125

Therefore, concerning this it will be clear as the discourse proceeds. And here it is quite clear that not only is the essence of God which transcends all other things and the essence-creating procession uncreated, but also this transcended procession of God, being essence-creating, is uncreated. For how could that which is creative and demiurgic, and these things simply of all beings, be something created and made and one of the things that so exist?

And after a little, the same one says again, "the discourse does not profess to express the self-transcendent goodness and essence and life and wisdom of the self-transcendent divinity, which is established beyond all goodness and divinity and essence and wisdom and life in secret places, as the oracles say, but the manifested goodness-creating providence"; and to this providence he here also dedicates most god-befitting hymns. And in the eleventh chapter he also calls this divinity, writing: "we call divinity, in a principial and divine and causal sense, the one super-principial and super-essential principle and cause of all things; but in a participated sense, the providential power given forth from the unparticipated God, the self-deification, by which the participants are and are called 'en-Godded'." (p. 604) Is then the inexpressible and super-principial essence of God, which in its ineffable and unparticipated and unmanifested and uncaused aspect transcends this providence, alone uncreated? Or is also the providence transcended by that essence as cause, this also being called divinity as not being outside the pleroma of the one divinity, uncreated? It is most manifest that this also is uncreated; for it makes 'en-Godded' those receptive of deification, as this is not outside the one God, and by their participation in it they are perfected as 'en-Godded', since it has the power of perfecting divinely by participation, for it is also self-deification.

But also in the twelfth chapter, having said "divinity is the providence that beholds all things" and having divinely praised this here as well, he then says "that from the transcendent and super-eminent and most simple holiness and lordship and kingship and divinity is every good providence, beholding and sustaining those under its providence, imparting itself in a manner befitting its goodness for the deification of those who have turned to it." Therefore, the providence from the super-eminent and transcendent and most simple holiness and lordship and kingship and divinity (that is, of the essence of God; for that is most simple, as being entirely indivisible, and because in itself it is super-nominal and anonymous, it is called transcendently by all its proper energies), the good providence, I say, from that, also called divinity as overseer of all and beholder of all, what else is it but an energy of God, and not essence, since being from that essence it differs from that essence and is transcended by it as being its cause and super-nominal? How then is this providence from that not uncreated, being a beholder and sustainer of those under its providence, and these things imparting itself in a manner befitting its goodness for the deification of those who have turned to it?

But having shown this to be participated—which is to say, a participation, as he himself in many places of his writings calls it (for he says "imparting itself in a manner befitting its goodness")—he immediately added in sequence: "since the cause of all is super-full, according to a single excess transcending all things, he is hymned as holy of holies, according to an overflowing cause and an exceptional transcendence, as one might say, inasmuch as holy or lordly or divine or kingly beings transcend non-beings, and these self-participations transcend the participants, by so much is the unparticipated cause established beyond all things, both the participants and the participations," that is, according to essence. Are then the

125

Περί ταύτης τοίνυν δῆλον ἔσται προϊόντος τοῦ λόγου. Ἐνταῦθα δέ κατάδηλον ὡς οὐ μόνον ἡ μετά τῶν ἄλλων πάντων καί τῆς οὐσιοποιοῦ προόδου ὑπερέχουσα οὐσία τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλά καί ἡ ὑπερεχομένη πρόοδος αὕτη τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὐσιοποιός οὖσα, ἄκτιστός ἐστι˙ τό γάρ ποιητικόν τε καί δημιουργικόν καί ταῦτα πάντων ἁπαξαπλῶς τῶν ὄντων, πῶς ἄν εἴη δεδημιουργημένον καί πεποιημένον καί τῶν οὕτως ὄντων ἕν;

Μετ᾿ ὀλίγα δέ πάλιν ὁ αὐτός φησιν, «οὐκ ἐκφράσαι τήν αὐτοϋπερούσιον ἀγαθότητα καί οὐσίαν καί ζωήν καί σοφίαν τῆς αὐτοϋπερουσίου θεότητος ὁ λόγος ἐπαγγέλλεται, τήν ὑπέρ πᾶσαν ἀγαθότητα καί θεότητα καί οὐσίαν καί σοφίαν καί ζωήν ἐν ἀποκρύφοις, ὡς τά λόγιά φησιν, ὑπεριδρυμένην, ἀλλά τήν ἐκπεφασμένην ἀγαθοποιόν πρόνοιαν»˙ εἰς ταύτην δέ τήν πρόνοιαν κἀνταῦθα θεοπρεπεστάτους ὕμνους ἀνατίθησιν. Ἐν δέ τῷ ἑνδεκάτῳ κεφαλαίῳ καί θεότητα ταύτην ὀνομάζει γράφων˙ «θεότητά φαμεν ἀρχικῶς μέν καί θεϊκῶς καί αἰτιατῶς τήν μίαν πάντων ὑπεράρχιον καί ὑπερούσιον ἀρχήν καί αἰτίαν˙ μεθεκτῶς δέ τήν ἐκδιδομένην ἐκ Θεοῦ τοῦ ἀμεθέκτου προνοητικήν δύναμιν, τήν αὐτοθέωσιν, ἧς τά μετέχοντα ἔνθεά ἐστί τε καί λέγεται». (σελ. 604) Ἆρ᾿ οὖν ἡ ἀνέκφραστος καί ὑπεράρχιος οὐσία τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἡ κατά τό ἄφραστον καί ἀμέθεκτον καί ἀνέκφαντον καί ἀναίτιον ὑπερέχουσα ταύτης τῆς προνοίας, μόνη ἄκτιστός ἐστιν; Ἤ καί ἡ ὑπερεχομένη παρά τῆς οὐσίας ἐκείνης ὡς αἰτίας πρόνοια, θεότης καί αὗτη ὀνομαζομένη ὡς οὐκ ἐκτός οὖσα τοῦ πληρώματος τῆς μιᾶς θεότητος, ἄκτιστός ἐστιν; Τῶν ἀριδηλοτάτων ὅτι καί αὕτη ἄκτιστός ἐστιν˙ ἔνθεα γάρ ποιεῖ τά δεκτικά θεώσεως, ὡς αὕτη μή ἐκτός οὖσα τοῦ ἑνός Θεοῦ, καί τῷ μετέχειν αὐτά ταύτης ἔνθεα τελεῖται, ὡς μή μετοχῇ ταύτης ἐχούσης τό τελεῖν θείας, ἐπεί καί αὐτοθέωσίς ἐστιν.

