101

The principle of providence has been sown in natural philosophy, and the principle of judgment in practical philosophy, according to the modes appropriate to them, by which they are made manifest through the contemplation of things that are and things that come to be.

I think that this God-minded teacher, having understood these things, as has been said, appropriately named the aforementioned saints from the mode of contemplation concerning them according to kind and worth, and the great John also from place. Wherefore the great saint John, as a preacher of repentance, is an image of practice; as a hermit, of dispassion; as a Levite and priest, of gnostic contemplation; as having leapt for the Word from the womb, he is a symbol of immutability and of the state according to virtue and knowledge. And Saint David, as a Jew and shepherd, is an image of the practical philosophy through confession; as king of Israel, he introduces the contemplative mystagogy. Therefore, the kind of Saint John is the nation and the tribe from which he came, his worth is the preaching and priesthood, and his place is the desert in which he lived. And of Saint David likewise, his kind is the nation and the tribe, and his pursuit, that is, his worth, is the shepherding and the kingship. By which each one, (14∆_414> being contemplated analogously to himself according to the proper principle of the modes spoken of concerning him, shows the mystery signified through him "without stumbling".

R (100). ..».IF HE FLEE TO EGYPT, WILLINGLY BECOME A FELLOW-FUGITIVE..».

From the same discourse, on the text: "If He flee to Egypt, willingly become a fellow-fugitive; it is good to flee with the persecuted Christ. If He tarry in Egypt, call Him out of Egypt, for He is well-worshiped there."

It is necessary, I think, in addition to knowing that the Lord fled into Egypt and

to know, accordingly, by whom He was persecuted. The Lord, therefore, flees not merely to Egypt, but also persecuted by Herod, who was then reigning over the land of Judea. Herod is interpreted, as they say, as passion, and leathern, and nature, and Egypt itself is also taken in many ways, according to the concepts of the contemplative modes concerning it: sometimes as the present world, sometimes as the flesh, sometimes as sin, sometimes as ignorance, and sometimes as affliction, according to which latter sense it is especially fitting now to understand the flight of the Lord into Egypt. It is good, therefore, to flee together to Egypt with Christ, that is, with the divine Logos of discernment within us, who for a time is persecuted on account of His infancy—because of us who are infants according to Him—by the earthly mindset that still dominates and rules us through the passionate movements of the flesh, 1300 into the affliction of practice, until death is announced to us, through dispassion, of those who seek the life of the most divine Logos who is an infant in us, that is, of those who wish to deaden our God-perfected life according to the Logos, and who rage to destroy the Christ-like state, or disposition, as He, through our unhesitating free choice, willingly mounts our Egypt as if upon a light cloud (14∆_416> —I mean, our flesh— and shakes its movements and passions as if they were certain man-made idols, and moves them from their seat and completely casts them out of the soul, and, after the casting out of the images, duly transfers the worship to Himself. Thus, then, we flee well with the persecuted Christ, receiving dispassion as a good reward for the flight with Him through voluntary affliction.

And again we call Christ out of Egypt, not allowing the divine logos of discernment within us, after the retreat and perfect mortification of the passions, to attend foolishly to contrivances against things that are not, nor allowing Him to be known as a Logos of flesh only in ourselves or in others who converse with us. But

101

τῆς μέν προνοίας ὁ λόγος τῇ φυσικῇ, καί ὁ τῆς κρίσεως λόγος τῇ πρακτικῇ κατέσπαρται φιλοσοφίᾳ, κατά τούς αὐτοῖς πρέποντας τρόπους, οἷς διά τῆς θεωρίαν τῶν ὄντων τε καί γινομένων ἐμφαίνονται.

Ταῦτα, καθώς εἴρηται, νενοηκότα τόν θεόφρονα τοῦτον διδάσκαλον οἶμαι προσφόρως τούς ὀνομασθέντας ἁγίους ἐκ τοῦ κατά γένος καί ἀξίαν τρόπου τῆς ἐπ᾿ αὐτοῖς θεωρίας καλέσαι, τόν δέ μέγαν Ἰωάννην καί ἐκ τοῦ τόπου. ∆ιόπερ ὁ μέγας ἅγιος Ἰωάννης, ὡς μέν κῆρυξ μετανοίας, πράξεώς ἐστιν εἰκών, ὡς δέ ἐρημίτης, ἀπαθείας, ὡς Λευΐτης δέ καί ἱερεύς, γνωστικῆς θεωρίας, ὡς δέ τοῦ λόγου προσκιρτήσας ἀπό γαστρός, ἀτρεψίας καί τῆς κατ᾿ ἀρετήν καί γνῶσιν ἕξεώς ἐστι σύμβολον· ὁ δέ ἅγιος ∆αβίδ, ὡς μέν Ἰουδαῖος καί ποιμήν, τήν δι᾿ ἐξομολογήσεως πρακτικήν φιλοσοφίαν εἰκονίζεται, ὡς δέ βασιλεύς Ἰσραήλ, τήν θεωρητικήν εἰσηγεῖται μυσταγωγίαν. Γένος οὖν τοῦ μέν ἁγίου Ἰωάννου τό ἔθνος καί ἡ φυλή ἐξ ὧν ὑπῆρχε, ἀξία δέ τό κήρυγμα καί ἱερωσύνη, καί τόπος ἡ ἔρημος ἐν ᾗ διῆγε· τοῦ δέ ἁγίου ∆αβίδ ὡσαύτως, τό μέν γένος τό ἔθνος ἐστί καί ἡ φυλή, τό δέ ἐπιτήδευμα, ἤγουν ἡ ἀξία, ἡ ποιμαντική καί ἡ βασιλεία. Αἷς ἑκάτερος, (14∆_414> ἀναλόγως ἑαυτῷ κατά τόν πρέποντα λόγον τῶν ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ λεγομένων τρόπων θεωρούμενος, τό δι᾿ αὐτοῦ δηλούμενον "ἀπταίστως" μυστήριον δείκνυσιν.

