C. 1 - What Is the Intention of the Discussion and What Is the Tradition Concerning the Divine Names

What Is the Intention of the Discussion and What Is the Tradition Concerning the Divine Names

Lectio 1

On the Mode of Proceeding in This Work

C. I, § 1. 1. Yet now, O blessed one, after the Theological Hypotyposes, I shall cross over to the opening up of the divine names, as is possible.

2. Yet be even now by us the predefined law of the eloquences, that we should assert the truth of things said about God not in persuasive words of human wisdom (1 Cor 2:4) but in the demonstration of the power of the theologians, moved by the Spirit,

3. according to which we are joined to ineffable and unknown things, ineffably and unknowingly, according to the better union of our reasonable and intellectual power and operation.

4. Therefore universally we must not dare to say nor even to think anything about the supersubstantial and hidden deity (Isa 45:15), beyond those things which divinely are expressed to us from the holy eloquences (1 Cor 4:6).

5. For it is fitting to attribute to it the supersubstantial science of the ignorance of supersubstantiality, which is above reason and intellect and substance itself, and looking to the superior as much as the ray of the thearchic eloquences sends itself to superior splendors, let us be constrained by temperance and sanctity about divine things.

6. For if it is fitting at all to believe all-wise and most true theology, divine things are revealed and inspected according to the proportion of the minds of each, with the thearchic goodness segregating, in saving justice, by immeasurability from the measured, as incomprehensible, as befits God.

7. For just as intelligible things are incomprehensible and uncontemplatable by sensible things; and simple and unfigurable things by these things which are in composition and figure; and the intangible and the unfigurable lacking of the form of incorporeal things by things formed according to the figures of bodies; according to the same ratio of truth, that unity is super-posited above substances which is supersubstantial, and above minds that which is above mind, and to all deliberations that is indeliberable which is above deliberation, and ineffable by every word that which is above word, the good; unity unifying every unity and supersubstantial substance and unintelligible intellect and an unspeakable word and irrationality, unintelligibility, and unnameability, according to nothing existing of existing things and indeed the cause of being for all things, yet itself not existing, as above every substance and such that it might articulate properly and knowingly about itself.

§ 2. 8. Therefore, as has been said, concerning this supersubstantial and hidden deity, we must not dare to say nor to think anything beyond those things that divinely have been expressed to us from the holy eloquences.

9. For just as this itself handed on concerning itself in the eloquences, as befits its being good, for all existing things whatever is science and contemplation of it is inaccessible, as segregated from all things supersubstantially. And you shall find that many of the theologians have praised it not only as invisible and incomprehensible but likewise as inscrutable and non-investigable, as with no vestige existing of those who have crossed over to its hidden infinity.

10. Nevertheless the good is not universally incommunicable to each of existing things, but gathering singularly in itself the supersubstantial ray of each of existing things by proportional illuminations, kindly it super-appears above and extends to its possible contemplation and communion and assimilation holy minds, which, as is acceptable and as befits holy men, send themselves to it, and neither do they proudly presume to higher things than those fittingly given by the apparition of God, nor do they fall to lower things out of subjection to what is worse, but firmly and indeclinably they are extended to its super-resplendent ray and with commensurate love of the fitting illuminations, with holy reverence and chastely and in a holy manner they are elevated higher.

1. In this book, therefore, which is entitled On the Divine Names, after the custom of those who artfully handed on the sciences,

first, he sets out certain things necessary for the following consideration;

second, he begins to pursue his principal intention in chapter 3, which begins, and we shall inspect the naming of the good.

2. About the first, he does two things:

first, he shows the ratio of the divine names;

second, he shows that the names that are treated in this book are common to the whole Trinity; and this in chapter 2, which begins at per se goodness, determining and manifesting.

3. About the first, he does two things:

first, he connects himself to the preceding book, where speaking to blessed Timothy, he says that after the Theological Hypotyposes, that is, the divine distinctions by which the persons in the Trinity are distinguished from one another, he shall cross over to the opening up, that is, to the manifestation of the divine names, according to his ability. For to expound these perfectly seems to be beyond man.

4. Second, at yet be even now, he begins to set out certain things necessary to the following work. Yet he sets out two things:

first of all, the mode of proceeding in this work, for this is necessary to know beforehand in whatever doctrine.

Second, he shows the ratio of the divine names which he intends to treat in this book, at following these thearchic laws.

And these two are expressed well enough in the title of this chapter, which has itself thus: What Is the Intention of the Discussion, as regards the first; and What Is the Tradition Concerning the Divine Names, as regards the second.

5. About the first, he does two things:

first, he shows from what he must proceed in this work;

second what things must be handed on, at therefore universally we must not dare.

6. About the first, he does two things:

first, he shows from what he must proceed in this work, because it must not be supported by human reason, but by divine revelation, receiving this from the Apostle who says in 1 Corinthians 2:4–13: not in persuasive words of human wisdom . . . : but in the doctrine of the Spirit, comparing spiritual things to spiritual things.

And this is what he says: yet be, that is, let there be, even, that is, also, now the law of the eloquences, that is, which is handed on in the Sacred Scriptures, predefined, that is, predetermined, by us, just as once it was by the Apostle; which indeed is the law: that we should assert, that is, should build up or manifest the truth of things said about God, not in persuasive words of human wisdom, that is, not being supported, as the principal middle terms for proving a proposition, by the principles of human wisdom, which proceeds according to natural reason, but in the demonstration of the power of the theologians, that is, of those who handed on the canonical Scripture, namely the apostles and prophets, of the power, I say, moved by the Spirit, namely the Holy Spirit. For Denys, in his doctrine, is supported by the authority of Sacred Scripture, which has strength and power according as the apostles and prophets were moved to speaking by the Holy Spirit revealing to them and speaking in them.

7. Second, he introduces the ratio of the aforementioned law, at according to which we are joined.

And the power of such a ratio is: we can be supported by the principles of human wisdom in those doctrines in which things are handed on which are knowable and speakable for men, and which can be both known and said by these who have that doctrine.

But in the doctrine of the faith there are proposed to man certain things unknown and unspeakable to which those having faith adhere, not by knowing or by perfectly explicating by word, although they adhere to them more certainly and an adhering of this sort is higher than any natural knowledge. In the doctrine of the faith, therefore, we cannot be supported by the principles of human wisdom.

8. And this is what he says: according to which, namely the power of revelation proceeding from the Holy Spirit into the apostles and prophets, through faith we are joined to ineffable and unknown things, that is, to the divine truth which exceeds every human speech and thought. Nor does faith so join us to them that it makes them known and spoken by the believing man as they are, for this would pertain to open vision, but it joins ineffably and unknowingly: for we see now through a mirror, as is said in 1 Corinthians 13:12.

9. And lest anyone were to despise this joining on account of its imperfection, he adds, according to the better union of our rational and intellectual power and operation, that is, above the power and operation of our reason and intellect, so that a genitive might be put for an ablative, after the custom of the Greeks.

For we are joined through faith to higher things than are those to which natural reason attains, and we adhere to them more certainly, as much as divine revelation is more certain than human knowledge. Yet he says, rational and intellectual, because of those things that we naturally know, certain of them are observed by us per se without any investigation, and intellect properly pertains to these; whereas certain of them are known through inquiry, and reason pertains to those. Yet he says, of operation and power, because we know many things by power, which we are not actually regarding.

10. Then when he says, therefore universally we must not dare, he shows what things are handed on in this doctrine;

and first, he poses a proposition;

second, he manifests it, at for it is fitting to attribute.

11. Yet he concludes the proposition from premises. For this also is observed in human sciences: that principles and conclusions are of the same genus. And therefore the principles from which this doctrine proceeds are those which have been received through the revelation of the Holy Spirit and are had in the Sacred Scriptures. Therefore this is what he concludes: that in no way ought anyone to dare to say, with his mouth, nor even to think anything about the hidden supersubstantial deity, which is above every substance, and through this is hidden for us to whom created substances are proportionate for knowing and consequently for speaking, beyond those things which divinely are expressed to us from the holy eloquences, that is, are expressed through the holy eloquences. Yet significantly he does not say, in the holy eloquences, but from the holy eloquences, because whatever can be drawn out from these things that are contained in Sacred Scripture, are not alien to this doctrine, even though they are not contained in Sacred Scripture.

12. Then, when he says, for it is fitting to attribute, he introduces an argument to manifest the proposition;

and first, he poses the argument;

second, he proves certain things that he presupposes in the argument, at for if it is fitting at all.

13. Therefore such is the power of his argument: from what is known by anyone alone, no one can know or speak, unless as much as is manifested by him. Yet it befits God alone perfectly to know himself according to what he is. Therefore no one can speak or think truly about God except inasmuch as it is revealed by God. Which divine revelation indeed is contained in the Sacred Scriptures.

14. And this is what he says: that it is fitting to attribute to it, namely to God alone, supersubstantial science of the ignorance of supersubstantiality, that is, of the unknown divine supersubstantiality; which supersubstantiality indeed is not unknown on account of any defect on its part, but on account of its excess, namely because it is above created reason and intellect and above created substance itself which is the object commensurate with a created intellect, just as uncreated essence is proportionate to uncreated science. And for this reason just as the divine essence is supersubstantial, so also he calls his science supersubstantial. For it is always necessary that the object of a knowing power should be proportionate to that knowing power.

15. Nevertheless lest we should be altogether set in ignorance of God, he adds, it befits us, I say, looking, through spiritual contemplation, to the superior, that is, to what is above us, namely God, to tend, as much as the ray of thearchic eloquences sends itself, that is, extends itself, to superior splendors, that is, to the intelligible truths of divine things.

