Слово 28

In the previous word, we cleared the concept of the Theologian, explaining what he should be like, before whom, when and how much to philosophize. Namely, he should be as pure as possible, so that the light is acceptable as light, to philosophize before zealous people, so that the word, falling on barren ground, does not remain fruitless - to philosophize when there is silence within us and are not spinning around external objects, so that our breathing does not stop, like those who are sobbing - moreover, to philosophize as much as we ourselves comprehend and can be comprehended. After such explanations for this, when we “plowed up new fields” of God for ourselves, so as not to “sow among the thorns” (Jer. 4:3), and leveled the face of the earth, having formed ourselves and formed others according to the model of Scripture, let us proceed to the presentation of theology. Let us leave the control of the word to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, about whom we have the word - the Father, let him be well pleased with him, the Son, let him cooperate with him, the Spirit, let him breathe him; It’s better to say, let there be a single illumination of the one Divinity on it, connectively divided and divisively combined, which is beyond understanding! But now, when I willingly ascend the mountain, or, more correctly, I desire and at the same time am afraid (I wish out of hope, I am afraid out of weakness) to step inside the cloud and talk with God (for God commands this) - now, which of you is Aaron, come up with me and stand close, but be content with the fact that he needs to stay outside the cloud; and if Nadab, or Abihu, or one of the elders, ascend also, but stand from afar, according to the dignity of your purification: whoever belongs to the people and among those unworthy of such heights and contemplation, if he is not pure, do not approach at all (because this is not safe), and if purified for a while, stay below; and listen to the single voice and trumpet, that is, to the naked expressions of piety, and look at the smoking and lightning mountain as a threat and at the same time a miracle for those unable to ascend; but whoever is an evil and indomitable beast, is not at all capable of containing within himself what is proposed in speculation and Theology, do not hide in the forest with the evil intent that, attacking by accident, catch some dogma or some word, and tear apart sound teaching with your blasphemies, but stand even further, retreat from the mountain, otherwise he “will be stoned” and crushed (Heb. 12:20), “the evildoer will die an evil death” (Matt. 21:41), because true and solid teachings are stones for the beastly; will perish, although he is a “lynx”, which will die with his motleys (Jer. 13:23); or “a lion, hungry and roaring” (Ps. 21:14), who seeks either our souls or our expressions in order to turn them into food for himself; or the “pig”, which “tramples” the beautiful and brilliant “beads” of truth (Matt. 7:6), or the “Arabian” and other breed of “wolf”, even wolves are “faster” in their false thinking (Hab. 1:8); or a fox, that is, a cunning and unfaithful soul, which, depending on time and need, takes on different forms, feeds on dead and stinking bodies, also small grapes (because it cannot get large ones); or any other animal prohibited by law, unclean for food or consumption! For the word, having withdrawn from such, wants to be inscribed on tablets of hard and stone, and, moreover, on both sides of the tablets, because of the open and hidden meaning in the Law - open, which is needed for many and those who remain below, and hidden, which is intelligible to the few and those who reach out to grief. But what happened to me, friends, witnesses of the mystery and lovers of truth like me? I walked in order to comprehend God; With this thought, having renounced matter and the material, immersed as much as I could in myself, I ascended the mountain. But when I opened my eyes, I barely saw God from behind (Ex. 33:22–23) and then covered with the “Rock” (1 Cor. 10:4), that is, the Word incarnate for our sake. And having looked a little, I contemplate not the first and pure nature, cognizable by Himself, that is, by the Trinity itself; I contemplate not what is inside the first veil and is covered by the cherubim, but what is extreme and extends towards us. And this, as far as I know, is that greatness, or, as the divine David calls it, that “splendor” (Ps. 8:2), which is visible in creatures created and governed by God. For all that is “God behind”, which after God gives us knowledge of Him, just as the reflection and image of the sun in the waters shows the sun to weak eyes that cannot look at it, because the vividness of the light strikes the senses. So you too, theologize, although you will be Moses and God to Pharaoh, although with Paul you will ascend to the “third heaven” and hear “unspeakable words” (2 Cor. 12:4), although you will become higher than them, having been awarded the angelic or archangelic face and rank! For everything that is heavenly, and other things beyond heaven, although in comparison with us is much higher in nature and closer to God, is nevertheless further removed from God and from His perfect comprehension than how much higher it is than our complex, low and low-gravitating composition. So, again we must go back to the beginning. “It is difficult to understand God, but it is impossible to express it,” - this is how one of the Hellenic theologians philosophized 214 and, I think, not without a cunning thought, so that they would consider him to have comprehended him, he said: “difficult,” and in order to avoid accusation, he called it ineffable. But as I reason, it is impossible to say, and even more impossible to understand. For what is comprehended by the mind, perhaps even a word will explain to someone who has not completely damaged hearing and a dull mind, if not quite sufficiently, then at least weakly. But not only people who are numb and bowed down, but even very exalted and God-loving ones, as well as every born nature, for which this darkness - this coarse flesh, serves as an obstacle to understanding the truth, have absolutely no strength or means to grasp such a great object in thought. I don’t know if this is possible for higher and spiritual natures, which, being closer to God and illuminated with complete light, perhaps see Him, if not completely, then more perfectly and definitely than us, and, moreover, according to their rank, some are greater and less than others. But I won’t expand on this further. As for us, not only “the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding and understanding” (Phil. 4:7), not only prepared according to the promises (1 Cor. 2:9; Is. 64:4), for the righteous, neither eyes can see, nor ears hear, nor thoughts can imagine, but it is even hardly possible for us to have an exact knowledge of creation. For here too you have only shadows, as assured by the one