155

AGAINST THE SECONDS, THE THIRD (p. 694)

CATALOGUE OF THE RESULTING ABSURDITIES

FROM THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE PHILOSOPHER BARLAAM

So then, the things that offend against the truth and the God of truth, through what seem to him to be confessed principles and propositions which this man put forward against truth itself, are so many and of such a kind and have come to this point of false doctrine. But the things which he thinks to conclude, though unwillingly, he happens to testify against himself again (for it was against his will that his writings came into our hands and, as it were, proclaimed their author to be a wicked man); what, then, he is again shown to think wrongly, from his writings now in our hands, in no way contradicts those things previously said about him. For, to speak concisely, it has such an excess of malevolence, as to show the prophets to be actuated by demons, the saints who lived according to the gospel of God to be ranked with the heretics, and to declare the virtue of the prophets and apostles and those with them to be vice and not virtue. Has anyone ever been more heterodox, who composes such arguments? Will anyone be able to be indignant with one who speaks against the man who writes such things? Will anyone who loves such writings and accuses those who do not love them have a share with the saints? For what if what he says is not explicitly of these things, but is inferred from what he says? Such are the depths of Satan, the mysteries of the evil one, which he whispers into the ears of those who submit to him, (p. 696) not lowering and slackening the tone of his voice, but concealing the harmfulness of the thought. But we shall show here briefly how he tries to establish each of the things said, and first through what means his argument shows the divinely-inspired prophets, alas, to be possessed by demons.

He argues that their visions are inferior to intellection and declares them to be fantasies, even if sensible, so that he might show that knowledge is superior to them; then, proceeding, he himself says again, “a mind is impassioned or possessed by a demon, whichever would operate according to an activity inferior to intellection.” Since, then, the prophets saw with the mind (“for the vision of the prophets,” says Basil the Great, “is not something sensible, but is comprehended by the mind, God illumining it”; and again, “the prophets foresaw the future, their guiding faculty being formed by the Spirit”), if, at any rate, the prophets saw with the mind in the Spirit, but with an “activity inferior to intellection,” as this man said, and this activity is demonic when it is not active concerning possessions and base pleasures and glories, is not that divine vision, according to the one who says such things, demonic? And what of the divine Spirit and that light which produces this vision? But may such a blasphemy turn back upon the head of him who composes such arguments, or rather, having fallen away even from his own head, may it be as far away as possible, going into non-existence, as he repents and learns the truth anew.

From where, then, did he fall into so great a pit? one might ask. Because with reason and natural philosophy he investigated things beyond reason and nature, disobeying the fathers who say, “it is not possible for the manner of prophetic vision to be interpreted by reason, but only he knows it clearly who has learned by experience; for if often no reason could explain (p. 698) the works and affections of nature, how much more the activity of the Spirit,” which one might also see testified in many places for the saints after Christ.

155

ΚΑΤΑ ΤΩΝ ∆ΕΥΤΕΡΩΝ Ο ΤΡΙΤΟΣ (Σελ. 694)

ΚΑΤΑΛΟΓΟΣ ΤΩΝ ΕΚΒΑΙΝΟΝΤΩΝ ΑΤΟΠΩΝ

ΕΚ ΤΩΝ ΤΟΥ ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΟΥ ΒΑΡΛΑΑΜ ΣΥΜΠΕΡΑΣΜΑΤΩΝ

