113

them under the divine darkness? For Moses was no longer seen then, having entered it alone, according to what is written; but what is even greater, is that having caused himself to ascend above himself and having ineffably released himself from himself and placed himself beyond all sensory and intellectual activity, he made himself, O the wonder, hidden to himself, as also divine Paul, so that seeing, they did not know themselves but were at a loss as to what it was that was seeing. And what again exceeds all paradoxical excess by pre-eminence, is that even in that ineffable and supernatural manifestation, He remains hidden even to those who have been released and hidden, not only from all others, but also from themselves. A proof of this supremely unknowable hiddenness is Moses' desire and request and ascent to the clearer vision, but also the perpetual progress of the angels and the saints in the infinite age toward the more manifest of the visions, so that even seeing, by that very sight they know that light to be beyond sight, how much more the God who is revealed through it. For our eye also, having gazed at the disc of the sun, seeing it, knows it to be beyond sight.

And let no one again take issue with the example for not being entirely suitable; but let him understand this only, that to those who behold the divine light in revelation, the exceeding hiddenness of the divine is known no less, if not even more, and (p. 522) and pre-eminently more, than to us, who through symbols or the concepts derived from them or through negation attempt to perceive the incomprehensibility of the divine nature, that it is incomprehensible. For even the blind man knows, having heard and believed, that the brightness of the sun exceeds the measure of the physical eyes, but not as one who sees. And when the sun is under the earth, we can see it intellectually, not only those who have experienced healthy sight, but also anyone who is blind but persuaded by those who see. And not only this, but even one whose eyes have been put out would know that the disc of the sun has a brightness beyond sight; but to partake of and enjoy this light is impossible for him. Thus, therefore, to see God intellectually and to know Him as beyond the mind through negation might be possible both for those who have briefly experienced that vision and for those who have not yet raised that eye of union which is beyond the mind toward Him, but who are nonetheless persuaded by those who have raised it, but this sight is not union. And he who does not believe those who see through the union that is beyond the mind would himself also glorify the divine as beyond the mind, but only as beyond his own intellectual powers. But he who has removed every downward disposition from his own soul and has been freed from all things through the observance of the commandments and the dispassion resulting from this, and has transcended all cognitive activity through intense and sincere and immaterial prayer, and there, through an unknowable union, has been pre-eminently illumined by the unapproachable radiance, this man alone, having become light and beholding through the light and seeing light in the vision and enjoyment of that light, truly knows the super-luminous and inconceivable nature of God, glorifying God not only as beyond the intellectual power of the mind, this human one—for many created things are also beyond it—but also as beyond that most supernatural union, (p. 524) through which alone the mind is united to the things beyond the intelligible "in a more divine imitation of the super-celestial minds."

But enough of these things. But returning to that point, we say that if someone wishes to call this vision that is beyond vision an intellection beyond all intellectual activity, he does not differ from us at all. This philosopher, however, thinking that we call this thing only "vision" in a restricted sense, and not also "inconceivable intellection," raged against the very name of "vision," and having gone mad with a by no means praiseworthy madness, being abandoned in these arguments, he sinned against the prophetic grace as

113

αὐτούς ὑπό τόν θεῖον γνόφον; Οὐ γάρ ἔτι Μωσῆς ἑωρᾶτο τότε μόνος ἐν αὐτῷ γενόμενος, κατά τό γεγραμένον˙ τό δ᾿ ἔτι μεῖζον, ὅτι καί αὐτόν ἑαυτοῦ ὑπεραναβιβάσας καί ἀπολύσας ἀπορρήτως ἑαυτοῦ καί ὑπέρ πᾶσαν θείς αἰσθητικήν καί νοεράν ἐνέργειαν, κρύφιον αὑτόν ἑαυτῷ, ὤ τοῦ θαύματος, ἐποίησεν, ὡς καί τόν θεῖον Παῦλον, ὥσθ᾿ ὁρῶντας, αὑτούς μή εἰδέναι ἀλλά διαπορεῖν, τί ἦν ἐκεῖνο τό ὁρῶν˙ τό δ᾿ αὖθις ἔτι πᾶσαν παράδοξον ὑπερβολήν ὑπερβολήν καθ᾿ ὑπεροχήν ἐκβαῖνον, ὅτι καί ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἀπορρήτῳ καί ὑπερφυεῖ ἐκφάνσει κρύφιος ἐκεῖνος μένει καί αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἀπολυθεῖσι καί κρυβεῖσιν, οὐ τούς ἄλλους πάντας μόνον, ἀλλά καί ἑαυτούς. Τεκμήριον δέ τῆς ὑπεραγνώστου ταύτης κρυφιότητος, ἡ τοῦ Μωσέως ἐπί τήν τρανοτέραν θέαν ἔφεσίς τε καί αἴτησις καί ἀνάβασις, ἀλλά καί ἡ τῶν ἀγγέλων καί τῶν ἁγίων ἐν ἀπείρῳ αἰῶνι διηνεκής ἐπί τά φανότερα τῶν θεαμάτων προκοπή, ὥστε καί ὁρῶντες αὐτῇ τῇ ὁράσει ὑπέρ ὅρασιν γινώσκουσι τό φῶς ἐκεῖνο, πόσῳ μᾶλλον τόν δι᾿ αὐτοῦ ἐπιφαινόμενον Θεόν. Καί ὁ ὀφθαλμός γάρ ὁ ἡμέτερος, τῷ ἡλιακῷ ἐνατενίσας δίσκῳ, ὁρπων αὐτόν, ὑπέρ ὅρασιν γινώσκει.

