144

in him, a worthiness of a prophet, an apostle, an angel, of God, though he was formerly "earth and ashes". And the intellects that are blessed with such a power are themselves said to see; in this way that light is according to the intellect and beyond the intellect; but they are also said to see themselves, for that light is self-seeing, since it is incomprehensible by a created gnostic power, but visible to the worthy.

For this reason, the great Dionysius said that "the intellects move in a circle, being united to the unoriginate and unending illuminations." But it is also necessary to note this, that this one who was more precise in all things than all others did not simply say that the intellects move in a circle, being united to the unoriginate illuminations, but that they are "said" to move, indicating, as I think, that such a union is not natural to them, even if they happen to be allotted the grace from the beginning because they never had experience of pollution. And that such a light and the power that sees it are not naturally present in the supercosmic angels, there is for this a more trustworthy testimony again from the most hostile one, which they say can be compared: for their fall and the demonic race is deprived of the light and of the power that sees it, but of none of the natural things; therefore, neither the light nor that vision is natural. And yet the demonic race is not deprived of intellection; for they are intellects and have not cast off their being and, "I know who you are," they say, (p. 676) "the Holy One of God," who "did not allow the demons to speak, because they knew he was the Christ." Therefore also the Theologian said: "Do you disbelieve in the divinity? Not even the demons do this." But if they know the divinity, it is necessary for them to know this too, that it is none of the created things.

Therefore that light is not knowledge, neither that which comes through affirmations nor that through negations. And indeed each of the evil angels is an intellect, but an "Assyrian," to speak prophetically, who uses knowledge badly; but it is not possible for anyone to use that light badly; for when one has inclined towards worse things, it immediately flies away, leaving destitute of God the one who used consent for evil. Therefore that light and the illumination is not intellection, unless it be said homonymously, especially on account of the blessed intellect, just as also divinity on account of the one who energizes the ineffable grace; for it is a deifying energy, in no way separated from the energizing Spirit, the one who is illuminated through purity being acted upon even in the very fact of being illuminated, for which reason this is also called purity by the fathers, the light and the illumination being unoriginate. And this is shown more in the case of men, that is, of those who have attained deification by being illumined in an angelic manner, who, according to Maximus, great in divine things, "beholding the light of the invisible and super-ineffable glory, they themselves also become receptive of the blessed purity with the powers above."

But if we also examine the cause for which this innovator constructed that the deifying gift of the Spirit, or rather all the powers of God, are created, besides that evil source of heresies, which we refuted above, we will find no other than that the great Dionysius said that God caused these to subsist, and this denotes only existence, but not also the mode of existence; therefore it could be said of those that exist createdly and of those that exist uncreatedly (p. 678) from God. For the great Basil used this word both for the Son, saying, "for did not he who brought forth clods of dew cause to subsist both the clods and the Son in the same way?", and for the Holy Spirit, "Spirit," he says, "of the mouth of God, that you may not judge it as something from without and of the creatures, but may glorify it as having its hypostasis from God"; and again, "this it has as a sign of its property according to hypostasis, to be known through the Son and to subsist from the Father." And in many places Gregory the Theologian also calls the pre-eternal generation of the Son hypostasis. You then might soon prove to us through such terms that the Son or also the Holy Spirit is a creature, you who for no other reason the divine powers to be created

144

ἐν αὐτῷ, ἀξίαν προφήτου, ἀποστόλου, ἀγγέλου, Θεοῦ, ὤν πρότερον "γῆ καί σποδός". Τοιαύτης δέ δυνάμεως οἱ νόες εὐμοιροῦντες, αὐτοί λέγονται ὁρᾶν, οὕτω κατά νοῦν καί ὑπέρ νοῦν ἐστι τό φῶς ἐκεῖνο˙ ἀλλά καί ἑαυτούς λέγονται ὁρᾶν, αὐτοπτικόν γάρ ἐκεῖνό ἐστι τό φῶς, ἐπεί γνωστικῇ κτιστῇ δυνάμει ἄληπτον, ὁρατόν δέ τοῖς ἀξίοις.

