111

spending the night under the darkness in that formless life, did he not see divine patterns? For, it says, "You shall make" all things "according to the pattern shown to you on the mountain." What then? did he too, having been in the divine darkness, go out of his mind for the worse and see phantoms, since it is written that he saw a pattern?

But the philosopher, knowing no difference between sensible, imaginary, intelligible, and divine patterns, hearing that the theologian learned such and such things by what was seen, and by the vision formed by the angel was initiated and was led up to the intelligible knowledge of beings or of things seen, from this deduces that "knowledge is better than vision, because," he says, "from the latter the prophet was led up to knowledge, not led down." Therefore, one might say, do all who expound for us in detail the meaning of the oracles lead us from worse things to what is better, and did the Lord, in giving the Gospel on earth as a concise word, give us the worse thing, while those who clarify it remove us from the Gospel and lead us up to their own thought as to something better? Away with this evil thought; but they do not lead us away from the oracles, but from them, as being causes of knowledge and a fount of eternal light, the teachers of knowledge themselves, having received it, lead us up from our own ignorance to the better, to knowledge. For in such cases these prepositions are indicative sometimes of motion, sometimes of cause. Therefore, when Scripture says that from vision the prophet was initiated, or an angel led him from vision to initiation, it does not say this, that it moved him away from vision, but that from it as a cause and provider of knowledge the prophet was taught things not known before, and the angel, understanding more clearly the things of the vision since (p. 534) he was an angel, explained to the prophet and led him up from ignorance to understanding. The ignorance, therefore, from which he was moved away, is worse than the knowledge to which he was led up, but the vision that gives the knowledge, and that in a God-imitating manner holds it compacted within itself, how is it not better than the knowledge supplied by it? Yet it was necessary that the one who proceeded against the fathers should not leave the prophets unmolested either. For they are the first fathers and fathers of the fathers in the Spirit; it was necessary, therefore, for them to share also in the abuse.

Then, having had his fill of striving against the fathers and prophets, he who found as a pretext those who embrace stillness in order to attack, as he said, all divine things, sets himself up as an exegete of the most mystical sayings of the Gospel and deigns to teach how the pure in heart see God and how the Son comes with the Father and makes his abode with them. "The pure in heart, therefore," he says, "see God in no other way than by analogy or by causality or by negation; and he is more capable of seeing God who knows more of the parts of the world or the better parts, and even more so he who has more knowledge of what he knows, but most capable of all of seeing God is he who has come to know both the manifest parts of the world and the unseen powers, the sympathies with the earth and the other elements and all the antipathies of these with each other, the differences, the properties, the commonalities, the energies, the connections, the applications, the harmonies, and simply the unspoken and spoken principles of this whole universe; for to whomever," he says, "it has been given to contemplate all these things well, that man is able both to know God as the cause of all these things, and from all these things he knows God as cause, and by setting him above all these things through negation he again knows him to be above all. "For since," he says, "God is known from beings alone, not from what (p. 536) one does not know, of course, but from those things alone which he knows will he know God. So that the more one knows, and the more majestic things, and more accurately, so much the more does he differ from others with respect to knowing God; and the very way of knowing God by negation, which seems especially to disregard created beings for the knowledge of God, to come about without the knowledge of all beings

111

διανυκτερεύων ὑπό τόν γνόφον ἐν τῇ ἀνειδέῳ ἐκείνῃ ζωῇ, οὐ θείους τύπους εἶδε; «Ποιήσεις» γάρ, φησί, πάντα «κατά τόν τύπον τόν δειχθέντα σοι ἐν τῷ ὄρει». Τί οὖν; κἀκεῖνος ἐν τῷ θείῳ γνόφῳ γεγονώς ἐπί τό χεῖρον ἐξέστη καί φανταστικῶς ἑώρα, ἐπειδή τύπον ἀναγέγραπται ἰδών;