who said: “I look to the heavens - the work of Your hands, to the moon and stars” (Ps. 8:4) and the constant law in them, for he speaks not as one who sees now, but as one who hopes to someday see. But in comparison with creatures, much more inconceivable and incomprehensible to the mind is the nature that is higher than them and from which they originated. What I call incomprehensible is not that God exists, but that He is. For our preaching is not in vain, our faith is not in vain; and this is not what we teach about. Do not turn our sincerity into a reason for godlessness and slander, do not exalt yourself over us, who confess to ignorance! There is a very big difference between being sure of the existence of something and knowing what it is. There is God - the creative and meaningful cause of everything; in this are our teachers - both vision 215 and natural law - vision turned to the visible, which is beautifully established and completes its path, or, I will say this, motionlessly moves and rushes; a natural law, from what is visible and well-ordered, inferring about the Beginning of its Leader. For how could the Universe be formed and stand if it were not for God who brought about and contained everything? Whoever sees a beautifully decorated harp, its excellent structure and arrangement, or hears the harp itself being played, imagines nothing else other than the one who made the harp or who plays it, and goes back to him in thought, although perhaps he does not know him personally. Likewise, the creative power that moves and preserves what has been created is clear to us, although it is not comprehended by thought. And he is extremely foolish who, following natural instructions, does not ascend to this knowledge by himself. However, God is not yet what we imagined under the concept of God, or with what we depicted Him, or with what our word described Him. And if anyone has ever embraced Him with his mind to any extent, then how will this prove it? Who has reached the final limit of wisdom? Who has ever been rewarded with so many gifts? Who has “opened the mouth” of the understanding and “drawn in the Spirit” (Ps. 119:131), that, with the assistance of this Spirit, “who searches everything” and knows, even “the depths of God” (1 Cor. 2:10), he comprehended God, and he no longer needs to stretch further, because he has the last of what he desires, to which all life and all the thoughts of a high mind strive? But what concept of God will you form, who places himself above all philosophers and theologians and boasts beyond measure, if you entrust yourself to every path of speculation? Where will your inquisitive mind lead you? Would you call the Divine a body? But how can you call it infinite, without limits or outlines, intangible, invisible? Is this really what bodies are like? How arbitrary! The nature of bodies is not like that. Or is the Divinity a body, and at the same time not infinite, not limitless, etc., so that It has no advantages over us in anything? What a rude concept! How can the Deity be venerable if It has an outline? Or how will It avoid not being composed of the elements, again decomposing into them and not being destroyed at all? For complexity is the beginning of struggle, struggle is the beginning of division; division means destruction, and destruction is completely alien to God and the first nature. So there is no division in Him, otherwise there would be destruction; there is no struggle, otherwise there would be division; there is no difficulty, otherwise there would be a struggle. Therefore, the Divine is not a body, otherwise there would be complexity in Him. The word stops here, ascending from the last to the first. Moreover, God’s property is to permeate everything and fill everything, according to what was said: “Am I not the one who fills the heavens and the earth,” says the Lord (Jer. 23:24), and also: “The Spirit of the Lord fills the universe” (Wis. 1:7), - how can it be preserved if God limits Himself to other things, and Himself to others? Or He will penetrate a world filled with nothing, and everything among us will be destroyed to the reproach of God, Who will become a body and lose everything He has created; or He will be a body among other bodies, which is impossible; or will rise both in conjugation and in opposition to bodies; or it will mix with them like a liquid, and will divide some and divide others, which is more absurd and meaningless than Epicurus’s atoms; and thus our doctrine of the corporeality of God will disintegrate and will have neither density nor coherence. If we say that God is an immaterial body, and, moreover, as some people think, a fifth and rotating body (let an immaterial and a fifth, and, if you wish, even an incorporeal body be admitted; since their words flow and are composed arbitrarily, but this is not what I am arguing about now), then to what kind of movable and portable will this body belong? I do not say how offensive it is to assume that the Creator with the created and the Wearer with the worn move in the same way, if only they assume this. But what motivates Him again? How does everything move? What sets things in motion and what makes everything move? And then, what motivates this very thing? - and so on ad infinitum. Moreover, how can He not need to be contained in a place, if only there is something portable? But if they say that God is some other body besides the fifth, although, for example, an angelic one, then how do we know that angels are corporeal, what kind of bodies they have, and the higher the angel God will be, to whom the angel serves? And if the body is higher than the angelic, then again an innumerable swarm of bodies will be introduced and such a depth of idle talk that it will be impossible to stop anywhere. From this it is clear that God is not a body. Yes, none of the inspired men said or allowed this; such a teaching is not of our yard. Therefore, we can only assume that God is not corporeal. But if it is not corporeal, then it does not depict and does not comprehend the essence, just as the words do not comprehend the essence: unborn, without beginning, unchangeable, incorruptible, and what else is said about God and about the things that belong to God. For in Him, the Existing One, does nature and independence express that He has no beginning, does not change, is not limited? On the contrary, whoever truly has the mind of God and has perfected himself in speculation has yet to continue his speculation and research and comprehend all of existence. When depicting and explaining one or another of the objects of your reasoning, it is not enough to say: this is the body or this is the one born; on the contrary, if you want to completely and satisfactorily define the conceivable, then you must name the subject of these predicates (for this corporeal and born and perishable is either a man, or an ox, or a horse). So here too, the one who explores the nature of Being will not stop by saying