τῆς φύσεως αὐτοῦ ζητήσωμεν πῶς κτᾶταί τις τοῦτο καί ὁρᾷ. Πῶς οὖν; Τῇ τῶν θείων ἐντολῶν τηρήσει˙ τῷ γάρ τηροῦντι ταύτας τήν ἑαυτοῦ ἐμφάνειαν ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ κύριος, ἥν ἐφεξῆς προϊών καί «μονήν ἑαυτοῦ καί τοῦ Πατρός» ὠνώμασεν εἰπών, «ἐάν τις ἀγαπᾷ με, τόν λόγον μου τηρήσει καί ὁ Πατήρ μου ἀγαπήσει αὐτόν καί ἐλευσόμεθα πρός αὐτόν καί μονήν παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ ποιήσομεν», καί «ἐμφανίσω αὐτῷ ἐμαυτόν». Ὅτι μέν οὖν λόγον αὐτοῦ τάς ἐντολάς αὐτοῦ λέγει δῆλον, ἐπεί καί ἀνωτέρω ἀντί τοῦ νῦν εἰρημένου "λόγου" τέθεικεν αὐτάς˙ «ὁ ἔχων» γάρ, φησί, «τάς ἐντολάς μου καί τηρῶν αὐτάς, ἐκεῖνος ἐστιν ὁ ἀγαπῶν με».

Ὥστε καί ἀπό τούτου δείκνυται, καί μάλιστα κατά τούς τοῦ φιλοσόφου λόγους καί τά κατ᾿ἐκεῖνον δόγματα, μηδαμῶς οὖσα γνῶσις ἡ θεωρία αὕτη τοῦ Θεοῦ, κἄν ἐκεῖνος πάντα μᾶλλον ἤ τοῦτο βούληται. ∆εῖ δέ καί ἡμᾶς εἰδέναι ταύτην οὐκ εἶναι γνῶσιν λέγοντας τήν θεωρίαν καθ᾿ ὑπεροχήν, ὡς καί τόν Θεόν μή ὄντα˙ καί γάρ ὑπέρ τά ὄντα πεπιστεύκαμεν αὐτόν. Ἀλλά πῶς καί μή βουλομένου τοῦ φιλοσόφου ἀπό τῶν ἐκείνου λόγων δείκνυται τό θεῖον τοῦτο φῶς ἕτερον παρά τήν γνῶσιν; Τήν τῶν ἐντολῶν τήρησιν ἐκεῖνος οὔ φησι δύνασθαι τό σκότος τῆς ἀγνοίας ἀπελαύνειντῆς ψυχῆς, ἀλλά τήν μάθησιν καί τήν κατ᾿ αὐτήν ἐπίμονον μελέτην˙ τό δέ μή ἀπελαῦνον τήν ἄγνοιαν γνῶσιν οὔποτ᾿ ἄν δύναιτο παρέχειν. Τό τοίνυν κατ᾿ ἐκεῖνο μή παρέχον γνῶσιν τήν θεωρίαν ταύτην (σελ. 446) χορηγεῖ, κατά τούς τοῦ Κυρίου λόγους˙ οὐκ ἄρα γνῶσίς ἐστιν ἡ θεωρία αὕτη, μή ὅτι δέ γνῶσιν ἡγεῖσθαί τε καί λέγειν ταύτην οὐ