Ἀλλά καί ἐν τῷ δωδεκάτῳ κεφαλαίῳ, «θεότης ἐστίν» εἰπών «ἡ πάντα θεωμένη πρόνοια» καί ταύτην κἀνταῦθα θείως ἐξυμνήσας, εἶτά φησιν «ἐκ τῆς ὑπερεχούσης καί ὑπερκειμένης καί ἁπλουστάτης ἁγιότητος καί κυριότητος καί βασιλείας καί θεότητος εἶναι πᾶσαν ἀγαθήν πρόνοιαν, θεωρόν καί συνοχικήν τῶν προνοουμένων, ἑαυτήν ἀγαθοπρεπῶς ἐπιδιδοῦσαν πρός ἐκθέωσιν τῶν ἐπεστραμμένων». Ἡ τοίνυν ἐκ τῆς ὑπερκειμένης καί ὑπερεχούσης καί ἁπλουστάτης ἁγιότητος καί κυριότητος καί βασιλείας καί θεότητος (δηλαδή τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ Θεοῦ˙ ἐκείνη γάρ ἁπλουστάτη τέ ἐστιν, ὡς παντάπασιν ἀμέριστος, καί διά τό καθ᾿ ἑαυτήν ὑπερώνυμος εἶναι καί ἀνώνυμος μεθ᾿ ὑπεροχῆς ἐκ πασῶν καλεῖται τῶν οἰκείων ἐνεργειῶν), ἡ γοῦν ἐξ ἐκείνης ἀγαθή πρόνοια καί θεότης ὀνομαζομένη ὡς πάντων ἔφορος καί πάντων θεωρός, τί ἄλλο ἤ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐνέργειά ἐστιν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ οὐσία, τῷ ἐξ ἐκείνης εἶναι τῆς οὐσίας ἐκείνης διαφέρουσα καί ὑπερεχομένη παρ᾿ ἐκείνης ὡς αἰτίας οὔσης καί ὑπερωνύμου; Πῶς οὖν οὐκ ἄκτιστος ἡ ἐξ ἐκείνης αὕτη πρόνοια, θεωρός οὖσα καί συνοχική τῶν προνοουμένων, καί ταῦτα ἑαυτήν ἀγαθοπρεπῶς ἐπιδιδοῦσα πρός ἐκθέωσιν τῶν ἐπεστραμμένων;

Ἀλλά γάρ δείξας καί μεθεκτήν τἀυτό δ᾿ εἰπεῖν μετοχήν, οὖσαν ταύτην, ὡς καί αὐτός πολλαχοῦ τῶν λόγων ὀνομάζει ταύτην ( «ἑαυτήν» γάρ φησιν «ἀγαθοπρεπῶς ἐπιδιδοῦσαν»), ἐφεξῆς εὐθύς ἐπήγαγεν˙ ἐπεί δέ ὑπερπλήρης ἐστίν ὁ πάντων αἴτιος, κατά μίαν τῶν πάντων ὑπερέχουσαν ὑπερβολήν ἅγιος ἁγίων «ὑμνεῖται, κατά ὑπερβλύζουσαν αἰτίαν καί ἐξῃρημένην ὑπεροχήν, ὡς ἄν τις φαίη, καθ᾿ ὅσον ὑπερέχουσι τῶν οὐκ ὄντων τά ὄντα ἅγια ἤ κύρια ἤ θεῖα ἤ βασιλικά, καί αὗ τῶν μετεχόντων αἱ αὐτομετοχαί, κατά τοσοῦτον ὑπερίδρυται πάντων καί τῶν μετεχόντων καί τῶν μετοχῶν ὁ ἀμέθεκτος αἴτιος», κατ᾿ οὐσίαν δηλονότι. Ἆρ᾿ οὖν αἱ