what He is not, but on the contrary, to what He is not, add what He is (especially since it is easier to embrace one thing with the mind rather than deny everything one by one); add, so that through the exclusion of what is not, and through the position of what is, the conceivable becomes intelligible. And whoever, having said what not to eat, remains silent about what is, acts almost the same as if asked: what is twice five? answer: it will not amount to two, or three, or four, or five, or twenty, or thirty, in short, not one of the numbers contained in ten or in tens, and yet not to say: this will amount to ten, that is, the questioner’s thoughts cannot stop at what he is looking for. For, as everyone clearly sees, it is much easier and more likely to explain about an object what it is not by means of what it is, than by excluding what it is not, to show what it is. Since our Divinity is not physical, let us continue our research a little. Does God exist anywhere or anywhere? If nowhere, then someone too inquisitive will ask, how can it exist? For just as that which does not exist is nowhere; so it may also be that something that does not exist anywhere at all. And if God is somewhere, then because He already exists, without a doubt He is either in the world or above the world. But if in the world, then either in something or everywhere. And if in anything, it will be limited to something small. If everywhere, then more than by something, but also by many other things, that is, as containing content, so that the whole of God will be limited by the whole world, and not a single place in Him will remain free from limitation. Such are the difficulties if God is in the world! And another question: where was He before the world came into existence? And this will also complicate things a lot. If God is above the world, then is there really nothing that separates him from the world? Where is this something higher than the world? How to imagine the exceeding and the exceeded, if there is no limit that would separate and delimit both? Or must there necessarily be an environment to which the world and that which is above the world would be limited? What else is this but the place we have been avoiding? I am not even talking about the fact that the Divinity will necessarily be limited if It is comprehended by thought. For the concept is also a type of limitation. Why did I talk about this, perhaps in excess of what people need to hear, and adhering to the now established way of speech, in which the noble and simple are rejected, and the complicated and mysterious are introduced, so that the tree can be recognized by its fruits, that is, by the darkness of expressions - the darkness that inspires such teachings? Not with the intention of conveying the idea that I am speaking extraordinary things and “abundant” with wisdom, tying “knots” and “explaining hidden things,” which constituted the great miracle in Daniel (Dan. 5:12), but wanting to explain the very thing that my word was intended to say at the very beginning. What exactly? That the Divinity is incomprehensible to human thought, and we cannot imagine Him in its entirety. And It remains incomprehensible not because of envy. For envy is far from God’s nature, impassive, the only good and sovereign, especially envy of a creature, which is more precious to God than others, because for the Word what is preferable to verbal creatures? Moreover, our creation itself is the height of goodness. And also the reason for this is not the own honor and glory of the One who is “full” (Is. 1:11), as if incomprehensibility could give Him venerability and greatness. For to pave one's way to primacy in order to prevent others from achieving it is characteristic of the sophist alone, but it is alien not only to God, but also to any man of any good morals. But if there are other reasons for this, then perhaps those closest to God know them, seeing and delving with their minds into His unsearchable destinies, if only there are people who have succeeded to such an extent in virtue and, as said, “enter into the exploration of the abyss” (Job 38:16). How much can we comprehend, who measure what is not easily contemplated in small measures, this may be necessary so that the convenience of acquisition does not make it convenient to lose what has been acquired. For usually, just as we more easily keep what we have acquired with difficulty, we most likely despise what we have acquired conveniently, in order to acquire it again whenever possible. Therefore, those who have intelligence consider the very difficulty of receiving a benefit to be a benefit. Perhaps this is also necessary so that we do not suffer the same fate as the fallen angel, so that, having received the whole light into ourselves, we do not “harden our necks before the Lord Almighty” (Job 15:25) and do not fall from exaltation in the most pitiful fall. Or maybe it is also necessary so that those who have purified themselves here and patiently waited for the fulfillment of their desires will also have something left there as a reward for their hard work and a bright life. That is why this bodily darkness stands between us and God, like the cloud between the Egyptians and the Jews from ancient times. For this means, perhaps, “he has made darkness his covering” (Ps. 17:19), that is, our fatness, through which only a few and a few can see. But whoever is concerned about this, let him be wise, let him rise to the heights of reflection. And we, “prisoners of the earth,” as the divine Jeremiah says (Lam. 3:34), we, covered with this coarse flesh, know that just as it is impossible to overtake your shadow, no matter how much you hurry, because it moves upward as much as it is captured, or how vision cannot get close to visible objects without the mediation of light and air, or just as the species that swim in water cannot live outside the water, so there is no the ability to be in communication with the intuited without the mediation of anything corporeal. For something of ours will always come up, no matter how much the mind strengthens to cleave to what is familiar and invisible, detaching itself as much as possible from the visible and secluding itself into itself. And we will see this from the following. Spirit, fire, light, love, wisdom, mind, word and the like – aren’t these names of the first nature? So what? Do you imagine either spirit without movement and expansion, or fire not in matter, without upward movement, without its characteristic color and shape, or light not mixed with air, separately from what, as it were, gives birth to it, that is, what shines? How do you imagine the mind? not abiding in something else? And thoughts that are at rest or appear, in your opinion, are they not movement? Can you imagine any word other than the one that is silent in us or that is poured out (I hesitate to say, disappearing)? And wisdom, in your concept, what is it besides the skill of reasoning about Divine