На написанное Акиндином против света благодати и тех, кто им в различные времена был просвещен, слово возражения седьмое.

CHAPTER 1. That [our] word is correct, systematically advancing, stopped at the words of the sacredly silent about contemplation. 1. So, correctly [our] word, systematically advancing, now finally comes to the fact that Barlaam, first of all, put forward another against the sacredly silent, since already at the beginning, attacking Akindinian [dogmas], it said and showed that he put on the same toga of wickedness as he, although he turned it in a variety of ways, turned it on its head, and made the last first. And the reason [for such a modification is] to hide from those who see that he is wearing the costume of him [Barlaam], and to convincingly appear to have refused communication with him. So [quite] consistently he presented both himself, in confirmation, and then in refutation for us, the previous [arguments] of him [Barlaam]. After all, being a student of his malice, after he saw him turn [his] boldness into shame, so that for this reason he chose to retire into eternal exile, then not being able to bear it, and clearly not being able to take revenge for the defeat, he tried to achieve the same by opposite [means], assuring that he was not of the same mind with him, and [at the same time] accusing us of the same thing as he. 2. So, trying to seem to disagree with Barlaam, Akindinus, starting with theology, ended with words about contemplation, completing the presentation of the words in the reverse order, but in relation to each of them [i.e. e. both theology and contemplation] he repeatedly and in many ways shows either the unsteadiness and thoughtlessness of his words, rushing without the slightest confirmation to the opposite trends and statements, or the timidity and malice of his thoughts, with the greatest secrecy offering his own, or - the same thing to say - Varlaam's, [fabrications] and always slandering and distorting the meaning (and in some places the words themselves) of what we wrote to him. For in these [our writings] there is neither any new interpretation (καινοτομία) of pious sayings, nor a rejection of the one divinity, but an interpretation - as far as possible - of the height of the idolizing gift, godlessly blasphemed by Barlaam and, of necessity, glorified and explained by us, who defend him with strength, and due gratitude for the grace rewarding the source of grace - [although] imperfectly, but no less than it should have been, given our literary skills. CHAPTER 2. That deifying grace and divine light are not divine and uncreated because of something else. 3. And the one who takes [these sayings out of context] and reinterprets them pushes himself and those listening to him to the abyss. And he does not feel that he is teaching two things that are the most opposite to each other, speaking about the divine and the god-creating and God-giving (θεουργόν) grace of the Spirit, divinity and self-divinity, and the rulership of God, and the good government, calling it, - rather, having heard from the God-bearers, who quite clearly call [it that way] - and forbidding it to be uncreated. And this despite the fact that the great Basil writes: “If the Spirit is created, then He is not divine. But it is said: “God fill the spirit of Blessed with divine wisdom and reason” 995. So, to what do you find the divine [more] suitable: creation or divinity? If to the creation, then you will call the Father a creation. After all, it is written about Him: “His ever-present power and Godhead” (Rom. 1:20). If it is to divinity, then, stopping blasphemy, recognize the dignity of the Spirit” 996. With him, I will justly address this [Akindinus], slightly changing the words, but not the meaning contained in them: are you so unreasonable that even from these very highest voices you have not approached [in thought] the dignity appropriate to the grace of the Spirit? For if you hear that any of the creations is declared divine by the fathers, do not think that for the sake of its own nature, which is created, it is called such, but for the sake of the divine gift of the Spirit living in it, and know the god-creating grace itself to be divine and uncreated, just as a ray of the sun is light in itself. 4. But you, when you say that the light that shone on the mountain from the Savior and was poured out on only the worthy is not uncreated is the divine gift of the Divine Spirit, you say precisely that the shame and public condemnation to which you yourself were subjected after that by your teacher, trembling, you accepted only in words, rejecting the essence of the matter and still thinking and proving that this light is created. But how could anything else be and be called divine because of these [light and gifts], when they themselves needed another idolizer? Divine grace and divine light would also be complex if they were called uncreated for the sake of something else existing within them, and if because of one [of its component] it is uncreated, and because of another it is created. But every divine radiance, in the words of the great Dionysius, which reaches the providential beings in a variety of ways, remains simple 998. But now, it means, you went not against us, but against the Spirit itself, setting in motion your argumentative and warlike disposition, and bringing into battle the unstoppable eloquence and sophistical art of your words, or, more appropriately, dishonest methods (κακομαχίαν) or unconvincing idle talk? For who, having heard about the inherent glory and unapproachable light, and uncreated grace, would then, listening to your wise reflection, consider them created in themselves and would agree to imagine through them [something] different, by nature, uncreated, unapproachable and ever-essential, for the sake of which they, according to you, were awarded a name that does not in the least correspond to the truth? CHAPTER 3. About the fact that it is pleasant for us when we are scolded along with piety, but those who scold us for it are worthy of regret. 5. What is especially important, given that the divine Spirit is blasphemed, if [and] the godly hears [addressed] “wicked”, from those who do not grasp the truth or voluntarily slander it? However, it is a great pleasure for us to be reproached together with God by those who suffer from blindness in relation to their own [teachings] and who, out of terrible envy, pervert ours. So we rejoice for ourselves, being reproached by you, but we grieve a lot in our souls for you and mourn - understand this well - your souls, without ceasing to grieve. How you rebelled against piety, how you deviated from the straight path, why you turn away from the truth, how, without feeling it, you gave yourself over to the inconstancy and vanity of your own reasoning, “not understanding what you say or what you affirm” (1 Tim. 1:7) Because of which, and always saying something new, and putting forward [positions] inconsistent in relation to the previous ones, you are in great confusion fill the souls of those who listen. Alas, how, having lost your shame, you, without blushing, boldly tell lies - acting against us with a tongue sharper than a two-edged sword (Ps. 63:4), - as if we proclaim two gods: the first and the second, the great and the small, and one is above, and the other is between God and the angels, and at the same time not an angel, but another God. Here are the doorless lips of those who do not fear the Lord, here are the [mouths] of those who put their hope in lies (Isa. 30:12) and do not think about the judgment seat of Christ. CHAPTER 4. About the fact that Akindin can speak against us in no other way except by various ways of hiding our [genuine] thought and slandering it. 6. Present our obvious understanding to everyone, and we will see the convincingness of your attacks on us. Since the vain-wise Barlaam rejected the idolizing grace of the Spirit, and uttered blasphemies against the Lord (πρύτανιν) of grace, and humiliated those who in every century became involved in it, we were faced with the necessity - as is now the case with you, self-taught theologians, who, like him [Barlaam], before learning for yourself, teach, and also about deification - we are therefore faced with the need to talk about grace what we have adopted from our fathers, and to offer evidence of what was said, collecting from the Divine Scriptures both the statements themselves and the meaning of what was said. So, we said that this grace is neither the essence of God, nor an angel, nor anything else from among those who receive grace. For grace is also the deifying energy of God, being called light, spirit, divinity, deification, and everything that follows. Who, having heard this, will not feel satisfied with the dogma, unless he has become a clear opponent of God's grace? Who does not confess that divine grace and energy is common and the same for the three Persons of divinity and not outside the one divinity? Who of the right-minded will not understand that grace differs from the divine essence, as existing from it, although it is not separated from it? Who will not notice that most of our words about grace are spoken not dogmatically, but polemically, being addressed to one who, hypocritically using as a pretext those who love the silent life, has raised an open war against the saints living in [their] scriptures? 7. The whole struggle and the meaning of our words are almost the same. And you do everything to hide our reasoning, and you falsify, and damage, and reinterpret, and chop off, maliciously omitting the most important things in between, mixing and merging, and pouring out a lot of black liquid of villainy from your heart, like a cuttlefish, you hide yourself along with [your] evil wisdom, and turning the transparency of our sources into a “muddy drink”, you pour through ears into the hearts of the listeners, on his own head, undoubtedly, drawing with both hands the prophetic oath, according to what was said: “Woe to him who makes his brother drunk with muddy corruption” 999. Tell me, don’t you yourself confirm our words with your testimony that we do not say that this grace is a divine essence? How then is she our second God? After all, it is impossible to imagine an essenceless God even in thought. Do you see that the slander in which you wander, agitating and frightening, shaking and misdirecting the Church of God, is untenable and easily recognizable, to what extent, of course, does this depend on you? CHAPTER 5. That Akindinus, in imitation of the Arians and Severians, having accepted the patronage of a rich woman, tried - with her financial support - to restore the sacred Church against itself; and from ancient times the saints [who were in it] - against each other; and each of them - against himself. 