∆ιά τοῦτο ὁ μέγας ∆ιονύσιος «κυκλικῶς εἶπε κινεῖσθαι τούς νόας, ἑνουμένους ταῖς ἀνάρχοις καί ἀτελευτήτοις ἐλλάμψεσιν. Ἐπιστῆσαι δέ καί τοῦτο χρή, ὡς οὐχ ἁπλῶς ὁ πάνθ᾿ ὑπέρ ἅπαντας ἠκριβωμένος οὗτος κυκλικῶς τούς νόας εἴρηκε κινεῖσθαι ταῖς ἀνάρχοις ἑνουμένους ἐλλάμψεσιν, ἀλλά "λέγεσθαι" κινεῖσθαι, ὑποσημαίνων, ὡς ἐγᾦμαι, τό μή φυσικήν αὐτοῖς εἶναι τήν τοιαύτην ἕνωσιν, εἰ καί διά τό μολυσμοῦ πεῖραν οὐδέποτε λαβεῖν συγκεκληρωμένοι τυγχάνουσιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς τῇ χάριτι. Ὅτι δέ τό τοιοῦτο φῶς καί ἡ ὁρῶσα τοῦτο δύναμις οὐ φυσικῶς τοῖς ὑπερκοσμίοις ἔννεστιν ἀγγέλοις καί παρά τοῦ ἐχθίστου τούτοις ἔνι μαρτυρίαν αὖθις ἀξιοπιστοτέραν, ὅ φασι παρίσασθαι˙ τό γάρ ἔκπτωσιν ἐκείνων καί δαιμόνιον φῦλον τοῦ μέν φωτός καί τῆς ὁρώσης τοῦτο δυνάμεως ἐστέρηται, οὐδενός δέ τῶν φυσικῶν οὐκ ἄρα φυσικόν οὔτε τό φῶς οὔτε ἡ ὅρασις ἐκείνη. Καί μήν οὐδέ νοήσεως ἐστέρηται τό δαιμόνιον φῦλον˙ νόες γάρ εἰσι καί τό εἶναι οὐκ ἀποβεβλήκασι καί, «οἶδά σε τίς εἶ», φασίν, (σελ. 676) «ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ Θεοῦ», ὅς «καί οὐκ ἠφίει τά δαιμόνια λαλεῖν, ὅτι ἤδεισαν τόν Χριστόν αὐτόν εἶναι». ∆ιό καί ὁ θεολόγος εἶπεν˙ «ἀπιστεῖς τῇ θεότητι; τοῦτο οὐδέ οἱ δαίμονες». Εἰ δέ θεότητα ἴσασι, καί τοῦτ᾿ εἰδέναι αὐτούς ἀνάγκη, ὅτι τῶν κτιστῶν οὐδέν ἐστιν ἐκείνη.

