128

If, then, it is so in these cases, how could anyone say that the divinity, established supernally in secret places, becomes known, when its natural symbol has been known? For what? If the symbol of daylight at dawn were inaccessible to sight no less than the sun, or rather even more than it, would it have been possible (p. 606) for them to behold that day or at least to behold anything else during it? How then would they have been able to know what sort of light the correspondingly suitable sun of that day is? So and much more are the divine things known only by their participations, but what they are in themselves according to their own establishment and principle, no one knows, not even the highest intelligences among the supermundane beings, at least not as much as we are to know.

Indeed, the Lord's disciples did not see this symbol simply, without first receiving eyes which they did not have before, so as to become seeing from being blind, according to the divine John of Damascus, and to see that uncreated light, so that even if it became perceptible to the eyes, it was to eyes that had become beyond eyes and were perceiving the spiritual light by a spiritual power. Thus, both according to sense and beyond sense was that light, the ineffable, the inaccessible, the immaterial, the uncreated, the deifying, the eternal, the radiance of the divine nature, the glory of the divinity, the beauty of the heavenly kingdom. Does such a thing, then, seem to you to be alien to the divinity, a sensible and created symbol and visible through the air? But that it is not alien, but natural to the divinity, hear again the one wise in divine things, the Damascene, saying, 'He did not have the adornment of the divine glory as something acquired, as Moses did, but from the innate divine glory and radiance'; and again, 'He takes the chief of the apostles as witnesses to His own glory and divinity, and He reveals to them His own divinity,' that which is beyond all things, the one and super-perfect and pre-perfect. And that it is not visible through the air, the great Dionysius shows, and all those with him who call this light the light of the age to come, when we will have (p. 608) no need of air, according to them; and in addition to these, the great Basil also, saying that this is visible to the eyes of the heart. And that it is not sensible, one can perceive both from its not being visible through the air, and because though it shone brighter than the sun on Tabor, it was not seen by those in the vicinity. But you, opposing so many saints who extol such a light to such a degree, are you not clearly blaspheming God willingly?

Will you not cease, therefore, O man, from declaring the light of the divine and essential beauty to be not only sensible and created, but also inferior to our understanding? Inferior to understanding, O earth and heaven, and all you in them who see the light of the divine kingdom, the beauty of the age to come, the glory of the divine nature? A light, which the apostles, in an ecstasy beyond all sensible and intellectual perception, according to the divine Andrew of Crete, saw, 'having received the truly seeing by not seeing at all and by suffering divine things accepting the sensation of things beyond nature'? For what? Is not the ecstasy beyond thought in such matters demonic? A demonic ecstasy, therefore, the initiates of the Lord suffered—O unheard of report!—although we have received the tradition of saying together to Christ that

"the chief of the apostles, having beheld on the mountain the uncontainable effusion of Thy light and the inaccessibility of the divinity,

were changed by a divine ecstasy"?

How could you not be convicted of calling God a creature, you who declare His essential energies to be created?

For no one having understanding would say this, that the essential goodness and life is the superessential essence of God; for the essential is not that which has the essential things; but according to the great Dionysius, 'whenever we name the superessential hiddenness God or life or essence, (p. 610) we understand nothing other than the

128

Εἰ γοῦν ἐπί τούτων οὕτω, πῶς ἄν τις φαίη γνωστήν γίνεσθαι τήν ἐν ἀποκρύφοις ὑπερανιδρυμένην θεότητα, γνωσθέντος τοῦ φυσικοῦ συμβόλου ταύτης; Τί γάρ; εἰ τό κατ᾿ ὄρθρον σύμβολον ἡμερινοῦ φωτός ἀπρόσιτον ὄψεσιν ὑπῆρχεν οὐ ἧττον ἤ ὁ ἥλιος, μᾶλλον δέ κἀκείνου μᾶλλον, ἦν ἄν (σελ. 606) αὐταῖς τήν ἡμέραν ἐκείνην θεάσασθαι ἤ θεᾶσθαι γοῦν ἄλλο τι κατ᾿ αὐτήν; Πῶς οὖν ἄν τόν ἀναλόγως κατάλληλον ἥλιον ἐκείνης τῆς ἡμέρας γνῶναι ἐδυνήθησαν οἷον φῶς ἐστιν; Οὕτω καί πολλῷ μᾶλλον τά θεῖα μόναις ταῖς μετοχαῖς ἐπιγινώσκεται, αὐτά δέ κατά τήν ἑαυτῶν ἵδρυσίν τε καί ἀρχήν οἷά ποτέ ἐστιν οὐδείς οἶδεν, οὐδέ τῶν ἐν τοῖς ὑπερκοσμίοις ἀνωτάτω νόων, οὔκουν ὅσα γε ἡμᾶς εἰδέναι.