8. Since, due to the lack of husbands, when none of the well-meaning ones seemed to listen, the monk accepted the patronage of a woman, and “in an unrighteous estate” (Luke 16:11) who did not try to be faithful, and did not want to “make friends for herself from” this “mammon of unrighteousness”, who, “when she becomes poor,” will “receive” her, who has become their friend from the locals [times], “to their eternal shelters” (Luke 16:9), according to the word of the Lord, but [instead choosing as friends] the Barlaamites, and on earth from [under] God’s shelter expelled by sacred courts and the most terrible excommunications, like Basilina once - adhering to the wisdom of Arius, and Patricius - [followers of] Sevirus, as Blessed Maximus tells 1000. So, when she helped with all her means and with all her zeal, she opened her hand badly, and even worse, she squandered what she had not gathered well (Matthew 25:24), and thereby turned the minds of those who were greedy for gain, so that what [she had collected] would no longer be carried out of the darkness and bins in which it was contained before, or to carry [it] to the darkness and bins of wickedness, to which it is now rushing. And when, therefore, she helped in this way - it is not difficult to understand by whom she was moved - and generously provided you with funds, you not only once again fanned an undeclared war with the theologians and like-minded people with them, but also decided to urgently show everything divine as hostile towards itself, pitting theology and its highest contemplation of God against each other, and raising theologians [into battle] against the visionaries of God from the ages, as far as this is from you It depended on arming [the God-seers] themselves against each other, and raising each of them against themselves and against each other, mobilizing their voices, as this is quite clearly revealed from beginning to end. 9. Although this Patricia, who during the time of the divine Maximus supported the followers of Sevirus, some excused and said in her defense that it was not on her own impulse that she extended her hand [of help] to the Acephales, but did this by listening to other advisers, [but] this strong in the divine [husband] said: “I do not treat what happened that way, keeping in mind Rehoboam, the son of the great Solomon ( 1 Kings 12:13), and at the same time knowing that it is swear forbidden to begin canonical things for those who do not have the right to do so, and especially for women, for whom the divine word has declared silence to be more beneficial than breathing (1 Cor. 14:34) 1001. Nowadays, Akindinov and the manifold danger (κινδύνου) from him, the intercessor guards for the most part in her inner rooms the leader of such selected vicious dogmas, biding her time and then, angleing before him the path of deceit in whichever way she knows, sends him forward so that he can freely speak and instruct those whom she has previously bewitched with her tricks, and through them he caught many. 10. When she learned that those who oppose error have appeared and are looking for this [Akindinus] - those whom he recently tried to mislead in the presence of objectors demanding that he adhere to his own teachings, then again in her even more secret places she hides this husband, and says that he cannot be present - for he does not want to make noise at all - and that she herself is ready to teach the accuracy of dogmas and speak in defense of the one who has hidden himself [from human eyes], if only someone would want to learn from her and lend [her] ears as a teacher. For it is not her [business] to appear in theaters, but to teach those who come, for she has acquired an exact experience of divine dogmas, not only more than all those who came together at those great councils that shamed this Barlaam and after him the other Barlaam [that is] Akindinus, and not only more than others, here glorified and authoritative, but also more than the one who is now prudently hiding. For if at first she was his listener, but then she studied the entire Scripture with the greatest attention, just as she studied everything, and acquired knowledge of it so much more accurately than that of her teacher at first that she can speak more freely than he and defend him in these [issues] when he, in his prudence, hid. 11. Thus, she not only listened to other advisers in order to take on what is not permitted, and what is swornly forbidden to women, as the divine word proclaimed, but also of her own free will, and considers it a matter of honor for herself to be a teacher of men in divine dogmas, and resists those who do not want to yield, and she is bolder and higher than the one who taught her, and is not ashamed of the Master’s command, He does not agree with the apostolic commandment or thought when he says: “I do not command women to teach” (1 Tim. 2:12), and orders complete silence in churches, and not to teach from home, but only to ask for the sake of learning (1 Cor. 14:34-35), nor does he take into account Gregory himself, nicknamed from theology, who in the Poems directly writes: “On top It is appropriate for women to wear a veil of modesty, and let the wise men fight with opposing speeches, scattering the infidels; let them take care of the weaving shuttle and the yarn, and the divine songs, and for everything else, let them be dead, for it will be better that way” 1002. Having completely ignored all this, she speaks with those present at ease, or, more appropriately, more boldly, and [addressing] those who are absent, she uses long letters, which, if it were possible to imagine here, then even more likely everyone would admit that truly the Sirach approaches her: “there is no malice greater than the malice of a woman” (Sir. 25:24). 12. But she will say that she sees as an example [herself] the godly Theodora, who presided over the Seventh Council, and what other [empress] like her stood up for the defense of divine customs and dogmas? But in this way she will show herself as trampling on the laws above and below, and trying to appropriate from nowhere royal power and honor that is not due to her. After all, so what if even she was once briefly involved in the name of a certain dynasty? Does this make her count among those who have received royal power and will, if necessary, legislate, and convene general councils, and approve what they have decreed well? No matter how it is. And what am I saying about this one, who, even after becoming related through marriage to the king’s family, was always the slave of the truly kings? For she, while co-reigning with the living Theophilus, and being equally crowned with the royal crown, did not at all take on such matters before she became a widow, and fairly exercised by inheritance the rights of kingship appropriate to [her] child. Therefore, together with the child, she presided over the Council, showing by this that not only other women, but also the queens themselves do not have [the right] to touch upon such [issues], unless some ups and downs put them in front of such a necessity. If this happens, then it is truly good and better than [all] good things, both the other [affairs] of the empire, as far as possible, and its piety - either to correct it, if it has been destroyed, or - if it is in order - to preserve it for [their] king and child. But enough about that. CHAPTER 6. Analysis of his speech on contemplative vision. 13. Akindinus, in his writings, both from the century of sacred theologians and those who now follow them, and the teachers of sacred silence and the supernatural contemplation that corresponds to it, cutting it, as it were, into two parts and desiring to arrange them into opposing parties, tries to convince [of this] and with the help of their writings in defense of this [silence], that the divine light has never been truly visible to anyone from every century who have been purified thanks to hermitage, asceticism, prayer and silence. For having shown how he believed that God is not only visible, but also partook of holy angels and people from creation alone - after all, he [essentially] declared this, declaring the luminosity of the divine nature, and all the energies and gifts of the Holy Spirit to be created - he adds: “Well, he who said: “let no one, hearing about the “intelligent feeling” (αινοός), hope that he can see [will appear] the glory of God" 1003, or [who said]: "Blessed is that mind that has acquired perfect ugliness in prayer (άμορφίαν)" 1004, or: "God sees everyone, but God is seen by those who see nothing during prayer" 1005, or any other saints who turned away those who strive for the divine manifestations of God from everything that produces in the contemplating mind images of light or fire, or any other image, they did not know about the Lord’s lordship [appearing] on the mountain on which He was transfigured? But, as it seems, there is one meaning for that sacrament, and another for theology and contemplation of all other people, no matter who it was.” 14. We [hearing the expression] that the glory of God was not visibly revealed to anyone, understand ["apparently"] in the sense of "sensually", and this is indicated by what is quoted a little later, where he teaches the contemplating mind to turn away from everything that can present to the mind the image of light or fire, or some other image 1006. For everything that has image and form is necessarily sensible or a representation of something sensible. If in [the story of] the divine transfiguration you hear both about light and about visible form (μόρφωςτιν), then this is because it was impossible to say otherwise - after all, about the One who remains unchangeable it is said “transformed”, because He then became manifest. “He was transformed,” it is said, “not into what He was not, having perceived, nor into what He was not, having been transformed, but showing Himself to His disciples by what He was” 1007. And this light is also called divine darkness, as it appears [in the soul] as a result of not only the withdrawal, but also the cessation of everything sensory and all reasoning, and all thoughts. Therefore, “blessed is that mind that has acquired complete ugliness,” and “Those who see nothing during prayer see God.” “Since,” it is said, “every thought enters the heart through the representation of some sensory things, then the blessed light of divinity illuminates it [that is, the heart], when it is abolished from all [sensual things] and is free from their images, since this lightness, as a result of the deprivation of all thoughts, appears to the pure mind” 1008. 15. Those who said this knew for certain, of course, the divine transformation, and not, as you mistakenly thought, a kind of sensual light in the proper sense of the word or an imaginary mental image - for this is what you are now obviously turning to - which was once only the three apostles, but also not the divine or angelic essence, but God's divine radiance and grace, and lordship, spiritually revealed and in each generation mysteriously arising in saints: now, as it were, as part of the [marriage] pledge (Eph. 1:14) in the measure of the purity that has come to everyone from the fulfillment of the divine commandments, and in the future - so obvious and so great a joy that brings that everything here in comparison is symbols, mirrors, and firstfruits. So, as they know that the enlightenment of the Spirit appears spiritually and inexpressibly, they prohibit what happens through feeling and imagination - natural or demonic. CHAPTER 7. Analysis of another of his sayings, where with deceptive advice he tries to abolish the phenomenon worthy of divine grace. 