Ἀλλ᾿ ὁ μηδεμίαν διαφοράν αἰσθητῶν καί φανταστῶν καί νοητῶν καί θείων τύπων ἐπιστάμενος φιλόσοφος, ἀκούων ὅτι ἐμάνθανε τοῖς ὁρωμένις ὁ θεολόγος τά καί τά καί ὑπό τῆς διαπλασθείσης ὑπό τοῦ ἀγγέλου ὁράσεως ἐμυεῖτο καί πρός τήν νοητήν γνῶσιν ἀνήγετο τῶν ὄντων ἤ ὁρωμένων, κἀντεῦθεν συνάγει ὅτι «κρεῖττον γνῶσις θεωρίας, ἐπειδή ἀπό ταύτης ὁ προφήτης ἐπί τήν γνῶσιν ἀνήγετο, φησίν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐ κατήγετο». Οὐκοῦν, εἴποι τις ἄν, καί πάντες οἱ διεξοδικῶς ἡμῶν τόν τῶν λογίων ἑρμηνεύοντες νοῦν ὡς ἀπό χειρόνων ἐπί τό βέλτιον ἡμᾶς ἀνάγουσι, καί ὁ μέν Κύριος λόγον συντετμημένον τό εὐαγγέλιον δούς ἐπί τῆς γῆς, τό χεῖρον δέδωκεν ἡμῖν, οἱ δέ διευκρινοῦντες ἐξιστᾶσι τοῦ εὐαγγελίου καί ὡς ἐπί τι κρεῖττον τήν ἐκείνων ἡμᾶς ἀνάγουσι διάνοιαν; Ἄπαγε τῆς κακονοίας˙ ἀλλά τῶν μέν λογίων οὐκ ἀφιστᾶσιν, ἐξ ἐκείνων δέ, ὡς αἰτίων γνώσεως ὄντων καί πηγῆς φωτός ἀενάου λαβόντες καί αὐτοί οἱ διδάσκοντες τήν γνῶσιν, ἐκ τῆς προσούσης ἡμῖν ἀμαθίας ἐπί τό κρεῖττον τήν γνῶσιν ἀνάγουσιν. Ἐπί γάρ τῶν τοιούτων αἱ προθέσεις αὗται, ποῦ μέν κινήσεώς εἰσι δηλωτικαί, ποῦ δέ αἰτίας. Ὅταν οὖν λέγῃ ἡ Γραφή, ὡς ἐκ τῆς θεωρίας ὁ προφήτης ἐμυεῖτο ἤ ἄγγελος αὐτόν ἀνῆγεν ἐκ τῆς θεωρίας εἰς τήν μύησιν, οὐ τοῦτό φησιν, ὡς ἀπεκίνει αὐτόν τῆς θεωρίας, ἀλλ᾿ ὡς ἐξ αἰτίας ἐκείνης καί χορηγοῦ τῆς γνώσεως τά πρίν μή γινωσκόμενα ὁ προφήτης ἐδιδάσκετο, καί ὁ ἄγγελος, καθαρώτερον συνιεῖς τά τῆς θεωρίας ὅτε (σελ. 534) ἄγγελος, ἐξηγεῖτο τῷ προφήτῃ καί ἀνῆγεν αὐτόν ἀπό τῆς ἀμαθίας ἐπί τήν σύνεσιν. Ἡ μέν οὖν ἀμαθία, ἐξ ἧς ἀπεκινεῖτο, χεῖρον τῆς γνώσεως εἰς ἥν ἀνήγετο, ἡ δέ διδοῦσα τήν γνῶσιν ὅρασις, καί ἡ θεομιμήτως συνεπτυγμένην ἔχουσα αὐτήν ἐν ἑαυτῇ, πῶς οὐ κρεῖττον τῆς παρ᾿ αὐτῆς χορηγουμένης γνώσεως; Ἔδει δ᾿ ὅμως τόν κατά τῶν πατέρων χωρήσαντα μηδέ τούς προφήτας ἀνεπηρεάστους καταλεῖψαι. Πρῶτοι γάρ εἰσιν ἐκεῖνοι πατέρες καί τῶν πατέρων πατέρες ἐν Πνεύματι˙ ἔδει τοίνυν κοινωνῆσαι καί τῆς ἐπηρείας.

