102

being added beyond knowledge has made it so that, being one, it is foolishly compared to itself. Furthermore, if because of homonymy the knowledge that is beyond knowledge is a species of knowledge in general, those who speak of ten genera of beings are deceived. For there is one genus of all things, being, and the One who is above all is under it, and being is better than this one, and the other things joined to this one, being something else, make it better than the one. Furthermore, since there is also touch beyond touch and sight beyond sight and simply sensation beyond sensation - for intellection is also called these things homonymously - if that which is beyond sensation is a species of sensation, sensation will be better than that which is beyond sensation, and likewise for each of the others.

But let us return. What then is that union which is none of the things that exist, by way of transcendence? Is it theology by way of negation? And yet that is a union, not a negation. Furthermore, we do not need ecstasy in it, but for that (p. 476) union, even the angels do. And in addition to this, he who does not theologize by negation is not even pious, but of that union, among the pious only the godlike attain it. Furthermore, theology by negation is conceived by us and is spoken, but the great Dionysius said that that one is ineffable and inconceivable even to those who see. Furthermore, the light according to that theology is a certain knowledge and discourse, but the light according to this contemplation is beheld hypostatically, acting noetically and speaking spiritually and ineffably to the one being deified. And indeed, the mind, theologizing by negation, thinks of things dissimilar to God. It therefore acts discursively. But that is a union. Moreover, along with the others, it also removes itself from there; but that is the union of the mind with God, and this is what the fathers said, "the end of prayer, a rapture to the Lord." Therefore, the great Dionysius also says that through it we are united to God. For in prayer, the mind, gradually laying aside its relations to beings, first, those to shameful and evil things and all tribes simply, then those to intermediate things which are adapted for worse or for better according to the intention of those using them, among which is indeed all learning and the knowledge through it, for which reason it is a patristic command not to accept knowledge at the time of prayer, when it is offered up by the enemy, so that we may not be robbed of what is better. Therefore, gradually laying aside these relations and those to things better than them, the mind in pure prayer completely departs from all beings. And this ecstasy is exceptionally higher than theology by negation; for it belongs only to those who have attained dispassion. But it is not yet union, unless the Paraclete, shining from above upon the one praying who is seated in the upper room of the natural heights and expecting the promise of the Father, should through revelation seize him for the (p. 478) contemplation of the light. And of this contemplation there is a beginning and the things after the beginning, differing from one another as fainter and more brilliant, but no end whatsoever, for its progress is infinite, and likewise that of the rapture in revelation. For an illumination is one thing, and a lasting vision of light is another, and another is the vision of the things in the light, in which even distant things come under one's eyes and future things are shown as present.

But to speak and clarify these things is beyond me; and if also the things before them, yet those things belong to the subject at hand; I shall return, therefore. The contemplation of this light, at least, is a union, even if not lasting for the imperfect. But what else is the union of the light, if not a vision? And since it is accomplished even after the cessation of the noetic energies, how could it be accomplished, if not through the Spirit? For in the light the light is seen, and in the like light also the one seeing, if it should be active in no other way, having departed from all other things, it too becomes wholly light and is made like to that which is seen, or rather even

102

ὑπέρ γνῶσιν προστεθέν ἐποίησεν, ὥστε αὐτό πρός ἑαυτό ἕν ὄν ἀφρόνως παραβάλλεται. Ἔτι, εἰ διά τήν ὁμωνυμίαν ἡ ὑπέρ γνῶσιν γνῶσις τῆς καθόλου γνώσεως εἶδος, οἱ δέκα γένη τῶν ὄντων λέγοντες ἠπάτηνται˙ καί γάρ ἕν ἁπάντων γένος, τό ὄν, καί ὁ ὑπέρ πάντα ὤν εἷς ὑπ᾿ αὐτό, καί τό ὄν τοῦ ἑνός τούτου κρεῖττον, καί συνημένα τούτῳ τῷ ἑνί τά ἄλλα ὄν ἕτερον ποιοῦσι κρεῖττον τοῦ ἑνός. Ἔτι, ἐπεί καί ἁφή ἐστιν ὑπέρ ἁφήν καί ὅρασις ὑπέρ ὅρασιν καί ἁπλῶς αἴσθησις ὑπέρ αἴσθησιν - λέγεται γάρ καί ταῦτα ὁμωνύμως ἡ νόησις - εἰ τό ὑπέρ αἴσθησιν αἰσθήσεως εἶδος, κρεῖττον ἔσται ἡ αἴσθησις τοῦ ὑπέρ αἴσθησιν καί ἐφ᾿ ἑκάστου τῶν λοιπῶν ὡσαύτως.