or human objects? And also truth and love - aren’t they praiseworthy dispositions that oppose - one to untruth, and the other to hatred, and just as they themselves become more intense and weaker, arise and cease, so they make and change us alike, producing in us the same thing as colors in bodies? Or is it necessary to consider the Divinity, as much as possible, in Itself, stepping away from these images and collecting from them some single idea? But what kind of mental structure is this that is assembled from these images, and not what they are? Or how will a single entity, by its nature not complex and indescribable, contain all these images, and each one is perfect? It is so difficult for our mind to get out of the circle of physicality, as long as it, in its weakness, considers what exceeds its strength! Since every rational nature, although it strives for God and the First Cause, nevertheless cannot comprehend it, according to what I have explained; then, fading with desire, being, as it were, in the throes of death and not enduring these torments, she sets off on a new voyage, in order either to turn her gaze to the visible and from this make something a god (according to a bad calculation, however, for what is visible higher and more godlike than the seer, and moreover, to such an extent that the seer worships, and the visible receives worship?), or from the beauty and improvement of the visible, to know God, use your sight as a guide to the invisible, but in the splendor of the visible do not lose sight of God. Because of this, they began to worship, some the sun, some the moon, some the many stars, some the sky itself along with the luminaries, which were given to rule the world both in the quality and quantity of movement; and some to the elements: earth, water, air, fire, since they are necessary for everything, and without them human life cannot last; others - whatever they encountered in a series of visible things, recognizing as God everything that seemed beautiful to them. Some began to worship even picturesque images and statues, first of relatives - and these were people who indulged in grief and sensuality without measure and wanted to honor the dead with monuments, and then strangers - and this was done by the descendants of the first, distant from them by time, they did it because they did not know the first nature, and the honoring that came to them according to legend became, as it were, legal and necessary when the custom approved by time turned into law. But I think that others, wanting to please the rulers, glorify power, express surprise at the beauty, over time they made the one they revered as a god, and to further the seduction they added some fable. Those of them who were more devoted to passions recognized passions as gods or began to honor anger, murder, lust, drunkenness as gods, and I don’t know, maybe something else close to this; because in this they found (of course, unkind and unfair) justification for their own sins. And some gods were left on earth, others (which is prudent) were hidden underground, and others (a funny section!) were elevated to heaven. Then, submitting to self-will and the whims of a wandering imagination, they named each fiction the name of some god or demon and, erecting idols that attracted them to themselves with their great value, legitimized them to be honored with blood and fat, and some even with the most vile deeds and extravagances and murder. For such honors were fitting for such gods! They even disgraced themselves by giving God's glory to sea monsters, four-legged reptiles, to what is most vile and ridiculous in these species, so that it is difficult to determine whether those who worshiped were worthy of greater contempt, or what they worshiped. But it is more likely that the servants of such gods are more despicable, and even more so in the highest degree because, being by nature rational and having received God's grace, they preferred the worst to the best. And this is one of the tricks of the evil one, who turned good itself into evil, as there are many other examples of his evilness. In order to attract people under his power, he took advantage of their misdirected desire to find God and, deceiving them in what they wanted, leading them like a blind man seeking his own path, scattered them along different rapids and cast them into one abyss of death and destruction. So it was with them, but our leader is reason. And since we, although we also seek God, do not allow anything to happen without a leader and ruler, then the mind, having examined what is visible, having surveyed everything that has been from the beginning, does not stop there. For there is no reason to assign dominion to that which, according to the evidence of the senses, is of equal honor. And therefore, through the visible, he leads to that which is higher than the visible and what gives existence to the visible. For by what were the heavenly and earthly things, which are in the air and under the water, brought into the structure, or better yet, what is more primary than this - heaven, earth, air and water nature? Who mixed and separated it? Who holds in mutual communication, affinity and agreement (I praise the one who said this, although he is not ours!)? Who set it in motion and leads it in a continuous and unhindered flow? Isn’t he the artist of everything, isn’t he the one who put the law into everything, according to which everything moves and is controlled? Who is the artist of this? Is it not the one who created and brought into being? For such power should not be attributed to chance. Let us assume that being is a matter of chance; from whom is order? If you like, we will give in to chance, but who observes and preserves those laws according to which everything happened initially? Is it someone else, or a case? Of course it’s different, not a case. Who is this other than God? Thus, from the visible, the God-given and innate reason of all raised us to God - this original law in us and given to everyone! Let's repeat what was said at the beginning. No one has ever found God, that He is by nature and essence, and, of course, will not find. And if he ever finds it, then let those who want to look for it and think about it. It will find, as I reason, when this god-like and divine, that is, our mind and our word, unites with what is akin to itself, when the image ascends to the Prototype, to Which it now strives. And this, as I think, is expressed in that very wise teaching, by which we know at one time insofar as we ourselves are known (1 Cor. 13:12). And what reaches us in this life is a thin stream and, as it were, a small reflection of the great light. Therefore, if someone has come to know God, and it is testified that he has known, then this knowledge is attributed to him in the sense that, in comparison with another, not so much enlightened, he turned out to be a partaker of a greater light. And such excellence was recognized as perfect, not