16. “But it is necessary,” he says, “to keep in mind the errors into which many of the anchorites fell from sensory manifestations of light, and the admonitions of the saints who do not allow the ascetic life to be lived [based] on such hopes and honor the formless, and only the memory of God, established in the soul, is declared to make the soul the church of God.” Doesn’t “knowledge” “puff up”, according to the Apostle 1009? And from the knowledge of creations, can you number those who have fallen into error? This means that all knowledge [in general], and that which you yourself consider to be the only knowledge of God from creation, will, according to you, be a delusion. We would, of course, learn a lot of benefit by having you as an advisor, if we disdained the knowledge that is due to us through ignorance or recklessness, abandoned the arts because of malice, and completely rejected God’s divine grace because of errors. But we were not taught to practice every good [deed] in the hope of reward, but for the sake of love for God alone. But isn’t there a heavenly reward in store for those who struggle? Likewise, despite the fact that the enlightenment of the Spirit is established as a general “honor” [for ascetics], we are not convinced by the “mother-in-law” (1 Cor. 9:24), especially when we are not skillful against the evil one who is trying to take away and appropriate [our reward] by deceit. 17. And the immutable remembrance of God in prayer provides us with that very enlightenment of the Spirit when the continuity of remembrance is not interrupted by earthly concerns. Thus, thanks to him, we become churches of God, and wanting to show us and teach this, Christ, praying on the mountain, sparkled, as the Damascus father and the divine primate of Crete Andrew explain 1010. Therefore, the “end of prayer,” according to John Climacus, is “rapture to the Lord” 1011, and therefore Saint Isaac called enlightenment “the fruit of prayer.” For he says: “there is purity of mind in which the light of the Holy Trinity shines during prayer. And then the mind becomes higher than prayer, and there is no need to call it prayer, but the product of pure prayer sent down thanks to the Spirit” 1012; and again: “Prayer is purity of mind, which alone is cut off with amazement from the light of the Holy Trinity” 1013; and again: “we contemplate the glory of His holy nature when God deigns to introduce us into spiritual mysteries” 1014. CHAPTER 8. Refutation of other sayings of Akindinus, who teaches that knowledge alone is an undelightful light, and transforms himself into an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14) who arms against the light of grace. 18. And he who is in danger of falling into Barlaam’s delusion, calls knowledge alone the undeceptive light of the knowledge of God and believes it to be the coming and indwelling of the Father and the Son. For although he mentions doing the divine commandments, “but as one who perfectly deifies our souls and enlightens us with the most charming light of knowledge, because “the commandment of the Lord is bright, enlightening the eyes” (Ps. 18:9), and “the light of His commandment” (Is. 26:9). This, too, was considered by Varlaam to be the most perfect reward for the zealous - the truth of the logoi of existence. He asserted that through this Christ the truth and the Father of Truth dwells in philosophers because of the knowledge of truth in beings. We said to him that he who knows the truth also knows a lie: after all, the knowledge of opposite things is one and the same. So, if someone, because of the knowledge of the truth, has God dwelling in him, then because of the knowledge of lies, both lies and the father of lies, the devil, dwell in him; therefore knowledge is not penetration. 19. And to [Akindinus] after this [Barlaam], in defense of his error, who abuses the verbs of the Spirit, I would say both that “the commandment of the Lord is light” and that “the light of His commandment.” But the “Jews”, being rich thanks to these [commandments and commands] in the knowledge of the divine “will”, and “having reasoned better, are taught from the divine law,” - according to the divine apostle (Rom. 2:17-18), - and “having in it the image of reason and truth” (Rom. 2:20), and continued to remain darkened and petrified, as now those who teaches about the mysteries of God without [ascetic] practice. So, knowledge is not the most perfect and useful, and the most charming enlightenment, even if it comes from the very words of the Spirit: “for those who are not hearers, but the doers of the law,” according to Paul, will be justified” (Rom. 2:13). Spirit contemplation of God, only those who are worthy to see the cognizable and only the “right heart” 1020 entrusted 1021. 20. And he involuntarily revealed to us the curvature of his heart also from his creations, that is, these writings, having raised knowledge somewhere upward, he again undertakes to bring this light down, saying: “And without this light, which enlightens,” as he says, “the bodily eyes, nothing prevents a person from becoming perfect and being deified, as the saints say. And by trusting in him, many may be deceived, due to the fact that the darkness of wickedness is “transformed into an angel of light” (2 Cor. 11:14). Without what “this”? On Tabor of the shining light and seen divinely by the apostolic eyes, or appearing to all the saints at different times? But in the above words it is sufficiently shown that this [light] is not different from that, and that it is the very god-created grace and energy of the Spirit, without which it is impossible to achieve a blessed life. For as the divine Gregory of Nyssa also says, interpreting the goal of asceticism according to God: “Eternal life and inexpressible joy in heaven are bestowed by the grace of the Spirit, and the dignity to accept gifts and taste grace is given by love (έρως) [carried out] through faith during [ascetic] labors. After all, the work of righteousness and the grace of the Spirit, which came together, filled the soul in which they came together with a blessed life, but when they diverge from each other, they do not provide any benefit to the soul. For the grace of God does not have the property (φύσιν) to visit souls fleeing from salvation, and the power of human virtue in itself is not sufficient to lead souls who have not received grace to a [blessed] form of life" 1022. Is this the kind of divine light that can enlighten the eyes of the body? For although it is written, and it is said among us, that the light that shone upon the disciples on Mount Tabor was seen with bodily eyes, this is because the eyes received the power of the Spirit, thanks to which they saw such things. So, without the light of the Spirit, operating in an obvious or hidden way, is it possible to lay some kind of beginning of such perfection? And for the perfect one, how can he not shine clearly? 21. And again [Akindinus] brought error into the middle and “transformed into an angel of light.” But this one, having been exposed by us as a villain, will involuntarily refute the fact that, according to the mind of Akindinus, the only divine and true manifestation of light is knowledge: for truth exists before any pretense. So, if the devil, pretending to be the existing truth, pretends to be an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14), then, therefore, truth is an angel of light, a good angel. What kind of light is [an angel] proclaiming as an angel of light, if not the light of God, of whom he is an angel? Thus, if the evil angel feignedly portrayed knowledge or virtue alone, then one could conclude from this that the enlightenment from God that arises in the worthy is given only by knowledge and virtue. Since the villain also shows an imaginary light, different in relation to virtue and knowledge, that is, an intelligent light, true, divine - different in relation to virtue and knowledge. CHAPTER 9. Against the Hellenic view and the false theory that agrees with it, and about the unadulterated and divine enlightenment and its obvious signs, and that from it the excess of God’s love for us appears. 22. And that the evil angel also shows such light in order to mislead, this can be seen from the speeches of his adherents (μυστηπόλων). For they say: “As for what is above us, it is necessary that the vision [of these things] come from above, and that the intellectual light shine, thanks to which one can be united with the divine.” It is not surprising that the secret men and secret guides of the evil one incredibly maliciously clothe themselves in words to hide [their true face], so that through hearing they can seduce those who have not fully mastered the skill of distinguishing between good and bad. After all, if he who is in the proper sense of the word darkness pretends to be an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14), then what is surprising if those deceived by his feigned light and having infused all of it into themselves, or rather, I will say in their own words, those who combined with him and through him, speaking in order to seduce many with the beauty of words, feignedly depicted the speeches of the servants of the true light, that is, those who were honored with the divine and idolizing light of the Spirit and thus completely and indelibly enlightened? For “and his servants,” says the apostle, “pretend (ύποκρίνονται) to be ministers of righteousness” (2 Cor. 11:15). (In the text of Scripture: and his servants are transformed (μετασχηματιζονται) like ministers of righteousness). 23. Just as in the above words we managed, by exposing the “good words” (Rom. 16:18) of those who, supposedly for the sake of protecting the one divinity, introduce its dissection and confusion, to expose together with them those who were like-minded since ancient times, so now, having reached this point in our speech, it is useful and at the same time necessary to imagine that the lying voices of those completely captivated by the charming vision of God are extreme charm, and to show that those visions of theirs, thanks to which, as they say, they are united with the divine, lead away from the truly divine, and the light that supposedly shines upon them is a bait and a terrible trap, invented against people by the chief of darkness, and brings down those caught under the power of eternal darkness, and that their visions attract them to the sky ( άνατατικάς εκείνων έποψίας) go beyond the limits of the moderate meanings of the soul and all natural extremes and go there, - again I will say in their words, - “where the abyss lies, eternally unfaithful, shrouded in darkness, dirty, meaningless” 1023. For they call the demonic tribe (τό δαιμόνιον φΰλον) higher than us and above [located], and divine, and those who are worthy of communication and contact with them are declared happy (εύδαίμονας) 1024. 