For the truth of Sacred Scripture is a certain light through the mode of a ray derived from the first truth, which light indeed does not extend itself to this: that through it we should be able to see the essence of God or know all things that God in himself knows or that the angels or the blessed seeing his essence know, but up to some fixed term or measure, the intelligible truths of divine things are manifested by the light of Sacred Scripture.

16. And thus, while we extend to knowing divine things no more than the light of Sacred Scripture extends itself, let us be constrained through this, as though restrained by fixed limits, about divine things, by a certain temperance and sanctity: by sanctity indeed while we conserve the pure truth of the Sacred Scriptures from every error; whereas by temperance, while we do not force ourselves upon them more than is given to us.

17. Then when he says, for if it is fitting at all, he manifests what he had presupposed in this argument:

and first of all, that God is known to himself alone, yet hidden to us;

second, he manifests the mode in which the divine knowledge is communicated to us, at nevertheless the good is not universally incommunicable.

18. He shows the first in two ways:

first of all, by arguments;

second, by authorities, at for just as this itself handed on.

19. Yet he poses, first, two arguments;

of which the first is thus: divine things are revealed by God according to the proportion of those to whom they are revealed; but to know the infinite is above the proportion of a finite intellect; therefore this very what-God-is itself is not known by anyone from divine revelation.

20. And this is what he says: certain divine things are revealed by God and inspected by us, according to the proportion of the minds of each. And I say this: if it is fitting at all to believe theology, that is, Sacred Scripture all-wise and most true. For Matthew 25:15 says, he gave . . . to each according to his power.

21. And it must be noted that he poses two reasons from which it is had that Sacred Scripture is most of all to be believed. For that someone is not believed happens from two causes: either because he is or is reputed to be ignorant, or because he is or is reputed to be a liar. Whence, since Sacred Scripture is all-wise and most true because revealed and handed on by God who is truth and knowing all things, Sacred Scripture is most of all to be believed.

22. And I say this, with the thearchic, that is, divine, goodness segregated from the measured, that is from finite things, by immeasurability, that is, by the infinity of the divine essence, not indeed so that in no way it may be known, but so that it may not be comprehended. And on account of this he adds, as incomprehensible. For indeed by the blessed the divine essence is attained by the mind yet is not comprehended. And this indeed God does in saving justice. For the ratio of distributive justice consists in this: that there is given to each according to his condition. And just as through the order of distributive justice established by the prince of a city, the whole political order is saved, so through this order of justice the whole order of the universe is saved by God; for with this subtracted all things would remain confused. And this indeed he does as befits God; for it befits him by his goodness to save those whom he fashions.

23. He poses a second argument, at for just as intelligible things, which is thus: a superior grade of beings cannot be comprehended through an inferior, just as intelligible things cannot be comprehended perfectly through sensible things, nor simple things through composite things, nor incorporeal things through corporeal things; but God is above every order of existing things; therefore through nothing of existing things can he be comprehended.

24. And this is what he says: for just as intelligible things are incomprehensible and uncontemplatable by sensible things, that is, through sensible things; and simple and unfigurable things through those which are in composition and figure, that is, which are composite and figured (for there is no figure except of composite things); and just as a lacking or privation of the form, namely bodily, of things incorporeal, which lacking or privation indeed is intangible and unfigurable, that is, incorporeal things themselves, which lack form and are intangible and unfigurable (so that we might understand the abstract to be posited for the concrete) are incomprehensible and uncontemplatable by things formed according to the figures of bodies, that is, for bodies themselves, thus, I say, is this according to the same* ratio *of truth: that unity is super-posited, that is, God, who is unity itself as though existing as one through his own essence, which is supersubstantial, is super-posited above substances; and which is above mind is super-posited above minds, that is, intellectual spirits; and the good itself, namely God, which is above deliberation, that is, above every reason, is indeliberable to all deliberations, that is, non-investigable by any created reason; and which is above word, that is, above every speech of a creature, is ineffable, that is, unspeakable, by every created word.

25. Where he touched on four things, namely: substances, which are objects of knowledge; mind, that is, simple intellect; deliberation, that is, inquiring reason, which pertains to the knowing powers; and word, which pertains to the manifestation of thought. Yet he posits these four because he not only intends to show that God cannot be comprehended through any knowing power or manifested perfectly by speech, but that neither through any created object or through whatever created likeness. Whence also in the examples that he posits, he does not say that intelligible things are incomprehensible to the senses, but to sensible things, because through sensible things intelligible things cannot be comprehended. And there is the same ratio concerning the others.

26. And it must be considered that not only did he say that intelligible things are incomprehensible for sensible things, but also uncontemplatable, because through those things that are of an inferior order, not only can those things that are of a superior order not be comprehended, but neither can they be contemplated. For then we contemplate through another, when through one thing we can see the essence of another in order to know of it what it is. Yet its essence is comprehended when it is known as perfectly as it is knowable. For he who knows a demonstrable conclusion through a probable middle term, although he contemplates it in some way, nevertheless does not comprehend it because he does not attain to the perfect mode of his knowledge.

27. Therefore God is indeed incomprehensible to every created intellect, because he is above every mind and reason, as having more from the clarity of truth in his essence, which pertains to his knowability, than any creature from its power for knowing. Whence no creature can attain to the perfect mode of the knowledge of him, which he named supersubstantial science, and this would be to comprehend him.

Nevertheless a created intellect can contemplate his essence by attaining it in some way, nevertheless not through any object or species or whatever created likenesses, because none of these can lead by the hand to the divine essence, much less than a body to an incorporeal essence.

Therefore, according to Denys’ argument, it is necessary to say that God both is incomprehensible to every intellect and uncontemplatable to us in his essence, as long as our knowledge is bound to created things, as connatural to us; and this is the case in the state of the way.

28. And because he had called God a unity, lest anyone should believe that he is a unity formally inhering in things, as though participated in these things, to exclude this he adds, unity, namely subsisting per se, unifying every unity, that is, diffusing unity in all things, which in whatever mode participate in unity. Then, because he had named God supersubstantial unity and good above mind, someone could believe that God in no way can be called substance or mind or something of this sort, and for this reason, to exclude this he adds that God is indeed substance but supersubstantial.

29. For the evidence of which it must be considered that names, since they are imposed by us, so signify according as things fall in our knowledge. Since therefore this very what-God-is itself is above our knowledge, as has been shown, yet our knowledge is commensurate with created things, names imposed by us do not so signify according as they correspond to the divine excellence, but according as they apply to the existence of created things.

Yet the being of created things is drawn off from the divine being according to a certain deficient assimilation.

Therefore, according as in whatever way there is a likeness of created things to God, names imposed by us can be said of God, not indeed such as they are of creatures, but through a certain excess, and this signifies what he says: that God is supersubstantial substance; and likewise what he adds: that he is unintelligible intellect, that is, not such as are intellects that are understood by us; and he is an unspeakable word, that is, not such as are the words that are said by us.

30. Yet just as names imposed by us can be said of God according as there is some likeness of creatures to God, so according as creatures fail of the representation of God, names imposed by us can be removed from God and their opposites predicated. Whence he adds that God so is called reason, that he can be called also irrationality; and so is called intellect, that he can be called unintelligibility; and so is called word, that he can be called unnameability—not indeed on account of these things being deficient for him, but because according to nothing of existing things is it existing, that is, he does not exist according to the mode of any existing thing; and he indeed is the cause of existing for all things, pouring his likeness in some way into all things, so that thus he can be named from the names of creatures; yet it is non-existing, not as though failing of being, but as existing above every substance; and he is unnameable, such that it might articulate properly and knowingly about itself, that is, according to the propriety of his being and according to his perfect science of himself, by which mode no one can articulate him.

31. From the things already said, he infers the principal conclusion when he adds, therefore concerning this supersubstantial and hidden deity, as has been said, we must not dare to say nor to think anything beyond those things that divinely have been expressed to us from the holy eloquences; which has been expounded above.

32. Then, when he adds, for just as this itself handed on, what was shown above by arguments, he shows by authority, when he says that this, deity, handed on concerning itself in the holy eloquences, as befits its being good, that is, his goodness, in order to hand on the truth, namely, concerning himself; this, I say, itself handed on, because for all existing things science and contemplation of it is inaccessible, that is, no one can come to it, not indeed by whatever sort of science or contemplation, but by that by which there is known what he is or from this there is contemplated what he is; which indeed is comprehensive science of his substance. And this science indeed or contemplation is inaccessible to that reason, because it is segregated from all things supersubstantially, that is, according to the supersubstantial excess of the deity. For to him alone does it apply to know of himself what he is.

33. And this especially seems to be taken from what is said in Exodus 33:20: man shall not see me and live; and 1 Timothy 6:16: he inhabits inaccessible light, which no one from among men sees nor can see. And you shall find that many of the theologians have praised it not only as invisible and incomprehensible, but also as inscrutable and non-investigable, according to Job 11:7: perhaps comprehending the vestiges of God; and Romans 11:33: how incomprehensible are his judgments and unsearchable his ways.

34. And why he should be called non-investigable, he consequently expounds: as with no vestige existing of those who have crossed over to its hidden infinity. Yet one negation there is superfluous, and he speaks according to the propriety of the term: for to investigate properly is to be led through the vestiges of someone going through the way to the end of the way. Therefore the deity could be investigated, if any men having come to the knowledge of him had left for us some instructions, as though certain vestiges, through which we could come to see God. But this is not the case: either because no men have crossed over to this, if it should be referred to comprehensive vision, or because those who have crossed over to seeing God through his essence, as all the blessed, could not express to us the divine essence itself. Whence also Paul, snatched up to the third heaven, says that he heard arcane words, which are not permitted to man to speak (2 Cor. 12:4).