as really perfect, but as measured by the strength of his neighbor, therefore “Enosh began to call on the Lord” (Gen. 4:26), and his merit was based on trust, and trust not in relation to knowledge, but in calling. Enoch was “taken” (Gen. 5:24), but whether he comprehended the nature of God, or will still comprehend it, is unknown. And in Noah, who was entrusted with the whole world, or the seeds of the world, to save from the waters with a small tree that avoids drowning, one advantage is pleasing to God (Gen. 6:5). And the great patriarch Abraham, although he was justified by faith and made an extraordinary sacrifice - the image of the great Sacrifice, nevertheless saw God not as God, but nourished him as a man and is praised as having honored how much he comprehended. Jacob saw in a dream a high staircase and the ascent of angels, he mysteriously anoints the pillar (perhaps signifying the Stone anointed on us), gives the place, in honor of the One who appeared on it, the name: “the house of God” (Gen. 28:17), fights with God as with man (is this a real struggle between God and man, or does it mean, perhaps, the equation of human virtue with God), wears signs of struggle on his body, showing that the created nature yielded victory, and as a reward for piety receives a change in name, from Jacob it was renamed Israel (a truly great and honorable name!); but neither he nor anyone else from the twelve tribes of which he was the father, even if he stood higher than Jacob himself, has yet boasted that he had fully declared the nature of God or the image of God. And Elijah was not a strong wind, not a fire, not an earthquake, as we know from history (1 Kings 19:12), but a slight coolness was a sign of God’s presence, and only presence, not nature. Which Elijah? Whom the fiery chariot lifts to heaven, thereby signifying something superhuman in the righteous man. Is it not surprising to you - first the judge Manoe, and then the disciple Peter? But one cannot stand the sight of God who appeared to him and says: we perished, wife, because we saw God (Judges 13:22), which shows that even the appearance of God, not only nature, is inconceivable for man, and Peter did not allow the appeared Christ into the ship and sent him away (Luke 5:3–8), although he was more ardent than others in the knowledge of Christ, for which he was called blessed and awarded the most important assignments ( Matthew 16:16–19). What shall we say about Isaiah, about Ezekiel, the viewer of the greatest mysteries, and about the other Prophets? One of them saw the Lord of hosts sitting on the throne of glory, surrounded, glorified and covered by six-winged seraphim, saw how he himself was cleansed with coal and prepared for prophecy (Is. 6: 1–7). Another describes the chariot of God - the cherubim, and above them is the throne, and above the throne is the firmament, and in the firmament of Him who appeared, as well as some voices, movements and actions (Ezek. 1:22-27), and I cannot say whether this was a daytime phenomenon, beheld by the saints alone, or a nighttime undeceitful vision, or a representation of the sovereign in us, by which the future is embraced, as the present, or another inexplicable type of prophecy - this is known only to the God of the Prophets and participants in similar inspirations. At least, neither those about whom we have a word, nor anyone else after them, were, according to Scripture, in the “council” 216 and the essence of the “Lord” (Jer. 23:18); no one has seen or known the nature of God. If Paul could express what the third heaven and the procession to it consisted of (or a gradual ascent, or an instantaneous rapture), then perhaps we would learn a little more about God (if only this was the mystery of Paul's rapture). But since this was inexpressible, we too will honor silence, having listened to Paul himself, who says: “We know in part and we prophesy in part” (1 Cor. 13:9). So, likewise, the one who is “not ignorant of knowledge” (2 Cor. 11:6) confesses, who threatens to present proof that Christ speaks in him (2 Cor. 13:3), so the great champion and teacher of truth confesses. Therefore, he places all further knowledge, as extending no further than small similarities of truth, above mirrors and fortune-telling (1 Cor. 13:12). And if I were not afraid of giving others the idea that I was engaged in such research to the point of excess and unnecessarily, I would say that about this same thing, and nothing else, it can be said: “you cannot contain it now” (John 16:12), by which the Word itself made it clear that over time we will be able to accommodate and understand this. And this same thing John, the Forerunner of the Word, the great voice of truth, recognized as impossible “for the world itself to contain” (John 21:25). So, every truth and every word is unthinkable and dark for us. It is as if we are building huge buildings with a small tool, when with human wisdom we catch a vision of what exists, when we approach mental objects with our feelings or not without feelings that make us whirl and wander, and we cannot, touching inviolable objects with our inviolable mind, come any closer to the truth and imprint its pure ideas in our minds. And the word about God, the more perfect it is, the more incomprehensible it is, leading to a greater number of objections and the most difficult decisions. For every obstacle, even the least important one, stops and impedes the course of the mind and does not allow it to strive forward, just as the reins suddenly restrain rushing horses and with their sudden shock they turn aside. So Solomon, who to the point of excess was wiser than anyone else, both those who lived before him and those contemporary to him, received as a gift from God “breadth of heart” and a fullness of contemplation more abundant than sand (1 Kings 4:29), the more he plunges into the depths, the more he feels whirling and considers it almost the end of wisdom to find how far she has moved away from him (Eccl. 7:24). And Paul, it is true, attempts to explore, not to say the nature of God (he knows that this is completely impossible), but only the destinies of God, but since he finds no end and rest in the ascent, since the love of the mind does not clearly reach its final limit, but always remains for him something not yet known, then (wonderful thing! oh, if only it were the same with me!) concludes his speech with amazement, calls everything like the “riches” of God and “depth” (Rom. 11:33) and confesses the incomprehensibility of God’s destinies, expressing himself almost in the same way as David, when he sometimes calls the “destinies” of God “a great deep” (Ps. 35:7), in which it is impossible to reach the foundation either by measure or by feeling, then says that “his knowledge is marvelous” both because of his composition, and “high” than how far his powers and his volume extend (Ps. 139:6). Leaving everything else behind, David argues, I will turn to myself and consider human