Οὐ μήν οὐδέ τό σύμβολον τοῦθ᾿ ἁπλῶς ἑωράκασιν οἱ τοῦ Κυρίου μαθηταί, μή πρότερον ὀφθαλμούς λαβόντες, οὕς οὐ πρότερον εἶχον, ὡς ἐκ τυφλῶν γενέσθαι βλέποντες, κατά τόν ἐκ ∆αμασκοῦ θεῖον Ἰωάννην, καί ἰδεῖν τό ἄκτιστον ἐκεῖνο φῶς, ὥστε εἰ καί ὀφθαλμοῖς ἐγένετο ληπτόν, ἀλλ᾿ ὑπέρ ὀφθαλμούς γεγενημένοις καί πνευματικῇ δυνάμει τοῦ πνευματικοῦ φωτός ἀντιλαμβανομένοις. Οὕτω κατ᾿αἴσθησιν καί ὑπέρ αἴσθησιν τό φῶς ἐκεῖνο τό ἀπόρρητον, τό ἀπρόσιτον, τό ἄϋλον, τό ἄκτιστον, τό θεοποιόν, τό ἀΐδιον, ἡ λαμπρότης τῆς θείας φύσεως, ἡ δόξα τῆς θεότητος, ἡ τῆς οὐρανίου βασιλέιας εὐπρέπεια. Τό τοιοῦτο τοίνυν ἀλλότριόν σοι δοκεῖ θεότητος, αἰσθητόν τε καί κτιστόν σύμβολον καί δι᾿ ἀέρος ὁρατόν; Ἀλλ᾿ ὡς μέν οὐκ ἀλλότριον, ἀλλά φυσικόν θεότητος, αὖθις ἄκουσον τοῦ τά θεῖα σοφοῦ ∆αμασκηνοῦ λέγοντος, «οὐκ ἐπίκτητον, ὡς ὁ Μωϋσῆς, ἔσχε τό τῆς θείας δόξης ὡράϊσμα, ἀλλ᾿ἐκ τῆς ἐμφύτου θείας δόξης τε καί λαμπρότητος»˙ καί πάλιν, «τούς κορυφαίους τῶν ἀποστόλων προσλαμβάνεται μάρτυρας τοῖς οἰκείας δόξης τε καί θεότητος, ἀποκαλύπτει δέ αὐτοῖς τήν οἰκείαν θεότητα», τήν ἁπάντων ἐπέκεινα, τήν μόνην καί ὑπερτελῆ καί προτέλειον. Ὅτι δέ οὐδέ δι᾿ἀέρος ὁρατόν, δείκνυσιν ὁ μέγας ∆ιονύσιος καί ὅσοι μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος φῶς τοῦτο ὀνομάζουσιν, ὅτε οὐκ ἀέρος (σελ. 608) ἡμῖν ἔσται χρεία κατ᾿ αὐτούς, πρός δέ τούτοις καί ὁ μέγας Βασίλειος τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς καρδίας τοῦτο λέγων ὁρατόν. Ὅτι δέ οὐδ᾿ αἰσθητόν, ἔστι συνιδεῖν καί τῷ μή δι᾿ ἀέρος εἶναι ὁρατόν, ἀλλά κἀν τῷ Θαβωρίῳ λάμψαν ὑπέρ ἥλιον οὐδέ τοῖς πλησιοχώροις ὦπται. Σύ δέ τοσούτοις καί ἐπί τοσοῦτον ἐξυμνοῦσι τό τοιοῦτο φῶς ἀντικείμενος ἁγίοις, ἆρ᾿ οὐ δῆλος εἶ βλασφημῶν ἐκών εἰς τόν Θεόν;

Οὐ παύσῃ τοιγαροῦν, ὦ ἄνθρωπε, τό φῶς τῆς θείας καί οὐσιώδους εὐπρεπείας, οὐκ αἰσθητόν μόνον καί κτιστόν, ἀλλά καί χεῖρον τῆς ἡμετέρας νοήσεως ἀποφαινόμενος; Χεῖρον νοήσεως, ὦ γῆ καί οὐρανέ, καί πάντες οἱ ἐν αὐτοῖς τό φῶς ὁρῶντες τῆς θείας βασιλείας, τήν καλλονήν τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, τήν δόξαν τῆς φύσεως τῆς θείας; Φῶς, ὅ κατ᾿ἔκστασιν πάσης αἰσθητῆς καί νεορᾶς ἀντιλήψεως οἱ ἀπόστολοι, κατά τόν Κρήτης θεσπέσιον Ἀνδρέαν, εἶδον, «τῷ μηδόλως ὁρᾶν τό ὄντως ὁρᾶν εἰσδεδεγμένοι καί τῷ πάσχειν τά θεῖα τῶν ὑπέρ φύσιν τήν αἴσθησιν προσιέμενοι»; Τί γάρ; Οὐ δαιμονιώδης ἡ χείρων διανοίας ἐπί τῶν τοιούτων ἔκστασις; ∆αιμονιώδη τοίνυν ἔπαθαν ἔκστασιν, ὤ τῆς ἀνηκούστου ἀκοῆς, οἱ τοῦ Κυρίου μύσται, καίτοι κοινῇ λέγειν παρελάβομεν πρός τόν Χριστόν ὅτι

«τό ἄσχετον τῆς σῆς φωτοχυσίας καί ἀπρόσιτον τῆς θεότητος θεασάμενοι τῶν ἀποστόλων οἱ πρόκριτοι ἐπί τοῦ ὄρους,

τήν θείαν ἠλλοιώθησαν ἔκστασιν»; Πῶς δ᾿ οὐκ ἄν ἁλοίης καί κτίσμα λέγων τόν Θεόν, ὁ τάς οὐσιώδεις ἐνεργείας

αὐτοῦ κτιστάς ἀποφαινόμενος; Οὐ γάρ ἄν τοῦτο φαίη τις νοῦν ἔχων, ὅτι ἡ οὐσιώδης ἀγαθότης καί ζωή ἡ ὑπερούσιος οὐσία τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐστιν˙ οὐ γάρ τό οὐσιώδες ἡ τά οὐσιώδη ἔχουσα˙ κατά δέ τόν μέγαν ∆ιονύσιον, «ὅταν τήν ὑπερούσιον κρυφιότητα Θεόν ἡ ζωήν ἤ οὐσίαν ὀνομάσωμεν, (σελ. 610) οὐδέν ἕτερον νοοῦμεν ἤ τάς