35. Therefore he excludes a threefold mode of knowledge:

first of all, that by which something is seen through itself, and this when he calls the deity invisible;

second, the mode in which something is known through the inquiry of reason, and this when he calls it inscrutable: for to scrutinize implies inquiry;

third, the mode in which something is known by learning from another, when he says non-investigable.

36. Then, when he says, nevertheless the good is not universally incommunicable, he manifests how the knowledge of the hidden deity is communicated to others. For it would be against the ratio of the divine goodness, if he so retained his knowledge to himself that he would communicate it to absolutely no other, since it is of the ratio of the good that it should communicate itself to others. And for this reason he says that although the science of the supersubstantial God must be attributed to God alone, nevertheless, since God is the good itself, it cannot be that he would not communicate to any of existing things.

37. Nor nevertheless is his knowledge so communicated to others just as he knows himself; but gathering, that is, firmly conserving singularly in itself the supersubstantial ray, that is, reserving the supersubstantial knowledge of his truth to himself alone, he super-appears, as though he should say, appears from above, kindly, as though not from necessity but from grace, by proportional illuminations, that is, according to proportional illuminations, of each of existing things, as though he should say, the ratio of his goodness is such that, with a certain mode of knowledge reserved to itself which is singular to itself, from his grace he communicates to inferiors some mode of knowing, according to his illuminations, which are according to the proportion of each.

38. And not only does he super-appear and illuminate, but also the very fact that inferior minds, illuminated using the light given, come to know him, is from him. And this is what he adds: that it extends the holy minds to the contemplation of it possible to them, because, as has been said above, in some mode he is contemplatable by all things. And because those who contemplate him in some way are made one with him (according as the intellect in act is in some way the being understood in act) and consequently they are assimilated to him as informed by him, he adds, and communion and assimilation.

39. Yet consequently he shows the conditions of the holy minds that are extended into God:

the first of which is that, according as it is licit for them from divine concession, and according as it befits them from their proper condition, they bear themselves to him. Whence he adds, which, namely minds, send themselves to it, that is, God, as is acceptable and as befits holy men, namely such that they presume neither to something higher from pride, namely above what has been given to them fittingly according to the apparition or revelation of God, nor again do they fall to lower things, that is, they do not throw themselves down below what has been given to them, from subjection to what is worse, that is, from a certain pusillanimity, by which, abandoning better things, they adhere to worse ones.

The second condition of the holy minds is that firmly and indeclinably they are extended to its super-resplendent ray, that is, to the truth manifested to them from above, so that firmness might be referred to certitude and indeclinability to immobility.

The third condition is that they should exhibit the affection of love for the divine things manifested; and this is what he adds: and with commensurate love of fitting illuminations, namely such that their affection about these things pursues them, which are given to them according to their measure, through which they are elevated to divine things by spiritual wings, namely intellectual contemplations, with holy reverence and chastely and in a holy manner: reverently indeed, inasmuch as they abstain from other things which are above these; yet chastely, inasmuch as they do not detain themselves with inferior things; whereas in a holy manner, inasmuch as they adhere firmly to these things which are given to them according to the ordination of God.

Lectio 2

On the Knowledge That We Can Receive of God Through the Divine Names

§ 3. 11. Following these thearchic laws, which both govern all the holy adornments of the supercelestial orders and substances, which indeed is above mind and substance, venerating the hiddenness of the thearchy, with inscrutable and holy reverences of mind, and venerating unspeakable things with a chaste silence, we are extended to splendors shining upon us in the holy eloquences and by these we are illuminated to the thearchic hymns, illuminated by these super-mundanely and figured to the holy enunciations of the hymns both unto seeing through them commensurately the thearchic lights given to us and unto praising the principle of the whole apparition of holy light, which the good gives, as it handed on from itself in the holy eloquences:

12. as that it is the cause and principle and substance and life of all things; and the calling back and resurrection of those cutting themselves off from it; yet the renewal and reformation of those things that have lapsed into the corruptive of the deiform; yet the holy gathering of those things that are moved according to a certain unclean commotion; and the confirmation of the standing; and the uplifting leading by the hand to it of acts from above; and the illumination of those that are illuminated; and the principle of perfection of those things that are perfected; and the thearchy of those things that are deified; and the simplicity of those things that are simplified; and the unity of those things that are united; supersubstantially the super-principal principle of all principles; the good handing on of what is hidden, according as is fitting; and, so that it might be said more simply, the life of the living, the substance of existing things, the principle and cause of all life and substance, on account of its goodness which both leads existing things to being and contains them.

§ 4. 13. Yet these things we remember from the divine eloquences and, so that it might be said thus, you shall find every holy hymn of the theologians by dividing the names of God manifestively and lauditively to the good processions of the thearchy.

14. Whence in almost every theological business, we see the thearchy praised in a holy manner: as monad indeed and unity, on account of the simplicity and unity of supernatural impartibility from which, as by unifying power, we are united and, with our divisible othernesses super-mundanely concluded, we are gathered together to a deiform monad and to a unition imitative of God; yet as Trinity on account of the manifestation of the supersubstantial fecundity of the three persons, from which every paternity in heaven and on earth is also named (Eph 3:15); yet as cause of existing things, because all things are led to being on account of its substantifying goodness. Yet wise and beautiful, because all existing things conserving their proper nature uncorrupted, are full of all divine harmony and holy adornment. Yet kind differently, because in one of its own persons it has communicated with us totally unto truth, calling back to itself and restoring human extremity, from which ineffably simple Jesus was composed and eternal he received temporal presentation and was made among our nature, who supersubstantially exceeds every order according to every nature, with unchangeable and unconfused gathering of what is proper and also whatever other deific lights, the hidden tradition of our leaders has given to us manifestively according to the succession of the divine eloquences.

15. These things also we have been taught: now, indeed, according to our proportion, through the holy veils of the eloquences and of the hierarchical traditions, with kindness veiling intelligible things with sensible things and supersubstantial things with existing things and placing forms and figures around unformable and unfigurable things and multiplying and composing supernatural and unfigurable simplicity with a variety of divisible signs; yet then, when we shall be incorruptible and immortal and shall attain the Christoform and most blessed end, we shall be always with the Lord (1 Thess 4:17), according to the eloquence, filled indeed with the visible apparition of God himself in most chaste contemplations, refulgent about us with most manifest splendors, just as around the disciples in that most divine transformation (Matt 17:5, Mark 9:6, Luke 9:32, 34), yet participants of the intelligible gift of his own light, by impassible and immaterial mind and a unition above mind, by unknown and blessed admissions of super-clear rays in a more divine imitation of the supercelestial minds. For we shall be equal to the angels, as the truth of the eloquences says, and sons of God, existing as sons of the resurrection: (Luke 20:36)

16. Yet now, as is possible for us, indeed we use proper signs for divine things and from them again proportionally we are extended to the simple and united truth of intelligible miracles, and after every unition of deiform things according to us, sedating our intellectual operations, we send ourselves to the supersubstantial ray, according as it is permissible for us;

17. in which there preexist all the ends of all knowledge super-ineffably, which it is possible neither to know, nor to say, nor totally to contemplate in any mode, because it is segregated from all things and super-unknown;

18. and indeed it pre-receives in itself the terminations of all substantial knowledge and powers simultaneously and all supersubstantially, and above all celestial minds it is gathered by incomprehensible power.

19. For if knowledge is of all existing things and if existing things have an end, what is above every substance also is segregated from all knowledge.

§ 5. 20. And indeed, if it is better than every speech and all knowledge, it also is gathered universally above mind and substance.

40. After Denys has shown the mode of this doctrine as regards those things that are handed on in it and from which it proceeds, here he begins to pursue the ratio of the divine names, about which he is concerned in this book:

and first, he shows what knowledge of God we can receive through the divine names;

second, how God can be named, at and indeed it pre-receives in itself.

41. About the first he does two things:

first he shows what knowledge of God we can receive through the divine names;

second, he shows how, after knowledge of this sort, this very what-God-is itself remains hidden to us, and this at yet now, as is possible for us.

42. About the first he does two things:

first he shows how knowledge of God can be received through the divine names;

second, he assigns the difference between this knowledge and the knowledge that will be in the fatherland, at these things also we have been taught.

43. About the first, he does two things:

first, he shows what knowledge of God we can receive through the divine names;

second, he shows this as though by examples, through certain names of God, at yet now, as is possible for us.