nature and human composition in general. What is this confusion in us? What kind of movement? How is the immortal connected to the mortal? How am I poured down and raised up in grief? How does the soul turn within me, give life and itself participate in suffering? How is thought both enclosed within limits and indefinable, and abides within us, and bypasses everything in the speed of its striving and flow? How is it communicated and transmitted with the word, penetrates through the air, enters with the objects themselves? How is one connected to feeling and detached from feelings? And even before this, how is our initial creation and composition, and our final formation and improvement, carried out in the artistic church of nature? What is this desire and division of food in us? Who, without forcing us, led us to the first sources and means of life? How does the body feed on food, and the soul on words? What is the attraction of nature, what is the mutual inclination between parents and children that binds them with love? How are species (of creatures) constant and do not agree on distinctive features? How, with so many of them, are the features of the indivisible elusive? How is one and the same living being both mortal and immortal—mortal because its own life ceases—and immortal because it gives birth to other living beings? One goes away, another comes, as in a flowing river that does not stand still and is always full. We can still think a lot about the members and parts of the body, about their mutual harmony, while they, according to the law and proportionality of nature, in accordance with needs and for beauty, some are close, others are distant from each other, some protrude, others are distant, some are connected, others are divided, some embrace others, others embrace themselves; a lot about sounds and hearing, about how sounds are transferred from sonorous instruments, and hearing receives them and enters into mutual communication with them due to stress and impressions in the mediating air; there is a lot about vision, which communicates in an inexplicable way with visible objects, comes into motion with one wave of the will and at the same time with it - in which respect it is likened to thought, because with the same speed both thought converges with the object of thought, and gaze with the object of vision; a lot about other feelings that serve as some kind of receivers of the external, inconceivable to the mind; a lot about calm during sleep, about dreams, about memory and memories, about reason, irritability and desire, in short, about everything that inhabits this small world - man. Do you want, I will list for you the differences between other animals in relation to us and to each other, that is, each nature, way of birth and upbringing, location, morals and, as it were, the laws of society. Why do some live in herds, others alone; some are herbivores, others are carnivores; some are fierce, others are meek; some are attached to a person and feed around him, others are indomitable and love freedom; some seem to be close to rationality and are capable of learning, others are completely meaningless and not receptive; some have more senses, others less; some are motionless, others move from one place to another, and others are very fast; some are distinguished by size and beauty, or by one thing, while others are either very small, or very ugly, or both; some are strong, others are weak; some are vindictive, others are suspicious and insidious, others are careless; Some are hardworking and home-building, others are completely inactive and careless? And besides this, why some crawl on the ground, others walk in an upright position; some love land, others land and water; some are clean, others are unkempt; some live in pairs, others do not; some are chaste, others lustful; some are prolific, others are not fertile; some are durable, others are short-lived? I would run out of words if I described everything in detail. Consider the nature of those floating in the water, who glide and seem to fly through the damp elements, breathe their own air, and in our air are exposed to the same danger as we are in the water; consider their morals, passions, births, size, beauty, attachment to place, wanderings, gatherings and separations, properties that are almost close to the properties of earthly animals, and some even have common ones, and properties that are opposite both in genera and indivisible. Consider also the flocks of non-singing and songbirds, the diversity in their appearance and color. What is the reason for sweet singing in songbirds, and who does it cause? Who gave the grasshopper a grasshopper on his chest? Who gives the birds these songs and chirps on the tree branches, when, excited by the midday sun, they fill the sounds of the forest and accompany the traveler with the singing? Who weaves a song to a swan when it spreads its wings through the air and, whistling them, writes out a sort of measured verse? I won’t talk about forced sounds and the ways in which art is clever in imitating reality. Why does the peacock, the arrogant Median bird, love decoration and honor so much that, having noticed a suitable one, or, as they say, with the intention of pleasing the female sex (since he feels his beauty), with a majestic gait, stretching out his neck and spreading his feathers glittering with gold and studded with stars in a circle, he exposes his beauty to lovers? Divine Scripture praises the wisdom of women in cloth, saying: “Who gave wisdom to women of cloth or cunning” (Job 38:36)? But this is natural for a rational animal, which abounds in wisdom and reaches even to the heavenly. Marvel at the natural intelligence of the dumb, and if you can, provide your own explanations for this. How are birds’ nests (whether they be stones, wood or roofs) arranged safely and beautifully together, with all the amenities for the chicks? Where do bees and spiders get so much hard work and art? In some, the honeycomb is composed of hexagonal cups facing one another and reinforced with partitions, which intersect at right angles in every two cups. And all this is done with such skill by bees in dark hives, when their buildings are not visible. And spiders, from thin and almost airy threads stretched in different directions, and from substances invisible to the eye, weave intricately woven fabrics that would serve them as an honest home and catch the weak for food. Did any Euclid produce anything like this, philosophizing about non-existent features and working on proofs? In which Palamis will you find such movements and formations of troops, although they, as they say, were adopted from cranes, which fly in formation and diversify their flight? Did Phidias, Zeuxis, Polygnotos, Parrhasia, Aglaophones, who knew how to paint and sculpt beauty perfectly, produce anything similar? Is the Knossos choir of dancers, which Daedalus so beautifully crafted as a gift for the bride, comparable, or