Καί μηδείς πάλιν τῷ μή πάντῃ καταλλήλῳ τοῦ παραδείγματος ἐπιφυέσθω˙ τοῦτο δ᾿ ἐνοείτω μόνον, ὅτι τοῖς ἐν ἀποκαλύψει τό θεῖον θεωμένοις φῶς τό ὑπερβάλλον τῆς κρυφιότητος τῆς θείας μηδέν ἦττον ὅτι μή καί μᾶλλον καί (σελ. 522) καί διαφερόντως μᾶλλον ἤ ἡμῖν ἐπιγινώσκεται, τοῖς διά συμβόλων ἤ τῶν ἀπό τούτων νοημάτων ἤ δι᾿ ἀποφάσεως ἐπιχειροῦσι τό ἀκατάληπτον συνορᾶν τῆς θείας φύσεως, ὅτι ἀκατάληπτον. Οἶδε γάρ καί ὁ τυφλός, ἀκούσας καί πιστεύσας, ὅτι ἡ φαιδρότης τοῦ ἡλίου τήν συμμετρίαν ὑπερβαίνει τῶν αἰσθητῶν ὀμμάτων, ἀλλ᾿ οὐχ ὡς ὁ ὁρῶν˙ καί τοῦ ἡλίου δ᾿ ὄντος ὑπό γῆν, νοητῶς ἔχομεν ὁρᾶν αὐτόν, οὐ μόνον οἱ δ᾿ ὑγιοῦς ὄψεως πεπειραμένοι, ἀλλά καί ὅστις τῶν πεπηρωμένων μέν, τοῖς δ᾿ ὁρῶσι πειθομένων. Καί οὐ μόνον, ἀλλ᾿ ὅτι καί ὑπέρ τήν ὄψιν ἔχει τήν λαμπρότητα ὁ τοῦ ἡλίου δίσκος εἰδείη ἄν καί ὁ τούς ὀφθαλμούς ἐκκεκομμένος˙ μετέχειν δέ καί ἀπολαύειν τοῦτον τοῦ φωτός ἀμήχανον. Οὕτω τοίνυν καί τόν Θεόν νοητῶς ὁρᾶν καί ὑπέρ νοῦν αὐτόν δι᾿ ἀποφάσεως γινώσκειν γένοιτ᾿ ἄν καί τοῖς πρός βραχύ πεπειραμένοις τῆς ἐκείνου θέας καί τοῖς μήπω διάρασι τό ὑπέρ νοῦν ἐκεῖνο τῆς ἑνώσεως ὄμμα πρός αὐτόν, πειθομένοις δ᾿ ὅμως τοῖς διάροσιν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐχ ἕνωσίς ἐστιν αὕτη ἡ ὄρασις˙ καί ὁ μή πιστεύων δέ τοῖς διά τῆς ὑπέρ νοῦν ἑνώσεως ὁρῶσιν ὑπέρ νοῦν καί αὐτός τό θεῖον δοξάσειεν ἄν, ἀλλ᾿ ὑπέρ τάς νοητικάς αὐτοῦ δυνάμεις μόνας. Ὁ δέ πᾶσαν τήν πρός τά κάτω σχέσιν τῆς οἰκείας ἀφελών ψυχῆς καί ἐκ πάντων ἀπολυθείς δά τῆς τῶν ἐντολῶν τηρήσεως καί τῆς ἐκ ταύτης ἀπαθείας, καί ὑπερβάς πᾶσαν γνωστικήν ἐνέργειαν δι᾿ ἐκτενοῦς καί εἰλικρινοῦ καί ἀΰλου προσευχῆς, κἀκεῖ δι᾿ ἑνώσεως ἀγνώστου καθ᾿ ὑπεροχήν περιλαμφθείς τῷ ἀπροσίτῳ φέγγει, μόνος οὗτος, φῶς γεγονώς καί διά τοῦ φωτός θεώμενος καί φῶς ὁρῶν ἐν τῇ τοῦ φωτός ἐκείνου θέᾳ τε καί ἀπολαύσει, καί τό ὑπερφαές καί ἀπερινόητον ὄντως γινώσκει τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὐχ ὑπέρ τήν νοητικήν μόνην δύναμιν τοῦ νοῦ, τήν ἀνθρωπίνην ταύτην, δοξάζων τόν Θεόν - πολλά γάρ καί τῶν κτιστῶν ὑπέρ αὐτήν εἰσιν -, ἀλλά καί ὑπέρ τήν ὑπερφυεστάτην ἕνωσιν ἐκείνην, (σελ. 524) δι᾿ ἧς μόνης τοῖς τῶν νοητῶν ἐπέκεινα ὁ νοῦς ἑνοῦται «ἐν θειοτέρᾳ μιμήσει τῶν ὑπερουρανίων νόων».

Ἀλλά τούτων μέν ἅλις. Ἐκεῖνο δ᾿ ἐπαναλαβόντες λέγομεν, ὡς τήν ὑπέρ θέαν ὅρασιν ταύτην, εἴ τις νόησιν ὑπέρ πᾶσαν νοεράν ἐνέργειαν ἐθέλει καλεῖν, διαφέρεται πρός ἡμᾶς οὐδέν. Ὁ μέντοι φιλόσοφος οὗτος, νομίσας ὅρασιν ἡμᾶς τουτί μόνον ἀφωρισμένως, ἀλλ᾿ οὐχί καί νόησιν ἀπερινόητον καλεῖν, κατ᾿ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ὀνόματος τῆς ὁράσεως, ἐμάνη, καί μανείς οὐμενοῦν ἐπαινετήν μανίαν, ἐγκαταλειφθείς περί τούς λόγους τούτους, κατά τῆς προφητικῆς χάριτος ἥμαρτεν ὡς