of a root (p. 498) a most fruitful tree, but we do not have the perceptive power to adequately reach the richness of the root, come let us look again from the fruits, that is, from the works, at the enlightenment of Socrates and Plato and those like them. From where, then, might we precisely recognize this? Is it from the laws of incestuous marriage, or the works of pederasty, or the doctrines concerning gods and demons and heroes, or that diffuse monstrous tale of our souls, which pours them forth from heaven and transmigrates them, wandering on earth from bodies into unsuitable bodies, before descending or ascending, as each of them was unfortunate or fortunate in its inclination?

Did not the daimonion that accompanied Socrates, which he also obeyed throughout his life, indicate to you, our philosopher, what their enlightenment was? Nor from the serpent that appeared, of the Platonist Plotinus as he was dying, were you able to comprehend what their enlightenment was and what daimonion was with them, which he called the divine within himself, as he says, and which divine part he hastened to lead up to that divine principle both throughout his life and at his death? But listen to Pythian Apollo and you will learn from where their enlightenment came; for when Amelius, the companion of Plotinus, asked where his soul had gone after he died, Apollo himself "about the gentle friend wove honey-toned voices," and turning to the very soul of Plotinus, he sang, among other things, also these: "Often the impulses of your mind, striving to be borne on crooked paths by their own rushes, the immortals, providing a frequent ray of light, guided up the straight-pathed circles, and the immortal, boundless way; now (p. 500) when you have loosed the tent, and left the tomb of your daemonic soul, you come now to the daemonic assembly."

Did you see from where their light came, and with whom he arrays their souls? What is so surprising if, with the father of lies, darkness is shown as light for the purpose of deceit, and the names, along with the things themselves, are falsely interchanged, the crooked and the straight? But you, who along with Apollo call them enlightened, you might perhaps persuade us to celebrate Platonic and Socratic rites, since when Proclus of the Lyceum was celebrating these annually, a light was once seen by his fellow initiates running around his head; but this light showed us again its origin when the serpent appeared, crawling around his same head, as he was already dying, and he himself, while still alive, did not disdain to tell from where that light had shone upon him. For by using Chaldean purifications, as he himself says, he "conversed with luminous, self-seen Hecatean phantasms"; "but the phantasms of Hecate," says the true theologian, "are dark." Do you see clearly how that light is darkness itself?

This, then, is a greater and more manifest scandal than the former. For if we were to accept that Socrates and Plato are seers of God, taught by God, and enlightened by God, just as you yourself claim, and that those who heard the divine declarations from them and believed are admirable and enviable on account of their purpose and obedience and reverence toward them, it is necessary for us also to emulate them and to believe those men, so that, if not among the knowledgeable, we might at least become among the admirable and blessed. So then, we will approve divination among the best of human pursuits, and we would be shown pleasing to the most mantic (p.502) Phoebus, having the proclamation of our wisdom and of its superiority to many or all others proclaimed from there as certain.

And what account could further have the strength to enumerate the other kinds of deceit and the chain of evil-opinioned doctrines and the refuse of shameful and wicked passions and

ρίζης (σελ. 498) δένδρον πολυφορώτατον, ἡμεῖς δ᾿ οὐκ ἔχομεν διορατικῇ δυνάμει τῆς πιότητος διαρκῶς ἐφικέσθαι τῆς ρίζης, φέρ᾿ ἴδωμεν ἀπό τῶν καρπῶν αὖθις, δηλονότι τῶν ἔργων, τόν Σωκράτους καί Πλάτωνος καί τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτούς φωτισμόν. Πόθεν οὖν τοῦτον ἀκριβῶς ἐπιγνῶμεν; Ἆρ᾿ ἐκ τῶν νόμων τῆς ἀθεμιτογαμίας ἤ τῶν ἔργων τῆς παιδεραστίας ἤ τῶν περί θεούς καί δαίμονας καί ἥρως δογμάτων ἤ τῆς τῶν ψυχῶν ἡμῶν κατακεχυμένης τερατολογίας ἐκείνης, ἥ προχεῖ ταύτας οὐρανόθεν καί μετεγχεῖ, πλαζομένας ἐν γῆς ἀπό σωμάτων εἰς σώματα μή κατάλληλα πρίν καταδῦναι ἤ ἀναδῦναι, ὡς ἑκάστη τούτων ροπῆς ἐδυστύχησεν ἤ εὐμοίρησεν;