24. This was clearly Socrates, the son of Sophroniscus, who had a demon accompanying him, whom he obeyed all his life. Immediately he received from him a testimony that he was the best in wisdom, when he was supposedly initiated by the false light of this [demon] to instruct in that which is extremely contrary to the truth. What is this? Who does not know [this] arrogant nonsense and that fable poured [by him] into human souls, which pours them [that is, souls] from heaven and pours [from one vessel into another], forcing them to wander on earth from bodies to bodies that are not suitable for [them], before being undressed or clothed, in accordance with the inclination that each [soul] had the happiness or misfortune of acquiring? Who does not know about those laws and illegal marriages, about unnatural loveless loves and about [his] words in their defense, about [his] godless and warlike opinions (δόγματα) about gods, demons and heroes, and about that empty and most monstrous chatter, about ideas that exist [in themselves]? He was initiated into this - magnificent and ineffable - by those who appeared through the light and were united with it, and by a vision from above. But we, submitting to the words of the truly enlightened and to the truth itself and not succumbing to the words of error, reject not only ideas, but also contemplations and false lights, through which he interfaced with false demons and through them learned that there is an ethereal soul and the rotation of souls, and that not only evil, but also good there are demons, and gods, different in nature and strength, of which some walk on a convexity the celestial sphere, while others wander under the concavity, and still others are terrestrial and underground, and these [the latter] are the autocrats no longer of mortals, but of the dead. 25.1025. After Plato and Socrates, Plotinus, nicknamed the Platonist, appeared as such, saying that he elevates the divine that exists in him to the highest divine, both while alive and already dying. And with such speeches even now he, deceiving many, convinces them to consider him divine. But the image of his life, and, moreover, the crawling serpent that appeared from under him, already dead, - as those who tell his story themselves say, - showed us what it is, what he calls divine, and where those lights come from that he calls [coming] from above. But you can also learn from Apollo of Pythia where their enlightenment came from. “For when Amelius, a follower of Plotinus, asked where his soul went when he died” 1026, then Apollo himself, “In honor of his dear friend, composed sweet-voiced speeches” 1027 and, turning to the very soul of Plotinus, sang, among other things, this: “Many times the aspirations of your mind, along crooked paths, Eager to rush, with your strength On the circles of the right path and on the divine path erected by the Immortals, giving a thick ray of light... Now, when you have been released from the body, having dissolved the tomb of the Demonic (δαιμονιης), soul, You are already following the demonic (δαιμονίην) 1028 host" 1029. Do you see where their light comes from, and to whom it relates their souls? Is it surprising that the father of lies shows darkness as light in order to mislead, and that he, along with things, falsely turns one thing into another and [their] names: “crooked” and “right”? 26. But even then, after him, when Proclus of Lycia annually celebrated holidays in honor of Plato and Socrates, the participants in the mysteries sometimes saw a light surrounding [his] head 1030. But where this light came from was again shown to us by the appearance of a snake crawling around this very head of his, when he had already died, as those present [at the time] said. And he himself did not consider it unworthy, while still alive, to express where this light shone to him: “Using the purifications of the Chaldeans,” as he himself says, “he conducted a conversation with the Hecate ghosts, light-like and seen with his own eyes” 1031, “The Hecate ghosts,” says the true theologian, “are dark” 1032. 27. Let us, as those who know what pertains to them not only from the revealed fruits of their wickedness, but also by the power of insight reaching to the hidden fatness of the roots of [their] rottenness, by means of their statements presented here, having dug up in words, we will reveal their lies [hidden] in the depths. Not knowing much from my own experience about both the falsely named and the true and truly unrelated to matter (μή προσύλου) light, but being able to both notice and say a lot, [based] on the teaching of those who have truly found the “life hidden” in Christ (Col. 3:3), and in the mental [beginning] of the soul, those who have become intelligent and higher in mind, and true light, and resurrected by the “first” and true “resurrection” (Rev. 20:5, 6), and by the experience of the best, having studied the bad, and having a heart eminently capable of discernment, like the Lydian stone 1033, as cleansed [from filth] and mixed with the grace of the Spirit. You can’t hide from them by presenting, like copper, evil, covered with the shine of melted gold, that is, with the appearance of good, [for] their senses are fully trained to distinguish between good and bad, and you won’t charm them through hearing, you won’t mislead them and won’t subjugate them, even if, for greater charm, you select and arrange words quite beautifully and convincingly, for they are skillful and through these [words] recognize the unacceptability (τό φεύκτον) 1034 and the absurdity of the lie hiding in the depths. They could say that “hide” is well suited to those who, in [their] blindness, pretend to see, even if one of those following [them] in the same way falls into delusion, for they, without knowing it, exposed their lie, for the evil spirit is associated - and not united - with those unfortunate (κακοδαίμοσιν) souls. So, the light that accompanies delusion is always seen: not by the folding (συνέλιξιν) and return of the mind to itself - for it indelibly directs to the divine - not by it, therefore, but by the activity passing through thoughts, usually what is related to delusion appears, when someone without mental silence rushes to the mystery of vision. For, since the soul then has mixed actions, the spirit of delusion finds a [successful] moment to enter those who are not the most attentive and not strengthened by humility, and mix with these [their actions]. And thus secretly receiving entrance, even if he then hides, [nevertheless] remains in the soul, pretending in some cases to be good and with the help of this connecting with it, but not connecting. For it belongs to the good Spirit alone to “pass” through everything and “through all spirits, intelligent, pure, and subtle,” as Solomon believes (Wis. 7:23) and the truth. 28. And the initiates know and say that the infusion of the light of grace into the soul is not the conjugation of a few certain parts or forces, giving mutual control, but, as it were, a mixture, miraculous, almost indescribable and unheard of. What word can convey how it spreads throughout [the soul], and abides within itself without origin; and everything completely embraces and surpasses, and is indivisibly contained in [one] part; and he is the communicant and has no mixed communication with the communicant; and is uncontrollable and inviolable, and seeing [it], even in vague manifestations, due to the excess of light, is thus cognized, and becomes in contemplation one spirit with those who have achieved it thanks to pure prayer, being seen by them as pouring out, and not separating from them, so that the “abounding majesty” (Eph. 1:19) of God’s love for us thanks to this mixture appears obvious? To do many things with one is the most distinctive property of love, which in various ways becomes a uniting of those who are distant, 1035 the majority of whom believe that the union is accomplished due to [their] similarity. Therefore, there is an ancient expression, commonly used and constantly repeated: “similarity, friendship” 1036. And the [union] of the marriage agreement seems to have something more in comparison with other [types of unions], but it is neither merging nor mixing, but much becomes one kind of communication and, as it were, cleaving, as Scripture says that “a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two will become one flesh” (Gen. 2:24; Eph. 5:31; Matthew 19:5), and only into the flesh, but not into the spirit alone. 29. The unity of God with those who are worthy surpasses any method of unity in that it is all-perfect, and since the Spirit “passes better,” the word “through all pure spirits” (Thessalonians 7:23), for the great Basil says that no creation participates in the verbal soul in order for it to dwell in it essentially, but the Holy Spirit dwells in it essentially, that is passes through its very essence 1037, so that, through its mediation, the body associated with it becomes spiritual, elevating it above carnal wisdom and passions. So, being such, the union of God with the saints and His love for them shows it to be abundant, and that this alone [love] is truly love. For she alone peacefully combines and inevitably brings lovers together. Thus, “cleave to the Lord, he is one spirit” (1 Cor. 6:17), and those who are Christ’s will shine as Christ did on the mountain, for “the brightness of our God is upon us” (Ps. 89:17), sings the divinely inspired singer. 30. But by no means can the demonic spirit pass through the entire soul in this way, but, having fallen away from the heavenly community (της άνω συνοδίας), he tries, as far as it is in his power, to take possession of it villainously - but, however, through [its] inclination corresponding to falling away - by likening to himself those deceived by him. Then, having grown the lust of the soul, each for something different, but for one thing, however, in everything with which he dealt, thanks to this deviation, having found entrance and peace, evil mates with those seduced by it, as if standing under the same yoke of passion leading to the same end. And just as one who has the power of destruction, like some restive horse, which, sometimes, against the will of the rider, drags him to it [that is, destruction, destroying him] through the harness [with which the rider is connected with him], so the demon communicates and is connected [with souls] by such contacts, such plexuses, or close to such. Thus, from here, delusion is easily exposed, and the non-delusional [disposition of the soul] is not hidden. And if you want to recognize each of the two from [something] else, then listen to the one who says: “From actions (ενεργημάτων) you will recognize the intelligent light that has shone in your soul, whether it came from God or from Satan” 1038. CHAPTER 10. The chapter of Saint Diadochos on the light of contemplation, cited by Akindinus against this light, having been tested by us, appears to be written in defense of this light and against the one who displays it badly. 31. But immediately he gives us the paternal chapter, [this] one who fights against the fathers, saying: “For the great Diadochos says that when the mind begins to be frequently exposed to the influence of divine light, it becomes completely transparent, so that there is no need to doubt that it sees its [own] light abundantly; and that everything that appears to him in an image, be it as light, be it as fire, arises from the evil of the enemy, this is what the wonderful Paul teaches us, saying that “Satan is transformed into an angel of light” (2 Cor. 11:14). So it is not worth it for anyone to go through an ascetic life with this hope, lest Satan thus find a soul ready to steal it, but so that in every feeling and message of our hearts we may achieve only to love God 1039.” It is wonderful that you brought this chapter from Diadochos, who is most experienced in these things. For if we had brought it, you would probably have boldly crossed him out from the list of saints, as you are accustomed to doing with others, crossing out those whose explanations cannot be distorted and reinterpreted. 32. So he points out to you, as you see here, that the mind has light, which it sees abundantly, becoming completely transparent when it begins to be frequently exposed to the divine light. Such light of the mind is not knowledge, as you yourself admit, which is why you previously advised to flee from it as useless, and is not sensual: for it would not be [the light of] the mind if it were sensual. Therefore, the mind that sees this light, according to this paternal explanation that you yourself cited, when it becomes transparent, from what light do you think it becomes transparent, and in what way? Gaining knowledge? Then it will be a thought, but that light is not a thought, as has been shown many times. From some sensual light? Then this light of the mind will also be sensual, but that light is more than feelings, for it is [the light of] the mind. But it is also formless, for about that which appears in sensual fire, or in light, or in an image - human, that is, or some friend from among those that exist - you have heard that it belongs to the evil of the enemy. So there is a divine light, thanks to which such a mind becomes transparent, which is neither sensory at all, nor knowledge, as your thought imagines. So, under the influence of this divine light, the entire mind becomes godlike. 