Ρ (100). ..».ΑΝ ΕΙΣ ΑΙΓΥΠΤΟΝ ΦΕΥΓΗ, ΠΡΟΘΥΜΩΣ ΣΥΜΦΥΓΑ∆ΕΥΘΗΤΙ..».

Ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ λόγου, εἰς τό· «Ἄν εἰς Αἴγυπτον φεύγῃ, προθύμως συμφυγαδεύθητι· καλόν τῷ Χριστῷ συμφεύγειν διωκομένῳ. Ἄν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ βραδύνῃ, κάλεσον αὐτόν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου, καλῶς ἐκεῖ προσκυνούμενον».

∆εῖ καθάπερ οἶμαι, πρός τῷ γινώσκειν εἰς Αἴγυπτον φυγόντα τόν Κύριον καί

ὑπό τίνος διωκόμενον κατά τό ἀκόλουθον εἰδέναι. Φεύγει τοίνυν ὁ Κύριος οὐ μόνον ἁπλῶς εἰς Αἴγυπτον, ἀλλά καί ὑπό Ἡρώδου διωκόμενος, τοῦ τηνικαῦτα τῆς Ἰουδαίας γῆς βασιλεύοντος. Ἑρμηνεύεται δέ ὁ Ἡρώδης, ὥς φασι, πάθος, καί δερμάτινος, καί φύσις, ἡ δέ Αἴγυπτος καί αὐτή πολλαχῶς λαμβάνεται, κατά τάς ἐπ᾿ αὐτῆ τῶν θεωρητικῶν τρόπων ἐπινοίας, ποτέ μέν εἰς τόν ἐνεστῶτα κόσμον, ποτέ δέ εἰς τήν σάρκα, ποτέ δέ εἰς τήν ἁμαρτίαν, ποτέ δέ εἰς τήν ἄγνοιαν, ποτέ δέ εἰς τήν κάκωσιν, καθ᾿ ἥν μάλιστα νῦν ἐπιβολήν πρέπον ἐστίν ἐκδέξασθαι τήν εἰς Αἴγυπτον τοῦ Κυρίου φυγήν. Καλόν οὖν ἐστι συμφεύγειν εἰς Αἴγυπτον τῷ Χριστῷ, τουτέστι τῷ ἐν ἡμῖν διαγνωστικῷ θείῳ Λόγῳ, διά νηπιότητα τέως διωκομένῳ, δι᾿ ἡμᾶς τούς κατ᾿ αὐτόν νηπιάζοντας, ὑπό τοῦ κρατοῦντος ἡμῶν ἔτι καί βασιλεύοντος διά τῶν ἐμπαθῶν τῆς σαρκός κινημάτων χοϊκοῦ φρονήματος, 1300 εἰς τήν διά τῆς πρακτικῆς κάκωσιν, ἕως οὖ θάνατος ἡμῖν μηνυθῇ διά τῆς ἀπαθείας τῶν ζητούντων τήν ψυχήν τοῦ ἐν ἡμῖν νηπιάζοντος θειοτάτου Λόγου, τουτέστι τῶν τήν ἡμῶν κατά τόν λόγον θεοτελῆ ζωήν νεκρῶσαι θελόντων, καί τήν χριστοειδῆ κατάστασιν, ἤγουν ἕξιν, ἀφανίσαι μαινομένων, τοῦ διά τῆς ἡμῶν ἀδιστάκτου κατά προαίρεσιν προθύμως ὥσπερ διά νεφέλης (14∆_416> κούφης ἐπιβαίνοντος ἡμῶν τῇ Αἰγύπτῳ, λέγω δέ τῇ σαρκί, καί τά ταύτης κινήματά τε καί παθήματα ὥσπερ τινά χειροποίητα εἴδωλα κατασείοντος καί τῆς ἕδρας μετακινοῦντός τε καί παντελῶς τῆς ψυχῆς ἀπωθουμένου, καί εἰς ἑαυτόν μετά τήν εἰκόνων ἀποβολήν δεόντως μετάγοντος τήν προσκύνησιν. Οὕτω μέν οὖν συμφεύγομεν καλῶς τῷ Χριστῷ διωκομένῳ, τῆς σύν αὐτῷ φυγῆς διά τῆς ἑκουσίου κακώσεως καλόν λαμβάνοντες μισθόν τήν ἀπάθειαν.

Καλοῦμεν δέ πάλιν τόν Χριστόν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου μή ἐῶντες τόν ἐν ἡμῖν θεῖον τῆς διαγνώσεως λόγον μετά τήν τῶν παθῶν ὑποχώρησιν καί τελείαν νέκρωσιν ταῖς κατά τῶν μή ὄντων μηχαναῖς ἀνοήτως προσανέχειν, μηδέ σάρκα Λόγον ἐν ἑαυτοῖς μόνον ἤ ἐν ἑτέροις ἡμῖν προσομιλοῦσιν αὐτόν συγχωροῦντες γινώσκεσθαι. Ἀλλά