153

“But God,” he says, “will be no different from visible things, if He is seen from the things around Him; for each of these things is seen not from what it is in itself, but from the things around it (p. 714); for sight does not perceive the substance of the sun, but the things around it.” First, then, from the example you proposed, you willingly reveal yourself a slanderer of God and His saints; for there is the sun and the ray and that from which the ray is called, and there are not two suns because of this; therefore, there is one God, even if the deifying grace from God is spoken of as divine; and the light is one of the things around the sun, not, therefore, the substance of the sun. How then is the light from God that shines upon the saints the substance of God? And what of the sun's light? Does it become visible or did it exist even before being seen? How much more, surely, the light that deifies those who behold it. Then, if because of this God differs in no way from any of the visible things, how then is He not seen by you and those like you, and indeed by men much better than you? Let your eyes, therefore, being blind to the light beheld by the saints, also shut your mouth, which blasphemes that divine light in such ways, having taught that it is not natural, nor visible through the air. Asserting this, you yourself have not left even the age to come unscathed; for while the God-inspired writers say clearly that we will not then need air and the light that comes through it, you declare this light, which is not apprehensible by the power of the senses, the beauty of the future and abiding age, to be perceptible by the senses and to be visible then through the air.

“But even if I am clothed with weakness with respect to such a light,” he says, “still, having my ears open, I hear him who says ‘that from the things around Him, God is sketched out by the mind alone, illumining our governing faculty, and that of those who have been purified, only as much as the sight of a lightning flash's speed that does not stand still.’” Truly you are like a blind man being taught about light by one who sees, who, before he has heard the teacher through, out of overwhelming folly, as if he himself knew better and would teach, (p. 716) rises up against his teacher. For what does this theologian say as he proceeds? “For this reason God illumines very dimly the mind alone at the beginning, so that by what is comprehensible He might draw one to Himself, but by what is incomprehensible He might be marveled at, and being marveled at He might be desired the more, and being desired He might purify.” What does He purify when desired? The mind alone? No; for this, according to the fathers, does not need much effort to be purified, and is naturally prone to fall away from purity, for which reason it might be purified even without divine desire as this theologian has shown, and such a purification is suitable for beginners. But the divine desire, purifying every state and power of both soul and body and working a more permanent purification in the mind, makes man receptive of the deifying grace. For this reason the divine, “being experienced, purifies, and purifying, it makes men godlike; and to those who have become such, He already converses as with His own—the word dares a youthful flight—God being united with and known by gods; and perhaps just as much as He already knows those who are known.” Where here is the dimness of the illumination? “For inasmuch as,” he says, “God knows them, by so much perhaps do they also,” he says, “know God.” How? Not by dim applications of the intellect, as he said at the beginning of his discourse, but by knowing God in God and through union with Him having already become godlike and by a godlike power attaining to the most divine graces of the Spirit, which it is impossible for those who are not godlike and who seek the things of God by the mind alone to gaze upon. “

But that he who has this experience knows God by the grace which makes man godlike, has already become clear. But from where shall we know that this is also light? From the same one again, or from some other of those who teach through experience. Let another, therefore, come forward, so that there may be more who bear witness together. For the divine Maximus, having spoken (p. 718) of the union of the saints in the age to come with the divine

153

«Ἀλλ᾿ οὐδενός», φησίν, «ἔσται διαφέρων ὁ Θεός τῶν ὁρωμένων, εἰ ἐκ τῶν περί αὐτόν ὁρᾶται˙ καί γάρ ἕκαστον τούτων οὐκ ἐκ τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτό, ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ τῶν περί αὐτό ἐστιν (σελ. 714) ὁρώμενον˙ ἡλίου γάρ οὐ τῆς οὐσίας ἀντιλαμβάνεται ἡ ὄψις, ἀλά τῶν περί αὐτήν». Πρῶτον έν οὖν ἀπό τοῦ σοί προτεθέντος παραδείγματος συκοφάντης ἑκών ἀναφαίνῃ τοῦ Θεοῦ καί τῶν ἁγίων αὐτοῦ˙ ἥλιος γάρ καί ἡ ἀκτίς καί ὅθεν ἡ ἀκτίς καλεῖται, καί οὐ δύο παρά τοῦτο ἥλιοι˙ τοιγαροῦν εἷς Θεός, εἰ καί ἡ ἐκ Θεοῦ θεοποιός θεολογεῖται χάρις, καί τῶν περί τόν ἥλιόν ἐστι τό φῶς, οὔκουν οὐσία τοῦ ἡλίου. Πῶς οὖν οὐσία Θεοῦ τό ἐκ Θεοῦ τούς ἁγίους ἐπιλάμπον φῶς; Τί δέ τό τοῦ ἡλίου φῶς; Ὁρώμενον γίνεται ἤ καί πρό τοῦ ὁρᾶσθαι ἦν; Πολλῷ μᾶλλον δήπουθεν τό θεουργοῦν τούς θεωμένους φῶς. Ἔπειτα, εἰ μηδέν παρά τοῦτο μηδενός τῶν ὁρωμένων διαφέρει ὁ Θεός, πῶς ἆραί σοί τε καί τοῖς κατά σέ, μᾶλλον δέ καί τοῖς πολλῷ σου κρείττοσιν ἀνθρώποις, οὐχ ὁρᾶται; Οἱ σοί τοίνυν ὀφθαλμοί, τυφλοί ὄντες πρός τό τοῖς ἁγίοις φῶς ἐποπτευόμενον, καί τό σόν στόμα ἐμφραξάτωσαν, τοιαῦτα εἰς τό θεῖον φῶς ἐκεῖνο βλασφημοῦν, διδάξαντες ὡς οὐ φυσικόν, οὐδέ δι᾿ ἀέρος ἐκεῖνο ὁρατόν. Ὅ διαβεβαιούμενος αὐτός, οὐδέ τόν μέλλοντα αἰῶνα ἀνεπηρέαστον ἀφῆκας˙ τῶν θεηγόρων γάρ σαφῶς λεγόντων ὡς οὐκ ἀέρος καί τοῦ δι᾿ αὐτοῦ φωτός τότε δεησόμεθα, σύ τό μή ληπτόν αἰσθητικῇ δυνάμει τοῦτο φῶς, τήν καλλονήν τοῦ μέλλοντος καί μένοντος αἰῶνος, αἰσθητόν ἀποφαίνῃ καί δι᾿ ἀέρος καί τότ᾿ εἶναι ὁρατόν.