33. For just as vision cannot actually become light without becoming a participant in the light - not the essence, but the energy of the illuminator - so the mind could not really see on its own, since it has an intelligent sense, without participating in the divine light - not the essence - away [such wickedness]! – but the energy of the Enlightening One. And you can rightly be surprised that when the mind, often exposed to the influence of divine light, becomes completely transparent, it sees that light, which, as you said, was of no benefit to anyone who saw it. And we have already said before about leading an ascetic life not in the hope of this divine enlightenment. But it is obvious that the saint here is addressing those who are preparing (τους εισαγωγικούς), who do not need to hear about such things at all, since they can easily be misled; That’s why he presented [the teaching] about this light very vaguely. He exhorts to love, since it bears at the appropriate time the fruit of this supernatural enlightenment, from which, in turn, it itself becomes perfect. Therefore, Saint Diadochos himself, in another place in the Chapters, says: “We learn the perfection of love from enlightenment” 1040. CHAPTER 11. About idleness (Ps. 45:11) of the mind and what is born from it. Here again we talk about divine enlightenment, and from what it is possible to recognize those who have acquired it. 34. When the mind withdraws from everything sensory, and rises from the flood of turmoil surrounding all this, and examines the inner man, then, first of all, seeing the disgusting mask that has grown [to him] from wandering down, he hastens to wash it away with crying. Then, when he takes away this ugly cover, then, if the soul is not torn roughly (άγενώς) by various relationships, he enters inside the true “cages” without fear and “prays,” according to the commandment, “to the Father who is in secret” (Matthew 6:6), who first gives him a gift containing [other] gifts, [that is] the world of thoughts, and together with This [world] produces [in him] a humility that gives birth and contains all virtue, consisting not of easily achievable words and [external] behavior for those who wish, but evidenced by a good and divine spirit, which humility is created by the Spirit Himself, which is renewed “in the womb” (Ps. 50:12). And in these, as if in a reliable fence of mental paradise, all kinds of trees of true virtue grow, and in the very middle the sacred royal palace of love is erected, and at its gates the beginning of the next century, unspeakable and inalienable joy, blooms. 35. For non-covetousness is the mother of carelessness; carelessness - attention and prayer; and they - crying and tears; these erase preconceived opinions, and when these are discarded, the path of virtue is easily accomplished, since obstacles are removed, and the conscience becomes impeccable, and this causes perfect joy and blissful laughter of the soul. Then sorrowful tears turn into sweet ones, and “the words of God become sweeter to the throat and sweeter than honey to the lips.” 1041 And petition in prayer turns into thanksgiving, and teaching in divine testimonies is the joy of the heart, which indulges in them with shameless hope, and, as it were, first tastes this treat, and learns “the exceeding riches of goodness” (Eph. 2:7 ) God, according to who said: “Taste and see that the Lord is good” (Ps. 33:9), [for He is] the joy of the righteous, the joy of the upright, the joy of the humiliated, the consolation of those who grieve because of them. Doesn’t that only go as far as consolation and these are the only gifts of sacred betrothal, and does not the Bridegroom show Himself more clearly than this to those who are washed with blessed tears and thanks to virtues dressed as for marriage? Not at all. And now we, ignoring those who are quick to be condemned because of envy and who seem to be saying to us: “Do not speak about the name of the Lord” (Acts 4:17-18), otherwise “we will carry your name as evil” (Luke 6:22), composing and spreading slander and false accusations against you,” we continue [our] speech, believing in what our holy fathers believed, and saying [what they said], and looking at this, and convincing others, for [Scripture] says: “When we believed, we also said the same things: and we believe, we also spoke the same things” (2 Cor. 4:13; Ps. 116:1). For when every shameful passion dwelling [in the soul] is expelled, and the mind, as our word has already indicated, has completely returned to itself and to the other powers of the soul, with the cultivation of virtues it will adorn (φιλοκαλήση) the soul, moving towards the most perfect, and even more practical “ascents... suppose” (Ps. 83:6) with God's help, clearing away not only the seal of wickedness, but also eliminating everything acquired, even if it relates to the most useful property or thought. When, having surpassed all the intelligible and not alien to the imagination meanings [acquired] around this and having lovingly and at the same time lovingly put everything aside, he, being, according to what is written, “deaf... and dumb” (Ps. 37:14), appears to God, then he cuts off the word of matter and is formed by a higher formation in all safety, since nothing outside knocks on the door [of his feelings], despite the fact that the grace within [him] changes [him] for the better and, paradoxically, enlightens with indescribable light what is inside and perfects [his] inner man. 36. When “the day of dawn and the day of dawn appear in our hearts” (2 Peter 1:19), according to the head of the apostles, “comes forth,” according to the prophetic word, the true “man will do his true work” (Ps. 103:23). And, using the light, he [as if] ascends or is erected on the road to eternal mountains, and things that are worldly in this world - oh, a miracle! - becomes a spectator, without being separated (μή δηαζευγνύμενος) or separated from the matter that initially accompanied him, [ascends as] as this road leads [him] 1042 - after all, he does not rise on the imaginary wings of the mind - which bypasses everything as if blind, neither regarding absent sensory things, nor regarding superior ones intelligible without receiving exact and undoubted comprehension. But truly he ascends with the ineffable power of the Spirit, and with spiritual and ineffable perception hears ineffable verbs, and sees the invisible, and [still] from here he is all in wonder, and if he goes there, then he competes with the ever-sleeping singers, truly [while] on earth becoming another angel of God and through himself bringing every kind of creation to Him, since he himself, [being] in Communion to all, I was able to partake of Him who is above all, so that “the hedgehog in the image” 1043 [of God] would be carefully finished. 37. Therefore, the divine Nile says that “peace of mind (νου κατάστασις) is an intelligible height, similar to the heavenly blue (χρώματι) 1044, to which the light of the Holy Trinity joins (έπιγίνεται) 1045 during prayer" 1046. And Saint Diadochos, connecting the end with the beginning, presented it in one chapter, writing: “Holy grace carefully delivers to us two [things], of which one is infinitely superior to the other. For she renews us in water and brightens us “in the image,” washing away from us every “defect” (Eph. 5:27) of sin, and saves other things to work with us. So, when the mind begins to taste the goodness (Ps. 33:9) of the All-Holy Spirit in many senses, then we must know that grace begins, as it were, on top of that, “in the image,” to paint “the hedgehog in the likeness” 1047, so that this feeling makes it obvious to us that we are formed “in the likeness” (Gen. 1:26), and we learn the perfection of the likeness from enlightenment” 1048 . And again: “No one can acquire spiritual love unless “in every knowledge” ( Sol. 1:5; Heb. 10:22) he is enlightened by the Holy Spirit. After all, if the mind does not perfectly receive from the divine light “in its likeness,” then it can have all the other virtues, but remain deprived of perfect love” 1049. In a similar way, we hear Saint Isaac saying that “a blessed mind during prayer sees its own purity, similar to the heavenly color, which the “elders of Israel” called “the place of God” (Ex. 24:10), when it was seen by them on the mountain” 1050, and again: “[true] purity of mind is that after which the light of the Holy Trinity dawns during prayer.” 1051. 38. For the divine light is everywhere, but it does not clearly dawn everywhere. And he is alone, but does not shine equally for everyone, not even for the divine themselves, as God-like and clearly illuminated. For just as there is one sunlight, and there are many rays, and not only are there many, but some of them are clearer, and others are dimmer, according to the ability of those who receive light to perceive light, in the same way - as if according to a vague image [contemplated] in sensory things - it happens in relation to the light that exceeds the sense and mind. The intention of the enlightener should also be considered here. Therefore, the divine Maxim says: “to multiply,” it is said about God, [by His] will to bring [into being] each of the existing beings, multiplying by providential actions, and “to remain inseparably One” - since He, like the sun, emits many rays and remains in unity” 1052. The wise Maximus has covered everything here, but I will use a more suitable and close example for what was proposed: “The sun has risen,” says Habakkuk, “and the moon has risen in its order” (Hab. 3:11), that is, the “Sun of righteousness” has risen (Mal. 4:2), Christ, and Christ-like [Christians] became full of light (ττλησιφαείς) 1053, being shone from above. So, the sun has light spread around throughout the entire celestial sphere, sending the radiance of its rays from all its sides to this entire [sphere], of which, being the smallest part, the disk of the moon receives the corresponding ray illuminating it, being able to lay claim to this ray more than the entire visible world, but without becoming a participant in the essence of which this ray is lordship. And having accepted the sun as a light-giving gift, that is, a solar ray from the sun, [the moon] becomes a lesser luminary. So, this ray is a light-giving gift, passing through the body of the moon and yielding to the radiance around the solar disk, and the light is not different from it [radiance]. For the moon, by its nature, cannot entirely contain the excess of the sun’s light, nor does it possess any other [light] besides this. Using her example, as with the help of a vague image, one can understand how “the righteous will be enlightened like the sun” (Matt. 13:43) according to the unwavering promise of the Savior [captured] in the Gospels, and as the light that shone upon Paul, which was a brief radiance of the great light, and on Tabor, chosen from the disciples, the light was shed, called divinity, and became in God and thanks to God seeing God - or rather, in the words of the prophet, “in the light of God they see light” (Ps. 35:10), - in an indescribable way, visible divinity, like a vague but natural, beginningless ray of invisible divinity, does not negate the fact that the trinitarian divinity is one and simple. For, being multiplied by god-creating and light-giving communication with the worthy and the magnificent communion, it, by its super-essential power, firmly holds on to its inherent indivisible simplicity. 