Ἅ μέν οὖν προσκρούει τῇ ἀληθείᾳ καί τῷ τῆς ἀληθείας Θεῷ διά τῶν αὐτῷ δοκούντων ἀνωμολογημένων ἀρχῶν καί προτάσεων, ἅς οὗτος κατ᾿ αὐτῆς τῆς ἀληθείας προὐβάλλετο, τοσαῦτά ἐστι καί τοιαῦτα καί εἰς τοῦθ᾿ ἥκοντα κακοδοξίας. Ἅ δ᾿ ἐξ ὧν οἴεται συμπεραίνειν, ἄκων μέν, ἑαυτοῦ δ᾿ ὅμως αὖθις τυγχάνει καταμαρτυρῶν (ἐκείνου γάρ οὐκ ἑκόντος εἶναι πρός τάς ἡμετέρας ἥκει χεῖρας τά ἐκείνου συγγράμματα καί τόν συγγραφέα σφῶν οἷα πονηρόν ὡσανεί προήγγειλεν)˙ ἅ τοίνυν αὖθις ἐκ τῶν μετά χεῖρας ἡμῖν αὐτοῦ συγγραμμάτων ἀναφαίνεται κακῶς φρονῶν, κατ᾿ οὐδέν ἀπάδει τῶν περί αὐτοῦ προειρημένων ἐκείνων. Ἔχει γάρ ὡς συνελόντα φάναι τοσαύτην κακονοίας ὑπερβολήν, ὡς τούς μέν προφήτας ὑπό δαιμόνων ἐνεργεῖσθαι δεικνύναι, τούς δέ κατά τό τοῦ Θεοῦ εὐαγγέλιον πολιτευσαμένους ἁγίους τοῖς αἱρετικοῖς συντετάχθαι, τήν δέ προφητῶν καί ἀποστόλων καί τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτούς ἀρετήν κακίαν εἶναι καί οὐκ ἀρετήν ἀποφαίνεσθαι. Ἆρά τις γέγονεν ἐξ αἰῶνος τοῦ τοιούτους συντιθέντος λόγους κακοδοξότερος; Ἆρά τις δυνήσεται νεμεσῆσαι τῷ πρός τόν τοιαῦτα συγγραφόμενον ἀντιλέγοντι; Ἆρά τινι μετά τῶν ἁγίων ἔσται μερίς τά τοιαῦτα συγγράμματα στέργοντι καί κατηγοροῦντι τῶν μή ταῦτα στεργόντων; Τί γάρ εἰ μή φανερῶς ἐστιν ἅ λέγει τούτων, ἀλλ᾿ ἐξ ὧν λέγει συνάγεται; Τοιαῦτα τά βαθέα τοῦ σατανᾶ, τά τοῦ πονηροῦ μυστήρια, ἅ τοῖς ὑπέχουσιν αὐτῷ τά ὦτα ψιθυρίζει, (σελ. 696) οὐ χαλῶν καί ὑπεκλύων τόν τόνον τῆς φωνῆς, ἀλλά τό βλαβερόν ὑποκρύπτων τοῦ νοήματος. Ἡμεῖς δ᾿ ὅπως ἕκαστον τῶν εἰρημένων κατασκευάσαι πειρᾶται, διά βραχέων ἐνταῦθα φανερώσομεν, καί πρῶτον διά τίνων δαιμονιώδεις, φεῦ, τούς ἐνθέους προφήτας δείκνυσιν ὁ λόγος αὐτῷ.

Τάς ὁράσεις τούτων χείρους εἶναι νοήσεως κατασκευάζει καί ἀποφαίνεται ὡς φαντασίας οὔσας, εἰ καί αἰσθητάς, ἵνα τήν γνῶσιν ὑπερέχουσαν τούτων ἐπιδείξῃ˙ εἶτα προϊών αὐτός φησι πάλιν «ἐμπαθῆ τυγχάνειν ἤ δαιμονιώδη νοῦν, ὅς ἄν ἐνεργοίη κατά χείρω νοήσεως ἐνέργειαν». Ἐπεί τοίνυν οἱ προφῆται νῷ ἐώρων («οὐ γάρ αἰσθητή τις», φησίν ὁ μέγας Βασίλειος, «ἡ τῶν προφητῶν ὅρασις, ἀλλ᾿ ὑπό τοῦ νοῦ κατανοουμένη, τοῦ Θεοῦ φωτίζοντος αὐτόν»˙ καί πάλιν, «προεώρων οἱ προφῆται τά μέλλοντα, τυπούμενοι τῷ Πνεύματι τό ἡγεμονικόν»), εἰ γοῦν νῷ ἐν Πνεύματι ἑώρων οἱ προφῆται, «ἐνεργείᾳ δέ χείρονι νοήσεως», ὡς οὗτος εἶπεν, αὕτη δέ δαιμονιώδης, ὅταν μή περί χρήματα καί τάς κάτω ἡδονάς καί δόξας ἐνεργῇ, ἆρ᾿ οὐ κατά τόν τά τοιαῦτα λέγοντα δαιμονιώδης ἡ θεία ὅρασις ἐκείνη; Τί δέ τό θεῖον Πνεῦμα καί τό φῶς ἐκεῖνο, τό τήν ὅρασιν ταύτην ἐμποιοῦν; Ἀλλά τρέποιτο ἐπί τήν κεφαλήν τό τοιοῦτο βλάσφημον τοῦ τοιούτους λόγους συντιθέντος, μᾶλλον δέ καί τῆς αὐτοῦ κεφαλῆς διαπεσόν ὡς πορρωτάτω γένοιτο, πρός τό μή ὄν χωρῆσαν, μετάμελον λαβόντος καί μεταμαθόντος τήν ἀλήθειαν.

Πόθεν δή τῷ τηλικούτῳ βόθρῳ περιέπεσεν; ἔροιτό τις ἄν. Ἐπεί λόγῳ καί φιλοσοφίᾳ φυσικῇ τά ὑπέρ λόγον τε καί φύσιν ἐξερεύνησεν, ἀπειθήσας τοῖς πατράσι λέγουσιν, «οὐ δυνατόν ἑρμηνευθῆναι λόγῳ τόν τρόπον τῆς προφητικῆς ὄψεως, ἀλλ᾿ ἐκεῖνος μόνον οἶδε σαφῶς, ὁ τῇ πείρᾳ μαθών˙ εἰ γάρ φύσεως ἔργα καί πάθη πολλάκις οὐδείς ἄν παραστήσειε (σελ. 698) λόγος, πολλῷ μᾶλλον τῆς τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνεργείας», ὅ καί τοῖς μετά Χριστόν ἁγίοις ἴδοι τις ἄν πολλαχοῦ μαρτυρούμενον.