the Cretan inconvenient and, poetically speaking, unraveling labyrinth, which, by the trick of art, repeatedly returns to its original track? I am silent about the treasuries and treasure-keepers of the ants, about the supply of food in accordance with the time, and about what else is known to be told about their travels, leaders and the strict order of affairs. And if the reasons for this are accessible to you, and you have learned how much reason there is in this; then consider the differences between plants, down to the artificiality noticeable in the leaves, which is why together they are most pleasing to the eye and most beneficial for the fruit. Consider the variety and richness of the fruits themselves, especially the predominant beauty of the most necessary ones. Consider the powers of roots, juices, flowers, smells, not only the most pleasant, but also healthy, the attractiveness and quality of paints. Consider also the preciousness and clarity of the stones. Nature, as if at a general feast, offered you everything, both what you need and what serves your pleasure, so that, among other things, you would come to know God from the benefits themselves, and from your needs, acquire more information about yourself. After this, go through the latitude and longitude of the mother earth common to all, go around the sea bays connected to each other and to the land, the beauty of forests, rivers, abundant and inexhaustible sources of not only cold and drinkable waters flowing over the earth, but also those that make their way underground through some clefts, whether because a strong wind drives and pushes them away, or because a strong struggle heats up and resistance, they make their way little by little, wherever they can, and for our use in many places they provide warm baths of various properties - this is a free and self-compounded healing. Tell me how and where this comes from? What does this great and artless fabric mean? Everything here is no less praiseworthy, whether we consider them in mutual relation or separately. Why does the earth stand firmly and steadfastly? What keeps it going? What support does she have? For reason does not find anything to base this on, other than God’s will. Why is it that the earth is sometimes raised to the tops of mountains, sometimes besieged in the plains, and, moreover, so diversely, often and gradually changes its positions, and all the more richly satisfies our needs and captivates us with its diversity? And whether it is separated for human habitations, or uninhabited, because it is cut by mountain ridges or otherwise cut off and set aside for another purpose, everywhere it serves as the clearest proof of the omnipotence of God! And in the sea, if the size did not surprise me, I would begin to marvel at the meekness, how it is not bound by anything, and stands within its own boundaries. And if it did not surprise me with its meekness, I would begin to marvel at its size. Because it surprises both; then I will praise the strength that is visible in both. What brought the water into it? What connected them? Why does the sea rise and stand in its place, as if ashamed of the adjacent land? Why does it take all the rivers into itself and not arrive? Is it because of the excess of its size, or, I don’t know what else to say for this reason? Why is sand the limit for such a huge element? What can naturalists say to this, wise in empty things, who really measure the sea with a small cup, that is, a great subject - with their concepts? Wouldn’t it be better for me to briefly discuss this from Scripture, since this is both more convincing and more accurate than long reasoning? “I drew a line over the surface of the water” (Job 26:10). Here are the bonds for the wet nature! But don’t you marvel, aren’t you amazed at the thought, looking at how it carries the earthly swimmer on a small tree and with the wind, so that for his needs and communication both land and sea are connected, so that what is distant from each other by nature over large spaces flocks into one for man? And what are the original sources? Search, man, if you can explore and find something! Who dug rivers in the plains and mountains? Who gave them unimpeded flow? What a miracle of opposites - and the sea does not overflow and the rivers do not stop! What's nutritious in the waters? Why is there this difference that some plants are irrigated from above, while others receive water through their roots? - May I also enjoy a few words, discussing the joys sent by God! Now, leaving the earth and earthly things so that my words can flow in order, soar on the wings of thought into the air; from there I will lead you to the heavenly, to heaven itself, above heaven, and so on. True, the word does not dare to stretch high; but it will stretch, however, not beyond what is permitted. Who poured out the air - this is an abundant and unfading wealth, which is used not according to merits and occasions, which is not held back by limits, is distributed not according to age, like manna is received not beyond need, and honestly, the air is given to everyone in equal measure - this chariot of feathered creatures, this seat of the winds, the air that dissolves the seasons, animates animals, or better yet, preserves the soul in the body, the air in which bodies and with which a word in which there is light and what is illuminated, and also the vision that flows through it? Consider also what is beyond the air? For I will not agree to give the air such an area as is attributed to it. Where are the wind storage facilities? Where are the treasures of snow? “Who,” according to Scripture, “gives birth to drops of dew? From whose belly comes ice” ( Job 38:28–29 )? “Who puts water in the clouds” (Job 26:28)? Who stopped part of it on the clouds (isn’t it wonderful to see a flowing substance held by a word!) and pours out the other on the face of the earth and sows it in due time and in due measure, without leaving the entire moist essence free and uncontrollable (the former cleansing under Noah was sufficient, moreover, the Undead One does not forget His covenant), and without holding it back completely (so that we again do not need Elijah, who ends the drought)? It is said: “if the heaven shuts”, who will “open” (Job 12:14), and “if he opens the windows of heaven” (Mal. 3:10), who will hold back? Who will endure the immensity of both, if the One who sends rain does not order everything according to His measures and weights? What wise teaching about lightning and thunder will you offer me, who thunders from the earth, although you do not shine with even small sparks of truth? Can you name the reason for this by any vapors coming out of the earth and producing clouds, or some kind of condensation of air, or compression and collision of rare clouds, so that compression produces lightning, and dissolution produces thunder? Or can you name some wind that is compressed and then cannot find an outlet, which, being