39. After all, if an indivisible division is seen among the sensory luminaries and lights, then why are you surprised that the mental [lights], and even more so those [being] more than the mind and divine, are both divided and not divided, and participate, and are non-participating. And I will say in the words of the theologian Chrysostom, who explains how we “receive everything from His fullness” (John 1:16): “if we both share and do not share fire when we partake of fire, which is also a body, then why can’t this be the case when we are talking about energy, and even more so when it comes to energy from an incorporeal essence?” 1054. But the mind that has become involved in this energy and has been rewarded with this light and the body united [with it] provides many evidence of divine beauty, serving as an intermediary between divine grace and the plumpness of the flesh and giving [it] strength [to accomplish] the impossible. 40. Hence, according to virtue, a god-like and irresistible skill (εξις) and perfect immobility or inactivity in relation to depravity; hence the understanding (λόγος), which explains the logoi of beings and from itself reveals, thanks to the purity, the secrets of nature, through which, by means of analogy to comprehend what is beyond nature, it elevates the intellect (τό διανοούμενον) of those who listen faithfully, which [comprehension] is the spoken father himself (αυτός ό τού λόγου πατήρ ) 1055 immaterial touches comprehended; hence various other miracles, and [the ability] to see and foresee, and to talk about what is happening somewhere far away as if it were before one’s eyes. And the most important thing is that the intention of these blessed ones is not directed towards this, but just as if someone looked at a ray of sunlight and [at the same time] felt the air atoms, although this is not his goal, so those [blessed ones] who purely enjoy the divine rays, which by nature are inherent in the revelation of everything - not only [now] existing or also the past, but also what will happen later - along the way, knowledge of such things truly arises, according to the purity [each]. What is useful for them is the return of the mind to itself and the convergence [of it to one point], or rather, of all the forces of the soul, although this sounds strange, a return to the mind and activity in accordance with the mind and God, with the help of which, having prepared themselves, they are well positioned in relation to the prototype, that original and unknown beauty, when grace blooms [on them]. CHAPTER 12. About the fact that Akindinus tries to show the light of the Lord’s transfiguration to the evil ones, and thinks that those who do not consider it such, he calls ignorant of the undelightful manifestation and consolation, and our word shows this light to be truly divine and above [any] undelightful consolation. 41. The enemy of the great light, Akindinus, seemed to have drunk [the water] of the mythical Ameletus 1056, which flows abundantly, irrigating the valley of oblivion, and completely forgetting that above he decisively asserted that the light seen by the apostolic eyes on Tabor, and for Paul himself and the angels and archangels, is constantly invisible, as existing above all their vision of God, thereby showing itself imagining that this is the essence of God, now again in subsequent [his words] not only clearly calls it created and sensual, calling as such everything that has somehow become visible with bodily eyes, but also - scary to say! - declares it demonic, saying that “if this light, somehow visible with bodily eyes, were uncreated, and thanks to it a person would be adored, then the sayings of St. Nile and St. Diadochos, and St. Amphilochius, and many others who speak and convince one to flee from any sensual manifestation of light, whatever it may be, are destroyed, and that the one who achieves this manifestation of light, it seems, does not know [consisting] in the commandments of God and love for Him from the whole soul and from the whole heart of the formless and unadorned light manifestation and peace, and dispassion, and joy, and pleasure, and sweetness.” 42. So, the poor fellow again zealously strives to hide his previous evil thoughts with even worse ones. After all, what is he saying? - “If Paul or anyone else, having received such light, became deified and saw such a light as the apostles on the mountain saw shining from the Savior, then the sayings of St. Nile and St. Diadochos, and St. Amphilochius, and many others who speak and convince us to flee from any sensual manifestation of light, whatever it may be, are destroyed.” So it is obvious that he considers the theophany shown on the mountain to be sensual. And since he heard - and we said this in agreement with the fathers - that it was not by natural power, but thanks to the Spirit, that the best of the disciples contemplated this glory, therefore he added “whatever it may be” in order to embrace it in his word. And thus classifying it among what seems sensual to him, he then assures that every sensual manifestation of light, whatever it may be, is charm. He confirms himself in evil-mindedness with the following construction: “After all, there is one,” he says, “an unpretentious manifestation of light, one most perfect—love in the commandments of God and peace, and dispassion, and joy, and pleasure, and sweetness.” 43. It seems that you have completely become [the container] of this peace and love, that you have “hated your fathers and brothers in the Spirit” (John 15:25; Ps. 34:19, 69:5) and [fighting with them] you are therefore fighting together with everyone in general - both those who have now chosen to be pious, and from the ages [who have desired] “the right to rule the word of truth” ( 2 Tim. 2:15), - and to all this you bring to yourself randomly and inconsistently words that are not only inconsistent, but also clearly opposed and at war with each other. And he speaks about sweetness and pleasure, [as if] casually showing us his experience, although he himself stole it from the books of his fathers, as if from some storeroom, and apparently did not go further inside and was not even allowed to look that there is something that is more perfect than this consolation, as the divine Diadochus himself says, whom he brought as a witness of what seems to him perfection. And it’s worth saying again, even though it was already said a little higher: we have to repeat the same thing in their defense over and over again to someone who lies against them many times. 44. So, blessed Diadochos says that “two [things] holy grace carefully delivers to us, of which one is infinitely superior to the other” 1057. Having defined both, he then adds: “so that this feeling makes it obvious to us that we are formed “in the likeness” (Gen. 1:26), and we learn the perfection of the likeness from enlightenment. For if the mind does not perfectly receive from the divine light “in its likeness,” then it can have all the other virtues, but remain deprived of perfect love” 1058. So the Lord promised His coming and appearance to those who would show their love for Him through deeds. But Akindinus, out of what seems like a great deal of experience in virtue, creates the opposite interpretation and urges that the house of virtues be built in such a way that the walls are not built to the walls, but the walls are built to the ceiling, trying to show nothing else other than that divine grace is useless and unnecessary for everyone. Therefore, he uses all means to present the interpreters of this truth as disagreeing with each other, either distorting the meaning of what they said, or altering the statements themselves, when he thinks that it is possible to deceive many, as he fully demonstrated by the example of the above [words]. 45. And if somewhere it [was] not easy or convenient for him to do this, even having torn out the whole thought from these statements and plunging them into complete darkness, he thus contrasts them with each other, as he obviously did here. For having deceived and rejected both the words and the thought of the blessed Diadochos, in which he explains about the most divine light, he insists that [the saint] was talking about only consolation. Thus, having obviously slandered this one, he then makes this slander an excuse not to honor the words of the divine Macarius, and, without honoring, makes himself out to be a venerator, in order to mislead his listeners in this too, saying: “I honor the great Macarius, but only to the extent of calling this light of consolation given from God, but not also super-essential.” But won’t anyone who is attached to any evil heresy say these words, that “I honor the words of the fathers, the apostles, and the prophets, but only within certain limits, and not throughout”? If he says that the great Macarius also writes within these limits, then why in another place in his own writings does he declare that Saint Diadochus disagrees with the great Macarius in everything regarding this light, being himself truly in disagreement with both of them in everything and obviously speaking out against both of them by lying against them as if they disagree with each other? 46. ​​Nevertheless, if love and peace and joy alone [arising] from the commandments (Gal. 5:22) is, according to the wisdom of Akindinus, an undelightful manifestation of light, then the great and abundant Basil in everything was not free from delusion. After all, the divine Gregory of Nissa says in his funeral homily: “Was Moses covered in light through the bush? We can also say something akin to this phenomenon about him (Vasily - trans.), how at night there was a shining of light for him when he was praying at home. That light, illuminating the dwelling with divine power, was something immaterial” 1059. But both the great Athanasius and the great Anthony are not free from delusion: after all, one of them saw, and the other clearly wrote what we quoted above 1060, that “looking up, Anthony saw the roof as if opening up, and a certain ray of light descending towards him. And the demons suddenly became invisible, the bodily pain immediately stopped, and the house was whole again. Anthony, feeling this help and breathing more freely, feeling relief from suffering, prayed to the vision that appeared, saying: “Where have you been until now? Why didn’t you come from the very beginning to end my suffering?” And a voice came to him: “Antony, here I was, but I was waiting to see your struggle” 1061. “Time will not allow me to tell” (Heb. 11:32) about the divine manifestations of each of the fathers, but [you can always] hear them singing [about this in church every day. 47. And we, having learned from the experienced fathers of our time, do not consider sensory manifestations of light to be unattractive. We, truly, do not know that those who go through a properly silent life and engage in continuous prayer experience sensual light manifestations, but we have learned from this to conclude about the charm [hidden] in any such contemplation, if the bodily eye, as possessing sensual power, sees what