116

and by the vision formed by the angel he was initiated and was led up to the intelligible knowledge of things that are or are seen, and from this he concludes that "knowledge is better than contemplation, because from this the prophet was led up to knowledge, he says, but not led down." Therefore, one might say, do all those who interpret for us in detail the meaning of the scriptures lead us up from worse things to what is better, and did the Lord, by giving the gospel, a shortened word, upon the earth, 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 such an evil thought! But they do not remove us from the scriptures, but from them, as being the causes of knowledge and a fount of everlasting light, the teachers of knowledge themselves also having received it, lead us up from the ignorance that is in us to the better thing, knowledge. For in such cases these prepositions are indicative sometimes of motion, and sometimes of cause. Therefore, when Scripture says that from contemplation the prophet was initiated or an angel led him up from contemplation to initiation, it does not say this, as if it moved him away from contemplation, but that from it as a cause and supplier of knowledge the prophet was taught the things he did not know before, and the angel, understanding the things of contemplation more purely as (p. 534) an angel, explained them to the prophet and led him up from ignorance to understanding. Therefore, the ignorance from which he was moved away is worse than the knowledge to which he was led up, but the vision which gives the knowledge, and which has it folded up within itself in a godlike manner, how is it not better than the knowledge supplied by it? But it was necessary, however, for the one who went against the fathers to not leave the prophets unmolested either. For they are the first fathers and the fathers of the fathers in the Spirit; it was necessary, therefore, for them to share also in the abuse.

But having now had his fill of the struggle against the fathers and prophets, he who found a pretext in those who embrace stillness in order to attack, as he said, all divine things, then sets himself up as an interpreter of the most mystical sayings of the gospel and deigns to teach, how those who are pure in heart see God and how the Son comes with the Father and makes a dwelling with them. "Therefore," he says, "the pure in heart see God in no other way than either by analogy or by causality or by negation; but he is more capable of seeing God who knows more of the parts of the world or the better ones, 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 known both the manifest parts of the world and the unseen powers, the sympathies toward the earth and the other elements and the antipathies of all these things toward one another, the differences, the properties, the commonalities, the energies, the affinities, the applications, the harmonies and simply the unspoken and the spoken principles of this whole universe; for to whomever," he says, "it has been granted to contemplate all these things well, that man is also able to know God as the cause of all these things and from all these things knows God as cause and, placing him above all these things through negation, again knows him to be above all. "For since," he says, "God is known only from existing things, one will know God not from those things (p. 536) which one does not know, but only from those things which one does know. So that the more things someone knows and the more venerable and the more accurately, so much more does he differ from others with respect to knowing God; and the very way of the knowledge of God by negation, which seems especially to dishonor the knowledge of existing things for the sake of the knowledge of God, is not by nature able to come about without the knowledge of all existing things; for of those things whose existences we know, of these alone is it possible to know also their negations."

Oh, what words he has uttered against himself, yet in no way discordant with his other opinions; for elsewhere this man defines the perfect and wise man as the one who all things

116

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 οὐ πέφυκεν˙ὧν γάρ τάς ὑπάρξεις γινώσκομεν, τούτων μόνων χωρεῖ καί τάς ἀναιρέσεις γινώσκειν».

Ὤ οἵας ἀφῆκε καθ᾿ ἑαυτοῦ τάς φωνάς, οὐδέν δ᾿ ὅμως ἀπᾳδούσας ταῖς ἄλλοθι γνώμαις αὐτοῦ˙ τέλειον γάρ οὗτος ἄνθρωπον ἀλλαχοῦ καί σοφόν ὁρίζεται τόν πάντα