44. Therefore he says first that we, following these, namely the aforementioned thearchic, that is, divine, laws, namely that commensurately according to our measure and firmly and with love we should imitate the divine illuminations; which laws indeed govern not only holy men, but also the holy adornments of the supercelestial orders and substances, that is, adorn the beautiful and ordered dispositions of the angels; venerating through this also the hiddenness of the deity, which indeed is above mind and substance, by inscrutable reverences of the mind, that is, disposed to God in that we do not scrutinize the hidden things of God; and holy, because such reverence pertains to sanctity; and venerating the unspeakable things of the deity with a chaste silence, which indeed he says, because we venerate hidden things by not scrutinizing them and ineffable things by keeping silent about them; and this indeed arises from sanctity and chastity of mind, not extending itself beyond its limits;

thus, I say, venerating divine things, according to the result of the divine laws, we are extended to splendors shining upon us in the holy eloquences, that is, to the truths of Sacred Scripture revealed to men, and by these splendors of Holy Scripture, we are illuminated to the thearchic hymns, that is, to know the divine names, by which God is praised. For through these we know how to praise God as living, good, and other things of this sort, which here are handed on to us concerning God in the Sacred Scriptures;

we, I say, illuminated by these hymns, super-mundanely, that is, beyond the power of natural reason, and in a certain way configured to the holy enunciations of the hymns, that is, of the divine praises which are handed on in the Scriptures through the divine names, namely inasmuch as we are informed by their faith. Illuminated, I say, and figured unto this, namely, so that through hymns of this sort we might see, according to our measure, the thearchic, that is, divine, light given to us; and to this: so that we might praise the principle of the whole holy apparition of spiritual light; which principle indeed hands on not only spiritual light to our minds, but universally the good, as it hands on the very principle from itself in the holy eloquences; in Psalm 103:28 it is said: when you open your hand, all things shall be filled with goodness; and in Luke 11:13: your Father from heaven shall give the good Spirit to those asking him.

45. This therefore is the sense of the foregoing: that we should desist from the scrutinizing of divine things according to our reason, but should adhere to Sacred Scripture, in which the divine names are handed on to us, through which the gifts of God and the principle of the gifts are manifested to us. Therefore through the divine names, which are handed on to us in the Sacred Scriptures, we know two things, namely: the diffusion of holy light and of whatever goodness or perfection, and the very principle of this diffusion, as when we call God living, we know the diffusion of life in creatures and that the principle of this diffusion is God. And this principle indeed we do not know through the divine names as he is, for this is unspeakable and inscrutable, but we know him as principle and as cause.

46. And to manifest the ratio of this principle, first he posits certain things that pertain to the universal ratio of the principle, when he says, as that it is the cause and principle of all things, so that cause might be referred to the end, which is the first of causes, and principle to the agent cause, from which operation and motion begins. Yet afterwards he posits those things that pertain to the ratio of the principle with respect to determinate effects: and first, as regards the institution of things, when it is said, and substance and life, namely because through this principle all existing things exist and all living things live; then, as regards the betterment of things in spiritual matters, which indeed is considered according to three things, that is, according to purgation, illumination, and perfection.

47. Yet these three things are fulfilled by the angels according to intellect only: who indeed purge, by removing ignorance; who illuminate the intellect, by granting help for knowing the truth; yet who perfect while they lead to the knowledge of the truth. For the perfection of a thing consists in this: that it should attain to the end. Whence in the seventh chapter of the Angelic Hierarchies it is said that the assumption of the divine science is purgation, illumination, perfection. (Dionysius, The Angelic Hierarchies, c. 7, n. 3 [MG III, 209 C]. See also nn. 286, 327 of this work.)

But it pertains to God to change not only the intellect but also the will for the better, and as regards this he speaks here concerning purgation, illumination, and perfection.

48. Yet he posits five things pertaining to purgation. For since sin, by which the will is polluted, occurs because a man, on account of a temporal good, is turned away from the unchangeable good, the first thing in the purgation of his will is that the will should be led back to the unchangeable good; and as regards this he says that divinity is the calling back and resurrection of those cutting themselves off from it, namely through sin. And he posits calling back and resurrection, because not only does he draw us, which is to call back, but he also gives strength so that, having been called back, we might rise.

Yet the second is that, because God pleases the human will, he should forsake that changeable good on account of which he receded from God; and as regards this he says that God is the renewal and reformation of those things that have lapsed into the corruptive of the deiform, that is, of the divine likeness in us; yet this is sin.

Yet it happens, while God begins to please someone and sin to displease him, that from the beginning he should suffer a certain wavering of mind, drawn now here and now there, whence he needs to be gathered in one; and as regards this, third, he says that God is the holy gathering of those things that are moved according to a certain unclean commotion.

Yet further man needs, after he has been gathered in one, to be confirmed in it, lest through temptations he should be removed easily from that state; and as regards this he says, fourth, that he is the confirmation of the standing.

Yet further it is necessary that man should advance to better things; and as regards this, fifth, he says that he is the uplifting leading by the hand of acts from above, that is, of those that are done from above, that is, that advance, to it, namely to the deity. Yet he is called the uplifting leading by the hand, because not only does he stretch out a hand of help to those wishing to advance, but also he arouses to advancing.

49. After these five, therefore, which pertain to purgation, he adds something concerning illumination, when he says, and of those that are illuminated, the illumination, which illumination indeed is understood as regards this: that he hands on the light of his grace to the perfection of the intellect or to the perfection of affection.

50. And further he adds something concerning perfection, which indeed he touches on in two ways:

first of all, according as something is said to be perfected through attaining a proximate end, for example, justice or whatever sort of virtue; and this when he says, and the principle of perfection of those things that are perfected, with respect to their proper perfection, because whatever the proper perfection of a thing is principally preexists in God, just as the guidance of a city principally preexists in the ruler.

Whereas as regards the attainment of the ultimate end, he says, and the thearchy, that is, the principal deity, of those things that are deified. For the rational creature is said to be deified through this: that in his mode, he is united to God; such that deity principally applies to God himself, whereas secondarily and participatively to these who are deified.

51. Yet further, he posits those things that pertain to the betterment of all things commonly. Yet it must be considered that a twofold procession is found in things, namely of resolution and of composition; and according to both, things tend to the divine likeness.

For according to the way of resolution, things tend from composition to simplicity, which chiefly is in God; and as regards this he says that he is the simplicity of those things that are simplified.

Yet according to the way of composition, things tend from multitude to unity, while one is made from many. Yet unity first is in God; and as regards this he says, and the unity of those things that are united.

Yet not only is it communicated by God to things that they should subsist in themselves and be made better, but also that they should be the principle or cause of existence and betterment for other things; and as regards this, he adds that he is supersubstantially the super-principal principle of all principles. For he is not a principle in the same mode as other things, but more eminently; for thus he has being more eminently.

And in order to comprehend simultaneously the universal effects of God, he adds that he is the good handing on of what is hidden. For it is manifest that whatever things are in creatures, preexist more eminently in God. But creatures indeed are manifest to us, yet God is hidden. And therefore, according as the perfections of things are derived from God through a certain participation into creatures, in what is manifest there is made a handing on of what is hidden; and this is made according as is fitting, namely, according to the determinate proportion of each.

52. And because he had said that God is the substance and life of all things, lest anyone were to understand that God were formal essence or life coming into the composition of things, he excludes this perverse understanding, when he adds, and, so that it might be said more simply, that is, said universally, the life of the living and substance, that is, essence, of what exists, which is the agent principle and fontal cause of all life and substance, not indeed on account of his necessity, but on account of its goodness, which both leads existing things to being and contains them, that is, conserves them in being. And as he expounds concerning substance and life, so it must be understood also concerning all the following things, namely so that God might be understood to be the calling back and reformation of things and the simplicity and unity and other things that he said above, inasmuch as he is the principle and cause of these.

53. Then, when he says, yet these things we remember from the divine eloquences, he manifests through certain divine names posited in the Scriptures, that we gain knowledge of God from the aforementioned divine names; and he says that these things that have been said above, namely, that through the divine names God is known as principle and cause, we do not say from our own selves, but we commemorate it by receiving from the divine eloquences and, so that it might be said thus, every holy hymn, that is, praise of God, of the theologians, you shall find, if you search diligently in the Scriptures, by dividing, that is, distinguishing, the names of God to the good processions of the thearchy, that is, according to the processions of perfection, which come from the divine goodness into creatures.

54. For that God is called good, living, wise, and is named by many other names, is not from some multitude or diversity existing in his nature (because all these things are one in him), but from the diverse perfections of creatures we receive diverse names, which we attribute to God as the first principle of all these processions; and this manifestively and lauditively: manifestively, indeed, inasmuch as God is made known to us through his effects and inasmuch as through names of this sort, attributed to God, it is manifested to us that perfections of this sort are in things from God; whereas lauditively, inasmuch as the whole of this pertains to the goodness of God: that perfections should be communicated to things.

55. And he first expounds this in the name of unity, adding that in almost every theological business, that is, in every book of theology, we see the thearchy, that is, deity, praised as monad and unity; which two seem to signify the same thing, since one is Greek and the other Latin. Which name of unity indeed seems especially to be attributed to God on account of two things: first of all, on account of what he is in himself; and this he touches on when he says, on account of the simplicity and unity of supernatural impartibility. For the ratio of unity consists in impartibility; for one is being that is not divided.

Yet it happens that some things are not divided in act that are divided in potency, as a line or a house, both of which can be called one, but not simply. Whereas there is something undivided not only actually, but also potentially, such as unity and a point; and these can be called not only one, but also simple.

Yet in God there consists both indivisibilities, because he is not divided actually or potentially; and for this reason significantly he said, on account of the simplicity and unity, and he adds, of supernatural impartibility, because no simplicity or unity of natural things can be compared to the divine simplicity and unity.

56. Whereas second, the name of unity is attributed to God on account of his communicating unity to things; and this is what he adds: from which, namely from the divine unity, as by marvelous unifying power, two things come to us: the first of which is that we are united, that is, we have a certain unity, according to which there is said one man or one animal; the second is that, since our unity is not so perfect that it excludes every diversity, even those things that are diverse in us, are reduced to a certain unition, according to which even those things that are simply diverse in creatures, are one by a certain order, so that in this way at least they might imitate the unity of God; and this is what he says, that we are gathered together to a certain deiform, that is, like God, monad, that is, unity, as regards those things that already have been made one; and to a certain unition imitative of God, as regards those things that are being made one; and this, with our divisible, that is, which occur from some division, othernesses, that is, diversities, concluded, super-mundanely, that is, by super-mundane power.