compressed, flashes with lightning and, breaking out, makes thunder? But if you have passed through the air and everything in the air with your mind, then touch with me the sky and the heavenly? But here let faith guide us more than reason, if only you understood your weakness when you looked at what is closest to you and learned a way to find out what is above reason, and not remain completely earthly and devoted to the earthly, not knowing even this very thing - your ignorance? Who rounded the sky and arranged the stars? It’s better to say what the sky and stars themselves are? Can you say this, a pompous man who does not know what is under his feet, cannot bring himself to measure, but is curious about what is above your nature, and would like to embrace the immeasurable? Let us suppose that you have comprehended circles, gyrations, approaching and moving away, the rise of stars and the sun, some parts and their divisions, and everything for which you extol your wonderful science, but this is not an understanding of what still exists, but only the observation of some movement, confirmed by a long-term exercise, leading to the unity of observation of many, and then coming up with a law and exalted in the name of science; Thus, the modifications of the Moon became known to many, and vision 217 is accepted as the beginning of knowledge! But if you are very knowledgeable about this and want to be amazed at you, rightly tell me, what is the reason for such a structure and movement? Why is the Sun placed as a sign of the entire Universe and before the gaze of everyone, as the leader of the host, eclipsing the other stars with its luminosity more than they are eclipsed by some of them themselves, the proof of which is that although the stars themselves shine, the Sun surpasses them in light, and the stars are not visible, as soon as they rise with the Sun? It is beautiful, like a “groom”, fast and great, like a giant (I cannot borrow praise for it from another scripture except mine (Ps. 18:6); such is its power that from edge to edge everything embraces with its warmth, and nothing can help but feel it; on the contrary, everything is filled with it, and vision with light, and bodily nature with warmth, while it warms, but does not burn, because of its meekness goodness and harmonious movement, is open to everyone and embraces everyone equally. But have you reasoned about this thought? The sun in the sensory is the same as God in the mental, said one of ours. It enlightens the gaze, like God the mind, and is most beautiful in the visible, like God in the contemplative. But by what is it that the Sun is incessantly moved and rotated? tireless, life-giving and, as the poets rightly sing, viviparous, never ceasing either its movements or its good deeds? How does it create day on earth and night under the earth? Or I don’t know how to put it, looking at the sun. What does this increase and decrease of days and nights mean, this (to use a somewhat strange expression) equality in inequality? How does the sun produce and separate the seasons, which decorously approach and recede, and as if in a round dance they either converge or diverge with each other, converge according to the law of love, diverge according to the law of decorum, even gradually merge with each other and imperceptibly approach, like the approaching days and nights, so as not to produce a mournful feeling with their suddenness? But let's leave the Sun. Have you learned the nature and modifications of the Moon, the measure of its light and path? And how does the sun rule over the day, and she rules over the night? One gives courage to beasts, the other restores man to work, which is when it is most useful, sometimes rising, sometimes falling? “Are you able to tie the knot of Him and loose the bonds of Kesil” (Job 38:31), “as well as to number the multitude of stars and call them all by name” (Ps. 146:4), as one who knows the difference of each star and the order of its movement, so that I can trust you when you determine our destiny by the stars and arm the creation against the Creator? What shall we say? Should we stop the word here – on matter and the visible? Or since the tabernacle of Moses is called in the Word “the antithesis” of the whole world, that is, the totality of the visible and invisible (Heb. 9:24), then, having penetrated behind the first veil and ascended above the sensory, we can penetrate “into the holy” - into the mental and heavenly nature? But even though it is not corporeal, we cannot see it in a non-corporeal way, which is why it is called fire and spirit, or indeed is what it is. For it is said that He creates “flaming fire with His angels and His servants” (Ps. 106:4), does creating here mean nothing more than preserving in subjection to the law by which they were created; This nature is called spirit and fire, partly as mental, and partly as purifying, because the First Essence also accepts the same names. However, let it not be physical for us, or as close to it as possible. You see how we are spinning around in the word and cannot proceed further! Shall we strive to the extent that we know that there are some angels, Archangels, Thrones, Dominions, Principalities, Powers, Lordships, Ascensions, intelligent Powers or Minds, natures pure, unalloyed, inflexible or unyielding to evil, constantly rejoicing around the first Cause. These natures, as another would sing about them, are either illuminated by the purest illumination from the first Cause, or, according to their nature and rank, they receive another illumination in a different way; they so imagined and imprinted the Good in themselves that they became secondary lights and through the outpourings and transmissions of the first Light they can enlighten others; they are servants of God's will, strong, both in their natural and acquired strength, they go around everything, they readily appear to everyone and everywhere, due to their zeal for service and the lightness of their nature. These minds have each accepted one particular part of the Universe, or are assigned to one thing in the world, as it was known to the One who Arranged and Distributed everything, and they all lead to one end, at the behest of the Creator of all, they sing songs of God’s greatness, contemplate the eternal glory and, moreover, forever, not in order for God to be glorified (there is nothing that could be attached to the Fulfilled One, Who is also the giver of blessings to others), and so that even the first according to God of nature do not cease to receive benefits. And if this is sung according to its worth, then thanks be to the Trinity and the One Divinity in Three! And if desire is not enough, then in this case my word won, for it labored to prove one thing: that the nature of even secondary beings is above the mind, and not just the First and One, let me say for a moment, the Supreme of all. In Greek εν υποσήματι, i.e. almost the same as “essentially.” You might be interested in: