458

man, who changes acutely along with the times and needs), it is altogether necessary for providence, which has foreknowingly comprehended all individual things in outline, to appear diverse and varied and manifold, and, being co-extended with the incomprehensibility of the multitude of things, to be adapted suitably to each one, to each thing and thought, down to the bare movements that take place in soul and body. If, therefore, the difference among particular things is incomprehensible, and the principle of the providence that reasonably corresponds to them is infinite, yet it is not because the principle of particular providence happens to be infinite and unknown to us that we ought to make our own ignorance an annulment of the all-wise care for created beings. But we ought to hymn and accept all the works of providence without examination, in a manner befitting God and profitably, and to believe that what happens happens well, even if its principle is inaccessible to us. And in saying all things, I mean the things of providence, not the things done badly by us according to the principle of what is in our power; for these are entirely alien to the principle of providence. And so, concerning the manner signified by this great teacher regarding the power and grace of the saints according to principle and contemplation, conjecturally as far as possible, but not declaratively (for our mind falls far short of the measure of the truth according to him), having in my discourse run through what has been said, and as it were traced the tracks, I speak as follows by way of hypothesis only.

A different contemplation of the material dyad traversed by the saints, and what the unity understood in the Trinity is.

And by becoming beyond the material dyad, on account of the unity understood in the Trinity, I suppose him to mean that the saints have become beyond matter and form, out of which bodies are made, or flesh and matter, which he said they, having traversed them, were deemed worthy to be united with God and to be mingled with the purest light; that is, the relation of the soul to the flesh, and through the flesh to matter, or to speak generally, having laid aside all natural affinity of the sensible essence for the sensible, and having genuinely taken hold of divine desire alone, on account of, as I said, the unity understood in the Trinity. For having recognized that the soul lies midway between God and matter, and that it has unifying powers with respect to both—I mean the intellect with respect to God, and sensation with respect to matter—they completely cast off sensation along with sensible things, in respect to the relational activity according to disposition, but in respect to the intellect alone they ineffably (1196) appropriated it to God, to whom, having contemplated the whole soul united wholly to Him unknowingly as an image of the archetype according to intellect and reason and spirit, having, as far as is possible, a likeness through assimilation, they were mystically taught the unity understood in the Trinity. And perhaps the teacher also called anger and desire a material dyad, because they are attached to matter and are powers of the passible part of the soul, and are in rebellion against reason, and are able to scatter the intellect into many things, unless from the beginning one knowledgeably and forcefully yokes them to oneself. If someone were to master these and persuade them to be borne fittingly towards what is necessary, yoked in servitude to the dominion of reason, or even having utterly abandoned them were to depart, and alone clings to the uninclined charm of contemplative knowledge through reason and contemplation according to love, and has been contracted from many motions to the one and only pure and simple and indivisible motion of the most manly power according to desire, according to which he has philosophically fixed for himself stability about God unceasingly in the sameness of the perpetual motion according to desire, he is truly blessed, having attained the true and blessed not

458

ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ὀξέως τοῖς καιροῖς καί ταῖς χρείαις συμμεταβαλλόμενον), ἀνάγκη πᾶσα καί τήν πρόνοιαν, προγνωστικῶς πάντα συνειληφυῖαν κατά περιγραφήν τά καθ᾿ ἕκαστα, διάφορόν τε καί ποικίλην φαίνεσθαι καί πολυσχιδῆ, καί τῇ τῶν πεπληθυσμένων ἀκαταληψίᾳ συνεκτεινομένην ἑκάστῳ προσφόρως καθ᾿ ἕκαστον καί πρᾶγμα καί νόημα, μέχρι καί τῶν ψιλῶν κινημάτων τῶν κατά ψυχήν καί σῶμα συνισταμένων, ἁρμόζεσθαι. Εἰ οὖν τῶν κατά μέρος ἀκατάληπτός ἐστιν ἡ διαφορά, καί τῆς ἁρμοζούσης αὐτοῖς εἰκότως προνοίας ἄπειρος ὁ λόγος, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ, ἐπειδή ἄπειρός τε καί ἄγνωστος ἡμῖν τῆς τῶν κατά μέρος προνοίας ὁ λόγος τυγχάνει, τήν ἰδίαν ἄγνοιαν ἀναίρεσιν ποιεῖσθαι τῆς πανσόφου τῶν ὄντων κηδημονίας ὀφείλομεν, πάντα δέ καί ἀνεξετάστως, θεοπρεπῶς τε καί συμφερόντως, τά τῆς προνοίας ἐφυμνεῖν ἔργα καί ἀποδέχεσθαι, καί καλῶς γίνεσθαι τά γινόμενα πιστεύειν, κἄν ἡμῖν ὁ λόγος ἐστίν ἀνέφικτος. Πάντα δέ λέγων τά τῆς προνοίας φημί, οὐ γάρ τά κακῶς ὑφ᾿ ἡμῶν κατά τόν τοῦ ἐφ᾿ ἡμῖν λόγον γινόμενα· ταῦτα γάρ τοῦ κατά τήν πρόνοιαν λόγου παντελῶς ἀλλότρια. Τόν μέν οὖν σημαινόμενον τρόπον περί τῆς τῶν ἁγίων κατά τόν λόγον καί τήν θεωρίαν δυνάμεώς τε καί χάριτος ὑπό τοῦ μεγάλου τούτου διδασκάλου κατά τό δυνατόν στοχαστικῶς, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἀποφαντικῶς (πολλῷ γάρ ἀπολείπεται τῷ μέτρῳ τῆς κατ᾿ αὐτόν ἀληθείας ὁ ἡμέτερος νοῦς), διά τῶν εἰρημένων ὑποδραμών τῷ λόγῳ, καί ὥσπερ ἰχνηλατήσας, τοιόνδε καθ᾿ ὑπόνοιαν μόνον φημί.