Or what he says, we are united, can be referred to the fact that each thing is one in itself; yet what follows, and with our divisible othernesses, can be referred to the fact that many things, although they are diverse and other, nevertheless are reduced to a certain unity either perfectly or imperfectly. For monas, that is, unity, designates the perfection of unity; whereas unition designates the way to unity, in which the imperfection of unity is shown.

57. Then he shows the same in the name of Trinity; and he says that we find that God is praised as Trinity to manifest the supersubstantial fecundity of the three persons, which are not distinguished except according to origin; from which divine fecundity indeed there is derived every paternity, that is, the fecundity that is understood by the name of paternity, as the Apostle says, in Ephesians 3:15, that from God the Father every paternity in heaven and on earth is named; nor only named, but also exists or is caused.

58. Yet third, he manifests the same in the name of cause; and he says that God is praised as the cause of existing things, on account of the fact that all things are led to being from his goodness, substantifying things, yet not from necessity of nature.

59. Yet fourth, he manifests the same through the name of wise and of beautiful; and he says that the theologians praise the deity as wise and beautiful, because all existing things, in which their proper nature is found preserved without corruption, are full of all divine harmony, that is, perfect consonance or order from God and are, again, full of holy adornment; so that what he says: harmony, might be referred to wisdom to which it belongs to order and to measure things; yet what he says: adornment, especially might be referred to beauty. Yet through the fact that something is diminished from harmony or adornment, corruption occurs in things, according to a departure from their proper nature, as sickness in bodies and sin in the soul.

60. Fifth he manifests the same concerning the name of kindness; and he says that divine Scripture praises the deity as kind, differently however from the aforementioned names. For according to the aforementioned names, God is praised inasmuch as he has not communicated what is his; yet he is praised as kind, inasmuch as in the work of the Incarnation, in one of the deity’s own persons, namely in the person of the Son, it has communicated with us, that is, with these things that pertain to our nature, not bearing a celestial body, as Valentinus said; unto truth, that is, according to truth, not fantastically, as Mani said; totally, that is, as regards all the parts of our nature, not assuming a body without a soul or a soul without a body or a soul and a body without an intellect, as Arius and Apollinaris said.

And to show the end of the Incarnation, he adds, calling back from the state of sin human extremity, that is, human nature, which is the last of creatures, according to the order of creation, to itself, namely the deity, and not only calling back by removing, but also restoring, by operating.

61. And lest anyone were to believe that he has so communicated with us, according to dwelling only, as Nestorius said, as opposed to according to a true union in person and hypostasis, namely such that he, who is God, is truly man, he adds, from which, namely from the deity operating, or from which, that is, according to which humanity, Jesus, who is ineffably simple, according to deity, himself the same in hypostasis is composed according to humanity; and he who is eternal, according to deity, received temporal presentation, that is, to be temporal in this present time, according to human nature; and who, according to deity, supersubstantially excels every order according to every nature, was made among our nature, truly man contained under the human species just as other men also; through all of which he gives to understand that the same supposit is God and man.

62. And lest anyone perversely would understand that God is made man according to some conversion of deity into flesh or into soul or even according to some assemblage such that there would be one nature of God and man, as Eutyches devised, he adds, with unchangeable and unconfused gathering, that is, firm preservation, of what is proper, that is, the propriety of either nature, because neither was divinity converted into humanity nor humanity into divinity.

63. And because about the mystery of the Incarnation many things could be said, which he omits at present, because his principal intention is not about this, he adds that not only the aforementioned things are understood through the divine kindness, but also whatever other deific lights, that is, whatever other divine illuminations and truths, the hidden tradition of our leaders, namely of the apostles and the other doctors after them, has given to us manifestively according to the succession of the divine eloquences, that is, according to what is handed on in Sacred Scripture.

64. Then when he adds, these things also we have been taught, he shows the difference between the knowledge that we receive in the present life concerning God through the divine names, and the knowledge that the saints have in the future life, when he says that these things that have been said in the exposition of the divine names concerning God, we have been taught now, that is, in the present life, according to our proportion through the holy veils of the eloquences, that is, of Sacred Scripture, and of the hierarchical traditions, that is, of the other dogmas that the apostles and their disciples handed on that are not contained in Sacred Scripture, as for example those that pertain to the knowledge of the sacred mysteries. For hierarchy is the same as sacred principate, whence the apostles and the other prelates of the Church are called hierarchs as though sacred princes.

Yet he says, through the holy veils, because in the present life, through those things that have been handed down to us, we cannot see the very essence of God, as it is in itself, but we are instructed concerning God in the Scriptures through the likeness of his effects, as through certain veils, according to 1 Corinthians 13:12: we see now through a mirror in obscurity.

65. Whereas such are the veils that he expounds adding that from the goodness of God intelligible things are veiled about through sensible ones, as when the Scriptures speak of God and the angels under the likeness of certain sensible things, as is clear in Isaiah 6:1: I saw the Lord sitting upon a lofty throne; and below: the seraphim were standing upon it, six wings on one and six wings on the other (Is. 6:2); and likewise there are veiled supersubstantial things, namely divine things, with existing things, as when there are attributed to God not only sensible things, but also the intelligible perfections of creatures, as when we attribute to God life, intellect, and perfections of this sort found in created things; likewise from the same goodness bodily forms and figures are placed around incorporeal things not thus formable or figurable;

and, likewise, a thing simply supernatural and unfigurable manifoldly is composed through a variety of divisible signs, namely inasmuch as God himself, who is supernatural and simple, is manifested to us through diverse things in Scripture, whether they should be diverse processions or diverse likenesses. Yet significantly he said with kindness; for that intelligible things are expressed to us in the Scriptures through sensible things and supersubstantial things through existing things and incorporeal things through bodily things and simple things through composed and diverse things, is not on account of envy, so that the knowledge of divine things might be withdrawn from us, but on account of our utility, because Scripture condescending to us has handed on to us those things that are above us, according to our mode. And this mode of knowledge indeed is that by which we can know God in the present life.

66. Yet then, namely after the blessed resurrection, when we shall be incorruptible and immortal, with this corruptible receiving incorruption, and this mortal receiving immortality, as is said in 1 Corinthians 15:53, and when we attain the Christoform end, that is, assimilation to Christ, according to Philippians 3:21: he shall reform the body of our humility, configured to the body of his clarity, and most blessed because not only shall the soul be beatified but also, in its own mode, the body shall be glorified, then we shall be always with the Lord, according to the eloquence, as is said in 1 Thessalonians 4:17.

We, I say, filled with the visible apparition, that is, sensible and bodily, of God himself, as regards the humanity of Christ, and this in most chaste contemplations, because to the flesh of Christ we are not affected carnally, but spiritually, according to that saying of the Apostle in 2 Corinthians 5:16: and if we have known according to the flesh of Christ, but now we do not know; with Christ himself, I say, refulgent about us through the clarity of his body, with most manifest splendors, just as was made around the disciples in that most divine transformation, that is, the Transfiguration, as is had in Matthew 17:2: his face was resplendent as the sun; and not only shall we be filled with the sensible apparition of him, but we shall also be participants of the intelligible gift of Christ’s own light, which he pours out into us, according to the power of his divinity.

67. And we shall participate in this light in impassible and immaterial mind. For our mind now is indeed passible accidentally, from the union to the body, and it is made material according to affection for material things; and for this reason, now, it is not suitable for the participation of so great a light, as there shall be then, when in no way shall it be impeded through bodily passions or subjected to material affections. And through this participation of light we shall be also participants in the unition that is above mind, namely because our mind shall be united, as to the intelligible, to God himself who is above mind; and this shall be done through unknown and blessed admissions of super-clear rays, that is, of divine illuminations that, now, are hidden to us as unexperienced; by which, then, these same minds shall be beatified.

And this indeed men shall attain, according to the imitation of the supercelestial minds, that is, of the angels, in a more divine mode than now; for now, although in whatever contemplation of truth human minds are enlightened to the union of the angels, nevertheless we fall very short from equality with them, but then we shall be equal to the angels, as the truth of the eloquences says, and they shall be sons of God, existing as sons of the resurrection, as is had in Luke 20:36.

68. Then when he says, yet now, as is possible for us, he shows that after all the knowledge that we have of God in the present life, the very what-God-is itself remains hidden to us; and about this, he does two things:

first, he proposes what he intends;

second, he proves the proposition, at in which there preexist all the ends.

69. He says therefore, first, that now, that is, in the present life, as has been expounded above, we use, as is possible for us, proper signs for knowing divine things; which signs indeed are both perfections that proceed from God into creatures, and also metaphors that are transferred through likeness from creatures to God. And indeed signs of this sort are called proper for the knowledge of divine things on our part, because it is not possible for divine things to be made known to us otherwise than by this mode. Nor nevertheless do we so use signs of this sort in knowledge of divine things, that our mind remains in them, reckoning that God is nothing beyond things of this sort, but from those signs again we are extended, according to our proportion, to the simple and united truth of intelligible miracles, that is, of wonderful contemplations, which we receive concerning divine things through signs of this sort. Yet he says, to the simple and united truth, so that simplicity might correspond to the composition of signs; whereas unity to their multitude and diversity.