Οὐδέ τό συμπαρομαρτοῦν τῷ Σωκράτει δαιμόνιον, ᾧ καί διετέλει διά βίου πειθόμενος, ὑπέφηνέ σοι τῷ καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς φιλοσόφῳ τίς ἐκείνων ὁ φωτισμός; Οὐδ᾿ ὑπό τοῦ φανέντος δράκοντος, τοῦ πλατωνικοῦ θνήσκοντος Πλωτίνου, συνιδεῖν ἐδυνήθης τίς ἐκείνων ὁ φωτισμός καί τί τό συνόν ἐκείνοις δαιμόνιον, ὅ θεῖον ἐκεῖνος καλῶν τό ἐν αὐτῷ καθάπερ αὐτός λέγει, θεῖον ἀνάγειν ἔσπευδε πρός ἐκεῖνο καί διά βίου καί τελευτῶν; Ἀλλ᾿ ἄκουσον Ἀπόλλωνος τοῦ Πυθοῖ καί μαθήσῃ πόθεν ἐκείνοις ὁ φωτισμός˙ ἐρομένου γάρ Ἀμελίου τοῦ Πλωτίνου ἑταίρου, ποῦ κεχώρηκεν ἀποβεβιωκότος ἡ τούτου ψυχή, Ἀπόλλων αὐτός «ἀμφ᾿ ἀγανοῖο φίλοιο μελίχρους ὕφηνε φωνάς», καί πρός αὐτήν ἐπεστραμμένος τήν Πλωτίνου ψυχήν πρός τοῖς ἄλλοις ᾖσε καί ταῦτα˙ «πολλάκις σοῖο νόοιο βολάς λοξοῖσιν ἀταρποῖς ἱεμένας φορέεσθαι ἐρωῇσι σφετέρῃσιν, ὀρθοπόρου ἀνά κύκλους, ἄμβροτον τ᾿ οἶμον ἄπειραν ἀθάνατοι θαμινήν φαέων ἀκτῖνα πορόντες˙ νῦν (σελ. 500) δ᾿ ὅτε σκῆνος μέν λύσαο, σῆμα˙ δ᾿ ἔλειψας ψυχῆς δαιμονίης, μαθ᾿ ὁμήγυριν ἔρχεαι ἤδη δαιμονίην».

Εἶδες πόθεν ἐκείνων τό φῶς καί τίσι συντάττει τάς ἐκείνων ψυχάς; Τί δέ θαυμαστόν εἰ παρά τῷ τοῦ ψεύδους πατρί τό μέν σκότος πρός ἀπάτην δείκνυται φῶς, μεταβάλλει δ᾿ ἐψευσμένως εἰς ἄλληλα μετά τῶν πραγμάτων καί τά ὀνόματα, τό λοξόν τε καί τό ὀρθόν; Σύ δ᾿ ὁ μετά τοῦ Ἀπόλλωνος πεφωτισμένους ἐκείνους ἀνακαλῶν, τάχα κάι πλατώνεια καί σωκράτεια πείσαις ἄγειν ἡμᾶς, ἐπεί Πρόκλου τοῦ Λυκείου ταῦτ᾿ ἐπετείως ἄγοντος φῶς ὡράθη ποτέ τοῖς συμμύσταις τήν κεφαλήν αὐτοῦ περιθέον˙ ἀλλά τοῦτ᾿ ἔδειξεν ἡμῖν τό φῶς αὖθις ὅθεν ὁ περί τήν αὐτήν αὐτοῦ κεφαλήν φανείς ἕρπων δράκων, ἤδη τελευτῶντος αὐτοῦ, καί αὐτός δέ οὐκ ἀπηξίωσεν ἔτι περιών ἐξειπεῖν ὅθεν τό φῶς ἀνέλαμψεν ἐπ᾿αὐτόν ἐκεῖνο. Καθαρμοῖς γάρ χαλδαϊκοῖς, ὡς αὐτός φησι, χρώμενος «ἑκατικοῖς φάσμασι φωτοειδέσιν αὐτοπτουμένοις ὡμίλησε»˙ «τῆς δέ Ἑκάτης σκοτεινά» φησιν ὁ ἀληθής θεολόγος «τά φάσματα». Ὁρᾷς τρανῶς, ὅπως τό φῶς ἐκεῖνο σκότος ἐστίν αὐτόχρημα;

Τοῦτ᾿ ἄρα τοῦ προτέρου σκανδάλου μεῖζον καί ἐναργέστερον. Εἰ γάρ θεόπτας καί θεοδιδάκτους καί ὑπό Θεοῦ πεφωτισμένους εἶναι Σωκράτεις καί Πλάτωνος καταδεξαίμεθα, καθάπερ δικαιοῖς αὐτός, καί τούς παρά τούτων ἀκηκοότας τάς θείας ἀποφάνσεις καί πιστεύσαντας θαυμαστούς καί ζηλωτούς τῆς προαιρέσεως ἕνεκα καί πειθοῦς καί αἰδοῦς τῆς πρός ἐκείνους, ζηλοῦν καί ἡμᾶς ἀνάγκη τούτους καί πιστεύειν ἐκείνοις ὡς εἰ μή τῶν ἐπιστημόνων, τῶν γοῦν θαυμασίων καί μακαριστῶν γενοίμεθα. Ταῦτ᾿ ἄρα μαντείαν μέν τοῖς ἀρίστοις ἐγκρινοῦμεν τῶν ἐπιτηδευομένων ἐν ἀνθρώποις, ἀρεστοί δ᾿ ἀποφανθείημεν τῷ μαντικωτάτῳ (σελ.502) Φοίβῳ, τήν ἀνάρρησιν τῆς καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς σοφίας καί τοῦ κατ᾿ αὐτήν πολλῶν ἤ πάντων διαφέρειν ἐκεῖθεν ἀναδεδομένην ἔχοντες βεβαίαν.

Καί τίς ἄν ἔτ᾿ ἰσχύσαι καταλέξαι λόγος τά ἄλλα τῆς ἀπάτης εἴδη καί τόν ὁρμαθόν τῶν κακοδόξων δογμάτων καί τόν συρφετόν τῶν αἰσχρῶν καί πονηρῶν παθημάτων καί