Κόρον δ᾿ ἤδη λαβών τῆς πρός τούς πατέρας τε καί προφήτας ἀγωνίας ὁ πρόφασιν τούς ἡσυχίαν ἀσπαζομένους εὑρόμενος εἰς τό πᾶσιν, ὡς εἶπεν, ἐπιθέσθαι τοῖς θείοις, τῶν μυστικωτάτων ἔπειτα τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ρημάτων ἐξηγητήν ἑαυτόν προκαθίζει καί διδάσκειν ἀξιοῖ, πῶς οἱ κεκαθαρμένοι τήν καρδίαν ὁρῶσι τόν Θεόν καί πῶς σύν τῷ Πατρί ὁ Υἰός ἔρχεται καί μονήν ποιεῖται παρ᾿ αὐτοῖς. «Ὁρῶσι τοίνυν», φησίν, «οἱ κεκαθαρμένοι τήν καρδίαν τόν Θεόν οὐκ ἄλλως, ἀλλ᾿ ἤ κατά ἀναλογίαν ἤ κατ᾿ αἰτίαν ἤ κατά ἀπόφασιν˙ θεοπτικώτερος δ᾿ ἐκεῖνος, ὅς πλείω οἶδε τῶν τοῦ κόσμου μερῶν ἤ τά κρείττω, καί ἔτι μᾶλλον ὁ μᾶλλον οὗ γινώσκει τήν γνῶσιν ἔχων, θεοπτικώτατος δ᾿ ἁπάντων ὅς τάς τε ἐμφανεῖς ἔγνω τοῦ κόσμου μερίδας καί τάς ἀφανεῖς δυνάμεις, τάς πρός γῆν καί τἄλλα τῶν στοιχείων συμπαθείας καί τάς πρός ἄλληλα ταῦθ᾿ ἅπαντα ἐναντιοπαθείας, τάς διαφοράς, τάς ἰδιότητας, τάς κοινωνίας, τάς ἐνεργείας, τάς συναφείας, τάς ἐφαρμογάς, τάς ἁρμονίας καί ἁπλῶς τ᾿ ἄρρητα καί τά ρητά τοῦ ὅλου τοῦδε συνθήματα˙ ᾧ γάρ ἄν», φησί, «καλῶς ὑπῆρξε ταῦτα πάντα θεωρεῖν, ἐκεῖνος καί ὡς τούτων πάντων αἴτιον τόν Θεόν γινώσκειν δύναται καί ἐκ τούτων πάντων αἴτιον τόν Θεόν γινώσκει καί τούτων πάντων ὑπερτιθείς δι᾿ ἀποφάσεως αὖθις ὑπέρ πάντ᾿ ἐπίσταται αὐτόν. «Ἐπεί γάρ», φησίν, «ἐκ τῶν ὄντων μόνων ὁ Θεός γινώσκεται, οὐκ ἐξ ὧν δήπου (σελ. 536) ἀγνοεῖ τις, ἀλλ᾿ ἐξ ὧν μόνων γινώσκει γνώσεται Θεόν. Ὥστε ὅσῳ πλείω τις γινώσκει καί σεμνότερα καί ἀκριβέστερον, τοσούτῳ διαφέρει τῶν ἄλλων πρός τό γινώσκειν τόν Θεόν˙ καί αὐτός δέ ὁ κατά ἀπόφασιν τῆς θεογνωσίας τρόπος, ὅς δοκεῖ μάλιστα τήν τῶν ὄντων ἀτιμάζειν ἐπί Θεοῦ γνῶσιν, τῆς τῶν ὄντων ἁπάντων γνώσεως χωρίς παραγενέσθαι