70. And lest anyone should believe that through the aforementioned signs, we can comprehend perfectly the truth and intelligence of divine things, he adds that we send ourselves to the supersubstantial ray, that is, to knowing the truth about God, but not perfectly; but according as it is permissible for us, namely, sedating, that is, quieting, our intellectual operations, lest they should be borne beyond what is given to us; and this I say, after every unition of deiform things according to us, as if he should say: after we will have been united to divine things according to deiformity through knowledge, however much it is possible for us, still something about divine things remains hidden to us, from the investigation of which it is necessary that we should sedate our intellect.

71. Then when he says, in which there preexist all the ends, he proves what he had said; and about this he does three things:

for first he introduces a proof;

second, he expounds it, at and indeed it pre-receives in itself;

third, he proves a certain thing that he had presupposed in the proof, at for if knowledge is of all existing things.

72. Yet for the evidence of the first part, it must be considered that no finite power extends itself to the infinite, but it is concluded at some fixed term; whence, since every knowing power of a creature is finite, of whatever knowledge of a creature there is a fixed term beyond which it does not tend. And an example of this can be received from the diverse sciences. For geometry has some term, beyond which it does not tend; and likewise natural science. And this indeed must be understood concerning whatever created knowledge. Yet it is manifest that what exceeds the term of some knowledge is not attained by that knowledge.

Yet the supersubstantial ray, that is, the divine truth itself, exceeds all the termini and ends of whatever knowledge, because all the ends of whatever knowledge preexist more eminently in the ray itself, as in a primordial cause, in a mode ineffable to us, on account of its eminence. Whence it remains that we cannot know the aforementioned ray by inquiring nor express it by speaking nor perfectly contemplate it in whatever mode; not on account of a defect of it, but because it is distinct from all things and, consequently, unknown to all things, as though existing above all things.

73. Then when he says, and indeed it pre-receives in itself, he expounds what he had said: namely, that the ends of knowledge preexist in the supersubstantial ray; and he says that since that ray is supersubstantial, yet the knowing powers and the knowledge itself are substantial, that is, proportionate to created substances and consequently finite, it is manifest that the aforementioned ray pre-receives in itself, as the supreme cause, the terminations of all the aforementioned knowledge and powers, not indeed successively, as though it should have now this, now that, but simultaneously and unitedly; nor again particularly, as though it should have this termination and not that, but all universally; nor, again, does it have terminations of this sort in itself in the mode in which they are in created substances, but supersubstantially.

74. And because someone could refer what he had said: which it is possible neither to know, only to the knowledge of the present life, he extends this beyond this even to the angels; and he says that that supersubstantial ray is gathered not only above human minds, but even above celestial, that is, angelic, minds, not that it might be attained by them in no mode, but such that it cannot be comprehended, and this is what he says: by incomprehensible power.

75. Then when he says, for if knowledge is of all existing things, he proves what he had presupposed, namely that in God there preexist the terminations of all knowledge. And his argument is thus: all knowledge is of existing things; for the object of knowledge is being. Yet existing things are finite. Therefore finite being is the object of finite knowledge. Therefore God, since he is infinite, exceeds every finite substance, prepossessing in himself the ends of all things; and, consequently, he is separated from all knowledge, inasmuch as he exceeds all knowledge of a creature, so that he can be comprehended by none.

Lectio 3

How God Can Be Named

21. Existing indeed as circum-apprehensive and comprehensive and pre-apprehensive of all things, yet universally this is incomprehensible by all and neither is there sense of it, nor phantasm, nor opinion, nor name, nor speech, nor touch, nor knowledge; how shall a divine speech concerning the divine names be treated by us, with the deity having been demonstrated to be unspeakable and super-nameable and supersubstantial?

22. But what we have said when we expounded the Theological Hypotyposes, one, unknown, supersubstantial, the good itself, what is, triune unity, I say, which is simultaneously God and simultaneously good, it is possible neither to say nor to think. But also the unitions of holy virtues befitting the angels, which it is necessary to call admissions or receptions, of super-unknown and super-clear goodness, are ineffable and unknown, and only shall be in those who above angelic knowledge are considered worthy by the angels themselves.

23. Deiform minds united to these in imitation of the angels, as is possible, because according to the quieting of every intellectual operation there is made such a unition of the deified minds to the supreme light, praise it most properly through removal from all existing things; taught this truly and supernaturally by illumination, from the most blessed unition to it, which indeed is the cause of all existing things, yet nothing itself, as substantially segregated from all things. Therefore indeed for none of those, however great lovers of truth they are, is it possible to praise what is above every truth, the thearchic supersubstantiality, in whatever mode it is, the super-essence of super-goodness, neither as reason or virtue, nor as mind or life or substance; but as excellently segregated from every habit, motion, life, phantasm, opinion, name, word, deliberation, intellect, substance, station, gathering, unition, end, infinity, all things whatsoever are existing.

24. Yet because, as the essence of goodness, as being through itself, it is the cause of all existing things, it is fitting to praise the prince of good, the providence of the thearchy, from all things caused, because all things are both around it and for its sake, and it is before all things, and all things consisted in it, and to be this is the deduction and substance of the totality of things and all things desire it: intellectual things indeed and rational things, by knowledge; yet those things subject to them, sensibly; and other things according to vivifying motion or substantial and habitual aptitude.

§ 6. 25. Therefore the theologians, knowing this, praise it both as unnameable and from every name: unnameable indeed as when they say that the thearchy itself, in one of the mystical visions of the apparition of God, significantly rebukes him who said, *what is your name? (*Gen 32:27) And as when they say that he, driving him off from all knowledge from the naming of God, says, why do you ask my name? And this is wonderful. (Gen 32:29) Yet is this name not truly wonderful which is above every name (Phil 2:9), which is unnameable, which is gathered above every name that is named, whether in that age, or in the future? (Eph 1:21) Yet of many names as when they introduce it again saying, I am who am (Ex 3:14); life; light; God; truth; and when those experienced of the deity, praise the cause of all things with many names from many caused things as good; as beautiful; as wise; as lovable; as God of gods; as Lord of lords; as holy of holies; as eternal; as existing; and as cause of the ages; as granter of life; as wisdom; as mind; as reason; as knower; as prepossessing all the treasures of all knowledge; as virtue; as power; as king of kings; as ancient of days; as without aging and invariable; as salvation; as justice; as justification; as liberation; as exceeding all things in magnitude; as in the subtle breeze. And indeed they say also that it is in minds and in souls, and in bodies, and in heaven and on earth; and simultaneously the same in the same, mundane, circa-mundane, super-mundane, supercelestial, supersubstantial, sun, luminary, fire, water, spirit, dew, cloud, stone itself and rock, all existing things and nothing of existing things.

§ 7. And therefore both the unnameable and the names of all existing things shall befit the cause of all things and existing above all things, so that the kingdom of all should be diligently, and all things should be about it and segregated from it as from a cause, as from a principle, as from an end, and it, according to the eloquence, should be all things in all things (1 Cor 15:28).

26. And truly it is praised as the principal substance of all things both perfective and contentive, guard and food and conversive to itself; and this unitively and communicably segregatedly. For not only is it the cause of containing or of life or of perfection, so that from this alone or another providence, goodness that is above name should be named, but it pre-receives simply and incircumfinitely in itself all existing things by the most perfect goodnesses of one and the same and of the cause of all things and, from all existing things, it is praised and named fittingly.

§ 8. 27. And indeed the theologians commend not only those namings of God from perfect or particular providences or foreseeings, but it is sometimes from certain divine apparitions in the holy temples or elsewhere, illuminating the masters or prophets, according to various different causes and virtues, they name the super-resplendent and super-nameable goodness; and they place around it human or fiery or amber forms and figures, and they praise its eyes and ears and hair and face and hands and spine and wings and arms and back and feet; and they place around it crowns and thrones and chalices and bowls, and certain other mystical things, concerning which we shall tell in the Symbolic contemplation according to our virtue.

28. Yet now, gathering from the eloquences whatever things belong to the present business and using the things that have been said as a certain canon and observing them, let us proceed to the opening up of the intelligible namings of God.

29. And let us observe with the inspective deliberation of God, that always according to every theology, the hierarchical law induces that we should tell properly the contemplations by which God appears; and let us appoint holy ears for the opening up of the holy namings of God, gathering holy things in holy men according to the divine tradition and removing them from the mockeries and delusions of the unlearned; yet more the unlearned themselves, if certain men totally are such, liberating them in this from the assault of God.

30. Therefore to guard this is useful to you indeed, O beautiful Timothy, according to most holy commemoration, and to make divine things neither speakable nor exposable to the unlearned; yet may God, unspeakable and unnameable, give to me, as befits God, to praise the many deific namings of the deity, and not remove the word of truth from my mouth (Ps 119:43).

76. After Denys had shown what knowledge of God we can receive through the divine names, here he shows how God can be named;

and first he raises a doubt,

second he solves it, at but what we have said when we expounded.

77. The doubt therefore is thus: he has shown that God is mightier than every speech and every thought of ours, and not only does he exceed our speech and thought, but universally he is gathered above every mind, even the angelic, and above every substance. And lest anyone were to believe that God is removed above all things such that not only is he not known, but that he does not even know the things that are below him, he adds that he is circum-apprehensive of all things, inasmuch as he knows the proprieties and circumstances of things; and comprehensive, inasmuch as he knows perfectly the quiddities or essences of all things; and pre-apprehensive, namely inasmuch as he does not receive the knowledge of things from things as we do, but his knowledge preexists before the things, as their cause; and nevertheless this is incomprehensible by all things, and neither can he be comprehended by sense nor by phantasm or imagination, nor by opinion, in which also brutes share; nor even can he be comprehended through those things that are proper to rational things: because neither is there a name of this, as comprehending him, nor any complex speech, nor touch, that is, simply intuited understanding, nor knowledge, which comes from the deduction of principles to conclusions. If therefore he is such, how could any speech concerning the divine names be treated by us?—since it has been demonstrated that the supersubstantial deity cannot be signified by voice, as existing above every name. For it seems ridiculous to wish to treat concerning the names of a thing that cannot be named.