Οὐκ ἄρα γνῶσίς ἐστι τό φῶς ἐκεῖνο, οὔτε ἡ διά καταφάσεων οὔτε ἡ δι᾿ ἀποφάσεως προσγενομένη. Καί μέν δή νοῦς μέν ἐστι τῶν πονηρῶν ἕκαστος ἀγγέλων, ἀλλ᾿ "ἀσσύριος", προφητικῶς εἰπεῖν, κακῶς χρώμενος τῇ γνώσει˙ τῷ δέ φωτί ἐκείνῳ χρῆσθαί τιναν κακῶς οὐκ ἔνι˙ πρός γάρ τά χείρω νεύσαντος εὐθύς ἀφίπταται, καταλιπών ἔρημον Θεοῦ τόν πονηρᾷ χρησάμενον συγκαταθέσει. Τοιγαροῦν τό φῶς ἐκεῖνο καί ἡ ἔλλαμψις νόησις οὐκ ἔστιν, εἰ μή ὁμωνύμως λέγοιτο, μάλιστα διά τόν εὐμοιροῦντα νοῦν, ὥσπερ καί θεότης διά τόν ἐνεργοῦντα τήν ἀπόρρητον χάριν˙ θεοποιός γάρ ἐστιν ἐνέργεια, τοῦ ἐνεργοῦντος Πνεύματος ἥκιστα χωριζομένη, ἠργμένου μέν τοῦ διά καθαρότητα πεφωτισμένου καί κατ᾿ αὐτό τό πεφωτίσθαι, διό καί καθαρότης τοῦτο παρά τῶν πατέρων ὀνομάζεται, τοῦ δέ φωτός καί τῆς ἐλλάμψεως ἀνάρχου οὔσης. Καί τοῦτο δείκνυται μᾶλλον ἐπί τῶν ἀνθρώπων, δηλαδή τῶν ἀγγελικῶς πεφωτισμένων ἐπιτυχόντων τῆς θεώσεως, οἵ κατά τόν πολύν τά θεῖα Μάξιμον «τῆς ἀφανοῦς καί ὑπεραρρήτου δόξης τό φῶς ἐποπτεύοντες, τῆς μακαρίας μετά τῶν ἄνω δυνάμεων καί αὐτοί δεκτικοί γίνονται καθαρότητος».

Εἰ δέ καί τήν αἰτίαν, ἐξετάσομεν, δι᾿ ἥν ὁ καινοφανής οὗτος τήν θεοποιόν δωρεάν τοῦ Πνεύματος, μᾶλλον δέ πάσας τάς δυνάμεις τοῦ Θεοῦ, κτιστάς εἶναι κατεσκεύασε, μετά τήν πονηράν ἐκείνην τῶν αἱρέσεων πηγήν, ἥν ἀνωτέρω ἀπηλέγξαμεν, οὐδεμίαν εὑρήσομεν ἑτέραν ἤ ὅτι τόν Θεόν ὑποστῆσαι ταύτας ὁ μέγας ἔφη ∆ιονύσιος, τοῦτο δέ ὕπαρξιν δηλοῖ μόνον, ἀλλ᾿ οὐχί καί τόν τρόπον τῆς ὑπάρξεως˙ τοιγαροῦν καί ἐπί τῶν κτιστῶς ὄντων καί ἐπί τῶν ἀκτίστως ὄντων (σελ. 678) ἐκ Θεοῦ ρηθείη ἄν. Ὁ γάρ μέγας Βασίλειος ἐπί τε τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐχρήσατο τῇ λέξει ταύτῃ εἰπών, «ὁ γάρ τετοκώς βώλους δρόσου οὐχ ὁμοίως τάς τε βώλους καί τόν Υἱόν ὑπεστήσατο;», κἀπί τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος, «Πνεῦμα» γάρ, φησί, «στόματος Θεοῦ, ἵνα μή τῶν ἔξωθέν τι καί τῶν κτισμάτων αὐτό κρίνῃς, ἀλλ᾿ ὡς ἐκ Θεοῦ τήν ὑπόστασιν ἔχον δοξάζῃς»˙ καί πάλιν, «τοῦτο τῆς κατά τήν ὑπόστασιν ἰδιότητος σημεῖον ἔχει, τό διά τοῦ Υἱοῦ γνωρίζεσθαι καί ἐκ τοῦ Πατρός ὑφεστάναι». Πολλαχοῦ δέ καί Γρηγόριος ὁ θεολόγος ὑπόστασιν ὀνομάζει τήν τοῦ Υἱοῦ προαιώνιον γέννησιν. Σύ τοίνυν τάχ᾿ ἄν ἡμῖν διά τά τοιαῦτα προσρήματα καί τόν Υἱόν ἤ καί τό Πνεῦμα τό ἅγιον ἀποδείξῃς κτίσμα, ὁ δι᾿ οὐδέν ἕτερον τάς θείας δυνάμεις κτιστάς εἶναι