appears. And we believed that those contemplations of the saints were accomplished by spiritual, and not sensual, power, and we were taught that by rejecting, they rejected these, [that is,] imaginary and sensual manifestations of light. And Akindinus, because of these mundane and full of charm, slandering those higher and spiritual contemplations and light manifestations of the sacredly silent ones, did not notice that he mistakenly attributed the grace of the Good Spirit to Belial, but rather was terribly deceived by the common deceiver himself. For not only knowledge, but also virtue can be called light, but it is not accomplished without that light. After all, [Climacus] says: “you will know praiseworthy humility and will not fall into error, [seeing it] present in yourself in a multitude of indescribable light and indescribable love for prayer” 1062, and then: “the soul, freed from what was previously perceived, undoubtedly sees the divine light” 1063, and again: “in beginners, a sign that according to God their steps are the addition humility, in the average - a retreat from warfare, and in the perfect - the addition and abundance of divine light" 1064. And the divine Diadochos, as was written a little higher, says: “We know the perfection of love from enlightenment” 1065. And Simeon, the divinely inspired translator, taking upon himself the person of the great Macarius in these [deeds], says: “The great Apostle Paul made obvious to every soul the perfect sacrament of Christianity, which is the shining of heavenly light in revelation and the power of the Spirit, so that no one, considering that the enlightenment of thoughts through knowledge is the only [enlightenment] of the Spirit, would not be in danger of not achieving the perfect sacrament of grace due to ignorance and frivolity. Therefore, Paul cited the example of the glory of the Spirit surrounding the face of Moses as undoubted proof. “If that which perisheth,” he says, “is in glory: much more is it that which remains in glory” (2 Cor. 3:11), saying “perishable” because glory covered the mortal body of Moses, and he showed the immortal glory of the Spirit in revelation, which now has for those worthy to continually shine in the immortal face of the inner man. For he says: “We all, that is, born of the Spirit by perfect faith, beholding with revealed face the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord” (2 Cor. 3:18). CHAPTER 13. About the fact that Akindinus thoughtlessly says that the mind purified by virtue sees its own special light without divine enlightenment, and foolishly urges to avoid it more than any other consolation of the soul. 48. But [Akindinus] is one and the same, and because of the same thing, he easily either forbids or prescribes, and, moreover, in one work, and thus constantly evades, by what he just said, he proved that sensual light manifestations are satanic, slandering through them spiritual ones, and now begins with the evil intention of presenting them as undelightful. The beginning of his transition to the completely opposite is in some way mixed from both opinions and makes the difference [between them] not very obvious. “One must think,” he says, “that a bright and pure heart sometimes sees light, according to some of the fathers, but the light of consolation, like the fear of God, accomplished by the Spirit, or that the mind sees its own light, according to the great Diadochus, and not uncreated and supersubstantial. But even this own [light must] be rejected because of [the danger of] delusion, resorting to the love of God, done with all the soul and with all the heart and mind.” 49. So, he convinces us to think that the heart, that is, the mind, sees its own light, which is not knowledge, but is not uncreated either, without taking into account the fact that what the sun is for the sensible, God is for the mental 1066. After all, the light of healthy eyes, by which they truly become light when the sun is above the earth, what kind of light is this? Isn't it sunny? And the light, therefore, of the mind, purified through the divine commandments, by which the mind truly becomes light, is what other than divine [light]? “For for those who are ever present,” says [Gregory the Theologian], “God Himself is light, and not anything else, for what is the need for a second light for those who have the greatest light?” 1067 Therefore, the Hellenes and barbarians who did not learn it, even having considerable knowledge, are nevertheless darkened. And the evil one, although because of the skill of the mind, which he uses for the worse, is called “evil,” however, he is obviously darkness, having become as far as possible from the divine light, without which the mind could not even see its own light. “If anyone,” it is said, “wants to see the state of the mind, then let him deprive himself of all thoughts, and then he will see the mind like a sapphire or heavenly color” 1068. And to do this without dispassion is one of the impossible: for it is necessary for God to cooperate and breathe into him a kindred light. 50. So, Akindinus here urges us to think that, according to some of the fathers, the heart sees its own light, which is not knowledge or some kind of disposition, but also sees the light of consolation. However, he himself urges to avoid the light of the mind because of [the danger of] delusion. But, O mystery man and teacher of ineffable [mysteries], - one can rightly say to him, - there is also a charming consolation. Therefore, John Climacus says: “Reject, as unworthy, with the hand of humility the joy that comes, so that, being too receptive, you do not accept a wolf instead of a shepherd” 1069, and in another place again: “look into the coming sweetness, lest it be insidiously mixed by bitter doctors, but rather by conspirators” 1070. Why then do you not advise rejecting what you call the light of sweetness and consolation, but only the [light] of the mind? Do you see that you are an empty talker and a deceiver? This will become most obvious from what follows. CHAPTER 14. The fact that from what he himself now says again, it follows that this unfortunate man declares all the prophets, the apostles, the fathers, and the martyrs from all eternity to be deceived and possessed. 51. For, having declared every sensual manifestation of light to be satanic, and those who see anything like that to be delusional, and demonic, and not knowing the manifestation of light [that comes] from the divine commandments and love of God, which he believes to be knowledge and the only undeceitful light of knowledge, he taught this definitely, having reached this point in his speech and now again explicitly says: “One must think that a pure heart sees, and that the mind sees not only the light of consolation, but also its own light,” and adds: “[sees] divine visions, but in images and imprints and symbols, as the prophets saw.” And, nevertheless, he himself, who a little higher said verbatim that “everything that appears to the mind in an image arises from the enemy’s evil arts,” now says: “A bright and pure heart sees both light and divine forms, but in images, and imprints, and symbols, as the prophets saw, and those who [were preachers] of grace 1071, in the form of doves 1072 and fiery tongues 1073 who have seen the Holy Spirit, or thanks to the divine Savior Christ our God body - His glory and divinity, and not in itself directly, and we will not honor ourselves with more perfect grace than the apostles when we surpass the divine prophets.” 52. Do you see how modest this husband is? Perhaps, with the greatness of his thought alone, which you also see before you, it is measured and compared fairly, as being highly appropriate to him. But, O most humble in disposition and most penetrating in mind, everything that is in the images, and imprints and symbols that you yourself mention - for this is your word about it, and you yourself wrote in your essay that “all divine symbols are bodily outlines and fictions leading to an implicit truth, that is, knowledge” - everything that is in such images, and imprints, and symbols is sensual. For among the truly corporeal there is nothing that is not sensual. So, if everything that the prophets and apostles and their successors saw in the light, and also the mental, but rather spiritual, “cloud of witnesses” 1074, and what the sacred assembly of 1075 saints saw in the images, and imprints and symbols that you yourself speak of, then all of them, therefore, were vouchsafed, according to what you say here, the sensory manifestation of light, which you call a little higher Satanic deception, from which all Christians should turn away and flee. That’s why you insisted that the fathers urged you to flee, as if from satanic delusion, from any sensory manifestation of light, whatever it may be. After all, [this expression] “whatever it is” is attributed by you, and it includes what appeared to the saints in images and prints, and clearly excludes this from the undelightful manifestation of light. 53. But you also said about those who are chasing after this manifestation of light that they do not know that the fulfillment of the divine commandments in itself is an invisible and indelible manifestation of light, not being ashamed even of the promise of the Commander, who promised to come and appear and dwell in those who kept His divine commandments (John 14:21-23). In your opinion, it means that we need to think both: and that everything that in one way or another appeared in an image is satanic delusion, and that from time immemorial prophets, and apostles, and fathers, and martyrs saw with their hearts, in other words, with their minds, both light and divine visions, but in images and prints, so I tremble and think of the blasphemy revealed from this, and you clearly do not make any distinction between God and Mammon and between the possessed and the God-bearing. CHAPTER 15. About the fact that he slanderes the mystery of the Lord’s incarnation, saying that the body of Christ is a symbol of that light, just as the dove seen by the Baptist is a symbol of the Spirit. In this chapter, and that it is faith, and not testimony, that belongs to the statements that we have made about prophetic visions and divine light. 54. What do you and the sight of tongues and a dove put forward against the lordship of the divine nature? After all, no one theologized or meant that the Spirit always has such an appearance. But “the Son, born without beginning from the Father,” says [Damascene], “has a natural, beginningless ray of divinity, not later receiving existence, nor glory itself. And the glory of divinity becomes [with Him also] the glory of the body" 1076. And how, Isaiah “sees a throne high and exalted” (Is. 6:1), Ezekiel – chariots (άρματα) 1077, and the Baptist – the Spirit Himself in the form of a dove (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32) – can you say? Rather, we, in turn, ask you, who previously declared that every sensory manifestation of light, whatever it may be, is delusion, and the evil of the enemy - everything that appears in an image - how did the prophets and [preachers] of grace see [the divine] in images and imprints, as you yourself now confess? Since you have now said that even a bright heart sees such things, how does the heart see images and imprints, and the appearance of a dove and tongues? 