78. Then when he says, but what we have said when we expounded, he solves the aforementioned doubt; and about this he does two things:

first, he shows how God can be named;

second, how it can be discussed concerning the divine names, at yet now, gathering from the eloquences.

79. The first part is divided into three, according to the three modes of the namings of God, which he assigns;

the second part begins at yet because, as the essence of goodness;

the third part begins at and indeed the theologians commend.

80. About the first, he does two things:

first he posits the root of the first mode of namings;

second, he assigns the first mode of the namings of God, at deiform minds united to these.

81. Therefore he says first that, as was said in the book On the Theological Hypotyposes, one itself per se, which is God, which is unknown and supersubstantial, that is, above every substance, and which is the good itself, that is, the very essence of goodness, and which is what is itself, that is, being itself per se, namely the triune unity itself, I say, in which there is not any grade, but all three per se are simultaneously and equally God and simultaneously and equally the good itself, not that the Son is the shadow of goodness as Origen and Arius said—that one, I say, according to what it is in itself, it is possible neither to say, nor to think, for us; for we cannot see the very essence of God, which is unity in Trinity, in the present life.

82. And although the angels see his essence, nevertheless even the unitions of holy virtues that befit the angels are ineffable and unknown to us, namely the unitions by which they are united through knowledge to the divine essence, by attaining it in some way, but not by comprehending it; which, namely the unitions, it is necessary to call admissions or receptions of the divine goodness, super-unknown and super-clear; for it is not unknown on account of obscurity, but on account of an abundance of clarity. Yet they can be called admissions, inasmuch as the divine goodness itself sends itself in a certain mode to holy minds; yet receptions, inasmuch as holy minds grasp it, according to their mode. And although now admissions of this sort are ineffable and unknown to us, nevertheless they shall be in some men, but only those who are considered worthy by the angels themselves, that is, by the society and company of the angels, as regards super-angelic knowledge. For the vision of God through his essence is above the nature of whatever created intellect, not only human, but also angelic.

83. Then when he says, deiform minds united to these, he assigns the first mode of the namings of God, namely that which is made through removal, and he says that the minds of the holy ones conformed to God, namely of the prophets and apostles, united, that is, joined to the aforementioned admissions and receptions, according to the imitation of the angels, not indeed equally to the angels but as is possible in this life, praise God most properly through removal from all existing things; and this because the unition of holy minds to God, which is above every light, thus is made, namely through removal from all existing things, according to the quieting of every intellectual operation, that is, in the ultimate stage, in which their every intellectual operation is quiet. For this is the ultimate to which we can attain about divine knowledge in this life: that God is above everything that can be known by us, and for this reason the naming of God that is through removal is most proper; for those who praise God thus through removal, through God’s illumination truly and supernaturally are taught this from the most blessed joining to God; which God, since he is the cause of all existing things, himself is nothing of existing things, not as though failing from being, but supereminently segregated from all things. And for this reason the divine supersubstantiality, which is the essence of goodness, by these who are lovers of the divine truth, which is above every truth, cannot be praised, in whatever mode it is, that is, comprehensively, such that he should be called neither reason or virtue nor mind or life or substance. And there is the same ratio concerning all the other names that signify the processions of God into creatures.

84. But they praise it as super-excellently segregated from every habit, which can be referred to artificial things or to whatever exterior circumstances; also from motion, as regards natural things; life, as regards living things; phantasm, opinion, that is, reckoning, as regards sensitive things; uncomplex name, complex word, deliberation, that is, inquisitive reason, as regards rational things, as men are; intellect, as regards intellectual things, as angels are; and universally as regards all things he says, substance, if the being of things were considered; station, gathering, as regards the permanence of things: so that station might be referred to the firmness of a thing according as is consists in itself; whereas gathering, according as it is firm in other things; and as regards the perfection of things, he adds, unition, end, infinity, and universally from all things in whatever mode they exist.

This therefore is the first mode of the namings of God, through the negation of all things, the reason being that he is above all things, and whatever is signified by whatever name is less than what God is, because he exceeds our knowledge, which we express through names imposed by us.

85. Then when he says, yet because, as the essence of goodness, he hands on the second mode of the namings of God, namely those that name God as cause; and about this he does three things:

first, he introduces the ratio of namings of this sort;

second, he posits the namings themselves, at therefore the theologians knowing this;

third, he excludes a certain error, at and truly it is praised.

86. Yet for the evidence of the first part, it must be considered that since effects proceed through a certain assimilation from their causes, according to the mode in which something is a cause, it prepossesses in itself a likeness of its effect. For if something is the cause of something else according to its species or nature, the effect has in itself a likeness according to its nature: as a man generates a man and a horse a horse. Whereas if it should be a cause of something else according to some superadded disposition, according to this also it shall have a likeness of its effect. For the builder is the cause of a house, not according to his nature, but according to his art, whence the likeness of the house is not in the nature of the builder, but in his art.

87. Yet further it must be considered that, since the good has the ratio of an end, because the good is what all things desire, yet the end is the first of causes, the good is that to which the ratio of causing first applies. Therefore, according as something has itself to the good, according to this it has itself that it should be a cause.

88. Therefore because God is good, not indeed good as though participating goodness, but as the essence itself of goodness, not through any created disposition is he the cause of things, but through his being itself he is the cause of all existing things; nor through this is it excluded that he acts through intellect and will, because his understanding and willing is his very being. And therefore in himself his cause prepossesses the likeness of all his effects.

89. Yet every cause can be named from the name of its effect, inasmuch as it has in itself a likeness of it. For if there should be a likeness according to identity of ratio, that name will befit cause and caused, as the name of man, the generator and the generated. Whereas if there should not be a likeness according to the same ratio, but it should be more supereminent in the cause, the name will not be said of both according to one ratio, but supereminently of the cause, as heat of the sun and fire.

90. Therefore, because the likeness of all things preexists in the divine essence not through the same ratio, but more eminently, it follows that it is fitting to praise the providence of the deity from all things caused, as the prince of all good, that is, having principally in itself the whole good and diffusing it to others; nevertheless not univocally but supereminently, which happens on account of the fittingness of creatures with it; which fittingness indeed he designates when he adds, because also all things are around it. For effects are said to consist around a cause, inasmuch as they approach to a likeness of it, according to the likeness by which lines going out from the center stand around it, according to a certain likeness, derived from it.

91. Yet some things are found to be around something, which thing nevertheless is on account of those that stand around, as a column is on account of the house. Yet God is not on account of creatures, but conversely, and for this reason he adds, and for its sake all things are, by that mode of speaking by which medicine is said to be for the sake of health, that is, on account of health.

92. Yet it happens among us, that what is on account of the end is the active cause of the end and prior to it in generation, as medicine has itself to health; and lest God should be believed to be an end in this way, he adds, and he is before all things. For there are some things on account of the end that although they do not precede that on whose account they are, nevertheless confer something on it, as clothing is on account of man; and to exclude this from God, he adds, and all things consist in him, whence from none of them can he receive anything, but all things acquire whatever they have from him.

93. And lest anyone should believe that God is the cause of things only through the mode of an end, as certain men posited, and not through the mode of a fashioner and conserver, he adds, and to be this, namely the deity or divine providence, is of the totality of things, that is, of all things or of perfect things, the deduction, that is, the production, and substance; as if he should say: deity itself through its own being is the cause of production and of existing things.

94. Yet it must be considered further that every effect is converted to the cause from which it proceeds, as the Platonists say. The ratio of which is that each thing is converted to its good, by desiring it; yet the good of an effect is from its cause, whence every effect is converted to its cause, by desiring it. And for this reason after he had said that all things are deduced from the deity, he adds that all things are converted to it through desire; and this is what he says: and all things desire it.

95. And lest anyone should believe that all things know it, he shows how, in diverse ways, diverse things desire it, adding, intellectual things indeed, that is, angels, and rational things, that is, men, desire it by knowledge, that is, by knowing it, for it cannot be known unless by intellect or reason; yet things subject to these desire it not by knowledge, but other things indeed only sensibly, as brute animals; and other things according to a vivifying mode, as plants; or according to substantial aptitude, as those things that are moved according to generation and corruption; or habitual, as in other motions, which are according to quality and quantity and where; for all things of this sort, although they do not know God, nevertheless are said to desire him, inasmuch as they tend to a certain particular good. Yet in every particular good the first good is refulgent, from which whatever good has that it is desirable.

96. Then when he says, therefore the theologians knowing this, he posits the divine namings according to the aforementioned ratio, and he says that the theologians, considering the aforementioned things, namely that God is segregated from all things and nevertheless is the cause of all things, sometimes indeed call him unnameable, yet sometimes there are attributed to him the names of all things: unnameable indeed, they call him, as when they say that this deity in one of the mystical visions, which were according to imaginative divine apparition, significantly rebukes him who asked, what is your name? of the angel who appeared in the person of God. And so that he would exclude him from all knowledge that could come from the name of God, he said, why do you ask my name which is wonderful? And this is had in Genesis 32:27–29. And truly this name is wonderful, which is above every name, as is said in Philippians 2:9; which is unnameable, as though gathered above every name that is named whether in that age or in the future, as is had in Ephesians 1:21.