«Ἀλλ᾿ εἰ καί πρός τό τοιοῦτο φῶς ἀκρασίαν περίκειμαι», φησίν, «ἀλλ᾿ ἀνεῳγμένα ὦτα ἔχων, τοῦ λέγοντος ἀκούω "ὡς ἐκ τῶν περί αὐτόν νῷ μόνῳ σκιαγραφεῖται ὁ Θεός, τοσαῦτα περιλάμπων ἡμῶν τό ἡγεμονικόν, καί ταῦτα κεκαθαρμένων, ὅσα καί ὄψιν ἀστραπῆς τάχος οὐχ ἱσταμένης"῾ Ὄντως ἔοικας τυφλῷ παρά του τῶν ὁρώντων περί φωτός διδασκομένῳ, ὅς, πρίν διακοῦσαι τοῦ διδάσκοντος, ὑπό τῆς ὑπερβεβαλούσης ἀπονοίας, ὡς αὐτός κρεῖττον εἰδώς τε καί διδάξων, (σελ. 716) ἐπανίσταται τῷ διδασκάλῳ. Τί γάρ προϊών φησιν ὁ θεολόγος οὗτος; «∆ιά τοῦτο περιλάμπει λίαν ἀμυδρῶς τῷ νῷ μόνῳ τήν ἀρχήν ὁ Θεός, ἵνα τῷ ληπτῷ μέν ἕλκῃ πρός ἑαυτόν, τῷ δέ ἀλήπτῳ θαυμάζηται, θαυμαζόμενον δέ ποθῆται πλέον, ποθούμενον δέ καθαίρῃ». Τί καθαίρει ποθούμενον; Τόν νοῦν ἆρα μόνον; Οὔ˙ καί γάρ οὗτος κατά τούς πατέρας οὐ πολλῆς σπουδῆς εἰς τό καθήρασθαι δεῖται, ρᾷδτά τε τῆς καθαρότητος πέφυκεν ἐκπίπτειν, διό καί χωρίς τοῦ θείου πόθου καθαρθείη ἄν ὡς ὁ θεολόγος οὗτος ἔδειξε, καί τοῖς εἰσαγομένοις ἡ τοιαύτη κάθαρσίς ἐστι κατάλληλος. Ὁ δέ θεῖος πόθος, πᾶσαν ἕξιν τε καί δύναμιν ψυχῆς τε καί σώματος καθαίρων καί τῷ νῷ μονιμωτέραν ἀπεργασάμενος τήν κάθαρσιν, δεκτικόν τῆς θεοποιοῦ χάριτος τόν ἄνθρωπον ποιεῖται. ∆ιά τοῦτο τό θεῖον «παθούμενον καθαίρει, καθαῖρον δέ θεοειδεῖς ἀπεργάζεται˙ τοιούτοις δέ γενομένοις, ὡς οἰκείους ἤδη προσομιλεῖ - τολμᾷ τι νεανικόν ὁ λόγος - ὁ Θεός θεοῖς ἑνούμενός τε καί γνωριζόμενος˙ καί τοσοῦτον ἴσως, ὅσον ἤδη γινώσκει τούς γινωσκομένους». Ποῦ τό ἀμυδρόν ἐνταῦθα τῆς ἐλλάμψεως; «καθ᾿ ὅσον γάρ», φησί, γινώσκει ὁ Θεός αὐτούς, κατά τοσοῦτον ἴσως καί αὐτοί», φησί, «γινώσκουσι Θεόν». Πῶς; Οὐ διανοίας ἀμυδραῖς ἐπιβολαῖς, καθάπερ ἀρχόμενος τοῦ λόγου εἴρηκεν, ἐλλ᾿ ἐν Θεῷ Θεόν εἰδότες καί διά τῆς πρός αὐτόν ἑνώσεως θεοειδεῖς ἤδη γεγονότες καί θεοειδεῖ δυνάμει ταῖς θειοτάταις ἐπιβάλλοντες χάρισι τοῦ Πνεύματος, αἷς ἐνατενίζειν τούς μή θεοειδεῖς καί νῷ μόνῳ ζητοῦντας τά περί Θεόν ἀμήχανον. «

Ἀλλ᾿ ὡς μέν τῇ θεοειδῆ τόν ἄνθρωπον ποιούσῃ χάριτι τόν Θεόν γινώσκει ὁ παθών, ἤδη γέγονε σαφές. Πόθεν δ᾿ ὅτι καί φῶς αὕτη ἐστίν εἰσόμεθα; Παρά τοῦ αὐτοῦ πάλιν ἤ καί ἄλλου του τῶν διά πείρας διδασκόντων. Παρίτω τοίνυν ἕτερος, ὡς πλείους εἶναι τούς συμμαρτυροῦντας. Εἰπών γάρ (σελ.718) ὁ θεῖος Μάξιμος τήν γενησομένην ἐπί τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος τῶν ἁγίων ἕνωσιν πρός τό τῆς θείας