Ἀλλ᾿ ἐπανίωμεν˙ τί οὖν ἡ μηδέν τῶν ὄντων καθ᾿ ὑπεροχήν ἕνωσις ἐκείνη; Ἆρ᾿ ἡ κατά ἀπόφασίν ἐστι θεολογία; Καί μήν ἕνωσις ἐκείνη ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἀφαίρεσίς ἐστιν. Ἔτι οὐδ᾿ ἐκστάσεως κατ᾿ αὐτήν οὐδ᾿ ἡμεῖς δεόμεθα, ἐπί δέ τῆς (σελ. 476) ἑνώσεως ἐκείνης καί οἱ ἄγγελοι˙ καί πρός τούτοις, ὁ μέν μή κατά ἀφαίρεσιν θεολογῶν οὐδ᾿ εὐσεβής, τῆς δ᾿ ἑνώσεως ἐκείνης τῶν εὐσεβῶν μόνοι οἱ θεοειδεῖς τυγχάνουσιν. Ἔτι ἡ κατά ἀπόφασιν θεολογία νοεῖται παρ᾿ ἡμῶν καί λέγεται, ἐκείνην δ᾿ ἄρρητον καί ἀπερινόητον καί αὐτοῖς τοῖς ὁρῶσιν ὁ μέγας εἶπε ∆ιονύσιος. Ἔτι τό μέν κατ᾿ ἐκείνην τήν θεολογίαν φῶς γνῶσίς τίς ἐστι καί λόγος, τό δέ κατά τήν θεωρίαν ταύτην φῶς ἐνυποστάτως θεωρεῖται, νοερῶς τε ἐνεργοῦν καί πνευματικῶς ἀπορρήτως τῷ θεουμένῳ ὁμιλοῦν. Καί μέν δή τά ἀπεμφαίνοντα τῷ Θεῷ διανοεῖται ὁ νοῦς κατά ἀφαίρεσιν θεολογῶν˙ διεξοδικῶς ἄρα ἐνεργεῖ˙ ἐκείνη δ᾿ ἕνωσίς ἐστι˙ πρός δέ μετά τῶν ἄλλων καί ἑαυτόν ἐκεῖθεν ἀφαιρεῖ, ἐκείνη δέ τοῦ νοῦ πρός Θεόν ἕνωσίς ἐστι, καί τοῦτό ἐστιν, ὅπερ οἱ πατέρες εἶπον «τέλος προσευχῆς, ἁρπαγή πρός Κύριον». ∆ιό καί ὁ μέγας ∆ιονύσιος δι᾿ αὐτῆς ἡμᾶς ἑνοῦσθαι τῷ Θεῷ φησιν. Ἐν γάρ τῇ προσευχῇ τάς πρός τά ὄντα σχέσεις κατά μικρόν ἀποτιθέμενος ὁ νοῦς, πρῶτον μέν τάς πρός τά αἰσχρά καί πονηρά καί τά φῦλα πάνθ᾿ ἁπλῶς, εἶτα τάς πρός τά μέσως ἔχοντα καί μεθαρμοζόμενα πρός τό χεῖρον ἤ τό βέλτιον τῇ προθέσει τῶν χρωμένων καταλλήλως, ὧν δήπου καί πᾶσα μάθησίς ἐστι καί ἡ διά ταύτης γνῶσις, διό καί πατερικόν ἐστι παράγγελμα μή καταδέχεσθαι τήν γνῶσιν ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς προσευχῆς, ἀναδιδομένην ὑπό τοῦ ἐχθροῦ, ἵνα μή τό κρεῖττον συληθῶμεν˙ ταύτας τοίνυν καί τάς πρός τά κρείττω τούτων σχέσεις κατά μικρόν ἀποτιθέμενος ὁ νοῦς ὁλοσχερῶς κατά τήν εἰλικρινῆ προσευχήν ἐξίσταται τῶν ὄντων πάντων. Αὕτη δέ ἡ ἔκστασις τῆς μέν κατά ἀφαίρεσιν θεολογίας διαφερόντως ὑψηλότερόν ἐστι˙ μόνων γάρ ἐστιν τῶν ἀπαθείας ἐπειλημμένων˙ οὔπω δέ ἕνωσίς ἐστιν, ἐάν ή ὁ παράκλητος ἐν ὑπερῴῳ τῶν φυσικῶν ἀκροτήτων καθημένῳ τῷ προσευχομένῳ καί προσδοκῶντι τήν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ Πατρός ἐπιλάμψῃ ἄνωθεν καί διά τῆς ἀποκαλύψεως πρός τήν (σελ. 478) τοῦ φωτός ἁρπάσῃ θεωρίαν. Τῆς δέ θεωρίας ταύτης ἐστί καί ἀρχή καί τά μετά τήν ἀρχήν, κατά τε τό ἀμυδρότερον καί τηλαυγέστερον διαφέροντα πρός ἄλληλα, τέλος δ᾿ οὐμενοῦν ἐπ᾿ ἄπειρον γάρ ἡ πρόοδος αὐτῆς, ὡσδαύτως καί τῆς ἐν ἀποκαλύψει ἁρπαγῆς˙ ἄλλο γάρ ἔλλαμψις καί ἄλλο διαρκής φωτός θέα, καί ἄλλο τῶν ἐν τῷ φωτί πραγμάτων, ἐν ᾧ καί τά μακράν γίνεται ὑπ᾿ ὀφθαλμούς καί τά μέλλοντα ὡς ὄντα δείκνυται.

Ἀλλά ταῦτα μέν ὑπέρ ἐμέ λέγειν καί διατρανοῦν˙ εἰ δέ καί τά πρό αὐτῶν, ἀλλ᾿ ἐκεῖνα τῆς προκειμένης ὑποθέσεως˙ ἐπάνειμι τοίνυν. Ἡ γοῦν τοῦ φωτός τούτου θεωρία ἕνωσίς ἐστιν, εἰ καί μή διαρκής τοῖς ἀτελέσιν˙ ἡ δέ τοῦ φωτός ἕνωσις τί γε ἄλλο ἤ ὅρασίς ἐστιν; Ἐπεί δέ καί μετά τήν τῶν νοερῶν ἐνεργειῶν ἀπόπαυσιν τελεῖται, πῶς ἄν τελεσθείη, εἰ μή διά Πνεύματος; Ἐν γάρ τῷ φωτί τό φῶς ὁρᾶται καί ἐν τῷ ὁμοίῳ φωτί καί τό ὁρῶν, εἰ κατά μηδέν ἄλλο ἐνεργοίη, πάντων τῶν ἄλλων ἐκχωρῆσαν, φῶς ὅλον καί αὐτό γίνεται καί τῷ ὁρωμένῳ ὁμοιοῦται, μᾶλλον δέ καί