97. And not only is God praised in the Scriptures as unnameable but also as of many names, as when God himself is introduced saying, I am who am (Ex. 3:14); and life and truth (John 14:6); and light (John 8:12); and God (Ex. 3:6): I am the God of Abraham.

98. And not only do they introduce him saying many names of himself, but also those who were experienced about the deity, as the apostles and prophets, praise God as the cause of all things from many caused things. Yet it is not necessary to distinguish here the diversity of these caused things that he adds here, because they will be distinguished in the distinction of the chapters, when he reduces all effects of this sort to fixed chapters. For they praise him as good (Luke 18:18); as beautiful (Song 1:15); as wise (Job 9:4); as lovable (Song 5:16); as God of gods (Ps. 49:1); as holy of holies (Dan. 9:24); as eternal (Baruch 4:7); as existing: are you not he who alone is? (Job 14:4); as cause of the ages (Sir. 24:14); as granter of life (Acts 17:25); as wisdom (1 Cor. 1:21); as mind, and another translation has intellect (Is. 29:16); as reason: I who speak justice, where another translation has: I who dispute justice (Is. 63:1), or better it can be said that reason in Greek is logos, which also signifies word, which is found in many places in the Scriptures; as knower (2 Tim. 2:19); as prepossessing all the treasures of all knowledge (Col. 2:3); as virtue (1 Cor. 1:24); as power (Ps. 88:9); as king of kings (Rev. 19:16); as ancient of days (Dan. 7:9); as without aging and invariable (James 1:17); as salvation (Matt. 1:21); as justice, as justifying, as liberation or redemption, according to another translation (1 Cor. 1:30); as magnitude exceeding all things (Job 23:6); as in the subtle breeze (1 Kings 19:12); and they say that it is also in minds, or hearts (Eph. 3:17); in souls (Wis. 7:27); and in bodies (1 Cor. 6:13); in heaven and on earth (Jer. 23:24); and simultaneously in the same, that is, as regards the same matter, they say that the same is mundane, that is, in the world (John 1:10); circa-mundane (Sir. 24:14); super-mundane (Is. 66:1); and supercelestial: high over all nations is the Lord, and above the heavens his glory (Ps. 112:4); supersubstantial (Matt. 6:11); sun (Mal. 4:2); luminary, that is, star (Rev. 22:16); fire (Deut. 4:12); water (John 4:10); spirit (Joel 2:28); and dew (Hos. 14:6); cloud (Hos. 6:4); stone (Ps. 117:22); rock (1 Cor. 10:4); and all other existing things are attributed to him as cause; and it is nothing of existing things, inasmuch as it super-exceeds all things. And therefore it both befits God, who is the cause of all things and nevertheless existing above all things, to be unnameable, inasmuch as existing above all things, and nevertheless all names of existing things befit him, as cause of all things; and he adds the reason.

99. For the evidence of which it must be considered that the rule of the universe is best. Yet for the goodness of rule there is required that he who rules should not be altogether alien from those who are ruled, but should have some concordance with them, in order that he can be useful; and nevertheless that he should super-exceed his subjects, lest he should be contemptable, so that he can command them. And this what he adds: so that the kingdom of all, that is, the rule of the universe, should be diligently, that is, should proceed in the best way, all things are about the first cause, as though derived from it according to a certain likeness; and from it all things are segregated, as from a cause, on account of which all things are; as from a principle, from which they flow; as from an end, which they attain; and it, through this mode, should be all things in all things, inasmuch as every perfection of all things is God himself causally, according to the eloquence, for this is written in 1 Corinthians 15:28.

100. Then when he says, and truly it is praised, he excludes the error of certain men. For there were certain Platonists who reduced the processions of perfection to diverse principles, positing that there is one principle of life, which they called first life, and that there is another principle of understanding, which they called first intellect, and another of existing, which they called first being and good. And to exclude this, he says that God truly is praised as the principal substance of all things, inasmuch as he is the principle of existing for all things; and he is called the perfective cause of all things, inasmuch as he gives all perfections to things; and he is called the contentive cause, guard and food, which three seem to pertain to the conservation of things. For there are certain things that do not need anything except to be conserved in their principles, because they cannot be corrupted from without, as the celestial bodies, and as regards this he says that he is a contentive cause, because he contains these in being. Whereas there are certain things that, although they do not fail from their own principles, can be corrupted from without, as water by fire, and as regards this he says, guard, because these are defended by God, lest, beyond the order of their ratio, they should be corrupted by those things. Yet there are certain things that for their conservation need supplemental things, as men and animals need food, and as regards this he says, food, namely because he administers to all things those things that are necessary for their conservation. He is also even a cause conversive to itself, because the very fact that things are converted to God, by desiring him as their end, is in them from God. And all these things befit God unitively, that is, not according to diverse virtues, but according to one simple virtue; and communicably segregatedly, because he so communicates the aforementioned causalities to others, that nevertheless a certain singular mode of causing remains separately for him.

101. Yet for this reason he is thus praised diversely as cause, because not only is it the cause of containing, that is, of the salvation of things, or of life or of perfection, so that the divine goodness that is above every name, should be named, that is, ought to be named, from this alone or another providence, that is, causality, but the divine goodness itself pre-receives simply in itself all existing things, that is, not such that it is composed out of all things, but those that are many composed things in themselves, in God are one simply and incircumfinitely, because when singular names determinately signify something distinct from others, coming into divine predication, they do not signify this finitely, but infinitely: as the name of wisdom as it is received in created things signifies something distinct from justice, as for example existing in a determinate genus and species, but when is it received in divine matters, it does not signify something determined to a genus and to a species or a distinction from other perfections, but something infinite; and for this reason God is praised and named fittingly from the most perfect goodnesses, that is, perfections, which come to things through the providence of that supreme cause; which although it is one and the same, is nevertheless of diverse things—nay rather, the cause of all things, as when he is named by the name of substance or of life or of something of this sort, and also it is named from all existing things, on account of the participated perfections in them, as if he were named sun on account of clarity and rock on account of firmness and thus concerning the others.

102. Then when he says, and indeed the theologians commend, he posits the third mode of the namings of God, and he says that the holy theologians commend to us not only those namings of God that are taken from perfect or particular providences or foreseeings, so that through providences we should understand perfections communicated to things, as goodness and wisdom; yet through foreseeings, the things themselves participating perfections of this sort, as man or the sun—of which providences indeed those are called perfect that are universal, as good, existing, and things of this sort; yet particular that befit some genus of things, as wise and just, but it happens that sometimes they name the goodness of God that is super-nameable, on account of its super-splendor, from certain divine apparitions, that is, imaginative visions, by which the prophets or masters were illuminated, which he says on account of those who have written hagiographies; or in the holy temples or in whatever other places, and this according to diverse causes and virtues. For from diverse rationes, diverse apparitions have been made, whence they place around him human or fiery or amber forms, and unto his praise they describe for him eyes and ears and other members, and they place around it crowns and honors and other things of this sort, which is easy to consider from diverse places in Scripture. And concerning names of God of this sort he premises that he will tell in the book On the Symbolic Theology, which is not had among us.

103. Then when he says, yet now, gathering from the eloquences, he shows how the divine names must be treated, and about this he does three things:

first he shows which divine names must be treated in this book;

second, what mode of doctrine must be observed both as regards those teaching and as regards those listening, at and let us observe with the inspective deliberation;

third, he exhorts Timothy, to whom he is writing, to observe this, at therefore to guard this is useful.

104. Therefore he says, first, that now we must proceed, in this book, to the manifestation of the intelligible divine names, that is, those that are not taken from sensible things symbolically, but from intelligible perfections proceeding from him into creatures, as are being, living, and things of this sort, such that there are gathered from the Sacred Scriptures whatever names pertain to the present business; and that these things that have been said in this chapter must be used as a certain rule, which it is necessary to respect in the whole present work. For since there have been introduced three genera of the namings of God,

concerning the first, which is through removal, it is treated in the Mystical Theology;

concerning the second, which is through intelligible processions, in this book;

concerning the third, which is through sensible likenesses, in the book On the Symbolic Theology.

105. Then when he says, and let us observe with the inspective deliberation, he shows the mode of determining concerning the divine names, when he says that it must be considered that we should tell properly, in this book, the contemplations by which God appears. And he says, properly, against metaphorical apparitions. And again it must be observed that to the manifestations of the holy names of God, there are admitted holy ears, namely those of the faithful, who listen piously and reverently, not those of the infidels, who mock and blaspheme, such that we might gather holy things in holy men, according to the divine tradition, with God commanding: do not give the holy to dogs (Matt. 7:6); so that thus holy things might be removed from the derisions of the unlearned—nay rather, the men themselves, if those who are totally resisting divine things should be freed from the assault of God; for these by deriding divine things do not harm divine things, but themselves. And this, I say, must be provided for in this work, because always according to every theological doctrine the hierarchical law, that is, that which is handed on through the holy princes, induces, that is, commands or exhorts, that these things must be observed according to a certain deliberation, which does not come from human wisdom, but from the very circumspection of God.

106. Then when he says, therefore to guard this is useful, he induces Timothy to observe these things; and he says that it is useful for him to guard the things already said, but that he should ponder these in a most holy way, and that those things that are divine he should neither tell nor expose in whatever way, that is, give to the unlearned, namely to the infidels or whatever unlearned men who, not grasping on account of inexperience, deride.

107. Yet last, he ends the present chapter in a prayer, asking God that he should give to him with the praise of God, according as befits God, to hand on the diverse namings of the deity, which cannot be expressed or named by voice, and that he should not remove the word of truth from his mouth.