Θεωρία διάφορος τῆς διαβαθείσης ὑπό τῶν ἁγίων ὑλικῆς δυάδος, καί τίς ἡ ἐν τῇ Τριάδι νοουμένη ἑνότης.

∆ιά δέ τοῦ ὑπέρ τήν ὑλικήν δυάδα γενέσθαι, διά τήν ἐν τῇ Τριάδι νοουμένην ἑνότητα, τό ὑπέρ τήν ὕλην γενέσθαι καί τό εἶδος, ἐξ ὧν τά σώματα, τούς ἁγίους λέγειν ὑπονοῶ αὐτόν, ἤ τήν σάρκα καί τήν ὕλην, ἅσπερ διασχόντας ἔφη Θεῷ συγγενέσθαι καί τῷ ἀκραιφνεστάτῳ κραθῆναι φωτί καταξιωθῆναι, τουτέστι τήν πρός τήν σάρκα τῆς ψυχῆς σχέσιν, καί διά τῆς σαρκός πρός τήν ὕλην, ἤ καθόλου εἰπεῖν, πάσης τῆς αἰσθητικῆς οὐσίας πρός τήν αἰσθητήν ἀποθεμένους φυσικήν οἰκειότητα, τῆς δέ θείας μόνης γνησίως ἐπιλαβομένους ἐφέσεως, διά τήν, ὡς ἔφην, νοουμένην ἐν Τριάδι ἑνότητα. Μέσην γάρ κειμένην Θεοῦ καί ὕλης τήν ψυχήν ἐγνωκότες, καί τάς πρός ἄμφω ἑνοποιούς δυνάμεις ἔχουσαν, τόν νοῦν λέγω πρός τόν Θεόν καί πρός τήν ὕλην αἴσθησιν, τήν μέν αἴσθησιν μετά τῶν αἰσθητῶν παντελῶς ἀπετινάξαντο, κατά τήν ἐν διαθέσει σχετικήν ἐνέργειαν, κατά δέ τόν νοῦν μονώτατον ἀῤῥήτως (1196) αὐτήν τῷ Θεῷ προσῳκείωσαν, πρός ὅν ὅλον ἀγνώστως ἑνωθεῖσαν ὅλην ὡς ἀρχετύπου εἰκόνα κατά νοῦν καί λόγον καί πνεῦμα, ὡς ἐφικτόν καθ᾿ ὁμοίωσιν ἔχουσαν τό ἐμφερές θεασάμενοι, τήν ἐν τῇ Τριάδι νοουμένην ἑνότητα μυστικῶς ἐδιδάχθησαν. Τυχόν δέ καί τόν θυμόν καί τήν ἐπιθυμίαν ὑλικήν δυάδα προσηγόρευσεν ὁ διδάσκαλος, διά τό προσύλους καί τοῦ παθητικοῦ τῆς ψυχῆς μέρους αὐτάς εἶναι δυνάμεις, καί πρός τόν λόγον στασιαζούσας, καί εἰς πολλά σκεδάσαι τόν νοῦν δυναμένας, εἰ μή ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐπιστημόνως ἄγχων ἑαυτῷ ὑποζεύξειεν. Ὧν εἴ τις κρατήσειε καί ἐφ᾿ ἅ δεῖ πρεπόντως φέρεσθαι πείσειε, δουλικῶς ὑποζευγμένας τῇ δυναστείᾳ τοῦ λόγου, ἤ καί παντελῶς αὐτάς ἀπολιπών ἀπολίποι, καί μόνος τῆς ἀῤῥεποῦς κατ᾿ ἀγάπην γνωστικῆς διά λόγου καί θεωρίας ἔχεται θέλξεως, καί πρός μίαν καί μόνην ἐκ τῶν πολλῶν καθαράν τε καί ἁπλῆν καί ἀδιαίρετον τῆς κατ᾿ ἔφεσιν ἀῤῥενωτάτης δυνάμεως κίνησιν συνεστάλη, καθ᾿ ἥν περί Θεόν ἀκαταλήκτως ἐν ταυτότητι τῆς κατ᾿ ἔφεσιν ἀεικινησίας ἑαυτῷ φιλοσόφως ἐπήξατο τήν μονιμότητα, μακάριος ὄντως ἐστί τῆς ἀληθοῦς τε καί μακαρίας τυχών οὐ