55. And we know and believe, having been taught by the words of our fathers, that not only with our hearts, but also with our eyes, the prophets, the apostles, and many saints after them happened to see, and [see] not only this, but also much higher than such. And if anyone asks how they saw, then we will say together with Father Chrysostom: “We don’t know. If anyone wants to know how they saw, then let him become a prophet himself. For this is learned by experience” 1078. That is why we, if anywhere we say anything about the most divine light, then, being forced by contradictions, we speak verbs of faith: what we saw with other eyes; which is not our faculty of perception; that thanks to the Spirit they contemplated. For these are not verbs of the natural order, but of faith. Moreover, knowing that these divine visions are also inexpressible, we perceive what is spoken in a godly manner, learning from them a higher understanding. For truly there is no lion or bull in heaven, and the divine Spirit was not a tongue or a dove before appearing, or after appearing as such. 56. But you, counting the body of Christ among such, are similar to those who think that the Lord appeared as a man, and did not truly become one, and does not now remain in heaven as such: for the Spirit does not now continue to be a dove. And according to these amazing teachings of yours, just as the Baptist of the Lord saw the Holy Spirit through a dove, so the apostles saw His glory and divinity through the body of Christ. So, in your opinion, the impression and symbol, the form and image of the Master's light was the Master's body, and not just a symbol - oh wickedness! – but also illusory and non-hypostatic. It would be appropriate, of course, then to call none of those who had eyes in Judea at that time those who did not see the light that appeared on Tabor, for everyone saw the body of the Lord, which, according to Akindinus, is a symbol of divine light, just as the dove seen by the Baptist is a symbol of the Spirit. However, the dove was not just a symbol of the Spirit, but of the meekness of the Spirit and the good news of deliverance from the mental flood. How could the Baptist, simply seeing a dove, conclude about the descent of the Holy Spirit? But as I said, the essence is above all that contains human language, hearing and sight, those visions, and other ineffable ways that presented the coming of the Spirit to the seer of God 1079. 57. Whatever this method may be, it has nothing close to the incarnation of the Word. For It became flesh, but not also the Spirit; and the dove became a symbol, but not the body of the Spirit. And the body of Christ is truly the body of God, and not a symbol, and, moreover, such that it appears, but does not exist, like a symbolic dove. Of course, we also say about those who ascended the mountain with Jesus that they saw this most divine light through the body, however, not as a symbol of the body, but in such a way that the divine brilliance hidden in it shone out from it and showed that it is truly hypostasized to be united with the nature that exudes this light. And one who puts the incarnation of the Word of God on a par with the sacred visions of the prophets could not even call them a pre-writing (πρόγραμμα) and a shadow of this [incarnation]. So, above Akindinus insisted that this light itself is a symbol, and now he says that the Master’s body is a symbol of this light, so that the body of Christ, according to him, is a symbol of a symbol. If, according to him, all divine symbols are contours and fictions leading to knowledge, then what is the symbol of a symbol, let him teach again. CHAPTER 16. That he himself, of course, is possessed by the insane delusion of which he falsely accused the God-bearers above. 58. By concluding his words: “let us not vouchsafe ourselves a more perfect grace than the apostles, when we surpass the divine prophets,” he therefore hints that he himself has attained this light, that is, the one on which he insists, and such visions, that is, sensual and imaginary. At the same time, he ridicules the thought of those who do not allow imaginary and physical manifestations of light, but assures that the mysterious and sacred visions that occur during sincere prayer should be supersensible. 59. And remember now [the reader] that while he was using me as a teacher 1080, and considered it something great and beneficial for himself to be with me and under my leadership, then, then, having come to me when I lived on the Holy Mountain, and having stayed for a few days, he told me that he sees a certain light, as soon as he remains alone and begins to return his own mind to himself, which light, often opening up from below, revealed from within a certain human face. I, however, declared to him that this was a terrible deception, a mockery, and a Satanic trick, but rather a crafty ambush and a difficult-to-detect trap, and insoluble bonds for those caught, with the help of which the evil one finally interfaced with those defending Hellenic deception, as we said in this word, having shown 1081 this above. And then speaking such [words] to him and holding [him], believe me, with all my soul I wanted, with the help of God, to deliver man from cruel delusion. But some who had known him for a long time - for he lived in the Lavra 1082, into which almost all the clans of people from everywhere flocked, or rather always flock, forming, as it were, a kind of second ecumene and a common abode of the pious [arrived] from everywhere - certain Lavriots (not an insignificant one), having testified something bad about him to the then primate, did not allow [I] accept him as cohabitant. So he left us with this phenomenon that had previously formed in him, and I’m afraid that he is not taking revenge for him, and is he now hinting at him, and as if possessed by him, he spends his life opposing all the saints and those who agree with them. And he rebelled against me most of all, because I then undertook to destroy this light phenomenon and exterminate it. End of the first book of objections to Akindinus. Exodus 35:31. In the Slavic Bible: the Spirit of God, wisdom and reason Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit, 19, 48 – W. Pruche (ed.), Basile de Cesaree. Sur le Saint Esprit, 2nd edn. [Sources chretiennes 17 bis. Paris: Cerf, 1968], p. 85 Literally: “truth” – την του πράγματος άλήθειαν See: Dionysius the Areopagite, On the Heavenly Hierarchy, 1, 2 – PG 3, 121B Avv. 2:15. In Scripture itself: “thy neighbor” Maxim the Confessor. Letter to John Cuvicularius – PG 91, 461D-464A Gregory the Theologian, Moral Poems, 2. Advice to virgins, 311–312, 320–321, 351 – PG 37, 602–603, 606 Diadochus of Photicus, Chapters, 36 – des Places 105 Evagrius of Pontus, Chapters on Prayer, 117 – PG 79, 1193A Quote not identified Diadochus of Photicus, Chapters, 40 – des Places, 108 John of Damascus, Homilia in transfigurationem domini, 12, PG 96, 564C 1 Cor. 8:1. In the Slavic Bible: “the mind is boasting” See: their homily “On the Transfiguration” John of Sinai, Ladder, 28 – PG 88, 1132D Isaac the Syrian, Homily 32 – Σ πετσιέρης, art. 140 He, Word 72 – Σ πετσιέρης 281 Footnote content missing Gregory of Nyssa, About the goal according to God – PG 46, 289ВС Synesius of Ptolemais, De insomniis, 5 – PG 66, 1293D Here is a play on words: “δαιμόνιον – εύδαίμονας” This and the next paragraphs repeat almost verbatim those found in the First Letter to Barlaam, 46–47 Porfiry. About the life of Plotinus, 22 – Brehier, v. 1, p. 24 In Plotinus, as in general among ancient authors, the term “δαιμόνιος” does not carry a negative connotation, and it should rather be translated as “divine” (as M. L. Gasiarov translates this place: “having plucked your soul from God from the tomb, you rush into the highest hosts of the Light gods”), but, following the context of Palamas, we found it necessary to translate it as “demonic” Mauritius. Life of Proclus, 23 – J. F. Boissonade (ed.), Paris, 1862, p. 162–163 Gregory the Theologian, Sermon 39, 5 – PG 36, 340A "λυδία", - more often "λυδία λίθος", - a siliceous stone, originally discovered in Lydia (a region in Asia Minor) and used for the chemical analysis of gold Literally: “that which should be avoided” Wed: 3rd troparion of the canon at Matins on the Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy; 1st Betrothal Prayer at the Marriage Ceremony Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 9, 10 Basil the Great (pseudepigrapha), Against Eunomius, 5 – PG 29, 713A Macarius the Great, Homily 4 (On patience and prudence), 13 – PG 34, 876D Diadochus of Photicus, Chapters, 40 – E. Des Places, Sources Chretienne, v. 5, p. 108 Diadochus of Photicus, Chapters, 89 – E. Des Places, Sources Chrutienne, v. 5, p. 149 Ps. 118:103. The presentation in this paragraph largely follows the Ladder of John of Sinai Literally: “as the road knows” (ώς οίδεν ή ίδός) General Troparion to the Saint, tone 8; Wed: Gen. 1 Translation options: “which follows” or “which replaces” Evagrius of Pontus, Active Chapters to Anatolius (attributed to Nilus of Sinai), 70 – PG 40, 1244A; Neil of Sinai, On various evil thoughts 18 – PG 79, 1221B Troparion for the Immaculates from the rite of burial; Wed: Gen. 1 Diadochus of Photicus, Chapters, 89 – E. Des Places, Sources Chrotiennes, v. 5, p. 149 Diadochos of Photicus, Chapters, 89 – ?. Des Places, Sources Chretiennes, v. 5, p. 149–150 Isaac the Syrian, Homily 32 – Σ πετσιέρης, σ. 140 Maximus the Confessor, Scholium on “On the Divine Names”, 2, 11 – PG 4, 232С This adjective in its proper sense is used exclusively in relation to the moon John Chrysostom, Discourses on the Gospel of John, 14, 1 – PG 59, 92 In Meretakis's edition the words "Λ όγου Πατήρ" are capitalized, but it is absolutely incredible that they refer to the Father of the Word Himself - God the Father. And in the modern Greek translation - in lowercase letters “the father of the word himself,” but even then the meaning remains dark. We translated “ό του λόγου” as “about whom we are talking,” suggesting that we could be talking about Chrysostom, about whom St. Gregory refers in the previous paragraph Amelet (“Knowing no worries” or “Freeing from worries”), according to Plato, is one of the rivers of Hades. Plutarch says that its water cannot be contained in a vessel, but is poured out arbitrarily Diadochus of Photicus, Chapters, 89 – E. Des Places, Sources Chretiennes, v. 5, p. 149 Gregory of Nyssa, Funeral Oration for Basil the Great – PG 46, 809C 6, 10, 31; Wed: 2, 15, 68 Athanasius of Alexandria, Life of St. Anthony, 10 – PG 26, 860A John of Sinai, Ladder, 25 – PG 88, 996A Diadochus of Photicus, Chapters, 89 – E. Des Places, Sources Chretienne, v. 5, p. 149 Gregory the Theologian, Homily 40, 5 – PG 36, 364B Gregory the Theologian, Sermon 44, 3 – PG 36, 609BC Compare: Evagrius of Pontus, Active chapters to Anatolius, 70 - PG 40, 1244A; Neil of Sinai, On various evil thoughts, 18 – PG 79, 1221B John of Sinai, Ladder, 7, 57-PG 88, 813 C Troparion of the Baptism of the Lord Chorus of the 9th song of the canon at Matins of Pentecost Heb. 12:1. St. Gregory Palamas refers to martyrs Literally: "sacred list" (ιερός κατάλογος) John of Damascus, Homilia in transfigurationem domini, 12, PG 96, 564B In fact, in Ezekiel's vision (Ezekiel 1:1–28), it is not chariots that are mentioned, but wheels (τροχοι). Chariots (άρματα) are mentioned in the vision of Zechariah (Zech. 6:1–3). However, some fathers, which Palamas obviously follows, talk about Ezekiel’s vision of the “cherubic chariot” (see, for example: John Chrysostom, Commentary on Ps. 77:4; Macarius of Egypt, Spiritual Discourses, 1) Gregory the Theologian, Sermon 41, 5 – PG 36, 436A Great Lavra Ven. Athanasius on Athos You might be interested in: